The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 08/12/2004 SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Council Chambers - City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Avenue 6:30 p.m.—9:30 p.m. * * * August 12, 2004 * * * fes•,..---ux: .:Msec%ur.;+�r.YAK.<.eiLv .i>,�,re-.4-5�:,.�i Tt.:+x., tat...6�zm+r ys:x- 44=_�l'a�,.'-1F"�r. i.:..,.r '. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • July 22, 2004 VI. PUBLIC COMMENT VII. COMMISSION REPORTS VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS New Business: • Presentation of First Draft: Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3—Transportation • Discussion of Clearview Triangle • Briefing on 2004 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments • Briefing on Areawide Rezone Proposal-Greenacres Neighborhood X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER • Discussion regarding meeting dates in November and December,2004 XI. ADJOURNMENT COMMISSIONERS CITY STAFF Fred Beaulac Marina Sukup,AICP Robert Blum Greg McCormick,AICP John G. Carroll Scott Kuhta,AICP David Crosby Debi Alley William Gothmann, Chair Gail Kogle Ian Robertson, Vice-Chair www.spokanevalley.orq City of Spokane Valley Request for Planning Commission Review DATE: August 12, 2004 TYPE: ❑ Consent ❑ Old Business ❑ New Business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Legislation E Information ❑ Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments- Informational briefing on proposals. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive Plan provides for an annual Comprehensive Plan amendment process. The deadline for submitting Comprehensive Plan amendment requests was July 1, 2004. The City received eight requests which will be considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on September 23, 2004. The proposed amendments are summarized as follows: File No. CPA-01-04 Location: South side of Dishman-Mica Road, west of its intersection with Bowdish Road. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to Community Commercial; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR-3.5 and B-3 to B-2, Community Commercial, on approximately 4.23 acres of land. File No. CPA-02-04 Location: North side of Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR-3.5 to UR-22 on approximately 1.4 acres of land. File No. CPA-03-04 Location: South side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Medium Density to High Density Residential; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR-7 to UR-22 on approximately 5 acres of land. File No. CPA-04-04 Location: South side of Broadway Avenue, about 4000 feet east of Sullivan Road. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR-7 to UR-22 on approximately 4.85 acres of land. File No. CPA-05-04 Location: North side of Valleyway Avenue, about 150 feet east of Sullivan Road. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Low Density Residential to Regional Commercial; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR-22 to B-1 on approximately 1.75 acres of land. File No. CPA-06-04 Location: East side of Adams Road, about 400 feet south of Mission Avenue. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR-3.5 to UR-22 on approximately 8 acres of land. File No. CPA-07-04 Location: The proposal will remove Mansfield Avenue, between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway, from the Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan. Request: Amend the Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan by removing Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. File No. CPA-08-04 Location: North of Rutter Road, west of Dora Avenue, on the southeastern boundary of Felts Field Airport, the only Airport property located within the City of Spokane Valley. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to Light Industrial; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR-3.5 to 1-2 on approximately 10 acres of land. ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity, Zoning and Comprehensive Plan maps for each request. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Planner ante .000 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments August 12,2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments >Comprehensive Plan Amended Annually >July 1St cut off for applications >Planning Commission Public Hearing >PC Recommendation to City Council >Council makes final decision(by December) >Appeals to Growth Management Hearings Board >Zone Change with Comp Plan Amendment CPA-01-04 -�- : ■imn nor: > Location:South side of Dishman-Mica Rd.,west of na Bowdish. > Comp Plan Designation: ii �J Low Density Residential and 1�� G,,;'%®�� Community Commercial ,':AAA Nkir,. > Proposed Designation: —= '� Community Commercial ?= SS RN4 > Size: 4.23 acres 8=.la is =�PUhr:you r Jwb 1 CPA-01-04 -... ,:t nom,ow > Zoning:UR-3.5 and B-3 1111111111- ' > Proposed Zoning: B-2 `111_1.• ..__ > Current Use: Office, residence,vacant A a r` ,m17 z=r ni i l" CPA-02-04 Plan PAN, •i - II._ — > Location: North side of - Broadway,east of Ella Rd. �Vra1�lg > Comp Plan Designation: L-_— H. Low Density Residential ,-- — : > Proposed Designation: F�% -110 _ High Density Residential -�-�-- -�I 'mail EMI > Size:1.4 acres *Eli u■na oma..- =-1 ...F2_— ... gr .___ 1. am b CPA-02-04 lgri11: 111:'it >Zoning:UR-3.5 ��u _II ➢Proposed Zoning: UR-22 X11 Imam_-1 > Current Use:Residence, s.° ..X111:it vacant lip�i r a ,>,'Ultj1/-11101 III i in , _ ,, ti --,•• M. •• rt�.16 � . ,g9N16 Emma II r„...---I. -.I--Er ......... . •, .'KENNER MI .. - ...s IWb 2 CPA-03-04 arftle > Location: South side of '.:i4� 11 Springfield,west of Sullivan. ■Er wsli nal > Comp Plan Designation: lgam �n gams 1111Medium Density Residential t----- nn > Proposed Designation: ; nnl High Density Residential > Size: 5 acres 7...M.191■ 111111 III o IglI 1111 ..... CPA-03-04 ��o� > Zoning: UR-7 .■ 1 �,�`, /► .� > Proposed Zoning: UR-22 :I. �a%1ij 1 > Current Use: Vacant ��- Oboe r » inns :_RI!, � t II I � 'prr 1 i !i1 ' !Iii1ra I �� f CPA-04-04 -P-MOP _ > Location: South side of r-S►- ':1101 Broadway,South ft east f Iy�'int., Sullivan Rd. , ,- > Comp Plan Designation: Low Density Residential ■� 4/ '.i1 �7 r711� > Proposed Designation: lot j 91 n��1 High Density Residential Ewe it grist l:? 1 > Size: 4.85 acres ' I-- Illi��III'��7 in I-17-7 ==SII 7. 1111=_ils�, :1,�IIIII-=ii:,t, lijcoma.;fin man. b 3 CPA-04-04 °- =1u1 ;^111 > Zoning: UR-3.5 1fy � �' lam"-aptlf > Proposed Zoning:UR-22 I 115 �1 > Current Use: Residence, vacant �: til Lbw_ ni11��1 .n'''�. mu _Nunm �_ ips __r/L�.1111111 n All i,i'111111111"1� Jif au tric assn'" I�,.riNaIll i .?� CM* .. N CPA-05-04 ,r > Location: North side of I Valleyway,150 ft.east of I a Sullivan Rd. I lip > Comp Plan Designation: i' • Low Density Residential > Proposed Designation: '" Er Regional CommercialPan 11 Pli > Size: 1.75 ----- 9 l CPA-05-04 i .4131 NE > Zoning: UR-22(2001) ,ffez, > Proposed Zoning:B-1 II■ III > Current Use:2 residences IS i lid I ii . Tr- Eli Forezo w a 4 CPA-06-04 > Location: East side of 1g th. Adams Rd.,400 ft.south : •u,,, of Mission Avenue ==""""tj=:i. > Lot Size: 8 acres IO nuii; ',,=LI=i:■ m�� j��■.� iii: > Comp Plan Designation: r.";%p==1:4 m ,g ■ ='■�r I Low Density Residential moms,�- ,/...==;: p.■nn_C- � > Proposed Designation: 13iiL �� ' 9,_�-4.'i High Density Residential F---- moll��II2!IIII:U" > Size: 8 acres 1 1 "`'IIIIIi kEgasi .,.. ,=_ 1111111■,-'�:�� C- d litt wrii u1III1111111 Gerrp•hocir rn• Wb CPA-06-04 ......, ,,' ' , - > Existing Zoning: UR-3.5 i" ri yam.:.rssone > Proposed Zoning: UR-22 = .•"�;{�. ltifg ,`` > Current Use: Vacant It CI= ':.'adsiiPta`` --: ;.:j.. _: MOW•11 M.%E !-r nn=1me-j '%yam, iimitIn aliIIC dIII_ iE 1111: *! :'i=,-,-„,_ .im 4 ';'-f-:: '•', `ls ' ''' - _.N.�.�.. ti b CPA-07-04 alim TA> Proposal: Amend Arterial .w.� Road Plan-Remove 1:111 on liNI Mansfield Avenue -`) IJ f1 .; between Houk Street and .71I'>�l1,— --- Mirabeau Parkway. llit" > Comp Plan: Surrounding land use designations IIII include Mixed Use and Light Industrial -- ,i'l. -- .;;.r- �.ngn.om�1 u _ mak 1. cam+m.ma. circa sa�... ..... Wb 5 CPA-07-04 Immanzo #112 mkt > Surrounding Zoning: In SRR-10 and 1-2 .._' ^*' - > Current Land Uses: Mostly `';SI �!' Mostly vacant,office and 7t � `� �=, Ill II,R" .xim ui. Ill •�Jnn m�n . llr1pL .nxnm.�l u �\ Arterial Road Plan is I f ? ` - l `rte i \_ � K i • _ -.__ 1-----1-- _r :1::,_1111" N i 1 ""y _c ' , r CPA-08-04 > Location:North of Rutter d l„it2,.:E ��■II,::IIIYz:O Road,west of Dora CCe, ntllo: �.�_: Avenue,on the ._ !-,..r;5„- southeastern boundary of Felts Fieldnaelll-�•�-'l Felts Field Airport,the only - ��ml11 JplWllihi Airport property located ,/�_�E-;1111'? within the City of Spokane '0,w , Ills,.1i111L i II l �1..V".1,. - Valley. / .— .5 r „ �. > Comp Plan Designation: `,;":".1:-.2E-__I al �,; ro•' Low Density Residential 1E.7: . ,1111F tir - — imp.- /i > Proposed Designation: Y, 1 Il ii. Light Industrial Io 1111111111 II IVO > Size: 10 acres .. , ... 6 CPA-08-04 � : i.iii vi > Existing Zoning: .-1YT- pj��:::'111 � UR-3.5 and UR-22 ;::-'==""-1' ; > Proposed Zoning: I-2 __ '' i- Felts Field ,y„ i_'rY"n j > Current Use: Airplane ¢ ', � hangars,vacant �rP �inIc.IU1111Ci11:: lig.�dlll..11IIV~'- larir-iiiilirat-i2tzirft-i.:131,: 1 g= i 17a A1d! - .- -um; Sr/gig-El -.� `,pF a€ ';‘,7.7"..=, I_ ..*:-"Ga- es i ism ...� Jldh 7 Spnione % tIk Greenacres Areawide Rezone August 12, 2004 Areawide Rezone by Property Owner Petition ➢Zoning Code provides for areawide rezone by petition of property owners—51% ➢Spokane Valley received petitions signed by more than 51%of property owners in area proposed for rezone. ➢Planning Commission conducts public hearing ➢PC Recommendation to City Council ➢Council makes final decision Greenacres Areawide Rezone > Location:457 acres, �� _� bounded by Spokane lai 111 �~�-_;�1 River to the north and ��%�'�� ° � L�A1 west,Mission to the south a 0 «�4 and Barker to the east. - '+�a.t:, 0 F> Existing Comprehensive „.�R` ' ,.1 Plan Designation: i W }r%'. I le 9 � 9 �"4 � ..T Low Density Residential L-�� '_=. 1111. 1f 711 - Y m. 1 Greenacres Areawide Rezone > Current Zoning:UR-7` 7 > Proposed Zoning: UR-3.5 95Egli keilLtir: `iia w `a'f�t:� f > Current Uses: Large lot :+ development e / • ii• i _ 'zia 1Irua � ■■�tnrn:� ' magi 91 ,lily,0 t ai — >wb 2 .0.0alley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 +Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 4 Fax: 509.921.1008 4 cityhall@spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Marina Sukup,AICP,Community Development Director CC: Dave Mercier,City Manager, Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Date: August 6,2004 Re: Transportation Issues Attached is a VERY,VERY DRAFT of the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan. 1. Functional Class: Designation of functional class requires an answer to two questions: a. Is this the way the roads are actually used?Or b. Should the roads be used in this manner? 2. Funding: Federal or State funds may be available for roadways classed "Collector or better, BUT if no funds are available, community expectations will be frustrated. 3. Improvements to Mobility: Increasing through traffic movement may conflict with preserving neighborhood integrity. a. A Transportation Plan should not provide guidance for cut-through traffic without serious consideration of immediate and log term consequences. b. Conflicts may arise when too many types of traffic use the roadways simultaneously. Should bikeways be established along truck routes? c. High traffic roadways allowing heavy truck traffic conflict with adjacent residential development e.g. Barker Road. d. The Regional Plan would have heavy truck traffic diverted from Bigelow Gulch and Forker Road to Sullivan through the neighborhood between schools. Is there an alternative? 4. Connectivity with other plans: The Arterial Road Plan identifies some issues with adjoining jurisdictions: a. The Town of Millwood has identified Liberty and Euclid as Principal Arterial in their jurisdiction. These roads are primarily local access roads. b. Truck Route designation: this is recommended in order to preserve the community's investment in pavement, although adjacent jurisdictions have not done so. Havana (Rock Products); Trent to Wellesley and Harvard; and Forker Road to Sullivan (discussed above) present concerns. 5. Opportunities: The"Bridging the Valley" project may present opportunities to acquire excess right-of-way to correct transportation "disconnects"e.g. Euclid. It may also create new obstacles to mobility. The STA Light rail project presents a number of interesting possibilities. The"inventory" is neither complete nor necessarily correct at this time, but your thoughts on the type of information and how understandable it is would be very helpful. Please note corrections on the current information, if you see anything that jumps out at you. Attached you will also find the a summary of the County Goals, Policies and where the same issues are addressed in the proposed Plan—you will note that bringing rural roads to urban standards is really the only new strategy, but one that is unique to cities and not appropriate for counties. The full internal and inter-agency review process will begin once we have verified our"facts"— please identify corrections, additional issues, questions or concerns that we should research. As noted above,this is VERY,VERY draft! Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 3 0 TRANSPORTATION 3M Introduction Transportation systems should provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods. Modes of transportation which impact Spokane Valley include roadway, transit, air, rail, bicycle and pedestrian. Each of these modes is addressed independently, although the development of an efficient and truly multi-modal transportation system requires an evaluation of the interaction and interdependency of each mode in relationship to others. Airport, rail and arterial roadways have implications for regional freight mobility; transit pedestrian and bicycle systems form part of larger systems with very localized implications for the movement of people. The roadway system will serve both mobility and access needs depending on the functional classification. 3.1 Planning Context The Growth Management Act provides the following guidance: "Transportation: Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans."' Regional transportation planning services are provided by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), and coordinated by the Spokane Transit Authority(STA) and local jurisdictions, in accordance with federal and state planning requirements and the Countywide Planning Policies for Spokane County (CWPP). Pursuant to the CWPP, local plans should identify major transportation facilities and should designate areas that are expected to support public transportation services. Plans should identify specific routes that are, or could be, subject to available funding, designed and constructed utilizing a regional standard for heavy truck traffic to serve the movement of goods from industrial and rural areas to the market. Future land uses requiring heavy freight movement should be encouraged to locate along these routes. A functional classification system of roadways is required to assure regional consistency and to support alternative transportation modes. The CWPP also require that plans address land use designations and site design requirements that are supportive of and compatible with public transportation, including, but not limited to, pedestrian-scale neighborhoods and activity centers; mixed-use development; and pedestrian- friendly and non-motorized design. Strategies which encourage vehicular trip reduction, including technology and alternate modes of transportation should be included to protect the environment and to preserve the community's investment in its roadway system. The Growth Management Act also requires that transportation facilities be provided concurrently with development. 1 RCW 36.70A.020(3) Page 1 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 3.2 Roadways 1. Roadway Functional Classification2 Principal Arterial System. Principal arterials serve the major centers of activity in urbanized areas, the highest traffic volume corridors, and the longest trip desires and carries a high proportion of the total urban travel even though it constitutes a relatively small percentage of the total roadway network. The system should be integrated both internally and between major rural connections. The principal arterial system carries most of the trips entering and leaving the urban area, as well as significant intra-area travel, such as between central business districts and outlying residential areas. The system also carries important intra-urban and inter-city bus routes. The system distinguishes between interstate, other controlled access freeways and other principal arterials with partial or no controlled access. Spacing between principal arterials may vary between one mile in highly developed areas to five miles in relatively sparse development at the urban fringe. Service to abutting land is subordinate to travel service to major traffic movements. Minor Arterial Street System. The minor arterial street system interconnects with and augments the urban principal arterial system. It accommpdates trips of moderate length at a lower level of travel mobility than principal arterials. The system places more emphasis on land access than the higher system and offers lower traffic mobility. Such a facility may carry local bus routes and provide intra-community continuity, but ideally does not penetrate identifiable neighborhoods. This system includes urban connections to rural collector roads where such connections have not been identified as principal arterials. The spacing of minor arterials may vary from one tenth to one half mile in central business districts to two to three miles in suburban fringes but is normally not more than one mile in fully developed areas. Collector Street System. The collector provides both land access and traffic circulation within residential neighborhoods and commercial and industrial areas. It differs from the arterial system in that facilities from the collector system may penetrate residential neighborhoods, distributing trips from arterials through the area to their ultimate destinations. Conversely, the collector system also collects traffic from local streets in residential neighborhoods and channels it into the arterial system. In a central business district, or other area of similar development and traffic density, the collector system may include the entire street grid. The collector street system may also carry local bus routes. Local Access Street System. The'Local Street System includes all facilities not included in one of the higher systems. It primarily permits direct access to abutting lands and connections to higher order systems. It offers the lowest level of mobility and usually contains no bus routes. Service to through traffic movement is usually deliberately discouraged. 2 American Association of State,Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO) Page 2 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan ,11114, g ,v. 2' 6' 10' (MIN) 2' 4' 12' 12' 7' 7' 12' 12' 4' 2' 10' (MIN) 6' 2' 1 1 SWALE BIKE TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC BIKE SWALE 1 LANE LEFT TURN LANE LANE 27.MIN I 25MIN 4" , SIDEWALK SIDEWALK TYPE'B'CURB CRUSHED SURFACING ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT TYPE'B"CURB PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL TYPICAL SECTION — N.T.S re 3,, 48' 48' "" .I�illi '. 2' 6' 10' 2' 4' 12' 12' 12' 12' 4';2' 10' 6' 2' ►11, SWALE BIKE TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC BIKE SWALE LANE LANE - 2R MIN 27,MIN 'y.'W,,,,'''' ',,,,..,.,,rr'` SIDEWALK SIDEWALK CRUSHED SURFACING I ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT TYPE'B'CURB TYPE'B'CURB MINOR ARTERIAL TYPICAL SECTION — N.T.S \ 3 Nil lf, -. - - 43' .- :IFS+Iii cIIl 2' 6' 10' 2' 4' 12' 7 7' 12' 4' 2' 10' TRAFFIC BIKE SWALE 6' 2' 1 � SWALE BIKE TRAFFIC LANE LEFT TIM LANE LANE 27.MIN I 1 2%IIIN r SIDEWALK SIDEWALK TYPE"B'CURB CRUSHED SURFACING ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT TYPE'B'CURB COLLECTOR ARTERIAL TYPICAL SECTION — N.T.S NOTE: actual roadway dimesions and features will vary based on local conditions, such'as traffic, available right—of—way, zoning and land uses, topography, etc. R/W q R/W 30' 30' 2' MIN 5''-2 12'-15' 6' 6' 12'-15' ._2' S — —,--2' MIN _SIDE TRAFFIC LEFT TURN TRAFFIC SIDE WALK _' LANE LANE LANE WALK 4' NO -. 44.- 21 A,, MIN 27.MIN _ 1�p* 1.... Mq A•, 4. TYPE "B" CURB CRUSHED SURFACING ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT LOCAL ACCESS STREET TYPICAL SECTION — N.T.S 2. Safety Street design and construction standards should accommodate the characteristics of vehicles utilizing the roadway, making adequate provision for weight, size and turning radius requirements. The four general classes of design vehicles include passenger cars and light Page 3 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan trucks, buses, large trucks and recreational vehicles. Bicycles are be considered a design vehicle where bicycle use is allowed on the roadway. Traffic safety must consider roadway capacity, the type of traffic utilizing the roadway, terrain, access management, traffic volumes and congestion. Access management requires the management of access to land development while simultaneously preserving the flow of traffic on surrounding road systems in terms of safety, capacity and speed. Design levels of service (LOS) are C for arterials (including freeways) and D for all local and collector streets. The capacity of an arterial is often dominated by the capacity of individual signalized intersections. Intersection design improvements and signalization modifications should be considered as cost effective alternatives to the addition of additional travel lanes. Intersections must be designed to maintain visibility for the safety of motorist, bicyclists and pedestrians. Particular care is exercised at school crossings and in areas frequented by the elderly and disabled. 3. Design Standards Table 3.1 Roadway Design Standards Arterials Collectors Principal Principal Local Private (Access (Uncontrolled Minor Residential Commercial Access Roads Control) Access) Inside Lane Width 12 12 12 12 12 12 (ft) 10 Outside Lane Width 16 16 16 16 16 n/a n/a (ft) Shoulder(ft) 8 8 6 Bow/swalefEasement 18 18 18 18 18 10 15 Border Easement 15 15 15 15 15 8 6 w/o swale(ft) 2 Lanes n/a n/a 44 37 40 30 20* 3 Lanes 46 46 46 n/a n/a Paving Width(ft) 4 Lanes 56 56 56 n/a n/a 5 Lanes 70 70 70 n/a n/a n/a n/a 6 Lanes 80 80 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 Lanes 94 94 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Return Radius 30 20 30 Flat 55 40 40 30 35 30 20 Design Speed(mph) Rolling 50 40 35 30 30 30 20 Mountainous 40 35 30 30 25 25 20 Flat 1190 575 500 275 415 275 100 Horizontal Curve Radius(ft) Rolling 955 500 350 275 275 275 100 Mountainous 500 350 230 230 165 165 100 Superelevation(%) Maximum 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% n/a n/a Grade(%) Maximum 6.0% 6.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 8.0% 12.0% Minimum 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% Stopping Sight Flat 450 275 275 200 225 200 125 Distance(ft) Rolling 400 275 225 200 200 200 125 Mountainous 275 225 200 200 150 150 125 Intersection Sight Varies based on control,speed and topography. Consult Policy on Geometric Design-Highways& Distance(ft) Streets.AASHTO 2001 Crest Vertical Curve Flat 150 60 60 60 40 30 10 (K value) Rolling 110 60 40 40 30 30 10 Mountainous 60 40 30 30 20 20 10 Sag Vertical Curve Flat 100 60 60 60 50 40 20 (K Value) Rolling 90 60 50 50 40 40 20 _ Page 4 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 3.1 Roadway Design Standards Arterials Collectors Principal Principal Local Private (Access (Uncontrolled Minor Residential Commercial Access Roads Control) Access) Mountainous 60 50 40 40 30 30 20 The minimum width of private roads is based on the number of residential lots served. 3-6 lots=20 ft;7-20 lots=24 ft.;21 or more lots=28 ft. 4. Corridor Travel Time Standards 1 Table 3.2 SRTC Congestion Management System travel Times 1999 TModel2 2020 Roadway AVI From To Average SB NB EB WB 1-90 Sullivan Havana 7:45 8:41 Havana Sullivan 8:03 10:46 Sprague 1-90 2:23 2:13 Argonne/Dishman/Mica Upriver 1-90 Dr 5:59 6:34 Sprague Avenue Sullivan Argonne 7:00 6:37 Argonne Sullivan 6:45 7:10 University Road Sprague 32nd Ave 3:34 3:46 Pines Road Sprague 1-90 2:41 2:23 1-90 SR 290 2:28 3:11 Sullivan Road Sprague 1-90 2:03 1:40 1-90 SR 290 4:12 4:25 Upriver Drive Frederick Sullivan 12:46 12:17 4. SRTC Forecast Deficiencies 2025 Table 3.3 shows roadways expected to exceed 80% of volume/capacity ration by 2025. Table 3.3 Roadways Exceeding 80%of Capacity 2025 Roadway From To Functional V/C Class Ration Barker Road 1-90 SR 290 Principal 1.16 1-90 Sullivan Barker Freeway 1.16 1-90 Sullivan Harvard Freeway 1.08 SR 290 Wellesley Starr Road Principal 1.08 Forker Bigelow Gulch Wellesley Minor 1.08 Dartmouth Sprague Appleway Collector 1.05 Vista Appleway Broadway Minor 1.04 SR 27 Urban Boundary 32nd Ave Principal 1.03 1-90 Sprague Pines Road Principal 1 Euclid Sullivan Spo.Industrial Pk Collector 0.99 Montgomery Pines Road University Minor 0.99 Knox Park Vista Collector 0.99 Park 8th Ave Appleway Minor 0.99 McDonald Sprague 4th Ave Principal 0.95 Barker Road Sprague 4th Ave Principal 0.95 Havana 2nd Ave SR 290 Principal 0.83 Carnahan 4th Ave 8th Ave Minor 0.83 Source: SRTC 2025 Forecast 9/2002 Page 5 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The SRTC Metropolitan Transportation Plan notes that intersection deficiencies impede the flow of traffic, even when sufficient capacity is otherwise available. Table 3.4 shows intersections expected to exceed 90% of capacity by 2025. Table 3.4 Intersection Deficiencies Exceeding 90%of Capacity 2025 Roadway Cross Street Functional Class V/C Ration Wellesley Starr Road Principal 1.02 Wellesley SR 290 Principal 1.02 SR 290 Barker Road Principal 1.02 Indiana Barker Road Principal 1.02 Broadway Barker Road Principal 1.02 Sprague Barker Road Principal , 1.02 Broadway Flora Minor 1.01 SR 290 Flora Principal 1.01 Euclid Sullivan Principal 1 32nd Ave Sullivan Principal 1 36th Ave Sullivan Principal 1 SR 27 36th Ave Principal 1 Montgomery University Principal 1 Montgomery Vista Minor 1 Valley Way Vista Minor 1 Knox Park Principal 0.99 Broadway Park Principal 0.99 Broadway Heacox Principal 0.99 Appleway Park Principal 0.99 8th Ave Park Principal 0.99 Appleway Thierman Principal 0.99 4th Ave Thierman Minor 0.98 29th Ave Glenrose Principal 0.98 16th Ave Carnahan Principal 0.98 9th Ave Camahan Principal 0.98 4th Ave Camahan Principal 0.97 Appleway I-90 Principal 0.97 Sr 290 Hamilton Principal 0.92 Source: SRTC 2025 Forecast 9/2002 5. Arterial Road Plan Map 3.1 (in process) illustrates the Arterial Road Plan by functional classification. 6. Freight Movement The Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) classifies state highways, county roads and city streets according to the tons of freight that are transported each year. The tonnage classifications used for designating the Freight & Foods Transportation System FGTS are as follows: T-1: More than 10 million tons per year T-2: 4 million to 10 million tons per year T-3: 300,000 to 4 million tons per year T-4: 100,000 to 300,000 tons per year T-5: At least 20,000 tons in 60 days Page 6 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The 2003 Update included only County Roads classified as T-1 and T-2 as shown in Table 3.5. The annual truck tonnage for a specific route is estimated using the average annual daily traffic (AADT), truck percentage, truck type, and working days per year. A summary of truck classification types is found in Figure 3.1. For purposes of this analysis, trucks are defined to include all trucks 2 axle (6 tired) or larger. They also include larger 2 axle (4 tired) delivery vehicles such as express package delivery vans, bread trucks, or any commercial vehicle. Private pickups, vans, or recreational vehicles are not included. To aid in calculating annual tonnage, trucks are divided into 3 categories, as shown below: Single Units- a single vehicle including dump trucks and mixers, regardless of Figure 3.1 I the number of axles. rr Double Units- a 2 unit vehicle, normally a truck and trailer, generally with 4 to 6 axles. This category is basically any truck up to 80,000 lbs. 4,-L r Older double trailers can be included in this category. r-- Trains (Triple Units) - Normally a tractor and 2 trailers. Trucks rated from 80,000 lbs. to 105,000 lbs., _ _ __ _ except gasoline tankers; which are included. In calculating the approximate freight tonnage, the following average weights were used: Singles: 7 tons Doubles: 27 tons ' Trains: 42 tons Table 3.5 WSDOT Freight&Goods Transportation System Classification 2003 Update S okane Valle . From To FROM: TO: Length Class P Y Milepost Milepost Dishman-Mica Rd 420 Ft After 4Th Av Sprague Av 7.25 7.48 0.23 T1 Appleway By Dollar Rd University Rd 0 2.66 2.66 T2 Argonne Rd(one Way South) Argonne Rd Dishman-Mica Rd 0 1.45 1.45 T2 Argonne Rd Mullan Rd SR 290(Trent) 0 0.38 0.38 T2 Bridge 4504&Millwood City Argonne Rd Limits Bruce Rd 0 5.04 5.04 T2 Broadway Av Havana St 55 Ft Before Sullivan Rd 0 7.03 7.03 T2 Dishman-Mica Rd 55 Ft Before University Rd 420 Ft After 4Th Av 5.04 7.25 2.21 T2 Fancher Rd 3Rd Av(one Way) Spokane City Limits 0 1.4 1.4 T2 Havana St 4Th Av Spokane City Limits 0.23 1.18 0.95 T2 Montgomery Av Argonne Rd University Rd 0.26 1.31 1.05 T2 Mullan Rd(one Way North) Dishman-Mica Rd Argonne Rd 0 1.29 1.29 T2 Sprague Av Havana St Appleway By 0 1.38 1.38 T2 Sprague Av(one Way) Sprague Av Appleway By 0 2.62 2.62 T2 Sprague Av University Rd Appleway Av 0 4.34 4.34 T2 420 Ft After Sr-290 Sullivan Rd Sprague Av Westbound Ramps 3.01 5.81 2.8 T2 University Rd 4Th Av Sprague Av 1.98 2.23 0.025 T2 Source: 2003 FGTS Update.WSDOT Page 7 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan WSDOT's 2001 data included roadways classified as T-3 through T-5 and are summarized on Table 3.6 as follows: Table 3.6 WSDOT Freight&Goods Transportation System Classification 2001 T-3 through T-5 Spokane Valley From To Class * 8th Ave Carnahan Park T3 8th Ave Dishman Mica Rd Woodruff T4 16th Ave Dishman Mica Rd Sullivan T3 24th Ave SR 27(Pines) Calvin T4 32nd Ave Dishman Mica Rd Sullivan T3 Alki Fancher Dyer T4 • Appleway Sprague Barker T3 Barker Road 1-90 Trent(SR 290) T3 Boone Stanley Howe T4 * Boone Fancher Seehorn T4 * Bowdish 44th Ave 32nd Ave T3 Bowdish 32nd Ave Mission T4 Bradley Cataldo Mission T4 Carnahan 8th Ave Kahuna Drive T3 Cataldo Yardley Howe T4 * Cataldo Barker East to end T4 Desmet Yardley Dyer T4 ' Dickey 11th Ave 8th Ave T4 Dollar 1st Ave Appleway T3 ' Dollar Trent Utah T3 * Dyer Road 1st Ave Sprague T3 * Dyer Road Valleyway Sharp T4 * Eastern Mansfield Utah T4 Eastern Nixon Dean T4 Eastern 4th Ave 1st Ave T3 Eastern Moreland Dyer T4 * Euclid Sullivan Harvard T3 * Evergreen Sanson 55 ft after Trent T3 Fancher Sharp Mission T3 * Farr Maringo Upriver T4 Flora Euclid Wellesley T3 Havana 8th Ave 4th Ave T3 Jackson Montgomery Bowdish T4 Kiernan Ave West end Sullivan T3 • Knox Ave Fancher Dickey T4 Main Dyer Thierman T4 * Mallon Lake Thierman T4 * Mallon Yardley Howe T4 * Mansfield Fancher Dollar T4 * Maringo Argonne Farr T4 McDonald Road Forrest 4th Ave T4 Mission Pines Sullivan T4 Mission Argonne Pines T3 Mission Flora Arc T3 * Mission Fancher Vista T3 Montgomery University Pines T3 Moreland Bettman Eastern T4 Nixon Dyer Thierman T4 * Park Road 8th Ave 18th Ave T4 Park Road 8th Ave UPRR Overpass T3 Progress Trent Forker T3 Page 8 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 3.6 WSDOT Freight&Goods Transportation System Classification 2001 T-3 through T-5 Spokane Valley From To Class * Railroad Ave Sharp Fancher T4 * Riverside Dyer Thierman T4 ' Schafer Sundown University T3 Sharp Railroad Ave Thierman T3 * Sprague Appleway Barker T3 Springfield Lake Dyer T4 * Sullivan 32nd Ave Sprague T3 420 ft after WB Ramps on SR Sullivan 290 To north end T3 Thierman Mission Broadway T3 * University Dishman Mica Rd 15th Ave T4 University Montgomery Trent(SR 290) T4 University Main Mission T4 Utah Eastern Dollar T4 * Valleyway Ave Fancher Dyer T3 * Valleyway Ave Park Mullan T3. Wellesley Flora Upriver T3 Wilbur Montgomery Jackson T4 Yardley Broadway Sharp T3 * *Industrial Location Source: FGTS. WsDOT 2001 7. Roadway Design Roadways should be designed to accommodate not only cars and trucks, but bicycles, pedestrians and public transit, both safely and efficiently. Due consideration must be given the adjacent land uses. Connected street patterns, as distinguished from closed design, allow for the dispersal of vehicular traffic and provide easier access for emergency and service vehicles. Street should be connected as the opportunity arises. At the same time, it is important to minimize high speed and cut-through traffic in residential neighborhoods and to preserve the access of pedestrians and transit patrons. Access management will preserve arterial and collector roadway capacity and reduce the long term cost of mobility, improving access to new and redeveloping properties. The appearance of the City's thoroughfares will be enhanced by thoughtful consideration of landscaping, lighting and both public and commercial signage. Spokane Valley's street system follows the traditional grid design, although streets in some areas are necessarily discontinuous as a result of topography. Street design should limit the adverse impacts on the environment resulting from storm water run-off, loss of vegetative cover, air and visual quality, while reducing maintenance requirements to a minimum. 8. Pavement Management Roadways should be designed for the type of traffic they serve. Pavement sections in industrial areas should be designed for commercial truck traffic. Designation of truck routes will expedite the flow of commercial traffic in other areas of the City and limit adverse impacts on residential neighborhoods. In order to prolong pavement life, minimizing the number of stops and starts along these routes and interconnecting signals for progressive movement should be considered. An important consideration in the establishment of truck routes is connectivity with sources of supply and distribution located outside the City, as well a major freight terminals and intermodal connections. Map 3.2 (in process) identifies truck routes within the City of Spokane Valley. Page 9 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 3.3 Rail Passenger Rail Service is provided daily by the Amtrak Empire Builder with service to Seattle, Portland on the west and Chicago and Minneapolis on the east. Map 3.3 Empire Builder Route -Empire Builder. .... Wolf Point,MT ! Seattle,WA`4�+= ./Spokane, A / .. - Fargo,ND Portland,OR ' Minneapolis-St.Paul,MN 1 Chicago,_ IL L iigii ,44iLii xcY'',iai i"-ij u.1::!-:_ _ - -- —5--- - :ii ,.,.S-..,_: :n Freight Rail Service is provided by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). BNSF services an east-west route from Chicago to Seattle and Portland. Map 3.4 Washington State Rail System i t `I . ! • S _ — --- 'd.. . ^. ..iJy} uwcII I I ' I r f I OA \....I'ILZI 10: �_ . SCRIMP — I l r.. w Ar i .un _ ) tip` '. � 11:,+_ _ S naa 1 Kt ZO'c. IL, (r, Batman I ! %L Mini *n I i l:S 1 1t y 9 I ,,, I . i - moua I 1 a:wr XJ.re:01 l a:a.m« t?-f '''' I m..a. I *r.�. y...—t.v?_Irma'_. `I I rli c: :o:.a1 a,,:a r i I I ,,a r.,:4 ri,..4 c.TPli 1: ...t.- 1 ,;r r�Y.01,x.rrr WASHINGTON STATE /s•Y ^.,:cT:cul.•x 9cl t- ...�..�w•I - 71-4C wr n ;:-....1717N cPlsF=4 " "r RAIL SYSTEM TK T7c'1115 r9.9(+a ii^ cA:c9v r1- rX t>wy Tx'S.f»I'A%,L:.!4::TTJ xli xrrsr S. ,ttXXT yi ,Wae:a::;Y 7+..VStc+Ta14:4 C 3=C Satw%G k:.i. The UPRR provides service to Canada, the Yakima Valley and the Portland area. Bridging the Valley. The Bridging the Valley(BTV) project is a community-initiated project to explore the creation of one common railroad corridor from which Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway and Union Pacific Railroad would operate between Spokane, Washington Page 10 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and Athol, Idaho. This 42 mile corridor presently has 72 railroad crossings (46 in Washington)with over 494 trains operations per week. Growth in train traffic is forecast to increase annually by 3.4% over the next 20 years. Traffic accidents, traffic congestion from roadway closures, increased carbon monoxide emissions in the serious non-attainment area and noise significantly effect the economy, health, safety and general welfare of the public in Spokane and Kootenai Counties, and therefore the Inland Northwest. The Bridging the Valley project would eliminate approximately 51 at-grade crossings through closure (35 in Washington) and relocation of the Union Pacific Railroad mainline into the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway corridor. The remaining 21 crossings are either currently grade separated (5 existing grade separations in Washington) or would be graded separated (6 in Washington) as part of this project. This approach would concentrate public investment into 8 railroad grade separations within Washington State into one corridor to cross two railroads rather than spread out public investment into 61 railroad crossings spread across 87 miles of railroad track.With an estimated total project cost of 252 million in 2001 dollars (165 million in Washington /87 million in Idaho), the Benefit/Cost ratio of 1.4 indicates it's a project that makes economic sense and has benefits far exceeding its cost to the public (80 million in net present value). Map 3.5 Spokane Valley Area Railroad Network Ultimately, by 2008 this ...__ -.._- _,_- ._ --- ,. _... , project will create a SPOKANE VALLEY AREA RAILROAD NETWORK triple track railroad corridor with a J 3i, _ ToSandpoint 4 completely grade- t �/ pee Ms) l: ;� separated roadway Athol system. Both railway r and roadway systems g•• :�... :.. will be able to operate ! more efficiently and i 1 effectively throughout i iL-L - Sandpoint Area �;�. the corridor. The public � Spokane Central . 72 rade . a i;�sness RIZ9 can expect a ee Crossings in �� Tracks a Project Area significantly safer „ o� 0 ft Rights _ � '°S�` M transportation system, L�"a� =2.0 miles- . - cj � �. with less congestion and .�' ' ' ,--- `_ r z Pas � Deur delay, as well as an 9 _._ . ��aRa----- ! Falls d'Alene` environment with less �' ' ° Jct. 4`14oR� 4 carbon monoxide and �� `�-:. substantially less noise Q7 . - pollution from train j , ate r : _. col :. whistle blowing at the 52 1 t'� NO FIN ' at-grade crossings that " . -------------------7,- Burlington 4or€hem Santa Fe Railroad, Union Paeific an Bu€lington currently exist in raartt►ern Santa Fe Railroad Washington. - Union Pacific Railroad A summary of the crossings within the City of Spokane Valley affected by this project are shown on Table 9._. Page 11 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9. Bridging the Valley BNSF Crossing Proposal Current Proposed Havana At Grade Grade Separated Park At Grade Grade Separated Vista At Grade Close Argonne Grade Separated Modify Grade Separation University At Grade Close Pines At Grade Grade Separated Evergreen At Grade Close Sullivan Grade Separated Modify Grade Separation Flora At Grade Close Barker At Grade Grade Separated Wellesley Grade Separated Remove Grade Separation Source: Initial Environmental Evaluation Washington State and the Inland Northwest can expect improved freight mobility from Northwest Seaports to the east, maintaining the competitive edge they currently enjoy. 3.4 Inter-City Bus Service Intra-City bus service is provided by Greyhound and Northwestern Trailways. ' lry17 -4 7-"^" Map 3.7 Trailways Service Routes Vanmewe — a `c` Vancouver, ay nk NILBellingham "'ro,i Goy /4110000. '.. Mt.Vernon _�3` Everett r—' Moses •* Seattle 'Flake Spokane 0,..,. Toti7inia *kr poeur d'Alene WASH!' 70 � . Chehalisan IMos Kelnt9ssoula /T ' - . Longview utte ., Pr*. en�eto Billings / « Eugene a Grand Baker McCall Ontario �� °" Caldwel Boise y •REGON ,� mean Map 3.6 Greyhound Service Routes 3.5 Transit Spokane Valley is located in the East Planning Region of the Spokane Transit Authority (STA). The STA currently provides local bus and express bus to downtown Spokane, as well as para- transit service within the City of Spokane Valley. In the Spring of 2004, a local option election authorized an additional $.03 sales tax for a six year period for transit service. The STA currently operates two Park & Ride facilities within Spokane Valley located at University and Appleway Boulevard and on Indiana at Mirabeau Parkway. See Map 3.8 below: Page 12 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan .. , ....... , . .40 ..., !6 liaence ,1:14 .t.g t• ‘•"• i t. •-2. e a, . , 795 7: ., g R . ; t•' 1r-" 95 91 'd _ ' ....:,-HC:L_Jii'' ; t,.,, 1111 rtztotr z ,.95 ,,,,....., t; zr 90 7:4 1114311.3 ....3 f t s 73 i .:41.1. '64 94 $01 96 F. ' nr.. "`” • *„ tt'• - , •_•-•. -- :!•.._ 111111431 90 ..../ ......- AI• :.: . ..----- •n.-1-•1, 143 1 E 90 1 e 97 113 Pff Spokane Transit 1.:rain• - — System Map .7.:, 6.2.: ..—.'.......- 011Illr..-EIR ,...7.:= 97 .... 97 • 3.111311 3 3, 1331 1312 327.44 i g ', I1-'_f'••=tr•"•• "W=1.1t•Ittl a 3rnoir.--.. 034,7 Table 3.7 2003 Annual Ridership by Route Weekday Annual Saturday Annual Sunday Annual Route Ridership Total Ridership Total Ridership Total #71 Mirabeau Point Express 247 62,985 N/S N/S N/S N/S #72 Liberty Lake Express 324 82,620 N/S N/S N/S N/S #73 VTC Express 284 72,420 N/S N/S N/S N/S #90 Sprague 2,998 764,490 1,842 95,784 887 51,446! i #91 Mission 421 107,355 224 11,648 130 7,5401 #95 Argonne 177 45,135 80 4,160 N/S N/S #96 Pines 117 29,835 33 1,716 N/S N/S1 1 #97 South Valley 109 27,795 52 2,704 N/S N/S ,TOTALS 4,677 1,192,635 2,231 116,012 1,017 58,9861 Source: Spokane Transit Authority Schedules for fixed routes presently vary from 30 minutes to one hour. The STA is currently evaluating its system to consider more direct routing, better connectivity, improved travel times to increase ridership. The proposed route is illustrated on Map 3.9. Page 13 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan _J t 7 ,..1.1s,- ai 1 ill aziAtmi r I t iI +��Fiityryl t=-c3� --iriviiii, .11,::. I- , -,. wg.'16.03 jiir 1 „�■ 1f�■mss.: yy milm r ag. .410 , I {■1/�iaa bl{111991 , a. .Sx lii � ..� as 1 • , ,.. ' , i 1110 ir'—' s, tilt IA i 1 Area " -" _ Igo{ ! ..R rainitrilllialSgraffliziNite .41 14-11 /1Nanall011 ftmIERimm.um", PtAI 11ti 1rIh 199 = `1101 i1r '/� sVI ■1 um Ix_ 11i + {..,_VIII=a, �■°� ri1 f i� ' t X197 .. xV` atettrif ` -=ing .Ba L _ � = ili % .� r all�_ ! R )3=7 y� L- a F -,o_-1 ■II F& li/� ir IF VI t ./ `1 . t ,In , � Map 3.9 Proposed Transit Routes Paratransit van service is for individuals whose disability prevents them from using the regular fixed route buses. This means that a person must be unable, due to a disability, to get to or from the bus stop, get on or off the bus, or successfully travel by bus to or from the destination. Currently, paratransit service.is provided weekdays from 6 A.M. to 12 A.M., Saturdays from 6 A.M. to 12 A.M.,Sundays and,holidays from 8 A.M. to 8 P.M. (last pickup at 7:00 P.M.) throughout the paratransit service area. All paratransit trips must begin and end within the Public Transportation Benefit Area (PTBA). Currently, all of the area within the corporate limits of the City of Spokane Valley are located with the PBTA. This area also includes Cheney, Medical Lake, Airway Heights, Millwood, Fairchild Air Force Base, Liberty Lake and the City of Spokane. The Spokane International Airport is also served, as is most of the east Spokane Valley. STA provides bike racks on all their buses with the exception of the streetcars used on the Plaza/Arena Shuttle. The racks hold two single seat, two-wheeled, non-motorized bicycles. Each bicycle can be secured independently of one another. The STA is currently evaluating light rail as an alternative mode of transit. Light rail is a form of public transportation that operates along a set pathway on steel rails. Light rail usually operates at street level adjacent to automobile traffic but in its own lane, separated from traffic. This Page 14 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan exclusive path or guide-way gives light rail vehicles the ability to travel without being delayed by traffic. Light rail may be powered by electricity or by diesel. Outside of central business districts, stations are typically positioned a half-mile or more from each other to best link major destinations and neighborhoods. They are designed to enhance the surrounding neighborhood and attract residential or commercial development. In many cities, fares are comparable to bus service and transfers between the two are free. Trains are scheduled to match customer demand. Typically, there are more frequent departures during commute hours with train service available 18 to 20 hours each day. Parking is available at some stations, and local bus service to and from the stations is coordinated with the train arrivals. Another alternative under evaluation is the Bus Rapid Transit or BRT that combines many of the features of rail with the flexibility and cost savings of using over-the-road vehicles. BRT vehicles can operate on their own roadways or lanes or on city streets. Signal prioritization, and other technologies may be used increase speed and enhance service. Stations are designed to integrate into the community, promote economic development, enhance travel time, and encourage intermodal connectivity. The initial phase of the Spokane Regional Light Rail Project(LRT) is 15.6 miles and connects Downtown Spokane to University City. The route begins at the STA Plaza and the downtown alignment runs less than a mile along Riverside Avenue. The Convention Center and the Spokane Intermodal Center are within walking distance to the nearest station. East of Downtown, the alignment shares approximately 6 miles of existing railroad right-of-way(BNSF and UPRR) to Dishman Mica Road. It will serve the Riverpoint Higher Education Center and the Fairgrounds. The route continues eastward for almost 9 miles along Appleway Boulevard and then along abandoned railroad right-of-way owned by Spokane County. The alignment passes through the eastern Spokane Valley to the City of Liberty Lake. The development of an LRT station at University City provides the opportunity to encourage urban redevelopment of the area, with significant potential for the creation of economic opportunities in the area. Map 3.10 Page 15 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan PROPOSED ALIGNMENT ra aPoaA*S COIEZOR �� f— :I 4 " ' wi .#tal"a1-11 -e-,:--'_'"'":_---;,__.--74-t-14-;) t ;.— J.:. ,r—tee S'�-+5'5. ./'c �.� E�3F`F M "-"; 1 77r',:,------,-- - •-^� , 'i " ti i 1��r!"ia»c�-m� l r ,,..� ^¢ 1 -l rte' ' j }-t-t--,L,s.o. - , s J1�-' "'� nso •-:73.4--, �- ="u,avn�~'lj '�'�F'm` , C.''E 7 `c__ 7.412,71-11-.7.--�1 "Y-.:.s m..s�-...'r'"�..t"`/"r"S C§ remv r2 .�-s.. $1+—L-- I !- Li .r- •i` - f.:y 1 I 6_ ��-:rer- � ii i.% .+'. J 1T A�.T �-v:+a.' -�'L'Llat::4 � ]V.�Z1 'TL" ZIBfL�'.f� • # .—.-,z."trJr o va" ;: :,�;. fc"-..:-':LaraiOesuK�` -r��l `',r---;° _Yt` ' i.y 'ti..f' ..7iac*.�F V7Arzi 1 i CO'--.max- .`^-�=k `;i:. ,� 'e. a�oisramc "b _ 1 y 5 tT��--- r�- `�f 3 _ 7 C�'�-y~`r`� , r--i ro ALMETrgg IAT 8TM7ST..,...., , ^ --ucrn:ac�x&�Z ——ALTEELN A'113 LIU ALIMNISEC #o= . , .FIJ:mtELEMAuM3�vr The largest station will have a 1000-car parking lot and will be located at the Appleway interchange in the Spokane Valley. Future extensions are anticipated to include a connection west to the Spokane International Airport/West Plains area, a connection to North Spokane using the North Spokane Corridor, and a connection east into Idaho to the City of Coeur d'Alene. Economic factors suggest that the combination of LRT and BRT may be the most realistic. The project will require community support and the approval of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding. The long range success°of this project will depend on Spokane Valley ability to redevelop its commercial corridors and to locate higher density housing in close proximity to transit routes. Future Extensions of the LRT/BRT which extend to North Spokane and to the Spokane International Airport will be evaluated following funding approval of the first phase. 3.6 Air Spokane International Airport, the Airport Business Park and Felts Field Airport are owned by the city and county of Spokane, Washington, and are operated and maintained by the Spokane Airport Board. Felts Field Airport's history traces back more than 85 years with its beginning as a landing field in a park area next to the Spokane River in the Spokane Valley. The airport's heritage includes the original site of the Washington Air National Guard. In the 1930's and 1940's, Felts Field served as Spokane's municipal airport with scheduled airline service from the airport terminal. That building, along with others at the airport, are now on the National Register Register of Historic Places. All but approximately 10 acres of the 410-acre Felts Field is located in the City of Spokane, Washington. Ten acres are located within the City of Spokane Valley. The airport is located at the North end of Fancher Way in the western Spokane Valley, and is now an active General Aviation airport with 320 based aircraft and more than 72,000 annual aircraft operations. Page 16 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Information for the combined Spokane Airport System is summarized on Table 3.8 Table 3.8 Airport Statistics: 2004 2003 %Change YTD 2004 YTD 2003 %Change Total Passengers 246,676 214,996 14.74% 908,737 841,407 8.00% Enplaned Passengers 120,937 105,562 14.56% 455,649 420,304 8.41% Deplaned Passengers 125,739 109,434 14.90% 453,088 421,103 7.60% Total Cargo(U.S Tons) 4,726.7 4,707.4 0.41% 18,185.7 18,155.6 0.17% Total Freight 4,140.0 3,757.9 10.17% 15,842.1 14,290.7 10.86% Freight On 1,696.3 1,695.1 0.07% 6,937.7 6,223.0 11.48% Freight Off 2,443.7 2,062.8 18.47% 8,904.4 8,067.7 10.37% Total Mail 586.7 949.5 -38.21% 2,343.6 3,864.9 -39.36% Mail On 218.6 477.6 -54.23% 923.7 2,182.3 -57.67% Mail Off 368.1 471.9 -22.00% 1,419.9 1,682.6 -15.61% Total Operations 8,726 8,911 -2.08% 30,739 33,900 -9.32% Air Carrier Operations 3,343 3,258 2.61% 13,141 12,971 1.31% Air Taxi Operations 1,908 2,056 -7.20% 7,751 7,792 -0.53% Itinerant General Aviation 1,964 1,932 1.66% 5,734 6,754 -15.10% Local General Aviation 1,323 1,485 -10.91% 3,451 5,566 -38.00% Military Operations 188 180 4.44% 662 817 -18.97% As of September 2001,FedEx began carrying mail,which is reported as freight. Freight,mail and cargo are reported in U.S.tons Source: Spokane International Airport-Last Updated on 5/25/04 3.7 Bicycle Bicyclists vary in age and expertise. Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodation Bicycles (Federal Highway Administration 1994) describes the following categories of bicycle user types (A, B, and C). 1. Advanced (experienced) cyclists are generally using their bicycles as they would a motor vehicle. They are riding for convenience and speed and want direct access to destinations with a minimum of detour and delay. They are typically comfortable riding with motor vehicle traffic; however, they need sufficient operation space on the traveled way or shoulder to eliminate the need for either them or a passing motor vehicle to shift position. 2. Basic (novice) or less confident adult cyclists may also use their bicycles for transportation purposes, e.g., to get to the store or to visit friends, but prefer to avoid roads with fast busy motor vehicle traffic unless there is ample roadway width to allow easy overtaking by faster motor vehicles. Thus, basic riders are comfortable riding on a neighborhood street and shared use paths and prefer designated facilities such as bike lanes or wide curb lanes on busier streets. 3. Children riding on their own or with their parents, may not travel as fast as their adult counterparts but still require access to key destinations in their community, such as schools, convenience stores, and recreational facilities. Residential streets with low motor vehicle speeds, well-defined bike lanes or shared used paths can accommodate children without encouraging them to ride in the travel lane of the busy roadways. Page 17 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officers defines "bikeway" as a generic term for any road, street, path or way that is specifically designated [with appropriate Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) signing & pavement markings] for bicycle travel, regardless of whether such facilities are designated for the exclusive use of bicycles or are to be shared with other transportation modes. Bikeways include the shared use path, bicycle lane, and bicycle route. Shared Roadways. Shared lane facilities include all streets with no special provisions r t for bicycle travel, typically featuring 12-foot lane width or less with no shoulders. The shared roadways function well for bicycle travel on local streets where low volume and low speeds are combined. Figure 3.2 Shared Roadway Shared roadways provide access to the many origins and destinations dispersed throughout a community and to other bicycle facilities, and are appropriate:on local streets in residential areas with low motor vehicle traffic volumes and speeds. Streets with general shared lane conditions that are to be designated as part of a signed bikeway system should have hazards to bicycle travel mitigated. Street parking should be restricted in areas of critical width to improve safety of bicyclists. Shared roadways do not usually require or warrant any special signing for bicyclists, unless they are potential alternate routes or critical links in the overall bikeway system. As a general rule shared roadways are acceptable for bicycle use on local streets with traffic volumes of 2,000 or less AADT and traffic speeds of 25 mph or less. Where volumes and speeds are higher, additional lane width becomes increasingly important. Traffic calming devices may be considered to lower traffic volumes or speeds. Wide Curb Lanes are travel lanes nearest the curb having a width that is wider than the standard 12-foot lane. The extra width provides space so that motor vehicles and bicycles may share the lane. Figure 3.3 Wide Curb Lanes 11ft. 13ft. = 1 Oft. A wide curb lane will accommodate both bicycles and motor vehicles on arterial streets and roadways by providing additional operating room, allowing motorists to use the. lane also used by bicyclists, and allowing motor vehicles to pass bicycles without having to change lanes. Wide curb lanes on arterial roadways improve the cycling environment even though they may not be designated as a bikeway. A wide curb lane integrates'bicycle and vehicle traffic and forces recognition and awareness on the part of motorists, particularly at intersections. More people should be encouraged to ride bicycles for short-distance personal, business, social and recreational trips. Bicycle routes, bicycle lanes and bicycle paths are recommended for this purpose and are particularly important for casual or infrequent cyclists not adept at riding in traffic. On-street bicycle routes provide information to the bicyclists for the use of secondary streets to connect to on-street bicycle lanes that offer a designated space for bicyclists and can be a significant factor in route choice. Bicycle paths or multi-use trails that are separated from the roadway can serve both transportation and recreation functions, and have proven to be significant generators of bicycle use. Due to the nature and frequency of bicycle trips made near schools, it is particularly advantageous to provide a designated bikeway system. Page 18 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Figure 3.4 Bicycle Route Bicycle Routes may include a signed shared c, roadway or bicycle route, designated by appropriate signage. However, wide curb lane treatments, which �•.a-,-� :..�;� are typically implemented on busy arterial routes, are .a.�.... `.,.< T i usually not signed as designated bicycle routes. Bicycle routes provide directional assistance to bicyclists and continuity between bicycle lanes, shared use paths or other bicycle facilities. Bicycle route signage is not recommended for routine use on major arterials with general shared roadway conditions, or even wide curb lane treatments. Signage may also alert motorists to the presence of cyclists. Bicycle routes should to be designated on local streets with fewer than 2,000 vehicles per day, where traffic speeds are at or below 25 mph; or along collector roadways with wide curb lanes. Generally, bicycle routes are not recommended along roadways with high traffic volumes above 3,000 ADT and traffic speeds above 25 mph without the provision of wide curb lanes or paved shoulders. Bicycle lanes Bicycle lanes are designated portions of a roadway, a minimum of 4 feet wide (5 feet preferred) excluding curb and gutter, that are signed, striped and marked for bicycle use and are more appropriate for arterial routes within an urban area where 1216 traffic volumes and speeds are greater. . , Bicycle lanes improve conditions for cyclists ; ►�;. of all abilities within a given corridor and ® '�9 at-` encourage increased bicycle use by c - .p, .; !''!.<< ..• r, Axa providing a greater degree of comfort and ,) . perceived safety for less skilled cyclists. Figure 3.5 Bicycle Lane Bicycle lanes should be clearly marked for one-way travel, with designated facilities provided on both sides of a street or roadway. Special consideration must be given to the treatment of bicycle lanes at major intersections. Bike lanes tend to complicate left turn movements for bicyclists at intersections. It is also difficult for bicyclists continuing straight while motor vehicular traffic is turning right. Off-Road Bicycle Facilities Bike Paths or Shared Use Paths are usually shared with walkers,joggers, in-line skaters, pet owners, 113-6 ft 3A 6 ft dtes wheelchair users and others, as well as bicyclists. Typically paved trails are a minimum of 10 feet wide 4 -5 ft 4 .5 ft and are separated from the roadway system. They are designed for the exclusive use of bicycles and w. y other non-motorized users. Shared use paths are i exclusive rights-of-way with minimal cross flow by <— 10 -12 ft —'i motor vehicles. Figure 3.6 Shared Use Path Bike paths provide enjoyable recreational opportunities as well as desirable commuter routes and provide system continuity and linkage in areas where no on-street facilities are available. They are appropriate where uninterrupted right-of-way is available to provide long, continuous routes for commuting or recreation trips and within an independent right-of-way such as an abandoned railroad corridor, linear park, or greenway. They may be effective as cut-through between buildings or connections between cul-de-sacs and other breaks in the street network. Shared use paths should be thought of as a complementary system of off-road transportation Page 19 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan routes for bicyclists which serve as necessary extensions to the roadway network and bikeway system. Bicycle paths/multi-use trails attract a variety of user types, and therefore need to be designed to accommodate multiple users. While recreational trails do not always need to be paved, these paths should be paved if they are desired to be used for bicycle commuting or transportation trips. Most often, urban and suburban trails are paved to widths of 10 feet or more. @tNE ROUTE 3.8 Pedestrian Walking is the oldest and most basic form of human transportation. It requires no fare, no fuel, no license, and no registration. With the exception of devices to enhance the mobility of the disabled, walking demands no special equipment. Thus, walking is the most affordable and accessible of modes. At the core is the pedestrian. Pedestrians are the catalyst which makes the essential qualities of communities meaningful. They create the place and time for casual encounters and the practical integration of diverse places and people. Without the pedestrian, a community's common ground, its parks, sidewalks, squares and plazas, become useless obstructions to the car. Pedestrians are the lost measure of a community, they set the scale for both center and edge of our neighborhoods.3 A pedestrian system which includes sidewalks,,pathways, trails and crossings should be safe, accessible and provide direct and convenient connections between home, school, shopping, services, recreation and transit. A pedestrian environment that includes open spaces and amenities including benches, shelters, and plantings creates a sense of place and stimulates walking for recreation as well as transportation. Creating a pedestrian environment requires the existence of the physical infrastructure. When sidewalks are missing (or obstructed), or crossings are difficult, these functional deficiencies become an impediment to walking. The pedestrian network must also be interconnected and there must be destinations within walking distance. Finally, the pedestrian environment must be comfortable and attractive. Sidewalks are walkways that parallel a street or highway within the roadway border width. The term generally implies a separated(horizontally and/or vertically) and paved surface. Sidewalks in the public right-of-way most commonly border and take the slope of adjacent roadways. Shared-use paths may also serve a pedestrian circulation/transportation function, particularly in suburban and rural rights-of-way. Where such a route is located in a public right-of-way and provides a direct pedestrian connection between neighborhoods, residential areas, schools, employment centers, and other origins and destinations, it must be accessible. Other public pedestrian routes may parallel water or rail transportation corridors or occupy public rights-of-way in easements. Roadway shoulders may also be used by and improved for pedestrians. When used for utilitarian circulation purposes (rather than recreation, for example), pedestrian facilities are considered a transportation mode. 9 Peter Calthorpe, The Next American Metropolis:Ecology, Community,and the American Dream,p.17.Princeton Architectural Press,1993. Page 20 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan In urban areas, sidewalks predominate; in outlying areas and in the pedestrian transportation corridors that link them to other destinations, shared-use paths may be more common. Because each route provides a unique connection between diverse origins and destinations, such pedestrian }'..E routes, when they occupy the public right-of-way, • .r >M CA must be designed and constructed to be � accessible. Mr0 IF x= `+ , Figure 3.7 illustrates the minimum accessible :" 4 � sidewalk widths needed for: -:. E ,: ....vi ..-- • forward passage (36 inches); j • - • -narrowed passage at a point (32 inches for -� m. . L. i '•! ''' a maximum distance of 24 inches); 0 . :.• 1 , •.f:•. • clear width for two wheelchairs (60 inches); � -•rep. f'0' # , . - -clear width for scooter and ambulatory i��.�4 '•' pedestrian (48 inches); `+(1"` .. +►_ A approach space at telephone (30 x 48 1 inches), and ':';.I • latchside clearance at doors (18 inches on 11 pull side). Figure 3.7 Minimum Accessible Sidewalk Widths 3.9 Intermodal/Multimodal Transportation "Multimodal planning focuses on system choices and adapts a generic, non-mode- specific approach to defining and evaluating transportation problems; it then attempts to provide an unbiased estimate of each mode's contribution, singly or in combination, to solve the problem. Intermodal planning, on the other hand, examines the policy and service interactions between modes, focusing on ensuring ease of movement for both people and goods when transferring from one mode to another.'4 Transportation system choices for individuals will depend on the relative convenience, access and pricing of the alternatives. Public policy may seek to change the relative value of individual choices by improving convenience and access through public improvements or affecting pricing through incentives or regulation. Public Improvements. Improved pedestrian access to transit corridors, shopping and schools makes walking and public transportation more attractive to individuals using those facilities. Planning for higher density land uses adjacent to transit corridors increases the likelihood of larger numbers of people using these mode alternatives. Similarly, bus shelters and similar amenities which increase individual comfort and convenience will encourage additional utilization of alternative modes of transportation. Incentives. The Commuter Trip Reduction (CRT) program encourages car and van- pooling through corporate sponsorship. Additional incentives include flexible work scheduling which allows workers to avoid peak traffic periods, telecommuting and company sponsored bus passes. Where High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes are in place, vehicles with at least two occupants benefit from reduced travel time. 4 Technical Assistance Report, MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING IN VIRGINIA:, PAST PRACTICES AND NEW OPPORTUNITIES, Stephen C. Brich and Lester A. Hoel. Page 21 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Regulation. Limiting the availability of free parking, for example, increases the cost of operating a single occupant vehicle, a cost which then must be weighed against the convenience of operating a single occupant motor vehicle. Similarly, increased emission control requirements reflected in the price of a motor vehicle will have an effect on the transportation mode choice of individuals. Decisions concerning the timing of freight movement are determined by the needs of suppliers and markets, but competitive pricing is probably the most significant factor in mode choice. "Just in time" delivery has replaced warehousing in most commodity markets, where delay is a cost factor. A significant factor in determining delay is related to the efficiency of intermodal connections, loosely defined as that point where two or more modes of transportation come together; e.g. roadways connecting airports, railroad loading facilities and freight terminals. 3.10 Transportation and the Environment Air Quality The Spokane area is currently designated as a serious non-attainment area for carbon monoxide (CO)and moderate non-attainment for PM10 (particulates). SRTC is seeking designation as a CO attainment area through the implementation of a Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan, working with Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority (SCAPCA); Department of Ecology(DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is important that transportation projects do not create new CO hotspots, make existing conditions worse, or delay timely attainment of the CO standard. 3.11 Land Use & Transportation The transportation system should be adequate to serve existing land uses and planned to meet future transportation demand. The adequacy of the system to meet local circulation needs as well as regional transportation objectives will be determined by existing and future land uses. The City of Spokane Valley streetsystern is primarily a traditional grid with principal arterials laid out at approximately one mile intervals,and minor arterials located approximately midway between principal arterials. Deviations from the grid result primarily from topographical limitations. Except in these areas, the grid,distributes local residential traffic relatively evenly to the arterial network, although there is more direct access (properties fronting arterial roadways) than is desirable for the functional classification. The roadway network in non-residential areas is less well developed, with little or no segregation of freight and passenger traffic. As the city grows, it should be anticipated that conflicts between the two will increase. In commercial areas, the lack of access management on arterials has reduced roadway capacity significantly. At intersections in particular, placement of driveways may limit the effectiveness of design or signalization improvements. Local circulation and access along commercial corridors such as Sprague Avenue will be improved substantially by requiring shared and cross access between commercial properties as part of redevelopment. Changes in residential densities will increase the demand for transportation services. Encouraging higher densities along transit corridors will expand the mode choice, provided that pedestrian connections are planned appropriately. Safety and accessibility are primary concerns in providing access to schools and in providing for the elderly and the disabled. Page 22 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Expediting the flow of freight traffic and improving intermodal connectivity are important in creating attractive venues for business and industrial development. Land use plans should consider strategies for segregating freight movement from passenger traffic where possible. 3.12 Transportation Concurrency In conformance with the requirements of the Growth Management Act,5 the City of Spokane Valley reviews land development actions for concurrency. Highway Capacity Manual methods selected by the City are used to analyze project impacts to intersections, and level of service (LOS) information in the Capital Facilities Plan is used as a starting reference to analyze project impacts. A traffic impact analysis may be required if not enough information for a concurrency assessment is available. A development project cannot be approved if the transportation impact reduces the Level of Service below the adopted standards unless the project is modified to make improvements or a proportionate share of the cost of maintaining the adopted LOS is paid. 3.13 Citizen Surveys The Citizen Survey conducted in the Spring of 2004 solicited community opinion on several general and other more specific transportation issues. The majority of respondents (92%) traveled less than fifteen minutes to work, but 9 out of ten drove to work. Over 2/3rd of respondents (69%) believed that the construction of the Sprague/Appleway Couplet had been a useful transportation improvement and should not be returned to two-way traffic.. Figure 3._+_:SpraguelAppleway Couplet Has Been Useful Improvement to Overall Roadway System Sixty-nine percent of respondents indicated 100% they were strongly or somewhat supportive 80% •n=393 of extending the Appleway section of the ° couplet east past University Road, but 60%o 44% although 56% of respondents indicated they 40% were strongly or somewhat supportive of the 25°/e couplet being extended east to Evergreen 20% o U Road, another 35% were either strongly or 0% somewhat opposed to this proposition. Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly disagree disagree agree agree Figure 1: Development of Light Rail in the Spokane Region 100% Community support for the development of 80% III n=394 light rail was mixed as shown in Figure 3._. 60% 40% 27% 25% 23% 14% ° 20% 0% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly oppose opposesupport support 6 RCW 36.70A.020(12) Page 23 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Eighty-one percent of survey respondents who reported living in an area that had recently been part of the Spokane Valley were satisfied (either very or somewhat)with the reconstructed streets with nearly 50% reporting that they were very satisfied with the reconstructed streets. Figure 3._: Priority Level: Making Major 100% Streets Friendly for Pedestrians and Bicyclists) ®n=399 80% Four out of ten respondents identified making streets pedestrian-friendly as a 60% 44% high priority with 79% of respondents 40%o 34% said making streets friendly for 22% pedestrians and bicyclists should be 20% ' either a high or medium priority. 0% Low priority Medium priority High priority Supplement with additional data following Fall Workshops Priorities & Implementation Strategies T.1 Preserve the Community's investment in Roadway Infrastructure. T.1.1 Designate freight transportation corridors. T.1.2 Implement "paveback" or full width paving as a requirement for reconstruction following utility installation. T.1.3 Consider roadway impact fees for roadway system expansion. T.1.4 Require shared access and mutual access easements as a requirement for new and redeveloping commercial properties. T.1.5 Limit direct access from individual properties to arterial and collector roads. T.1.6 Consider implementing median control measures on certain arterial roadways. T.1.7 Establish design standards requiring off-street queuing in commercial parking lots or, in the alternative, acceleration/deceleration lanes within public rights-of- way on arterials and collectors. T.1.8 Interconnect and establish progressive signalization along freight corridors to limit unnecessary stopping movements. T.1.10 Implement a pavement management system. T.2 Expand multi-modal choices available to individuals and improve intermodal connectivity T.2.1 Include sidewalks in City street reconstruction and improvement projects T.2.2 Require sidewalks and pedestrian facilities in all new development. T.2.3 Work with the Spokane Transit Authority to provide bus pull-out bays on the far side of intersections and to provide bus shelters for transit patrons. T.2.4 Supplement bikeways with off-road trails to access residential subdivisions, employment centers, schools and recreation facilities. Page 24 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan T.2.5 Locate high density residential development and employment centers along transit routes. T.2.6 Support the development of light rail (LRT) to U-City and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) to Liberty Lake. T.2.7 Support the continued provision of paratransit to areas within the Public Transportation Benefit Area (PTBA). T.2.8 Encourage ride- and van-pooling, telecommuting, flexible work schedules, and Commuter Trip Reduction (CTR) to reduce travel demand. T.2.9 Provide bike lanes on arterial roadways and encourage bicycle-friendly streets in all areas of the City. T.2.10 Reduce obstructions and conflicts between bicycle/pedestrian facilities and vehicular transportation routes. T.3 Provide for safe and efficient freight mobility. T.3.1 Support the "Bridging the Valley" project to reduce the number of at-grade railroad crossings. T.3.2 Reduce the adverse impacts of freight and air traffic movements through requirements for noise attenuation adjacent to residential land uses. T.3.3 Improve intermodal connectivity between roadway, airport and rail freight facilities by establishing appropriate design standards. T.3.4 Encourage the development of intermodal facilities in close proximity to established transportation corridors. T.3.5 Discourage development of low-density residential development in close proximity to designated freight corridors and intermodal freight facilities. T.3.6 Designate Hazardous Cargo routes that minimize the risk of inadvertent spill or contamination. T.4 Establish appropriate design standards for transportation facilities. T.4.1 Street design should provide for full connectivity between residential neighborhoods and discourage cut-through traffic. T.4.2 Street design should complement adjacent development. T.4.3 Encourage landscaping and beautification of local access roads, collectors and arterials. T.4.5 Utilize traffic calming strategies to reduce vehicular speeds where appropriate. T.4.6 Bring unimproved and rural cross-sections up to urban standards. T.4.7 Establish design standards, including requirements for signalization and drainage, that limit adverse effects on the environment. T.4.8 Arterials and collectors should meet or exceed the minimum Level of Service (LOS) adopted in the Capital Facilities Plan. T.4.9 Design freight corridors to enhance traffic flow and freight mobility. T.4.10 Establish operational standards consistent with design standards and environmental sustainability. Page 25 of 25 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan Goal T.1 Develop transportation plans that complement, support and are consistent with land use and Required by GMA-not restated transportation plans from other jurisdictions and agencies. Policies Coordinate planning and operational aspects of the regional transportation system with cities T.1.1 within Spokane County, adjacent jurisdictions,Washington State Department of Transportation, Required by GMA-not restated Spokane Transit Authority, Spokane Regional Transportation Council and any other affected agencies. T.1.2 The regional transportation plan shall be consistent with the Transportation Element of the Required by GMA-not restated Comprehensive Plan. T.1.3 Development of regional transportation plans shall be coordinated and consistent with adopted Required by GMA-not restated comprehensive land use plans. Goal T.2 Provide transportation system improvements concurrent with new development and consistent with Addressed adopted land use and transportation plans. Policies T.2.1 Maintain an inventory of transportation facilities and services to support management of the See Tables defining existing and ultimate Arterial transportation system and to monitor system performance. design T 2 2 Transportation improvements needed to serve new development shall be in place at the time Required by Concurrency-See Section 3.12 new development impacts occur. If this is not feasible,then a financial commitment,consistent RCW 36.70A.020(12) with the capital facilities plan, shall be made to complete the improvement within six years. T.2.3 Transportation improvements shall be consistent with land use plans,capital funding and other Required by GMA-not restated planning elements. Implement concurrency review and management that evaluates impacts from new development T.2.4 and identifies funding sources for improvements. Evaluate the transportation system annually Required by GMA-not restated and compare to prior years. Coordinate planning with appropriate jurisdictions and utility companies for utility corridors that T.2.5 may affect the transportation system. Required by GMA-not restated Use a 10-and 20-year horizon when preparing transportation forecasts to provide information T.2.6on the location,timing and capacity needs of future growth. Required by GMA-not restated T 2 7 The transportation system shall support the Land Use Element of the Spokane County Required by GMA-not restated Comprehensive Plan as growth occurs. Major shortfalls between transportation revenues and improvement costs should be addressed T.2.8 during the annual review of the 6-year transportation improvement program. Resolution of Required by Concurrency-Section 3.12 RCW revenue shortfalls could include reassessment of land use,growth targets, level of service 36.70A.020(12) standards and revenue availability. 1 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan Goal T.3a Provide a range of transportation choices within the Spokane Region. Policy T.3a.1 The transportation system shall provide a range of transportation modes. Provided Goal T.3b Provide a safe,efficient and cost-effective public transportation system. Addessed Policies T.3b.1 Coordinate with other governments and communities to create a regional network of safe, Required by GMA-not restated efficient and cost-effective public transportation services and facilities. T.3b.2 Develop transit services and facilities that support land use plans and integrate regional and Required by GMA-not restated local transportation needs. T.3b.3 Support development of secure, conveniently located park-and-ride lots. Priority T.2 T.3b.4 Encourage the use of bus, ride-sharing and high-capacity transit services to make major T.2.8,T.2.9 segments of the transportation system more efficient. T.3b.5 Provide intermodal connections to enhance the efficiency and convenience of public T.2.4,T.2.8,T.2.7,T..4.9 transportation. Goals T.3c-d Preserve existing right-of-way and designate new right-of-way which supports high-capacity "High-capacity transportation corridor"not transportation corridors. defined-LRT/BRT Addressed Encourage land uses that will support a high-capacity transportation system. Addressed Policies Support high-capacity transit facilities and services that are consistent with the actions and T.3d.1 plans of Spokane Transit Authority, Spokane Regional Transportation Council and other T.2.6,T.2.7 jurisdictions. T.3d.2Provide for mixed-use activity centers that support a high-capacity transportation corridor. T.2.5 Goal T.3e Promote pedestrian and bicycle transportation countywide and increase safety, mobility and Addressed convenience for non-motorized modes of travel. Policies T.3e.1 The transportation network should provide safe and convenient bicycle and walking access T.2.1,T.2.2,T.2.3,T.2.4,T.2.9,T.2.10, between housing, recreation, shopping, schools,community facilities and mass transit access points. Obstructions and conflicts with pedestrian and bicycle movement should be minimized. T.3e2 Bicycle facilities should be designed where practical along arterials. Public bicycle/pedestrian T.2.4, T.2.9 facilities,where approved by the County,should be clearly marked. 2 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan Inventory existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities and maintain a pedestrian/bicycle plan T.3e.3 coordinated through the Spokane Regional Transportation Council and implemented through Map is County map-SRTC updates not available, the County 6-year transportation improvement program. Note:there is an existing regional T.1.10 pedestrian/bikeway plan,developed by SRTC. Promote hard surface walkway systems, including but not limited to, concrete, asphalt and brick T.3e.4 as an alternative to sidewalks that are separate from roads if they fit in with the characteristics of T.2.4 the neighborhood and private maintenance is assured. T.3e.5 Convenient bicycle parking and designated areas where bicycles can be secured shall be T 2 9 required at major destinations and at transportation centers. T.3e.6 Encourage preservation of abandoned rail rights-of-way for development of bike, pedestrian, T.1.10, equestrian routes or other non-motorized forms of transportation. Allow hard-surfaced pathways,including but not limited to, concrete, asphalt and brick to T.3e.7 substitute for sidewalks in commercial or industrial areas when pathways provide more direct T.2.4 and/or safer routes for pedestrians. Develop street, pedestrian path and bike path standards that contribute to a system of fully T.3E.8 T.2.4,T.2.9 connected routes. Goal T.3f _ Addresed Support and encourage the continued viability of the passenger and freight rail system in the region. _ Policies T.3f.1 Participate with other jurisdictions to facilitate safe and efficient rail systems. Required by GMA-not restated T.3f.2 Cooperate with railroads to develop traffic safety and noise reduction solutions. T.33.1,T.3.2 Land use types and densities shall be established along rail corridors that support and are T.3.5T.3.2, T.3f.3 compatible with freight and passenger rail transportation. T.3f.4 Encourage banking of rail right-of-way. Regional rather than local issue T.3f.5Encourage the continuation of rail service that supports the viability of the local economy. T.3.1, Encourage consolidation of operating rail lines and corridors to facilitate safety, improve T.3.4, T.4.9 T.3f.6 operating effectiveness and reduce impact on adjacent lands. Goal T.3G Protect airports in Spokane County from encroachment by incompatible land uses. Addressed Policies Prohibit uses in airport areas which attract birds,create visual hazards, discharge particulate matter into the air which could alter atmospheric conditions, emit transmissions which would Area east of felts Field is presently fully T.3g.1 interfere with aviation communications and instrument landing systems, otherwise obstruct or developed. conflict with airport operations or aircraft traffic patterns or result in potential hazard for off- airport land use. 3 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan Commercial and industrial uses that benefit from and do not conflict with aircraft operations T.3g.2 T.3.4 should be encouraged. T.3g.3 Decisions on zone reclassifications and land use development shall consider noise hazards of T.3.2,T.3.6 aircraft operations and accident potentials. T.3g.4 Coordinate airport development on a regional basis. Regional rather than local T.3g.5 Discourage new residential development near airports where significant noise impacts and Residential areas adjacent to Felts Field fully safety hazards exist or are likely in the future. developed T.3g.6 Encourage noise abatement procedures per FAA regulations at airports in Spokane County. Airport operations issue Goal T.3h Maintain close-in airport facilities,which are easily accessible to the cities they serve and complement Generally a regional issue-some policies the economic health of Spokane County. addressed Policies Assure that the airports can maintain or expand their levels of operations to meet existing and T.3h.1 Interlocal agreement-not necessary in Plan future aviation demands consistent with airport master plans. T.3h.2 Provide for adequate services and facilities in scale with the needs of individual airport Airport operations issue operations. T.3h.3 Ensure that airport planning is coordinated and consistent with the goals and policies of the Addressed Spokane County Comprehensive Plan. T.3h.4 Encourage multi-modal access to airports. T.3.3 Goal T.Hi Recognize major airports and military facilities as key elements of a strong economic base for Addressed Spokane County. Policies Protect public and private investment in facilities for which there may be no feasible future T.hi.1 replacement. Addressed in T.3.5 T.Hi.2 Land use decisions on land in airport areas shall consider regional and national needs as well interlocal Agreement not required in Plan as localized concerns. Goal T.4a Ensure that urban roadway systems are designed to preserve and be consistent with community Addressed character. Policies T.4a.1Utilize best available engineering practices to ensure a safe and efficient roadway system. Priority T.4,T.1,Stategy T.1.10 4 • Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan T.4a.2 Optimize the capacity of existing roads to minimize the need for new or expanded roads through Priority T.1,T.1.4, the use of improved signage, signalization, road maintenance and other means. T.4a.3 To the greatest extent possible, provide coordinated and integrated traffic control systems. Priority T.1,T.1.8 Discourage private roads as a principal means of access to developments. Allow private roads T.4a.4 within developments as a principal means of circulation, provided adequate measures are in T.4.1 place to assure safe travel,emergency access and permanent private maintenance. Transportation facility design standards shall support the creation and preservation of T.4a.5 communities and neighborhoods while simultaneously providing for the safe and efficient T.3.5T.3.2,T..1,T.4.2 movement of people and goods. Develop an arterial road plan that emphasizes planned corridors for high-capacity roadways to T.4a.6 keep high-speed traffic out of residential neighborhoods. T.3.6,T.3.5,T. T.4.5 Design of new transportation facilities or facility improvements should incorporate adequate T.4a.7 consideration of the cultural, historical and aesthetic issues associated with a proposed T.4.1,T.4.2, transportation improvement. Encourage curbside landscaping consistent with safety requirements. Identify those species of T.4a.8 landscaping that are most appropriate for curbside planting. T.4.3 Adequate access to and circulation within all developments shall be maintained for emergency T.4a.9 service and public transportation vehicles. T.4.8, Consolidate access to commercial and industrial properties by encouraging the development of T.4a.10 commercial and industrial centers rather than strip development to minimize traffic congestion T.1.4,T.1.5,T.1.6,T.1.7 on urban arterials. T.4a.11 Encourage street designs,which reduce the number of access points on principal arterials and T.1.7,T.1.4,T.1.5 highways by combining driveways for adjacent properties and use of frontage roads. Encourage 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. T.4a.12 Cul-de-sacs or other closed street systems may be appropriate under certain circumstances T.4.1 including, but not limited to,topography and other physical limitations that make connecting systems impractical. Encourage local access streets which are curvilinear, narrow or use other street designs T.4a.13 consistent with safety requirements to discourage through traffic in neighborhoods where such T.4.1,T.4.5 design fits into the surrounding street systems and aids in implementing specific land use designs. 5 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan T.4a.14 Allow paved alleys that are privately owned and maintained. Not addressed T.4a.15 Develop roadway standards that reduce the opportunity and impact of spills of contaminants T.4.10, from reaching surface and groundwater. Reduce right-of-way width dedications to the minimum necessary to provide for transportation T.4.5 needs. a)Use border easements to accommodate drainage and pedestrian facilities. T.4a.16 b) Building set back requirements should be established from centerline of right-of-way Street centerline varies with functional and should be minimized to reduce impact on use of private property while maintaining classification-alternate proposal under public safety and aesthetic values. consideration Goal T.5.a-c Provide a safe and efficient system of rural roads. Not Applicable To the maximum extent possible, Spokane County shall provide all-weather roads to serve the rural Not Applicable environment. _ Provide major rural arterials that connect urban areas (urban connectors)while maintaining rural Not Applicable character and protecting the environment. Policies Develop and maintain safe and efficient transportation connections between urban population T.5.1 centers. Prohibit new commercial use along rural collectors and state highways,which are located T.5.2 outside the Urban Growth Area boundary except in designated rural activity centers and limited development areas. T.5.3 Ensure the preservation of rural character and discourage urban sprawl by managing access to Not Applicable major rural collectors,which are located in rural areas. T.5.4 Ensure that proposed rural collectors avoid significant natural areas or historic resources where possible and mitigate impacts where avoidance is not possible. Ensure that the transportation system in the rural areas and resource lands are consistent with T.5.5 their rural/resource character. Improvements should emphasize operations, safety and maintenance. Goal T.6 Provide a safe and efficient transportation system,which responds to the needs of the community, Addressed with special consideration for the elderly, special-needs and low-income individuals. Policies Adopt standards and techniques to slow vehicle traffic and reduce the volume of traffic in T.4.1,T.4.5 T.6.1 residential neighborhoods. T.6.2Advocate safe and effective traffic control or grade separation at railroad grade crossings. T.3.6, 1.3.1 6 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan Goals T.7 Provide efficient and cost effective movement of people, goods and freight to maintain industrial, Priority T.3 commercial and manufacturing capability. Establish and maintain level of service standards for roads. Priority T.3 Policies T.8a.1 Transportation system improvements shall be consistent with adopted levels of service. Required by GMA-not restated The following shall serve as Spokane County's level of service standard: T.8a.2 Spokane County's level of service shall be based on the operational analysis at county Standards for City streets requested arterial intersections and county arterial/state highway intersections conforming to the "Spokane County Standards for Road and Sewer Construction"as amended. The Spokane County Steering Committee of Elected Officials has accepted"corridor travel time"to be used to establish the minimum level of service for the regional transportation T.8a3 system. Spokane County shall participate in the development,evaluation, refinement as Addressed See Section 4. necessary and adoption of the"corridor travel time"standard for regional minimum level of service. Goal T.8b Support level of service standards for transit established in conjunction with the Spokane Transit Addressed Authority Board of Directors. Policies T.8b.1 Ensure that the transportation system improvements are made consistent with adopted transit levels of service. CWPP reqre STA to set standards-addressed T.8b.2 Spokane County's Level of Service Standards for Transit shall be consistent with Level of Service adopted in conjunction with the Spokane Transit Authority Board of Directors. _ Goals T.8 c-d Incorporate standards for pedestrian and bicycle facilities into county road standards. Not applicable to City streets Clean streets as needed to meet air quality standards for particulate matter(PM). T.4.10 Policies Update as necessary and use a street cleaning plan coordinated with the Spokane County Air T.8d.1 Pollution Control Authority,consistent with the regional minimum level of service,to meet T.4.10 mandated particulate matter(PM)standards. _ Goal T.9 Incorporate community participation in the transportation planning process and actively involve Addressed-Process incomplete businesses and neighborhoods in transportation choices. Policy T.9.1 Encourage and facilitate meaningful public involvement throughout plan development and Arterial Road Plan to include ultimate cross- implementation, including at the project level. sections 7 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan Goal T.10 Fund transportation improvements to meet existing and future needs based on level of service Addressed standards. Policies T.10.1 Provide for a long-range financial strategy to implement the 6-year transportation improvement Addressed-specifics in Capital Facilities Plan program of the Capital Facilities Element. T.10.2 Funding to protect and maintain existing transportation infrastructure shall receive priority over priority 1 other costs or transportation improvement programs. Develop methods for funding improvements in transportation subareas that provide a fair and T.10.3 T.1.3 equitable distribution of the transportation improvement costs. T.10.4 Enhance funding methods by establishing or implementing bonds,impact fees, road T.1.3 improvement districts and other funding sources. T.10.5 Impact mitigation fees and user-based fees shall be considered as a source for funding for all T.1.3 transportation improvements required because of new development. T.10.6 Transportation impact fees shall be based on cumulative impacts from proposed land uses Required by RCW within a traffic basin,with a proportionate share allocated, based on a reasonable relationship between trips generated by any proposed land use and improvements required. Transportation funding directed to projects in areas where annexation or incorporation is T.10.7 expected should require interlocal agreements with the affected cities to provide for joint funding Not Applicable • of improvements and/or sharing of revenues. GOal T.11 Reduce the use of single occupant vehicles and increase the use of alternate forms of transportation Addressed through transportation demand management strategies. Policies T.11.1 Promote programs aimed at reducing peak period traffic congestion. T.2.8 T.11.2 Endorse programs that support alternatives to single occupancy vehicles. T.2.8 T.11.3 Support the use of telecommunications technologies for telecommuting,tele-shopping and T 2 8 video conferencing as alternatives to vehicle travel. T.11.4 Encourage working at home to minimize commuter traffic. T.2.8 T.11.5 Promote and facilitate ridesharing opportunities in cooperation with state and other transit T..2.8 agencies. T.11.6 Encourage employers to offer commute trip reduction programs for employees. T.2.8 8 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane County Plan Proposed Spokane Valley Plan Goals T.12a-b Develop transportation systems that avoid environmental impacts where possible and mitigate Addressed impacts where avoidance is not possible. Create transportation systems that work toward a sustainable community. Addressed Policies T.12.1 Design transportation improvements to minimize air,water and noise pollution. T.1.8, T.4.7 T.12.2 Ensure that new transportation systems avoid or mitigate significant impacts to natural areas or LRT/BRT require EA-no new roadways historic resources. proposed T.12.3 Transportation facilities shall not be developed in areas where they will have a significant negative effect on the environment. New local transportation systems not proposed • T.12.4 Protect and preserve environmentally sensitive areas to the greatest extent practical when LRT/BRT require EA-no new roadways developing new transportation facilities. proposed T.12.5 Develop transportation facility design standards,which are sensitive to community, cultural, aesthetic, historical and environmental needs. T.4.10,T.4.7 T.12.6 The transportation system in Spokane County shall conform to the federal and state Clean Air Required by statute and CWPP Acts. The transport of contaminants shall be minimized through residential areas and centers by T.12.7 restrictive routing and scheduling where practical. .T3.6 T.12.8 Enforce federal and state regulations for transportation of contaminants. Required as a matter of law New proposal T.4.6 Bring rural crosss-sections to urban standards • 9 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9._North/South Arterials Lanes Class Street From To aNote Current Cl) Proposed X County City F Pines(SR 27)1 Trent(SR 290) Sprague 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Bikeway from Trent to Mission only Pines(SR 27)2 Sprague 16th Ave 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Pines(SR 27)3 16th Ave City Limits 4 H 4 H PA PA Y Pines Road 1 16th Ave 32nd Ave 2 U 2-3 U MA MA Y _ Pines Road 2 32nd Ave Thorpe 2 U 2 U C RC Y Progress 1 Forker Road Sanson 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Progress 2 Sanson Trent(SR 290) 2 R 2 U MA La Y Rotchford Sprague 16th Ave 2 B 2 U n/a RC Sands 44th Ave Dishman Mica 2 R 2 R MA RC Y Saltese 1 16th Ave 24th Ave 2 U 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Saltese 2 Sullivan 32nd Ave 2 R 4 U MA MA Schaefer 44th Ave Dishman Mica 2 R 2 U MA RC Y Sullivan 1 Progress @ Sanson Sullivan @ Queen 2 R ? ? MA MA Y ISSUE-Alignment splits School Campus y Sullivan 2 Sullivan @ Queen Trent(SR 290) 2 R 4 U PA MA Y Y Sullivan 3 Trent 1-90 PA PA Y Sullivan 4 1-90 24th Ave PA PA Y Sullivan 5 24th Ave 32nd Ave PA MA Y Thierman 1 Broadway Mission C CC Y Thierman 2 Alki 8th Ave MA MA Y Thorpe Dishman Mica Madison 2 R 2 U C RC Y University 1 Trent(SR 290) RR Tracks MA La Deleted from ARP University 2 Mission Dishman Mica 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Vera Crest 16th Ave End 2 U 3 U La RC Vista 1 Mission Broadway 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Vista 2 Broadway Sprague 2 U 2 U C RC Vista 3 Sprague Appleway 2-3 U 3 U La CC Yardley Sharp Broadway 2 R 2 U C La Delete from ARP F-Freeway RC-Residential Collector PA-Principal Arterial CC-Commercial/Industrial Collector La-Local Access MA-Minor Arterial 4 *U=Urban R=Rural Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9._North/South Arterials Lanes Class co Street From To a0iNote Cl) 0) 7 Current X Proposed X County City 1-- Adams Mission 32nd Ave 2 R 4 U MA MA Argonne City limits Sprague/Appleway 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Barker Road 1 Trent(SR 290) Appleway 2 R 4 U PA PA *Bikeway From Euclid to Appleway Barker Road 2 Appleway City limits 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Bettman/Dickey 8th Ave 16th Ave 2 R 2 U C RC Blake 24th Ave Pines Road(SR 27) 2 U 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Bowdish Mission Dishman Mica 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Dishman Mica Sprague/Appleway City Limits 4 H 6 H PA PA Y Y Carnahan 1 4th Ave 8th Ave 2 R 3 U MA La Y Deleted from ARP Carnahan 2 8th Ave City limits 2 R 3 U MA MA Y Evergreen 1 Forker Road Trent(SR 290) 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Evergreen 2 Indiana 32nd Ave 2 U 4 U PA PA Y Add Ramp Fancher City Limits 1-90 2 U 6 U PA PA Y Y Farr 1 Broadway Sprague 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Farr 2 Sprague 8th Ave C C Flora 1 Wellesley Trent 2 R 2 U MA RC Y Flora 2 Trent Euclid 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Flora 3 Euclid Spokane River 2 R 2 U MA La Y Deleted from ARP Flora 4 Spokane Rive Mission 2 R 2 U MA La Deleted from ARP Flora 5 Mission Sprague 2 R 4 U MA MA Havana 1 City Limits 1-90 2-4 U 4 U MA PA Y Havana 2 1-90 8th Ave 2 U 4 U MA MA Y Heacox Broadway Alki 2 R 4 U MA MA Herald 1 Mission Sprague 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP _ Herald 2 8th Ave 16th Ave 2 U 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Hodges Sprague 8th Ave 2 R 2 U C RC Long 1 Montgomery Cataldo 2 R 2 U La RC Long 2 Broadway Appleway 2 R 2 U La RC Long 3 8th Ave Sprague 2 R 2 U La RC McDonald 1 Wellesley Trent 2 R 2 U C RC Y McDonald 2 Mission 24th ave 2 U 2 U MA MA Y Mullan Argonne Appleway 3 U 3 U PA PA Y Park 1 Trent Sprague PA PA Y `Buckeye to Valleyway Park 2 Sprague Appleway MA PA Park 3 Appleway 8th Ave MA MA Y Park 4 8th Ave City Limits 2 R 2 U C RC F-Freeway RC-Residential Collector PA-Principal Arterial CC-Commercial/Industrial Collector La-Local Access MA-Minor Arterial 3 *U=Urban R=Rural Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9._East West Arterials Lanes Class ,, Cu (,)Street From To a 0 m Note 4Current Proposed 0) County City 3 2 x x 03 (— Mansfield Wibur Mirabeau Parkway 2 MA MA Marietta Sullivan Euclid 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Mirabeau Parkway Pines(SR 27) Indiana 2 U 4 U C MA Y Mission 1 Fancher Thierman 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Mission 2 Thierman Vista 2 C CC Y Mission 3 Vista Argonne 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Mission 4 Argonne Sullivan 3 U 4 U MA MA Mission 5 Flora City Limits W 3 U 4 U C MA Montgomery 1 Argonne Pines Road(SR 27) 2 U 4 U MA MA Y Montgomery 2 Pines(SR 27) Indianna 2 U 4 U MA MA Y Saltese Sullivan 32nd Ave 2 R 3 U MA MA Sharp Fancher Yardley 2 2 C La Deleted from ARP Sprague 1 Havana 1-90 4 U 6 U PA PA Y Sprague 2 1-90 Appleway 7 U 7 U PA PA Y Y Sprague 3 Appleway Barker 2 R 3 U MA RC Y Sprague 4 Barker Hodges(City limits) 2 R 2 U C RC Y Trent(SR 290) City Limits E City Limits W 6 H 6 PA PA Y Hazardous Cargo Route Utah Bradley Park 2 2 MA La Deleted from ARP Valleyway 1 Park Farr 2 R 2 U C La Y Delete from ARP-Cut through traffic Valleyway 2 Herald Flora 2 R 2 U C La Y Discontinuous-Deleted from ARP Wellesley 1 City Limits W Sullivan 2 R 3 U MA MA Y Wellesley 2 Sullivan Flora 2 R 3 U MA RC Y Wellesley 3 Barker City Limits E 2 R 4 U PA PA Y F-Freeway RC-Residential Collector PA-Principal Arterial CC-Commercial/Industrial Collector La-Local Access MA-Minor Arterial 2 *U=Urban R=Rural Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9._East West Arterials Lanes Class a 03 Street From To N Current cn Proposed (0/3 _t)County CityNote X X m i- 3rd Ave Havana Fancher 2 MA La Y Deleted from ARP-N/S Corridor will eliminate 4th Ave Havana Thierman 2 MA La Y 4th Ave 2 Thierman Park C La Y Deleted from ARP 4th Ave 3 Dishman Mica Sullivan 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP 8th Ave 1 Havana Park MA MA Y 8th Ave 2 Dishman Mica Sullivan MA MA Y 8th Ave 3 Long City limits La RC 16th Ave 1 Carnahan Bettman/Dickey C RC 16th Ave 2 Dishman Mica Sullivan PA PA Y 16th Ave 3 Sullivan Rotchford 2 U 2 U La RC 24th Ave 1 University Sullivan 2 U 2 U C RC 24th Ave 2 Sullivan Vera Crest 2 R 2 U La RC 32nd Ave Dishman Mica Sullivan 3 U 4 U PA PA Y 44th Ave 1 City Limits Schaefer 2 R 2 R C RC 44th Ave 2 Schaefer Sands 2 R 2 R MA RC Y Appleway 1 1-90 University 6 U 6 U PA PA Y Y Appleway 2 University Evergreen n/a 3-4 U PA PA Y Y Appleway 3 Evergreen Sprague n/a 3-4 U PA PA Y Y Appleway 4 Sprague City Limits n/a 3 U PA PA Y Y Broadway 1 Havana Fancher 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Broadway 2 Fancher Park 2 U_ 4 U PA PA Y Broadway 3 Park Sullivan 3 U 4 U PA PA Broadway 4 Sullivan Flora 3 U 4 U MA MA Broadway 5 Flora Long 2 R 2 U MA La Deleted from ARP Broadway 6 Greenacres Sullivan 2 R 2 U MA La Deleted from ARP Cement Empire Trent 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Conklin Broadway Sprague 2 R 3 U La RC Empire Butler Cement 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Euclid 1 Park Vista 2 R 2 U MA RC Deleted from ARP-Millwood tie Euclid 2 Kaiser Entrance Sullivan 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Euclid 3 Sullivan Flora 2 R 3 U C CC Euclid 4 Flora Barker 2 R 3 U C CC Realign along UPRR ROW Euclid 5 Barker City limits 2 R 3 U La CC Indiana 1 Wilbur Sullivan 2 U 4 U MA MA Y Indiana 2 Sullivan Flora 2 4 U MA MA Align @ Mission 1-90 Havana City limits 6 6 F F Y Hazardous Cargo Route Knox Vista Argonne 2 U 2 U C La Y Deleted from ARP-cut through traffic F-Freeway RC-Residential Collector PA-Principal Arterial CC-Commercial/Industrial Collector La-Local Access MA-Minor Arterial 1 *U=Urban R=Rural Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9._East West Arterials Lanes Class T Street From To 3 o Note Current cc?) Proposed cnCountY City x 2 X X m i- 3rd Ave Havana Fancher 2 MA La Y Deleted from ARP-N/S Corridor will eliminate 4th Ave Havana Thierman 2 MA La Y 4th Ave 2 Thierman Park C La Y Deleted from ARP 4th Ave 3 Dishman Mica Sullivan 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP 8th Ave 1 Havana Park MA MA Y 8th Ave 2 Dishman Mica Sullivan MA MA Y 8th Ave 3 Long City limits La RC 16th Ave 1 Carnahan Bettman/Dickey C RC 16th Ave 2 Dishman Mica Sullivan PA PA Y 16th Ave 3 Sullivan Rotchford 2 U_ 2 U La RC 24th Ave 1 University Sullivan 2 U 2 U C RC 24th Ave 2 Sullivan Vera Crest 2 R 2 U La RC 32nd Ave Dishman Mica Sullivan 3 U 4 U PA PA Y 44th Ave 1 City Limits Schaefer 2 R 2 R C RC 44th Ave 2 Schaefer Sands 2 R 2 R MA RC Y Appleway 1 1-90 University 6 U 6 U PA PA Y Y Appleway 2 University Evergreen n/a 3-4 U PA PA Y Y Appleway 3 Evergreen Sprague n/a 3-4 U PA PA Y Y Appleway 4 Sprague City Limits n/a 3 U PA PA Y Y Broadway 1 Havana Fancher 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Broadway 2 Fancher Park 2 U 4 U PA PA Y Broadway 3 Park Sullivan 3 U 4 U PA PA Broadway 4 Sullivan Flora 3 U 4 U MA MA Broadway 5 Flora Long 2 R 2 U MA La Deleted from ARP Broadway 6 Greenacres Sullivan 2 R 2 U MA La Deleted from ARP Cement Empire Trent 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Conklin Broadway Sprague 2 R 3 U La RC Empire Butler Cement 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Euclid 1 Park Vista 2 R 2 U MA RC Deleted from ARP-Millwood tie Euclid 2 Kaiser Entrance Sullivan 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Euclid 3 Sullivan Flora 2 R 3 U C CC Euclid 4 Flora Barker 2 R 3 U C CC Realign along UPRR ROW Euclid 5 Barker City limits 2 R 3 U La CC Indiana 1 Wilbur Sullivan 2 U 4 U MA MA Y Indiana 2 Sullivan Flora 2 4 U MA MA Align @ Mission 1-90 Havana City limits 6 6 F F Y Hazardous Cargo Route Knox Vista Argonne 2 U 2 U C La Y Deleted from ARP-cut through traffic F-Freeway RC-Residential Collector PA-Principal Arterial CC-Commercial/Industrial Collector La-Local Access MA-Minor Arterial 1 *U=Urban R=Rural Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9._East West Arterials Lanes Class >. Street From To 3 Note 83Current Proposed c County City 3 X X m (— Mansfield Wibur Mirabeau Parkway 2 MA MA Marietta Sullivan Euclid 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Mirabeau Parkway Pines(SR 27) Indiana 2 U 4 U C MA Y Mission 1 Fancher Thierman 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Mission 2 Thierman Vista 2 C CC Y Mission 3 Vista Argonne 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Mission 4 Argonne Sullivan 3 U 4 U MA MA Mission 5 Flora City Limits W 3 U 4 U C MA Montgomery 1 Argonne Pines Road(SR 27) 2 U 4 U MA MA Y Montgomery 2 Pines(SR 27) Indianna 2 U 4 U MA MA Y Saltese Sullivan 32nd Ave 2 R 3 U MA MA Sharp Fancher Yardley 2 2 C La Deleted from ARP Sprague 1 Havana 1-90 4 U 6 U PA PA Y Sprague 2 1-90 Appleway 7 U 7 U PA PA Y Y Sprague 3 Appleway Barker 2 R 3 U MA RC Y Sprague 4 Barker Hodges(City limits) 2 R 2 U C RC Y Trent(SR 290) City Limits E City Limits W 6 H 6 PA PA Y Hazardous Cargo Route Utah Bradley Park 2 2 MA La Deleted from ARP Valleyway 1 Park Farr 2 R 2 U C La Y Delete from ARP-Cut through traffic Valleyway 2 Herald Flora 2 R 2 U C La Y Discontinuous-Deleted from ARP Wellesley 1 City Limits W Sullivan 2 R 3 U MA MA Y Wellesley 2 Sullivan Flora 2 R 3 U MA RC Y Wellesley 3 Barker City Limits E 2 R 4 U PA PA Y F-Freeway RC-Residential Collector PA-Principal Arterial CC-Commercial/Industrial Collector La-Local Access MA-Minor Arterial 2 *U=Urban R=Rural Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9._North/South Arterials Lanes Class Street From To 0 oc) v Note (9 cf? 7 Current X Proposed X County City i- Adams Mission 32nd Ave 2 R 4 U MA MA Argonne City limits Sprague/Appleway 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Barker Road 1 Trent(SR 290) Appleway 2 R 4 U PA PA * *Bikeway From Euclid to Appleway Barker Road 2 Appleway City limits 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Bettman/Dickey 8th Ave 16th Ave 2 R 2 U C RC Blake 24th Ave Pines Road(SR 27) 2 U 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Bowdish Mission Dishman Mica 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Dishman Mica Sprague/Appleway City Limits 4 H 6 H PA PA Y Y Carnahan 1 4th Ave 8th Ave 2 R 3 U MA La Y Deleted from ARP Carnahan 2 8th Ave City limits 2 R 3 U MA MA Y Evergreen 1 Forker Road Trent(SR 290) 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Evergreen 2 Indiana 32nd Ave 2 U 4 U PA PA Y Add Ramp Fancher City Limits 1-90 2 U 6 U PA PA Y Y Farr 1 Broadway Sprague 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Farr 2 Sprague 8th Ave C C Flora 1 Wellesley Trent 2 R 2 U MA RC Y Flora 2 Trent Euclid 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Flora 3 Euclid Spokane River 2 R 2 U MA La Y Deleted from ARP Flora 4 Spokane Rive Mission 2 R 2 U MA La Deleted from ARP Flora 5 Mission Sprague 2 R 4 U MA MA Havana 1 City Limits 1-90 2-4 U 4 U MA PA Y Havana 2 1-90 8th Ave 2 U 4 U MA MA Y Heacox Broadway Alki 2 R 4 U MA MA Herald 1 Mission Sprague 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Herald 2 8th Ave 16th Ave 2 U 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Hodges Sprague 8th Ave 2 R 2 U C RC Long 1 Montgomery Cataldo 2 R 2 U La RC Long 2 Broadway Appleway 2 R 2 U La RC Long 3 8th Ave Sprague 2 R 2 U La RC McDonald 1 Wellesley Trent 2 R 2 U C RC Y McDonald 2 Mission 24th ave 2 U 2 U MA MA Y Mullan Argonne Appleway 3 U 3 U PA PA Y Park 1 Trent Sprague PA PA * Y *Buckeye to Valleyway Park 2 Sprague Appleway MA PA Park 3 Appleway 8th Ave MA MA Y Park 4 8th Ave City Limits 2 R 2 U C RC F-Freeway RC-Residential Collector Pt Principal Arterial CC-Commercialllndustrial Collector La-Local Access MA-Minor Arterial 3 '`U=Urban R=Rural Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 9._North/South Arterials Lanes Class En Street From ToNote Current Cl) Proposed X County City i Pines(SR 27)1 Trent(SR 290) Sprague 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Bikeway from Trent to Mission only Pines(SR 27)2 Sprague 16th Ave 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Pines(SR 27)3 16th Ave City Limits 4 H 4 H PA PA Y Pines Road 1 16th Ave 32nd Ave 2 U 2-3 U MA MA Y Pines Road 2 32nd Ave Thorpe 2 U 2 U C RC Y Progress 1 Forker Road Sanson 2 R 4 U MA MA Y Progress 2 Sanson Trent(SR 290) 2 R 2 U MA La Y Rotchford Sprague 16th Ave 2 B 2 U n/a RC Sands 44th Ave Dishman Mica 2 R 2 R MA RC Y _ Saltese 1 16th Ave 24th Ave 2 U 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Saltese 2 Sullivan 32nd Ave 2 R 4 U MA MA Schaefer 44th Ave Dishman Mica 2 R 2 U MA RC Y Sullivan 1 Progress @ Sanson Sullivan @ Queen 2 R ? ? MA MA Y _ ISSUE-Alignment splits School Campus Sullivan 2 Sullivan @ Queen Trent(SR 290) 2 R 4 U PA MA Y Y Sullivan 3 Trent 1-90 PA PA Y Sullivan 4 1-90 24th Ave PA PA Y _ Sullivan 5 24th Ave 32nd Ave PA MA Y _ Thierman 1 Broadway Mission C CC Y Thierman 2 Alki 8th Ave MA MA Y Thorpe Dishman Mica Madison 2 R 2 U C RC Y University 1 Trent(SR 290) RR Tracks MA La Deleted from ARP University 2 Mission Dishman Mica 4 U 4 U PA PA Y Vera Crest 16th Ave End 2 U 3 U La RC _ Vista 1 Mission Broadway 2 R 2 U C La Deleted from ARP Vista 2 Broadway Sprague 2 U 2 U C RC Vista 3 Sprague Appleway 2-3 U 3 U La CC Yardley Sharp Broadway 2 _ R 2 U C La Delete from ARP F-Freeway RC-Residential Collector PA-Principal Arterial CC-Commercial/Industrial Collector La-Local Access MA-Minor Arterial 4 *U=Urban R=Rural COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES FOR SPOKANE COUNTY Policy Topic 5 sportatio INTRODUCTION Overview of Growth Management Act (GMA) Requirements Regional transportation systems include major highways, airports and railroads, as well as bikeways, trails and pedestrian systems. The Growth Management Act (GMA) encourages a variety of efficient transportation systems in order to reduce sprawl while improving the efficient movement of people, goods and services. Therefore, close coordination is necessary between transportation planning and the land use element of each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan. The Growth Management Act (GMA), as well as other state and federal legislation, requires transportation planning to be conducted on a regional basis. According to RCW 36.70A, local jurisdictions must adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the development causes the level of service on the transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development. The strategies could include increased public transportation services, ride-sharing programs, demand management strategies and other transportation system management strategies. Overview of Countywide Planning Policies The Countywide Planning Policies propose that transportation planning in Spokane County be carried out by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council. Consequently, each jurisdiction's land use plan should be consistent with the regional transportation system. ) Policy Topic 5-Transportation ( Draft: Updated by the Technical Review Committee through a process beginning February 4,2004 and continuing through March 17,2004. Process continued through the Steering Committee Subcommittee to update the Countywide Planning Policies,beginning May 14,2004 and continuing through June 21,2004. Page 31 COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES FOR SPOKANE COUNTY j a. alternative modes of transportation to the automobile, including public transportation, pedestrian facilities, bikeways and air and rail facilities; b. an assessment evaluation of the general environmental and economic impacts of the plan; NOTE: MORE APPROPRIATE WORDING. c. coordination with land uses to reduce transportation demands; d. standards for accessibility to major institutions, manufacturing and industrial centers and air and rail terminals; e. incorporation of utility easements into transportation corridors; f. provisions for special-needs populations; and g. access management to regional arterials. } 4. Comprehensive plans shall include, where applicable, the master plans of identified major transportation facilities to ensure that they are reasonably accommodated and compatible with surrounding land uses. Such facilities shall include, but not be limited to, airports, state highways, railroads and major freight terminals. 5. Local jurisdictions shall develop and adopt land use plans that have been coordinated through the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC)to ensure that they preserve and enhance the regional transportation system. These plans may include high-capacity transportation corridors and shall fulfill air quality conformity and financial requirements of the .: • .: :: •• - •. • ' "R• . - Federal Transportation Laws and Regulations, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and the Growth Management Act (GMA). NOTE: UPDATED TO REFLECT CURRENT CONDITIONS. 6. Local jurisdictions shall designate within land use plans areas that can support public transportation services. These areas shall include existing as well as new Policy Topic 5-Transportation Draft: Undated by the Technical Review Committee through a process beginning February 4,2004 and continuing through March 17,2004. Process continued through the Steering Committee Subcommittee to update the Countywide Planning Policies,beginning May 14,2004 and continuing through June 21,2004. Page 33 COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES FOR SPOKANE COUNTY } Plans should identify specific routes that are, or could be, subject to available funding, designed and constructed utilizing a regional standard for heavy truck traffic to serve the movement of goods from industrial and rural areas to the market. Future land uses requiring heavy freight movement should be encouraged to locate along these routes. 9. Recognizing the need to maintain existing rail lines for shipments of commodities, which reduces the impacts of shipping commodities by roads, local jurisdictions should protect rail facilities to the extent possible. 10. Each jurisdiction should coordinate its housing and transportation strategies to support existing, or develop new, public multi-modal transportation systems. 11. Each jurisdiction shall address land use designations and site design requirements that are supportive of and compatible with public transportation_, • , } limited to: for example: a. pedes i .an scale nei ihborhoods and activi centers; b. mixed use development: and c. pede trial friendl and nonmotorized desinn. RE-INSERTED BY THE STEERING COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE NOTE: INDIVIDUAL CHOICE FOR EACH JURISDICTION. I Policy Topic 5-Transportation Draft: Updated by the Technical Review Committee through a process beginning February 4,2004 and continuing through March 17,2004. Process continued through the Steering Committee Subcommittee to update the Countywide Planning Policies,beginning May 14,2004 and continuing through June 21,2004. Page 35 Jun COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES FOR SPOKANE COUNTY ) 17. The transportation element of each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, where transit service exists, will include level of service standards for transit routes and services. Each jurisdiction will coordinate the level of service standards with all adjacent jurisdictions and appropriate agencies. NOTE: UPDATED TO REFLECT CURRENT CONDITIONS. 18. Each jurisdiction shall use its adopted level of service standards to evaluate concurrence for long-range transportation planning, development review and programming of transportation investments. 19. The annual process to update and approve the Six-year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP) by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) shall be used to prioritize regional transportation improvements and programming regional transportation revenues. 20. Transportation elements of comprehensive plans shall reflect the preservation and maintenance of transportation facilities as a high priority to avoid costly replacement and to meet public safety objectives in a cost-effective manner. 21. Each jurisdiction, Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) and other transportation agencies shall identify significant regional and/or countywide land acquisition needs for transportation and establish a process for prioritizing and siting the location of transportation corridors and facilities. ) Policy Topic 5-Transportation Draft: Updated by the Technical Review Committee through a process beginning February 4,2004 and continuing through March 17,2004. Process continued through the Steering Committee Subcommittee to update the Countywide Planning Policies,beginning May 14,2004 and continuing through June 21,2004. Page 37 Vicinity Map ;1111111111111111Wd 11111 11111111111 til NipIIII II INIENNINI " Ilk III IIIWI 111111111111111 williliim Illir% Site III 1M fir' ' "114 1111141 * ani Ill 1111 41t AM 4 iiiO4 g 111110• mi 17, 1111Nras .......-1111111- 1J... n 4' Comprehen�sive' Plon Amendment CPA-01-04 *Wane�' Comprehensive Plan Map IIIIIIIIIII.1 7.0 WIIHNIIN.IW41 L. . iitositsittii .ath JtT 3e IIII71 All -pi s�an ,,C all Pill -.. 11111111i11111111a ' ' ---- -1 4- •'?,-,atit4 Ø4p Comp Plan Category I Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential ® High Density Residential Mixed Use Ar : er 1111 / Urban ActivityllI Community CenterCenter = Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial - Regional Commercial II IIII II Light Industrial Heavy Industrial 11111 Mineral Land _ _ 111111 iii N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-01-04 August,2004 SPokan � Valley Zoning Map mmellIWITIO wAtir . 111 ill 13111.11M.11.1 ''.. :'''".':':. ..''15/ gal iMMIIIIIIIM =- - 4 1:'''1" In um samosis Nom • .-. :I., 12 son IpPrllpR , .isim, 11 _ 111 EN plikki /it/lice 1 Zonin1C3Tegory P ... .:. 1:-; 11111k *0 i„// :::: I A 4 c. II 14 1 B-3 111111 NO ////' 71° IRE NS 4 1 " I:: kft .. -. ,, ii L. ' mz ____IMIllasili \I N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-01-04 %' 2004ey August, Vicinity Map i 'iir _1 11111111ritriii mirg ,161 Comprehensive Plan Amentlment August, �w� jvi Comprehensive Plan Map ": . „- 1,-po .--im...-------i--- rill o1 rl.il....! Desmet 11 .11 mil mormilmmi II NsI _ ..... -- 11111 111111 rill Density Residential • mil ■ iii ■ 1111111 read m illalurli_ 1ELi -nia al Low Den.Ity Resld t Comp Plan Category MO - Low Density Residential 111 1.1 la Medium Density Residential ir :ii:i - High Density Residential , sti.iic: 111111111111 III Mixed Use II Community Center , ® Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial u nty CmeMil- aorcIn I.dtririir±FI! TEfl Heavy Industrial 1111111111111111\Mineral LandA0iii NI __. .........._ ...... isa .1 N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-02-04 August,2004 >Valley Zoning Map " ri1110111111111111 111„.7.1 r.11. 11111 a 1111111111 1111 11111.11111111111111, 111.1 iii rlirir. . ar-.... . __Jes ,./ i fill I , ,, r Ar of11111 sli 1 A. I Ai A Ai A : --- • fr i Ill 11111 !- - • - - ."'. ..:. .-:. .:-''..,-.:11 iiii MI millimi Ill up zoning category ••: . .. • .: a .. milii, , • ;1 .: UUURRR:377.5* . ..1.1:....:. :.;:..::!1 rums§ ii . . ri ////, RR-10 1111111111111111 ITTIIIIIIMITI TO 1 • _.j MZ 1 1111M19 Will 1111 1 - 1111 MIME IIIIIII Ell 111 N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-02-04 ��'� Vicinity Map 'Wag MI ' I will reral k tin ' I iii OM 111111111. r-,. I i'-°I 111 3 11111 'IIIIIIIIII lit] ri , IP" -.1-111 iir ilitsr N CompreM1ens'�v�euPla�nO Amendment so 0,0eess.„ ��1 _ CPA-03-Od st, 1 Zoning Map \ �I III � Irl 41 I iiii. **1*----impti NI glinisilditor iti II I no Ia. di oi, F, ---Iii vasi Ifir gva a 9 • 40416 ismo jilt iii mop 1 Imitgi 4yositiveriLmo •ii f I\ migi Site am 4. iiia 1.111•:.:; s,:.// 1;1 . Zoning Cat imi I uR-3.5egorY LI I mi IIII IIUR-7 UR-12 fil 0 ,Ar A r: r A r I W 2 A e.1 A., „ 'MI B-2 1"1".".. ..m"mm A A ' 7 r I • pip" I..�z� JIIII r , yr Imo A A N Comprehens"i�you 'owan AmentlmenY CPA-03-04Sikikane Comprehensive Plan Map mk 11. 1 ! 1141RP abW1‘,, il I i In in i 1 lij m pl I I IYiwrgitili .", II NI illiwI .... III OS I lit; igium . .0 si 1111 __ prin.fi- •, P A Comp Plan Category B Low Density Residential in rillMedium Density Residential IIIIII. High Density ResidentialMixed Use i _ _1 Community Center Milli ® Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial I ■ Regional Commercial Ili ILight Industrial IHeavy Industrial !_ Mineral Land N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-03-04 Spokane August,2004 Valley Vicinity Map , minermalqii!Wallig rift il ImiLiki, li Inal wismat ‘ ..... 15r-Ew-in Iiii ,!!_s 001.,: ji teraisoli tiDirro ..... , -,,,,itic„, poreirm 1 ,,,,,,, .. - n 4 - i 111110 Iri r• - ailissylv timAiniongill sito 1 ill° IMP men I dm , . , __ __... r„, .... ITArtimirosibil ..." moutwitio ... jaw 1111....Lomm" ion I 111111111M in----m ilram—arg--ri-vA00•1 _ _gigoovus. 4, Comprehensive 1P I�a Nmentlmen[ GPA-040C � 1 Comprehensive Plan Map 1111111111 remm,, ilirdi II iiii 111 iiiimi Wisi ii kt imii ap iiiliii 190 I 90 Site loressiea ... . NB 111111 / • - 1111gX1mo■LiIiiáIi1 ill" Olin ■ Illjrli ill III Mod Ell WI II Comp Plan Category Elm in Low Density Residential 11111 „' 1 11-- • Medium Density Residential ■ - High Density Residential 11113 .111 Mixed Use Ei ■ . ,,, II Mai _ Community Center 1IIIIII 11111 ® Urban Activity Center I... 1M, . Neighborhood Commercial � ..Comty ecial im RegionalmuniCommeCommrcialrIII1 Light Industrial '... I . Prague A. Heavy Industrial , . „...111111.1611 Mineral Land 1111 11111 S „-0��/I mil N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-04-04 *Ilia" August, 2004 Valley Zoning Map 1 illir, .\\.. 1 _ WI me 1 k -N1:\ . lk, x 1 ' N'I ,v..4*z...il*ZT ' 'N-1 r-N-------.-.............................. 111 Equil . , ,.‘, ' Winn' dal -`• 6%. , °Milli Ma 4 mi isms l __..r:- 'A.,. ii:90 .1 ....m... .............m...b, 11111 11.7111111111 III I IIIIIV till I glir II I aril I? 111W16:11 gilt 1 ONO III 1 II:Mg MIN r- 7 REM Illid III ENE Mk aili UR 7* 1-Lrier_., uIiiiP9if Comprehensive///X• UR-22 I Man mow , =Tr-2 n . 1 m e- � Planpo Amendment CPA-0d-04 Sioliane ust, Vicinity Map 1 1111111111111 I 11 pop Site • I Valleyway Y/ lir. � Comprehensive Plan Amendment Comprehensive Plan Map ___ ___1____ 7 4 414. $ J__ . , _ , , m cn i -- -- II --_. — / Site , z7 i / c I 1, -' : Valleyway , m_____ — c II � I I I I— I Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential --\ , -- Medium Density Residential 1 ( I ® High Density Residential I I Mixed Use Community Center ® Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial " — L J Community CommercialI - ------------- ® Regional Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial L ---1 Mineral Land j N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-05-04 SpokanII V alley August, 2004 Zoning Map 1 or re- I I ill .1 r - - " Slfe 1 i my r r Zoning Category A 4 A/A All" UR-3.5 Y///. UR-22 �Uu o , ... MZN � Comprehensive Plan Amendment 00".... CPA-05-04SiZkane Valley Vicinity Map t71 N ‘"/ ‘ 4 41 I 4 1 11 NI I I I I It ° gala a_ suaise Mee -- niumn efts mi *ft Lim. I- - • wo. slop , ,. itio _41 p..._ ;a0; r. 11,1„ gin so _ mi.. ...4 !---- MIA Irm mu Poll • ■ 11 -hu og Site om-11111•11 III al MII ImioNi tat 11111111§01 ora Ifil NNE =Fa Di • vli mow 4T- PP :: iii 1•• mom Isii0 1 1101,121211,11,0Z gogg ti ram= iiiimiiiiimm II Jai ki-------- Eno II . mom minTi "7- ra i ‘, II lapown Aim mom link,i is§ dokommi 0 111111111111: ill 1 Km nommoon - nal oirmumn um MEI Pan!! gimsommoi NEE Ewa ratimill AIM 11 - rtin NM ligmlasingoonns :111 um : Alm sridellqi ii mmil so "III iii ' IP' II Imill ma "IL TR m_ilia, 1111101,1111TIN Ilicougni......., ...,......., il- ,.. _f_ Comprehensive'P IaAmendmen[ CPA-06-04 ....Valley Comprehensive Plan Map _ i 90 E290 ON _ / 1 z so _ s . /3_ ..2... ON-------_.Opp n1V 1 S0 E7-$�0N ,■ ` pm s I 1P4I111l IN roullItagrA liIII'. 1111% • Site ... . mom Ea • ii , ��c. IM u NMI ■.■ ■■■. 1111011111111 ■■1111 1111■ ■ g.pp 11■'■'■� '■: ■fa, b. 111 1111,11111111,. ■ 1,,1111 .aldh Am •■ FIA III ■ 1111.11sum ■� m I.1111al1111.■ � /um moi.,.... ■ ll 1 al.. ii �. ■ ■ rig � I Comp Pl!!b0"iry :w� N ' Low Density Residential si ■ ■ 1111 "' Medium Density Residential 111111111 I High Density Residential ■ Mixed Use — , Community Center 11111 1,5 EIJI =lki �■ - ' ® Urban Activity Center ■r�■ - I Neighborhood Commercial 11111111U - limo • Community Commercial ■ _ - Regional Commercial ■ ■ In Li ht Industrial ■ ai— C g1111" ■ IMO ' Heavy Industrial ■ Mineral Land , sommii N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-06-04 S�Ao �` August,zoos Valley Zoning Map ii J,M1'� ty....„,......, WI ft ' , r A -- irmit .,w , r , , , , ,A Milli 111% *. 4 '. ' 14 ; r ' 4 1 mil Amimmorill owm�,�ri ri, !i.;l.'�1' ,, , by�','��,�j��l'��"i�l'''1i'"� !MI um on iii w EN •ii lib - , m: ,w 1 ;„., 11111 1111 ma dive: ill .....,THI ili ft.= 4 r; P ‘,44.4 .... .. mini No 11111.1 11111 ' mi, I site filii rib 4' ' liAl illidlial Ell MIIIj,Eil Nam= Lift aa 01111 um 1111111111111111 men wo mom ;IP aii No lumm WI .. — IM . 111111. Afill ill 111111111111 1,1011169 11 it 11181,1,5„ One 1.911 NI Ns imaim Ng Wit =UM mi 111 .' MN MM. Ni.. ro, I 11P_ANN teillErialr,: .. 1111 IIIIII 111111111111111 impp\40 manuommiguirrariontseg-44 ram • vid„.eas II I .. - II h . zoning Category I UR-3.5 1111111111111111 1111111 1111101 i /7 UR-12 1111111 111111 IV "1111 milli via71-22 111111111111111111111 11111110111 =-2 iv II 11111111 ail PAIIII_1114 imi 1 B-3 I I ///// RR-10 I 1111 1.111 EMI i 11111 Om um EklusmaJ1111111101111111 11111 111111111111 :: II 1111 Comprehensive PlaN n Amendment CPA-06L0 Sikikane Vicinity Map IlL llFuture Mansfield Road 111 im Alignment 11111111111111ii. o 11.11111.111111.1IPh1a :: ry .■i gp N128 On , ■",I■ glAllig41. II" - . : 119° ..-.�.. �in 111411 111111111111111111111 1'111 111111 IIII E i g imi-Vii mimull 01 -1,11 „„, ,,, .......„ t .., Ii. , uu 111111 -.1111.00111111 El NM 11umlil N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-07-04 Wane August,2004 40000Valley Comprehensive Plan Map 111- 1 I -1 .Matie 'II V E a a Future Mansfield Road Alignment11 111.ilk III ILI lollI 0 —� :tsfield 1 ji • ■ 4,, MMMM ®.® ®sMMuuMeMeeoMeee®s®®.: ..., s s. it NI, . . \ 0 = ' non -------- - — �-i ird ani — ,——�— y i nt ome•, 7 l` �• - Mo.-� — _ z-_ _. -� 1 F TT 1- -t._- I L iI ! I �i - — I r— II —f ]__I__ ___i_ Comp Plan Category f - - 1 1 '- Low Density Residential ----- \ . Medium Density Residential _ _ _ � 1 Mixed Use __ I • MI High Density Residential ��,_ ` r - — 111 1111111 Community Center ly--- 1111111 --1 ' _ L Urban Activity Center '-: . \ --- . - `11 -- - 111 111111 Neighborhood Commercial — Ii • ty '�'g'�0 111 _1!111 � Communi Commercial 1 • - Regional Commercial ,fl— I-Ia Il I ilPh Mill illimmum Heavy Industrial ( �- " ll 11 in ��i ' 4 111111111111111011111111111111111111111110111111111111111111111111101111111111!11111111111111101111111111IL Mineral Land _ .:.. -_t- ■ _____........ all N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-07-04 Spokane August, 2004 Valley Zoning Map"nAl ";\r 4 '‘ \ j r , -r# A . , \ \\, �� . Future Mansfield Road ° f ,/ : i r/ � ,�� Alignment N &, .0 • orifr AA / / •/%%".' rA, \\ �. ,.\-\ ,� � / , /4 ..\ TTTT,/� 4i ,. . tet :2141 G ./ ' V i ,am 1. Lt.)/ lam!/�l�l ��imPrA��.� .4 , ._ --- Ad — L:jj ,... /moifi&I\ \\\�16- .isilirrAI:ArAr...4:40X.Ar ArArA "r4r-'7:'w ,Is 1, 1, ,s, I 90 NN29 0 \N, • di , , ri , Rini_ i 0 ► ' ,_.„_„A;:---- zoning polygon /��11I.� ;�A; A: •0 ii A � / i'� UR-3.5 %///// � a 1/ % i :>� Wen ► 1 / '// J /UR-7 �/ .- / /pArl. UR-12 I A,FIA lA �► ///A UR-22 ��ar r r. 1111 1,111,, ' B-1 1 I 9"41M111 IIII__1 / B3 rr, `�; 1111 :i illi ": jv�/ RR-10 too norm %111 ir IA /\\' , 1-2 7 i / 11111 ; ■ IPPI um _AL. Mz r 1111101 11111111P111111115 I / A 111111111111211111111 N Comprehensive Plan Amendment �— CPA-07-04 Spokane' August, 2004 Valley Vicinity Map Brid•eport IA v V'!'ii , "„. :1■ ' „i„iI .■■ �� =moi 1'i■ ell�� P re .1 can r AlidPm!"II isipmnstal IBM lbw _ City of Spokane � IIS =■i„' ,';',� OPPIII ! III iii ��' `�II�■1■■mo�i 04111118. I. pp_, ....pin n te111,/"0-11.4 ....AI nab • � ot•o l viiti,_o___ �Is 1 imIiii j -d ■ 1MI1 �• •1100 INIBIE11111n, II i ity of Sp. .Q IS i1JII ■ ‘�1 1Imr1a_I- 1E1 • .I , 1111—■ ■' 111011 11111111 III III 11 -- gilt! ... ...-. _ illiilm 1111111 N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-08-04 Spo"kan''ems`` August,2004 . .0Valley Comprehensive Plan Map k , DIIIUiIIlbJJ id divilab I �1in ail 'I1 6 ,1, • City of Spokane ,lig„J.. A.. .....lori . „1.'.111 T■, lam' Ell ''' al jprorg/74dril 11 • r _II!' lullulilli I ■ ' : ■ ■ --- sal milli Laill6— 1 ,- 11111. si "'— re 'El -ar-7-21!_1iIm1'11 !l� ■ iii___ -1.•'=" �■H■ r al _Ls ■■ ■ oIII ■ 1 Comp Plan Category mi 111111.1111111M N■ Mic ■■ ■■moi ■ . ii■ iro�I IIII Low DensityResidential Medium DensityResidential . • ■I,, ,i ANM ■=n"d. .p ■ High Density Residential ■� ■r� aro inI AII IN Mixed Use 'rr ' ilp1 Community Center ■ ' ■ ® Urban Activity Center ■ ■ Neighborhood Commercial a ' !1I1 Community Commercial ■"' i;iil Regional Commercial I Light Industrial Heavy Industrial IIIIt'Ir '.-11 Mineral Land 1111111111I III I N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-08-04 Spokan�an'e� August,2004 4000Valley Zoning Map Brid•e•ort „111111.-p 111P911 EMI mum 1 Pr.1P1,_ ! 'iP" If. ILill za I. Ncozo Wr AAA ■ ■1ummo7� - 11 ■ opIi ■I alp.�C a City of Spokane ,M .■ ■ �_ ' /. Aliofair,dad VI_1111 RIFI / n Site ..t /oma. 411 AM ■ ,1 I1■■ op �i .ri-tt: � ...,.e;. : '-'- '- gill VIII In .,.. . ...,... • 111111 1111 1.1 al 1 111 ...i�;AZ*4 �1,11' ` �� ©� C is a ". 11 k . MI � �� ■ � Zoning Category �`1�— \11111111... Man-�iefd �1* NM mi lin. ■ D U R-3.5 ' r`♦♦♦♦♦� � - M_ H �� o • 1 MINI MIN Lql.Mir A PA pi U R T 12 \�\`' \\ = `1 —l 1 NM g111111 ill trArxi it MUM �= MIN n r AlUREl all all .W/ 1 li SN''\\ � F� %/� /i� ' k. 1154 !b5 W/ B-2 I ; , ,...-*'* %al* , s' MI i B-3 •••.i.imaik 1XW' T‘' ' ,I'KN' 1\ I _1111P -*---:::::11! , _______...„ ...0,......„,„,,L,.,,,i..„......ti wo- 1 , 1 t ,./ iTio 7. :.-" 0` ' .4‘ , * I - 1 .. , 1 • k . I ♦` �w'►�1 ..:, : mz ' -N 1,,. 1 . N • v3i1v. ,... -- ; Stlit ` \ . 1,., . \I. M AIL' I \ 1M, \ \ NI 1 iiissisSSSiSriliell ift N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-08-04 ft Spokanane - August,2004 valley Spokane Valley o 2125 A 2O year Plan for the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Questionnaire results compiled from a total of 183 Community Meeting "Unscientific Surveys" 1. Do you live in the City ,tf Spokane Valley? No 10% Yes 90% mNo0Yes 2. Do you own a business in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes 18% No 82% No o Yes 3. Do you work in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes 29% j7No 1% No n Yes 1 4. What is your home zip code? 99223 i 1 99216 mom 12 n 99212 rmriu116 Q 99209 11 O 99206 _ - --'59 o 99202 i 1 N 99037 ®15 99019 i 2 99016 67 0 20 40 60 80 5. In general terms,do you think Spokane Valley is headed in the right direction? 100 87 80 60 46 40 20 6 0 No Yes Undecided 6. If you answered No in Question 5,what changes would you suggest? Please be as specific as possible. ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT: Place a stop on dense housing development until a common sense overview determines that we're not damaging the valley. Control growth in residential areas. Keep neighborhood density as is. Don't zone for the sake of zoning, consider all factors. Should be less emphasis on real estate development,preserve some open spaces,protect Spokane River Corridor, aquifer, views and quality of life. Greenacres Appleway looks like a used car lot. Developers need to be held more accountable for roads and other improvements needed for population of the Valley. The Valley is a developer's dream come true. Pay attention to residents'wants and needs. Work toward consensus. Stop all development in Greenacres and similar neighborhoods! Less houses per acre, more ruralization vs. urbanization. No urbanization(encroachment). Developers have control. Hold off on allowing any development until people have had genuine input. As is, you've already destroyed areas beyond repair. Stop allowing housing developments to ruin our neighborhood. Slow down the building. Community Meetings should be offered prior to haphazardly approving developers request for rezoning. Zoning should be consistent in specified districts. I see too much "in-filling"happening! Change zoning laws!! Don't follow the County!! 2 Address by writing ordinances to mitigate compatibility problems between old zoning uses and new uses. No more copycat planning, but create a Spokane Valley that isn't formulated by Seattle or the Puget Sound Hearing Board. Let's be unique and creative. More neighborhood planning/growth direction(parks, traffic, schools, etc.) Not so many houses per acre. Don't force high density housing into rural areas in the city limits Preserve the neighborhoods. COUNTRY LIVING: Please insure you maintain the semi-rural atmosphere where people can continue to have large animals and gardens. Do not build in country. Have areas that have one-acre or larger lots. Listen to the property owners more. I moved to the Valley many years ago to live in the country. Respect the rights of people to maintain a rural lifestyle. COUPLET: Leave the Appleway and Sprague roads as they are. Change one-way system back to two-way system. Extend Appleway as soon as possible-leave Appleway and Sprague one-ways. Finish the Couplet. Couplet road to two-way streets again. GENERAL TRAFFIC: Remove traffic light at Sprague& Gillis. Purchase five feet each side of Broadway, create center turn lane. Too much traffic MUNICIPAL SERVICES: Appears that law enforcement services have declined. Concerned about the privatization of government services. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Vacant businesses continue to grow. PARKS&RECREATION: Parks not yet under this "city': More parks, we don't need a central downtown. CODE ENFORCEMENTt: Code department needs better qualified personnel. CITY MANAGEMENT: Have a better plan for budgeting. Better communication between officials and community. I see costs of city government with no improvements in quality. Not organized and public not properly and adequately represented. Poor money outlook. You already want to outsource parks, libraries, etc. Look into the future and at other cities. More public input on zoning-transportation-parks issues. More tax benefits for the elderly. We were sold a bill of goods that said"incorporate so you can do what you want'. We are being forced into a highly dense city and losing our small-town country lifestyle. Keep it out of Greenacres. Listen to the people. Creating more government wasn't best idea. Less growth, less government interference, and lower taxes! 3 LIBRARY SYSTEM: Leave the library system alone! Please do not privatize the libraries. COUNTY GOVERNMENT: Go back to County form of government. Go back to County-we like it small and quiet. New County Commissioners. LOGISTICS: Seems as though we are more of a pass-through for Spokane to Liberty Lake. I feel we are treated as an appendage of the City of Spokane. 7. Would you say police services are: 80 71 70 60 - 50 50 - 40 - 30 - 20 - 20 15 10 - 3 0 Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent 8. Would you say fire protection services are: 80 70 - 70 60 - 56 50 - 40 - 30 - 27 20 - 14 10 - 0 0 Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent 4 9. Would you say library services are: 60 56 50 42 40 30 30 23 20 10 0 0 Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent 10. Would you say street maintenance is: 70 63 60 - 53 50 - 40 - 30 - 29 20 - 18 10 - 2 0 Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent 11. Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved services in Spokane Valley? 100 92 90 - 80 - 70 - 60 - 50 - 48 40 - 30 - 20 - 10 - 5 0 - No Yes Undecided If yes,which services? Parks, Roads/Street Repair&Maintenance, Police, Fire Protection, Parks&Recreation, Open Space Purchase,Transpioitation,Public Safety, Community Hubs,Infrastructure,Library District. 5 Other Comments: Prove your fiscal responsibility first. This is not a good start! Taxes have increased enough! Balance the budget! I thought we'd save money! I want to understand the City's growth plan first. The City was supposed to have more money after incorporation. If money is needed and not squandered, 12. Have you had any interaction with the City of Spokane Valley permit center? 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 No Yes 13. How would you rate your level of satisfaction with the services you received from the City's permit center? Would you say you were... Very unsatisfied 3 Somew hat unsatisfied 5 Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 19 Somew hat satisfied 7 Very satisfied 11 0 5 10 15 20 6 14. How important to the future of Spokane Valley is having an area of the City that is recognized as the"downtown"? Would you say.... Very unimportant 33 Sorrow hat unimportant ®7 Neither important nor unimportant 35 Somew hat important 57 Very important 45 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 15. If you feel a developing a"downtown"is important,which of the following areas of Spokane Valley would be the most ideal location for a downtown? 4% 10% 4% (I. 73% S University City area o Nirabeau Point area Rnes&Sprague i Evergreen&Sprague ®Other(see list below) Other: I would support this if the University area is developed into a "downtown"area. Wherever is best suited for long range plans(parking,growth, etc.) Appleway and Barker Depends on studies, traffic, we/dry utilities, capital budgets, etc. Sullivan and 425 I don't want a "downtown" North Pines Junior High School The Safeco Building on Adams and Sprague Sullivan and Sprague 7 16. Would you support Spokane Valley officials strategically investing public money to promote the creation of a downtown that would have a mix of restaurants, retail,and public buildings like city hall? Would you say you... Strongly oppose 36 Sorrew hat oppose ^ 14 Neither support nor oppose -- _- 30 Somew hat support 53 Strongly support 35 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 17. In your opinion, does Spokane Valley have an identity or something that makes it unique? 81 80 80 79 78 77 76 75 75 74 73 72 No Yes Please describe: Optimism and Potential Nice to family togetherness People like it and will improve The river and hills on both sides Quality of Life and Safety You have room to do your own thing. Urban Big lots Gate to Washington Long-term residents seem to identify Our Heritage Car lots Culture Chance to develop a city from scratch Spokane Valley We have a chance to develop two great Natural area along river one-way streets to move traffic The River Lots of dosed businesses on Trent& Small town with large town features Sprague Rural river We're not in Spokane Just being a city in 2004 Friendliness More like being in Country not in City Heritage Valley Mall and Mirabeau Point areas Its citizens The closeness of the neighbors in their neighborhoods A unique blend of neighborhood types Friendliness, things like Valleyfest. Country Living Freedom to grow A laid back, rural,safe place —More-space--— AgriculturaLoutlay Walking Zone-no vehicles in area. Distinct neighborhoods Landscaping A semi-rural space for living 8 Traffic Bedroom community.'!! More of a community, not a City A stupid name Diversity of lifestyles(rural and urban) We're all different and don't want to Centennial Trail, YMCA, Mirabeau Point "look"like a big city. Grass roots Except being called Spokane Large lots sizes, family friendly, farms, Don't need Downtown Spokane-we're U-Picks in the area very self-sufficient Rural roots=larger spaces History as an agricultural community Probably only the Mall We did vote to create a new city Country living and open spaces Centennial Trail Any identity that the community does not already have Would have to be invented and would lack legitimacy 18. How important to the future of Spokane Valley is having a"community identity? Would you say... Very unimportant ,. 16 Somew hat unimportant 8 Neither important nor unimportant 22 Somew hat important ,t 57 Very important 67 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 19. Would development of a"community identity"best be accomplished through physical changes, such as the development of a city center or the building of gateways at the major points of entry into the city,or through social changes,such as more community events like Valleyfest? 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 . 30 20 10 •0 Physical Changes Social Changes Both Changes Equally Important 9 20. Do you agree or disagree that the Sprague/Appleway couplet has been a useful improvement to the overall roadway system in Spokane valley? Would you say you... Strongly disagree 21 Somew hat disagree 6 Neither agree nor disagree 16 Somew hat agree 48 Strongly agree 82 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 21. How supportive would you be of the Appleway section of the couplet being extended east past University Road? Would you say you... Strongly oppose 30 Somew hat oppose 13 Neither support nor oppose 19 Somew hat support 37 Strongly support 78 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 22. How supportive would you be of the couplet being extended east to Evergreen Road?. This would result in Sprague changing to a one way east of University. Would you say you... Strongly oppose 40 Somew hat oppose 14 Neither support nor oppose 19 Somew hat support 36 Strongly support 64 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 10 23. The Spokane Transit Authority is currently studying the viability of building a light rail system from downtown Spokane to University City in Spokane Valley. Recognizing that taxpayers in the Spokane region would likely pay some portion of the cost of the system, how supportive would you be of the development of light rail in the region? Would you say you... Strongly oppose 47 Somew hat oppose 26 Neither support nor oppose 25 Somew hat support 41 Strongly support 28 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 24. Now think about the general character of the development along the major streets of Spokane Valley,such as Sprague Avenue, Pines Road,and Sullivan Road. What is your level of satisfaction with the typical pattern of development along the major streets? Would you say you are... Very dissatisfied -9 Somew hat dissatisfied 33 Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 29 Somew hat satisfied 67 Very satisfied 18 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 25. Do you consider adding street trees and landscaping to major streets in Spokane Valley a high, medium,or low priority for city officials. 80 70 - 68 68 60 - 50 - 40 - 30 30 - 20 10 - .. Low Priority Medium Priority High Priority 11 26. Do you consider making the major streets friendly for pedestrians and bicyclists by adding things like sidewalks, benches,and bike paths a high, medium,or low priority for city officials. 80 71 70 - 60 - 59 50 - 40 40 30 - 20 - 10 - 0 Low Priority Medium Priority High Priority 27. Do you consider stronger controls on signs and billboards in Spokane Valley a high, medium, or low priority for city officials. 70 61 60 55 50 50 40 30 20 10 0 Low Priority Medium Priority High Priority 28. Do you live in an area that was recently part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project? 140 120 100 80 [pi 60 40 20 0 No Yes 12 29. If yes,once the project was completed in your area how satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the reconstructed streets? Were you ... Very unsatisfied ®4 Somew hat unsatisfied ®4 Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 12 Somew hat satisfied 11 Very satisfied 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 30. How supportive would you be of the development of small scale commercial centers closer to residential neighborhoods in Spokane Valley? Would you say you would... Strongly oppose 45 Somew hat oppose 28 Neither support nor oppose 34 Sorrew hat support 44 Strongly support 17 0 10 20 30 40 50 31. Do you agree or disagree that Spokane Valley is a safe place to live. Would you say you.... Strongly disagree 3 Somew hat disagree 8 Neither agree nor disagree 8 Somew hat agree 101 Strongly agree 47 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 13 32. Do you agree or disagree that your neighborhood is a safe place to live. Would you say you.... Strongly disagree 3 Somew hat disagree 9 Neither agree nor disagree - 4 Sorrew hat agree Strongly agree 72 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 33. Generally speaking, how would you rate the quality of parks in Spokane Valley? Would you say they are.... 70 64 60 53 50 40 30 21 20 17 10 9 0 Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent 34. Is there a park in or close to your neighborhood? 120 100 99 80 63 60 40 20 0 No Yes 14 35. Recognizing that taxpayers in Spokane Valley would likely pay some portion of the cost,do you consider building more parks in the area a high, medium, or low priority for city officials? 90 80 - 77 70 - 60 - 55 50 - 40 - 34 30 - 20 - 10 - 0 Low Priority Medium Priority High Priority 36. Generally speaking, how would you rate the quality of recreational facilities such as swimming pools,community centers,senior centers, and exercise opportunities in Spokane Valley? Would you say recreational facilities are.... 80 67 70 60 47 50 38 40 30 20 10 10 3 0 Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent 37. Are there recreational facilities in or close to your neighborhood? 120 106 100 - 80 - 60 - 51 40 - 20 - 0 No Yes 15 38. Recognizing that taxpayers in Spokane Valley would likely pay some portion of the cost,do you consider building more recreational facilities in the area a high,medium,or low priority for city officials? 90 80 77 70 66 60 50 40 30 18 20 10 0 Low Priority Medium Priority High Priority OTHER COMMENTS: CITY IDENTITY: Give the city a decent name! Liberty Lake and Mirabeau Point are very pretty. Spokane Valley could use some beautification. OH-I do dislike "City of Spokane Valley, WA"on address labels that are often sent to us from organizations. Mr. Munson long ago(before incorporation)said he was favoring "Opportunity"or"Greenacres': The Valley is working too hard to be like other places. It needs to be satisfied with what it is, and making improvements on existing structures. Mirabeau Park and area are beautiful and wonderful. Thank you! Don't let our city become like Spokane. Please keep Spokane Valley City like a hometown city. No more car lotsrrrumunrr Please stop thinking of our City as an appendage to the City of Spokane. We are not a high speed pass-through. We are plenty large enough to have our own identity. GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT: GMA is not just about growth. Focus on good management of what presently exists. I am very concerned with the expansion of commercial(or residential)property close to 1-90. We may be just as short-sighted as Portland and Seattle, leaving no room to widen I-90. You need a mission for the future with the continued high growth in Idaho and Montana. Let's keep budgets in mind-wastewater issues seem to favor developers Large animal owners could become a special interest group. They need to be good neighbors also in keeping with their maintenance. Numbers kept on parcel. "We were here first'doesn't fly anymore. There are zoning codes for a reason. Thanks! I am HUGELY concerned about continued growth of residential areas impacting currently developed neighborhoods. City growth-hopefully does not mean more car lots. I feel the developers should pay for improvements such as sidewalks, widening of streets, street signals and crosswalk improvements to Sprague Avenue, Barker and 1'Avenue. I am concerned that our beautiful neighborhoods are being overdeveloped with large tracts of lower-income housing..UR-7 Zoning is TOO dense!! I question the effect of such dense population on our aquifer, city services, roads, and SCHOOLS.'! I am opposed to high-density developments in existing neighborhoods. Infilling should match the area not change the character of the area. Grrowth management One-acre minimum, impact fees on all new building for schools,sewer and water. You need to put the moratorium on new developments in place NOW. Proceed after you've "listened to what the people want': As is, things in our area have already been irretrievably changed/destroyed. Developers win again! 16 Keep the rural lifestyle in the neighborhood where they have been for so many years. We don't want to fill every inch of the new city with high density development. Don't let the older homeowners be pushed out by developers. We need to keep our diverse lifestyles. Spokane is a unique and beautiful place- we don't need to develop every inch. We live in Greenacres and have a history already of keeping developers from changing our area into a more DENSELY populated place! Our roads, for one, are NOT built for this. Overall: citizens of all kinds should have equal say in planning decisions. Developers should not have an unequal influence. Profit isn't the only motive for all people. More single-family houses, not the community kind where all the houses are the same and look like condos. ZONING: Keep rural areas natural. R-1 is best suited for Greenacres. When we moved out here, we thought this issue was settled. The best government is limited government. Maintaining residential lots of% to 1 acre in some areas is#1. Greenacres need to be one house per acre. Would like to see a grandfather clause for the mini farms of the Valley. The preserved areas do not need to pay the developers cost. Look at a two-tiered system: as soon as the zoning is changed, it is immediately placed into a higher tax bracket. Large animals permanent-zoned OK Let property owners have equal input and access to zoning issues as developers. Keep the rural flavor and diverse lifestyles of different neighborhoods. I voted for the Valley in hopes of preserving my rural lifestyle. It's not headed that way. Don't pass ordinances to turn everyone into one big "covenant': Zoning laws need to be changed! We can't expect our quality of life to be changed and be happy about it by building what is called"high density housing"projects in order to increase a tax base! Very concerned about high density zoning in neighborhoods that-were-builtand have groinmoderate to low density. Do not allow high density where SR-1. Keep up the good work! I am concerned about the current zoning in the Ponderosa. We need to have the single family one acre zoning back. That is why most of us moved here. Zoning is a big issue now. MUNICIPAL SERVICES: Police services are nonexistent in the Greenacres area. Street maintenance and beautification is very important. Keeping good police and fire protection is critical. New wastewater plant NOW! City-owned, not County. Police services are spread too thinly. CITY MANAGEMENT: I didn't vote "yes'for the city and now I get to pay more for services the County provided through increased taxes! Someone has to pay. There is no free lunch. I liked the Valley 40+years ago and wish it was the same. Grandfather clause still in use! Many concerns and ideas were presented. All we can hope for is that our city officials will listen and really act on the suggestions! Watch budget overruns. Taxes are high enough! If you don't listen, we will find alternatives. I live in an unincorporated area of the Valley in Greenacres. I strongly oppose being annexed just as a revenue tool for the City. City of Spokane Valley really needs to get City services organized and implemented BEFORE any of these items should be discussed, All this paper is not for Greenacres homeowners, but for the City of Spokane Valley!!! You already spend too much of my money. Leave us alone! Please keep out of Greenacres. I moved there because of the fact that I'm NOT in the City of Spokane Valley. PISS OFF! Keep taxes low. The City needs to communicate more on all issues. Let us, the people of the City, decide our own development. For some reason,I believe the city will not be keeping its original promise of lowering taxes, due to all the questions regarding tax increases. Didn't you say you would SAVE us money? Less government, less taxes, keep it real with real budgets! 17 Show us a projected budget that is positive and maybe you can start looking to put more parks and stuff in. Find and do "Must Do"items ASAP, then do others. Build a City that people are pleased to live in. Make Spokane Valley a destination. Be progressive! Considering the recent information that says the City of Spokane Valley will not be as fiscally sound as it was proposed,I think that"developing a viable downtown area"is a FRILL. We should spend our money on infrastructures first, then public services(i.e. fire,police, libraries, etc.)and finally, if after those are in place, we can spend our "excess monies"on beautification and developing a downtown area. Don't wind up like SPOKANE. Listen to the people and USE COMMON SENSE!!! COUNTRY LIVING: You must preserve the rural feel of the area. Spokane Valley is a unique area and if you allow high density development on every vacant lot, the rural areas will be lost forever. I would like to se the area remain as rural/farm like as possible. That's why we moved here. Not to be in a big city! I moved here for the semi-rural atmosphere with easy access to shopping. I DO NOT approve of anything that would change that to an urban area with city problems. I work in the "city"of Spokane. I come home to be in my relaxing open area! Moved to Greenacres because it was a rural area and would like to keep it as such. Existing agricultural neighborhoods should be left alone where we have homes and acreage. This is the true flavor of the Valley. The concept of a small farming community seems to be slipping away due to growth. What really messes the skyline is WIRES! NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION: Don't force high density housing into rural, low density areas in the City. Preserve the neighborhoods What is being done to preserve the neighborhoods? PUBLIC LAND PRESERVATION: Keep our wetlands and Dishman-Mica wildlife area. PARKS&RECREATION: Parks&Recreational areas important. Greenacres has no parks, but lots of development. We need sidewalks for safety, Developers must improve the overall area's appeal not just a plastic playtoy in the middle of a field labeled as being a 'park': Should have year-round tennis, swimming, etc. The Mirabeau Senior Center needs a wood dance floor. The comparatively small savings for using vinyl will make for a much less satisfactory facility. A park with a community pool is strongly needed in the Ponderosa. CITY CENTER: People-friendly"downtown"important. Liberty Lake's park(Pavillion Park?)is a good example of something that could be a centerpiece of the community. Concerts and movies could draw people to nearby businesses. It is large enough to be really useful and shareable. Creating a downtown center is important-so we have a STRONG SENSE OF COMMUNITY. The future of Spokane Valley should have a central location to establish the identity. COMMUNITY CENTERS: Edgecliff area needs a community center,please help in any way you can. LIBRARY SERVICES: I do not support a move to privatize the libraries. Our libraries are running well just the way they are. Please DO NOT privatize the libraries! They are running well and have a great system going, We need to support them and maybe build a new Valley library Argonne Library is a good location for the library and office,so please leave where it is located. Our library does not need to be privatized. 18 THE COUPLET: Please have Sprague and Appleway a two-way street. The businesses have really gone downhill along the one-way roads. We need to support all of our businesses by having a two-way road. It is hard to get in and out of. Please do not continue Appleway in the residential areas, for they make a lot of noise and they drive very quickly. I know the survey by Clearwater on the Couplet was unfair and not given to any businesses or people living in the area affected. I feel the Council is too eager to spend money that will take traffic away from the existing businesses along Sprague Avenue. We don't need any more empty buildings. To get business back on Sprague, I would like to see it once again two-way. What you do with Appleway doesn't bother me, as I travel Broadway mostly. After Sprague is ruined by the couplet, how would we use it? The #1 reason I voted for incorporation was to leave Appleway a one-way and return Sprague to a two-way! The couplet and extension VERY important to long term growth and business. Makes access to the Spokane Valley much easier. Put Sprague back to a two-way street so University can once again be active with businesses. What you do with Appleway doesn't matter to me. But I have talked to people who have businesses east of University, and they aren't for a one-way street for Sprague to Sullivan. STREETS AND TRAFFIC: 4th Avenue to the Greenacres Elementary School is a horrible street for kids to travel to and from school. An accident is just waiting to happen on that street! Greenacres in general, where my business is located, is dismal in terms of city support for streets, curbs, etc. Just east are paved roads and sidewalks. Also,I do not want to see Appleway turn into Auto Row of Adult Shops. Appleway Boulevard east of Tschirly is a disaster! Questions about "safety"with more development in residential areas which are especially high density. There is more traffic and kids are less safe on foot and bikes. The City has more than its share of BLIND corners. Speeders like to take off Argonne down Willow to Valleyway, turn back to Mullan and go back to 1-90! Recent Sprague Avenue improvements are well received. The landscaping at some of the businesses along Sprague are placed in such locations as to block vision when exiting onto Sprague. More lights-street lights on Appleway. Making lettered "Exits'off of Appleway so that businesses on Sprague could advertise which exit to take to get to their location. Why haven't they finished the 160 and Evergreen intersection on west corner? Refinish Appleway from Flora Road to Barker Road. Street and road signs-especially over the intersection street signs-are very important and more are needed. The end of Appleway and University is still a major accident waiting for someone to plow head on into the abutments because there are not any "caution ahead"lights nor any reflective marker signs. SURVEY TECHNIQUES: To have a better view of what the people want is to survey 1,000 people or more. 400 people is a small cut of population. Survey by phone had poor coverage. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION: Light Rail!!! Bicycle trails to connect to Centennial Trail from the South Valley over 1-90! If the Light Rail is done, it should be capable of extension to Idaho. I support the bus system. Light rail needs to serve Liberty Lake perhaps via Mirabeau Point Park& Ride CODE ENFORCEMENT: Code enforcement of junk cars, fences, etc. is a joke. I think the code enforcement on junky neighbors needs to be enforced. I had a complaint with the City before Spokane Valley was incorporated. My neighbor is worse than before. He's been that way for 30 years and nobody does anything about it. The City of Spokane Valley should concentrate on these issues. Junk yards have a big impact on community identity and integrity! I live on Bowdish and Jackson. My junk yard neighbor lives two houses north of me. Please check it out. I have already sent in a complaint to the new Spokane Valley City. 19 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Change this to a 50 year plan. Until our growth and planning future is complete-many of these questions are not appropriate. We need to see a comprehensive plan prior to answering the enclosed sheets. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: A community's economic health is often a product of its attitude and attractiveness to business. Does it provide mixed-use areas of commercial and residential activity so the entrepreneur can five and work in the same location? Does it encourage people to get out of their vehicles and browse along streets inhabited by locally-owned shops- or is it fined with parking meters sending one to the mall with its chain stores? Provide off-street parking for older commercial areas along arterials. Allow older mobile home parks a zoning variation so they can accept RVs as month-to-month tenants. Is there a readily apparent contact point for individuals seeking a business license, or wanting to develop real estate? Bureaucratic nightmares send people to other communities. Residential zoning- can it move in stages seeking to preserve the good characteristics of the neighborhoods absorbed into this new city while replacing the undesirable-is there an appeal process? One man's eyesore is another's work of art. I believe that for an "Emerging City"to be economically and socially viable that the quantity of commercially zoned property needs to be limited and focused.' Housing needs to be varied and located near commercial hubs to promote 'full service"neighborhoods. Thank you. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: Don't see Community Development services on list to be covered-agency support, housing redevelopment, food bank and community center for poverty problems. More than 20%of our citizens live below the poverty level. Public/Community Development/Long Range Planning/Comprehensive Plan/Public Participation/Unscientific Survey 20 CITY SF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Commission Action Meeting Date: August 12, 2004 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Clear View Triangles GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Ordinance 03-53 and 03-83. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 03-83 (the "Nuisance Ordinance) provides that the Public Works Director will promulgate policies relative to "clear view triangles". The Interim Zoning Regulations Section 14.810.020 of the Interim Zoning Regulations provides measuring standards for "clear view" triangles and regulates the placement of fences and vegetative screens, including hedges and shrubbery, although the provisions have never been enforced and may be more appropriate to rural systems than urban areas. This section also regulates the fencing around swimming pools which was superseded by the International Codes on July 1, 2004. The Public Works Department proposes to establish the requirements for"Clear View Triangles" by ordinance, within the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code, to be enforced by the Community Development Department. The proposed ordinance will also relax the fencing requirements along flanking streets to permit six foot fences, provided they do not encroach on the "clear view triangle". The proposed standards measure the triangle from the curb or edge of pavement, rather than from the centerline of the street, as is presently the case. The proposed provisions eliminate the bias created by different right-of-way widths and is more clearly understood by property owners. In the event that the City wishes to avoid future visibility issues associated with fences, a mechanism to require permits for new fences should be considered. A determination of Non-Significance was issued on May 26, 2004 and a draft proposal was submitted to CTED and other agencies for their review. A public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission prior to any consideration by the City Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None required. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Not applicable. STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Presentation Draft Ordinance CITY ',F SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHING-11N ORDINANCE NI. 04-0 AN ORDINANCE *IF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING SECTI's N 7.06 OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY UNIF'•RM DEVELOPMENT CODE; AMENDING ORDINANCE No. 03-053 ( Y AMENDING SECTION 14.810.020 FENCES OF THE INTERIM ZONING CODE; AMENDING ORDINANCE N.. 03-83 RELATING TO THE PROHIBITION OF NUISANCES; PROVIDING FAR SEVERA=ILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Interim Zoning Code adopted by the City of Spokane Valley pursuant to Ordinance 03-53 regulates the placement of fences and vegetative screens, including hedges and shrubbery; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 03-83 Prohibition of Nuisances effective on October 23, 2003 provides that vegetation, buildings, structures and fences that obstruct or hinder the use of any public walkway, sidewalk or street, or that obstruct or obscure the view of traffic or traffic control devices are prohibited nuisances; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 03-83 further provides that the Public Works Director will promulgate policies relative to"clear view triangles"; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director is responsible for the enforcement of nuisance ordinances; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, ordains as follows: Section 1. Section 7.06 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code is hereby established to read as follows: "Section 7.06. Clear View Triangle A clear view triangle is a measurement applied at the intersection of two Vegetation within clear-view triangle streets or the intersection of an alley or commercial driveway and a street, to ensure 1`"•„�I�.*, unobstructed vision of , Age motorists and pedestrians. Within the clear view triangle, the ;31?• g TMinimum ” f 3'Mammum space between three ?� and seven feet above Ground grade must be unobstructed (See Figure 7.06)and calculated as follows: a) Uncontrolled Intersection: the right isosceles triangle having sides of fifty feet(50'-0") measure along the curb line of each intersecting local access street(or five feet from edge of pavement for a street with no curbs), alley or commercial driveway (See Figure 7.06.a) ; or 50 FT �. LOCAL ACCESS STREET CURB PILHf-Of-Wax - �PROPERIY LME I ,• <-0 11• V \ v Cltx PGHI-Of'-WAY Figure 7.06.a. Uncontrolled Intersection b) Stop Controlled Intersection: the right triangle having a sixteen foot (16'-0") side measured along the curb line of a local access street (or five feet from edge of pavement for a street with no curbs), alley or commercial driveway, and the distance shown on Table 7.06.1 based on posted speed along the side along the curb line of the intersecting street (or five feet from edge of pavement for a street with no curbs)(See Figure 7.06.b) ; or Figure 7.06.b Stop Controlled Intersection Table 7.06.1 SEE TABLE 7.06.1 THROUGH STREET CURB Posted Speed Distance RIGHT-OF-WAY (in MPH) (in feet) 70 o w 30 95 N 4, 7-PROPERTY LINE 30 95 u,N *``` 35 110 •—i I L L CITY RICHT-OI-WAY c) In cases including, but not limited to, arterials with posted speeds in excess of 35 m.p.h., one-way streets, steep grades and sharp curves the City Traffic Engineer will determine the appropriate measurement. Section 2. Section 14.810.020 Fences of the Spokane Valley Interim Zoning Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "14.810.020 Fences 1. No sight-obstructing fence more than thirty-six(36) inches in height nor any non-sight- obstructing fence (cyclone) more than forty-eight(48) inches in height may be erected and/or maintained within the required front yard or required flanking street yard of any lot used for residential purposes. Within a P.U.D. a fence may exceed the height limit specified herein if designated on a preliminary site plan when approved by the Hearing Body as part of the development concept. Such fence shall not exceed six(6)feet in height, although entranceway gates, arches, covered entrances, support structures, etc., may exceed this height when a specific design is presented and approved by the Hearing Body. When perimeter fencing is used with a P.U.D. design, a minimum of five (5)feet of landscaping is required between such fences and public/private pedestrian or roadway rights-of-way. Hedges, shrubbery, or other materials used in lieu of a fence and not a part of a landscaping requirement per Section 14.806.040, yet serving the same function as a fence, shall be considered a fence. A residential fence exceeding a height of six(6) feet requires a variance from the Hearing Body; 2. Neither residential, commercial or industrial fencing, nor any sight obstruction which constitutes a hazard to the traveling public - - - ••••-: e •- -e-•' •:••-_ , shall be permitted on any corner lot in any zone within the area designated as the"clear view triangle" pursuant to the standards established in Section 7.06 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. -• - - --• - -- . ••••-e - ..-- - - - •-•e -e . _-- with an arterial street, the area can be determined by measuring four hundred (100)feet along have their branches removed at the trunk from ground level to a minimum of seven (7) feet clear view triangle shall be maintained to be no higher than three (3)feet above grade elevation the yard area in which the pool is located, and such fenced area shall be provided with a gate or gates having a latch openable only from the pool side of the fence located a minimum of forty providing minimum safeguard of the pool area. 4 3. In the Exclusive Agricultural, General Agricultural, RR-10, SRR-5 and SRR-2 Residential, and Mining zones, electric fences shall be permitted in accordance with the following standards: a. Electric fences shall be for the confinement of animals and control of predators. b. Electric fences shall conform in all respects to the Washington State Rules and Regulations for electrical wiring, RCW 19.28, as to voltage, amperage, safety factors, and shall be energized only with Underwriters Laboratories approved exciting equipment. c. Electric fences shall be marked with warning signs at least twenty-four(24) square inches in area located every one hundred and fifty (150)feet. In the EA and GA zones when the area of the property concerned is twenty (20) acres or more and, providing further, where the fences are not adjacent to a public highway or platted area, the use of conspicuous insulators shall be considered sufficient warning when approved by the State Electrical Inspector. d. Electric fences shall be prohibited in all Industrial, Business, RS and SR-1 thru UR-22 Residential zones. 5. 4. Barbed wire fences shall be prohibited in RS and SR-1/2 thru UR-22 Residential zones. In the B-2, B-3 and Industrial zones, barbed wire may be used for security purposes only on the upper one-quarter(1/4) of the fence. 6. 5. Nonresidential fences in the Industrial, Business and Mining Zones are allowed up to eight (8) feet in height. Section 3. Ordinance 03-083 is amended to read as follows: LI Section 4. Nuisances Prohibited. No person, firm or entity shall erect, contrive, cause, continue, maintain or permit to exist any public nuisances within the City. Prohibited public nuisances include, but are not limited to: A. Vegetation. 1. Overhanging limbs or branches that are less than eight (8) feet above a public walkway or sidewalk, or less than fourteen (14) feet above a public street. 2. Vegetation that obstructs or hinders the use of any public walkway, sidewalk or street, or that obstructs or obscures the view of traffic or traffic control devices, Works Director as provided in Section 7.06 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. 3. Any growth of noxious weeds or any toxic vegetation shall be subject to WAC 17.750 as currently adopted and hereafter amended. B. Building, Structures, Fences. 1. Buildings or portions thereof which a are deemed dangerous by the Spokane Valley Building Code -- -- - -___ •e - - !- -_e• - ••- ' =- ••••• - Dangerous Buildings} provided that such conditions or defects exist to the extent that life, health, property or safety of the public or the structures occupants are endangered. 2. Any fence that obstructs or hinders the use of any public walkway, sidewalk or street, or that obstructs or obscures the view of traffic or traffic control devices, pursua• e e,: .'.> .,._••. - Works Director as provided in Section 7.06 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. Section 5. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect following its passage and subsequent publication in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of June, 2004. Mayor, Michael DeVleming ATTEST: City Clerk, Chris Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary Driskell Date of Publication: Effective Date: .Malley Clear View Triangles Community Development Department August 12,2004 Background • The Nuisance Ordinance No.03-83 on October 23, 2003 provides that the Public Works Director will promulgate policies on"Clear View Triangles" • The Zoning regulations(Ordinance 03-53)regulates the placement of fences and shrubbery which is prohibited within the"Clear View Triangle" • As written,the standards are difficult to enforce • This ordinance also regulates fences around swimming pools,rules which conflict with the requirements of the International Code Clear View Triangle Vegetation within clear-view triangle 1 vur . TMNmun .: _ N S'Mmdmm Ground 1 '.0 - Blind Corners ': ir j 1T r,A60-,1';',. ��-:-..,14:.;:q-f,4T��5 . Y f}S'"4 ,4 .4.. -7.; " . ,-'� a - Ni qs>.fia 1 fR..C$; If y. '': ,t .J ,x T,::',.'" r Y - UNCONTROLLED b f ^ ;' ' INTERSECTION ' � :.."-''''''''';'• , � �•; • CURRENT • 4t Center line of the road 4 r , e 110'x110' / � r w "''''?-74:4-; �.!, l "`j 4,;. �;• PROPOSEDF . iN ,,;Curb/Edge Pavement ` 50'x 50' 1. 'C0 SS. I LOCAL ACCESS STREETRIGHT-Of-WAY /a' OPERTV UNE p., _ t._.. ,,,„ . ,,,,<„, 1 U `, � Uncontrolled -, Intersection 12c � I Proposed 2 50 35 Fences siert p �yay5e - ' ,n,i 1! E { 4,- -01- t f . 5lFk' j A T Y' Z .1 • L CONTROLLED ;' 17 INTERSECTION • CURRENT < ..,� �r ' •o •t.-1, Center line of the road 7. r's 32'x 400' �a ,a a `° • PROPOSED ± . Curb/Edge Pavement ' e 16'x varies w/speed t „: i t1 i • t, • ' 3 Stop Controlled Intersection Proposed SEE TABLE 7.06.1 MOM!STREET 16 El `*I Posted Speed Distance(in (in MPH) feet) 25 70 30 95 tip !' 35 110 Special Cases • May be established by the Traffic Engineer in special cases, including but not limited to: •arterials with posted speeds in excess of 35 m.p.h. •one-way streets • steep grades and •sharp curves Proposed Amendments • Establish Section 7.06 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code • Amend Ordinance 03-83 to reference Section 7.06 SVUDC • Delete provisions in the Interim Zoning Regulation Section 14.810.020 Fences to delete provisions in conflict with SVUDC and International Codes Next Steps • Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing on July 8,2004,and forward a recommendation to Council for action 4 City of Spokane Valley Request for Planning Commission Review DATE: August 12, 2004 TYPE: ❑ Consent ❑ Old Business ❑ New Business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Legislation E Information ❑ Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Areawide Rezone for Greenacres Neighborhood - Informational briefing on proposal. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spokane Valley Zoning Code-Section 14.402.100 PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: The Interim Spokane Valley Zoning Code includes a process where an areawide rezone may be initiated by property owner petition. The Code requires that 51% of property owners within the area sought for rezoning sign the petition. On July 1, 2004, the Spokane Valley Community Development Department received petitions with more than 51% of property owners requesting that the City rezone that part of Greenacres currently zoned UR- 7*to UR-3.5. The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on the proposed zone change on September 23, 2004. ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity,Zoning and Comprehensive Plan maps for area proposed for rezone. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Planner Vicinity Map ..11=..... ..--- 111111111E- 1,L0,6 •17� III � a) 5" \1117____117\1\,.....ilI a _, Mil 143 C Er) rallmmTra.... all 1.11CD MEMILO$.i 4:- ES 1111rAllie irm_„ Mint::01 ._ ii.... ,,,„1, 101 cu \Milliallitala 11111111111 i Ojr) riii '1111I cBE e!►� �r ■ P. ------- 1 -- 1101_1_,OW riii I I IS Da j I FAm Lt4r • 'c /...44,44-4,,A� � volt '"�1��9 14*1101. FL_ 1:1: ir ■►'w� ISI F1 ipp. 4V7///a �,� I Fi��'% ►� ri Site /� srAn �/�J/�I;� ///I/� �i,�. .--110.- 4 6 .:1./..... ,�� Imo,'. II�►1,� 4. ;A:19;d4:1:1 :101 ,-„w4 4. 'Pr- 4'_ - °' "' r fr.' 'rq...,,,,,,,, // .moi /7 I (4 Lipi_ 417.0.44 AA/4a. llav ..,, 7, Or / / `• I / . ./ /� /► r/ / / /t �0�/%/ ii/te.// / i ■ � � 101(..4 /r- � . . . . � ��iiR //Flora Pit / �p� itod� i / .,,!r • 1 -.4,„. � ,, -,,,,,,,,,ring,~41 ail MN ON w ---- `" 1IIIhill . 7'.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.i liatiligliglirlialaigh-11141■11 witriallii NM RIVP11011111111111111111,1411ItaiiiFil NI ,,,,...)13‘ . _ .i 1111110,iiiimMiliplori . I 111_4.......1111fil_________. 93 OF- X IP°-1111111 ild111 Tt'taa��1�11111111111111111111 �BroadwaMIN inilinall �'. ■ VIV1IIIiIIWi1 !Ig■inurt 1 IEEE iti Mil ice, ice. �a I, aP Fa��IIIL1■■, r . 11 Ma MOM Mlles . moi! ■ 1 . ..r EA 0111mu,1!..�w - g g .i I 'r ,sr �.\moiilt 1qpiii-nm, `" B I'� e. ■■ i • a , �. �'�f'�III � ��I �'y,;�\I /IIIIIAR n� �'IiE��,,1 11111210111111=11111112■I� IF fit ��. / ►41.i_ll'�.WI pi .1�.:��r��1l�It 0 ��...1.1•.�ow a El :fie;_ N Greenacres Areawide Rezone can,August, 2004 4.0.00Valley Comprehensive Plan Map �■■■■�..,.p■■■r ■�� III ��, �?t:�*S'� m ac a w II I 117 is MI ■ Ilirri �IN� ■/u44 i 430, ED Wrille or lipooiso mall ar ri___ • , , ' ~A ° Lila*lilt or r 3,1), ,, -1,c,"...00 en 1,.,,, ,. . 1 aiiiIIII ,s, l`rwl - _,' -"- /7��%jjam �� vv. 1/SII ''��I �I■ mi 410 � � w II ■ m r - I ' 'E r;.GGj�fhitus\ta -ill Site ,e 4� ,94 %00$0.5%I� --6 III►��,, ,moi// -- ...-ino.-._....,......_ ...,— .- 7-A... ,,v/ie r r r'KV8'01711r \"\ r p_ ......,r...••_40rfsol 4 ' A rAr a' .. li 11110i) -%ii,, 1.1 //Pir.. "#,47.:i41 A 4.5 NA. A ,A,-,40.,0 0 r / / / 4. pal r- i ' all II •,AwPyr '/ O%Pe FA,��itm/'.� at ,-,III 0,4 / ir •/��/�// %till/ i ' % // Iroo� _ iP—,~/ / . /r du /A� A/ /. a AO.A4, .� .•",��■�■•.... ■ rill iii /..��.. - 0.0.1-.A , �Ia ipit / 'Pj % d■ � ■L'I ,�r'■��1,.E_ . LI �� ,.,„ , 1I Z' 11�1._ ......m IP'I_: t4? 1J$ . amoram .._:.,,:m.... imalliii :3._ ....... . Comp Plan Category - raO� . ..1 ir Low Density Residential I fl i 1 �+i i.Medium DensityResidentialmumaim4 Ell �� — {tT�'� _ '�°� i 93 9�er F- - High Density Residential �..� :�1■"'It�- 1 ', ��Mixed Use PJi mi ,� !NM ' CommunityCenterI. ■IPTRittM.IP �� Urban Activity Center ■i 111! 1",_'�■■rr'.1Ir�r�f��■■■ ---- — �:1■IId.I I N 0111 ::_I:.� rI � �Jill 111:iii____I _I 111. Neighborhood Commercial ■� � , „111111r01111111.10— I'I ' h � _ � 'Ir� ''' Community Commercial ��=r I=1111111;114141111. � " ��i - Regional Commercial ' =_ r��,�•�. r ,Li ht Industrial _� V IIIR�- 111•1,0144)* Heavy Industrial ■ NM v a� � ;' `,I'Q`\Ips .`;_ ► ,/ ' Mineral Land IIIPL1JIJ`1 ■�' ,,,�,`,�•� •1• i� . c ss as 1 nor N Greenacres Areawide Rezone i Spokane August, 2004Valley Zoning Map 1111 a -- "I'W 1 itxs, illiM"ri w•4 A SI 1,�\\ pan l',giagoissiI ■Ig \\� ► ♦♦♦A �� TOM EMCM;m♦ ��!� `iii \\,epi 1/..o.• oil �� ♦♦, \ , . - 4, MailltIERW" 1,., t Will 1 ,-------------r- 94. 1 \ Iso ' , \---- --iiiloortgo. . ,6 ,...-.. o4 .. I- Y -s`ems].��• *q' `` � d, D��Ij 1 19' E,t�! -<9: i ,I �j�j l® �� .r . ' ` * !�. � � is S If!!! ,➢ 't,gt / r . �p/ /�/ rte -.. ..• . o• �re" ',A . .. two ` f,t ''/%-rc � %✓�PA,9%2O ®# /j � 000..10 , FA / , 5�� '• � '�'� %� / i � I � r� ...7,J_ . .. . ..,,:. •.•: : . .... . • : 4 i A. -.4 ,Ar 1r P.' A' AAA r AreA br r r WaS\0901 , ; : • .. . ,. . i 'V A .I• r,44 4A Areg 00.1,049:122,__IrA,441' -51,104'0::41-, • ••• • 4 .%... i 1"'" ' , _piqo 19' rry or ' or •9460" 4414141. 0 OT • .....• .- •-.- , • i il A ;it d" Atd"' r 0 1 0 -----Z44/04,4 Ad vocelnEtil" Illiar-37.-:-.4r1 -FYYa� .;I:••••C:::..: ": ...-.. i / Al. r r AV drana/ / /� / / /� MP „oAllistot A ,IPL,..1..1-211 N ,.l � � il. :,. o P " 1�IP■ n er ii '16c-a•Pit . '" ad. IIIII - -� �.� 1121511111- � � � ll !Iil I 511111 101,1 __l�� ;� ��t�Z ��1��-.. ►,Itis • 1:..i. W WINOMM LtatLI.t:1__ psi . A 1 ,� Le end \` \ ��1\�`��1►� ;.. Imo/ �� 1101-111ill 1j'I 11114. di,\ UR-3.5 \` \ 1°11.11 II ll IP IFi ■�. r••. UR-7 i Sr mmio 293 pp. 90 1-7 UR 7` �� ill i VI...dw- " UR-12III Adair 61 �Fs�u.ru`'''�''_�i 'I11■- 1:17.___ ; fione "Mil gisir—lei aimp-wills {'�4 8 2 �� 4 „imolai' �ow u.me _.�-- tri....___.. ■ � 1 II &3 / N —`rI RR-10 IIIIIIpIitIRII4IIIPiPI! MuIJIIiI : lam]' =1!141111 /�0 �GG �� 1;.0"11 „teat., ii N�,1 I-2 1 - 1' ' 5/1 �'4 :tory� /II m / �1 V( ��/1 •- 13 I la Ait � ��71/� �_ias-■S rill ' ��"III�� ..��,,- ,101.:740;40y--0-4 _•_.��!i � �I��i1li��,� I II = /��,may e IMP I nun , ...a . EnsgE4 um MIMIC r.O. N Greenacres Areawide Rezone Spb''kan August, 2004 .000Ualley l y.JL 1 ./,It ., /..., ! J J f 1 j Y YF 1 I ,../../. ' 1� ! - { A 2345- 1 } 4444, i. — 33J 3ti '..%,,...I.7 / ,. } ar.. - - ,,....4.4,--,e) f--\----<) / .... #1 i I ....r. _ I -1-, i J-1':t (-----q:-))11-1". I _ i . --.-- iii. t j+` $tj 4 } d. { g w. 1111 I 1 pp& 1 ::�,� i +' ! LA 1 - 1—.— ' + lil . <---.. -''- IIML. ow . . VI WU. ' :..-- -. . . . - _ 1 ' . .,,t/, • i •wg um � lt► m. f !—J c 2.2314 „.� „.. ! / F 't I I it lir - E P e F 1 ill U tit ' F ..----M____!--r”" ."--"If. .- MI6° I ! al _ 1.. F= ; ' NM —� �. k "- ,_,- -------- , 1 %,... �- I CAS_ �. 1-7:-1 HI •" �_ 1 :1� �--•� Inn. MCA 1 �_isw 4 �� d ,.. ,. a d �I 14.35 - 4441 ,,. . i... i 4..15 I 4•01,p I 1/.5.45 i • 1 ��-. , _ . j, alk. �I■'r'"' . , _, . = • ! _ NW IIIM 111 s .1i1M-41.,_ 11. '..-...,j 1 fAri II. � T 1 � _�Lnam „„ r'I. ..„ „ie.,-....4: . _. >::,A,- ! F s -11- 6 I: i 1116r M -'.-- -'- kY 1 • '4: I F - .._/.. w=,lM :K ig IN it - i�' rl> %._,... / ! le IP. lel! Hi 0 r-, :i 1 ; ••••--11 9.lii'WIMP 1 ._.._ ,\ i 1 VIA•r,Armill4 itriamallam .4,0t . - \,.vrititioa,,,,,1 ipripiK j_,,,----,--,,...-., v 911 1 ° ,� \i u.' eh •1., � Y64.y �~ »F. i !' k S •�"•.! I 2.5.45 • � \ i. j ry t 1� f*� " laI j� y .� a ' ; ' ) � tine f i , ! r _ ,.,.._..f.._._._ � . 1 -. __,,._. ' ' iumnicali _ff,--_ a I j.. ,,,i r - , 35.231 2.511 ...10 � .' �. , __ a aa44 __`r_ 3523- -w-31:514 m-s4s _. . { ^ �'i ^ 1! .,77/7". ,..I i -1 L ...._ ' 6 \.,. i ( — ..,,r_... ........ .. ,.. .._ I I ..vim. ' %: ':/ •I i I •_ f ,� 4.31-13 ` ,s.�..0 O.-.a�, . q ..4 yY t .06.21 • j -- LEGEND o pay e4•••••*sky Mee er••.tie..2.w Draft Bike Plan for Study = "ein"'""""• """"'fil^'""""0aW.= City of Spokane Valley 0 WmMi.04•031.. /V amd• oN°. NOTICE:The Information shown on this may is complied horn various sources and is Sii .,,,, u.au0r\ s>Mar subject to constant revlelon.Bike ways are based on Spokane County Bike ways. AP am .s+ To confim,accuracy contact Community Development,the City of Spokane Valley,(506)921-1000. B3' Data Prod,oeV Augant 06,2004 6oal6:l•a 1376 M This map aprorLd oftho Spokane Valley Geogaphio Int onnaPon 6yAmn. • a —,l ( •v.•� ! ,1 t r ,,,- r a .,Ir a ,..ice'-•-y ,-... I Hyl i • — �. 1 IS.,14s a j7, II\M 9Jat t - �t• —1�, t t 1 i �. 9 ' t J "„t � 1 Iii T :i I } _ t _F } t �� '—' _ s.. 1 ! 1_1 1 1 • - .. i { �F 4[LVI : ] i' 1 117,u .� _-” s 1 i -tip --' " l — • --i,r-sumer .' ��!8�,��1� �� • 1 �i �r — u. � �w M nR°W� t i -•-1 !} ! i t f • xr�_A _....._— ten+, .1 t r tj ) ! a d)1 1 ‘..4 I- a l 1, I. _ y� PI 7i O- e -' S d S �` • ✓ t1t I ! t �' ` ,,i„� ,-.-• t� 4 I I ,t_ 1 1 c. 1 ..s-' - ..S� . - �r�! liMl '\ ---))- t �,� un a, �' V I�A I�Itl a, 6,_ -� \..�—, - II /_'i_ t }t _ _ ,�_ 1,7.,_.ar _� f -_ L 1 a ^ '` Il'sl ��1 a I i, e ? y♦ U ,� i• /� ,I) ou+_-` a "" �/--'- .J'�' �f.� ri i r- +�'ii .._ -----;,----7-k — __ �/„ • \,'ten,. i%%J 5 .Its 1 :1 _ 1 lifflailr--. ... -.II 4L141IP',111117 ' __.,-1F-171 -,:.`2,A•1!-k- t ! - - ; -i-p "} 11 !l }a -�1-l r - '''''4.'j _ r _ i , yr ( l ,.i r r • •�I }- _, )•� 1 j, `� :, F 1.s.'f r .F; .F {t _ ' 9 D F 4 t �1,„."'''T:_ �i lw _.II t 1-�ILI� � - d. _ ..� - i_i 'tf. ,7 ,, t s N jf Ili \ F — -pds 1`�- �1- i� �i rI 13 '..,.._ 1 �� '-'4:.-17' �1.y :<'! _- g }� .w -eex -..-L ,ILL!.- :t - _ _-r-t._. , , 9 I-I- i_r t ,tPa" 0'_ e A '-"'_-- �-'---..:-_,.-,,2-_,r-,,„,Ti <a - -- '- ', I . - •-�W� ,. - Z— l —' �� % ! 1,..!. Qf _I q d s.g �r�;'lL 1 �} 'V,° IWC I., [t '`d ! I �l I "moi -- ,,.,,• .1x�J. �, L .,.,._I_ .1 .... - •e 7� �I L Ili - �III u -� tt! "i 1 _1:-7.,,i,,,,, =t " r.•. W iT/ 1, j kt \ I -,.. , �.'a } r.F ''. }w,,)ar n,,[ +vJu -,`f llu 1 __. # �`� J 1."` ,„,;.:1-1,.i i= 1I '.%� r.irI I) "1 _ ,an'..( E ..f 1 ,. ._ ,d = 'r s n., -w' H,n 4-•-- _ -!"d _ ""1-111''''' Ia =: _.e1-"_' � !. Ir! 1. � ,II� ' ITi 't ^"r -11, - t^'" ` ? .. ...,.r 1� • • .. g 1� `Lt- .�__;.,.i._ , I ._, ,,,,,•.�. �. -_t as 1IF-1 TI I—.I f 11L5_' -liari,l_ _ _ - L 1 -1. y d t '.�Jp t J - ,"zip — .....=,,,q,,:=: -=----,,-,- .1,, '' r e _ fi! ! € U� i • '71.,,,:::-_,L,,;_ },._ „ ' T a -.--;71-,--;..1 . !, , i:' a - . d N _ I 1 I 1 -.-:-.5177— = d F F 4 it 1111i ., 1 , •z— _ ! ! II !_ t JJ..- f t h-1 - - t. } "t ;'?1111. TIi(= =-8 r d;, ii a /L.,.• �z-; f • t _ I. - , { ] J 1-- 1 i A , .' } 1 iI _ 1 } -J .!'f -,--5 _ :1.. •mak._ i - t I ! �' i d - 4s j, .J -• a 1` " ! J !° 3 ., -✓:� -,.-,— ...s...,_ as '(' � l\ } !• _ � { °� ¢c Eh II�IE� It , '6} ! �. -1:it t J 1 ( ! sem, >� \l,.'''' p '. Ir -_� 1-n j < .)l� ) t` t 1 `dl ,n om, t "' / f • .. a t;� ,. 1 ! tt if�-�+ns,�� }�• !: 1 ! 1 ! i i d-� a ,<,.--1-sit ! F_!. -) .t - III . !F. !I �. a a ! =1 ! ` ..,_-.�.-. - - - , 1 e t!i ! ; J. 1 t 1<-3 a( .1- \f� �. : rr E F , 1, �M1 ,•.S r�d< �, ,. E.." 'E "+. \� <.. w• r'_ 1• a fi 1 a� 3;1,44 } 'IV tI $ • /t 1W rte- a '.1 > 6 F'h;..4 3 t,. !„ -„1 . L. - V •. `I 1 a. ,,.. `,. .�,. 1 ., _ 1 & \-=, j ' 1 / - 1 ,. i- ! .. " .� F..- ; - _ ' ,. i , d ! Q v t } ` 1 1 ' I A_ s !r a i t'`1ii / ,, I I ! ' nat1- r _I !• IC 4.144 j A ! i d ! -II 1� 1-` ~ 1 1". !.. a \'—'71:A' �• i. -tom n b �<. w r Y'a.•^ -, t ,� t," `"•... a s 1 T •\t ` 7j E- - ____ ,S� •Y..<j i + ..n.- 1i t :7:-., - /1 _ !' i 31,4444 1 r i_E_, i',.-'-. ' ' • il::..', }'`'tJ i! (�1`t- 1 a4 — "_ j i, s-- r 1.- ' �. d 4 r l ! �o— ••-•••- -iw. I _� _ 3. C �� t• n �_ t s "J z 1 rt a f r , k LEGEND o e.ee1...•.,..Y Proposed Truck Routes __ ""'""""Arts City of Spokane Valley O 0,-,...,........m°pcan' warexNOTICE:The Information shown on tide map le complied from vadoue eolvicee and In •Y1��11� IV n• •. „ a�.. subject to conetantrevlelon.There ere no warrantee guaranteed with this product accuracyTo confirm accuracy contact Community Development,the City of Spokane Valley,(SUE)021-1000. ..j ll0y N ddthDate Produced Acme 11,2004 wale:l'-1]76 K Prodle Spokane Valley Geogaphio Intone;don Weems •` fes.I' 2 t •"""• r' J I' ''---.:�; ! -- ! - as-44 1 � + , • I. ! t_ { ! a r, f3 fit. t p i --I fes_ -- _ • -25-43 — - fYV •• I! : I , a /ate I � 11� ,Il i ii17 , 9121.85-44 E—�I — t .... ." , t P , F�� 1f . „, , - 1111 III -� S 4 \, _Li ii }°�' i� ! _ +� � 1„..111 t! !� J p \-, i I—iI i ��i _'� RSI -.” '_1,...1 ! 1 1 I • Ie % • 1 0 i • 11 0- -L f p &... —� ® 't t III } r ,A� t I Li) �j" - I �',`'` I1,!--= it �I; I—'_ r.I .I — �� J t ,. ' p�„'i.,.- -t t p_t 1=,.i a a -�� SII „ 1"----7-_,A ,ix y Y-� I c�l�l _ ,r \...11' tl� P: U i ;� — ---.11_!J_6y= f F 1 I J = -e� J� \ II ��'� _ �,. i ,�� *,/ i=r t_ILj 1]t -�`, /;, �,. I ' -p L 1�, a I�1 �I� i M1 . 1 ; , `- sro— ` — t-- a r / J w► iii 1 7 J f ddd 1 .._ ; t J •� .r JI , { f` -�i _ 4 j_ • _ ,II _ E”` 'r'. s:_ -. -- �-1 I- - - }- . y� I- d-I °, . , - r-7' , a :-'.F j ,-a c1 El.,.,. 2. t _,f J L _ °.aG, r --�; rts" I--: I —f - I ' d, -, I I' f ? A-'- t _. III i `t i ' I _� -----7,-----.,„„-,,,:1,_,s,_ ,.�{ .> n y Flu i c;-( .Js..., -/'� l! IA- a _ u , I� - } ; .1'I ��I"" :7_ - I I I yl, x; 11,, sr+"_y' Kll'—� I '"�_ ".r I 5 Y } - - l 1mi J1 �II 1 i v -1-I .r� Ir��rJ t _ .-_-=,`---„--f.,'!_ t oma' 1 '! rIr I"- 4 t .�.,- `-r / .-.-1 LT... -i %+w,. _ 1 1 - , -"Fi 1 i W r in'•r .. - - - II:zu' T - j • P a i I' I—� '>�M I T�11 `i% , f 1 II 5 8 1,•..cd , E ;a :,,,,,i,_,,,,,,. .i jy Fy`_` 'i 11419 it i I '..— -E p •. Im :- - .,,'� �1 t� s 7WL.._ ' IIa 1 I� I 31' L-_f i ! I ri r ! f?{ , 7.3j,,...._,..4. _ I I. L ip oT _. Fru: ,_ _ or- M11 •-) r -f _r.' II r, f „i — h.` ;= 1 t a ' p p - ' ❑• ,,L j:-..,J 1, j ''+)/i fy ' a II:II?IIF. I 1tlII ' -�IL>j '11 J'} 1 . �.14‘1;,,,•1,7-L--0, 7 tps' E. '} ,!' -17r4...2._ _ ,� 7 , '''"11;... y- !i , !, s, I� i I I I a� If:'-r.,I J - -J ! _ 1 aE 1m f J ! i f I �'i n �> = L J .} 1 ✓ \ .. � ( fl 1 n I d 1, 1 4t . .. ,l r ? 1 '' ;A-' yi�i t t 1 E • ti - f i r tf n , i a i r s -, ,. 1 �.. '- / - \21.. !I pt /:17,,,'''''':-1(:—-.+` x - - -�,fix, p 1+ . ' L.1 ✓ i IJ`4 ef� 4 t. 9 „ 1 'i „.44,- lt1 -`a s 1� �" p l'-_4-:. I , , .. . . f • • E. EI E i 1� `@ i 1 /A1,- I • r i p' `` f 7 ,../, ti • - iW h.. ' ,k '-,I �t�.,' 1•d o ! >` x-- R;I! J .-r�`',jf' 1 "� i ' `, • - 'r _.�.' E f-' r f �. Y t I' e n 1 y .<�� i d i } e _ 1 i1 1 i I J 1 !1 4 ; � ] kt r: :nF i r�. ps. £ ! t 3 ?ate pLT* ' gJ( f- I a- f t• .. ! J f �� ' ; _:.— , 10._ v. 31 'Z., ''1 P. 7. 1114,4,.. .r.7--,'S ,o3,..,-,,--1- 1 1 . ,,,it./-•-•• Y t_ 1 ...I=r f.. ; ... -- - 1� cat I--,—? 'E.•ti i ., 1,• F I J I '• I c • `t�tjf'_yW il�! i 1 _ cam' f e f 1 t }m .1'''' 1,y.-3 ,-''''-,-,- 17, \� -I ... .,,, - ,•'k w � -, i d I 1. , fr ,t I.E E k.�: ;1 '` I - - i E f } F E. ; J t f` r `" �b ` W I i 1 e.. r.. ,/ s E f .." l� f 1 t j, + a4-4 fIT; k p t y \ '24.44 J ,� t `"rp LEGEND 0 a'''°ate"yew N ^""°"""-W Proposed Arterial Road Plan 1.1"'aMo. ""' ee "�"""" City of Spokane Valley o a�„,�e„8d., e.a..wimonn (] Wale.l w ;' w.,,.w.ub..wo„� NOTICE:The Information shown entNemap Iscomplledfrom various sources and la I�iia►t�a A' Mr.*CO N aw.oaeU.S,.I subject to constant revision.There are no wan-antes guaranteed with this product.To confirm accuracycontact Community Development,the City of Spokane Valley,(500)021-1000. ....ON/alley Prodot ofthoappckan'Way Goo phio InnNnnaon 0yetame 6oale:l'.1]76>Y