Agenda 02/25/2016 Vale w
stione
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Special Meeting Agenda
City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 E. Sprague Ave.
February 25, 2016 6:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 11, 2016
VI. COMMISSION REPORTS
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
a) Public Hearing: CPA-2016-0001 Privately Initiated Comprehensive
Plan Amendment located near Utah and Elizabeth
b) Study Session: CTA-2015-0006 proposed amendment to Spokane
Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.85 Marijuana Uses, 19.120.050
Permitted Use Matrix and Appendix A Definitions
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Council Chambers— City Hall,
February 11,2016
Chairman Stoy called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the
pledge of allegiance. Administrative Assistant Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and
staff were present:
Kevin Anderson Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Heather Graham Lori Barlow, Senior Planner
James Johnson Karen Kendall, Planner
Tim Kelley
Mike Phillips
Suzanne Stathos
Joe Stoy Deanna Horton, Secretary of the Commission
Commissioner Anderson moved to accept the February 11, 2016 agenda as presented. The vote on the
motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed.
Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the December 10, 2015 minutes as they were presented. The
vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against, and the motion passed.
Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the January 28, 2015 minutes as they were presented. The
vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed.
COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioners had no reports.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Staff had no reports.
PUBLIC COMMENT: No public comments.
COMMISSION BUSINESS:
A. Election of 2016 Officers: Ms. Horton explained she would accept nominations for position, hand
out ballots if there were more than one nomination for the position, announce the voting, declare a
winner and then hold the next election with the same process. Only members who have served on
the Commission for more than one year are eligible to serve as chair and vice chair, a member
cannot serve in either positon for more than two consecutive years.
Ms. Horton called for nominations for the positon of chair. Commissioner Anderson nominated
Commissioner Graham, who accepted the nomination. Commissioner Kelly nominated
Commissioner Phillips, who accepted the nomination. Ms. Horton handed out ballots, the
Commission filled out the ballots,they were collected and Ms. Horton read the results:
Commissioner voting: Cast Vote for:
Anderson Graham
Graham Graham
Johnson Graham
Kelley Phillips
Phillips Graham
Stathos Graham
Stoy Graham
Commissioner Graham was declared the Chair of the Commission for 2016. Ms. Horton then
called for nominations for the position of vice-chair. Commissioner Anderson nominated
Commissioner Stoy, who accepted the nomination. Hearing no other nominations, Commissioner
Stoy was declared the vice-chair.
02-11-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 4
B. Study Session: CPA-2016-0001,A privately proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, near
Elizabeth and Utah, requesting a change from Low Density Residential to Light Industrial.
Planner Karen Kendall gave a presentation regarding the privately proposed Comprehensive Plan
amendment. The proposal is to change seven parcels owned by Avista located along Elizabeth
Road from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Light Industrial (LI). Avista owns the parcel to the
west of the request, on which they have an equipment yard.
Commissioner Graham said there is a parcel, addressed 2527 N. Elizabeth, which has not been
included in the proposal. She asked why that parcel was not part of the proposal and would it be
was considered an island. Ms. Kendall stated she knew the property owner had been contacted
however did not participate in the request. Ms. Kendall said it would be up to the Commission if
they felt they should recommend including the parcel. Commissioner Stoy asked if the parcel were
occupied, Ms. Kendall responded she was not aware. However, Commissioner Anderson stated he
had done research to note that the property had changed hands in 2015. Commissioner Anderson
said Avista started buying property in 2014. Commissioner Anderson commented there was only
one line in the staff report which mentioned the fact that the extra property was not part of the
proposal. Ms. Barlow asked Commissioner Anderson how he would like staff to address the
subject. Commissioner Anderson stated he would not have allowed the proposal to be processed at
all. Ms. Barlow stated she was confused as to why Commissioner Anderson would feel non-
inclusion of the one parcel would invalidate the entire request. Commissioner Anderson stated the
proposal properties were purchased as R-2 zoning, (LDR), and he would not allow the non-
included parcel to be surrounded by LI on three sides. Commissioner Johnson stated it was already
LI at the rear of the property. Commissioner Anderson agreed all the parcels currently exist as
single family and light industrial uses. Commissioner Anderson said he would not allow LI on the
other two sides,just because someone wants to do it. Commissioner Kelley asked if there was a
way to contact the single parcel owner and ask them why they are not participating. Ms. Barlow
stated that property owner would be contacted and probably already had been, as part of the public
notification procedures. Ms. Kendall stated the notices for the public hearing had gone out to the
surrounding 400 foot radius of the proposal which was mailed on Monday, February 8, 2016. A
sign was posted on the property on Tuesday, February 9, 2016. Ms. Kendall said she was aware
Avista's real estate department had contacted the property owner with a proposal to purchase the
property, but at this time the parcel was not included in the Comprehensive Plan request. Ms.
Kendall stated she would contact the applicant and ask them to address this subject at the public
hearing. Commissioner Kelley asked Commissioner Anderson if the excluded parcel was included
in the request,would it change his perspective on the proposal. Commissioner Anderson said if the
property owner of excluded property, came in and said they were ok LI all the way around their
property, then he might look at the proposal differently. There was no explanation in any of the
paperwork which said what Avista had done about this lone parcel in the middle of the request,
Commissioner Anderson was concerned because the property just changed hands recently..
Commissioner Stathos asked if Avista had contacted this single property owner prior to the
property being sold in 2015. Ms. Kendall stated she was not aware of any of Avista's negotiations,
but could contact the applicant and ask them to address it in their comments at the public hearing.
Commissioner Anderson stated he was aware of a previous proposal for this area and the two
parcels to the north were not included in the previous request. Now the farthest one is included,
but the next one in is not. Ms. Kendall stated Avista waited to submit the proposal until the real
estate transaction for the property addressed as 6724 E. Utah was completed. It is close to being
finished and will be complete by the time this request is finished. However they wanted to get
make the deadline for submitting the request in 2015 and not have to wait another year.
Commissioner Johnson asked if 6724 E. Utah was added after the request had been submitted. Ms.
Kendall stated the request had been amended to add the seventh parcel (6724 E. Utah).
Commissioner Johnson asked if this amendment would make a valid request. Ms. Barlow
responded the application and request was valid at submittal, and the request to add the additional
parcel was a valid amendment to the application.
Ms. Barlow said she would like to clarify a couple of things before moving forward. The parcel at
2527 N. Elizabeth, which is not included in the request, would not be considered an island. There
02-11-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4
is LDR across the ROW from it, so it would not be isolated. Ms. Barlow said in the case of private
property rights the City places a high amount of deference to private property rights. However,
zoning is a legislative authority, and when making decisions for the good of the City, the Planning
Commission's recommendation to the City Council and ultimately the Council's decision, has the
authority include pieces of property like this one in the request. Ms. Barlow said there is a set of
criteria outlined in the staff report which should be used for the basis of the decision being made.
Should the City be challenged, a legal team would use this criterion to determine if the result was a
legally defensible decision.
Commissioner Graham asked for the definition of an island since staff did not feel the parcel
(2527) would be considered one. Ms. Barlow said an island would be completely surrounded and
this would not be completely surrounded on all sides. Mr. Driskell stated the argument would be
the City creating spot zoning and this would not be considered spot zoning. The parcel (2527) is
still contiguous with the zoning across the right-of-way, and the rest of the parcels abut the LI
zoning behind them,which is in complete accordance with the City's regulations.
Commissioner Anderson said LUG-10 was quoted in the findings in the staff report, along with the
findings related to LI, however in his opinion the Commission members should be able to see
under LUG-1 LUP 1.2, LUP 1.7 and LUP 12.1 which address land use on private property to give a
comparison.
Ms. Barlow said she respected private property rights, but from a professional standpoint it would
not make any sense to leave the one parcel as LDR and change the others. Commissioner Johnson
said for him it would make a difference if 6724 E. Utah sale were to be finalized. Ms. Barlow said
there would be no reason to think it would not be finalized. Commissioner Anderson said if 2527
N Elizabeth stayed a residential property it would damage the person's personal property value.
Ms. Barlow said she felt that statement was subjective, but based on that, any change of the
properties around it would have a similar effect on that parcel.
Commission Stoy asked if residential was allowed in an LI zone. Ms. Kendall stated a new
residence would not be allowed in a LI zone. However according to the City's nonconforming
regulations Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.20.060(A)(5) Existing legally established
single-family residential uses located in any nonresidential zoning district shall not be deemed
nonconforming and shall be permitted as a legal use. Ms. Kendall shared the development
regulations would require buffering if 2527 N Elizabeth remains as R-2 and Avista chose to
develop any buildings up against the property line. Buffering could be in the form of a sight
obscuring fence and landscaping. This would be required if there was a building proposed, but not
if they are just using it for storage. Commissioner Anderson asked if there was a site obscuring
fence in place now between the properties and the parcel to the west. He said the parcel at 6610 E.
Utah changed ownership in 2008. Staff explained since the conditions on the property have not
changed, there would be no trigger for the landscaping requirements. Commissioner Johnson
asked if there would be access restrictions for Elizabeth or could the approval be conditioned to
restrict access from Elizabeth, should the property ever be sold. Ms. Kendall stated the access
would be controlled at the time of development. It would depend on whether or not the parcels
were combined,and it would be determined based on the City's Street Standards. Ms. Kendall said
the applicant has stated they are proposing to expand their yard and are not proposing any access
from the proposed lots. Access would be only from the existing access from their yard on Utah.
Ms. Barlow did not feel as if the Street Standards would allow access, however would defer to the
Development Engineers to confirm this. Mr. Driskell said it would be fair to include a
recommendation for this proposal to the City Council for them to consider. Ms. Barlow said the
proposal should be looked at not only with consideration to the surrounding property owner's
rights, but also considered the property owner who is making the request. There must be a balance
in the considerations.
Commissioner Graham clarified that buffering is required when a commercial building is put up
against a property line, a fence and landscaping, when "adjacent" to a residential zone. However
adjacent does not qualify across the ROW when it comes to a landscaping requirements. Ms.
Kendall said the setbacks for landscaping requirements would be 20 feet from a zone or a use,
02-11-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4
which would not be as great as the ROW. Commissioner Graham said she was trying to determine
if the word adjacent was used in the same manner in the code. Ms. Barlow said the SVMC
19.30.030(B)(5) states, Property is adjacent and contiguous (which shall include corner touches and
property located across a public right-of-way) to property of the same or higher zoning classification;this
is where the City applies the zoning criteria standard. Commissioner Graham wondered why this
same adjacency would not be applied to the need for buffers. Ms. Barlow said this language comes
from the "Changes and Amendments" section of the SVMC. The landscaping buffers are in
another section of the code and there is a discrepancy in the way the two adjacencies are defined.
However they should be defined differently, because there should not be a five foot wall of
screening running along the ROW. Buffers are developed for side and rear yards to protect
residential private space. Screening in the front yard addresses different issues, such as security
issues along the ROW.
Commissioner Stathos asked if hazardous materials would be allowed in a LI zone. Ms. Kendall
stated there are some, however these properties are located in the Airport Overlay Zone which
further restricts what uses and materials can be allowed in this zone. Commissioner Stathos also
wondered what the emergency response time was in the area. Ms. Barlow said the Fire Department
was routed notice of the application and generally addresses any concerns through this process.
Ms. Kendall indicated the fire department had not commented. Ms. Barlow said this generally
means the provider has no concerns. Staff stated they would contact the fire department by the
public hearing. Commissioner Stathos wondered if there was a requirement for a specific response
time for hazardous materials.
Commissioner Johnson confirmed the staff report said the property could support 23 homes if all of
the lots were consolidated and the lots were completely empty. Commissioner Stoy asked how
wide the ROW was on Elizabeth and Utah. Staff will get answers for the next meeting. The public
comment period is 15 days from the date of the public mailing. SEPA notice was done 3-4 weeks
ago. No public comment had been received to date. Commissioner Graham said she had read there
had been soil contamination on site, and she wanted to know what and where it was. Ms. Kendall
said she did not know what the contamination was,but she would request the information.
GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Anderson noted the Planning Commission meetings are not
on the City calendar on the City's website.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 7:07 p.m.
Chairperson Graham Date signed
Deanna Horton, Secretary
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Planning Commission Review
Meeting Date: February 25, 2016
Item: Check all that apply: ❑consent ❑old business ❑ new business ®public hearing
❑information ❑ admin.report ❑pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing Comprehensive Plan Amendment — CPA-2016-
0001
PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: On February 11, 2016 the Planning Commission held a study
session.
BACKGROUND:
The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from
November 2nd to November 1st of the following year. Applications received prior to November
1st are considered by the Planning Commission in late winter/early spring of the following year,
with a decision by City Council in late spring/early summer.
The Planning Commission will review the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) and make a
recommendation to City Council. City Council will consider the recommendation and approve
the amendment as recommended by the Planning Commission, disapprove the amendment, or
modify and approve the proposal. If the Council chooses to substantially modify a proposal,
they must either conduct a public hearing or refer the proposal back to the Planning Commission
for further consideration.
CPA-2016-0001 is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map
amendment requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Low
Density Residential (LDR) with a Single-family Residential Suburban District (R-2) zoning
classification to a Light Industrial (I-1) designation with a Light Industrial (I-1) zoning
classification. If approved, the site will receive a zoning designation consistent with the new
land use designation.
The staff report has been finalized to include agency and public comments received through the
public review process and provided in conjunction with the public hearing meeting materials.
The information provided assists the Commission with deliberations following the public
hearing.
The Planning Commission directed staff to provide additional information on three topics.
Comments are addressed in italics.
1. Consider additional Goals and policies in the analysis that reflect on the private property
rights of the remaining residential development such as Goal LUG-1, LUP-1.2, LUP-1.7
and LUP-12.1. Goal LUG-1 and Policy LUP-1.2 was added to section C.3.a of the staff
report.
2. Width of right-of-way and pavement on Utah Avenue and Elizabeth Road.
1of2
a. Utah Avenue is 30 feet wide with approximately 20 feet of pavement. Further west
along property owned by Avista the right-of-way is 40 feet wide with 30 feet of
pavement.
b. Elizabeth Road is 40 feet wide with approximately 20 feet of pavement.
3. Allowed number of access points on Elizabeth Road. Elizabeth Road is a local access
street. Developed properties are allowed up to two access points per parcel provided
that all other requirements of the Spokane Valley Street Standards are met. If access is
taken from Elizabeth Road, frontage improvements, such as pavement widening, curb,
sidewalk and Swale, will be required.
The applicant has been informed of the Planning Commission's questions regarding the property
sales and contaminated soils. A representative will be available at the meeting to discuss the
proposal.
NOTICE:
Notice for the proposed amendment has been placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald on
February 5, 2016 and February 12, 2016 and the site was posted with a "Notice of Public
Hearing" sign, containing a description of the proposal on February 10, 2016. Individual notice
was mailed to property owners within 400 feet of the amendment on February 8, 2016.
SEPA REVIEW
Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA — RCW 43.21C) an environmental
checklist was completed for the proposed amendment. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
are considered "non-project actions" defined as actions involving decisions on policies, plans, or
programs that contain standards controlling use or modification of the environment. Additional
environmental review may be required for the physical development of the subject properties.
Staff reviewed the environmental checklist and a threshold determination was made for the
proposal. A Determination of Non-significance (DNS) was issued for the proposed amendment
consistent with the SVMC Title 21 —Environmental Controls.
STAFF CONTACT:
Karen Kendall, Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit 1 —CPA-2016-0001 Staff Report
Exhibit 2—Responses from Avista(owner/applicant)
Exhibit 3 —Presentation
2 of 2
COMMUNITY&ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
40000 ValleySTAFF REPORT TO THEj j.
PLANNING COMMISSION
CPA-2016-0001
STAFF REPORT DATE: February 4, 2016;revised February 18, 2016.
HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 25, 2016,beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall
Council Chambers,Valley Redwood Plaza Building, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 101, Spokane
Valley, Washington 99206.
Project Number: CPA-2016-0001
Application Description: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive
Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment request to change the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Low Density
Residential(LDR)with a Single-family Residential Suburban District
(R-2) zoning classification to a Light Industrial(I-1) designation with a
Light Industrial(I-1) zoning classification.
Location: Parcel numbers 35121.5501, 35121.5502, 35121.5601, 35121.5602,
35121.5901, 35121.6001, and 35121.5101 located SW of the
intersection of Utah Avenue and Elizabeth Road, further located in the
NE 1/4 of Section 12,Township 25 North, Range 43 East, Willamette
Meridian, Spokane County, Washington
Applicant/Owner: Michelle Anderson, Avista Corporation; PO Box 3727, MSC-21;
Spokane, WA 99220-3727
Owner: Chad and Jasmine Jones; 6724 East Utah Avenue; Spokane Valley,
(Parcel 35121.5101) WA 99212-1430
Date of Application: October 27, 2015
Date Determined Complete January 13, 2016
Staff Contact: Karen Kendall,Planner, (509) 720-5026,kkeill11a),spokancvallcy.org,
APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)
Title 17 General Provisions, Title 19 Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 Environmental Controls.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit 1: Vicinity Map
Exhibit 2: Comprehensive Plan Map
Exhibit 3: Zoning Map
Exhibit 4: Aerial Map
Exhibit 5: Amendment Application
Exhibit 6: Agency comments
Staff Report CPA-2016-0001
A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is a privately initiated request to
change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Low Density Residential(LDR) with a
Single-family Residential Suburban District(R-2) zoning classification to a Light Industrial(I-1)
designation with a Light Industrial(I-1) zoning classification. Avista is the current property owner of six
parcels(35121.5501, 35121.5502, 35121.5601, 35121.5602, 35121.5901 and 35121.6001),Avista is
purchasing parcel 35121.5101 and included in proposed amendment. Parcel 35121.5201 located directly
south of parcel 35121.5101 has not been included in the site-specific amendment as it is not owned by
AVISTA. The application meets the procedural criteria, even if parcel is not included.
Avista owns approximately 10 acres west of site-specific amendment area for their natural gas service
center. Avista has provided several reasons to support their application which include the following:
• A growing need for more natural gas services spurring a need to expand the adjacent Natural
Gas Service Center equipment and maintenance yard to accommodate for the increase capacity
of materials.
• The expansion of equipment storage yard will enable existing and future natural gas lines to be
better served.
• The current natural gas facility, accessed from Dollar Road,has served the community and
existed in the area for over 20 years and has been designed and operated to be compatible with
the existing residential uses.
1. PROPERTY INFORMATION:
Size and The combined, area of all parcels is 5.3 acres. The site is relatively flat
Characteristics: with residential landscaping including trees and bushes. There are no
critical areas in the amendment area or vicinity.
Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential(LDR)
Zoning: Single-Family Residential Suburban District(R-2)
Existing Land Use: Single-family residences exist on 5 of the 7 lots. Two residences
have recently been removed from site by the current property owner.
2. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES:
North Comprehensive Plan—City of Spokane Light Industrial
Zoning—City of Spokane Light Industrial
Existing Land Uses—railroad, Felts Field Airport, Skyway Café and airplane
hangers
South Comprehensive Plan—Light Industrial(I-1),Low Density Residential(LDR) and
Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)
Zoning—Light Industrial(I-1), Single-Family Residential Suburban District(R-2)
and Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)
Existing Land Uses—Landscape material storage yard, SCRAPS, single-family
residences.
East Comprehensive Plan—Low Density Residential(LDR)
Zoning—Single-Family Residential Suburban District(R-2)
Existing Land Uses —Single-family Residences
West Comprehensive Plan—Light Industrial(I-1)
Zoning—Light Industrial(I-1)
Existing Land Uses—AVISTA Natural gas service center, and storage, equipment
and maintenance yard
Page 2 of 9
Staff Report CPA-2016-0001
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA
1. Findings:
Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls), the lead agency has determined that this
proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The
Planning Division issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal on
February 5, 2016. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental
checklist, the application, Spokane Valley Municipal Code Titles 19, 21, and 22, a site
assessment,public and agency comments, and other information on file with the lead agency.
2. Conclusion(s):
The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and SVMC Title 21
have been fulfilled.
C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT
1. Compliance with Title 17(General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code
a. Findings:
SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria
i. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map
amendments if it finds that:
(1) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,
welfare, and protection of the environment;
Analysis: The proposed Light Industrial (I-1) designation is intended to serve high
technology and low-impact industries as well as office and commercial uses as
ancillary uses. These uses presently exist in the vicinity of the amendment area to the
west, north and south.
The amendment area is located within the service boundaries of Spokane County
Division of Utilities and Orchard Avenue Irrigation District. Other utilities such as
electricity, telephone and garbage are to be provided by franchise utility providers in
conformance with applicable City standards and requirements.
Spokane County Fire District No. 1 is the fire protection service provider for the City
of Spokane Valley, and the police service provider is the City of Spokane Valley.
Utah Avenue and Elizabeth Road intersect at the northeast corner of the property.
Both streets are identified in the City of Spokane Valley Arterial Street Plan as local
access streets. Safety related to fire, police and road access is currently present to
serve the amended area.
The amendment area is not covered by critical areas or designated natural
resources. Avista discovered contaminated soil on one parcel and has removed
contaminants, cleaned and restored site. The public health, safety, welfare and
protection of the environment are promoted by standards established by the state and
the City's regulations.
Page 3 of 9
Staff Report CPA-2016-0001
(2) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A
RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment;
Analysis: The Growth Management Act (GMA) stipulates that the comprehensive
land use plan and development regulations shall be subject to continuing review and
evaluation by the City. The proposed amendment provides for economic
development adjacent to similar zoned parcels and utilizes land for infill development
within an urban area. The proposed land use designation is consistent with the intent
of the light industrial designation to provide a transition between heavy industrial
and less intense uses. The amendment provides a suitable land use designation
consistent with the City's GMA compliant Comprehensive Plan.
(3) The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the
property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies;
Analysis: One significant change has occurred in the area of the proposed
amendment. A parcel north of Trent Avenue and Bradley Road located approximately
one and one half blocks south of the amendment area received approval in 2014
through a comprehensive plan amendment (CPA-2014-0002) to change the
designation from LDR to CMU to expand the regional animal shelter, SCRAPS.
Existing conditions of the area to the north, south, and west are established industrial
uses within their respective zones. The proposed seven parcels presently exist as
established single family uses. Located east across Elizabeth Road are established
single family uses.
(4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or
Analysis: The amendment does not correct a mapping error.
(5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive
Plan.
Analysis: The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the
Comprehensive Plan.
ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan
amendments:
(1) The effect upon the physical environment;
Analysis: There are no known physical characteristics that would create difficulties
in developing the property under the proposed designation. This is a non project
action and future development will be evaluated for compliance with all
environmental requirements.
(2) The effect on open space, streams,rivers, and lakes;
Analysis: There are no known critical areas associated with the site, such as
wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat areas, frequently flooded areas or geologically
hazardous areas. The site is not located within the shoreline jurisdiction and there
are no known surface water quality or quantity issues.
(3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding
neighborhoods;
Analysis: Residential and light industrial height standards vary by five feet from 35
feet in residential and a maximum of 40 feet in light industrial. The following table
provides a comparison of the development standards for each zone:
Page 4 of 9
Staff Report CPA-2016-0001
Maximum Maximum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum
Zone Building Lot Lot Lot Front Rear Side
Height Coverage Width Depth Yard Yard Yard
Setback Setback Setback
Existing R-2 35 ft. 50% 80 ft. 90 ft. 15 ft. 20 ft. 5 ft.
Proposed I-1 40 ft. N/A N/A N/A 20 ft. 0ft.* 0ft.*
*Exception for properties adjacent to a residential use or zone shall maintain a 20
foot setback along the side and rear.
AVISTA would like to expand the equipment storage yard located to the west into the
proposed amendment area. Expansion of the storage yard is a less intense use
compared to other light industrial uses permitted and would have a minimal impact
on traffic and noise. However, the application review should consider the uses
allowed in the light industrial zone since the property may be redeveloped or sold.
Development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations will ensure
compatibility with the existing residential neighborhood. The use of fencing and
screening will provide visual separation and physical buffers between land uses.
The site-specific amendment is located within the Airport Hazard Overlay (SVMC
19.110.030). The City's regulations are intended to protect the surrounding
community while preserving the economic vitality of Felts Field Airport.
Considerations are placed upon adjacent uses, noise and height. The proximity to
Felts Field provides benefits for a non-residential use impacted by noise and
restricted residential density.
(4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads,public
transportation,parks,recreation, and schools;
Analysis: The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on
a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. A level of service standard is
identified for each of the city services. Policy CFP-9.1 of the Comprehensive Plan
recommends a concurrency management system for transportation, sewer, and water
facilities. This is implemented through SVMC Chapter 22.20 Concurrency. At the
time of development, an additional SEPA review may be required to evaluate the
impacts of the use(s) and proposed structure(s) on the physical environment and
transportation. Currently the site is served with all utilities and improved public
roads.
(5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region;
Analysis: The proposed site-specific map amendment should not affect the existing
character of the surrounding neighborhood. Found contaminated soils have been
removed and sites acquired by the new land owner, Avista, have been cleaned and or
homes removed. Avista has served the community in its current location for over 20
years. The site has been designed and operated to be compatible with the existing
residential uses. Avista's equipment and material storage is a minimum depth of 100
feet located along the west property line adjacent to existing residences included in
the amendment area. There is minimal intensity to current operations adjacent to the
existing single family use. The expansion to existing operations would add benefit to
the neighborhood as proposed operations and disturbance are less intense compared
to other light industrial uses. Avista's application notes development will provide
Page 5 of 9
Staff Report CPA-2016-0001
landscaping, screening and restrictions of onsite operations to access Elizabeth
Road. The regional benefit speaks to increased natural gas services.
(6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density
and the demand for such land;
Analysis: As shown in Figure 2.1 of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan, 5.1
percent of the land in the City is designated for Light Industrial. Light and heavy
industrial categories total 20.3 percent of the total land uses, which is larger than all
the office, commercial and mixed use categories combined at 15.3 percent. The
Existing Conditions Housing and Economic Trends report prepared in September of
2015 states there is a rising demand for industrial areas with an increased demand
possible in the future. Light Industrial does not affect density within the City of
Spokane Valley.
(7) The current and projected population density in the area; and
Analysis: The current density within the single family residential suburban district
(R-2) is four dwelling units per acre, except restrictions are placed upon density
being located in the Airport Hazard Overlay. If development did occur to meet all
development standards a maximum of 23 residences are allowed within the
amendment area totaling 5.3 acres. Currently two single family residences have
been removed from the site following the land purchase by Avista. There are a total
of 5 residents remaining and four of which are under ownership by Avista at the
consent of former owner. This does not result in displacement of residences. The
amendment would have a marginal impact on population density and does not
demand population analysis since there is no increase in density.
(8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
Analysis: The amendment will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan
since the amount of property that would move from a residential
2. Compliance with SVMC Title 19 Zoning Regulations
a. Findings:
The proposal is to change the comprehensive plan designation from Low Density Residential
(LDR) with a Single-Family Residential Suburban (R-2) zoning classification to Light
Industrial(I-1)designation with a Light Industrial(I-1)zoning classification.
Future development on the site will be subject to the provisions in SVMC Titles 19, 20, 21
and 22.
Pursuant to SVMC 19.30.030 (B) all site specific zoning map amendments must meet all the
following criteria:
a. The requirements of SVMC 22.20, Concurrency;
Spokane County Utilities provides sewer throughout the City of Spokane Valley.
Specific sewer requirements would be addressed at the time of development however
sewer facilities exist in the area and are available to the site. Orchard Avenue
Irrigation District is the water purveyor for this area. Water requirements will be
coordinated with the water district at the time development is proposed. Each parcel
has direct access to a public local access street. The proposed amendment meets
concurrency requirements.
b. The requested map is consistent with the Comprehensive plan;
Page 6 of 9
Staff Report CPA-2016-0001
As stated in previous analysis the proposed amendment is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
c. The map amendment bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety and
welfare;
As stated in previous analysis the proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to
the public health, safety and welfare.
d. The map amendment is warranted in order to achieve consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan or because of a need for additional property in the proposed
zoning district classification, or because the proposed zoning classification is
appropriate for reasonable development of the subject property;
The map amendment is not being sought to achieve consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan. However the amendment may inadvertently address a need for
additional unused industrial space as described in the Existing Conditions Housing
and Economic Trends report prepared September of 2015 stating, `However
vacancies have decreased substantially from over 20 percent to less than 10
percent....at some point new space may need to be developed."Existing conditions of
the area to the north, south, and west are established industrial uses within their
respective zones. The proposed seven parcels presently exist as established single
family residences.
e. The property is adjacent and contiguous (which shall include corner touches and
property located across a public right-of-way) to property of the same or higher
zoning classification;
The properties located west, north and south of the subject property have a Light
Industrial (I-1) land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan and a Light
Industrial(I-1)zoning designation. The subject property meets the requirement.
f. The map amendment will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the
immediate vicinity of the subject property;
The site is surrounded to the west and south by storage yards associated with light
industrial use and a more intense use north at Felts Field Airport. There are existing
single family residences across Elizabeth Road to the east of proposed amendment
area. The proposed expansion of an existing use to the west would not create new and
different operations than presently occurring. Residences located east of Elizabeth
Road will be buffered by the existing public street. Existing land uses are compatible,
or will be made compatible, with the application of development regulations at the
time of development.
g. The map amendment has merit and value for the community as a whole;
The amendment will allow a range of low intensity commercial uses up to light
industrial assembly, manufacturing and processing as proposed uses. If development
occurred individually on the seven lots there may be more impacts of several light
industrial uses on each lot verse a consolidation of the amended area into one parcel.
The currently property owner of six lots is Avista. Avista is purchasing parcel
35121.5101.
b. Conclusion(s):
Pursuant to RCW 36.70a.130(2)(a), proposed updates to the Comprehensive Plan will be
processed only once a year except for the adoption of original subarea plans, amendments to
the shoreline master program, the amendment of the capital facilities chapter concurrent with
the adoption of the City budget, in the event of an emergency or to resolve an appeal of the
Comprehensive Plan filed with the Growth Management Hearings Board.
Page 7 of 9
Staff Report CPA-2016-0001
The proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC Title 19 and state law regarding
Comprehensive Plan amendments.
3. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
a. Findings:
The Light Industrial designation provides for expansion of adjacent property to the west and
consistent with the development that is occurring on adjacent properties. It will provide an
opportunity for additional light industrial uses serving as a transitional category between
heavy industrial and other less intense land use categories. The amendment does not
introduce a new designation into the neighborhood, but reduces the immediate conflict
between the light industrial and low density residential uses by utilizing a street right-of-way
as a separation between the uses. The amendment is generally consistent with the following
Comprehensive Plan goals and policies.
Goal LUG-1 Preserve and protect the character of Spokane Valley's residential
neighborhoods.
Policy LUP-1.2 Protect residential areas from impacts of adjacent nonresidential uses and/or
higher intensity uses through the development and enforcement of the City's land use
regulations and joint planning.
Goal LUG-10 Provide for the development of well-planned industrial areas and ensure the
long-term holding of appropriate land in parcel sizes adequate to allow for future
development as industrial areas.
Goal LUG-12 Designate and protect a variety of strategically located light industrial areas.
Goal EDG-7 Maintain a regulatory environment that offers flexibility, consistency,
predictability and clear direction.
Policy NP-3.3 Encourage commercial development that is designed and scaled in a manner
that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods.
b. Conclusion(s):
The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Adopted Comprehensive Plan.
4. Adequate Public Facilities
a. Findings:
The Growth Management Act(GMA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan requires that public
facilities and services be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is
available for occupancy.
The area is currently served with public water and sewer. Utah Avenue and Elizabeth Road
will provide transportation access. As previously stated both roads are classified as local
access streets according to Map 3.1 of the City's adopted Arterial Street Plan. Spokane
County Fire District No. 1 will provide fire protection service, the City of Spokane Valley
Police Department will provide police service.
b. Conclusion(s):
The proposed amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development.
Page 8 of 9
Staff Report CPA-2016-0001
D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Findings:
Public hearing noticing was mailed on February 8, 2016, the site was posted on February 10,
2016 and the notice was published in the Valley News Herald(local newspaper) on February 5,
2016 and February 12, 2016. Staff has not received any public comments as of the date of staff
report.
2. Conclusion(s):
No concerns are noted at this time.
E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS
1. Findings:
Staff routed the initial proposal to agencies on January 13, 2016 and received no comments. Two
comments have been received following the notice of public hearing sent to agencies on February
8, 2016 by Spokane County Division of Utilities and Spokane Tribe of Indians (see Exhibit 6).
Agency Received Comments Comments Dated
City of Liberty Lake, Community Development No
City of Millwood No
City of Spokane,Planning Services No
City of Spokane Valley Police Department No
Spokane County, Building and Planning No
Spokane County, Division of Utilities -Info Svc Yes 2-10-16
Spokane County, Clean Air Agency No
Spokane County, Fire District No. 1 No
Spokane County, Fire District No. 8 No
Spokane County, Regional Health District No
Spokane Transit Authority(STA) No
Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) No
Washington State Dept of Ecology(Olympia) No
Washington State Dept of Ecology(Spokane) No
Washington State Department of Fish&Wildlife No
Washington State Department of Natural Resources No
WA Archaeological&Historic Preservation No
Avista Utilities No
East Valley School District#363 No
Century Link No
Comcast No
Orchard Avenue Irrigation District#16 No
Spokane Tribe of Indians Yes 2-17-16
2. Conclusion(s):
No concerns are noted.
Page 9 of 9
!
„p,rg!_.onIr ..',,R d,
Marguerite ',.13d/,
', „ ,, 1 ,,,>c', ' 14,d-lcu'„
> 0,; st ta,', '''.; ', 2 ,, 6
Sargent
'> , l'i 'c---7 ','' • % ','1",'/-.':i
,0)1J',!!,,,,..z_l , ,c, ','c 1euRdi, , c'!, !,.- 0',, 114,
f 1 ,t>i "t., -1":„,,f, f', '' Dfa k ' r6,:sii -1 ',, ''„ r '„, , f''"'E''''I''''/ gj
,,,f,,, 1,--,Z7 !jjjjjjal fj j'N,,,„, I'l , „,,,j'js 5IOj''j ',11'; ; (c'd)
, 2:.'' ; `L':f',....',' ;, ,-'c'f'',f,' ;;FL,c!'i ' 7' ' ',/ ' % ' 'r ''',, Vista Rd0 , 0
.o
1 ' 1-7i'n `-".4 , Bessie/:, _f',I;d' I c'1 ' '' ' '' !”,r-c !,„,,, ,-,,!,
, .,'e‘$Rd ' , 0ii',r!7,-, ::' '".: Rd; ': i,-'
Bessie'11Se ,'51'' ! ‹>c,', , /% .v f ' „,f' izevN/,'!5/ Darn !s7'!!!
o
Bessie Rd r-- „cnb laid . ,;, ,,„),,; ; ; ; .; ;; .;t. ,; ;.,;;. .,;;;D ick!,
.s
Bessf- 9TcunG'Itu'r. !,FRt% C ! ' „„,, '', ,,, Rd
2
4 '''›j'r 1/I 5• ', f, tif) „; , ff-----” '"' f' ,Iilikitlih,i If EiLdn, . %,
s
Sipple ,, ri 1 5(-• / , ' , 5C 1, (1,, , , , ,'Z, , .? ,„„,% ,,,n-11107% ,' ,„,E ,!
' I ', E ' ' ", f / ;t. '! ! ' !, ' ' ,,,:!, i,a,,,lid;;,, 1-
ElyRd
.
, , ,3 ', rt: 1,(Bd ..:al':,-.E ,, ,,, ,c'' : , ;,.. ›-, ', , ',EI'', ,, ,7., !! , 'c-;')., ' 0
Center
0
Le,o,/Is, , %,,, •t3, ,,LJ
00 ,,vri,)I.,,,,,C' -6 , , ,0"'"! ', /, Lui , %, ! ," ,-.: !''',"'; '1';',1 ':'11),' '''';',3 !!
„., „!,!, ',2.,?,'-','”› ,;, ...1%, ;';, ; , 7c, ,,,, ' c0; ,;4.,. J,
t
V Ella
Dick-R"'; , 4.) ',%%V% , ' ''' 'Rd , 1.„ ,,....s ., "'
0
od„IRd 'f' c' ,,,„ ,
2
,1 ,,, ,,, cc c „ ;; - ....), ,g.,,,' ,'R
illa:Rd'! ' ''',''ilf Rd,,,, c:'"7, Bowman„,
Center , ,,-1,;,,i-, „t,, zz,,,,,,,,:,,;
R 2
0_
0,Ra ,,,, ',! ' '!, , ,,, ,, , f , --- LNly''
2
E
Dora
10
” ' ' at-1 Rd ! c, ! , ,o, : z' ),,
Egerton R.:(:-!, ', 2,10'',Nril Girard Rd ', 117,61,y,%I.,! ,
0
!,j, , , %',,,i. lyi Rd, ,e!,- ' a. ,, , sovi,T ET SE
Bowman„ f ''R!. „ ,1- :-, ------fk, ,‘..1,-..., ':f, , 1 '' , -" ,,,,, , '11 1 ,n d
Rd E
Colem
5 ' . Girard z ' !,,RCI,' ! ! , in Rd'i""T ',,, Bradley 'rn
>
Lily,' , -f ,,'' ;,p-Hcc2;fil , , ';tau ,d
L.'
r 11 u-c% ' ' -''! - ''' Aa1P2'18 ' I'm an'I'C 5Cf' fU
—
cp
lz;„ z Coleman;,,,'.. ., Rd;
0
tD
w
C'
0
0
Li_ o
(N• c)
007 .,,,,.,, 6 PY'er''' (7,
i 1 35121,0 Ci2S, > LO
0, a'
p
g
Rd Dollar St
N- 2
0
8
N ui
Dollar”'
.u2
2
<
01
Rd --„;905 ,, , Lp 0 1
Rd
0 ct
ri
•A' , ' t err' ,N1SE -- Rd '
0
•,•,,;' ,,, %; Dickey Rd g seeho 9 K)- `,','„
EL
cL
m
E
8 / f I ' f ,,, nCher';
15
Cy
, a 1- .„,,C.,•,,,, Fa
2
Ni
1,,,'1 I; Wa•y ,.....I.f..."''''' ,'' ,,,,
Howe
'''
1^,1
'45''' ' ' ' '....''''''
S i ' (1).
,—I
Lel
M
,ther
F n,
0
,,' ; ,,c,t:' ',
0- 2
2
s
ett
I t,„,',,,!!!: !I, 0_
'5
, er'o
' , ,9 -7.' ',
'''‘ , ;, 1; '
o
0
35024000135025,9072 V
'; ',
Rd
.=
0 '''''')° 1 ,'t, ' '
Yardley
g
' '!1
i-,'EOS '' 1
.(36',,'
9
p
0
=
35026,9070 i Byrd St
p
0
% '''' i','
I
I,
cz
,k-HI
,
i j
(/)
..7.0 'j Ln
,., , ,
I
=
CZ
.0
' .../cio
.1. '
t 0
„Di E z
''-0'
LTD 0.5
,ia „_1
cs) f-=
I s-i!S
H
C\I
,
, ,
, ,
06'EZDSE , ''. ' -17. 35115. - ',, ',r
.z Q068; c' Custer'Rd
3502...—
� m f
a" Center RAY � p
' ,
x I �' m
f
� I
l f ri ,�� ?
p I �, volt, 1 f 6 pg U :9,
yM
;,,i.,,., � � ?e ,,,I � j'y ��II" i�, ��f��rf���'�,w �I���� �ap��� l f��
dY w � tJ" /f^ / , ,u6Nam" �t9
TP rLI�Wl4�L�G1���r ���d�'� 1���� � ����W
® r € > i ,I d"� u i
t, r °'Gerard Rda � �m� "�" �� ��
f Cp!4 aP �i,,),//1,!r ,i1/1414,14,/,'
o ;C 4 3 /, iai✓�/1110 I A46eff/f do
'
j 0
� a°'�r*y.,r� � �, ��r,i,aa�' r r
Irca �s
Q , Lily Rd �. r�� f//;;;;//,,,,/,,,':
i a o
- ,,,,,,,,, r r 4 r ,), �u', ( ,
f4, r NT V /
++ ", �� �v�r�;� ��� aid >_
Lily. Rd ........
Coleman Rcl ^� ,aP pa �a
CZ 'C�lenyan,Rd
.�° ryh ; a! aa� a'
_ �f
W
11
_ Dora,Rd
, "p�;1eaoG � o
�� Na waa�r�g � N ,,,,0011,,,,,6,,,,p,',,,,,,,,,, ; o
Cl) �'���" � �a�'ar ^� ��drf, Vrr�e � aa "g ,. / ria Eao
" a Braille Rd
I i '11,,a i �rOS
''ill'''/"/,I r wy,"'
0
f d � ,rho G� aAfw1a
f Q...Q�I "za■ "`1111
F � � „�,35 Or " �� � a ,�`"/40,0%,'.0,,,009.1.,„.//,./00',/:1400/v)///7//(7/0/
51 Q33 0 ��C.r a, Hyl'E
% , p c v e" °vn��h,,h �h r i �r �w,���04
o
' lb reanM�a� �� > / f�
�� y
d d V, � r+",,u�` d� �'A"�p� �Pa'rn P f 1 �� �p I° �� P �, rY o_
r r k rf �' r)rx�i ! /4 h'er#' ,� J�r�'/ 1:f pi,q E
� � r„ u7�a� ., 7fr/g/IIV//j/fr� � l "pry m
0
r t�bTfJ ZZTSE
r� - ,r ar )a'aW,N° y , h 'Paaaaa vr?1
11.'1116;'11''';'11
7 � �J'n/ it„�����l<r4 �r nP � � �,�u��� rd t`� lr ���'r�4��� PUl w
,Iii
.�r I TOaZZTS£,"", 1' or f,I) , ,,, r/a,/,o'a° air ole
� � zT � �/ �' rr 'Do 1l hd `� ,49 1 roo —°
'� in r ,h , h N
J1''' '/ �� ' a ,,11d 8 Drr 1
id „;J ,tl a ), ?/g f 0"� a�' '��!u 'o t //// Cs/,,,07.„,,,/,i1,,,,,,2.,irWd , A 0
N SF t� �� � kikv 'tT N'/N' l,N° DNji, )mMI +rioa N
1 :Gia [$..9% r" gvr'' d� f lia„N.,y� lr � �e'.+'I ',' ,,,,,,,7,0,7,.,.�� k h!',��,v'� /au°'��g Ca
"`y `"� vfet� �i�/�F�, �'' a� g� u7 4�('T'�r '�)'N �a ,N� '� ra � "P�'�,C' "��ki, v d
0
u S ;�a a ' � ' - w'
N t� ,r eie �a m 01' ‘(/' ra
0 �mW d �'/ a� o
64J14 jJ'
U m �rrrr�rf a ra �JN ���,5d � CTSS� '_
Ln
rn 4/7 1 /7,
r` �d ro �`,de,r>d 1 Eastern Rd�,w�a a, ET8z U� ry, a
Hi
rr f
u �ti` ^i)#///jrff 4)'9,1";,/r; t��P✓n i d sas
-o
11
1 ,Iii
a „ � � aVito/a� I�� r��/ SQZT £ZTEE9
'ie o'aaa�il a^�' 'airr"a lie pf, el,ye Sr, p,ar���(Yry `n
ll d, i "NSR i �,��iw� Ca j i r�i 'Pik�y��'rli ""'' r',' rid ra,° �� °2
Lu
��w�a� �� ;� �amr�� a°a r> a��'ar� , �r� i ' „ a '�aa2 N—
m 1a�owr `4'ra � rrlhe''� ,,,oaf ul a fhld i r �, m a
0-
01
'r / d �; .�o y1 d J� J'a ,- k(ia r a, ��i
p he
,,���r3k 412' , a d Dickey,:Rd J r >, ,/ �� y,,e,�” E
,d, v �r a;,, �� a � as d � 'o a;
a� �r � ia2
un
r'('(,(1.:7=''1,7t;','”'�a f l a ''ct'f' m'll4 r9 d� as / w
e fpr /,, '4:,(//1'''''''
d�/,'''/cc I, t �^R if1- ? 1, /n
«" r� P d ! a�'� e��°ra2i aJ1 r�u
i y o bL�"'' dt Wa�C m orf" rd 2far I—,,',(+ae i ' '�'r,'�'i)
i 0
�, r'1 w-7:7,,'44,1C�',°1 I'P.0, ,, fie; uV ,r. � ,� R3 V,„,,'0',�"4 6,,y,,, E
,�rcr"� ��r 0j � , i ds°®r„ ' f 1,,,'%'1
/11/1"..4/..,0; an ch
0
Fanco,e, Nay � . w
J r J .71
U
N '
_
tt
t
0a)
�
0
a)
za
C1 � u b w
Lo
rn
C e'
Ln
�' m
Hu
''R '` ( +� 47 fy .w
Ln
I N m
m
Ln .- . ..
� lial,llIIIIII �:IIIIIII � (Ip �pru'° V u ll� m i c• , "`
ILII ( I,011°01°0,0 Ui1, 11➢ � .d-
y V � - > u.-Vuuo 1%I,
"u �r 4HOW1 ,Ikh ',I II u "11; H,.. I II N II;II II III � i
1 „ rCy �[ cekl� ,r'trl
�` r 11 � 11 11 11 � 11 11� 11 11 11 11 � �;� II �Ilal ii''� I II
I �I,U U (enter,Rd• ,,q,, a,-,, ye„
l
1°1,1 1110 X11 lud49 � 1IInIIII� I
'I i
Par Rd 1 �l t��D11!iJ
1(16
iffirl,LNC?lUlulfJ ,Il/ i I I!lie i i fug C11)
„'`G!! rd Fid
i®,
/ °[ �t/(r/ 11i E i 0
Colemari;;Ftd /1 i!� � Il"'ir aii
w
C�leman 'Rd `°
�, h,7/7
s
�,,
, H"4""" - �,�/fi
��yy u
9.
,� Crura,Bd, ��� - — -YCJ tip` , r �'�� °�/ l
� cii/S'ff,4,44c';'''. '',//';
_ ��� % �//° , r'� !!'!!!"""1
/1� � / Ct
%���� J/I r�,J�l�� ��� Vi//////ft,�rl "I d ,, la � � �� �"�' / i°� � E
E
c / e//1/1dJ'� /v�/ ! �Vo mil �p
' %r' ' A ./ �a Bradley I , � zis
� t
N %0,00.%0017,0101,00,147000,01,0 E
w G f
P�
o
��� /, /� l 35124.0907fI" w
1 -�-�.., �� 1;�r. I , ,vii l46;11/i�'. 0)4'0
(� _ ,.._.0 `— ` � <(/,,,'",7%;',t':�V '%��lo��"�/'� ` �`,,/,,y/�.r ri� r/i/, / Q
• ./� OCG /f ,r/// II ii it/,lel/ /44);/',//
Qr ,. % �� Q ��/r//'�/,/l;,ray m
/1ft10IOZ?IS S /i/1 a r rs I
'4. 1Mir ,,. %/ l l' tN� iii ,/ p .,/ / / 60% r
� / a %�6l
N
'S�IIOIOZZIS£ /� �/ � ii �� >
�S£''''1'4„,'* � /' i1 rmr///�.0://ii/
// ,r/� � oiI w
mJ /�/��/�/ i 1 art r
W �„/fir �[7c�ttar Rd ars St
r
0
/ '
cy r /� /,44/ p �u�-r r.qd/�a,d .��/��� �� 14E r o
o Iii / 8 /0,100i �7/114°,01 �� o
hi �; Ian :, / /11(/'N!//P/7! i 7 l� ,- 2
fit
yle,5":6,11
I� 4stern1Rd,i,a /�.,,,,,,,m
;', 1�/,fi rtoort',/, / ,,,/, /r i%SO'1 SE c,
/er � d e „� /f IZIS£ � Ct
1"�e/ � e�r/J,/ � r :04//1 �i �n
IAA
��rfl ���/fir/ rG//�i %//,/ j/' �1/ '%/arra , in a5
m
WcL
/� r'i ""'# / x7111 ://)„,,/e1 11/ifi,/ /�tilid,/i N:._ 7)
r =
ra ,,,�r j f11 o j// `� //1r� E/ CrrcceyRd I11
l ca / �/, r /I rl/ °'I )- iv '1- 5VI
r 1
2
,°Fancher. Way
m � w
0
S L
w.
'-' 0
00
7 Qy �eq fr
I 00a , %,‘J a• ct ,6Gp —" d .,
a u
m O "w"1 m E° vtan
ar
a
To:
Karen Kendall (City of Spokane Valley - Community Development)
CC:
From:
Jim Red (Spokane County - Division of Utilities)
Date:
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Planning/Building #:
SubjectStage:Phase:
CPA-2016-0001Comprehensive
Address
AO01
The Comprehensive Plan Amedment lies within the Spokane County Sewer Service Area.
Any new use will be required to connect to sewer. Permits and plans will be required.
There are uses on the parcels that are connected to sewer. If these are to be demolished,
abandonment permits will also be required.
February 17, 2016
Karen Kendall
Planner
RE: CPA 2016-0001
Ms. Kendall:
Thank you for inviting the Spokane Tribe of Indians to be a consulting party is greatly
appreciated.
We have reviewed the ground disturbance permit forwarded to our office for the project
mention above; we are concerned that the project area potentially contains cultural
resources, which would be impacted by the proposed ground disturbing action.
Recommendation:
Cultural Survey.
However if any artifacts or human remains are found upon excavation activity this office
is to be notified and the immediate area cease.
These commentsare basedon the information available at the time of this review and on
behalf of the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer.
Should additional information become available our assessment may be revised.
Again thank you for this opportunity to comment and consider this a positive action that
will assist us in protecting our shared heritage.
If questions arise, please contact me at (509) 258 – 4315.
Sincerely,
Randy Abrahamson
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
FEBRUARY 17, 2016
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
11707 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley WA 99206-6110
Dear Sir/Madam,
This document is written in response to questions generated at the Spokane Valley Planning
Commission meeting held on 2-11-2016 for CPA-2016-0001. Avista is pleased to respond to the
questions and we are always available by phone or e-mail if further clarification is needed.
Question 1: Provide history and background regarding Avista pursuing purchase of Parcel
#35121.5201.
2011-2014- Avista sent two rounds of letters to all property owners on the west side of Elizabeth
road informing them of our interestin purchasing their property. Minimal interest was received
back from owners at that time.
rd
March 2015- A 3round of letters to all property owners was sent out again in March of 2015
offering to purchase their properties, and the majority of owners responded back to begin
negotiations with Avista.
The owner of parcel 35121.5201 contacted us in late March to discuss the possibility of selling,
but the asking price was considerably higher than we could pay. Negotiations were cordial and
friendly through the entire process, but we were ultimately unable to arrive at a mutually
acceptable agreement. Shortly after the initial discussions with the owner of parcel 35121.5201,
we were informed that the owner had decided to discontinue negotiations with us, and to sell the
property to his children, which he did shortly after that.
November 2015- A letter of interest was sent to the new owners of parcel #35121.5201 (the
previous owners children), informing them that we were still interested in purchasing their newly
acquired property, and that we were willing to negotiate with them to arrive at an acceptable
agreement. Three phone messages were left with the new owners asking for a meeting to
discuss the proposal. The new owners finally contacted Avista in late November, but the new
owners asking price was considerably higher than possible to arrive at a deal.
December 2015- The owner of parcel #35121.5201 discontinued negotiations with Avista. We
are still open to future negotiations to purchase theproperty if the owner chooses.
Question 2: When will purchase of Parcel #35121.5101 (owned by Jones) be finalized?
Answer 2: The Real Estate Department of Avista will close the transaction by the end of
February. There were numerous old vehicles that were on the property that needed to be
moved before funding could occur. As of today the vehicles have been moved and deed will be
recorded at the end of February.
Question 3: Provide details on parcel where contaminated soils were found. Describe the
process of discovery and how it was remediated.
Answer 3: The contaminated soil was discovered at 2425 N. Elizabeth Road. When Avista
purchases a piece of real estate a level 1 ESA Survey is performed as part of our due diligence.
Through our ESA survey it was determined that there was an old neighborhood trash pit located
on the back half of the property. Avista hired Test America to outline the physical size of the site
and perform an analysis of the soils. Some low level lead based paint was discovered and
Avista contracted with Tilton Excavating and Test America to remove the contaminants. Several
loads of garbage and debris was taken to the Graham Road Hazardous Waste Facility and
disposed of. Soils were monitored until the results came back clean. Washing machines,
bicycles, bedframes, and old car parts were a small sample of the items that were removed. It is
our assessment that this was a neighborhood dump site for many years. I am attaching
documentation of the site discovery and subsequent clean-up process. The site was ultimately
remediated below WA state levels for unrestricted land use (MTCA Method A.) During
windstorm 2015 a tree located at 2425 N. Elizabeth blew down impacting an Aivsta power pole.
The transformer attached to the pole ultimatelylanded on Elizabeth Street. A cleanup of non
PCB containing transformer oil was completed by Avista.
Warm regards,
Karen Kendall
Michelle Anderson
PROJECT MANAGERS
family
to
Not
selling
2015.
a
#
to
Avista,parcel
35121.5201.
1
in
sold
in
interested
member
42
53
6
lot
This
7
inof
purchased
side
road
west
Elizabeth
and
2009
lots
2015
swale
facility
7
in
stormwater
purchased
acres
Fleet
Ten
for
2015
sliver
in
Service
in
purchased
Triangular
purchased
Gas
Original
Center,
1990's
From:Staton, Rod
To:Karen Kendall
Subject:FW: MTCA Site Discovery and Notification-2425 E. Elizabeth, Spokane Valley WA 99212
Date:Wednesday, February 17, 2016 3:58:25 PM
From: Booth, Kevin
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 1:34 PM
To: plei461@ecy.wa.gov
Cc: Soyars, Darrell
Subject: MTCA Site Discovery and Notification-2425 E. Elizabeth, Spokane Valley WA 99212
Mr.Lienart
,
Hereisnotificationforanewcleanupsiteat2425E.Elizabeth,SpokaneValleyWA99212
MTCA Site Discovery and Notification
Location:
Arefusepiletothewestoftheresidencelocatedat2425E.Elizabeth.
Site Discovery Date:
July13,2015
Discovery and identification of hazardous substance
:
Priortopurchaseofthesubjectproperty,AvistacontractedwithAECOMtocompleteaPhase
IESA.AsaresultofthePhaseI,alimitedPhaseIIwasrecommendedforthesite.ThePhase
IIwascompletedonJuly30,2015.Basedonfieldobservationsandanalyticalresultsofthe
PhaseIIESA,concentrationsofpetroleumhydrocarbons,PCBs,PAHsandVOCsinthetest
areawerenotpresentatconcentrationsexceedinglaboratoryMRLsorMTCAMethodA
cleanupvalues.
However,leadwasdetectedatconcentrationsexceedingMTCAMethodAcleanuplevelsin
shallowsoilatthreelocationswithinthetestarea.Leadconcentrationswerebetween320-420
ppmandthusdidnotexceedMTCAMethodCforindustriallanduse.Analyticaltesting
suggeststhattheimpactwaslimitedinarealextentanddidnotmigratevertically.The
verticalextentofcontaminationwasbasedonareviewofmetaltestresultsinthecompanion
samplescollectedfromnativesoilwithinthetest area.
Circumstances of the release:
Itisnotknownwhenorhowtherefusepilewasplacedonthis
site.
Remedial actions completed and planned:
Avistapurchasedthesubjectpropertyduring
August2015andremovaloftherefusepilewascompletedinearlySeptember2015.Between
400-600tonsofcontaminatedmaterialwasdeliveredtotheGrahamRoadLandfillinMedical
Lake,WA.
AsummaryreportdetailingtheremedialactionwillbeforwardedtoEcologywithinthenext
fewmonths.
Pleasecallwithanyquestions.
Kevin Booth |
AvistaCorp.
| |
509-495-4738509-990-5915(Cell)509-777-5892(Fax)
kevin.booth@avistacorp.com
October 19, 2015
Mr. Kevin Booth
Avista Corporation
MSC-21
P.O. Box 3727
Spokane, Washington 99220-3727
RE:Letter Report - Limited Confirmation Sampling
N. 2425Elizabeth Road
Spokane Valley, Washington
AECOM ProjectNo: 60432346
Dear Mr. Booth,
This letter report documents findings of the Limited Confirmation Sampling performed by
AECOM on behalf of Avista Corporation (Avista). The activities described in this report were
conducted at 2425 N. Elizabeth Road, in Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington during
August and September 2015, The general site location is shown on Figure 1, Vicinity Map.
In response to recognized environmental conditions (RECs) resulting from the historic dumping
observed on site and reported in the Phase I ESA (AECOM, June 2015) AECOM conducted a
Limited Phase II ESA in July 2015. The results of the Phase II ESA indicated that lead
concentrations in multiple soil samples collected from the soil mixed with waste exceeded
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology)Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Method
A cleanup criteria for unrestricted site use. No other potential contaminants of concern were
detected at concentrations exceeding MTCA Method A criteria.
As a result of this assessment, Avista contracted directly with Tilton Construction and Excavation
to conduct remedial activities at the site. These activities included excavation of the trash and
contaminated fill, transport and disposal of the material to Waste Management’s Graham Road
facility, a Sub-Title D landfill located near Medical Lake, Washington.
AECOM was requested to assist with the cleanup action by assisting the contractor in identifying
the limits of the excavation, differentiation of fill andnative soil, and in responding to general
questions raised during the project. Additionally, AECOM collected confirmation samples from
the limits of the excavation to confirm that the remedial objectives were obtained.
On September 2, 2015 the first confirmatory sampling event was completed. A total of nine multi-
aliquot samples were collected from the side walls and bottom of the excavation. Figure 2, Site
Plan shows the general locations where confirmatorysoil samples were collected. Soil samples
were transported to Test America’s Spokane laboratory for rush analysis of lead by EPA Method
6000-7000. Soil sample results indicated that the soil samples collected from the side walls and
from the bottom of the central and eastern portions of the site contained concentrations of lead at
AECOM
528 Spokane Falls Blvd, Suite 503
Spokane, WA 99202
Tel: 509.928.4413
Fax: 509.928.4415
www.aecom.com
less than the MTCA Method A cleanup level of 250 milligrams per kilogram (mg\\kg). One sample
(S-9) collected from the bottom of the western-most portion of the excavation exceeded Method A
criteria with a lead concentration of 320 mg\\kg.
Additional soil removal was completed from the western-portion of the excavation and an
additional confirmation sample (S-9R) was collected on September 11, 2015. The results of this
sample were less than MTCA Method A criteria (14 mg\\kg) and excavation was completed. Table
1, Confirmatory Soil Sample Results shows the lead concentrations in the confirmatory soil
samples.
Table 1. Confirmatory Soil Sample Results
Sample ID Lead mg\\kg
S-1 74
S-2 68
S-3 17
S-4 48
S-5 85
S-6 80
S-7 28
S-8 52
S-9 320
S-9R 14
BOLD = Exceeds MTCA Method A Cleanup Requirements of 250 mg\\kg
In summation, a total of 586.38 tons of construction debris,trashand lead-contaminated soil were
removed from the unpermitted dump site located at 2425 N. Elizabeth Road in Spokane Valley,
Washington. Based on our observations while on site and the results of the confirmatory soil
samples collected from the limits of the remedial excavation it is our opinion that the remedial
objectives of the project have been obtained.
Limitations
The conclusions presented in this report are professional opinions based solely upon AECOM’s
environmental evaluation of the site, and the subsurface exploration data, as identified in our
previousreport. The conclusions are intended exclusively for the purpose stated herein, at the 2425
N. Elizabeth, Spokane Valley, WA. It should be recognized that this study was not intended to be a
definitive investigation of contamination at the subject property and the conclusions provided are
not necessarily inclusive ofall the possible conditions. It is possible that currently unrecognized
subsurface contamination may exist at the subject property.
Opinions and recommendations presented in this report apply to site conditions and features as
they existed at the time ofAECOM’s site explorations and those reasonably foreseeable. They
cannot necessarily apply to conditions and features of which AECOM is unaware and has not had
an opportunity to evaluate.
It is a pleasure to be of service to you. If you have questions, please contact the undersigned at
(509) 944-3815.
Sincerely,
AECOM
Gary D. Panther, LG
Project Geologist
FIGURES
Figure 1 –Vicinity Map
Figure 2 –Site Plan
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Laboratory Analytical Reports
Attachment B – Soil Disposal Receipts
FIGURES
Spokane
Washington
Site
Source: USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, Spokane NE, Washington, 2014
02,000
4,000
Scale in Feet
Figure 1
Site Plan
2425 North Elizabeth Road
Spokane, Washington
N Elizabeth RoadN Elizabeth Road
Source: Google Earth Pro, aerial dated 7/2/2013
ATTACHMENT A
LABORITORY ANALYTICAL REPORTS
1
2
3
4
5
ANALYTICAL REPORT
6
TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc.
7
TestAmerica Spokane
11922 East 1st Ave
8
Spokane, WA 99206
Tel:(509)924-9200
9
TestAmerica Job ID: 590-1862-1
10
Client Project/Site: Avista Elizabeth Phase II
For:
11
URS Corporation
12
528 E. Spokane Falls Blvd, Ste 503
Spokane, Washington 99202
Attn: Gary Panther
Authorized for release by:
9/4/2015 10:17:14 AM
Randee Arrington, Project Manager II
(509)924-9200
randee.arrington@testamericainc.com
This report has been electronically signed and authorized by the signatory. Electronic signature is
intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten signature.
Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s) as received by the laboratory.
1
Client: URS CorporationTestAmerica Job ID: 590-1862-1
Project/Site: Avista Elizabeth Phase II
2
Table of Contents
3
1
Cover Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
2
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
Case Narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
4
Sample Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
5
Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Client Sample Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
8
QC Sample Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
9
Chronicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
12
Certification Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
Method Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10
14
Chain of Custody . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11
15
Receipt Checklists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12
TestAmerica Spokane
Page 2 of 159/4/2015
!" ## $%&
1
2
3
'()!*+,!-./0123401
5 )(# $(#6,!7 $89 #%: !;<(= >
4
" ## $%&
5
? : %<$!
6
7
@ $ A !
8
B > # A! C 9% $#6!
9
10
11
12
Page 3 of 159/4/2015
!"# $ %&
1
2
3
' (# !"#)*+!,"-.# !"#)*4 .%,5+3!!"0."2/"0",1"2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 4 of 159/4/2015
! " #!$%&'#$$()*
1
2
3
+,(' )$
- "('$
4
+,(' )+,(' ). $/) 0" #!
5
6
&'#$$()*
7
855) 6 (" #!12 $ ./#33#!'*.,$ 4.(55) 6 (" #!$.3(*.#).3(*.!#".5 .0) $ !". !."2 $.) 0#)"7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 5 of 159/4/2015
!"#$%&' #( )* ")
1
2
!"#$%&' #-./#$34+%,#$%&' #-./#0123456734
3
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/228%"9 :/#$; <
4
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#1@A2
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
5
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
+ %<@FG4#G7
6
!"#$%&' #-./#$37+%,#$%&' #-./#0123456737
7
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/208%"9 :/#$; <
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#1FA4
8
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
9
+ %<65
10
!"#$%&' #-./#$3N+%,#$%&' #-./#012345673N
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/428%"9 :/#$; <
11
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#10AF
12
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
+ %<4@
!"#$%&' #-./#$3F+%,#$%&' #-./#012345673F
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/408%"9 :/#$; <
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#10AN
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
+ %<F5
!"#$%&' #-./#$30+%,#$%&' #-./#0123456730
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/728%"9 :/#$; <
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#10A7
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
+ %<50
!"#$%&' #-./#$36+%,#$%&' #-./#0123456736
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/708%"9 :/#$; <
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#1@A1
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
+ %<52
!"#$%&' #-./#$3@+%,#$%&' #-./#012345673@
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/N28%"9 :/#$; <
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#10AF
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
+ %<75
Page 6 of 159/4/2015
!"#$%&' #( )* ")
1
2
!"#$%&' #-./#$35+%,#$%&' #-./#0123456735
3
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/N08%"9 :/#$; <
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#1FAF
4
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
5
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
+ %<07
6
!"#$%&' #-./#$31+%,#$%&' #-./#0123456731
7
.%" # ; =" </#21>27>40#42/F28%"9 :/#$; <
.%" #( = B </#21>27>40#44/42? 9= !"#$; <)/#12AN
8
8 "C;</#6242 #3#8 "% )#D- ?E
H!% I" ( )* "L*% M 9(+8.+K! ".?9 '%9 <H!% IJ <. #G%=
9
+ %<N72
10
11
12
Page 7 of 159/4/2015
!"#$% &%'($)'
1
2
3
*%)+,-. /010 2 *%)!$' 34 56
4
<!= !"#$% 49. *: >?02@AB1CA2D $7%8) !"#$% 49. *%)+,- :$!8;
*!)E7F. ,$7-5E%# GH#%. G,)!$CID
D8!$H'7' :!)J+. @A?15E%# :!)J+. @AB1
5
*:*:
D8!$H)%&%'($) (!$7N7%E&<*9<M87)95E%#!E%-D8!$HL%-97$ K!J
6
7
<!= !"#$% 49. < >?02@AB1C12D $7%8) !"#$% 49. <!= ,8)E,$ !"#$%
*!)E7F. ,$7-5E%# GH#%. G,)!$CID
8
D8!$H'7' :!)J+. @A?15E%# :!)J+. @AB1
#7;%< < O&%JP
9
D8!$H)%D--%-&%'($) (!$7N7%EM87)9O&%J<7"7)'
10
<!= !"#$% 49. >?021Q/A21 * $7%8) !"#$% 49. 21
*!)E7F. ,$7-5E%# GH#%. G,)!$CID
11
D8!$H'7' :!)J+. @A?15E%# :!)J+. @AB1
!"#$% !"#$% #7;%* * O&%JP
12
D8!$H)%&%'($) (!$7N7%ED--%-&%'($) (!$7N7%EM87)9O&%J<7"7)'
<!= !"#$% 49. >?021Q/A21 * 9 $7%8) !"#$% 49. 21
*!)E7F. ,$7-5E%# GH#%. G,)!$CID
D8!$H'7' :!)J+. @A?15E%# :!)J+. @AB1
!"#$% !"#$% #7;%* 9* 9O&%JP&59
D8!$H)%&%'($) (!$7N7%ED--%-&%'($) (!$7N7%EM87)9O&%J<7"7)'&59<7"7)
<!= !"#$% 49. >?021Q/A21 9M $7%8) !"#$% 49. 21
*!)E7F. ,$7-5E%# GH#%. G,)!$CID
D8!$H'7' :!)J+. @A?15E%# :!)J+. @AB1
!"#$% !"#$%9M9M&59
D8!$H)%&%'($) (!$7N7%E&%'($) (!$7N7%EM87)9&59<7"7)
Page 8 of 159/4/2015
!"#$%&'()
1
2
3
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +12 + ,-() ./0 3451267812
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250559 *#&:0 +$(&;
4
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
5
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
6
7
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +12 + ,-() ./0 3451267812
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250559 *#&:0 +$(&;
8
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 4IJ5
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
9
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
10
11
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +18 + ,-() ./0 3451267818
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250539 *#&:0 +$(&;
12
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +18 + ,-() ./0 3451267818
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250539 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 4KJ2
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +1L + ,-() ./0 345126781L
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250259 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +1L + ,-() ./0 345126781L
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250259 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 43JK
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
Page 9 of 159/4/2015
!"#$%&'()
1
2
3
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +1K + ,-() ./0 345126781K
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250239 *#&:0 +$(&;
4
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
5
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
6
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +1K + ,-() ./0 345126781K
7
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250239 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 43JL 8
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
9
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
10
11
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +13 + ,-() ./0 3451267813
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250859 *#&:0 +$(&;
12
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +13 + ,-() ./0 3451267813
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250859 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 43J8
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +17 + ,-() ./0 3451267817
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250839 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +17 + ,-() ./0 3451267817
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250839 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 4IJ4
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
Page 10 of 159/4/2015
!"#$%&'()
1
2
3
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +1I + ,-() ./0 345126781I
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250L59 *#&:0 +$(&;
4
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
5
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
6
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +1I + ,-() ./0 345126781I
7
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250L59 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 43JK 8
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
9
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
10
11
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +16 + ,-() ./0 3451267816
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250L39 *#&:0 +$(&;
12
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +16 + ,-() ./0 3451267816
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250L39 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 4KJK
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +14 + ,-() ./0 3451267814
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250K59 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +14 + ,-() ./0 3451267814
/ *) !$(()'*);0 54<58<23 250K59 *#&:0 +$(&;
/ *) =)')&>);0 54<58<23 22025B)#')%* +$(&;D0 45JL
A *'"A *'"/&(.%&*& (G&% (A *'"B#)- #);
B#)- ?@-)?@-)9)*"$;=E%G '*$#C,$E%*C,$E%*HE, )#$# C% (@F);C% (@D*
$# *$#@ =)M)#)%')D0
Page 11 of 159/4/2015
!"!#$ !%&'()**$ +
1
2
,$-% $ % +.'/ 0 1* !#$'(2%3$&
3
4
1) 4% ! +5 %6 $*751'8 6!%& !"!#$ !%&'9:7;2! $ !%&':$
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 12 of 159/4/2015
!"#$%&&'()
1
2
3
!" !"#* +,(-. -!/2(! !,!30'1!(' !()
4
5
2(! !,!3#4 5 ( /, +6
6
7
0'1!(' !()#4 5 ( /, +6
8
9
10
11
12
Page 13 of 159/4/2015
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 14 of 159/4/2015
1
!"#$%&'(")(*( &+",-(*.' /+
2
3
4
!"01%2(34"5678 /+"# 13*(4"@(/+:%(3 *$"#& .$!(
/+"01%2(34"5
5
,3($+ 34"<3$+=>"#-( '$"?
6
91(/+ !:!/;(3, %%(!+
7
8
9
10
11
12
@(/+:%(3 *$"#& .$!(
Page 15 of 159/4/2015
1
2
3
4
5
ANALYTICAL REPORT
6
TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc.
7
TestAmerica Spokane
11922 East 1st Ave
8
Spokane, WA 99206
Tel:(509)924-9200
9
TestAmerica Job ID: 590-1930-1
10
Client Project/Site: Avista Elizabeth P II
For:
11
URS Corporation
12
528 E. Spokane Falls Blvd, Ste 503
Spokane, Washington 99202
Attn: Gary Panther
Authorized for release by:
9/14/2015 4:04:58 PM
Randee Arrington, Project Manager II
(509)924-9200
randee.arrington@testamericainc.com
This report has been electronically signed and authorized by the signatory. Electronic signature is
intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten signature.
Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s) as received by the laboratory.
1
Client: URS CorporationTestAmerica Job ID: 590-1930-1
Project/Site: Avista Elizabeth P II
2
Table of Contents
3
1
Cover Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
2
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
Case Narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
4
Sample Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
5
Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
Client Sample Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
7
QC Sample Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
8
Chronicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
9
Certification Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10
Method Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10
11
Chain of Custody . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11
12
Receipt Checklists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12
TestAmerica Spokane
Page 2 of 129/14/2015
!" ## $%&
1
2
3
'()!*+,!-./01.2/01
3 )(# $(#4,!5 $67 #%8 !9:(; <
4
" ## $%&
5
6
= 8 %:$!
7
> $ ? !
8
@ < # ?! A 7% $#4!
9
10
11
12
Page 3 of 129/14/2015
!"# $ %&
1
2
3
' (# !"#)*+!,"-.# !"#)*4 .%,5+3!!"0."2/"0",1"2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 4 of 129/14/2015
! " #!$%&'#$$()*
1
2
3
+,(' )$
- "('$
4
+,(' )+,(' ). $/) 0" #!
5
&'#$$()*
6
855) 6 (" #!12 $ ./#33#!'*.,$ 4.(55) 6 (" #!$.3(*.#).3(*.!#".5 .0) $ !". !."2 $.) 0#)"7
7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 5 of 129/14/2015
!"#$%&' #( )* ")
1
2
!"#$%&' #-./#$31(+%,#$%&' #-./#0123415234
3
.%" # 9 ;" :/#21<44<40#45/526%"7 8/#$9 :
4
.%" #( ; A :/#21<44<40#4B/22= 7; !"#$9 :)/#1>?@
6 "C9:/#>242 #3#6 "% )#D- =E
5
F!% G" ( )* "K*% L 7(+6.+J! ".=7 '%7 :F!% GI :. #H%;
+ %:4B
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 6 of 129/14/2015
!"#$% &%'($)'
1
2
3
*%)+,-. /010 2 *%)!$' 34 56
4
<!= !"#$% 49. *: >?02@@?ABA2C $7%8) !"#$% 49. *%)+,- :$!8;
*!)D7E. ,$7-5D%# FG#%. F,)!$BHC
C8!$G'7' :!)I+. @JAA5D%# :!)I+. @@?A
5
*:*:
C8!$G)%&%'($) (!$7N7%D&<*9<M87)95D%#!D%-C8!$GL%-97$ K!I
6
7
<!= !"#$% 49. < >?02@@?AB12C $7%8) !"#$% 49. <!= ,8)D,$ !"#$%
*!)D7E. ,$7-5D%# FG#%. F,)!$BHC
8
C8!$G'7' :!)I+. @JAA5D%# :!)I+. @@?A
#7;%< < O&%IP
9
C8!$G)%C--%-&%'($) (!$7N7%DM87)9O&%I<7"7)'
10
<!= !"#$% 49. >?021?@021 * $7%8) !"#$% 49. 2?&
*!)D7E. ,$7-5D%# FG#%. F,)!$BHC
11
C8!$G'7' :!)I+. @JAA5D%# :!)I+. @@?A
!"#$% !"#$% #7;%* * O&%IP
12
C8!$G)%&%'($) (!$7N7%DC--%-&%'($) (!$7N7%DM87)9O&%I<7"7)'
<!= !"#$% 49. >?021?@021 * 9 $7%8) !"#$% 49. 2?&
*!)D7E. ,$7-5D%# FG#%. F,)!$BHC
C8!$G'7' :!)I+. @JAA5D%# :!)I+. @@?A
!"#$% !"#$% #7;%* 9* 9O&%IP&59
C8!$G)%&%'($) (!$7N7%DC--%-&%'($) (!$7N7%DM87)9O&%I<7"7)'&59<7"7)
<!= !"#$% 49. >?021?@021 9M $7%8) !"#$% 49. 2?&
*!)D7E. ,$7-5D%# FG#%. F,)!$BHC
C8!$G'7' :!)I+. @JAA5D%# :!)I+. @@?A
!"#$% !"#$%9M9M&59
C8!$G)%&%'($) (!$7N7%D&%'($) (!$7N7%DM87)9&59<7"7)
Page 7 of 129/14/2015
!"#$%&'()
1
2
3
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +123 + ,-() ./0 4251627516
/ *) !$(()'*):0 52;66;64 670758 *#&90 +$(&:
4
/ *) 3)')&<):0 52;66;64 6=055
5
@ *'"@ *'"/&(.%&*& (F&% (@ *'"A#)- #):
A#)- >?-)>?-)8)*"$:3D%F '*$#B,$D%*B,$D%*GD, )#$# B% (?E):B% (?C*
6
7
!(&)%* + ,-() ./0 +123 + ,-() ./0 4251627516
/ *) !$(()'*):0 52;66;64 670758 *#&90 +$(&:
8
/ *) 3)')&<):0 52;66;64 6=055A)#')%* +$(&:C0 2HIJ
@ *'"@ *'"/&(.%&*& (F&% (@ *'"A#)- #):
9
A#)- >?-)>?-)8)*"$:3D%F '*$#B,$D%*B,$D%*GD, )#$# B% (?E):B% (?C*
10
11
$# *$#? 3)K)#)%')C0
12
Page 8 of 129/14/2015
!"!#$ !%&'()**$ +
1
2
,$-% $ % +.'/ 0 1* !#$'(2%3$&
3
4
1) 4% ! +5 %6 $*751'8 6!%& !"!#$ !%&'9:7;2! $ !%&':$
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 9 of 129/14/2015
!"#$%&&'()
1
2
3
!" !"#* +,(-. -!/2(! !,!30'1!(' !()
4
5
2(! !,!3#4 5 ( /, +6
6
7
0'1!(' !()#4 5 ( /, +6
8
9
10
11
12
Page 10 of 129/14/2015
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Page 11 of 129/14/2015
1
!"#$%&'(")(*( &+",-(*.' /+
2
3
4
!"01%2(34"5678 /+"# 13*(4"@(/+:%(3 *$"#& .$!(
/+"01%2(34"5
5
,3($+ 34"<3$+=>"#-( '$"?
6
91(/+ !:!/;(3, %%(!+
7
8
9
10
11
12
@(/+:%(3 *$"#& .$!(
Page 12 of 129/14/2015
ATTACHMENT B
SOIL DISPOSAL RECEIPTS
City Council
Planning Commission
(Mailed, posted and published)
Notice of Public Hearing
On February 5, 2016
Environmental Decision Issued
Submittal
Formal Application
13-01-CPA
13-01-CPA
13-01-CPA
?I1J./*"81 /2K"?L*MNOOPQ"EOON+*
;*RN1/.!"D/2*!!NR*/+*"=M1 I"3
84)"?*!*+2*S"D/+NS*/2Q"GN2LN/"#T%"7N!*"1O"8.//.":1 Q*"U39#9">"?IM.R *V
EI*/*S"&AT&#T%&#,
!"#$"%&#'"(" !"#$"%&#,"(")*+"%#$"%&#'"(" ./"#$"%&#,"("012.!
)*+"%&$"%&#')*+"%&$"%&#,)*+"-#$"%&#' /"-&$"%&#,
35#%,,5,-#-
3##4
-%#,99
4678
-,&%#&
467:
%,&-#&
467;
467<%#&%,
'&-5#%,#&'
4;=<>
#-3#%-'9
4?60
5##%A%5
@<;=8
&-&-9
@<;==
#'#-&#-'&
@<;=;
--,%%%A##'
88
8:B>C#&#'&%&''
###--#%-3
)D?E;)
&#&&#
)E4
9'&,#,
)E7?0
9#,&A%5
);<=?
)<D%&#A#%#,3
%--'#-%3&
)C
5#&##9-,
)CEF?
#%3&9%A
)CEFC
%%&#,
)CG
%'&#%#5
HD=:0
#,&#A
H;4<)
:4;4??#%&%,
9##&5%,
7467?
%#-&-#5
F>)CDE
##-,&%'A&
F>;@E0
!"#$"%&#'"(" !"#$"%&#,"(")*+"%#$"%&#'"(" ./"#$"%&#,"("012.!
)*+"%&$"%&#')*+"%&$"%&#,)*+"-#$"%&#' /"-&$"%&#,
'%&&9
F>;H
%9&'#%
F>;G
&&&##
F;EG6
##&&%
;4F>
;>8B);-#'3%,&#-%
#&&%-
;E@
-&&#'
?>W8;D
3,&%#9
?:EE0
%--5-'9##&
?:EF6
&%&&%
?04@
%#&#'
?046B
?0F;EF##&%'
93&-#5
?<D84
%9'&%'&#&5
?<?8D;
A-5&95A%'9
?<?F>;
'-5#',5#59
?<?C>:
0:>H03#5',
-5#5%&
0:;>40
'3&5%#
0;@6<
%&%';%
0;>?F
,%,'---&'A3#$'9A
0?
'9&%#%
<=<>?0
,9&3%&
C>:F;E
C>:;>8#&##&#,-9
#%#3&%-,'
C>:0H0
-5##%%'
G4;;X0
#$#5'#$-%A95#$%9'-$5'-
012.!
F.R*"%"1O"%#%T%#T%&#,
;*I1M2"8M*.2*SY
)+0G1H*"80IH!J")K*LMNNOP" NNM *
=*QM0H12"CH!*22MQ*H *">L0I+"3
84.")*2* !*R"CH MR*H!P"EM!KMH"#S%":M2*"0N"8MHR*L"T#,%#"U":I221HV
+*H*R"#&S&#S%&#,
!"#$"%&#'"(" !"#$"%&#,"(" !"#$"%&#-"("/0!12
)*+"'&$"%&#,)*+"'&$"%&#-.* "%&$"%&#-
#&'#%5%-%--
3##4
#&&#
46.78
'#%''-5
49:8
',#<
49:;
49:=#%#,#5
#&&#
49:7
,<@####%&
4=>7?
%'''<@,
4)9/
@@&#%
67=>8
'&&'
67=>>
#5#<5,%
67=>=
885<5##,#@'
#@#<3,'
8;A?B
%-',<@5
.C) =.
'#'5
. 4
--'#'
. :)/
.=7>)%,%<%-,
3<<@%'%&5
.7C
-%,'#,#&3
.B
5#,&%#
.B D)
#&@##5
.B DB
###'
.BE
<5&#-
FC>;/
F =>?=&#&#
%'#@
F=47.
#&&#
;4=4))
#,5&%#
:49:)
!"#$"%&#'"(" !"#$"%&#,"(" !"#$"%&#-"("/0!12
)*+"'&$"%&#,)*+"'&$"%&#-.* "%&$"%&#-
#<%##
D?.BC
###3<'<
D?=6 /
#&#%
D?=F
<5&#-
D?=E
D= )/%&&%
,5##%
D= E9
'%#@
=4D?
'&&'-&5-5%-
=?8A.=
@,&#&
= 6
'#&,
= 68
%%#-
)?W8=C
); /%@&<
#<#3,,#
); D9
#&&#
)/46
&#&#
)/49A
'5%#%
)/D= D
)7C84#@#5%'-
-<-<@#%%
)7)8C=
<'#%##3%%'
)7)D?=
<3#--%&%@,
)7)B?;
@-,5@##<
/;?F/
##3#%#
/;=?4/
@#&'#3
/=697
/=?)D#'%5<,<
-5-@'##'3#$',-
/)
3-,#<
7>7?)/
##5&#<
B?;D=
#55-%3
B?;=?8
B?;/F/'3#3&-<
#,#,''#
E4==U/
/0!12
D1Q*"%"0N"%#%S%#S%&#-
=*+0L!"8L*1!*RX
?H*I0J "8*KJ/L"?M NOPPQR"DPPO!
: SO*J01"CJ/ 11OS J! ";N*KH"2
83 "? 1 !/ T"CJ!OT J/R"FO/MOJ"#U%"7O1 "*P".N M*KR "V#,,%#"=".N J/W
DH J T"#%U&#U%&#,
!"#$"%&#'"(" !"#$"%&#,"(" !"#$"%&#-"(".*/01
)*+"'&$"%&#,)*+"'&$"%&#- !"%&$"%&#-
4'5-'#,#
2##3
4'&2
3678
#'&,
3679
#4&5
367:
3:;<=%4###'>
2#&'%%
3?6.
,4###
@<:;8
#&&#
@<:;;
#&4
@<:;:
''%,#->
88
#%&'
89A=B
C?D: ->&#'
#%&'
D3
5>&#-
D7?.
##4
:<;?
#42&%-
<C
B,4''#>&
-2&#,
BDE?
54&#'
BDEB
'%&-
BF
'&&'
GC;9.
##&%
G:3<
%%&,
93:3??
7367?2#&#&
#'#-
E= BCD
5-##'
E=:@D.
&#&#
E=:G
!"#$"%&#'"(" !"#$"%&#,"(" !"#$"%&#-"(".*/01
)*+"'&$"%&#,)*+"'&$"%&#- !"%&$"%&#-
-'&>
E=:F
%&&%
E:DF6
&#&#
:3E=
%5'4-4>
:=8A :
:D@8&##%
'&&'
?=X8:C
-#&4
?9DD.
',&5
?9DE6
&#&#
?.3@
&#&#
?.36A
%%&,
?.E:DE
?<C83#&'&#'
'#%''-5
?<?8C:
,#''#5-
?<?E=:
%,,&%44
?<?B=9
'%%%%-4
.9=G.
.9:=3.5'&#&
',%2
.:@6<
#,%
.:=?E
#4-%#%,'>#
.?
,%&4
<;<=?.
'%&-
B=9E:D
,,&>
B=9:=8
B=9.G.-5&#%
#&5##>
F3::).
4524-4''#$'4>
.*/01
E0S "%"*P"%#%U%#U%&#-
: H*N/"8N 0/ TY