The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 07/28/2016 SCITI POKane Valle y Spokane Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. July 28, 2016 6:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 14, 2016 minutes VI. COMMISSION REPORTS VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: X. Study Session: Comprehensive Plan Update — Draft Land Use Map XI. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XII. ADJOURNMENT Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall, July 14,2016 Chair Graham called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Secretary Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: Kevin Anderson Mike Basinger,Economic Development Coordinator Heather Graham James Johnson Deanna Horton Secretary of the Commission, Tim Kelley Mike Phillips Suzanne Stathos Joe Stoy Commissioner Stoy moved to accept the July 14, 2016 agenda as presented. The vote was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the June 23, 2016 minutes as presented. The vote was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. COMMISSION REPORTS: The Commissioners had nothing to report. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Economic Development Coordinator Mike Basinger reviewed the schedule for upcoming meetings,reminding the Commissioners the schedule is subject to change. July 28 Draft Land Use Map,August 11 Draft Goals and Policies,August 25 Conceptual Regulations for signage and landscaping PUBLIC COMMENT: Lyle Hatcher, Liberty Lake speaking on behalf of Mary Lou O'Donnell, 102 N Bolivar Rd.: Mr. Hatcher stated he was speaking on behalf of Ms.O'Donnell because she is elderly and can not get out. Mr. Hatcher stated Ms. O'Donnell's home has been a nightmare for her to live in, as it has been for the surrounding neighbors who live near Aspen Sound. Although the Code Enforcement department has assisted in toning down the noise, it is still a major problem for these residents when the employees are testing out the installed sound equipment. He said at times the walls would (will)just rattle the bass is drumming so hard. It makes it impossible at time to almost carry on a conversation. Mr. Hatcher would like to help Ms. O'Donnell sell her property however it is not worth anything as a residential property,nor are any of the properties close to Aspen Sound. He is asking that as the Planning Commission reviews the Comprehensive Plan they consider changing the designation of the properties close to Sprague along Bolivar to commercial so that the residents can sell and get some kind of return on their property. Mike Rogers, 18 N Bolivar Rd.: Mr.Rogers stated he lives in this home with his mother and next door to a beauty salon. The beauty salon does not have enough parking and so they park up and down the street and in front of his mother's home and become angry when he waters his lawn and their cars. The beauty salon would like to buy his property but they do not want to pay anything for it. He also stated he will never be able to sell it as a residence because of the noise from Aspen Sound and the constant beating noise which even makes it difficult to listen to the television. Mr. Rogers said he would like to request that as the Planning Commission reviews the Comprehensive Plan they consider changing the properties along Bolivar from residential to commercial so the residents can sell their property. they will not be able to see and move if it stays residential because of the noise from Aspen Sound and the beauty parlor. COMMISSION BUSINESS: Study Session: Comprehensive Plan—Residential Standards Mr. Basinger explained staff wanted to discuss the proposed residential standards and what the surrounding jurisdictions standards are. Mr. Basinger started with single family residential and said the Comprehensive Plan states Low Density Residential allows for six units per acre and there is no proposal to change this. He reviewed the standards for Spokane County, the City of Spokane and Liberty Lake. Staff is proposing to consolidate the City's R-3 zone and R-4 zone, which would have a minimum lot 06-23-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 2 size of 5,000 square foot lots. There would be no width or depth restrictions and the rear yard setback would be reduced to 10 feet. Currently Spokane County,who would be developing in the Urban Growth Areas(UGA)in their Low Density Residential in 5,000 square foot lots,with a 5 foot rear yard setback. Liberty Lake,which is developing on the City's eastern boundary,has a 5,000 square foot minimum lot size, a 15 foot rear yard setback. The city of Spokane has a 4,350 square foot lot size and a 5 foot rear yard setback. The Commissioners discussed how this change would affect the City's character. Concerns were raised that the Valley is a place of large open lots which people move out into this area to find and changing this standard would ruin the character of the City completely. Commissioner Graham asked Commissioner Phillips if you could physically see a difference between 5,000 and 6,000 square foot lots, he confirmed it would not be a visible difference. Commissioner Phillips also supports the change saying this would be easier to design infill lots. Commissioner Anderson felt as if there should be two sets of standards,one for open development,where no residential development had previously occurred on wide open spaces,and one for infill development,small lots surrounded by developed lots. The Commissioners had very open dialog regarding their thoughts and opinions about reducing the required lot sizes and the impact on the City. Commissioners Stoy,Phillips and Kelley shared their points of view based on being involved with the development community but still holding for the individual home owners. Commissioners Graham, Anderson, Stathos and Johnson attempted to understand that development outside the City limits was at the standards staff presented but were concerned how it would affect the City's character. Mr. Basinger explained the City is trying to streamline the regulations and make development simpler for everyone. Multifamily development in the City has only occurred in the MF-2 zones,there has been no development in the MF-1 zones because 12 units per acre has not be profitable for developers Mr. Basinger shared with the Commissioners. He said staff held several stakeholder meetings and 22 units per acre is the maximum units developers are able to achieve on a property in our market. This is primarily due to parking requirements of 2.5 parking spaces per unit for new multifamily development. The only way to achieve more density would be to add additional floors which is not possible with the needed parking spaces of 2.5 per unit. The surrounding jurisdictions have two multifamily zones,with Spokane County and Liberty Lake having no limit on the units per acre. The City of Spokane complicates the allowed units by building height,parking spaces and setbacks. Some Commissioners felt there needed to be some kind of a transition between the single family residential areas and the multifamily,when Mr. Basinger explained there would be relational setback requirements. He stepped to the whiteboard to explain for every 10 feet in height over 25 feet, there would be a requirement of a setback of an additional 10 feet from the property line required in order to not have the buildings right next to single-family housing. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Stoy and Johnson commented on the excellent discussion which occurred during this evening's topic. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor,motion passed. Chair Heather Graham Date signed Secretary Deanna Horton CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: July 28, 2016 File Number: NA Item: Check all that apply: ❑X Study Session ❑old business ❑ new business ❑ Public Hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Comprehensive Plan Update DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Presentation on draft Land Use map GOVERNING LEGISLATION:None BACKGROUND: Per RCW 36.70A.130(1),every county and city in the state is required to conduct an update of its comprehensive plan and development regulations every 8 years. The City of Spokane Valley's update is due no later than June 30,2017. Staff and the consultants are continuing to develop the Draft Comprehensive Plan. On July 14, 2016, staff provided a presentation on residential development in our region to offer context for the proposed residential development standards. Tonight, staff will provide an overview of the draft land use map and the correlation to the existing conditions report, with an emphasis on the focused analysis of Medium Density Residential,Mixed Use, Office, and Neighborhood Commercial. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger,Economic Development Coordinator Attachments: PowerPoint Presentation Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update Draft Land Use Map Mike Basinger, Economic Development Coordinator j�eYl Community Vision • Increased focus and access to parks and trails • Consider a specific focus area around new City Hall • Provide for a greater variety of housing types • Preserve the character of the neighborhoods • Locate housing near amenities like retail, health care, parks, and transit • Increase business opportunities and reduce barriers Spokane 2 Council Goals • Streamline land uses and maximize flexibility • Preserve established neighborhoods • Provide for a variety of housing types like tiny homes cottage houses • Change the mixed-use designations along Trent • Consolidate Office and Garden Office or change to Corridor Mixed Use • Expand and designate new areas of Neighborhood Commercial j� 3 Analysis of the existing Land Use • Medium Density has experienced little development • Office zones have high vacancy rates • Desire to have more opportunities for Neighborhood Commercial • Corridor Mixed Use may not be appropriate along Trent Avenue Spokane 4 Valley Medium Density Residential ( MDR) • Multifamily development is not feasible in this zone • 1 permit was issued in MF-1 from 2012-2015 • Applicant submitted a CAR application requesting a density increase • Largest share of multifamily development is in mixed use zones • 60% lot coverage is unattainable due to density restriction • Recommendation is to rezone to higher density residential Spokane 5 Recommendations for MDR • Integrate medium density into low, high, & mixed use where appropriate • Create transitional provisions to protect adjacent uses • Relational height limit Flpsro,: RoLationilIleigi — 1 to 1 height to setback ratio 1 1 { I -NI 2 5' 10' Spokane 6 Valley Multifamily R ,_ !,,,,, : , _0 .4 di . , . ., 1_ _ieilopr aric,r A RV oior 4 . al 1 wig 1, •7 II . ;k : . `i i .. ■1 �._ �■■■C ■ .! i l ►, �� r1l Imo' Ilii Inn" 010 di..,. .,..to :le Er H _ -.ArA op-0-11- Fm-71 . -Nillil:- , II 1 - Aii- - re Ilaiiiir4t1 1 1, _r i . .Ari / 1 s r.�!IrUITImt -lb 1 yr .Ptitaill ,Z, Mr; gliT111111 m.m• .1 . .„ . _...x 1 i ' Fa) 1.1 . 1. 416 .F7'!! ' a �■ 7*/drii a ■ . 1 - °- �• j _..._1:r, r , r ■ gyri- ■` ir rjr' .r.A._ ■■ m Al I .71. li'r. e , I _ I J E[ > . . - 111 LIE _ "I] .- - - • 4 / //,/ : Ar ..' SFr pop, .. / r yir r. • I I r Aor t 0414 Aie doj u lb } �� I N � � { 1. IF - i _ . __JL - _ � '� __ .�' !I .` __ s. , ,, . ir 1-m111111 ... ...I. . ..• • IT _ . ..... . .. . . �' r6IL 1IiLT1 IFf R:hei., , .. _11 _. - EL ■ C 111.-,� slam mon■ _I _ ..are 1 — LI . T, r—r—r� •J Spokane 7 1/alley Proposed Regulations MFR • Consolidate MF- 1 and MF- 2 • Allow increased density • Provide transitional provisions to protect adjacent zones • Locate multifamily near services j� 8 Parks and O Space • Desire for more parks and open space _ • Designated land by Mirabeau - 14 • . al* 71. j • Designated Appleway Trail ROWsi guiliL : . _ _ �, ,A_ 0:::::77 1■�■ � �I'I■!■ ria 1 ILEI :10. a�� -um. ■iii■ 1 11■Illi !iii:!mriiiM:111.„) , ' � f �1 ii■■iii2-= E1�1'1■�. ■. ar ,� ,' � :h: ^1 ■111 ... ■ e, i }. ■ ■■■11��==_� �� 1 ;CI � 0� �4f.I - _ 1 qtr 1�■4 � �� /J. � '..././...„,/,„,,w„/..,,,„ :,../.., 7:..../././...., ■ ^ +Si m ■ll_inl - " iii if. �r ■ ■" IF 1� I�I�� gam !tea �� I. / # // 1 #- q IN III INK- 747$00,- l re ..: lIiIII'11i i• HI1i !I .iI , ! ':.id , I 1- ii;iir )' Lm .. -,--,, _ .- -E .rd d 1,400;•!..5t.';'le r s aorp i R au.ill: "1 ■ 1 1M r L I i1 •• ,I■1111��■■r■■ 111 ' --T _ -- rR-.Allot • ma• 11�■1 1 I �1 2 II II mmIIIIIII��tn ■■■■ pi -- 1 H {- ---- "- - �t _ �Isi�.�5�151� � l�� C �'� 11111111111■E. 111 �_�� . .9 ..;, ..R/i1 Idiptt er91'I ill' raj 1.-111! ' I „mi.!. ■ EI hIII . II IIIIIIFI■1■■■I■E 1111 i o� I W., girain �h IIIIIIt 111 !AMU I I I I �•— � -IlkII 10- �■■!1 �I I11� o i - •m 1■1111111111 —_ Spokane 9 1/alley Office ■ Office space has a vacancy rate of 20 ■ Spokane Valley has an oversupply of office space ■ Recent office development is clustered around 1-90 ■ Argonne, Pines, and Evergreen corridors have had little new office development since 2004 ■ Typical parcel sizes are .75 acres which is not conducive to new office development Spokane 10 Valley Recommendations for Office ,.......-„,•._.- . .01 . . 1 .limo Lumps,I u11 ' '.., ern �i1IC" ANWAMP; w i1�fu ,�j ;ramsi ..: u111 ,111 ■■ r•i 1 11!11161 .1w----1 . 1 h • Change office corridors to Corridor Mixed Use !Q!;: A -nl- 1. . G J �1rn110 1 ' - , 1111.1 mow! l mil - • Multifamily, office, retail, and light manufacturing : — r -■ g iv Ed.l_!T1111 - Il {Iii'= I : '1 . i 1:11501/11111$11 Immo.== . ib r.;11i '1..4 "III =`--== y` lig - _ i- __ - �� x.111 w. 1■ ■ R w..-. whin;i4-— III � „,.. .Ii.... IL��li1 �111i � 11 i � ■IJP Pr m 1111 - Imo °r F 11■1111■..1 .:' ■=I IIIA I _::�• �e.mi 1 - i�f Nam Im r 5'E JIi1111 �,~. .. �. ,. . r , „,, -- ��--1111 - -'IF, 1'., 11 ` - L:�1.1116 0lil al r .� it:ill f lm PPjell8FINFM �# ii !I 1� 5!�1�111 �firi 6;1w. .11 A 1111 ■.■.■.. " ISM Ili LTA 1 1 elk. 11rs■mama 111 . +.+T 1111111111 IMM. ■ f �R$ F f-'- f:'' ',,.-M ■ ■ ■ nz..�I . IBJ A! ___• I■ 1,1 •0 111 11.111 - mum . 7 — E. �.�,_�� salon 11. ■ Iri I 111 11111. I . ii. .Ii... •�. .r - � TIM �- . roo..._vm-E.':.t.-04,451ENTIP��.driii ow .611.. 1A fr/L i1.■! ,..�1j'f11■1!_I-- . ■■.■ ri■■■■■■1■111;'. II 1 1 ■.11..iii +�y■a..■1■1-- .� � i■ mo=. - KR14rit+y0�� •• - r • I!1 !• 0� ■...■■■..■..a1■■■■f:1' , $'i'.........Pm ..�1..�. ., .■; -- ■�■:.1:11111. 1 . ir 1 , 1 u■■■■■■■v' ' ■n11111d 1111. . II■■II■11111m■ ai% .,f- . ..■.■..■■.■■I■■in■ i. !w=11� ! n s ata i 1' ....■...■..■J��■ �� ■� �■� .. 1 , i "Oa c Oreon',e. s fes: �,�� 1■■111161 1■1111■1■1 i1■■..■...■.■ ■ w [ y P —�� ter. 111,1■1■■1■1■11(,I■1111111111.11;■■■ it=a' .■::111■11■: ■•F—� �� qr. _ # ___-_.,�� Koro c.,- . ', I I- or. WO �.,/ ��■■ 1..11.1.1.. � p� �� ,o�. �rr�,jp��l� �"`.. r .■■■■.■.■■■.■ 2;`10,•1111111■ ■1I —� �� .. ■fy D !` j �. —r R�t1:".1G3■ ■ � �1+. -� �� SII � .I? r. urE��a ' __ J �Iv' �."� ' ■11■1111111•1111. -M �� . n0E. r .. 11■moi ■•�� ■■■■■.■.■■ ■1. ■1.■� flr� �� =�i �sR �® �- ail rR srr p �. - ■RI 1911 ■■■■. X11■■111 ■ 1 ■1111_12divi ik► -. ,01 . ,).- . may - ,��:�. f 11_ �1-� �__.." : � ._ �.�-l----■----�. X1111. ■ 1� .� _T Spokane 11 Valley" Neighborhood Commercial ( NC • The City lacks small-scale, neighborhood oriented commercial areas • The community desires more small-scale retail uses in neighborhoods • Small and local businesses can assist in developing a vibrant retail market ' ‘z.,t--- iiiii i'Tr, Ei ,., ., , I , . , t . , :e �- 2 _. . 0 � . ' du - , o J ._ - rte. ' 1 ? , ,, _ r _. i_p , - __ _ ___.... ...._ • • _ __ Spokane 12 Valley Recommendations for NC • Designate new areas for neighborhood commercial development • Allow residential use to be outright permitted • Locate new commercial areas in close proximity to neighborhoods • Locate new commercial areas at major intersections or future transportation routes Spokane 13 DesignationsiNew Nehborhood Plante's Ferry Forker Evergreen _ 11 l J 1 J I I LUL - -_,,,,,_...1 �� rh in I Y Ai - MI F . - 1 , in --T .. 1 ,mAEr - . 1 .:,.....„._,•.:,„_,_. ..... 1 1+ ■ 1 ME Ai i F _ _ -: -,. ,. : . -:- •-- -- • [ 1(—I Tr_l -c--) 1 35 64.4 101111111 El N F o F 1,:.e-F lir ihe alt efliA :':'.: .:.- . . '. , . . . . M. . Fin - Rial 1-1 '1 - 8 .„.....„, ,_ _ _ : . ..• . . • . 1,:...„..... ..... .!. . . ... 7 �' �y � N , � •� i - � sir r � o - 4 r0,1.1 � � � y ,i � �--r -� - 1 ,411 a 1 1 :7 ..,i / ,,,://: 0,,,,......: N#1040Nk!' 41 • * - :b.-, -i ..',. -. . _ iiit- ria-— 1.1 II—II 1—1 = 141111111MO 111114011111 r-Th ---6%.;1!ge .:".11*..... nth-O i., .r. , „... ....„._,..._,......,,,.... ., _ . r..... yi.ii.,,.... ....„ IMMIX. Ifti* mini Tip _H. 6::c ffiFE ....- -. : : .--,.,:.- - ....2 ' BE 4,00!,! K. i El , ,lli‘.' 0-''' 1 01 — r 9 l 1 I I I T{w *Wan'',a�'`` 14 .Valley Industrial Mixed Use • Created a new designation along Trent Avenue • Allows for light industrial (contractors and tow yards) • Continues to allow for commercial uses FT �� ,� � , _ rte . �.�� l■- � ' - r_ ■ . -I ii ;r i = „H nom ■■■� c I', fast baht ;i�'■ .. 1. 1 mAnnalliii • :. i _ _ �� I-a :moo n ■.11�■,.■■. . limp ■ '-mom ■ I ^_■ 111 ,■ it ��- • 1f ■■i�I■■■r! ■ �� 11■ .■ ■ - ' :gum�■no :1 -..i■■■n■■■■■■ me_ Ili: . :� I iii 1 \1 • 1 ' I i or. m uti--- 05f.. a= 112.— — . ' 11111' 1F 411 ■ ■■■EII1•mit?1 - 111■•ml • IIII■ �I■� 1 „ ce �am . 1 1 �4` t ff. s +di ard.k — - .—:— — Q ———?1I - Spokane 15 Valley' Industrial ■ Consolidated the industrial designations ,. .'rld: su.u..!! •�t��ililr!_ I.-. mriii f■ A.'�.---e. i Siuii1r i.. i.1 n 51.--,.ii . ' • -s_ "7/ ' --All ma •=_ �11113"atiuw �{lldlll�}I.uul:I�+ Irr�r * � ��' *ti ___,.-L---_,: :_-,--;--: x r �' _ : - :—�� ■ 1111 VIII SIL _aulllumrl..MuryM■ FIS11111�1gArru7 .r.Rl' �rl l�nl��f . .,. 11��1A��I�-I�f_JI1 =11111 mt4Rlgr unionU� ![r �1 4lliir':r�i[sieve', l■� — rlrrrl�.11lllll•1l.All rel •"'lllli llll■ w . •1.1l1.r1[•��4M1. - [ ��. -� / ill. �11'r Ac#i.'t�'•,I1 ..IIID--'�! lig' ■.lr..r=r at i.' iiiibi ii_ - -——' --:f_-- ..I ,00ia, ;•' /.. +: T1� .P.M ;i' to sus r r a� - "N � r: 1 r�E:m,r111A� �-. I 1-•i� '�� - I � j /�`�f''�' f` . 1. —1� —i-F� 1..i Awy .1•AI %> .,-!....;1://77.,: ✓fid 111g4 . I� - _. .. _ . _ _ Il& �C�FI' µ i iii__ ; �bl.1.Yc St . - - ma� �� I�LLIti /.. EIMMIE. - N tA _ „.. ,_ ._ lin ill IIPTTL2-4%iti- IIM r .tit. „ NI _ "r ... , ,,,.., „ 7 ,, s' iravi ___,-L.---- or , .,.... -,.......,,-.,.,.:.... ... ,.. ; ...-_ , gm ,,,,, l .✓� 1 I III 1 w, Idfi }fji, . 6 iir mik.„ - , , . - ga 4-,q1-2,:'....$. uk. .,.r=;,pit ,.id'' ' IF, ..,,,.5„,ailii tqw,i,„.k. dit. : 40.11Y,':;-.:;:t, I.. ispiiii in =111111i6.! y5: _ 1111111111111 ' ".-°9 mt:ti t ;J 1 —.�r+�r.._mac— I—may ^.. I YI _ 11' IIIlIi.9'l'-'.II ifu11ii 'L uu..■.I..u;:I_ `L ! {;7r1llllli 411Ful I 1 I. {', ii,-�a.1�•6 •1 ! rm 1`■ ■�� [ I ' 4j' I T i uMIN t r N. v .+ ry�.lWes -- .w .. -�n.nk,�_..... t 111.. M�7• 1 itjmmmm}� � I � t 1.1:61 r ,. 16M. Spokan 16 .Valley CommunityCommercial • Integrated into Corridor Mixed Use and Regional Commercial ni11111,1PraiiMIIIMI ■uiIii■■ 1 11111:111118111 - _ _ ____, max .--., . .,.. ..11--- a I --1,6D- 111&°611 61511PRIPiliniMlirm Iffirli .Jill Fig--JIM ' - / - . , I i M tir WA N , _ lNW 0P/ ',/,,t7-, Alpp . 1 dx Iv .r4 :-.-- - me - -. • II .iJW! UL1IbIIIIIP1iji; E LEI 1 r i : !� i r. il1i ��I ■ ■ ■i �1�1 _ e_ __,, . . Ai :� , Ji 'i _'m -,,, lem Pill4.1 In gm IF ening Toll -: :■p 1 linilli* er n �� . E {,/rte x ., ,-- 01 Wirli6,111:tdi! : WA°1 E tiArtvi! -, -proor- kl PI ' 111110150 Or ' fp r i ir •• mi.,.. , r , ,,Aii / / , $ pro 4 .4 ler ' I: . / / ;m 1 JY1i %` r , .+///7777" 00 10 111 • [b la Filall .. ial Ill "A 34 .,,-. , ,� 00,0 401194014 . „ groolF010,4 ogodwolio04000,0„4 , r � .-: � ra�arr_.r•.wr�wr. ,�- ,F � � r _ t �� T. .1 -> •- x�* ' -1, r a 1-i.r. _-1`:. e`' ` Spokane 17 ' alley Implementing Regulations for Single- Family • R1 and R2 remain • Consolidate R3 & R4 • Lot Size of 5 , 000 sq . ft . minimum • No width or depth restrictions • Rear yard setback of 10 ft . j� 18 Community Prosperity Proposed Map (9 Designations, 11 zones) Existing Map (12 Designations, 17 zones) t¢u ti may.. ®� Il -- MIR i fr•u- ,, --, f s .- d'lligrz:S'%' 16 : r'L" -"=-,4 ai • ---1&,. - es,.r; R , -� 111 : � ■ b .. >�� t alb. 1� s' _,--. � �Jt i.�f MIN \ : R Mon �.� 1 N1117N'sssrj—"-0 I • 1 I r • L r 1 Ma Irk Wan No Action Alternative I � I.�g: Community Prosperity A llemallye slRsl _—� �1 Crtr d kan :pae*iler -nMi[Mune seseeMal ®Cary of Spokane Valley Mind Use Q - -_ ire 4 I ro°q Walerbpdy =I Neighborhood CammerculMansards _a,M a°°ao---m �. ._- Future Land Use Map 207 =I Regional Commercial - m � CopmAnnieve Plan Designations _cos.r°nynenne,eq ..y e. Single Famiry alved I�dMslrldl Mamatl Use ex�m -Mena Camrnca tIl Ou Morel. 111111 Weir... MUIti.Fart ily Industrial i"... rw eMnry neMeaee nery wsnM _Cgmdar Mixed Use Parks and Open Space ] � .aosnry s.ansao aamicy w r: Spokan 19 Valley Questions ro . II s �, d. Mill 'lir Ill e . C ..;1: . ] �: — �w _ _177lope.: �INY¢ , Yr �' F h r` IJP.. MN-YUP■::Mill o rs- r �RII1 � �� a' •fir 1 •��!oow 0 TAS - : - ,r �IIIIIIIIIr Nu1• I! X I II' is tl� il4, • I. IF- 1■ "It{ -. ,1�ki toll i. 11'72::-...-.7•,:-. i; r c) i .I!r -die -q�l n r .'r,"'!" .4 q ., III. ..in•, ....a:,::11.4 - , n1a 1 i11 - r� ■ a -" ill as i I. . 11 :i l Ile I Y' I�..iill 1 . AA ,;$,- 111.1'_. �c :5 :■ i•IIA -M 1 ;�I.r ■ ._ aIIMIIii 4- YS. f 11 1--� __ -::,- = . • - - -- _ c�IIIn11 J -- _� • E a_a el _ # Y• - Z-'----..,, - -- W it _ •I - �.El ri ' l s t1 a I- _..l i I� 1• r L Ytk� 5 1 1 2. ;a+, s ngH II II``R: 9 °`'� i I ! ,., M = 111111 1 Yrr i 1' �Y ii/ 1 unlit nn �F �.Ti..i_-- 4 *' - ■0.f ^ '— 1 `' n 4 i J CO��ll- �rlir-. IL Spokane 20 Valley