Loading...
2018, 07-17 Study Session This is a large packet and therefore might be a little slow in opening AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION FORMAT Tuesday,July 17,2018 6:00 p.m. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10210 E Sprague Avenue (Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting) CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Community Recognition:Anna Priebe, Girl Scout Gold Award Recipient 1. Aging &Long Term Care of Eastern Washington -Mark Calhoun; Lynn Kimball and Art Swannack 2. Comprehensive Plan Amendments -Lori Barlow,Marty Palaniuk, Micki Harnois,Karen Kendall 3. Council Goals/Priorities for Lodging Tax Advisory Committee -Chelsie Taylor 4. Modification of Speed Limit Schedule For School Zones -Bill Helbig 5. Avista Natural Gas Easement-Cary Driskell 6. Advance Agenda-Mayor Higgins 7. Information Only (will not be reported or discussed): (a) Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Wireless Franchise Agreement (b) Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Fiber Franchise Agreement 8. Council Check in -Mayor Higgins 9. City Manager Comments -Mark Calhoun ADJOURN Study Session Agenda,July 17,2018 Page 1 of 1 S1 (4 ly .000Valley TROCLAXTTION "inari g . JV. OPLIDBE tV0WEAVIIWG VIE GIRL KO goLDAWAxo WHEREAS, in 1912 in the midst of the Progressive Fra and at a time when women in the United States couldn't vote, Juliette Gordon Low started the Girl Scout Movement, where they blazed trails and redefined what was possible for themselves and for girls everywhere;and WHEREAS, for over 100 years the Girl Scout program has delivered quality experiences for girls around the globe as it helps today's girls become tcmorrow's leaders; and WHEREAS, girls work hard to earn their badges which symbolize their dedication to make the world, a better place; which badges include the areas of artist, athlete, citizen, cook, first-aid, Girl Scout Way, and naturalist; and WHEREAS, earning the Girl Scout Gold.Award is a mighty achievement and is the highest and most prestigious award a girl can earn in Girl Scouts,and Anna Priebe has met and/or exceeded the requirements for this award; and WHEREAS, Anna's beautiful Gold Award project is truly inspiring as it uses dance, puppet shows and music to help give youth an avenue for self-expression and to gain confidence. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Rod Higgins, Mayor of the City of Spokane Valley, on behalf of Spokane Valley Gouncilmemberrs and community, do hereby extend commendations of the highest order to Anna Priebe for her outstanding achievements, and we give Anna our sincere best wishes for success in all her future endeavors. PROCLAIMED this day of ,2018. l liggins, Mayor CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 17, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business [' new business [' public hearing [' information ® admin. report [' pending legislation [' executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Aging & Long Term Care of Eastern Washington GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: n/a BACKGROUND: Aging & Long Term Care of Eastern Washington Executive Director Lynn Kimball will provide an overview of their agency's services in order to assist our City to determine interest in joining the agency's interlocal agreement. She will be accompanied by their Board Chair, Whitman County Commissioner Art Swannack. OPTIONS: Council discretion. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council discretion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $12,026 annually STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation; Agency Supporting Documents Aging vwv LONG care TERM OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Agency Lynn Kimball, Executive Director July 17, 2018 1222 N.Post St. I Spokane,WA 99201 I TEL 509-458-2509 I FAX 509-458-2003 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. SERVING:Northern Ferry,Pend Oreille,Spokane,Stevens&Whitman counties v v�� Ain Lor Presentation Goal TERM Care OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Provide overview of agency services, budget and structure to assist the City of Spokane Valley to determine interest in joining the agency's interlocal agreement. WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. v vtvo Aging& LONG Who We Are TERM Care OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Help older adults and people living with disabilities stay in their homes • Serve Ferry, Stevens, Pend Oreille, Spokane and Whitman counties • Our mission is to promote well-being, independence, dignity, and choice • Designated Area Agency on Aging WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. v*R' Acinc $?1 zvo LoNG Our Services — Spokane Valley TERM Care OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Community Living Connections Caregivers and Families • Information, Assistance and Referral • Caregiver Training and Registry • Options Counseling • Family Caregiver Support • Benefit Enrollment Center • Kinship Caregiver Support • Dental Care Access Assistance • Kinship Navigator Senior Services • Medicaid Transformation Demonstration • Adult Day Care Community Services • Bathing Assistance • Medicare and Public Insurance Counseling • Falls Prevention • Health Homes - Care Coordination • Group Meal Sites • Medicaid In-Home Case Management • Home Delivered Meals • Veteran's Directed Home Care Case • Legal Assistance Management • Long Term Care Ombudsman • Minor Home Repair • Farmer's Market Vouchers Aging LONG Our Partners In Spokane TERM Care OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Greater Spokane County Meals on Wheels • Frontier Behavioral Health - Elder Services • Spokane Neighborhood Action Partners (SNAP) • University Legal Assistance • Family Home Care • Providence Adult Day Health • Medicaid Home Care Agencies: 9 businesses • Medicaid Support Services: 41 businesses WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. v Aging LONG Agency Structure TERM Care OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Governing Board • Meets quarterly, 2 hour time commitment • Planning & Management Council • 35 volunteers from 5 counties • Meets 10 times per year • Reviews and makes recommendations to Governing Board • Staff • Carries out agency mission • Responsible for service delivery, contract monitoring, program development, coordination WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. �� or Aging& 0. �onlG 2018 Agency Budget TERM r Ca e OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Administration, $783,883,6% Direct Services, $6,005,582,43% Contracted Services, $6,992,546,51% `sem Total Budget $13,782,011 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. vvv� Aging Commitment forioining og. LTONERMG Care Interlocal A OF EASTERN WASHINGTON 2010 Census #60+ % of Total $ Share City of Spokane 37,633 34.1% $25,618 City of Spokane Valley 17,695 16.0% $12,026 Spokane County 32,521 29.4% 22,101 Stevens County 10,989 9.9% 7,437 Whitman County 5,936 5.4% 4,057 Pend Oreille County 3,661 3.3% 2,479 Ferry County 2,108 1 .9% 1 ,427 Total 110,543 100% $75,145 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. vv ,Ain Benefits to Spokane LTERM ONG Care Valley OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Representation on Governing Board • Representation on Planning and Management Council • Public, community based planning process • Information and input into service delivery WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. • vvvr - Aging& AI LONG care TERM OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Questions ? Contact Information: Lynn Kimball, Executive Director Lynn.Kimball@dshs.wa.gov (509) 458-2509 1222 N.Post St. I Spokane,WA 99201 I TEL 509-458-2509 I FAX 509-458-2003 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. SERVING:Northern Ferry,Pend Oreille,Spokane,Stevens&Whitman counties v vve007 Aging 1" ?7' LON TERM rare G OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Supporting Documents Copy of Presentation Agency Brochure 2017 Service Data for Spokane Valley Agency Budget Contracted Services Budget Council of Government Match Contributions Agency Bylaws Current Interlocal agreement 1222 N. Post St. I Spokane,WA 99201 I TEL 509-45$-2509 I FAX 509-45$-2003 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. SERVING:Northern Ferry,Pend Oreille, Spokane,Stevens&Whitman counties 7/5/2018 tvio a Aging LONG TECare OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Agency Overview Lynn Kimball, Executive Director July 17, 2018 1222 N.Post St I Spokane,WA 99201 I TEL 509-458-2509 I FAX 509-458-2003 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. SERVING:Northern Ferry,Pend Oreille,Spokane,Stevens&Wh:tmancount:es -vv$0 Aging& Lor Care Presentation Goal TOF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Provide overview of agency services, budget and structure to assist the City of Spokane Valley to determine interest in joining the agency's interlocal agreement. WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. 1 7/5/2018 vA14 Agin g& TLONG ERM Care Who We Are OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Help older adults and people living with disabilities stay in their homes • Serve Ferry, Stevens, Pend Oreille, Spokane and Whitman counties • Our mission is to promote well-being, independence, dignity, and choice • Designated Area Agency on Aging WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. :woo- Aging& e V 79 © Our Services — Spokane Valley TERM Care OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Community Living Connections Caregivers and Families • Information,Assistance and Referral • Caregiver Training and Registry • Options Counseling • Family Caregiver Support • Benefit Enrollment Center • Kinship Caregiver Support • Dental Care Access Assistance • Kinship Navigator Senior Services • Medicaid Transformation Demonstration • Adult Day Care Community Services • Bathing Assistance • Medicare and Public Insurance Counseling • Falls Prevention • Health Homes-Care Coordination • Group Meal Sites • Medicaid In-Home Case Management • Home Delivered Meals • Veteran's Directed Home Care Case • Legal Assistance Management • Minor Home Repair • Long Term Care Ombudsman • Farmer's Market Vouchers 2 7/5/2018 ��� Aging TERM Care Our Partners in Spokane OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Greater Spokane County Meals on Wheels • Frontier Behavioral Health - Elder Services • Spokane Neighborhood Action Partners (SNAP) • University Legal Assistance • Family Home Care • Providence Adult Day Health • Medicaid Home Care Agencies: 9 businesses • Medicaid Support Services: 41 businesses WWW.ALTCEW.ORG � ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. vvVk, Aging �C o NG Agency Structure TO RM Car e OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Governing Board • Meets quarterly, 2 hour time commitment • Planning & Management Council • 35 volunteers from 5 counties • Meets 10 times per year • Reviews and makes recommendations to Governing Board • Staff • Carries out agency mission • Responsible for service delivery, contract monitoring, program development, coordination WWW.ALTCEW.ORG I ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. 3 7/5/2018 ��� Aging& TLONG ERM Care 2018 Agency Budget OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Ad ntN7isttatioll, $733.,883,69 Direct Service G, $6.405,582,43% Contract ed Services, 56,992,546,51% z Total Budget$13,782,011 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. ‘V Aging Commitment for Joining cC�1a TONG RM Care Interlocal Agreement OF EASTERN WASHINGTON 2010 Census #60+ % of Total $ Share City of Spokane 37,633 34.1% $25,618 City of Spokane Valley 17,695 16.0% $12,026 Spokane County 32,521 29.4% 22,101 Stevens County 10,989 9.9% 7,437 Whitman County 5,936 5.4% 4,057 Pend Oreille County 3,661 3.3% 2,479 Ferry County 2,108 1.9% 1,427 Total 110,543 100% $75,145 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. 4 7/5/2018 ..Rv o- Aging& Benefits to Spokane TLONG ERM Care Valley OF EASTERN WASHINGTON • Representation on Governing Board • Representation on Planning and Management Council • Public, community based planning process • Information and input into service delivery WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. W‘ LONG v Aging TERMCare OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Questions ? Contact Information: Lynn Kimball, Executive Director Lynn.Kimball@dshs.wa.gov (509) 458-2509 1222 N.Post St. I Spokane,WA 99201 I TEL 509-458-2509 I FAX 509-458-2003 WWW.ALTCEW.ORG ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. SERVING:Northern Ferry,Pend Oreille,Spokane,Stevens&Whitmancounties Return to Index 5 r v - Agin c���og The mission of Aging & � � Q �� Long Term Care of Eastern yl i VI LONG C� TERM Care Washington (ALTCEW) is I OF EASTERN WASHINGTON to promote well-being, •independence, dignity, and Aging& Long Term Care Aging& -r choice for all older persons of Eastern Washington ; LONG 71 1222 N. Post St. i Spokane,WA 99201 TERM Care ,r `.� and individuals needing TEL509-458-2509 I FAX509-458-2003 OF EASTERN WASHINGTO At ionterm care. action©altcew.org i www.altcew.org i g ADVOCACY.ACTION.ANSWERS. a WE ADVOCATE -' . liVE TAKE ACTION t WE PROVIDE ANSWERS il! COMMUNITY LIVING �� CONNECTIONS LINKINGYOU TO r \'` Peroonalllze�Cade 8 Support Op,lons � Spokane County .I , . 509-960-7281 v - ALTCEW SERVES SPOKANE, NORTHERN Ferry,Stevens,Whitman and Pend Oreille County FERRY,STEVENS, PEND OREILLE AND 800-873-5889 f.,st,„ WHITMAN COUNTIES. — 41,1111111 211111.11111 No person shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of,or employment in, Your Resource for or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under 11.111611111/111111110 any ALTCEW program or activity on the basis of Independent Living 1111414 race,color,creed,national origin,religion,sex,age, 11.4111111111111 marital status,Vietnam era or disabled veteran's and Community Based ��11.10P- status,sexual orientation,era or e disabled veteran's erof a y's Services in Eastern sensory,mental,or physical disability. Washington ADVOCACY. ACTION. ANSWERS. 020216 I All rights reserved.Copyright 2016 509-458-2509 I www.aLtcew.org ,_ :.�,_ wird. I, �/ ,_/��'- r , ^fir ... .A m ' 4(11,,. -vov '6( kdfif , I ' - ; 1 ' ' ,1e,:. „- 1 0,,, t. AVVL R. 41110 ✓ SECIEr- xirrir a4� I1 l a di\t".11111111111111 is Aging& Long Term Care of Eastern SERVICES PROVIDED BY ALTCEW AND OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS INCLUDE: Washington (ALTCEW) is a social service Community Living Connections Senior Services agency that helps older adults and people • Information and Assistance • Bathing Assistance living with disabilities stay in their homes. • Dental Care Access • Fall Prevention Training ALTCEW provides services such as case • Medicare and Medicaid Insurance Counseling • Farmers Market management for people who need a • Medicare Fraud Reporting • Home Delivered Meals/Meals on Wheels caregiver, caregiver training, and answers •Options Counseling questions about Medicare and Medicaid. p CONTACT US • Legal Assistance Caregiver Services TODAY, • Long Term Care Ombudsman Alone, we cannot fulfill our mission, •Adult Day Center WE'RE HERE • Minor Home Repair • Caregiver Training we work with local partners in the g TO HELP. •Senior Meal Sites • FamilyCaregiver Support to provide services such asg •Senior Transportation home delivered meals, family caregiver • Home Care Referral Registry support, transportation and information. • Kinship Caregiver Support Through community partners, ALTCEW Medicaid Client Services provides funding for services to older • Care Coordination ,A1,2- Age ng adults and individuals living with a ZVt, 9; • Home Care Referral Registry LONG disability in our five-county area. TERM are • Medicaid Case Management I OFEASTERN WASHINGTON • RN Consultation 4 • s 4IP11,,.# COMMUNITY LIVING „.� CONNECTIONS — _ Persona atl Cara z 6 Support op,i ona t 4141 ' {\ Spokane County ,�' 1,_, , � 509-960-7281 ,m6i. r ._ ._ i. , Ferry, Stevens, Whitman and Pend Oreille County IIII ` ; ! " '.. • 800-873-5889 Return to Index 6.20.18 �� � Agingg LONG TERM Care OF EASTERN WASHINGTON SPOKANE COUNTY & SPOKANE VALLEY 2017 Spokane County 2017 Spokane Valley Services People Units People Units Information&Assistance Contacts 2,447 5,690 N/A N/A Options Counseling Hours 99 979 14 117 Case Management(Title XIX)(Months) * 3,240 37,432 334 3,754 Family Caregiver- In-Home Respite Hours 115 10,196 5 680 Home Delivered Meals 1,059 142,152 261 36,439 Congregate Meals 2,236 90,901 168 8,352 One-way Trips(Nutrition) 47 5,453 2 296 One-way Trips(Adult Day Center) 22 2,920 2 76 Adult Day Care Hours 30 2,061 2 65 Minor Home Repair Contacts 224 405 19 46 Bathing Assistance 60 2,645 5 432 2017 Client Data for Spokane County and Spokane Valley Spokane County: Spokane Valley: •63%Female • 37%Male •46%Low Income •67%Female •33%Male • 58%Low Income 2017 SPOKANE COUNTY AGE 2017 SPOKANE VALLEY AGE DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION 85+ ,15.2% <25,0.6% 85+ ,18% <25,1% 80-84 25-59, 25-59, 10.0% 23.4% 80-84 , 20% 11% 60-64, joi 60-64, 1 12% 12.4% 70-79, 70-79, `---.1. 65-69, 25% 65-69, 0 24.9% 13.2% 13/0 A total of over 8,238 individuals received service(s)in Spokane County,832 of the individuals received services in Spokane Valley in 2017. A total of$8,212,000 was spent on the above named services in 2017. Thanks to our staff,contracted services providers,volunteers,and Governing Board for a great year of A Mil service. Other Services Funded in Spokane County & Spokane Valley: • Long-term Care Ombudsman Investigations • Kinship Caregiver • Dementia Training • Caregiver Training • Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program • Senior Employment Placements • Fall Prevention Workshops • Referral Registry for Independent Providers *$59.83 million was authorized for Case Management(TXIX)goods and services in 2016 *$67.55 million was authorized for Case Management(TXIX)goods and services in 2017 Return to Index Aging&Long Term Care of Eastern Washington ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET 2012 TO 2018 TOTAL 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 REVENUE Discretionary Funds: OAA,Title III-B $ 793,758 $ 821,845 $ 773,469 $ 826,927 $ 780,186 $ 754,165 $ 770,265 $ 5,520,615 OAA,Title III-C-1 Congregate Meals 461,235 443,703 458,241 523,592 527,828 538,438 539,969 3,493,006 OAA,Title III-C-2 Home Delivered Meals 417,651 440,625 564,247 474,675 472,547 461,672 464,431 3,295,848 OAA,Title III-D 36,812 34,680 34,566 17,328 21,727 41,585 34,260 220,958 OAA,Title III-E Federal Family Caregiver 273,472 209,856 287,304 249,647 218,668 258,915 293,829 1,791,691 OAA,Special Projects 29,133 18,663 17,334 2,000 - - 33,115 100,245 OAA,Elder Abuse 8,161 2,900 2,000 10,069 11,524 6,098 6,102 46,854 Total Older Americans'Act Revenue 2,020,222 1,972,272 2,137,161 2,104,238 2,032,480 2,060,873 2,141,971 14,469,217 Senior Citizens Services Act(SCSA) 812,236 793,254 749,071 786,047 770,831 725,962 791,141 5,428,542 Total Discretionary Funds 2,832,458 2,765,526 2,886,232 2,890,285 2,803,311 2,786,835 2,933,112 19,897,759 Non-Discretionary Funds: Title XIX/Aging/CORE/Nursing/CSCM 5,001,667 4,996,008 5,079,380 5,563,284 6,347,034 6,892,913 6,915,045 40,795,331 TXIX Chronic Care Management 289,518 171,277 - - - - - 460,795 Veterans Directed Home Services - - - 4,500 7,800 8,450 6,000 26,750 Nutrition Svcs Incentive Program(NSIP) 184,000 191,000 200,000 250,000 233,365 209,505 209,505 1,477,375 Home Care Referral Registry 132,083 133,543 132,955 124,539 154,483 167,146 151,554 996,303 Health Homes - 17,829 216,397 429,009 780,057 844,785 768,990 3,057,067 State Family Caregiver,Kinship Caregiver,Navigator 1,167,460 1,358,212 1,191,275 1,123,143 1,234,372 1,259,837 1,225,699 8,559,998 SHIBA,Sr Drug Education,Sr Medicare Patrol,MIPPA 109,618 113,945 124,846 150,872 143,070 136,403 122,560 901,314 Title XIX I&A-Admin.Claiming(FBH/ES off 2016) 75,000 74,000 74,000 35,022 7,584 10,196 10,000 285,802 Caregiver Training-ALTCEW Training 272,086 349,356 440,037 513,163 539,683 515,111 563,402 3,192,838 Caregiver Training Reimbursement 5%admin fee 8,699 12,221 16,003 17,714 21,950 26,444 18,000 121,031 Title V: Senior Employment 200,165 152,541 151,151 135,375 163,295 144,712 160,731 1,107,970 ADRC/Options Counseling/Dementia Grant 142,978 34,311 94,221 52,992 26,855 13,214 6,318 370,889 Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program 78,878 78,662 85,585 92,859 92,889 91,569 92,128 612,570 New Freedom Transportation 30,598 - - - - - - 30,598 Medicaid Transformation Project(MTD/1115) - - - - 193,855 459,217 653,072 State Home Delivered Meals - - - - - 28,271 56,343 84,614 Chronic Disease Self Management 19,775 15,202 9,892 9,864 - - - 54,733 Bridging Care(formely Care Transitions/CCTP) - 112,840 310,248 530,270 136,648 - - 1,090,006 National Institutes of Health Grant - 46,599 165,669 185,205 129,237 - - 526,710 Empire Health Foundation-Health Homes - - 20,000 - - - 20,000 Empire Health Foundation-FCSP - - - 22,598 27,646 - - 50,244 Council of Governments 86,567 86,567 83,037 80,832 80,832 75,125 75,125 568,085 Interest Earned 19,289 12,230 11,548 10,229 11,918 19,645 8,282 93,141 Miscellaneous Income/Conference Fees 5,660 9,124 9,579 785 11,254 10,952 - 47,354 Total Non-Discretionary Funds 7,824,041 7,965,467 8,415,823 9,332,255 10,149,972 10,648,133 10,848,899 65,184,590 Total Revenue-All Funding Sources $ 10,656,499 $10,730,993 $ 11,302,055 $12,222,540 $ 12,953,283 $13,434,968 $ 13,782,011 $85,082,349 Aging&Long Term Care of Eastern Washington ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET 2012 TO 2018 TOTAL 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 EXPENSES Personnel Services: Salaries $ 2,718,188 $ 2,748,887 $ 3,106,244 $ 3,394,148 $ 3,511,813 $ 3,660,203 $ 4,032,422 $ 23,171,905 Payroll Taxes and Benefits 849,569 899,921 1,036,402 1,211,329 1,306,728 1,414,014 1,602,914 8,320,877 Subtotal Salaries and Benefits 3,567,757 3,648,808 4,142,646 4,605,477 4,818,541 5,074,217 5,635,336 31,492,782 Maintenance and Operations: Supplies 42,433 60,204 62,305 72,415 62,163 53,103 72,689 425,312 Minor Equipment 40,325 28,728 50,196 105,072 71,004 53,293 50,400 399,018 Professional Services 137,693 182,784 260,015 317,618 333,160 320,217 373,860 1,925,347 Communications 42,799 29,940 32,542 35,387 47,514 49,716 55,590 293,488 Travel 72,259 103,777 108,827 104,288 86,557 89,027 98,510 663,245 Advertising 14,654 14,890 16,310 13,638 18,880 23,100 47,750 149,222 Rentals 257,510 260,796 233,034 238,242 279,162 286,303 295,226 1,850,273 Insurance 51,794 54,234 53,504 49,175 53,822 58,132 59,740 380,401 Maintenance and Repair 9,049 10,614 10,561 19,962 11,493 11,498 13,500 86,677 Training 14,927 12,076 4,683 6,431 5,590 7,866 18,630 70,203 Printing 3,464 2,366 2,270 5,156 2,865 4,480 10,390 30,991 Misc(Dues&Subscriptions) 20,054 22,323 27,953 54,887 56,891 37,163 57,844 277,115 Subtotal Maintenance and Operations 706,961 782,732 862,200 1,022,271 1,029,101 993,898 1,154,129 6,551,292 Major Equipment - - 24,867 40,328 5,000 - - 70,195 TOTAL EXPENSES 4,274,718 4,431,540 5,029,713 5,668,076 5,852,642 6,068,115 6,789,465 38,114,269 CONTRACTED SERVICES 6,312,403 6,254,960 6,125,859 6,195,369 6,636,520 6,726,001 6,992,546 45,243,658 TOTAL EXPENSES 10,587,121 10,686,500 11,155,572 11,863,445 12,489,162 12,794,116 13,782,011 83,357,927 INCREASE/(DECREASE)IN NET POSITION $ 69,378 $ 44,493 $ 146,483 $ 359,095 $ 464,121 $ 640,852 $ - $ 1,724,422 Funds from Reserves (40,418) (48,243) (93,470) $ 106,065 $ 310,852 $ 370,651 Return to Index H:\Budget\ALTCEW Financial History 2012-18.xlsx Aging& Long Term Care of Eastern Washington ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET 2012 TO 2418TOTAL 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2013 SUBCONTRACTS TXIX-Case Management $ 2,045,959 $ 2,048,937 $ 1,994,573 $ 2,098,832 $ 2,397,088 $ 2,479,248 $ 2,632,463 $ 15,697,100 Information and Assistance/Community Living Connections 806,968 734,078 725,276 708,903 673,86] 600,806 631,877 4,881,775 Senior Nutrition and Transportation 1,126,738 1,136,669 1,210,373 1,295,787 1,249,124 1,251,046 1,266,232 8,535,969 Family Caregiver,Kinship Caregiver,Navigator 1,392,172 1,503,159 1,350,424 1,221,960 1,329,712 1,334,472 1,367,574 9,499,473 Bath Assistance/Limited Home Care 132,322 126,208 126,415 149,342 132,982 100,4.08 130,077 897,754 Adult Day Care and Transportation 122,357 121,958 103,388 51,335 76,530 78,498 106,137 660,203 Minor Home Repair 110,215 108,182 108,183 118,006 116,406 103,414 104,406 768,812 Transportation-Van and Volunteer 162,091 129,996 129,995 140,962 136,813 137,371 136,298 973,526 Legal Assistance 97,680 97,676 98,331 93,570 92,676 93,896 95,906 669,735 Long Term Ombudsman Program 15,841 15,549 15,548 15,268 15,268 15,268 15,044 107,786 Home Care Referral Registry 43,342 32,732 38,904 33,752 41,059 40,160 35,160 262,109 Title V Senior Employment 158,122 115,185 117,164 111,388 130,128 150,146 143,372 925,505 Bridging Care/Health Homes - 50,690 96,411 126,891 244,867 154,000 - 672,859 Medicaid Transformation Demonstration - - - - - 127,822 328,000 455,822 Other 101,596 33,941 10,874 29,373 - 59,446 - 235,230 Total Contracted Services $ 6,312,403 $ 6,254,960 $ 6,125,859 $ 6,195,369 $ 6,636,520 $ 6,726,001 $ 6,992,546 $ 45,243,658 ALTCEW Total Contracted Services 8,000,000 7,000,400 6,000.060 5,000.060 4,000 060 3,000 006 2,000 006 1,000 060 0 ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2016 ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2013 Total Contracted Services 5 6,312,403 $ 6,254,960 $ 6,125,359 $ 6,195,369 $ 6,636,520 $ 6,726,001 $ 6,992,546 $ 45,026,625 Less Case Management(TXIX) (2,045,959) (2,048,937) (1,994,573) (2,098,832) (2,397,088) (2,479,248) (2,632,463) (15,697,100) Non-Medicaid Contracted Services 4,266,444 4,206,023 4,131,286 4,096,537 4,239,432 4,234,953 4,154,850 29,329,525 Return to Index ALTCEW COG - Allocation - 2018 2010 Census COG Member #60+ % of Total $ Share City of Spokane 37,633 34.1% $25,618 Spokane County 50,216 45.4% 34,107 Stevens County 10,989 9.9% 7,437 Whitman County 5,936 5.4% 4,057 Pend Oreille County 3,661 3.3% 2,479 Ferry County 2,108 1.9% 1,427 Total 110,543 100% $75,125 #Source: 2010 Census $75,125 Adjusted with Spokane Valley 2010 Census City of Spokane Valley 17,695 16.0% $12,026 Spokane County 32,521 29.4% 22,101 Return to Index BYLAWS OF AGING AND LONG TERM CARE OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Adopted: February 17, 1978 As Amended: May 1979 August 1980 December 1980 August 1984 May 1985 February 1987 February 1988 May 1989 February 1991 February 1992 February 1994 March 1995 August 1996 December 1999 May 2000 August 2002 August 2005 November 2010 February 2013 June 2014 ( i ) BYLAWS OF AGING AND LONG TERM CARE OF EASTERN WASHINGTON Contents Page No. CHAPTER I: DEFINITIONS 1 CHAPTER II: IDENTIFICATION 2 2.01: Name 2 2.02: Office 2 2.03: Planning and Service Area 2 2.04: Purposes 2 2.05: Organization 3 2.06: Legal Status 3 CHAPTER III: GOVERNING BOARD 3 3.01: Composition 3 3.02: Appointment 3 3.03: Term of Service 3 3.04: Vacancy 3 3.05: Functions 4 3.06: Officers 4 3.07: Conduct of Meetings 5 CHAPTER IV: PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT COUNCIL 7 4.01: Composition 7 4.02: Appointment 7 4.03: Term of Service 8 4.04: Vacancy 8 4.05: Functions 8 4.06: Officers 10 4.07: Conduct of Meetings 10 4.08: Committees 13 CHAPTER V: AGENCY STAFF 16 5.01: Composition 16 5.02: Executive Director 16 5.03: Personnel Policies 16 ( i ) CHAPTER VI: AGENCY AFFAIRS 16 6.01: General Provisions 16 6.02: Negotiable Instruments, Contracts, Agreements and Deeds 17 6.03: Immunity from Liability 17 6.04: Audit 18 6.05: Non-Discrimination 18 CHAPTER VII: DURATION/DISSOLUTION 18 7.01: General Provisions 18 7.02: Dissolution Procedures 18 CHAPTER VIII: ADOPTION/AMENDMENTS 19 8.01: Adoption 19 8.02: Amendments 19 ( ii ) BYLAWS Of AGING AND LONG TERM CARE OF EASTERN WASHINGTON CHAPTER I -DEFINITIONS As used in these Bylaws: (1) "AGENCY" means Aging and Long Term Care of Eastern Washington. (2) "AREA AGENCY ON AGING" or "AREA AGENCY" means the single agency designated by the State Agency to be responsible for the program described in 45 CFR Part 1321 within a Planning and Service Area designated by the State Agency. (3) "PLANNING AND SERVICE AREA" means the geographic area served by the Agency; it encompasses a four and one-half county region, including both incorporated and unincorporated areas, and is formed by the Counties of Spokane, Whitman, Stevens, Pend Oreille and that portion of Ferry north of the northern boundary of the Colville Indian Reservation. (4) "45 CFR PART 1321" refers to the Federal Regulations promulgated to implement the terms and provisions of Title III of the Older American Act Amendments of 1984 (Public Law 98-459)which amended Title III of the Older Americans Act of 1965; these regulations were published in the Federal Register on April 1, 1985. (5) "RCW 35.21.730" through "RCW 35.21.755" refer to the Revised Code of Washington, Chapters 35; these are statutes of the State of Washington. (6) "GOVERNING BOARD" or "BOARD" means the body which has the responsibility for broad oversight of the Agency for public accountability. (7) "PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT COUNCIL" or "COUNCIL" means the body which is responsible for advising the Governing Board on all matters relating to the development and implementation of the Area Plan on Aging, and for overseeing the Executive Director in the administration of the external and internal affairs of the Agency. (8) "AREA PLAN ON AGING" or "AREA PLAN" means the document submitted by an Area Agency to the State agency in order to receive subgrants or contracts from the State Agency's federal Older Americans Act grant. The Area Plan contains commitments that the Area Agency will administer activities funded under 45 CFR 1321 in accordance with all federal requirements. The Area Plan also contains a detailed statement of the manner in which the Area Agency is developing a comprehensive and coordinated service delivery system throughout its planning and service areas. 1 of 20 (9) "VENDOR" means a public or private agency or organization, which is under contract to the Agency to provide specific services to older persons and people in need of long term services and supports in the Planning and Service Area. (10) "CONFLICT OF INTEREST": It is the intent of the Agency that during the process of the award of funds to contractors and the selection of contractors to provide services, that all actions by the Agency not only be fair but appear as such. Therefore, any Council Member, Governing Board Member or Agency staff member who is a Board member, employee, or officer of any organization or agency which may stand to realize financial gain or loss from an impending action of the Governing Board or Council shall be deemed to have a conflict of interest. This definition shall not apply to elected officials who serve on public agency boards pursuant to their capacity as an elected official except where said public agency is before the ALTCEW body on which the public official serves and is in direct competition with another agency for the same award of contract or award of funds. CHAPTER II -IDENTIFICATION 2.01 NAME: The name of the association is Aging and Long Term Care of Eastern Washington. 2.02 OFFICE: The principal office of the Agency is in Spokane, Washington. 2.03 PLANNING AND SERVICE AREA: The Planning and Service Area served by the Agency is a four and one-half county region, including both incorporated and unincorporated areas, formed by the counties of Spokane, Whitman, Stevens, Pend Oreille, and that portion of Ferry north of the northern boundary of the Colville Indian Reservation. While the Agency normally renders services only to older residents and people in need of long term services and supports of the aforementioned area, the Agency may extend services to older persons and people in need of long term services and supports outside the boundaries of the Planning and Service Area if contractually obligated to extend such services. 2.04 PURPOSES: The purposes for which this Agency is formed are as follows: (a) To improve the quality of life of older persons and people in need of long term services and supports through the development, and the fostering of the development, of comprehensive and coordinated service systems in order to: (1) Secure and maintain maximum independence and dignity in a home environment for older persons and people in need of long term services and supports capable of self-care with appropriate supportive services; and (2) Remove individual and social barriers to economic and personal independence for older persons and people in need of long term services and supports; 2 of 20 (b) To speak and work in behalf of older persons and people in need of long term services and supports whenever to do so may develop and enhance their best interests and happiness; (c) To seek the support of, and join with, individuals and private and public corporations, agencies, associations, and organizations whenever it is appropriate and proper to do so for the purposes of fulfilling these purposes; and (d) To perform the functions and responsibilities of an Area Agency on Aging as set forth in 45 CFR Part 1321. 2.05 ORGANIZATION: The organizational components of the Agency are: (1) the Governing Board, (2)the Planning and Management Council, and (3)the Agency staff. The various components of the Agency and their members are assigned functions, rules, powers, and responsibilities as prescribed in these Bylaws. The membership requirements and procedures for establishing the membership of various components are also prescribed. 2.06 LEGAL STATUS: Aging and Long Term Care of Eastern Washington has been created by the City of Spokane and Spokane County, Whitman County, Stevens County, Pend Oreille County, and Ferry County by execution of an Interlocal Government Cooperation Agreement pursuant to RCW 35.21.730 through RCW 35.21.755. The Agency has the status of a "public corporation, commission, or authority." CHAPTER III - GOVERNING BOARD 3.01 COMPOSITION: The Board shall be composed of one Commissioner from each of the Counties party to the Interlocal Government Cooperation Agreement, three representatives of the City of Spokane, at least two of whom shall be members of the City Council and, as an ex-officio member, the Chairperson of the Planning and Management Council. Elected officials party to the Interlocal Government Cooperation Agreement may designate an alternate elected official from the same body, to attend meetings in their place if they are unable to attend. 3.02 APPOINTMENT: The representatives of the five Counties and of the City of Spokane shall be duly appointed to the Board by each county and the City of Spokane in accordance with the procedures normally used by the County Commissioners of each County and the Spokane City Council for appointments to commissions. 3.03 TERM OF SERVICE: There are no limitations on the length of terms of office, or on numbers of consecutive terms. Each representative's term of service shall be established by his/her appointing jurisdiction. 3 of 20 3.04 VACANCY: A vacancy on the Board may occur by resignation, or by the conclusion of a member's term of service established by his/her appointing jurisdiction. The vacancy shall be filled by the appropriate governmental entity. 3.05 FUNCTIONS: The functions of the Board shall be as follows: (a) Approve the annual Area Plan on Aging; (b) Approve the annual operating budget of the Agency; (c) Adopt personnel policies; (d) Adopt operating policies and procedures; (e) Appoint and terminate the Agency Executive Director; (f) Execute agreements and contracts, with the exception of those delegated to the Planning and Management Council and Agency Executive Director; (g) Adopt and amend Bylaws; (h) Assist in fund raising; (i) Assist in coordination with the administrations of the parties to the Interlocal Government Cooperation Agreement to obtain technical assistance, legal services, data processing services, and other services as needed; and, (j) In addition to the Council, establish additional advisory committees for other purposes. 3.06 OFFICERS: (a) General Provisions: The officers of the Board shall be a Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, and Secretary/Treasurer. All officers, except the Secretary/Treasurer, shall be chosen from the membership of the Board. The Agency Executive Director shall serve as Secretary/Treasurer. (b) Elections: The officers, except the Secretary/Treasurer, shall be elected to one year terms by the Board at the annual meeting of the Board. The term of office for officers, except the Secretary/Treasurer, shall begin immediately following the conclusion of the annual meeting. Re-elections to office are permissible. (c) Vacancies: Whenever any vacancy shall occur in any office by death, resignation, or otherwise, the same shall be filled by the Board at the next opportunity, and the officer so elected shall hold office for the remainder of the unexpired term. 4 of 20 (d) Duties: (1) Chairperson: The Chairperson of the Board shall preside at all meetings of the Board and shall perform the duties usually devolving upon a presiding officer; (2) Vice Chairperson: The responsibilities of the Vice Chairperson shall be to assist the Chairperson and perform all duties of the Chairperson in his/her absence; (3) Secretary/Treasurer: The Secretary/Treasurer shall cause to be kept: (i) Minutes of all meetings of the Board; and (ii) Full and accurate accounts of the receipts and disbursements of all Agency funds. Further, the Secretary/Treasurer shall present a current financial statement at each regular meeting of the Board and at the annual meeting. The Secretary/Treasurer and appropriate members of the Board and staff shall be bonded in such amounts as determined by the Board. 3.07 CONDUCT OF MEETINGS: (a) Meetings: Regular meetings of the Board shall be held quarterly. These meetings shall be held on the date and at such place and hour as the Governing Board determines. Additional meetings may be held on the call of the chair, or by any officer if the chair is absent, unable, or refuses to act, or by a majority of the members of the Board by delivering written notice personally, by mail, by fax, or by electronic mail to each member of the Board. Written Notice shall be deemed waived in the following circumstances: (1) A member submits a written waiver of notice with the Secretary/Treasurer of the Board at or prior to the time the meeting convenes. A written waiver may be given by telegram, fax, or electronic mail; or, (2) A member is actually present at the time the meeting convenes. (3) The Board shall take action to adopt the date, time, and location of the regular and annual meetings. Notice of the date, time, place, and the business to be transacted shall be delivered to each local newspaper of general circulation and local radio or television station that has, on file with the Agency, a written request to be notified of such special meeting or all special meetings of the Board. In addition, notices of other than regular meetings of the Board will be posted on the Agency's website and prominently displayed at the main entrance of 5 of 20 the Agency's principle location or of the meeting location, if not at the Agency's principle location. Such notices will be displayed or posted at least 24 hours before the time of such meeting as specified in the notice. Final disposition shall not be taken on any other matter at such meetings of the Board. (4) The notices provided in this section may be dispensed with in the event a special meeting is called to deal with an emergency involving injury or damage to persons or property, or the likelihood of such injury or damage, when time requirements of such notice would make notice impractical and increase the likelihood of such injury or damage. (5) Notice requirements and procedures not set forth above shall comply with the provisions of the Washington State Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 42.30 RCW. In the event of a conflict with the provisions of these bylaws and state law, the provisions of state law shall take precedent. (b) Public Notice and Participation: Notice of the date, time, and location of regular Board meetings shall be published once annually in at least one newspaper of general circulation. Publication of such notice shall normally occur in January of each year. The first Board meeting held during the first calendar quarter each year shall be designated the Annual Meeting. Attendance of the public at the Annual Meeting and at regular meetings of the Board shall be welcome. Participation at meetings shall be permitted by recognition of the Chair. (c) Quorum: A majority of the total voting members of the Board shall constitute a quorum. (d) Majority: A majority vote of the quorum shall be necessary to take action on any matter coming before the Board, unless otherwise stipulated in these Bylaws. (e) Parliamentary Authority: Roberts' Rules of Order, Revised, shall be the parliamentary authority for all matters of procedure not specifically covered by these Bylaws. (f) Conflict of Interest: When the process of awarding funds to or the selection of contractors poses a conflict of interest or apparent conflict of interest for a Governing Board or staff member, they shall disclose any conflict or potential conflicts. (Refer to Chapter I, Definitions, Item 10) Any person who is aware of a conflict on the part of any Governing Board member, or agency staff member, may disclose said conflict to the entire Governing Board at which point the Chair shall decide whether or not a conflict does exist. In lieu of making that decision, the Chair may open the question to a vote of the full Governing Board. If a member of the Governing Board, PMC, or staff declare or are determined to have a conflict of interest, they shall not take part in the discussions or vote on that 6 of 20 specific award of contract or award of funds, but may remain at the meeting in order to hear the discussions and be available to answer questions. (g) Voting Members: Representatives of the counties, the City of Spokane, and the ex- officio member from the Planning and Management Council shall be voting members of the Board. CHAPTER IV PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT COUNCIL 4.01 COMPOSITION: The Council shall be composed of no less than twenty-seven (27) and no more than thirty-five (35) members. It shall be representative of all counties within the Agency's Planning and Service Area. To this end, efforts shall be made to maintain the following geographic representation within the body's membership: Spokane County - 70%; Whitman County - 10%; and the Tri-County Area (consisting of Stevens, Pend Oreille and Ferry counties) - 20%. Further, to facilitate close working relationships among ALTCEW and the units of general purpose local government party to the creation of the Agency, six (6) members of the Council shall be representatives of these governmental units. Finally, in an effort to ensure that the Council is broadly representative of older persons and the community, the Council's membership shall include: (a) More than fifty percent(50%) older persons, including persons in great economic or social need, minority older persons, and consumers of ALTCEW-funded services; (b) Representatives of older persons and people in need of long term services and supports; (c) One or more local elected officials; and (d) The general public. 4.02 APPOINTMENT: Two different procedures shall be followed in appointing members to the Council: (a) Representatives of Units of Local Government: The Governing board shall invite each governmental entity party to the Interlocal Governmental Cooperation Agreement to appoint one person to represent it on the Council. These appointees shall be seated with full privileges. (b) Community Representatives: The balance of the members on the Council shall be appointed by the Governing Board. Nominations for the Community Representative positions on the council shall be offered to the Governing Board by the Council. 7 of 20 4.03 TERM OF SERVICE: A Council member's term of service shall be keyed to the member's category of membership on the body. The terms of service for the two categories of membership are as follows: (a) Representatives of Units of Local Government: There are no limitations on the lengths of terms of office, or on the number of consecutive terms for representatives of units of local government. Each representative's term of service shall be established by his/her appointing jurisdiction. (b) Community Representatives: The normal term of service of a community representative on the Council is three (3) years. The term of service shall normally commence on any first Saturday in February and terminate on any first Friday in February. While reappointment to the Council is permissible, no community representative may serve in more than two (2) consecutive three (3) year terms, except as noted herein. If a person is initially appointed to a partial term, the length of the partial term shall govern the individual's eligibility for re-appointment. If the partial term is twelve (12) months or less, reappointment to two additional three (3) year terms is permitted; if the partial term is greater than twelve (12) months, however, the individual is eligible for reappointment to only one additional (3) year term. In addition, should a Council Member be elected to serve on the Washington State Council on Aging, their term of service may be extended to coincide with the representative's term of service on the Washington State Council on Aging. Reappointment to the body beyond these limits may occur only after an absence from the Council of one (1)full year. 4.04 VACANCY: A vacancy of the Council may occur by resignation, or by a declaration of vacancy by the Governing Board on the recommendation of the Council for sufficient and proper cause. Three consecutive unexcused absences from regular Council and/or Committee (Planning and Resources, Advocacy, Services Quality Assurance, Nominating, or Executive) meetings shall be sufficient and proper cause. 4.05 FUNCTIONS: The Council shall be responsible for performing the following functions: (a) Planning activities, including: (1) Identify the needs of older persons and people in need of long term services and supports in the Agency's Planning and Service Area; (2) Suggest, and rank by degree of priority, responses to address the needs; (3) Develop the Area Plan on Aging for the Agency's Planning and Service Area, and Annual Updates thereof; (4) Conduct public hearings on the Agency's draft Area Plan on Aging and Annual Updates; 8 of 20 (5) Recommend the Area Plan on Aging and Annual Updates, to the Governing Board for formal adoption; and (6) Undertake other short and long range planning studies and projects. (b) Once approved by the Governing Board, implement the Area Plan on Aging, including: (1) Solicit proposals from public and private entities for the provision of services to older persons and people in need of long term services and supports in the Agency's Planning and Service Area; (2) Recommend vendors to provide services and, as appropriate, recommending the allocation of Agency funds to specific vendors for the provision of services; (3) Recommend the terms and provisions of contracts with public and private entities for the provision of services; and (4) Negotiate and execute amendments to contracts between $35,000 and $55,000 with those of$35,000 or less to be delegated to the Agency Executive Director for negotiation and execution. (5) Monitor and assess work performed by subcontractors and vendors under contract to the Agency for the provision of services. (c) Represent the interests of older persons and people in need of long term services and supports by: (1) Review and comment on all community policies, programs and actions which affect older persons and people in need of long term services and supports; (2) Act as an advocate on behalf of older persons and people in need of long term services and supports. (d) Review and recommend to the Governing Board agency policies governing the administrative, personnel, and financial operations of the agency. (e) When requested by the Governing Board, recruit and screen all applicants for the position of Agency Executive Director, and refer the most qualified candidates to the Governing Board for consideration. (f) Review and recommend Agency personnel policies to the Governing Board. (g) Review and recommend adoption of the Agency's Annual Report concerning its activities to the Governing Board. 9 of 20 (h) Review and recommend amendments to the Agency's Bylaws to the Governing Board. (i) Elect, at the annual meeting of the Council, a Chair and Vice Chair. (j) Appoint, as needed, committees and task forces to assist in the execution of Council duties and functions. (k) Recommend annually to the Governing Board PMC members to serve on the ALTCEW Grievance Committee. (1) Assist in fundraising. 4.06 OFFICERS: (a) General Provisions: The officers of the Council shall be a Chairperson, Vice Chairperson and Secretary. The Chairperson and Vice Chairperson shall be chosen from the membership of the Council. The Agency Executive Director shall serve as Secretary. (b) Election: The Chairperson and Vice Chairperson shall be elected by the Council at the annual meeting of the body. These officers shall hold office for a one-year period commencing at the conclusion of the annual meeting of the Council. The standard period of time they remain in office shall be one year or until their successors are elected and qualified. (c) Vacancies: Whenever any vacancy shall occur in any office by death, resignation, or otherwise, the same shall be filled by the Council at its next regular meeting, and the officer so elected shall hold office for the remainder of the unexpired term, and until his/her successor is elected and qualified. (d) Duties: (1) Chairperson: The Chairperson of the Council shall preside at all meetings of the Council, and shall perform the duties usually devolving upon a presiding officer. (2) Vice Chairperson: The responsibilities of the Vice Chairperson shall be to assist the Chairperson, to perform all duties of the Chairperson in his/her absence, and to chair the Council's Planning and Resources Committee. (3) Secretary: The Secretary shall cause to be kept minutes of all meetings of the Council. 4.07 CONDUCT OF MEETINGS: 10 of 20 (a) Meetings: (1) Regular Meetings: Regular meetings of the Council shall be held each month with the exception of August and December. These meetings shall be held at such place and hour as the Council determines. (2) Special Meetings: Special meetings of the Council may be held on the call of the chairperson or by any officer, if the chairperson is absent, unable or refuses to act, or by a majority of the members of the PMC, by delivering written notice personally, by mail, by fax, or by electronic mail to each member of the Council. (3) Annual Meeting: The Annual Meeting of the Council shall be held in February each year at such place and hour as the Council determines. (b) Public Notice: (1) Regular and Annual Meetings: The Council shall take action to adopt the date, time, and location of the Regular and Annual meetings. Notice of the date, time, and location of Regular and Annual Council meetings shall be delivered once annually to each local newspaper of general circulation and local radio or television station that has, on file with the Agency, a written request to be notified of such special meeting or all special meetings of the Council. Written notice shall be deemed waived in the following circumstances: (a) A member submits a written waiver of notice with the secretary/ treasurer of the Council at or prior to the time the meeting convenes. A written waiver may be given by telegram, fax, or electronic mail; or, (b) A member is actually present at the time the meeting convenes. (2) Special Meetings: Notice of the date, time, place, and the business to be transacted by the Council at a special meeting shall be delivered to each local newspaper of general circulation and local radio or television station that has, on file with the Agency, a written request to be notified of such special meeting or all special meetings of the Council. Written notice shall be deemed waived in the following circumstances: (a) A member submits a written waiver of notice with the secretary/ treasurer of the Council at or prior to the time the meeting convenes. A written waiver may be given by telegram, fax, or electronic mail; or, (b) A member is actually present at the time the meeting convenes. 11 of 20 In addition, notices of other than regular meetings of the Council will be posted on the Agency's website and prominently displayed at the main entrance of the Agency's principle location and of the meeting location, if not at the Agency's principle location. Such notices will be displayed or posted at least 24 hours before the time of such meeting as specified in the notice. Final disposition shall not be taken on any other matter at such meetings of the Council. (3) The notices provided in this section may be dispensed with in the event a special meeting is called to deal with an emergency involving injury or damage to persons or property, or the likelihood of such injury or damage, when time requirements of such notice would make notice impractical and increase the likelihood of such injury or damage. (4) Notice requirements and procedures not set forth above shall comply with the provisions of the Washington State Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 42.30 RCW. In the event of a conflict with the provisions of these bylaws and state law, the provisions of state law shall take precedent. (c) Public Participation: Attendance of the public at the annual meeting, regular meetings and special meetings shall be welcome. Participation at meetings shall be permitted by recognition of the Chair. (d) Quorum: One-third (1/3) of the membership of the Council shall constitute a quorum. (e) Majority: A majority vote of the quorum shall be necessary to take action on any matter coming before the Council, unless otherwise stipulated by these Bylaws. (f) Conflict of Interest: When the process of awarding funds to or the selection of contractors poses a conflict of interest or apparent conflict of interest for a Council or staff member, they shall disclose any conflict or potential conflicts. (Refer to Chapter I, Definitions, item 10) Any person who is aware of a conflict on the part of any council member or agency staff member may disclose said conflict to the entire Council at which point the Chair shall decide whether or not a conflict does exist. In lieu of making that decision, the Chair may open the question to a vote of the full council. If a member of the Council or staff declares or is determined to have a conflict of interest, they shall not take part in the discussions or vote on that specific award of contract or award of funds, but may remain in the room in order to hear the discussions. 12 of 20 (g) Council Member Participation by Telephone: On an occasional basis, a Council member may be approved to participate in Committee and Council meetings via telephone. Participation by telephone is subject to the following: one week advance notice to the ALTCEW office, a maximum of two Council members per meeting date participating via phone, and if possible, internet or fax access at your location in order to receive and view hard copies of handouts presented during the meeting. Should more than two Council members request meeting participation by telephone, selection will be governed by the date and time of the notice to the ALTCEW office and confirmation of internet or fax access. 4.08 COMMITTEES: A. Executive Committee: (1) Composition: The Executive Committee of the Council shall consist of the elected officers of the Council and the Chairs of the various standing committees, and the immediate past Chair of the Council. (2) Responsibilities: (a) Review and recommend to the Council agency policies governing the administrative, personnel, and financial operations of the Agency; (b) Review periodic audits, reports and assessments of the Agency's operations; (c) Review and recommend to the Council revisions to the Agency's Bylaws. (d) Periodically review Council meeting attendance records of members from the Nominating Committee and make recommendations to the Council on the declaration of vacant seats. (e) Annually nominate and recommend to the Governing Board PMC members to serve on the ALTCEW Grievance Committee. (f) Upon request, conduct hearings on Agency employee grievances. (g) In between meetings of the Council act as a coordinating body and, in addition to the above, exercise any power specifically delegated to it by the Council. (h) Review and provide recommendations to the Council on the services provided directly by ALTCEW staff. (i) Review and recommend to the Council the development of programs/services directly provided by ALTCEW staff on a fee for service basis. 13 of 20 (j) Initiate the annual performance review of the Executive Director and make recommendations to the Governing Board. (k) Review and recommend to the Council public information/marketing strategies for the Agency and its contracted services network. (3) Chair: The Council Chairperson shall serve as the Chair of the Executive Committee. B. Standing Committees: Members of Standing Committees shall be nominated by the Chairperson of the Council and elected by the Council. (1) Nominating: (a) Composition: The Council Nominating Committee shall consist of at least three (3) Council members, one from each of ALTCEW's three subregions. (b) Responsibilities: (i.) At the annual meeting, make nominations for the Council's officers after determining that the nominees will serve, if elected. (ii.) Offer to the Council the names of nominees for the community representative positions on the Council; and (iii.) Periodically review Council meeting attendance records of members and, as warranted, make recommendations to the Council Executive Committee on the declaration of vacant seats due to non-attendance. (c) Chair: The Chair of the Nominating Committee shall be appointed by the Council Chair, with the approval of the Council. (2) Planning and Resources Committee: (a) Composition: The Council Planning and Resources Committee shall consist of at least five (5) members, with adequate Planning and Service Area representation reflected in its membership. (b) Responsibilities: (i.) Review and recommend to the Council the unmet needs, gaps and resources for older adults and people in need of long term services and supports in the Agency's Planning and Service Area. 14 of 20 (ii.) Review and recommend to the Council services and prioritization of services to address identified needs and gaps, especially those funded by the Older Americans Act and Senior Citizens Services Act. (iii.) Review and recommend funding allocations for contracted services based on prioritization in accordance with principles outlined in the Area Plan. (iv.) Participate in the Request for Proposal process to procure providers to deliver services recommended in the Area Plan. (v.) Review and recommend to the Council other short and long range planning studies and projects. (vi.) Review and recommend to the Council the Area Plan and any updates, and conduct public hearings to gather public input on the Area Plan and the annual agency budget. (c) Chair: the vice Chair of the Council shall serve as Chair of the Planning and Resources Committee. (3) Services Quality Assurance Committee: (a) Composition: The Council Services Quality Assurance Committee shall consist of at least seven (7) Council members, with adequate Planning and Service Area representation reflected within its membership. (b) Responsibilities: (i.) Review ALTCEW's Financial Statements for purposes of reviewing vendor's rates of expenditure of ALTCEW funds, and formulate corrective action for Council consideration, as appropriate. (ii.) Review and recommend to the Council action on amendments to ALTCEW subcontracts and vendor contracts. (iii.) Periodically review fiscal and program monitoring reports and assessments of the Agency's subcontractors' and vendors' operations;. Recommend corrective actions to the Council. (c) Chair: The Chair of the Services Quality Assurance Committee shall be appointed by the Council Chair, with the approval of the Council. 15 of 20 (4) Advocacy Committee: (a) Composition: The Council Advocacy Committee shall be composed of at least seven (7) Council members. (b) Responsibilities: (i.) Review local, state, or federal laws, regulations, policies, or actions which impact older persons and people in need of long term services and supports and make recommendations to the Council. (ii.) Act, with the Governing Board, Council and designated staff, as an advocate for older persons and people in need of long term services and supports. (c) Chair: The Chair of the Advocacy Committee shall be appointed by the Council Chair, with the approval of the Council. (5) Special Committees: The Council Chair may appoint any number of committees or task groups to assist the Council in the discharge of its duties. The Chair of each committee and task group shall be appointed by the Chair of the Council. CHAPTER V -AGENCY STAFF 5.01 COMPOSITION: The Agency staff shall be composed of an Executive Director, other professional staff members, and supporting staff, as required. 5.02 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: (a) The Executive Director shall be employed and terminated by the Governing Board. The Executive Director shall be responsible to the Governing Board through the Planning and Management Council for the proper performance of all assigned duties. (b) The Executive Director shall be responsible for the overall direction and management of the Agency in accordance with policies established by the Governing Board, and for the performance of such other functions as are assigned by the Planning and Management Council and/or the Governing Board. He/she performs the responsibilities and duties of this position under the general direction of the Governing Board and for those functions delegated to it, the Planning and Management Council. He/she is supervised by the Chair of the Governing Board and at the Board's discretion, the Chair of the Planning and Management Council. (c) The specific duties and responsibilities of the Executive Director shall be stated in the Job Description adopted by the Governing Board. 16 of 20 (d) The Executive Director shall be responsible for managing the implementation of the Business Continuity Plan in the event of local disasters or emergencies affecting ALTCEW staff, subcontractors and clients. The Executive Director will coordinate actions with the ALTCEW Governing Board Chair, ALTCEW Governing Board Members in the counties that are impacted, the county Emergency Operations Center and Disaster Recovery Team in the affected area(s)to ensure continuity of services. 5.03 PERSONNEL POLICIES: The Agency staff shall be selected, paid, promoted and discharged in accordance with personnel policies established by the Governing Board. CHAPTER VI -AGENCY AFFAIRS 6.01 GENERAL PROVISIONS: The Agency shall perform the functions of an Area Agency on Aging in accordance with the terms and provisions of CFR 45 Part 1321. The Governing Board shall establish Operating Procedures for the Agency which set forth guidelines to insure compliance with CFR 45 Part 1321 and to insure that the Agency is operated in a manner consistent with sound administrative practices. 6.02 NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS, CONTRACTS, AGREEMENTS AND DEEDS: All checks, drafts, notes, bills of exchange, and orders for the payment of money; all deeds, contracts and agreements to which the Agency shall be a party; shall, unless otherwise required by law, Federal or State Regulations, these Bylaws, or otherwise directed by the Governing Board, be signed as follows: (a) For routine, recurring expenditures and payroll, by the Executive Director and the Governing Board Chair or Vice-Chair. (b) For all other matters, by the Governing Board Chair or Vice-Chair, if the Chair or the Executive Director is not available. (c) The Governing Board, upon the request of the Agency Executive Director, may authorize by name and for prescribed purposes, another staff member(s)to sign documents, payroll, and vouchers for routine, recurring expenditures, for the Executive Director. 6.03 IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY: No individual member or employee of Aging and Long Term Care of Eastern Washington shall, by reason of their performance of any Agency duty, function or activity authorized by the Older Americans Act, as Amended, regulations of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Washington State Senior Citizens Services Act, directives of the Department of Social and Health Services, or these Bylaws be liable for the payment of damages under any law of the United States or any State if they have acted within the scope of their duty or function, have exercised due care, and have acted without malice. 17 of 20 (a) Power to Indemnify: The Agency shall have the power to indemnify any individual member or employee against expenses actually and reasonably incurred by them in connection with the defense of any threatened, pending, or completed action, whether civil, criminal, administrative, or investigative to which they are a party by reason of having been such member or employee, except in relation to matters to which they will be adjudged to be liable for negligence or misconduct in the performance of a duty. (b) Right to Indemnity: To the extent that a member or employee has been successful, on the merits in defense of any action, they shall be indemnified against expenses, including attorney's fees, actually and necessarily incurred therein. (c) Insurance: The Agency shall have the power to purchase and maintain insurance on behalf of any or all members or employees, past or present, against liability asserted against them and incurred by them, whether or not the Agency would have the power or duty to indemnify them against such liability. 6.04 AUDIT: The Secretary/Treasurer of the Governing Board shall see that the books are audited on an annual or biennial basis by a CPA firm or(of)Washington State. The Planning and Management Council's Executive Committee shall review each audit and prepare appropriate recommendations for action of the Council and the Governing Board. The Comptroller General of the United States, the Secretary of the Washington Department of Social and Health Services, or their representatives are authorized access to all records and books of the Agency for the purpose of audit and examination in accordance with the Older Americans Act. The funds of the Agency shall be subject to audit in the manner provided by law for the auditing of public finds of the State of Washington. 6.05 NON-DISCRIMINATION: The officers, board members, committee members, employees, and persons served by this Agency shall be selected entirely on a non- discriminatory basis with respect to age, sex, race, religion, national origin, creed, color, sexual orientation, and any sensory, mental or physical disability. Provided that, nothing in this paragraph takes precedence over rule of law, including, but not limited to, those provisions relating to the funding of the operations of the Agency by the State of Washington or the Federal Government. CHAPTER VII - DURATION/DISSOLUTION 7.01 GENERAL PROVISIONS: The Agency shall have perpetual existence, except as terminated in Paragraph 7.02 below. 7.02 DISSOLUTION PROCEDURES: (a) General Provision: The Agency may be terminated by its reorganization and transformation to another legal form, by the reassignment of its functions and assets 18 of 20 to another governmental entity, or its disestablishment by a two-thirds (2/3)vote of the Governing Board upon the recommendation of the Planning and Management Council. The property and assets of the Agency will be disposed of in consonance with the reasons for disestablishment or dissolution, being either returned to their source, transferred to an entity continuing the purposes and functions of the Agency, or otherwise will be applied in the promotion of aging planning and aging services. In the event of its insolvency, the Superior Court of Spokane County shall have jurisdiction and authority to appoint trustees and receivers of the Agency property and assets and to supervise such trusteeship or receivership. (b) Procedures for Voluntary Dissolution: Pursuant to Paragraph 4 7.02 (a) above, the following procedures shall be followed in the event that the Agency is to be voluntarily dissolved. (1) Adoption of a Resolution of Intention to Dissolve by a two-thirds (2/3)vote of the Governing Board, upon recommendation by a two-thirds (2/3)vote of the Planning and Management Council. (2) Filing of the Resolution with the Secretary of State, the County Auditors, and the Spokane City Clerk. (3) Establishment of a Plan of Dissolution by the Planning and Management Council upon adoption of the Resolution of Intention to Dissolve. (4) Approval of the Plan of Dissolution by the Governing Board. (5) Execution of the Plan of Dissolution as approved. The Plan of Dissolution must include provisions for termination of all agreements between the Agency and Washington State or other entities; for notice to all creditors and claimants; for an orderly termination of all business; transfer of appropriate functions to any authorized agency; transfer of assets; and must provide for public notice and public hearings, as appropriate. (6) Promulgation by the Chair of the Governing Board of Articles of Dissolution and their filing with the Secretary of State will be the final act of dissolution. CHAPTER VIII -ADOPTION/AMENDMENTS 8.01 ADOPTION: These Bylaws shall be developed by the Planning and Management Council and recommended to the Governing Board for adoption. These Bylaws shall be adopted by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the membership of the Governing Board at any regular or special meeting of the Board. 19 of 20 8.02 AMENDMENTS: Any part of these Bylaws may be amended by a two-thirds (2/3)vote of the membership of the Governing Board at any regular or special meeting of the Board. The Planning and Management Council may offer recommendations on the Agency's Bylaws to the Governing Board. These recommendations first must be approved by a two-thirds (2/3)vote of the Council at any regular or special meeting. In each case, notification and copy of such proposed amendments must have been introduced to the Council and Governing Board members at the last meeting of each respectively. THE FOREGOING BYLAWS of Aging and Long Term Care of Eastern Washington were adopted by the Governing Board on the 17th, day of February 1978. These Bylaws have, subsequent to adoption, been amended by the Agency's Governing Board in May 1979; August 1980; December 1980; August 1984; May 1985; February 1987; February 1988; May 1989; February 1991; February 1992; February 1994; March 1995; August 1996; December 1999; May 2000; August 2002; August 2005; November 2010; February 2013, and June 2014. Signature of Chair Jon Snyder, Governing Board Chair Signature of Secretary/Treasurer Nick Beamer, Executive Director 20 of 20 Return to Index INTERLOCAL GDVERNMENT AGREEKENT FILED TO CREATE THE EASTERN WASHINGTON I'wi 'R 3 - 1 B. AREA AGENCY ON AGING — THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and among Spokane County, having offices for the transaction of business at W. 1116 Broadway, Spokane, Washington 99201 ; Stevens County, having offices for the transaction of business at the Steven County Courthouse, Colville, Washington 99114 ; Whitman County, having offices for the transaction of business at the Whitman County Courthouse, Colfax, Washington 99111 ; Pend Oreille County, having offices for the transaction of business at the Pend Oreille County Courthouse , Newport , Washington 99156 ; Ferry County, having offices for the transaction of business at the Ferry County Courthouse, Republic, Washington 99166; and the City of Spokane, having offices for the transaction of business at North 221 Wali , Spokane, Washington 99201; each a public agency for the purposes of Revised Code of Washington 39 . 34.020, hereinafter jointly referred to as the "Parties. " WITNESSET H: WHEREAS, Revised Code of Washington, Section 74..38,030(3) , provides that the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services may, as part of the program of community based services, designate area agencies in regional areas (planning and service areas) within the State; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Revised Code of Washington, Section 74. 36.100, the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services is authorized to take advantage of and participate in the Federal Older Americans Act of 1965 (PL 89-73) and to accept, administer, and disburse any Federal funds that may be available under said act; and WHEREAS, the Federal Department of Health, Education and Welfare , pursuant to PL 89-73 and amendments thereto, has promulgated certain rules and regulations (45 CFR Parts 901-11) which encourage and assist state and area agencies to concentrate resources in order to foster the development of comprehensive and coordinated service systems which serve older persons; and WHEREAS, 45 CFR Sec. 903.57 provides that the state agency (Office on Aging) shall divide a state into distinct multi-county areas called planning and service areas; and WHEREAS, the State Office on Aging has designated the Washington State Counties of Spokane, Stevens , Ferry (excluding that portion of Ferry County within the boundaries of the Colville Indian Reservation) , Pend Oreille, and Whitman as Planning and Service Area Number 11 ; and WHEREAS, 45 CFR Sec. 903.63 provides that following the determination of planning and service areas, the state agency shall designate a single agency or organization within a planning and service area as the area agency on aging; and WHEREAS, The Senior Citizens Services Act provides for establishment of area agencies on aging in regional areas (planning and service areas) within the State ; and -2- WHEREAS, 45 CFR Sec. 903.63(C) ( 3) provides that an area agency can be any office or agency designated by the chief elected official or officials of a combination of units of general purpose local government to act on behalf of such combination for that purpose; and WHEREAS, Revised Code of Washington, Chapter 39.34, titled "Interlocal Cooperation Act" authorizes local governmental units to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with other localities on a basis of mutual advantage and thereby provide planning and administrative services in a manner that will accord best with geographic, economic, popula- tion, and other factors influencing the needs and development of local communities ; and WHEREAS, Revised Code of Washington, Sec. 39.34.030(2 ) provides that "Any two or more public agencies may enter into agreements with one another for joint or cooperative action pursuant to the provisions of this chapter (RCW 39.34) " ; WHEREAS, the parties have a mutual interest in forming a single purpose Council of Governments (C.O.G. ) to facilitate the organization and operation of the Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging for that geographical region designated by the Washington State Office on Aging as planning and service area Number 11. WHEREAS, the Chairman of the Boards of Commissioners of each of the, five counties and the Mayor of the City of Spokane has been authorized by duly adopted resolution of the County Commissioners of each county and the Spokane City Council, -3- respectively, to execute an agreement to be entitled Interlocal Government Agreement to create the Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging. NOW, THEREFORE, each of the undersigned executes and mutually agrees in exchange for the agreements of each of the others to create the Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging by adoption of these ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION ARTICLE I. NAME. The name of the Association is the Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging. ARTICLE II. PRINCIPAL. The principal office of the Agency is in Spokane, Washington. ARTICLE III. DURATION. The Agency shall have perpetual existence, except as terminated in ARTICLE X herein. ARTICLE IV. PURPOSE. The purposes for which this Agency is formed are: A. To improve the quality of life of older persons through the development, and the fostering of the development, of comprehensive and coordinated service systems to serve older persons in order to: 1. Secure and maintain maximum independence and dignity in a home environment for older persons capable of self-care with appropriate supportive services, and 2. Remove individual and social barriers to economic and personal independence for older persons; -4- B. To speak and work in behalf of older persons whenever to do so may develop and enhance their best interests and happiness; C. To seek the support of, and join with, individuals and private and public corporations, agencies and organizations whenever it is appropriate and proper to do so for the purposes of fulfilling these objectives; and D. To perform the functions and responsibilities of an Area Agency on Aging as set forth in 45 CFR Part 903. ARTICLE V. POWERS. The Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging shall have the power to develop an area plan for programs on aging; receive and administer funds granted for programs and services for the elderly; establish a budget for funds appropri- ated by the State for administering the agency; hire any necessary personnel ; expend funds for necessary services identified in the "Area Plan" ; and any other powers expressly granted by the Federal and State enabling legislation referred to heretofore in the Agreement. ARTICLE VI. ORGANIZATION. A. General Provisions: The Agency is a separate administrative entity organized as a public regional body in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Older Americans Act, as amended. The principal organizational components shall be a Governing Board, a Panel on Aging and an Advisory Council . -5- B. Governing Board: The Governing Board shall be composed of one representative duly appointed by each of the Counties to this Agreement, three Representatives duly appointed by the Spokane City Council , and as ex-officio members, the Chairpersons of the Panel on Aging and the Advisory Council. The Governing Board shall , by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of its membership, adopt and amend the Agency By-Laws. On all other matters, a majority of the total members of the Governing Board shall constitute a quorum, and a majority vote of the quorum shall be necessary to take action on any matter coming before the Governing Board. The Governing Board, in addition to adopting and amending the Agency By-Laws, shall have the authority to approve the annual Area Plan on Aging, approve the annual operating budget, adopt personnel policies, adopt Agency operating procedures, appoint an Agency Director, execute agreements and contracts and any other duties as may be established by the Agency By-Laws. The Governing Board may select a Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, and other officers. The Chairperson shall be empowered, at times other than open meetings to execute all agreements and contracts which have been negotiated and approved by the Governing Board at open meetings. C. Panel on Aging: The Panel on Aging shall be composed of no less than nineteen (19) and no more than twenty-seven (27) members. The Panel on Aging shall be representative of all counties within the Agency' s service area. Further, to -6- insure that the Panel is broadly representative, six ( 6) members of. the Panel shall be representatives of the units of general purpose local government party to this Agreement, six (6) members of the Panel shall be members of the Advisory Council to the Agency, and the balance of the membership shall be concerned citizen volunteers representative of the community-at-large. Appointment procedures and members ' terms of service shall be established in the Agency By-Laws. The Panel on Aging shall be responsible for the day-to-day administration and supervision of the Agency' s activities, including but not necessarily limited to: (1 ) Development and, once approved by the Governing Board; implementation of the annual Area Plan on Aging; (2 ) Negotiation of the terms and provisions of prime contracts, sub-contracts and inter-agency agreements; (3 ) Administration of the internal affairs of the Agency pursuant to policies and procedures adopted by the Governing Board; (4) When requested by the Governing Board, recruitment and screening of all applicants for the position of Agency Director and referral of the most qualified candidates to the Governing Board for consideration; (5 ) Development and recommendation to the Governing Board for adoption by the Governing Board the Agency' s -7- Annual Report; (6) Submission of periodic progress reports on Agency' s activities to the Governing Board; ( 7) Recommending to the Governing Board operating procedures to be followed by the Panel on Aging in their•. administration of Agency' s activities; and (8) Making recommendations to the Governing Board on Agency By-Laws and amendments thereto. D. Advisory Council: The Advisory Council shall be comprised of at least fifty percent (50%) consumers of services provided by the Agency and shall be composed of at least nineteen (19) and no more than twenty-seven (27) members. The Advisory Council shall be representative of all counties within the Agency' s service area. Its members shall be appointed by the Governing Board. The terms of office and method of selection of the Advisory Council members shall be established by the Agency By-Laws. The Advisory Council shall advise the Governing Board, Panel on Aging, and Agency staff on the development and imple- mentation of the annual Area Plan on Aging, and shall perform other duties as may be established by the Agency By-Laws. ARTICLE VII. FISCAL MANAGEMENT. The Agency shall maintain itemized and detailed records covering (A) aging program revenues received from whatever source for financial maintenance of the Agency and all programs thereunder and (B) all expenditures -8- incurred pursuant to adopted program budgets. The Agency shall conform to all fiscal requirements established by State or Federal law. If any matching funds are required for operation and maintenance of the Agency or any programs thereunder, the cost shall be prorated among the Parties based on the per- centage of individuals over 60 years of age located in a particular parties ' geographical area to the total percentage of individuals over 60 years of age in the Region 11 Planning and Service Area. ARTICLE VIII. CONTRACTS AND SUBCONTRACTS. The Governing Board may exclusively enter into prime contracts, concerning the elderly, with the Federal or State governments, and may subcontract with any municipal , profit or non-profit corporation, or individual to provide services for the elderly as identified in the annual Area Plan on Aging. ARTICLE IX. ACQUISITION AND DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY. The Agency shall acquire, hold, and dispose of real and personal property in the same manner as Counties within the State of Washington, as provided for within R.C.W. 36.32 and R.C.W. 36. 34, respectively. ARTICLE X. TERMINATION. A. Termination of Association: The term of association for each Party to this Agreement is one (1 ) year, commencing January 1 , 1978. A Party' s participation in the Agreement shall be automatically renewable for additional periods of -9- one (1) year each, without the requirement of formal action by the Party, on the first day of January of each successive year. Any Party to this Agreement desirous of terminating its participation in the Agreement, effective the following January 1, shall deliver written notice to the offices of the Agency by the first day of July of any given year. B. Dissolution: The Agency may be terminated by its re- organization and transformation to another legal form, by the reassignment of its functions and assets to another governmental entity, or its disestablishment by a two-thirds (2/3 ) vote of the Governing Board upon the recommendation of the Panel on Aging. The property and assets of the Agency will be disposed of in consonance with the reasons for disestablishment or dissolution, being either returned to their source, transferred to an entity continuing the purposes and functions of the Agency, or otherwise will be applied in the promotion of aging planning and aging services. In the event of its insolvency, the Superior Court of Spokane County shall have jurisdiction and authority to appoint trustees and receivers of the Agency property and assets and to supervise such trusteeship or receivership. -10- ARTICLE XI. VENUE STIPULATION. This Agreement has and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington, and it is mutually under- stood and agreed by each Party hereto that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforce- ment of this Agreement or any provision thereof shall be instituted and maintained only in the courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Spokane, Washington. ARTICLE XII. MODIFICATION. No change or addition of any printed portion of this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon any Party. There shall be no modification of the Agreement , except in writing, executed with the same formalities as this present instrument. ARTICLE XIII. NOTICES. All notices called for or provided for in this Agreement shall be in writing and must be served on any of the Parties at their respective addresses hereinabove given, except as noted in ARTICLE X above. Notices sent by registered mail shall be deemed served when deposited in the United States Mail. ARTICLE XIV. ALL WRITING CONTAINED HEREIN. This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties. No other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the Parties hereto. -11- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties undersigned have caused this Agreement to be executed this 1st . day of January r 1t78i ATTEST: S.p'.k, ne County Spokane County By Clerk of the ward Approved as to Form: ,C a rman Deputy Prosecuting Attorney ATTEST: 401)" I ' Ftman County Whitman County By lerk of the Beard yyy / "19) 9r, Approved as to Form: a man / Dipmby Prosecuting Attu ney ATTEST: Pend =ftteille County Pend Oreille County By Clerk of the Board Approved as to Form: Chairma /7/) Prosecuting Attor y± -12- ATT ST: lete,fi • _.,/ ft2441,1 ), Ferry Court F ry County By Clerk of the Board /. '' �, Ar Approved as toForm: airman ,_...<4.7 r ,. a L Prosecut ng Attorney ATTEST: / ( ! Stevens County Stevens County By Clerk of the Bo- rd -) tom., .. Approved as to Form: rnacik-I114tA) i ___ 7' , , 7... , „.04.- I L feputy Prosecuting Attorney ATTEST: / C ty a ' f Sp, * ;ne City of Spokane By City C er Approved as to Form: AcAge eager II ' 401;11,(,4„, AC7/&. Co •rat Counse -13- AMENDMENT TO INTERLOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT TO CREATE THE EASTERN WASHINGTON AREA AGENCY ON AGING THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and among Spokane County, Stevens County, Whitman County, Pend Oreille County, Ferry County, and the City of Spokane, each a public agency for the purposes of Revised Code of Washington 39. 34 . 020, hereinafter jointly referred to as the "Parties", is an amendment to the Interlocal Government Agreement entered into by the Parties on January 1, 1978, hereinafter "Original Agreement" . WHEREAS, pursuant to the Original Agreement, the Parties on January 1, 1978, created the Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging, hereinafter "EWAAA" ; and WHEREAS, since that date, and with the assistance of local, state and federal funding, EWAAA has provided services to older Americans within the five county area, and WHEREAS, as initially created, EWAAA had three boards, the Governing Board, the Panel on Aging, and the Advisory Council to administer the affairs of the Agency, and WHEREAS, experience has shown that the Panel on Aging and the Advisory Council could be combined into one body without adversely affecting the purpose or operational proficiency of the Agency, and, in fact, by combining these two Boards the Agency should become more effective and efficient in administering its programs, and 1 WHEREAS, in order to change the structure of the Agency in that manner, the Original Agreement must be amended to reflect those changes -- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the parties hereto: Section 1. That Article VI, Organization, of the Original Agree- ment shall be amended to read as follows: ARTICLE VI ORGANIZATION. A. General Provisions: The Agency is a separate administrative entity organized as a public regional body in accordance with the requirements with the Federal Older Americans Act, as amended. The principal organizational components shall be a Governing Board, ( (a Panel en Aging and an Advisery eetinei) ) and a Planning and Management Council. B. Governing Board: The Governing Board shall be composed of one representative duly appointed by each of the counties to this Agreement, three representatives duly appointed by the Spokane City Council, and as an ex-officio member( (s) ) , the Chairperson( (s) ) of the ( (Panel en Aging and the Advisery eetineW ) Planning and Management Council. The Governing Board shall, by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of its membership, adopt and amend the Agency By-Laws. On all other matters, a majority of the total members of the Governing Board shall constitute a quorum, and a majority vote of the quorum shall be necessary to take action on any matter coming before the Governing Board. The Governing Board, in addition to adopting and amending the Agency By-laws, shall have the 2 authority to approve the annual Area Plan on Aging, approve the annual operating budget, adopt personnel policies, adopt agency operating procedures, appoint an Agency Director, execute agreements and contracts and any other duties as may be established by the Agency By-Laws. The Governing Board may select a Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, and other offi- cers. The Chairperson shall be empowered, at times other than open meetings to execute all agreements and contracts which have been negotiated and approved by the Governing Board at open meetings. C. ( (Panel en Aging) ) Planning and Management Council: The ( (Panel en Aging) ) Planning and Management Council shall be composed of no less than ( (nineteen f19}) ) twenty-seven (27) and no more than ( (twenty-seven fR9-) ) thirty-five (35) members. ( (The Panel en Aging) ) It shall be representative of all counties within the Agency's service area. Further, to ( (ensure that the Panel is broadly representative) ) fa- cilitate close working relationships among EWAAA and the parties hereto, six (6) members of the ( (Panel) ) Council shall be representatives of the units of general purpose local government party to this Agreement. ( (six f6} members of the Panel shall be members et the Adv±sere eeuneiI to the Ageney; and the baIanee e€ the membership shall be eeneernea eit±ten velunteers representative of the eemmunity-at- Iarge-) ) Additional composition requirements for the Council, appointment procedures and members ' terms of 3 service shall be established in the Agency By-Laws. The ( (Panel en Agng) ) Council shall be responsible for ( (the day-te-day adminlstratlen and superv4sien e€ the Ageney-Ls aetlAt4es7 neIuding but net neeessarlIy 14m4ted te) ) per- forming the following: ( (fI} Bevelepment and,- epee appreved by the 6evern4ng Beards lmplementatlen of the annual Area Plan en Ag4ngt) ) (1) Planning activities, including development of the Area Plan on Aging for PSA #11, and Annual Updates thereon; ( (fR} Negetlatlen e€ the terms and prevlslens e€ the pf4me eentraets; sub-eentraets and Inter-ageney agreementst) ) (2) Implement the Area Plan on Aging, once adopted by the EWAAA Governing Board; ( (f3} Adr4nlstratlen ef the 4nternaI affa4rs ef the Ageney pursuant to peI4eles and preeedures adapted by the 6evefn ng Beards) ) (3) Represent the interests of older persons; ( (f4} When requested by the Gevern±ng Beard- reeru±tment and sereen±ng e€ ail appIleants fer the pes±t±en e€ Ageney Blreeter and referral e€ the melt quaIlf±ed eand±dates to the 6evern±ng Beard far eens± eras±ens) ) (4) Administer the internal affairs of the Agency 4 pursuant to policies and procedures adopted by the Governing Board; ( ({5} BeveIepment and reeemmendatien to the Geverning Beard fer adeptien by the Geverning Beard the Ageneyis Annual Repent+) ) (5) When requested by the Governing Board, recruit and screen all applicants for the position of Agency Director, and refer the most qualified candidates to the Board for consideration; ( ({6} Submissien of periedie pregress repeats en Ageneyis aetivities to the Geverning Beardt) ) (6) Review and recommend to the Board for adoption the Agency's Annual Report concerning its activities; ( ({ } Reeemmending to the Geverning Beard eperating proeedures to be €eIlewed by the Panel en Aging n their administratien of Ageneyis aetivities+ and) ) (7) Make recommendations to the Governing Board on amendments to the Agency's By-Laws; ( ({6} Making reeemmendat±ens to the Geverning Beard en Ageney By-Laws and amendments therete-) ) (8) Other duties as may be established by the Agency By-Laws. ( (B- Advisery eetineiIt The Adv±eery eeuneil shall be eemprised of at least fifty pereent {50%} eensumers of serviees previded by the Ageney and shall be eempesed of at least 5 nineteen {19} and me mere than twenty-seven { 4} members.- The Advisery eeuneiI shall be representative ef all eeunties within the ageneyls serviee area.- its members shall be appointed by the Geverning Beard.- The terms ef effiee and method o€ seleetien of the Advisery eeuneii members shall be established by the Ageney By-haws- The Advisery eeuneii shall advise the Geverning Beard; Panel en Aging; and Ageney staff en the develepment and implementatien of the annual Area Plan en Aging; and shall per€erm ether duties as may be established by the Ageney By-haws.-) ) Section 2 . Article X, Termination, sub-paragraph B. of the Original Agreement shall be amended to read as follows; ARTICLE X. TERMINATION. B. Dissolution: The Agency may be terminated by its reorganization and transformation to another legal form, by the reassignment of its functions and assets to another governmental entity, or its disestablishment by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the Governing Board upon the recommendation of the ( (Panel en Aging) ) Planning and Management Council . The property and assets of the Agency will be disposed of in consonance with the reasons for disestablishment or dissolution, being either returned to their source, trans- ferred to an entity continuing the purposes and functions of the Agency, or otherwise will be applied in the promotion of aging planning and aging services. In the event of its insolvency, the Superior Court of Spokane County shall have 6 jurisdiction and authority to appoint trustees and receivers of the Agency property and assets and to supervise such trusteeship or receivership. Section 3 . All other terms and conditions as set forth in the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect except as amended hereby. In WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties undersigned have caused this CAr Agreement to be executed this 1 day of t` 'icr 1987 . RITE 16 -- Af . . Spo. ane County G1 -rk of the BoardOr Spokane County By , &WIZ- App . -d s to . lib ha man IJetde ros } T ey AllieATT _ T: 9 _.......c.,_:__ _ ALapriii; le itman County Whitman in Count By erk of the Board •r•ve' Form: �' airman �, t _A �1 . P o=" u" i g ,7 tto i ey 7 ATTEST: / .J.E1-, ,c." Cr pend bre P 11e County ,d Oreille * nty By Clerk o f the Board s'{ 1 d 0 Pr lfriAZZLIZ /�, Ap•roved as to Form: Ch .Yrmun 0 L IIC1 r-'QN_ --I t ose�cut ng �ttc�rn= IF ATTEST: Ferry County Ferry County By Clerk of the Board Al/ el, \ Approved as to cern: " airman _,d7a1 ' Prosecu Fr g '-ttone 77 ATTEST: Stevens Coun iStevens County Ey Clerk of the Board , , i, ct., co , 2---L-- -L___ Approved as to Form: Chairman Li , -Z prosecuting Attorney 8 ATTEST: City 4f ' kane 0 City of Spokane By City Cler C y nager Approved as to Form: assistant /City Attorney i t 9 C'PR 87-22 AMENDMENT TO THE BY-LAWS AND THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT OF THE EASTERN WASHINGTON AREA AGENCY ON AGING THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and among Spokane County, Stevens County, Whitman County, Pend Oreille County, Ferry County, and the City of Spokane, each a public agency for the purposes of Revised Code of Washington 39 . 34 . 020 , hereinafter jointly referred to as the "Parties, " is an amendment to the Interlocal Government Agreement entered into by the parties on January 1, 1978 , hereinafter "Original Agreement. " WHEREAS, pursuant to the Original Agreement, the Parties on January 1, 1978, created the Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging, and WHEREAS, since that date, and with the assistance of local, state and federal funding, EWAAA has provided services to older Americans and others in need of lene teat care within the five county area, and WHEREAS , the Governing Board of the Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging, at its December 9, 1994 , Governing Board meeting, voted to change the name of the agency from "Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging" to "Aging and Long Term Care of Eastern Washington" and WHEREAS , upon the adoption of this amendment, references in the By-laws and the Interlocal Agreement to the Eastern Washington Area Agency on Aging shall be referring to Aging and Long Term care of Eastern Washington; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PARTIES HERETO, THAT THE EASTERN WASHINGTON AREA AGENCY ON AGING SHALL AMEND ITS BY-LAWS AND THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO CHANGE ITS NAME TO AGING AND LONG TERM CARE OF EASTERN WASHINGTON. DATED this4/ day of , 1995 . OF 1 . :. Spok Cc my By Sp b kerne Countys Clerk of the Board 4WZ// - Chairman Approve, as to •rm. - a -137.1!/7 Prosecuting Attorney ATTEST L/2 J.L &.(!4& _ Whitman County B Whitman County Clerk of the Board ,, ,,�1■ A airman Ap ( ed to ,- puty Prosecuting Attoey ATTEST; Me-r,e;;elzet-- Pend Wile County Pend [}refill aunty � Clerk of the Board ` V/7 , kj Chairman A••_roved as to •rin: r.- - - Prosecutir ttorney ATTEST: " 'r2—fL -( _ Ferry County By Ferry County Clerk of the Board -.1::214:71:P-7,--re./.4 -.--2.-70,eIP' ,..* ifZol Chairman Approved as to Form: = --- o C , C Attorney ATTEST: Cat.tL C- iie 9°tV Stevens County S SteveansGinty Clerk of - he Board ai,A / 2 'c2e'_ Chairman Approved as to F rm: / ,A 4 Prosecuting Attorney ATTEST: Cityiej Spokane y City of - •olan- Clerk ft) O GGG�— City Manager Approved as to Form: Assistant City Attorney CtyCom.NC Return to Index CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 17, 2018 Department Director Approval El Item: Check all that apply: ❑consent ❑old business ®new business ❑public hearing ❑ information ® admin.report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed 2018 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments— Overview CPA-2018-0001, CPA-2018-0003, CPA-2018-0004, CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018- 0006. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A, SVMC 17.80.140 and 19.30.010 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.140 establishes an annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle that runs from November 1'to October 31'of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications during the following spring, with a decision by City Council generally occurring in late spring/early summer. The Community and Public Works Department received four privately initiated requests for site- specific Comprehensive Plan amendments. In addition, the City proposed two site specific Comprehensive Plan amendments. Sites approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. On February 8, 2018, the Planning Commission was briefed on the 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendments(CPAs), and a public hearing was conducted on February 22,2018. The public hearing was closed at that time. On February 16, 2018 an appeal of the Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)issued for CPA- 2018-0003 was received by the City. Pursuant to Chapter 17.90 SVMC appeals related to State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) decisions are heard by the Hearing Examiner(HEX) and subject to a public hearing. Due to the SEPA appeal it was determined that the public hearing scheduled for February 22, 2018 in front of the Planning Commission would be conducted, but that deliberations or further action would be deferred until such time as the HEX ruled on the SEPA appeal. On March 27, 2018 the HEX conducted the appeal hearing. On April 17, 2018 the HEX issued a decision that denied the SEPA appeal. At the May 10, 2018 Planning Commission meeting the Planning Commission reviewed and deliberated on each of the proposed CPAs. The following recommendations to the City Council were voted on: CPA-2018-0001 The Planning Commission voted 6-1 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2018-0001. CPA-2018-0003 The Planning Commission voted 6-1 to forward to City Council a recommendation of denial of CPA-2018-0003. CPA-2018-0004 The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2018-0004. CPA-2018-0005 The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2018-0005. Note: Commissioner Phillips recused himself due to a conflict of interest. 1 of 2 CPA-2018-0006 The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2018-0006. PUBLIC NOTICE: Notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald and each site was posted with a "Notice of Public Hearing" sign, with a description of the proposal. Individual notice of the proposals is required to be mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each amendment. The City opted to increase the noticing radius to include property owners up to 800 feet of each amendment pursuant to SVMC 17.80.120(B)(1)(c). Notice of the public hearing was mailed at least 15 days prior to the public hearing SEPA REVIEW: Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA — chapter 43.21C RCW), environmental checklists were required for each proposed amendment. Under SEPA, amendments to a comprehensive plan are considered "non-proj ect 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 checklists and a threshold determination was made for each proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. Determinations of Non-significance (DNS) were issued for the proposed amendments consistent with SVMC 21.20. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSALS: Proposed amendments to the Comprehensive plan are organized into individual reports consisting of staff reports, maps, and comments submitted to date to assist the City Council in its review. OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed with the first reading scheduled for July 24, 2018; or take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to proceed with the first reading at the July 24, 2018 Council meeting. STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner Martin Palaniuk, Planner Karen Kendall, Planner Micki Harnois, Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1) Power Point Presentation 2) Staff Report CPA-2018-0001 3) Staff Report CPA-2018-0003 4) Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 5) Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 6) Staff Report CPA-2018-0006 7) PC Meeting Minutes 2-08-18 8) PC Meeting Minutes 2-22-18 9) PC Meeting Minutes 5-10-18 10)PC Meeting Minutes 5-24-18 2 of 2 Valley 2018 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments City Council Administrative Report July 17, 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process SVMC 17.80. 140 2 Staff Role Planning City Council • Facilitate Process Commission • Legislative • Conducts Review • Conducts Public Decision and Analysis Hearing • Considers Public • Prepares • Deliberates and Comment Reports and Makes • Discretion to public notices Recommendation approve, modify, to Council or deny requests Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process 3 C .� Study Session Administrative 0 .v •N 2-2- 18 Report a o E 0 } 7- 17- 18 .V c _ D rn E Public Hearing T } ._2 _a O O .0 0 2-22-18 D i t 4'1— V o Q 0 } O U Ordinance 1st < •v E 0 " (1) N c Deliberations > Reading (1) Ti _4 .— N V > > -1- •} 'c 5-10-18 } 7-24-18 Q C N C U Q N w0 Z 0 a_ Findings of Fact Ordinance 2nd 5-24-18 Reading 7-31-18 aiiillh 10( ill Today EPA Pr oCess Route to Agencies with Jurisdiction • 14 day review period 4 [. for Review and Comment J SEPA is a Washington State Law ( 1971 ) Issue DNS • Publish and Post Tool to identify environmental (Determination of • 14 day comment and impacts that MAY result from Non-Significance) appeal period government decisions i.e. permits, regulations, policies or plans Information provided allows Agency Decision • Unless Appeals are agencies, applicants and public to Finalized received or Decision understand environmental impacts withdrawn SEPA Appeal — CPA- 2018 - 0003 February 16, . Appeal of DNS Decision Received 2018 March 27, • Appeal Hearing Conducted by 201 $ Hearing Examiner (HEX) April 17, 201 $ • Decision issued by HEX — SEPA appeal Denied Agency Routing - Who receives the application ? Avista Comcast County Planning & Building CVSD #356 SRCAA County Environmental Services CenturyLink SRHD County Water District #3 SV Police East Spokane Water District # 1 SRTC WA Ecology EVSD #361 STA Liberty Lake WVSD #363 Spokane Tribe of Indians City of Spokane Inland Power & Light SV Fire # 1 CSV Building Model Irrigation District # 18 Trentwood Irrigation District CSV Engineering Consolidated Irrigation District # 19 Vera Water & Power CSV Parks Modern Electric Water Company DOC CSV Traffic WA Parks Dept DAHP Millwood Spokane Aquifer Joint Board WA Fish & Wildlife WSDOT Spokane County Fire #8 WA Natural Resources Public Hearing Notice 111140 p;- *''1 .14'0 0 1 Joni 1 IIIP1 ---ik 1M\""\kAN , ❑ Published in paper _ ‘ ....:k \NI:\ . .� 2-2- 18 & 2-9- 18 .e . , , itl\s'IrylifFiff,/e i\\TA .;.1& eird e*;, A,' elNk' i�� . sHriorrir, Jr1A,4,47,0itts\ ill ❑ Posted 2-7- 18 limo 6,90:e ■ X1111L'ii007".4NaV4 pt ❑ Mailed 2-7- 18 'I VII m gArtgellINN\ ,M Expanded noticing from 400s\Itz �� awe m feet radius to 800 feet. 66.6': w Leg,n1111111 Parcels '. Planning Commission Materials 8 Am iiii Yellow Binder city OfSr ani 1i• , ley o Application Materials A nd , ._ �,�nem ts pre„ensi ePlan ❑ Staff Report `� �`` ' ' � p . +V kit? r �: s '4 . yYl`E '-� N coo }'h . .r r ddb '_, ❑ Notices 7 o Agency Comments ;fr SA, ❑ Public Comments 4 ' o Maps kitiq4 7 o Any other related documents 1 Approval Criteria — Staff Report Analysis Required Findino Other Considerations Supports public health, safety o Effect on Environment welfare, and protects the ❑ Compatibility and impact on environment existing uses and neighborhoods Consistent with GMA and ❑ Adequacy and impact on Comprehensive Plan services Responds to a change in o Benefit to City and Region conditions o Quantity, Location and Demand Corrects an error for land Addresses a deficiency o Projected population for area o Other effects on Comp. Plan 2018 Amendments 10 sa_ Privately Initiated City Initiated ❑ CPA-2018-0001 i CPA-201 8-0005 Li CPA' -Withdrawn 12 CPA-201 8-0006 ❑ CPA-2018-0003 a CPA W;thdw"^ J7 • CPA-2018-0004 11 Privately Initiated Map Amendment CPA-201 8-0001 Micki Harnois, Planner C PA_2 0 1 8_000 1 E Hi 12 _.IIIIIII. .111111 I ,,q riLv,-eJ ,-i.... z c , , _22 7 Cc Ci i II .h 2: Project CPA-2018-0001 Number: 2 ' - •- Applicant: Robin Petrie , _ ._ ... _i W Owners: Robin R & Lori A Petrie :. Mr > Audrey N Green , c, ei 3. et a t : u j Proposal: Change the land use _ 3, li > designation from SFR \ 0 pp artu nit:, 0 to MFR and the zoning ]. , i , -...s. Project Site from R-3 to MFR , a ii-1111I—! - — --- _._ ,g, . _ CPA-2018-0001 1 31 .�01.. 1 . J.41 _; ._. . ' i ., 4 d am , . , 7 liliWI' 1 ' L 1111 .,..-.0 so O w Q e' - •it- .__ MEM • r 2 ,_....„ , 4.4_ , .,,,. . y — (1"e°'Displaying ' _4_. ..w�1 ir _ " -�, y I 4 uses - •Iii �•� QSurrounding - '` yrj : 1 Ce F = Commercial W J t = MultifamilyLlo i 1. . Will a. \4%.,. [ = CPA-2018-0001 _ :,, ( 8 , ,_ ._,k,PA-201 _ _ _ ..„ 14 _ CMU W Study Areal l l d i Z Q :36 W E 14515,_ YAVE SFR 124 VALLEY .2835 W a __ 6 E Ce Z -- r - .VALLEYWAYAVE CL < n `i J = CMU MFR I O • d = MFR r.- V - = SFR i CPA-2018-0001 iii ,„,„_iii'-I 15 CMU 11 Study Area M I .._, r � . a 36 R-3E * • 4515 "Iir N AVE V 12-- VALLE .2835 Z 0E V' LLEYWAY AVE Z = CMU �111 MF � � O In} N = MFR _, _-.. L M. , 1 im i —E x an ve = R-3 f VW" Comparison of Development Standards 16 Lot Maximums Density Minimum Setbacks Building Minimum Lot dwelling Front/Flanking Rear Side Zone Hei ht Coverage g Size acre Yard Yard Yard R-3 35 ft. 50% 5,000 sqft 6 15 ft./20ft. 10 ft. 5 ft. MFR* 50 ft. 60% 2,000 sqft 22 15 ft./ 20ft. 10 ft. 5 ft. *Where MFR abuts R- 1 , R-2, or R-3 zones, development shall comply with Transitional Regulations Staff, Agency & Public Comment Staff & Agency Comments Public Comment ❑ CPW ❑ No public comments to ❑ Spokane Valley Fire date Department No. 1 ❑ Sewer ❑ WSDOT ❑ STA 18 Privately Initiated Map Amendment CPA-201 8-0003 Marty Palaniuk, Planner C PA_2 0 1 8_000 3 19 111111111._ E Proiect iStirC1''5''i '• .,•.1"O''6 '''.... CPA-2018-0003 Number Project Site Applicant: Whipple Consulting _...7,.. ,.... t . :.•=,T,...r.F. lii .7.0.4.c. LU .. ... Engineers > Owners: 11 Ce Dennis & Melissa Crapo 2. I .8' C., 1.1.1 Proposal: Change the Land Use ,,. . . ,r, L .., :,. r. p E.,4 > . 0 Designation from SFR to CMU and the zoning , f ..i _ ,k- v . • S.. Y , 7. •,L from R-2 to CMU x, ,. .. .„., I '_ 7 :: S i-A.)..P CPA-2018-0003 — � = � } _ ik :At_ ,.rai, .1.1 11 fie.r _ - i�s e. .! •. iL v.i •. . n,.. 20 p IT � 71 1- f 1 7 ir-11-1E-41- 21:,,-, ....,, tr ..,„ .. .. .. , , _i .,,,,,,, rwi,t, „ _, ... a_ , ,.... _ 7 . - getr ,P/ NI' e' < I,`. . . ,.' lbe '...,.. 2 ,, , ,„ 11 '-' .---.:.,.i.., .i .0.1,' ,...... r 10 .t3yI7111:0-7=-470 :7:111:-'1' .-4,-..7...: _ • yi , .,11'1.:-:',:„..:.1„_4...':4 < f � _. ` r 4 Cleti 141111t Inti ,mss Y :,,,,7, : . . 1 v ; i ; r I � i � r� T7 ry ' nw �I 1r-1..... CPA-2018-0003 -4 •�'. w A. , _ - f fid^ - - ' aiii _i_l 1 _. 77117E-A4 ,.. v) i Majority of site is in the * ' 1 , AL floodplain , . *k -P.: - ., .. ,... N Approximate location roal ------.._ '*. �. -ChesterMa _ t ,.,,,. Ce CLOMR in 2017 removed °) .. „.,� . IL_ •1±! p `: IW:4" V floodplain a Ce 1 F., I Chester Creek y - . Q (Type F stream) ' '., -'` `'. I -,l, � t -7 .- r . �'' '' •} Located north of site ;Irry,tio 4 t ' i 4 Imp LIJ Alluvium Soils ' ',, (1tetL -i ,, -, :. I—' i Entire site covered no _ "'r - ,., '�a 7, - H visual �. ,'or-.) , ` '� ,.?► :. . 4 . it- * ; , 10 .I, I...---,5,..-,,,,,,,, ..k. 0,4 ' -.10,, . --,.....;..41W-4q.0 4 . I .. .�. ^.� I „... 4„..., .... ie. -I., :i 6. nf.' lLF ..2,-73,- ,da- J1r1 JY o�- x CPA-2018-0003 „ . ....„, \I\F14 ti � 1 6 - CMU � �`�i ,..• ,i Wim`-.. 11111 -17 Z ,k W 4'141/, * . r „t, 1 Study Area N Ce Z >\:6:','P' • I a ---,.... '''''---,,N.,-:‘:„.. , CIL < 1 ' Om = CMU Aii , - 1 x . 1111111/1 x” IIuI n V • Pi SFR It.Y.:= 1 •'4ui :)...k, s '--- L I I 1 fI CPA-201 8-0003 di r Th, CMU . 23N.% �,; f tiif R_3 �, L r_.�;i-.,tip - R-2 F h III CL ...Z,, ..:II'l ', k< mv .-. I * . Ili _ 141 r s. {� ,h•rr,,• 0 N Lc- I % Study Arear``. k ,_- . . .,....,-c ,......iNt.s = CMU ''"Iir ...„.4, ,,„/ , >\---...,,;, Q____,,..t. il: , --______ _ , '''.----„,,,,,,,.. . =4' AP A -._ ,,. .,/ 0 .,_.., .gt.„,„.., = R_3 �,d Pt _, pri um • fir; I t ,...,_ . I M R_ r = R-2 —_ — - 1,41. 041 r . .• Comparison of Development Standards 24 Lot Maximums Density Minimum Setbacks Building Minimum dwelling/ Front/Flanking Rear Side Zone Height Coverage g Lot Size acre Yard Yard Yard 10,000 R-2 35 ft. 30% 4 15 ft./20ft. 20 ft. 5 ft. sqft CMU* Unlimited N/A N/A Unlimited N/A 10 ft.* 5 ft.* * If abutting residential, development shall comply with Transitional Regulations Staff, Agency & Public Comment Staff & Agency Comments Public Comment 0 CPW ❑ Comments received ❑ Spokane Valley Fire Included in Packet Department ❑ Sewer ❑ WA State Fish and Wildlife PublicComment Discussion ,,,_, AL T JA At y ' .. _ i{. ate; * _� _ Chester Creek { , . . i, of a Comments . $- poi. ,. . k ' ',,i'-r.,... Traffic , ._4 .. )1 ., i �_ -. lillt Access F, 1', 'd . _ � r i4 _ � ... - t 1 ... ' 11 ,:,- 1 - _ -::.! , ¢ .� • tea Neighborhood .$ �` ' , .j. t 1 ' ,114.1`;K . _',' ; Sum Character ;r. �� '�`o x r 1 •••¢ii `.. -\51,1"...V.17. LIf • ';'off ��,,. � °t. __y: -r.-' i • Floodplain , - _ . ; - a r w t - --,_-_.-N.,-_ -,,.. , _ilii. , Schools s' � fi #` 1 "vim- t. ;4,.-P.' ,r, - _ _ • r { y ¢ " 27 Privately Initiated Map Amendment CPA-201 8-0004 Marty Palaniuk, Planner - : CPA-20 1 8_0004 f ..] _ 28 LIF-L - H In 111.1L.11MCity Hall 11.11._ ill .„.3,.1 ' • 1 1 FM Ei V HIV tl -— •-•••...=- r _- -: I 111 I Project CPA-2018-0004 - .-A :- ---=-----=4,-,E.1 NI kd 4.-i - r '-111 II Number rTr illfr -. - -.."-". di I 1•TI I.— I ,I I — , - Applicant: Heather Bryant , -Pllim _ I.;„ 1 Af„... 9. "M- • IA 1I mMM--EmR-1-1 IU I1111 - •' ___ Owners: > I I uniwki,„imit ).',1 smouElL Steve & Tresa .thalw :_li I -7/171 'iii I I H 1 I IIII Ill ce I I I 1 ilis k Schmautz Immo , :F.Lith AUP • _ I ' I I— r, Project Site 1.1.1 ; ; A,, 1 i I.........,4 Proposal: Change Land Use °I 1_101 1 '• 11 1-.1-14 1 ' " I'l--I • '74-- , :E i.- ..J. t r 2 a• 0 Designation SFR to .-, , E .'c' .7 1 — - a . ..i i; , P. A: ;5 trjH m M •Ei .0 -r. . _.-,,,.._ , -., NC and the zoning - . .„,.. ,.., a' "a. if i r .;',..:.....:. E kith LrO : L • from R-3 to NC .. , ,,, I ,.._ .. .„.... . , . .4. 8-0004PA-201 _ _ _tii.0. : - 29 ... ,......_ .. a. ` I - It . i L___ ›... .____7.._. .., , . ., 1 .mn r--,,-_ ��_ ._� , '' ' r I •' > — + `''ate < - IMF ili . _ Th AvenueF,71 2 I -. _ ... , , ., I - . , . , . ,...7'At , mr -_-::...- 7-- --- ... ,.._.,.. ,L. _ t y 8 h ' F1= j1111:7 , `; Avenue - �-- i.s_ - - tii & 1, ,. r 8-00041MFRPA-2 _ _01111 nth 0 30 a ■ W EfiihAve •C -- V F D H a - - 7th Avenue Z Q Study Area W YLLI * . et 49 RD — Ithirk 8'" Avenue 5! Cm Q = SFR — 0 = MFR $F l VEth_ha ii = NC _1 1 1. J5iirc. ,..___ _ CPA-2018-000431 ti. Ce ill _ — .� y Jam. L CIM E 6th A+=e °) R311111 •C . a 11. .11911111 * - _ 7th Avenue _ Study Area 0 - 7•4 Z , NC R° ? _ill 8th Avenue � �-r:, = R-3 H- z " % — O I i N = MFR E 9th Ave E utEy 4� = NC 1 at Lt 1 I 1 Comparison of Development Standards 32 Lot Maximums Density Minimum Setbacks Building Minimum dwelling Front/Flanking Rear Side Zone Hei ht Coverage g Lot Size /acre Yard Yard Yard R-3 35 ft. 50% 5,000 6 15 ft. /20ft. 10 ft. 5 ft. sqft NC 35ft. N/A * * 15ft. 10 ft.A 10 ft.^ * If residential development, comply with density & dimensional standards of adjacent residential zone. A If adjacent to residential use. Staff, Agency & Public Comment Staff & Agency Comments Public Comment O CPW ❑ Comments received ❑ Spokane Valley Fire Included in Packet Department ❑ Sewer Public Comment Discussion 34 II _ .- i , . m- 0.- . . 1... 4 .N. ,_. . „ . me lip ion lir II' ,--ael• ' 0 ' - -; . , ..,p • Comments ,,- . _. _ ....,. 0 - .... , ' I, ... .._. 4+4461.r..1••+ .0.4:.,,,,-7 41: 4rC-1.7.1-Cl' 1-.;-"''. F - 1 ".. .1 iv.,11...., -4.!,,it.,.,...4a... _ .... Alp__ -. , ---1.ir .,4m. ...... 046 o Traffic 7th Avenue :. 4, k - - , ' - 1111.41 140 o Access , 41 * • . . ...or .0% ...s, R --." . , lin "1.' tif 1 •4‘ o Neighborhood 1 .-16 ...akii.. . ..., . - , ,,---- ..... , ..-If, ------OL' '4'1'. '1-i .k ,... - ..,., „ Character . -_ Arrrrirriair, . f _ = = • ' - - — . — o Covenants .... . . /rill]iir . It •• - JI .., - - I I - - . , A. - • 1.._,• .•'- _...11tZ 142 , Nk 6, iiii 1 , :sr .. - SI ) •m I 35 City Initiated Map Amendment CPA-201 8-0005 Karen Kendall, Planner ,-,-,„ Project Site ' - C PA_2 0 1 8_000 5 36 —111111.-111111— _ —- ...P 7 Project CPA-2018-0005 ,,---- e-------- 1,, 4. Number _ * Applicant: City of Spokane Valley it LU Owners: Five Fifty LLC , i ! -.1 -...... ...; ; ic Ezzl VzIley > i — 1 2 m - 2 Hgh School P et Proposal: Expand the NC ___ , ---- E.-- — +l•- 7' IE It-- , LU designation & zoning to . 7 ,L - --- - --• -,. > eliminate split zoning of 1 ___4. , - , , 1/4 A ri Ilr irentwooa i-I nnkijalld 0 the parcels currently 1 1 "1'1- ,.- , , -Ln- -: - --- designated SFR and NC '-ri i i - -- --xe and zoned R-3 and NC. ./ _ ,,, 4, _ , 2 Inclu.1111 , I 17: II Si — CPA-201 8-0005 . .. ,% .46, „ t F • 37 "- ilm • . . * — -- NI Of* P 4 • a QIVO 4.!* ; F 51 IMP 2 ....., _ ,.,_____ 41, lipi- .m ' J , Q [II I• • . J " 71. /1_,„._ , -. „,.,".... /._ W '+ Y f '• --- N,,At. I — ..weim mi. , 'r— .L.11 — I <IC ,, -A1L _ P� . _ _ Ar,,, .... ", l �l - ` P G • - .a — 1.1'v 1 Mt , .NIK it . ... _ . . ' W. S �F"ir. II a im a PA-2 1 — - - � 0 8 0005 " . _ws. 4 le IL 1111110 a„ "' :- i - ' / 7:. ,:., . i . ... _ ab, 38 r vn Y/ Majority of site is in the - . .. 7 I 4 floodplain N Approximate location I WCLOMR currently under /// F.- review. V _Y Q Easement Q ID500 feet wide A _ ❑ Bonneville Power Admin i ;s, E �i c.� iti ^�s � 4 t 4 � . ❑ Type F stream ,:.� - `. - W I e� �—� ...,,ii„. „... , I-- Located NW corner of � � � �-- H site - iiminii , _ � - t ciuwror - ; r ,. CPA-20 1 8-0005 ___ _/ __ ___.. ..„ _,...s2.„,.2 - - NC S (.'AGGRO . $ , V-- u"+I<Nnisr, q ,,N'S; 9 .. ;Study Area 39 J� 4,4 cis a 40352.0052 4G351.904 x 0 ADDRESS 4 REDRESS W UNKNOWN UNKNOWN 8 toCIL Z a 4, W * .PP i 45354.9123 y OUNKMGWM Y E� r ,, SFR ADDRESS W Z cC Q -- SFR II I- a ills w # . - . . 44r# . : j- „ii!ii .-111,...111, 01114-j ill IV!1#4111, 0 EiU-1 .. WIIIIMIIIIIIII . I 'o) r _ kir. - - 'fig III' opp, . I.A... "..' 1 *Al s iiii , j ,, 1 ,. L. ' 'C CAvnric'hNe. , I I C PA-2 0 1 8-000 5 , ______ ., ,... _.„...2 9. N }�'� Study Area 40 - �r4., ��' - II A 4052.9052 46351.54-0-9 " 0 ADORES 0 AQ9R.ESI UNKNOWN UN MN OWN CL / . Q _____ __ _:_, . * 1, � 4SS5L.:S12F 0DUNK DRESS AD Z SFR —,_..Z = R-3 --1 -.7.1Zzi:E5-c-ci , 1 0 rj..._, ., i „Ili N , maikIIIIIIIIIIII. MiltilliP# , -.i�nrhae. 11.11 ��� tt kr - .7:'C PAm 2 .'. „r 0 8-0005 - 41 1"d:41:1:- ::":I.'ei &g*I.i. I PARCEL CONFIGURATION ` CORRECTING ERROR Y _ . Comprehensive Plan Zoning f = SFR = R_3 r. 1,111m = N C = `' r I, ' 1111 ". p.- . s ..,..r:..,......— .-N- . Am. ______1/4I,1*),i, .h-im' . - - ,A in,:1,....-.Ar--.• mm ktiu. i.r.,.,--,— . i, :i..-..-./-...-... 4#A. ,p..„: e , ..- - _ - Aro .......-\-, = . -1.----.. .....;;-0. -... i 1 4 — ' , F Staff, Agency & Public Comment 42 Staff & Agency Comments Public Comment ❑ CPW ❑ No public comments ❑ Sewer to date 43 City Initiated Map Amendment CPA-201 8-0006 Karen Kendall, Planner C PA-20 1 8_0006 11 41 2 a L r -----=; 1 4 East'...£111£5. ...h.ch. , ----—-- ' --' ii Project High School Site Project CPA-2018-0006 F E E,,ilf.AMSF,, - Number Applicant: City of Spokane Valley „ - . . , ir ;I11 13r ILI Owner: MPR Spokane LLC II rw3 li la v / Frentwood 7- Prim kv. > Proposal: Expand the IMU , 0 _ et —I 1.1.1 designation & zoning to _ , ..„.,.....--- , _____----__ eliminate split zoning of the .- :: 3 _ HL_------ — 0 parcels currently . LE lirdusind Park A'St t designated SFR and IMU rJi ri EL _F Kiprnai,A6.C, -1- L : .::..,..1 loi —e3 r: Elnithairizil Psrk Ei St 79 c7) and zoned R-3 and IMU. 0 4;. r.,.. ,. -5 ..-.• -----. 1 1 .; i Study Area ,7 riIMMilik 4CPA-201 . . - - 04+ .s 45 _ ; L i tproat Q - _ :45015_140D • ' `. r ' 2 , . . . .,..... _ Iutria r Q o , _ ine F a 11111 W ,,az- , ,, < Jima Trent Avenue SSR 290) 1 ) 1 L,_. !.:::1 -1 CPA-2018-0006 11- Rich Ave46 SFR W 47) Om Z a � i wai 45015M ! ckumlZ innu + 1 fi2U5�E a � = SFR � TRENT Nkil 0 i__ _ _____.111..-im, V _ _ __ _ _ —E.=f-ren• . . CPA-2018-0006 1 1 ,� �Il :31:1 . !!=- I 47 I j R-3 ocC , .... 1.-011, irms11 0 45015 .14C , Z = R-3 crow 16205 . E 0 � TRENTA\ N = imu l Staff, Agency & Public Comment 48 Staff & Agency Comments Public Comment ❑ CPW ❑ No public comments ❑ Sewer to date Planning Commission Recommendation 49 MI Approval Required Findings/Other Considerations ❑ CPA-2018-0001 Q Supports public health, safety welfare Li Vote 6- 1 Q Consistent with Comprehensive Plan ❑ CPA-2018-0004 Responds to a change in conditions Vote 7-0 Corrects an error ❑ CPA-2018-0005 Compatible with existing uses and Vote 6-0 neighborhoods ❑ CPA-2018-0006 Q Adequate services Vote 7-0 Q Quantity, Location and Demand for land Planning Commission Recommendation 50 Deny Findings ü CPA-2018-0003 ❑ Does not support public health, safety Vote welfare, or protect the environment Vo e 6_ ❑ Not consistent with Comprehensive Plan Does not respond to change in conditions Not compatible with existing uses or neighborhood Adequate quantity of CMU land in vicinity - No additional demand ATTACHMENT 2 COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING AND PLANNING DIVISION Ar-l"' .ne STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA-2018-0001 STAFF REPORT DATE: February 15, 2018. HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 22, 2018, beginning at 6:00 p.nn., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. Project Number: CPA-2018-0001 Application Description: , Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single-Family Residential (SFR)with a Single-Family Residential Urban District(R-3)zoning classification to a Multifamily Residential (MFR) designation with a Multifamily Residential (MFR)zoning classificatiott. rLocation: Parcel No(s). 45153.2801, 45153 2835,and 451532836; addressed as 12402 East Valleyway Avenue and 124 6 East Valleyway Avenue, located three hundred (300) feet east of the intersection of Valleyway Avenue and Pines Road (SR Ilwy 27), further located in the SW 'A of Section 15, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, J Spokane County, Washington ApplicaudOwnen Robin R&Lori R Petrie, 12416 East ValIeyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 992145-0928 Parcels 45153.2835 and 45153.2836) Owner: Audrey N Green, 12402 East Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216-0063 (Parcel 45153.2801) Date of Application: October 18,2017 Date Determined Complete 3anuaryll,2018 Staff Contact: Micki Harnois, Plannzer, 509 720-5532, mharnois4 a s.okane Salle .+or. APPROVAL CnrruRIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SIAM) General Proviions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SV1vIC Environmental Controls. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Application Exhibit 7: SEPA Checklist Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map Exhibit 8: Environmental Exhibit 3: Aerial Map Determination Exhibit 4: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 9: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 5: Zoning Map Exhibit 10: Agency Comments Exhibit 6; Complete Determination A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is a privately initiated request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from SFR with an R-3 zoning classification to a MFR designation with a MFR zoning classification. Robin and Lori Petrie_are the current property owners of Parcel No(s).45153.2835 and 45153.2836, and Audrey Green is the owner of Parcel No,45153.2801. On Staff Report CPA-2018-0001 August 4, 2015 the site was subject to short plat File# SHP-2015-0007 which received preliminary approval for four lots large enough for duplexes. This occurred prior to the adoption of the revised 2016 development standards. Currently the property is zoned to allow single-family residences including duplexes. The change of zoning from R-3 to MFR would allow for multifamily dwellings and commercial uses such as professional offices and self-service storage facilities. The application meets the procedural criteria. 1. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and The combined, area of all parcels is 2.1 acres. The site is relatively flat Characteristics: with residential landscaping. There are no critical areas in the amendment area or vicinity. Comprehensive Plan: SFR Zoning: R-3 Existing Land Use: Two single-family residences with outbuildings exist on the site. 2. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: North Comprehensive Plan—MFR Zoning—MFR Existing Land Uses—Single-Family residences,Apartments South Comprehensive Plan—SFR and MFR Zoning—R-3 and MFR Existing Land Uses—Single-family residences,Apartments. East Comprehensive Plan—SFR Zoning—R-3 Existing Land Uses—Single-family Residences West Comprehensive Plan—Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Zoning—Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) Existing Land Uses—Professional offices, auto repair, personal services, retail sales, church. 3. APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: 10-10-17 Application Submitted: 10-18-17 Date of Complete Determination: 1-11-18 SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issue date 2-2-18 End of Appeal Period for DNS:Not Appealed 2-16-18 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing 2-7-18 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: 2-2-18 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: 2-6-18 Implications: A rezone of the parcels to MFR would allow a broader range of uses, including multifamily residential, (up to 22 dwelling units per acre), professional offices and self-storage facilities. The land use designation and zoning west of the site on Pines Road(SR Hwy 27)is Corridor Mixed Use which attracts higher intensity commercial uses,the closest which is abutting the site on the west. Additionally a parcel abutting the project site on the south is zoned MFR and is developed Page 2 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2018-0001 with a inultifatnily residential use. A change in designation would allow for development similar to existing uses abutting both south and north. The R-3 zone allows for single-family residential development at an urban density that provides flexibility and promotes reinvestment to existing single-family neighborhoods. The MFR zoning allows For multifamily housing located near business and commercial centers,the arterial street system and public transit. The existing land uses are conforming under the MFR zoning as they are outright permitted, Future development under the MFR zone would allow the construction of multifamily buildings at a maximum height of 5C feet while the R-3 zone limits the building height to 35 feet.The density of 22 dwelling units per acre is allowed in the MFR zone and the density in the R-3 zone is 6 dwelling units per acre.AR other setbacks are the same in each zoning district. The following table provides a comparison of the development requirements for both zones. R-3 and MFR Development standard Comparison Lot Maximums Lot Minimums Minimum Setbacks Zone Building Height Coverage Width DepthFront/Flanking Rear Yard Side Yard Garage Yard 11-3 3S ft. 5[]96 N/A N/A 15 it. 10 ft. 5 ft. 20e MFR` 50 ft, 6DX N/A N/A 15 ft. 10 ft. 5 ft. 2(Y 1 Where MFR abuts R-1, R-2, or R-3 vanes,development shall comply with Transitional Regulatic-ns B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, the lead agency has determined that this proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environtnental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCM/ 43.21C.030 (2) (c). The Building and Planning Division issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal on February 2, 2018. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Titles 19. 2i, and 22 SVMC, a site assessment, public and agency comments. and other information on file with the lend agency. 2. Conclusion(s); The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. C. FINDINGS ANTI) CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE I. Compliance with Title 17 (General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Approval Criteria Page 3 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2018-0001 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 MFR designation allows for multifamily development. Generally this designation is located near business and commercial centers, the arterial street system and public transit. The Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) designation is located along Pines and is intended to serve light manufacturing, retail, multifamily, and office uses along major transportation corridors. These uses presently exist in the vicinity of the amendment area to the west, north and south. The MFR would allow high density residential and office uses consistent with those in the immediate area. Adjacent residential zones would be protected through transitional standards. The amendment area is located within the service boundaries of Spokane County Environmental Services Department and Modern Electric Water Company. Other utilities such as gas, telephone and garbage are to be provided by franchise utility providers in conformance with applicable City standards and requirements. Spokane Valley Fire Department provides fire protection services;Police services are provided by the City of Spokane Valley. All services are available at the time of development. The site has no critical.areas or designated natural resources. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment are promoted by standards established by the state and the City's regulations. (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) adopts thirteen goals to guide the development of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. The request allows opportunity for growth in an area with adequate public facilities, and creates opportunity for a range of residential uses and densities to develop in a neighborhood adjacent to commercial and high density residential uses. The request does not conflict with any other GMA goals. MFR allows for a broader range of allowed uses. MFR is generally located near business and commercial centers, the arterial street system and public transit. The City's Comprehensive Plan requires that residential neighborhoods be protected from incompatible land uses and adverse impacts associated with transportation corridors. Transitional regulations protect single family uses where residential zones abut more intensive zones to mitigate the impacts of higher intensity uses. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not conflict with any portion of the City's adopted Plan not affected by the amendment. (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. The properties on Pines Road located 300 feet west of the site were previously zoned Office (0) which curtailed retail uses. During the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update the Office designation was eliminated and the designation was changed to CMU which expanded the opportunity for a variety of retail and office uses. The proposed three parcels, which are adjacent to the CMU designated parcels, are designated as SFR for single family uses. The MFR would Page 4 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2018-0001 allow for a range of residential uses, including multifamily and single family, office uses consistent with the existing uses. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The amendment does not correct a mapping error. (4) 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. No significant effects upon the physical environment are expected if the property develops consistent with the MFR zone. (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: The height standards in single-family residential and multifamily zoned property vary by fifteen feet from a maximum of 35 feet in single family residential and a maximum of 50 feet in multifamily residential. The table in Section 3 provides a comparison of the development standards for each zone. SVMC Chapter 19.75 Transitional Regulations addresses setbacks where properties of more intensive zoning abut less intensively zoned properties. This would apply to the side yards on the east property line of the two eastern parcels as they would be abutting the R-3 zone (upon approval of the MFR designation of the parcels). These regulations will also apply to uses in the established setbacks in the MFR zone that are associated with multifamily dwelling development. 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. (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 CF-P6 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends that the City ensure that facilities and services meet the minimum Level of Service standards. This is implemented through chapter 22.20 SVMC Concurrency. Page 5 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2018-0001 The City's Senior Traffic Engineer reviewed the proposal and generally found that future development at the maximum density allowed under the R-3 zone would generate 13 pin peak hour trips and 120 daily trips. Future development at the maximum density allowed under the proposed MFR zone would generate, 29 pm peak hour trips and 307 daily trips. Both Pines Road (SR Hwy 27) and Valleyway Avenue have adequate capacity to absorb the increase in traffic. However, south bound turn movements onto Pines during the p.m.peak hour traffic may be impacted. At the time of development a Trip Generation Letter or Traffic Impact Analysis will likely be required and appropriate safety mitigation measures considered to mitigate actual development impacts. No trip generation letter is required at this time. 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. The site has traditionally been residential and the regulations ensure that future development will be compatible with the existing residential uses in the immediate area. The MFR will allow the maximum development of the property compatible with the uses allowed and create greater opportunity for infill development.. Maximizing the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas is consistent with the intent of the MFR designation. A higher density of residential housing proximal to retail areas will support retail uses. (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 15 of the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan, 5.6 percent of the land in the City is designated as Multifamily which is 10 percent of all residential zoned land. Figure 18 shows the residential land capacity for all land uses in 2016. It reflects that there is a net 717 acres for potential multifamily development with a city wide population increase of 6124 persons. The 2.1 acres would have an insignificant effect on the amount of land designated for both SFR and MFR and/or the potential population increase. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and (8) Analysis: The current density within the single family residential urban district(R-3) is six dwelling units per acre. Based on 2.4 persons per household, the projected population density would be 15 persons per acre. If development did occur to meet all development standards in the MFR zone a maximum of 46 residences would be allowed with a projected population density of 53 persons per acre within the amendment area. Currently two single family residences are located on the site. Considering the existing development and the available area for new development, maximum density will not likely be achieved. Directing density to areas near transportation corridors and commercial areas is consistent with the intent of the MFR designation. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The amendment will have no substantive impact on other aspects of the plan since the property will remain residential in use. Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). Page 6 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2018-0001 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings: The Multifamily Residential designation provides for multifamily development. The amendment does not introduce a new designation, nor introduce new uses, into the neighborhood, but reduces the immediate conflict between the corridor mixed use and low density residential uses. Transitional regulations will mitigate impacts between residential zones. The amendment is generally consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. Policy LU-P7 Protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses and adverse impacts associated with transportation corridors. Policy LU-P14 Enable a variety of housing types. Policy LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas. Goal H-GI Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. 3. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: The GMA and the City's Comprehensive Plan require 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. Valleyway Avenue will provide transportation access. As previously stated this road is classified as a local access street according to Map 3.1 of the City's adopted Arterial Street Plan. Spokane Valley Fire Department 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. D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any public comments to date. 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted at this time. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: The following agencies were notified and commented as indicated. Comments are attached. Staff has not received any agency comments of concern to date. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering Yes 1-10-18 City of Spokane Valley Police Department No Page 7 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2018-0001 Spokane Valley Building and Planning No Spokane County Environmental Services Yes 1-26-18 Department Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency No Spokane County Regional Health District No Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Yes 2-6-18 Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) No Spokane Valley Fire Department Yes 1-8-18 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 Washington State Department of Transportation Yes 2-12-18 WA Archaeological &Historic Preservation No Avista Utilities No Central Valley School District#356 No Century Link No Comcast No Modern Electric Water Company No Spokane Tribe of Indians No 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. F. CONCLUSION: For the reasons set forth in Section C (1 and 2) the proposed amendment to change the land use designation from SFR to MFR, and the associated zoning from R-3, to MFR is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H) and with the Comprehensive Plan. Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT 1 Spoka.0,001°`n'e V alley. COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted.-'-.=-.-a b ti, i Received by: W Fee: 1;660 W 4� °� PLUS#: N File#: 09?� Cr — -O 17 OM PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATION ❑ Map Amendment; or ❑ Text Amendment APPLICANT NAME: ND i P E' 4..,., )45-15-3 a 2.835- MAILING ADDRESS: ) 2J--I 1 aC3 F Va E`.Q >/ wet)/ CITY: 6/14 f�..�X I O " 1 STATE:W ! ZIP: 9Tzj .(>j t i ti RJ" sj�i-�l - • PHONE: 1`l CELL: EMAIL: / LA II' ., Q PROPERTY OWNER: ftujra)f N NQ. 1.4.5"15 - t MAILING ADDRESS: I 1 q-en— �`1 Ot1IT CITY: S k)dry_`\rQ, ��:C i STAZIP: Qct z I v PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: SITE ADDRESS: 1 -etI(;) 1^ \AXIL2 x PARCEL No.: '53 - .�.,t. �j COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: GM/Develoornent Enda eririg PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: OCT 1 9 2017 ZONING DESIGNATION: 12 3 Pt^!rr 1 .: _ _T PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: in. t dams __.".._ _.. ju y1{r ai ht BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper : ©_t_gxj'` 'e__ ...-0:)(71. ---‘1311--- i- PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of Spokane Valley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) I, li '`, �O , (print name) swear qg affirm that the above res onses are Y.� . made truthfully an to th best of my knowledge. 1 - (-ca.1 i� A15 ,(L/ �t ��� (S nature) (Dat-) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) >1, SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this / t<7 day of deAr9 ,2029 NOTARY SEAL .-/A4AA._ c ier+10te.-di'll Q NO/44 CHRISTINE M.BAINBRIDGE i Notary Public in and for the State of Washington NOTARY PUBLIC ' STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES ; Residing at /,‘,64,�ji , AUGUST 29,2019 ' /4� ( My appointmentexpires: - - 11/7-1 LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s),the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, ft A r-Q y G NQ.'e -,owner of the above described property do hereby authorize to re resent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. ( 1151. 3 `ZED I WuNk, t\ ke_e_T-1 -D1 0 - I 17 PL-06 V1.0 Page 5 of Spokane Valley. COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: b li, Received by: 12 l '• Fee: p 660 (.b `` t1 '- PLUS#: 1\C1r�c' File#: I�'.,P�c— 000 PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATION 0 Map Amendment; or ❑Text Amendment Pate-e--1 At5i5-a,2.636 APPLICANT NAME: Raab e P 6-!� 1.15./53 MAILING ADDRESS: I -'4! F lky ova CITY: 6;11 0 � STATE'W ZIP: ,.,t PHONE:551 1"1 -7.1;16 CELL: IL)r :�F 991 ' •paiftl(att PROPERTY OWNER: ft1ir )f Nel G- .1445-75NQ ' c -2E0 t MAILING ADDRESS: f C, tiG-, �2_ E \ct t CITY: �.,Jp �����Q, ,'� �7J.� STATE: � ZIP: � PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: 121-1�j g Vat-[4(six.-61 PARCEL No.:SITE ADDRESS: /45-163 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: `GSV[ieve1oornenii ErmineerirIg PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: OCT 19 2017 ZONING DESIGNATION: 3 in (tea' Nam PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of papery: ku PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of Spokane _fir Valley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) I, Roblif,_, P iO , (print name) swear affirm that the above res o ses are made truthfully anis to th best of my knowledge. ��� Lis" 5-3, j 3�j .q5(� ,Z /0 / /S ? (S na ure) (Dat O NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: A COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) /"<" delir-je< SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of ,207 NOTARY SEAL , n l€ gia--st,All _. - NOTARY SIGNATURE CHRISTINE M.BAINBRIDGE.; Notary Public in and for the State of Washington NOTARY PUBLIC , • STATE OF WASHINGTON #: � ��, COMMISSION EXPIRES ; Residing at: ,.._4 .JlAhJ L�i�-' z 4 • AUGUST 29,2019 J 3( My appointmentexpires: ? ' l 9411 LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If theapplicant is not the //legal owner(s),the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; ' I, V Q.y owner of the above described property do hereby authorize 14bik, to re resent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. e _1 1-16.-153 281)1 1i) c• -•;(Nk, AIAA-R-v-y Q(kee''j -Do l o - ) 1-t 1'7 PL-06 V1.0 Page 5 of S���ors SEPA CHECKLIST pok, ne SVMC 21.20 Iley. 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 • Fax:(509)720-5075 • permitcenter aspokanevallev.org STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: Received by: Fee: PLUS#: File#: PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL *"THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED"* 0 Completed SEPA Checklist ❑ Application Fee Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81/2" by 11"or 11" by 17"size ;s• Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHFCKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement(EIS)must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS.Answer the questions briefly,with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write"do not know"or"does not apply."Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems,the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered"does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D). PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of S""Okane SEPA CHECKLIST A Eley, For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant,"and "property or site"should be read as "proposal,""proposer," and"affected geographic area," respectively. • A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable 10 2. Name of applicant: R45bty., pe3f rt 3. Address and phone fly m r of qpplsicant and conta t person• gel 2..tc 5-6q - 2 � Rob . R ct l 4. Date checklist prepared: /6 IIC 5. Agency nnrequesting checklist: lv 6. Proposed timing or schedule(including phasing, if applicable): lk 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connec ed with this proposal? If yes, explain. Ap+-, 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be preparedirectly related to this proposal. /11 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. I1V6 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. IV FI 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) ru PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley, 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 1Q:CJ:" V4.1 WCty a5i- -•-• itszs 1/41) 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? (06 The general Sewer Service Area? Teas Priority Sewer Service Area? (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area(CARA)/Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of(including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? MO 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? IV PL-22 V1.0 Page 3 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? DoI1 + f i\oLJ 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts. �O B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1) Earth a. General description of the site(check one): I( .flat, ❑ rolling, ❑ hilly, ❑ steep slopes, ❑ mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site(approximate percent slope)? �0 c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. 9....NckLy..1 d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose,type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. NR f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. 0 g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? bQ_ d + t u„fork-. PL-22 V1.0 b LL. kk` P' -L± Page 4 of • G''pQe "� SEPA CHECKLIST .000Valley. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2) Air EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. ru b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. tOo c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: y ' Pi- 3) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. n 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Iv pc 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley, EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. .p1(.. f� 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. "JO b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 0 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. J c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where • will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. cdtpon) 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. itio d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: I v PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of Spornvakane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley EVALUATION FOR 4) Plants AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder ,map , aspen, for evergreen tree: f6, , pine, other 0 shrubs 51-grass ❑ pasture ❑crop or grain ❑ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulirush, skunk cabbage, other ❑water plants:water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ❑ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? N �1 c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. A) d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegptatioq on the site, f any: b - — �r1& p'— bCiu U1447 5) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: "N birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: 0 mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ❑fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so,explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: IV PL-22 V1.0 Il et Page 7 of g" kane SEPA CHECKLIST Malley. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 6). Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it, will be used for heatin , manufacturing,qtc. b . tiA P aPI-- b& l'owl b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. 30 c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control k energy impacts, if any: �� ��cv�-tl� - Lklos ate— b cc., 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe nn i1ti 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: rU b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:traffic, equipment, operation, other)? try 1 ' 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. ft..) 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Nrt PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST .00100Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 8). Land and shoreline use a. What ig the current use of the site and adjacent propertie ? 1. k .aPL1 / O c jc�c€`± 11 i'AQS b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so,describe. M c. Describe any structures on the site. f d. Will any structures be demolished? If so,what? e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R.-3 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? A It g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? R h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? �� If so, specify. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? t t j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: k) I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: PL-22 V1.0 I I j Page 9 of Sppok�`" ane SEPA CHECKLIST s M 1leyY EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or lowdeiiu me housing. Q�� .. 40 be, l`'� - 1,t. b. Approximately how many units, if any,would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 1 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: 10 "It 10). Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what isthe principal exterior building material(s) (� ��--, proposed? C7 be_ c\ �`t'�r fca�i t J b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? A ti c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: IVgg"� 1 11). Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? ULitf k b3 c a e II^KA-1 f30a. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? views? 'V ft- c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? ii4 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 14 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST alley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediatevicinity? b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,describe.'nn �� Iv A- c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: ito 1 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. 00 b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to thesite. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. 11.01CLA b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stgp? X10 -ZOO "W c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the prof ct eli inate? cAeLAN,26'`nevAlk-Q-6\ ofo PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Val leY d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe(indicate whether public or private). EVALUATION FOR flet ,gyp`. AGENCY USE ONLY e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation?7If so, generally describe. 11 6- f. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, Rienerally desae,--6kirNAAAtvaacribe. '.+0 b a4 O vk. t f c- fir' 1 b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. a u. 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: electricity, IX natural gas, [water, E5 refuse service, [ telephone, � sanitary sewer, ❑ septic system, ❑ other-describe b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. to -Pt C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: pcs„--7(frx.,02„, 101 1 (17 PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of �►,�► SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley Date Submitted: D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, orrelleease of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Inv) a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals,fish, or marine life? IU a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals,fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? i a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST .00 Valley' a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? r V ` a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. tro >T` E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon this check list. Date: (b [16 (7 Signature: P \\ 'fS Please print or type: • Proponent: 11/1_ Address: 124416 E. OL11-Q--xtuay -Wk-��.G'�jUC�.RQ-Yi °jig- � Phone: 50Q • CCC ( " Z675 R -C Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Address: Phone: PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of DISCLAIMER:This schedule is informational ���.*_�T only. Actual decision-making timeframes Spokane may vary for each application. Valley. Planning Division COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT SCHEDULE Pre-Application Meeting 1 (Required) d i C 1 OW �1 Yom✓ Formal Application Submittal Ij .i COMPLETE Completeness ` Application and SEPA Checklist is Determination routed to staff and agencies for review. I INCOMPLETE I Complete Applicant notified 4 SEPA Decision(Post and Publish with a 14 of an incomplete calendar day comment&appeal period) application. 4 Incomplete Notice of Public Hearing publishes in the Valley Herald,City's website Review and sent to staff,agencies and parties of record. If a map amendment resubmittal and is proposed the site is posted with a sign and property owners within deem complete. 400 feet are notified by mail. (15 day comment period) 1 Study Session(informational item)with Planning Commission 1 _ ��)( `l'NS Public Hearing with Planning Commissionk) k, R,eitYA 044- ?Ci L lip. -Stattp-Sessian(informational it m)with City Council 1 . lit reading of Ordinance with City Council 1 2"d reading and decision of Ordinance with City Council i Ordinance signed and published in newspaper. Ordinance is effective 5 calendar days after publication. FL-04 V1.0 . Page 1 of 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SIII AMENDMENT APPLICATION galley' svMc 17.80.140 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 ♦Fax:(509)720-5075 ♦permitcenterc.spokanevallev.org Year ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS . The City of Spokane Valley is accepting applications for map and text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) allows Comprehensive Plan amendments only one time per year. Any interested person, organization, agency or business may submit suggestions, proposals, or requests to the City for changes to the Comprehensive Plan, including maps and text. PROCEDURES 1. Application Period.Applications are due by November 1stofeach year to be considered during the next calendar year amendment cycle. Submittals received after the deadline will be considered during the next annual amendment cycle. 2. Staff Review and Report. Spokane Valley Planning Staff will review all applications and will prepare a report and recommendation to the Spokane Valley Planning Commission. The report will analyze how each proposal addresses amendment criteria established by Spokane Valley City Council. All application documents and staff reports will be available for public review. 3. Planning Commission Public Hearing.The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct a formal public hearing on all proposed amendments. The Commission will consider amendments individually and will examine the cumulative impacts of all amendments collectively. The Commission will prepare one recommendation to the Spokane Valley City Council, including findings on each individual proposed amendment. 4. City Council Review and Decision. Within 60 days of receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, City Council may choose to adopt the individual amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission, disapprove the amendments, or modify and adopt 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. 5. Notice. Each year, the City will provide notice of the annual amendment cycle at least 60 days prior to the application deadline via display ads in local newspapers, email to interested parties and on the City's website. Notice of public hearings and public meetings will be provided to the public as set forth in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. At a minimum, notice will be provided to surrounding properties within 400' for site-specific Land Use Map amendments at least 14 days prior to any public hearing. Notice will also be posted on-site at least 14 days prior to any public hearing. Legal notice will also be published in the newspaper. 6. Appeal Procedures. City Council decisions on Comprehensive Plan amendments may be appealed to the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board within 60 days of publication of notice of adoption,in accordance with RCW 36.70A.290(2). 7. Staff Contact. Questions may be directed to Lori Barlow, Senior Planner (Ibarlow(cr�spokanevallev.orq) or Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager (skuhta(c�spokanevallev.orq), 509-921-1000. PL-06 V1.0 Page 1 of 4 Spoka`ne Ysilley. COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL "THE PLANNING DIVISION WILL NOT ACCEPT YOUR APPLICATION IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** A. 'Submit the following forMAP AMENDMENTS: et -re-Application Meeting Request(include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) $$. Completed Application Form .1011/Application and SEPA Fee I(/ SEPA Checklist: One(1)copy of completed State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental Checklist, including option Non-Project Action supplemental form. (Note:Any previous environmental documents that are relevant to this project should be included and may 1be adopted by reference.) 1. . Notice of Public Hearing packet for 400-foot notification. (Please note:DO NOT submit the �" notice of public hearing packet until you have been contacted by the City.Addresses must be current within 30 days of the Planning Commission public hearing.) D One(1)copy of a narrative describing the following: 1. State the reason for the Comprehensive plan Map Amendment. 2. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; c. 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; d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error;and e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Describe how the proposal addresses the following specific factors; a. The effect upon the physical environment; b. The effect on open space, streams,rivers,and lakes; c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks,recreation and schools; e. The benefit to the neighborhood,city and region; f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density. and the demand for such land; g. The current and projected population density in the area;and h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. SSubmit the following for TEXT AMENDMENTS: ❑ Pre-Application Meeting Request(include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) ❑ Completed Application Form ❑ One(1)copy of the text proposed to be changed,showing deletions by strikethrough and additions by underline. ❑ One(1)copy of a narrative describing the following: 1. Why the change is needed and the potential land use impacts if approved; 1. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; c. 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; d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error;and PL-06 V1.0 Page 2 of • Spokane APPLICANT ADVISORY Valley a WATER CONCURRENCY Public water in Spokane Valley is provided by water districts or irrigation districts. . These entities are not related to the City. Any statement by the City of Spokane Valley relating to water concurrency will be based exclusively on information provided by the water purveyor for a given area as the .. owner/operator of the water facility. Spokane Valley has not performed any independent analysis as to the existence or non-existence of water capacity, and specifically makes no representations as to the accuracy of the water capacity information provided by any water purveyor. Therefore, applicants for development approvals' should carefully consider the adequacy of water availability at an early stage of planning developments in the City of Spokane Valley. Please read, sign and date on the bottom of this page. If you have any questions, call John Hohman, Community Development Director, at(509)720-5300. Please return one(1) signed copy to the City Planning Department. The City of Spokane Valley November 21,2005 Distribution: applicants, public, news media By siznink this document, you are only acknowledgine that you received a copy of this document. faik-"-----11%- t-^ /43 . Signature that document was received Date • Project File Number/Name � I.a ar.a.::`..i. �!.+PE..N F !k.`X :u.. �Gr. r i I I' I I !i!I :� l! 4xuu da 1 1igxuwd : 1 rxi.1a ,, ID ob �iyi ,A. r � �1i 0qqW µ d .Ii31i 1yP X 4ul + I f 'B or+ �' , M4i � S !d{ i u �ryx � tl * it � r , '. il� i4jr..."114i.;4111140111014 � iNiaXi ui b °,Rti1' '0 �X ,s pr�4 . A1 iligl i pallr : uX sgi4 !iI� ulLB Mx4g!I4Si kX i i i IMxa e �5X�a aiJMt M�I iX Xu + � li 1:10.j&::'4,40,',11.OP "41 i x !�'tig tiX &a tu 05 .iqii i iivui �I ��rIi!i . �.4 M4 §inW� ;. i,uflipM�afiJ1: fxaP u,4', odw ipipB : IM.p oirlil lqx !Y4fi�i 1� u�X'�+1.$ ! � iu � +NGhSi .,ftai %:;04.01:, " ,#P .1 Xry r:whZv rg9 i1u ii !vi : i vb ,iew,u1ii wyraY „))ir*dring.:'ilaN 1 , i i.f„1Y11TL+. k� � A lfi har iM 'uxi x .Wi 7h ii u *� i .raiLa ui'i I d. 3ua �!�aF u r1 r;y im,1, :l'.i„i:C ,I , ff, i '. ploIN 4i:EW1XrJ llJd6, ''g+ „ r sl°r'7 w ! :0.'...1;11:i.,; Ath1 �,1 Ii. Bu •?.� i " a k , Vi�i4k.�d roam,„..171411., , � h T4 wgt ,,r (I fs . ' h. . E . tix1 ,!::',.:-., tI Tiu. q.:u e.,, r i ? hY Nmonu �1'M :''red � 9T� l':1 1.f:6Lia" �Li� i�� � likr h lirFu 1 Iiii4f�r4 rIri„� r� Xl3 k, !i .:..,' n +Ii, ,x 1i fi” 'I : 11,w m '•r 'i ,fl; ry y4litr( ,,,irrr ' �' u� Flpf, uX� Y • 6rf/!Gh : iR1k kdW���„„ r�yy !IV ',,r.6qlnl4Xvtqr[ k ' PM n. a 'I§ N n � i 6t.aru , In �k�J • ?•' aiu „ :".;.:'!?:::1!:X��i i ! 0, p rv' fi � o ° I,!IR5'PA i4y' 1 rLu I �pF:.! .vv � Cyp Al qd,'..10041,%..0 a ' u qnnF!rd� f1 A 1w fa00.. d. !..0,,: , fL,61 .r „ q.. iyu 4 q.a i4i ,,,,kzr Iiry arroah : ''rVhT .!!� i 14 iirla. :1:: r n Ia i� d( I y I i 9gk �C)KxF. 9�* ai 1T .At n mXli� f .0;..., u.i rTui aS1 ti 41,11: 1 "Development approvals” include subdivisions,short plats, binding site plans,manufactured home park site development plans, planned unit developments, zoning reclassifications, and conditional use permits that would permit an increased amount of water to be used on the site. PL-26 V1.0 Page 1 of 1 The property, currently zoned R3, is bordered on the south by MFR zoning, across the street on the north is MFR zoning, west is commercial and east is zoned R3. The property is on Valley Way just east of Pines road, so it has great access to the freeway and other main roads, (Sprague, McDonald). There is a local gas station/ convenience store across Pines. A car wash, restaurants (Denney's, Little Euro, Taco Time, Ron's, etc.) within walking distance. There are other drive to restaurants in the area and grocery stores. Gyms, hair salons, nail places also. Auto repair/tire shops on Pines. There isa chiropractor and dentist within walking distance. The valley hospital is in a short driving distance up Pines. A school is just up the road on Broadway for families with children. There is shopping on Sprague and Pines (Walgreens). The city bus stop is at the corner of Pines and Valley Way. There are banking building in the area, also. The property has easy access to a lot of business and transportation, which should bring in tax revenue to the city. The increase in traffic will be minimal, as your traffic person has told me. The change will buffer the property to the east from the commercial property on the west corner. EXHIBIT 2 (..;1-A-Z U 1 d-uuul vicinity iviap ------- - - -e.,-- r- 7_. _ = • _, . — . !E meniganokei fkihe -ri -10- = €I ndimDa AIN '' Ihvion ,...--- SO rwy- '..ENG, SpLi,I4 CY,E•7- - P ' - Valltpir hklIl •• .-- 4 11 E Vise-A.3n A.i•- • r.; ._.;..i, •''...-- ---.__________ IF, 141. 1 'T.: 3ige 2 CC .....4., - EntoA - _ a -,'1 7 - -ee Ak- - =— ESihupPer, 4, Z CZ M a. c 2. '= d• 7. Z 6.1 Z . 3 CC Z Z = X = .. 6 .= 1:-. 'S. S E c 0 atai do Ag 4 IA_ a; E de 0 . . •• 0 -a ,17-' V4 Ce ,*. 00 In —I V: WI Z ce 2 a • -.. _, di 2 2 = ..., +.4. ...•-'.',,-.'. t.-, 4 k 0 a , E 6r6.-Klai'ay Ace:, L,.."... • -,,, Z 1=1 .e,. a Z 2 4 r2....1• ..,... E.Ali - 4ii4;F 3 tz at mi re E Ogi4 vc it,M, Z .' I- = T1 m c E Vll cr IL- aagewor.AV 0 -iti 12 X E IIII E u. = z V o cc c z E Nixon Ln cc :' .f.LEIr.l.lio-hr la s qf C G = Spokane ca Ji sli ma 1 Valley z z 5.r.'.:"Vt- ..',. . Espiatia.A.0 E 1stAve -a- c E Nd Ave E Appletiayrea, agi 7. 1,0 E 2pil La. er V- 0 .i - ElidAve .. a ca '.=... _v. - .- 1 ... .1.4 e• E 4th 4- Fa .... •Iii-0-1. -.., a . - ,.., cc - AP 41. -2 174 E Eth•Ct la ' • .0 tr. a ..r.- a -a a F. , EC r..; -• ./.. .- -, w• 17 E 1.4.Ave '4 7. a, :'-''' .- L rith Lr F5 CU i-Z = 'A IL .7 Le 60 :- = IC.14 U, - .C X tr -c, a' • " ..• ._ lc ce , ;EN.111 Av 4 2 EIC't E- - --; •,,,-,,= = .., ... ElittLn E 11 ili Ave.:: 0 1 P I .1. .. - .0 .31 0 a ,142 •og % :El 211•04,* ,.. 1 2. - •1 • Febn,ary 14, 2018 1:36,112 0 0.3 0.6 t2 1-11-1.1-1 -19-6.!--r- 0 0.,5 1 2 Sources:Esri,HERE,lacttrrn ilia-nap,inEt P cap_GEE FAC PPS. NRGAN. CikKtrOUT. *R. I<Odtr,t 611-, 011narr-E" : Japan., METI, Esri China (1-brig IC.01n), 5.49550:11m. MEI:i OpenStreardap elSreltutors,End el e GIS Lr G4ITIITIVritY VI.1215 AXIBUit EXHIBiT 3 '— ". P ''.*jr ' - ' '1 4'i ' ?' ' ':* '- I. r .Lik+i e: 1X,47. 1 ., • .:' 7 .' - ;, p ' , , _ _ _ ,, - . ) 5' ".. .•••Cio,•; r42.... 1 ' r -.. .. "w":,;Ic,,. .: .` Study Are _ _ _ \ . _ ......0.,r. , ,-._ -s y. ti , ._s-71.- Jnr , `..... 5 II x: '5 3 '8. • 1, 124 6I ti ,„, _ , .. .. ale, : ,'' zu,kiLaArawaqi i &is6941 -; ' 'L 'ill© et.a ,-c; . ,:CF° LL A'AVE — 45153.283'1F416g .jf _ A �r� I hr ,4 . MI 3 III 3 441 IL i ..t- LII l 018-•01001 7 Rc ucst: ��''`x` Petro, Rabin & Lori! �� I Owner: green, Audrey Citizen initiated proposal to change the ValleyI Carr�pre�aerrsrtarr map from SFR to MFR; Parcel#: 5�e +Pap subsequent Rezone_ i-on R-3 to A4FR Address: See Map - I EXHIBIT 4 Comprehensive Plan Map •Hmoi, turfy Area 45153.2836 12416 E VALLEYWAY AVE 451 53.2$411 12442 E VALLEYWAY AVE 45153.2835 12418 E VALLEYWAY AVE 11/1 CPA-2018-0001 Request: `'�"""' Owner Petrie, Robin& Lord ►J ` Career, Audrey Citizen initiated proposal to change the I dowses* Valley Parcel#; See Neap Comprehensive.Plan map from SFRto MFR, Address. See Map subsequent Rezone from R-3 to MFR EXHIBIT 5 Zoning Map : All 1 Study Area r." 45163.2636 12416E VALLEYWAY AVE 45153.2801 12402 E VALLEYWAY AVE 45153.2636 12416 E VALLEYWAY AVE 1.111 ' /Mr CPA-2018-0001 Request. Sfo'icane Tne: Pefrie, R�Qbirr & Leri Citizen initialed proposal to change the �� re r�, Audrey Comprehensive P!an n?ap from SFR erg MFR; 1 400001° ; ' oMua,�ds: See milli subsequent Rezone frorn R-3 to MFR EXHIBIT 6 COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCITY OF BUILDING&PLANNING DIVISION poCIF Va11ey- DETERMINATION:OF COMPLETENESS REVIEW 10210 E Sprague Ave Suite 106+Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5240♦Fax:509.720:5375 O:planning@spokanevalley.org Project Number: CPA-2018-0001 Application Description: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the land use designation from Single Family Residential (SFR)to Multifamily Residential (MFR) and the zoning from Single-family Residential Urban (R-3)to Multifamily Residential (MFR). Location: Parcel No(s). 45153.2801, 45153.2835 and 45153.2836; addressed as 12402 East Valleyway Avenue and 12416 East Valleyway Avenue; located approximately three hundred (300)feet east of the intersection of Pines Road (SR Hwy 27) and Valleyway Avenue, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 15, Township 25 North,Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Property Owner(s): Robin R&Lori A Petrie, 12416 East Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Audrey N Green,P 0 Box 14063, Spokane Valley, WA 99214-0063 Applicant: Robin Petrie, 12416 East Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Date of Application: October 18, 2017 Date of Complete Determination: January 5, 2018 Staff Contact: Micki Harnois, Planner (509)720-5332 mharnois@spokanevalley.org Date Issued: January 5, 2018 Signature: /3 6 0 4 (24,* YOUR APPLICATION IS: Complete The required components of the application are present. The materials provided thus far are judged by the Building&Planning Division to meet the procedural submission requirements and the information is sufficient for continued processing even though additional information may be required or project modification may be undertaken subsequently. The Determination of Completeness does not preclude the Building&Planning Division from requesting additional information or studies either with this notice or subsequently if new information is required or substantial changes in the proposed action occur. The issuance of the Determination of Completeness shall not be constructed to mean that any of its application components have been approved. EXHIBIT 7 i-Ncin or. SEPA CHECKLIST ane SVMC 21.20 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 ♦ Fax: (509)720-5075 ♦ permitcenterrspokanevalley.oru, STAFF USE ONLY y Date Submitted: /01/ fit/7 Received by: /1'1 Fee: �- ' • t ' -- C)OO/ PLUS#: File#: C�>°� c '�c0/ PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL **THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED'`* ❑ Completed SEPA Checklist ❑ Application Fee Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81/2" by 11" or 11" by 17" size Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement(EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS.Answer the questions briefly,with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write"do not know"or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered"does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D). PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of Sf (1i e ' " SEPA CHECKLIST Valley For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable II 2. Name of applicant: Rk?13 Pas 3. Address and phone Nmpeof cant and conta t person; ciq I E VIa� ypplia ; 5poi` 'lel .11 , �b 4. Date checklist prepared: /0 /16 /r) 5. Agency requesting checklist: 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. �e.. a. Fp 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. 11)6 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) r • PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of Spoxane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley} 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise . -1 location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and S< range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or Gi boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. X104'. Vciz kojy 11)6t1 o)—• 0.S 40 ,,s, a-511 tt� y V11g�Wci 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? J) The general 1 9 Sewer Service Area? y42,5 Priority Sewer Service Area? (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) /Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of(including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). 11) 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? IOC) 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. Pt- 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? iv A PL-22 V1.0 Page 3 of A ° i Oka.ne SEPA CHECKLIST Valley. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Doig - 141\0W- 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts. 100 . ENVIRONMENTALELEMENTS EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1) Earth a. General description of the site(check one): T .flat, ❑ rolling, ❑ hilly, ❑ steep slopes, ❑ mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slog 9n the site(approximate percent slope)? c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. fU 1"t f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. M0 g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? +o b42._ dQ+ b .ti lÀIL1+ PL-22 V1.0 ( Page 4 of SpMkane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: tu A. 2) Air EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate)quantities if known. ekI � b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. too c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: ru 3) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the Li^,,C site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, �,k)� LOs- � � ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If V6LL-'" appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. e,Y- 1100 LILL' 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. to 0 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Iv 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. r0 6 PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of Spokane � SEPA CHECKLIST Valley. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 5) Does the proposal He within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. 66�� 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. rO O 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. 1 Pt c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. I , 14-3 pdavvq-v 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. tuo d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: IV -A- PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of �:. ,� SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley. EVALUATION FOR 4) Plants AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: 14 deciduous tree: aldermap , aspen, tly r evergreen tree:l , eda , pine, other ❑ shrubs -grass ❑ pasture ❑ crop or grain ❑ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulirush, skunk cabbage, other ❑ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ❑ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? itk c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. A) d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegptatiori on the site,,if any: bQ er 1 bcu 5) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: `[ birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ❑ mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ❑ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site partnrtof a migration route? If so, explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: PL-22 V1.0 ft) Page 7 of Spokane z. SEPA CHECKLIST Valley,. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 6). Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heatin , manufacturing,qtc. r- 6-Vev\ ift&trwec.3, (--tfciti b cc lc\ b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. 1U0 c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: •_ b AQ C tKA - 9or bc-ct (al 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe VPc 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. IV i 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: ru �q b. Noise r 1 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Ai 11 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. N ri 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: l'Uft PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 8). Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent propertie ? k \T vL actjaceri± H P AQS b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Suivt c. Describe any structures on the site. .0;-•3 it) PC d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? 0-1 ro e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? • f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? � I5� g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? tru pt h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? n �� If so, specify. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? p j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: PL-22 V1.0 (i) Page 9 of Spok""o`" ane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-inc me housing. b ct€r--K '"'t/ bc b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 1 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: 10 ft 10). Aesthetics ' a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including 56 --k ' antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) -9(ti voiJ proposed? wor --ho be A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: IV � 11). Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? a '.,ty S e v t �� Ct'� Eck-A- b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with��views? tV c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: V\ PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 14 Sjpane SEPA CHECKLIST ►J F lei EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediatevicinlx? b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Iv Pr- c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Yu f 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next tothe site? If so, generally describe. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to thesite. P c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: it) P y 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe N`��w proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. ak -^t 4 ri I%QS .)- 01(31-A L/\'‘ij150 b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stqp? N30 O c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? , so\k3.4.0.1 How many would the prof cteli inate? 6. K.Q-ck 40(056"(-t. PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of '` ' �~ SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? R„ If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposedppiimeasures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally descr . Q dkd 'uu' Q& UL poet ick_.( [01,1a9( b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. ij j rt 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: electricity, [A}, natural gas, lYjwater, [A. refuse service, `a telephone, L.sanitary sewer, ❑ septic system, ❑ other- describe b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. N3 ft C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: •' /0 1 16 (17 PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of **(Wane } SEPA CHECKLIST Valley Date Submitted: D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage,nnor��release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How wouldq the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals,fish, or marine life? Iv A a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? nn Iv �l a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, orprimefarmlands? IU6` 1 a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of p"la`*kane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley- a. lleya. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? y a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon this check list. Date: b ff6 Signature: Please print or type: Proponent: P6 2 tc vr� (Lay, DJA Address: � � � E �,�i � Phone: 5-0Q ' ctq ( Z675 Person completing form(if different from proponent): Name: Address: Phone: PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of EXHIBIT COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT seiTyminnine PLANNING DIVISION punact DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Valley' 10210 E Sprague Ave•Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.726.5240 Fax 509 720 5075•planning@spokanevalley,org FILE NUMBER: CPA-2018-0001 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the land use designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multifamily Residential (MFR) and the zoning from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) to Multifamily Residential (MFR). PROPOSAL LOCATION: Parcel No(S). 45153.2801,45153.2835 and 45153.2836; addressed as 12402 East Valleyway Avenue and 12416 East Valleyway Avenue; located approximately three hundred(300) feet east of the intersection of Pines Road (SR Hwy 27) and Valleyway Avenue,further located in the SW '/ of Section 15,Township 25 North,Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington APPLICANT: Robin Petrie, 12416 East Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 PROPERTY OWNER(S): Robin R&Lori A Petrie, 12416 East Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Audrey N Green,P 0 Box 14063, Spokane Valley, WA 99214-0063 LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley, Community&Public Works Department Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, 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). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Spokane Valley Municipal Code Titles 19, 21 and 22, site assessment, and comments from the public and affected agencies. This information is available to the public on request. DETERMINATION: This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on his proposal for 14 days from the date below. STAFF CONTACT: Micki Harnois, Planner, (509)720-5332,mharnois@spokanevalley.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner, A ,,\\1 DATE ISSUED: February2, 2018 SIGNATURE: A , APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community&Public Works Department within fourteen(14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and make specific factual objections to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Scheduled shall be paid at time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of 1 File No.CPA-2018-0001 COMMUNITY ITY & PUBLIC '1 ORS S D1 FAtRTME T' niti rn BUILDING &PLANNING DIVISION Milky LEAD AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW 10210 E Sprague Ave• Spokane Valley WA 99206 _509.720.5240 • Fax: 509.724.5075 •p ningCcr spckanevalley,org DATE: February 2, 2018 Prepared By: Micki Harnois, Planner A. BACKGROUND - Project Number: CFA-2018-0001 _ Description: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single- family Residential Urban.District(R-3)zoning classification to Multifamily Residential (MFR) designation with a Multifamily Residential (MFR) zoning classification. Location: Parcel No(s).45153.2801,45153.2835 and 45153.2836; addressed as 12442 East Valleyway Avenue and 12416 East Valleyway Avenue; located approximately three hundred(300)feet east of the itttersection of fines Road (SR Hwy 27) and Valleyway Avenue, further located in the SW 'l of Section 15, "Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Applicant: Robin Petrie, 12416 Fast Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Property Owner(s): Robin R&Lori A Petrie, 12416 East Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Audrey N Green, F 0 Box I4063 okanc Valley, WA 99214-0063 REVIEW OF SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS OF SECTION 14 OF PART A (BACKGROUND) FOR CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA(CARA)/AQUIFER SENSITIVE AREA(ASA) The entire City of Spokane Valley lies in the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area(CARA). The proposed site- specific comprehensive plan map amendment will not lead to any impacts to the aquifer. No concerns noted. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1.EARTH The SEPA Checklist states the site's topography is flat with approximately one percent slope. Soils include gravely valley soils. The percent of the site which will be covered with impervious surfaces will be determined during the building permit process after future construction. No concerns noted.. 2.AIR This is a non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and Spokane Regional Clean Air Authority requirements to minimize air impacts. No concerns noted. Lead Agency Environmental Checklist Review February 2, 2.018 CPA-2018-0001 Page 1 a3 3.WATER Surface The SEPA Checklist states that the site is not located near a surface water body nor will there be any discharge to a surface water body. The property is not located within a 100-year floodplain pursuant to Panel No. 53063C0590D of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) [Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 6, 2010). No concerns noted. Ground The Checklist states no groundwater will be withdrawn or discharged. No concerns noted. Water Runoff The Checklist states that stormwater will be addressed at the time of building permit review. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Regional Stormwater Manual. No concerns noted. 4.PLANTS The Checklist states current vegetation consists of deciduous trees including maple, evergreen trees including fir and cedar and grass. No concerns noted. 5.ANIMALS The Checklist states birds have been observed on the site. No concerns noted. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES Staff notes the proposal is a non-project map amendment and utility approvals will be required at the time of building permit review. No concerns noted. 7A.ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARDS The proposal is a non-project map amendment. No health hazards are identified.No concerns noted. 7B.NOISE Staff notes traffic noise in the vicinity is from surrounding commercial and residential uses and Pines , Road (SR Hwy 27) located approximately three hundred (300) feet west of the proposed amendment. No concerns noted. S. SHORELINE AND LAND USES Staff notes that the two single family structures and outbuildings on the properties will remain. Uses adjacent to the properties include single family residential use to the east, professional offices, auto repair, personal and retail services and a church exist west of the site between the property and Pines Road (SR Hwy 27), single family use and apartments are located north and south of the subject property. The proposed amendment would change the designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) zoning classification to a Multifamily Residential (MFR) designation with a Multifamily Residential (MFR) zoning classification. No concerns noted. 9. HOUSING This is a non-project map amendment. The two existing housing units will remain. No concerns noted. 10.AESTHETICS The proposal does not affect any existing structures or views. Building height limits would be increased from 35' up to 50'.No concerns noted. Lead Agency Environmental Checklist Review February 2,2018 CPA-2018-0001 Page 2 of 3 11.LIGHT AND GLARE This is a non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. No concerns noted. 12.RECREATION There are no recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity. No concerns noted. 13. CULTURAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION The SEPA Checklist states that it is unknown at this time. No concerns noted. 14.TRANSPORTATION This is a non-project map amendment. The site fronts Valleyway Avenue to the north. No parking, access to the frontage street, vehicular trips or transportation impacts are being reviewed at this time. Future project(s) proposed on the site will be analyzed by the City of Spokane Valley traffic engineer and Washington State Department of Transportation and transportation concurrency will be required prior to issuance of future building permits. No concerns noted. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES Spokane Valley Fire Department is the fire protection service provider for the City of Spokane Valley, and the police service provider is the City of Spokane Valley. The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) provides public transit service within the City of Spokane Valley. The subject's property is located within the boundaries of the Central Valley School District#356. No concerns noted. 16.UTILITIES The subject's property is located within the service boundaries of Spokane County Environmental Services Department (sewer) and Modern Electric Water Company. Other utilities such as electricity, telephone and garbage are to be provided by franchise utility providers in conformance with applicable City standards and requirements. No concerns noted. REVIEW OF SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS The non-project review is a tool to help the lead agency evaluate the environmental consequences of a non-project proposal and to provide information to decision-makers and the public. After reviewing the supplemental sheet for non-project actions, the City has determined the proposed amendment is not likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. There are no significant changes in land use, density, or the built environment anticipated as a direct result of the adoption of the comprehensive plan amendments. If adopted, the comprehensive plan amendments will mitigate adverse impacts on the environment on a project-specific basis. Furthermore, proposed projects resulting from these amendments must comply with all applicable regulations. Lead Agency Environmental Checklist Review February 2,2018 CPA-2018-0001 Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT 9 COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT .i.r ora °11. BUILDING& PLANNING DIVISION Salle . NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 10210 E Sprague Ave• Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5240 •lax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley,org Date of Notice: February 7, 2018 Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.120, Notice of Public Hearing, the Building &Planning Division is sending notice to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject property. Public Hearing Date and Time: February 22,2018, beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, City Hall Project Number: CPA-2018-000l Application Description: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the designation from Single Family Residential (SFR)to Multifamily Residential (MFR) and the zoning frcuri Single Family Residential Urban(R-3) to Multifamily Residential (MFR). _ Location: Parcel No(s).45153.2801, 45153,2835 and 45153.2836; addressed as 12402 East Valleyway Avenue €nd 12416 East Valleyway Avenue; located approximately three hundred(300) feet east of the intersection of Pines Road (SR Hwy 27) and Valleyway Avenue,further located i- the SW 'A of Section 15,Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette _ Meridian, Spokane County, Washii ton _ Applicant: _ Robin Petrie, 12416 East Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Property Owner(s): Robin R 8c. Lori A Petrie, 12416 East Valleyway Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Andre N Green, P 0 Box 14063 ,okane Valle ,WA 99214-0063 Date of Ai ,lication: October 18, 2017 Date Determined January 5,2018 CGm tete Staff Contact: 14r1ioki Hamois, Planner (509) 720-5332 mharnoises,okanevalle .or, Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to the Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested parsons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at(509) 921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the hearing at the Community & Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Send written comments to the Spokane Valley Community& Public Works Department. EXHIBIT 10 so, 'iCommunity& Pubte erlcs Department kane Milleyx 10210 E Sprague Amine 4 Spokane Val[yy WA 99206 Phone; (509)720-5000♦ Fax: (509)720-5075 ♦ www.spolcaneva[ley.org Memorandum To: Nikki Harnois, Planner From: Chad Riggs, Senior Engineer Date: January 10, 2418 Re: CPA-2417-00011: Valleyway Comprehensive Plan Amendment SEPA Checklist Review Comments Development Engineering has reviewed the SOPA Checklist for CPA-2017-0001 to change the comprehensive plan designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multi Family Residential (MFR). We have no issues at this time. Al conditions will be deferred to the time of building permit application. Aill' OE ,gym hl r y Bryan Collins,Fire Chief' SPO A J 57, 2120 N.Wilbur I FIRE DEPARTMENT EPA T ENT Spokane Valley,WA 99206'kh 440 h Phone(509)928-1700 "ft Est. 1940 FAX(509)892-4125 R S www.spokanevalleylire.com January 8, 2018 City of Spokane Valley 10210 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: CPA-2017-0001 Technical Review Comments The Spokane Valley Fire Department has completed a review for the above referenced project and has no comments on the SEPA checklist. Sincerely, Traci Harvey Fire Protection Engineer Spokane Valley Fire Department Q:\Dept Data Unshared\Prevention Unshared\Plats\Shorties\2017\Comp Plan Amendments\CPA-2017-0001 Harnis.docx Mary Moore From: Figg, Greg <FiggG@wsdot_wa.gov> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 2.(}6 PM To: Lori Barlow Cc: Ray Wright Subject: RE: CPA-2018-0001 Draft Staff Report To PC (004) ejl comments Lori, The Washington State Department of Transportation also requests that a trip generation and distribution letter be provided for this project. It is our understanding that the City of Spokane Valley Public Works Department has requested this letter as well. This letter will give us a better idea of the level of traffic that v5,40 be generated and the intersections that it will utilize. Based on this letter we will be able to determine if further analysis is needed or not. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. Sincerely, Greg Figg Development Services Manager WSDOT Eastern Region (509) 324-6199 figgg@wsdotwa.gov From: Lori Barlow Sent: Friday, February 9, 201S 5:34 PM To:Jenny Dickerson <inickerson@$pokanevallev.arg>; Chaz Bates<cbatesOa spokanevallev.org>; Mike Basinger <rnbasinger@spokanevalley.or >; Jahn Hohman <jhobrnan ?sookanevaffev.org> Cc: Gloria Mantz < r antzftsr okanevalley,orr>; Ray Wright‹rwright@spolcanevallev.org>; Martin Palaniuk empalar:iuk sookaneaallev.orl >; Doug Powell <dpawell@spokanevalley.org>;Chad Riggs<crnggs spokanevalley.org>; Erik. Lamb <elamb@spokanevalley.org>; Cary Driskell <CDriskell spokanevalley,org> Subject: CPA-2018-0001 Draft Staff Report To PC (CD4) ejl comments All, Attached is Micki`s staff report for CPA 20118-0001, The request is to change the land use designation from SFR to MFR. Let Micici or I know if you would like to discuss anything, otherwise, please provide comments by Feb. 13 (Tuesday]. Thanks- Lori • 1 To: Micki Harnois (City of Spokane Valley - Community Development) CC: From: Jim Red (Spokane County - Environmental Services Dept) Date: Friday, January 26, 2018 Planning/Building #: Subject: CPA-2018-0001 Stage: Comprehensive Phase: Address: SSO9 As per the development regulations/zoning code of the governing authority as amended, a wet (live) sewer connection to the area-wide Public Sewer System is to be constructed. Sewer connection permit is required. Commercial developments shall submit historical and or estimated water usage prior to the issuance of the initial building permit in order to establish sewer fees. All existing uses, not currently connected to the sanitary sewer system, are required to be connected. Spohdnelrdnsil February 6, 2018 Ms. Mick' Humors, Planner City of Spokane Valley 10210 E.Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Amendment 2018-0001 Dear ids. Harnois, Spokane Transit is in receipt of the SEPA checklist and associated documents for the above referenced project. The proposed land use designation change (Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single-family Residential Urban District(R-3) zoning classification to Multifamily Residential (MFR) designation with a Multifamily Residential (MFR) zoning classification)) will likely result in an increased demand for transit and a supportive pedestrian environment at this location. STA currently has stops at the intersection of E.Valleyway Ave. and N. Pines Rd., less than 350w from the identified sites. Should this proposed land use plan designation change be adopted, STA requests that the following be considered at the time of development: • Safe and convenient pedestrian crossings of N. Pines Road • Completing the sidewalk network on the south side of E.Valleyway from the site to the existing sidewalk • improved ADA bus stops at the intersection of E. Valleyway Ave and N. Pines Rd. STA's most recent bus stop design standards can be found at httos:I1www.sookanetransit.ccmjprojects- pla nslbus-stop-design-standards Please let me know if you have any questions about these comments or requests. It is important to STA to continue to coordinate on changes to our respective plans. We value your efforts to include us in this process. Sincerely, Karl Otte rstro rn, A I SCP Director of Planning& Development 328-RIDE s;solranatransltcorn 1230 W Roane Avenue 599:321.060 TTY 456.4327 Spokane,Washingwn 99201-2686 509.325.0036 t r'r es r•1 _.:b l Tsi US E F i �' `+ - I'�- ° - a �- , . X ... 1tl 3.1733• '; F �,` .. 4 , ' .q. .F I j . ti ir ;'-'1* L .. IV lillir ill ....0 1.. raggleTO .. , iiiltk .7 hr.it , r, _ , ,) . i T I I. 'ZEE IMM � I i.1 = 53: 02 j -� n kait7 R F a.�ri_i2,.,Jreu 153.550 _ 1 r PInes �, 41- #5153:5565 + 53: 5t' 1 ..... 5 e t i1 e® irn 5S5 Sudl 45153.5509° ' 7. ri- _ -t -,-'5' 153_2834 Fr arr Ali 45`.;,.5593 4,153.55-1°J '10'1 f , g . r., — �, •- i 451`.s3r55i"2' 57.5'? _ L€- - - acv "• 15494 " .... .0 - :MLA .... 1 rr r ..- 1 dn , -,. -.1 7 . 14 • S� in -9383 ' t v . J - i. _ _. i _ ...- - - ... -. w ATTACHMENT 3 COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING AND PLANNII G TV1sION CITY n STAFF REPORT TO THD PLANNING COM1'VIISSION .000Valleyr CPA-2018-0003 STAFF RRPORT DATE: February 15, 2018 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 22, 2018, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 9920& Project Number: CPA-2018-0003 _ — Application Description: Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Suburban (R-2) to Corridor Mixed Use(CMLT) `. Location: Parcel number 45333.1807; located west of the Y intersection of East Sands Road and South Bowdish Road, further located in the SW ' of Section 33,Township 25 North,Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian Spokane County,Washington _ Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers,21 S Pines Rd, Spokane Valley, WA -1 99206 • Owner: Dennis &Tvlelissa Crapo, 2602 N Sullivan Rd, Spokane Valley, WA _ 99216 Date of Application,: October 26,2017 Date Determined Com lete: Janue 5, 2018 Staff Contact: Martin Palaniuk,Planner (509)720-5031 mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org spokauevalley.org APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Application Exhibit 7: Environment Determination Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map Exhibit 8: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 9: Agency Comments Exhibit 4: Zoning Map Exhibit 10: Public Comments Exhibit 5; Complete Determination Exhibit 11: Critical Areas Map Exhibit 6; SEPAL Checklist 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 iron SFR to CMU and to change the Zoning District from R-2 to CMU. Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 The site is a vacant parcel located southwest of Chester Creek and Dishman Mica Road in the Forest Meadows neighborhood. The Union Pacific Railroad runs adjacent to the parcel along the northeast boundary. The railroad right-of-way is approximately 150 feet wide with the railroad tracks situated in the center and Chester Creek along the south side of the tracks and adjacent to the site. A commercial use consisting of a self-service storage facility is located on the northeast side of the railroad right of way. The self-service storage facility is situated between the railroad right-of-way and Dishman Mica Road. Bowdish/Sands Road crosses over Dishman Mica Road into the site area and provides access to the site along the east boundary. Single-family homes in the Forest Meadows Pt Addition subdivision are located along the west boundary of the parcel. Single-family homes in the short plat SHP-09-10 have been recently constructed along the south boundary of the site. The subject parcel is Lot 7 of this short plat. Short plat SHP-09-10 was approved in April, 2011. The plat divided 7.66 acres into six single family residential lots and a single drainage easement. At the time of the plat an environmental review was undertaken due to the presence of critical areas on the site. A mitigated determination of non-significance was made on March 16, 2011 and noticed as required. The determination was not appealed. According to the National Wetlands Inventory(NWI),the project site included Freshwater Emergent (PEM1F) and Freshwater Forested/Shrub (PSS1C)wetlands. Biology, Soil &Water, Inc (BSW), 3102 N Girard Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99212, conducted a comprehensive Critical Areas study and submitted a report, dated August 12, 2010. The BSW study conducted numerous test holes to determine soil type and hydrologic characteristics of the site. The study concluded that the wetland area mapped in the NWI as a PEM1F wetland was not a wetland. It also concluded the area mapped as a PSS1C wetland on the NWI map as somewhat excessively drained soils was not a wetland. The study further concluded hydrologic conditions on the site do not meet the wetland criteria. A"Type F" stream is located along the north boundary of the property within the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. The actual location of the south Bankfull Width of Chester Creek was surveyed in the field and plotted on the subject site plan map included as a part of the BSW report. (see Exhibit 11) According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps, dated July 6, 2010 a significant portion of the site lies within the 100-year floodplain. A narrow strip of land running along the north boundary of the property is located within the floodway and would preclude development. (see Exhibit 11) The final plat of SHP-09-10 includes a drainage easement across the west 15 feet of Lot 4 of the plat to allow the flow of drainage from Sundown Drive onto the subject parcel. As part of the plat,the entirety of Lot 7, the subject parcel,was designated as a blanket drainage easement to be used for storing and treating stormwater. The plat dedication language states that no modifications can be made to the boundaries of the drainage easements without the approval of the City and that engineering calculations would be required for any modifications to the blanket drainage easement consisting of Lot 7,the subject parcel. (see Exhibit 11) Implications: The rezone of the site to CMU would allow a broader range of uses to include light manufacturing, retail, office and multi-family uses. Any change in the land use designation to the parcel would have implications for existing uses. Impacts to the property and surrounding properties are likely to occur whenever the current undeveloped use transitions to a use other than a vacant undeveloped lot. Impacts associated with commercial or light manufacturing are generally more intense than impacts caused by single family residential development. If redevelopment to a commercial or light manufacturing use were to occur, the adjacent residential uses could experience impacts. Impacts may include greater lot building coverage, greater building heights, and increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic into and out of the site. Transitional building height and setbacks, screening, and landscaping would reduce the impacts to adjacent residential properties. Page 2 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 The CMI] is intended to allow for light manufacturing, retail, multi-family, and offices along major transportation corridors. CMU recognizes the historical low-intensity, auto-dependent commercial development patterns. It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue and the north-south arterials. Nonresidential development in the CMU zone adjacent to a residential use is subject to trausitional setback requirements intended to reduce the impact to the residential uses and the neighborhood. A maximum building height is not established in the CMU, but is limited by the transitional requirements. For any development in the CMU zone that is adjacent to an It-1, R-2, or R-3 zone, a minimum ground level setback of 10 feet is required, Starting at a height of 15 fact the building must be setback at a ratio of one foot for every foot of height. Open space and landscaping, pedestrian pathways,and outdoor recreation areas accessory to the permitted use are the only uses permitted within the ground level setback in the CMU. Additionally, parking or drive aisles would require screening, loading areas would be prohibited within 30 feet of the residential zone, and mechanical equipment, building vents,and exhaust within transitional setback areas would require screening. All outdoor lighting in the transitional setbacks would be shielded and limited to 16 feet in height. Landscaping, parking, and on-site treatment of stormwater would also be required consistent with the development regulations. The following table provides a comparison of the development requirements for both zones. R-2 & CMU Development Standard Comparison Lot Maximums Minimum Setbacks Building - Density Zone Height Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Garage R-2 35 ft. 50% 15 It. 20 ft 5 ft. 20 ft. 4 dues/acre Clial N/A N/A 10 ft. * 10 ft.* 10 ft.* N/A N/A 'ill adjacent la a resider:Ual use. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and The lot is 255,124.4 square feet or 5,85 acres in size. The property is Characteristics: covered with grasses, trees and shrubs, Per the k3SW Critical Areas report,(August 12,2010) the site does not have wetlands. The majority of the site is located within the floodplain, with the north edge located in the floodvvay. Comprehensive Single Family Residential - Plan: Zoning; Single Family Residential Suburban(R-2) Existing Land Use: Vacant property dedicated as a blanket drainage easement as part of short plat SI-IP-09-10 Page 3 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 1. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: Comp Plan: CMU North Zoning: CMU Land Uses: Union Pacific Railroad track and right-of-way, Commercial(self- service storage) Comp Plan: SFR South Zoning: R-2 Land Uses: Residential Comp Plan: CMU East Zoning: CMU Land Uses: Commercial and residential Comp Plan: SFR West Zoning: R-2 Land Uses: Residential Note: A 150-foot wide Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way is located adjacent to the property along the northeast boundary of the property. • 2. APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: October 26, 2017 Application Submitted: October 26, 2017 Date of Complete Determination: January 5, 2018 End of Appeal Period for DNS:Not Appealed .February 16, 2018 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing January 31, 2018 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: February 2, 2018 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: February 6, 2018 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, 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 Building and Planning Division issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal on February 2, 2018. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Titles 19, 21, and 22 SVMC, 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 Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. Page 4 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 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:Land use and the regulation of land uses are inherently related to the public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment. Community infrastructure is designed and built in response to the development of property which in turn is dictated by the land uses that are permitted through the comprehensive plan and zoning regulations. All services are available or will be required to serve the site as development occurs. The City is required by the GMA to identify and protect Critical Areas. Critical Areas include Frequently Flooded Areas, Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas, Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas, Geologically Hazardous Areas, and Wetlands. The majority of the site is located within a floodplain. A Type F stream is located north of the site in the railroad right-of-way and will require buffering for protection. The soil on the site is classified as an alluvium soil made up of finely granulated silt and clay deposits from water flow. Alluvium soils are generally loosely consolidated and hold moisture. Any development on the site would require compliance with Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls. (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) adopts thirteen goals to guide the development of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. The request allows development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services are available. Environmental regulations ensure that critical areas are adequately protected while balancing the land owners right to develop the property. The request does not conflict with other GMA goals. The request is not consistent with the intent of the CMU land use designation. (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: The subject property was created through a short subdivision process that was completed in 2012. Prior to the subdivision in 2012 the site was unplatted property and existed in its natural state. Single-family homes have been built adjacent to the site as part of that short subdivision. The properties located west and south of the site in the Forest Meadows neighborhood were subdivided and developed with single family homes in the late 1970's and early 1980's. The Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way is located along the northeast boundary of the property. The right-of-way is 150 feet wide along the boundary and contains a railroad track bed and a set of tracks. Chester Creek flows along the southwest side of the tracks within the railroad right-of-way and is confined to a banked channel. Page 5 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 A self-service storage facility is located northwest of the site side on the opposite side of the railroad right-of-way.. The storage facility was permitted and constructed in the mid to late 2000's. The gas station and convenience store located east of the site at the southeast corner of Dishman Mica Rd. and Bowdish Rd. was constructed in the mid 1990's. The zoning of the subject property was changed from agricultural to single family at the time of the Forest Meadows 2"d Addition subdivision in the early 1980's. It has remained as a single family zone since that time. The commercially zoned properties located northeast of the site have undergone several zone changes since incorporation in 2003. The property was zoned B-2 under the City's interim zoning, Community Commercial (C)from 2007 to 2016 and Corridor Mixed Use from 2016 to present. The amendment does not respond to any substantial changes since the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. Growth has been continuous in the area with the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way being a dividing line between residential and commercial land use designations. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The proposed amendment does not respond to a mapping error and would not correct any error. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: Between 2007 and 2016, commercial square footage in Spokane Valley increased roughly 700,000 square feet. The vacancy rate for office buildings in Spokane Valley has been much higher and more volatile than the countywide vacancy rate for office property. High vacancy indicates there may be an oversupply of office space in Spokane Valley. Spokane Valley has 4,349 acres of commercial and industrial land capacity, with the greatest concentration in its industrial designation. There is a higher portion of vacant land across these designations compared to residential designations. General commercial land use makes up 18.2% of the City's land use. The proposed amendment does not address a deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. A thorough analysis of land use quantity and needs was completed during the City's 2016 legislative update to the Comprehensive Plan. Deficiencies in the plan were addressed as part of the update and land use changes were implemented in the area that addressed those deficiencies. There is adequate commercial and industrial property to accommodate future growth. ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis: The change in land use would allow a more intense development of the property. The CMU designation is the most versatile of the commercial/mixed use designations and permits a wide range of uses. The uses range from light manufacturing to single-family dwellings. If commercial development occurs the site will transition from open field of grasses, trees and shrubs to asphalt parking areas, stormwater treatment areas and buildings with commercial landscaping. The maximum building height in the CMU zone is regulated through the application of transitional setbacks and would be limited by the proximity of the surrounding Page 6 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 residential uses. A residential density standard does not exist in the CMU zone and multi family development would be limited by the physical factors imposed by the site. (2) The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; Analysis: The site is currently dedicated and utilized as a drainage easement for the stormwater associated with Sundown Drive. The site is undeveloped and covered with grasses, shrubs, and trees. It is a low lying area adjacent to Chester Creek and part of the Chester Creek floodplain. The terrain associated with the single-family lots located south of the site was raised to lift them and remove them from the floodplain area. Any development that would occur on the site would require compliance with the Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls to limit the impact to both the floodplain and to the riparian area along Chester Creek. Modifications to the floodplain can be undertaken through a Map Revision process with FEMA. Chester Creek is considered a type "F" Stream in the location of the proposed CPA. The stream will require the necessary buffers and protections outlined in SVMC 21.40.032. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis: The areas south and west of the site are residential neighborhoods comprised of single family homes. The density of the homes ranges from one single family home per acre to four single family homes per acre. The lot sizes are generally between 10,000 and 40,000 square feet. The proposed change to CMU would allow multi family development and a wide range of commercial and light industrial uses to occur on the property. The CMU is intended to provide for these uses along major transportation corridors, recognizing the historical low-intensity, auto-dependent commercial development patterns. The CMU zone has no density limit, height limit or lot coverage maximums. Development consistent with the CMU standardscould be significantly different in character and scale from the low density residential uses. The neighborhood is separated from the CMU land uses along Dishman Mica Road by the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way and tracks. The SFR land use is the only use located south and west of the railroad right-of-way in this area. The railroad right- of-way serves as an organic boundary separating the SFR land use from the CMU land use along Dishman Mica Road. The change would not be compatible with the low-density single family residential neighborhood that exists adjacent to the site. (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. Policy CFP-9.1 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends a concurrency management system for transportation, sewer, and water facilities. SVMC 22.20 requires concurrency review when an application is submitted. Future development projects will be evaluated to determine if the impacts of the development will meet the Level of Service set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. At the time of development, or redevelopment, 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. Page 7 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 A Trip Generation and Distribution Letter was submitted as part of the application that contemplated the highest intensity of uses for the site. The information was reviewed by the City's Senior Traffic Engineer. It was determined that the higher density would account for an estimated 845 new trips throughout a typical day over the lower density residential use. During the peak hours there would be an expected additional 14 new a.m. peak hour trips and 56 new p.m. peak hour trips. In reviewing the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan traffic model at the Dishman Mica and Bowdish Road intersection, the Level of Service (LOS) calculations indicate that the intersection will operate at a LOC C during the pm peak period. Adding the new pm peak hour trips that would be generated for this land use to the model continues to give a LOS C. By granting the change to CMU, a delay of about 3.5 seconds on average would be added to every vehicle using the intersection. It was determined that there is adequate transportation infrastructure to meet transportation concurrency. The site is located within the service area for Spokane County Water District#3 and is currently served with water. Spokane County Environmental Services serves the site with sewer. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis: The City of Spokane Valley updated their Comprehensive Plan in 2016 with considerable public outreach. Analysis and public input with regard to the land use needs and requirements of the Ponderosa neighborhood, Dishman Mica corridor, and the City were considered at that time. Appropriatechanges in land use designations and zoning were undertaken at that time to address any needs or deficiencies identified in the update process. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis: The Comprehensive Plan underwent a periodic, legislative update in 2016. The 2016 update relied on information in the Existing Conditions Report and the Retail Improvement Strategy to inform the need and location of commercial and mixed use land uses. As part of the 2016 update, CMU land use was designated along the Dishman Mica corridor in the vicinity of the proposed amendment. The Comprehensive Plan has identified 1,073 net developable acres of land within the City that are available in the CMU zone. In the south Dishman Mica area, near the proposed amendment site, there is over 24 acres of undeveloped CMU zoned property. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Analysis: Spokane Valley has experienced steady, but modest population growth since its incorporation, growing at a rate of about 1%per year. The City's estimated 2016 population was 94,160 according to the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFNI), making Spokane Valley the ninth-largest city in Washington. The County's current population allocation assumptions anticipate Spokane Valley's modest growth pattern to continue, resulting in a 2037 population of 109,913 in Spokane Valley. According to the COSV Retail Improvement Strategy Report the population density for this area ranges from 21-50 people per ten acres in the vicinity of the site to 11-20 people per ten acres south of the site. Northeast of Dishman Mica Road the population density is more than 50 people per 10 acres. If the 5.86 acre site was to develop at a density of 22 dwelling units per acre then an additional 128 dwelling units might be expected. However, it is assumed that the site characteristics will limit the number of dwelling units to below the maximum density. Light Page 8of12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 manufacturing, office or retail development would not add to the population density. The development of the property will not have a significant impact on the population density. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: Overall the amendment would have no substantive effect on other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is not consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan Findings: The 2016 Comprehensive Plan was informed by the 2015 Housing and Economic and Transportation System Existing Conditions report,the Retail Improvement Strategy Report, and the Tourism Strategy Report. The City conducted in-depth analysis of the land use needs as part of the update. The Existing Conditions Housing and Economic Trends report provided an in-depth analysis of the existing conditions which include population and demographics, housing, land base, and economic and development trends. The report also analyzed the zoning issues for multi-family, mixed use, office and neighborhood. The Retail Improvement Strategy completed a Trade Area Analysis and Retail Trade Capture Assessment and developed a retail strategy and action plan. Changes made to the land use during the 2016 update are in consonance with that analysis and the comprehensive plan goals,policies, and strategies. The area south and west of the proposed amendment site is entirely low density SFR land use. The neighborhood is separated from the.CMU land uses along Dishman Mica Road by the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way and tracks. The SFR land use is the only use located south and west of the railroad right-of-way in this area. The railroad right-of-way serves as an organic boundary separating the SFR land use from the CMU land use along Dishman Mica Road. Designating CMU land use southwest of the railroad right-of-way, adjacent to the SFR land use is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The 2016 update included changes to the CMU land uses in the vicinity of the proposed amendment. Those changes were deemed adequate to provide the CMU land use needs at the time of the update. Additional change to the CMU land use in this area is not consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. Conclusion(s): The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update was developed with considerable public input and an in- depth,focused analysis of land use quantities and deficiencies. The 2016 update responded to the identified deficiencies with considerable land use changes in the Dishman Mica corridor. Those changes were deemed sufficient to address land use needs for the foreseeable future. Additional CMU property is not necessary. 3. 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 adequate transportation, water, and sewer facilities. (See section 4 above) Page 9 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 b. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development. D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff received the following public comments to date. Comments received after the date of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission at the February 22 meeting. Name Comment Maleah Christensen Opposes the amendment; concerned about flooding, drop in property values, and traffic. Colleen Shubin Opposes the amendment; concerned about flooding and impacts to the neighborhood. Holly&Kreg Woodbridge Oppose the amendment; concerned about flooding,traffic,crime, and impacts to schools. Jenny&Ed Yake,4003 S Forest Oppose the amendment; concerned about flooding, believes Meadow displacement of the floodplain by development may create flooding on his property, concerned about traffic, wildlife, and school impacts. Patrick Miller, The Millers Oppose the amendment;concerned about home values and traffic; cites the available CMU properties on Dishman Mica Road. Cindy Gleesing, 4225 S Opposes the amendment; concerned about impact to the Bowdish Rd neighborhood, traffic, property values, and quality of life. Kay Boger Opposes the amendment; concerned about flooding. Keith Opposes the amendment; does not feel the development is appropriate. Richard Schultz Opposes the amendment; concerned about flooding; feels commercial development is not appropriate. Concerned Ponderosa Family Opposes the amendment; concerned about school overcrowding, increase in crime, home values; does not feel multi-family is appropriate for the neighborhood. Scott Henderson Opposes the amendment; does not like the idea of apartments and rezone for this area. Mike Reents Opposes the amendment; concerned about drainage, traffic, property values, school crowding, increased crime, increased noise and loss of privacy. Molly Kinghorn, 4041 S Opposes the amendment;. concerned about traffic, school Ridgeview Dr. crowding, drainage of Chester Creek; feels that single family residential is appropriate. Darby Jacobs Opposes the amendment; concerned about traffic, fire safety; does not feel multi-family or commercial development is appropriate. Page 10 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 Mr. &Mrs. R.W. Bravinder Oppose the amendment; feels the change is not appropriate for the neighborhood; concerned about flooding and traffic. Tamara Perrin Opposes the amendment; concerned about schoolcrowding, house values, and traffic. 2. Conclusion(s): Notice of Public Hearing (NOPH) was published on February 2, and 9, 2018. The NOPH was posted on site on January 31,201 and mailed on February 6,2018 to residents within an 800 foot radius. Pursuant to Section 17.80.120.B.1.c the City determined it was appropriate to increase the radius from 400 feet to 800 feet due to the likely public interest in the proposed amendment. All comments have been reviewed and considered. The comment letters are included in Exhibit 10 of this staff report. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: The amendment application was routed to jurisdictional agencies, utilities, and public districts for review and comments. Agency comments are attached in Exhibit 9.The following agencies submitted written comments for the proposal: Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Senior Traffic Engineer Yes January 10, 2018 City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering Yes January 10, 2018 City of Spokane Valley Building&Planning City of Spokane Valley Parks &Recreation Spokane Valley Fire Department Yes January 5, 2018 City of Millwood City of Liberty Lake City of Spokane City of Spokane Valley Police Department Spokane County,Building and Planning Spokane County,Environmental Services Yes January 12, 2018 Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County,Fire District No. 1 Spokane County,Fire District No. 8 Spokane County Regional Health District Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Spokane Aquifer Joint Board Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) Washington State Dept of Commerce Washington State Dept of Ecology(Olympia) Yes January 18, 2018 Washington State Dept of Ecology(Spokane) Washington State Dept of Fish& Wildlife Yes January 8, 2018 Washington State Dept of Natural Resources Washington State Dept of Transportation Washington State Parks &Recreation Commission Page 11 of 12 Staff Report CPA-2016-0003 WA Archaeological &Historic Preservation Avista Utilities Inland Power&Light Modern Electric Water Company Central Valley School District#356 East Valley School District#361 West Valley School District#363 Century Link Comcast Model Irrigation District#18 Consolidated Irrigation District#19 East Spokane Water District#1 Vera Water&Power Spokane County Water District#3 Spokane Tribe of Indians 2. Conclusion(s): Agency comments generally contemplated future development and no substantive issues were identified. F. CONCLUSION: For the reasons set forth in Section C (1 and 2)the proposed amendment to change the land use designation from SFR to CMU is not consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H) and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 12 of 12 EXHIBIT 1 r r., till( kane �.. Spo Valley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF USE ONLY ���?? Date Submitted: Alf i' 'ZOO. deceived by: Fee: »+0 O 4350 $ 4 PLUS#: 04- File#: CP,, v 201 Dt (CPA-zoI"6"oo3) PART II - APPLICATION INFORMATION ❑ Map Amendment; or ❑ Text Amendment APPLICANT NAME: Whipple Consulting Engineers MAILING ADDRESS: 2528 N Sullivan Rd CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99216 PHONE: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227 CELL: EMAIL: info©WhippleCE.com PROPERTY OWNER: CRAPO,DENNIS A&MELISSA MAILING ADDRESS: 2602 N SULLIVAN RD CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99216 PHONE: (509)924-8964 FAX: CELL: EMAIL: SITE ADDRESS: Bowdish Rd and Sands Rd Spokane Valley,WA 99206 PARCEL No.: 45333.1807 Single Family Residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Corridor Mixed Use ZONING DESIGNATION: R2 CMU PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): We are requesting a Comprehensive Plan Change and Zoning Reclassification frornR2.Single Family Residential to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU)as is on the north side of the Union Pacific Railroad Tracts. The land is now vacant with trees,shrubs,grasses and weeds. PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of 4 • Spokane Valley• COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) �7 I, o,��(� t. 4 q,Ob , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. /2a--7 ignature) (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this E�t� day of ©C�0 , 20 fl NOTARY SEAL (4/,1,, / `� , OTARY SIGNATURE . vsON,q�yO_ ',• Notary Public in and for the State of Washington •• •• • (:: :; : \ 0N.e__.ES = Residing at: J 1. OCT 12,2020 • i • • • • %/%;FGtO `` My appointment expires: dCA ' `7 O� LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s),the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize_ to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 4 of 4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Sökane AMENDMENT APPLICATION SVMC 17.80.140 Valley. Community Development— Planning Division 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 4 Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5310 4 Fax: 509.688.0037 • planning®spokanevalley.org Year 2017 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS The City of Spokane Valley is accepting applications for map and text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) allows Comprehensive Plan amendments only one time per year. Any interested person, organization, agency or business may submit suggestions, proposals, or requests to the City for changes to the Comprehensive Plan, including maps and text. PROCEDURES 1. Application Period. Applications are due by November 1s`of each year to be considered during the next calendar year amendment cycle. Submittals received after the deadline will be considered during the next annual amendment cycle. 2. Staff Review and Report. Spokane Valley Planning Staff will review all applications and will prepare a report and recommendation to the Spokane Valley Planning Commission. The report will analyze how each proposal addresses amendment criteria established by Spokane Valley City Council. All application documents and staff reports will be available for public review. 3. Planning Commission Public Hearing. The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct a formal public hearing on all proposed amendments. The Commission will consider amendments individually and will examine the cumulative impacts of all amendments collectively. The Commission will prepare one recommendation to the Spokane Valley City Council, including findings on each individual proposed amendment. 4. City Council Review and Decision. Within 60 days of receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, City Council may choose to adopt the individual amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission, disapprove the amendments, or modify and adopt 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. 5. Notice. Each year, the City will provide notice of the annual amendment cycle at least 60 days prior to the application deadline via display ads in local newspapers,email to interested parties and on the City's website. Notice of public hearings and public meetings will be provided to the public as set forth in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. At a minimum, notice will be provided to surrounding properties within 400'for site-specific Land Use Map amendments at least 14 days prior to any public hearing. Notice will also be posted on-site at least 14 days prior to any public hearing. Legal notice will also be published in the newspaper. 6. Appeal Procedures. City Council decisions on Comprehensive Plan amendments may be appealed to the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board within 60 days of publication of notice of adoption, in accordance with RCW 36.70A.290(2). 7. Staff Contact. Questions may be directed to Lori Barlow, Senior Planner (Ibarlow(@spokanevallev.orq) or Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager (skuhta()spokanevallev.orq), 509- 921-1000. PL-06 V1.0 Page 1 of 4 Spokane Valley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL "THE PLANNING DIVISION WILL NOT ACCEPT YOUR APPLICATION IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED" A. Submit the following for MAP AMENDMENTS: ® Pre-Application Meeting Request (include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) ❑ Completed Application Form ❑ Application and SEPA Fee ❑ SEPA Checklist: One(1)copy of completed State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) Environmental Checklist, including option Non-Project Action supplemental form. (Note: Any previous environmental documents that are relevant to this project should be included and may be adopted by reference.) ❑ Notice of Public Hearing packet for 400-foot notification. (Please note: DO NOT submit the notice of public hearing packet until you have been contacted by the City. Addresses must be current within 30 days of the Planning Commission public hearing.) ❑ One(1) copy of a narrative describing the following: 1. State the reason for the Comprehensive plan Map Amendment. 2. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; c. 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; d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; and e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Describe how the proposal addresses the following specific factors; a. The effect upon the physical environment; b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation and schools; e. The benefit to the neighborhood, city and region; f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land; g. The current and projected population density in the area; and h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Submit the following for TEXT AMENDMENTS: ❑ Pre-Application Meeting Request (include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) El Completed Application Form ❑ One(1) copy of the text proposed to be changed, showing deletions by str-ilet#reug#and additions by underline. ❑ One(1) copy of a narrative describing the following: 1. Why the change is needed and the potential land use impacts if approved; 1. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owners control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; and PL-06 V1.0 Page 2 of 4 /IAN E WFiipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. October 24, 2017 W.O. No. 2017-1904 City of Spokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave., Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Attn: Ray Wright Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Bowdish Change from Low Density Residential (R-2)to Corridor Mixed the (CMU) Bowdish Road & Sands Road Planning Level Traffic (Trip) Distribution Letter Dear Ray: Per the City of Spokane Valley requirements, we have prepared a planning level trip generation and distribution letter for the 5.86 acre+/- residential property located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Bowdish Road & Sands Road. This letter will establish the potential trip generation and distribution for the change ofland use from Low Density Residential to(R-2)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) for the subject property as shown on Figure 2, Site Plan, and determine if further study may be required. This report will follow the standards for doing traffic distribution letters as required by the City of Spokane Valley, and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), PROJECT DESCRIPTION The planning level project proposes to change the current land use code desi,+ ation from Low Density Residential (R-2) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMIJ). The subject property is approximately 5.86 acres +/- of developed land. The project site is currently-undeveloped The existing land use is Low Density Residential (R-2) which has a maximum density of 4 residential units per acre, per Table 19.70-1. Under the current land use designation,the subject property can be developed into 23 single family residential lots. With access from Bowdish Road The proposed zoning is Corridor Mixed Use (OM) which has a mixture of potential land uses that are allowed Under the City of Spokane Valley Municipal code(Chp. 19.64.050)_ It is anticipated that the highest and best land use for the subject property. Would include a 15,000 sf (15.0 ksf)retail store with 60 apartments above. VICINITY i SITE PLAN The site is listed on the current comprehensive plan as Low Density Residential and currently zoned as R-2, The site lies on a portion of the SW 1/4 of Section 33, T.25/NT,, R.44E., W.M. 2525 N. Sullivan Rd. • Spokane Valley, WA 99215 PO Box 1566 - Veraclale, WA 99037 Phone 509-893-2617 • Fax 509-926-0227 Civil, Structural, Traffic, Survey, Landscape Architecture and Entitlements Bowdish CPA change From LDR(R-2)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Traffic Distribution Letter October 24,2017 Page 2 within the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington. A vicinity map is included as Figure 1 and a preliminary copy of the Site Plan is included as Figure 2, please see the Appendix. The parcel number for the site is 45333.1807. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Trip Types The existing land use is residential, and the proposed land uses are commercial and residential landuses. ITE has developed data regarding various trip types that all developments experience. These are found in several places, however, for this analysis the Trip Generation Manual 9t Edition as well as the Trip Generation Handbook were used to develop the criteria for this analysis. Generally, all existing and proposed developments will be made up of one or more of the following trip types: new (destination) trips, pass-by trips, diverted trips, and shared (internal trips). In order to better understand the trip types available for land access a description of each specific trip type follows. New (Destination) Trips -These types of trips occur only to access a specific land use such as a new retail development or a new residential subdivision. These types of trips will travel to and from the new site and a single other destination such as home or work. This is the only trip type that will result in a net increase in the total amount of traffic within the study area. The reason primarily is that these trips represent planned trips to a specific destination that never took trips to that part of the City prior to the development being constructed and occupied. This project will develop new trips. Pass-by Trips - These trips represent vehicles which currently use adjacent roadways providing primary access to new land uses or projects and are trips of convenience. These trips, however, have an ultimate destination other than the project in question. They should be viewed as customers who stop in on their way home from work. An example would be on payday, where an individual generally drives by their bank every day without stopping, except on payday. On that day, this driver would drive into the bank, perform the prerequisite banking and then continue on home. In this example, the trip started from work with a destination of home, however on the way, the driver stopped at the grocery store/latte stand and/or bank directly adjacent to their path. Pass-by trips are most always associated with commercial/retail types of development along major roadways. Therefore, for this project pass-by trips will be considered. Diverted (Linked) Trips - These trips occur when a vehicle takes a different route than normal to access a specific facility. Diverted trips are similar to pass-by trips,but diverted trips occur from roadways, which do not provide direct access to the site. Instead, one or more streets must be utilized to get to and from the site. For this project, because of the many different routes that can be taken to and from the site, we believe that these would be difficult to track and verify. Therefore, no diverted trips were acicnowl edged for this analysis. Bowdish CPA change From LDR(R-2)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) Traffic Distribution Letter October 24,2017 Page 3 Shared Trips -These are trips which occur on the site where a vehicle/consumer will stop at more than one place on the site. For example, someone destined for a certain shop at a commercial site may stop at a bank just before or after they visit the shop that they went to the site to visit. This trip type reduces the number of new trips generated on the public road system and is most commonly used for commercial developments. Determining these trip types is more difficult to quantify and without specific guidance are usually determined by engineering judgment on a project by project basis. Although some shared trips between land uses may occur with this project, there is no supporting data to justify a large shared trip reduction. Therefore, to be conservative no shared trips were credited for this project Intermodal trips (non-Vehicle) Pedestrian Trips—When a residential or hospitality land use is located within close proximity of complimentary land uses such as, shops, restaurants, offices, or event centers, some vehicular trips will be replaced by pedestrian trips. The decision for residents/guests to drive or walk to their destination is dependent upon several factors and variables. The first may be trip length or distance; the second may be the route, typically the crossing of a large roadway without signalized crosswalks or other safe crossing facilities would be a deterrent; the third may be parking at the destination; and fourth may be the weather as rain or snow conditions may deter pedestrian activity. For this project pedestrian trips will not be considered Bowdish CPA change From LDR(R-2)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) Traffic Distribution Letter October 24,2017 Page 4 Trip Generation Characteristics for the Proposed Project As noted earlier, trip generation rates are determined by use of the Trip Generation Manual, 9''' Edition published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)to determine the number of trips generated during the PM Peak Hour. The purpose of the Trip Generation Manual is to compile and quantify empirical trip generation rates for specific land uses within the US,UK and Canada. Existing Land Uses For the existing Single Family residential land use, the highest and best use of 23 single family residential lots will be used therefore land Use Code (LUC) #210 will be used. The potential trips generated by the single family residential land use are shown in Table 1. Table 1 -Trip Generation Rates for LUC #210—Single Family Detached Housing No. of AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Dwelling Vol. @ 0.75 Directional Vol. @ 1.00 Directional Units trips per o Distribution trips per Unit o Distribution Unit 25% In 75/o Out 63% In 37% Out 23 17 4 13 23 14 9 Average Daily Trip Ends (ADT) Dwelling Units Rate ADT ii 23 9.52 219 Proposed Land Uses For the proposed Multi Family Residential land use, the highest and best use of l 00 multi-family residential land uses will be used therefore Land Use Code (LUC)#220 Apartment will be used. The potential trips generated by the multi-family residential land use are shown on Table 2. Table 2- Trip Generation Rates for LUC #826 Specialty Retail Center Thousand AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Directional Directional Square Feet Vol. @ 2.71 N/A Distribution Distribution KSF In Out Trips/KSF 44% In 56% Out 15.0 - - - 41 18 23 ( Pass-by 8 4 4 New 33 14 19 Average Daily Trip Ends (ADT) 20%Pass-by Per Engineering Judgement KSF Rate ADT IL _15.0 44.32 665 Bowdish CPA change From LDR(R-2)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) Traffic Distribution Letter October 24,2017 Page 5 Table 3 -Trip Generation Rates for LUC#220—Apartment No. of AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Vol. @ 0.51 Directional Directional Dwelling Vol. @ 0.62 Units trips per Distribution tripsUnit Distribution Unit 20% In 80% Out per 65% In 35% Out 60 31 6 M 25 38 25 13 Average Daily Trip Ends (ADT) KSF Rate ADT 1 100 6.65 399 Trip Generation Comparison Since the existing single family residential land use trip generation is proposed to be replaced by the proposed Multi Family Residential trip generation, the difference in trips generated is shown on Table 4 Table 4- Trip Generation Comparison AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Vol. Directional Vol. Directional Land Use Code(LUC) per Distribution per Distribution LUC In Out LUC In Out LUC 826 Specialty Retail (Proposed) - - - 33 14 19 LUC 220 Apartment(Proposed) 31 6 25 38 25 13 LUC 210 Single Family Residential <17> <4> <13> <23> <14> <9> { Difference 14 2 12 48 25 23 Average Daily Trip Ends (ADT) < >indicates Land Use Code (LUC) Rate ADT Subtraction of number LUC 826 Specialty Retail (Proposed) 665 LUC 220 Apattment (Proposed) 399 LUC 210 Single Family Residential <219> Difference 845i1 As shown on Table 4 the additional trips of the Corridor Mixed-Use land uses are anticipated to generate a total of 14 additional trips in the AM peak hour with 2 additional trips entering the site and 12 additional trips exiting the site. In the PM peak hour, the Mixed-Use land use is anticipated to generate a total of 56 additional trips, with 29 additional trips entering the site and 27 additional trips exiting the site. The anticipated average daily trips to/from the proposed Mixed-Use land uses are 845 trips. TRIP DISTRIBUTION It is anticipated that the subject property is accessed via Bowdish Road. The roads anticipated to be used by the additional trips generate by a development of the subject property are listed below. Bowdish CPA change From L17R(R-2) to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) Traffic Distribution Letter October 24,2017 Page 6 Bowdish Road is a north/south, two-way, 2-lane, minor arterial serving a large residential area south of Interstate 90. Bowdish Road Hens south from Mission Avenue, and cxosses several major arterials, until it intersects with Sands Road. Bowdish Road,between Mission Avenue and Fishman-Mica Road is a two-lane roadway. South of Disbman-Mica Road,Bowdish Road crosses the Union Pacific Railway and becomes a local access roadway. Sands Road branches off of Bowdish Road and continues the arterial to 441,Avenue. Bowdish Road is posted at 25 MPH on the local access portion, and is posted on the minor arterial as 35 MPH. Considering many factors such as the surrounding transportation facilities, typical commuting patterns, existing development in the area, and the ACT of surrounding roadways the traffic for the proposed development is anticipated as follows, 5%to/from the south on Bowdish Road, and 95%to/from the north on Bowdish Road, Where the.trips will follow existing traffic patterns at the intersection of Disltrnan-Mica Road & Bowdish Road, Conclusions and Recommendations It is anticipated that a change of land use to Mixed Use would generate 14 additional AM peak hour trips and 48 additional PM peak hour tips. Based on the number of trips generated the location of the project and an understanding of the operation of intersections within the area, we believe that if the change is approved that there would he no impact from this project on the surrounding transportation system.Additional at the time of any"real" project the"real"project would be reviewed for traffic impact at that time. Therefore, based upon the analysis provided and a working knowledge of traffic in the area we recommend that the comprehensive plant map amendment be allowed to move forward without further analysis. Should you have any questions related to this document please do not hesitate to call at 893- 21517. Sincerely, kZ. Iii,p A° 0 4v, W I '744'71. „ff.. ,yr) 0 . Todd R. Whi TRW/bng encl. Appendix (Vicinity Map, Site elan, Trip Dist %) cc: Sponsor File APPENDIX 1 . Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. Trip Distribution by Percent 4. Misc. Information • I T (� _ J ' - ` f; I . I ' tII 1 'F!. . A. , r. 1 ffe _ – —1 _ - 4 r� -'L r; 4 Y __t__1__,5 En , y_. N -_ _ I^—i syr � • ��% �f I —._ - ,. _ --- - F. .r'Pr.i '� o he s1er — `'' f_ P _I !} L) . _ _ _ 'ti.4 _ F1: I I °'J HA_ ▪ moi. _LI T • ... 1yil.X , —_ • air +I_ I r I 1 . ,__,' I f ri,'.51 -------- p -- 1 , -E I ▪ -' _ �� ._ - e - -4- •--PO o _ S `E t3 �; — ,. 1 , - -I -.C �e _— � -- _i—hr Li.- i - -r 1 I ILi I LA _1_ li ......0.,. ,! } I I ( I ' I / f 1 — C1 I _ L ;�- — E — NOT TO -SCALE o PR❑J #: 17-1904 `~ DA-m: 1UMW": 7 Pb TRIP GEhlEF2ATl�lkl ❑IETRIalITraN oRA N: 8NG BOWDISH CPA APPROVED: TRW R fWDISH ROAD & BANDS ROAD SPOKANE VALLEY, WASH INGT❑N WHNPPLECONBLLTlNG ENG,IMEERS CIVIL ANC TRANBP®RT.4110 U>4.IfTINEETIING 2S2B 14ORTISULLIVAN ROAD I F I I:,U R E 1 VICINITY MAP sI>owa4l vAtcwe,lvlds 14INVON 99316 FR 507,8;12817 FAX 9179-92541227 i-i rf _ + T. r JY r�� ' - A• 4 ..l.f -wV ` I e.,t ',ht.,. 1'C f.. �1y� 'rrJt.7. '' 1--•_,p r ft .; ��.-+/`'. ,., �tf ';1` , .e+. Ms .i.4.—QTS r ' -µ - 1 `4 I% - ady• ra � .l- +-ISP'..'f-,,,P�J'} Y j' f If p„. • r-1 - � . � i ; i •' . i R1.. r•cl 2. .3 ' r 1 ?4t - i? 0 ' '" e d i ,.,1 1 ,T ' !' 'key...A .. F r`�' •. _ - bb' . :1 r . r • 1 i s 0-9 W. — Ili 111--1—1, I a , • .- f .tteli‘h. . • • - ftp! YYt 71i IZE.. a J - es .--1 . N r'. ,.r., - 1 • d €' 1 1 . • 4J ' v r r . . ' �� t r� +r i f f d PRDJ #, 17.1904 DATE: 113/20/1 7CPA TRIP GENU ATIL7h &1DISTRIBUTIONDRAW N NO B DW1 19 H CPA APPROVECi: TRW DDWL31'�H RC].BcQ 1;,. SANDS RQA'U SPOKANE VALLEY, WA S H I NI IST❑N WHIPPLE C4NSULraNc EMGINEERB cive.ANDTflArmi,CD ITA1'IC N ENGINEER NG 5.1•112629 NORTH SULLIVAN R4O FIGURE 2 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN saalcw+EVALLEY.WASHINGTON639211 PH:BOG•9G3.2517 FAX•SIA.923-0'22a7 s TRIP GENERATION / rt;F TOTAL IN OUT AM PEAK 14 2 12 PM PEAK 48 25 23 o U a �Ca. d CI o M o AM(2/11) No PM(24/22) N o —. 95% enBOWDISH ROAD 3 -- -o Li w St BOWDISH ROAD C.) Q 5% to ck-- AM(0/1) U co Z\C'' PM(1/1) a zr U p c ti 0 DI 0 01.ccl U d- 0 rn N 0 H U W 116. a z l t 10 W U NOT TO SCALE PROD #: 17-1904 N CPA TRIP GENERATION & DISTRIBUTION DATE: 1 0/20/1 7 BOWDISH DRAWN: BNG CPA :Iwo E C APPROVED: TRW BOWDISH ROAD & SANDS ROAD 1 . SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON WHIPPLECONSUTTINOENGINEERS C,,' AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING W L 2528 NORTH SULLIVAN ROAD FIGURE 3 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION SPOKANE VALLEY,WASHINGTON 99216 FH:509.893-2517 FAX:X:509-926-0227 Ir Photo 1 —Property Frontage—Bowdish Road looking North I r 3 • 1 -i"+y„!f a I -die H- Air , Y ..„.,,,,,,,,,,,,,imail_, ,....,,, ._ . ,40ffer--- Photo 2—Intersection of Dish/nail-Mica Road & Bawdish Road, Looking 1 Torth n,....i iv.r.i... tiporicirrAb 4 mg= { 'w sN i, � '�� ,.yam r _ -f L.....,-,...:1-do' .7', .46,1,..N1.; , , , A, - r.'`•� 1' _I 1 I 14 5108 uPk WEN i �.•.. ” ~ Yr . . 'S '�._- _ F, ++ - } ill:— ` ► _ _. e. ���a w.s�.--� r _ .. • f AWCE Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Narrative: Parcel:45333.1807 October 23, 2017 The Comprehensive Plan Amendment for parcel 45333.0807 is to change the land use and zoning from R2 (Single Family Residential)to CMU (Corridor Mixed Use),consistent with the property north of the Railroad tracks. The subject parcel is approximately 5.86 acres and is accessed via Dishman Mica Rd to Bowdish Road,south Sands Road. The parcel fronts Bowdish Road, on the east property line,for approximately 175 feet,which is the access point for this lot.The north property line adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad is 940 feet.The west property line is approximately 525 feet adjacent to single family lots ranging from .42 to .85 acres and a 2.25 acre vacant lot owned by the City of Spokane Valley, which is adjacent to the Railroad tracks. The south property line is approximately 685 feet adjacent to single family lots ranging from .30 of an acre to .80 acres. All lots were created per SHP-09-10. See exhibit 1. The following services will be provided by the utilities listed. Electricity will be supplied by Avista. Natural gas will be provided by Avista. Comcast will provide cableTV. And telephone will be provided by CenturyLink. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The parcel is adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad Track and with all the noises associated from the tracks to the subject site is not contusive to single family housing. This is consistent with the owner's experience in developing and selling lots in the Ponderosa East Subdivision, laying south of and adjacent to the same railroad line.With the amendment there will also be a buffer between the tracks and the existing single- family lots. The physical environment will need to be mitigated to make the land amenable for permitted Corridor Mixed-Use development. The site falls into the Chester Creek flood plain, but not within the floodway and with the correct mitigation the site can be raised for permitted and allowed uses,thus improving the stream bed for birds and mammals to thrive. The impacts on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhood will be minimal with the buffering required and this space being a buffer for those who live close by. 2528 N. Sullivan Rd. • Spokane Valley, WA 99216 A PO Box 1566 • Veradale, WA 99037 Phone 509-893-2617 • Fax 509-926-0227 Civil, Structural, Traffic, Survey, Landscape Architecture and Entitlements This request is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. A. Goal LUG-4. Provide neighborhood and community scale retail centers for the City's neighborhoods. This amendment is consistent with this goal through the implementation of the policies as outlined below. a. LUP-4.1. integrate retail developments into surrounding residential areas with attention to quality design and function. This amendment allows for street upgrades to the entrance of the neighborhood. The location of this corridor mixed-use site will have minimal impact to the layer residential development being place adjacent to the existing railroad right of way. b. LUP-4.2. Encourage pedestrian and bicycle access to neighborhood shopping and services. This change will take advantage of existing pedestrian and bike route to the Chester Store and Bowdish/Sands Road and Dishman Mica Road currently utilizing the existing railroad crossing. c. LUP-4.4. Encourage Mixed-Use residential and commercial and office development in Neighborhood Commercial designations where compatibility with nearby uses can be demonstrated. Integrate retail developments into surrounding residential areas with attention to quality design and function. This amendment allows for an unusable and difficult to market lot to add mixed use near the train tracks. d. LUP-4.5. Ensure compatibility between mixed-use developments and residential areas by regulating height, scale, setbacks, and buffers. This amendment to buffer the residents for the train tracks and adding mixed use to the area. e. LUP-4.7. Develop design guidelines that encourage quality design and pedestrian and vehicle circulation in commercial, office an Mixed-use development. This amendment allows for Corridor Mixed-Use to be a positive action in this neighborhood. B. Goal LUG-9. Encourage the development of mixed-use areas that foster community identity and are designed to support pedestrian, bicycle and regional transit. This amendment is consistent with this goal through the implementation of the policies as outlined below. f. LUP-9.2 The mix of land uses allowed in either the Corridor Mixed-use or Mixed-use Center designation should include: a. A variety of housing types including apartments, condominiums,town houses,tow- family and single-family dwellings on small lots. b. A full range of retail goods and series including grocery stores,theaters/entertainment, restaurants, person services and specialty shops. c. Public/quasi-public uses and/or open space: d. Professional Office and other employment oriented uses;and e. Commercial uses that require large land areas by have low employment density and are anti-dependent, such as lumber yards, plant nurseries,warehouses, and auto dealerships, should be prohibited for either Mixed-use category. This amendment allows for a variety of dwellings, shops, and or services. C. Goal LUG-14. Improve the appearance and function of the built environment. This amendment is consistent with this goal through the implementation of the policies as outlined below. g. LUP-14.3. Establish standards for the scale and intensity of commercial, retail and industrial signage that protects views and minimize signage clutter while allowing adequate business identification. This amendment allows the neighborhood to keep it's identify without the clutter of signage and keeps Corridor Mixed Use encroachment with are surrounding the Railroad close to the Dishman Mica Arterial. D. Goal LUG-16. Provide a street system that connects neighborhoods. This amendment is consistent with this goal through the implementation of the policies as outlined below. a. LUP-16.1. Encourage new developments, including multifamily projects,to be arranged in a pattern of connecting streets and blocks to allow people to safely get around easily by foot, bicycle, bus,or car. This amendment allows for upgrades to Bowdish and Sands along the site and can extend frontage upgrades for connectivity, allowing for circulation across the frontage or the property. b. .LUP-16.2. Develop street, pedestrian path and bike path standards that contribute to a system of fully connected routes. This amendment can extend to the boundaries for connectivity allowing for circulation across the site frontage. The following provision of the development codes allows for the proposal: a. Per the Amended Comprehensive Plan Map,the subject parcel is located in the Corridor Mixed Use zone. b. Per SVMC Chapter 19.70.030, Mixed-use, the lots will comply with the dimensional standards shown in Table 19.70-1. Front yard setback will be 15 ft. minimum, rear yard setback of 10 ft. minimum, and side yard setback of 10 ft minimum. Driveways and off-street parking areas shall be paved with hard surface material. c. Per SVMC Chapter 19.60 Permitted Uses, Corridor Mix-Use are a permitted use in the CMU zone. d. Per SVMC Chapter 22.20, Concurrency, certificates of water and sewer availability have been submitted with the application.With regards to traffic, a Trip Generation and Distribution Letter has been submitted detailing the anticipated changes to traffic as a result of the project. e. Per SVMC Chapter 22.50.020,Vehicle Parking, each unit will have a minimum of two off-street parking spaces. f. Per SVMC Section 22.130.070, Development Transportation Improvements,the streets will be improved and built to current City of Spokane Valley street standards. g. Per SVMC, Chapter 22.150,Stormwater Management Regulations,the project will be designed such that post-development storm water will be treated and disposed of by methods approved in the Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual. EXHIBIT 2 v IL I L L 11y ivldp r 1-1-_A' 10-kit-NJ larifli:1 - $ilei■j}liiii s�■■�■� �� �I w, �'F h�— ;.IIIA■■■1l oh �� ,minis If■l ,, 1■■■■■ -■■1R■ L. ■111■ s 111111,!!' El. ` 1Ibi 1 &. 1111 1111~I ,;' II r w, ww niw 0, c' 1111■ 1111 �`liilw,nRc 1 .. ■ 111 =m �� s ,.. 4_,•: w * i N I. ■ 111 ■ ,s- 1 ■■1 I ■a '� 111■11111 �- 1111 �°111111 1`111 _ 1 �'; 1111111 r, .� 410...±,7,- _ 11■AI■ 1111 JIII III m__1._„:1111,113 o'n. ,, 1�1■�; IIi1111 ���Fir.[►i iri fl 11�11r1 ■ i rte■■■■� ivriz 1111111111111 .E ��r�C�f- 11� {I1 l ..�. *`I^ i r c Frd Pr`" 1:4::: 11==,` rt " fi f �A~- fay- ■�P 1 111111111■ . y_ , ... — t ' . • Casty .2.4Th A 1 h I 111 M�'m11ac,,-;s,a c.■ m �_ •lin •e •°sifi4' ��1,• °` ■■ = : 'Pa-1, Iww 9:� ■ II ,l■ mi'w�L ,,;4s_ I IA ! 1 w: r - 111 .o■■ mim: a High f`` - mm f ■i ' it-35th m -- 111111 _..■l Im7 ;.., _'1 MI 10 ili � '� I dux 'l11,�L 1u1 ''-a-mm■ r a -- 11 m L■P. t•r ��,E1�111'11 w 1i� ■ ♦.144 $1,w�r ,701.11 .a,; Mania ■. N1► 4 " p. filer X111 L IP ► ,f1-.1110 fiw +•r _ ; 1111 =� lk # 1116 • } #. Pfl# \- Y1i! ,L-mil T�. �i i 'm { *iI•l1■■ions. �'� n ,y Er 111'# pit l� €'e 6ti► �.II���.'.,� _ �;� ��. jar ,►.�u.*��1 �� *2 �s . + 111 1!'� �ll�. ■'�# *1 (1111 J1 rrlltiis► + #�II<111 at Ara a 0 al Pond erosa Ni ►411 Wm. 111, 11111 � ® 1:b ■ � *Ekementary !ame fs r amu.■ 42�- _ 1 w ' . 1111■ r ". ir. .1 X11 ` '' '. m12 -y • '' CI: ir fro V I ..._,PIN IFiFil -..., ,,, : • =� _fir' ` { !mm li 000411r,.. Sim a� l■r :. „,,„4,• Ln ...[ A.,. IP - r • 7 L ar. . -di ==iir- . -.::._,._r. 9 Emis_ A, ,,-,-...7?-.,, _. ..,._rdr„.-. 4,_••—r-,„,-.4.41, i ■ �: ■ r��f�i�AM mm, Im Alt I ire n ,• t�;4r _ P im ■� _ r''c l�46th 71L! '1' ,th.A l _ ,-�IN�1 ' .?-i .e Mgff, M : 111111 } = *-' , th_-2; Y L"S� �....1;,< ?s 11 X1111 ,�! u f =� L6": .5 E:Aunnx LIII S moi 1.14 , LI FEARPi,IIM • _ Di -.' #-'• Milli' ' vry- ,.,.-y#: . . lig .__.___=-. .. --- \ 44 Pcr I --r-'. IIII/II' III - -..'75.-14/4117t 'VAL” - 3 LS*/ g. t a !' '■1 . _ .5'' / tab m t v d 1 r Am.rill 11111111M. 11119111P '.-I; V irA I P _......„ sf .a,- raj .. /irk.; --. au Will I 111 — r -Ai ti� 'k111-4.1 At �'t-eskf 1_, E Sioux Cir ' 1 A1• EXHIBIT 3 Comprehensive Plan Map 111010 '0413f 1+'Fy firfr� illill 11111 .,,„c4, [i'3 1111 . IIII I hi .1 1 Study Area A414.4.440L0 45333.1847 O VACANT LAND Q yr , 11111/11111 lir d "Dr r0 0 Alibi'? 4c 1 11 i }'rivarely inriivttrd.stte-retic flc C'omprrlacrrsrw Pan AAP and CPA-2018-'0003 ql., SL. Zoning Map aniendrornrrecrtrcatirrgtochange tite dr-1m t ors Cwrp+ir TNivaPlodLAPrciRDestgnagorrfrau! Owner Dennis � Lm,DeerSliy,ReS+dr+rridt(rcI)RJ Melissa Crapo wish R Sirrgle-/>J!,ftly Resddertttai Suburban atl Pare!#: dee Map f]tavricrMo_reorttrtgclasrf?eafforatu Curr f dixrd Me(01,1741 d sAratiQn with o Address: See Map Corridor Mixed Use(CM 2116 ciaasi COW? EXHIBIT 4 Zoning Map w -..... 00 , sk hvc I 1 w -' i". P 9rrrrr d,Pr,L a ki I -,,,,,,N,,,,,, . � 4 111,n.,,,p,,,,,, _„ Study Areai ii 45333.1807 ()VACANT LAND 7 0 rn i f�,a'qy kir ^3w III e„,„„'crt;r.x7r o S e� 3 a iiiL , , _ 1111111111111/b1S1. �y �l r 7Fri+arPelyrniierlraJsirr-speco,corn�urtreritimPlan.l aparrd 1 CPA�2O18—ODO3 I Request: urlrrg iTtrpcnw�nrianarad reyra 'iRgrvck�rg�rrlae "k' Owns Owner: Dennis $e C[rxrpreflcvrsiue Plan Land Lias Deafafdceram �.L Low Durr;1 Reside7tkrd(Lag) Meds [; 7 Q wlih a Sine?faueily X�s�deratlal 5ar6rrrlrn r Disrrlrl(XV souring&mela-orlon[a '�T.+ P r CL I ; B Map Corridor Mixed Else(CLIZ rj areegnaga r with n ~-',] I Address; See NQS? _- l Cor)rdarAl9xerl[Tse{Y.Sdd ±ancfassrinn EXHIBIT 5 COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT p0 �1� BUILDING &PLANNING DIVISION Va11ey DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS REVIEW 10210 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 4 Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5240®Fax:509.720.5375®planning@spokanevalley.org spokanevalley.org Project Number: CPA-2018-0003 Application Description: The application 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 Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) designation with a Corridor Mixed Use(CMU)zoning classification. Location: Parcel numbers 45333.807; located W of the Y intersection of East Sands Road and South Bowdish Road, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 33,Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers, 21 S Pines Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Owner: Dennis &Melissa Crapo; 2602 N Sullivan Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Date of Application: October 26, 2017 Date of Complete Determination: January 5,2018 Staff Contact: Martin Palaniuk, Planner (509) 720-5031 mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org Date Issued: January 5, 2018 Signature: -1244/4-72) cZk'rrir!, YOUR APPLICATION IS: Complete The required components of the application are present. The materials provided thus far are judged by the Building&Planning Division to meet the procedural submission requirements and the information is sufficient for continued processing even though additional information may be required or project modification may be undertaken subsequently. The Determination of Completeness does not preclude the Building&Planning Division from requesting additional information or studies either with this notice or subsequently if new information is required or substantial changes in the proposed action occur. The issuance of the Determination of Completeness shall not be constructed to mean that any of its application components have been approved. EXHIBIT 6 SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane SVMC 21 .20 V iley Community Development- Planning Division 11703 E Sprague Ave Suite B-3 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5310♦ Fax: 509.688.0037 ♦ planning®spokanevallev.org STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: Received by: Fee: PLUS#: File#: PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL 'THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** ►� Completed SEPA Checklist ® Application Fee ® Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81/2" by 11" or 11" by 17"size ® Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done)and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give. the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know"or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems,the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered"does not apply." IN ADDITION,complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D). For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words"project,""applicant," and "property or site" should be read as"proposal,""proposer,"and "affected geographic area,"respectively. PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of 14 Spokane 4r SEPA CHECKLIST Valley A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable Comprehensive Plan Change Bowdish and Sands 2. Name of applicant: Dennis and Melissa Crapo CIO Whipple Consulting Engineers 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 2528 N Sullivan Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216- Todd R Whipple, PE phone:509-893-2617 4. Date checklist prepared: October 11, 2017 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Comprehensive Plan Amendment for 2017 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? Yes If yes, explain. Upon successful implementation of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a Zone Change to immediately implement and develop a project consistent with the revised zone. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.A previous Short Plat SHP-09-10 was prepared, this SEPA checklist, Application form, Trip Generation Letter, and Narrative. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? None known If yes, explain. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. This Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Zone Reclassification. Once the site is rezoned then a Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, Project Specific SEPA, Building Permits,Water Plans, Sewer Plans, Storm Drain Plans, Street Plans, UIC registrations, Street Permit, Utility Permit, Street Obstruction Permit, Street Tree Plan, etc... PL-22V1.0 Page 2of18 Sponn�kane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.)The Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification proposes to change 5.86 acres from R2(single family residential)to CMU (Corridor Mixed Use), see exhibits 2 and 3. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.The subject parcel is located on the west side of the intersection of Bowdish Road and East Sands Road, just south of East Dishman Mica Road, with appoximatley 275 linear feet of frontage on Bowdish Road, located on portions of Southwest 1/4, Section 33,Township 25N, Range 44E,W.M.Spokane County Parcel Number 45333.1807. 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? Yes The general Sewer Service Area? Yes Priority Sewer Service Area?Yes (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA)/Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). Project does lie within the ASA in the City of Spokane, per Figure 6-1 Aquifer Sensitive Area from the SRSM, as well as the high susceptibility area of CARA, per Figure 6-2 of the SRSM. Stormwater disposal methods will be consistent with Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual (SRSM), which may include grassed percolation areas, evaporation ponds, drywells and gravel galleries depending upon specific soil types encountered at the locations of the proposed facilities at time of a specific project. Anticipated rate will be appropriate for the design option chosen. At this time the volume is unknown. Because the system will follow the SRSM there will be a dead storage component of 0.5' in each swale or pond area that should limit direct discharge of items used in the home as well as firefighting activities. PL-22 V1.0 Page 3 of 18 nTM�'okane � '`°`�� SEPA CHECKLIST Sp Valley' 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? The CMU zoning may anticipate chemicals, but the future project for this site has not been chosen. 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. Applicable BMP's will be used during construction to contain any leaks or spills as they occur. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? Once the CMU zone has been developed there may be chemicals stored,and spills associated with CMU volumes will be handled on-site per the facility spill prevention and clean- up plan. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Unknown at this time. 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts. Yes, stormwater will be discharged into the ground. No potential impacts are anticipated at this time and the future discharge will be as allowed in the SRSM. The existing stream bed will not receive an new stormwater. PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of 18 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1) Earth a. General description of the site(check one): ®flat, ❑ rolling, ❑ hilly, ❑ steep slopes, ❑ mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?Less than 5% c. What general types of soils are found on the site(for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. NRCS classification is Endoaquolls and Flluvaquents, 0-3% slopes, and Urban land- Phoebe, disturbed complex 3-8% slopes. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity?Yes If so, describe. A site review does indicate the presence of these types of soils, additionally, the City of Spokane Valley maps show unstable or erodible soils on the subject site. Therefore, during plan preparation of a specific project the site Geotech will note the presence of these specific types of soils and an acceptable manner by which to deal with them, see exhibit 5. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. In a future project there may be grading proposed for streets, site, and building pads. The grading would involve removal of organics, preparation of street subgrade and preparation of building pads. This will occur over the entire buildable portion site.Although quantities are unknown at this time,we would anticipate the movement of approximately 15,000 to 20,000 cy. Any import or export of material shall be from/to a preapproved source/destination and coordinated with the City of Spokane Building and Planning Department. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? During site preparation for a future project, some minor erosion from wind and rain may occur during construction, but would be mitigated through the use of appropriate BMPs. The existing seasonal streambed may be mittigated to provide more buiding space. The subject site will be stabilized by paving,concrete, buildings and landscaping. If so, generally describe. PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of 18 Spo°T'`" v ane ne SEPA CHECKLIST k Valley,. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?60%-70" h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: During site preparation for a future project, on-site grading shall be consistent with approved grading and temporary erosion sediment control plans. Use of appropriate BMPs during construction and the stabilization of disturbed soils by paving, concrete, buildings and landscaping following construction. 2) Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (Le., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During site construction,for a future project, some fugitive dust could be expected, although the intent of the permits would be to control this instance. Additionally, a future project may create exhaust fumes from construction equipment, etc. At the completion and occupancy of a future project, construction air emissions may occur, exhaust machinery and vehicles. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? None known. If so, generally describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: All future site development shall comply with Spokane Regional Clean Air(SRCAA), construction related requirements. Future tenants may require additional review through SRCAA. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 3) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. The site is in a Flood plain, see exhibit 4, which may be mitigated so the PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of 18 Sp"ok��� ane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley,: property can be buildable. Chester Creek a seasonal streambed is adjacent to the Railroad tracks. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, although this is a non-project section Chester Creek does lie within 200-feet of the subject site. Future projects will need to take this into consideration. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Future work within the flood zone AE is anticipated. Indicate the source of fill material.To be determined at time of flood zone mitigation, if at all possible. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? No Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Future work within the flood zone AE is anticipated. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? Yes. If so, note location on the site plan. See exhibit 7. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? No. If so,describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No, stormwater treatment is required pursuant to the SRSM. All future runoff will be treated in the EVALUATION FOR catchment areas before discharged. AGENCY USE ONLY b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Yes. Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. As noted previously, a future project will be developed following the requirements for stormwater as outlined in the SRSM. Additional measures,if any,will be added if required during the design and approval process with the City of Spokane and any other affected agencies. PL-22 V1.0 Page 7 of 18 Spokanetr SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any(for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.There will be no water material discharged into the ground from septic tanks. . c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? The source of runoff from this site after completion of design for this propery, will be from the constructed elements of the design. The intent is to convey stormwater to catchments or pond areas to treat and discharge the treated stormwater (as required by the SRSM) to the underlying soils, via swales, ponds, drywells, galleries, etc. Will this water flow into other waters? No. If so, describe. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? No. Runoff will be treated in the catchment areas before entering ground water. The site does not contribute to any surface waters. If so, generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: As noted previously, the project will be developed following the requirements for stormwater as outlined in the SRSM. Additional measures, if any, will be added if required during design and as approved by the City. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 4) Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ®deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ® evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ® shrubs PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of 18 an•�okane � � SEPA CHECKLIST Sp Valley ® grass El pasture El crop or grain El wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulirush, skunk cabbage, other El water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ® other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? CMU projects usually take up a large amount of space. Most of the vegetation may be removed. The seaonal streambed may be mitigated allowing for more vegetation. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.Unknown. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: With on proposed project at this time, measures to preserve or enhance vegetaion is unknown. The seasonal streambed would be the best place to mitigate. 5) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: a birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: a mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ❑fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List,any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the EVALUATION FOR site.Unknown. AGENCY USE ONLY C. Is the site part of a migration route?Yes If so, explain.The area is listed as Rocky Mountain Elk habitate, but the site is surrounded by homes and the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks.Consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife may be required to create a project consistenant with this designation, see exhibit 6. PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of 18 N4 Spoke SEPA CHECKLIST Valley d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:With no proposed project, the measures to preserve or enhance wildlife is unknown. 6). Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar)will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas will be used by future site-specific projects for heating, air conditioning and lighting. Additionally, solar, wind and other sources of power would be available for future projects. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The future construction of a CMU site should not affect solar energy on adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal?. List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Final building plans shall demonstrate compliance with the commercial provisions of the Washington State Energy Code (WSEC). 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal?Unknown. if so, describeOnce a project specific plan is developed a new SEPA will need to be completed. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.None known 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Does not apply, at this time as this is a non- project section. b. Noise PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 18 artier "`"`� �-��.. SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley. 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?Typical noises associated with the Railroad Track: train whistles and the sounds of the train cars traveling past the site, with collector street traffic, commercial uses, and residentail uses adjacent or nearby. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. For a future CMU project, short term noises from construction would be anticipated.Long term noise would be typical traffic and occupant noises associated with CMU areas. Future construction noise is anticipated to occur during daylight hours. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Future construction restricted to hours allowed by City code. 8). Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?The subject site is currently undeveloped. b. The property to the north is adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad and further north is Corridor Mixed Use mini storage. The property to the east is a single family lot with the north portion currently vacant,which is the portion of land adjacent to the subject site. c. The properties to the south and west are approximatly 1/3 of an acre single family homes and a vacant lot to the northwest of the subject site which is owner by City of Spokane Valley. EVALUATION FOR d. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Unknown. AGENCY USE ONLY e. Describe any structures on the site. No structures are on the site. f. Will any structures be demolished? N/A If so, what? PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of 18 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Va11ey4 g. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R2, Single-Family Residential h. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? CMU Corridor Mixed Use. i. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?Unknown. j. Has any part of the site been classified as an"environmentally sensitive" area?Yes If so, specify.Aquifer Sensitive Area, flood plain, Chester Creek floodwater and Elk migration route. k. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? This is unkown at this time with not project selected. I. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None m. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A n. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Develop to applicable zoning code development standards at time of specific project development. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.Does not apply. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.Unkown at this time. PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of 18 ��� � SEP CHECKLIST Spokane Valley c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:Unknown at this time. 10). Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Maximum height as allowed by code, 35 feet. Future project exteriors may be one of the following or a combination; wood, brick, aluminum, lap siding (wood/concrete/vinyl) with cultured or natural stone, windows, doors, asphalt shingles or metal roofing, those materials common to house construction within the Spokane region . b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Yes, views will be altered by future development. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Final site and building plans shall be developed cohesive with related design standards of the City of Spokane Valley Zoning Code, 2 stories with marketable attributes. 11). Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? Unknown What time of day would it mainly occur? The subject site will be illuminated at night consistent with the City of Spokane Valley zoning codes and standards. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Yes, ambient light affect. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Exterior lights from the adjacent residential and commercial uses in the area and Train lights. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: See comment to 11 a. PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of 18 pna,...ne SEPA CHECKLIST Spok Valleyu 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There is an existing bike lane running south on Bowdish and at the the intersection of Bowdish and Sands, turns onto Sands Road. There are 2 public parks within 1 mile of the site, Castle Park and Brown's Park. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? None anticipated. If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None at this time. 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? No If so, generally describe. None identified by WISAARD search. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None, other than those requird by City of Spokane Valley Code, Washington State, and/or Federal Law. 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Dishman Mica Road; Bowdish Road and Sands Road. There are no plans at this time Show on site plans, if any. b. Is site currently served by public transit? No. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Spokane Transit Route 97, 0.80 miles to the north at the intersection of Bowdish Road and 32"d Avenue. PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of 18 �TM�' `kane' ""'= SEPA CHECKLIST Spo Valley. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? Unknown. How many would the project eliminate? None. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? There may be upgrades to Bowdish Road. If so,generally describe(indicate whether public or private). Unknown at this time. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? None anticipated If so, generally describe. Existing Union Pacific Railroad Zine. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? See the attached Trip Generation and Distribution Letter. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. This project is anticipated to generate 845 average daily trips. The project is anticipated to generate 14 AM peak hour trips and 48 PM peak hour trips. These rates were developed from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Handbook and the Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None at this time as they are project specific impacts. 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? Unknown. If so, generally describe. Unknown at this time. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Unknown at this time. 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: ® electricity, ® natural gas, ®water, ® refuse service, ® telephone, ® sanitary sewer, ❑ septic system, ® other- describecable TV. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project,the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the PL-22 V1.0 Page 15 of 18 Spokane vz SEPA CHECKLIST Valley. immediate vicinity which might be needed. The following utilities are known at this time to be service providers adjacent to or within the immediate area. 1. Avista—Gas 2. Avista/— Electricity 3. CenturyLink—Telephone 4. Comcast/Other—Cable TV 5. Spokane County Utilities—Sewer 6. Consolidated Water District#19—Water C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: _-i Date Submitted: (r' /7-te 17 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for protect actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal,would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water;emissions to air; production,storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Yes, as the current site is undeveloped,development will increase stormwater runoff,vehicle emissions and site related noise, however, the allowed uses will be restricted on to produce, store or release toxic/hazardous substances. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Through cordination, CC&R's and proper site management. PL-22 V1.0 Page 16 of 18 anuF -ane SEPA CHECKLIST SP'W Valley 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The future site will be graded,which will remove plants. There are no fish or marine life onsite. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: The grading will remove most if not all plant material on the site. The stream bed should be mitigated to a more healthy condition. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? This site will not likely to deplete energy or natural resources. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:The owner will use Energy Star equipment and has the option to use wind or solar energy. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The site is surrounded by homes and businesses and by mitigating the existing stream bed will more likely than not have game birds on that portion of the property. a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Mitigation of the stream bed. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are There are no existing plans as of yet for this property. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities?The Corridor Mixed Use is unknown at this time. There are utilities on or close to the site. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: No measures at this time. PL-22 V1.0 Page 17 of 18 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 7. Identify, if possible,whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.Any project on this site must follow local,state and fenderal laws for the prtection of the environment. E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon t 's check ' Date: ,ie)//4/r7 Signatur-• Please print or type: Proponent: Gtj l6 6)74u `r7 &' /d > Address: Zzr AI.- " /Ov Rod 5p5, VA41 Z 14 Phone: / 1 Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Address: Phone: PL-22 V1.0 Page 18 of 18 EXHIBIT 7 OMMIJNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT I ne Sfllia PLANNING DIVISION DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Valley' 1021013 Sprague Ave* Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5240.Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning rispokanevalley,org FILE NUMBER: CPA-2018-0003 PF#OI OSAL DESCRIPTION: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the land use designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) and the zoning from Single Family Residential Suburban(R-2)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). PROPOSAL LOCATION: Parcel number 45333.1807; located W of tile Y intersection of lEast Sands Road and South Bowdish Road, further located in the SW'4 of Section 33,Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington APPLICANT: Whipple Consulting Engineers, 2t S Pines Rd, Spokane Valley,WA 99206 OWNER: Dennis &Melissa Crapo,2602N Sullivan Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley, Community & Public Works Department Pursuant to Title 21 (Envii•onmentail Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, 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). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Spokane Valley Municipal Code Titles 19, 21 and 22, site assessment, and comments from the public and affected agencies.This information is available to the public on request. DETERMI1VATJON This DNS is issued wider WAC 197-11-340(2);the lead agency will not act on his proposal far 14 days from the date below. STAFF CONTACT: Mactin Palaniuk,Planner, (509) 720-5031, mpalaniukspokanevaliey,org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner DATE ISSUED: February 2,2018 SIGNATURE: r• & &LA Z--'-;—_) APPEAL: An appeal of this deteunination shall be submitted to the Community&Public Works Department within fourteen(14)calendar days after the date issued, The appeal must be written and make specific factual objections to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90.Appeals,and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Scheduled shall be paid at time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680,appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. Cly of Spokane Valley February 2,2I1! aetermicalion of 7+Ian-Significance(DNS) Page I of l File No.CPA-201$-1MP EXHIBIT 8 '011�11VIC CITY 'EBLIC VOR S DEPARTMENT Soot BUILDING +&PLANNING DIVISION D1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING .00%iley. 10210 E Sprague Ave •Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720-5244 •Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning[ spr►kanevallcy.erg, Elate of Notice: February 7, 2018 Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVNIC) 17.80.120, Notice of Public Hearing, the Building & Planning Division is sending notice to all property owners within 840 feet of the subject property. Public Hearing Date and Time: February 12,2018, beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, City Hall Project Number: CPA-2018-0003 Application Description: The application 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 Corridor Mixed Use(CMIJ) designation with a Corridor Mixed Use(CMU)zoning classification. Location: Parcel number 45333.1807; located W of the Y intersection of East Sands Road and South Bowdish Road,further located in the SW 1./ii of Section 33, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Applicant(s): Whipple Consulting Engineers,21 S Pines Rd, Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Owner(s): Dennis & Melissa Crape; 2602 N Sullivan Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Date of Application: October 26,2017 - Date Determined January 5,201$ Complete _ Staff Contact: Martin Palaniuk, Planner (509) 720-5031 rYipalaniuk s okanevalley.0 • Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to the Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. NOTICE: Individirals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at(509) 921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the hearing at the Community & Public Works Department, located at the Spokane ValleyCity Miall, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Send written comments to the Spokane Valley Community &Public Works Department. Comprehense Land Use Designation 64,4b1 : .4% 4 . . 4 4 '1« _ I. I 1 Jr . AIN it - ''S. , , N.,...1,6,,_ ,.a.,. ..... . . ., . e , I• r ' ` . Project Site Li ,--- • ri ..... .„... J • 4 - gr .w,.`--- __ .o,r -- ,,.0,- January 331, 201$ 1:4,514 0 0C 5 c�?r 015 ri Zoning r 1N.4u ; t , I I a .I 0 0,Q5 C l CL2t n ;"<f: R1 Nic r>Mu chlu ;, '....-N^[' cvnicC37S. 4fn[`1e. f,?RI- s ot<crip-zz. Ch1.6.Vt,.: P6. IA 4JyGS. R O.Y;,,µ 51.4 ne C.*4,441 Urrn.: - 111 POS • RC EXHIBIT 9 Spo'claneSPOI1h1hh1h11 Cummajrr"sty Si. Public Worlcs Department ,000Val 1e" 10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509) 720-5000 # Fax (.5119)724-5075 + www.spokanevalley.org —- _ Memorandum To: Marty Pallaniuk, Planner From: Chad Riggs, Senior Encineer Date: January 10, 2018 Re: CPA-2013-00103; Bowdish and Sands Road Comprehensive Plan Amendment SFPA Checklist Review Comments Development Engineering has reviewed the SEPA Checklist for CPA-2018-0003 to change the comprehensive plan designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMCJ). We do not have any comments on the SEPA Checklist; however, the subject parcel contains a blanket drainage easement created by SIP-09-10 for the purpose of storrnwater treatment, storage and disposal. The plat dedication stales: "No rtaodifications to the boundaries of the drainage easements can be made without prior approval of the City of Spokane Valley. Engineering calculations shall be required for any modifications to the blanket drainage easement (Lot 7, Block 1. Seg Sheet 2)"_ The applicant should be made aware that a plat alteration and supporting drainage calculations will be required for any proposed modifications to the blanket drainage easement. All conditions will be deferred to the time of plat and/or building permit application. To: Martin Palaniuk (City of Spokane Valley - Community Development) CC: From: Jim Red (Spokane County- Environmental Services Dept) Date: Friday, January 12, 2018 Planning/Building #: Subject: CPA-2018-0003 Stage: Comprehensive Phase: Change land use from LDR to CMU Address: SS09 As per the development regulations/zoning code of the governing authority as amended, a wet(live) sewer connection to the area-wide Public Sewer System is to be constructed. Sewer connection permit is required. Commercial developments shall submit historical and or estimated water usage prior to the issuance of the initial building permit in order to establish sewer fees. All existing uses, not currently connected to the sanitary sewer system, are required to be connected. SS12A Applicant shall submit expressly to Spokane County Environmental Services Department"under. separate cover", only those plan sheets showing sewer plans and specifications for the public sewer connections and facilities for review and approval. Commercial developments shall submit historical and or estimated water usage as part of the sewer plan submittal. Prior to plan submittal, the developer is required to contact Chris Knudson or Colin Depner at 477-3604 to discuss the details of the sewer plans. Once submitted, the sewer plan may require revised and or additional plat comments to be addressed. January 10, 2018 CPA-2018-0003 Review of Trip Generation& Distribution Letter TEDL dated October 24, 2017 Parcel No.45333.1807 A planning level Trip Generation and Distribution Letter (TGDL) was submitted to the City of Spokane Valley fora proposed land use change from Low Density Residential(R-2) to Corridor Mixed Use (CfVMU). if the 5.86 acre +J- parcel is developed to CMU, the higher density would account for an estimated 845 new trips throughout a typical day over row Density Residential. During the peak hours, we would expect there to be an additional 14 new a.m. peak hour trips and 5.6 new p.m. peak hour trips. In reviewing the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan traffic model at the bishman Mica and Bowdish Road intersection, LOS calculations indicate that the intersection will operate ata. LOS C during the pm peak period. Adding the new pm peak hour trips that would be generated for this land use to the model continues to give a LOS C. By granting the CPA, a delay of about 3 Ya seconds on average would be added to every vehicle using the intersection. Based on the information submitted in the letter combined with the City's 2040 Comprehensive Nan traffic model, the City of Spokane Valley has determined that there is adequate transportation infrastructure to meet concurrency at time of building permit for this CPA. Attached are intersection capacity analysis to support the conclusions in this response, No pass-by trips were credited at this time for this analysis as recommended in the letter.Adequate street capacity exists tori .ut pa,s-by consideration. In the future,at time of permit,the applicant may submit a project specific T .D an• request a pass-by trip exemption. _ f _/ �r l . ' / Ra Wright, PE Sr. Engineer,Traffic City of Spokane Valley H M Signalized intersection Capacity Analysis 45: Bowdish & Jishman mica 1/1012018 Movement EOL EBT EBR WEL WBT WBR NBL NBT hiBR SBL SBT SBR Lana Configurations ) To }i 4 T Traffic Volume(uph) 10 470 110 35 210 30 50 120 40 15 ISG 13 Future Volume(vph) 10 470 110 35 210 30 50 120 40 15 150 10 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1700 1100 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time(e) 4.0 6.0 4.0 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane Utii.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.97 1,00 0.85 EIt.Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Said. Flow{plot) 1482 1515 1442 1489 1559 1612 1376 Elf Permitted 0.95 1.00 0,95 1,00 0,84 0.96 1.00 Said. Flow(perm} 1482 1515 1442 1489 1332 1561 1376 Peak-hour tactor, PHF 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,05 0.96 0.95 0.95 Adj.Flow{vph} 11 495 116 37 221 32 53 126 42 16 158 11 TOR Reduction i(vph) 0 9 0 0 5 0 0 11 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow(aph) 11 602 0 37 248 0 0 210 0 0 114 2 Heav Vehicles % 9% 9% 9% 12% 12% 12% 5°% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Prat NA Prot NA Perm NA, Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 4 4 4 Actuated Green, 6G(e) 0_8 46.3 3.2 49.2 16.6 16.5 16.5 Effective Green,g(s) 0.3 46.3 3.2 49.2 16.5 16.5 16.5 Actuated 9/C Ratio 0.01 0.57 0,04 0,61 0.20 0.20 0.20 Clearance T ime(s) 4.0 6.0 4.0 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap(vrph) 14 865 56 904 271 317 280 Ws Ratio Prot 0.01 00.40 c0.03 1)_17 vis Ratio Perm 016 0.11 0.00 vWo Raba 0.79 0.70 0.66 0.27 0.77 0.55 0.01 Uniform Delay, di 40.0 12.3 38.4 7.5 30.5 28.9 25.7 Progression Factor 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 135.$ 4.6 27.8 0.7 13.6 2.4 0.0 Delay(s) 175.6 16.9 66.1 $_2 44.1 31.3 25.7 Level of Service F B E A D C C Approach Delay(s) 19.7 15.6 44.1 31.0 Approach LOS B B D C Intersection Summery _ HCA2000 Control Delay 24.5 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCtI 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.70 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 81.0 Sura of lost lime(s) 15.0 Intersection Cepaclly Utilization 71.`.% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 Description: 2015 counts o Critical Lane Group COSV Network l+ Synchry 9 Report BS4nllen 01 \ I itacr � t1l't 1 P 11' • I' ' Page 1 ICM Signalized intersection Capacity Analysis 45: Bowdish & Dishman mica 1110/2018 moi+ #T I4tov+emon( _ EBL EBT EBR WBL WET W13R _ NEL NET NBR SQL SET SBR Lane Configurations t ) T} 41. 4' 1r Traffic Volume(vph) 10 470 135 43 210 30 58 120 40 15 162 10 Future Volume(vph) 10 470 135 43 210 30 58 120 40 15 162 10 ideal Flaw(vphpi) 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 6.0 4.0 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lane 11111, Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 097 1.00 0,98 0.98 1.009 0.85 Flt Protected 0,95 1.00 0,95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Sato'.Flaw(pros) 1482 1507 1442 1489 1568 1612 1376 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.79 0.97 1,00 Said.Flow(perm) 1482 1507 1442 1489 1245 1565 1376 Peak-hour factor,PI-1F 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0-95 0.95 0.95 Adj.Flow(vph) 11 495 142 45 221 32 61 126 42 16 171 11 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 11 0 0 6 0 0 10 0 0 0 9 Lane Group Flow(vph) 11 626 0 45 247 0 0 219 0 0 187 2 Hew Veh %icles 9% 9% 9% 12% 12% 12% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Turn Type Prot NA Prat NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 4 Permitted Phases 4 4 4 Actuated Green, G(s) 0.8 45.8 3.0 48.5 172 17.2 17.2 Effective Green,g(s) 0.5 45.6 3.0 48.5 17.2 17.2 17.2 Actuated 91C Relic 0.01 0,57 0.04 0.60 0.21 0.21 0.21 Clearance Time(s) 4.0 6.0 4.0 5,5 5,0 5.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Grp Cap(aph) 14 852 53 891 264 332 292 vis Ratio Prot 0.01 00.42 c0,03 0,17 ods Ratio Perm c0.18 0.12 0,00 vfc Ratio 1179 0,73 0,85 0.28 0.83 0.56 0,01 Uniform,Delay, d'l 40.0 13.1 38.3 7,8 30.5 28.5 25.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay,d2 135.6 5.6 72,0 0.8 19.7 2,0 0.0 Delay(S) 175.6 18.7 110,8 8.6 50.1 31,2 25.2 Level of Service F 8 F A D C C Approach Delay(s) 21.3 24.0 50.1 30.9 Approach Las C C 0 C Intersection Summary _ HCM 2000 Control Delay 28.1 HCI 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.75 Actuated Cycle Length(a) 81.0 Sum of lost third(s) 15,0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 76,7% ICU Leval of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 Description'2015 counts o Critical Lane Group COSV NetworkJ, ti 1 r r Syc hr°9 Report BSonnen °-V"l U i L I � 'It; L�' 1; r '�,. 'i i. (A)0...1-- U Page 1 E et 40111* SPOKANE Regan C°2121)iY Ili 118,Fie* (NT)1 -rd- FIRE DEPARTMENT Spat nr Valley,WA 992136 Phone(509)925-9700 FIRE DIE Est. 1940 FAX www.spnkr n tvti1t eyti rs.cam November 9, 2017 City of Spokane Valley 10210 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley. VJA 99206 RE: CPA-2017-0003 Technical Review Comments The Spokane Valley Fire Department has completed a review for the above referenced project and has no comments on the SEPA checklist. Specific fire department requirement shall be conditioned on future permits. Sincerely, Traci Harvey Fire Protection Engineer Spokane Valley Fire Department Q:Dept Data UnsharedlPrevention Unshared\Plats1511ortiesti2O1mS PA1CPA-2017- 4O3 Palaniuk.do x 'CAYf. '?•ff4 1"ili9 ;- STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY 40? N" Monroe Street • Spokwt;e, tevashin,3ton 99205-12I5 • (509)329-34W1 January 18, 2018 Mr, Martin Palaniuk Planner City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Re: Crapo Camp Plan Amendment/Zone Reclassification, File At CPA--2018--0003 Dear Mr. Palaniuk: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Application and anticipated Determination of Nonsignificance regarding the proposal to change 5.86 acres from Single Family Residential (R2) to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) for future development (Proponent: Dennis & Melissa Crapo). The Department of Ecology (Ecology) has reviewed the documents and submits the following comments: Water Quality Program-Shannon Petrisor (509) 329-3610 Proper erosion and sediment control practices must be used on the construction site and adjacent areas to prevent upland sediments from entering surface water. Local stormwater ordinances will provide specific requirements. Also refer to the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington found at htt.:lfwww.ec .ova_ ov/,ro rarnsiw•f stormwaterleastern man ualimarrual.html. All ground disturbed by construction activities must be stabilized. When appropriate, use native vegetation typical of the site. All new dry wells and other injection wells must be registered with the Underground Injection Control program(UIC) at Department of Ecology prior to use. Also, discharge from the wells) must comply with the ground water quality requirement (nonendangerment standard) at the top of the ground water table. Contact the Eastern Regional Office LTIC Coordinator, Llyn Doretr us at(509) 3518 or via email at Llvn.Dorerus{a ec. _wa.gov. You may also go to htt•:flwww.ec .wa.+oy! ro:ramsfw• Prndwtrtuiclre'istrationlreg info.html for registration forms and further information. Mr. Martin Palaniuk January 18, 2018 Page 2 Stormwater runoff may contain increased levels of grease, oils, sediment, and other debris. Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) should be installed and maintained so that any discharge will be appropriately treated to remove these substances_ Routine inspections and maintenance of all erosion and sediment control Best Management Practices (13MPs) are recommended both during and after development of the site. A Stormvvater Pollution Prevention Plan for the project site may be required and should be developed by a qualified person(s). Erosion and sediment control measures in the plan must be implemented prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. These control measures must be effective to prevent soil from being carried into surface water by stormwater runoff. Sand, silt, and soil can damage aquatic habitat and are considered pollutants. The plan must be upgraded as necessary during the construction period. Proper disposal of construction debris must be in such a manner that debris cannot enter the natural stormwater drainage system or cause water quality degradation of surface waters. Dumpsters and refuse collection containers shall be durable, corrosion resistant, nocabsorbent, nonleaking, and have close fitting covers. If spillage or leakage does occur, the waste shall be picked up immediately and returned to the container and tke area properly cleaned. The operator of a construction site that disturbs one acre or more of total land area, and which has or will have a discharge of stormwater to a surface water or to.a storm sewer, must apply for coverage under Department of Ecology's Baseline General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities. Owners of sites where less than one acre of total land area will be disturbed must also apply if the construction activity is part of a larger plan of development or sale in which more than one acre will eventually be disturbed_ Discharge of stormwater from such sites without a permit is illegal and may be subject to enforcement action by the Department of Ecology. If any soil or ground water contamination is known to be on the site, additional information is needed. The applicant may be required to submit additional studies and reports including, but not limited to, temporary erosion and sediment control plans, a stormwater pollution prevention plan, a site map depicting sample locations, a list of known contaminants with concentrations and depths found and other information about the contaminants. Application should be made at bast 60 days prior to commencement of construction activities. A permit application and related documents are available online at: http:i/ .ecv.wa.uoviprop:rands!woistorrnwaterlcOnstruction, or by contacting the Water Quality program, Department of Ecology, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, WA 9851)4- 7600; (360)407-6401. Mr. Martin Palaniuk January 18, 2018 Page 3 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Ecology's comments are based upon information submitted for review. As such,they do not constitute an exhaustive list of the various authorizations that must be obtained or legal requirements that must be fulfilled in order to carry out the proposed action. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments, please contact the appropriate staff listed above. Department of Ecology Eastern Regional Office (Ecology File #: 201800082) cc: Todd Whipple, PE, Whipple Consulting Engineers (for Dennis and Melissa Crapo) Mary Moore From: Lawlor, Jeffrey J (DFW) <Jeffrey.Lawlor c@dfw.wa,gov> Sent: Monday, January S, 2018 7:43 AM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: FW: Request for Comments CPA-2018-0003 Attachments: SEPA Documents CPA-2017-0CO3.pdf Martin Palaniuk- Thank you for the opportunity to comment on CPA-2015-0003- RnwdishfSancts Rd Comp Plan Amendment. Please let the record show thatChester Creek is considered atype "F" Stream in the location of the proposed CPA. The stream should be afforded the necessary buffers and protections as outlined in the Cities CAO, If there is a need to install a crossing on this stream as part of future development then a hydraulic project approval will be required by WDFbV. Thank you, Jeff Lawlor Assistant Regional Habitat Program Manager 2315 N Discovery Place Spokane Valley WA 9Y216-156 509-S92-1001, x321 jff.r_ey.lawiorgdfw.wa.gov From:SEPADesk (DFW) Sent; Friday,January 5, 2018 3:17 PM To: Lawlor,Jeffrey.1 (DFW) Subject: FW: Request for Comments CPA-2018-7003 Sent From 5EPA inbox Kelly Still I WDFVY Habitat Customer Service Specialist 1360.902,2422 I Kelly.Still aVdfw.+n+a.gov T&i a-ni and your response May be subf&ct m'mac disclosure, From: Martin Palaniuk [mailto:n,palaniuk@spokanevalley.or 1 Sent: Friday,January 5,2018 3:11 PM To: 'Avista Dave Byus' <dave.bvus@avistacarp.corn>; 'Central Valley School District#356' <jrawefl cvsd.org>; 'Centuryl-ink' <Karen,Stoddard@centurVGnk.com>; 'Chris Johnston'<criohnston@sool'Caneslieriff.arg>; 'Chris Knudson' <CKnudson@spokanecountV.or >; Anderson, Cindy (FCY) <CYAN461.L ECY.WA.GOV,; 'City of Liberty Lake' <atainio@libertylakewa,gov>; 'City of Spokane Tirrell Black' <tblackPsookanecitv.erg>, 'Colin Depner' <CDEP'NER@spokanecountV.orR>; 'Comcast! <bievan richardson@cable,comcast.cern>; 'Consolidated Irrigation District #19' <consoiidatedirri ation@COrncast,net>; Mary Moore<mrnoore@spokanevalley,arg>: Doug Powell <dpowell@spokarrevalley.org>; 'East Spokane Water District 141' <dist1@comcast.net>; 'East Valley School District#361' ‹sn,ithL0@evsd.ore>; 'Environmental Services Judy Green'<jagreen@spokanecountv•or >; 'Inland Power & Light' connien@inlandnawer.cQ!rrr>; McCann, Jacob (ECV)<JMCA461 aECY.WA,GOV>; Mary Moore <mnoore@spokanevallev.org>, 'mike Makela' <Makelovl@spokanevaileyfire.com>; Mike Stone 1 <mstone spnkanevailev.org>; 'Model Irrigation District#18' <iim modirr.crg>; 'Modern Electric Water Company' <modern@mewco con»; Patricide, Brian (PARIS) <Brian.PatnadePP kRKS.WA.GO >; 'R.andy Myhre' <E andv.myhre@aaistacorp,cpm>; 'Spokane AquiferJoint Board' <infofasaokaneaouifer,9r >; 'Spokane County Fire District#8' <iawalkup@ascfd4.org>; 'Spokane County Planning & Building' <jpederson@spokanecounty.orR>; 'Spokane County Utilities' <j_real si okanecounty,org>; 'Spokane County Water District#3' <scwd3Cc comcast.net>; 'Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency' <awestby spokanecleanair.orP>; 'Spokane Regional Health Oistriet'<psavage srlhcl_ar >; 'Spokane Regional Transportation Council' <rstewart@SRTC.org>; 'Spokane Transit Authority' €kotterstrom spokanetransit,c0m>; 'Spokane Tribe of Indians' <randya@spokanetribe.cQrn>; 'Torn Richardson City of Millwood'<torn.richardson millwoodv'a.us>; Harvey, Traci<harweytc spokanevaUe i► ire_cnm>; 'Vera Water& Power' <kwells.(averawaterandpower.com>; COM GMU Review Team <reuieuvteam rammerce.wa. o_v_>; Kaehler, Gretchen (DAMP)<Gretchen.Kaehler[a DAHP.wa.gov>; ECY RE SEPA REGISTER<separeRister a['ecy.Wa.Rov>; SEPADesk(DFW) <SEPAdeskdfw, „g wa ov>; DNR RF NORTHEAST REGION <northeast.re ion dnr. a. ov>; Guidatti, Chris {PARKS) <Chris.Gpidotti PARKS.WA.GOV>; 'WATransportation' ,cFiggG@Wsdot.wa.Rov>; 'WestValleySchool District#363' <b ri a n.l i berg @ vuvsd.o rg> Subject: Request for Comments CPA-2018-0003 All, Please review the attached Environmental Checklist and associated materials for the following project: Project Name: Bowdish/Sands Road Comprehensive Plan Amendment Pile 4: CPA-2018-0003 Site Address: Not addressed. Parcel No.45333.1807 located west adjacent to the Bowdish Road and Sands Road intersection. Please submit written comments to me via email, or mail, by January 19, 2018 0 5:00 p.m.. My contact information is listed below and noted on the attached documents. Thank you, Marty Martin Palaniulc Planner 10210 E. Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley, WA X9205 (S09) 720-5031 I moalaniuk(isookanewalley.org Stiokane Valley.000 This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act, chapter 42.56 RCA. 2 *Wane COMMUNITY &PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Spo e c PLANNING DIVISION Valley- REQUEST alleyREQUEST FOR COMMENTS - ROUTING MEMORANDUM ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW DATE: January 5, 2018 TO: Interested Parties, City Departments, and Agencies with Jurisdiction FROM: Martin Palaniuk, Planner 10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 PH: 509.720.5031 E-MAIL: mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org SUBJECT: CPA-2018-0003 - Bowdish/Sands Road Comp Plan Amendment SEPA Checklist for: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) and the zoning from Single Family Residential Suburban (R-2) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). LOCATION: Parcel number 45333.1807; located W of the Y intersection of East Sands Road and South Bowdish Road, further located in the SW '/4 of Section 33, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Please review the attached SEPA Checklist and submit written comments via mail, facsimile, mail or in person by January 19, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. to the attention of the staff person identified above. The City of Spokane Valley is the lead SEPA agency for the environmental review of the above referenced project. If additional information is required or needed for your department or agency to comment please contact the Planning Division. If no comments are given by the date indicated above, it is assumed that there are no comments relative to the environmental review. The determination will be based on the existing information. 10201 E.Sprague Avenue•Spokane Valley,WA•99206•(509)720-5000•Fax(509)720-5075 Spokane x: Valley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF USE ONLY 1, `zO: � i 66 3 x Date Submitted: / " P17- All by: Fee; PLUS #: 4/4-- File#: CPA 0 tom -ova (CFA- 011 "603) PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATION ❑ Map Amendment; or ❑ Text Amendment APPLICANT NAME: Whipple Consulting Engineers MAILING ADDRESS: 2528 N Sullivan Rd CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99216 PHONE: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227 CELL: EMAIL: info@WhippleCE.com PROPERTY OWNER : CRAPO,DENNIS A&MELISSA A MAILING ADDRESS: 2602 N SULLIVAN RD CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99216 PHONE: (509)924-8964 FAX: CELL: EMAIL: SITE ADDRESS: Bowdish Rd and Sands Rd Spokane Valley,WA 99206 PARCEL No.: 45333.1807 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Corridor Mixed Userl Chi.Development Engineering ZONING DESIGNATION: R2 CMU OCT 2 6 2017 PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: Project# ------ BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attaMed full explanation on separate sheet of paper): We are requesting a Comprehensive Plan Change and b iin' 4Zeclassific-ation-frorR2,Single Family Residential to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) as is on the north side of the Union Pacific Railroad Tracts. The land is now vacant with trees,shrubs,grasses and weeds. PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of 4 `wa <111 tN Spokane _x_ Valley' COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) 1 T1ej1 ncs qp6 , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. / //-7 ignature) (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this /2_urrn day of - ,20 f1 NOTARY SEAL 2(-4/re*/ /7-1101" "OTARY SIGNATURE 4sON Alva i'.� Notary Public in and for the State of Washington .• .•.e NOTARY PUBLIC • 1 • Residing at: COMM.EXPIRES • e • ° OCT.12,2020 e e i '•°"/1; a�F WASN G:eNN\ My appointment expires: VC ' `V-7-1 7,07-0 '�i,,iNN�� LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s),the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 4 of 4 Awc E Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Narrative: Parcel:45333.1807 October 23, 2017 The Comprehensive Plan Amendment for parcel 45333.0807 is to change the land use and zoning from R2 (Single Family Residential) to CMU (Corridor Mixed Use), consistent with the property north of the Railroad tracks. The subject parcel is approximately 5.86 acres and is accessed via Dishman Mica Rd to Bowdish Road, south Sands Road. The parcel fronts Bowdish Road, on the east property line, for approximately 175 feet, which is the access point for this lot.The north property line adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad is 940 feet. The west property line is approximately 525 feet adjacent to single family lots ranging from .42 to .85 acres and a 2.25 acre vacant lot owned by the City of Spokane Valley, which is adjacent to the Railroad tracks. The south property line is approximately 685 feet adjacent to single family lots ranging from .30 of an acre to .80 acres. All lots were created per SHP-09-10. See exhibit 1. The following services will be provided by the utilities listed. Electricity will be supplied by Avista. Natural gas will be provided by Avista. Comcast will provide cableTV. And telephone will be provided by Century Link. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The parcel is adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad Track and with all the noises associated from the tracks to the subject site is not contusive to single family housing. This is consistent with the owner's experience in developing and selling lots in the Ponderosa East Subdivision, laying south of and adjacent to the same railroad line.With the amendment there will also be a buffer between the tracks and the existing single- family lots. The physical environment will need to be mitigated to make the land amenable for permitted Corridor Mixed-Use development. The site falls into the Chester Creek flood plain, but not within the floodway and with the correct mitigation the site can be raised for permitted and allowed uses, thus improving the stream bed for birds and mammals to thrive. The impacts on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhood will be minimal with the buffering required and this space being a buffer for those who live close by. 2528 N. Sullivan Rd. • Spokane Valley, WA 99216 PO Box 1566 • Veradale, WA 99037 Phone 509-893-2617 • Fax 509-926-0227 Civil, Structural, Traffic, Survey, Landscape Architecture and Entitlements 1 t SEPA CHECKLIST pone SVMC 21 .20 Talley k Community Development— Planning Division 11703 E Sprague Ave Suite B-3 0 Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5310 0 Fax: 509.688.0037 0 planning@spokanevalley.org STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: Received by: Fee: PLUS #: File#: PART I -- REQUIRED MATERIAL **THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** ® Completed SEPA Checklist ® Application Fee ® Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 8'/2" by 11" or 11" by 17" size • Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. if you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems,the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Part D). For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as"proposal,""proposer," and "affected geographic area,"respectively. PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of 14 Spokane ( C . SEPA CHECKLIST Valley A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable Comprehensive Plan Change Bowdish and Sands 2. Name of applicant: Dennis and Melissa Crapo C/O Whipple Consulting Engineers 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 2528 N Sullivan Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 - Todd R Whipple, PE phone:509-893-2617 4. Date checklist prepared: October 11, 2017 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Comprehensive Plan Amendment for 2017 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? Yes If yes, explain. Upon successful implementation of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a Zone Change to immediately implement and develop a project consistent with the revised zone. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.A previous Short Plat SHP-09-10 was prepared, this SEPA checklist, Application form, Trip Generation Letter, and Narrative. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? None known If yes, explain. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. This Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Zone Reclassification. Once the site is rezoned then a Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, Project Specific SEPA, Building Permits, Water Plans, Sewer Plans, Storm Drain Plans, Street Plans, UIC registrations, Street Permit, Utility Permit, Street Obstruction Permit, Street Tree Plan, etc... PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of 18 = "' �=�-�. � ; � ' SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.)The Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification proposes to change 5.86 acres from R2 (single family residential)to CMU (Corridor Mixed Use), see exhibits 2 and 3. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.The subject parcel is located on the west side of the intersection of Bowdish Road and East Sands Road, just south of East Dishman Mica Road, with appoximatley 275 linear feet of frontage on Bowdish Road, located on portions of Southwest 1/4, Section 33, Township 25N, Range 44E,W.M. Spokane County Parcel Number 45333.1807. 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? Yes The general Sewer Service Area? Yes Priority Sewer Service Area? Yes (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) /Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). Project does lie within the ASA in the City of Spokane, per Figure 6-1 Aquifer Sensitive Area from the SRSM, as well as the high susceptibility area of CARA, per Figure 6-2 of the SRSM. Stormwater disposal methods will be consistent with Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual (SRSM), which may include grassed percolation areas, evaporation ponds, drywells and gravel galleries depending upon specific soil types encountered at the locations of the proposed facilities at time of a specific project. Anticipated rate will be appropriate for the design option chosen. At this time the volume is unknown. Because the system will follow the SRSM there will be a dead storage component of 0.5' in each swale or pond area that should limit direct discharge of items used in the home as well as firefighting activities. PL-22V1.0 Page 3of18 Spokane` ( SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? The CMU zoning may anticipate chemicals, but the future project for this site has not been chosen. 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. Applicable BMP's will be used during construction to contain any leaks or spills as they occur. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? Once the CMU zone has been developed there may be chemicals stored,and spills associated with CMU volumes will be handled on-site per the facility spill prevention and clean- up plan. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Unknown at this time. 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts. Yes, stormwater will be discharged into the ground. No potential impacts are anticipated at this time and the future discharge will be as allowed in the SRSM. The existing stream bed will not receive an new stormwater. PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of 18 Spokane ( SEPA CHECKLIST Valley' B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1) Earth a. General description of the site (check one): ® flat, ❑ rolling, ❑ hilly, ❑ steep slopes, ❑ mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?Less than 5% c. What general types of soils are found on the site(for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. NRCS classification is Endoaquolls and Flluvaquents, 0-3% slopes, and Urban land- Phoebe, disturbed complex 3-8 % slopes. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? Yes If so, describe. A site review does indicate the presence of these types of soils, additionally, the City of Spokane Valley maps show unstable or erodible soils on the subject site. Therefore, during plan preparation of a specific project the site Geotech will note the presence of these specific types of soils and an acceptable manner by which to deal with them, see exhibit 5. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. In a future project there may be grading proposed for streets, site, and building pads. The grading would involve removal of organics, preparation of street subgrade and preparation of building pads. This will occur over the entire buildable portion site. Although quantities are unknown at this time, we would anticipate the movement of approximately 15,000 to 20,000 cy. Any import or export of material shall be from/to a preapproved source/destination and coordinated with the City of Spokane Building and Planning Department. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? During site preparation for a future project, some minor erosion from wind and rain may occur during construction, but would be mitigated through the use of appropriate BMPs. The existing seasonal streambed may be mittigated to provide more buiding space. The subject site will be stabilized by paving, concrete, buildings and landscaping. If so, generally describe. PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of 18 Spokane gi� SEPA CHECKLIST Valley g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?60%-70" h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: During site preparation for a future project, on-site grading shall be consistent with approved grading and temporary erosion sediment control plans. Use of appropriate BMPs during construction and the stabilization of disturbed soils by paving, concrete, buildings and landscaping following construction. 2) Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During site construction,for a future project, some fugitive dust could be expected, although the intent of the permits would be to control this instance. Additionally, a future project may create exhaust fumes from construction equipment, etc. At the completion and occupancy of a future project, construction air emissions may occur, exhaust machinery and vehicles. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? None known. If so, generally describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: All future site development shall comply with Spokane Regional Clean Air(SRCAA), construction related requirements. Future tenants may require additional review through SRCAA. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 3) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Yes. The site is in a Flood plain, see exhibit 4, which may be mitigated so the PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of 18 Spokane { SEPA CHECKLIST Valley property can be buildable. Chester Creek a seasonal streambed is adjacent to the Railroad tracks. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, although this is a non-project section Chester Creek does lie within 200-feet of the subject site. Future projects will need to take this into consideration. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Future work within the flood zone AE is anticipated. Indicate the source of fill material.To be determined at time of flood zone mitigation, if at all possible. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? No Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Future work within the flood zone AE is anticipated. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? Yes. If so, note location on the site plan. See exhibit 7. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? No. If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No, stormwater treatment is required pursuant to the SRSM. All future runoff will be treated in the EVALUATION FOR catchment areas before discharged. AGENCY USE ONLY b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Yes. Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. As noted previously, a future project will be developed following the requirements for stormwater as outlined in the SRSM.Additional measures, if any,will be added if required during the design and approval process with the City of Spokane and any other affected agencies. PL-22V1.0 Page 7of18 `�T'•`� �� _ ( . i � SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any(for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.There will be no water material discharged into the ground from septic tanks. . c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? The source of runoff from this site after completion of design for this propery, will be from the constructed elements of the design. The intent is to convey stormwater to catchments or pond areas to treat and discharge the treated stormwater (as required by the SRSM) to the underlying soils, via swales, ponds, drywells, galleries, etc. Will this water flow into other waters? No. If so, describe. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? No. Runoff will be treated in the catchment areas before entering ground water. The site does not contribute to any surface waters. If so, generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: As noted previously, the project will be developed following the requirements for stormwater as outlined in the SRSM. Additional measures, if any, will be added if required during design and as approved by the City. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 4) Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ® deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ® evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ® shrubs PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of 18 aT,� - � (�\` SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley. ® grass O pasture ❑ crop or grain O wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other 0 water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ® other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? CMU projects usually take up a large amount of space. Most of the vegetation may be removed. The seaonal streambed may be mitigated allowing for more vegetation. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.Unknown. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: With on proposed project at this time, measures to preserve or enhance vegetaion is unknown. The seasonal streambed would be the best place to mitigate. 5) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: ® birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ® mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ❑ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the EVALUATION FOR site.Unknown. AGENCY USE ONLY c. Is the site part of a migration route?Yes If so, explain.The area is listed as Rocky Mountain Elk habitate, but the site is surrounded by homes and the Union Pacific Railroad Tracks.Consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife may be required to create a project consistenant with this designation, see exhibit 6. PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of 18 '`"� i < SEPA CHECKLIST Spo`�kane Valley d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:With no proposed project, the measures to preserve or enhance wildlife is unknown. 6). Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar)will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas will be used by future site-specific projects for heating, air conditioning and lighting. Additionally, solar, wind and other sources of power would be available for future projects. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The future construction of a CMU site should not affect solar energy on adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal?. List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Final building plans shall demonstrate compliance with the commercial provisions of the Washington State Energy Code (WSEC). 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal?Unknown. If so, describeOnce a project specific plan is developed a new SEPA will need to be completed. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.None known 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Does not apply, at this time as this is a non- project section. b. Noise PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 18 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)?Typical noises associated with the Railroad Track: train whistles and the sounds of the train cars traveling past the site, with collector street traffic, commercial uses, and residentail uses adjacent or nearby. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. For a future CMU project, short term noises from construction would be anticipated.Long term noise would be typical traffic and occupant noises associated with CMU areas. Future construction noise is anticipated to occur during daylight hours. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Future construction restricted to hours allowed by City code. 8). Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?The subject site is currently undeveloped. b. The property to the north is adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad and further north is Corridor Mixed Use mini storage. The property to the east is a single family lot with the north portion currently vacant, which is the portion of land adjacent to the subject site. c. The properties to the south and west are approximatly 1/3 of an acre single family homes and a vacant lot to the northwest of the subject site which is owner by City of Spokane Valley. EVALUATION FOR d. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Unknown. AGENCY USE ONLY e. Describe any structures on the site. No structures are on the site. f. Will any structures be demolished? N/A If so, what? PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of 18 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley. g. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R2, Single-Family Residential h. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? CMU Corridor Mixed Use. i. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?Unknown. j. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area?Yes If so, specify.Aquifer Sensitive Area, flood plain, Chester Creek floodwater and Elk migration route. k. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? This is unkown at this time with not project selected. I. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None m. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A n. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Develop to applicable zoning code development standards at time of specific project development. EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.Does not apply. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.Unkown at this time. PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of 18 SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:Unknown at this time. 10). Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Maximum height as allowed by code, 35 feet. Future project exteriors may be one of the following or a combination; wood, brick, aluminum, lap siding (wood/concrete/vinyl) with cultured or natural stone, windows, doors, asphalt shingles or metal roofing, those materials common to house construction within the Spokane region . b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Yes, views will be altered by future development. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Final site and building plans shall be developed cohesive with related design standards of the City of Spokane Valley Zoning Code, 2 stories with marketable attributes. 11). Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? Unknown What time of day would it mainly occur? The subject site will be illuminated at night consistent with the City of Spokane Valley zoning codes and standards. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Yes, ambient light affect. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Exterior lights from the adjacent residential and commercial uses in the area and Train lights. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: See comment to 11 a. PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of 18 Spokane t r SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There is an existing bike lane running south on Bowdish and at the the intersection of Bowdish and Sands, turns onto Sands Road. There are 2 public parks within 'I mile of the site, Castle Park and Brown's Park. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? None anticipated. If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None at this time. 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? No If so, generally describe. None identified by WISAARD search. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None, other than those requird by City of Spokane Valley Code, Washington State, and/or Federal Law. 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Dishman Mica Road; Bowdish Road and.Sands Road. There are no plans at this time Show on site plans, if any. b. Is site currently served by public transit? No. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Spokane Transit Route 97, 0.80 miles to the north at the intersection of Bowdish Road and 32nd Avenue. PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of 18 ��T,��kane =�- � ; � ' SEPA CHECKLIST Spo Valley c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? Unknown. How many would the project eliminate? None. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? There may be upgrades to Bowdish Road. If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Unknown at this time. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? None anticipated If so, generally describe. Existing Union Pacific Railroad line. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? See the attached Trip Generation and Distribution Letter. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. This project is anticipated to generate 845 average daily trips. The project is anticipated to generate 14 AM peak hour trips and 48 PM peak hour trips. These rates were developed from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Handbook and the Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None at this time as they are project specific impacts. 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? Unknown. If so, generally describe. Unknown at this time. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Unknown at this time. 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: ® electricity, ® natural gas, ®water, ® refuse service, ® telephone, ® sanitary sewer, ❑ septic system, ® other- describecable TV. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project,the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the PL-22V1.0 Page 15of18 �"`� � � `� SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley immediate vicinity which might be needed. The following utilities are known at this time to be service providers adjacent to or within the immediate area. 1. Avista— Gas 2. Avista/— Electricity 3. CenturyLink—Telephone 4. Comcast/ Other—Cable TV 5. Spokane County Utilities— Sewer 6. Consolidated Water District#19—Water C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: %,> _ Date Submitted: v" 1 /t-7 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production,storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Yes, as the current site is undeveloped, development will increase stormwater runoff,vehicle emissions and site related noise, however, the allowed uses will be restricted on to produce, store or release toxic/hazardous substances. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Through cordination, CC&R's and proper site management. PL-22 V1.0 Page 16 of 18 CITY OF ��� � �. Spokane ' C ' SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The future site will be graded, which will remove plants. There are no fish or marine life onsite. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: The grading will remove most if not all plant material on the site. The stream bed should be mitigated to a more healthy condition. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? This site will not likely to deplete energy or natural resources. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: The owner will use Energy Star equipment and has the option to use wind or solar energy. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodpiains, or prime farmlands? The site is surrounded by homes and businesses and by mitigating the existing stream bed will more likely than not have game birds on that portion of the property. a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Mitigation of the stream bed. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are There are no existing plans as of yet for this property. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The Corridor Mixed Use is unknown at this time. There are utilities on or close to the site. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: No measures at this time. PL-22 V1.0 Page 17 of 18 ;ry_-�:-� ��. Spokane f SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Any project on this site must follow local,state and fenderal laws for the prtection of the environment. E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon t 's check Date: L/' //7 Signatur- 11 Please print or type: Proponent: r I'll i 'i (4^ /N / Address: Z AJ /Ove 2 , ! cZ4 Phone: jci Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Address: Phone: PL-22V1.0 Page 18of18 EXHIBIT 10 A Mary Moore From: Richard Bravinder <yoandme2@msn.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 7:32 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: Bowdish and Sundown Zoning Changes We are writing to protest the proposed zoning change and possible development at the intersection of Bowdish and Sundown in Spokane Valley AKA Sundown Sands Development. This proposed change appears to have bee ramrodded thru the system with no consideration for the people who will be most affected by it. From the homeowners who's land sits adjacent to the proposed rezone and were told that there would be no development in the area, to the local residents who have bought into the area because of the type of lifestyle they sought and found, to the future sellers and buyers who's property values will be negatively impacted, and the neighborhood standards both aesthetic and financial, all of these are the losers. It is difficult to understand how a development can be built on an area that is adjacent to and part of a flood prone area, a creek runoff that often floods across the roads and is so out of sync with the community and neighborhood style. There is an enormous traffic congestion problem in this area already especially when it comes to emergency evacuation issues such as the fire storms we have experienced and the increased traffic that will occur from the upcoming Harvest Center expansion. This proposed development will only lead to further congestion problems with the potential for death and/or injury to people seeking safety. The voters of the Valley recently changed the makeup of our city council with the intent to have people on it who were more concerned about the residents than developer dollars. This will be their first opportunity to show we the voters how you our represenativities respect our desires. We urge you to honor our faith in you and reject this zoning change. Respectively: Mr. & Mrs. R. W. Bravinder 4115 S. Sunderland Dr. Spokane Valley i Mary Moore From: Cindy Gleesing <j.gleesing@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 6:34 AM To: Lori Barlow Subject: Ponderosa project I am writing to complain about the proposed Bowdish and East Sands Rd project in the Ponderosa area.This project should not take place. Zoning should NOT be changed.This project would cause a huge impact to our neighborhood. Our road system can not handle this project!!! Property values would decline.The impact to our neighborhood and quality of life would be substantial. Do not allow this to happen. Cindy Gleesing 4225 5 Bowdish Rd Sent from my iPhone 1 Mary Moore From: Maleah Garn <MaleahGarn@msn.com> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018.9:05 AM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: CPA- 2018-0003 Mr. Palaniuk, I am emailing concerning the changing of the plot of land from residential to corridor mixed use. I am concerned about the area any way, it seems to flood every year. If this land changes from residential to corridor mixed use the price value on houses in the area will go down, where we all just got notified that they went up this last year that seems to send mixed messages to us home owners. Please think twice before letting this happen. That corner is already a little wonky and then to put in more traffic for commercial businesses or apartments it could be very dangerous. I just wanted to voice my concern for this as I am unable to attend the public hearing on the 22nd. Thanks for reading my email. Maleah Christensen 1 Mary Moore From: avasmommy19@gmail.com Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 11:22 AM To: Lori Barlow Subject: Bowdish and sundown To whom it may concern, I am writing in hopes that myself, and many more in my neighborhood can shed some light on this devastating proposal to develop this land. To be completely honest I was opposed to even building the new houses that are now there because of the wildlife and the enormous flooding issues we already have on that large piece of land. Our neighborhood is clean, safe and beautiful and I cannot express how much I oppose ANY sort of commercial building OR apartments. Our school ponderosa elementary is already crowded enough. Not to mention how much traffic and potential crime this will add to our area. I don't care how"nice" or "upscale" apartment complexes can be there is always crime. We have had three major for storms in the ponderosa, this also poses a safety concern for us as building any new apartments will make it harder for any of us to get out since there could potentially new building on a main access road. We only have TWO of those to get in and out of ponderosa. I am not willing to let Mr. Crapo's greediness affect the safety of my family all because he wants to develop land that shouldn't be developed in the first place. WE as a community will not stand for it.The wildlife and flooding issues is also a huge concern.This land needs to remained untouched from any new potential buildings. For the safety of our community and the wildlife as well. Thank you, Holly and Kreg Woodbridge Sent from my iPhone 1 Mary Moore From: Scott H <scotteye74@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 6:35 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: Re: CPA- 2018-0003 Thank you for sending this to me. I see there is a traffic study done. But can I ask what, if anything is being done to address access to the Ponderosa neighborhood? Currently there are only two access points to serve the area. Does the city have any plans to limit development until such time as more access is provided? Are there currently any limits are in place? Can you please advise me where to look in the SVMC to find out where traffic volumes are addressed for this area. I do plan to create a letter stating my disapproval of this plan but I would like to have as much information as I can prior to doing so. When does the comment period end? In the narrative on page 4, Item a, under "The following provision of the development codes allows for the proposal" it states that there is a plan in place by the city to amend the current comprehensive plan and change the parcel to CMU anyway. Can I please get a copy and or link to that map? If the city plans to amend this anyway does that mean that it may be rejected now then the City is going to change it anyway and there is nothing we can do about it? I see LUG goals and LUP goals often referenced can you also advise me as to where these are located? Thank you, Scott Henderson 10115 E 48th Ave Spokane Valley, WA 99206 If my professional signature is attached to the previous email and either email will become part of the record please remove the LandTek signature and add it as shown above. This is for me personally, LandTek LLC is not involved. I have switched to my personal email for further inquiries. On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:33 PM, Scott Henderson <shenderson@landteksurveyors.com>wrote: Scott Henderson LandTek LLC 619 N Madelia St. Spokane, WA 99202 P: (509)926-2821 F: (509)926-276 Forwarded message From: Martin Palaniuk<mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org> Date: Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 8:22 AM Subject: RE: CPA- 2018-0003 To: Scott Henderson<shenderson@landteksurveyors.com> Cc: Carrie Koudelka<coudelka@spokanevalley.org> Scott, 1 There has not been a specific proposal for this site. Should the request to rezone be approved then any of the uses in the CMU zone would be permitted. Per your request, I have attached a copy of the application documents. I am in the process of developing the staff report. The Planning Commission will be holding a public hearing on the proposal February 22, 2018 at 6:00 PM at the Spokane Valley City Hall. I would encourage you to submit written comments. Let me know if you have any additional questions. Marty Martin Palaniuk I Planner 10210 E. Sprague Avenue ( Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 720-5031 I mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org Tom. O ne Valley This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act, chapter 42.56 RCW. From: Scott Henderson [mailto:shenderson@landteksurveyors.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2018 5:12 PM To: Martin Palaniuk<mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org> Subject: CPA- 2018-0003 Hey Marty, First off this is for me personally, and is not work related at all. I live up in this neighborhood so I am just a concerned citizen. Can you forward me any public information on this project CPA-2018-003 (Bowdish and Sundown). I am curious what/how this project is being proposed. I will likely be one of the many that dislikes the idea of apartments and/or rezone here. Thank you for your time, Scott Henderson LandTek LLC 619 N Madelia St. Spokane, WA 99202 P: (509)926-2821 2 F: (509)926-2736 3 Mary Moore From: Scott Henderson <shenderson@Iandteksurveyors.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2018 5:12 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: CPA- 2018-0003 Hey Marty, First off this is for me personally, and is not work related at all. I live up in this neighborhood so I am just a concerned citizen. Can you forward me any public information on this project CPA-2018-003 (Bowdish and Sundown). I am curious what/how this project is being proposed. I will likely be one of the many that dislikes the idea of apartments and/or rezone here. Thank you for your time, Scott Henderson LandTek LLC 619 N Madelia St. Spokane,WA 99202 P: (509)926-2821 F: (509)926-2736 1 Mary Moore From: Heidi <htaylor1013@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 3:24 PM To: Lori Barlow Subject: Bowdish and Sands Rd Parcel Change Request City Council Chambers 10210 E. Sprague Ave RE: CPA-2018-003 Dear City of Spokane Valley, This letter is to express objection to file number: CPA-2018-003, located at Bowdish and Sundown to change the parcel from Low Density Residential to Corridor Mixed Use. It has been a dream of mine to live in Ponderosa since I was a child.That dream came true the summer of 2017 and I move my family and two children to Ponderosa. I have always felt that Ponderosa is a great place to raise a family, due to the excellent schools, neighborhood support/involvement and low traffic area. The request to change this parcel to Corridor Mixed Use would be detrimental to the City of Spokane Valley,specifically the Ponderosa,for the following reasons: Schools are already overcrowded.The current ballot is asking us to vote yes to building another high school. Currently the high schools are 1,100 students past capacity. We cannot guarantee that voters will vote yes, thus not solving the overcrowding problem,which is both unproductive and a safety concern. If Diamond Rock is allowed to build on this property and condos/apartments are put here, that means a mass amounts of residents and many with children, adding to the school overcrowding. Diamond Rock already has made their mark on Ponderosa, across from Redeemer Lutheran on Schafer Road.These condo/apartments have been added to the apartment-free Ponderosa area.To add another one intersection over, is unnecessary and irresponsible. If this parcel allowed to be changed to Corridor Mixed Use, the potential of petty crimes/theft increases.There are often petty thefts in the area of Ferret Drive and Coleman, in Ponderosa. Multiple dwelling residences, will increase the population in this area, subjecting our community to crime/theft against our protest. Resale value of the homes in this area will decrease for all in this area.The poor homeowners who recently purchased homes on the block of Sundown and Bowdish would have terrible value. I have heard from many that they were promised that the area behind their home was"protected" and "would never be built upon". Our Fire District insurance coverage would increase due to multiple residential dwellings. The above are just a few issues that changing the parcel located at Bowdish and Sundown from Low Density Residential to Corridor Mixed Use would cause. Please take our concerns into consideration and deny the request of change.Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Concerned Ponderosa Family Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Mary Moore From: Darby Jacobs <darby@jacobspatio.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 10:02 AM To: Lori Barlow Lori, My Name is Darby Jacobs, My wife Connie and I live at the corner of 48th and Skipworth, we really think there should not be development at the corner of Sundown and Bowdish, besides it being a wetlands, the traffic in the area couldn't handle it, there are only 2 roads out of the ponderosa, Shaffer and Bowdish, if there is an emergency [forest fire] those 2 road could hardly handle the traffic that would have to come out of it with the homes up there now, much less adding a whole new apartment or multifamily homes to it. Hope you chose wisely, Darby Jacobs Jacobs Custom Living 16023 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane, WA 99037 509-926-4230 509-924-3916 fax www.jacobscustondivinI.com 1 Mary Moore From: Kay Boger <kboger08@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 4:00 PM To: Lori Barlow Cc: Jerald Boger • Subject: Parcel number 45333.1807 Hello Ms. Barlow, I am concerned about the change in plans to Commercial mixed use for this area. Since the houses have been built and water has been diverted, the small creek running next to the railroad tracks rises to the rail. Could you please send me the link for the proposed development? Sincerely, Kay Boger 509.994.4283 kboger08@gmail.com 1 Mary Moore From: Keith <klmcos@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 3:43 PM To: Lori Barlow Subject: Diamond Rock Zone Change and Development- Bowdish and Sands Rd Area. Lori, Why are developers allowed to continually overdevelop areas with mass housing such as condos and apartments? We home owners move into areas free of such developments. With more traffic congestion and increased potential for crime, as it usually happens with lower income housing, what benefits are us home owners who live in the area gaining? I am referring to the zone change and development happening by Diamond Rock in the Bowdish and Sands Rd area. I oppose this development and will be at the meetings. Thanks Keith Have a Great Day! 1 Mary Moore From: Molly Kinghorn <mkkinghorn@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 5:12 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: Building in Dishman Mica - Bowdish Area Please do not approve the re-zoning of land at Sundown and Bowdish near Dishman-Mica. This area is already being targeted for too much commercial and apartment buildings. The increase of traffic will be awful and the impact to already crowded schools needs to be addressed. Apartments were just finished up next to Albertsons on 32nd. A huge apartment project is planned for the prior Painted Hills golf course. Barney's on Dishman-Mica is planning multiple retail buildings. Please consider keeping this area of our neighborhood as single family lots. The Chester creek also can't be ignored. It is dry a portion of the year, but has a lot of water at this time of year. We shouldn't keep trying to push this water elsewhere-such as into homeowners basements. Please don't re-zone this land. Molly Kinghorn 4041 S Ridgeview Dr Spokane Valley WA 99206 1 Mary Moore From: Patrick <ptmiller1619@netscape.net> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 10:57 AM To: Lori Barlow Subject: Land use change on sands road We currently live in the ponderosa area and have recently been informed that a five acre parcel on sand rd. is being reviewed for land use changes. We would love to see the acreage stay zoned as R-2 and not CMU. Rezoning this property is unnecessary and will be very damaging to our home values. Looking at the project size and how much traffic this will create. Their is no way that sands intersection and Bowdish rd before the bridge crossing the creek can handle the traffic increase. We have many commercial lots available for purchase on Dishman mica near Chester store and harvest food that can be developed for small community businesses. Please don't allow this changed in land use to be approved. The Miller's Sent from my iPhone 1 Mary Moore From: Lori Barlow Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 11:56 AM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: FW: Land use change on sands road Please include in the PC packet. Thanks- Lori Lori Barlow,AICP City of Spokane Valley (509)720-5335 Original Message From: Patrick [mailto:ptmiller1619@netscape.net] Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 10:57 AM To: Lori Barlow<lbarlow@spokanevalley.org> Subject: Land use change on sands road We currently live in the ponderosa area and have recently been informed that a five acre parcel on sand rd. is being reviewed for land use changes. We would love to see the acreage stay zoned as R-2 and not CMU. Rezoning this property is unnecessary and will be very damaging to our home values. Looking at the project size and how much traffic this will create.Their is no way that sands intersection and Bowdish rd before the bridge crossing the creek can handle the traffic increase. We have many commercial lots available for purchase on Dishman mica near Chester store and harvest food that can be developed for small community businesses. Please don't allow this changed in land use to be approved. The Miller's Sent from my iPhone 1 Mary Moore From: Mike Reents <Mike.Reents@nationalbeef.com> Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 1:17 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: CPA-2018-003 Hi Marty, Thank you for your time today on the phone and explaining to me the change in zoning. My wife and I just bought our home in the neighborhood this summer, had I known the owner of the property behind me was going to ask for the change in zoning I would have never purchased the property. The dirt road put in this summer does not allow for drainage from my property which worries me. I am also concerned about too much traffic, devaluation of my property values, overcrowding of the schools, increased crime rates, noise levels, and lack of privacy as this would be built in my back yard. Thanks, Mike Reents Field Marketing Manager Habana! eelMobile: (509) 499-5129 Fax(509) 922-6462 Toll Free:1-800-449-2333 (8712) National Beef Packing Company LLC 12200 North Ambassador Drive, Suite 500 Kansas City, MO 64163 1 Mary Moore From: RICHARD SCHULTZ <rschultz2006@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 5:16 PM To: Lori Barlow Subject: SVMC 19.70.050 Bowdish & East Sands Project in the Ponderosa area I have lived in the Ponderosa area for 26 years . This area has been under water all most every year I have lived here. I believe that rezoning this area to commercial is not fair to our community and to the people that would purchase unknowingly in this area and be flooded out. The Maps and Photos presented at the meeting on Feburary 8th were not up to date and deceiving to some one that is not familiar to this area. The Photos presented were before the 5 houses were built.this is deceiving. this is not an honest indication of this area today. I am against rezoning this area for commercial use. Thank You Richard Schultz Mary Moore From: colleen s <clb2653@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 4:20 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: proposed building at bowdish and sundown Dear Sir I am writing to voice my opposition to this proposed build site. The zoning definitely should not be changed from residential to corridor mixed. Too many families will be affected by this change. It is also along a creek that has seasonal flooding. Please consider the people that live in this area, we chose these neighborhoods because of how family oriented they are. Please don't ruin our neighborhood. Sincerely Colleen Shubin Spokane Valley resident 1 Mary Moore From: Tami Perrin <tamiperrin@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 4:47 PM To: Lori Barlow; Martin Palaniuk; Planning Subject: CPA 208-0003 To Mr. Barlow, Mr. Palaniuk and Commissioners, I am very concerned about the proposed zone changes in the Ponderosa neighborhood. This is not a good or safe place to put apartments or businesses. That area can get congested from trains that are right next to the land. There are only a couple roads in and out of the Ponderosa, so this would cause a concern for safety as well. Dennis Crapo has built the houses that are also on that land and promised them that they would not put anything behind them. This would lower their values of their new homes, and I feel it's very dishonest of Dennis to do this. Another concern I have is for the schools' capacities. Chester Elementary was just remodeled and they already ran out of room for their kindergartners so Ponderosa Elementary is housing all their kindergarten classes. Our new school would not have room for another apartment complex of families along with the current growth, and we would have overcrowding again. Horizon Middle school is overcrowded as well and would be the middle school for that area. Please take the time to go out and see this area so you can understand the issues that are not being presented by Diamond Rock construction as they have already presented maps that were outdated to not show the current houses on that land. I am not opposed to growth and building. We are excited to see Barney's plan to add more businesses, on their land, that are in the appropriate place, with great traffic flow, and will not decrease the value of the neighborhood. That is the right way to do things. Thanks for your time and consideration on this issue. Sincerely, Tamara Perrin Mary Moore From: avasmommy19@gmail.com Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 6:07 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: Proposal to build on sundown and bowdish To whom it may concern, I am writing in hopes that myself, and many more in my neighborhood can shed some light on this devastating proposal to develop this land. To be completely honest I was opposed to even building the new houses that are now there because of the wildlife and the enormous flossing issues we already have on that large piece of land. Our neighborhood is clean, safe and beautiful and I cannot express how much I looked ANY sort of commercial building OR apartments. Our school ponderosa elementary is already crowded enough. Not to mention how much traffic and potential crime this will add to our area. I don't care how "nice" or "upscale" apartment complexes can be there is always crime. And WE as a community will not stand for it.The wildlife and flooding issues is also a huge concern.This land needs to remained untouched from any new potential buildings. For the safety of our community and the wildlife as well. Thank you, Holly and Kreg Woodbridge Sent from my iPhone Mary Moore From: Jenny <j_lundberg@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 8:12 AM To: Martin Palaniuk; Lori Barlow Subject: Bowdish and Sundown Hello, I live at 4003 S Forest Meadow, and I just want to send this email to express my concerns for the land being built on at Sundown and Forest Meadow. That entire area floods every year, so I'm not even sure how those homes were approved to be built. Since those homes were built, we have even worse flooding behind our house from the creek. I looked into getting flood insurance to prepare for these new homes and the possible Painted Hills development, and was told there is nothing I can do since I am not in a flood zone. If my home floods after these developments, I will not be covered. How is this not an issue? The water needs to go somewhere if it can't flood on that FLOOD PLAIN anymore at Bowdish and Sundown. Traffic on the corner of Sundown and Bowdish is already horrible. It's a high traffic area and people that tend to speed. There are always walkers in that area too, so I can see this creating all sorts of issues. Where is our wildlife going to go if you continue taking away their habitat? I see deer and moose in that field often. It's a shame someone would consider taking that away. We moved to this area for the wildlife and nature. Traffic on Dishman Mica will be impacted from this, as well as fire evacuations from Ponderosa. This is not okay! Our schools are already overcrowded. Ponderosa was created to have homes on bigger lots, not homes on top of each other or multi unit housing. Also, we feel like our house values will go down. Please do not allow this to go through. Thank you, Jenny Yake and Ed Yake Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 1 EXHIBIT 10 B Mary Moore From: cctlbuech <cctlbuech@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 3:59 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: Development in Ponderosa Dear Mr. Palaniuk; Many in our neighbor strongly oppose the proposed building on the corner of Bowdish and Sundown in the neighborhood of Ponderosa. Also known as project number CPA 2018-2003. Applicants Dennis and Melissa Crappo. As our neighborhood of single family homes continues to grow traffic at our two entrances are already having a negative effect. Any development at this location effectively blocks 1 of the entrances. As this neighborhood has a history of catastrophic fires with subsequent evacuation of the neighborhood blocking one of our only two entrances will place all who live here at risk. This property completed flooded last year during spring thaw when Chester creek overflowed its banks and covered Bowdish and the railroad tracks. Increased crime and increasing the population will continue to erode the quality of our already maxed out elementary school. These are all reasons that any development on this site should not be allowed. There are few neighborhoods left in Spokane Valley that have not seen multi-family homes shoe-horned into whatever available real estate is left. Statistics prove out that communities that have a higher percentage of multi-family units vs single family homes also have increased crime and transient population. We need to look ahead at what our true priorities for the city of Spokane Valley are. A cohesive, positive COMMUNITY that is a safe place to raise our children and grandchildren or a crime ridden, high density, overpopulated, burdened schools providing substandard education, with too much traffic? Not the future those of us with a true vision for our community want to see. Please say no to any development on this property. Thank you Cynthia Becklund 10522 East Ferret Dr Spokane Valley Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S7. 1 Mary Moore • From: Kathy Catalano <KathyC@witherspoonkelley.com> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 12:12 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: RE: Reference CPA-2018-0003 I am writing in support of all the Spokane Valley residents who are fighting Diamond Rock Construction on his zoning changes, excessive building, etc. Diamond Rock is encroaching on homeowners' enjoyment of their homes by literally building apartments/duplexes in their backyards. I know this for a fact as he has already done it to me (side of my house), and is literally doing it again (behind my house). So now the lovely view I once was able to enjoy is now gone and I get to stare at duplexes and traffic up and down the street and semi-trucks literally on the side of my house because they have nowhere else to park. This company and its owner Dennis Crapo needs to stop. He is ruining the close knit neighborhoods we maintain in the Valley and should not be permitted to make the Valley literally an apartment complex. I will be attending the meeting this evening (it's my understanding there is a city council meeting). I must say, individuals that are speaking of this meeting and our council are quite unimpressed with the council it seems and feel that the citizens of Spokane Valley go unheard. Kathy Catalano Word Processor I Witherspoon • Kelley KathyC(c�witherspoonkelley.com I vCard W p 422 W. Riverside Ave, Ste 1100 Spokane, WA 99201 (509)624-5265 (office)A A ki (509)458-2728 (fax) witherspoonkelley.com Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email and any accompanying attachment(s)is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged. If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient. unauthorized use. disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error. please immediately notify the sender by return email, and delete the original message and all copies from your system. Thank you. 1 Mary Moore From: Jill Collier <jill_gir102@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 1:30 PM To: Planning; Martin Palaniuk Subject: Sundown and Bowdish zone change Dear Commissioners and Mr. Palaniuk, My name is Jill Collier and I am writing in response to the proposed zone change to the parcel on Sundown and Bowdish from single family residence to CMU. My property overlooks the parcel in question and I am opposed in the strongest of ways to this proposed change. The Ponderosa neighborhood is one that is known for its rural and more secluded feel. A CMU land designation would go completely against the character and integrity of the neighborhood. Aside from the increased noise, traffic and general disturbances to the neighborhood commercial businesses and multi-family housing brings to a neighborhood, the residents in close proximity would no doubt see a decrease in property value as well as decrease in quality of life in our peaceful neighborhood. It is misleading of the petitioner to imply a CMU would fit the nature of the neighborhood because there are similar nearby zone designations when in reality the neighborhood is set back away from commercial properties and the surrounding businesses we do have are small, locally owned businesses with minimal sound or traffic impact. The entrance to the property is also located on a stretch of Bowdish road that is not as busy an arterial as the more northern stretch of road would imply. Again, this area is protected and set back into a single family home neighborhood, divided by railroad tracks, trees and the Chester Creek. My greatest concern for the zone change is the precedent that would be set for the rest of the neighborhood. Having a CMU located within an R2 with considerably sized lots sets the precedence to divide up other larger parcels changing the entire feel of the neighborhood. Sadly, the owner of the parcel in question has already given us the residents a glimpse of what a CMU would feel like when he utilized this property as a private landfill over the last 2 summers. Our neighborhood was filled with a horrid stench as day after day landscaping trucks and trailers would dump large loads of garbage and compost onto this property. This broken trust leads me to believe should the city approve the zone change, our neighborhood will be doomed to more encroachment of unwanted activity and inappropriate build up. When the planning commission revised the comprehensive plan last year, there seemed to be a sense of importance on preserving neighborhoods while allowing for expansion of private properties in more fitting areas along major corridors. I believes strongly, this zone change would go against the intentions and hard work of balancing growth and families that the commission has diligently set forth. Thank you all for your time and service and please do not allow the zone change. Sincerely, Jill Collier 1 -7-7/5-bv FEB 2 Et 2018 To: Spokane Valley Community s & Public Works l e�partrnent coo .1 1f JIrY 7rPciKANE �V L pt,fti.F;• In regards to the Re-zoning of the parcel of land shown in the enclosed notice. am a long time resident of the Ponderosa neighborhood and have great concerns of the re-zoning of this property, to mixed use from a low density residential use. This land was once designated as a wet lands, and was changed to residential use, Since then (6) new homes were built, and this last parcel was designated to have one single residence built. The owners have been bringing in fill dirt for a couple of years, but the land is still lower than the creek bottom which borders the property If the bank of the creek should fail, or if the creek should be blocked up and cause an overflow this land would be 10' to 1$' below water_ is there a variance of how close anything can be developed next to the creek? Street access is another big issue. Where this property would have access is in a very busy intersection and visibility to any en coming traffic would surely cause accidents to happen. Finally l would ask that you keep our Ponderosa neighborhood strictly a "Residential Area" and this parcel of land be used as such. Concerned resident of the ponderosa neighborhood. r s r- Colon iulTITv & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Sca ��___� BUILDING & PLANNING DIVISION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Willey. IO 10 E Sprague Ave• Spokane Valley WA 99206 509320.5240•Fax:509.7205075 •planning@spekanevalley.org spokanevalley.org Date of Notice: February 7,201g Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17,80.120, Notice of Public Hearing, the Building & Planning Division is sending notice to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject property. Public l .earixrg Date and Time: February 22,2018,beginning at 6:00 p.m, Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, City Hall Project Number: CPA-2018-0003 Application Description: The application 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 (IDR)with a Single-family Residential Suburban District(R-2) zoning classification to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU)designation with a Corridor Mixed Use CMU tonin_ classification. Location: Parcel number 45333.807; located W of the Y intersection of East Sands Road and South Bowdish Road,further located in the SW 'A of Section 33, Township 25 North,Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane Coun , Washin. on Applicants); Whipple Consulting Engineers,21 S Pines Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Owner(s): Dennis & Melissa Crap.; 2602 N Sullivan Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Date of Application: October 26,2017 Date Determined January 5,2018 Corn plate -. Staff Contact: Martin Palaniuk, Planner (509)720-503 1 n.alaniukas Inkanevaliev:oi r Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to the Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers_ The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. NOTICE; Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at(509)921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the hearing at the Community & Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, between 8.00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Send written comments to the Spokane Valley Community &Public Works Department. Co r-ehense Land Use Desi-iat an ,, MI .. , .4 LIP- AI . . ,. `-- ti,. * , w t' irmlitliir W... \-an., . , 1 r Project Site Or l ; + • t r dilr ;f L It . r:uar/ 31. 2018 RECEIVE D 1:4.514 ri tri 11f, 11 Z0111119 W. IMU FEB 2 0 2018 1_,.._,_,_,„_4=___i____.__.,_._1 /i :-:5 . 1 II:kn et'. R1 NC t ( } SPOKANE VALLEY CLOMfs1I. tfITY ;-.ETtLCD'.atNT MU CMU w. £Art: �'S. C�..raL:e .C.ecciit OmMire 4:!'.1 ram el, CJ S.krtt IIS . RCdim Aly ..°J I1 W.; .'W.4FTi .1:24.3nar#L'r;Atrr �,nkr e 1 1.23 , f d i l r / /'7'l'[—1 b.."41,-7 es;t-v! 1 Mary Moore From: Dan Williams <ffdwilliams@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 1:15 PM To: Martin Palaniuk; Lori Barlow Subject: CPA-2018-003 Attachments: 11401 E. Sundown Drive.docx; 11401 E. Sundown drive diagram.pdf Letter attached concerning the re-zoning of the land behind address 11401 E. Sundown drive. Thank you, Dan Williams • • 1 To whom it may concern: My name is Dan Williams. My wife and I purchased a home at 11401 E Sundown Dr. on February 3. The next day a sign was posted for a SEPA determination and notice of public hearing comprehensive plan amendment to rezone the area behind our home from single family residential to corridor mixed use. My understanding of this is that rather than a home being built, the builder wants to place either apartments or some other form of commercial structure in this area. I have a few concerns with this. First is that during the purchase of our home we were informed by the builder's realtor that they could not build directly behind us as it was zoned as wetland. With this in mind, my wife and I agreed to purchase this home knowing that information. I understand that this is hear say as all's have is a diagram that was both shown to us during an open house and then again later via email. My next concern even though my family is new to the community is the access to these said apartments will only have one route, off of Bowdish. In the event of potential flooding or a fire how are these multiple units supposed to evacuate? I wanted to let you know in writing that my wife and I will be very displeased if the City of Spokane Valley chooses to approve this re-zoning. My wife plans to attend the meeting held tonight February 22nd to voice her concerns, I am unable to attend because I am working. If you have any questions, please feel free to call or email me.Thank you for your time. I have sent an attachment of the diagram that was shown to us when we attended an open house. Dan Williams 509-954-2926 ffdwilliams@gmail.com 0 9 • • • ' e aria.>A. 8 ` te Anpr, ourq� ��r __--__-. ioua. duo...----_=-.7.--,7.=.-.-.:::::-.=.-.-7._ ----- '�..�/raa. .�ruuoraaauaurruaaaa. _______-___ ______=vs / -r. _ __-- riaraaaraaaa//aa/� _____________r==___ —__ '11.c.:.=--------",---.r_= = .\ _______-___= iaraaarraaarararaar." __ _ =_— __ j") g 00[10 011111-11001:110 0001:1 -.B. > ELI 1111111111E1 Egli iCD 0000 HOOD =_ ®E®® IDIDL � ,hili- 1 kit ili OMMIIII_ �) Front Back i„,........). CO 1 4.,1-.1.1.1,,.+1-.1t I I 19 .>,-4.',,÷4,),J; .1CA ti �•i' .ti�Gs a; �r ''', •ti},,•,.%., rr.'r -• c' �,-. ./. �� L,.f' 't ci (\�"/�yf r'; - a- , t> `ri' r"..., r.`°`'!.'i '', :. ' '..0< .''. . }. ., lS�rr,, . 0 j: i �.r eleS ID s . rr, ti.' f:,ri, "'�' �4$ , ' 7., r,>,-.. . J.fir�:+ a{- C- O ElffeatigeMaler R':___ ' \ J .; '.`. • Y ,WVSfJMR0YMlY1tll4l160110 J d \\''\� !lam" 'lYY.1.. VelfellOMOSIMINW�R6IJ.Y W C J -_- _.. _ _ .tr p . CO �\\ yr vwa�rin...... a w N ''. V- aa 1 I) 1111 l� -� I r! fel rJ 'r• d�. -ci) '`...-.) —r----ip. =:17= r--1 U 0 Ict 9 1l' 'N Left Right ` f1CYZQ Oin, Energy Credits 0 V Required:3.5 Braced Wall Methods Provided:3.5 6/29/2017 *Main Floor Wall Height to be 109 1/8" Main Floor:1057 sf. : LEE `Second Floor Wall Height to be 97 1/8" CS WSP:Continuous Sheathing Second Floor:973 sf. 3a-95%Gas Furnace=1.0 1/8"SCALE: 1' :Gypsum Board Garage:686 sf. 4-Heating Components in conditoned space=1.0 AGB ll window headers,door headers GBG:Portal Frame Total Cond:2030 sf. 5c-Electric heat pump water heater=1.5 0 &beams to be 2-2x10 u.n.o. 800#Hold Down Device • Coracle Entre 43 r +Y 33— • $ 1.605051 Fie 51,36010 Transoms Above 60665p• gfines Doer 36' ks I ud6010 nnwm Above i VA. 15.4' ea 1%10 Root Jobb®18'a< s' 1 Gnat Room I m., 4Y HM Y4e0 1 m w -`.`ten' 60105E O — 22 I •I n e 5••••-•1 LL I e �! C N .-,1.----.4- E � 8116•%.rae j - Mig. j a m o Mare Bedroom C C CO EL 1} 11/1������i111��� X3'2 Open Fo nrt On Top of We Pkia l� 16 t 3• f X34.50110! m UP o. o B e oo 1 YVIG I WfG 74• _•\ 13.6• L []@sD,fr. i ' • 1'e s3• 1'6• + 3b' TY ! I I .. Th-W o4 10'.9' t 76' a .q I '0 m o Electr ic m 'o I 1 d io co Il. n O f tr. Ooen RaQino '1„ o „ ' .",ns Heelumti--,,• ' 4 C m rl 1 v' m C'V Farad AU 7 fl \, II mm, ., r _ �' Ti s ❑ «d whole hoose i n a (0 evhe,ul6n rb• •v . Sro' ^I i t0'-01A•� r I C> O \. —vbave I 1T n 0 3 q.l. 3070T. � ?4'Pkt Door t >v 10 mM.rated doom B'3 I( l� 'O 3 IN selFOosln9 hinga m T 7S6Hansoms �0 1 { mo BO thief r— m :? m _ ,; i...._ 1 1 .l m I a',' D•6• a f/J d ^ s,Y 5116•%1T 6LB ®r (I o Bottom afbum mn by dua0 ,a Gal i i _ m Gang Covered Can'-r•Porch I__.... Bedroom iTOYO eiR. I .C f 1 • �• [p i /m r 0 -1 a I m i r Y 403651 . i I tau 61aaeri ' i It u OI • . •ora———-- 16'x30610 V iv 12%12 Header I 6=5' ' f TI v r b' 1-1' 13.3' 13.6• ���,�O el EV f� Va• , I�-v. 13 13 4• 11' Second Floor > AN ,�7 - ,5 i% 471 Main Floor *'I O Energy Credits• "" • • Required:3.5 au . Braced Wall Methods Provided:3.5 6/29/2017 *Main Floor Wall Height to be 109 1/8" Main Floor:1057 sf. *Second Floor Wall Height to be 97 1/8r' Second Floor.973 sf. 3a-95%Gas Furnace=1.0 SCALE: CS-WSP:Continuous Sheathing Garage:686 sf. 4-Heating Components in conditoned space=1.0 1/8'r=1' *All window headers,door headers GB:Gypsum Board Total Cond:2030 sf. Sc-Electric heat pump water heater=1.5 &beams to be 2-2x10 u.n.o. PFG:Portal Frame 3 . 1 800#Hold Down Device • N.W. 1/4 SECTION 33,TCIWNSH1P 25N., RANGE 44E.,W.I \ ` :.f'iz••1..-... '* ♦` \ . . F❑'R FULL LEGEND GOcoNnsE :., ::: 4 • SEE SHEET G❑.❑ • L..�` -•\ ',♦``• \;♦�` PROPORTY BOUNDARY UNE DETAIL F \ ``♦,`\ �,...~`\\ • EGSSSING/PROPOSED: FLOODWAY A,".. ••�� •(AIRS OF PROPOSED CONCRETE O coma 0 \, `��, �,'---, :` �� ♦\�` r . ®EXTEND' • ♦♦ �♦` O.\ \`�� ``,.,� \` :� \ \` • 9 .O .CAPON 70P OF PAVEMENT SPOT • ®PRONOE ♦ • �♦ \. ,�, -" \ �� `\��' \� �• .(1977.10) ELEVANG OF PAVEMENT SPOT . ``1 • \ • � •''\ �• s''' ` `�♦` E%ISLING STORM CULVERT AS SHOWN • 0 • ` \♦♦ • 1�\ y♦\ .PROPOSED STORM CULVERT AS.SHOWN • `:` 1,.., ` � • ``- \ /r ``��`� `- . ,`Ns:•N..�.\\\ Cr COMING STORM DRAINAGE CA1CH BASIN `• ' \ Li % EXISTING NON I. `�\i\`�,•` ♦�♦`♦�\ z.• • \ • ``♦. 1 /STRU RPL NON I ♦��♦ ♦�♦♦ ♦♦\ ' \\` ♦ \ \ I �`♦v` ♦\\", "` \ \ \ . \\ '1 ' \ \\ \...',2;` <"..••,••..:...•..\•. \" `1Z.\. • \ \ \ . \ hcive.5 ` .\`\`�♦ �`�� `����. 1 � • \\ i `\ \ \\ LL EXLSTNG't00 YR \\ \�♦lj V_,_ f7 // 1 \ \ \ � 1 Fr, '\ ♦ • •♦ \,J }1 r'1 '�'�I f/ �/ •.. ,�, \ L, .o..� \\ \. 1 ♦\ \1 LOT - /7 PROPQSm tOA Yt! \i • •\ a •''••��fJl�- ii •y,1' TFS•r�r \\ 1 I• 0 \_' Y 7 • FLOOD PLAIN I ) '\1( ]I!1�l DI • \\ j•,%•,�1•,•7r"v'• � �.': .•� cid p`\1 0 / ! I.E+' . 1V�// 40 SX \ \ .'3•. ', Y': e. N \ • \.i` © +� C-Zoog :0f; /i �V I I 1• \\\ \\ \\ \ \\\ •\ \ n � _ \?\\ \1 // `'f-r I I \\ `\ \\ � \ ! CXJs� �- / 1 . `\�l �!/til f� / 1 L--� \\ ♦\ `' • ........,2.,•,.. .. . • `� \ G 4 I /��/\ {j 1 i t1 ' ° \.1 ,, . . o' • 411 ' . ii . i\• 5j\ 4 t ! \ Ori 7/ `\\• i• 1 ) ',;,i I I' •t�l.to1S 1-G I �h[,'' ,.'` 3, f/ L,/1, -I + IMPORT 7;500 CY--. 1. / I I-_- N. . \ \\ A. \ 1 '\ STRU FlU. / .� \0 �`i� ': ///`1'"•-,. •1 ( -- -7 1 1 1 \p \ P • \ .. I \\ I .E 11401 Il J6 -.. + I 1\ --"'.•• I.` •1 \ 1E 11303 \\I . 11307 I \E. 11311 I l. E 11317-�I E 11321 / 1 f E 11219 ' •j 1 LOT I . \LOT\ { ♦ LOT Is..- ----.LOT ' 1 LOT 4• • LOT f , 'N ! I .L '/1 \ 1 1 2 \ I ♦`3 .��ly 4�� '.I _ -5 rte} l 5-� i 1, ( — L. _ / 1 \ \ `\ .\ ,,,,:..11\ \ \ 1 ..F.,- ♦ -- - ' ...� 1•'���� : / • . 1. -• 1 1 11 \\•:: \\\'! \ \ \\ I' -r-'1/ 1'T .• �.'\!!l`__ 1 • I 4 a •o�j ! .. ' 1 11• \,,• \\ q 11 jl .�• ��' \ .' FLOOD 10 YR �l/' ,;ff IIT I f . 1 . •b . \\• x `\ \ �I /fo.\\,,,3:1;t ••�I '. .\ j ! �'i5 • . ---_ 1-.,I . 1 /l •�\•\7 \` \♦♦ \.I 1/I •' 1vr• I' � �i .4-/ •Li 1 • ♦ .• Iv_ ,,/ „ II 2 c F.,i: d� { V10.5...07'' ') ?I� ! -�-„ - _ \ r•,� ` ���.�,•P 1 I I %�r�• ----- Tt?ifR4sT».�. i s • I G f _� • ,\as,;,a,.,.,,�:��.^�--`w�f' cam.. _` ,•;�> - '.nom m - ''=isa l SO I • _ ' U__—, \\ g X70\�� ' _ — �-s ° N 1. ' I DRIVE. _----- --.----- — .• I30Ea 1ic EA Nrn SITE GRADING PLAN ' ' . F ' • SCALE 1'=40' _ - ' • • . • �_ • GRAPHIC SCALE. - . .. I r } }u , le h . , r E 3i805 31806 rin, , 3 9163 op _ trim , 32 rb' 80 ! r a 0,,i. IP iik '''''."—E Sundown Q amnia Nit 917.ittt.) .r.. 3 . 1523 . 3 .1522 ' - . d i. 1�g,. urs I +4 17 ill 4 AM M This map/plat Is being furnished as an aid in locating the herein described land in relation to �i B adjoining streets,natural boundaries and other land,and Is not a survey of the land depicted. �,y 40 E.Spokane Falls Blvd Except to the extent a poll cy of title Insurance Is expressly modified by endorsement,if any,the '`, company does not insure dimensions,distances,location of easements,acreage or other matters "!al...., Spokane, AA 99202 shown thereon. `4.\.:' ''..Z'y- Phone:609456.0550 geo! d va ntaae Fax;866.537.9602 First Mary Moore From: Deanna Horton on behalf of Planning Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 7:40 AM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: FW: Concerning Project Number CPA-2018-0003 Deanna From: Dar and Steve [mailto:darsteve@comcast.net] Sent:Thursday, February 22, 2018 5:39 AM To: Planning Subject: Concerning Project Number CPA-2018-0003 To whom it may concern: We would like to add our names to the list of residents of the Ponderosa area, who are opposed to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesting the change from Low Density Residential to a Corridor Mixed- Use designation of Parcel number 4533.1807. Our concerns include; 1. Irreparable Damage to the Environment: The encroachment of buildings and roads into what is obviously a wet-land that should not be disturbed. This would have a negative impact upon wildlife and the over all esthetics of the Ponderosa area community. It would destroy the beauty of this area. 2. Noise and Light Pollution: The effect that a Corridor Mixed Use Designation, which would allow any number and kind of use of the parcel and the ensuing construction activity projects that will follow, is a very frightening prospects to Ponderosa residents. One of the many reasons we live in this area is the peace and quiet that it provides us. 3. Significant Increase in the Amount of Traffic: More businesses, construction and/or residential dwellings such as apartment complexes in the Corridor Mixed Use parcel, will only add to the traffic congestion on the already too-narrow Dishman-Mica Road and Ponderosa residential streets. For example, in the event of an emergency (such as a wildfire evacuation that has happened on more than one occasion) this increase in traffic will lead to an extremely dangerous situation! Too many cars and not enough escape routes in the event this should happen. Please hear our concern! This request for a change in zoning is a BAD idea and we are firmly opposed to it! We plead for the Spokane Valley City Council not to allow this to happen! Steve A. Zwicker G. Darlene Donoian/Zwicker 1 Mary Moore From: Deanna Horton on behalf of Planning Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 7:39 AM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: FW: CPA-2018-0003 Bowdish Road and Sands Road Deanna From:STEVE & MELODY LUNDEN [mailto:slunden@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:27 PM To: Planning Subject: CPA-2018-0003 Bowdish Road and Sands Road Planning Commissioners and staff, I oppose the amendment CPA-2018-0003 Bowdish Road and Sands,Road. I am writing to express my concerns with the proposed change in zoning. As a longtime resident of the Ponderosa neighborhood, since 1991, I have seen a variety of changes to our neighborhood, some positive and some negative. The change in zoning proposed for the parcel in questions is problematic for a variety of reasons. First, the majority of the site is located within the floodplain. The new residences that were recently built had fill brought in to raise the elevation. The area in question was to provide for an area for the storm water from Sundown to drain via a blanket drainage easement. If the parcel is filled, that drainage area would be lost. Second, the request to change zoning is not consistent with the GMA Comprehensive Plan. Sufficient CMU acreage is available within the city limits as currently configured to provide for future growth. Additionally, the railroad right-of-way has been a dividing line or organic boundary between residential and commercial land use designations as referenced in the staff reports. This change would not be compatible with our neighborhood. There is no viable reason to change the zoning based on these two factors. Third, high density development would add substantially to the traffic that crosses the UP rail crossing in the morning where school buses must stop at the crossing. This would cause delays and impact to us as we travel to work. Traffic has been a considerable problem when evacuations are required due to wildfires. With only two public entrances and exits to the neighborhood, it is a problem. The third 1 chained access is only opened by the Fire Department and may not be available as it is secured via lock and chain in an emergency. To conclude, I would request that the change in zoning be rejected due to the flood plain, drainage, traffic and that, by the City's own report, the added CMU acreage is not needed. This would not fit in our neighborhood and would violate the natural boundary provided by the UP Railroad right-of-way between the Single Family Residential from Corridor Mixed Use. Thank you for your consideration of my opinion. Sincerely, Steven M. Lunden 4221 S Hollow St. Spokane Valley WA 99206 2 Mary Moore From: Maleah Christensen <maleahgc@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2018 3:27 PM To: Lori Barlow; Martin Palaniuk; Planning Subject: CPA 208-0003 To Ms. Barlow, Mr. Palaniuk, and Commissioners, As I am unable to attend the public meeting on February 22 concerning CPA208-0003; I thought I would send my thoughts and views in writing ahead of time. I am concerned with changing the zoning of single family to CMU in the Ponderosa neighborhood at Sundown and Bowdish Road. Changing it can bring in a lot of unwanted traffic. I bought a house adjacent to a Diamond Rock development that changed prior to our moving in. We didn't know that everyone who lived in those 24+townhouses all had to drive past our home to get to their's. The sign at the end of the street says dead end, but really it isn't. I wish I had known before we bought our home how much traffic there would be. For the new homes just built in that same area, they were under the impression that there would be residential homes built there. If anything else goes there it will decrease their home value and views. Which is sad, when we were just notified this last summer that housing appraisals had gone up. In an emergency situation (fire or such) there are only two ways out of the Ponderosa area. To add more congestion on now both of these exits doesn't seem safe or prudent. Emergency crews will have a hard time getting to the incidents when everyone is trying to get a way from them. Along the lines of disasters, the area is known for its potential of flooding pretty much every year. That doesn't seem wise to make it worse with adding apartments or commercial businesses there. How are we to keep the water flowing away from existing homes if we pile up dirt in the wrong places and have more issues. I would am excited about what Barney's is trying to do with their property. I fully support more companies to come and bring revenue to the area, but not at the expense of tax payers and home owners. There are many places business can lease or own; there are plenty of apartment/duplexes that people can rent. What was hard for us was finding a home we could purchase and put down roots in the area. Changing this plot of land will continue to hinder families from be permanent community members. Temporary housing doesn't fix that problem. Please take the time to consider the impact this will have on the neighborhood and the community if you are to pass this, listen to the voice of your voters. Take the time to consider if you were one of those new houses how you would feel. Thank you for taking the time to read my email. Sincerely, Maleah Christensen 1 Mary Moore From: Deanna Horton on behalf of Planning Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 7:55 AM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: FW: Proposed Ponderosa zoning change Deanna Original Message From: ajmoglia@gmail.com [mailto:ajmoglia@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 12:07 PM To: Planning<planning@spokanevalley.org> Subject: Proposed Ponderosa zoning change Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > Please add this to your list of letters fighting against: >cpa-2018-0003 We have lived in this area for 18 years and moved here because of its semi rural area, wildlife, quietness, and uniqueness of being a neighborhood yet space around us. >This zoning change would kill the natural wildlife habitat ( which is in a natural flood zone) crazy how an ordnance can change what is natural, safety of our neighborhood, increase in traffic and noise. > I encourage you to vote NO for this ordnance. >See you at the February 22nd meeting at 6pm. >Thanks for your time. >Joyfully, >Al and Marylou Moglia > 509-842-8112 >Sent from my iPad 1 Mary Moore From: Lance Verity <Isvertandcompany@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2018 9:13 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Cc: ibarlow@spokanevalley.org Subject: Comments on CPA-2018-0003 Attachments: Runoff Weirsjpg; Traffic speeds evening jpg;Traffic speeds morning jpg; Vehicle view on south bound traffic Bowdish jpg;Weirs jpg Ref: CPA-2018-0003 General: Well here we are again, the Chester Drainage area is again under assault from a development squarely within its boundaries. Unnecessary developments within wetland/drainage areas are a terrible use of land. Infringing on these natural areas puts any structure in these areas at risk. CARA/ASA: Without a doubt every person within the Spokane Valley already knows about the wetlands within and around the proposed building area. Every vehicle that passes by this area via the Dishman-Mica Roadway, most assuredly sees the flooded fields and Chester creek. What they probably don't know is the function of this wetland and how it's connected to the Sole Source aquifer beneath them. These wetlands must be recognized as a structure unto themselves and how they function within the Chester Drainage area. Indeed this wetland must be considered as an extension of the Chester Drainage area. To keep the effective purpose of the wetlands (filtering and percolation) the size and location must be retained. Safe Practices: Unfortunately the individuals purchasing homes in this area will be at risk from potential flooding. Each year Spokane and Spokane_Valley witnesses increasing water through runoff; mainly because of rain on snow events. Spokane has committed millions of dollars in retaining runoff in temporary storage (CSO) tanks. Grassy swales and dry wells are not significant replacements for the naturally developed drainage and wetlands of the Spokane Valley. If you think Spokane Valley doesn't have any such structure or will ever need it see attachments. Water will go where it wants; it follows the path of least resistance. Time is on its side. Reference attachments: 1. Weirs 2. Run off Weirs Traffic management for safety: The traffic into and out of the"Ponderosa" area has only two locations, through either the Bowdish/Dishman Mica intersection or the Schafer/Dishman Mica intersection. If this development is completed, the entrance to the property will have to be utilizing South Bowdish road at the curve. The south bound traffic on Bowdish road will have a very limited time to respond to exiting vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. As shown on the attached overlaid satellite photos, evening speeds at this curve are approaching or equal to the speed of traffic on Bowdish/Dishman. The following scenario was formulated for a vehicle traveling 40 MPH during evening • hours on Bowdish road; referencing attachment# 3. At 40 mph Travel time for 220ft= 3.75 sec 1 Reaction time = 1.5 sec Reaction distance = 88ft Vehicle stop distance=80ft Total reaction and vehicle stop distances = 168ft 220-168 = 52ft and 2.25 sec to spare. While most drivers are attentive and not impaired I am concerned about cell phones and the fact that on Feb 9th an attendant at Chester gas station and myself pushed a stalled vehicle off the tracks nearby. Whether the diver was impaired or what, I thought it was a very unsafe place to park at 6:50 in the morning. Reference attachments: 1. Traffic Speeds Morning 2. Traffic Speeds Evening 3. Vehicle view south bound Bowish Road Thank you, Lance Verity 710-6593 4222 South Hollow Str Spokane Valley lsvertandcompany@gmail.com 2 Mary Moore From: Sharee Tucker <sheeye7@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 9:43 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: Project for 7th & University Hello Martin, This is Sharee &Shawn Tucker and We are residents on 7th street. We oppose this initiative because it is a family neighborhood. On our street alone, there are at least 6+ houses with multiple children ranging from infancy to young teenagers. Our street is a safe pathway away from traffic for kids to walk to school, therefor seeing many more children walking to and from school from 6th &4th street, using our road. While kids are at school, I (Sharee) walk my toddlers with a group of women who also have babies/toddlers. If you have had kids,then you would know how attentive you must be with them. Now imagine a steady flow of cars, SUVs, and trucks passing by. This would be no easy feat to take a walk with our kids. We also have quite a few elderly people who enjoy the relaxed climate of our community. If we increase traffic, this will bring a higher sense of commotion and urgency. Please take into consideration all of our amazing residences here on 7th street: parents, children, nurses, city workers, and teachers.We work hard to provide a safe haven for the things we value most: FAMILY. Sincerely, Sharee &Shawn Tucker P.S. I was planning on attending the meeting, but I must a attend a mandatory meeting that will last until 6:00 downtown. I will still drop by directly after my meeting in case this one is still going. Sent from my iPhone , • . .„,21 .. -1. . . _ L , k woe ... .- . all ' ' .- - — ...._ ... , ,.... E 28trfAve E 28th Ave ;<111004 .1.. -14gE281.h Ave 1 E.28th Aye E:78•IiiitAve . • . - f Ilh 611, L un, , _ • _., ''t'• . f ; --'• 0 j,„(.,,, . '.-:-:it;--.; pr.."•' 4 V. _ m ID piLt 4 II. it. .4 / MI • , ^ . a r % Y " . . , • , -- . .. - ..._ .. . . op -..._ E , , : .., i ... • 4IL • bi '.2 , i . • • , r. .• %._... - -0,- ,,-* - .,._ l,A1. "fir, - ..,.. A - — - 91.11 E 291.h Ave E 291h Ave 4. . _ ..... S'Retvri-looKICtrA•---, .I" .- 4. or' , - - . . il14 , - • , - 7.1. • . ''', , 1•cfilli.„ ,w.- 1004. - ...- 1 ,,,,, • -- * * . ,i1Vir liliga ir lite, Lighl House IP ..., - .....) " ;,• '1 .",* • •:' -(!t•' J.- --''').----4- ,..:.--- '44, 1 1..4:4 -k.,-03, -,,.. - iiit .. .... , „Iglu, - 4 - -i , ---....7.. 4f,..- “A AL, 4 4 . ) ?.+104 (itielir ,(216, '41114 • IL ' ''- '' -47it ' ' , ric•Lf''-":--i ' *- ••Agg•- " 'k - ' • — l• '' ••e_ie•A • • -"' . st 1 ,44' w.,,,, cl...Npit - ut- .... _ 311, 1- t IP ""),,i, • ,,..i?E' . en - . ,,-'_„. '-1 ,il trr,i : i,3 I-.';-..... . ,.01 ' I • , ,,„'• - ', „:,,:- ' i •'5- 11. 1-1`...11.- - " • ' --. - ' - ----•• •-:4,,,-- r..-- , 4.- • ,s, 1-..i..- r EA . it ...,. T. — ---•i q ' 1 , ,..,. . ,. , _ A,'A."'..4".IlAe. ' - " ' . tai, ' ' #77-5_41 *1:r1 A.*, --• 7k iv. t a'• ' lik;i .11% r .i,.. , -..._. .. er I ..-f,- kt • . _ .._ ,i . 1 . -r---,.. ,,,- c, -- i,,Er 'I 4 fl %4,, . e, •it„,„ --, '2. 0, 44,Q. II 111.0 1 I r — I ''. 4 - MO •-.- II, . , . ' k ''''‘ 0, ,1"„Illie; i -4. _ ( ki... "1".."11.111=10 ,:55- ii .T , sk Ave & E 3•1 It Avili 4E-31 iitrikv. ... ' r.-4'• '' ilk IA ';,:'' • aa'' - E 31 -- tn-...., , 'N •-,,, .. \---"•• ••' i tril •.. * ' *,,."--‘' VI, kV: .,-,._,,. . \ , .,...6 _. . . •N :, ,,,, I, .ri. ' .1.-- • Weir ji...iii , . .44w 1 1 ii, • • . 4 . • II ' 7 r ''''',.......„.„ 0, .-01,4,* I I - - - ir AL. .. .-' ' . , . - - --„ -- \ I . i bk . AL , . ial . 441156111117:: ' F-12nd Av.f...' t, • •••••1 - - • - 1 i ., .. lirtirer aa, •:.....-_ • . ob * 1, , —. -... - , . _• .-...) -,,, -_-•••, , ,- --r 0 rUniversity Vi cp-oog[e l: -,- iik • C : 16 ' Apart ,. — - • , - "•11‘3,-. _ - ,. _ --- •:: ' ---- • : -- . - .7 •.;:e.a.d, ,.....fru,d5-Lattg l' -m! '.7-,e-1-',.ecitati :t ii!=111111F--- . -IIIIIIMMIIIMMMMIIIIIIIIMIIMII- waraccglevcorn irr ap.W.:27)4--G•14 G.:-7: 117._27117.:,: 6:1: ." _77.,i,f Dr 5- 7,7 7. i-.-..•P-..71...0 .:- ___ ------- - .4.. __ ,_,1 ii• 1.6,_ , _ _ -0., • iv ',- -- -:-°;, i'' 1, . 11.I' 1._.. - •c- , • 1101111- " . . , '7,50E- - _ - - - -- .._. - , ... ---- • . •--, • 7. '"''''' . 4.•'th..':., -'. ' s'''''- -,-_- • _ .......,::, ,,_ .- , - :1' • I '-' ' 1- 1 _ -... . . ---....._, IL _ , . •--..„, --1-4,..i. -. - ':i '''-%''...1-.7-. . : -- Ir.; 2r• _. _ k„ - Willi k ' , - - _ - .- _ 1 .., ,. ..N• .-„ut„._ • - •`*,-i..-,-,e7:1" L , . t k: - •„ . '..4!_, - - .,,_;.,...; i . . -.5. 7 141 I.•p — -' N, .,.. ,., I! 1 e, .. # ., . '. % t ' .. n r I 41t.. 4"...' s '. ' \ 1 . . s .. . _ , 4 le. JILL,7 ,,..4.4V" ,... -' ' - • -mit! ' T.--'.. ' I 'IlL' 4 . ...„ 4- ' '!";111'.:.' S- . a ' 7 - .. - 41 =4." . '44, --; '.1.116•-'' . ', -•:" 7- 7.... d11- - ,',-z I __ .'" •''' 7. ' • - ,'' - 1.4,:- - .-',..,.., .- 4-4,L,Z,__-,- ',.....- -k;;:"%:',. --. _ . 7- _,,,-7,---;_,..- '' - - , , ih. -• - .....,...7.7.„-...., ,•__,!,,c-..,7 . .--:......; •-.1s, .4 -t..r. i . .. r. ''4 r ... •`-. - ' ells i r -,-. '• . • .'''.- : le' - -. , . -- - ci. --.....- , _ .....;... _ 41,-.6.... _ . . — -7 r. . . . . . _ _ •.--,- — - .... "W-.r a''''-'.."1-Sr L'.' .tS!': , .'''' _,'4 , ;...-'.7- - ' "` -''^7.76. ..-. , ,..1. 7: .:_i ,. ... .1 -- ' .. • lilt . 1• - X N11.-..-- ....,,, '1'.• • X--- - -.-.. _. ...._ -, •.''''•-• ..1.-+-7- - r ' ..;. lit-',.•-•-•_.„- _..- - ' Imillph .. • ....-461&,--.,...z.,--4 . , 6, 411/.. Li, _. -1F - ,1. '. • , f- nip ..1.1 ,..43-,-L- -.f-7--• -- ,_-•,.....::--,...„... - ' --AbitIN..0, _ ...., •• .t..A° ..,--•- -r-,-2.-•-,..---.:....-1„,- `',„.: r. . ,''I' - .. ..,... 1 :::±¢:0 Sr17".4 ;': 1.:-;:-:"r- ', ' . - - 7641rtiFP6 --_ ' -. jilikA) Nkipili 1, ;Rik .''. 1_1•--„,... . .a - , ..., ,_. :. .wiL,..... .,--• ...i. 4 araer,c. • - , ., ,. 4, lift : - 10 ' • Typtal traffic .0 .7.-1.7 gm Im'immi L7-7: . -.• . , El SurrOc.wil Pr --,* , .?"#--•ti,, TWTFIt . 11,2 • S CI .S . . ! Ill ' .- ' a: 1 . • . - • ._,=, )1, .,;-T-1-i.2:-.F,M a zii 13 PV JIM gym ..- f Mir:r I l e M —— i . . ,,• - 1,174.2E.1-y -..g.-_,_ . _- - , -7.°..Tra , X ___ ___ _ µ ,i�'n -_ _ -_-_ "a te-r•- =1?i•:.: ..T ,�J `L�L•�.gC7C7a`�+"C�.%n'f7.'�:T . _ .-"°= ,tj_�: - '.2 Y --- .2rr' -.. 'r1r - -Mk. --711 .1.1r, -..1,': , . . . x T. . -- - en g, 11,- •- , ... '1-. ' -a _ .,. . , ,„,. .., . t,....c. 4:10 ..1„, . et). GLF )11Prtil' ...,-. . s. . - t Ilk - '41111111c 1 11101!" 1, ."'. z� r cs / -. i 4 ,' j. 1 - ' Illk 4 f'1,4-• - . - 4-' • 41417 ji . g . � :, . ,- - - . . 440 ikkit. ,' ‘ , . . 4.' , 11111*->%, 3 . _ . r.,,,, • r + _ "4. �� _ ": i' ;[{� eit - � it pY . , • �, , \a�. 4 4- '41 'AA ark - - — — y . _rte _ .� ,, % 1 ''''4k- by ~ • -�; I tra1Pf r �,.._. ��� `k*' • -^ ---rte 4., j MitE t I �P .....' - - -- S T W T F S -• ' , -..e� ,..-67,„..,. --r_� 3=.!° •L'PLf -1r1,! OMA , ML . - -- 110....' ' - , ` rt.,,e ,� :aracv LNnr.�dSutranrrs SP+�di —Y14-4.7.ar f'75f* _ 43.7, ,. 7 L,d. 1:—.1!'�c�;7 . 430 r w {Y •'f 1 '14 mss. w.. . - M�- -PIA 4 .t Iry .+,_ •".�` 4 �, -1�1. a . aa.J . —.4 ''''''''''''''''''biaiiiis %.___- ::: - '�• �• e ., ..4, " ' * - fir., i. � ' i _- +3�rM ' .} r +14�. p ` ifiw ....PM r 6 +fir � _ .. IIIAA • G --- _ — ab —� — s ..--.7.•_ rte . 1 it t,!• J ... .-- 't. 4 - = r Y :tel - 4 _` •Y _ ►. arm 4�`�'�4i' "a - - , • . ' . a 4 dr { , r _ Ci iY ar .lei { 6. - e p ` aN , � -y - • " w -- 471.0 C € ' g - '; .. ...I:3, R• e. 1� 4'' _a,.t.Y�t.a-,,,j 4.,....t• 4'i ms 's ' ' - • * • IV- .1111 b y S .4 Y# t r 10 It 4.,--4.: r + y ..... ---" . "" a ���'�"�'- — w„ , 10'x". _r Ilia.L .... _ ter' f { ter 4 _ r Mary Moore From: Meg Williams <megjwilliams@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2018 7:52 AM To: Lori Barlow; Martin Palaniuk Subject: CPA-2018-0003 Attachments: house.pdf To whom it may concern; My name is Megan Williams. My husband and I just closed on a home at 11401 E Sundown Dr on February 3. The next day a sign was posted for a SEPA determination and notice of public hearing comprehensive plan amendment to rezone the area behind our home from single family residential to corridor mixed use. My understanding of this is that rather than a home being built the builder wants to place either apartments or some other form of commercial structure in this area. I have a few concerns with this. First is that during the purchase of our home we were informed by the builders realtor that they could not build directly behind us as it was zoned as wetland. We were given a plot map which I have attached showing where they stated they had planned to continue with other homes. Please see the 3rd page of the attached document. This deception was used to secure the purchase of our home as we had disclosed that we would not buy it if it was only going to continue to have been developed. I understand that this is hear say as all's have is a diagram that was both shown to us during an open house and then again later via email. My next concerns even though my family is new to the community is the access to these said apartments will only have one route, off of Bowdish. In the event of potential flooding or a fire how are theses multiple units suppose to evacuate? I plan on attending the meeting on the 22nd to continue to voice my concerns but wanted to let you know in writing that my husband and I will be very displeased if the City of Spokane Valley chooses to approve this rezoning. Thank you for your time. -Megan Williams 509-671-0717 11401 E Sundown Dr Spokane Valley, WA 99206 1 D 12 / .ruin. 8 Afill ■oar► .r■!r. ---- uru!► Aaarr.- ----________= - ...ai�n.+err_sa.rr�wrrr- 'v+r..MININIiu -----.car ► .aauaaaaa. ----------------- �..�:r` _ as �: .■ar■■► .raraarraaaaraarr. -- ���- y�r.rlYYrrpAAgr 1iY +WAI _--- -- .,�.--.--_---.�-.-. J.I..tMnnrl_t.. r.fiflYrLYi........ ED ilt. -------------------- ------��^ • r!r ! rlrrlrr■ r _ �.iraruaauar■�gr�i�. Y vgomoufrJrrrMJ • �iYGO 4,,,,i,c4;9_. - . = 11.11111.111 [11.11110.11111 Nall........ �: �I � al : l0llLOHO DEM ®E0Lti : 1 _ EEE .: -01F-11-ti _ il� — aw NOD EMI]L'''..-.0.,i i ®®L� _ _ ®®® ,' . HI t•II k Or ,) Front Back v0 ����' �`���' �',� 1�'. �, �� 1 Jam, �� .I)�LI� 1 1 114 t�.� I J.�.IJ�J�.i CI'°• :ar S > _�.; ' :.., is >' r ca ;�:t.a�.�� :• ar :: .:.may;, a: ,:� �: :: ,.� .�r}��, :� l..r. -Jti ,' 'r.i�r, Q a i _ - ��11—I 111,1 1 f(l 'I = [6 CD CD MOINIMallealMOICJOO60�i1l17�l6[ rr CO> 4_ vsaiwaisrwri....emw; v _ - s_..r�anrirrrar�.rr�._ C co �� w.r..naan....r...rr w OLJ 'ice r CO _ __ �aor+a94 •.•� � �F' 4!_ �.... -w • -7 _i e IIa( • i����E11:I f 0 ;::aL'y G u■o :_ G,.- CO 1161 Left Right °3, �O .l Energy Credits 0 Iiii MIN Required:3.5 V Braced Wal!Methods Provided:3.5 6/29/2017 *Main Floor Wall Height to be 109 1/8" Main Floor:1057 sf. SCALE: "Second Floor Wall Height to be 97 1/8" CS-WSP:Continuous Sheathing Second Floor.973 sf. 3a-95%Gas Furnace=1.0 SCA1.18^=i' GB:Gypsum Board Garage:686 sf. 4-Heating Components in conditoned space=1.0 *All window headers,door headers PFG:Portal Frame Total Gond:2030 sf. 5c-Electric heat pump water heater=1.5 O &beams to be 2-2x10 u.n.o. • 800#Hold Down Device i Coracle Pao 45 2' SS +-6-1' 1 6' 'r b' 7.11• 6 124 e�� `n u ]L0505L Pie 5La6010 Trona=Above . b06b5p Gass Door + 86 o< ' utl8016 nruom Above 1 6.4 154 ' n m - �"E + n 9 6• g I —b' I 4d n F u r i?'. .' Hoot h n .� ^ nTC 1 m O {{{IllryMM Brea vroom aS?Hf Y1dl -(' 60405E O LT m •p'S '+�� 3.1ifl -u o n 50:T1�_. 14 • E m ® C N 3 pp'o 2 3lie-TOLE ��q t0' �� E et m ❑ o 17 Hever Bedroom i - U C E -3.-2-' O.on Rai On Top of-3 IPldetil m r6.--6- .'.-.5:,,,, 0 I", '� corA 1' 1= ?S"50160: m ' nal._ rite 74• 1P•b' �. r 0n6n �III� % aIli l t� t �1 3•Y in-r---w, © 50 ��' p ',..744 76 5-]•� I li 111 L 111 • rp� l o Mosaic I 'pn [ '^ _•- ooen Rohine 1'a•-4 II Q • �5=� b Hai Pomp f TO }I m II u O Ot m o ` m Famed Nr Neter tilr Bedroom T 74- n L O] e m 501100 den variable 0q ®®. !Fonlace Hen 2 i. _ Olnln o v _ • speed adioluWh�e Mose / 6• -' ', 50" 10-61A• r - C S ` Iii 0107. e.- Io- 'i O O ' _ 1.- I `rI Zr74 Pee Voar n U 70 mtn.ruled door s'0 C N o wY self da sing hinge �t - 5-]0565H ny70f0 — ii O 40 c r t Transoms Above 30 do, 24- 76* 0 II i - CO> d' —+—f— ^ 511e•x 12•5LB I �ta • c 2 e aee Bomm oilman on loo Owen 1 ,-Zn '"'C B II W CO as n a Gmmge Lamm,Generale MVO, n ............,._. H,roamr0 CO I :K r 1 q rCn J 0 I I n _`. ....�.__. 403b54 ' I Cx b'OHD I I I ._.___._-._I i it ZI }3V Header I I Illi:::' 1 .. —_— 16'x 0OH0 ]•bmi]Hendee I 6-5" 4' l y • + -�l s b' 7-1' iS-0" 10.6• /0} 56. ri„,,ZWArit AR 10 - 20 4• 11' Second Floor 4S N0.01./.0 Main Floor 1�i , el/ Energy Credits Q V All Required:3.5 Braced Wall Methods Provided:3.5 6/29/2017 *Main Floor Wall Height to be 109 1/8" Main Floor:1057 sf. *Second Floor Wall Height to be 97 1I8" Second Floor 973 sf. 3a-95%Gas Furnace=1.0 SCALE: CS-WSP:Continuous Sheathing Garage:686 sf. 4,Heating Components in conditoned space=1.0 1/8"=1' *All window headers,door headers GB:Gypsum Board Total Cond:2030 sf. 5c-Electric heat pump water heater=1.5 &beams to be 2-2x10 u.n.o. PFG:Portal Frame 3 1 800#Hold Down Device • N.W. 1/4 SECTION 33,TOWNSHIP 25N., RANGE 44E.,W.I \ � ��=� ����\\��\ FOR FULL LEGEND GONE l-�\ •\ ` \ `•i \\\� ,\ PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINE OETAILF \�C\ �.. C\`\\`\\\ • E]0SDNG/PROPOSED • 'may. 2�CONSIRl N•_\ \\�\`\ `\��`�: - F100DWAY ytk i�� 'LIAIFTS OF PROPOSED CONCRETE O Ca:0 D a \\\ �j gam _ �.:� • • `\\ V '\ \ \ .., ' \\ `\.\ 7 • 'PROPOSEDEATION TOP OF PAVEMENT SPOT ®PROVIDE \�` •\ to o • �•., • 0 \ \\� s' _ �\• �\\\\.' •(1977.101 'COSTING SEP OF PAVEMENT SPOT `�1 V i'-'`i '\ \i�;�\``` �`\\`\•\ COSTING STORM CULVERT AS SHOW,' • \ 1\ ,�\'`� \\\ V.,, ,NN, L _ - ` N \`\` �.�_ �y\ S'�\ .PROPOSED STORM CULVERT AS.SHOVM \.� •\ - • \ //!\ \\-...-in:----, �;````� ,`• "; S` \\ ❑' DOS11NG S oRM DRAINAGE CATCH BASIN • �. . `\ - \ // COSTING NON -1`:-•.-Z-...,---",,,• \\ \~\\�k,t ' \\ \�\\• • ; / STRU RAL DIKE• I "'.. �:.:. \t\;\ \N� • \ \ \'`,. . \ 3A201;e3 . \ . ' � \ \ \ \\ \ - \• \\ •--.:...... tea 'C'-\ \ • .\ \ \\ \ \ \ / - \ ~\��\ \ • . • a \ •• \ \ \\ • • \\ A `\ \ `\ `.1 easrWG•foci'YR \ \\ `r� /41 lam.\7 4�- I / \ \ ` , - F1A PLAIN •\. `\• \'\ �J : f ri Q • .. i II/-�/ i41 ......'...4. . ,::,„..,: ,,,,v ✓•3. • •\l \ \, l 5 1,. 0 \ 1 LOT / PROPOSED 1Od YR 1 \ \ "'71ft1 r � .. .A , r• `\ �.1 y \� N 7 0 F1.000 PLAN/ I l \\Q/41,,r� �,+ DI - r`--'\ \\ \ Y, 4. •-....--H l 1 N © w.I —20!_.Vis" _ ..-- ', /i .4 1 1 \ \ . \ ,\ ..„. ..,d, 5 v, B@ -..'c".� �-4 .',^ �\ •` / 1`�/r / t 1 \ `\ \\ \\\` zoo9•$i dot 5 W., '.- i. -+� 1,.^4-',-- 1 -1/f/174'142 : L._--.1 \ ... \ ' ,,. ..... :> r • 1 i - • dor ' ' 1 ••=- i 7. 1 -- ,°°9A;r7;,Nu,11\.1,AW., , , :--.1------:-.: ,'.7.,--,$,.\c,.(focy / I' v A t � t fel V �i!' a• t •' �,-, �� C!}. '1 \- 1 IMPORT 7:500 CY----- I- / 1 \ .--.,., s�./ //i i \�\ i \ `\ \ I \ STRU FILL - \O ' Iy /i�S .1 I --- 1 1 1 • 1, \' F., \ . 1 \\ .. -- f T Vie r ♦ 5, \ lE-11303 `\ E. 11307 ( \E. 11311 1 1. E. 41317- E. 11321 .E 11401/ 'moi T / 1\V 0' I 1 E 11219 b j l .LOT'\ ' t_,I `LOT\ ( \ LOT 1y.- -•-•d pT • 1 LOT 0(11': • LAT / 111,1, "�'�Fi. / I .1.....-- - / 1 •1\ ,� \ \\ 1 \\ \\. \2 1\ f \•3 ..� _ \` 4-\ 1-- r: `'-}rf� -•'6_i `,i p •i • \ r"" I 1 •. - / \ \• `\ .1 l \ 1 I f k; li., t • r/i 1 t • 1 f 1 �.' \\ \ff ' i \ I1 .1• 1' ` FtODD eWN YR �1 '', c /�^' 1i I . i l ,I• 1 I • f \4 ' \\' .1\ `\ • •J - Ii..\\fir 1j1r -, I ,. \' I �!'4;41, III • I . • n � o Igo°� - -- „ ' N 1. ---- — SUNDOWN p" —1�--' ra - - --� •'---r---�------�-----<---- •: • 1.3 I • VE•� —a-----s- __ - ------ l3 I 901 D1 -----___--- - RD J __ \ m I. • • SITE GRADING PLAN • • •SCALE: 1'=4O' • .. GRAPHIC SCALE. -- _ .. 80 ao /k, , 'Nt 1 3. 1804 4 z 318O5 * 3.1806 C.a. ‘ i 3.9163 , V. - 80 0 .5 On) ell y 80 � ' 61 7 I ,) kci ; . fiX23 -tzt 24 .�1 522 A I This map/plat is being furnished as an ald in locating the herein described land in relation to N1:° "M E R r C",1 adjoining streets,natural boundaries and other land,and Is not a survey of the land depicted. �4' �,. 40 E.Spokane Falls Blvd Except to the extent a policy of title Insurance Is expressly modified by endorsement,If any,the Y _ t• _Pj\•�` company does not insure dimensions,distances,location of easements,acreage or other matters ,.< Spokane, WA 992.02 shown thereon. ���., y �� Phone:609.456-0550 geoAdvar�tage Fax:856.5379302 4� tia nrst American EXHIBIT 10 C -.-Vkiri...Vi'• '1 ki -S r Barney's Harvest Foods 11205 E. Dishman-!liea Road Spokane Valley,WA 00206 PRSRT STD f-1 {y C,EWE Af �° US Postage k joipi PAID Spokane, WA = 2 Zai Permit# � I'l Y OF SPOKANE VALLEY POND1 - QSA TILLE COMING SOON. The Ponderosa area is growing and Barney's wants to be part of that growth. In 2018,the Barneyrs Center will begin growing into Ponderosa Village.We want this multi-use center to be a welcome addition to our community.What features does the Ponderosa area need? Are you interested in locating a business in the Ponderosa Village? Barney's wants to hear from you and get your feedback.Stop by our Customer Service counter and fill out a feedback form, OR you can log on at www.harvestfbarisnw.cornibarneys-supvey/ and give us your opinion that way, Either way, you'il be entered. All completed forms will be entered into a drawing fora $250 Gift Certificate on January 20,2018. Please give us your thoughts and watch Pordexesa Village become a reality.Thank you so much_We truly appreciate your business! The Management& Staff of Barney's Harvest Foods _ r urs1 ! ` I �. � ' ' Via. dice 0 . . 4 • r E . . . r 1 •• S .. l ,. • 4P.:r • • te • • wt �� f' _..7 :r '.. .,7..... ...' . = , . � • -liNtHpir NC.: f~ � - •. . /3. - 1 }ti F I- is ti vf . .-1k. i ^ . 7, � RSA � LI ' s, COMING ON!' NDE °' , ' :q __ 42.,r-11L . (.Lr 1o.'.- 2r9I23 8 FEMA Flood Map Serulee Center L Search By Address Changes to this PIMA _ Revisions (0) `1 Amendments (3) + Revalidations (0) You can choose a new flood map or move the location pin by selecting a efferent location on the locator mop below or by-entering a new location in the search field above. NOTE Please be sure to enable popups for this site. '..! - h8 _ -,-.. -_ ,...., ilr ,-....,,,,j Lli ` `t .tx rk ,'. .- '.:-47:. 1 1 o SP,J IAF E VALLEY • t CltrP` �� 'aa . _5. y 1 crITY i t t fir A ' .; .1rA w - q / .' AREA C F'MAL FLO v' HAZARD 110....Jo". y M Dieltni para rlvaimoiR • 3II No Digo at Data Available i r MAP PANELS 0 1Jnrnappair 'Nv 5iFU 1 Area Of ri11n1r71ar Flood Hazard;' Etrat rive 1.01..7 Rs OTHER AISEAS Area of eJricier.eanlined>'tQQZ Hante GENERAL Channel,Cultiert,ar Stvrm Sewer STRUCTURES Ind!Huhn Levee.Date.erFlotioia 11 41 I iiitntgirnsaferna.aoulnertalfsearch?AadressQt ery=115119 2CIE%2119sunclown Ia2Udr.%20spokane%2Qvalley512C%20waMsearchr+< ullsanchar 2)3 • - __1_. �.. ..: - •- Y yrI S s.� - . #{ Fn.rF�S. w� �++�Lrk• ` $ WPB- -3` k fil` • J • r • •+ . Ali" r +r xi '1-" " ,. ,.'s...F .. r$ y _ tS. r 1 �'iu, F 0. „. 1it .. r — J r-'•j `I- ' y'—I 7/ — r w 0\ij. ' 1 .. li ••• . C--- 1.i t: '•- ., , • .; 1 ',) •'i.•‘•• .i,.,. -, ..„ 1,.. , t.:•. ,..4 ; s , ..p, f•i't,•• ,-- ,•-• ' :,. -• ..••,i,,,„imm. ••• -•'-••' •li•.‘'' ..'-:• '.'•:i.,:olt. •.,•:::1••1':',4,„„ •-'.,--- '1,.-.,;,),•: ;.:.,.:••••-ii•—•' i...,4, . ' •'''''. .7,1•,. . . ;'••• -:..11.'.i. •,'•:.,'•-'•' • .•:i -:. ...• v. !;.•,,,,., ,•.,', ', '' , '". ., ... :.•.::^• • '..t.' •*.wikt,t1--..-, ;00ft,iotii:WKIrkittitfi•,•%•r•,1-,--:.:"-....-.AL ••f.....,.•,.' 4 -",--,-2! ,",IV"'" ' ''''' _ . ". . ', ^' . „,,,y t :, .'''r ' . .: .',',: ., , ,',,,tri.$,,,,1,.'Vii,t .•rrti' '... .'...: A:. .,',,4;....:,:.,..g4;, ,,''!,!"',''...' ,- --..,--: .':` . .. .." • '•'''! 4,t,0',,,,,,.°.,'',°''.,^ ,,,- ,' '...C.:, ..,. di = :',,,;''. • • ,"-t.Mit ..1!1 ' ° -.. '.7,.''•,.,,''.4."..--.'- ''' . -,,'• kr4:'; .M. -.-"•A .-1.. -6" — ..4.. , , .. .. . .... . ...A, .. . . ... -— ----,-. ''.',:'""`"fr.'";,'";4:".....• '''',":-:'''''.''• :411#5,t .,, .:.*2!"' 41*4"4 -7''1":-.'••r•J-i"--,•.,'•'•:,•,'•:.,', -i*iiiti4w4,14 • - ,- t•• I _,, „.„...,.....-y.c - ...... .„...... . ,- ,- • -,..,-„,,„..., ,,k..„,.... „,.... ...,,•-„,-.,,,,,:*‘-?,...„...,0iff.,A..„0„...t4or.,,,,,....,,,,,...: „. . . .-, .... , ,-441•t;:.:',f,i,,,,,,,,-2,-„,,,,,,- -. . •,1 • '' .,• *.%„.i.... ',,,,,,w... •:...,40,,,,,i ,.,,..... ;. ,--,„,,,,i,: t1kk.'Nk•,‘44.'27-4,,1 H.J11.',11,4".?"',i.'1' %Y. .".'::77.. t44.1,1V*5."-11•4'. ' -4,-. „,„aa,..4,". '4".. ,;,-.-,4, •--. '- 14_,.,..t-,.. 41,..4.7.,„,f,kt., .....4''1:7:,i '' t.;.,i..4',',`7,*,\,*,'''717,7.:1'4,1,47:4#7".''''',"t41',°;,,l',4441:,,,Z.,f!,t,E;iiiit0f,517.;.:',1,-,,',;,,",',,,:::',H;1—':,•:;...."-`1' "'''' rt.f.r . . / ' 2., '4:4 ,s.,.-•,;••••-'•''''• ,:arglIK, :,=. '74'4-"7;2.41,' .... -'' `v:21,.. s-if.,,-•,';'_‘,4•,.-,."44:21i- ••' • • -••'.:'',•.7.-:::••k.•,:,• "•.•••"1-••-•::';'.4'••li'-'''.:T.•,••', ,L.•:•4`..'!4::•'•••4-10%,C:''44-4v*.'"q•i.,' '--liOtl.' •'''' • •,,,,.., _ ••"•."'"•:•••:,-' ••--••"'' - . ',,' .,•• . •.'•1.'''''''!•.,:'••••14,•••:: .,•.'''•,....-",•,;',-.''t".•7°;:-•`--1-';'''',-;:ft.a.'‘,:ft',,,•••fttg7.7•7•• •,: t.,i•A•":•.•. V.'-'•'..•-•••..•'•••.1'. ••••'.• •;1 ,.• -•••;.;'2.41,0•44k'•-:,-,,,i4a,k4-',„":4,,,t.!;,---'•' •--• :' . '• :- ' 1. . „,.:- •i,•:;.:,-',1-.14-1•;c!!,•;4441.;1:4 !•••'-';''.'•••4`.1",!•:,'•'.•'••;7:.:'-',.4...:1-kii••TitOttAitlitritgr'•4!•::.• ..;:••.;-•.'-'•-' •-.• --' . ': •• • ••••. . •''••r•i••'.c-••,i-,.^X:,,•;••••,,f;!!,S).:4•-'-'''''.•:-.--- --'•- I ''-' • ''''''-''''''''''''-••";44.4:••;•i'Pok,-,,J.,N•27•,'-**V4'--#.1k#1,\,Itrfka !tlirielt•P.•T.•;,•Sk='fr•;-'4,4;--If`...;V: '''' ' •;-•' , '1 - -••.'•.' • •••••'...-4''"-''-•'..-•"••• - *••;,-- '':.•-• 1 -, - '-•••. '•••'• -,-. •„,''....,.,1•.,,.•,;i::`"':.::••••,-:•,•f-1••!..'t•••2.3,•!;:,;;.-,!; •-••••••,•,q.:1,k;,:,,vr."i`.-;;;;.4444-••,.1,,:&i:r•••:;•-t,'.••,;'-••,-::-•.--,'.. ' • '• :••-,. •,',i j; •-' --...-4.•' •'''•'•'-• • '.• ' ' • '--;''j.•'.•'•"•:•-•:'`•••t'•-••-''''&`''("'"'''•''-""••:***itNitY***24••;'•".';‘,•,•,",h4,4)4,,-,-;••;,;,0.,,„y ;,..,,, -•.- . . .441;1 I • - . . 1 .•ni'Ci•-:':'••,',,', :',,'..'.. *,--,•-..,_,•,,,•',;4.•.§:s",',4..',•it•.;-.01•4141'°:::•-k!-'',4;Y•.•,i':'•i'-':'14,,ttiitir';•':•1'4'P'''gq:4•''';4 • '• • 1.. ' - 4 i• . ' • • •,::-,:,,, : ,,:, .....,..:•,,•-‘,,t•.,,,-..,..4,.•..v.::c.+4...,*.,,Or,40,1%,Plifiril,kfv„.„,,,.4.,„,,p4.14,10...• :' :s.;,..,y,,,,,,f.:%.,9,,i ii,,, ,s1 1_,,, .,,, , .it,,',.,,-`, .',,...'.ii.-1:,..," .,...‘.''''.''',;,,t7,,,111V,*!°(tfit4 tlitli.$40'.*141:*',V.,te„t4k,40,1v,,,,t74,4,c4.4.1..• l ' ' ' ' '''''' '('''",•, ..:'i '',rt..14:',‘1P.fl.51,-**-,1 A'Wik:,-‘.4,-,14‘,1,.4W-st",tt-,..,,,,41.i. 1,',,$t,'.:-:-;••,',-•,.1,••-110.4.:•''---,,,i-*:44,•••It•-": ,'': --•*,-..„F"•",'''''''-- -- .A,'11:, . " ' ..t.:3:'e't.'"1.'r i''W •4,14,4.:-;41: ',,,i'1,',";•,..,;:-..,..,..;` -4- --4!"....4.1.c.... 4.111), -44,4•.„.,,,.„k ,,,,, _ :\‘‘(''t\-1 ',"' ' '1/4 •-• ( q7 1 1 ¢ I I . . -. z 1 J-4r" 1. . X':.n• -.n"Il •• e.. - -.4,• a A e 4..t..1,45111 0. _ • —. `" ..' ' ..', '7171 i.• _Pt ;111"...,1,........'g 'i ' . .m ir- ' '..1_, iv,--rzap _ . . ,...3 ' 1 - kf • • ...,tn fr • . - • . • ..• • • •i-1. idri4E11.110,'C'''144-.." 1 - , 3 r• - -"7— . -: . ijoit, i ' ' '' 2taa- •-, ...d `O. 0... 31,4176' . '..re . • 1.• I , . n . .RT.,' IC%•1..., 4 • • •. IL. . -I i .. !.‘ 1,.. . ' -...e.,4 - N. ..' I. - 1.4.. ' . . - _... ''..',.• Irli" 4•:. F- , 1%....= • i'off.. _. . ‘-11 ' - -•*:'' . 4- -, , , • -1. f C ':...i '-'0 :-...,. l• 0:- -"‘',.., 7,,,i -. - - .. 111,.: 7 ' . I "a. _. ...• i • • .„-._• ... ••.a. .. .1, : • .- 41%1 -- .•-• .:.., -,5,4.1.7.-., t•••-...-••- ...,r- -....- --.- . ••• ' -I. .• lir' •. '.N...? T -, cli.4• IC_II' k: ' . '• ° 'L . ,-7: - - - • . 4. 4 - , . 1 . i'• . .. '' ... .11,•,..*.s•..... . . . . j • '..- P.N..+I v..... - . - . •-.N,,,, mr- .. . ...., l .. _ 44 ....- -.... .., . ... ‘ .., ---.-__......' My name is Shawn Johnson, I live at 11311 E Sundown, directly bordering the lot we are discusslng this evening. We purchased our home from the Creeppos/Diamond rock in Oct of 2016. At that time our understanding was that the lot behind us would be O'NE single family home,there was evena sign at the development showing it was a single lot, We specifically asked if our home was in a flood zone, we were told it was not. However we have since learned it IS in a flood zone,which explains the ankle deep water frequently in our bads yard, I fear that ANY development of the lot in question would only cause even more water to rise in our yard, potentially causing all manner of problems, including structural damage. Had we been made aware of either of these issues prior to purchase, we would never have even considered purchasing the home. Our place was chosen with great care,as we were downsizing, looking for a neighborhood with a bit of nature,our last home_ We fell in love with the ponderosa neighborhood,the people and the park like area. We can only hope that the value of our home is not severely depreciated, as I believe it will be, and we will try to sell immediately if rezoning is approved hoping the kiss isn't too significant. We have NO desire to live next door to anything commercial and/or multifamily,retail, or light.manufacturing Yes, the property belongs to the Creppos and 1 understand their desire to use it. Maybe in this case, the best use of the lot is to donate it to the city as a park area, or allow the neighborhood to purchase the lot at a fair market value,which I understand has been attempted at a price far higher than its current value. Clearly I do NOT support rezoning, in fact 1 don't support development of this lot at all. We have watched deer, eagles, geese, ducks, quail, hawks, even a moose and her calf use this property. To take that away from not only the wildlife and birds, but from all the people who enjoy the beauty and serenity of this place feels wrung. It gives financial gain to only a few at the expense of the many, I hope that we are bigger than that, I need to believe there are still some things more important than money. F+ ` Thank you for your time 2 2 70;8 Clio OF SPOKANE VALLEY 11, C rc+ Teti a2/22/2n1$ F =S 2 2 23111 CITY OF S€Pr;KANE VALLEY To: Spokane Valley Community& Public Works Department We plead with you to keep the single family zoning for our area. When we purchased our house,the main reason we chose the Ponderosa was because it was uniformly single family residences_ Even though the properties had a higher cost,we liked the large lots and the privacy it brought,and don't want this changed for our backyard The area in question is listed as a flood zone. As building has increased upstream in the Painted Hills area we have noticed in the last couple of years that the area across from Harvest Foods on Dishman Mica has become a pond of water(as it currently is today)that stays for most of the summer The houses that were recently built adjoining the land in question had quite a bit of soil brought iii to put them on a higher level. We are concerned that of this also occurs for the area being discussed it will cause new issues for current home owners. Attached are some photos of what it looked like when this area flooded in 1997. Additionally,the roads into the Ponderosa are already restrictive enough without adding an extra load on them. When the fire occurred in the Dishrnan Hills in 2008, area from Dish man Mica to 44th was asked to evacuate, the houses above 44`h were not. It took us 1 hour to go two blocks and we are the one of the closer houses to Dishman Mica. Building has continued to occur in the upper area of the Ponderosa and there is still only 2 roads, flowdish and Schafer,that provide an entrance/exit, Changing from single family zoning will only exacerbate this problem. Daryle and Beverly Thorn arVal - �;� Yr t gr I f ' e t.." a 3 ..- _ ' _ t 'LTi~ or r r�' 1. 'TI' 11 06q111 'fill,1 o~. Ci 61.1 . ¶: _ _ _ TY•.�� e • T gyp..-.t — - ry �� , .rt.f JOS•' . M' -r.. �'' T�^ `� _ . -_ _ ,•' _ _ . aye V {lam `O- .4," + i - • - ,e,"' ---' *AC, --41. _ __ ' 7. ... ' �+, Iii - lag b. .er.,.7-- ..-r"`"`-• -----,-*-- ' ..f. - - L r yJ .... � _ - r ,e. els F} `r L1-..41:1-.....4, . — ..."11- • � ••e--.. To: Spokane Valley City Council ;L From: Dave and Kay West r I`4.::? Z Z 2013 Re: Building on Designated Flood Plain C1Tr' CF SPOKANE VAL E'! Date: 2-22-18 Thank You for the opportunity to address a critical and very important issue that will affect many people.We know that you will honor all opinions and will come to a decision that will be benificial from a financial and safety concern for all people in the affected area: i.e property value and increased traffic. My wife and I reside at 5.4007 Forest Meadow Dr.that borders the Chester Flood Plain. Every ___ years _roceiv flood w,ater_up_on_ur_prope s_ee attached picture]from water diverted up stream from US- If these proposed zoning changes and building permits are approved, the water that would normally he absorbed in those areas will he diverted to the field behind us and ultimately encroach on our property and into our home. Please feel tree to visit our property to see exactly the risk of flooding we face. Thank You for your service to our community. Re ectfully ubmitted: A Dave and lay West • t �a { y � X44 Yr+ - • ""k 4111110 _ � y r *#R L/ 410 411 February 13, 2018 Cary P. Driskell r City Attorney 10210 E, Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Re: Protective Covenants of Old Orchard Subdivision (copy enclosed) Recorded 2/23154 as No. 223697B as amended by Amendment to Dedication dated 4/09/54 recorded 5/19/54 as No. 240866B Dear Mr. Driskell: We are homeowners at 14719 E. 811' Avenue in Spokane Valley(parcel no. 45212.1350) and recently received a Notice of Public Hearing in the mail_ The hearing pertains to an attempt to alter the restrictive covenants that have been in place in our subdivision since 1954. We met with Martin Palaniuk, planner, last week to discuss the upcoming hearing and were advised that the parcel located atthe corner of 8 i and University was removed from the restrictive covenants in 2416. We request that you review this matter and advise us how this occurred. And we would like a copy of the minutes from that hearing. We and other neighbors never saw a sign of a hearing and never received notice in the mail. We want to know if this is correct and if so, please explain in detail the process that was taken to remove the covenants. We request your response prior to the hearing on February 22'"v. Please be advised that Steve Sclunaut , owner of parcels 45212.1348 and 45212.1349, and applicant for the upcoming hearing previously attempted to alter the restrictive covenants in 1997 and was denied. At that time we and several neighbors opposed this alteration. Since that time, we and our neighbors know of no other attempts to alter the covenants. The restrictive covenants have been in place for almost 64 years and per paragraph P of the covenants, they are binding "unless by a vote of the majority of the then resident owners of the lots it is agreed to change the covenants in whole or in part." It is our understanding there is no agreement. Please advise immediately if your understanding is different. It is also our understanding that the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) also provides that an application to alter a subdivision "shall contain the signatures of the majority of those persons having an ownership interest in lots,tracts, parcel sites or divisions in the subject subdivision or portion to be altered. If the subdivision is subject to restrictive covenants which were filed at the time of approval of the subdivision, and the application for alteration would result in the violation of a covenant, the application shall contain an agreement signed by all parties subject to the covenants providing that the parties agree to terminate or alter the relevant covenants to accomplish the purpose of the vacation of the subdivision or binding site plan, or 4111portion thereof." SVMC 20.60.010 Again,there is no agreement and one owner's desire to violate the covenants should not be allowed to take precedence over the binding restrictive covenants and wishes of the majority of homeowners. Without"an agreement signed by all parties subject to the covenants"the Building&Planning Division lacks authority to consider the application. SVMC 20.60.020 To our knowledge,there is only one property owner, Steve Schmautz, in our subdivision in agreement to change the restrictive covenants that have been in place for 64 years. Mr. Schmautz does not live in our subdivision and wants to use his property for commercial purposes. We live in a residential subdivision and do not want to incorporate commercial property into it. Commercial property will decrease all residential property owners' home values, increase traffic, and increase crime. As you know, the protective covenants are a recorded document on all parcels in the Old Orchard Subdivision. The property owners have relied on these covenants for many years. Paragraph Q of the covenants states: "If the parties hereto, or any of them, or their heirs or assigns, shall violate or attempt to violate any of the covenants herein, any other person or persons owning real property situated in this subdivision may prosecute any proceedings at law or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such covenant to restrain or prevent him or them from doing so, to recover damages or other dues for such violation; or both." We intend to follow this provision if it is warranted. Please let us know the current zoning for parcels 45212.1348 and 45212.1349 owned by Steve Schmautz and if either of them is no longer protected by the restrictive covenants,we request detailed information as to how this was accomplished because it is in direct violation of the notice provisions in the SVMC. Please consider this letter as our filing of a written request for a copy of the notice of application and the final decision. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Rad Jane Sebert 10719 E. 8th Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 926-7227 Enclosure cc (w/encl.): Spokane Valley Community and Public Works Department Mark Calhoun, Spokane Valley City Manager Martin Palaniuk,Planner Heather Bryant/Steve and Tresa Schmautz 4110 C4+?'�b✓+4i ,N. f m ty. 1•��jy�� `• .r+r«..-�.w..c.LT"^*' , ,`'• .ryf..T \� . r5 y \•. . i�t y Q., n e 03. y.e - r J� 7 q�S+a • ` + ti 31J)irr' +j i � - i ►a t,Yleq r" y , ''a{ i� �e'-it �[a� ft r,7‘tS .�Y.,tii E 9 E :.' 4 ,i • 4.y I."4, 1 CO7 E� S Ate t&glit 1r• .•,„; — ZLy�� F 3 •S `a. ,�.f�.� ,i a + a f •' ...:.• 'Toffs t. i��,,7c.: e.•31 � , z,- � g�yypp - t Date of Notice: February 7,2018 Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.120,Notice of Public Hearing, the Building &Planning Division is sending notice to all property owners within 800-feet of the subject property. Public Hearing Date and Time:February 22,2018,beginning at 6:00 p.m. •Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Courucil•Chrunbers,City Hall • jProitNuiner CPA-2018-0004 " Appi" a on ea 'Iit1on: -Tiwripp atiotc infpriVaC;ely inti iteti'site;sp ific Comp usivetlan-- Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the C,o.}pprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)with a Single-f roily Residential Urban District(R-3) zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial (NC)designation with a Neighborhood Commercial(NC)zoning classification. Environmental The City issued a E)etermination,o£Non-signi cance(INNS)on February Determination: 2,2018 pursua:ntIo the,Ita'le Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)and chapter 21.20:Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Location: Parcel number 45212.1348;located in'tlle SE corner of 7th Avenue and University Road,furtrther'located.in4he.NWWI, of Section 21,Township 25 • North;Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington Applicant(s): Heather.Bryaht, 108 N Washington,guife,500,Spokane,WA 99201 Ow er s„)s, r, "'Steve 8t,,'Tresa Schmautz, 108 N Washington,Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 Date of Application: October 30,2017 'Date Determined January 5,2018 Complete Staff Contact Martin Palaniuk,Planner . . (509)720-5031 ynpalaniuk@suolcanevallev.org Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to the Manning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to acpo,mmodate physical,hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at,(509)921-1000 as sgoii as possible so that arrangements may be made. . . . . , , • 1 A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the healing'at the Community & Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Send written comments to the Spokane Valley Community&Public Works Department. III 410 Provisions contained in Plat and Dedication of Old Orchard Subdiv- ision, filed for record February 23, 1953; recorded in Book 3 of Plats, page 11; as follows; • PRCY.I'NCTI COVENANTS: • • A. As a condition of acceptance of this Plat by the Spokane County Planning Commission; no lot in this subdivision. shall be solid until such lot is furnished a` domeutic water.supply. . B. All lots in•this' ei bdivition shall be classified and known as Residential. LOts'. ' C . None tilt new structures "Shall be erected upon'any lot .ip this sub- di`vision'. D. Da more than'one structure ShP» be erected upon any lot, except t'at' one detachet • gal,age 'shall be permitted. E. Only dingle-family dwellings shall be permitted in this subdivision. (Sec exception beta ).. • F. No reeidential structure shall be -erected having less than, 1000 square feet of floor space upon the ground floor, exclusive. of car- ports; breezeways, patios, porches or- other area not designed for indoor living quarters G. • No Tenidential structure shall be .erected nearer than 30 feet to, the front property line of any lot, nor'' any detached garage nearer than ,..55 feet, nor, shall, .any reeidence'be nearer a s .de_•prapex!ty4ine thaa 10 feet, and all other construction shall conform 1x all respects to the building regulations of Spokane County. H. Any structure erected shall be complete as to external appearance, including fiinished painting, and shall be connected,to public sewer or "septic- tank within six,months from date oi' commlednidnt of con- struction,.. I. No basement, garage., trailer,, or •other temporary structure, fixed, mobile or portable, may be occupied or used as living quarters at any time. J. No advertising, sign. billboard: poster or public notice may be erected or displayed on any lot ar roadside adjacent thereto, excepting such sign or signs of modest and reasonable size used only to offer for sale real estate lying within this plat. K. If any lot or lots in this subdivision be further subdivided, re- arranged, or portion or portions thereof incorporated with any other lot or lots, or portion or portions thereof, such subdivision or re- arrangement shall not result in any parcel of land of less than 8800 square feet in area, and not less than 70 feet of frontage on a road, remaining after such rearrangement, nor shall any such rearrangement be permitted that will leave any structure or structures on adjoining parcel or• parcels with less front, ,side or rear clearance than that outlined above. L. No business, industry or commerce shall be permitted within this subdivision. M. As a condition of acceptance of this plat, no structure shall be erected upon Lot 2 in Block 5 until such time that the owner or owners , shall have acquired such additional and adjoining land to permit con- struction of a'structure that will comply with the clearances outlined above and provisions of the Spokane County Planning Commission. Such structure may be used as a community club or civic center. • . Tl r vl ''4 -2- N. The covenants above relating to size and location of structures, and number of structured on any lot shall not be invoked against any structure in this subdivision completed prior to the date of execution of this instrument. • •P. These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all parties and persons claiming under them until January 1, 1979, and are automatically extended for successive ten-year periods thereafter, unless by a vote of the majority of the then resident owners of the lots it is agreed to charge the covenants in whole or in part. A:. If the parties hereto, or any of them, or their heirs, or assigns, shall violate or attempt to violate any of the covenants herein, any other person or persons owning real property situated in this subdivision may prosecute any pwoceedings at lav or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such . covenant to restrain or event him or them from doing eo, to recover damages' or• other dues for such violation,2� 7 or both. •fig Block8 l 2 are o. Lots, 1, 2, & 3, Block 3, and ;gots 6, 7, , sub- ject to right-of-way for irrigation pipe line. R. None of the covenants mentioned above shall apply to Block 3 of this Plat. By instrument dated April 9,1954 recorded in Book 4.9 of Mise. records, page 571, Protective Covenant "1 was amended to read as follairs. • No residential structure shall be erected having less than 850 'squire feet- of floor Space upon the ground floor, exclusive of oar ports, breezeways, patios, porches or other area not designed for indoor living quarters. -1• ` cPrhiitVii4tr [Flat Image Search ,esult.1 m93 3.. } T,M1 ^47V,y4: 5-,xr.. 1Y.0, '..�:,.;...y. : ,"ry.•,ii F,A' • F„7.., ;.:ylr: _ "!vS%.•• • • • ' f • TT�. .•%=rr 'i 2 `?:•i�',,, y''::S +r',. / ' p,... • Type a question u es:t'-io rHutiFo:^.r h e ..1--,•,01-4,4- .'r:' _ - :.,4'r,^„,.11.„..... •'-. 7.rs .. I , rr ,,,• •,. L~ ;re: r ,7.1 , / •R' r r ' : },•, tr.-..F.F.h�&_or'izra?S x • :-b("� i1Gy(•)4! .s: .riticai areas iviap rr -zu .1 b-uuUJ 4 45334 517 • ...4.5333.1012 45333,9•97 ''':"N::''-'N,:..,.,,,.___.‘„,..,..,.....N....,:,r rr t • � o Pr- s„ a ,r fi ' �oO. 1- 4 4 45333. 003 45333.1008 �� 1 0:. 333144 • Z a ..i - . r' r I ei Ci ryy I ' `"`��Y. SUS '--_._-- . s • q co k r., '�' b o R4 ; r ID. >. I° bin �, _ g os.. ,e7,:l. ri 9 _ '4533 9'124 Vi 45333.1202 -- c',-•14 453S3.11 01 5333_1102 45333.1529 51._ A February 14, 2018 1:2,257 ® 0.0175 0.085 0.67- mi Parcel N€1mberEBPAC3AL E 5 N r. ' . 1 . 1 , LI 0 01.43 CLOS 0-12 Parcels csv l FERE DeLarrne, MsixnKCnd:a., 1:31enStredMap vat-tram-II GIS Wear crsmrrtirity Ileyi ddrPts ATTACHMENT 4 COMMUNITY &PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING&PLANNING DIVISION Sitiokane ja1le COMMISSION REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMSSION �+ CPA-2018-0004 STAFF REPORT DATE: February 15, 2018 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 22,2018, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. Project Number: CPA-2018-0004 Application Description: Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Neighborhood Commercial(NC) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban(R-3)to Neighborhood Commercial(NC) Location: Parcel number 45212.1348; located in the SE corner of 7th Avenue and University Road, further located in the NW '/a of Section 21,Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Applicant: Heather Bryant, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 Owner: Steve&Tresa Schmautz, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 Date of Application: October 30,2017 Date Determined Complete: January 5,2018 Staff Contact: Martin Palaniuk,PIanner, 10210 E Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls, ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Application Exhibit 6: SEPA Checklist Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map Exhibit 7: Environment Determination Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 8: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 4: Zoning Map Exhibit 9: Agency Comments Exhibit 5: Complete Determination Exhibit 10: Public Comments 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 of parcel 45212.1348 from Single Family Residential (SFR)to Neighborhood Commercial(NC) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3)to Neighborhood Commercial(NC). The contiguous parcel to the south is also owned by the Schmautz Family and is zoned NC. The topography on the site affects the access from 8u'Avenue to the vacant NC-zoned parcel, and due to the small size of the parcel it is not conducive to commercial development. In order to increase the area that will allow NC development, the zoning must be consistent across the entire parcel. To do so will require Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 a change to the land use designation through a comprehensive plan amendment. The parcel size could be adjusted to accommodate neighborhood commercial development if the zoning is consistent between the two properties. The site underwent a rezone in 1997 from a UR 3.5 zoning designation that allowed a maximum density of 4 dwelling units per acre to UR 22 which allowed a maximum density of 22 units per acre. The Hearing Examiner approved the rezone but limited the density to 14 units per acre and limited the maximum building height to 35 feet. During the 2016 update of the Comprehensive Plan both parcels owned by the Schmautz Family Trust were re-designated and rezoned. Parcel 45212.1348 was designated SFR, with an R-3 zoning district, and parcel 45212.1349 was designated NC, with an NC zoning district. An additional parcel on the west side of University, and under separate ownership, was also re-designated and rezoned to NC. Noticing for the Comprehensive Plan update process, public meetings, open houses and public hearings was completed consistent with the SVMC and Growth Management Act (GMA) (chapter 36.70A RCW). Individual notice to property owners was not completed, and not required, for the legislative action. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and Characteristics: The property consists of a single parcel 37,090 square feet in size with frontage on 7'h Avenue to the north,University Road to the west, and 8th Avenue to the south. Comprehensive Plan: Single Family Residential (SFR) Zoning: Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) Existing Land Use: Single family residential and the uses normally associated with a use of this type. A home and detached garage have been constructed on the property. Access is taken from 7th Avenue through a private driveway situated between the two buildings. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: North Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) South Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial(NC) and Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) East Zoning: Single Family Residential Urban(R-3) West Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial (NC)and Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) IMPLICATIONS: The rezone of the site to Neighborhood Commercial would allow a broader range of uses including retail and office uses. Since the parcel is currently developed with a single-family home, any change in designation to the parcel would have implications for future development. Impacts to the properties will not occur unless the current residential use transitions to a commercial use under the NC zoning designation. If redevelopment to a commercial use were to occur,the adjacent residential uses could experience impacts. Impacts may include greater lot building coverage and increased vehicle and Page 2 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 pedestrian traffic into and out of the site. Building setbacks, screening, and landscaping would likely mitigate the impacts to some degree. The Neighborhood Commercial zone is intended to provide an amenity that serves the neighborhood. In addition to retail and office uses,the NC zone allows some low intensity commercial uses such as medical office, day care, and community hall, club or lodge. Nonresidential development in the NC zone that is adjacent to a residential use is subject to dimensional standards intended to reduce the impact to the residential uses and the neighborhood. Building height in the NC zone is limited to 35 feet which is consistent with the maximum height permitted in the residential zones. Ten-foot side and rear yard setbacks would be imposed in addition to a 15-foot front yard setback. Additionally,parking or drive aisles would require screening, loading areas would be prohibited within 30 feet of the residential zone, and mechanical equipment, building vents, and exhaust within transitional setback areas would require screening. All outdoor lighting in the transitional setbacks would be shielded and limited to 16 feet in height. Landscaping, parking, and on-site treatment of stormwater would also be required consistent with the development regulations. The following table provides a comparison of the development requirements for both zones. R-3 & NC Development Standard Comparison Lot Maximums Minimum Setbacks Density Zone Building Height Coverage Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard Garage R-3 35 ft. 50% 15 ft. 20 ft. 5 ft. 20 ft. 6 du's/acre NC 35 ft. N/A 15 ft. 10 ft.* 10 ft,* N/A Samei *If adjacent to a residential use. IShall comply with the density of adjacent single family residential zone. APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: October 18, 2017 Application Submitted: October 30, 2017 Date of Complete Determination: January 5, 2018 SEPA Determination of Non-Si ificance Issue date February 2, 2018 End of Appeal Period for DNS:Not Appealed February 16,2018 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing February 7, 2018 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: February 2,2018 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: February 7, 2018 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, 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 Building and Planning Division issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the Page 3 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 proposal on February 2, 2018. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Titles 19, 21, and 22 SVMC, 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 Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE 1. Compliance with Title 17(General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone 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:Land use and the regulation of land uses are inherently related to the public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment. Community infrastructure is designed and built in response to the development of property which in turn is dictated by the land uses that are permitted through the comprehensive plan and zoning regulations. Infrastructure in the form of roadways, parking, sewer, water, schools,fire protection, etc., is built to protect and to serve the public health, safety, welfare and to protect the environment. The site has no environmentally sensitive areas. (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) adopts thirteen goals to guide the development of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. The request allows opportunity for growth in a centralized area with adequate public facilities, and creates opportunity for small scale businesses to develop in a neighborhood oriented commercial area within walking distance of residential neighborhoods. The request does not conflict with any other GMA goals. (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: This property and the property located adjacent to the south are under the same ownership. The southern property is zoned NC. The development of the southern adjacent NC zoned parcel is constrained by the site topography. 8th Avenue and University Road are elevated approximately four to six feet above this parcel making access to the parcel challenging from an engineering and construction perspective; requiring a steep entry approach. University Road slopes downward as it travels northward past the site and is at the same elevation as the site at the north boundary. Access to any neighborhood commercial development would be more easily accommodated if access can be gained from the northern site. Page 4 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update specifically sought to idents areas into which NC zoning could be clustered. The Comprehensive Plan identifies neighborhood areas served by arterial roadways. The parcel located adjacent and south of the subject parcel was identified and zoned as NC as part of the 2.016 update. That parcel has some difficulties associated with access and is limited. The parcel cannot be made larger through a boundary line adjustment. Doing so would create a split-zoned parcel due to the underlying zoning. The amendment would allow the full use of the parcel and expand the NC zone. ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior.to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis: The change to NC will allow neighborhood commercial development of the property. The site will likely transition from a residential use with residential driveways, trees, lawn, and buildings to a commercial building with parking structures, commercial landscaping, and stormwater treatment areas. Traffic will likely increase with the commercial development. The transition would have some impact on the physical environment. (2) The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; Analysis: Any stormwater associated with commercial development will be retained and treated on the site. The site does notcontain any streams, rivers or lakes. The open space areas associated with the required residential front, rear, flanking, and side yards will likely transition to parking or commercial landscaping areas. However there will be negligible impact on the open space areas. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis: The applicant submitted a Trip Generation and Distribution Letter (TGDL) as part of the application. Based on the City Senior Traffic Engineer's analysis of the TGDL, the higher density of a commercial use would likely add an additional 208 new trips throughout a typical day. The site would likely draw vehicle traffic from the pass- through traffic already found on 7fh Avenue and University Road. Topography makes any traffic on or off of 8th Avenue unlikely. The commercial uses allowed in the NC zone are limited and are intended to be of a scale that is compatible with a neighborhood The uses are intended to serve needs normally associated with a neighborhood. A Neighborhood Commercial development is purposefully limited to reduce impacts to neighboring residential uses. Development standards will limit the height and location of any new commercial development and together with landscaping and screening standards, will reduce the impacts to adjacent residential uses. A positive impact would be created if the property is developed with a use that serves the surrounding residential uses. Page 5 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools; Analysis: Neighborhood commercial use will likely have minimal impact on parks, recreation or schools. Generally the use does not generate a need for those facilities. As noted earlier the uses permitted within the NC zone are smaller in scale and suited for neighborhoods. University Road and 86 Avenue are both designated as Urban Minor Arterials. Minor arterial streets provide inter-neighborhood connections, transit access, and serve both local and through trips. No impacts are anticipated. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis:As noted earlier, the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update sought to increase the neighborhood commercial nodes. Consumers increasingly prefer to live close to certain amenities. Providing a neighborhood commercial use within a residential neighborhood will provide both economic opportunity and a neighborhood amenity. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis: The Existing Conditions Housing and Economic Trends Report completed by ECONorthwest in September, 2015, identifies a lack of small-scale, neighborhood- oriented eighborhoodoriented commercial areas within walking distance to many of the residential areas in the City. Based on comments received throughout the public engagement process, it was clear that the community desired more small-scale retail uses in neighborhoods. As part of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update, areas with the densities to support neighborhood scale retail were identified. The land use designations and zoning were changed for these sites during the update. The parcel adjacent and south of the subject parcel was identified as a suitable site and designated for neighborhood commercial land use and zoning as part of the 2016 update. Sloping terrain limits this site however. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Analysis: Spokane Valley has experienced steady, but modest population growth since its incorporation, growing at a rate of about I% per year. The City's population density is currently 2,414 people per square mile. The addition of a neighborhood retail development is not anticipated to increase or decrease the population or density in the area. The change will have no impact on population density. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The NC designation would support many of the Economic Development, Land Use, Transportation, and Housing goals. It would have little effect on the Capital Facilities and Public Services, Public and Private Utilities, Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources elements of the Comprehensive plan. Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals,policies and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan. The NC use designates area for small-scale neighborhoods serving retail and office uses. Ideally the areas are no larger than two acres in size and are located as business clusters. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan update identified the NC zone as underserved and identified and designated for areas NC. Page 6 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Adopted Comprehensive Plan. 3. 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 the same services that are.described above under the concurrency discussion. Model Irrigation District #18, Spokane County Environmental Services, Spokane Valley Fire District,and Central Valley School district provide water,sewer, and fire protection and schools services in this area. Urban services are available. Specific site needs will be addressed at the time a development is proposed for the site b. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development. D. FINDINGS ANT) CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff received the following public comments to date. Comments received following the date of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission at the February 22, 2018 meeting. Name Comment Scott Smith, 10819 E 8th Ave Opposes the amendment; feels there is already enough vacant commercial areas, prefers the site remain residential. Ray and Jane Sebert, 10719 E 8th Oppose the amendment; cite the covenants contained in the Ave original plat restrict commercial uses on the site;feel traffic safety at the intersection of 8th and University is an issue; feel commercial will not maintain the residential character of the neighborhood. Mike Irmer, 10806 E 8th Ave Oppose the amendment; cites the covenants;does not want multi- family development. Albert Keith Jonas Hiner,Ph.D. "Oppose the amendment; concerned about increased crime; home and Kathleen"Kitty"E.Brudos, values; cite the abundance of commercially zoned areas. 10824 E 8th Ave Justin Braid Wanted information of the amendment;stated the neighbors have historically opposed multi-family development. Lonny&Nancy Green, 10715 E Oppose the amendment; concerned about traffic, increased noise, 7th Ave and loss of home value;prefers single family development. 2. Conclusion(s): Notice of Public Hearing (NOPH) was published on February 2, and 9, 2018. The NOPH was posted on site on February 7, 2018 and mailed on February 7, 2018 to residents within an 800 foot radius. Pursuant to Section 17.80.120.B.1.c the City determined it was appropriate to Page7of9 Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 increase the radius from 400 feet to 800 feet due to the likely public interest in the proposed amendment. All comments have been reviewed and considered. The comment Ietters are included in Exhibit 10 of this staff report. The comments from Mr. and Mrs. Sebert were directed to the Office of the City Attorney. The response from the City Attorney will be provided to Planning Commission once it is completed and provided to the Seberts. Notably,the Seberts have identified existing covenants that they have indicated prohibit certain commercial development. Pursuant to Washington law, the City does not enforce private restrictive covenants. Private parties may enforce such covenants. Accordingly, staff has not taken a position on the applicability of the covenants to any future development. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any agency comments of significance to date. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Senior Traffic Engineer Yes January 18, 2018 City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering City of Spokane Valley Building& Planning City of Spokane Valley Parks &Recreation Spokane Valley Fire Department Yes January 8, 2018 City of Millwood City of Liberty Lake City of Spokane City of Spokane Valley Police Department Spokane County, Building and Planning Spokane County, Environmental Services Yes January 11, 2018 Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County, Fire District No. 1 Spokane County, Fire District No. 8 Spokane County Regional Health District Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Spokane Aquifer Joint Board Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) Washington State Dept of Commerce Washington State Dept of Ecology(Olympia) Washington State Dept of Ecology(Spokane) Washington State Dept of Fish& Wildlife Washington State Dept of Natural Resources Washington State Dept of Transportation Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission WA Archaeological & Historic Preservation Avista Utilities Inland Power&Light Modern Electric Water Company Page 8 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2018-0004 Central Valley School District#356 East Valley School District#361 West Valley School District#363 Century Link Comcast Model Irrigation District#18 Consolidated Irrigation District#19 East Spokane Water District#1 Vera Water&Power Spokane County Water District#3 Spokane Tribe of Indians 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. - F. CONCLUSION: For the reasons set forth in Section C(1 and 2)the proposed amendment to change the land use designation from SFR to NC is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H) and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 9 of 9 i M i I f11Yik Spokane Val cy, COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: /0/ Q)7/7 Received by:, 27,1,-6/1,-- Fee: 7 /600 PLUS#: File#: 006/ PART II -- APPLICATION INFORMATION "Map Amendment; or ❑ Text Amendment APPLICANT NAME: Heather Bryant %T.11) 8 III•. MAILING ADDRESS: 108 N Washington,Suite 500 uu f 31 2011 CITY: Spokane STATE: WA ZIP:99201 PHONE: 509-481-0899 FAX: CELL: EMAIL: heatherpsdsrealty.com PROPERTY OWNER: Steve/Tresa Schmauiz MAILING ADDRESS: 105 N Washington,Suite 500 CITY: Spokane STATE: WA Zip: 99201 PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: SITE ADDRESS: 721 S University RD PARCEL No.; 45212.1349 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential Urban PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Commercial :;+rf..}t_=5NE +.';LI_E'{ ZONING DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential Urban f_OtwfF`lUNi'FY DE'VELOPMEN PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Commercial BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): The owners,Steve and Tresa Schmautz,of the parcel located at 721 S.University Rd are proposing a Comprehensive plan Map Amendment to have this parcel(45212.1348)zoning be changed to neighborhood commercial. PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of • • Spookan'' e' ley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION • PART Ill -AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) r CU'1 ` , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are ade truthfullyand to the bestknowledge. my 9 • � +' 10 7-/PO/ (Signature) (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 2 f H day of 6 75r2 ,20 NOTARY SEAL NOTARY SIGNATURE E1II11I1IIUIIIIIIIIHIIIIIIIIU111111ii1111111botary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary Public Et = Et State of Washington = 500k- 111 CARLOS A. HERRERAesiding at: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 01,2019 r5111111111111111111111€111111nI1I111111111t;I5 tJ U aI� My appointmentexpires: LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: if the applic "s not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; ,owner of the above described property do hereby authorize \-\-eCtA_JP-1)011 raw+. to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 5 or COMPREHENSIVE PLAN S , polane , . ,.m._ AMENDMENT APPLICATION Talley SVMC 17.80.140 �I J 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 ♦Fax;(509)720-5075 ♦permitcenterr@i spokanevalley.org Year (-)701 7 ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS The City of Spokane Valley is accepting applications for map and text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) allows Comprehensive Plan amendments only one time per year. Any interested person, organization, agency or business may submit suggestions, proposals, or requests to the City for changes to the Comprehensive Plan, including maps and text. PROCEDURES 1. Application Period.Applications are due by November 1stof each year to be considered during the next calendar year amendment cycle. Submittals received after the deadline will be considered during the next annual amendment cycle. 2. Staff Review and Report Spokane Valley Planning Staff will review all applications and will prepare a report and recommendation to the Spokane Valley Planning Commission. The report will analyze how each proposal addresses amendment criteria established by Spokane Valley City Council. All application documents and staff reports will be available for public review. 3. Planning Commission Public Hearing. The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct a formal public hearing on all proposed amendments. The Commission will consider amendments individually and will examine the cumulative impacts of all amendments collectively. The Commission will prepare one recommendation to the Spokane Valley City Council, including findings on each individual proposed amendment. 4. City Council Review and Decision. Within 60 days of receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, City Council may choose to adopt the individual amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission, disapprove the amendments, or modify and adopt 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. 5. Notice. Each year, the City will provide notice of the annual amendment cycle at least 60 days prior to the application deadline via display ads in local newspapers, email to interested parties and on the City's website. Notice of public hearings and public meetings will be provided to the public as set forth in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. At a minimum, notice will be provided to surrounding properties within 400' for site-specific Land Use Map amendments at least 14 days prior to any public hearing. Notice will also be posted on-site at least 14 days prior to any public hearing. Legal notice will also be published in the newspaper. 6. Appeal Procedures. City Council decisions on Comprehensive Plan amendments may be appealed to the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board within 60 days of publication of notice of adoption,in accordance with RCW 36.70A.290(2). 7. Staff Contact. Questions may be directed to Lori Barlow, Senior Planner (Ibarlow cC�.spokanevalley.oro) or Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager (skuhtat spokanevalley.orq), 509-921-1000. P1-O6 V1.0 Page 1 OA Spokat�e Valley• COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART 1 REQUIRED MATERIAL "THE PLANNING DIVISION WILL NOT ACCEPT YOUR APPLICATION IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** A. Submit the following forIVIAP AMENDMENTS: r© Pre-Application Meeting Request(include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) ® Completed Application Form El Application and SEPA Fee [7i' SEPA Checklist: One(1)copy of completed State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) Environmental Checklist, including option Non-Project Action supplemental form. (Note:Any previous environmental documents that are relevant to this project should be included and may be adopted by reference.) ❑ Notice of Public Hearing packet for 400-foot notification. (Please note:DO NOT submit the notice of public hearing packet until you have been contacted by the City.Addresses must be current within 30 days of the Planning Commission public hearing.) One(1)copy of a narrative describing the following: 1. State the reason for the Comprehensive plan Map Amendment. 2. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health,safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change inconditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error;and e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Describe how the proposal addresses the following specific factors; a. The effect upon the physical environment; b. The effect on open space, streams,rivers,and lakes; c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks,recreation and schools; e. The benefit to the neighborhood,city and region; f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land; g. The current and projected population density in the area;and h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Submit the following for TEXT AMENDMENTS: ❑ Pre-Application Meeting Request(include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) ❑ Completed Application Form ❑ One(1)copy of the text proposed to be changed,showing deletions by striket#woupand additions by underline. ❑ One(1)copy of a.narrative describing the following: 1. Why the change is needed and the potential land use impacts if approved; 1. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health,safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; C. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyondthe property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error;and PL-06 V1.0 Page 2 of y� e - mail TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 30, 2017 TO: Heather Bryant, SDS Realty PROJECT: 721 S University Road Rezone Dear Ms. Bryant: Thank you for contacting Sunburst Engineering regarding this project. Spokane Valley always requires a trip generation and distribution letter for a rezone. The document created under this proposal will determine the number of trips generated by the site, and in general ways determine where it will go. The trip generation and distribution letter describes the project, the reason for the letter (such as rezone, building permit, etc.) and examines the traffic generated by it and then describes in general ways where the traffic would be distributed. These characteristics will be built upon if subsequent traffic impact analysis become necessary. Once a draft of the completed trip generation and distribution letter is ready for review, a copy will be emailed to you and/or whomever you designate for review. After you have reviewed and approved the document, it will be submitted. During this review please let me know of any changes you would like to the document.I am requesting a budget of $1,000.00, lump sum, to prepare the letter and will bill you after it has been submitted. 1 anticipate being able to have a draft of the letter ready for you to review within five working days from when the signed proposal has been received. If these terms are acceptable, please sign below and e-mail this proposal back to me. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call and thank you for this opportunity to work with you. • f9ijJ'7..Proposal acceptance: 'ti- -• 4`,� ►. Date: l6 1' By: .- ' CAA4,-‘— .r From the desk of... Phone (509) 924-2155 16402 E Valleyway Ave Ann L. Winkler, P.E. Fax (509) 228-9440 Spokane Valley, WA 99037 Sunburst Engineering Narrative for 721 S University proposal of Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2018 Narrative: The owners, Steve and Tresa Schmautz, of the parcel located at 721 S. University Rd are proposing a Comprehensive plan Map Amendment to have this parcel(45212.1348) zoning be changed to neighborhood commercial. The proposed change would allow both parcels owned by Steve and Tresa Schmautz to be zoned to neighborhood commercial. Parcel #45212.1349 located at 729 S University was changed to neighborhood commercial in 2017; while the proposed parcel was zoned R-3. Due to the current parcel boundary lines, as well as topography of the parcel, having 721 S University zoned neighborhood commercial allows for a more cohesive master plan in the future. The proposed amendment bears a relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment by allowing the parcel(s)to be developed in such a way as to allow for small-scale neighborhood-serving retail and office uses such as those identified in the Spokane Valley 19.60.050 Permitted uses matrix. The proposed amendment appears to be consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A, especially in regards to creating a coordinated and planned growth plan. Although the proposed amendment would affect a portion of the City's adopted plan, it is felt that since with the owner of the adjacent property to the south and partial west is the same, it would be a benefit to the overall plan. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in the current zoning of the parcel completed in 2017; where their adjacent parcel (729 S University)was changed to neighborhood commercial while 721 S University is R-3. Amending the current zoning allows for the property to develop business(s) that fit within a close-knit community. Adding services to the neighborhood within walking distance. The proposed amendment of changing the parcel from R-3 to NC would have minimal impact to the physical environment or effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes. The goal would be to eventually develop an area that blends into the community in use and visual impact. The proposed amendment of changing the parcel from R-3 to NC would increase the compatibility with adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed amendment would have limited impact on the community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation and schools. Small scale neighborhood shops often increase sense of community and loyalty for those within the neighborhood. • Should the parcel be developed, the current vision is to develop small scale business that would bring missing elements to the neighborhood at time of planning and development. This development could potentially bring in more jobs to the local neighborhood, but not significantly increase traffic congestion or noise. Increasing this area to neighborhood commercial could add another buffer between the traffic along University Rd. EXHIBIT 2 v Lunn Ly 1Viap k...r r -.Lv 1 o–vvv't r , _ I 1 I 1 I _ E 15t S -Ave r— E 2nd s CrT�`�e- ea ea f i dtis J L_�.[d.---"..."."*-l-----LEMII `-c 0jii,-.D._, ���E3rd Ove \ - �� �� illiE 4th Ave h ,_, y tt_ �� �– S p ka n e — — R IIIiIIIIUi 11111 n —lI y E — E .nCt :. � lf� M1I1■111 -t...' 111111m cn L? �`1 ^ EDU –E S.thAueb^ " _ E'6t 'i L] ---Ir %---E, ■■■■'�nth Axille ■1EN■ E6t Ave IE6.thAwe MN=, �t �. = — > —,, F ri I ■ o _ va_ ,.bth_A.ve � — � _7.th AveiiEth Ctw I- Z. E 7th Ave Y O11111 c a ■■ - Ota , E_._,1 lum milli ,ci BIM ii -4._________f= � '! ! ' lAe 1111■ 1111111 E - H , ' I , 11 ..h A 1■11 LE 9th Ave�— ' _ F9.th.A1c� __— th MIMI 9eF11111 ., � _ _ HH 1.Othe I I 1EL_l 1111E lOt]a Ave— Central Ell E 1.0thi A.ve�. ' 1 EErin? Ave ■ . _� Valley Early } O a�tun�hr .1 I ■_ 11�■ ■a jLthAe_______ jtJJj �� � Learning Ce 1.I�_ Ei E lw1th E 11th L_n_�--1 –., II Elementary o p Ave ■ _1.L h A.:e % �� C s 1111111111 Ea 2th Ar c ro —�_t�it0 3 —] , r tC i , `nx.� — E_13th-Aue I —O MN ! j G— R E crossb-o , ����■ I �- c Ct II,1 kE VlcElrau Ln= -G� ��I X �� 1 o73 I v 0a Li _ 1111 = n I� _E_1_4th Aue_� -�� — �~-� - \\\F._, }:4th.Ave �� 14th Ln _. ,� Ill n J — III -Ailh� e .im��, ■ � � rn y .!Lith Ave I 71 I Lc a — ua �� _ I II - I l-� f T 1111 --� AIM. 1 Comprehensive Plan Map E7th Ave Study Area 45212.1348 721 S UNIVERSITY RD c4 E 8th Ave CPA-2018-0004 Request: l'rivatelyinitiated site-.specific Comprehensive q Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting I" 11.1.6111°. to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use pL1j��lil\.+ (-NMI" from 7Ta a Owner: Steve & Designation Single Family Residential(SFR) LJTresa Sehmaufz with a Single-family Residential Urban District(1?-3) 1, Valley Parcel#: See Map zoning classification toNeighborhood Connnercial (NC)designation with a Neighborhood Commercial • Address: See Map (NC)zoning classification EXHIBIT 4 Zoning Map E 7th Ave Study Area 45212.1348 721 S UNIVERSITY RD U/ E 8th Ave Re[xIIeSt' Privately initialed site-specific Comprehensive CPA-2018-0004 Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting Spoliate Owner: Steve & to change the Cfrom inglPlan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR) Tresa Schmautz with a Single-family Residential Urban District(R-3) galley Parcel#: See Map zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial (NC)designation with a Neighborhood Commercial Address: See Map (NC)zoning classification EXHIBIT 5 COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Spkane BUILDING &PLANNING DIVISION Talley DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS REVIEW 10210 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 4 Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5240•Fax:509.720.3375•planning@spokanevalley.org Project Number: CPA-2018-0004 Application Description: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR)with a Single-family Residential Urban District(R-3) zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial (NC)designation with a Neighborhood Commercial(NC) zoning classification. Location: Parcel number 45212.1349; located in the SE corner of 71h Avenue and University Road, further located in the NW Vs of Section 21,Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Applicant: Heather Bryant, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 Owner: Steve&Tresa Schmautz, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 Date of Application: October 30,2017 Date of Complete Determination: January 5, 2018 Staff Contact: Martin Palaniuk, Planner (509) 720-503 l mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org '' / Date Issued: January 5, 2018 Signature: �l *I /L YOUR APPLICATION IS: Complete The required components of the application are present. The materials provided thus far are judged by the Building&Planning Division to meet the procedural submission requirements and the information is sufficient for continued processing even though additional information may be required or project modification may be undertaken subsequently. The Determination of Completeness does not preclude the Building& Planning Division from requesting additional information or studies either with this notice or subsequently if new information is required or substantial changes in the proposed action occur. The issuance of the Determination of Completeness shall not be constructed to mean that any of its application components have been approved. EXHIBIT6 morone SEPA CHECKLIST SVMC 21.20 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 ♦Fax:(509)720-5075 ♦permitcenter ct.spokanevalley,org STAFF USE ONLY la-5-61 Submitted: /i7 //7 Received by: f'2 4 -' Fee: l PLUS#: File#: '//� f5/7-0"/ PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL. **THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED"` 'Completed SEPA Checklist [1j Application Fee • ate:• ', 1 .F Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 8'/2" y " y " - b 9'i or b 77 size �_� � fes • ' ❑ Trip Distribution and Generation Letter,if requested by Development Engineerind:'Z,, /Q,,,` PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST; ` The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement(EIS)must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. JNSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS; This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS.Answer the questions briefly,with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. in most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know"or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems,the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects.The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS; Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered"does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D). PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of M,Y� 'ral SEPA CHECKLIST .0,0017a, 1 For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant,"and "property or site"should be read as"proposal,""proposer," and"affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable 721 Rezone to 729 Neighborhood Commercial 2. Name of applicant: Steve/Tresa Schmautz 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 708 W Cliff Dr.Spokane.WA Heather Bryant 509-481-0899 heather@sdsrealty.com(owner representative) 4. Date checklist prepared: October 2017 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley-Planning 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Nothing planned at this time. Proposal to change zone of 721 S.University parcel to be same as 729 S.University during 2017's review period. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion,or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Nothing planned at this lime; 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No know applications 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. No know applications 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.)Nothing planned at this time. Proposal to change zone of 721 S.University parcel to be same as 729 S.University during 2017's review period. Propsat would increase functionality and cohesiveness In boundary lines end topography PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of poral SEPA CHECKLIST .000%iley. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 721 S University Rd,Spokane WA;Parcel#45212.1348 primarily on the corner of 7th Ave and University Rd.with a portion of it running south towards 8th Ave. 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? Yes The general Sewer Service Area? UnknowrPriority Sewer Service Area?Unknown(See: Spokane County's AWQMPAO" DK t(es for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement PartA. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area(CARA)/Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of(including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). No changes to current systems 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? No changes to current land use; chemical storage etc. 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out ofdisposal systems. No changes to disposal methods; any future changes will follow proper disposal guidelines as provided by environmental agencies 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? None identified at this time PL 22 V1.0 Page 3 of *Wane SEPA CHECKLIST r b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock(if known)? None identified at this time 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? if so, describe any potential impacts, No change to current B. ENVIRONMENTALELEMENTS EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1) Earth a. General description of the site(check one): ❑ flat,0 roiling, ❑ hilly, ❑ steep slopes, ❑ mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site(approximate percentslope)? +1-3-13%estimate c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. gravely ashy loam d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. unknown e. Describe the purpose,type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. No change to current f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No change to current g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? No change to current; potentially 50-75% PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of n� SEPA CHECKLIST . '' h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: No change to current; would use decorative natural features if needed in future EVALUATION FOR Z) ANr AGENCY USE ONLY a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. No change to current b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that mayaffect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No change to current c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: No change to current 3) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. N/A 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals ordiversions?No Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. • PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of Slit ne SEPA CHECKLIST dorogSFValler EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? No Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No change to current c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? No change to current Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. No change to current 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? No If so, generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: No change to current P1-22 VI.0 Page 6 of p jj������ SEPA CHECKLIST rey' EVALUATION FOR 4) Plants AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ® deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ❑ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ® shrubs ▪ grass O pasture O crop or grain ❑ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ❑water plants:water lily,eelgrass, milfoil, other O other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? No change to current c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: No change to current; any future changes would include native vegitation; preferably draught tolerate, low water consumption 5) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: unknown ❑ birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ❑ mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: El fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. unknown c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so,explain. unknown d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: No change to current PL-22 V1.0 Page 7 of S"okane SEPA CHECKLIST Sr:Mane EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 6). Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,etc. No change to current; future electric and/or natural gas b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:No change to current; future would include LED fixtures energy efficient items 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? No If so,describe 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required, No change to current 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: No change to current b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:traffic, equipment,operation, other)?None 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from thesite. None 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of *ManeSEPA CHECKLIST P .0. %ile EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 8). Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Rezone Neighborhood commercial (729 S. University; residential home b.. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. Existing housing and outbuildings d. Will any structures be demolished? If so,what? Not for this proposal and/or planned in near future e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R3 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Single family Residential g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? No if so, specify. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?No change to current j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? No change to current k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: No change to current 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: No change to current PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of Slit .ne SEPA CHECKLIST 40000 Pa Valley' EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle,or low-income housing. No change to current b. Approximately how many units, if any,would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle,or low-income housing. No change to current: potentially 1; middle income c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts,if any: No change to current 10). Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?Nothing planned at this time; estimate tallest point 161/block or metal siding b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?Nothing planned at this time Any potential building would be setback in potentially similar location as existing building(s) c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts,if any: Nothing planned at this time Any potential changes would incorporate landscaping and natural elements to keep cohesiveness of community; and work into the new 'Appleway Trail' feel 11). Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?Nothing planned at this time Any potential changes would photocell lighting directed to highlight vegetation and walk- ways for safety b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?No c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: photocell lighting directed to highlight vegetation and walk- ways for safety PL-22V1.0 Page 10of14 siyokan SEPA CHECKLIST Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?Appleway Trail b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next tothe site? If so, generally describe. No b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific,or cultural importance known to be on or next to thesite. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. University Rd/7th Ave; small portion of 8th Ave Foresee potentially traffic off of 7th Ave or property directly on to University to avoid congestion at corner of 8th and University b. Is site currently served by public transit? No If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? 7 Blocks c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the projecteliminate? No change to current PL-22 V1.O Page 11 of Spe SEPA CHECKLIST fie' d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets,not including driveways? if so, generally FOR EVALUATION describe(indicate whether public or private). USE ONLY No change to current; potential change from private to public e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water, rail, or air transportation? If so,generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. No change to current; unknown expansion at this time; any discussions have been proposing small scale business to serve community homes g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: No change to current; any future work would involve work with traffic control and civil to reduce/control 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection,police protection, health care, schools, other)? if so,generally describe. No b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services,if any. None 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: [ electricity, ® natural gas, ®water, ® refuse service, ® telephone, ❑ sanitary sewer, ❑ septic system, ❑other-describe b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, end the general construction activities on the site or In the immediate vicinity which might be needed. No change to current C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: \\,,,,\444. _..k\A- e PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 or SUriL' SEPA CHECKLIST , Valey. Date 6.I' nom, 1 q Submitted: D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for Drolect actions) Because these questions are very general,it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than If the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1.. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water;emissions to air, production, storage,or release of toxic or hazardous substances;or production of noise? No Change to current; a.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants,animals,fish, or marine life? No Change to current; a.Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants,animals,fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? No Change to current; a.Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains,or prime farmlands? No Change to current; • a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: B. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, Including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? No Change to current; PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of rr SEPA CHECKLIST 40,a0Vr a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? If parcels developed for neighborhood commercial,may see minor increase in traffic a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s)are: Evaluating best routes for traffic to move In/out of proposed property should the current land be developed for business use 7. Identify, if possible,whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. No known conflicts E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon this check list. Date: Signature: Please print or type: Proponent: Address: Phone: Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Address: Phone: PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of EXHIBIT 7 f COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SkaneoF PLANNING DIVISION 4.00\Ti11eyDETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE 10210 E Sprague Ave• Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5240•Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley.org spokanevalley.org FILE NUMBER: CPA-2018-0004 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single-family Residential Urban District (R-3) zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation with a Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning classification. PROPOSAL LOCATION: Parcel number 45212.1349; located in the SE corner of 7161 Avenue and University Road,further located in the NW './.4 of Section 21,Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington APPLICANT: Heather Bryant, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 OWNER: Steve&Tresa Schmautz, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley, Community&Public Works Department Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, 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). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Spokane Valley Municipal Code Titles 19, 21 and 22, site assessment, and comments from the public and affected agencies.This information is available to the public on request. DETERMINATION: This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on his proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m.on February 16,2018. STAFF CONTACT: Martin Palaniuk, Planner,(509)720-5031,mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner DATE ISSUED: February 2,2018 SIGNATURE: ` I APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community&Public Works Department within fourteen(14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and make specific factual objections to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90 Appeals,and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Scheduled shall be paid at time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680,appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-S ignificance(DNS) Page 1 of 1 File No.CPA-2018-0004 COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 0� � PLANNING DIVISION REVISED DETERMINATION OF do•OValley'' NON-SIGNIFICANCE 10210 E Sprague Ave • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5240•Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley.org FILE NUMBER: CPA-2018-0004 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single-family Residential Urban District (R-3) zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation with a Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning classification. PROPOSAL LOCATION: Parcel number 45212.1348; located in the SE corner of T" Avenue and University Road, further located in the NW 'A of Section 21,Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington APPLICANT: Heather Bryant, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 OWNER: Steve&Tresa Schmautz, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley, Community & Public Works Department Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, 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). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Spokane Valley Municipal Code Titles 19, 21 and 22, site assessment, and comments from the public and affected agencies. This information is available to the public on request. DETERMINATION: This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on his proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m.on February 16,2018. STAFF CONTACT: Martin Palaniuk,Planner,(509) 720-5031, mpalaniuk@spokanevalley.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner rr DATE ISSUED: February 2,2018 SIGNATURE: 44. L L ' "\) APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community & Public Works Department within fourteen (14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and make specific factual objections to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90 Appeals,and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Scheduled shall be paid at time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of File No.CPA-2018-0004 EXHIBIT 8 COMMUNITY &PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT S°"' or BUILDING &PLANNING DIVISIONpOlane ValleyNOTYCE OF PUBLIC HEARING k 10210 E Sprague Ave• Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5240 •Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley.org Date of Notice: February 7, 2018 Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.120, Notice of Public Hearing, the Building &Planning Division is sending notice to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject property. Public Hearing Date and Time: February 22,2018,beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, City Hall Project Number: CPA-2018-0004 Application Description: The application is a privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR)with a Single-family Residential Urban District(R-3) zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial(NC) designation with a Neighborhood Commercial(NC)zoning classification. Environmental The City issued a Determination of Non-significance(DNS)on February Determination: 2,2018 pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) and chapter 21.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Location: Parcel number 45212.1348; located in the SE corner of 7th Avenue and University Road,further located in the NW '1a of Section 21,Township 25 North,Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Applicant(s): Heather Bryant, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 Owner(s): Steve & Tresa Schmautz, 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, WA 99201 Date of Application: October 30,2017 Date Determined January 5, 2018 Complete Staff Contact: Martin Palaniuk, Planner (509) 720-5031 palaniuk ra,spokanevallev.org Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to the Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at(509)921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the hearing at the Community & Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Send written comments to the Spokane Valley Community&Public Works Department. Comprehensive Plan Map Study Area b 45212.1349 729 S UNIVERSITY RD E 8th Ave j CPA-2018-0004 Request' Privately initiated site-specific Comprehensive • Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting Tn.M• to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use nok le Owner: Steve & Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR) r Tresa Schmautz with a Single-family Residential Urban District(R-3) Valley zoning classification to Neighborhood Cwi�mercial ■(��ley Parcel#: See Map (NC)designation with a Neighborhood Commercial Address: See Map (NC)zoning classiflcation EXHIBIT 9 January 18, 2018 CPA-2018-0004 Review of Trip Generation & Distribution Letter TGDL dated November 15, 2017 Parcel No. 45212.1348 A planning level Trip Generation and Distribution Letter (TGDL) was submitted to the City of Spokane Valley for a proposed land use change from Urban Residential(R3) to Neighborhood Commercial(NC). If the 0.85 acre+1- parcel is developed to NC, the higher density would account for an estimated 208 new trips throughout a typical day over R3. During the peak hours, we would expect there to be an additional 31 new a.m. peak hour trips and 16 new p.m. peak hour trips. In reviewing the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan traffic model at the intersections of 4n, and University and 8th and University, level of service is predicted to be at LOS B for the intersection of 8th and University and LOS A for the intersection of 4th and University during the pm peak period. Adding the new pm peak hour trips that would be generated for the new land use to the Comprehensive Plan traffic model indicate no change in LOS for either intersection with little to no added delay. Based on the information submitted in the letter combined with the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan traffic model, the City of Spokane Valley has determined that there is adequate transportation infrastructure to meet concurrency at time of building permit for this CPA. Attached are intersection capacity analysis to support the conclusions in this response. No pass-by trips were credited at this time for this analysis as discussed in the letter. Adequate street capacity exists without pass-by consideration. In the future,at time of permit,the applicant may submit a project specific T L a d request a pass-by trip exemption. �i! lay right, 2 E Sr. ngineer, Traffic City of Spokane Valley HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: University & 8th 1/17/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '1 '{'a 4, 1 44, 'I Traffic Volume(vph) 58 88 65 13 58 17 26 260 9 45 526 77 Future Volume(vph) 58 88 65 13 58 17 26 260 9 45 526 77 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 Frt 1.00 0.94 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow(prof) 1538 1516 1454 1538 3062 1553 3046 Flt Permitted 0.63 1.00 0.94 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow(perm) 1026 1516 1376 1538 3062 1553 3046 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj. Flow(vph) 61 93 68 14 61 18 27 274 9 47 554 81 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 31 0 0 10 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 61 130 0 0 83 0 27 282 0 47 629 0 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 13% 13% 13% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Prot NA Prot NA Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 Actuated Green, G(s) 13.7 13.7 13.7 5.0 65.8 6.0 66.8 Effective Green,g(s) 15.2 15.2 15.2 5.0 66.8 6.0 67.8 Actuated gIC Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.67 0.06 0.68 Clearance Time(s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 155 230 209 76 2045 93 2065 ids Ratio Prot c0.09 0.02 0.09 c0.03 c0.21 Ws Ratio Perm 0.06 0.06 vlc Ratio 0.39 0,56 0.40 0.36 0.14 0.51 0.30 Uniform Delay,dl 38,2 39.3 38.3 45.9 6.1 45.6 6.5 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.82 0.89 1.14 Incremental Delay,d2 1.6 3.1 1.2 2.8 0.1 4.1 0.4 Delay(s) 39.9 42.5 39.5 49.4 5.1 44.5 7.8 Level of Service D D D D A 0 A Approach Delay(s) 41.8 39,5 9.0 10.4 Approach LOS 0 D A B Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service B HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.37 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(ruin) 15 Description:2005 counts c Critical Lane Group COSV Network _ Synchro 9 Report ___ 411Y-6v/Ati\ Vt ?\ttii BSonnen tkl/ikt Page 1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3217: University & 4th/4th 1/17/2018 IA ' + C 4- 4\ t ,' 4' 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 't 0) '9 +1 /1 ft '1 ft r Traffic Volume(vph) 33 26 34 10 21 36 15 328 5 118 743 29 Future Volume(vph) 33 26 34 10 21 36 15 328 5 118 743 29 Ideal Flow(vphpi) 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Total Lost time(s) 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Wit.Factor 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Satd.Flow(prot) 1553 2840 1538 2784 1553 3099 1553 3106 1389 Flt Permitted 0,72 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow(perm) 1170 2840 1156 2784 581 3099 838 3106 1389 Peak-hour factor,PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Adj.Flow(vph) 35 27 36 11 22 38 16 345 5 124 782 31 RTOR Reduction(vph) 0 33 0 0 35 0 .0 1 0 0 0 7 Lane Group Flow(vph) 35 30 0 11 25 0 16 349 0 124 782 24 Heavy Vehicles(%) 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 8 4 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 2 6 6 Actuated Green,G(s) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7,5 72.8 70.4 81.5 75.1 75.1 Effective Green,g(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 72.8 71.9 81.5 76.6 76.6 Actuated g1C Ratio 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.73 0.72 0.82 0.77 0.77 Clearance Time(s) 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 4.0 5.5 4.0 5.5 5.5 Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 105 255 104 250 446 2228 733 2379 1063 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 0.01 0,00 0.11 c0.01 c0.25 v/s Ratio Perm c0.03 0,01 0.03 0,13 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.04 0.16 0.17 0.33 0.02 Uniform Delay,dl 42.7 41.9 41.8 41.8 3.7 4.4 2.0 3.7 2.8 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.30 1.33 0.72 0.75 2.16 Incremental Delay,d2 1.9 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.0 Delay(s) 44.6 42.1 42.3 42.0 4.9 6.1 1.5 3.1 6.0 Level of Service D D D 0 A A A A A Approach Delay(s) 43.0 42.0 6.0 3,0 Approach LOS 0 0 A A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 8.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service A HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.33 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.0 ' Sum of lost time(s) 12.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 Description:2005 counts c Critical Lane Group COSV Network __ Synchro 9 Report BSonnen , Page1 X14 X It 4At kOtli(4 S 11.1 nburst16402 E. Va Ave eywa Spokane Valley,llWA 99037 ENGINEERING (509) 924-2155 sunburstengr.com November 15, 2017 W.O. No. 1718 Raymond Wright, P.E., Senior Traffic Engineer City of Spokane Valley, Public Works 10210 E Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Trip Distribution Letter for Zone Change of 721 S. University Road Dear Ray: I have been contacted by Heather Bryant of SDS Realty to complete a trip distribution letter for 721 S University Road. A rezone of this 0.85 acre property is proposed from R3, Urban Residential to NC, Neighborhood Commercial! The neighboring parcel at 729 S University (0.38 acres) is already zoned NC. It is also is under the same ownership. No site plan is attached to this rezone. The site presently has a duplex on it which will be removed as a part of this development. The neighborhood commercial zoning was included in the zoning code for parcels where local businesses would appeal to the surrounding residents. The corner of 8th 1 University is a good location for this use and having this zoning on these two parcels creates a site big enough to attract locally oriented businesses. Access to the site is allowed to University Road, a principle arterial with sidewalks on both sides. Bicycles are also allowed on it. There are currently two sidewalk drops to accommodate this access, but no driveways have been connected to these proposed access points. The current residence is accessed from 7th Avenue, and a driveway is also present to 8th Avenue. The current zoning allows six residential units per acres and the site is big enough for five residences. If the site was fully developed as allowed under the existing zoning, it would generate 4 trips in the a.m. peak hour, 5 trips in the p.m. peak hour and 50 trips during an average day. , 1.1)((d1 tOfPc a7 Trip Distribution Letter for 721 S University Rezone November 15, 2017 Page 2 The site is likely to accommodate 7,400 square feet of building, just under 20% of the lot size. It is assumed the building would be partly in use as offices and partly as retail. There is also an interest by the owner to develop some housing on the site in accordance with the neighborhood commercial zone. The trip generation characteristics of the site once rezoned are expected to be represented by the characteristics found in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Manual, Trip Generation, 9th Edition using several land use categories: Specialty Retail (Land Use Category 826), General Office Building (Land Use Category 710) and Apartments (Land Use Category 220).This manual is a nationally recognized resource for determining trip generation for these and other land uses. Estimates of weekday trip generation rates and volumes for the a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour and on a daily basis are summarized on the following tables. \---- orAlAillh Table 1 -Trip Generation Characteristics for Retail ( L al f A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour A T Vol ©6.84 Directional Vol ©2.71 Directional Vol © KSF Trips per Distribution Trips per Distribution 44.32 KSF KSF Trips per 48% In 52%Out 44% In 56%Out KSF \\I3.7 25 12 13 10 4 6 104 The pass-by trip rate during the a.m. peak hour is estimated at 60% (15 trips) and during the p.m. peak hour is estimated at 34% (3 trips). *� Table 2 -Trip [Generation Characteristics for Office (jA 10 ) A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour AD KSF Vol @ 1.56 Directional Vol @ 1.49 Directional Vol @ Trips per Distribution Trips per Distribution 11.03 Trips KSF KSF , per KSF 88% In 12%Out 17% In 83 Out 3.7 6 5 1 6 1 5 41 Trip Distribution Letter for 721 S University Rezone November 15, 2017 Page 3 Table 3 - Trip Generation Characteristics for Apartments ( LU, ff/ \ A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour ADT l Vol @ 0.51 Directional Vol @ 0.62 Directional Vol @ 6.65 Units Trips per Distribution Trips per Distribution Trips per Unit Unit Unit 20% In 80% Out 65% In 35% Out 8 4 1 3 5 3 2 53 When combined, the site will generate 35 a.m. peak hour trips, 21 p.m. peak hour trips and 258 trips on an average day. Some of these trips will be pass-by /diverted and internal trips. When discounting the number of trips generated under the existing zoning, the site generates 31 additional trips in the a.m. peak hour (16 new/destination trips), 16 trips in the p.m. peak hour and 208 trips on an average day. No nearby intersections will experience 20 or more additional trips in either peak hour as a result of the rezone. Distribution of new (destination) vehicle traffic generated by the site was based on likely routes to and from the building, existing geometric characteristics of the transportation system and other factors to be 70% south on University Road, and 30% north on University Road, and is shown graphically on Figure 1. Two bus routes run on University Road along the site frontage. The Valley Transfer Center is located four blocks north of this site at 4th / University, providing access to the greater Spokane area. Sidewalks and bike lanes are also available on University. Therefore, trips by bus or other forms of alternative transportation should be expected and could make up 5 - 10% of the trips to/from this site. ll 1Qfi' ,t)0 10 li° t�{iii, qmr, hiAk1L Trip Distribution Letter for 721 S University Rezone November 15, 2017 Page 4 I look forward to your review of the information in this letter and please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Sunburst Engineering, PS G\47 9 Ann L. Winkler, P.E. Traffic Engineer encl. cc: Heather Bryant, SDS Realty file 1'.W IN1Q WwASH .6` 7:. 0, 4, 31398 : 40 s4,jaLV��ti 11/15I17 - . — .-I I _ - --- - — i-- . .-._ - -I: -- - _ _ _ .. ..I ._.. - __.. _ - S ll.i. JI.I,. . - `:I In!..1 � I I � y Zi. _ ..._ ..._ ` _LL I - - Z. PI: iJ _- O_% _ dol . - __ i P _ i 1 t4-1...4 Ili s •N='i .. , _ l --. i. ,1,1j1113' - ', _ .,. _ • --- r _ { ..- % w hR + 1 - y'q y i ,, t J. - II II 5_ -- - s ' h 11FI tf1 2 1 ," y. Graphic Provided by Spokane County Scout Su.i nb u rst 721 S University Zone Change Figure 1 ENGINEERING 16402 E Valleyway Ave Tri Distribution Letter Vicinity Map I Spokane Valley,WA 99037 p Trip Distribution Map (509)924-2155 www,sunburstengr.com To: Martin Palaniuk (City of Spokane Valley- Community Development) CC: From: Jim Red (Spokane County- Environmental Services Dept) Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 Planning/Building #: Subject: CPA-2018-0004 Stage: Comprehensive Phase: Change from LDR to NC Address: SSO9F Facilities on the site are currently connected to sewer, however depending on the nature of the new use and or expansion; additional facilities may also need to be connected. Therefore, a sewer connection and inspection may be required. Commercial developments shall submit historical and or estimated water usage prior to the issuance initial building permit of the project in order to establish sewer fees. A sewer plan maybe required. Applicant should contact Colin Depner at 509-477-3604 concerning this. E t'4 0\1.-"1011210p � SPOKANE • T ` T T ; T Bryan Collins,210 Fire Wilbur 51) 1K1CA7� Y !A1■1JL V1212a rv.Wilbur FIRE DEPARTMENT Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Phone(509)928-1700 FIRE DEPT. Est. 1940 FAX(509)892-4125 www.spokanevalleytire.com January 8, 2018 City of Spokane Valley 10210 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: CPA-2018-0004 Technical Review Comments The Spokane Valley Fire Department has completed a review for the above referenced project and has no comments on the SEPA checklist. Specific fire department requirement shall be conditioned on future permits. Sincerely, Traci Harvey Fire Protection Engineer Spokane Valley Fire Department Q:\Dept Data Unshared\Prevention Unshared\Plats\Shorties120181Comp Plan Amendment\CPA-2018-0004 Palanluk.docx EXHIBIT 10 A Mary Moore From: Deanna Horton on behalf of Planning Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2018 3:37 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: FW: Attn Marty: Project planned for 7th and University Would you like to respond to his questions?. Deanna Original Message From:Justin Braid [mailto:justin.braid@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2018 11:54 AM To: Planning<planning@spokanevalley.org> Subject: Attn Marty: Project planned for 7th and University I live on 7th and our neighborhood is interested in what is planned for 7th and University. We saw the white sign but was unable to understand what "low density housing means". if there is an apartment planned on going in, we would like to know when the public meeting is planned so we can formally contest it as 15+ households on 7th avenue have contested another planned apartment house on 6th and Bowdish in the recent years. Thank you for your time and assistance. Sincerely, Justin Braid 808-284-7305 1 February 13, 2018ft CITY °F SPO/c Cary P.Driskell ;T,�.,E x`!T Y City Attorney 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Re: Protective Covenants of Old Orchard Subdivision (copy enclosed) Recorded 2/23/54 as No. 223697E as amended by Amendment to Dedication dated 4/09/54 recorded 5/19/54 as No. 240866B Dear Mr.Driskell: We are homeowners at 10719 E. 8th Avenue in Spokane Valley(parcel no.45212.1350) and recently received a Notice of Public Hearing in the mail.The hearing pertains to an attempt to alter the restrictive covenants that have been in place in our subdivision since 1954. We met with Martin Palaniuk,planner, last week to discuss the upcoming hearing and were advised that the parcel located at the corner of 8th and University was removed from the restrictive covenants in 2016. We request that you review this matter and advise us how this occurred. And we would like a copy of the minutes from that hearing. We and other neighbors never saw a sign of a hearing and never received notice in the mail.We want to know if this is correct and if so,please explain in detail the process that was taken to remove the covenants. We request your response prior to the hearing on February 22"a Please be advised that Steve Schmautz, owner of parcels 45212.1348 and 45212.1349, and applicant for the upcoming hearing previously attempted to alter the restrictive covenants in 1997 and was denied. At that time we and several neighbors opposed this alteration. Since that time,we and our neighbors know of no other attempts to alter the covenants. The restrictive covenants have been in place for almost 64 years and per paragraph P of the covenants,they are binding"unless by a vote of the majority of the then resident owners of the lots it is agreed to change the covenants in whole or in part."It is our understanding there is no agreement. Please advise immediately if your understanding is different. It is also our understanding that the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC) also provides that an application to alter a subdivision"shall contain the signatures of the majority of those persons having an ownership interest in lots,tracts,parcel sites or divisions in the subject subdivision or portion to be altered.If the subdivision is subject to restrictive covenants which were filed at the time of approval of the subdivision,and the application for alteration would result in the violation of a covenant, the application shall contain an agreement signed by all parties subject to the covenants providing that the parties agree to terminate or alter the relevant covenants to accomplish the purpose of the vacation of the subdivision or binding site plan, or portion thereof." SVMC 20.60.010 Again,there is no agreement and one owner's desire to violate the covenants should not be allowed to take precedence over the binding restrictive covenants and wishes of the majority of homeowners. Without"an agreement signed by all parties subject to the covenants"the Building&Planning Division lacks authority to consider the application. SVMC 20.60.020 To our knowledge,there is only one property owner, Steve Schmautz, in our subdivision in agreement to change the restrictive covenants that have been in place for 64 years. Mr. Schmautz does not live in our subdivision and wants to use his property for commercial purposes. We live in a residential subdivision and do not want to incorporate commercial property into it. Commercial property will decrease all residential property owners' home values, increase traffic, and increase crime. As you know,the protective covenants are a recorded document on all parcels in the Old Orchard Subdivision. The property owners have relied on these covenants for many years. Paragraph Q of the covenants states: "If the parties hereto, or any of them, or their heirs or assigns, shall violate or attempt to violate any of the covenants herein, any other person or persons owning real property situated in this subdivision may prosecute any proceedings at law or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such covenant to restrain or prevent him or them from doing so,to recover damages or other dues for such violation,or both." We intend to follow this provision if it is warranted. Please let us know the current zoning for parcels 45212.1348 and 45212.1349 owned by Steve Schmautz and if either of them is no longer protected by the restrictive covenants,we request detailed information as to how this was accomplished because it is in direct violation of the notice provisions in the SVMC. Please consider this letter as our filing of a written request for a copy of the notice of application and the final decision. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, 441-elekr qc'''2-R--?g-drz-41* Rad Jane Sebert 10719 E. 8th Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 926-7227 Enclosure cc (w/encl.): Spokane Valley Community and Public Works Department Mark Calhoun, Spokane Valley City Manager Martin.Palaniuk,Planner Heather Bryant/Steve and Tresa Schmautz .•1:' 4. 5 1 y �,11:,r ��}L$IFV%C; 21';�rt iR—i-,1:0i J4f':, ~1 s��ilt� Z ~? i ;) y�� 7 ; �t,,�[ .�l�,;i.: :'<< �4 ';C2Srlt���,� ri.�7iLo •;. � °i 7� 2 l i - 1: F , l ,j _ 0 • 5- . 4. z-:,-.-•",:•,.-:-.,- . 3' .-..- - :.- ' , : . , .--, -'"' •--:.' -- 1 • :,-Y.-,' +I ). 013 SiFf�`_1 �a% Ii ia'-ILI `4!: iil?v1,.., iHl'.P) 1 l _ i lq,TF filgK7cl Lieu i.s. ;p: 9 Date of Notice: February 7,2018 • Pursuant to Spokane ValleyMunicipal Code (SVMC) 17.80,126,Notice of Public Hea•ring;the Building &PIanning Dfvision is sending notice to all property owners witfun 800 feet of the subject property. • . Public Hearbrg Date and Time:February 22;2018,beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council•Cliambers,.City Hall • Project Number: • CPA-2018-0004 • Ww � pii atf escrrigoil::.. -a p511- t o1s-a.pYi,V n intad•site-spe e- - _. . ..._. - • , •Map and Zoning Map amendment requesting to change the • Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family • • - Residential(SFR)with a Single-family Residential Urban District(R-3) zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial(NC)designation with a Neighborhood Commercial(NC)zoning classification. Environmental The City issued a Determinatio• n of Non-significance(DNS)on February Determination: 2,2018 pursuant to the Sta'fe"Enviroidmental Policy Act(SEPA)and . chapter,21.20:Spokane Valley Municipal Code., Location: Parcel nwnber 45212.1348 -iocated'n•the SE corner o th Avenue and University Road,further located.in the NW 1l of Section.21,Township 25 Nax;Ia,:Range 44 East,Willamette Meraitlian;,Spokane County,Wallington Appliicant(s): ,,Heather Bry nt; 108 N Waslnngta Strife 500,Spokane,WA 99201 Ownu .:.(4 , ., . .Steve 8 •Ttesa Sehmautz; 108 N Washington, Suite 500, Spokane, 'WA 99201 • • Date of Application: October 30,2017 - - •Date Determined January 5,2018 Complete Sof Contact: Martin Palaniuk,Planner • • (509)7205031 • maalaniuk[a?, nekanevalley.org. . Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the bearing pursuant to the Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting'who require . special assistance to accommodate physical,hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk • at(509).921-1000 as soot as possible so that arrangements inay be*fade. . - A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the hearing at the• Community & Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Send writ--teen comments to the Spokane Valley Community&Public Works Department. Provisions contained in Plat and Dedication of Old Orchard Subdiv- ision, filed for record February 23) 195IF, recorded in Book 3 of Plats, page 11, as follows: • • PROTECTIVE COVENANTS: • A. As a condition of acceptance of this Plat by the Spokane County P1•ebbing Commission' no lot in this subdivision..shall.be sold until such lot is furnished e:'domentic water.supply. B. All lots: in•this stbd'ivitiOn shall .be classified and .known as Residential Lats.. C. None tut nets structures 'shall be erected upon•any lot in this sub- c�1 inion D. Na more thail'one atriicttre shAll be erected upon any lot, except that One.detached garage'eWm be permitted. . E. digellinge shall be permitted in this subdivision. • (See exception• belaay.)'. ; ': Ido residential structure shall be •erected having lees them, 1000 square feet of floor 'space upon the ground floor, exclusive, of car- ports; breezeways, patios, porches or' other area•not deli ned for indoor living quarters:" G. • No residential ='structure shall be erected-nearer t.an 3Q ,feet to- the front property line of any lot, nor' any detached garage nearer than X55 •deet, tor. shall ;any residence-1)e nearer a side,•propet- y4tne than 10 feet; :and' a,Ll other construction shah: conform in all respects to the building regulations of Spokane C othity. - H. Any structure erected shall be complete as to external appearance, • -including finished painting-, and shah,,be-connected_to public sewer .or 'septic tank within six,months from date of coimner cement of con- structi on,. V I. .No. basement, garage, ;trailer.) or •other_temporaacjr stilattice, fixed, mobile or portable, may be occupied or used 'ar living quarters at•any time. J. No advertising sign, billboard, poster or public notice may be erected or displayed on any lot or roadside adjacent thereto, excepting such sign or signs of modest and reasonable size used only to offer for • sale real estate lying within this plat. K. If any lot or lots in this subdivision be further 'subdivided, re- arranged, or portion or portions thereof incorporated with any other lot or lots, or portion or portions thereof, such subdivision or re- arrangement shall not result in any parcel of land of less than 8800 square feet in area, and not less than 70 feet of frontage on a road, remaining after such rearrangement) nor shall any such rearrangement be permitted that will leave any structure or structures on adjoining parcel or- parcels with less front, ,side or rear clearance than that outlined above. L. No business, industry or commerce shall be permitted within this subdivision. M. As a condition of acceptance of this plat, no structure shall be erected upon Lot 2 in Block 5 until such time that the owner or owners shall have acquired such additional and adjoining land to permit con- struction of a structure that will comply with the clearances outlined above and provisions of the Spokane County Planning Commission. Such structure may be used as a community club or civic center. tom, • • ' -2- N. The covenants above relating to size and location of structures, and number of structured on any lot shall not be invoked against any structure in this subdivision completed prior to the date of execution of this instrument. P These covenants are to run'with the land and shall be binding on all parties and persons claiming under them until January 1, 1979, and are automati Public Viewer -LPlat Image Search Results] i 1__,(ErV..�1L� ,, :"�. k" w'.;tij+ 'e::i ,, s ;r ':z ,. : .� . :Y,_.. ( • : •` :: Type a question for help :n,::4tr:9atRillt.—',d, 4^,...4-, .••'+? . ,_J:.,r. -•t.i.- :•- - .r�"!r'*' -- -W T�7 - - c:. - - •...,---- 1 3 S �' ��rtrt,TT :r' 9i:, nt r.X . isEak 1 r i /� ' €JrrF kJy i i 8f : • ,c.,,,, ow , g..... - :.. Y••.4s- h' °s; �� Jkll .; : yY 't ..I ' a, r ,i ss'n r ,. ,m; '., ' •� . ted 3. t aa' e ..r.•r aS1;;;,x:[ M:r..,- a� , t I . � J '0' r'' 9w; T," •,r i•''_•.xr:'% ;i:i F- LiF1�. 1. f��a i .i�.el� yJ>��1'�if �r � I �. rY,••� rie.. -x ••°ii v, ; ' '4' "•='' "II r,a)d„ ..1 .t �I12 cil 02t3311954• ,:i J.;1ye` vP`„ 'l' ' a ''' ''-.' [.. oe's� ,_r s=;3 y:f�g: n i< '1,},i {, 1- Ir�,.F;G i,,,, ,: .1.0.41223697B5,...r,� ..m a• .y^ ';7 p, ..r;•, ,�r. a 'f -- r I' g.r ! �L.i' •I. , k' . . J. ;3 s �. �r rE` r ii„ 1.`ds 1, ,. �.�... 6 I' ' Y 4 :k'`�' -' . ''I';: ..} I i- ��4 1 rt Iry rI �•.rel?z z7 �:� rir t ,1� 4u, ;7''-.0,.11:;.,545,62.„.7,--. i[I s. �' rw�,. 'A �r� F "{f�',�h Ld" r 1 •.:+.. ;' rI o ..- s1 a •`I ill 01 1' i'I ��` t- v k`u -7,:t7,-,:-,..--4,4370 I _ p ; ,..i €12451 za2_ ': ._. ' moi: �° �s �{f f} �� r •.->~. gra . �-,3,rsr. `...-l u!3,',�".". i1#..Li5r3'r, F,.t. '�.a�� ',... ,,-C1., t`K.! , hf.9.,, rt• fdlal .r. ..,: 1. i r :.h Platl�a _ t OLD ORCHARD SUB wP... � " A'.4' ,.,. ,_ 1 :., 1 �•tr.'�r, • • • w M• -r-z:•';a'. -`�•!'= ->'wV•'•�r•- "',;v� 9'ia::`rdli-: 'p..'r„:i• --t +•r r'• �...,s�.. 3s1:. "f!.. ,W.r}�.!*v..::...�:..,.'i:�:z=... ..1,. r'•.['4 ?+�":n:r,s:'•= ' H,Id t w t F....,, 1••ML ui23£�1._. - X41 ✓••Iyd•.,fix' •,Y �•%>�'. tk'+l .,.i . ,w..Y. „ .•. ,.__ .i�.{w N. y'' TA (Y. . 'k!-1: S89'28?4�VR Eli2E12 2122E02 .71 Yw: er • . 5.1".** ,0117]7 110.M BWB ♦.w <. 4.7- Laaw731 a _ Z R 33 6`) �c_3 b 1337 4: 804 0.t S �2 126 W t„ � o...,. S erra F2ona 7~opr Iz 9.64.87 ..c* 60. � R... . et Ffi .3131441rt Toad sa v ARE-- go _ -f" - - Ir g t I •r �rt• a - • 'a7.9�f �A�7t3?• .7 2371 4ZS}stetSOr. 13T2C G'r I, e, t•4 la 1P. 11 Eo- 8 + : rN s a d s. 5 g t ga £'yz Si? • Iia �A "' IY 1 , Y r 'Y gay 41 '?y 6orli 1 76 1.... ,9..4....1,--,Ir ,.,..r•�...tL---sir_.... 7sw•.•,,,�-.�•r]k :r i37� j,.,,,,, 79k •,a�, 32 y - tl � ! .3 , !s? ,114 d , lag L. q o ! F,, r2 1 !: a• K .F tl FS' l /1{, _-yam_-_- F IT 3 2 ,R r4 1111!' 2U 2] ER 1 Ra- 2101? PS' 2E- 27 23. 29 r¢ 31 P. , '^ ,�y: iF 6 r 71FA7 1+As7ssR7 7'7.75 F . •,�„3a ur ; J> • • S. Vg • FIS Y41 47•44 w• • `r. 55,, 775 fIJ 7R #Q A]CC - • . _i = r. .a LbcK� 3 - J zEy prr�j Z 015.25. `ct 3 it ° Ill"-. #0 1'� ....,.,.?V` \ 19334 -,,' • etoc g e 8 Ln 0 d KI t 4 it 1 5 4 ?098• "2 1-4o�k 34044 f , 1 gi g E f<- a r -1 r 1g 4y; r 1551 trA.4.3 - �}o, w R. a0''E CP T C91£NAk7R ME1� P➢437J�E 94u.i.APPLY 1V pLb:IC: ' f•• \ 1 PLAT. t. 10 1112 t Ia ' 1d - p 1 , act, 113.09 434.51 r •1:- .....`a} 6 i. - \ : � I _ S 3 —. ._. fired E_ s v+ •�- _ _ .*tri*6415: ri • :F. ••Keentr M 1403741.1,342 OP IMAM SWEA �,,, NM U4 >f' 26 ' ," 743•'P 'IF MD 255477 $u4C3�1� 4 M $ r $ • i -,74 •• wsiiR 2tti3.42 r r 1 N89`Z3r7tl`E 2e r = tFIU 04 �? rF'5 , & g• $ 4 3061717 4T%m g V r r q41 -1- 6.5..0. pt* :, .� v ulxaAS = ao E a°"aYtJt 3,t� •d7 tai yr • 1501 2 �4. • Ip • . • ... _. • I ,,•. .rr. `01.•:-‘,0;,-.6....-..--,.w �1. f. ` �.. r�,S_ yy'' ..-L- PLAY i tmr11Y LtXL' T *..0'21'.]4. - ` 1V'...T .6 Y. ...I:.AIATY..1.PoPC -+_..T.,_2µ- • - Y. „I......-,••• :...ycC • -7•-",'q•.15,4"42,'1 ..Mpa'#.' r•. gr. w,•. r C.,;' :� r:` t•1.`,. • ;.4 .i '+27,-x•aS L.: .. -•,•.,2,•;••• 'r Y ,4,,JJ��4 'ref y..,,�y,.A- ',AL r' 1 DIA �• "..`,.,[�G',.iV` ` -•si•' ,jr..+ y .•;�,�..•+. 117, F -i ,Gr. f .-,,,�,�iw.m:,,,AA'.,r-t:.e 11,As.£. .}11.41-; �IA' J f 14,10. ;'w. .. , ;F'+''1„iw, ,A,'''',+•" J1' -' �ti '-.. .. _ {,yy T. '.:'•'.'. '' ' 144 ,,r N.. n +.t,.nr•k2 '' �•7:.1.+ .il. .,t ,r, :+'I -_ 1 wl''74i- • ,I:; 'r - '' .ri�'^,74 r:.:.;a: ---t”` , • k :., t: �rk� "c }., r1i1`� '4th, `,�' iy' ",�L+.1iif4~`=r3. W�,={� ,�' �'P'I�w'e ��..-�'I?i„'=37: R�.� :�^'' �.iti•7.%.^M{Yr•'::^«,^+:Csr:.r.'e,^.,'': •:1:%:"� .s.3+i'�a ��,�{s.:i`� '�,'� x-;:Jr.�' .?!.v,� .j�;.'�n Ir f;�Ty�i r !I'' v��5•�SF,:,z' � st .<; 'r•F:':;'.i.�_ :� ..3 .'?. 1'.`w^' �:Lt ;J k�. y �.L t i}. , i f' .y.'� w ,at .I ,•a, , �u."' ,+," .. 'i "Ir �y� "`r�,,j i4i tti T' , �y:4'J N.,E•:.�3.�V,.I.�i? P.i'S'. d.f_y fJ�I.tr 1_..,y y t �i• �, .7!. 'dt r r'a `"' '?` L;..7"5; - '"�. :.`r�y u �I:�r^ro., .}' �r�!y?1 � '�l ,1• .'!�FJ .,;'11.,,,-,1- 'l'tnc 'I list i�; ;�j]iI rS1�,[ tr ,- �,.� WF} pS�l'��r'�'�•r� y,�'�,`�,. �:� .. ,b � �s�l �;.,j �' y� r'. '",},'••+d. r< war .$"Ki„S. r }�,C, 4i t �, v r v d. f k L �:I ,'# r �I'1+ , ' j� � ,I. �5� sC I11�,1,a;Iil,;,I!7424 ii� {� �U 9n 1��,y �41 G p�f! xa � , 4:I �1�r4111' N eQ 'p � F1'iF' °�i , �� i :' 1'1' ,-, T. "i II lu a t 'C•.1d.�E-t r`,�;F I �1 1` 4i, •I .'Y' .rr;^ .}-,S.N ,p,t 0 1 I 2-01,7 'i..V. ti J p ,�^Sr ,o,, ,r L, •rc , i '1,• r. Ja,• i1�4 y aYa$clj +J•it i. i'»{I_r't .� h: «:'I {jri kt ,€r�yt 5 14• r If.s:' 7,1,,+ - S 9` 6'I, _ __ 1- -h:.:' '1' �A.,4 „,',,"�,' { of,�i SS .„ v: - Ie ,9 far lr' .:Lr< q` ...{I' J4� -t.i ,1 fr ,7, + "f'Y,.•,fit.. I'-y;,-1 0-071,.i. l'iA 1 1+ frg!jr r. •4 - J r'"r. ,'i: :..F�cis`u- f�,J. �s• � - ,'152 "'T I�•i-, 4 ','I.l r I,+ rl J.I irr,'�3f"'i.> .,,. �,r ,r .tu Ili 1, ""f, � '1 T�i:• ,•o i'; .P, :t �' v �. :Y4. '� >I�'•.r�•'�.,h.. �� ,;rl. �� i r,L.� V x ��. �,:� I� 'I � I, T I ..p h!,:: I vi.. -,Lu ..{. f,I �l'j ,+I .1•P4='� J , �, '1,, 4T. 1'0.:, nr ri k,. '^i ,�i, P I '.c,.a. .�,d,. ..j.LYTY.,. �n,•I rt' fill. ,r�,�h•, �r 1„ i���'� r,. .'h.§ s�% .,`'�A• �.� rr•�"r3. .l .,�� t""" � r + a. i '� .4 .[a,-}.:, ,r .1. ,1i .+, t = iU. ,1. 1. :•r•. t"1. .r, ,. .w:•. {y, '.;1-s',1siP. 14,E ,-q!. •'�. ,a. .f,f, .I 2.2!;!01,{�, �ra;P" "i. � �•r� "�1.._ '-I'. .p,- � �1 r. !d .e, ! ti .,� C,. !, �:�I ;td .F. uS�c,l�'. 'i. -? -a°!:i--.,,,, `.4.i'•:. .J. r •.1, J. „ '2Ir•i +. 1 ��1.1,,, �w TN= .11 �. .r� i1''� t,(1„,,,,,V2,-....� � •G: ...w. !.. ,..::.^.+.-.._..:..,?,.l..k�.:! :_...�..1.J_, .r_Zr...,...��._��.i ., �1,-.L....,I.Ji::':..:i.v.i'w.�,. �..� ,." „-..c.,w'-'I'.:J�.-.U=. .I+_..�t:..��;....:;s...:...::..:esu.L...,-','S�,-.t...:}.:-.`...:1^.:`c...7..u..�,�_.its(,,,,Y1_uT1 tr`1-� '=_4�.r. ��1.i nr✓,,�.- .,._ . .•S�t• 5�4 tlx. . ., '.. .r..Internal'E:�r' re'r a Cibi:-:IC. dlie,,, L Your application h,,, r NicrosoFt Out1r,. ' ,: i;:Fri„ . '�; PIC 9:53 Am • Mary Moore From: nancy green <nanclonn2@yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2018 11:12 AM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: File# CPA-2018-0004 I am writing this e mail to oppose the change of parcel#45212.1349 S.E.corner of University Rd.and 7th. Ave.from single family residential to neighborhood commercial. I feel that it will lower my property value and create more traffic and noise than is already present. I would rather see new houses built and keep this area residential as it was intended to be. Thank You, Lonny and Nancy Green 10715 E.7th.Ave. 1 Mary Moore From: Mike Irmer <mike@foglepump.com> Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 10:19 AM To: Martin Palaniuk Subject: 7th ave. University project Dear Martin, I am writing you in concern for the seventh ave. and university residential change project. I am not for any changes and do not want multi home dwellings crammed into the small area that is being planned on changing. I was told we were notified 2016 of a sign change on 8th but never saw no such changes. There is a old orchard Platt covenant that I hope you can see and adhere to. I hope this helps with an upcoming decision. I can be contacted by email if you have questions or don't understand my rambles. I am also with Ray Sebert on this issue. Sincerely Mike Inner 1 Mary Moore From: Scott A. Smith <starlinerscott@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 5:50 PM To: Martin Palaniuk Cc: rjsebert@q.com Subject: commercial zoning on university I have grown up where I now reside, my parents owned the house before I did. I am asking PLEASE DO NOT CHANGE ANY ZONING ON UNIVERSITY ROAD I!H There are plenty of available commercial spots now that are vacant and creating a commercial zone where there is no need for any is INSANE! Look at all the available spots on Sprague or Appleway or go to Pines or major thru streets and realize we already have plenty of room for commercial and there is no need to create any here. The Zoning on University is residential and should remain that way. I would be happy to petition or sign anything to help let the valley planning know that is what people want here. Scott Smith 10819 E 8th Spokane valley, Wa. 99206 1 Mary Moore From: CenturyLink Customer <rjsebert@q.com> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 10:57 AM To: Martin Palaniuk; Ray Sebert Subject: File No: CPA-2018-0004 To Martin Palaniuk, We are concerned and writing about File No: CPA-2018-0004 by 7th Ave and University Road, where it has been petitioned for a change from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial. 1. First of all there is a Protective Covenant in the Neighborhood of Old Orchard Sub, File Number 0183 Recording date 02/23/1954. The Old Orchard Sub is 6th Ave to 9th Ave, and University Road to Pierce Road are included. The area is all residential and we would like it to stay that way. 2. We were told in our meeting with you on Tuesday, Feb. 6th that the lot at 8th and University Road had been changed in 2016. Is that the lot at 8th Ave, East of University or West of University Road? We would like to know how that change happened if East of University because there was never a sign in the lot and there were no letters written to the local land owners. We have checked with quite a few neighbors and none of them saw a sign or received a letter either. 3. We have lived at our address since 1963 and over the years we have seen a great number of accidents, as it is a very dangerous intersection. People speed down 8th Ave past our house at a good speed to make the light. And with the hill at University going South and the obstruction of view going west or east on 8th Ave, and with people trying to make the light, it is so very dangerous. 4. We do not need any more traffic in the area than what Single Family Residents would create. Anything commercial has the opportunity to create a situation for Crime, Theft, and Drugs in our neighborhood. There are plenty of Neighborhood Commercial Business Places within a few blocks of 8th and University. 5. Since the owners of the original plats had the fore sight to create the Protective Covenants, we feel that it is our job to continue on to protect the neighborhood from any Commercial Business. Thank you for your consideration. Ray and Jane Sebert 509-926-7227 10719 E 8th Ave Spokane Valley, WA 99206 1 EXHIBIT 10 B RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2Or8 City of Spokane Valley: Attn. Martin Palaniuk. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY The signatures below are a list of people that can not make the meeting in regards to File No: CPA-2018-0004, They are against changing the property from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood Commercial. Print Name: 1% C.. c3(Ac:lcsan Sign Name: CaLIA,44- ke-1614'44' Address/Phone Number: io/ 1, 6 RON v , Print Name: P‘'(: k jet- ' Sign Name: Ay- ,L— Address/Phone Number: (6 7;. 3 {E s A e Print Name: An Sign Name: Address/ Phone Number: 1.O LI Print Name: 7 ,9.. _v Sign Name: Address/ Phone Number: /Q // ?-f/ Print Name: Sign Name: Address/Phone Number: RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2013 • CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY r reit) 2, ` o (%` To w Lc.)bvi t.-) a ec ,. .-cc7nc i, Thif`,- f p/+et Oc)#1cPrvs 44(1-- fcr'Ce_l c,^f 7.2 , Sc,u^ t 01, • - _ \1, d'L . SC\r\OVICILL 4-a f C1 INN..!1 LLC.i . 044 iN14 S4ete- C i .i r _sc- Sclntvlu.0 . C CEI1ce. �, II � r ... Ain/ :� R '-% .,� 121�'I bra 0\8y1c, ~~ l 1\estc 'Ati Ur ri •4 Desi iaocl Co+'"ii mvi-- eta_ k , /live.. rr ct\f1 i r ,e61 01' ,, `'#'Ltct `I/t 1 3, L.. OUi.C%X. �jJ Q54i !l] cy V -1-Le o(r), or-c;\nct rel 5vLck u1s dA (oveAc4A s. Sec. rd i .E 5 U 1'� \c(1--es- . t1 OA t S`.t.0; # e,•- -ao'YI I c&. ' 514 ( IAS vet-- ' w cit is 5v�r .iq1 1oerQf{ Sec, Vrr L SA-.1 Q0 0. s k' A) s toes.s , 1+Acku s-t--r-tA. or c OM M et-c e 56 c.(1 b ?e r 1 fFet4 k.JAAAVirr - L 5uLaNATI Sl O A <. ` ;.s eb trelr�cat -- uigs v-- crn--6 e; eckr V . 0- 1 8e4rs c6 0P,L1. ,:t. " v ,l'tiNsf._. J4- Cad 5c - + en kaue_ 61 ii) Qr-e.e_ Gji C'\ e r (esa es e were to r - eh l�'1' € Coo ri loops a1cce p cL aWfk .e. C.\l S l :n . J .IL e cairv\ojc 40s-1-- Olt., _c,,A r-e ,5_�-0,k - 4x,15 e �; I[ ,ck Q ir: Uierm yl-- ' ' 4- c, e 6:Ipveer.5 i .s Vl EA 2-OD c -5 44 r II guess kirk' I ..'k1),c ��4. a .16 on c)re 4--lAci11 b 5 lige.- it it o 6 t. du + '• rr . IttV44 r 1.5 .^0 4 41 41‘160-- rile'.11.j lr �L\t a'e 5 c. - 7. 0.5e 44' a w Ave_ 0 v Ot(\CI [)c)u ILI. L 11 U f�g\aet` W,(11 11✓lC-f'Cr_1 e. ti / G p (leen 5 r1.1- c 400 - is li►�► e- ,7- eci76� - s(4 16 -- ''-clAin t hot e.c Cf i)�1 a rvim p+e d bet°-A e r!-s tucu [` II I � r aC'C-'5S 4/1 - 1C4` ,{} t', apt . 0t i 4'ni‹ Lit. ut1�1 {gue .r .L , 44\44- ucY1 ortir�.P per,'; (Cj col .. . . vn f "' U 1 1- . _ ii 7ocL Skill- l Itie5 U6. 4-0 4 ke.- 1.>,\( d V(Nty6t !`i a A 4"4`�. k Bei \ lc) t-- z 5 co 1—n e,r F �.1 19 AtR-e arivemaik 4e, owners Jo)- cocA I5of\31e crmlrk 146w-es k�eer+tt, +i //� S[.yt`�`'oUdlcki+'1(h a.��� . � � tfl.V� ��n�1 r i- `J r �,er 1 d iuV' , — 441 vB A .G( ..54-61. ' o I �S u 1s r�/! , 1- 16 o 11l w`e'd • l,51 1 -Ali I4 i9 Cb17) e'1 d-C1 c ( .5 !` l" r 0-63 tivA josfs, [4- Fir-60A ar M 04- 1, , 11E. . Ls neec9 Q ;� In drLC)cL cow/m e t Fa e. eat o, 7 alick Opl i vers 1 ? 5 , U flue, o� ~r- - .�� s-1- ° . IA 6.30 e (>t' LJ j 1Ac l [ArS or' ctoc °LA-40d- 5 %_ prig sSiciA4 1 W is al awed c /VCS de,51 4iq 4 /c 1� h n'ec e5Sci "f`U +C Ii C'_ 444e en eLl p we a o rw:eck Are , - rr --orrv� • s ufkA k -Vq fti r Loo,--NWc joss ) `'Ysec �vinrc 6 reackeeotrai 74) iztve e)U e-- 561— -561— 0-2-- -671 OICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY SCIT���� CARY P. DRISKELL-CITY ATTORNEY p PNraileye 10210 East Sprague Avenue! Spokane Valley,WA 99206 ♦.r (509)720-5105 • Fax:(509)720-5095 4 cityattorney@spokanevalley.org February 16, 2018 Ray and Jane Sebert 10719 East 8th'Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Re: Letter dated February 13, 2018 regarding restrictive covenants related to CPA-2018- 0004 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sebert: Thank you for providing the above referenced letter to Mr. Driskell. I am responding on behalf of our office. Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2018-0004 is a privately initiated comprehensive plan amendment and associated zoning change submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Shmautz. They are seeking to amend the land use designation and zoning for the parcel located at 721 South University (parcel no. 45212.1348) from Single Family Residential (with an R-3 zone) to Neighborhood Commercial (with a NC zone). They also own a second southern parcel located at 729 South University (parcel no. 45212.1349) that is currently designated Neighborhood Commercial under the Comprehensive Plan and which has an associated NC zoning designation. CPA-2018-0004 is in the midst of the City's Annual Comprehensive Amendment process and a public hearing with the Planning Commission is scheduled for February 22, 2018, at 6 pm at City Hall. You have indicated that the two subject parcels are located within the Old Orchard Subdivision and that they are subject to numerous "protective covenants," a copy of which was provided with your letter. To date, we have received no information or other evidence that the covenants have been amended other than as outlined in the recorded document that you provided. We have not received any information indicating an agreement to otherwise modify the restrictive covenants at this time. From the outset, it is important for me to convey that the City does not enforce privately enforceable restrictive covenants like those that you have provided. The City has no authority under Washington law to enforce or invalidate restrictive covenants. See Viking Props. Inc. v. Holm, 155 Wn.2d 112, 130 (2005). Accordingly, the City will not enforce such covenants and they are not part of the criteria for land use decisions such as comprehensive plan amendments or associated zoning changes like CPA-2018-0004. To the extent covenants are valid and enforceable, it is up to private owners within subdivisions, such as yourselves, to enforce those covenants. You may wish to contact legal counsel for any legal questions regarding the validity, applicability, and enforceability of the covenants at issue in this case. In your introductory paragraph, you have asserted that the parcel was "removed from the restrictive covenants in 2016." I believe there may have been a misunderstanding in your discussions with Mr. Palaniuk, as the City does not have authority to unilaterally remove the parcel from the restrictive covenants. Instead, in 2016, the City adopted its 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update and associated zoning map through the passage of Ordinance No. 16-018. During that process, 729 South University was designated and zoned Neighborhood Commercial. The 2016 Update was required under the Growth Management Act (chapter 36.70A RCW) and went through an extensive two year process of review, public input, and Planning Commission and City Council consideration prior to approval. Since it was a Comprehensive Plan update, it was processed pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.140, and was not subject to chapter 20.60 SVMC. The City provided all appropriate public noticing and provided ample opportunity for public comment pursuant to RCW 36.70A.035 and RCW 36.70A.140 for that process. While the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation for that parcel was changed to Neighborhood Commercial, no change was made to the restrictive covenants, and neither parcel was "removed from the restrictive covenants." You also explained that any alteration of a subdivision would be subject to chapter 20.60 SVMC and that subdivision alteration applications must be signed by the majority of the owners of property in the subdivision, and in some cases, by all property owners. That is correct as it applies to alterations of subdivisions. However, as I indicated above, comprehensive plan amendments and associated changes in zoning are processed pursuant to SVMC 17.80.140. See SVMC 17.80.020, Table 17.80-1; SVMC 19.30.010; SVMC 19.30.020. They are not subject to the requirements of chapter 20.60 SVMC because they do not alter the plats for subdivisions. Further, since a comprehensive plan amendment and associated zoning change are not an alteration of a subdivision, they cannot remove or otherwise alter existing privately enforced restrictive covenants. Finally, you have asked for a copy of"the notice of application and the final decision." Further, you requested "a copy of the minutes from that hearing." Pursuant to the Public Records Act (chapter 42.56 RCW), I am treating your request as a public records request. Pursuant to RCW 42.56.520, the City is required to respond to your request within five business days. This letter serves as the City's required response within the five business days. Although you have not specified a particular project for the notice of application and final decision, I will assume based upon the substance of the letter that you are referring to a project application related to alteration of the subdivision. Please provide a written response if this assumption is not correct. As I indicated above, the City has not processed any subdivision alteration for either parcel owned by the Sclunautz' that would require a notice of application, and so we have no responsive documents to your request. You may find a copy of Ordinance No. 16-018, which was the final decision with regard to the Comprehensive Plan Update, on the City's website at www.spokanevalley.org by selecting "Documents" from the top menu and then selecting"Ordinances." With regard to your request for a copy of the minutes from the hearing, it appears that is a request for Page 2 of 3 • • minutes of a hearing removing the parcel from the restrictive covenants. As 1 indicated above, no such action has occurred, there was no hearing on removal of the parcel from the covenants, and thus the City has no responsive documents to that specific request. There were several City Council meetings during which Ordinance No. 16-018, the ordinance adopting the Comprehensive Plan Update, was considered, and you may find the minutes for all meetings www.spokanevalley.org by selecting "Documents" from the top menu bar and then selecting "Minutes, Council Meetings." With this response, we will consider your public records request closed. Since your letter relates to CPA-2018-0004, we have treated it as public comment for the proposed amendment and included it in the packet provided to the Planning Commission. We will also provide a copy of this response letter to the Planning Commission at the public hearing. Thank you again for your questions and please contact me with any fiulher questions. Sincerely, 9/U1 Erik Lamb Deputy City Attorney cc: Cary Driskell, City Attorney Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Martin Palaniuk, Planner • Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk Heather Bryant/Steve and Tresa Schmautz Page 3 of 3 co pyl WITHERSPOON•KELLEY SPOKANE COEURa'ALENE Attorneys &Counselors MAY 9 2018 Stanley M.Schwartz CITY OF aPOiCAN� Admitted in Washington&Idaho LEGAL 0Et'AR�"M AN f Email:sms@witherspoonkelley.com May 8, 2018 Erik Lamb Deputy City Attorney 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 ci t yattorney(cvspokaneval l ey.org Marty Palaniuk, Planner City of Spokane Valley 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 rnpalaniuk rr,spokanevalley.org Re: Ray and Jane Sebert Restrictive Covenants Related to CPA-2018-0004 Dear Messrs. Lamb and Palaniuk: I am in receipt of Mr. Lamb's February 16, 2018 letter which states the opinion that the "City does not enforce privately enforceable restrictive covenants" similar to those provided by my clients, Ray and Jane Sebert. I do not take issue with your statement concerning the City's duty to enforce covenants and your citation to Washington law. With respect to CPA-2018-0004, it is acknowledged that the City has the right to change the zoning for parcel no. 45212.1348 as requested by the owner and applicant. However, with respect to any land use action the City elects to take on the subject property, we request the zoning map and associated files contain a notation that states "The parcel identified as no. 45212.1350 is subject to protective covenants filed at Spokane County Auditor's No. 240866B." For your information, I am enclosing a copy of the protective covenants for Old Orchard Subdivision(previously provided February 13, 2018 to City Attorney, Cary P. Driskell). In consideration of this request, I refer you to two Washington cases from Division III: Sunberg v. Evans, 78 Wash. App. 616 (1995) and Rogers v. City of Toppenish, 23 Wash. App. 554 (1979). As you will see, both of these cases create liability when the City fails to disclose or improperly discloses knowledge about real property that affects its use and enjoyment. Based upon correspondence from various parties (including this letter) the City is put on notice of the restrictive covenants. In turn, to avoid a misunderstanding and future claims,please place a notation on the zoning map (and file) as set forth above. 422 W. Riverside Avenue,Suite 1100 Tel:509.624.5265 Spokane,Washington 99201-0300 Fax: 509.4513.2728 www.witherspoonkelley.com 51700063.00cx May 8, 2018 Page 2 Thank you for your courtesies. Very Truly Yours, WITHERSPOON • KELLEY c,---7/6"‘„xi S ey M. Sch artz Enclosure cc: Ray and Jane Sebert , Ni „®EDUIC/.TaO1� t 1.0 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS,THAT SOREN P.SORENSON,AWIDOWER,A.WADE ADAMS AND JOHANNA A.ADAMS,HIS WIFE,DARREL A. reed 1 STRAUGHAN AND VIRGINIA B.STRAUGHAN,HISWFE,LDWS G.SMITH AND ELSIEM.SMITH,HIS WIFE,pAUL R.BATES AND LEONA M.BATES, � , HIS WIFE,EULA L.PATTERSON,A WIDOW,GL AIN H.COOK AND ELEANOR H.COOK,HIS WIFE,JOHN HAUGAN ANO MARGARET HAUGAN,HIS WIFE, / �. i HANS HAUGAN AND GUNHILD HAUGAN,H15 WIFE,ADDLE MAE RICKEL,AWIDOW HENRYJ.GALES AND HELEN M.GALES HIS WIFE THE COLLEGE PLACE CChYIUNITY CLUA,AODRPDRATION,GEORGE HARVEY AND HELENK.HARVEY1 HIS 1IIJFE,VECTOR L.HATFIELD AND Z.FAITH HATFIELD,HIS WIFE, •(V HAVE PLATTED INTO LOTS,BLOCKS AHO ROADSTHE LANDOESCRiBED AS: ` AND FORRESTRPAAP AND RUTH L.P45P.HIS WIFE, . THE SOUTH IGS FEET OF THE W112 EI/29THE SOUTH 165 FEET OF THE W 1/2 EI/2 5I/2.OF TRACT 195 OF OPPORTUNITY;ALLOF TRACT 197,AND ALL OF TRACT I98,EXCEPT THE SOUTH 177.5 FEET OFTHE EAST 340 FEET THEREOF;THE NORTH IGO FEETOF THE WEST 100 FEET OF THE NE va NW 1/4 EA"' SW?/4;AND THE NI/2NWI/4NWN4SWu4,EXCEPITHE EAST3ae.TFEETOFTHE SOUTH 245.7 FEET,ALSO EXCEPT THE SOUTH 7 FEET THEREOF; OF SECTION 21,T 25 N,R 44 EWM,SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON;TO SE KNOWN AS"OLD ORCHARD SUBDIVISION", , AND DD HEREBY OEDICATE TO THE PUBLIC USE FOREVER THE ROADS SHOWN UPON THE ACCOMPANYING MAP. ."! V" I PROTECTIVE COVENANTS . A. AS A CONDITION OF ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PLAT BY THE SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIDN,NO LOT IN THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL BE SOLD UNTIL SUCH LOT IS FURNISHED A DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY. B. ALL LOTS IN THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL BECLASS 1 FlED AND KNOWN ASRESIDENTIAL LOTS. C. NONE BUTNEW STRUCTURES SHALL BE ERECTEO UPON ANY LOT IN THIS SUBDIVISION. D. NOT MOREIHAN ONE STRUCTURE SHALL BE ER ECTED UPON ANY LOT,EXCEPT THATONE DETACHED GARAGE SHALL BE PERMITTEDJIMME E. ONLY SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS SHALL BE PERMITTED IN THIS SUBDIVISION,{See Exception Below) F. NO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE SHALL BE ERECTED HAVING LESS THAN 1000 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR SPACE UPON THE GROUND FLOOR, EXCLUSIVE OF CAR PORTS,BREEZEWAYS,PATIOS,POR CHES OR OTHER AREA NOT DESIGNED FOR INDOOR LIVING QUARTERS. G NO RESIOENTIAL STRUCTURE SHALL BE ERECTED NEARER THAN 30 FEET TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE OF ANY LOT,NOR ANY DETACHED . GARAGE NEARER THAN 55 FEET,NOR SHALL ANY RESIDENCE BE NEARER A SIDE PROPERTY LINE THAN 10 FEET,AND ALL OTHER CONSTRUC- TION SHALL CONFORM IN ALL RESPECTS TO THE BUILDING REGULATIONS OF SPOKANE COUNTY. H. ANY STRUCTURE ERECTED SHALL BE COMPLETE AS TO EXTERNAL APPEARANCE,INCLUDING FINISHED PA1NTING,AND SHALL BE CONNECTED TO PUBLIC SEWER OR SEPTIC TANK WITHIN SIX MONTHS FROM DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. I. NO BASEMENT,GARAGE,TRAILER,OROTHERTEMPORARY STRUCTURE,FIICEO,MOS!LEOR PORTABLE,MAY BE OCCUPIED OR USED AS LIVING QUARTERS AT ANY TIME, J. NO ADVERTISING SIGN,BILLBOARD,POSTER OR PUBLIC NOTICE MAYBE ERECTED OR DISPLAYED ON ANY LOTORROADSIDE AOJACENT THERETO, EXCEPTING SUCH SIGN OR SIGNS OF MODEST AND REASONABLE SIZE USED ONLY TO OFFER FOR SALE REAL ESTATE LYING WITHIN THIS PLAT. K. IFANY LOT OR LOTS IN THIS SUBDIVISION BE FURTHER SUBDIVI DEO,REARRA NGEO,OR PORTI ON OR PORTIONS THEREOF INCORPORATED WITH ANY OTHER LOT OR LOTS OR FORTION OR PORTIONS THEREOF,SUCH SUBDIVISION OR REARRANGEMENT SHALL NOT RESULT IN ANY PARCEL OF LAND OF LESS THAN 8800 SQUARE FEET IN AREA,AND NOT LESS THAN 70 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON A ROAD,REMAINING AFTER SUCH REARRANGE- MENT,NOR SHALL ANY SUCH REARRANGEMENT BEPERMITTEl �T WILL LEAVE ANY STRUCTURE OR STRUCTURES ON ADJOINING PARCEL OR PARCELS WITH LESS FRONT,SIDE OR REAR CLEARANCE THAN.6UTLINED ABOVE. L. NO BUSINESS,INDUSTRY OR COMMERCE SHALL ISE PERMITTED WITHIN THIS SUBDIVISION. M. AS A CONDITION OF ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PLAT,NO STRUCTURE SHALL BE ERECTED UPON LOT 2 IN BLOCK 5 UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THEOWNER OR OWNERS SHALLHAVE ACQUIRED SUCH ADDITIONAL AND ADJOINING LAND TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF ASTRUCTURE THAT WILL COMPLY WITH THE CLEARANCES OUTLINED ABOVE ANO PROVISIONS OF THE SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMNIISSION.SUCH STRUCTURE MAY BE USED AS A COMMUNITY CLUB OR CIVIC CENTER. N. THE COVENANTS ABOVE RELATING TO SIZE AND LOCATION OF STRUCTURES,ANO NUMBER OF STRUCTURES ON ANY LOT,SHALL NOT BE 1NVONEO 1F THIS AGAINST ANY STRUCTURE MINIS SUBDIVISION COMPLETEO PRIOR TO THE OATE OF EXECUTION OF THIS INSTRUMENT, P, THESE COVENANTS ARE TO RUN WITH THE LAND AND SHALL SE BINOINGON ALL PARTIES AND PERSONS CLAIMING UNDER THEM UNTIL JANUARY 1,1979,AND ARE AUTOMATE CALLY EXTENDED FOR SUCCESSIVE TEN-YEAR PERIODS THEREAFTER,UNLESS BY A VOTE CF THE MAJORITYOF THE THEN RESIOENT OWNERS OFTHELOTS ITIS AGREED TO CHANGE THE COVENANTS IN WHOLE OR IN PART. Q. IF THE PARTIES HERETO,OR ANY OF THEM,OR THEIR HEIRS OR A SSI GNS,SHALL VIOLATE OR ATTEMPT TO VIOLATE ANY OF THE COVENANTS HEREIN.ANY OTHER PERSON OR PERSONS OWNING REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THIS SUBDIVISION MAY PROSECUTE ANY PROCEEDINGS AT LAW OR IN EQUITY AGAINST THE PERSON OR PERSONS VIOLATING OR ATTEMPTING TO VIOLATE ANY SUCH COVENANT TO RESTRAIN OR PREVENT HIM DR THE M,FROM DOING SO,TO RECOVER DAMAGES OR OTHER DUES FOR SUCH VIOLATION, OR BOTH. O LOTS 1,2B3,BLOCK 3,ANO LOTS 6.7 26 27 828,BLOCK 2,ARE SUBJECT TO RIGHT-OF•WAYFOR IRRIGATION PIPE LINE. • -•/ ) Cf,e4 •-. -�-L ,:.t _ ,r.•,.. f'' ' •- 'J.'4.., •~•• ! :;%wrvJ 1 I.._.,G.. • ... ! •/: .I. Q' yY rdr- ,rI ,1 ,C O../ :,,• 41 " f1. arfV 1 {!/Q d �` ` 111i ale+ tr • • • / • + rlr I 4 .,1 .:JG � t - .�.!' '.ee. ' . rj , J' • , • . . /J ', f':l,.r t,>/. . :L a�-1 t.v -v: rf.Lia... 7.: r',l ' L:4,:' /,.rut s / ± "'FFF+++ PRES.College Place Camm itvq y Club �_:-R:iX•�: ��•. -r•a:' ie�' •., , _ ���+c ,+&.f`' r'a 'Iles• fi�I' keL44„, sELY.College Place Community Club ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF SPOKANE S, ON THIS +t,.DAY OF�dtil'-et v'•4. ,1954.8EFORE ME PERSONALLY APPEAREO SOREN P.SORENSON,A.WADE ADAMS,JOHANNA A.ADAMS, DARREL A 3 RAUGHAN,VIRGINIAB.STAAUGHAN,PAULR.BATES,LEONAM.BATES,LOUISG.SMITH,ELSIEM.SMITH,RUTHLPAAP, EULA L.PATTERSON, GLAIN H.COOK,ELEANOR H,000K„JOHN HAUGAN,MARGARET HAUGAN,HANS HAUGAN,GUNHILD HAUGAN,ADDIE MAE RICKEL,HENRY J.GALES,HELEN M,GALES, GEORGE HARVEY,HELEN K.HARVEY,FORREST R.PAAP,VICTOR L.HATFIELO,Z.FAITH HATFIELD, JJ�l)� TO ME KNOWN TO BE THE IDENTICAL PERSONS WHO EXECUTED THE WITHIN AND FOREGOING INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED IT TO•>t'IfEIRFREE AND AND ACT AND DEED FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES HEREIN MENTIONED. i. • :,'`_ --0 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND AND AFFIXED MY OFFICIAL SEAL TIE DAY AND THE YEAR FIRST ABOVE MENTTIOIVED...1,, ”' L : : NoFARY PUBLIC IN ANDTHE STATE OF WA HING•TON, RESIDING AT OPPORTUNITY,WASHINGTON Provisions contained in Plat and Dedication of Old Orchard Subdiv- ision, filed for record February 23, 1953, recorded in Book 3 of Plats, page 11, as follows: PROTECTIVE C OVENANTSn A. As a condition of acceptance of this Plat by the Spokane County Planning Commission, no lot in this subdivision shall be sold until such lot is furnished a domestic water supply. B. All lots in this subdivision shall be classified and known as Residential Lots. C . None but new structures shall be erected upon any lot in this sub- division. D. Not more than one structure shall be erected upon any lot, except that one detached garage shall be permitted. E. Only single-family dwellings shall be permitted in this subdivision. (See exception below). F. No residential structure shall be erected having less than 1000 square feet of floor space upon the ground floor, exclusive of car- ports, breezeways, patios, porches or other area not designed for indoor living quarters. G. No residential structure shall be erected nearer than 30 feet to the front property line of any lot, nor any detached garage nearer than 55 Feet, nor shall any residence'be nearer a side-_prope±ty,ltne than• 10 feet, and all other construction shall conform in all respects to the building regulations of Spokane County. H. Any structure erected shall be complete as to external appearance, including finished painting, and shall- be connected to public sewer or septic tank within six months from date of commencement of con- struction. I. No basement, garage, trailer, or other temporary structure, fixed, mobile or portable, may be occupied or used as living quarters at any time. J. No advertising sign, billboard, poster or public notice may be erected or displayed on any lot or roadside adjacent thereto, excepting such sign or signs of modest and reasonable size used only to offer for sale real estate lying within this plat. K. If any lot or lots in this subdivision be further subdivided, re- arranged, or portion or portions thereof incorporated with any other lot or lots, or portion or portions thereof, such subdivision or re- arrangement shall not result in any parcel of land of less than 8B00 square feet in area, and not less than 70 feet of frontage on a road, remaining after such rearrangement, nor shall any such rearrangement be permitted that will leave any structure or structures on adjoining parcel or parcels with less front; side or rear clearance than that outlined above. L. No business, industry or commerce shall be permitted within this subdivision. M. As a condition of acceptance of this plat, no structure shall be erected upon Lot 2 in Block 5 until such time that the owner or owners shall have acquired such additional and adjoining land to permit con- struction of a structure that will comply with the clearances outlined above and provisions of the Spokane County Planning Commission. Such structure may be used as a community club or civic center. . Public Viewer -[Ptalt.image Search Results! - • • - e " I=i[e Hefp1y ype a question for L { Fite Num aer 0183 T org mpr.:H r1 a le I� . 21-25-44-2 :trn 2236978 R,bcar>�D,g Llaote 02I.3T'I 954 €[ l images,..und .1 0 9 �.• . ._ Pro ec N a PLUSSjteNumher` i4370 `PL-I1 ProectNumber 02051732 : •: ' ' .. , � ��..:. .: . �._. • Plat Map �• TYpe Rh:13 P 14 •P f 4 IOLD ORCHARD SUB . g � T .5 fr II21 ,2 2lr.:i2Et12] ..,. —3 • 2,...a ; ' \19,1'29.20-1,9- 2-417 a•1ralr,- > I:w 1 W'a 1 a.xnse ,I .02.s # BLDG ec,5 Q .�•' Ig„I—Dm.- 1t.1 .,[ BLDG 1 rL."!1l8 .i,.f: r USAR4j Ts+u.ee ,.,O N c[ G 9 IyL� ... I VILE{ [[[[[[ 1•, 1P l,r•,:• _.•1•' ! it I 0z'tz', 3: 2 9 1 -i;4 to a f. r s, I a �a+ SE19+2ZC 1f zoo ...,.,===,=,. ...= _L.sa9"20`e0'C1 r-,„;.0-196.I. 7 ocr 19564.®1 a1 ' Tbo =^^95T a •--1 tarki �.,# .wTI'wi.. ''Acr la? .. .._.?�1FE..�, :• :- T t.., 6''T` e ,N -s • �� i r,sl.h5s4 r{r� f "�''.... �...�s.sa '+aa< 7o�tls95a *x!i sY- 7t �tk asyfi ' ra 1 t33' 6 s�� I A 13 la 11 i JO 9 6 a' T ti fi 5 I 4 « 3'_ Z. s'1� '1 n• a . , N . 1 170 n nl ti a i-. < C'' I- s X .. 1 r'...... ...I:C"„.... i [ n tl nI r1 ._ _ Nt ,; -Z. r .�x,..w.... 1 '2 r 'G iu.Lsar1171 Y IT a' 1(I 1e pip z; 22 u 2r 25 2?�s �a 2b �c, nl f �+ I Cr ln:tklC�3sty r n.oanW 4R__ �"y7.. 1 .._ l - z vx sxty+:ri II - ......_..._„.. ?'1, ..--11—.4 I • ._'._.... 7 TH ,""mfr.,_ 0.>`!r2 x Al?<< i9 ' P r ns i• Fsl .1” 'Rs eu T' '• j f -3g4, ( X7,1. -ti if,, 9t1 —. iY5:7 • Iary a j56 I. r I is 5 13 l 41a ( "" iC.a 6 g r: �� �+�irr If 11�ea ln cy i - 94 94 ya 'yb34 :LIMlscf? K T -MO _ .su. • Ir. G1:... Q 4,'- :-...:•:�•:- - Ia _ ,i1.1 189"?c 1'J"t: .4a.rr? -w. GI _ 5 b, . ., 1.467 N CT' N A 7if11i£rs7.1cfQlvi.cc.KriT,'JYi7..L4Mc..I-.ILL AF.i!rp41.e.:.; • . 3 - IC 14 - I! [I[ 12 r3 '11i'•*r /'h/ (F'^j a,�'j f- \ - I PLAY. r T 171 T MAP �,.1 , •N• 1 a71.Gi I tSGS:i r t1=:'---...41,4„'4,rM {7 C r \ •4 f 555.._. €3 t' TR:ar=>•:9T-. ^;v E_ _ n •� r.,,,6.2.:7-2.0.---" " ,_i rRJLT.511___34_9 _ \ �1 Irl6 Gaad ^""�"° �� 86474`ltd CF!!141,'4 Ewt.tl--_•--^ tI N,r�i'aV- �SSd'� ,ovze, ri 1lIA 5i 4 , a In n • `�}`_I, 45°, 27.t3 C2 114.1la, al, i a n e nes. 1o'•r;71-6.2,.340' ,.;" W r } - y - wg. 1,...c. 0 r'i ion 4 '� t-�r'r6 <R --,- r �� ._t.}«. ';,::",lis µ.__ jjjj77771!!! fa• .R,, y11' !129'2:4{5 .T�'',111,1 i�� i'I�.r/may I1 7 I� ICC45CI 'I r .O ftat is r tel 1:71,i ksi r .. v -4. IA 09 �Wl '',.!?!!';'.4;':=—_=4 9 j7 . ti E. L1 fl .J. A.[!e. .r a fr T ..r __ .. .. T y'l�1 ,yt I It I '-lo! y i T A L 'k6 1 i 1 41 I T S . -�... ]N El, -- . ;� ,„ # Pry[ F un i <0 k1F aback" :Exp Fgt..m VIeVJ ,; ,iI , I,r I 1 i;A-1 s ,s 1 I I - .L. j---i., 1 n k d n d r' -' 1 L� r—-_'' :1 r c..--! c,.-- ,.I' t . - I u� r r I� e • - --:Y -.: ___ r : - as x, . ;s ` • _=,y;. i©.� '..:-A.:7.r'n�erne- eRpl"orer-- 3 Citrix,IG4 i_iie, ;Your-a br.�soRh.,.. .. ( , .: #tern-OTE{u. ' .,i_T F R; '7r?rimv flr.F 94 ?Mk fa- A ARA ATTACHMENT 5 COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING AND PLANNING DIVISION pakane Valley STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018-0006 STAFF REPORT DATE: February 15, 2018 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 22, 2018, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. Project CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018-0006 Number: Application Non-project action to correct a map error on the Land Use Designation Map due to the Description: City inadvertently bisecting the parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. CPA-2018-0005 CPA-2018-0006 Expand NC designation and zoning to Expand Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) eliminate split designation of designation and zoning to eliminate split Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and designation of ]MU and Single Family Single Family Residential(SFR),and the Residential (SFR, and the associated associated zoning of NC and Single zoning of IMU and Single Family Family Residential Urban District(R-3). Residential Urban District(R-3). Location: Parcels 46352.9052, 46352.9014, Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 46351.9049, 46351.9005, 46354.9127; East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west Iocated south of the intersection of of the intersection of Trent Avenue (SR Progress Road and Forker Road; further 290) and Lillian Road; further located in located in Section 35 of Township 26, the north half of Section 1, Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane Spokane County, Washington County, Washington Owner: Five Fifty,LLC MPR Spokane LLC Applicant: City of Spokane Valley Staff Contact: Karen Kendall,Planner APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls. ATTACHMENTS: CPA-2018-0005 CPA-2018-0006 Exhibit 1: Vicinity Map Vicinity Map Exhibit 2: Comprehensive Plan Map Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 3: Zoning Map Zoning Map Exhibit 4: Aerial Map Aerial Map Exhibit 5: Environmental Checklist Environmental Checklist Exhibit 6: DNS Determination DNS Determination Exhibit 7: Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 8: Agency Comments Agency Comments Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is a City initiated request to correct a mapping error. The following amendments are bisected with two different land use designations and zoning: 1. CPA-2018-0005: Parcels are currently designated Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Single Family Residential (SFR). 2. CPA-2018-0006: Parcel is currently designated Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) and Single Family Residential(SFR). PROPERTY INFORMATION: CPA-2018-0005 CPA-2018-0006 Size and The area is approximately 10 acres in The site is 0.83 of an acre is size. Characteristics: size. The site has had earth The site is fully developed with disturbance over the years. Located structures,pavement, stormwater in the NW corner of parcel facilities and landscaping. 463 51.9049 is a Type F stream. Currently, the entire area is located in a 100-year floodplain. However, FEMA is reviewing a CLOMR application to modify the boundaries. Approval of the CLOMR is anticipated in the near future. Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)has an overhead powerline and easement of 500 feet running through the subject area. Comprehensive SFR and NC SFR and IMU Plan: Zoning: Single Family Residential Urban Single Family Residential Urban District(R-3)and NC District(R-3)and IMU Existing Land Vacant Office/warehouse building Use: 1. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(C),ZONING(Z),AND LAND USES(LU): CPA-2018-0005: CPA-2018-0006: Spokane County C: SFR North C: Rural Conservation Z: R-3 Z: Rural Conservation(RCV) LU: Single family residences LU: Single family residences C: SFR C:Industrial(I) South Z: R-3 Z: Industrial(I) LU: Single family residences LU: Offices and warehouses Spokane County C: SFR C: Rural Conservation&Urban Reserve Z: R-3 East Z: Rural Conservation (RCV) &Urban LU: Single family residences Reserve (UR) LU: Single family residences and vacant land Page 2 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 C: SFR C: IMU West Z: R-3 Z: IMU LU: Single family residences LU: Offices and warehouses 2. APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: N/A Application Submitted: N/A Date of Complete Determination: N/A SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issue date February 2,2018 End of Comment and Appeal Period for DNS: Not Appealed February 16, 2018 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing February 7, 2018 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: February 2, 2018 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: , February 7, 2017 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, the lead agency has determined that neither proposal has a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required for either proposal under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The Building and Planning Division issued a Determination of Non- Significance(DNS)for each proposal on February 2,2018. The determinations were made after review of a completed environmental checklist for each proposal,Titles 19, 21, and 22 SVMC, a site assessment for each proposal,public and agency comments, and other information on file for each proposal with the lead agency. 2. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled for each proposal. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 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 CPA-2018-0005: The affected parcels are inappropriately and erroneously burdened by two different sets of development regulations as an unintended consequence by the mapping error. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment benefit is eliminating the bisected zoning condition which allows the property to develop consistent with other properties in the area. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The affected parcel is inappropriately and erroneously burdened by two different sets of development regulations as an unintended consequence by the mapping error. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment benefit is eliminating the bisected zoning condition which allows the property to develop consistent with other properties in the area. Page 3 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 (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 CPA-2018-0005: The proposed amendment corrects a mapping error and allows for development consistent with adjacent zoned parcels. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update considered the Goals and Policies of GMA and ensured that the Comprehensive Plan was consistent throughout. Correcting the map designation error has no effect on the other portions of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The proposed amendment corrects a mapping error and allows for development consistent with adjacent zoned parcels. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update considered the Goals and Policies of GMA and ensured that the Comprehensive Plan was consistent throughout. Correcting the map designation error has no effect on the other portions of the 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 CPA-2018-0005: The amendment does respond to a substantial change of land use designation and zoning. The City underwent an extensive legislative comprehensive plan update in 2016 resulting in a land use designation that was not intended to bisect property. This amendment is the City's first opportunity to respond. As part of the changes, properties designated NC were expanded and designated on portions of parcels associated with CPA-2018-0005. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The amendment does respond to a substantial change of land use designation and zoning. The City underwent an extensive legislative comprehensive plan update in 2016 resulting in a land use designation that was not intended to bisect property. This amendment is the City's first opportunity to respond. As part of the changes, the land use designation IMUwas created and applied to parcel associated with CPA-2018.0006 to capture the existing diverse uses and focus future infill development along Trent Avenue. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The City initiated amendment corrects a mapping error. The City inadvertently bisected parcels with the land use designations/zoning during the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. This created parcels to be burdened by two different sets of development regulations. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The City initiated amendment corrects a mapping error. The City inadvertently bisected parcels with the land use designations/zoning during the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. This created parcels to be burdened by two different sets of development regulations. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Page 4 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: 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. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: 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 CPA-2018-0005: There are designated critical areas such as a Type F stream on the northwest corner of parcel 46351.9049. Parcels are located within a 100-year floodplain. FEMA is currently reviewing a conditional letter of map revision (CLOMR) application which will modify the boundaries and remove the floodplain from the majority of the site. The parcels are not located within shoreline jurisdiction, nor are there known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: 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 associated with CPA-2018-0006. The parcel is not located within shoreline jurisdiction, nor are there known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The existing land use designation of NC for the proposed amendment was evaluated and incorporated to the City's Comprehensive Plan through the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. The City initiated amendment corrects minor mapping errors to eliminate split zoned parcels. The corrections are both minimal in size and would not create an impact to adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods by significantly increasing the area available for development. CPA- 2018-0005 parcels are vacant and future development will be evaluated for compliance with all municipal requirements as it relates to adjacent uses. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The existing land use designations of IMUfor the proposed amendments were evaluated and incorporated to the City's Comprehensive Plan through the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. The City initiated amendment corrects a minor mapping error to eliminate a split zoned parcel. The correction is both minimal in size and would not create an impact to adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods by significantly increasing the area available for development. CPA- 2018-0006 parcel is fully developed and a swale is constructed within the split zoned portion of land designated SFR. Page 5 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018-0006 (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The map correction will have no impact on community facilities or utilities. The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. Capital facilities and utilities were analyzed in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. The minor adjustment to land use amounts will have no impact. 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. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The map correction will have no impact on community facilities or utilities. The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. Capital facilities and utilities were analyzed in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. The minor adjustment to land use amounts will have no impact. 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 public streets. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The proposed amendment will not affect the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood. The land use designation exists and the City is correcting a mapping error. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The proposed amendment will not affect the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood. The land use designation exists and the City is correcting a mapping error. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The mapping error will have an insignificant effect on the amount of land associated with each designation as this corrects an error. The adjustments will not affect the density currently allowed in the vicinity and will have no effect on population density. As discussed in the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan the neighborhood- scale commercial development is limited in Spokane Valley. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan update designated a portion of parcels NC associated with CTA-2018-0005. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The mapping error will have an insignificant effect on the amount of land associated with each designation as this corrects an error. The adjustments will not affect the density currently allowed in the vicinity and will have no effect on population density. Residential uses allowed in the IMUdesignation are incidental and subservient to any commercial or industrial uses. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The amendment corrects a mapping error. This will not result in displacement of residences. The amendment have an insignificant effect on population density and does not demand population analysis since no increase in density is anticipated Page 6 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018-0006 Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The amendment corrects a mapping error. This will not result in displacement of residences. The amendment have an insignificant effect on population density and does not demand population analysis since no increase in density is anticipated. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The insignificant adjustment to land quantities will not affect any portion of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment is correcting a mapping error. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The insignificant adjustment to land quantities will not affect any portion of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment is correcting a mapping error. Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Compliance with Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations a. Findings: Either proposal corrects a land use designation mapping error. While portions of the properties described below will receive a new zoning district as the current zoning extends to the property boundaries, this is not a site specific rezone, and therefore the criteria associated with SVMC 19.30.030(B) is not applicable. Comp Plan amendments and area-wide rezones are processed pursuant to SVMC 17.80.140, 19.30.010 and 19.30.020. CPA-2018-0005: Change the Comprehensive Plan designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial(NC) designation with a Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning classification. CPA-2018-0006: Change the Comprehensive Plan designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) zoning classification to Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation with an Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) zoning classification. 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. Pursuant to SVMC 19.30.010(B) and 17.80.140(H), Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria, annual amendments may be completed to correct a mapping error. The proposed amendment is consistent with Title 19 SVMC and state law regarding Comprehensive Plan amendments. See Section C(1) above. 3. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings: CPA-2018-0005: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designates areas for small-scale neighborhoods serving retail and office uses.Neighborhood business areas should not be larger than two acres in size, and should be located as business clusters rather than arterial strip commercial developments. The amendment to correct a mapping error is generally consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. Page 7of10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018-0006 LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. LU-Fl Enable neighborhood-scale commercial uses in residential areas. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. LU-P13 Work collaboratively with landowners and developers that seek to provide mixed-use residential projects. CPA-2018-0006: Industrial Mixed-Use (IMU) allows for light manufacturing, retail, offices, and lighter industrial types of uses such as contractor yards. The amendment to correct a mapping error is generally consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. LU-P13 Work collaboratively with landowners and developers that seek to provide mixed-use residential projects. b. Conclusion(s): CPA-2018-0005: The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Adopted Comprehensive Plan. CPA-2018-0006: The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Adopted Comprehensive Plan. 4. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: CPA-2018-0005: 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 minor adjustment to land use designation amounts to correct the mapping error will have no impact on services or providers. Capital facilities and utilities were considered in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update and found to be adequate. CPA-2018-0006: 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 minor adjustment to land use designation amounts to correct the mapping error will have no impact on services or providers. Capital facilities and utilities were considered in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update and found to be adequate. b. Conclusion(s): CPA-2018-0005: The proposed amendment to correct a mapping error will have no impact on public facilities;Sites will have adequate urban services at the time of development. CPA-2018-0006: The proposed amendment to correct a mapping error will have no impact on public facilities; Sites will have adequate urban services at the time of development. Page 8 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any public comments to date for either proposal, This will be updated once the comment period has expired. 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns for either proposal are noted at this time. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has received the following agency comments to date for both CPA-2018-0005 and CPA-2018- 0006. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated Avista No Central Valley School District#356 No CenturyLink No Spokane Valley Police Department No Washington State Department of Ecology No City of Liberty Lake _ No City of Spokane No City of Spokane Valley Building Division No City of Spokane Valley Development Yes 1-8-18 Engineering _ City of Spokane Valley Parks Department No City of Spokane Valley Traffic Yes 1-22-18 City of Millwood No Comcast No Consolidated Irrigation District#19 No East Spokane Water District#1 No East Valley School District#361 No Inland Power&Light No Model Irrigation District#18 No Modern Electric Water Company No Washington State Parks Department No Spokane Aquifer Joint Board No Spokane County Fire District#8 No Spokane County Planning&Building No Spokane County Environmental Services _ Yes 1-16-18 _Spokane County Water District#3 No Spokane Regional Clean.Air Agency No Spokane Regional Health District No Spokane Regional Transportation Council No Spokane Transit Authority No Spokane Tribe of Indians No Spokane Valley Fire Department#1 No Trentwood Irrigation District No Vera Water&Power No Washington State Department of Commerce No Page 9 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 Washington State Department of Arch and No Historic Preservation Washington State Fish&Wildlife No Washington State Natural Resources No Washington State Transportation No West Valley School District#363 No 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted for either proposal. All comments are reflective of at the time of future development. F. Conclusion: CPA-2018-0005: For the reasons set forth in Section C (1 and 2) the request to expand the NC designation and zoning to eliminate the split designation of NC and SFR, and the associated zoning of NC and R-3 is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H)and the Comprehensive Plan. CPA-2018-0006: For the reasons set forth in Section C (1 and 2) the request to expand the ilVI1U designation and zoning to eliminate the split designation of IMU and SFR, and the associated zoning of IMU and R-3 is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(11)and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 10 of 10 I � I V 1.V1_1.111...y 1.1KV 'kJ A_ t .L lvV 1 4, v V '.J 1 I Antoine t , - Conservation Arcs g 1:.,. c z z �aGo 55�o E Francis Ave c 4 11 -----%\46'4 9t. ..I 5 Z r�� z r J 9 1, Ad D O C C4 �� no r E Sanson Ln E Sanson Ave vI=i . •I MINE B Evere Ave 0, l• - oa .r ,,■ z - m �v I11 Z++. ■1 z 1 - pro�wn-Ave it Milt. ,�� .' c E_Cro Ave { o i■■■■■■1■; ■ qe . ■ --,y.!—Ir■ , S-=111 TMr . 1,E ween E Queen l2 °J:�we_■■■•,I . . imam=__MIN-m'' I.z B— ■ liming ■ 41■■■■■■ ck.,Irk N —""'�I E Olympic 1E -01, ...I'd"! !E Wa Wabash 1, 11110-1, 1 �%, sit d; East Valley �I�� " ' �: Er 1� cam-Int n o East '•s I i *r.■ .� �� I �� ■u cam-I■ t ... 2 Senior 1.� ■ r e W abas)a�m w Valleyg E E Wahasla ; � i m i l tI .40 y■ >• �I� A . w E�JdabashfC Z $i h V r 'D[miEVi IS ME Ave m■ ■■1r�� ■■ '� NM, !■1EN r m■ Broad Middle g a11e �—Mai____IN �1� I Ca E �■ I'r ■ ■I. a �a ll111�m r■ .oEBroaLn r �■ IEkmenta0Iy ■ i Z E$asiland C w v. I!I 1 ■11 WU" lli1111 gill a III 1Nom I L i __ i IF"1 n E Wellesley ve ■■■■■!■all■■ z i�IIIIII ii --1 . I. •• ■ Iwll E Hero �■�!■� ■e�iu�trr tag=�� ■ ■■ 11■1■i11 ■11111111 ■ ■■ ` z E a!Jey?)1 • J y I I. �1��X111 f �,��11�1� ��� �` ■ ■ ■■ �1� ■■ • c :cy ■ _ 001 ■■ Ho Awe A- ,II� �� �� \'Lrhl w � � �- � "� �i ■ Hero ■� 111_ ,,, .Heroytl I■-■■■1■■ z �111P —y v„ IV 1l1N11111 er.Qy Ave. := -107: 1111■Il1l■■.��r■ice■'1� = Eton• ellow_� ° .-.1, UI.r�e?�� • o _owAve11111 is el'lvwAve .ii .11 z onafellow L_'iiiii 111j 1i 11� E Longfel -''''''..4111111 ��� 1�Cn Agve `�" ii.t,;,-, 115�1111J1J „____ III it w , .■I� -- 111= _ �,/i X11311 III■.��Ml■'■1� c„I. _ E_Rich ve ■�l♦ �1� �� VIII z z ►E Rieh_Ave1111 ■■, ■■� ir■■�1' E}''ch Ave ���. — M 4E�1 41111111:ern 1E Rockwell -E-Rockwell-ciESRToekwelA _L gip —p, 1 X1111111111111■�!, 1��11�`�� ■�h ■ .1-.11=.�rri��—�1;� Z - '�'■ n A11!n. J,� '., LQ ©ff �■,",11iik• 1 �I it _ 2LI / rill. �Iii z .rent Ave Milac glk EXHIBIT 2 Comprehensive Plan Map Aiiiiiiir-----„ • ,a k46352,9052 04636.7_0_ °s`��t 4UldKNOWN h+ S,9 • - - . :. - -owS . 463 - \ Study Area g N ����RIogl_SS ' ,,` 111 46352.9052 46351,9049Z 0 ADDRESS 0 ADDRESS UNKNOWN UNKNOWN ':1-.! r !– s 4,a v 46354.9127 Z 0 UNKNOWN ADDRESS E Evefett Ave N fd_._ Al*. Aj ei ;a —11011.11 v8 „ 1trMilliH— E-Queen-k Z �.Qgen.A.ve 1011.*#### w ,,,1,� � G�E0o 1 A.,. i lir" 4r Ah.711 mks .. r------- ,... E Olympic Ave u , N I 0 MI E-01 .pic-Avea. a I -W basli Avew 1 / RI Sffis \ CPA-2018-0005 Request: e1" Owner: Five Fifty, LLC pUIl(� City initiated proposal to expand Vall4 000° ey Parcel#: See Map Address: See Map Neighborhood Commercial NNC) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel Zoning Map 4. ,, b x46352 9052 ' _' 4 Study Area et 4 A�DDRE-g§ I',~ a s;` OA s'79�48 �. of f,UNKIUOUA UN R kid; y s s . , ��N UN�O�R9�aS t 3/41,47 0.04,, . 46352.9052 46351.9049 `,� Z 0 ADDRESS 0 ADDRESSlik, UNKNOWN UNKNOWN f o U :n v 46354.9127 rg , 0 UNKNOWN Zr ADDRESS E-EverettAve 1 i .4zrlic__J L 1 , h. ,___17:::?:,,,>\\. 4,ye `1 ed..... II 111 1111 ;a i4 1111111... F. --E-Queen-Ave" —mil %WS Zgi—T---.,_11:-Queen.fl.ve 111111111111 i:- 016, N[ IF E-O4.ympic.Aue f 4 Ills dir 0 iii E Olye►3pi Ave • 0 101 mpic-Av iWabashjve 0 CPA-2018-0005 Request: *tame �' Owner: Five Fifty, LLCCity initiated proposal to expand Eley Parcel#: See Map Address: See Map Neighborhood Commercial(NC) designation and 41010 zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel EXHIBIT 4 ti, 'Lbw,-Y '0 ''-- Ailliff" , 1 11'''‘ *if'' ,•'410:1/4,,ir'''..„...--' -.1.1"01*÷111'..J ° --: ' . „„4, , +.- e ,.- gr""*V ' _ ' ,•%re•tv.11,.• - A . . .. ,, -• -- . JP.. 4 ..A. -' ' s .4.1 r.. ' ' ". 'I.• 4"):1A ' l'•,e Legend i ;,/ .d" , 1"; "r- . . '...:. Ilrir ' ,.%. ;' /.." : '4 :Lp. .444. , BPA Easement ., .,,,,,,3-,,t,t,....,40'... . , •,,,,ii. .*„.444.,, •„;"," *. 1 . . :r1 ••••1;6./jP4P,I.,./v5".4 . r 4 . . ' ,.1 t-'4,_ ,6,-,60; . j ' = FEMA 2010 '•...„ , 4,4,f,, 4.•• , A '..1 yr N.,‘e 4 '' , }, •at..'"ilt,;•.,),'7,744,',,,;470e,:„t'e, 'fit;,,1,40,p,3",„„_70.%$,Ii.6,,,,,.. .,.',,740,......,„„'ep.,,,N,41.41,4 ima , e , _, _' ,• r_Fl_o_o_di_Zone ; -g,,to ,,,,,i.• ., .'',,:.4.,...,:to..,4' 4.s .04i,i,i.2.,,t4 474,'14:7,; 4 Ne.'&1'444 ' ' ' '' ' l',. I I 0.2 POT ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD HAZARD '-* ''' ts ''' ‘'."1,f'er*1/4,rfi'.1:64--' 'I,' f t t 4...1.44,ev-ilt.APS") • ^,'' '•,' • • I 1, , le. !_,-,4,4.'4 4 ••,,, ,' 's'`...-.141:,.1' • ) 4 40 t , ' , A WI' . ‘" ' ''Th.1.1141****4-40- 44•elli 4.` ' ' I '''• 44044*. 4 1 ' g. . •);6„,,,A. ,... ,, • „ ,Pe r it'4.4;•,`- :i.....;• ..,441,41r4v.4,441,,,,,,, ,•'.1 r • 14.74-4,111,-,.44 t II, 4 , ' , 1 ,pi' •# d.',- 4,0441.,4•teii.'#;',,P. , 4,414,ti*********44.'','#'''....i„ . ?ft,\i., ' 177A AE r. •:.'. •:41,01 • s '014•10.604.414,r ,, 044.0,*:4:4V,0Y+'144.***"'•.'"';‘eNaut,i2,. '.., V \i il e'- , '4 ,!**i :....''' ***44,4)***,. 1'44+4 44,.,4411***4Pial;se...".•-----' " -t.%. , . ...# re.i.p . *,***4 *** r•*4*11,444-4,44,45/41?,6:1 e"r''--;,4-.----- - '- --"` ;- , .4 e 4, 6,*or,44 a,*• ", . -r. . 4P • • '47( •' At!.4 i ••4•4 1.444.44.4-Ye''''4 .° e-' 4--'-"... ..,.. ' * . A.‘„1, . , 7-4„44.,,41.i , . ,s, ' 4114.0•444.44,..,,4111,e.,41. ....1....... A.1,e,1,1,,,,,r,*„ • ' 4 ctia, ., ., i„,. ,./r,4, ,4",...-; 1/10.itiffivC.A„ ,',:,•;.f*,..140,1:,6`,.,s5t4t.::\10.,:.;;,....,•4635_2'.90524irot,„°.,6`;;:::`', ird,a,e/463 4." 4L;fr' .--,4:-..„.44<4,,, 1 . _ , y ,... .4" 352.9014' -•-,-d- " 4 " ' " ''''''' IriV%.' 1/45%'' .' ''')1 "' \\ . . a 4.' - e -,---, 4 ri ATD, 1-.1"1 fc--e.-Z--..-211.1-2%_e_.fte •. 'll' •' 0 • .4, Om, ...7 4 ale;.' *s, ', e, .i rt, . I_"e„pe_ .._.• -a*. uR Ess i__•._:.,.',.0_2._kol,20 , el.?',--0--,---,.:,,t,..1,e_t_0_. Atisr. ' Q-6,ii0 ,..40,.. ,A '14, . ".4,t,,v, ' ,i.". ' . - '''-'--",--f--''- 0-0_0 0 0 • -'-••- OA ,- a y Study Area ' f 0. 4. 'it /.1' .1, 0.1.-4 /4.4',1 1 •'' 1 4 e" * # * t`. 0.,,--,7„,. -vita\-,.)-0-,,p' ,•,. , -,,. e. p- ... .4,&i...., . ,, .., ,- ,,,,.,ajair_a r a II r # r ,,*.e.'",,`,..",a4alry "..* Ir.' .er e• A., \" /.1 ' -. . '. ' Ilti 44 "Pine' ,,,e',/ 's* a•-•..4%,..1%.#,10.....„4. r a a r r a a 0'0 0t A01:0".0,7,,Al -.,, ,dpN't ... , • c3,' ' ' rr'" ,o, '4#4V:04 OS 4 *'41'/I/4'4' '. " " rii%t4 4"•!‘ /'fir 11')''' arY44440 ' " t ' •r"1".... 1 ::/....,,,i. , „,,,/' • 46,....352,9052::/?' •_afrea,,,'1,014:..:......„;',.: 46351.9049#0,,,a,,e,aza,-/..,/,,-,. litrep, - : t,, • s.:,,,::. 000., , . .„ .,, 0 ,/ UNK N 41/ i'l„,..' ,,,. A. 4. UNKNI:?WN„ , .„4,4, ,,,.., ip. ,,,..,/,. ..d.\,,, .%,,,4. ,.\,,,,_,,.!,,,,.,,,, • ;,..,.., ....0.::(10,,,,.,..:. , , / .., „,,,,,,,,,e,:.•;,....,...4:,........,„..,,,,,..,:,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:::.::::::::;„:.,,,,,e2,,,,,,,,..;,,,,„„...„:;,,s;,,, ,..,,..",,,;.„.„;:i,„4r„.&.. •,. ',444.1.kw,,--ei,-.....,:, 1.,,, \ "...,/1 ,... • , , d , ./. Ifr-e-'4:2-..,:,<L..,-*=;',":--4-1 .-..ev'ta ..:,-,,,te:#7,..:"--‘'.:,i'Le,`t4',Or..•)..r.elltolt:413irs,‘'f.c.1 : r,•.,,-: •' :' : r . - 'Y tir014 ':':-"-11 I. -tr r ' '''''' / (/////e. ef:/ '.....',':'';',,C.,,,70:4:4,146354'.912;7'ir,:a:b;',::,-:•.:0,,e,i'do 4. i ,,,, , , ,„,0 g,i F_,„.4,rr,FP4 „.•••' z /of "0'.4.::oe:::.4;4,4 0.,,e..4.0 UNKNOWN."-',..r;r:•,,ir:0:1,-,"1.,,'"•;ee,./'se 0 4 1: -•"` ra, ,,Fitteil ,.... -. 1. e, or i .4 e*„...,e1,,,..•/01ADDRESS.,,...0*/"...,0,,,,..44 A 4 At, t . w,. ._..rtv,ete ji_Alm _ " .1 7,1****•••••••••!•&##',.',0:1P4...4./1,'A,.%1*4"..',. 4 il ---.1., '.., ''..-' ./e ,I-%.,.•••*•Vir*444,## ef../44'...44°4.'I.'.I4r.4; L' . er . , r 7.e , „ sa.,44•4,41,4,44,......e.„,...„. 0 is 0 0 ^..,..4 0 ''. tyl'• tel:,A0 r-T- elf .41 el°ie 4,4:-.- ..",+4••••• v 0 "0 ,.'0"0' , ,. * , ,,b- ,,. 4113-4.• 4. ,e .,. e 0 0 0,- 0'- * #0' •."''' •• A, ' .0-..4'.0°. _0" 'J‘AI' _ A---. 0.4.4),,,,,P00,•• • e • • • • .". ..,. ,,,I.:, ° ,, 1.,,,,,,,,•.,e4rr.er..r:4:4:.•,..........er:.Q.,#:."'4,,' 41'.. :''',,l',., i'•.4 •*f ,. • ks.", - ' ' ,,i*- , • l' - -, 1 r. - i ,,, ,, 3 ,, ..,-..1",. .0, - II i, e,,,,, ..„•fr,• ,„," ..,404,,,f. ., r+,,,Ir.r..•.,,,e/„at ....,,f•'e•.l'-' • , 'I ?I", -PP., 411 • '-. ( i . i ;or p er., ,e'-'4'-' A ""' i fr •fr°if 4. 't I 4' ' .,/ r• /la ''''' fra ''' ' ,YI "", ? ''' 4, '!" 4,,,,1,*_'l'A.A.let-nr. 4. ,,,-,', -.1,' " . , ',, 0 . 04 ?" 1*,044,* ' lifier .' -0 ..0.• ' ,,- •'',0 4''''' ',..., '.. . .,.-,--,-...-,.. ,-s-..9.,--. .--..•-....-=-- 'W.__ ', .:- ' ,,,,, ., 2," : ,".,,.. -'0, . _.'E.,„31e,-' 1 - -=` ••• ,,..,,, . '- . ior jr.P,i",...'it,A, :1:1'.A. ".•A.'•,,A , L . 1-'"--"-------''''`•1 "--.7="" ''44-..----r" -.k ::''7,:,-"'". ' ' PT;,4'r' l'Ir 1"4. , . : ..V°Ns4‘ ": wri 0,..•- r,.•., .. ,-„,-.; --- '''-, ireer7‘,,....;,.,-......,,......,-..i.,, t 4,:',_ 1- - '-,11:-.0'11111-. ..., r--4* li ,1,-,.%-il:L._, ''': * ; ,:f,4,1; / -. ' ''-',,r' ',!, .-.0 '' VE•141,-I ..;'`,./ "AZ-.. ., e ./,..-,:.,,s,,,,,,,:-:',,,,,.,,,,,,'''. '.,i 4, 1,,P 4 ""t/ le if ••4# i.4;,-"' i 1 .'"- -,--•-••_1-.....____LP. ._,----- _,-,60 f• ) teal' i',,? ' -4 0,A. ''','4 6.<, siti ve 0.- V.< • 't ,',,,i•,r," 1 Q., ... i„ , . -l' , .,1- ,,,,,,,, ,,--.- '..,..-,,,'"'I' •, 44,,e* r elSlir,115 ,Spe.gP tit .....„...._.,. ,. ...r 4, ',N., 31 Ar e *to. ' •• e.` 1 Jr * 0 l'A -ii, •A„lis,:k..t..„ ? 0 r,r. A, ),it I, - - a,•,i.4.,,wile:„....4, ,v, . ,..„' ' .N.....'41/4e.rt,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,.7,,,,,,,:,,,,,, ,•,,,t-, 0- •• . • , -.•-....? i E citi, n A ei )8,e. fir.,,,,,, mr* "r, '.41:„ ./.01. ,, ic„,me.--•,le I, 4. 4, , E, *0 pr - *•-4 • * , „a - , a'„ 4 a4 . 4 ri• .0 , '-' Maw. 1 1 r . U. e 61;" I 1 14ja ."'... \,#*170,06 • , \''' '•el, '''',, *, '14i•' • ' ' '' -, "'" '.-- 777-._.----._-,. __---.•-_ ,. ri #7! '( .4',.‘"nl. .10••:.„i-- ;.:•, ' •00,,- .' :i;ti, • p ....„„ ,,,,, ,t 1, '.- ,it, „„e N,c,,,,, . V ),,' ,0 .c, , .,:„1.-•----' •''D-1'•4 1\ ' - 1 ,'"Ael ' t li' ''' ' P' Egliii t : - ."- '. \1,',,.%.,- .ve 1. e' ... ,- ' . ., ,- -..•„eep.A, 7..•-" - - o 4,.,, i • ., ,Ade. • , - 0. Mr1,?,1Af, : ' , .. io.• „.. , , ,, , ,,-•,,,,,_ -4.`„,/, •,,,,,- 4, k I. 1 „,,,,,:„.4 ,, v.o. , ,. , dr ,,,.,, ..., 1. ,?•_. .e= it ,1,:„.•' , .V. v. ..,..,,c..." ie,,x' , %11..„, , .„ ,-... . i ,„ ,,ti 1- r ,,, . ,f, .....c 4. 4 r ,,,,le 44 ,,, n , ,e, 1,..., , , -.,-- , -,4,‘,01. ..„„ ,,,,." i , , ...., , 4 foil ,,s0.. 1:, „,‘ •••• •1 _„„- ,,.. v g•P :...:1,01 ,,, , Y,1 IT •, 4 i --.0 ":, . A i P. • 1 'r-d• ..)' " • - ' '' " ' ' E 4!,14ra po clAsci L.,....,,;1:0510igk, 1".•• e: '""4,1 %Ali 4 ."'• 1,, p 1,4° . # a J -..0 tt' ' .01,1 .'• ' ' As "" ' 1 . - - '' -"l'I-''- ....- r'''''''' oe'0_,L ',‘,. ,n,s,-_,-,`, , .,,,o_ , 11 _Ai , - - CPA-2018-0005 Request: Sliblial'.1.;%.' Owner: Five Fifty, LLC City initiated proposal to expand Parcel#: See Map Neighborhood Commercial(NC) designation and Valley Address: See Map zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel EXHIBIT 5 cirtiiikad••" SEPA CHECKLIST ` ���� SVMC 21.20 Vd 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 ♦ Fax: (509)720-5075 ♦permitcenter@spokanevallev.ori STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: 12-18-17 Received by: Fee: N/A PLUS #: File#: CPA-2018-0005: CPA-2018-0006 & CPA-2018-0007 PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL "*THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** ❑ Completed SEPA Checklist ❑ Application Fee [� Reduced Site Plan of proposal in WA" by 11" or 11" by 17" size ❑ Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions.An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be clone) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. JNSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS', This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS; Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D), PL-22 V1,0 Page 1 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant,'" and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments (CPA) 2. Name of applicant: City of Spokane Valley 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Karen Kendall, Planner, City of Spokane Valley Community & Public Works Department; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 4. Date checklist prepared: December 28, 2017 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Anticipated adoption in May/June of 2018. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? No. If yes, explain. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Environmental Impact Statement was completed as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? No. If yes, explain. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Spokane Valley Council approval. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) These are non-project actions associated with the City's annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle. The City is initiating three comprehensive plan amendments.. Two of the non-project actions are due to the City inadvertently bisecting the parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 major update and the CPA action will correct the error. CPA-2018-0005: Proposal to expand Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel. CPA-2018-0006: Proposal to expand Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel. CPA-2018-0007: Proposal to change comprehensive plan designation and zoning district PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of Sj5okat SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley from Multifamily Residential (MFR) to Parks and Open Space (P/OS). The Spokane Conservation District recently purchased the property and intends to keep it as natural area, with the exception of their offices. The proposal brings the designation in line with the Conservation District's intentions to conserve the land for public use as open space. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. CPA-2018-0005: 46352.9052, 46352.9014, 46351.9049, 46351.9005, 46354.9127 (Parcel numbers were updated). Located south of the intersection of Progress Road and Forker Road; further located in Section 35 of Township 26, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2018-0006: Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west of the intersection of Trent Avenue (SR 290) and Lillian Road; further located in the north half of Section 1, Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2018-0007: 35233.9191; 35233.9192; 35233.9176; 35233.0513; 35233.0709; 35233.0710; 35233.0604; 35233.0605; 35233.0606; 35233.0607; 35233.0608; 35233.0609 and 35233.0505; addressed as 4418 East 8th Avenue; located at the SE corner of 8tr, Avenue and Havana Street; further located in the north half of the SW quarter of Section 23, Township 25, Range 43, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? Yes. The general Sewer Service Area? Yes. Priority Sewer Service Area?Yes. (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) /Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1 . Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). Not applicable. 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 3 of i'cikane SEPA CHECKLIST 410001rValley. 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. Not applicable. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? Not applicable. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Not applicable. a. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential im after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 2. pacts. Not applicable. B. ENVIRONMENTALELEMENTS applicable. 2) Earth a. General description of the site (check ane):❑ flat,❑ rolling, ❑hilly, ❑ steep slopes, ❑ mountainous, other Each amendment site has its own unique characteristics ranging from rolling to steep slopes. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percentslope)? Unknown. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Not applicable. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? Not applicable. If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. Not applicable. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of SP( liaxle SEPA CHECKLIST valley. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: At the time of future development, all grading activities will be reviewed per the City of Spokane Valley's Street Standards (SVSS). EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 3) Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile,odors, industrial wood smoke)during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable. 4) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a Type F stream located northwest of the proposed amendment CPA-2018- 0005. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Not applicable. Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of Spiktne SEPA CHECKLIST 4,00101FVaiky. Standards 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location (SVSS). on the site plan. 6) Yes, CPA-2018-0005. The property is within a 100-year floodplain pursuant to Community Panel No. 53063C0579D of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) [Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 6, 20101 Yes, CPA-2018-0007. The property is within a 100-year floodplain pursuant to Community Panel No. 53063C0563D and 53063C0564D of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) [Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 6, 2010]. 7) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? Not applicable. If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Not applicable. Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not applicable. c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Not applicable. Will this water flow into other waters? Not applicable. if so, describe. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: At the time of future development, all grading activities will be reviewed per the City of Spokane Valley's Street PL-22 Vi.0 Page 7 of Sf ilikane EVALUATION FOR SMOVIDMMUK9IINT 4000 Valley, 5 Plants EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ❑ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ❑ shrubs ❑ grass El pasture — crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ❑ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ❑ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not applicable. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not applicable. 6) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: 1-1In' birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ❑ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. c. Is the site part of a migration route? Not applicable. If so, explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of *ors kane SEPA CHECKLIST ��Valley° 6). Energy and natural resources EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? Not applicable. List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? Not applicable. If so, describe 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Not applicable. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not applicable. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Not applicable. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of Spokane isskwifte. SEPA CHECKLIST .0000Valley EVALUATION FOR 8). Land and shoreline use AGENCY USE ONLY a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? CPA-2018-0005 is vacant property. It is surrounding by vacant land and single family residences. CPA-2018-0006 has a newly developed building for office and warehousing use. Similar uses exist to the west. Single family residences are located to the north and east. Trent Avenue (SR 290) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway is located to the south. CPA-2018-0007: The property has an office building and several warehouse buildings with the majority of the area vacant. The site is owned by the Spokane Conservation District and currently not occupied. Surrounding properties consist of a mix of single family and multifamily uses. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? Unknown. If so, describe. c. Describe any structures on the site. CPA-2018-0005: None. CPA-2018-0006: 9,375 square foot commercial structure built for office and warehouse use. CPA-2018-0007: Approximately 7,000 square feet of commercial buildings built in 2003 according to the Spokane County Assessor's Office parcel data. d. Will any structures be demolished? Unknown. If so, what? e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? CPA-2018-0005: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) CPA-2018-0006: Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) and Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) CPA-2018-0007: Multifamily Residential (MFR) f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? CPA-2018-0005: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Single Family Residential (SFR) CPA-2018-0006: Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) and Single Family Residential (SFR) CPA-2018-0007: Multifamily Residential (MFR) PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of Sep ik ine SEPA CHECKLIST .000Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? None of the proposals are located within the shoreline designation. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive"' area? if so, specify. CPA-2018-0007 is located within a 100 year Floodplain. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not applicable. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not applicable. 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Not applicable. Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10). Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materials) proposed? Not applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable. c, Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 14 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley 11). Light and glare EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce?What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are no designated or informal recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity of each amendment. CPA-2018- 0007 will designate additional parks and open space for recreation uses. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? No If so, describe. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? None known. If so, generally describe. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to thesite. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. CPA-2018-0005: is located adjacent to Progress Road. CPA-2018-0006: Is located adjacent to Trent Avenue (SR-290). CPA-2018-0007: Is located adjacent to 8th Avenue. PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of 15 S lane SEPA CHECKLIST ! Malley. b. Is site currently served by public transit? Yes. If not, what is the EVALUATION FOR approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? AGENCY USE ONLY c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? Not applicable. If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? Not applicable. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: At the time of future development transportation will be reviewed per the City of Spokane Valley's Street Standards (SVSS). 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? The CPA is a non-project action. There are services in the vicinity and anticipated to be available at the time of development. if so, generally describe. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable. 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, - refuse service, C telephone sanitary wer, septic IsIstem, other- describe b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Not applicable. PL-22 V1.3 Page 12 of 15 S`prni Okane011.1111"1114.41144101ft, SETA CHECKLIST C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. 0-60 Signature: Date Submitted: (---1 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal,would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? It is anticipated as the sites develop impacts will be mitigated through the City's regulations and outside entities with jurisdiction. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: To be determined at time of development. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? It is not anticipated any site development will affect vegetation or habitats of any kind. Specifically CPA-2018-0008 intent for a zoning designation of parks and open space_(P10S)is to preserve and protect vegetation and animal habitats. b. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: To be determined at time of development. 2. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? It is not anticipated development of any kind would be likely to deplete energy or natural resources. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: To be determined at time of development. 3. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? It is not anticipated development would affect environmental sensitive areas, however protect and follow established critical area regulations within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. PL-22 V1.o Page 13 of 15 Sj]dkane SEP CHECKLIST a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: To be determined at time of development. 4. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether It would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? It is not anticipated development would affect land and shoreline uses, however protect and follow established regulations within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: To be determined at time of development. 5. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? It is not anticipated development would increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities. Any impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon the regulations within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:To be determined at time of development. 6. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. It is not anticipated the proposal will conflict with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this check list. Date: l *'-\ `1.1 Signature: 0411. Please print or type: Proponent: Karen Kendall, Planner, City of Spokane Valley Community & Public Works Department Address: 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: (509) 720-5026 Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Address: Phone: PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of 15 EXHIBIT 6 COMMUNITY,*, *BLIC WORKS:DEPAR.TMENT=: Sj 'ökane _ DETERM TATJON OE NUN SIGNIFICANCE VaiLlier :,...,;,.:,:,:::::.,.:,:...::.,.b:::,,,....,,.„::::::,...::,:::J.::::::,:,...,,:„.:::.::‘,,,:.::.:::,.. ....:::::.:,,,,,,, .....:::.:.::::,,,::•:::.,::::.:),..,,,,,.:,:,:.:-.',.:::,,', ;,:::..c:.:,::,,,z.,:.:,...,,.:,::,.. 10210 EastSpragueAvenueSpokane ValleyWA 99206-;. ...!',,•.::;% 509 720 5000•Fax a�09 720 5075•planning@spokanevalley org 4000 , 4 FILE NUMBER: CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018-0006 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: City initiated non-project actions associated with the City's annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle. The City inadvertently bisected various parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 major update; the CPA action will correct the error as follows: 1. CPA 2018.0005: Proposal to expand Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel and 2. CPA-2018-0006:Proposal to expand Industrial Mixed Use(IMU)designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel. PERSON COMPLETING CHECKLIST:Karen Kendall,Planner; City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 PROPOSAL LOCATION: 1. CPA-2018-0005:Parcels 46352.9052,46352.9014,46351.9049,46351.9005,46354.9127. Located south of the intersection of Progress Road and Forker Road; further located in Section 35 of Township 26,Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington 2. CPA-2018-0006: Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west of the intersection of Trent Avenue(SR 290) and Lillian Road; further located in the north half of Section 1,Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the SVMC,the lead agency for this proposal has determined that it 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). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. DETERMINATION: This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2);the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date issued. STAFF CONTACT: Karen Kendall, Planner, City of Spokane Valley Community and Public Works Department; 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509) 720-5026/FX(509) 720-5075, kkendall@a,spokanevalley.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner, City of Spokane Valley Community and Public Works Department; 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,WA 99206, PH: (509)720- 5335/FX(509) 720-5075, Lbarlow@spokanevalley.org City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 oft File No.CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 DATE ISSUED: February 2, 2018 SIGNATURE: i APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community& Public Works Department within fourteen(14) calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and specific factual objections made to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC) 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Schedule shall be paid at the time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 2 o12 File No. CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 ntr Spaorkane ,.Malley COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Building and Planning Division 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5000 1 Fax:509.720.5075♦ cityhail@spolcanevalley.org LEAD AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW DATE: February 2, 2018 A. BACKGROUND 1. PROJECT NUMBER: CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 (CPA-2018-0007--withdrawn) 2. DESCRIPTION: Non-project actions associated with the City's annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle. The City initiated three comprehensive plan amendments. Two of the non-project actions are due to the City inadvertently bisecting the parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 major update and the CPA action will correct the error. The remaining amendment was to designate Conservation District Owned properties as parks and open space. (See below): CPA-2018-0005: Proposal to expand Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel;and CPA-2018-0006: Proposal to expand Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel. CPA-2018-0007: Proposal to change comprehensive plan designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential (MFR)to Parks and Open Space (P/OS). Withdrawn by the City-not included in Environmental Review 3. PERSON COMPLETING Karen Kendall, Planner; City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague CHECKLIST: Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 4. APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 5. OWNER: CPA-2018-0005: Five Fifty,LLC CPA-2018-0006: MPR Spokane LLC 6. LOCATION: CPA-2018-0005: Parcels 46352.9052, 46352.9014, 46351.9049, 46351.9005, 46354.9127. Located south of the intersection of Progress Road and Forker Road; further located in Section 35 of Township 26, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2018-0006: Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west of the intersection of Trent Avenue(SR 290) and Lillian Road; further located in the north half of Section 1, Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of 4 CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 REVIEW OF SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS OF SECTION 14 OF PART A (BACKGROUND) FOR CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA(CARA)/AQUIFER SENSITIVE AREA(ASA) The entire City of Spokane Valley lies in the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area(CARA). The proposed site- specific comprehensive plan map amendment will not lead to any impacts to the aquifer. No concerns noted. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1.EARTH The topography at each of the sites has its own unique characteristics ranging from rolling to steep slopes. All future development proposals will be reviewed for consistency with the Spokane Valley Municipal Code,Regional Stormwater Manual and any relevant critical areas regulations. No concerns noted. 2.AIR This is a non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and consistent with Spokane Regional Clean Air Authority requirements to minimize air impacts. No concerns noted. 3.WATER Surface The SEPA Checklist states CPA-2018-0005 has a Type F stream located in the northwest portion of the site. Additionally, CPA-2018-0005 is located within a 100-year floodplain pursuant to Panel No. 53063C0579D of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps(FIRM) [Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 6, 2010). CPA-2018-0006 is not located near a surface water nor located in a 100-year floodplain. All conditions currently exist on the site. The designations proposed to be expanded to eliminate the bisected zoning will not create additional impacts. No concerns noted. Ground The non-project action has no impact on ground water; future development consistent with the zoning will adhere to regulations. No concerns noted. Water Runoff No future impacts are anticipated as a result of this non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Regional Stormwater Manual. No concerns noted. 4.PLANTS The non-project map amendment will have no effect on existing plants. Any impacts associated with future development proposals will be reviewed to identify site conditions and appropriately mitigated. No concerns noted. No concerns noted. 5.ANIMALS The non-project map amendment will have no effect on existing fish and wildlife conditions. Future development will be reviewed for potential impacts on wildlife habitat and mitigated as necessary. No concerns noted. 6.ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES Staff notes the proposal is a non-project map amendment and utility approvals will be required at the time of building permit review.No concerns noted. City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 2 of 4 CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 7A.ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARDS The proposal is a non-project map amendment. No health hazards are anticipated as a result of the land use designation amendment or with future development.No concerns noted. 7B.NOISE The Checklist states this is a non-project map amendment.No concerns noted. 8.SHORELINE AND LAND USES CPA-2018-0005 is vacant property. It is surrounding by vacant land and single family residences. CPA-2018-0006 has a newly developed building for office and warehousing use. Similar uses exist to the west. Single family residences are located to the north and east. Trent Avenue (SR 290) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway is located to the south. Future development will adhere to applicable zoning regulations ensuring compatibility with the existing land use. No concerns noted 9.HOUSING This is a non-project map amendment. No concerns noted. 10.AESTHETICS This is a non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. No concerns noted. 11.LIGHT AND GLARE This is a non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. No concerns noted. 12.RECREATION The slight adjustment to the land use designation is not expected to have any impacts on existing recreational facilities or future needs.. No concerns noted. 13. CULTURAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION The SEPA Checklist states that it is unknown at this time. No historic or cultural sites are known to be in the vicinity of the subject areas. No concerns noted. 14.TRANSPORTATION This is a non-project map amendment. CPA-2018-0005 is adjacent to Progress Road, CPA-2018-0006 is adjacent to Trent Avenue.No concerns noted. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES 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. The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) provides public transit service within the City of Spokane Valley. All properties included in the city initiated map amendment are located within the boundaries of the East Valley School District #361. Adequate services are available to all sites. No concerns noted. 16.UTILITIES City of Spokane Valley February 2, 2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 3 of 4 CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 The subject's property is located within the service boundaries of Spokane County Environmental Services and Trent Wood 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. No concerns noted. REVIEW OF SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS The non-project review is a tool to help the lead agency evaluate the environmental consequences of a non-project proposal and to provide information to decision-makers and the public. After reviewing the supplemental sheet for non-project actions, the City has determined the proposed amendment is not likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. There are no significant changes in land use, density, or the built environment anticipated as a direct result of the adoption of the comprehensive plan amendments. If adopted, the comprehensive plan amendments will mitigate adverse impacts on the environment on a project-specific basis. Furthermore, proposed projects resulting from these amendments must comply with all applicable regulations. City of Spokane Valley February 2, 2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 4 of 4 CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 EXHIBIT 7 COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT s°T' � PLANNING DIVISION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 4goo 'Valley 10210 East Sprague Avenue• Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5000 •Fax: 509.720.5075 •cityhall@spokanevalley.org Date of Notice: February 7,2018 Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.120,Notice of Public Hearing, the Planning Division is sending notice to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject property. Public Hearing Date and Time:February 22,2018,beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, City Hall Project Number: CPA-2018-0005 Application Description: This is a non-project action associated with the City's annual comprehensive plan amendment (CPA) cycle. This City initiated non- project action is due to the City inadvertently bisecting the parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 major update and the CPA action will correct the error. The proposal is to expand the Neighborhood Commercial(NC)designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of the parcels currently designated as Single Family Residential(SFR)and zoned Single Family Residential Urban District(R-3). Location: Parcels 46352.9052, 46352.9014, 46351.9049,46351.9005, 46354.9127. Located south of the intersection of Progress Road and Forker Road; further located in Section 35 of Township 26,Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington Applicant(s): City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Owner(s): Five Fifty,LLC Tupper Inc Staff Contact: Karen Kendall,Planner (509) 720-5026 kkendall@spokanevalley.org Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to the Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical,hearing,or other impairments,please contact the City Clerk at(509) 720-5000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. A staff report will be available for inspection seven(7)calendar days before the hearing at the Community &Public Works Department,located at the Spokane Valley City Hall 10210 East Sprague Avenue,between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm,Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Send written comments to the Spokane Valley Community&Public Works Department. Comprehensive Plan Map NC SFR 4.1 SFR E Ev er plieAv e E Crc iii Ave E - l CPA-2018-0005 Request: Sip�€�pokane Owner: Five Fifty,LLC&Tupper Inc City initiated proposal to expand Parcel#: 46352.9052, 2.9014, 1.9049, ' Neighborhood Commercial (NC) �,, Valley 1.9005, 4.9127 designation and zoning to Address: Unknown eliminate split zoning of parcel EXHIBIT 8 Karen Kendall From: Chad Riggs Sent: Monday,January 8, 2018 7:33 AM To: Karen Kendall • Subject: RE: Request for Comments - CPA-2018-0005 to 0008 Karen, DE does not have any comments for the CPA-2018-0005 to 0008 SEPA. Please check with Ray to verify he is ok with traffic review to be completed at time of development. Thank you, Chad Riggs, P.E. Senior Engineer 10210 E.Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 720-5033 1 criggs(a7spolcanevalley.org UrriMle This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act,Chapter 42.56 RCW. From: Karen Kendall Sent:Thursday,January 4, 2018 5:04 PM To: 'Avista Dave Byus' <dave.byus@avistacorp.com>; 'Central Valley School District#356'<jrowell@cvsd.org>; 'CenturyLink' <Karen.Stoddard@centurylink.com>; 'Chris Johnston'<crjohnston@spokanesheriff.org>; 'Chris Knudson' <CKnudson@spokanecounty.org>; 'Cindy Anderson (cyan461@ecy.wa.gov)' <cyan461@ecy.wa.gov>; 'City of Liberty Lake' <atainio@libertylakewa.gov>; 'City of Spokane Tirrell Black'<tblack@spokanecity.org>; 'Colin Depner' <CDEPNER@spokanecounty.org>; 'Comcast' <bryan_richardson@cable.comcast.com>; 'Consolidated Irrigation District #19'<consolidatedirrigation@comcast.net>; Doug Powell <dpowell@spokanevalley.o rg>; 'East Spokane Water District #1' <dist1@comcast.net>; 'East Valley School District#361' <smithL0@evsd.org>; 'Environmental Services Judy Green' <jagreen@spokanecounty.org>; 'Inland Power& Light'<connien@inlandpower.com>; 'Jacob McCann (Jmca461@ecy.wa.gov)' <Jmca461@ecy.wa.gov>; Mary Moore <mmoore@spokanevalley.org>; 'Mike Makela' <MakelaM@spokanevalleyfire.com>; Mike Stone <mstone@spokanevalley.org>; 'Model Irrigation District#18' <jim@modirr.org>; 'Modern Electric Water Company'<modern@mewco.com>; 'Patnode, Brian (PARKS)' <Brian.Patnode@PARKS.WA.GOV>; 'Randy Myhre'<Randy.myhre@avistacorp.com>; 'Spokane Aquifer Joint Board' <info@spokaneaquifer.org>; 'Spokane County Fire District#8'<bwalkup@scfd8.org>; 'Spokane County Planning & Building' <jpederson@spokanecounty.org>; 'Spokane County Utilities' <jred@spokanecounty.org>; 'Spokane County Water District#3' <scwd3@comcast.net>; 'Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency'<awestby@spokanecleanair.org>; 'Spokane Regional Health District'<psavage@srhd.org>; 'Spokane Regional Transportation Council' <rstewart@SRTC.org>; 'Spokane Transit Authority'<kotterstrom@spokanetransit.com>; 'Spokane Tribe of Indians' <randya@spokanetribe.com>; 'Tom Richardson City of Millwood'<tom.richardson@millwoodwa.us>; 'Traci Harvey, Spokane Valley Fire Dept No. 1'<HarveyT@spokanevalleyfire.com>; 'Vera Water& Power' <kwells@verawaterandpower.com>; 'WA Commerce'<reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov>; 'WA Dept of Arch and Hist Preservation '<Gretchen.Kaehler@DAHP.wa.gov>; 'WA Ecology, Olympia'<sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov>; 'WA Fish&Wildlife' <SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; 'WA Natural Resources'<northeast.region@dnr.wa.gov>; 'WA Parks' <Chris.guidotti@parks.wa.gov>; 'WA Transportation' <FiggG@wsdot.wa.gov>; 'West Valley School District#363' <brian.liberg@wvsd.org>; Ray Wright<rwright@spokanevalley.org>; 'planning@millwoodwa.us' 1 <planning@miflwoodwa.us>; Chad Riggs<criggs@spokanevalley.org> Cc: Lori Barlow<Ibarlow@spokanevalley.org> Subject: Request for Comments-CPA-2018-0005 to 0008 All, .Please review the attached Environmental Checklist and associated materials for the following_project: Project Name: City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment File #: CPA-2018-0005 Parcels: 46351.9049;46351.9005 and 46352.9027 Project Name: City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment File #:CPA-2018-0006 Parcel:45015.1409 Project Name: City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment File#:CPA-2018-0007 Parcels: 35233.9191; 35233.9192;35233.9176; 35233.0513; 35233.0709; 35233.0710; 35233.0604; 35233.0605; 35233.0606; 35233.0607; 35233.0608; 35233.0609 and 35233.0505 Please submit written comments to me via email, or mail, by January 19, 2018 @ 5:00 p.m.. My contact information is listed below and noted on the attached documents. Thank you. Karen Kendall I Planner 10210 E.Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley,WA 99206 (509)720-5026j kkendall@spokanevalley.org simandp 11ey• This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act,chapter 42.56 RCW. • 2 Karen Kendall From: Ray Wright Sent: Monday,January 22, 2018 2:34 PM To: Karen Kendall Subject: CPA-2018-0005 &0006 Karen: Traffic has reviewed CPA-2018-0005 and 0006 and determined that no traffic analysis is required for these proposed changes. Thank you for the opportunity to comment, Ray Wright, PE Senior Engineer, Traffic Spane ...M11ey. 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley,WA 99206 rwright(o7spolcanevalley.arq (509) 720-5019 1 Karen Kendall From: Red,Jim <JRed@spokanecounty.org> Sent: Tuesday,January 16, 2018 12:58 PM To: Karen Kendall Subject: Project:CPA-2018-0005 Attachments: r PA Comments.rtf i To: Karen Kendall (City of Spokane Valley-Community Development) CC: From: Jim Red (Spokane County - Environmental Services Dept) Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 Planning/Building #: Subject: CPA-2018-0005 Stage: Comprehensive Phase: Expand NC desigl Elimate split parcel Address: AOO1 Parcels are curently vacant. Sewer requrirements will be addressed as the property is developed. ATTACHMENT 6 COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING AND PLANNING DIVISION S "okane Valley STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018-0006 STAFF REPORT DATE: February 15,2018 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 22,2018,beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. Project CPA-2018-0005 & CPA-2018-0006 Number: Application Non-project action to correct a map error on the Land Use Designation Map due to the Description: City inadvertently bisecting the parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. CPA-2018-0005 CPA-2018-0006 Expand NC designation and zoning to Expand Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) eliminate split designation of designation and zoning to eliminate split Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and designation of IME and Single Family Single Family Residential(SFR),and the Residential (SFR, and the associated associated zoning of NC and Single zoning of IMU and Single Family Family Residential Urban District(R-3). Residential Urban District(R-3). Location: Parcels 46352.9052, 46352.9014, Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 46351.9049, 46351.9005, 46354.9127; East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west located south of the intersection of of the intersection of Trent Avenue (SR Progress Road and Forker Road; further 290) and Lillian Road; further located in located in Section 35 of Township 26, the north half of Section 1, Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane Spokane County, Washington County,Washington Owner: Five Fifty,LLC MPR Spokane LLC Applicant: _ City of Spokane Valley Staff Contact: Karen Kendall,Planner APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls, ATTACHMENTS: CPA-2018-0005 CPA-2018-0006 Exhibit 1: Vicinity Map Vicinity Map Exhibit 2: Comprehensive Plan Map _Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 3: Zoning Map Zoning Map Exhibit 4: Aerial Map Aerial Map Exhibit 5: Environmental Checklist Environmental Checklist Exhibit 6: DNS Determination DNS Determination Exhibit 7: Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 8: , Agency Comments Agency Comments Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is a City initiated request to correct a mapping error. The following amendments are bisected with two different land use designations and zoning: 1. CPA-2018-0005: Parcels are currently designated Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Single Family Residential(SFR). 2. CPA-2018-0006: Parcel is currently designated Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) and Single Family Residential(SFR). PROPERTY INFORMATION: CPA-2018-0005 CPA-2018-0006 Size and The area is approximately 10 acres in The site is 0.83 of an acre is size. Characteristics: size. The site has had earth The site is fully developed with disturbance over the years. Located structures,pavement, stormwater in the NW corner of parcel facilities and landscaping. 46351.9049 is a Type F stream. Currently, the entire area is located in a 100-year floodplain. However, FEMA is reviewing a CLOMR application to modify the boundaries. Approval of the CLOMR is anticipated in the near future. Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)has an overhead powerline and easement of 500 feet running through the subject area. Comprehensive SFR and NC SFR and IMU Plan: Zoning: Single Family Residential Urban Single Family Residential Urban District(R-3)and NC District(R-3)and IMU Existing Land Vacant Office/warehouse building Use: 1. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN(C),ZONING(Z),AND LAND USES(LU): CPA-2018-0005: CPA-2018-0006: Spokane County C: SFR North C: Rural Conservation Z: R-3 Z: Rural Conservation (RCV) LU: Single family residences LU: Single family residences C: SFR C:Industrial(I) South Z: R-3 Z: Industrial(I) LU: Single family residences LU: Offices and warehouses Spokane County C: SFR C: Rural Conservation&Urban Reserve Z: R-3 East Z: Rural Conservation (RCV) &Urban LU: Single family residences Reserve(UR) LU: Single family residences and vacant land Page 2 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 C: SFR C: IMU West Z: R-3 Z: IMU LU: Single family residences LU: Offices and warehouses 2. APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: N/A Application Submitted: N/A Date of Complete Determination: N/A SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issue date February 2, 2018 End of Comment and Appeal Period for DNS: Not Appealed February 16, 2018 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing February 7, 2018 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: February 2, 2018 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: February 7, 2017 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, the lead agency has determined that neither proposal has a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required for either proposal under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The Building and Planning Division issued a Determination of Non- Significance(DNS)for each proposal on February 2,2018. The determinations were made after review of a completed environmental checklist for each proposal,Titles 19,21, and 22 SVMC,a site assessment for each proposal,public and agency comments, and other information on file for each proposal with the lead agency. 2. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled for each proposal. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 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 CPA-2018-0005: The affected parcels are inappropriately and erroneously burdened by two different sets of development regulations as an unintended consequence by the mapping error. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment benefit is eliminating the bisected zoning condition which allows the property to develop consistent with other properties in the area. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The affected parcel is inappropriately and erroneously burdened by two different sets of development regulations as an unintended consequence by the mapping error. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment benefit is eliminating the bisected zoning condition which allows the property to develop consistent with other properties in the area. Page 3 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 (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 CPA-2018-0005: The proposed amendment corrects a mapping error and allows for development consistent with adjacent zoned parcels. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update considered the Goals and Policies of GMA and ensured that the Comprehensive Plan was consistent throughout. Correcting the map designation error has no effect on the other portions of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The proposed amendment corrects a mapping error and allows for development consistent with adjacent zoned parcels. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update considered the Goals and Policies of GMA and ensured that the Comprehensive Plan was consistent throughout. Correcting the map designation error has no effect on the other portions of the 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 CPA-2018-0005: The amendment does respond to a substantial change of land use designation and zoning. The City underwent an extensive legislative comprehensive plan update in 2016 resulting in a land use designation that was not intended to bisect property. This amendment is the City's first opportunity to respond. As part of the changes, properties designated NC were expanded and designated on portions of parcels associated with CPA-2018-0005. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The amendment does respond to a substantial change of land use designation and zoning. The City underwent an extensive legislative comprehensive plan update in 2016 resulting in a land use designation that was not intended to bisect property. This amendment is the City's first opportunity to respond. As part of the changes, the land use designation IMUwas created and applied to parcel associated with CPA-2018-0006 to capture the existing diverse uses and focus future infill development along Trent Avenue. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The City initiated amendment corrects a mapping error. The City inadvertently bisected parcels with the land use designations/zoning during the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. This created parcels to be burdened by two different sets of development regulations. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The City initiated amendment corrects a mapping error. The City inadvertently bisected parcels with the land use designations/zoning during the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. This created parcels to be burdened by two different sets of development regulations. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Page 4 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis CPA-20180005: 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. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: 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 CPA-2018-0005: There are designated critical areas such as a Type F stream on the northwest corner of parcel 46351.9049. Parcels are located within a 100 year floodplain. FEMA is currently reviewing a conditional letter of map revision (CLOMR) application which will modify the boundaries and remove the floodplain from the majority of the site. The parcels are not located within shoreline jurisdiction, nor are there known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: 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 associated with CPA-2018-0006. The parcel is not located within shoreline jurisdiction, nor are there known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The existing land use designation of NC for the proposed amendment was evaluated and incorporated to the City's Comprehensive Plan through the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. The City initiated amendment corrects minor mapping errors to eliminate split zoned parcels. The corrections are both minimal in size and would not create an impact to adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods by significantly increasing the area available for development. CPA- 2018-0005 parcels are vacant and future development will be evaluated for compliance with all municipal requirements as it relates to adjacent uses. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The existing land use designations ofIMUfor the proposed amendments were evaluated and incorporated to the City's Comprehensive Plan through the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. The City initiated amendment corrects a minor mapping error to eliminate a split zoned parcel. The correction is both minimal in size and would not create an impact to adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods by significantly increasing the area available for development. CPA- 2018-0006 parcel is fully developed and a swale is constructed within the split zoned portion of land designated SFR. Page 5 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks, recreation, and schools; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The map correction will have no impact on community facilities or utilities. The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. Capital facilities and utilities were analyzed in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. The minor adjustment to land use amounts will have no impact. 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. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The map correction will have no impact on community facilities or utilities. The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. Capital facilities and utilities were analyzed in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. The minor adjustment to land use amounts will have no impact. 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 public streets. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The proposed amendment will not affect the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood. The land use designation exists and the City is correcting a mapping error. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The proposed amendment will not affect the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood. The land use designation exists and the City is correcting a mapping error. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The mapping error will have an insignificant effect on the amount of land associated with each designation as this corrects an error. The adjustments will not affect the density currently allowed in the vicinity and will have no effect on population density. As discussed in the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan the neighborhood- scale commercial development is limited in Spokane Valley. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan update designated a portion of parcels NC associated with CTA-2018-0005. Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The mapping error will have an insignificant effect on the amount of land associated with each designation as this corrects an error. The adjustments will not affect the density currently allowed in the vicinity and will have no effect on population density. Residential uses allowed in the IMU designation are incidental and subservient to any commercial or industrial uses. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The amendment corrects a mapping error. This will not result in displacement of residences. The amendment have an insignificant effect on population density and does not demand population analysis since no increase in density is anticipated Page 6 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 Analysis CPA-2018-0006: The amendment corrects a mapping error. This will not result in displacement of residences. The amendment have an insignificant effect on population density and does not demand population analysis since no increase in density is anticipated (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis CPA-2018-0005: The insignificant adjustment to land quantities will not affect any portion ofthe Comprehensive Plan. The amendment is correcting a mapping error. Analysis CPA-2018.0006: The insignificant adjustment to land quantities will not affect any portion of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment is correcting a mapping error, Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Compliance with Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations a. Findings: Either proposal corrects a land use designation mapping error. While portions of the properties described below will receive a new zoning district as the current zoning extends to the property boundaries, this is not a site specific rezone, and therefore the criteria associated with SVMC 19.30.030(B) is not applicable. Comp Plan amendments and area-wide rezones are processed pursuant to SVMC 17.80.140, 19.30.010 and 19.30.020. CPA-2018-0005: Change the Comprehensive Plan designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) zoning classification to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation with a Neighborhood Commercial(NC)zoning classification. CPA-2018-0006: Change the Comprehensive Plan designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) zoning classification to Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation with an Industrial Mixed Use (IMU)zoning classification. 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. Pursuant to SVMC 19.30.010(B) and 17.80.140(H), Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria, annual amendments may be completed to correct a mapping error. The proposed amendment is consistent with Title 19 SVMC and state law regarding Comprehensive Plan amendments. See Section C(1) above. 3. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings: CPA-2018-0005: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designates areas for small-scale neighborhoods serving retail and office uses.Neighborhood business areas should not be larger than two acres in size, and should be located as business clusters rather than arterial strip commercial developments. The amendment to correct a mapping error is generally consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. Page 7 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. LU-PI Enable neighborhood-scale commercial uses in residential areas. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. LU-P13 Work collaboratively with landowners and developers that seek to provide mixed-use residential projects. CPA-2018-0006: Industrial Mixed-Use (MU) allows for light manufacturing, retail, offices, and lighter industrial types of uses such as contractor yards. The amendment to correct a mapping error is generally consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. LU-G.2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. LU-1313 Work collaboratively with landowners and developers that seek to provide mixed-use residential projects. b. Conclusion(s): CPA-2018-0005: The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Adopted Comprehensive Plan. CPA-2018-0006: The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's Adopted Comprehensive Plan. 4. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: CPA-2018-0005: 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 minor adjustment to land use designation amounts to correct the mapping error will have no impact on services or providers. Capital facilities and utilities were considered in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update and found to be adequate. CPA-2018-0006: 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 minor adjustment to land use designation amounts to correct the mapping error will have no impact on services or providers. Capital facilities and utilities were considered in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update and found to be adequate. b. Conclnsion(s): CPA-2018-0005: The proposed amendment to correct a mapping error will have no impact on public facilities; Sites will have adequate urban services at the time of development. CPA-2018-0006: The proposed amendment to correct a mapping error will have no impact on public facilities; Sites will have adequate urban services at the time of development. Page 8 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any public comments to date for either proposal. This will be updated once the comment period has expired. 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns for either proposal are noted at this time. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has received the following agency comments to date for both GPA-2018-0005 and CPA-2018- 0006. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated Avista No Central Valley School District#356 No CenturyLink No S.okane Valley Police De•artment No Washington State Department of Ecology No City of Liberty Lake No City of Spokane No City of Spokane Valley Building Division No City of Spokane Valley Development Yes 1-8-18 Engineering City of Spokane Valley Parks Depattatent No City of Spokane Valley Traffic Yes 1-22-18 City of Millwood No Comcast No Consolidated Irrigation District 1119 No East Spokane Water District#1 No East Valley School District#361 No Inland Power&Light No Model Irrigation District#18 No Modem Electric Water Company _ No Washington State Parks Department No Spokane Aquifer Joint Board No Spokane County Fire District#8 No Spokane County Planning&Building No Spokane County Environmental Services Yes 1-16-18 Spokane County Water District#3 No Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency No Spokane Regional Health District No Spokane Regional Transportation Council No Spokane Transit Authority No Spokane Tribe of Indians No Spokane Valley Fire Department#1 No Trentwood Irrigation District No Vera Water&Power No Washington State Department of Commerce No Page 9 of 10 Staff Report CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 Washington State Department of Arch and No Historic Preservation _ Washington State Fish&Wildlife No Washington State Natural Resources No Washington State Transportation No 'West Valley School District#363 No 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted for either proposal. All comments are reflective of at the time of future development. F. Conclusion: CPA-2018-0005: For the reasons set forth in Section C (1 and 2) the request to expand the NC designation and zoning to eliminate the split designation of NC and SFR,and the associated zoning of NC and R-3 is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H)and the Comprehensive Plan. CPA-2018-0006: For the reasons set forth in Section C (1 and 2) the request to expand the IMU designation and zoning to eliminate the split designation of IMU and SFR, and the associated zoning of IMU and R-3 is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(11)and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 10 of 10 I I I V 1tf1111Ly ivicti J `1✓1 13""L+U 1 U—UUUU N , AI .t,, ,-,! S II E Queen,; it., Ave.], ir 1, �j IIIR 0.04- 4 1-1 E O,]yYmpic s�i�� East Valley ,• L Ave East Seniar ,i��'r--;�„� - . . k Valley EEaSt HighITiii,bash ! ilz ri����A a Middle Valley Z a ■I■ W/ School g B 0ad-Av C� ■c- 101 Li q. = ,�, : '.6� �y �� �mE .astlandEt— �_ w:Trentw 1 r r �, F Welle le_Axes I1 I11 ��j1111 . !c, eP SIZyVIew org. ■ Hca ■■minium ii is ri=f4 Ea ' z g NE Elementary Illeroy trEl— /1-'11'—'— " .a — ♦ °i eroy Ave 1 1���1�1�� �� fK ■1• ■ E'III o , ,7,T 4,6' , l •e ,1,,,1 Vii' Z E1Iiero we r Aye a�� p 11011LE.L��gfe�l�t Ay =` IM Lljngellnw p L —Avd o 11 I f11 I Ute" imm cn _d!),+---r- ERchAveIlia 1� E z_,,,A,ve'd,y z ■ �� , llT7E Z �. 1� � "E-Rockwell 0,11i o.f'}n'wei'1 '�,� � Oa �,s '���� � AveIA- 1i�-� p� �ff Tres Ave ,E--1 2 lir .9- l p B Dn �r--- SpokaneEl acr.©sseLn r C '1 Ell o I_ E I•ndustri:Park AASt— A r Z MEliA &z ,N E Kiera`Ave E Industrial Park B St vS vt rl vi 'a f m ,� °' rJ2 E Industrial ,v 1------1-- t'' w `' Park x w r va `� m m x a7 c st Lti, •c e , 1. J r . . - P st a -1 z L lig i Z E Industrial Park D St ° 111. ` z 1. J - - =_ - ----;---_---- --.....a.- �— — E Industrial Park E St 1� E Da to>� v li _ E-Euchd Aye- E Euclid ALe Milo¢ Ark EXHIBIT 2 Comprehensive Plan Map Study Area 45015.1409 96205 TRENT iQ CPA-2018-0006 Request: Sp0°� e LLC Owner: MPR Spokane, j� City initiated proposal to expand Valley Parcel#: See Map Address: See Map Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel EXHIBIT 3 Zoning Map Study Area 45015.1409 TEM g TRENT LI CPA-2018-0006 Reuuest: �coir Owner: MPR Spokane, LLC pU��Ile City initiated proposal to expand Valley Parcel#: See Map4.000 Address: See Map Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel EXHIBIT 4 14 - 'MN - - J 41 N. f 1111* , , Study Area 4 t. T, may ``°`, _ 4 t. "i ' • Nr 1.. 4501'5.14©9 "' t y _ . , ,, !.} N'" s .g yy.rs�: „_ La ,...�...b��c. ..ter_'-a�re�"w �i ti`s CPA-2018-0006 Request: Spokane Owner: MPR Spokane, LLC l�u,ii City initiated proposal to expand Parcel#: See Map Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation 40.00 alley Address: See Map and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel EXHIBIT 5 cmll� SEPA CHECKLIST Ile SVMC 21.20 4000 r�. 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 ♦ Fax: (509)720-5075 i permiteenter(,spokanevallev.org STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: 12-18-17 Received by: Fee: N/A PLUS #: File#: CPA-2018-0005: CPA-2018-0006 & CPA-2018-0007 PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL ""THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** ❑ Completed SEPA Checklist ❑ Application Fee ❑ Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81/2" by 11" or 11" by 17" size ❑ Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST; The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions.An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. ,INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS; This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USEOF CHECKLIST FOR NOM PROJECT PRQPOSALS; Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D). PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 valley, For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable City-initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments (CPA) 2. Name of applicant: City of Spokane Valley 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Karen Kendall, Planner, City of Spokane Valley Community& Public Works Department; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 4. Date checklist prepared: December 28, 2017 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Anticipated adoption in May/June of 2018. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? No. If yes, explain. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Environmental Impact Statement was completed as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? No. If yes, explain. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Spokane Valley Council approval. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) These are non-project actions associated with the City's annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle. The City is initiating three comprehensive plan amendments.. Two of the non-project actions are due to the City inadvertently bisecting the parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 major update and the CPA action will correct the error. CPA-2018-0005: Proposal to expand Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel. CPA-2018-0006: Proposal to expand Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel. CPA-2018-0007: Proposal to change comprehensive plan designation and zoning district PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of SEPA CHECKLIST SpUlne __..Walley• from Multifamily Residential (MFR) to Parks and Open Space (P/OS). The Spokane Conservation District recently purchased the property and intends to keep it as natural area, with the exception of their offices. The proposal brings the designation in line with the Conservation District's intentions to conserve the land for public use as open space. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. CPA-2018-0005: 46352.9052, 46352.9014, 46351.9049, 46351.9005, 46354.9127 (Parcel numbers were updated). Located south of the intersection of Progress Road and Forker Road; further located in Section 35 of Township 26, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2018-0006: Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west of the intersection of Trent Avenue (SR 290) and Lillian Road; further located in the north half of Section 1, Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2018-0007: 35233.9191; 35233.9192; 35233.9176; 35233.0513; 35233.0709; 35233M710; 35233.0604; 35233.0605; 35233.0606; 35233.0607; 35233.0608; 35233.0609 and 35233.0505; addressed as 4418 East 8tr, Avenue; located at the SE corner of 8th Avenue and Havana Street; further located in the north half of the SW quarter of Section 23, Township 25, Range 43, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? Yes. The general Sewer Service Area?Yes. Priority Sewer Service Area?Yes. (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) 1 Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). Not applicable. 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 3 of Sl'ikane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley. 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. Not applicable. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? Not applicable. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Not applicable. a. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential im after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 2. pacts. Not applicable. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS applicable. 2) Earth a. General descriptio�of the site (check ane):❑ flat,❑ rolling, ❑hilly, ❑ steep slopes, mountainous, other Each amendment site has its own unique characteristics ranging from rolling to steep slopes. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Unknown. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Not applicable. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? Not applicable. If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. Not applicable. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of S�,7kne SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR 11' AGENCY USE ONLY PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of po�,n+ kar► SEPA CHECKLIST �.Valley. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: At the time of future development, all grading activities will be reviewed per the City of Spokane Valley's Street Standards (SVSS). EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 3) Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that mayaffect your proposal? Not applicable, If so, generally describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable. 4) Water a. Surface: 1) is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There is a Type F stream located northwest of the proposed amendment CPA-201 B- 0005. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans, Not applicable. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Not applicable. Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. PL-22 V1,0 Page 6 of Spokane SEPA CHECK!',IST . ' alley. Standards 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location (SUSS). on the site plan. 6) Yes, CPA-2018-0005. The property is within a 100-year floodplain pursuant to Community Panel No. 53063C0579D of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) [Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 6, 2010]. Yes, CPA-2018-0007. The property is within a 100-year floodplain pursuant to Community Panel No. 53063C0563D and 53063C0564D of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) [Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 6, 2010]. 7) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? Not applicable. If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Not applicable. Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not applicable. c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Not applicable. Will this water flow into other waters? Not applicable. If so, describe. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: At the time of future development, all grading activities will be reviewed per the City of Spokane Valley's Street PL-22 V1.0 Page 7 of Sli'okale EVALUATION FOR SANMPtlIST valley. Jr' Plants EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: n deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs Q grass • pasture — crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ▪ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ❑ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not applicable. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not applicable. 6) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: H mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. c. Is the site part of a migration route? Not applicable. If so, explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of Sp�7rkarie SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley 6). Energy and natural resources EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed projects energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? Not applicable. List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? Not applicable. If so, describe 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Not applicable. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if arty: Not applicable. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Not applicable. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley. EVALUATION FOR 8). Land and shoreline useAGENCY USE ONLY a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? CPA-2018-0005 is vacant property. It is surrounding by vacant land and single family residences. CPA-2018-0006 has a newly developed building for office and warehousing use. Similar uses exist to the west. Single family residences are located to the north and east. Trent Avenue (SR 290) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway is located to the south. CPA-2018-0007: The property has an office building and several warehouse buildings with the majority of the area vacant. The site is owned by the Spokane Conservation District and currently not occupied. Surrounding properties consist of a mix of single family and multifamily uses. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? Unknown. If so, describe. c. Describe any structures on the site. CPA-2018-0005: None. CPA-2018-0006: 9,375 square foot commercial structure built for office and warehouse use. CPA-2018-0007: Approximately 7,000 square feet of commercial buildings built in 2003 according to the Spokane County Assessor's Office parcel data. d. Will any structures be demolished? Unknown. If so, what? e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? CPA-2018-0005: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) CPA-2018-0006: Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) and Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) CPA-2018-0007: Multifamily Residential (MFR) f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? CPA-2018-0005: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Single Family Residential (SFR) CPA-2018-0006: Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) and Single Family Residential (SFR) CPA-2018-0007: Multifamily Residential (MFR) PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of Butane SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? None of the proposals are located within the shoreline designation. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. CPA-2018-0007 is located within a 100 year Floodplain. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not applicable. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not applicable. 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Not applicable. Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10). Aesthetics a, What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1,0 Page 10 of 14 Wane SEPA CHECKLIST _Valley. 11). Light and glare EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce?What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are no designated or informal recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity of each amendment. CPA-2018- 0007 will designate additional parks and open space for recreation uses. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? No If so, describe. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? None known. If so, generally describe. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. CPA-2018-0005: Is located adjacent to Progress Road. CPA-2018-0006: Is located adjacent to Trent Avenue (SR-290). CPA-2018-0007: Is located adjacent to 8t" Avenue. PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 13.115 Si o1 SEPA CHECKLIST ►401e,' b. Is site currently served by public transit? Yes. If not, what is the EVALUATION FOR approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? AGENCY USE ONLY c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? Not applicable. If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? Not applicable. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: At the time of future development transportation will be reviewed per the City of Spokane Valley's Street Standards (SVSS). 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? The CPA is a non-project action. There are services in the vicinity and anticipated to be available at the time of development. If so, generally describe. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable. 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: nn electricity, n natural gaswater, refuse service, ri telephon b •sanitary SE Wer, septic sy'stem, ❑l ther- describe b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of 15 Arlon SEPA CHECKLIST C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make Its decision. C� Signature: / A -� Date Submitted: "{ ( ti D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal,would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? It is anticipated as the sites develop impacts will be mitigated through the City's regulations and outside entities with jurisdiction. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: To be determined at time of development How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? It is not anticipated any site development will affect vegetation or habitats of any kind. Specifically CPA-2018-0008 intent for a zoning designation of parks and open space JPIOS) is to preserve and protect vegetation and animal habitats. b. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: To be determined at time of development. 2. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? It is not anticipated development of any kind would be likely to deplete energy or natural resources. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourcesare: To be determined at time of development. 3. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? It is not anticipated development would affect environmental sensitive areas, however protect and follow established critical area regulations within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. PL-22 V1.o Page 13 of 15 Mane011/\■..., SEPA CHECKLIST ,��alley. a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: To be determined at time of development. 4. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? it is not anticipated development would affect land and shoreline uses, however protect and follow established regulations within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: To be determined at time of development. 5. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? It is not anticipated development would increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities. Any impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon the regulations within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: To be determined at time of development. 6. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. It is not anticipated the proposal will conflict with local,state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this check list. Date: VD-1 . 11 Signature: Please print or type: Proponent: Karen Kendall, Planner, City of Spokane Valley Community & Public Works Department Address: 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: (509) 720-5026 Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Address: Phone: PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of 15 EXHIBIT 6 i ........:. . .. COMMUNITY,&iPUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCI�'Y OF _- �, pot arse DETI NATION of NQN Sig- mpoc Valley. 10210 EaSpragenue•SpokaneValley WA 99206509 720 5000 Fax:.599.7203075 planning@sOokaneualiey org FILE NUMBER: CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: City initiated non-project actions associated with the City's annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle. The City inadvertently bisected various parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 major update; the CPA action will correct the error as follows: 1. CPA-2018-0005: Proposal to expand Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel and 2. CPA-2018.0006: Proposal to expand Industrial Mixed Use(IMU)designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel. PERSON COMPLETING CHECKLIST:Karen Kendall,Planner;City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley; 102I0 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 PROPOSAL LOCATION: 1. CPA-2018-0005:Parcels 46352.9052,46352.9014,46351.9049,46351.9005,46354.9127. Located south of the intersection of Progress Road and Forker Road; further located in Section 35 of Township 26,Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington 2. CPA-2018-0006: Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west of the intersection of Trent Avenue (SR 290) and Lillian Road; further located in the north half of Section 1,Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the SVMC, the lead agency for this proposal has determined that it 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). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead. agency. This information is available to the public on request. DETERMINATION: This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date issued. STAFF CONTACT: Karen Kendall,Planner, City of Spokane Valley Community and Public Works Department; 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509) 720-5026/FX(509) 720-5075, kkendall@spokanevalley.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner, City of Spokane Valley Community and Public Works Department; 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509)720- 5335/FX (509) 720-5075, Lbarlow0,spokanevalley.org City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 oft File No. CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 DATE ISSUED: February 2, 2018 SIGNATURE: APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community & Public Works Department within fourteen (14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and specific factual objections made to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC) 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Schedule shall be paid at the time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination_ City of Spokane Valley February 2,2038 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 2 oft File No.CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 crtr /� Spokane ,l 'illey COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Building and Planning Division 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720,5000♦ Fax:509320,5075 41 eityhall@spokanevalley.org LEAD AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW DATE: February 2,2018 A. BACKGROUND 1. PROJECT NUMBER: CPA-2018-0005 &CPA-2018-0006 (CPA-2018-0007—withdrawn) 2. DESCRIPTION: Non-project actions associated with the City's annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle. The City initiated three comprehensive plan amendments. Two of the non-project actions are due to the City inadvertently bisecting the parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 major update and the CPA action will correct the enor. The remaining amendment was to designate Conservation District Owned properties as parks and open space. (See below): CPA-2018-0005: Proposal to expand Neighborhood Commercial (NC) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel;and CPA-2018-0006: Proposal to expand Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel. CPA-2018-0007: Proposal to change comprehensive plan designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential (MFR)to Parks and Open Space (P/OS). Withdrawn by the City-not included in Environmental Review 3. PERSON COMPLETING Karen Kendall, Planner; City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague CHECKLIST: Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 4. APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 5. OWNER: CPA-2018-0005: Five Fifty,LLC CPA-2018-0006: MPR Spokane LLC 6. LOCATION: CPA-2018-0005: Parcels 46352.9052, 46352.9014, 46351.9049, 46351.9005, 46354.9127. Located south of the intersection of Progress Road and Porker Road; further located in Section 35 of Township 26, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2018-0006: Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west of the intersection of Trent Avenue(SR 290) and Lillian Road; further located in the north half of Section 1, Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of 4 CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 REVIEW OF SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONS OF SECTION 14 OF PART A (BACKGROUND) FOR CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREA(CARA)/AQUIFER SENSITIVE AREA(ASA) The entire City of Spokane Valley lies in the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area(CARA). The proposed site- specific comprehensive plan map amendment will not lead to any impacts to the aquifer. No concerns noted. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1.EARTH The topography at each of the sites has its own unique characteristics ranging from rolling to steep slopes. All future development proposals will be reviewed for consistency with the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, Regional Stormwater Manual and any relevant critical areas regulations. No concerns noted. 2.AIR This is a non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and consistent with Spokane Regional Clean Air Authority requirements to minimize air impacts. No concerns noted. 3.WATER Surface The SEPA Checklist states CPA-2018-0005 has a Type F stream located in the northwest portion of the site. Additionally, CPA-2018-0005 is located within a 100-year floodplain pursuant to Panel No. 53063C0579D of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) [Federal Emergency Management Agency, July 6, 2010). CPA-2018-0006 is not located near a surface water nor located in a 100-year floodplain. All conditions currently exist on the site. The designations proposed to be expanded to eliminate the bisected zoning will not create additional impacts. No concerns noted. Ground The non-project action has no impact on ground water; future development consistent with the zoning will adhere to regulations. No concerns noted. Water Runoff No future impacts are anticipated as a result of this non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Regional Stormwater Manual. No concerns noted. 4.PLANTS The non-project map amendment will have no effect on existing plants. Any impacts associated with future development proposals will be reviewed to identify site conditions and appropriately mitigated. No concerns noted. No concerns noted. 5.ANIMALS The non-project map amendment will have no effect on existing fish and wildlife conditions. Future development will be reviewed for potential impacts on wildlife habitat and mitigated as necessary. No concerns noted. 6.ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES Staff notes the proposal is a non-project map amendment and utility approvals will be required at the time of building permit review.No concerns noted. City of Spokane Valley February 2,2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 2 of 4 CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 7A.ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARDS The proposal is a non-project map amendment. No health hazards are anticipated as a result of the land use designation amendment or with future development.No concerns noted. 7B.NOISE The Checklist states this is a non-project map amendment.No concerns noted. 8.SHORELINE AND LAND USES CPA-2018-0005 is vacant property. It is surrounding by vacant land and single family residences. CPA-2018-0006 has a newly developed building for office and warehousing use. Similar uses exist to the west. Single family residences are located to the north and east. Trent Avenue (SR 290) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway is located to the south. Future development will adhere to applicable zoning regulations ensuring compatibility with the existing land use. No concerns noted 9.HOUSING This is a non-project map amendment. No concerns noted. 10.AESTHETICS This is a non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. No concerns noted. 11.LIGHT AND GLARE This is a non-project map amendment. All future development will be constructed to standards established in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. No concerns noted. 12.RECREATION The slight adjustment to the land use designation is not expected to have any impacts on existing recreational facilities or future needs.. No concerns noted. 13.CULTURAL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION The SEPA Checklist states that it is unknown at this time. No historic or cultural sites are known to be in the vicinity of the subject areas. No concerns noted. 14.TRANSPORTATION This is a non-project map amendment. CPA-2018-0005 is adjacent to Progress Road, CPA-2018-0006 is adjacent to Trent Avenue.No concerns noted. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES 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. The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) provides public transit service within the City of Spokane Valley. All properties included in the city initiated map amendment are located within the boundaries of the East Valley School District #361. Adequate services are available to all sites. No concerns noted. 16.UTILITIES City of Spokane Valley February 2, 2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 3 of 4 CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 The subject's property is located within the service boundaries of Spokane County Environmental Services and Trent Wood 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. No concerns noted. REVIEW OF SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS The non-project review is a tool to help the lead agency evaluate the environmental consequences of a non-project proposal and to provide information to decision-makers and the public. After reviewing the supplemental sheet for non-project actions, the City has determined the proposed amendment is not likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. There are no significant changes in land use, density, or the built environment anticipated as a direct result of the adoption of the comprehensive plan amendments. If adopted, the comprehensive plan amendments will mitigate adverse impacts on the environment on a project-specific basis. Furthermore, proposed projects resulting from these amendments must comply with all applicable regulations. City of Spokane Valley February 2, 2018 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 4 of 4 CPA-2018-0005&CPA-2018-0006 EXHIBIT 7 COMMUNITY &PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT nF n�3 PLANNING DIVISION SCITp® i�4+ OF PUBLIC HEARING Vall ® NOTICE 10210 East Sprague Avenue• Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5000 •Fax:509.720.5075 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org Date of Notice: February 7, 2018 Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.120,Notice of Public Hearing, the Planning Division is sending notice to all property owners withm 800 feet of the subject property. Public Hearing Date and Time: February 22,2018,beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, City Hall Project Number: CPA-2018-0006 Application Description: This is a non-project action associated with the City's annual comprehensive plan amendment (CPA) cycle. This City initiated non- proj ect action is due to the City inadvertently bisecting the parcels with land use designations/zoning during the 2016 major update,and the CPA action will correct the error. The proposal is to expand the Industrial Mixed Use(MU)designation and zoning to eliminate split zoning of the parcel currently designated as Single Family Residential(SFR)and zoned Single Family Residential Urban District(R-3). Location: Parcel 45015.1409, addressed as 16205 East Trent Avenue; located 490 feet west of the intersection of Trent Avenue(SR 290) and Lillian Road; further located in the north half of Section 1,Township 25,Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Applicant(s): City of Spokane Valley; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Owner(s): MPR Spokane LLC Staff Contact: Karen Kendall,Planner (509)720-5026 kkendall@spokanevalley.org Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to the Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical,hearing,or other impairments,please contact the City Clerk at(509)720-5000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. A staff report will be available for inspection seven(7)calendar days before the hearing at the Community &Public Works Department,located at the Spokane Valley City Hall 10210 East Sprague Avenue,between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm,Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Send written comments to the Spokane Valley Community&Public Works Department. Comprehensive Plan Map Study Area] 45015.1409 16205 E TRENT AVE • E Trent Ave J CPA-2018-0006 Request; o�Ta� Owner: MPR Spokane, LLC = a� Parcelk See Map City initiated proposal to expand Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation 100101* V Address: See Map and zoning to eliminate split zoning of parcel EXHIBIT 8 Karen Kendall From: Chad Riggs Sent: Monday, January 8, 2018 7:33 AM To: Karen Kendall Subject: RE: Request for Comments - CPA-2018-0005 to 0008 Karen, DE does not have any comments for the CPA-2018-0005 to 0008 SEPA. Please check with Ray to verify he is ok with traffic review to be completed at time of development. Thank you, Chad Riggs, P.E. I Senior Engineer 10210 E. Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509)720-5033 I criggs(aspokanevalley.or'g nn'�� � -T This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act,Chapter 42.56 RCW. From: Karen Kendall Sent:Thursday,January 4, 2018 5:04 PM To: 'Avista Dave Byus' <dave.byus@avistacorp.com>; 'Central Valley School District#356' <jrowell@cvsd,org>; 'CenturyLink' <Karen.Stoddard@centurylink.com>; 'Chris Johnston'<crjohnston@spokanesheriff.org>; 'Chris Knudson' <CKnudson@spokanecounty.org>; 'Cindy Anderson (cyan461@ecy.wa.gov)' <cyan461@ecy.wa.gov>; 'City of Liberty Lake'<atainio@libertylakewa.gov>; 'City of Spokane Tirrell Black'<tblack@spokanecity.org>; 'Colin Depner` <CDEPNER@spokanecounty,org>; 'Comcast'<bryan_richardson@cable.comcast.com>; 'Consolidated Irrigation District #19'<consolidatedirrigation@comcast.net>; Doug Powell<dpowell@spokanevalley.org>; 'East Spokane Water District #1' <distl@comcast.net>; 'East Valley School District#361'<smithL0@evsd.org>; 'Environmental Services Judy Green' <jagreen@spokanecounty.org>; 'Inland Power& Light'<connien@inlandpower.com>; 'Jacob McCann (Jmca461@ecy.wa.gov)'<Jmca461@ecy.wa.gov>; Mary Moore<mmoore@spokanevalley.org>; 'Mike Makela' <MakelaM@spokanevalleyfire.com>; Mike Stone<mstone@spokanevalley.org>; 'Model Irrigation District#18' <jim@modirr.org>; 'Modern Electric Water Company' <modern@mewco.com>; 'Patnode, Brian (PARKS)' <Brian.Patnode@PARKS.WA.GOV>; 'Randy Myhre' <Randy.myhre@avistacorp.com>; 'Spokane Aquifer Joint Board' <info@spokaneaquifer.org>; 'Spokane County Fire District#8'<bwalkup@scfd8.org>; 'Spokane County Planning& Building' <jpederson@spokanecounty.org>; 'Spokane County Utilities' <jred@spokanecounty.org>; 'Spokane County Water District#3' <scwd3@comcast.net>; 'Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency'<awestby@spokanecleanair.org>; 'Spokane Regional Health District'<psavage@srhd.org>; 'Spokane Regional Transportation Council' <rstewart@SRTC.org>; 'Spokane Transit Authority' <kotterstrom@spokanetransit.com>; 'Spokane Tribe of Indians' <randya@spokanetribe.com>; 'Tom Richardson City of Millwood' <tom.richardson@millwoodwa.us>; 'Traci Harvey, Spokane Valley Fire Dept No. 1'<HarveyT@spokanevalleyfire.com>; 'Vera Water& Power' <kwells@verawaterandpower.com>; 'WA Commerce'<reviewteam @commerce.wa.gov>; 'WA Dept of Arch and Hist Preservation '<Gretchen.Kaehler@DAHP.wa.gov>; 'WA Ecology, Olympia'<sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov>; 'WA Fish&Wildlife' <SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; 'WA Natural Resources' <northeast.region@dnr.wa.gov>; 'WA Parks' <Chris.guidotti@parks.wa.gov>; 'WA Transportation' <FiggG @wsdot.wa.gov>; 'West Valley School District#363' <brian.liberg@wvsd.org>; Ray Wright<rwright@spokanevalley.org>; 'planning@millwoodwa.us' 1 <planning@millwoodwa.us>; Chad Riggs<criggs@spokanevailey.org> Cc: Lori Barlow<lbarlow@spokanevalley.org> Subject: Request for Comments-CPA-2018-0005 to 0008 All, Please review the attached Environmental Checklist and associated materials for the following:project: Project Name: City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment File#: CPA-2018-0005 Parcels: 46351.9049; 46351.9005 and 46352.9027 Project Name: City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment File #: CPA-2018-0006 Parcel:45015.1409 Project Name: City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment File #: CPA-2018-0007 Parcels: 35233.9191; 35233.9192; 35233.9176; 35233.0513; 35233.0709; 35233.0710; 35233.0604; 35233.0605; 35233.0606; 35233.0607; 35233.0608; 35233.0609 and 35233.0505 Please submit written comments to me via email, or mail, by January 19, 2018 @ 5:00 p.m.. My contact information is listed below and noted on the attached documents. Thank you. Karen Kendall I Planner 10210 E.Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley,WA 99206 (509)720-5026 i kkendall@spokanevalley.org *rika4°1111\ Ma11ey• This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act,chapter 42.56 RCW. 2 Karen Kendall From: Ray Wright Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 2:34 PM To: Karen Kendall Subject: CPA-2018-0005 &0006 Karen: Traffic has reviewed CPA-2018-0005 and 0006 and determined that no traffic analysis is required for these proposed changes. Thank you for the opportunity to comment, Ray Wright, PE Senior Engineer, Traffic ,.fie 4,00* 1k 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley,WA 99206 rwright@spokanevallev.orq (509) 720-5019 • • 1 Karen Kendall From: Red, Jim <JRed©spokanecounty.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 1:06 PM To: Karen Kendall Subject: Project: CPA-2018-0006 Attachments: r PA Comments.rtf 1 To: Karen Kendall (City of Spokane Valley- Community Development) CC: From: Jim Red (Spokane County - Environmental Services Dept) Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 Planning/Building #: Subject: CPA-2018-0006 Stage: Comprehensive Phase: Expand NC desig/ Elimate split parcel Address: AOO1 Sewer requrirements will be addressed as the property is developed. ATTACHMENT 7 - 10 APPROVED Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall February 8,2018 I. Vice Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:07 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: James Johnson Cary Driskell,City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Tim Kelley Lori Barlow,Senior Planner Mike Phillips Karen Kendall, Planner Michelle Rasmussen,absent—excused Mieki Harnois, Planner Suzanne Stathos Marty Palaniuk, Planner Matt Walton Deanna Horton, Secretary for the Commission Commissioner Walton moved to excuse Commissioner Rasmussen from the meeting The vole on this motion was six in fervor, zero against and the motion passed. II. AGENDA: Commissioner Walton moved to accept the February 08, 2018 agenda as presented. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero-against and the motion passed. III. MINUTES: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the January 11,2018 minutes as presented. The vote on this motion was six in favor,zero against, and the motion parsed Commission Walton moved to approve the January 25,2018 minutes as presented. The vote on this motion was six in favor, zero against and this motion passed IV. COMMISSION REPORTS;The Commissioners had no reports. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no administrative report. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Continued Public Hearing, CTA-2017-2005, A proposed amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Title 22, SVMC 19.60.050, SVMC 17.89.030 and Appendix A to update wireless facility regulations to address siting of small cell wireless facilities within the public rights-of-way, Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb stated the Commission continued the hearing from January 25,2018. Mr.Lamb answered some of the questions raised at that meeting: • Can the City require a specific distance between new poles? Mr. Lamb said this was feasible.The industry suggested this could prove problematic the more people who entered the market. The industry said the distance requirement could make it difficult to find a location which worked with the technology. • Can the City require the providers to co-locate? Mr. Lamb said legally the City could require co-location however some of the utility companies do not allow it. He noted sonic of the technology doesn't work if there is more than one provider on the same pole • Can the City require a minimum height for equipment location? Mr. lamb said to the extent that it doesn't interfere with the technology.A minimum height of 20 feet would not pose a problem, but a higher level,above 60-80 feet,may cause issues from a technology standpoint. • Can the City require the ground base facilities to be buried? Mr. Lamb stated legally the City could require it, although there a practical considerations. The industry provided a significant number of comments regarding how detrimental to the equipment ungrounding can be. 2(1!ii.O2-08 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 ot'S • Can the City require providers to transmit from the small cell to the macro cell via fiber? Mr. Lamb said the City cannot regulate the technology. By requiring the method of transmission,we would be regulating their technology. • There were questions regarding radiation levels, type of bandwidth, possible impacts on people,Mr.Lamb said under federal law we cannot regulate based on type of signal,which would he regulating the technology. Ile said these items are regulated by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC)and as long as the equipment meets FCC criteria the City cannot regulate them. • The Commission requested crime statistics on ground based facilities, Mr. Lamb said according to the industry comments these structures do not have an impact on crime. • Could the City tax wireless facilities? Mr. I..amb said the City already has a tax on telephone/wireless. l le said cities can do this under federal law, however we cannot tax the data. • Could the City require the provider to submit an engineering certification of the pole structures? Mr. Lamb said the City could require this, Ile said this relates to the public safety of facilities placed in the right-of-way. While the City does not have any pole standards, the utility companies do. The providers would already be supplying this information to the utility providers so it would not hurt to ask for a copy of it with the application. • Who is responsible for the cost of relocation of poles with small cell facilities on them? Mr.Lamb stated the cost of relocation is the responsibility of the party making the request. Relocation costs are the responsibility of the utility company if it a capital project. Relocations cost are the responsibility of the developer when it is a private development, • Is line of site a problem? Mr. Lamb said according to testimony at the last meeting, line of site was not an issue, Ile said in Spokane Valley the topography does not pose a problem because of the nature of the valley. The City does not have issues similar to downtown Seattle with all the hillsides and buildings. Industry has representatives who can provide more clarification. Mr. Lamb said staff and the Commission received comments at the last meeting from the industry providers. He has reviewed them and offered comments on some of the topics which were brought up. • The industry requested to have the undergrounding facilities requirement removed. Mr. Lamb said legally the City can require it. However,there are considerations due to the size of the vaults, vault safety and location,as pictures supplied by the vendors showed. • The industry requested removing the requirement for co-location or a minimum distance between new poles. Mr. Launb said staff does not see an issue with those requirements. The industry commented it would hinder the last company into the market. The Commissioners expressed concern someone's house may have 3, 4 or 5 poles placed in front of it, Mr. Lamb offered that.in front of city hall there is a pole on the edge of-City I tall property and another existing pole 20-30 feet away. • The industry requested shortening the permit. processing time from 60 to 30 days. Mr. Lamb said 60 days is required under state and federal law. The City's permit processing time is much shorter than that,however he recommends keeping 60 days. • T-Mobile requested the City allow a unified camouflage design, Mr.Lamb said this would be facility that houses both the antenna and control equipment in one enclosure. T-Mobile has suggested a unit which would not be bigger than six cubic feet. This is smaller in size than the size of the antenna and control box together. Mr.Lamb said this was a reasonable request and the Commission could consider this, however staff suggested a name change to limit confusion. ▪ The industry requested allowing small cell facilities within city parks. Mr.Lamb said given the size of our parks and their proximity the right-of-way there is no need for a facility in the park. The City has been working to clean up the overhead in its parks. It would be inappropriate to allow small cell facilities within the boundaries of the park. • • 2018-02-08 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 • The industry requested increasing the height of the electric transmissions structure from 50 to 60 feet. Mr. Lamb stated this related to the large macro-poles and he recommended not making this change. • The industry requested increasing the allowable deviation before an action is viewed as a substantial change. Mr. Lamb said this is the amount of deviation allowed before a Conditional Use Permit is required. He said the City regulations are relatively flexible and open,he would not recommend this change. Commissioner Johnson and Phillips expressed concerns regarding the requirement for private developer paying to move of the utility pole when there is a private development. Commissioner Johnson shared his fear that line of site could pose a problem when a now building is erected, Mr. Lamb said it Is the responsibility the carriers to determine it' their equipment was able to communicate. Vice-chair Johnson asked for public comment Joel Aro,Links Consulting for Verizon. Mr.Are said he was addressing a couple of questions • which arose. Ile stated there are naturally occurring gases in an underground vault. The equipment contained in the vault does not emit any kind of gas. He commented how damaged the equipment becomes if it is required to be buried. He requests the City eliminate this requirement. Commissioner Walton asked for the size of'the ground cabinet Verizon uses. Mr. Aro said he did not have the specifications with him. Mr.Aro said it would be the responsibility of the ruder for making sure that they have communication with their own facilities. Commissioner Johnson confirmed Verizon prefers fiber and that extensive damage, as shown in Verizon'c comment is caused by putting the equipment underground Steven Burke, Mobilitie, Coeur d'Alene ID: Mr. Burke said he felt the legal department had done a good job with the regulations and he wanted to encourage the Planning Commission to forward them to the City Council. He stated Mobilitie has a contained antenna and control equipment in one unit, He said crime will be difficult stating that Arista and CenturyLink require equipment to be ten feet off the ground. Mr. Burke said with enough notice his company would move their own equipment. City Attorney Cary Driskell clarified how Washington stale statutes regulates who pays to move a utility pole located in the right-of-way, He said under the statute if the City is doing a capital project.and utility pole needs to be moved,the cost is on the utility company. It is being moved for the public benefit. The Utility Trade Commission(UTC) has imposed tariff on utility rates which pays for these moves. The UTC determined that the person making the request pays for the movement. It it is a private development,then the developer pays. Commissioner Walton asked how many sites each of the carriers present were looking to deploy, Steven Burke for Mobilitie stated they had six, Mr.Aro stated Verizon was looking at three at this time. Commissioner Stathos confirmed the equipment would be labeled for safety as required • Dennis Crapo,Spokane Volley: Mr. Crapo stated he wanted the Commission to be aware of the unintended consequences of allowing more poles in the right-of-way. He said it would set a precedence,and could keep someone from being able to develop a property. Seeing no one else who wished to testify, Vice-Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 6:54 p.rrr. Mr. Lamb suggested the Commission begin with the proposed amendments which were presented at the January 25 meeting. Then move to the proposed changes to that proposal: + the 20 foot minimum height requirement, • the facilities must be buried in the ground unless technically infeasible, 20i8-02-0$Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of5 • not located within a certain number of feet (currently bracketed with 250 in this holding spot) of other small cell facilities unless the applicant demonstrates that no other location can accommodate or is sufficient to meet the wireless service needs, • if the provider cannot meet the 250-foot distance, then they must make an attempt to co- locate unless they demonstrate a reason why it is not possible. Mr.Lamb addressed the public comment which said that this could set a precedence. He said cities, tinder state and federal law, are required to allow facilities to locate within the right-of-way. 'l'he City cannot preclude them, which was the reason for the amendment. Mr. Lamb confirmed facilities can locate on private property, but it requires an agreement with that private property owner allowing a recorded casement. The Commission began deliberations of the issues which had been presented for change to the proposed amendment. Commissioners agreed to add a 250-foot distance requirement between facilities. They felt if the industry could demonstrate the problem of locating at this distance,they • can change it, The Commissioners agreed to add the requirement for co-location, if it was at all feasible, The Commissioners discussed requiring a 20-foot height minimum and agreed to this addition, Then the Commissioners moved to the requirement of undcrgrounding the control equipment. After their discussion the Coimttissioners agreed to adding this language as well. There was a consensus that requiring transmission by fiber would not be added, because the City cannot regulate the technology. Commissioners agreed to adding the requirement of engineering certification for the pole. Commissioner Johnson felt parcels with a 50-foot frontage should be exempt from new poles. Commissioner Phillips said he feels the carrier should have to pay to move any utilities. Mr. Lamb said from practical standpoint he was not sure how the City would be able to enforce it. Commissioner Walton confirmed there is no public comment or noticing regarding installation of a new utility pole. Mr. Lamb asked how the Conlnlissiorl felt about reducing the permit processing timeline from 60-days.The Commissioners agreed to leave the 60-day time line. The Commissioners agreed to allow for a combined enclosure which might be a bit bigger than the allowable size for the antenna alone. The Commissioners agreed they did not want to allow small cell facilities in City parks. The Commissioners agreed not to change the height limitations on electrical transmission towers. The Commissioners agreed to not change the deviation standards. Mr. Lamb said the Commission should make a motion to approve the changes presented on January 25 along with the changes which were discussed tonight which include:a 250-foot separation along with the co-location requirement,a minimum height of 20-feet, retain the existing language on the ground vaults, addition of a structural engineer certification with the application, and allowing unified camouflage facility with a different term as part of those changes. Commissioner Walton moved to recominemito the City Council the proposed amendment with the changes which had been had been recorded by the Deputy City Attorney. The vole on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed, Senior Planner Lori Barlow suggested changing the agenda to move the Comprehensive Plan study session ahead of the Open Space discussion due to the number of people in attendance who were interested in the topics. Commission gave consensus to proceed. ii. Study Session— 2018 Comprehensive Plan amendments: Ms. Barlow presented an overview of the Comprehensive Plan process. She explained there were • originally four privately initiated requests and three City initiated amendments. She explained after the docket was approved, one of the privately initiated amendments was withdrawn, One City initiated amendments was also withdrawn, After conversations with the property owner they requested the City hold off making the proposed change while they develop their plan for the property. Planner Micki Harnois explained CPA-2018-0001. The property is located approximately 300 feet east of Pines Road on Valleyway Ave. The request is the change three parcels of approximately two acres from Single Family Residential and R-3 zoning to Multifamily Comprehensive Plan designation and toning. The site is surrounded by multifamily designation to the north and south and Corridor Mixed Use to the west of the property. There have been no comments received for this amendment. 2111a-02.O1i Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 Ms. Harnois reminded the Commissioners that CPA-2018-0002 had been withdrawn by the property owner. Planner Marty Palaniuk explained CPA-2018-0003 is located atlowdish rind Sands Roads. The request is to change the Single Family designation and R-2 zoning to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). CMU designation located across the railroad tracks and Dishman Mica Road. He said the lot was created after a subdivision of the property in 2010, which divided the properly for several single family lots on the south side oldie original lot.This lot was created as a drainage easement which has been dedicated to the City. The property is surrounded on three sides by a single family residential and the railroad tracks to the north, The property borders Chester Creek, is located in a floodplain, has a Type F stream, a biologist has reported there are no wetlands on the site. Commissioner Walton asked if the property would have been allowed to be divided if the drainage easement had not been a part of it, Mr.Palaniuk stated he would have to defer to engineers an answer. Mr.Palaniuk stated the Commissioners already had any comment which was provided up to the time of mailing the packet. Any comments received since then had been provided to the Commissioners that evening. Mr. Palaniuk discussed CPA-2018-0004 is located at the corner of 7`h Avenue and University Road. The request is to change the designation from Single Family Residential and R-3 zoning to Neighborhood Commercial, He explained the subject parcel abutted another property owned by the same property owner, which was changed to Neighborhood Commercial during the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update. Mr. Palaniuk said the property was surrounded on other sides by single family. The site is bordered by University Road which is a minor arterial. Mr, Palaniuk said the Commissioners had any continents staff have received. Planner Karen Kendall was beginning her discussion of CPA-2018-0005,when Commissioner Phillips recused himself regarding this amendment, and left the council chambers. The City initiated amendments are both correcting mapping errors. The property for CPA-2018-0005 is located at the corner of Progress and Porker Road. The parcels arc split between Neighborhood Commercial and Single. Family Residential. 'l"hc amendment is to designate the north and cast edge of one parcel as Neighborhood Commercial and another along the BPA easement, Commissioner Stathos commented the area could not handle any more traffic if it was developed. Ms. Kendall explained the change proposed for CPA-2018-0006. The property is located on Trent Avenue approximately one and one half mile east of Sullivan. The parcel is developed and there is a stormwater swale along the 15 feet to be rezoned. The parcel is split zoned with the 15 feet on the east side of this parcel is zoned Single Family Residential while the rest is Industrial Mixed Use. The proposed change is to zone the easterly side Industrial Mixed Use, The next step is the public hearing which is scheduled for February 22,2018. iii. Study Session,Open Space requirements in Mixed Use zones. The Commission agreed to postpone the discussion of open space requirements to another meeting. VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the good of the order. IX. ADJOURNMENT:Commissioner Walton moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:35 p.m. The vole on the motion was unanimous in favor, the'notion passed. - f L �1 Michelle Rasmussen,Chair Date signed t4 A/2a—WthiThi Deanna Horton,Secretary Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall February 22,2018 I. Chair Rasmussen called the meeting to order at.6:03 p.m. Commissioners,staff and audience stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. Seeretniy Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson Cary Driskell,City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Eric Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Timothy Kelley Lori Barlow,Senior Planner Michelle Rasmussen Marty Palaniuk, Planner Matthew Walton Micki Hamois,Planner Suzanne Stathos, absent Karen Kendall, Planner Mike Phillips,absent Deanna Horton, Secretary of the Commission Mary Moore,Office Assistant Chair Rasmussen moved to excuse Commissioner Stathos and Commissioner Phillips from the meeting.The vote on this motion was five in favor,zero against and the motion passed. IT. Agenda: It was moved by Commissioner Johnson and seconded to approve the February 22, 2018 agenda as presented. The vote was five in•favor,zero against and the motion passed M. Minutes: It was moved by Commissioner Johnson and seconded to strike the February 8,2018 minutes from tonight's agenda. The vote on this motion was,fve in favor,zero against, and motion passed IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: 'There were no reports, V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no report. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: 'There was no comment, VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Findings of Fact CTA-2017-0005—Wireless Telecommunications Amendment Deputy City Attorney Erik. Lamb presented the Findings of Facts specifically identifying the modifications requested by Planning Commission for their approval as follows: a) Maintain a requirement for a separation for 250 ft, between small cell facilities. b) Maintain the requirement that if the separation is not possible, for applicants to make a good faith attempt to co-locate on the same pole. If co-location is not possible, new facilities within the 250 feet would be allowed. c) Maintain requirement that small cell facilities be located at least 20 ft. above grade unless technically infeasible. d) Maintain requirement for providers to bury or integrate facilities into surrounding unless technically unfeasible. e) Add a requirement that the applicant provide evidence that the small cell facility design wilt not impact the structural integrity of the utility pole on which it is placed f) Add allowance for "unified design enclosure" to allow combined antenna and equipment enclosure of up to six cubic feet in volume in lieu of separate antenna and equipment enclosures. g) Make such other minor grammatical and minor corrections recommended from the public comments. Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the Findings of Fact fire CTA-2017-0005• The vote on this motion was five in,favor, zero against and the motion passed. ii, Public Hearing: 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, 02-22-2018 Pinning Commission Minutes Page 2 of Senior Planner Lori Barlow gave a presentation to the Commission and audience,which introduced the 2018 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. She explained this meeting is for the Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing and to take public comments on the proposals. Ms. Barlow explained the findings of facts had been scheduled for March 8 but have been deferred • because of an appeal filed on the SEPA decision for CPA-2018-0003. She stated all Comprehensive Plan amendments arc required to submit a SEPA review, and a Determination of Non-Significance was issued for all with a comment and appeal period. During the 14l-day appeal period, an appeal was received for CPA-2018-0003, A hearing on the CFA-2018-0003 appeal is set for March 15,2018 in front of the l leaving Examiner and a decision is expected within a couple weeks thereafter. a. CPA-2018-0001 A privately Initiated Amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Laud Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) with a Single Family • Residential Urban District(R-3)zoning to a Multifamily Residential (MFR)designation with a Multifamily Residential (MFR)zoning. •• • Chair Michelle Rasmussen read the public hearing rules and opened the public hearing at 6:28 p.171. Planner Micki I larnois introduced Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2018-0001.This project site is 300 feet east of Valleyway and Pines Road. The applicant for this project is Robin Petrie who requests to change existing land use designation from Single Family Residential to Multifamily Residential and the zoning from R-3 to Multifamily Residential, Ms. 1larnois explained the differences between the two zones taking into consideration the land use and the zoning that exist near the sites and in this area. Ms. Hartwig said one comment had been received from the City's traffic engineer depending on future development,it would require a trip generation letter, The traffic engineer also stated that the capacity on the existing road would not be an issue. No public comments were received regarding this site, • • There were no questions from Commissioners • • • Chair Rasmussen opened the floor for public testimony: • Sarah Neelan, 12420 E Mansfield Ave. Apt 5.: Ms. Neelan said she was representing Steven •• Arsey who resides at 12522 E Valleyway. She said the area is an open space for all sorts of wildlife and to take that into account; and to please keep it rural and not urhan. Huss Peterson 12525 E Olive Ave.: Mr. Peterson described the area as single family homes and he feels the zoning being proposed is out of character. There were no further public cunnnentts and Chair Rasmussen closed public hearing,fur CPA 2018- (1001 at 6:37 pm. b. CFA-2018-0005 A City Initiated Amendment to expand Neighborhood Commercial(NC) designation and zoning to eliminate split designation of Neighborhood Commercial(NC) and Single Family Residential (SFR) and the associated zoning of NC and Single Family Residential Urban District(R-3) Chair Rasmussen opened the public hearing at 6:38p,777,for CTA-2018-0005 Planner Karen Kendall explained CPA-2018-0005 is a City initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment correcting a mapping error on the land use designations and zoning maps from the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update which split the zoning.The site is located in the Northeast corner of the City and is bordered to the north by Forker Road and Progress Road, which are both urban minor arterials. Ms.Kendall explained that the need to correct this mapping error is to expand the Neighborhood Commercial Designation and Zoning to eliminate the split zoning of the parcel.The current site is in a 100 year floodplain and there is a Conditional Letter of Map Revision application in the final review stages with FEMA to modify the boundaries of the floodplain. There is an 500 foot wide easement in the corner of the property that renis north/south and a Type F stream in the Northwest corner of the property. The correction will result in more appropriate boundaries of the Neighborhood Commercial land use designation and zoning and Single Family Residential land 02-22-2018 Planning Commission Minutes Pago 3 of 8 use designation and R-3 zoning.The City received comments from Public Works and the Spokane County Environmental Services, but no public continents. • There were no questions from Commissioners • Chair Rasmussen invited public testimony; there were no comments and Chair Rasmussen closed public testimony for CPA 2018-0005 at 6:43 p.m. h. CPA-2018-0005 A City Initiated Amendment to expand Industrial Mixed Use (IMU) designation and zoning to eliminate split designation of IMU and Single Family Residential(SFR)and the associated zoning of HMI and Single Family Residential Urban District(R-3) Chair Rasmussen Opened the public hearing at 6:48 p.m,far CPA-2018-0006 Planner Karen Kendall explained that CTA-2018-0006 corrects a mapping error that took place during the 2016 Annual Comprehensive Plan update.This site is located east of the intersection of • Trent Ave, and Sullivan Rd. The proposal is to expand the Industrial Mixed use designation and zoning which would eliminate the split zoning of the parcel. The area is 15 feet wide along the easterly side of the site.The 15 feet wide area to be included in the Industrial Mixed Use designation contains stormwater thci.lities that serve the existing development. The site is currently zoned Industrial Mixed Use and R-3. The amendment will coned a mapping error and will eliminate the • split zoning of the parcel. There were no public comments and Chair Rasmussen closed public irearingfor CPA 2016-0005 at 6;451r,H1. c. CPA-2018-0004 A Privately initiated Amendment request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3)to Neighborhood Commercial(NC) Chair Rasmussen Opened the public hearing at 6:46p.m,for CPA-2018-0004 Planner Marty Palaniuk presented CPA-2018-0004, explaining this is a privately initiated • amendment to change the land use designation from Single Family Residential and R-3 zoning to Neighborhood Commercial, The Neighborhood Commnercial designation is to provide neighborhood scale commercial development such as offices and retail that serve a neighborhood. This site is on the southeast corner of University Road and 7e Avenue. University is an arterial • street surrounded by Single Family Residential uses.The parcel adjacent to the proposed site was • changed in 2016 during the legislative Comprehensive Plan update to Neighborhood Commercial. if the amendment is approved it would also be designated as Neighborhood Commercial. During the legislative update,the City evaluated intersections along some of the arterials south of Sprague, and various parcels were re-designated in those neighborhoods as Neighborhood Commercial. Staff received comments from the City's Senior. Traffic Engineer who evaluated the intersections at 8th Avenue and University Road as well as 4th Avenue and University Road and he stated if intense development occurred, it would meet the level of service requirements. Staff received • public comments regarding traffic in and out of the site as well as traffic along 7"`and 8t' ' Avenues This property is pait of a plat from 1954 and some of the comments received have mentioned there were some covenants that could apply to the plat. Mr. Lamb explained the City Attorney's office received a letter regarding the covenants. The covenants would preclude business, commerce and industrial uses from operating on the site. however, with regard to restricted covenants, those are privately enforceable under Washington law. The Supreme Court has agreed that cities do not have authority to enforce private covenants. Citizens could seek a private action to preclude commercial, industrial or any other development. • We do allow single family residential under the neighborhood commercial so there is not a conflict. Commissioner Walton Neighborhood Commercial zones arc in Spokane Valley, Mr. Palaniuk • responded that stall'evaluated the arca of the City south of Sprague and at most of the arterial intersections of 86, 16th, 32nd Avenues, University, Evergreen and Sullivan Roads and designated 02-22-2018 Planning Commission Mules Page 4 of fi those as Neighborhood Commercial.This was done during the legislative update. Commissioner Johnson asked for some examples of a commercial business that would be allowed in the Neighborhood Commercial zone, Mr. Palaniuk responded some of the things the Permitted Use • • Matrix allows include retail, gas stations, medical office, and kennels. The intent is to provide •• neighborhood scale commercial uses to serve the neighborhood. Commissioner Rasmussen asked • how the City mitigates traffic problems. Mr. Palaniuk replied that any time development occurs; the City evaluates the traffic impact and may require a traffic impact analysis to identify improvements or restrictions to the proposed development. • Chair Rasmussen opened the public hearing on (.7'A- 2018-0004 at 6:58 pin. Ray Siebert, 10719 E. 8th Avenue: Mr. Siebert said that he is against changing the land east of University on 7th Avenue from Single Family Residential to Neighborhood Commercial. We have a protective covenant on the old Orchard Subdivision, which has been in effect since 1954. We • want to keep the covenant and keep this being a nice place to raise a family. The City illegally changed the property east.of University on 8"'Avenue to commercial when there was a protective covenant. Mr. Siebert stated the neighborhood had hired a lawyer to protect them if this change goes into effect. Jane Siebert, 10719 E 8th Avenue: Ms. Siebert said she is against the land change at 7111 Avenue and University Road. Shc said the property has a covenant and the municipal code states the City is supposed to follow them. She said she received a letter from the City Attorney stating the City has no authority under the Washington law to enforce or validate restricted covenants. By not enforcing the covenant, she said the City is definitely invalidating them.The covenant is binding unless by the majority of the residence owners agree to change them. There was a traffic analysis from the Senior.Traffic Engineer,which showed that there would he an additional 208 trips a day with this change. This much traffic would affect their neighborhood,property values will go down and it will increase crime. Ms. Seibert stated she does not feel the neighborhood was informed • well enough when the change to the parcel at 8th Avenue and University Road occurred in 2016. City Attorney Cary Driskell suggested changing the time limits from three minutes to one and one half minutes in order accommodate everyone in the room who wished to testify this evening. The Commissioners agreed to this change. • Mike Fritter, 10806 E 8"' Avenue: Mr. firmer shared his concern about crime, traffic and more people;he said the covenant was important in the 1950's so please leave it alone. Mark Conrad, 10804 E 7th Avenue: Mr. Conrad shared he is opposed to change because the property values will decrease and traffic will increase; it does not fit the form or area, Lacey Zieler, 10811 It 7th Avenue: Ms. Zieler shared her concerned for the children's safety and • more traffic. • William Braid, 11216 E 71h Avenue: Mr. Braid said he is concerned for the children in the area and putting commercial in will increase traffic and crime, and he asked the Commission please do not approve this, I{en Hof man, 10719 E 7th Avenue: Mr. I loffinan shared his concern about traffic,the value of property; said he bought in under the covenants and lie is opposed to this change. Lonny Green,10715 E 7th Avenue: Mr.Green shares his concern this will lower property values, and increase crime and traffic. Jim Brown,10714 C 6'h Avenue: Mr.Brown shared he is opposed to the plan and concerned about traffic. He said University is a racetrack. Andrew\'Vull,10723 E 7"'Avenue: Mr. Wall said he is concerned for children,more traffic and property values. Candice Wall,10723 IC 7th Ave. Ms.Wall said she is concerned about more crime,foot traffic and children safety. • 02-22-2018 Planning Commission Minato I'age 5 of 8 Sherce Tucker, 11312 E 1"'Ave. Ms,Tucker said she is concerned with traffic,crime and safely of children. Heather Bryant, Schmautz family representative: Ms. Bryant shared in 2016 the corner of gth and University, was changed to Neighborhood Commercial, Currently the family has no plans to develop the properly and the site would slay the same. There is a blind spot at 8'I`Avenue and University Road and by expanding onto 7th, it would eliminate the blind spot. If rezoned the covenant would take precedence. Al Merkel, 3927 S Sunderland Drive: Mr. Merkel shared he is opposed to this amendment because the covenants arc in place. He said he knows the amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,but when you see neighhors like this coming nut,the City should take note and let the neighbors resolve these issues in a non-adversarial way. Kurt Campbell, 10714 E 811'Ave.Mr.Campbell shared his concern about more traffic. Scott Smith,10819E 8'6 Ave.Mr.Smith shared his concern about more traffic and cutting between streets to get to the businesses. Seeing there was no further comment on CP,4-2018-0004 Chair Rasmussen closed the public hearing for CPA 2018-0004 at 7:21 pin. d. CPA-2018-0093 A Privately initiated Amendment request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Suburban (R- 2)to Corridor Mixed Usc(CMU) Chair Rasmussen Opened the public hearingfor CPI-2018-0003 at 7:22 pm. Mr. Palaniuk explained CPA-2018-0003 is a privately initiated amendment to change the parcel fi•om Single Family Residential and R-2 zoning to Corridor Mixed Use which allows commercial, light manufacturing, retail and office uses. This site is in the Ponderosa neighborhood along Dishman-Mica, south of the railroad tracks, along Bowdish and Sands Roads. 'l'he SEPA determination was appealed. The majority of this site is in the 100-year floodplain. There was a subdivision in 2010 and the entirety of this lot was designated as an easement for stormwater treatment. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision was approved by FEMA to raise the level of lots one through six of the short plat and remove them from the floodplain.Chester Creek runs north of the site in a channel which is south of the railroad tracks.'the stream is a'1'ype F',which means fish could be in the stream.It requires buffering if development should occur.This site also has alluvium soils, which are soils deposited from water action made of granulated silt and they do not drain well. The Comprehensive Land Use designation is Single Family Residential with a designated density of one unit per acre up to six units per acres.The area is single fancily. Corridor Mix Use allows commercial uses along transit corridors, Corridor Mixed Use is located along Sprague and Argonne, Mullen, Evergreen, Sullivan and Dishman-Mica. The R-2 zone height limit is 35 feet. Corridor Mixed Use has an unlimited height limit but transitional regulations would be applied to any development and would serve to limit the height adjacent to residential uses. The site would have a limit in height since it is next to residential uses. Staff received comments from Dept. of Fish and Wildlife who commented they were concerned about the Type F stream and said it would require buffering if development occurs. Staff received comments from the public regarding traffic, access in and out of site,access for fire safety,that the development does not fit,and concerns about the floodplain,and crowding in schools. Commissioner Johnson asked if there was a minimum setback for access onto Bowdish and how far off the intersection would the access have to be toward the south. Senior Traffic Engineer,Ray Wright explained at that location there would need to be a minimum of 60 feet of separation from the intersection,Currently staff is looking at the infrastructure to see if the streets can accommodate the growth. 02-22-201s Planning Curnmission Minutes Page 6 old Commissioner Kelley said there were concerns about escaping a forest fire in that area and traffic issues.Mr. Wright stated he did not believe a second access is required. With the rezoning, there would be an additional 800 trips over a 24-hour period;and peak traffic would be 10%of that. This does not address the fire but it would handle that volume easily. Chair Rasmussen asked about a couple of parcels which appeared to be land locked and how would rezoning effect those Mr.Palaniuk replied they are City owned parcels and arc not developed.Ms. Barlow stated those properties are partly encumbered for drainage purposes by the City. Chair Rasmussen asked if they are zoned R-2 and Ms. Barlow confirmed they were. Commissioner Johnson asked does that extend all the way to University.Mr.Lamb replied that a change in zoning would not change access because they are privately owned and would remain so. If there were any access issues,those would be addressed at the time of development. Commissioner Johnson said the background information stated there were 24 acres available for commercial mixed use. lie asked if this was before the nearby 1GA planned project. Mr. Palaniuk responded this reference does include the TGA project. Chair Rasmussen invited public comment. Mr. Todd Whipple,Whipple Consulting Engineers representing the applicant: Mr. Whipple explained his firm looked at the zoning code and get out the Comprehensive Ilan and they try to be consistent with the existing hind use and future land use and what is adjacent to the property. The site has a railroad track and Chester Creek so from a development perspective they assume that since Corridor Mixed Use is adjacent to the property there is no reason to not to change the land use. As the applicant, he requested the Commission to leave the hearing open for additional testimony after the SEPA appeal hearing and before the Commission issues its findings. Al Merkel,2925 S.Sunderland Drive: Mr. Merkel stated the property is a flood zone and shared concerns about.wildlife. Heidi Workman, 11406 E 44"'Avenue: Ms. Workman shared concerns of lire evacuations and the overcrowding of school, Christian Workman, 11496 a 44th. Avenue: Mr. Workman shared that any kind of soil contamination from a flood can contaminate the stream. Rebecca Readiner, 11321 E 42"d' Court: Ms, Readiner shared concerns about the flooding and traffic. Megan Williams, 11401 ESundown Drive: Ms. Williams voiced her concern about fire, safety and traffic. Dave West,4007 S Forest Meadow Dr.Mr.West requested the Commission look at the letter and attached picture he submitted as he is concerned about the flood encroaching on his property. As more and more development occurs upstream the flood will continue to encroach more onto his properly. Darrell Thom, 4409 S Hollow Court. Mr. Thom shared concern about access and fire evacuations. lle said he has been promised an extra access point for fire access. Rev Thom,4499 S Hollow Court.Ms.Thom said she is concerned property values will decrease. She said have been told there would never be any development because it is a floodplain. John Grevner, 3907 S Sunderland Drive. Mr. Grevner shared he is a wildland fire investigator and the last fire was a nightmare;and said he agrees with all that has been said. Steve McNulty,4106 S Hollow Court, Mr.McNulty is concerned about reducing property values, traffic, access to the property, traffic accidents, and that it will be harder for emergency response and evacuation,Ile said he is a geologist and the semi silty sands do not drain well and then ponding occurs, Lot 7 is platted as a blanket drainage easement, We agree with staff report. Annette Conrad, 10920 E 46th Avenue: Ms. Conrad shared concerns about Iaccess, flooding, bald eagles that come every year and the wildlife. 02-22-2018 Planning Con►rnissian Minutes Page 7 of 8 Dave.Johnson,11307 I Sundown Drive: Mr.Johnson concurs that the Commission has to oppose this. It is a single family residential and we do not want anything else. Mark Broder, 4105 S Hollow Court; Mr. Broader shared that any time modifications are made to the land the flooding gets worse,and said he opposed this John Boyd,4024 S Forest Meadow Drive: Mr. Boyd expressed his thoughts for lot.7 explaining if we planted obscuring trees, the trees would suck up the water, giving great access for the water to drain down through the silt soil and it would make an exquisite site or riding area. Robert O'Dell, 11425 E 44th Avenue;Mr. O'Dell shared he is opposed to the development and concerned about drainage and the disruption of the wildlife corridor. Jerry Johnson, 4506 S Skipworth Road: Mr. Johnson said he is concerned about the property values dropping, Shawn Johnson, 11311 E Sundown Drive: Ms.Johnson expressed concern that property values will drop,wildlife concerns and she will have more water in her yard. She said there was a sign, which said there would be one home on the proposed lot,and if there is more, it will only raise the water on her lot, which is ankle deep now. Galen Pavliska, 11321 E Sundown Drive: Mr. Pavliska shared the property is a flood zone and in his backyard. I le is concerned his property value will drop;he said he is opposed to this. Kent Mayer,4308 S Locust; Mr. Mayer shared the Comprehensive Plan was done less than two years ago and he thinks we need to stick to the plan. Ho said this is not an improvement.He asked if the 150 homes that are not built yet at the other end of Oh Avenue were included in the traffic analysis. Keith Cohen,12216 E 37ta3 Court:Mr.Cohen shared concern that bringing in multifamily homes will bring in crime. Renee Porter,3515 S Woodward Road: Ms. Porter expressed this does not fit this property and runs along railroad tracks and a two-lane residential road. This property is over a mile away from a transit stop. Barney's I larvest foods,just right up the road, is planning to put that exact plan into place and not infringing on anybody's property or property values. Paul Henderson, 11303 E Sundown Drive: Mr. I lenderson explained he was the first to buy in front of the subject parcel and his back yard is pure mush and he opposes the amendment. Oliva Brookshire, 4520 S Skipworth Road: Ms, Brookshire is concerned when bringing in multifamily homes that it will bring in renters,which brings in more crime. Barbara Roads,11315 E 46th Avenue:Ms.Roads explained this is a floodplain,and on the wrong side of the railroad tracks for commercial development and concerned for the impact on schools. Vicki Moore,4215 S Forest Meadow Drive:Ms.Moore is concerned for the safety of her special needs child who walks to the bus every day in front of the driveway that would be built. She has safety,traffic and wildlife concerns. Denise Shnaugei, 10613 E 46th Avenue,Ms. Shnaugel is concerned about dealing with Diamond Rock, The property is a floodplain,there are only two exits- Bowdish and Schafer, and that will limit getting out. Megan Knolls, 11406 E 48"Avenue:Ms.Knolls is concerned about traffic accidents will occur, and she opposes the amendment. Heather Harvego,4015 S Forest Meadow Drive: Ms.Harvego is concerned about flooding and traffic. More traffic noise. She said we do not want it. It will not help the neighborhood it will only hurt.the neighborhood. Caleb Collier, 11307 E 42"'a Court: Mr.Collier shared he served on council and suggests a good solution with this vacant land would be a park, Ile said a number of neighbors would contribute to the cost of purchasing this land, and the City might mediate some of the costs with it. 02-22-2018 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 era Sandra Bright, 11024 E 43'y'Avenue: Ms.Bright is concerned for the safety of the children near the railroad,wetlands,wildlife and traffic concerns. Patrick Miller,11302 E Sandstone Lane: Mr, Miller shared he is not against people coming into our neighborhood but in the right way,and he wants to keep R-2 zoning. Debbie Plant,4318 S Forest Meadows Drive: Ms. Plant shared we are a single family residential development and that it should stay an R-2. Logan Crumhorg, 4311 S Hollow Street: Mr. Logan explained that between fire hazards, the railroad and wildlife,this plan is ludicrous. John Pierce,4027 S Forest Meadow Drive: Mr. Pierce concurs, Al Mollya,4224 S University Road: Mr.Mollya said he thought this area was a protected wetland area. He shared there is not enough technology to protect all the water movement and he is against it. Troy Hoffman, 1131111 E Sundown Drive: Mr. 1-ioffman requested we go visit the site and then We that the development will not fit. This development is not necessary, and it will only benefit the developer. Rudy Worley, 11311 E Sundown Drive: Mr. Worley shared that his property abuts this project and his home has water damage, and he is opposed. Last summer it was truck after truck of fill material. Everyone is excited about the development at.Harvest Foods, As this fill continues to go into this spot,our homes are continuing to be damaged. He is in favor of R-2 zoning. Wayne Gruver,114041!;Sundown Drive: Mr.Gruver shared this site is a swamp.lie is concerned for the children who ride bike to go get ice cream. He said there are only two exits Schafer and Bowdish and the engineer needs to have a real traffic study. Jacques Plant, 4318 S Forest Meadow Drive: Mr, Plant shared that his home does not have adequate water pressure and with construction and development, he will have even less water pressure. Les Baker,11413 E 45111 Avenue:Mr.Baker is concerned about the disruption of wildlife and said the coyotes will move into the residential areas. Seeing nu one else who wished to testify, Chair Rasmussen closed public hearing at 8:32 pm Ms. Barlow informed the audience that public comment is closed as far as the Planning Commission however, written comments will be provided to the City Council. She wanted to remind the Commission about the appeal. The I tearing Examiner will be hearing the March 15, 2018 and a couple weeks later, we will have a decision on the appeal. The matter will not he in front of the Planning Commission,until the Hearing Examiner issues a decision. It will be brought back at a typical meeting,without further noticing to the property owners. She advised the audience to check the City's website and/or go to the Planning Commission page and see the agenda,or sign up for the mailing list to be notified. VII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: The Commissioners thanked everyone for their participation. VIII. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Johnson moved to adjourn at 8:48 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor,zero against,and the motion passed. Michelle Rasmussen, Chair Date signed /44it /4-0(tialy (PON6 1.1 Maly Moore,Secretary APPROVED Minutes Spokane Valley Planning.Commission Council Chambers—City Hall May 10,2018 I. Chair Rasmussen called the meeting to order at 6:01 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: James Johnson Cary Driskill,City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Tim Kelley Jenny Nickerson,Assistant Building Official Mike Phillips Marty Palaniuk,Planner Michelle Rasmussen Micki Harnois, Planner Suzanne Stathos,arrived at 6:04 p.m. Karen Kendall,Planner Matt Walton Deanna Horton,Secretary for the Commission Hearing no objections the Commission excused Commissioner Stathos II, AGENDA: Commissioner Johnson moved to accept the May 10, 2018 agenda as presented. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. III. MINUTES:There were no minutes to approve. IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: The Commissioners had no reports. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Senior Planner Lori Barlow informed the Commission the city of Millwood is holding a Planning Short Course May 23,2018 and suggested anyone who had not attended one previously should consider attending. This Short Course is produced by the Washington State Department of Commerce and provides good information. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT:There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Planning Commission Findings of Fact for CTA-2018-0002, a privately initiated code text amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code 19.60 and 19.65 to allow lodging in the Industrial zone. Planner Marty Palaniuk presented the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact for CTA-2018- 0002, a privately initiated code text amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) to allow hotels/motels in the Industrial zone. Mr.Palaniuk explained the Findings reflect the Planning Cotmnission's recommendation to the City Council: to allow hotels/motels with a building footprint of 25,000 square feet or less in the Industrial zone, a building footprint of more than 25,000 square feet, would need a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), Also adopted were minor language changes recommended by staff, to bring the original amendment language in line with the way the rest of the SVMC code is written. Commissioner Johnson clarified the 25,000 square foot footprint only referred to the building size on the ground and did not dictate the overall size the building could be. Commissioner Kelley moved to accept the Findings for CTA-2018-0002 as presented, Commissioner Walton stated lie was still strongly opposed to the language allowing a structure with a building footprint larger than 25,000 square feet. He said the applicant was not seeking anything larger and it would be a mistake to allow larger structures to take up more Industrial zoned land. Commissioner Kelley confirmed Mr. Walton is comfortable with a structure which has a 25,000 square feet or smaller footprint. Commissioner Walton noted he had moved to adopt language which excluded a larger structure but that motion had died for lack of a second. Commissioner Kelley renewed his support of the hotels/motels for what they can bring into the City by means of tax base,employment, other services,retail sales, business sales. Commissioner Johnson agreed the amendment was a good idea but feels the CUP process was extra regulation which was unnecessary,and felt this part of the amendment needed further discussion and should 2018-05-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 have been removed from the proposal. He also felt that the location of the project should be closer • to the arterial,and that not adding language to the amendment to require it lacked proper prudence. The motion passed, by a show of hands, with four in favor and three against, with Commissioners Johnson, Stathos and Walton dissenting. ii. Deliberations: 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendments CPA-2018-0001 Planner Micki Harnois reminded the Commission that CPA-2018-0001 is located approximately 300 east of Pines on Valleyway. The request is to change the Comprehensive Plan designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multifamily Residential (MFR) and from R-3 to Multifamily zoning. The property is bordered to the north and south by MFR and to the west by Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). Commissioner Johnson said he sympathized with people who did not want to have development intrude into their neighborhood but this was only a few hundred feet from the corridor and nothing stays the same forever. Commissioner Walton stated he felt it would match the rest of the surrounding areas. Commissioner Johnson moved to recommend approval of CTA-2018-0001. Commissioner Stathos asked where the line is drawn in order to stop development from encroaching into the neighborhoods. Commissioner Walton said he sympathized with Commissioner Stathos'comment and felt the Planning Commission exists to determine where change was appropriate, and he felt this change was appropriate in this area. The motion passed with a vote of six it favor, one against with Commissioner Stathos dissenting. CPA-2018-0003 Mr. Palaniuk reminded the Commission that CPA-2018-0003 was located on Bowdish Road just north of the intersection with Sands Road. The request is to change the designation from SFR to CMU and the zoning from R-2 to CMU. Mr. Palaniuk said this parcel is located in a floodplain, has alluvium soils, has a fish-bearing stream running through it and is south of the railroad tracks. The contiguous parcels which meet the criteria to make the request for the change are across the railroad right-of-way to the north,which is designated CMU. Commissioner Kelley discussed many of the objections which had been raised during the public hearing, schools would be over crowded, the traffic would increase, property values would decrease,there was not enough notice given and crime would increase. He noted that these issues are often brought up when a multifamily project is proposed. He commented that rarely do any of these things actually happen. He noted Ms. Barlow said there was plenty of notice given. Commissioner Walton said the request was to change from SFR to CMU has more uses than just multifamily which need to be considered when before allowing the change, Commissioner Johnson said when he visited the site in February and the homes in the front of the site are an extension of the surrounding neighborhood. He felt the transition between those homes and Disltman-Mica needed to be preserved,and this is not the right change for this area. Commissioner Phillips said he does not feel the CMU should reach across the railroad tracks to the south into the residential neighborhoods. Commissioner Stathos said she was concerned about the floodplain on the property and comments the citizens had made. Commissioner Kaschmitter said she had concerns regarding the floodplain,fire evacuations,soil contamination and the outpouring of people who were against the change, Commissioner Walton said lie noted all of the citizen comments, but in the staff report it noted that the request was not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The allowable uses for the CMU designation were not appropriate for the area and the requested change was not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Rasmussen said she was concerned about neighbors who live next to the request stating they have had water in their backyards and not allowing the CMU to encroach past the logical division of the railroad tracks. Commissioner Johnson Moved to recommend denial of CPA-2018-0003 to the City Council, The motion passed with a vote of six in favor and one against with Commissioner Kelley dissenting. 2018-05-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 CPA-2018-0004 Mr. Palaniuk said CPA-2018-0004 was located at the corner of 7''' Avenue and University Road. The request is to change the designation from SFR to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and the zoning from R-3 to NC. The applicant owns an adjacent parcel which was designated NC during the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update. During the public hearing, several citizens had commented that language on the subdivision plat could prohibit commercial development on any property located within the subdivision without a vote of the subdivision members. The Commissioners asked City Attorney Cary Driskell to opine on how this covenant would affect the property change. Mr. Driskell stated that covenants are a civil matter between parties and does not affect any decision that the Commission would make. The City has the legal right to rezone the property. The covenants could affect development in the future; however,a single-family residence is still an allowed use on the property. Commissioner Johnson said he understood the comments regarding increased in traffic in the neighborhood as was suggested by many who testified, but there was also a need for more NC in many areas. He also confirmed a Councilmember had requested that staff add more areas of NC in the City during the Comprehensive Plan update. Commissioner Walton said he understood the objections but since both parcels were owned by the same person, he felt it placed the property owner at a disadvantage when the parcels were zoned differently. Commissioner Kelley said the Commission had discussions during the Comprehensive Plan Update about having more services in the neighborhoods. The two parcels are right on University Road and fit all the criteria discussed for the NC during the Update. Commissioner Kaschcnitter agreed. Commissioner Johnson moved to recommend approval of CPA-2018.0004 to the City Council. The motion passed with a vote of seven in favor, and zero against, CPA-2018-0005 Commissioner Phillips recused hinmselfcomm this amendment and left the room. Planner Karen Kendall reminded the Commission this amendment was correcting a mapping error where several parcels were split zoned during the Comprehensive Plan Update. The parcels are located at the apex of Progress and Forker Roads. The City is proposing to correct the zoning by having the NC zone along the north and east portion above the Bonneville Power Easement and south and west of the easement changed to SFR,. The Commissioners had no concerns regarding this amendment. Commissioner Johnson moved to recommend approval of CTA-2018-0005 to the City Council. The motion passed with a vote of six in favor and zero against. CPA-2018-0006 Commissioner Phillips returned to the room. Ms.Kendall explained the parcel for this amendment is located on Trent Road just east of Sullivan, and the easterly 15 feet of the parcel is designated as SFR and the remainder of the parcel is designated Industrial Mixed Use (IMU). The proposal is to designate the entire parcel as [MU. The Commissioners had no concerns regarding this correction. Commissioner Johnson moved to recommend approval of CTA-2018-0006 to the City Council. The motion passed with a vote of seven in favor and zero against. iii. Discussion to Rescind CTA-2018-0002 Commissioner Walton moved to rescind the motion regarding CTA-2018-0002 due to a procedural error. Commissioner Walton stated he felt the topic needed more discussion, especially since the vote to approve the findings was four to three. He also felt there had been an error in parliamentary procedure during the April 26, 2018 meeting while recommending approval of the amendment, a privately initiated code text amendment to allow hotels/motels in the Industrial zone. The vote on the motion to recommend approval of the amendment as submitted with minor changes passed with 2018-05-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5 a vote of five in favor, two against. Although the Commissioners had discussed the merits of the amendment under small board rules, when the adopted motion was put to the floor, there was no discussion on the merits of the main motion itself before the Commission voted on it, which Commissioner Walton felt was in error. There was discussion as to whether the motion to rescind was the proper main motion and the Commission took a break for staff to research the topic. After review of Roberts Rules of Order, it was determined the motion to rescind was in order, however it would have been more timely had it been made prior to the Findings of Fact supporting the Planning Commission's decision on CTA-20I8-0002. If the motion to rescind passes, then there will need to be extra work to reconsider the Findings since they currently support CTA-2018- 0002 as it passed. Commissioner Walton stated he felt the Commission moved too quickly to take the vote on the adopted motion and Commissioners should have been given an opportunity to discuss the merits of the main motion on the floor. He feels that were several strong viewpoints that could have changed minds, there could have been amendments to the motion had the opportunity been there. However in moving to vote right after the motion was made,did not allow for the proper discussion of the merits of the motion itself. Commissioner Kelley said there is a proper procedure but many times based on small board rules all the elements are there, but not necessarily in the correct order, While he agrees there should be discussion every time, it does not always happen with this group and up until now,no one has had an issue with this process. He believes the topic was thoroughly discussed before it was voted on. Commissioners Stathos and Kaschmitter had no comment. Commissioner Johnson said he remembered Commissioner Kelley making a motion without the 25,000 square foot requirement with the CUP requirement but the motion was not very clear to him. After some conversation, Mr. Kelley made a motion to accept the amendment as it was • • written. Commissioner Johnson said it seemed the motion was unclear, and then all of the sudden there was a vote on it. Commissioner Kelley said his only confusion was when Ms. Barlow interjected that he adopted staff's proposed language changes, otherwise he said he was aware of what his motion was. Commissioner Walton added he understands that while at times the Commission does follow small board rules,it does not relinquish its right to follow the proper procedures when adopting a motion for Commission business. He also said to Commissioner Johnson's point,he was confused about what the actual motion before he was asked to vote on it. Commissioner Phillips stated he seconded the motion made by Commissioner Kelley and he understood the motion,whether it was understood by anyone else,five people voted in favor of it. Someone understood it enough to vote on it. Commissioner Walton said he was going to make one more plea that there is order and procedure for a reason. If they are not followed, there has to be a remedy for it, especially if there was an opportunity to seek clarification or to add additional clarification. He appreciates the extensive discussion prior to the motion being made, but after the motion is made there needs to be opportunity offer amendments and additional discussion based on the language of the motion itself before there is a vote. This did not occur during the vote of CTA-2018-0002,which violated proper procedure; he encourages the Commission to consider this when voting on the motion to rescind the motion. The motion failed with a vole of three in favor and four against with Commissioners Kaschmitter, Kelley, Phillips and Rasmussen dissenting. VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER:Thanks to staff and Commission members for discussion on parliamentary procedure. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:46 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor, the motion passed. 2018-05-10 Plannin mission Minute• I'agc 5 of 5 n'N 6c-, -5--/-/--- /A- Michelle Rasmussen, Chair Date signed t)5/7' aLl Deanna Horton, Secretary i 1 Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall 05/24/2018 I. Vice Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Secretary Moore took roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson Cary DriskeIl, City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Tim Kelley Marty Palaniuk, Planner Mike Phillips Micki Harnois, Planner Matt Walton Karen Kendall, Planner Deanna Horton, Secretary of the Commission Mary Moore, Office Assistant Hearing no objections the Commission excused Chair Rasmussen and Commissioner Stathos. IL AGENDA: Commissioner Walton moved to amend the agenda to include the May 10, 2018 minutes to the agenda. The vote was five in favor, zero against and the motion passed. III. MINUTES: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the April 26, 2018 minntes and the May 10th, 2018 minutes. The vote on this motion was five in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioners Kelley and Johnson reported they attended the city of Millwood Planning Short Course. Commissioner Johnson shared it was very informative and educational. Commissioners Walton and Kelley reported they attended the State of the City. Commissioner Walton was happy to see the mayor move the City forward in a positive manner and looking forward to continued support of the council. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no report. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no comment. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: Findings of Fact: 2018 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Lori Barlow, Senior Planner explained the Findings of Facts are the last phase of the Commissioner's process,which formalize their decisions moving forward to the City Council. Staff suggests the Commission approve the findings for each request individually. When the recommendation moves forward to the City Council staff will wrap the individual findings into one document so that they are considered as a group. CPA-2018-0001 — Micki Harnois, Planner presented CPA-2018-0001 which is located 300 feet east of Pines and Valleyway. It is R-3 zoning and the Comprehensive Plan designation is Single Family Residential. The proposal is to change the zoning to Multifamily Residential and the Comprehensive Plan Designation to Multifamily Residential. The vote was six in favor and zero against to recommend approval. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2018-0001 Findings of Fact as submitted. The vote on this motion was five in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. CPA-2018-0003 — Marty Palaniuk, Planner presented CPA-2018-0003 to change the Comprehensive Plan designation from Single Family Residential to Corridor Mixed Use and the zoning from R-2 to Corridor Mixed Use. The vote was six to one to deny the request. 05/24/2018 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 3 Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2018-0003 as presented. The vote on this motion was five in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. CPA-2018-0004 -- Mr. Palaniuk presented CPA-2018-0004 located on University Road and 7th Avenue. The request is to change the Comprehensive Plan designation from Single Family Residential to Neighborhood Commercial and the zoning from R-3 to Neighborhood Commercial. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2018-00004 as presented. The vote on this motion was five in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. CPA-2018-0005—Commissioner Phillips recused himself from the meeting regarding CPA-2018- 0005, and left the room. Karen Kendall, Planner presented CPA-2018-005 a City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment and is corrected a mapping error and expanding Neighborhood Commercial designation on property located at the corner of Progress Road and Forker Road. The decision to recommend approval six to zero in favor. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2018.0005 as presented. The vote on this motion was four in favor zero against, and the motion passed Commissioner Phillips returned to meeting. CPA-2018-0006 ---- Ms. Kendall presented CPA-2018-0006 a City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment correcting a mapping error to expand the Industrial Mixed Use designation on property east of Sullivan on Trent Avenue. The vote was seven to zero to recommend approval. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2018-0006 as presented. The vote on this motion was five in favor, zero against, and the motion passed ii. Public Hearing — CTA-2018-0001 — A proposed amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.65.020 Agriculture and Animal keeping Ms. Harnois presented CTA-2018-0001 and shared some historical background. The proposal will change the minimum square footage required to have animals in SVMC 19.65.020(A)(1)(a) from one acre to 40,000 square feet. This is the same amount of minimum square footage required prior to the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and development regulations update. The proposal will return the minimum square footage to the amount before the update. Ms. Harnois also outlined the steps involved in the process. This amendment to SVMC 19.65.020 revising the minimum lot requirement from one acre to 40,000 square feet will be consistent with the R-1 zone and eliminate the creation of non- conforming uses. The Commissioners discussed the difference between the minimum lot size and how many animals are allowed per acre. Chickens are in a different section and swine are not allowed. Commissioner Kelley clarified chickens are allowed with a lower minimum square footage of 2,000 square feet per chicken. . Vice-Chair Johnson opened public hearing at 6:40 p.m. Seeing no who wished to testify the Vice- Chair closed the public hearing at 6:41 p.m. Commissioner Walton said he thought there would be the potential for confusion for the public regarding minimum square footage and how many animals are allowed per acre but he is in favor of the change. Commission Phillips confirmed large animals keeping was based on a gross acre. Ms. Barlow explained first staff confirms the amount of square feet the customers has. If they have more than 40,000 square feet, they can have animals, and how many and of what type of animals are calculated on the lot size. Commissioner Phillips stated he was in favor of the proposal. Commissioner Kelley supports people raising animals and is in favor of the proposal. Commissioner Kaschmitter shared this will allow people to be in conformance and is in favor. Commissioner Johnson agrees with the need to be standardized and returning back to 40,000 square feet is appropriate and is in favor of the proposal. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CTA-2018-0001 as presented. The vote on this motion was five in favor, zero against and the motion passed. 05/24/20IS Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 3 VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the good of the order. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Walton moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:48 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor and the motion passed. Name, Chair Date signed Name, Secretary CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 17, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business [' new business [' public hearing [' information ® admin. report [' pending legislation [' executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Council Goals and Priorities for Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC). GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Imposition of tax, set-up of LTAC and determination of qualified expenditures is governed by RCVV 67.28, as amended by Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1253 in 2013; and Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.20. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: No action on the 2018 process leading to 2019 awards has been taken thus far. Council goals and priorities for using lodging tax revenues to benefit tourism in Spokane Valley were last reviewed by Council on August 8, 2017. BACKGROUND: The Tax Rate: In 2003, the City imposed an initial 2% lodging tax on all charges for furnishing lodging at hotels and motels pursuant to RCW 67.28.180. This tax is taken as a credit against the 6.5% state sales tax, so that the total tax a patron pays in retail sales tax and the hotel/motel tax combined is equal to the retail sales tax in the jurisdiction—which for Spokane Valley is 8.8%. The estimated revenues for the initial 2% lodging tax in the 2018 and 2019 Budgets are currently $580,000 and $600,000, respectively, based upon collections during 2017 and year-to-date collections for 2018. On April 14, 2015, the City imposed an additional 1.3% lodging tax pursuant to RCW 67.28.181. This tax is in addition to the existing 8.8% sales tax imposed in Spokane Valley, and when combined with a 2.0% lodging tax imposed by the Spokane Public Facilities District causes the total lodging tax rate in Spokane Valley to equal 12.0%. This additional lodging tax went into effect July 1, 2015. We currently estimate the 1.3% lodging tax will generate approximately $377,000 and $390,000 annually in 2018 and 2019, respectively. 1 The combined sales and lodging tax rates are shown in the table below: Tax Components Retail I Hotel Sales tax State of Washington 6.50% 4.50% City of Spokane Valley 0.85% 0.85% Spokane County 0.15% 0.15% Criminal Justice 0.10% 0.10% Spokane PFD 0.10% 0.10% Public Safety 0.10% 0.10% Juvenile Jail 0.10% 0.10% Mental Health 0.10% 0.10% Law Enforcement Communications 0.10% 0.10% Spokane Transit Authority 0.70% 0.60% Total sales tax 8.80% 6.70% Lodging tax City of Spokane Valley (initial 2.0% tax) 0.00% 2.00% City of Spokane Valley (additional 1.3% tax) 0.00% 1.30% Spokane PFD 0.00% 2.00% Total lodging tax 0.00% 5.30% Total tax 8.80% 12.00% Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) The organizations to which the tax proceeds are distributed are ultimately determined by the City Council which receives a recommendation from the LTAC. The LTAC is comprised of five members who are appointed by the City Council, and by State law the Committee membership must include: • At least two representatives of businesses that are required to collect the tax, • At least two people who are involved in activities that are authorized to be funded by the tax, and • One elected city official who serves as chairperson of the LTAC. The LTAC makes its recommendations based upon a combination of written application materials and a presentation that is made to them by each applicant. State Rules Governing Use of the Initial 2% Lodging Tax In 2013 the Washington State Legislature approved Engrossed Substitute House Bill (ESHB) 1253 which amended the lodging tax revenue, application process, selection process, and reporting requirements. ESHB 1253 specifically retained the City's authority to use lodging tax revenues to fund: • Tourism marketing. • The marketing and operations of special events and festivals. • The operations and capital expenditures of tourism-related facilities owned or operated by a municipality or public facility district. • The operations (but not capital expenditures) of tourism-related facilities owned or operated by non-profit organizations. 2 ESHB 1253 also established application and reporting procedures for cities with a population greater than 5,000 that applicants must now submit their applications to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. The application is required to estimate how the grant award requested will result in increases in the number of people traveling to the City for business or pleasure in the following categories: • Away from their place of residence or business and staying overnight in paid accommodations; • To a place 50 miles or more one way from their place of residence or business for the day or staying overnight; or • From another country or state outside their place of residence or their business. Through 2012, the City Council could, at its option, supersede the recommendation of the LTAC and award lodging tax funds to applicants in the amount the Council collectively determined was appropriate based upon their own goals and priorities for promoting conventions, festivals, special events, and tourist travel, regardless of the LTAC recommendation. However, ESHB 1253 altered this authority and the options for City Council action have been viewed as primarily being limited to either (1) approving some or all of the listed recipients and amounts recommended by the LTAC or (2) not approving any recipients and having the LTAC revise its recommendation for further City Council action. However, under RCW 67.28.1817, a municipality may propose "a change in the use of revenue received under [RCW 67.28]," but must submit the proposal to the LTAC for review and comment. Then, the LTAC must be given at least 45 days to review and provide comments prior to final action by the municipality. This allows the City Council to conduct its own review of the materials submitted, including the minutes and recommended amounts by the LTAC, to come up with its own proposed distribution of the revenue for any of the applicants, which may be the same or different from the LTAC recommendation. If it is different, the City must give the LTAC 45 days to review and provide comments on the proposed revised distribution before taking final action. The Council used this process in 2017 for the 2018 awards to ensure transparency and the public confidence due to questions from the public that arose during the LTAC review and recommendation process. Council Goals and Priorities for Use of the Initial 2% Lodging Tax In August 2013 Council for the first time adopted goals and priorities that it encouraged the LTAC to consider when making award recommendations, which Council updated in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017 to the following: 1. Council will focus on using lodging taxes to create distinct and identifiable increases in Spokane Valley tourism. As part of this goal, Council will use lodging taxes for the purposes allowed in State law, which include: a. Tourism marketing b. The marketing and operations of special events and festivals c. The operation and capital expenditures of tourism related facilities owned or operated by a municipality or public facility district d. The operation (but not capital expenditures) of tourism related facilities owned or operated by non-profit organizations. 2. Council desires that 20% of total grant monies awarded be directed towards funding new and innovative projects, activities, events or festivals that will distinguish Spokane Valley as a tourism destination. 3. Council will emphasize the utilization of funds for capital expenditures to develop tourism destination facilities or venues within the City of Spokane Valley as a means of drawing 3 additional visitors to the City (recognizing that this option is limited to facilities owned by a municipality or public facility district). Council would like to move in the direction of allocating a majority of lodging taxes toward this purpose. 4. Council recognizes that lodging nights are an important measure of a successful event or marketing program and will place higher consideration on events or programs with a demonstrable history of increasing overnight stays. Council may also take into consideration to a lesser degree the economic impact of all major components of our tourism-based economy including shopping, dining and overnight visits. 5. Council will take into consideration revenues derived from lodging sources within Spokane Valley received by applicants from other municipal entities and agencies such as the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Authority and Spokane Public Facilities District. 6. An award to any particular applicant cannot be greater than the dollar amount requested in that applicant's application. 4 2018 Timeline Leading to 2019 Awards of the Initial 2.0% Lodging Tax The calendar we plan to follow in 2018 for 2019 lodging tax awards is as follows: Tues 7/17/2018 Admin Report- Review Council goals and priorities for use of lodging tax proceeds. Tues 7/31/2018 Motion seeking Council consensus on Council goals and priorities for use of lodging tax proceeds. Tues 8/21/2018 Joint meeting between Council and LTAC at City Hall -review application -review Council Goals & Priorities for use of lodging tax Wed 8/31/2018 City runs notice in newspaper, places on web site, and sends letters to 2017 award recipients and others agencies that may have expressed interest. Fri 10/5/2018 Grant proposals are due to City by 4pm (no late submittals will be accepted). Fri 10/12/2018 Applications sent to Lodging Tax Advisory Committee for review. Thurs 10/18/2018 8:30 am Applicant presentations to Committee. Tues 11/13/2018 Formal Council Meeting Admin Report: LTAC Recommendations to City Council Tues 12/11/2018 Formal Council Meeting City Council Motion Consideration: Award Lodging Tax for 2019 RCW 67.28.1817 requires that the City wait for a period of at least 45 days after the LTAC meeting before action can be taken by the City Council. 12/11/2018 Council Action 10/18/2018 LTAC meeting 54 days Additional 1.3% Lodging Tax The 1.3% additional lodging tax imposed by the City via Ordinance #15-008 went into effect July 1, 2015, and we received our first remittance from the State in September 2015. The total collected during 2017 for this tax was $400,509, and we are estimating annual revenues for both 2018 and 2019 will be approximately$377,000 and $390,000, respectively, based upon collections during 2017 and year-to-date collections for 2018. Fund balance is estimated to be $1,873,777 at the end of 2018. Proceeds of this tax are to be used solely for capital expenditures for acquiring, constructing, making improvements to or other related capital expenditures for large sporting venues, or venues for tourism-related facilities that generate overnight guests at lodging facilities. The ultimate commitment of these funds will follow an application and award process similar to that employed with the initial 5 2.0% lodging tax where the LTAC will consider an application and make a recommendation to the City Council which will have the final say on whether an award is made. The City will need to accumulate enough money prior to beginning such a project. Any project developed by the City will need to go through the LTAC review process and will take into account not just the cost of constructing a facility but also the cost of future operations. It is noteworthy that the proceeds of the additional 1.3% lodging tax may only be used for the construction of a facility and may not be used for operations. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: This is a discussion item only but staff is: 1. Seeking consensus from the Council on the goals and priorities the LTAC should consider when evaluating applications, 2. Does the Council wish to prioritize the tourism venues decided upon during the July 10th Council discussion, which were improvements to the fairgrounds, a sports complex, and expansion of the CenterPlace outdoor venue, and 3. Communicating to Council that the 2019 Budget is again being developed to set aside $30,000 of lodging tax revenues to enhance CenterPlace advertising expenses resulting in an increase in that marketing budget from $30,000 to $60,000. The Council is able to make this decision independent of any input from the LTAC because this represents a historical use by the City that preceded the Legislature's adoption of ESHB 1253. If the City desired the use of any additional lodging tax proceeds, it would be required to utilize the same application process noted above that is required of all other agencies seeking funding. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: In 2019 the 2% portion of the lodging tax is currently anticipated to generate approximately $600,000 and the 1.3% portion an additional $390,000. STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: • Lodging Tax Award History—2003 through 2018 6 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Budget Worksheets\Lodging Tax\Lodging Tax Award History 03-18.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Lodging Tax Application/Award History For the years 2003 through 2018 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 AGENCIES Application I Award Application I Award Application I Award Application I Award 07 Apply 07 Award Sprg 07 Appl,Sprg 07 Awa, Armed Forces&Aerospace Museum 3,327 0 2,531 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Burke Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 147,500 0 CenterPlace-marketing 0 0 0 40,000 0 0 0 40,000 0 40,000 0 0 CenterPlace-marketing to regional meeting planners 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of Spokane Valley-Volleyball courts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of Spokane Valley-Directed Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of Spokane Valley-Tourism Study 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chamber of Commerce 0 0 0 0 15,440 0 15,440 5,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Crave NW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Evergreen Regional Volleyball Court Expansion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fair&Expo Marketing 58,376 17,500 35,000 25,000 21,000 18,000 0 0 20,000 20,000 0 0 Fairgrounds 0 0 21,000 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Family Guide 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Friends of Centennial Trail 23,480 0 2,000 2,000 0 0 9,000 0 0 0 0 0 HUB Sports Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Inland Dance Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,535 0 0 0 2,535 0 Inland NW Sr.Wellness Conference 12,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Latah Creek Wine Cellars 20,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Liberty Lake Rotary Club 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Plantes Ferry Park 0 0 71,842 20,000 0 0 23,876 0 30,000 0 0 0 Six Bridges Arts Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,000 12,500 0 0 Splash-Down Family Waterpark 230,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spo Con 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Arts Commission 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane County Fair&Expo Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane County Fair&Expo Center-Winter Glow Spe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Horse Breeders of Inland NW 5,830 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Oktoberfest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Polo Club 30,100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Regional Sports Commission 120,000 52,200 150,000 100,000 100,000 75,000 100,000 84,000 100,000 100,000 0 0 Spokane River Forum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Symphony 20,000 0 20,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Valley Heritage Museum 40,000 1,000 0 0 22,100 10,000 49,104 5,000 27,450 10,000 0 0 Spokane Valley Soccer Club 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Winery Association 3,285 0 8,250 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,500 7,500 Sports USA Sports Complex 103,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SV Junior Soccer Association 96,642 24,800 71,842 0 0 0 4,000 4,000 0 0 17,000 30,300 U.S.Figure Skating 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Valleyfest 19,724 2,800 49,700 0 27,200 15,000 25,900 15,000 30,000 25,000 5,000 5,000 Valleyfest(additional for Spring 07(for float) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,000 0 Valleyfest-Cycle Celebration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Visit Spokane(-.. --- ' - __ - _ _. -_.) 200,000 83,700 250,000 150,000 200,000 136,000 200,000 165,000 175,000 175,000 78,000 78,000 WebMaker 39,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 YMCA 50,000 18,000 12,000 6,000 12,000 6,000 17,000 7,000 0 0 0 0 YMCA Skateboard Park 0 18,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer out to Fund#104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 1,090,264 218,000 694,165 360,000 397,740 260,000 446,855 325,000 447,450 432,500 313,535 170,800 Page 1 of 4 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Budget Worksheets\Lodging Tax\Lodging Tax Award History 03-18.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Lodging Tax Application/Award History For the years 2003 through 2018 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AGENCIES Application I Award Application I Award Application I Award Application I Award Rnd 1 App I Rnd 1 Awrd I Rnd 2 App I Rnd 2 Awrd Armed Forces&Aerospace Museum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Burke Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CenterPlace-marketing 90,000 90,000 0 90,000 0 37,500 0 0 0 30,000 0 0 CenterPlace-marketing to regional meeting planners 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of Spokane Valley-Volleyball courts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of Spokane Valley-Directed Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of Spokane Valley-Tourism Study 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chamber of Commerce 155,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Crave NW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Evergreen Regional Volleyball Court Expansion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fair&Expo Marketing 30,000 30,000 30,000 18,250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fairgrounds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Family Guide 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Friends of Centennial Trail 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HUB Sports Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 40,000 40,000 50,000 42,600 0 0 Inland Dance Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Inland NW Sr.Wellness Conference 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Latah Creek Wine Cellars 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Liberty Lake Rotary Club 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,000 0 Plantes Ferry Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Six Bridges Arts Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Splash-Down Family Waterpark 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spo Con 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70,131 0 0 0 Spokane Arts Commission 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50,000 0 Spokane County Fair&Expo Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 25,900 Spokane County Fair&Expo Center-Winter Glow Spe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Horse Breeders of Inland NW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Oktoberfest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Polo Club 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Regional Sports Commission 175,000 145,000 190,000 115,000 150,000 120,000 165,000 165,000 200,000 185,000 0 0 Spokane River Forum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Symphony 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Valley Heritage Museum 0 0 30,260 3,250 11,600 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 3,900 5,000 1,100 Spokane Valley Soccer Club 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,000 0 Spokane Winery Association 8,300 8,300 9,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sports USA Sports Complex 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SV Junior Soccer Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U.S.Figure Skating 0 15,000 0 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Valleyfest 40,000 30,000 50,000 27,500 50,000 30,000 50,000 36,000 50,000 0 50,000 30,000 Valleyfest(additional for Spring 07(for float) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Valleyfest-Cycle Celebration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Visit Spokane(Spokano Vicitor Convontion Buroau) 325,000 306,000 336,000 236,000 275,000 195,000 250,000 250,000 0 0 275,000 251,720 WebMaker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 YMCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 YMCA Skateboard Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer out to Fund#104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 823,300 624,300 645,260 505,000 486,600 387,500 510,000 496,000 375,131 261,500 440,000 308,720 Page 2 of 4 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Budget Worksheets\Lodging Tax\Lodging Tax Award History 03-18.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Lodging Tax Application/Award History For the years 2003 through 2018 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 AGENCIES Application I Award Application I Award Application I Award Application I Award Application I Award Application I Award Armed Forces&Aerospace Museum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Burke Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CenterPlace-marketing 0 30,000 0 30,000 0 30,000 0 30,000 0 30,000 0 30,000 CenterPlace-marketing to regional meeting planners 0 0 0 0 30,000 17,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of Spokane Valley-Volleyball courts 0 0 0 0 120,000 68,000 160,000 60,650 233,508 0 238,000 0 City of Spokane Valley-Directed Marketing 0 55,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 City of Spokane Valley-Tourism Study 0 0 0 0 0 0 86,750 80,000 0 0 0 0 Chamber of Commerce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Crave NW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50,000 30,000 Evergreen Regional Volleyball Court Expansion 0 0 7,500 7,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fair&Expo Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fairgrounds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Family Guide 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,000 0 0 0 Friends of Centennial Trail 0 0 6,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HUB Sports Center 50,000 21,100 40,000 36,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 54,000 48,400 Inland Dance Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Inland NW Sr.Wellness Conference 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Latah Creek Wine Cellars 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Liberty Lake Rotary Club 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Plantes Ferry Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Six Bridges Arts Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Splash-Down Family Waterpark 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spo Con 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Arts Commission 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane County Fair&Expo Center 30,000 27,800 50,000 39,800 44,000 44,000 100,000 45,000 60,000 47,000 60,000 50,000 Spokane County Fair&Expo Center-Winter Glow Spe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20,000 2,170 0 0 Spokane Horse Breeders of Inland NW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Oktoberfest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20,000 10,000 Spokane Polo Club 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Regional Sports Commission 200,000 150,200 200,000 183,800 200,000 120,000 200,000 121,600 200,000 115,600 200,000 80,000 Spokane River Forum 0 0 0 0 1,000 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Symphony 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Valley Heritage Museum 12,000 6,400 20,000 13,100 28,209 18,400 35,800 17,200 27,500 9,500 25,000 13,000 Spokane Valley Soccer Club 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spokane Winery Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sports USA Sports Complex 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SV Junior Soccer Association 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U.S.Figure Skating 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Valleyfest 50,000 35,200 50,000 20,000 64,000 31,600 60,000 28,900 150,000 31,600 150,000 18,600 Valleyfest(additional for Spring 07(for float) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Valleyfest-Cycle Celebration 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 3,000 25,000 5,000 25,000 2,000 Visit Spokane(Spokano Vicitor Convontion Buroau) 350,000 184,800 280,000 247,000 328,430 230,000 253,777 163,650 282,830 103,130 282,830 70,000 WebMaker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 YMCA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 YMCA Skateboard Park 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer out to Fund#104 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250,000 0 250,000 Total 692,000 510,500 659,100 577,000 855,639 600,000 946,327 590,000 1,073,838 634,000 1,104,830 602,000 Page 3 of 4 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Budget Worksheets\Lodging Tax\Lodging Tax Award History 03-18.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA I 5/18/2018 Lodging Tax Application/Award History For the years 2003 through 2018 Total AGENCIES I Application II Award Armed Forces&Aerospace Museum 5,858 0 Burke Marketing 147,500 0 CenterPlace-marketing 90,000 547,500 CenterPlace-marketing to regional meeting planners 30,000 17,000 City of Spokane Valley-Volleyball courts 751,508 128,650 City of Spokane Valley-Directed Marketing 0 55,000 City of Spokane Valley-Tourism Study 86,750 80,000 Chamber of Commerce 285,880 105,000 Crave NW 50,000 30,000 Evergreen Regional Volleyball Court Expansion 7,500 7,300 Fair&Expo Marketing 194,376 128,750 Fairgrounds 21,000 15,000 Family Guide 35,000 0 Friends of Centennial Trail 41,080 2,000 HUB Sports Center 354,000 308,100 Inland Dance Association 5,070 0 Inland NW Sr.Wellness Conference 12,500 0 Latah Creek Wine Cellars 20,000 0 Liberty Lake Rotary Club 10,000 0 Plantes Ferry Park 125,718 20,000 Six Bridges Arts Association 15,000 12,500 Splash-Down Family Waterpark 230,000 0 Spo Con 70,131 0 Spokane Arts Commission 65,000 0 Spokane County Fair&Expo Center 374,000 279,500 Spokane County Fair&Expo Center-Winter Glow Spe 20,000 2,170 Spokane Horse Breeders of Inland NW 5,830 0 Spokane Oktoberfest 20,000 10,000 Spokane Polo Club 30,100 0 Spokane Regional Sports Commission 2,650,000 1,912,400 Spokane River Forum 1,000 1,000 Spokane Symphony 40,000 0 Spokane Valley Heritage Museum 344,023 121,850 Spokane Valley Soccer Club 25,000 0 Spokane Winery Association 36,335 17,800 Sports USA Sports Complex 103,000 0 SV Junior Soccer Association 189,484 59,100 U.S.Figure Skating 0 30,000 Valleyfest 971,524 382,200 Valleyfest(additional for Spring 07(for float) 6,000 0 Valleyfest-Cycle Celebration 60,000 10,000 Visit Spokane(Spokano Vicitor Convontion Buroau) 4,341,867 3,025,000 WebMaker 39,000 0 YMCA 91,000 37,000 YMCA Skateboard Park 0 18,000 Transfer out to Fund#104 0 500,000 Total 12,002,034 7,862,820 Page 4 of 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 17, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business [' new business [' public hearing [' information ® admin. report [' pending legislation [' executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Resolution 18-006 Adopting an Amended Master Speed Limit Schedule. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: • Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 9.05.030 • Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 468-95-330 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On March 24, 2009, Council adopted its Master Speed Limit Schedule via Resolution 09-004, which has been amended several times over the last nine years. BACKGROUND: The purpose of Resolution 18-006 is to modify the schedule to add, and modify, identified School Speed Zones. Central Valley School District (CVSD) is constructing a new school (Riverbend Elementary) on Mission Ave at Long Rd. Also, CVSD is demolishing the North Pines Middle school and building a new middle school on the same property. The two new campuses require new school zones on Broadway Ave, Mission Ave, and Long Rd, as well as a modification of a school zone on Alki Ave. These changes need to be reflected in the City's Master Speed Limit Schedule. City staff has completed the engineering analysis of these locations and recommends a 20 mph zone based on Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 468-95-330 which states: Applicable to state highways, county roads, or city streets, the reduced school or playground speed zone shall extend for 300 feet in either direction from the marked crosswalk when the marked crosswalk is fully posted with standard school speed limit signs or standard playground speed limit signs. Applicable to county roads or city streets, the school or playground speed zone may extend up to 300 feet from the border of the school or playground property when fully posted with standard school speed limit signs or standard playground speed limit signs. However, the speed zone may only include the area consistent with active school or playground use. The modifications to the Master Speed Limit Schedule are summarized in the following sections. North Pines Middle School 1 — Alki Avenue: Revise the 20 mph school zone on Alki Ave for North Pines Middle School. There is currently a school zone on Alki Ave from 400 feet west of SR 27 to SR 27. It was installed since numerous students cross Alki Ave to walk south on Pines or are picked up/dropped off on the south side of the road. In addition, students walk to and from school along the gravel shoulder on Alki Ave. Since this section of Alki Ave has numerous children walking along and crossing the street at random locations, installing a 20 mph school zone will help enhance safety by reducing the speed limit and alerting drivers that it is an area where children may be present. The current school zone would no longer be located near the active school area. The revised zone will be adjusted to address the new active school area. The new school zone would be located on Alki Ave and be effective from 800 feet east of Bates Rd to 600 feet west of SR 27. North Pines Middle School 2 — Broadway Avenue: Install a second 20 mph school zone on Broadway Ave for North Pines Middle School. As part of the new building CVSD is providing a set of school zone flashing beacons to be installed on Broadway Ave. The other schools that have access to Broadway have school zones. Establishing a new school zone on Broadway Ave would be consistent with the other schools along the corridor. The school zone alerts drivers that there is a school in the area and to expect students along the roadway and drivers slowing to access the school. The new school zone would be located on Broadway Ave and be effective from 400 feet east of Wilbur Rd to 650 feet west of SR 27. Riverbend Elementary School 1 — Mission Avenue: Install a school zone on Mission Ave for the new Riverbend Elementary School. As part of the new building CVSD is providing a set of school zone flashing beacons to be installed on Mission Ave. There are two entrances along Mission Ave and an uncontrolled crosswalk at the intersection of Mission Ave and Long Rd. The school zone will alert motorists that there is a school in the area to be alert for vehicles accessing the school and students in the area. The new school zone would be located on Mission Ave and be effective from 750 feet east of Long Rd to 350 feet west of Long Rd. Riverbend Elementary School 2 — Long Road: Install a school zone on Long Rd for the new Riverbend Elementary School. The school has entrances along Long Rd. The school zone will alert drivers that there is a school in the area and to be watchful for vehicles accessing the school and students in the area. The new school zone would be located on Long Rd and be effective from 650 feet south of Mission Ave to 150 feet north of Mission Ave. OPTIONS: 1) Consensus to move forward with Resolution 18-006 as drafted, revising the School Speed Zones as provided and identified in the draft resolution; 2) Request revisions to Resolution 18-006; 3) Take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council consensus to place Resolution 18-006 on the July 24 Council Agenda for Council consideration regarding the proposed amended Master Speed Limit Schedule, implementing the identified School Speed Zones. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $500 will be expended for placing new signs. STAFF CONTACT: Bill Helbig, PE, City Engineer Ryan Kipp, PE, Traffic Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution and Amended Master Speed Limit Schedule DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 18-006 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AN AMENDED MASTER SPEED LIMIT SCHEDULE; AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council from time-to-time may modify speed limits and speed zones to better reflect changing traffic conditions and roadway characteristics; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Spokane Valley Municipal Code Section 9.05.030, which, in part,provides that the maximum speed limits for streets can be established by ordinance or resolution; and WHEREAS,the City Council has authority under SVMC 9.05.030 to change speed limits, provided that such alteration shall be made on the basis of an engineering and traffic investigation, be reasonable and safe, and in the interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of this City; and WHEREAS,these changes will be listed in the Master Speed Limit Code adopted by the City. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County,Washington,as follows: Section 1. Adoption of the Master Speed Limit Schedule. The Master Speed Limit Schedule,as set forth below, is adopted. Section 2. Repeal. To the extent that any previous actions to establish speed limit signs are inconsistent with those set forth herein,they are repealed specifically including Resolution 17-017. Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. Adopted this day of , 2018. City of Spokane Valley L.R. Higgins, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 18-006 Establishing Speed Limits Page 1 of 4 DRAFT MASTER SPEED LIMIT SCHEDULE School Speed Zones SCHOOL SPEED ZONES The following road sections have been designated as school zones. The maximum speed allowable on the said road sections shall be 20 miles per hour as designated with any of the signage options pursuant to Washington Administrative Code section 392-151-035 as adopted or amended. The Council shall establish any changes to speed limits or school speed zones by resolution. TWENTY MILES PER HOUR: 4th AVENUE from 600 feet west of Adams Road to 300 feet east of Adams Road; from 300 feet west of Bradley Street to 300 feet east of Coleman Street; and from 300 feet west of Long Road to Moen Street. 8th AVENUE from 300 feet west of Adams Road to 800 feet east of Adams Road. 9th AVENUE from Herald Road to Felts Road. 10th AVENUE from Wilbur Road to Union Road. 12th AVENUE from Wilbur Road to Union Road. 16th AVENUE from 300 feet west of University Road to 300 feet east of Glenn Road; from Woodlawn Road to Clinton Road; and from 300 feet east of Bolivar Road to 200 feet west of Warren Road. 24th AVENUE from Union Road to Pines Road and from 300 feet west of Calvin Road to 200 feet east of Adams Road. 32w'AVENUE from 300 feet west of Pines Road to Woodlawn Road. ADAMS ROAD from 9'Avenue to 350 feet north of 4th Avenue and from 850 feet north of 24th Avenue to 24'Avenue. ALKI AVENUE from Glenn Road to Pierce Road and from 800 feet east of Bates Road to 600 feet west of SR-27. BARKER ROAD from 750 feet south of Mission Avenue to 300 feet north of Mission Avenue. BOONE from 300 feet west of Farr Road to 300 feet east of Farr Road. BOWDISH ROAD from 20'Avenue to 24th Avenue and from 300 feet south of 11'Avenue to 300 feet north of 11'Avenue. BRADLEY ROAD from 5'Avenue to 3rd Avenue. BROADWAY AVENUE from 400 feet west of Farr Road to 400 feet east of Farr Road; from 100 feet west of VanMarter Road to Johnson Road;from 300 feet west of Progress Road to St. Charles Road; from 400 feet east of McDonald Road to Blake Road; from 300 feet west of Felts Road to 300 feet east of Felts Road; from 300 feet west of Ella Road to 300 feet east of Ella Road; and from 400 feet east of Wilbur Road to 650 feet west of SR-27. BUCKEYE AVENUE from 200 feet east of Park Road to 350 feet east of Center Road. CATALDO from Rudolf to MacArthur. CENTER ROAD from Marietta Avenue to Utah Avenue. CIMMARON DRIVE from Sunderland Drive to 300 feet east of Woodruff Road. COLEMAN ROAD from 5'Avenue to 3rd Avenue. FARR ROAD from 300 feet south of Valleyway Avenue to 350 feet north of Valleyway Avenue. FLORA ROAD from 600 feet south of Wellesley to Wellesley Avenue. HERALD ROAD from 1 lth Avenue to 9'Avenue. LONG ROAD from 300 feet south of 4'Avenue to 2nd Avenue and from 650 feet south of Mission Avenue to 150 feet north of Mission Avenue. MacARTHUR from Boone to Cataldo. MCDONALD ROAD from Broadway Avenue to Cataldo Avenue;from 350 feet south of 16'Avenue to 14' Avenue; and from 7'Avenue to 5'Avenue. Resolution 18-006 Establishing Speed Limits Page 2 of 4 DRAFT MISSION AVENUE from 500 feet west of Bowman Road to Park Road; from SR-27 to 750 feet east of SR- I 27; from 750 feet west of Long Road to 350 feet east of Long Road and from Barker Road to 500 feet east of Barker Road. PARK ROAD from 300 feet south of Mission Avenue to Nora Avenue and from 100 feet south of Carlisle Avenue to 400 feet north of Buckeye Avenue. PINES ROAD from 25th Avenue to 23rd Avenue,from 40th Avenue to 500 feet north of 32'd Avenue,and from 18'Avenue to 20th Avenue. PROGRESS ROAD from 650 feet south of Broadway Avenue to Broadway Avenue and from Wellesley Avenue to Crown Avenue. RUDOLF from Boone to Cataldo. SCHAFER ROAD from 300 feet south of Cimmaron Drive to 300 feet north of Cimmaron Drive. SR-27 from 200 feet south of Mirabeau Parkway to 100 feet north of Pinecroft Way and from 300 feet north of Broadway Avenue to 300 feet south of Broadway Avenue. UNION ROAD from 12'Avenue to 10'Avenue. UNIVERSITY ROAD from 19'Avenue to 16'Avenue. VALLEYWAY AVENUE from 300 feet west of Marguerite Road to 150 feet east of Hutchinson Street. VISTA ROAD from Frederick Avenue to 200 feet south of Buckeye Avenue. WELLESLEY AVENUE from 700 feet west of Adams Road to 200 feet east of Burns Road and from Conklin Road to Flora Road. WILBUR ROAD from 12th Avenue to 10th Avenue. WOODRUFF ROAD from 300 feet south of Cimmaron Drive to 300 feet north of Cimmaron Drive. Playground Speed Zones PLAYGROUND SPEED ZONES The following road sections have been designated as playground zones. The maximum speed allowable on said road sections shall be as shown below when signs are in place. TWENTY MILES PER HOUR: MISSION AVENUE from 250 feet west of Bowdish Road to 1,500 feet west of Bowdish Road. TWENTY-FIVE MILES PER HOUR: MIRABEAU PARKWAY from 1,000 feet east of Pinecroft Way to 1,300 feet north of Mansfield Avenue. Speed Limits The following road sections have maximum speed limits higher than 25 miles per hour. THIRTY MILES PER HOUR: 3rd AVENUE from west city limits to Fancher Road. 8th AVENUE from Pines Road to Sullivan Road. INDIANA PARKWAY from Indiana Avenue to Flora Road. MISSION AVENUE from Pines Road to Sullivan Road and from Flora Road to Barker Road. MISSION PARKWAY from Indiana Parkway to Flora Road. MONTGOMERY DRIVE from Argonne Road to Dartmouth Lane. THIRTY-FIVE MILES PER HOUR: 1st AVENUE from Eastern Road to Thierman Road. 4th AVENUE from west city limits to Eastern Road. 8th AVENUE from west city limits to Park Road; from Dishman-Mica Road to University Road;and from Barker Road to Hodges Road. Resolution 18-006 Establishing Speed Limits Page 3 of 4 DRAFT 16th AVENUE from Dishman-Mica Road to Sullivan Road. 32"AVENUE from Dishman-Mica Road to Best Road. 44th AVENUE from Locust Road to Sands Road. APPLEWAY AVENUE from Sprague Avenue to east city limits. APPLEWAY BOULEVARD from Thierman Road to University Road. ARGONNE ROAD from Dishman-Mica Road to SR-290. BARKER ROAD from south city limits to 420 feet north of Bridgeport Avenue. BLAKE ROAD from SR-27 to Saltese Road. BOWDISH ROAD from Sands Road to Mission Avenue. BROADWAY AVENUE from Havana Street to Flora Road. CARNAHAN ROAD from south city limits to 8th Avenue. DISHMAN ROAD from 8th Avenue to Appleway Avenue. DISHMAN-MICA ROAD from 300 feet south of 8th Avenue to Sprague Avenue. EUCLID AVENUE from Sullivan Road to Flora Road; from Flora Road to Barker Road; and from Barker Road to east city limits. EVERGREEN ROAD from 32nd Avenue to Indiana Avenue and from SR-290 to Forker Road. FANCHER ROAD from the Freeway(PSH No. 2)access on 3rd Avenue to SR-290. FLORA ROAD from Sprague Avenue to Montgomery Avenue and from the north side of the Spokane River to Wellesley Avenue. INDIANA AVENUE from SR-27 to Indiana Parkway. INDIANA AVENUE from Sullivan Road to Indiana Parkway. MADISON ROAD from Thorpe Road to Pines Road. MANSFIELD AVENUE from Montgomery Avenue to Mirabeau Parkway. MARIETTA AVENUE from Sullivan Road to Euclid Avenue. McDONALD ROAD from 16th Avenue to Mission Avenue. MIRABEAU PARKWAY from SR-27 to Indiana Avenue. MISSION AVENUE from Argonne Road to SR-27 and from Barker Road to east city limits. MONTGOMERY DRIVE from Dartmouth Lane to SR-27. MULLAN ROAD from Appleway Avenue to Indiana Avenue. PARK ROAD from Beverly Drive to Bridgeport Avenue. PINES ROAD from Madison Road to 16th Avenue. PROGRESS ROAD from Wellesley Avenue to Crown Avenue. RUTTER AVENUE from west city limits to Park Road. SALTESE ROAD from 16th Avenue to Blake Road. SANDS ROAD from 44th Avenue to Bowdish Road. SCHAFER ROAD from 44th Avenue to Dishman-Mica Road. SPRAGUE AVENUE from west city limits to east city limits. SR-27 from SR-290 to 500 feet south of 16th Avenue. SULLIVAN ROAD from Saltese Road to Wellesley Avenue. THORPE ROAD from Dishman-Mica Road to Madison Road. UNIVERSITY ROAD from Dishman-Mica Road to Mission Avenue. WELLESLEY AVENUE from McDonald Road to Flora Road. FORTY MILES PER HOUR: BARKER ROAD from Euclid Avenue to SR-290. SR-290 from west city limits to 1,200 feet west of University Road. FORTY-FIVE MILES PER HOUR: DISHMAN-MICA ROAD from south city limits to 300 feet south of 8th Avenue. SR-27 from 500 feet south of 16th Avenue to south city limits. FIFTY MILES PER HOUR: SR-290 from 1,200 feet west of University Road to east city limits. Resolution 18-006 Establishing Speed Limits Page 4 of 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 17, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business [' new business [' public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report [' pending legislation [' executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed easement—Avista natural gas extension at 14th Avenue. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.11.020. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of Avista natural gas franchise September 17, 2013. BACKGROUND: Avista is the only provider for natural gas in the region. The City granted Avista a franchise to install and maintain its natural gas facilities in the City's rights-of-way. Avista has identified an area where it would like to connect gas lines from 14th Lane to 15th Avenue in Bettman's Addition, near Bettman Road. A map of the area is attached for reference. The parcel where Avista would like to install a buried gas line is parcel number 35243.1080, and is not right-of-way, although it was designated as such many years ago. As such, the franchise does not control this request. The City acquired the parcel in 2010 as part of a stormwater project, and it does not have any structures on it. The gas line would be located in a 10 foot easement along the west side of the property, and beneath several electric lines (installed pursuant to a different easement many years ago). The proposed easement language requires Avista to move its facilities in the event the City needs to do any alteration to the property for a public purpose. The City does not believe the easement would impact the City's use of the property. A copy of the proposed easement is attached for review. OPTIONS: (1) Place on a future consent agenda; (2) place of a future agenda for regular motion consideration; or (3) take other action as appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place on a future consent agenda. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney. ATTACHMENTS: (1) Area map; (2) proposed easement. ., f j • g ° 0.... ^im 'a° afiv . 5 4 -^ ti' �fd3rrti q, _ v • ... . "•�� r. 4 T .. \ , ,. ,:... ,... 4 .y.ti... eT"f " yr a•ate yy7, '. ....off i L } y� 'y -,.7., ' .::- , 4 #. y , 1:141 4r. •'+ r.ti.• 7 ," 'f$V. i. ' r•• teS# aIJ h•S"' •M1 is .. +C • 1 Va . .i.".! it' ,_...414r.:- y.r,F4';:kt...tiiir'i°7.. : :::::. r.101.:i.l...0-: a 6 4.:, '.... .. - 1-.. • :,-,P- . ---:°..° '. lot 1 ° . - . ° . r°-' " .--. ° '.:- - -'-may , [j lr t • ilhf , . .. .. - ''' -- 11.1111- 17 ' F. ..- „It- Of see° ,' ,£ . 14. .. . .0: .: •• ..;i..... -.,:: :;:‘,..,,,,..-. i7 ;v ... . .. , ot. .' '. . ._..:. ...,..,4. c.. :•:••. 4r,e. ..., e 44-.1-2,',.. :-.,.... 4. 6 ... . .,.. , ... _, ... . . .r..,.... .. Iri„ 110.. .,,,. . :._ ._ ...... , .. ...,... ......f,.. .. .._, ..___ fe.7..%4‘,4-: : fi k s •• ;, - ,J. . teik•:-.. 1.... •:: • tIv X y. L L', ., .k.„ .111•7 l Y _ i "fid ^.. Q �•L�Sbp ; . 1 Ili• e• S" 1 Yf' _. Atia '4C' 1 ,a$ a� '•x5. ~I' .•--...i., fi' ' ' r " b ¢��y� I �i r1 - e 111 �• ', •F {ye L r y� 4L om' : p ..::::,.., '1 ass1445114; 1. • a • * y a" • v1 -1,6.. "r Ili • �Y�• i� ' " ' °" ,'hl.• AypY 1 ",. }I.r,- yf5 �, A} ' . 4 ' ''..24.•0,4 4.::-...fr*..r'...2°, eo, . .... Ili:: . .„ ,,,x ... - . , . ... rr r I . _ 0 1?•a — 4 ItAL,1:1 ' 'k Au. • • ``::ter ... Return Address: Avista Corporation Real Estate Department MSC-25 P.O.Box 3727 Spokane,Washington 99220-3727 NATURAL GAS PIPELINE EASEMENT For Mutual Benefits and Good Consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,a municipal corporation ("Grantor"), hereby grants,conveys and warrants to AVISTA CORPORATION, a Washington corporation ("Grantee"), a perpetual non-exclusive easement on, over, under, along and across real property identified as Assessor's Parcel #35243.1080 located in the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of Section 24, Township 25 North,Range 43 East Willamette Meridian,in Spokane County, State of Washington,legally described in EXHIBIT"A"(the"Property"),and by this reference is incorporated into this easement. 1. PURPOSE.Grantee shall have the right to construct,reconstruct,operate,maintain,upgrade,repair,remove,relocate and replace a natural gas pipeline together with all related communications and appurtenances ("Facilities")on, over, under,along and across a 10'wide easement strip adjacent to the westerly parcel line,the approximate location of which is shown on the attached map marked EXHIBIT "B" (the "Easement Area"), and by this reference is incorporated into this easement. 2. ACCESS AND DAMAGE.Grantee shall have the right of access over and across the Property and the adjoining property of the Grantor for the purpose of the installation, repair and maintenance of said facilities, provided the Grantee repairs any damage, makes reasonable attempt to restore the affected area to its original or natural state, as close as reasonably possible or compensates the Grantor for any damage to said properties as a result of such access, installation,repair and maintenance. 3. CLEARING AND MAINTENANCE. Grantee shall have the right to cut, trim and remove any brush,branches, landscaping and trees, including danger trees, within the Easement Area, the Property and on Grantor's adjoining property that in the opinion of the Grantee,could interfere with the safe and reliable operation of Grantee's Facilities or that could interfere with the exercise of Grantee's rights as granted herein. 4. GRANTOR'S USE OF THE PROPERTY. Grantor reserves the right to use and enjoy the Property,to the extent that such use does not conflict or interfere with the Grantee's rights herein.Grantor shall not construct,place or maintain any building,structure or landscaping within the Easement Area that may interfere with Grantee's rights or with the safe operation of the Facilities or that are not in compliance with all safety and building codes,regulations and laws. Page 1 of 5,Avista Corporation Document No. 5. INDEMNITY. Grantee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Grantor,its employees,agents,guests and invitees from damage to property and personal injury to the extent caused by Grantee's negligence or willful misconduct in the exercise of its rights herein, provided that Grantee shall not be liable for property damage or personal injury that is caused by the acts or omissions of Grantor,its employees,agents,guests and invitees or any other person. 6. GRANTOR'S WARRANTY. Grantor warrants and represents that Grantor has the unrestricted right to grant this easement and the rights described here. 7. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The rights granted in this easement run with the Property and shall be binding upon and benefit the parties and their respective successors,heirs and assigns. DATED this day of ,2018. GRANTOR(S): CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Signature of:Mark Calhoun,City Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON) )ss. COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) On this day of , 2018, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared, Mark Calhoun, to me known to be the City Manager of the City of Spokane Valley,a municipal corporation of the State of Washington,that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to an official act and deed of said municipal corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument,and that the seal affixed is the seal of the City of Spokane Valley. Signature Print Name Notary Public for the State of Residing at My Commission Expires Page 2 of 5,Avista Corporation Document No. GRANTEE Avista Corporation By: Its: Page 3 of 5,Avista Corporation Document No. EXHIBIT A Legal Description Of the Property Parcel#35243.1080 Lot 12,Block 9 of Bettman's Addition as per plat thereof recorded in Volume C of Plats,Page 13,records of Spokane County,Washington TOGETHER WITH that portion of Vacated 14th Avenue and that portion of Vacated Dickey Road which attaches by Operation of Law. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, COUNTY OF SPOKANE, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Page 4 of 5,Avista Corporation Document No. EXHIBIT B Easement Area 352430915 352430986 352430987 352430988 352430989 N SW 1/4 Section 24, T25N, R43E. W.M. m Not to Scale Subject Property Parcel 35243.1080 352431079 352431078 352431077 352431070 Underground natural gas line 10'in width and approximately 165'in length adjacent to westerly parcel line 352431071 352431054 Page 5 of 5,Avista Corporation Document No. DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of July 12,2018; 8:30 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk,by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings July 24,2018,Formal Meetin2 Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue July 171 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minute,Avista Easement) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Ordinance 18-014, Comp Plan Amendment-Lori Barlow (20 minutes) 3. First Reading Ordinance 18-015 Comp Plan Amendment,Zoning Map-Lori Barlow (5 minutes) 4. First Reading Ordinance 18-016 ExteNet Wireless Franchise Agreement- Cary Driskell (10 minutes) 5. First Reading Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Fiber Franchise Agreement- Cary Driskell (5 minutes) 6. First Reading Ordinance 18-018 amending SVMC 2.75,Public Records-Erik Lamb (10 minutes) 7. Resolution 18-006 Amending 17-017, Master Speed Schedule, School Zones-Bill Helbig (10 minutes) 8. Motion Consideration: TIB Grant Applications-Bill Helbig, Gloria Mantz (10 minutes) 9. Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Mission Ave St. Preservation, McDonald-Evergreen-G.Mantz(5 min) 10. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Euclid Ave (Sullivan to Flora)-G. Mantz, R.Lochmiller (10 minutes) 11. Advance Agenda-Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 12. Info Item: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 95 mins] July 31,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue July 241 ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading Ordinance 18-014 Comp Plan Amendment-Lori Barlow (15 minutes) 2. Second Reading Ordinance 18-015 Comp Plan Amendment,Zoning Map-Lori Barlow (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance 18-016 ExteNet Wireless Franchise Agreement-Cary Driskell (5 minutes) 4. Second Reading Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Fiber Franchise Agreement-Cary Driskell (5 minutes) 5. Motion Consideration: Council Goals/Priorities For Lodging Tax- Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) NON-ACTION ITEMS: 6. Retail Recruitment Plan-Mike Basinger, and Scott VonCannon w/Retail Strategies (25 minutes) 7. Quarterly Police Department Report-Inspector Lyons (10 minutes) 8. Recap of AWC Yakima Conference-Councilmember Wick et al (30 minutes) 9. Advance Agenda-Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 10. Executive Session: Review the Performance of a Public Employee (30 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 145 mins] August 7,2018 Meeting Cancelled-National Night Out Au2ust 14,2018,Formal meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Aug 71 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Ordinance 18-018 amending SVMC 2.75,Public Records-Erik Lamb (10 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: Bid Award: Argonne Rd Preser.Project, Broadway to Indiana-G. Mantz (15 min) 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda-Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 35 mins] Au2ust 21,2018, Special Meetin2-5 pm, Council Chambers -45 minutes Joint meeting with Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Au2ust 21,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Aug 141 1. Estimated Revenues &Expenditures 2019 Budget-Chelsie Taylor (20 minutes) 2. Review of Potential and Pending Capital Projects-Chelsie Taylor (20 minutes) 3. Sullivan Bridge Project Completion Update-Erica Amsden, Gloria Mantz (15 minutes) 4. Council Budget Goals for 2019-Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 5. Advance Agenda-Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 75 mins] Draft Advance Agenda 7/12/2018 11:48:00 AM Page 1 of 3 August 28,2018,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Aug 211 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 3. Info Item: Department Reports Sept 4,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Aug 281 1. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Sept 11,2018,Formal meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Sept 41 1. PUBLIC HEARING#1: 2019 Revenues including Property Taxes—Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes;motion to set Oct 9 budget hearing) (5 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Sept 18,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Sept 111 1. Admin Report: Proposed Ordinance Adopting 2019 Property Taxes—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 2. Outside Agencies Presentations (Economic Dev& Social Services combined)—Chelsie Taylor 90 minutes 3. Advance Agenda -Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Sept 25,2018,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Sept 181 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. City Manager Presentation of 2019 Preliminary Budget—Mark Calhoun (45 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 4. Info Item: Department Reports Oct 2,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Sept 25 1. Budget Amendment, 2018 —Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Oct 9,2018,Formal meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Oct 21 1. PUBLIC HEARING#2: 2019 Budget— Chelsie Taylor (20 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3. First Reading Ordinance 18- ,Property Tax— Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 4. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Oct 16,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Oct 91 1. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Oct 23,2018,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Oct 161 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2018 Budget Amendment— Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance 18- ,Property Tax—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 4. First Reading Ordinance 18- ,adopting 2018 Budget Amendment—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 5. First Reading Ordinance 18- , adopting 2019 Budget—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 6. Motion Consideration: Outside Agency Allocation of Funds—Chelsie Taylor (20 minutes) 7. Admin Report: Quarterly Police Department Report— Chief Werner (10 minutes) 8. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 9. Info Item: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 80 mins] Oct 30,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Oct 231 1. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Nov 6,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Oct 301 1. Fee Resolution for 2019— Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 7/12/2018 11:48:00 AM Page 2 of 3 Nov 13,2018,Formal Meetin2 Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Nov 61 1. PUBLIC HEARING#3: 2019 Budget—Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance 18- ,adopting 2018 Budget Amendment—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 4. Second Reading Ordinance 18- , adopting 2019 Budget— Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 5. Admin Report: LTAC Recommendations to Council— Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) Nov 20,2018,Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Nov 131 1. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 2. Info Item: Department Reports Nov 27, 2018—Meeting Cancelled— Thanksgiving Holiday Dec 4,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Nov 261 1. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) Dec 11,2018,Formal Meetin2 Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Dec 41 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Proposed Fee Resolution for 2019— Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: Award of Lodging Tax for 2019—Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) Dec 18,2018, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Dec 111 1. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 2. Info Item: Department Reports No Meeting: Tuesday,December 25,2018, and no meeting Tuesday,January 1,2019 *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Animal Control Regulations(SVMC 7.30) TPA AWC Conference Recap Utility Facilities in ROW Camping in RVs Donation Recognition Duplex Density Electrical Inspections Federal Lobbyist Governance Manual Legislative Remote Testimony(Chambers) Naming City Facilities Protocol Neighborhood Restoration Program Police Dept. Quarterly Rpt(April,July,Oct,Jan) Police Precinct Lease Renewal(Nov '18) Sign Ordinance Snowplows, sidewalk snow removal,etc. St. Illumination(ownership,cost,location) St. O&M Pavement Preservation Surplus Property Resolution Tobacco 21 Resolution Draft Advance Agenda 7/12/2018 11:48:00 AM Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 17, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business [' new business [' public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report [' pending legislation [' executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed Ordinance 18-017 — ExteNet Systems, Inc. — wireless telecommunications facilities. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.47.040; RCW 35A.11.020; chapter 35.99 RCW, chapter 22.121 SVMC regarding small cell regulations. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: The City was recently approached by ExteNet Systems, Inc. (Extenet), regarding new wireless facilities necessary to bring small cell technology to the residents and businesses of Spokane Valley. Staff then began negotiating the terms of a wireless franchise ordinance agreement with representatives of ExteNet. We used the standard telecommunications franchise agreement as the template, based on a number of telecommunication franchises previously approved by the Council. Staff and ExteNet have agreed on the proposed terms for a wireless franchise agreement, which are before the Council in proposed Ordinance 18-017. OPTIONS: Information only, this will be brought forward for an ordinance first reading on a future agenda. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None at this time. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance 18-017 — ExteNet Systems, Inc., wireless telecommunications franchise. DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 18-017 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, GRANTING A NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO EXTENET SYSTEMS, INC. TO CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN AND OPERATE WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 authorizes the City to grant, permit, and regulate "nonexclusive franchises for the use of public streets, bridges or other public ways, structures or places above or below the surface of the ground for railroads and other routes and facilities for public conveyances, for poles, conduits, tunnels, towers and structures, pipes and wires and appurtenances thereof for transmission and distribution of electrical energy, signals and other methods of communication, for gas, steam and liquid fuels, for water, sewer and other private and publicly owned and operated facilities for public service;"and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 further requires that "no ordinance or resolution granting any franchise in a code city for any purpose shall be adopted or passed by the city's legislative body on the day of its introduction nor for five days thereafter,nor at any other than a regular meeting nor without first being submitted to the city attorney,nor without having been granted by the approving vote of at least a majority of the entire legislative body,nor without being published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the city before becoming effective;"and WHEREAS,this Ordinance has been submitted to the City Attorney prior to its passage; and WHEREAS,the Council finds that the grant of the Franchise contained in this Ordinance, subject to its terms and conditions, is in the best interests of the public,and protects the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of this City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, ordains as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance,the following words and terms shall have the meaning set forth below: "City Manager"means the City Manager or designee. "Common costs" shall include necessary costs not specifically attributable to the undergrounding of any particular facility, such as costs for common trenching and utility vaults. "construction"or"construct"shall mean constructing,digging,excavating,laying,testing, operating, extending,upgrading, renewing, removing, replacing, and repairing a facility. "day" shall mean a 24-hour period beginning at 12:01 AM. If a thing or act is to be done in less than seven days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays shall be excluded in the computation of time. Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 1 of 16 DRAFT "Fair share" shall be determined for a project on the basis of the number of conduits of Grantee's facilities being undergrounded in comparison to the total number of conduits of all other utility facilities being undergrounded. "franchise area" shall mean the entire geographic area within the City as it is now constituted or may in the future be constituted. "hazardous substances" shall have the same meaning as RCW 70.105D.020(10). "maintenance, maintaining or maintain" shall mean the work involved in the replacement and/or repair of facilities with new facilities that are substantially identical to those being replaced or repaired, including constructing, relaying, repairing, replacing, examining, testing, inspecting, removing, digging and excavating, and restoring operations incidental thereto. "permittee" shall mean a person or entity who has been granted a permit by the permitting authority. "permitting authority" shall mean the City Manager or designee authorized to process and grant permits required to perform work in the rights-of-way. "product" shall refer to the item,thing, or use provided by the Grantee. "relocation" shall mean any required move or relocation of an existing installation or equipment owned by Grantee whereby such move or relocation is necessitated by installation, improvement, renovation, or repair of another entity's facilities in the rights- of-way, including Grantor's facilities. "rights-of-way" shall refer to the surface of and the space along, above, and below any street, road, highway, freeway, lane, sidewalk, alley, court, boulevard, parkway, drive, Grantee easement, and/or public way now or hereafter held or administered by the City. "streets"shall mean the surface of, and the space above and below,any public street,road, alley, or highway,within the City used or intended to be used by the general public,to the extent the City has the right to allow the Grantee to use them. "telecommunications facilities" shall mean, collectively or individually, any and all equipment, fixtures, appurtenances, antennas, receivers, equipment boxes, backup power supplies, power transfer switches, cut-off switches, electric meters, coaxial cables, fiber optic cables,telcom demarcation boxes and related materials and other facilities necessary to furnish and deliver telecommunications services,including but not limited to poles with crossarms, poles without crossarms, wires, lines, conduits, cables, communication and signal lines and equipment, braces, guys, anchors, vaults, and all attachments, appurtenances, and appliances necessary or incidental to the distribution and use of telecommunications services. The abandonment by Grantee of any telecommunications facilities as defined herein shall not act to remove the same from this definition. Section 2. Grant of Franchise. The City of Spokane Valley, a Washington municipal corporation (hereinafter as "City" or "the City"), hereby grants unto ExteNet Systems, Inc. (hereinafter "Grantee"), a franchise for a period of 10 years, beginning on the effective date of this Ordinance, to install, construct, operate,repair,maintain,replace and use all necessary equipment and facilities to place telecommunications Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 2 of 16 DRAFT facilities in,under,on,across,over,through,along, or below the public rights-of-way located in the City of Spokane Valley, as approved under City permits issued pursuant to this franchise (hereinafter the "franchise"). This franchise does not include the right to install or maintain facilities on, over, or above that portion of the rights-of-way utilized for vehicular travel and parking. This franchise does not convey any right to Grantee to install its facilities on, under, over, or across any facility or structure owned by a third-party without such written approval of the third-party. No substantive expansions, additions to or modifications (excluding modifications necessitated by replacement or repair) or relocation of any of the facilities shall be allowed without first having received prior authorization from the City through an amendment to this franchise, or pursuant to a permit issued by the City. Placement of all telecommunication facilities in the rights-of-way shall be pursuant to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, including applicable zoning requirements. Grantee shall be permitted to install, operate, maintain,upgrade,remove,replace,repair and/or restore its telecommunications facilities within the rights- of-way in order to provide telecommunication services to its customers. A) Grantee shall be permitted to erect or replace poles within the rights-of-way only as permitted and pursuant to applicable Spokane Valley Municipal Code ("City Code") sections. Grantee shall be responsible for providing an alternate site analysis together with Grantee's initial request for approvals. Such report shall be paid for by Grantee, and may be prepared either by a third party consultant/engineer agreed to by the Parties. B) The maximum height of any structure placed within the rights-of-way shall be 90 feet. C) Any cabinet, cabling, or other accessory equipment which can be placed underground shall be undergrounded as provided in Section 14. Other cabling or electrical equipment shall either be placed within the supporting pole or structure, or concealed from view in accordance with applicable sections from the City Code. D)Any above-ground electrical equipment placed upon a utility pole or structure shall be operated in a manner which permits it to be deactivated during maintenance,construction, or reconstruction of other utility equipment located on the utility pole or structure. Any above-ground telecommunications facilities,including any electrical facilities necessary to the operation of the telecommunications facilities, shall be co-located with the facilities of another utility provider whenever commercially reasonable. E) To the extent that such facilities are personal wireless services, Grantee and the City will subsequently enter into a site-specific agreement, including the payment of a site specific charge, pursuant to the requirements of RCW 35.21.860, in a form to be mutually agreed upon. F) The facilities shall not be used for cable internet services or Cable Services as those terms are defined in 47 U.S.C. § 522(6). G) Grantee shall have the right, without prior City approval, to offer or provide capacity or bandwidth to its customers consistent with this franchise provided: (a) Grantee retains exclusive control over its telecommunications system, facilities, and services,and remains responsible for constructing,installing,and maintaining its facilities pursuant to the terms and conditions of this franchise; Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 3 of 16 DRAFT (b) Grantee may not grant rights to any customer or lessee that are materially greater than any rights franchisee has pursuant to this franchise; (c)Such customer or lessee or Grantee shall not be construed to be a third-party beneficiary under this franchise; and (d)No such customer or lessee may use Grantee's telecommunications system or services for any purpose not authorized by this franchise,nor to sell or offer for sale any service to the citizens of the City without all required federal approvals Section 3. Fee. No right-of-way use fee is imposed for the term of this franchise. Any such right-of-way use or franchise fee that may be imposed by subsequent ordinance would apply to any subsequent franchise, if any,between the parties. Section 4. City Use. To the extent applicable to Grantee's use of the rights-of-way, the following provisions shall apply regarding City use. A) Grantee agrees to reserve to the City the right to access four dark fiber strands (two pair) along the route as mutually approved by both parties at a later date,within the boundaries of the City,for sole and exclusive municipal, non-commercial use or designation (the "City Reserved Fibers"). City agrees that it shall not use the City Reserved Fibers as a public utility provider of telecommunications business service to the public. B) The City has the right to access by connection to the City Reserved Fibers at existing Grantee splice points or reasonably established access points within the City limits;provided that all splicing shall be the sole responsibility of Grantee, except cost,pursuant to Section 4(D),below. The City shall provide at least 30 days' written notice of intent to access the City Reserved Fibers. Upon any access or use of the City Reserved Fibers, City shall pay Grantee a recurring monthly charge of $20.00 per fiber pair per mile in use by the City (the "City Fiber Rate") unless otherwise specifically agreed by both the parties in writing and shall negotiate and enter into a"Fiber License Agreement"which shall govern the terms and conditions for use of the City Reserved Fibers,except cost,which is set forth herein. Said recurring monthly charge shall not be imposed until such time as the fiber is put into use by the City. City and Grantee shall execute a Dark Fiber IRU Agreement to outline the terms for the fiber dedication prior to the time the City wants use the dark fiber. C)In the event the City Reserved Fibers are the last fibers remaining in Grantee's fiber bundle,then the following shall apply: 1) If the City is using the fibers,then the rate the City shall pay Grantee will change from the City Fiber Rate to Grantee's standard commercial rate. 2) If the City is not using the fibers,the City shall have the option of abandoning the City Reserved Fibers in lieu of paying Grantee's standard commercial rate. If Grantee installs additional fiber capacity,the City's right to use four dark fiber strands as set forth in subsections 1 and 2, immediately above, shall again be in effect. D) All access, interconnection and maintenance to and on the City Reserved Fibers shall be performed by Grantee. The City shall pay all costs associated with such work to the City Reserved Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 4 of 16 DRAFT Fibers. The City Reserved Fibers shall have a term that matches the duration of this franchise Ordinance. E) Pursuant to RCW 35.99.070, at such time when Grantee is constructing, relocating, or placing ducts or conduits in public rights-of-way,the City Manager may require Grantee to provide the City with additional duct or conduit and related structures, at incremental cost, necessary to access the conduit at mutually convenient locations. Any ducts or conduits provided by Grantee under this section shall only be used for City municipal,non-commercial purposes. 1) The City shall not require that the additional duct or conduit space be connected to the access structures and vaults of the Grantee. 2)This section shall not affect the provision of an institutional network by a cable television provider under federal law. 3) Grantee shall notify the City Manager at least 14 days' prior to opening a trench at any location to allow the City to exercise its options as provided herein. Section 5. Recovery of Costs. Grantee shall reimburse the City for all costs of one publication of a summary of this franchise in a local newspaper, and required legal notices prior to any public hearing regarding this franchise, contemporaneous with its acceptance of this franchise. Grantee shall be subject to all permit and inspection fees associated with activities undertaken through the authority granted in this franchise or under City Code. Section 6. Non-Exclusivity. This franchise is granted upon the express condition that it shall not in any manner prevent the City from granting other or further franchises or permits in any rights-of-way, so long as any subsequent franchise or permit does not unreasonably interfere with Grantee's use of the right-of- way. This and other franchises shall, in no way, prevent or prohibit the City from using any of its rights- of-way or affect its jurisdiction over them or any part of them. Section 7. Non-Interference with Existing Facilities. The City shall have prior and superior right to the use of its rights-of-way and public properties for installation and maintenance of its facilities and other governmental purposes. The City hereby retains full power to make all changes, relocations, repairs, maintenance, establishments, improvements, dedications or vacation of same as the City may deem fit, including the dedication, establishment, maintenance, and improvement of all new rights-of-way, streets, avenues,thoroughfares and other public properties of every type and description. Any and all such removal or replacement shall be at the sole expense of Grantee,unless RCW 35.99.060 provides otherwise. Should Grantee fail to remove, adjust or relocate its telecommunications facilities by the date established by the City Manager's written notice to Grantee and in accordance with RCW 35.99.060, the City may cause and/or effect such removal, adjustment or relocation,and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee. The owners of all utilities,public or private,installed in or on such public properties prior to the installation of the telecommunications facilities of Grantee, shall have preference as to the positioning and location of such utilities so installed with respect to Grantee. Such preference shall continue in the event of the necessity of relocating or changing the grade of any such public properties. Grantee's telecommunications facilities shall be constructed and maintained in such manner as not to unreasonably interfere with any public use, or with any other pipes, wires, conduits or other facilities that may have been laid in the rights-of-way by or under the City's authority. If the work done under this franchise damages or unreasonably interferes in any way with the public use or other facilities, Grantee Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 5 of 16 DRAFT shall wholly and at its own expense make such provisions necessary to eliminate the interference or damage to the satisfaction of the City Manager. Section 8. Construction Standards. All work authorized and required hereunder shall comply with all generally applicable City Codes and regulations. Grantee shall also comply with all applicable federal and state regulations, laws, and practices. Grantee is responsible for the supervision, condition, and quality of the work done, whether it is by itself or by contractors, assigns, or agencies. Application of said federal, state, and City Codes and regulations shall be for the purposes of fulfilling the City's public trustee role in administering the primary use and purpose of public properties, and not for relieving the Grantee of any duty,obligation,or responsibility for the competent design,construction,maintenance,and operation of its telecommunications facilities. Grantee is responsible for the supervision,condition,and quality of the work done,whether it is by itself or by contractors, assigns, or agencies. If Grantee shall at any time be required,or plan,to excavate trenches in any area covered by this franchise, the Grantee shall afford the City an opportunity to permit other franchisees and utilities to share such excavated trenches,provided that: (1) such joint use shall not unreasonably delay the work of the Grantee; and (2) such joint use shall not adversely affect Grantee's telecommunications facilities or safety thereof. Joint users will be required to contribute to the costs of excavation and filling on a pro-rata basis. Section 9. Protection of Monuments. Grantee shall comply with applicable state laws relating to protection of monuments. Section 10. Tree Trimming. Grantee shall have the authority to conduct pruning and trimming for access to Grantee's telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way subject to compliance with the City Code. All such trimming shall be done at Grantee's sole cost and expense. Section 11. Emergency Response. Grantee shall, within 30 days of the execution of this franchise, designate one or more responsible people and an emergency 24-hour on-call personnel, and the procedures to be followed when responding to an emergency. After being notified of an emergency, Grantee shall cooperate with the City to immediately respond with action to aid in the protection of the health and safety of the public. In the event Grantee refuses to promptly take the directed action or fails to fully comply with such direction, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate action to prevent imminent injury or damages to persons or property, the City may take such actions as it believes are necessary to protect persons or property, and Grantee shall be responsible to reimburse the City for its costs and any expenses. Section 12. One-Call System. Pursuant to RCW 19.122, Grantee shall comply with Washington's One- Call statutes. Section 13. Safety. All of Grantee's telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and operational condition. Grantee shall follow all safety codes and other applicable regulations in the installation, operation, and maintenance of the telecommunications facilities. Section 14. Movement of Grantee's Telecommunications Facilities. If the City does not require the undergrounding of Grantee's facilities at the time of a permit application,the City may, at any time in the future,require the conversion of Grantee's aerial facilities to underground installation at Grantee's expense at such time as the City requires all other utilities,except electrical utilities,with aerial facilities in the area to convert them to underground installation. Unless otherwise permitted by the City, Grantee shall underground its facilities in all new developments and subdivisions where other utilities are to be constructed underground, and any development or subdivision where utilities are currently underground. Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 6 of 16 DRAFT Section 14 shall not apply to facilities that are required to remain above ground in order to be functional; provided, however, all other facilities and equipment capable of being installed underground shall be undergrounded by Grantee. Grantee may install a new pole to support antennas or other facilities that must be above ground to function with written approval from the City, and pursuant to adopted City code at the time any new pole is installed. In the event the City requires the undergrounding of the aerial utilities in any area of the City,Grantee shall underground its aerial facilities concurrently with and in the area of the other affected utilities. The location of any relocated and underground utilities shall be approved by the City. Where other utilities are present and involved in the undergrounding project,Grantee shall only be required to pay its fair share of common costs borne by all utilities, in addition to the costs specifically attributable to the undergrounding of Grantee's own facilities. Grantee shall be entitled to reasonable access to open utility trenches, provided that such access does not interfere with the City's placement of utilities or increase the City's costs. Grantee shall pay the City the City's actual additional cost to the City resulting from providing Grantee access to an open trench,including without limitation the pro rata share of the costs of access to an open trench and any costs associated with the delay of the completion of a public works project. Nothing in Section 14 shall be construed as requiring the City to pay any costs of undergrounding any of Grantee's facilities,except as may otherwise be required by Washington State law. Whenever any third party shall have obtained permission from the City to use any right—of-way for the purpose of moving any building or other oversized structure,upon at least 14 days' written notice from the City, Grantee shall move, at the expense of the third party desiring to move the building or structure, any of Grantee's telecommunications facilities that may obstruct the movement thereof;provided,that the path for moving such building or structure is the path of least interference to Grantee's telecommunications facilities, as determined by the City. Upon good cause shown by Grantee,the City may require more than 14 days' notice by the third party to Grantee to move its telecommunications facilities. Section 15. Acquiring New Telecommunications Facilities. Upon Grantee's acquisition of any new telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way, or upon any addition or annexation to the City of any area in which Grantee retains any such telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way, Grantee shall submit to the City a written statement describing all telecommunications facilities involved, whether authorized by franchise or any other form of prior right, and specifying the location of all such facilities. Such facilities shall immediately be subject to the terms of this franchise. Section 16. Dangerous Conditions - Authority of City to Abate. Whenever excavation, installation, construction, repair, maintenance, or relocation of telecommunications facilities authorized by this franchise has caused or contributed to a condition that substantially impairs the lateral support of the adjoining right-of-way, road, street or other public place, or endangers the public, adjoining public or private property or street utilities,the City may direct Grantee,at Grantee's sole expense,to take reasonable actions to protect the public and property. The City may require that such action be completed within a prescribed time. In the event that Grantee fails or refuses to promptly take the actions directed by the City, or fails to fully comply with such directions, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate action, the City may enter upon the property and take such actions as are necessary to protect the public,adjacent public or private property, or street utilities, or to maintain the lateral support thereof, and all other actions deemed by the City to be necessary to preserve the public safety and welfare; and Grantee shall be liable to the City for all costs and expenses thereof to the extent the emergency condition was caused by Grantee's use of the Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 7 of 16 DRAFT right-of-way. Section 17. Hazardous Substances. Grantee shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, statutes,regulations and orders concerning hazardous substances relating to Grantee's telecommunications facilities in the rights—of-way. Grantee agrees to indemnify the City against any claims,costs,and expenses, of any kind,whether direct or indirect, incurred by the City arising out of the release or threat of release of hazardous substances caused by Grantee's ownership or operation of its telecommunications facilities within the City's rights-of-way. Section 18. Environmental. Grantee shall comply with all environmental protection laws, rules, recommendations, and regulations of the United States and the State of Washington, and their various subdivisions and agencies as they presently exist or may hereafter be enacted, promulgated, or amended, and shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all damages arising, or which may arise, or be caused by, or result from the failure of Grantee fully to comply with any such laws, rules, recommendations, or regulations, whether or not Grantee's acts or activities were intentional or unintentional. Grantee shall further indemnify the City against all losses, costs, and expenses (including legal expenses)which the City may incur as a result of the requirement of any government or governmental subdivision or agency to clean and/or remove any pollution caused or permitted by Grantee, whether said requirement is during the term of the franchise or subsequent to its termination. Section 19. Relocation of Telecommunications Facilities. Grantee agrees and covenants, at its sole cost and expense, to protect, support, temporarily disconnect, relocate, or remove from any street any of its telecommunications facilities when so required by the City in accordance with the provisions of RCW 35.99.060, provided that Grantee shall in all such cases have the privilege to temporarily bypass, in the authorized portion of the same street upon approval by the City, any section of its telecommunications facilities required to be temporarily disconnected or removed. If the City determines that the project necessitates the relocation of Grantee's then-existing telecommunications facilities,the City shall: A)At least 60 days prior to the commencement of such improvement project,provide Grantee with written notice requiring such relocation, and Grantor will make reasonable efforts to provide at least 90 days' advance notice; and B) Provide Grantee with copies of pertinent portions of the plans and specifications for such improvement project and a proposed location for Grantee's telecommunications facilities so that Grantee may relocate its telecommunications facilities in other City rights-of-way in order to accommodate such improvement project. C)After receipt of such notice and such plans and specifications,Grantee shall complete relocation of its telecommunications facilities at no charge or expense to the City so as to accommodate the improvement project in accordance with RCW 35.99.060 (2). Grantee may, after receipt of written notice requesting a relocation of its telecommunications facilities, submit to the City written alternatives to such relocation. The City shall evaluate such alternatives and advise Grantee in writing if one or more of the alternatives are suitable to accommodate the work which would otherwise necessitate relocation of the telecommunications facilities. If so requested by the City, Grantee shall submit additional information to assist the City in making such evaluation. The City shall give each alternative proposed by Grantee full and fair consideration. In the event the City ultimately determines that there is no other reasonable alternative, Grantee shall relocate its telecommunications facilities as otherwise provided in this section or may terminate the site-specific agreement associated with Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 8 of 16 DRAFT the affected installation. The provisions of this section shall in no manner preclude or restrict Grantee from making any arrangements it may deem appropriate when responding to a request for relocation of its telecommunications facilities by any person or entity other than the City,where the telecommunications facilities to be constructed by said person or entity are not or will not become City owned, operated, or maintained facilities, provided that such arrangements do not unduly delay a City construction project. If the City or a contractor for the City is delayed at any time in the progress of the work by an act or neglect of the Grantee or those acting for or on behalf of Grantee,then Grantee shall indemnify, defend and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits including attorney fees to the extent arising out of or in connection with such delays,except for delays and damages caused by the City. This provision may not be waived by the parties except in writing. Section 20. Abandonment of Grantee's Telecommunications Facilities. No facility constructed or owned by Grantee may be abandoned without the express written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. A. Underground facilities: The City has discretion and authority to direct Grantee to remove a facility abandoned by Grantee (whether or not the entity had permission to abandon the facility) and restore the rights-of-way to their pre-removal condition when: (a) a City project involves digging that will encounter the abandoned facility; (b)the abandoned facility poses a hazard to the health, safety, or welfare of the public; (c) the abandoned facility is 24 inches or less below the surface of the rights-of-way and the City is reconstructing or resurfacing a street over the rights- of-way; or(d)the abandoned facility has collapsed,broke, or otherwise failed. Grantee may,upon written approval by the City,delay removal of the abandoned facility until such time as the City commences a construction project in the rights-of-way unless (b) or (d) above applies. When (b) or(d) applies, Grantee shall remove the abandoned facility from the rights-of- way as soon as weather conditions allow,unless the City expressly allows otherwise in writing. B.Aboveground facilities: Grantee shall remove any facilities which have not been used to provide telecommunications services for a period of at least 180 days. C. The expense of the removal, and restoration of improvements in the rights-of-way that were damaged by the facility or by the removal process, shall be the sole responsibility of the Grantee. If Grantee fails to remove the abandoned facilities in accordance with the above,then the City may incur costs to remove the abandoned facilities and restore the rights-of-way, and is entitled to reimbursement from Grantee for such costs,including reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Section 21. Maps and Records Required. Grantee shall provide the City,at no cost to the City: A)A route map that depicts the general location of the Grantee's telecommunications facilities placed in the rights-of-way. The route map shall identify telecommunications facilities as aerial or underground and is not required to depict cable types,number of fibers or cables,electronic equipment, and service lines to individual subscribers. Grantee shall also provide an electronic map of the aerial/underground telecommunications facilities in relation to the right-of-way centerline reference to allow the City to add this information to the City's Geographic Information System("GIS")program. The information in this subsection shall be delivered to the City by December 1,annually. Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 9 of 16 DRAFT B) In connection with the construction of any City project, Grantee shall provide to the City,upon the City's reasonable request,copies of available drawings in use by Grantee showing the location of such telecommunications facilities. Grantee shall field locate its telecommunications facilities in order to facilitate design and planning of City improvement projects. C) Upon written request of the City, Grantee shall provide the City with the most recent update available of any plan of potential improvements to its telecommunications facilities within the franchise area;provided,however,any such plan so submitted shall be deemed confidential and for informational purposes only,and shall not obligate Grantee to undertake any specific improvements within the franchise area. The information in this subsection shall be delivered to the City by December 1, annually. D) In addition to the requirements of subsection 1 of this section,the parties agree to periodically share GIS files upon written request,provided Grantee's GIS files are to be used solely by the City for governmental purposes. Any files provided to Grantee shall be restricted to information required for Grantee's engineering needs for construction or maintenance of telecommunications facilities that are the subject of this franchise. Grantee is prohibited from selling any GIS information obtained from City to any third parties. E)Public Record Act. Grantee acknowledges that information submitted to the City may be subject to inspection and copying under the Washington Public Record Act codified in chapter 42.56 RCW. Grantee shall mark as "PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL" each page or portion thereof of any documentation/information which it submits to the City and which it believes is exempt from public inspection or copying. The City agrees to timely provide Grantee with a copy of any public disclosure request to inspect or copy documentation/information which the Grantee has provided to the City and marked as "PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL"prior to allowing any inspection and/or copying as well as provide the Grantee with a time frame, consistent with RCW 42.56.520, to provide the City with its written basis for non-disclosure of the requested documentation/information. In the event the City disagrees with the Grantee's basis for non- disclosure, the City agrees to withhold release of the requested documentation/ information in dispute for a reasonable amount of time to allow Grantee an opportunity to file a legal action under RCW 42.56.540. Section 22. Limitation on Future Work. In the event that the City constructs a new street or reconstructs an existing street, Grantee shall not be permitted to excavate such street except as set forth in the City's then-adopted regulations relating to street cuts and excavations. Section 23. Reservation of Rights by City. The City reserves the right to refuse any request for a permit to extend telecommunications facilities. Any such refusal shall be supported by a written statement from the City that extending the telecommunications facilities, as proposed, would interfere with the public health, safety, or welfare. Section 24. Remedies to Enforce Compliance. In addition to any other remedy provided herein,the City reserves the right to pursue any remedy to compel or force Grantee and/or its successors and assigns to comply with the terms hereof, and the pursuit of any right or remedy by the City shall not prevent the City from thereafter declaring a forfeiture or revocation for breach of the conditions herein. Section 25. City Ordinances and Regulations. Nothing herein shall be deemed to direct or restrict the City's ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and appropriate ordinances regulating the performance of the conditions of this franchise, including any reasonable ordinances made in the exercise of its police powers in the interest of public safety and for the welfare of the public, including but not limited to the Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 10 of 16 DRAFT currently adopted Spokane Regional Pavement Cut Policy. The City shall have the authority at all times to control by appropriate regulations the location, elevation, and manner of construction and maintenance of any telecommunications facilities by Grantee, and Grantee shall promptly conform with all such regulations,unless compliance would cause Grantee to violate other requirements of law. In the event of a conflict between the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and this franchise,the Spokane Valley Municipal Code shall control. Section 26. Vacation. The City may vacate any City road, right-of-way or other City property which is subject to rights granted by this franchise in accordance with state and local law. In the event of a street vacation,the City shall include in the vacation ordinance a reserved easement for the continued location of Grantee's facilities. Section 27. Indemnification. A) Grantee hereby covenants not to bring suit and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents and representatives from any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards or liability to any person arising from injury, sickness or death of any person or damage to property of any nature whatsoever relating to or arising out of this franchise agreement; except for injuries and damages caused solely by the negligence of the City. This includes but is not limited to injury: 1) For which the negligent acts or omissions of Grantee, its agents, servants, officers or employees in performing the activities authorized by a franchise are a proximate cause; 2) By virtue of Grantee's exercise of the rights granted herein; 3) By virtue of the City permitting Grantee's use of the City's rights-of-ways or other public property; 4) Based upon the City's inspection or lack of inspection of work performed by Grantee, its agents and servants, officers or employees in connection with work authorized on the facility or property over which the City has control,pursuant to a franchise or pursuant to any other permit or approval issued in connection with a franchise; 5) Arising as a result of the negligent acts or omissions of Grantee, its agents, servants, officers or employees in barricading, instituting trench safety systems or providing other adequate warnings of any excavation, construction or work upon the facility, in any right- of-way, or other public place in performance of work or services permitted under a franchise; or B) Grantee's indemnification obligations pursuant to subsection 1 of this section shall include assuming liability for actions brought by Grantee's own employees and the employees of Grantee's agents, representatives, contractors and subcontractors even though Grantee might be immune under RCW Title 51 from direct suit brought by such an employee. It is expressly agreed and understood that this assumption of potential liability for actions brought by the aforementioned employees is limited solely to claims against the City arising by virtue of Grantee's exercise of the rights set forth in a franchise. The obligations of Grantee under this subsection have been mutually negotiated by the parties, and Grantee acknowledges that the City would not enter into a franchise without Grantee's waiver. To the extent required to provide this indemnification and this indemnification only, Grantee waives its immunity under RCW Title 51. Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 11 of 16 DRAFT C)Inspection or acceptance by the City of any work performed by Grantee at the time of completion of construction shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of these covenants of indemnification. Provided, that Grantee has been given prompt written notice by the City of any such claim, said indemnification obligations shall extend to claims which are not reduced to a suit and any claims which may be compromised prior to the culmination of any litigation or the institution of any litigation. The City has the right to defend or participate in the defense of any such claim, and has the right to approve any settlement or other compromise of any such claim. D) In the event that Grantee refuses the tender of defense in any suit or any claim, said tender having been made pursuant to this section, and said refusal is subsequently determined by a court having jurisdiction(or such other tribunal that the parties shall agree to decide the matter),to have been a wrongful refusal on the part of Grantee, then Grantee shall pay all of the City's costs for defense of the action, including all reasonable expert witness fees, reasonable attorney fees, the reasonable costs of the City of recovering under this subsection. E)Grantee's duty to defend,indemnify and hold harmless City against liability for damages caused by the concurrent negligence of(a)City or City's agents,employees,or contractors,and(b)Grantee or Grantee's agents, employees, or contractors, shall apply only to the extent of the negligence of Grantee or Grantee's agents, employees, or contractors. In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction determines that a franchise is subject to the provisions of RCW 4.24.115, the parties agree that the indemnity provisions hereunder shall be deemed amended to conform to said statute and liability shall be allocated as provided herein. F)Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, Grantee assumes the risk of damage to its telecommunication facilities located in the rights-of-way and upon City-owned property from activities conducted by the City,its officers,agents,employees and contractors,except to the extent any such damage or destruction is caused by or arises from any willful or malicious action or gross negligence on the part of the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors. Grantee releases and waives any and all such claims against the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors. Grantee further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City against any claims for damages, including, but not limited to, business interruption damages and lost profits, brought by or under users of Grantee's facilities as the result of any interruption of service due to damage or destruction of Grantee's facilities caused by or arising out of activities conducted by the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors, except to the extent any such damage or destruction is caused by or arises from the sole negligence or any willful or malicious actions on the part of the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors. G) The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration, revocation or termination of this franchise. Section 28. Insurance. Grantee shall procure and maintain for the duration of the franchise, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the exercise of the rights,privileges and authority granted hereunder to Grantee, its agents, representatives or employees. Grantee's maintenance of insurance as required by this franchise shall not be construed to limit the liability of the Grantee to the coverage provided by such insurance, or otherwise limit the City's recourse to any remedy available at law or in equity. A)Automobile Liability insurance with limits no less than$1,000,000 Combined Single Limit per Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 12 of 16 DRAFT accident for bodily injury and property damage. This insurance shall cover all owned,non-owned, hired or leased vehicles used in relation to this franchise. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary,the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage; and B) Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) occurrence form CG 00 01, or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage acceptable to the City,and shall cover products liability. The City shall be named as an insured under Grantee's Commercial General Liability insurance policy using ISO Additional Insured-State or Political Subdivisions-Permits CG 20 12 or a substitute endorsement acceptable to the City providing equivalent coverage. Coverage shall be written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 Combined Single Limit per occurrence and$2,000,000 general aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be limited to: blanket contractual; products/completed operations; broad form property; explosion, collapse and underground(XCU); and Employer's Liability. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain,the following provisions for Commercial General Liability insurance: A) Grantee's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to the City as outlined in the Indemnification section of this franchise. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be in excess of Grantee's insurance and shall not contribute with it. B) Grantee's insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled, except after 30 days' prior written notice has been given to the City. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. Grantee shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of any amendatory endorsements, including the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Grantee prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies required herein shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. Section 29. Performance Bond Relating to Construction Activity. Before undertaking any of the work, installation, improvements, construction, repair, relocation or maintenance authorized by this franchise, Grantee, or any parties Grantee contracts with to perform labor in the performance of this franchise, shall, upon the request of the City, furnish a bond executed by Grantee or Grantee's contractors and a corporate surety authorized to operate a surety business in the State of Washington, in such sum as may be set and approved by the City, not to exceed $25,000, as sufficient to ensure performance of Grantee's obligations under this franchise. The bond shall be conditioned so that Grantee shall observe all the covenants, terms and conditions and shall faithfully perform all of the obligations of this franchise, and to repair or replace any defective work or materials discovered in the City's road, streets, or property. Said bond shall remain in effect for the life of this franchise. In the event Grantee proposes to construct a project for which the above-mentioned bond would not ensure performance of Grantee's obligations under this franchise, the City is entitled to require such larger bond as may be appropriate under the circumstances. In the event the City draws on the surety for purposes set forth in this franchise such that the remaining value of the surety falls below $10,000, the City may request that the surety be renewed to the full value of$25,000 as a condition of doing any additional work in the rights-of-way. Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 13 of 16 DRAFT Section 30. Modification. The City and Grantee hereby reserve the right to alter, amend or modify the terms and conditions of this franchise upon written agreement of both parties to such alteration,amendment or modification. Section 31. Forfeiture and Revocation. If Grantee willfully violates or fails to comply with any of the provisions of this franchise,then the City shall notify Grantee in writing,stating with reasonable specificity the nature of the alleged default. Grantee shall cure any alleged default within 30 days after receipt of the notice. If Grantee fails to cure the default within such 30-day period, and the City and Grantee do not otherwise reach an agreement with regard to such default, then Grantee shall, at the election of the City, forfeit all rights conferred hereunder and this franchise may be revoked or annulled by the City after a hearing held upon reasonable notice to Grantee. The City may elect, in lieu of the above and without any prejudice to any of its other legal rights and remedies,to obtain an order from the Spokane County Superior Court compelling Grantee to comply with the provisions of this franchise and to recover damages and costs incurred by the City by reason of Grantee's failure to comply. Section 32. Assignment. This franchise may not be assigned or transferred without the written approval of the City, except that Grantee can assign this franchise without approval of, but upon notice to the City from any parent, affiliate or subsidiary of Grantee or to any entity that acquires all or substantially all the assets or equity of Grantee, by merger, sale, consolidation or otherwise. Use of Grantee's telecommunication facilities by Grantee's customers or attachment of third-party owned telecommunication facilities shall not constitute an assignment under this Agreement. Section 33. Acceptance. Not later than 60 days after passage of this Ordinance, Grantee shall accept the franchise herein by filing with the City Clerk an unconditional written acceptance thereof. Failure of Grantee to so accept this franchise within said period of time shall be deemed a rejection thereof by Grantee, and the rights and privileges herein granted shall,after the expiration of the 60-day period,absolutely cease, unless the time period is extended by a subsequent ordinance passed expressly for that purpose. Section 34. Survival. All of the provisions, conditions and requirements of sections: 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19,20,27,28,29,37,38 and 39 of this franchise shall be in addition to any and all other obligations and liabilities Grantee may have to the City at common law, by statute, by ordinance, or by contract, and shall survive termination of this franchise, and any renewals or extensions hereof. All of the provisions, conditions,regulations and requirements contained in this franchise shall further be binding upon the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, legal representatives and assigns of Grantee and City and all privileges,as well as all obligations and liabilities of Grantee shall inure to their respective heirs,successors and assigns equally as if they were specifically mentioned herein. Section 35. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,clause or phrase of this Ordinance. In the event that any of the provisions of the franchise are held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,the City reserves the right to reconsider the grant of the franchise and may amend,repeal,add, replace or modify any other provision of the franchise,or may terminate the franchise. Section 36. Renewal. Application for extension or renewal of the term of this franchise shall be made no later than 180 days of the expiration thereof. In the event the time period granted by this franchise expires without being renewed by the City, the terms and conditions hereof shall continue in effect until this franchise is either renewed or terminated. Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 14 of 16 DRAFT Section 37. Notice. Any notice or information required or permitted to be given by or to the parties under this franchise may be sent to the following addresses unless otherwise specified, in writing: The City: City of Spokane Valley Attn: City Clerk 10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Grantee: ExteNet Systems, Inc. Attn: CFO 3030 Warrenville Road, Suite 340 Lisle, Illinois, 60532 With a copy to: ExteNet Systems, Inc. Attn: General Counsel 3030 Warrenville Road, Suite 340 Lisle, Illinois, 60532 Section 38. Choice of Law. Any litigation between the City and Grantee arising under or regarding this franchise shall occur, if in the state courts, in the Spokane County Superior Court, and if in the federal courts,in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. Section 39. Non-Waiver. The City shall be vested with the power and authority to reasonably regulate the exercise of the privileges permitted by this franchise in the public interest. Grantee shall not be relieved of its obligations to comply with any of the provisions of this franchise by reason of any failure of the City to enforce prompt compliance,nor does the City waive or limit any of its rights under this franchise by reason of such failure or neglect. Section 40. Entire Agreement. This franchise constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the parties as to the subject matter herein and no other agreements or understandings,written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon execution and acceptance hereof. This franchise shall also supersede and cancel any previous right or claim of Grantee to occupy the City roads as herein described. Section 41. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of the Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of July, 2018. ATTEST: L. R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Date: Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 15 of 16 DRAFT Accepted by ExteNet Systems, Inc.: By: Name and official capacity The Grantee, ExteNet Systems, Inc., for itself, and for its successors and assigns, does accept all of the terms and conditions of the foregoing franchise. STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) ss COUNTY OF DuPAGE ) Before me, , on this day personally appeared , known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and known to me to be the of ExteNet Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and acknowledged to me that he executed the said instrument for the purposes and consideration therein expressed, on behalf of said Corporation. Given under my hand and seal of office this day of , 2018. Notary Public Printed Name: My Commission Expires: [SEAL] Ordinance 18-017 ExteNet Systems,Inc. Wireless Franchise Page 16 of 16 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 17, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business [' new business [' public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report [' pending legislation [' executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed Ordinance 18-018 — ExteNet Systems, Inc. — fiber telecommunications facilities. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.47.040; RCW 35A.11.020; chapter 35.99 RCW, chapter 22.121 SVMC regarding small cell regulations. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: The City was recently approached by ExteNet Systems, Inc. (Extenet), regarding new facilities necessary to bring small cell technology to the residents and businesses of Spokane Valley. Staff then began negotiating the terms of a fiber franchise ordinance agreement with representatives of ExteNet. We used the standard telecommunications franchise agreement as the template, based on a number of telecommunication franchises previously approved by the Council. Staff and ExteNet have agreed on the proposed terms for a fiber franchise, which are before the Council in proposed Ordinance 18-018. OPTIONS: Information only, this will be brought forward for an ordinance first reading on a future agenda. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None at this time. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance 18-018 — ExteNet Systems, Inc., fiber telecommunications franchise. DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 18-018 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, GRANTING A NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO EXTENET SYSTEMS, INC.TO CONSTRUCT,MAINTAIN AND OPERATE FIBEROPTIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 authorizes the City to grant, permit, and regulate "nonexclusive franchises for the use of public streets, bridges or other public ways, structures or places above or below the surface of the ground for railroads and other routes and facilities for public conveyances, for poles, conduits, tunnels, towers and structures, pipes and wires and appurtenances thereof for transmission and distribution of electrical energy, signals and other methods of communication, for gas, steam and liquid fuels, for water, sewer and other private and publicly owned and operated facilities for public service;"and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 further requires that "no ordinance or resolution granting any franchise in a code city for any purpose shall be adopted or passed by the city's legislative body on the day of its introduction nor for five days thereafter,nor at any other than a regular meeting nor without first being submitted to the city attorney,nor without having been granted by the approving vote of at least a majority of the entire legislative body,nor without being published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the city before becoming effective;"and WHEREAS,this Ordinance has been submitted to the City Attorney prior to its passage; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that the grant of the Franchise contained in this Ordinance, subject to its terms and conditions,is in the best interests of the public, and protects the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of this City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, ordains as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance,the following words and terms shall have the meaning set forth below: "City Manager"means the City Manager or designee. "construction"or"construct"shall mean constructing,digging,excavating,laying,testing, operating, extending,upgrading, renewing, removing, replacing, and repairing a facility. "day" shall mean a 24-hour period beginning at 12:01 AM. If a thing or act is to be done in less than seven days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays shall be excluded in the computation of time. "franchise area" shall mean the entire geographic area within the City as it is now constituted or may in the future be constituted. "hazardous substances" shall have the same meaning as RCW 70.105D.020(10). Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 1 of 14 DRAFT "maintenance, maintaining or maintain" shall mean the work involved in the replacement and/or repair of facilities,including constructing,relaying,repairing,replacing,examining, testing, inspecting, removing, digging and excavating, and restoring operations incidental thereto. "overbuilding" shall mean adding additional fiber capacity to an existing conduit housing fiber optic cable. "overlashing"shall mean the act of lashing new fiber optic cable to an existing aerial fiber optic cable. "permittee" shall mean a person or entity who has been granted a permit by the permitting authority. "permitting authority" shall mean the City Manager or designee authorized to process and grant permits required to perform work in the rights-of-way. "product" shall refer to the item,thing or use provided by the Grantee. "public property" shall mean any real estate or any facility owned by the City. "relocation" shall mean any required move or relocation of an existing installation or equipment owned by Grantee whereby such move or relocation is necessitated by installation, improvement, renovation or repair of another entity's facilities in the rights- of-way, including Grantor's facilities. "right-of-way"shall refer to the surface of and the space along,above,and below any street, road, highway, freeway, lane, sidewalk, alley, court, boulevard, parkway, drive, Grantee easement, and/or public way now or hereafter held or administered by the City. "streets" or "highways" shall mean the surface of, and the space above and below, any public street, road, alley or highway, within the City used or intended to be used by the general public,to the extent the City has the right to allow the Grantee to use them. "telecommunications facilities" shall mean any of the plant, equipment, fixtures, appurtenances, antennas, and other facilities necessary to furnish and deliver telecommunications services, including but not limited to poles with crossarms, poles without crossarms, wires, lines, conduits, cables, communication and signal lines and equipment, braces, guys, anchors, vaults, and all attachments, appurtenances, and appliances necessary or incidental to the distribution and use of telecommunications services. The abandonment by Grantee of any telecommunications facilities as defined herein shall not act to remove the same from this definition. Section 2. Grant of Franchise. The City of Spokane Valley, a Washington municipal corporation (hereinafter as "City" or"the City"), hereby grants unto ExteNet Systems, Inc., (hereinafter"Grantee"), a franchise for a period of 10 years, beginning on the effective date of this Ordinance, to install, construct, operate, maintain, replace and use all necessary equipment and facilities to place telecommunications facilities in, under, on, across, over, through, along or below the public rights-of-way and public places located in the City of Spokane Valley, as approved under City permits issued pursuant to this franchise (hereinafter the "franchise"). This franchise does not permit Grantee to use such facilities to provide cable services as defined by 47 C.F.R. § 76.5(ff). Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 2 of 14 DRAFT Section 3. Fee. No right-of-way use fee is imposed for the term of this franchise. Any such right-of-way use or franchise fee that may be imposed by subsequent ordinance would apply to any subsequent franchise, if any,between the parties. Section 4. City Use. The following provisions shall apply regarding City use. A) City may request that Grantee provide one or more strands (two pair) of dark fiber for City to use solely for City government administration purposes. Upon receipt of such request, City and Grantee shall meet as soon as practicable to determine whether Grantee has dark fiber available in the locations requested by City, and if Grantee has dark fiber available, City and Grantee will engage in good faith discussions to develop mutually agreeable terms for provision of such dark fiber. City and Grantee shall execute a Dark Fiber IRU Agreement to outline the terms for the fiber dedication. B) Consistent with and subject to RCW 35.99.070, at such time when Grantee is constructing, relocating, or placing ducts or conduits in public rights-of-way, the City Manager may require Grantee to provide the City with additional duct or conduit and related structures, at incremental cost, necessary to access the conduit at mutually convenient locations. Any ducts or conduits provided by Grantee under this section shall only be used for City municipal, non-commercial purposes. 1) The City shall not require that the additional duct or conduit space be connected to the access structures and vaults of the Grantee. 2)This section shall not affect the provision of an institutional network by a cable television provider under federal law. 3) Grantee shall notify the City Manager at least 14 days prior to opening a trench at any location to allow the City to exercise its options as provided herein. Section 5. Recovery of Costs. Grantee shall reimburse the City for all costs of one publication ofthis franchise in a local newspaper, and required legal notices prior to any public hearing regarding this franchise, contemporaneous with its acceptance of this franchise. Grantee shall be subject to all permit and inspection fees associated with activities undertaken through the authority granted in this franchise or under City Code. Section 6. Non-Exclusivity. This franchise is granted upon the express condition that it shall not in any manner prevent the City from granting other or further franchises or permits in any rights-of-way. This and other franchises shall, in no way, prevent or prohibit the City from using any of its rights-of-way or affect its jurisdiction over them or any part of them. Section 7. Non-Interference with Existing Facilities. The City shall have prior and superior right to the use of its rights-of-way and public properties for installation and maintenance of its facilities and other governmental purposes. The City hereby retains full power to make all changes, relocations, repairs, maintenance, establishments, improvements, dedications or vacation of same as the City may deem fit, including the dedication, establishment, maintenance, and improvement of all new rights-of-way, streets, avenues,thoroughfares and other public properties of every type and description. Any and all such removal or replacement shall be at the sole expense of Grantee,unless RCW 35.99.060 provides otherwise. Should Grantee fail to remove, adjust or relocate its telecommunications facilities by the date established by the City Manager's written notice to Grantee and in accordance with RCW 35.99.060 and Grantee has not experienced a force majeure or event beyond its control, the City may cause and/or effect such removal, Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 3 of 14 DRAFT adjustment or relocation, and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee. The owners of all utilities,public or private,installed in or on such public properties prior to the installation of the telecommunications facilities of Grantee, shall have preference as to the positioning and location of such utilities so installed with respect to Grantee. Such preference shall continue in the event of the necessity of relocating or changing the grade of any such public properties. Grantee's telecommunications facilities shall be constructed and maintained in such manner as not to interfere with any public use, or with any other pipes,wires,conduits or other facilities that may have been laid in the rights-of-way by or under the City's authority. If the work done under this franchise damages or interferes in any way with the public use or other facilities, Grantee shall wholly and at its own expense make such provisions necessary to eliminate the interference or damage to the satisfaction of the City Manager. Section 8. Construction Standards. All work authorized and required hereunder shall comply with all generally applicable City Codes and regulations. Grantee shall also comply with all applicable federal and state regulations,laws and practices. Grantee is responsible for the supervision,condition,and quality of the work done,whether it is by itself or by contractors, assigns or agencies. Application of said federal, state, and City Codes and regulations shall be for the purposes of fulfilling the City's public trustee role in administering the primary use and purpose of public properties, and not for relieving the Grantee of any duty,obligation,or responsibility for the competent design,construction,maintenance,and operation of its telecommunications facilities. Grantee is responsible for the supervision,condition,and quality of the work done,whether it is by itself or by contractors, assigns or agencies. If Grantee shall at any time be required,or plan,to excavate trenches in any area covered by this franchise, the Grantee shall afford the City an opportunity to permit other franchisees and utilities to share such excavated trenches,provided that: (1) such joint use shall not unreasonably delay the work of the Grantee; and (2) such joint use shall not adversely affect Grantee's telecommunications facilities or safety thereof. Joint users will be required to contribute to the costs of excavation and filling on a pro-rata basis. Section 9. Protection of Monuments. Grantee shall comply with applicable state laws relating to protection of monuments. Section 10. Tree Trimming. Grantee shall have the authority to conduct pruning and trimming for access to Grantee's telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way subject to compliance with the City Code. All such trimming shall be done at Grantee's sole cost and expense. Section 11. Emergency Response. Grantee shall, within 30 days' of the execution of this franchise, designate one or more responsible people and an emergency 24-hour on-call personnel, and the procedures to be followed when responding to an emergency. After being notified of an emergency, Grantee shall cooperate with the City to immediately respond with action to aid in the protection of the health and safety of the public. In the event Grantee refuses to promptly take the directed action or fails to fully comply with such direction, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate action to prevent imminent injury or damages to persons or property, the City may take such actions as it believes are necessary to protect persons or property, and Grantee shall be responsible to reimburse the City for its costs and any expenses. Section 12. One-Call System. Pursuant to RCW 19.122, Grantee is responsible for becoming familiar with, and understanding,the provisions of Washington's One-Call statutes. Grantee shall comply with the terms and conditions set forth in the One-Call statutes. Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 4 of 14 DRAFT Section 13. Safety. All of Grantee's telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and operational condition. Grantee shall follow all safety codes and other applicable regulations in the installation, operation, and maintenance of the telecommunications facilities. Section 14. Movement of Grantee's Telecommunications Facilities for Others. Whenever any third party shall have obtained permission from the City to use any right—of-way for the purpose of moving any building or other oversized structure, Grantee, upon at least 14 days' written notice from the City, shall move, at the expense of the third party desiring to move the building or structure, any of Grantee's telecommunications facilities that may obstruct the movement thereof; provided,that the path for moving such building or structure is the path of least interference to Grantee's telecommunications facilities, as determined by the City. Upon good cause shown by Grantee, the City may require more than 14 days' notice to Grantee to move its telecommunications facilities. Section 15. Acquiring New Telecommunications Facilities. Upon Grantee's acquisition of any new telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way, or upon any addition or annexation to the City of any area in which Grantee retains any such telecommunications facilities in the rights-of-way, Grantee shall submit to the City a written statement describing all telecommunications facilities involved, whether authorized by franchise or any other form of prior right, and specifying the location of all such facilities. Such facilities shall immediately be subject to the terms of this franchise. Section 16. Dangerous Conditions - Authority of City to Abate. Whenever excavation, installation, construction, repair, maintenance, or relocation of telecommunications facilities authorized by this franchise has caused or contributed to a condition that substantially impairs the lateral support of the adjoining right-of-way, road, street or other public place, or endangers the public, adjoining public or private property or street utilities, the City may direct Grantee, at Grantee's sole expense, to take all necessary actions to protect the public and property. The City may require that such action be completed within a prescribed time. In the event that Grantee fails or refuses to promptly take the actions directed by the City, or fails to fully comply with such directions, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate action, the City may enter upon the property and take such actions as are necessary to protect the public,adjacent public or private property, or street utilities, or to maintain the lateral support thereof, and all other actions deemed by the City to be necessary to preserve the public safety and welfare; and Grantee shall be liable to the City for all costs and expenses thereof to the extent caused by Grantee. Section 17. Hazardous Substances. Grantee shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, statutes,regulations and orders concerning hazardous substances relating to Grantee's telecommunications facilities in the rights—of-way. Grantee agrees to indemnify the City against any claims,costs,and expenses, of any kind,whether direct or indirect, incurred by the City arising out of the release or threat of release of hazardous substances caused by Grantee's ownership or operation of its telecommunications facilities within the City's rights-of-way. Section 18. Environmental. Grantee shall comply with all environmental protection laws, rules, recommendations, and regulations of the United States and the State of Washington, and their various subdivisions and agencies as they presently exist or may hereafter be enacted, promulgated, or amended, and shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all damages arising, or which may arise, or be caused by, or result from the failure of Grantee fully to comply with any such laws, rules, recommendations, or regulations, whether or not Grantee's acts or activities were intentional or unintentional. Grantee shall further indemnify the City against all losses, costs, and expenses (including legal expenses)which the City may incur as a result of the requirement of any government or governmental Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 5 of 14 DRAFT subdivision or agency to clean and/or remove any pollution caused or permitted by Grantee, whether said requirement is during the term of the franchise or subsequent to its termination. Section 19. Relocation of Telecommunications Facilities. Grantee agrees and covenants, at its sole cost and expense, to protect, support, temporarily disconnect, relocate or remove from any street any of its telecommunications facilities when so required by the City in accordance with the provisions of RCW 35.99.060, provided that Grantee shall in all such cases have the privilege to temporarily bypass, in the authorized portion of the same street upon approval by the City, any section of its telecommunications facilities required to be temporarily disconnected or removed. If the City determines that the project necessitates the relocation of Grantee's then-existing telecommunications facilities,the City shall: A)At least 60 days'prior to the commencement of such improvement project,provide Grantee with written notice requiring such relocation; and B) Provide Grantee with copies of pertinent portions of the plans and specifications for such improvement project and a proposed location for Grantee's telecommunications facilities so that Grantee may relocate its telecommunications facilities in other City rights-of-way in order to accommodate such improvement project. C)After receipt of such notice and such plans and specifications,Grantee shall complete relocation of its telecommunications facilities at no charge or expense to the City so as to accommodate the improvement project in accordance with RCW 35.99.060 (2). Grantee may, after receipt of written notice requesting a relocation of its telecommunications facilities, submit to the City written alternatives to such relocation. The City shall evaluate such alternatives and advise Grantee in writing if one or more of the alternatives are suitable to accommodate the work which would otherwise necessitate relocation of the telecommunications facilities. If so requested by the City, Grantee shall submit additional information to assist the City in making such evaluation. The City shall give each alternative proposed by Grantee full and fair consideration. In the event the City ultimately determines that there is no other reasonable alternative, Grantee shall relocate its telecommunications facilities as otherwise provided in this section. The provisions of this section shall in no manner preclude or restrict Grantee from making any arrangements it may deem appropriate when responding to a request for relocation of its telecommunications facilities by any person or entity other than the City, where the telecommunications facilities to be constructed by said person or entity are not or will not become City owned,operated or maintained facilities,provided that such arrangements do not unduly delay a City construction project. If the City or a contractor for the City is delayed at any time in the progress of the work by an act or neglect of the Grantee or those acting for or on behalf of Grantee,then Grantee shall indemnify, defend and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits including attorney fees to the extent arising out of or in connection with such delays,except for delays and damages caused by the City. This provision may not be waived by the parties except in writing. Grantee shall not be responsible for delay damages if Grantee's delay is the result of a force majeure or event beyond Grantee's control. Section 20. Abandonment of Grantee's Telecommunications Facilities. No facility constructed or owned by Grantee may be abandoned without the express written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. The City has discretion and authority to direct Grantee to remove a facility Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 6 of 14 DRAFT abandoned by Grantee (whether or not the entity had permission to abandon the facility) and restore the rights-of-way to their pre-removal condition when: (a) a City project involves digging that will encounter the abandoned facility; (b) the abandoned facility poses a hazard to the health, safety, or welfare of the public; (c)the abandoned facility is 24 inches or less below the surface of the rights-of-way and the City is reconstructing or resurfacing a street over the rights-of-way; or(d)the abandoned facility has collapsed, broke, or otherwise failed. Grantee may,upon written approval by the City,delay removal of the abandoned facility until such time as the City commences a construction project in the rights-of-way unless (b) or (d) above applies. When (b) or (d) applies, Grantee shall remove the abandoned facility from the rights-of-way as soon as weather conditions allow,unless the City expressly allows otherwise in writing. The expense of the removal, and restoration of improvements in the rights-of-way that were damaged by the facility or by the removal process, shall be the sole responsibility of the Grantee. If Grantee fails to remove the abandoned facilities in accordance with the above,then the City may incur costs to remove the abandoned facilities and restore the rights-of-way, and is entitled to reimbursement from Grantee for such costs, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Section 21. Maps and Records Required. Grantee shall provide the City,at no cost to the City: A)A route map that depicts the general location of the Grantee's telecommunications facilities placed in the rights-of-way. The route map shall identify telecommunications facilities as aerial or underground and is not required to depict cable types,number of fibers or cables,electronic equipment, and service lines to individual subscribers. Grantee shall also provide an electronic map of the aerial/underground telecommunications facilities in relation to the right-of-way centerline reference to allow the City to add this information to the City's Geographic Information System("GIS")program. The information in this subsection shall be delivered to the City by December 1,annually. B) In connection with the construction of any City project, Grantee shall provide to the City,upon the City's reasonable request, copies of available drawings in use by Grantee showing the location of such telecommunications facilities. Grantee shall field locate its telecommunications facilities in order to facilitate design and planning of City improvement projects. C) Upon written request of the City, Grantee shall provide the City with the most recent update available of any plan of potential improvements to its telecommunications facilities within the franchise area;provided,however,any such plan so submitted shall be deemed confidential and for informational purposes only,and shall not obligate Grantee to undertake any specific improvements within the franchise area. The information in this subsection shall be delivered to the City by December 1, annually. D) In addition to the requirements of subsection 1 of this section,the parties agree to periodically share GIS files upon written request,provided Grantee's GIS files are to be used solely by the City for governmental purposes. Any files provided to Grantee shall be restricted to information required for Grantee's engineering needs for construction or maintenance of telecommunications facilities that are the subject of this franchise. Grantee is prohibited from selling any GIS information obtained from City to any third parties. E) Public Disclosure Act. Grantee acknowledges that information submitted to the City may be subject to inspection and copying under the Washington Public Disclosure Act codified in chapter 42.56 RCW. Grantee shall mark as "PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL" each page or portion thereof of any documentation/information which it submits to the City and which it believes is Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 7 of 14 DRAFT exempt from public inspection or copying. The City agrees to timely provide Grantee with a copy of any public disclosure request to inspect or copy documentation/information which the Grantee has provided to the City and marked as "PROPRIETARY/CONFIDENTIAL" prior to allowing any inspection and/or copying as well as provide the Grantee with a time frame, consistent with RCW 42.56.520, to provide the City with its written basis for non-disclosure of the requested documentation/information. In the event the City disagrees with the Grantee's basis for non- disclosure, the City agrees to withhold release of the requested documentation/ information in dispute for a reasonable amount of time to allow Grantee an opportunity to file a legal action under RCW 42.56.540. Section 22. Limitation on Future Work. In the event that the City constructs a new street or reconstructs an existing street, Grantee shall not be permitted to excavate such street except as set forth in the City's then-adopted regulations relating to street cuts and excavations. Section 23. Reservation of Rights by City. The City reserves the right to refuse any request for a permit to extend telecommunications facilities consistent with applicable federal and Washington state law. Any such refusal shall be supported by a written statement from the City Manager that extending the telecommunications facilities, as proposed,would interfere with the public health, safety or welfare. Section 24. Remedies to Enforce Compliance. In addition to any other remedy provided herein,the City reserves the right to pursue any remedy to compel or force Grantee and/or its successors and assigns to comply with the terms hereof, and the pursuit of any right or remedy by the City shall not prevent the City from thereafter declaring a forfeiture or revocation for breach of the conditions herein. Section 25. City Ordinances and Regulations. Nothing herein shall be deemed to direct or restrict the City's ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and appropriate ordinances regulating the performance of the conditions of this franchise, including any reasonable ordinances made in the exercise of its police powers in the interest of public safety and for the welfare of the public. The City shall have the authority at all times to control by appropriate regulations the location, elevation, and manner of construction and maintenance of any telecommunications facilities by Grantee,and Grantee shall promptly conform with all such regulations,unless compliance would cause Grantee to violate other requirements of law. In the event of a conflict between the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and this franchise,the Municipal Code shall control. Section 26. Vacation. The City may vacate any City road, right-of-way or other City property which is subject to rights granted by this franchise in accordance with state and local law. Any relocation of telecommunications facilities resulting from a street vacation shall require a minimum of 180 days' notice as provided in section 37. In the event of a street vacation,the City shall include in the vacation ordinance a reserved easement for the continued location of Grantee's facilities. Section 27. Indemnification. A) Grantee hereby covenants not to bring suit and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents and representatives from any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards or liability to any person arising from injury, sickness or death of any person or damage to property of any nature whatsoever relating to or arising out of this franchise agreement; except for injuries and damages caused solely by the negligence of the City. This includes but is not limited to injury: Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 8 of 14 DRAFT 1) For which the negligent acts or omissions of Grantee, its agents, servants, officers or employees in performing the activities authorized by a franchise are a proximate cause; 2) By virtue of Grantee's exercise of the rights granted herein; 3) By virtue of the City permitting Grantee's use of the City's rights-of-ways or other public property; 4) Based upon the City's inspection or lack of inspection of work performed by Grantee, its agents and servants, officers or employees in connection with work authorized on the facility or property over which the City has control,pursuant to a franchise or pursuant to any other permit or approval issued in connection with a franchise; 5) Arising as a result of the negligent acts or omissions of Grantee, its agents, servants, officers or employees in barricading, instituting trench safety systems or providing other adequate warnings of any excavation, construction or work upon the facility, in any right- of-way, or other public place in performance of work or services permitted under a franchise; or 6) Based upon radio frequency emissions or radiation emitted from Grantee's equipment located upon the facility, regardless of whether Grantee's equipment complies with applicable federal statutes and/or FCC regulations related thereto. B) Grantee's indemnification obligations pursuant to subsection 1 of this section shall include assuming liability for actions brought by Grantee's own employees and the employees of Grantee's agents, representatives, contractors and subcontractors even though Grantee might be immune under RCW Title 51 from direct suit brought by such an employee. It is expressly agreed and understood that this assumption of potential liability for actions brought by the aforementioned employees is limited solely to claims against the City arising by virtue of Grantee's exercise of the rights set forth in a franchise. The obligations of Grantee under this subsection have been mutually negotiated by the parties, and Grantee acknowledges that the City would not enter into a franchise without Grantee's waiver. To the extent required to provide this indemnification and this indemnification only, Grantee waives its immunity under RCW Title 51. C)Inspection or acceptance by the City of any work performed by Grantee at the time of completion of construction shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of these covenants of indemnification. Provided, that Grantee has been given prompt written notice by the City of any such claim, said indemnification obligations shall extend to claims which are not reduced to a suit and any claims which may be compromised prior to the culmination of any litigation or the institution of any litigation. The City has the right to defend or participate in the defense of any such claim, and has the right to approve any settlement or other compromise of any such claim. D) In the event that Grantee refuses the tender of defense in any suit or any claim, said tender having been made pursuant to this section, and said refusal is subsequently determined by a court having jurisdiction(or such other tribunal that the parties shall agree to decide the matter),to have been a wrongful refusal on the part of Grantee, then Grantee shall pay all of the City's costs for defense of the action, including all reasonable expert witness fees, reasonable attorney fees, the reasonable costs of the City of recovering under this subsection. E)Grantee's duty to defend,indemnify and hold harmless City against liability for damages caused by the concurrent negligence of(a)City or City's agents,employees,or contractors,and(b)Grantee Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 9 of 14 DRAFT or Grantee's agents, employees, or contractors, shall apply only to the extent of the negligence of Grantee or Grantee's agents, employees, or contractors. In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction determines that a franchise is subject to the provisions of RCW 4.24.115, the parties agree that the indemnity provisions hereunder shall be deemed amended to conform to said statute and liability shall be allocated as provided herein. F)Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, Grantee assumes the risk of damage to its telecommunication facilities located in the rights-of-way and upon City-owned property from activities conducted by the City,its officers,agents,employees and contractors,except to the extent any such damage or destruction is caused by or arises from any willful or malicious action or gross negligence on the part of the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors. Grantee releases and waives any and all such claims against the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors. Grantee further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City against any claims for damages, including, but not limited to, business interruption damages and lost profits, brought by or under users of Grantee's facilities as the result of any interruption of service due to damage or destruction of Grantee's facilities caused by or arising out of activities conducted by the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors, except to the extent any such damage or destruction is caused by or arises from the sole negligence or any willful or malicious actions on the part of the City, its officers,agents,employees or contractors. G) The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration, revocation or termination of this franchise. Section 28. Insurance. Grantee shall procure and maintain for the duration of the franchise, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the exercise of the rights,privileges and authority granted hereunder to Grantee, its agents, representatives or employees. Grantee's maintenance of insurance as required by this franchise shall not be construed to limit the liability of the Grantee to the coverage provided by such insurance, or otherwise limit the City's recourse to any remedy available at law or in equity. A)Automobile Liability insurance with limits no less than$1,000,000 Combined Single Limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. This insurance shall cover all owned,non-owned, hired or leased vehicles used in relation to this franchise. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary,the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage; and B) Commercial General Liability insurance shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) occurrence form CG 00 01, or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage acceptable to the City,and shall cover products liability. The City shall be named as an insured under Grantee's Commercial General Liability insurance policy using ISO Additional Insured-State or Political Subdivisions-Permits CG 20 12 or a substitute endorsement acceptable to the City providing equivalent coverage. Coverage shall be written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 Combined Single Limit per occurrence and$2,000,000 general aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be limited to: blanket contractual; products/completed operations; broad form property; explosion, collapse and underground(XCU); and Employer's Liability. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain,the following provisions for Commercial General Liability insurance: Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 10 of 14 DRAFT A) Grantee's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to the City as outlined in the Indemnification section of this franchise. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be in excess of Grantee's insurance and shall not contribute with it. B) Grantee's insurance carrier or Grantee shall provide 30 days' prior written notice to the City of insurance cancellation. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. Grantee shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of any amendatory endorsements, including the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Grantee prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies required herein shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. Section 29. Performance Bond Relating to Construction Activity. Before undertaking any of the work, installation, improvements, construction, repair, relocation or maintenance authorized by this franchise, Grantee, or any parties Grantee contracts with to perform labor in the performance of this franchise, shall, upon the request of the City, furnish a bond executed by Grantee or Grantee's contractors and a corporate surety authorized to operate a surety business in the State of Washington, in such sum as may be set and approved by the City, not to exceed $25,000, as sufficient to ensure performance of Grantee's obligations under this franchise. The bond shall be conditioned so that Grantee shall observe all the covenants, terms and conditions and shall faithfully perform all of the obligations of this franchise, and to repair or replace any defective work or materials discovered in the City's road, streets, or property. Said bond shall remain in effect for the life of this franchise. In the event Grantee proposes to construct a project for which the above-mentioned bond would not ensure performance of Grantee's obligations under this franchise, the City is entitled to require such larger bond as may be appropriate under the circumstances. Section 30. Modification. The City and Grantee hereby reserve the right to alter, amend or modify the terms and conditions of this franchise upon written agreement of both parties to such alteration,amendment or modification. Section 31. Forfeiture and Revocation. If Grantee willfully violates or fails to comply with any of the provisions of this franchise,or through willful or unreasonable negligence fails to heed or comply with any notice given Grantee by the City under the provisions of this franchise,and an adequate opportunity to cure the violation or non-compliance has been given in writing to Grantee,then Grantee shall,at the election of the City, forfeit all rights conferred hereunder and this franchise may be revoked or annulled by the City after a hearing held upon reasonable notice to Grantee.The City may elect,in lieu of the above and without any prejudice to any of its other legal rights and remedies, to obtain an order from the Spokane County Superior Court compelling Grantee to comply with the provisions of this franchise and to recover damages and costs incurred by the City by reason of Grantee's failure to comply. Section 32. Assignment. This franchise may not be assigned or transferred without the written approval of the City, except that Grantee can assign this franchise without approval of, but upon notice to the City from any parent, affiliate or subsidiary of Grantee or to any entity that acquires all or substantially all the assets or equity of Grantee, by merger, sale, consolidation or otherwise. Use of Grantee's telecommunication facilities by Grantee's customers or attachment of third-party owned telecommunication facilities shall not constitute an assignment under this Agreement. Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 11 of 14 DRAFT Section 33. Acceptance. Not later than 60 days after passage of this Ordinance, Grantee shall accept the franchise herein by filing with the City Clerk an unconditional written acceptance thereof. Failure of Grantee to so accept this franchise within said period of time shall be deemed a rejection thereof by Grantee, and the rights and privileges herein granted shall,after the expiration of the 60-day period,absolutely cease, unless the time period is extended by ordinance duly passed for that purpose. Section 34. Survival. All of the provisions, conditions and requirements of sections: 5, 6, 7, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 27, 28, 29, 37, 38 and 39 of this franchise shall be in addition to any and all other obligations and liabilities Grantee may have to the City at common law, by statute, by ordinance, or by contract, and shall survive termination of this franchise, and any renewals or extensions hereof. All of the provisions, conditions,regulations and requirements contained in this franchise shall further be binding upon the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, legal representatives and assigns of Grantee and City and all privileges,as well as all obligations and liabilities of Grantee shall inure to their respective heirs,successors and assigns equally as if they were specifically mentioned herein. Section 35. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section,sentence,clause or phrase of this Ordinance. In the event that any of the provisions of the franchise are held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,the City reserves the right to reconsider the grant of the franchise and may amend, repeal,add, replace or modify any other provision of the franchise,or may terminate the franchise. Section 36. Renewal. Application for extension or renewal of the term of this franchise shall be made no later than 180 days of the expiration thereof. In the event the time period granted by this franchise expires without being renewed by the City, the terms and conditions hereof shall continue in effect until this franchise is either renewed or terminated by the City. Section 37. Notice. Any notice or information required or permitted to be given by or to the parties under this franchise may be sent to the following addresses unless otherwise specified, in writing: The City: City of Spokane Valley Attn: City Clerk 10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Grantee: ExteNet Systems, Inc. Attn: CFO 3030 Warrenville Road, Suite 340 Lisle, Illinois, 60532 With a copy to: ExteNet Systems, Inc. Attn: General Counsel 3030 Warrenville Road, Suite 340 Lisle, Illinois, 60532 Section 38. Choice of Law. Any litigation between the City and Grantee arising under or regarding this franchise shall occur, if in the state courts, in the Spokane County Superior Court, and if in the federal courts,in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 12 of 14 DRAFT Section 39. Non-Waiver. The City shall be vested with the power and authority to reasonably regulate the exercise of the privileges permitted by this franchise in the public interest. Grantee shall not be relieved of its obligations to comply with any of the provisions of this franchise by reason of any failure of the City to enforce prompt compliance,nor does the City waive or limit any of its rights under this franchise by reason of such failure or neglect. Section 40. Entire Agreement. This franchise constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the parties as to the subject matter herein and no other agreements or understandings,written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon execution and acceptance hereof. This franchise shall also supersede and cancel any previous right or claim of Grantee to occupy the City roads as herein described. Section 41. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of the Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of , 2018. L. R. Higgins, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 13 of 14 DRAFT Accepted by ExteNet Systems, Inc.: By: Name and official capacity The Grantee, ExteNet Systems, Inc., for itself, and for its successors and assigns, does accept all of the terms and conditions of the foregoing franchise. STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) ss COUNTY OF DuPAGE ) Before me, , on this day personally appeared , known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and known to me to be the of ExteNet Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and acknowledged to me that he executed the said instrument for the purposes and consideration therein expressed, on behalf of said Corporation. Given under my hand and seal of office this day of , 2018. Notary Public Printed Name: My Commission Expires: [SEAL] Ordinance 18-018 ExteNet Systems,Inc.,Fiber Telecommunications.Franchise Page 14 of 14