The URL can be used to link to this page

2019, 05-14 Regular Meeting AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT Tuesday,May 14, 2019 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 10210 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION: Pastor Al Hulten,Valley Assembly Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PROCLAMATIONS:National Clean Air Month 1.CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group.Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion:I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a.Approval of claim vouchers on May 14,2019 Request for Council Action Form Total: $2,725,724.40 b.Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending April 30,2019: $512,941.78 c.Approval of April 16,2019, Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session d.Approval of April 23,2019, Council Meeting Minutes Regular Formal e.Approval of April 30,2019,Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session NEW BUSINESS: 2.First Reading Ordinance 19-004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments—Lori Barlow,Mike Basinger [public comments] 3.First Reading Ordinance 19-005 Comprehensive Plan Zoning Map—Lori Barlow,Mike Basinger [public comments] 4.Mayoral Appointment: Spokane Hotel/Motel(TPA)Appointment—Mayor Higgins [public comments] PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.)When you come to the podium,please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. Council Agenda 05-14-19 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 5. Duplex Density Code Text Amendment 2018-0005—Lori Barlow 6. 2019 Budget Amendment—Chelsie Taylor 7.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins INFORMATION ONLY(will not be reported or discussed):n/a CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT General Meeting Schedule(meeting schedule is always subject to change) Regular Council meetings are generally held every Tuesday beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Formal meeting formats are generally held the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays. Formal meeting have time allocated for general public comments as well as comments after each action item. The Study Session formats(the less formal meeting)are generally held the 1st,3rd and 5th Tuesdays. Study Session formats DO NOT have time allocated for general public comments; but if action items are included, comments are permitted after those specific action items. 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)720-5102 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Council Agenda 05-14-19 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 SI Jt .000 Mlle It roctammation Clean Air Month City of Spokane Valley, Washington WHEREAS, May, 2019 has been designated as National Clean Air Month, which provides an opportunity to highlight the important role clean air has on our health, environment, and economy; and WHEREAS, 2019 commemorates the 50th year that Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency has been working on our behalf to ensure clean air throughout the Spokane region; and WHEREAS, Up until the late 1990's, the Spokane County Metropolitan Area regularly failed to meet national health-based air quality standards; and WHEREAS, In 2005, after decades-long efforts, the U.S. EPA officially declared Spokane County in attainment of all clean air standards; and WHEREAS, In recent years, impacts to air quality due to wildfire activity have been significant and led to several days of unhealthy air quality; and WHEREAS, Automobiles and wood heating continue to be large contributors to air pollution on an annual basis; and WHEREAS, Increased public awareness about air quality during May and throughout the year is important as are the actions of individuals to help improve air quality; and WHEREAS, The Spokane Valley Council encourages all citizens to take steps to help protect our air, such as: • Reduce unnecessary vehicle idling; • Walk, bike, ride the bus or share a ride; • Combine errands into fewer car trips; • Replace old wood burning stoves and inserts with new, more efficient wood,pellet or gas devices; • Reduce, reuse, and recycle; and • Plant trees. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Rod Higgins, Mayor of the City of Spokane Valley, on behalf of the Spokane Valley City Council and the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley, do hereby proclaim May, 2019 as Clean Air Month and we congratulate the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency on their 50th anniversary of working to preserve,protect and enhance this vital natural resource. Dated this 14th day of May, 2019. L.R. Higgins, Mayor CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 14,2019 Department Director Approval: a Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST VOUCHER NUMBERS TOTAL AMOUNT 04/17/2019 47341-47410 (-47343) $341,679.05 04/19/2019 47411-47426 $70,186.95 04/23/2019 8137-8147 $2,414.00 04/24/2019 47427-47473 $161,752.34 04/30/2019 8148-8155 $2,283.00 04/30/2019 47474-47488 $19,271.66 05/02/2019 47489-47525; 6779773; 8143201; 8194460 $1,791,785.04 05/03/2019 6657; 6659; 6661; 6668-6670; 6672; 6680;47526 $354,524.87 05/03/2019 47527-47530 $8,827.49 GRAND TOTAL: $2,725,724.40 Explanation of Fund Numbers found on Voucher Lists #001 - General Fund 001.090.000.560. General Gov't-Social Services 001.011.000.511. City Council 001.090.000.594 General Gov't-Capital Outlay 001.013.000.513. City Manager 001.013.015.515. Legal Other Funds: 001.016.000. Public Safety 101 —Street Fund 001.018.013.513. Deputy City Manager 103—Paths &Trails 001.018.014.514. Finance 105—Hotel/Motel Tax 001.018.016.518. Human Resources 106—Solid Waste 001.040.041. Engineering 120—CenterPlace Operating Reserve 001.040.042. Economic Development 121 —Service Level Stabilization Reserve 001.040.043. Building 122—Winter Weather Reserve 001.076.000.576. Parks &Rec—Administration 204—Debt Service 001.076.300.576. Parks &Ree-Maintenance 301 —REET 1 Capital Projects 001.076.301.571. Parks &Rec-Recreation 302—REET 2 Capital Projects 001.076.302.576. Parks &Rec-Aquatics 303 —Street Capital Projects 001.076.304.575. Parks&Rec- Senior Center 309—Parks Capital Grants 001.076.305.571. Parks&Rec-CenterPlace 310—Civic Bldg. Capital Projects 001.090.000.511. General Gov't- Council related 311 —Pavement Preservation 001.090.000.514. General Gov't-Finance related 312—CapitaI Reserve 001.090.000.517. General Gov't-Employee supply 314—Railroad Grade Separation Projects 001.090.000.518. General Gov't- Centralized Serv. 402--Stormwater Management 001.090.000.519. General Gov't-Other Services 403 —Aquifer Protection Area 001.090.000.540. General Gov't-Transportation 501 Equipment Rental &Replacement 001.090.000.550. General Gov't-Natural &Eco. 502—Risk Management 001.090.000.595. General Gov't-Pavement Preser. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve attached list of claim vouchers. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 04117/2019 1:27:18PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47341 4/17/2019 000958 AAA SWEEPING LLC RETAINAGE RELEASE 402.223.40.00 STREET SWEEPING RETAINAGE R 24,509.60 RETA1NAGE RELEASE 402.223.40.00 VACTORING SERVICE RETAINAGE 10,129.38 Total : 34,638.98 47342 4/17/2019 000648 ABADAN REPROGRAPHICS 100679 311.000.252.595 PRINT SERVICE 813.37 100923 303.000.278.595 PRINT SERVICE 29.05 100945 303,000.279.595 PRINT SERVICE 28.07 101038 311.000.284.595 PRINT SERVICE 822.81 V 01D a)rC/,, &/e,i d or Total : 1,693.30 943 4/17/2019 001107A:PAN QTS 1921-280356 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 89. 5 Total : 89.76 47344 4/17/2019 002931 ALL WESTERN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 107921 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 53.30 Total : 53.30 47345 4/17/2019 003078 ALLWEST TESTING&ENGINEERING 92352 303.000.278.595 0278-ENGINEERING SERVICES 2,500.00 Total : 2,500.00 47346 4/17/2019 007136 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 167H-3KJL-6P34 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CPW ENGINEE 40.74 1FTV-N1 MR-HVHJ 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CPW ENGINEE 10,93 Total : 51.67 47347 4/17/2019 006403 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC CM 5119044616 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR &MAINTENANCE -676.12 S119036792 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLI 712.76 Total : 36.64 47348 4/17/2019 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC 235225 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES:STREET 231.08 235330 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 106.08 235775 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES:STREET 30.33 235900 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 159.30 236063 001.040.041.543 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP.: CPV 639.57 Total : 1,166.36 47349 4/17/2019 007185 CARLSON SHEET METAL WORKS INC 185970 402.402.000.531 SUPPLIES: STORMWATER 48.96 Total : 48.96 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 04/17/2019 1:27:18PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47350 4/17/2019 002562 CD'A METALS 450983 101.000.000.542 REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLIES: SNO' 61.90 Total : 61.90 47351 4/17/2019 000101 CDW-G RDJ7164 001.090.000.518 NAS TO REPLACE DROP BOX 2,919.23 RRJ2516 001.090.000.518 CRADLEPOINTAER1600 FOR SWIP 127.17 RTV3491 001.090.000.518 CREDIT RE PO 44080 -15.94 Total : 3,030.46 47352 4/17/2019 000143 CITY OF SPOKANE IN-032658 001.040.043.558 HEARING EXAMINER- INTERLOCA 1,458.75 Total : 1,458.75 47353 4/17/2019 000683 DAVID EVANS&ASSOCIATES 440880 314.000.143.595 0143-DESIGN SERVICES 119,057.43 440881 303.000.281.518 0281-ENGINEERING SERVICES 8,627.43 441346 311.000.269.595 0269-TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS 3,371.65 441349 101.042.000.542 TRAFFIC SERVICES 10,752.41 Total : 141,808.92 47354 4/17/2019 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 79909666 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 139.40 79909667 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 657.72 79909668 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 367.80 79909669 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 187.59 Total : 1,352.51 47355 4/17/2019 002920 DIRECTV INC 36127086535 101.042.000.543 CABLE SERVICE FOR MAINTENAN 66.99 Total : 66.99 47356 4/17/2019 002157 ELJAY OIL COMPANY 4285849 001.040.041.543 FUEL FOR SNOWPLOWS/MAINTEN 4,074.99 Total : 4,074.99 47357 4/17/2019 003682 EPIC LAND SOLUTIONS [NC 0319-0857 303.000.249.595 0249-REAL ESTATE SERVICES 750.87 Total : 750.87 47358 4/17/2019 000869 EVCO SOUND& ELECTRONICS 7345 001.033.000.518 SUPPLIES: CITY HALL 930.49 Total : 930.49 47359 4/17/2019 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 524419 303.000.278.595 ADVERTISING 68.25 524421 303.000.279.595 ADVERTISING 71.89 524427 303.000.276.595 ADVERTISING 54.51 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 04117/2019 1:27:18PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept _ Description/Account Amount 47359 4/17/2019 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC (Continued) 525136 303.000.279.595 ADVERTISING 68.25 525138 303.000.276.595 ADVERTISING 51.75 525140 311.000.290.595 ADVERTISING 56.88 525141 402.402.000.531 ADVERTISING 55.30 526023 311.000.290.595 ADVERTISING 54.00 526024 101.042.000.542 ADVERTISING 52.50 526027 303.000.295.595 ADVERTISING 53.72 526028 311.000.269,595 ADVERTISING 68.73 Total : 655.78 47360 4/17/2019 001232 FASTENAL CO IDLEW138813 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 42.55 IDLEW139137 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 16.83 WASPK279727 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 342.64 Total : 402.02 47361 4/17/2019 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 49663 303.000.278.595 ADVERTISING 147.20 49697 303.000.279.595 ADVERTISING 148.80 49698 303.000.276.595 ADVERTISING 112.00 49714 311.000.290.595 ADVERTISING 118.40 49715 101.042.000.542 ADVERTISEMENT 115.20 49741 001,040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 92.65 49742 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 60.35 Total : 794.60 47362 4/17/2019 005474 FREIGHTLINER NORTHWEST PC001444191:01 101.000.000.542 TOOLS FOR SNOWPLOW VEHICLE 1,370.47 PC001444342:01 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 63.10 PC001444891:01 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 34.30 Total : 1,467.87 47363 4!1712019 000007 GRAINGER 9127690742 001.040.041.543 SUPPLIES: CPW ENGINEERING 87.73 9130011472 001.040.041.543 SUPPLIES: CPW ENGINEERING 204.72 9130011480 001.040.041.558 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: CPO 63.20 9130392450 001.040.041.543 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: CPV! 382.47 9131562770 001.040.041.543 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: CP\A 392.70 Page: 3 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 04/17/2019 1:27:18PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47363 4/17/2019 000007 000007 GRAINGER (Continued) Total : 1,130.82 •47364 4/17/2019 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY 29440 001.040.042.558 BUSINESS CONNECTIONS:ANNIE 25.00 Total : 25.00 47365 4/17/2019 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. AR107416 001.040.043.558 COPIER COSTS: PERMIT CTR 109.28 AR107422 001.011.000.511 COPIER COSTS: COUNCIL/CITY M( 127.19 AR107423 001.018.014.514 COPIER COSTS: IT 10.42 AR107424 001.018.016.518 COPIER COSTS: HR 84.77 ARI07425 001.013.000.513 COPIER COSTS: OPS/ADMIN 307.83 AR107426 001.013.015.515 COPIER COSTS: LEGAL 399.55 Total : 1,039.04 47366 4/17/2019 002043 HDR ENGINEERING INC 1200180423 303.000.273.518 0273- DESIGN SERVICES 18,830.00 1200184135 303.000.276.595 0276-RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES 6,327.98 Total : 25,157.98 47367 4/17/2019 002466 KENWORTH SALES COMPANY SPOIN3298485 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR& MAINT. SUPPLI 576.21 Total : 576.21 47368 4/17/2019 006328 KREM-TV 3-2019 SUMMARY BILL 001.040.042.558 ADVERTISING 15,500.00 Total : 15,500.00 47369 4/17/2019 001944 LANCER LTD 0473299 001.040.041.543 BUSINESS CARDS 56.09 0473351 001.040.042.558 BUSINESS CARDS 56.09 Total : 112.18 47370 4/17/2019 001640 MAINTENANCE SOLUTIONS INC 032623105 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 819.85 Total : 819.85 47371 4/17/2019 007134 MINUTEMAN PRESS 1629 001.040.043,558 PRINTING &BINDING 359.64 Total : 359.64 47372 4/17/2019 000662 NATL BARRICADE&SIGN CO 102981 101.042.000.543 SAFETY EQUIPMENT-STREET 28.59 Total : 28.59 47373 4/17/2019 001035 NDM TECHNOLOGIES INC 28012 001.090.000.518 WATCHGUARD FIREBOX T10 SUPE 552.10 Page: 4 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 04/17/2019 1:27:18PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47373 4/17/2019 001035 001035 NDM TECHNOLOGIES INC (Continued) Total : 552.10 47374 4/17/2019 001546 NORCO INC 29952856374 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 87.80 Total : 87.80 47375 4/17/2019 003090 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS 088777/3 101.000.000.542 REPAIR&MAINTENANCE SUPPLIE 89.19 Total : 89.19 47376 4/17/2019 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. 102528 001.040.043.558 DATE STAMP 190.24 Total : 190.24 47377 4/17/2019 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 283424893001 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: ENGINEERING -4.87 283425608001 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: ENGINEERING, 4.87 283681039001 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: ENGINEERING, 71.74 288755535001 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: ENGINEERING, 78.08 288756896001 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: ENGINEERING, 22.18 289982132001 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: ENGINEERING 282.29 294567813001 001.040.041.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: ENGINEERING 126.47 295971305001 001.090.000.518 COMPUTER HARDWARE NON-CAF 103.35 296780075001 001.090.000.519 OFFICE SUPPLIES: GEN'L GOV'T 20.68 298436669001 001.090.000.519 OFFICE SUPPLIES: GEN'L GOV'T 67.04 Total : 771.83 47378 4/17/2019 004621 OREILLYAUTOMOTIVE STORES INC 2862-327495 001.040.041.543 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINTENANCE 133.73 2862-327642 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 29.96 2862-327731 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR& MAINTENANCE 4.47 2862-328678 101.000.000.542 SAFETY EQUIPMENT: SNOWPLOVI 130.67 2862-328712 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR& MAINTENANCE 36.38 2862-328715 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR& MAINTENANCE 59.88 Total : 395.09 47379 4/17/2019 004829 OSI HARDWARE INV-US24673 303.000.287.595 0287-SIGNAL EQUIPMENT 220.50 Total : 220.50 47380 4/17/2019 001604 PACIFIC NW PAPER 197882 001.040.041.543 COPY PAPER: CPW 135.40 Total : 135.40 47381 4/17/2019 005049 PEDERSON, MICHAEL ROY MARCH 2019 101.042.000.542 DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL 1,275.00 Page: 5 vchlist Voucher List Page: 6 04/17/2019 1:27:18PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbartk Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47381 4/17/2019 005049 005049 PEDERSON, MICHAEL ROY (Continued) Total : 1,275.00 47382 4/17/2019 001860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY U686000 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 93.59 U686452 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 52.60 Total : 146.19 47383 4/17/2019 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING INC. 46027 101.000.000.542 WINTER RESPONSE 2019 8,820.00 Total : 8,820.00 47384 4/17/2019 005968 PRECISE MRM LLC IN200-1020593 101.000.000.542 DATA PLAN 275.00 Total : 275.00 47385 4/17/2019 002290 PURCHASE POWER POSTAGE 001.143.70.00 REFILL POSTAGE METER 5,017.00 Total : 5,017.00 47386 4/17/2019 000019 PURFECT LOGOS LLC 51156 001.040.043.558 NAME PLATES 98.01 51295 001.040.043.558 NAME PLATES 119.79 Total : 217.80 47387 4/17/2019 006427 RETAIL STRATEGIES LLC 372-7 001.040.099.558 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8,000.00 Total : 8,000.00 47388 4/17/2019 002288 SARGENT ENGINEERS INC. 32230 101.043.000,542 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-ENGII 1,975.00 Total : 1,975.00 47389 4/17/2019 002835 SCS DELIVERY INC 13213 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING 75.00 Total : 75.00 47390 4/17/2019 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 50318426 402.402.000.531 COUNTY'IT SUPPORT MARCH 2011 16,549.44 Total : 16,549.44 47391 4/17/2019 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 51504780 101.042.000.542 WORK CREW INVOICE FEBRUARY 6,543.50 Total : 6,543.50 47392 4/17/2019 003003 SPOKANE SUNSCREEN LLC 70491 001.033.000.518 WHITE FROST WINDOWS 299.48 Total : 299.48 47393 4/17/2019 004099 SPOKANE VALLEY ACE HARDWARE 025641 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 117.61 Page: 6 vchlist Voucher List Page: 7 04/17/2019 1:27:18PM Spokane Valley Sank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice FundiDept Description/Account Amount 47393 4/17/2019 004099 SPOKANE VALLEY ACE HARDWARE (Continued) 025669 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 25.80 025671 101.042.000.542 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: STRI 19.56 Total : 162.97 47394 4/17/2019 000391 SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DIST.#1 Q1-2019 FIRE FEES 001.229.45.00 Q1-2019 FIRE FEES 28,504.00 Total : 28,504.00 47395 4/17/2019 000093 SPOKESMAN-REVIEW,THE 0000003927 311.000.284.595 ADVERTISING ACCT 42354 5,000.87 Total : 5,000.87 47396 4/17/2019 007107 STANTEC CONSULTING SVCS INC 1488034 001.040.043.558 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 428.25 Total : 428.25 47397 4/17/2019 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3410502055 001.090.000.519 KITCHEN SUPPLIES 166.19 3410502063 001.013.000.513 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CITY MGR 42.42 3410502065 001.011.000.511 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CITY COUNCIL 23.07 3410502066 001.090.000.519 KITCHEN SUPPLIES 153.98 Total : 385.66 47398 4/17/2019 004740 THOMSON REUTERS-WEST 840052095 001.013.015.515 SUBSCRIPTION CHARGES 805.11 Total : 805.11 47399 4/17/2019 000335 TIRE-RAMA 8040096931 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 42.47 Total : 42.47 47400 4/17/2019 006846 US LINEN &UNIFORM [NC 2320296 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 30.63 2324108 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 30.63 2327903 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 30.63 2331726 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 30.63 Total : 122.52 47401 4/17/2019 000964 VOLT MANAGEMENT CORP 42386133 001.090.000.518 HELP DESK TEMP 1,197.43 Total : 1,197.43 47402 4/17/2019 003210 WEST CONSULTANTS INC. 011681 402.000.000.531 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 934.67 Total : 934.67 Page: 7 vchlist Voucher List Page: 8 04117/2019 1:27:18PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47403 4/17/2019 002363 WESTERN STATES EQUIPMENT CO IN000905056 101.000.000.542 ROAD GRADER RENTAL, DELIVER' 5,406.49 IN000926414 101.000.000.542 ROAD GRADER RENTAL-CLOSED 569.57 IN000929969 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLI 39.69 IN000930891 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLI 49.61 Total : 6,065.36 47404 4/17/2019 002501 WHITE BLOCK COMPANY 0259509-IN 402.402.000.531 SUPPLIES: STORMWATER 600.23 0259675-IN 402.402.000.531 SUPPLIES: STORMWATER 111.52 Total : 711.75 47405 4/17/2019 007156 WIDENER&ASSOCIATES 206341 303.000.265.595 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-ENGI 2,390.48 Total : 2,390.48 47406 4/17/2019 002651 WOODARD,ARNE EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 163.73 Total : 163.73 47407 4/17/2019 001885 ZAYO GROUP LLC 2019040005522 001.090.000.518 INTERNET 626.70 Total : 626.70 47408 4/17/2019 001885 ZAYO GROUP LLC 2019040003578 001.090.000.518 NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE ACC 261.03 Total : 261.03 47409 4/17/2019 001885 ZAYO GROUP LLC 2019040025710 001.090.000.518 INTERNET SERVICE 242.10 Total : 242.10 47410 4/17/2019 001163 ZIGGY'S 1009 711472 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 142.46 1009 712077 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 7.00 1009 713007 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 54.26 Total : 203.72 70 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : -3-41768:8-1 70 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 3 ,7' 841, 3`// (s,,-.01/: 2?1 Page: 8 9 vchlist Voucher List Page: - 04/19/2019 3:06:37PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47411 4/19/2019 001081 ALSCO LSP02154106 001.016.016.521 PRECINCT FLOOR MAT SERVICE 24.12 LSP02159048 001.016.016.521 PRECINCT FLOOR MAT SERVICE 24.12 Total : 48.24 47412 4/19/2019 003076 AMSDEN, ERICA Expenses 001.040.041.543 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 48.14 Total : 48.14 47413 4/19/2019 000030 AVISTA Mar 2019 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: PW MASTER AV1STA MA 28,071.71 March 2019 001.016.016.521 UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTA 9,506.30 Total : 37,578.01 47414 4/19/2019 004277 BUTCHER, DAN Expenses 101.042.000.542 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 52.09 Total : 52.09 47415 4/19/2019 007009 GALLS LLC 1001093898 001.016.000.521 UNIFORM PATCHES SERVICE FOR 616.90 Total : 616.90 47416 4/19/2019 006002 GREGERSON,TINA Expenses 001.076.301.571 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 76.93 Total : 76.93 47417 4/19/2019 000070 INLAND POWER& LIGHT CO 2017 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: DEC 2017 440,59 Total : 440.59 47418 4/19/2019 000388 1RVIN WATER DIST.#6 March 2019 001.076.300.576 UTILITIES:PARKS AND CPW MARC 192.50 Total : 192.50 47419 4/19/2019 006729 JAKT FOUNDATION 2019 001.090.000.560 2019 SOC SER/ECO DEV GRANT R 1,084.00 2019 105.000.000.557 2019 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB 1,500.00 April 2019 105.000.000.557 2019 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB 1,459.60 Total : 4,043.60 47420 4/19/2019 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT April 2019 001.033.000.518 OPERATING SUPPLIES: CITY HALL 210.07 Total : 210.07 47421 4/19/2019 007189 MACPHEE, COLIN BLD-2018-0417/0418 001.040.043.322 PERMIT REFUND: BLD-2018-0417/C 49.75 Total: 49.75 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page:/�--2 04/19/2019 3:06:37PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47422 4/19/2019 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO Jan 2016 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: JAN 2016 PW 12,331.78 Total : 12,331.78 47423 4/19/2019 000709 SENSKE LAWN &TREE CARE INC. 8809064 001.033.000.518 CREDIT: FOR INVOICE 8809064 ON, -43.52 8814763-1 001.016.016.521 CREDIT: FOR INVOICE 8809034 OA -54.40 8814814 001.033.000.518 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVAL Al 957.44 8821162 001.016.016.521 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVALAT 1,022.72 8821223 001.033.000.518 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVAL Al 1,719.04 8989783 001.016.016.521 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVALAT 1,251.20 8989856 001.033.000.518 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVAL Al 1,996.48 8995187 001.016.016.521 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVAL Al 718.08 8995253 001.033.000.518 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVAL Al 859.52 9018381 001.016.016.521 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVAL Al 636.48 9018434 001.033.000.518 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVAL Al 957.44 9025756 001.016.016.521 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVALAT 136.00 9025781 001.016.016.521 DE ICING AND SNOW REMOVALAT 195.84 Total : 10,352.32 47424 4/19/2019 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 April 2019 402.402.000.531 WATER CHARGES FOR APRIL 201 133.03 Total : 133.03 47425 4/19/2019 003175 VISIT SPOKANE March 2019 105.000.000.557 2019 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB 4,000.00 Total : 4,000.00 47426 4/19/2019 007192 WING, KYLEE CSV Refund 001.000.000.321 CSV ENDORSEMENT REFUND 13.00 Total : 13.00 16 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 70,186.95 16 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 70,186.95 Page: i2-- vchlist Voucher List Page:// age:r/ -4— 04/23/2019 12:19:35PM Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 8137 4/23/2019 007193 COOK,JESSICA PARK REFUND 001,237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM!: 210.00 Total : 210.00 8138 4/23/2019 007194 EASTERN WA WAEYC PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Total : 52.00 8139 4/23/2019 000979 IRS ENVIRONMENTAL OF WA INC PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOM 110 52.00 Total : 52.00 8140 4/23/2019 007195 LOOSIER, GEORGIA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND:AUDITORIUM 52.00 Total : 52.00 8141 4/23/2019 007196 MOLAND, RON PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI 210.00 Total : 210.00 8142 4/23/2019 007190 MORGAN,TOM PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 120.00 Total : 120.00 8143 4/23/2019 007197 PEARSON &WEARY CHIROPRACTOR PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO 52.00 Total : 52.00 8144 4/23/2019 007198 PROVIDENCE PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/: 210.00 Total : 210.00 8145 4/23/2019 007191 RANSTROM, DAKODA PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 SUMMER DAY CAMP REFUND 589.00 Total : 589.00 8146 4/23/2019 000499 SPOKANE CO LIBRARY DIST PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI 210.00 Total : 210.00 8147 4/23/2019 006979 USDA NRCS PARK REFUND 001.237.10.99 CANCELLATION REFUND: ROOM 2 657.00 Total : 657.00 11 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank total : 2,414.00 11 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,414.00 Page: ar vchlist Voucher List Page:/ --I-- 0412412019 'r04/24/2019 9:01:53AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47427 4/24/2019 004820 A&I DISTRIBUTORS 3277656 001.040.043.558 BULK PURCHASE FOR VEHICLE M 71.74 Total : 71.74 47428 4/24/2019 000958 AAA SWEEPING LLC 64019 101.042.000.542 CLEANUP OF SPILL 3/14/19 1,655.34 Total : 1,655.34 47429 4/24/2019 006937 ADVANCE AUTO PARTS 1921-280356 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 89.76 1921-281972 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 23.44 Total : 113.20 47430 4/24/2019 007136 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 1JJ3-VYXW-46KV 001.076.305.575 AMPLIFIER FOR LOUNGE AT CENT 593.93 Total : 593.93 47431 4/24/2019 006403 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC S121345155 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLI 698.19 Total : 698.19 47432 4/24/2019 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC 236288 101.042.000.542 CRACK SEAL 33,617.43 236483 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT 25.46 236521 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT 60,74 Total : 33,703.63 47433 4/24/2019 000796 BUDINGER &ASSOCIATES INC P19122-1 311.000.290.595 0290-GEOTECH SERVICES 2,110.23 S18777-3 001.033.000,518 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 390.95 Total : 2,501.18 47434 4/24/2019 000101 CDW-G RTX3526 001.090.000.518 COMPUTER HARDWARE- NON-CP 309.52 Total : 309.52 47435 4/24/2019 003319 CO-ENERGY, CONNELL OIL 0254772-IN 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 22.73 Total : 22.73 47436 4/24/2019 001888 COMCAST Apr 18-May 17 2019 001.090.000.518 INTERNET CITY HALL 106.17 Total : 106.17 47437 4/24/2019 000603 CONTRACT DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC 44575 001.040.099.594 FURNITURE- INSPECTOR BULLPE 7,542.21 Total : 7,542.21 Page: s4r /3 vchlist Voucher List Page: 04/24/2019 9:01:53AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47438 4/24/2019 003255 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 611237 101.042.000.543 TOWER RENTAL 214.45 612138 101.042.000.543 TOWER RENTAL 214.45 Total : 428.90 47439 4/24/2019 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 79941367 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 1,050.24 Total : 1,050.24 47440 4/24/2019 006327 DEVRIES MOVING PACKING STORAGE 87478 001.040.099.594 CUBICLE INSTALLATION: CPW 540.00 Total : 540.00 47441 4/24/2019 000746 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 000-217156-00-2 502.502.000.517 1ST QUARTER 2019 UI TAX 23,319.72 Total : 23,319.72 47442 4/24/2019 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 527282 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 80.58 527283 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 53.72 527476 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 63.99 527477 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 71.10 527478 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 63.20 Total : 332.59 47443 4/24/2019 001232 FASTENAL CO IDLEW139318 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT 14.94 Total : 14.94 47444 4/24/2019 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 49765 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 70.55 Total : 70.55 47445 4/24/2019 005474 FREIGHTLINER NORTHWEST PC001445606:01 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 10.89 Total : 10.89 47446 4/24/2019 000007 GRAINGER 9141242520 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT 27.05 9143969542 101.042.000.542 SAFETY SUPPLIES: STREET 27.66 9147488887 001.040.041.543 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: CPV\ 16.40 Total : 71.11 47447 4/24/2019 000321 GREATER SPOKANE INC 121542 001.040.042.558 MEMBER REGISTRATION: MIKE BA 80.00 Total : 80.00 47448 4/24/2019 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY 29443 001.011.000.511 BUSINESS CONNECTIONS: BRANE 25.00 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: - 0412412019 9:01:53AM Spokane Valley fr Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47448 4/24/2019 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY (Continued) 29445 001.011.000.511 BUSINESS CONNECTIONS:ARNE' 25.00 Total : 50.00 47449 4/24/2019 002538 HYDRAULICS PLUS INC 22986 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 267.37 Total : 267.37 47450 4/24/2019 007188 IMAGINIT TECHNOLOGIES IMINV129868 001.040.041.543 AUTOCAD CIVIL 3D TRAINING- KE 1,395.00 Total : 1,395.00 47451 4/24/2019 000864 JUB ENGINEERS INC. 0124370 101.042.000.542 2019 TIP MAINTENANCE& UPDATE 920.92 Total : 920.92 47452 4/24/2019 002466 KENWORTH SALES COMPANY SPOIN3304972 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR& MAINT. SUPPLI 153.93 SPOIN3305270 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 2.42 SPOIN3309913 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 9.76 Total : 166.11 47453 4/24/2019 004632 LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS 79799531 001.076.305.575 TELECOM SERVICES 1,352.58 Total : 1,352.58 47454 4/24/2019 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER LLP 419 001.013.015.515 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,089.29 485 001.013.015.515 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,135.00 Total : 3,224.29 47455 4/24/2019 003090 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS 88915/3 101.042.000.542 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: STRI 25.01 88928/3 402.402.000.531 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: STO 11.96 89160/3 101.042.000.543 SAFETY EQUIPMENT: STREET 74.04 Total : 111.01 47456 4/24/2019 001233 NORTHWEST FENCE COMPANY 0026039-IN 101.043.000.542 FENCE INSTALLATION: SULLIVAN E 11,210.75 Total : 11,210.75 47457 4/24/2019 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 300553301001 001.018.014.514 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 9.59 301383746001 001.090.000.518 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: GEN 24.14 302341823001 001.018.014.514 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 73.65 302342450001 001.018.014.514 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 19.58 Page: 2..--- /5- vchlist Voucher List Page: 4---- 04/24/2019 r04/24/2019 9:01:53AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47457 _ 4/24/2019 000652 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. (Continued) Total : 126.96 47458 4/24/2019 004621 OREILLYAUTOMOTIVE STORES INC 2862-328726 101.042.000.542 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: STR 43.12 2862-330152 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 58.36 Total : 101.48 47459 4/24/2019 001860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY U878122 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 125.82 U882100 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: MAINTENANCE SHOP 163.35 Total : 289.17 47460 4/24/2019 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING INC. 6499 309.000.282.594 CIP 0282- BROWNS PARK 134.26 Total : 134.26 47461 4/24/2019 002520 RWC GROUP 96773N 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 51.65 96853N 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 326.05 97088N 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI 291.54 CM93216N 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR&MAINT. SUPPLI -115.27 Total : 553.97 47462 4/24/2019 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 110100237 101.042.000.542 MARCH 2019 ENGINEERING 34,673.35 51504843 101.042.000.542 WORK CREW INVOICE MARCH 20' 3,828.20 Total : 38,501.55 47463 4/24/2019 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. 735788 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 456.60 Total : 456.60 47464 4/24/2019 001903 SPOKANE TRAFFIC CONTROL INC 4000 101.042.000.542 TRAFFIC CONTROL 900.00 Total : 900.00 47465 4/24/2019 004099 SPOKANE VALLEY ACE HARDWARE 25697 101.042.000.542 PROPANE: STREET DEPT 46.99 25698 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT 8.14 25710 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT 45.01 25714 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT 21.53 25715 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT 13.50 Total : 135.17 47466 4/24/2019 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 57697 001.016.016.521 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150.14 Page: .4.--- vchlist Voucher List ,,/'Page: f 0412412019 9:01:53AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47466 4/24/2019 001083 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTRC (Continued) Total : 150.14 47467 4/24/2019 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3410502049 001.013.000.513 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CITY MGR 27.29 3410502050 001.013.000.513 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CITY MGR 22.93 3410502056 001.013.000.513 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CITY MGR 239.35 Total : 289.57 47468 4/24/2019 001875 STRATA INCORPORATED SP180369-IN 311.000.254.595 0254-MATERIALS TESTING 4,340.00 Total : 4,340.00 47469 4/24/2019 001444 UNITED LABORATORIES [NV252406 101.043.000.542 SUPPLIES: BRIDGE MAINTENANCE 343.32 Total : 343.32 47470 4/24/2019 005400 WESTERN PACIFIC SIGNAL LLC 25751 303.000.287.595 0287-SIGNAL EQUIPMENT 4,735.32 Total : 4,735.32 47471 4/24/2019 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS INC 0000038589 101.042.000.542 BATTERY BACKUP SYSTESM 16,470.41 Total : 16,470.41 47472 4/24/2019 002960 WICK, BEN EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 290.61 Total : 290.61 47473 4/24/2019 007168 ZOOM VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS INC INV06467245 001.090.000.518 ZOOM STANDARD BIZ ANNUCALS 1,999.00 Total : 1,999.00 47 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 161,752.34 47 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 161,752.34 Page: r r9 vchlist Voucher List Page: "''1'--- 04/3012019 11:42:12AM Spokane Valley Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 8148 4130/2019 000030 AVISTA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOM 110 52.00 PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/, 100.00 Total : 152.00 8149 4/30/2019 007039 GOLD SEAL MECHANICAL PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: EXEC. CONF. F 52.00 Total : 52.00 8150 4130/2019 000979 IRS ENVIRONMENTAL OF WA INC PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 CANCELLATION REFUND: ROOM ' 475.00 Total : 475.00 8151 4/30/2019 006302 KAISER ALUMINUM PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOM 108 52.00 Total : 52.00 8152 4/30/2019 007202 PEETS, EILEEN PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME, 75.00 Total : 75.00 8153 4130/2019 007199 VARONA,JOEL PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 CANCELLATION REFUND: MIRABE, 384.00 PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 CANCELLATION: MIRABEAU SPRIN 550.00 Total : 934.00 8154 4/3012019 007200 WIRTH, DIXIE PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 CANCELLATION REFUND: MIRAGE, 243.00 Total : 243.00 8155 4/3012019 007203 YABLON, SHARON PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 300.00 Total : 300.00 8 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank total : 2,283.00 8 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,283.00 Page: 1.--_ i2 vchlist Voucher List Page: ,-.1--- 04/30/2019 3:55:24PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47474 4/30/2019 004046 AMERICAN ONSITE SERVICES A-291079 001.076.300.576 PORTABLE RESTROOMS AT PARK: 169.00 Total : 169.00 47475 4/30/2019 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 0053874 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 496.82 0055824 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 497.28 Total : 994.10 47476 4/30/2019 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 4/22/2019 001.076.305.575 PETTY CASH PARKS: 15359 18.00 Total : 18.00 47477 4/30/2019 004813 FIRST CHOICE COFFEE SERVICES 241913 001.076.305.575 COFFEE SVCS FOR CENTERPLAC 61.44 Total : 61.44 47478 4/30/2019 000321 GREATER SPOKANE INC 2019 001.090.000.560 2019 SOC SER/ECO DEV GRANT R 3,336.00 Total : 3,336.00 47479 4/30/2019 000410 GRIFFIN PUBLISHING INC. 22401 001.076.301.571 2019 SPRING/SUMMER RECREATI( 3,057.28 Total : 3,057,28 47480 4/30/2019 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 1380538 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE 31.61 1380539 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE- 42.14 1380540 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE 136.96 1380541 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE 52.68 1380542 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE 31.61 1380543 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE 31.61 1380545 001.076.305.575 EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE 63.21 Total : 389.82 47481 4/30/2019 004926 LE CATERING CO E01629 001.076.305.575 E01629: INLAND EMPIRE GARDENI 204.64 Total : 204.64 47482 4/30/2019 007201 PETTIS, DICK PRE-LU-2019-0013 001,040.043.558 PREMIT REFUND: PRE-LU-2019-00 35.39 Total : 35.39 47483 4/30/2019 000415 ROSAUERS FOOD& DRUG CENTER 01-1773153 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 15.45 Total : 15.45 Page: . ,9 vchlist Voucher List Page: '2" 04/30/2019 3:55:24PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47484 4/30/2019 000709 SENSKE LAWN &TREE CARE INC. 9065935 001.076.305.575 TREE REMOVAL: PARK ROAD POO 9,692.10 Total : 9,692.10 47485 4/30/2019 000404 SPOKANE VALLEY HERITAGE MUSEUM 2019 105.000.000.557 2019 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB 490.00 Total : 490.00 47486 4/30/2019 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 58375 001.076.305.575 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 275.67 Total : 275.67 47487 4/30/2019 003532 STERICYCLE COMMUNICATION SOLUT 8010955765 001.076.305.575 ANSWERING SERVICE FOR CENT! 54.44 Total : 54.44 47488 4/30/2019 000066 WCP SOLUTIONS 11145078 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 478.33 Total : 478.33 15 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 19,271.66 15 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 19,271.66 Page: —2-- vchlist Voucher List Page: —1- 0510212019 9:10:28AM Spokane Valley 26 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47489 512/2019 000150 ALLIED FIRE&SECURITY 1494565 001.090.000.518 SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIP: CITY 309.50 Total : 309.50 47490 5/212019 007136 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 1DHR-J4LK-CCPG 001.076.305.575 AMPLIFIER FOR LOUNGE AT CENT 16.85 Total : 16.85 47491 5/2/2019 000234 ARLT, SHANE Q2-2019 101.042.000.542 Q2-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 47492 5/2/2019 002326 BATTERIES PLUS BULBS P13660189 001.090.000.518 BATTERIES 60.88 Total : 60.88 47493 512/2019 000173 BINGAMAN, GREG Q2-2019 001.018.014.514 02-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 47494 5/2/2019 000796 BUDINGER&ASSOCIATES INC P19034-3 311.000.286.595 0286-GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATIC 134.04 Total : 134.04 47495 5/2/2019 003122 CALHOUN, MARK 02-2019 001.013.000.513 Q2-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 47496 5/2/2019 007114 CARDINAL INFRASTRUCTURE LLC 1466 001.011.000.511 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,500.00 Total : 6,500.00 47497 5/2/2019 000101 CDW-G RWZ5199 001.090.000.518 COMPUTER HARDWARE NON-CAF 618.39 RXP4166 001.090.000.518 HUDDLECAMHD 10X CONFERENC 880.26 Total : 1,498.65 47498 5/2/2019 000322 CENTURYLINK 4-19-19 to 5-19-19 001.090.000.518 CITY HALL PHONES 258.78 APRIL 2019 001.076.000.576 2019 PHONE SVCS:ACCT 509 214- 546.95 Total : 805.73 47499 5/2/2019 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 79947381 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 1,050.93 Total : 1,050.93 47500 5/2/2019 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 79948356 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE 3050 MICRO 302.18 Page: .9----- vchlist Voucher List Pagel 05102/2019 9:10:28AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47500 5/2/2019 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC (Continued) 79948603 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE:001-8922117-0 139.45 79948604 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE:001-8922117-0 657.92 79948605 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE:001-8922117-0 367.76 79948606 001.090.000.548 COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 187.59 Total : 1,654.90 47501 5/2/2019 000278 DRISKELL, CARY EXPENSES 001.013.015.515 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 801.32 Q2-2019 001.013.015.515 02-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 936.32 47502 5/2/2019 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 527280 303.000.295.595 ADVERTISING 51.00 527281 311.000.269.595 ADVERTISING 65.25 528247 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 60.75 528248 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 67.50 528249 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 120.87 528251 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 75.84 528252 001,040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 59.25 528253 001.040.043558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 57.67 Total : 558.13 47503 5/2/2019 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 49736 303.000.295.595 ADVERTISING 112.00 49737 311.000.269.595 ADVERTISING 140.80 49785 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 136.00 49786 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 152.00 49787 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 67.15 49788 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 65.45 Total : 673.40 47504 5/2/2019 007125 GANNON,ANNIE 02-2019 001.040.042.558 02-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 45.00 Total : 45.00 47505 5/2/2019 005191 HALEY, PAM Q2-2019 001.011.000.511 Q2-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 47506 5/2/2019 003297 HIGGINS, LEWIS ROD 02-2019 001.011.000.511 Q2-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: _33,_ 0510212019 9:10:28AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47507 5/2/2019 000421 HOHMAN, JOHN Q2-2019 001.018.013.513 Q2-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 47508 5/2/2019 000240 NAT'L LEAGUE OF CITIES 155026 001.011.000.511 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL 2019 000: 6,897.91 Total : 6,897.91 47509 5/2/2019 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 297807249001 001.076.305.575 OFFICE SUPPLIES:CENTERPLACE 21.43 297811616001 001.076.305.575 OFFICE SUPPLIES:CENTERPLACE 36.23 Total : 57.66 47510 5/2/2019 000307 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER MARCH 2019 001.016.000.589 STATE REMITTANCE 51,050.19 Total : 51,050.19 47511 5/2/2019 006475 PEETZ, BRANDI EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 129.18 Q2-2019 001.011.000.511 Q2-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 264.18 47512 5/2/2019 000029 PITNEY BOWES INC 1012286681 001.090.000.519 POSTAGE METER SUPPLIES 191.02 Total : 191.02 47513 5/2/2019 007133 PRUNTY, CAITLIN EXPENSES 001.013.015.515 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 688.66 Total : 688.66 47514 5/2/2019 003407 RIGHT! SYSTEMS INC SI-160851 001.090.000.518 VMWARE SUPPORT RENEWAL 10,515.60 SI-160897 001.090.000.518 NIMBLE ARRAY SUPPORT RENEW, 3,065.04 Total : 13,580.64 47515 5/2/2019 000031 ROYAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS IN102301 001.040.043.558 APRIL2019 COPIER COSTS 1,823.87 Total : 1,823.87 47516 5/2/2019 000308 SPOKANE CO PROSECUTING ATTY MARCH 2019 001.016.000.589 CRIME VICTIMS COMENSATION RE 778.56 Total : 778.56 47517 5/2/2019 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 14801206 001.090.000.566 1ST QTR 2019 LIQUOR/EXCISE TA) 6,274.88 42000596 001.016.000.554 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE/ISTH 22,500.00 42000606 001.016.000.554 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE MAY 2 21,792.39 51504815 001.016.000.523 APRIL 2019 HOUSING 104,784.98 Page: 3-- vchlist Voucher List Page: 2y —4- 05102/2019 9:10:28AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47517 5/2/2019 000001 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER (Continued) Total : 155,352.25 47518 5/2/2019 007204 SURVEYMONKEY INC 33686331 001.013.000.513 SUBSCRIPION 418.18 Total : 418.18 47519 5/2/2019 006413 THOMPSON, LINDA 02-2019 001.011.000.511 02-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 47520 5/2/2019 000964 VOLT MANAGEMENT CORP 42408390 001.090.000.518 IT SUPPORT 1,152.00 42435231 001.090.000.518 HELP DESK TEMP 1,176.00 Total : 2,328.00 47521 5/2/2019 000140 WALT'S MAILING SERVICE LTD 66843 314.000.223.595 POSTAGE SERVICES 2,542.30 Total : 2,542.30 47522 5/2/2019 001686 WASHINGTON SOCIETY OF CPAS 212000 001.018.014.514 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL: 305.00 Total : 305.00 47523 5/2/2019 002960 WICK, BEN 02-2019 001.011.000.511 02-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 47524 5/2/2019 004895 WOOD, SAM 02-2019 001.011.000.511 Q2-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 47525 5/2/2019 002651 WOODARD,ARNE 02-2019 001.011.000.511 02-2019 CELL PHONE ALLOWANCI 135.00 Total : 135.00 6779773 4/30/2019 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 9290201533 001.134.51.17 LE CONTRACT BILLING APRIL 201 . 1,535,279.00 Total : 1,535,279.00 8143201 4/30/2019 000409 DEPT OF REVENUE Q1-2019 001.076.302.576 COMBINED EXCISE TAX RETURN 1,768.34 Total : 1,768.34 8194460 4/30/2019 000409 DEPT OF REVENUE Q1-2019 001.076.301.589 LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX 2,864.95 Total : 2,864.95 40 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 1,791,785.04 Page: 4---- vchlist Voucher List Page: -1- 05/03/2019 Y05/03/2019 10:58:38AM Spokane Valley Sank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 6657 5/3/2019 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben86359 001.231.15.00 PERS:PAYMENT 117,954.00 Total: 117,954.00 6659 5/3/2019 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben86361 501.231.21.00 UNION DUES:PAYMENT 2,885.45 Total: 2,885.45 6661 5/3/2019 006345 IDAHO CHILD SUPPORT RECEIPTING Ben86363 001.231.20.00 IDAHO CHILD SUPPORT RECEIPTING: 163.33 Total: 163.33 6668 5/3/2019 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A PLAN Ben86365 402.231.14.00 401A:PAYMENT 35,966.14 Total: 35,966.14 6669 5/312019 000682 EFTPS Ben86367 001.231.13.00 FEDERAL TAXES:PAYMENT 35,267.35 Total: 35,267.35 6670 5/3/2019 000145 VANTAGEPO[NTTRANSFER AGENTS,457 PLE Ben86369 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION:PAYI 9,361.94 Total: 9,361.94 6672 5/312019 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A EXEC P1 Ben86371 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN:PAYMENT 769.08 Total: 769.08 6680 5/3/2019 000682 EFTPS Ben86393 001.231.11,00 FEDERAL TAXES:PAYMENT 1,945.01 Total: 1,945.01 47526 5/312019 000120 AWC Ben86357 403.231.16.00 DENTAL PLAN:PAYMENT 139,145.46 Ben86391 001.231.16.00 DENTAL PLAN(COUNCIL):PAYMENT 11,067.11 Total: 150,212.57 9 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total: 354,524.87 9 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 354,524.87 Page: s'I'` vchlist Voucher List Page: -'- 05/03/2019 11:54:30AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47527 5/3/2019 001606 BANNER BANK 9713 April 2019 001.040.043.558 NW REGIONAL FLOODPLAIN MGM 375.00 9713 April 2019 001.033.000.518 DISPLAYS2GO 79.20 9713 April 2019 001.013.000.513 HICO VILLAGE 15.08 9713 April 2019 001.013.000.513 THRIFTY RENT A CAR AUTO SALE: 208.85 9713 April 2019 001.040.043.558 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS 65.65 9713 April 2019 001.040.043.558 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS 8.16 9713 April 2019 001.040.043.558 OFFICE DEPOT 48.81 9713 April 2019 001.033.000.518 ULINE SHIP SUPPLIES 958.54 Total : 1,759.29 47528 5/3/2019 001606 BANNER BANK 8599 April 2019 001.076.305.575 UNITED AIRLINES 60.00 8599 April 2019 001.076.305.575 HOME DEPOT 60.36 8599 April 2019 001.076.305.575 INLAND NW INDUSTRIAL TRAININC 100.00 8599 April 2019 001.076.305.575 UNITED AIRLINES 60.00 8599 April 2019 001.076.000.576 HILTON HOTELS 912.50 8599 April 2019 001.076.305.575 ACI MECHANICAL 87.04 8599 Aprl 2019 001.076.305.575 DOLLAR TREE 32.64 Total : 1,312.54 47529 5/3/2019 001606 BANNER BANK 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALLIANZ GLOBALASSISTANCE 51.68 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALLIANZ GLOBALASSISTANCE 21.00 5214 April 2019 001.013.000.513 ALL1ANZ GLOBAL ASSISTANCE 23.71 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALLIANZ GLOBAL ASSISTANCE 23.71 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALLIANZ GLOBAL ASSISTANCE 27,85 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 DELTA AIRLINES 808.00 5214 April 2019 001.013.000.513 ALASKAAIRLINES 395.10 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALASKA AIRLINES 430.61 5214 April 2019 001.013.015.515 ALASKA AIRLINES 430.61 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALASKAAIRLINES 464.10 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALASKAAIRLINES 395.10 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALASKAAIRLINES 304.10 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALASKA AIRLINES 15.00 5214 April 2019 001.011.000.511 ALLIANZ GLOBAL ASSISTANCE 52.52 5214 April 2019 001.040.042.558 DELTA AIRLINES 536.60 5214 April 2019 001.040.042.558 ALLIANZ GLOBAL ASSISTANCE 34.88 Page:_ vch list Voucher List Page: z 05/0312019 11:54:30AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 47529 5/3/2019 001606 001606 BANNER BANK (Continued) Total : 4,014.57 47530 5/3/2019 001606 BANNER BANK 8573 April 2019 001.013.015.515 AWC 320.00 8573 April 2019 001.018.016.518 CRAIGSLIST.ORG 25.00 8573 April 2019 001.018.016.518 CRAIGSLIST.ORG 25.00 8573 April 2019 001.018.016.518 CRA1GSLIST.ORG 25.00 8573 April 2019 101.042.000.542 BEST BUY 435.19 8573 April 2019 001.090.000.517 VALLEY BOWL TROPHY 215.91 8573 April 2019 001.040.041.558 ZOOM VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS 14.99 8573 April 2019 001.040.042.558 IEDC 490.00 8573 April 2019 001.040.042.558 IEDC 190.00 Total : 1,741.09 4 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 8,827.49 4 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 8,827.49 Page: x— CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 14, 2019 Department Director Approval : Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Pay Period Ending April 30, 2019 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 304,572.15 $ 10,265.00 $ 314,837.15 Benefits: $ 186,088.47 $ 12,016.16 $ 198,104.63 Total payroll $ 490,660.62 $ 22,281.16 $ 512,941.78 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington April 16,2019 Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Rod Higgins,Mayor John Hohman,Deputy City Manager Pam Haley,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell,City Attorney Brandi Peetz,Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Linda Thompson, Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks&Rec.Director Ben Wick, Councilmember Mark Werner,Police Chief Sam Wood, Councilmember Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Arne Woodard, Councilmember Mike Basinger,Economic Dev.Manager Gloria Mantz,Engineering Manager Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded, and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. ACTION ITEMS: 1.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Knox Sidewalk,Hutchinson to Sargent—Gloria Mantz It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to award the Knox Sidewalk Project CIP #0279 to N.A. Degerstrom in the amount of$375,985.15 and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the construction agreement. After Ms.Mantz explained the project and the bid,Mayor Higgins invited public comments.No public comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. NON-ACTION ITEMS: 2. Crisis Co-response Team report — Chief Werner, Deputy Moman; Mental Health Professional Holly Keller;Frontier Behavioral Heath Chief Operating Officer Jan Dobbs Police Chief Werner explained that this response team is made possible through grant funds from the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs Association, and he turned the floor over to Deputy Moman who introduced Holly Keller and Jan Dobbs,who each then talked a little about their background. Deputy Moman went through the PowerPoint presentation explaining the mission of the team, and that the grant funds pay Ms. Keller's salary; he mentioned how the team differs in response from a regular patrol officer in response time,hospital time,and how they handle frequent users of emergency services;he talked about training, resources, the relatively new `Extreme Risk Protection Order,' and that the team collects and uses data to show outcomes; he explained about peak days and times; and showed a chart of suicide calls by the hour and by the weekday over a twenty-two month period;said of the 265 contacts to date,87% went to diversion, about 12% were emergency detentions, and only 1.1% were arrested; said they use no force on contacts beyond hand-cuffing and soft restraints. Officer Moman also noted that the work done by this team saves other officer patrol time,and relieves officers to remain on the street. Deputy Moman said that community feedback from individuals,community resources,and hospitals has been very positive. Ms. Dobbs said this program is very cutting-edge in the area of interventions as it gives the team, which includes a mental health professional, the ability to interact with people at the moment and height of the crisis. She also mentioned that Frontier Behavioral Health has the resources to deal with substance abuse Council Study Session:04-16-2019 Page 1 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT and provide immediate access to out-patient assistance, and to evaluate and treat; and that they are not just an interaction but a tangible resource and someone to work with the person in crisis to get them stabilized. Council thanked the team for an informative report. 3.Federal Legislative Agenda—Cary Driskell,John Hohman City Attorney Driskell introduced Mr. Bennett Resnick of Cardinal Infrastructure, our federal lobbyist in Washington,D.C. Mr.Driskell gave a brief recap of the purpose of the federal legislative agenda,as noted in his April 16, 2019 Request for Council Action form, and then turned the meeting over to Mr. Resnick, who explained that the focus of his company is transportation, infrastructure, and economic development issues,and about the various types of federal grants available.As discussion turned to the items on the draft federal legislative agenda and of the information on the four handouts, Deputy Mayor Haley asked if the percentage of the funding request is feasible. Mr. Resnick explained that the funding depends on the program;that the percentages are fairly high in terms of federal dollars,but the federal government can ask that more dollars get funded for these types of projects, and said based on that, these numbers are in line with our eligibility. The question of funding for urban versus rural was briefly discussed and Mr. Resnick said the process is complicated, but it is an attempt by Congress to balance the funding. Councilmember Thompson asked if having a school involved in a transportation project would be helpful and Mr. Resnick said having multiple stakeholders is always a benefit. Councilmember Wick noted that the project is listed and then the total funding dollars listed, and he asked if perhaps instead of putting down the cost of the project, we should rather put down the amount of the request. Mr. Hohman noted that was implemented on the handouts, and said he thinks we should implement that suggestion on the agenda as well. Councilmember Wick also questioned why we are including so many projects instead of just the top two. Mr. Hohman noted instead of focusing on one project at a time, we are trying to assemble as much state and local funding as we can on some of the other projects;that the idea is to focus on Pines as the priority then work on the others. City Attorney Driskell added that this is Council's federal legislative agenda,but staff's suggestion is to identify four projects which are significant transportation issues as it is valuable to include them on the agenda so as we move to get funding on the first few,we aren't starting on ground zero with the others; and Mr. Hohman stated that we included multiple projects at the urging of Cardinal. Mr. Resnick agreed it is prudent to have several projects to apply for and having a fairly robust list of projects gives direction to the congressional delegation of what's to come and what to expect in the next few years. Councilmember Woodard said that he likes the agenda with all the projects;that this is an education process and we will be competing against some monster projects through Spokane Regional Transportation Council and we have to start educating them too; said he feels we can't start too early;that we should push hard for the top two but start educating people on what's to come. Mr. Resnick said it is good to have a list of projects;that he is not sure what Congress will do and we want to be prepared in case they ask for priorities; we want them to be educated on the projects. There was Council consensus to move this legislative agenda forward, and Mr. Driskell said this will be brought to Council again in a few weeks for a motion consideration. 4. Comprehensive Plan Amendments—Lori Barlow,Mike Basinger Economic Development Manager Basinger explained tonight he will go over the ten comp plan amendments,three of which are privately initiated; and that he will explain the City initiated amendments, and Ms.Barlow will go over the site specific amendments. At the request of Mayor Higgins,Ms. Barlow started by explaining privately initiated map amendment CPA 2019-0001,a request from Mr.Danny Davis, owner of Circle J Mobile Home Park, to change the land use designation from industrial to single family residential,and the zoning from industrial to Single Family Residential Urban(R-3);she explained the area is 300' south of the intersection of Park Road and Broadway Avenue; she mentioned the existing and proposed transitional regulations; said there were no substantive agency comments but public comments included impacts to industrial area, incompatible uses, and limiting future development; she noted the comparison of development standards in the industrial and R-3 zone; and said the Planning Commission voted five to zero to recommend denial of this request. Ms. Barlow then went through the remaining Council Study Session:04-16-2019 Page 2 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT privately initiated map amendments as noted in her PowerPoint. Mr. Basinger said although we are not asking for any action tonight, for purposes of drafting the ordinance,he asked for Council's view on these proposed amendments. After some discussion on various options, City Attorney Driskell suggested going with the Planning Commission recommendations on the amendments, and for the amendment where there was no recommendation due to a split vote, after further discussion it was determined to go with the staff recommendation for the ordinance. Mr. Driskell noted as these amendments started prior to the Council's change in their Governance Manual concerning not taking further comments on issues once a public hearing has been closed,that Council had agreed to hear public comments on these issues for the first reading only; adding that by keeping the proposed change with the three-to-three split, that too would permit public comment; and said the public is expecting to be able to comment on these; however in moving forward after these amendments,comments will not be taken on issues once a public hearing has been closed. Mr. Basinger then explained the City-initiated text amendments as included in the PowerPoint, and as he noted,are also included in the yellow notebook,along with the remaining of the comp plan documentation. Council agreed to move these forward as suggested. 5. Community Economic Revitalization Board(CERB)Planning Grant—Mike Basinger After Economic Development Manager Basinger went through his PowerPoint explaining about the grant opportunity including the funding request, city match, and scope of work for improvements along the Appleway Trail corridor,there was Council consensus for staff to move forward and apply for the grant. 6.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins There were no suggested changes to the Advance Agenda. 7. Council Check-in—Mayor Higgins Councilmember Thompson mentioned Spokane Regional Opioid Task Force upcoming meeting on May 7, from 5-8 pm, entitled "A Community Connected" which will address the opioid crisis, and said she has placed some information handouts on the side counter. 8. Deputy City Manager Comments—John Hohman Regarding the earlier mention of only having six planning commissioners,Deputy City Manager Hohman explained that we don't have an actual vacancy,but one of the commissioners is having health issues, and said it would be prudent to look for a temporary commissioner, and there was consensus among Councilmembers to begin that process. Mr. Hohman also noted the upcoming two public meetings this Thursday regarding the Pines Grade Separation Project, one meeting at noon here, and the other 5:30 at CenterPlace;he said the purpose is to get public input on the alternatives,and then to bring that information to Council later in May. 9. Executive Session: Review the Performance of a Public Employee [RCW 42.30.110(1)(g)1 It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley,seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately sixth minutes to review the performance of a public employee, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 8:07 p.m. At 9:02 p.m. Mayor Higgins declared Council out of executive session, at which time it was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. ATTEST: L.R.Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session:04-16-2019 Page 3 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday,April 23,2019 Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Staff. Rod Higgins,Mayor Mark Calhoun, City Manager Pam Haley,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Brandi Peetz, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director Linda Thompson, Councilmember John Hohman,Deputy City Manager Ben Wick, Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks&Recreation Director Sam Wood,Councilmember Mark Werner,Police Chief Arne Woodard, Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Lesli Brassfield,Economic Dev. Specialist Carrie Koudelka,Deputy City Clerk INVOCATION: Mr.Bob Field of Intersection Church led the invocation on behalf of Pastor Isaac Hebden. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council, staff,and the audience stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AMENDED AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS n/a COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Councilmember Wood said he attended the STA(Spokane Transit Authority)board meeting where it was reported that their ridership is down 3.9 percent for the period of March 2018 to March 2019, as well as a 9.1 percent decrease in paratransit ridership,but an increase of 1.8 percent to the vanpool ridership,which had been steadily decreasing in the past.He said their March revenues were up 3.4 percent. Councilmember Peetz mentioned she participated in the DC Fly-in trip and while there, she discussed the Pines grade separation project and received positive feedback. She said there was good participation at Earthday at Balfour Park with over 100 vendors; she attended the Pines grade separation meeting and a "coffee chat"with law enforcement and Chief Werner where they discussed law enforcement and resources for the community. Councilmember Woodard said he attended a presentation at Envision Center regarding homelessness,the Duluth ribbon cutting ceremony, a River Forum meeting, and a Spokane Regional Transportation Council meeting. He attended the BNSF Pines and Trent meeting where they discussed project options and the impacts to the community. He also attended the Chamber of Commerce Business Connection meeting. Councilmember Thompson said the Board of Health is working on their strategic plan; she went to the Suicide Prevention Coalition meeting and was informed the suicide rates continue to increase among young males and seniors. She said she attended and judged the Miss Spokane Valley and mentioned that the final meeting of Spokane Valley Youth Voices will be on May 13th on the second floor of City Hall. Councilmember Wick said he attended the Spokane Health District transition committee meeting and said they are searching for a new director; he attended a joint meeting with Visit Spokane and the Spokane Airport board and they discussed their strategic plan and future development of the airport. He said they analyzed where flights are going and coming from and reported that 60 percent of travelers are non-stop Minutes Regular Council Meeting:04-23-2019 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT rather than connections and in trying to expand tourism to our area,they are looking to come up with flights to new locations. Deputy Mayor Haley said she was a Miss Spokane Valley judge and she attended the STA meeting. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Higgins said he attended the Duluth grand opening, an Alzheimer's research symposium, and the Eagle Scout Court of Honor. PROCLAMATIONS: Older American's Month;Lemonade Day Mayor Higgins read the proclamation for Older American's Month and invited Ms. Lynn Kimball and Ms. Jean Kindem to say a few words; they graciously accepted the proclamation and thanked the Mayor and Council. Mayor Higgins then read the Lemonade Day proclamation and invited Mr. Lance Beck and Ms. Georgia Oxford of the Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce to say a few words. Mr. Beck thanked Council and mentioned they have over 400 participants this year and they are looking forward to the event. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion:I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a.Approval of claim vouchers on April 23,2019 Request for Council Action Form Total: $901,586.41 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending April 15,2019: $365,440.81 c.Approval of March 26,2019 Council Meeting Minutes,Formal Format d.Approval of April 2,2019 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session e.Approval of April 9,2019 Council Meeting Minutes,Formal Format It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Midilome Neighborhood Street Improvement Project-John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to award the Local Access Streets (Midilome)Project CIP#0290 to WM Winkler Co. in the amount of$1,345,902 and authorize the City Manager to.finalize and execute the construction contract.Deputy City Manager Hohman said that staff provided an administrative report to Council on March 12,2019, and then referred to the packet materials identifying the streets to be covered. He said we have $1.5M budgeted per year to spend on local access streets and the City received five bids on this project; WM Winkler submitted the lowest responsive bid and was well below the engineer's estimate.He said staff recommends Council move forward on the project so we can get the work underway. Mayor Higgins invited public comment, no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 3.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Barker Road Widening—John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to award the Barker Road Widening Project CIP#0276 to Big Sky Corporation in the amount of$2,020,197 plus applicable sales tax, and authorize the City Manager to.finalize and execute the construction contract. Deputy City Manager Hohman said staff provided an administrative report to Council on January 29, 2019, and said this is an attempt to get this segment of Barker constructed prior to the grade separation project. He said it became imperative that the sewer goes in ahead of the separation project and he thanked the Spokane County staff for working together with us on this area.Mr.Hohman said the City received eight bids and recommends that Council authorize staff to proceed with the project. In response to Councilmember Wick's question about the FMSIB grant, Mr. Hohman clarified that originally, there were three phases but now there are only two. He said in coordination with FMSIB we can enter into a local agency agreement with WSDOT that would allow us to tap into funds now and seek reimbursement on this project or we have the option to use the money later. He added that a local agency agreement would need to be entered into prior to the bid advertisement if there are federal funds involved,but he said there are no federal funds involved with this project.He said that by Minutes Regular Council Meeting:04-23-2019 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT bidding early, we were able to get very competitive bids. Mayor Higgins invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 3a.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Garland Avenue Extension Project—John Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to award the Garland Avenue Extension Project CIP# 0295 to Poe Asphalt Paving, Inc. in the amount of$1,412,444, and authorize the City Manager to. finalize and execute the construction contract. Deputy City Manager Hohman said that on January 29, 2019, this proposal came before Council in cooperation with Centennial Properties and again on March 12,2019.He said typically, this work would be the responsibility of the developer but through the design of the grade separation project, we can save several months of construction time by offering a detour route which this project provides. He said this project also provides mitigation for the closure of Flora as required by the TIGER grant award for the grade separation at Barker. He said that the project was designed by Simpson Engineers in cooperation with Centennial Properties and was not designed by City staff.Mr.Hohman said the City received eight bids and the City share is half of the $1.4M bid,which he said is a great savings to the City. Mayor Higgins invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. Councilmember Woodard mentioned as a side note that the bids we have received on the Mission Avenue, Wilbur Sidewalks,Knox Sidewalks,Midilome neighborhood,Barker Road Widening,and Garland Avenue projects were all lower than the Engineer's estimate, a savings in tax funds of$3,283,983 and he thanked staff for their work. PUBLIC COMMENTS: After Mayor Higgins explained the process,he invited general public comments. Monty Cortez said he lives across the street from Plantes Ferry Park and he is concerned with the speed limits on the road, attendees at the park at late hours and the trash left behind. He said one parking lot is used as a racetrack and he has made numerous calls to the Sheriff's department.He said he thinks the speed limit on Wellesley should be reduced to 25mph and changed to single lane traffic as it is further down the road. He said people park along the roads rather than in the parking lot to avoid the $5 parking fee and he suggests speed bumps be installed in the parking lots and removal of the lot entries from Wellesley. Sandra and Wilbur McCarthy said they love the park but don't want the lights installed due to safety concerns for traffic on the road and they said parks should be closed at certain times. Mrs.McCarthy said when the park first came in they were told no lights would be installed but now they are talking about putting in lights. She said the LED lights at the County maintenance building shine toward her house and are very bright. Patrick Stretch said he came across homeless encampments at Sullivan Park and he said he feels residents should not be discouraged from using parks due to lack of enforcing the"No Camping"ordinance and more should be done to keep parks safe. Secondly, he said he plays softball but they can't play at Plantes Ferry Park because there are no lights.He said there are over 300 softball teams in the Spokane area and he would like them back in the Valley and he encourages the improvements at the park. Bob West said improvements would bring money to the Valley and the lights would not be LED lights,and the artificial turf would realize longer use and the park could be used deeper into the winter. Michelle Cortez asked that the homes around the parks be considered when making decisions about the improvements and she said the park should be locked at night and speed bumps installed in the lots. She said it should not be all about the money but the peace of mind of the homeowners should be considered as well. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 4. Plantes Ferry Sports Complex Renovation—John Hohman; Spokane County Parks,Recreation&Golf Director Doug Chase Deputy City Manager Hohman said on April 9th Council discussed tourism venues including a softball complex within Spokane Valley and a new potential option to consider is to join with Spokane County in renovating Plantes Ferry Park. Doug Chase, Spokane County Parks and Recreation Director and Beth Minutes Regular Council Meeting:04-23-2019 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT Spaley with Spokane Valley Junior Soccer Association presented the details of this option to Council. Mr. Chase began with a brief history and he said Spokane County acquired the park in 1952,purchased an additional seventy acres in 1991, and in 1996 they entered into a partnership with the Junior Soccer Association for maintenance. In 1997, they received a grant from the Recreation Conservation office to develop the fields and added fourteen acres in 2011 for overflow parking. Mr. Chase said they are now inviting the City of Spokane Valley to annex the property into the city limits and form a partnership with Spokane County whereby the County will continue to operate the complex.He said there are other events utilizing the park,including cross-country,Junior Olympics and sports championships. The Spokane Valley Junior Soccer Association has worked with the County over the last two decades managing the site. Ms. Spaley said the park is currently over capacity and they would like lights on the fields so they can use them in the spring and fall when it gets dark earlier.Finance Director Taylor provided a financial analysis, pointed out the updated comparison worksheet provided to Council,and discussed the figures to be financed by each jurisdiction and the fund accounts that would be used for the City's share. Mr. Chase said there is potential opportunity for grant money down the road once a plan is in place and competing for funds as a partnership could be that much more helpful in being competitive.Mr. Chase said Spokane County has one of the largest softball leagues in the state and the County maintains and operates the softball fields.He said in 2017, Trentwood Irrigation District imposed a rate increase and the cost to water the fields went from $33,000 to $90,000. He said the County identified some improvements in reducing that cost but they are limited by the size of the meter currently installed and found it takes 23 hours to water soccer fields. He said the perception is that they are being wasteful and inefficient but,in effect,they are trying to keep the fields green. Mr. Hohman said to move forward, we would work with Architects West and look at other areas to see if there is property in proximity to Plantes Ferry that we can add more ballfields to,creating a super complex for soccer, softball and other sports. He said we would likely solicit input from the public and report back to Council for direction. 5. Police Department Quarterly Report—Chief Werner Chief Werner went through his Powerpoint presentation and afterward, Councilmember Thompson asked about the camera/video program for citizens. Chief Werner said that if citizens or businesses have video surveillance on their property,they can report the location to the police department and then if something takes place in the area, the police can ask to utilize the footage on the camera. He said registration of the camera is on a volunteer basis. 6.Arties Landing Right-of-way Easement—Erik Lamb Deputy City Attorney Lamb said there is a proposed subdivision in the final plat approval stage located between Barker Road and Long Road just off Boone Avenue. He said there is a significant portion of undeveloped right-of-way that is former railroad property,and the owner is looking for an access easement over the City portion of right-of-way to access their property. It was the consensus of Council to grant the easement and move forward. 7.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins: There were no comments or additions. INFORMATION ONLY: The following agenda items were for information only and were not reported on or discussed: (8) Department Reports; (9) Customer Service Annual Survey; (10) Bike and Scooter Share Programs; and(11)Spokane Valley Arts Piece. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS Mr.Calhoun said on April 30,2019,staff will present the federal legislative agenda to Council for adoption and mentioned the cancellation of the May 7,2019 Council meeting due to the federal lobbying trip of three Council members to Olympia at that time. Minutes Regular Council Meeting:04-23-2019 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT 12.Executive Session: Review the Performance of a Public Employee [RCW 42.30.110(1)(g)] It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley,seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately thirty minutes to review the performance of a public employee, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session. Council took a ten-minute break and then adjourned into executive session at 8:30 p.m. At 8:55 p.m.Mayor Higgins declared Council out of executive session at which time it was moved by Councilmember Wood, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. ATTEST: L.R.Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Minutes Regular Council Meeting:04-23-2019 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington April 30,2019 Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Rod Higgins,Mayor Mark Calhoun,City Manager Pam Haley,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Brandi Peetz, Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Linda Thompson, Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks&Rec.Director Ben Wick, Councilmember Mark Werner,Police Chief Sam Wood, Councilmember John Hohman,Deputy City Manager Arne Woodard, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director Bill Helbig,City Engineer Gloria Mantz,Engineering Manager Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AMENDED AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded, and unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Motion Consideration: Adoption of Federal Legislative Agenda—Mark Calhoun, John Hohman, Cary Driskell It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to approve the proposed 2019 Federal Legislative Agenda as drafted. City Manager Calhoun briefly went over the background of our contract with Cardinal Infrastructure and of staff's work to identify projects that would be appropriate for Council to consider for inclusion on a proposed draft federal lobbying agenda,replying upon the City's legislative agenda as well as our City's budget goals. City Attorney Driskell added that based on conversation from last week,it was determined to include all four projects as well as the policy directives, and to include the total project cost as well as the funding request, and said that was the only change made since the last discussion. Councilmember Peetz suggested editing one or both of the last two sentences under the first agenda item to make it more clear,and it was ultimately suggested by Mr.Hohman to simply delete the reference to the 12t1i rank and stay with the sentence of this project being the number one unfunded project. Council concurred. Councilmember Wick asked if this document can be changed in the future if things change,and if so, would that need to come back to Council. Mr. Driskell said similar to the process for Council's legislative agenda, the document can be changed, and any changes would come back to Council for approval. Councilmember Wick also suggested to broaden the pictures and images on the one-page handouts to give it more of a look from a national scale; and said that suggestion is just for feedback and realizes it is not necessary to make those changes now. Mr. Calhoun added that we are also trying to keep it to one page, front and back so space is an issue; and that we will work through the refinements as we move forward. Councilmember Thompson mentioned the importance of and suggested adding something about partnerships in connection with the Bigelow Gulch project,and Councilmember Woodard suggested that might be a little premature at this point since we are coming together in partnership, but that hasn't been finalized. Council Study Session:04-30-2019 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Mr. Calhoun noted that we will learn more once we meet with our federal legislators and with representatives of the Department of Transportation in Washington,D.C., and further refinements can be made afterwards. Mr.Hohman stated that he and the County Engineer met and have agreed to bring the two staffs together to work out the details of that partnership, and how to jointly prepare for this project. Since the legislative agenda was slightly modified,Deputy Mayor Haley withdrew her motion and then moved to approve the proposed 2019 Federal Legislative Agenda as amended. Mayor Higgins again invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 2.Motion Consideration: Arties Landing Right-of-way Easement—Erik Lamb It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to approve the proposed access easement with Arties Landing HOA in substantially the form presented, and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the easement. Deputy City Attorney Lamb referenced the aerial photo just distributed to Councilmembers; and mentioned the undeveloped right-of-way; he said the development to the south needs to use that and put in improvements;they are proposing fourteen lots,and we are recommending this access easement.Mr. Lamb mentioned the portion of Boone that runs through the north part of that property; said this will be cleared up on that title on that property.Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 3.Motion Consideration: Spokane Valley Arts Council Art Piece—Mike Stone It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to authorize the City Manager to accept, on behalf of the City, the "IfI Could But Fly"sculpture by Bob Wilfong which is to be placed into storage until the final phase of the CenterPlace West Lawn Masterplan is completed. Parks and Recreation Director Stone explained the background of this particular art piece as noted in his Request for Council Action; adding that the sculpture is about 6' tall and that it can be stored until the west lawn masterplan has been completed. Councilmember Wick asked about the possibility of placing this at Browns Park, and Councilmember Thompson asked if there are any concerns about putting another sculpture into storage. Mr.Stone explained that he talked to Dr.Harken about this issue and Dr.Harken strongly supports placing this at the CenterPlace west lawn, and has no problems with us storing it until that area is ready. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 3a.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Evergreen Preservation,Mission to Indiana—Gloria Mantz It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to award the Evergreen Road Preservation Project, Indiana to Mission, CIP 0269 to Inland Asphalt Company, in the amount of$707,284.51 and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract.After City Engineer Helbig,standing in for Ms. Mantz, explained this project and bid process,he said that having this award come in now instead of later,saves weeks of construction time.Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 3b.Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointment,Jail Task Force—Mayor Higgins It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to approve Mayor Higgins'recommended appointment of Deputy Mayor Pam Haley to the Spokane County Jail Task Force. At Mayor Higgins' request, City Manager Calhoun explained that Spokane County and the City of Spokane are in the process of appointing members to a task force to work to develop recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners related to the County Jail;that as the Spokane County jail is a regional issue which will ultimately require broad based financial support from Spokane Valley as well as other affected communities, we feel our participation on the Task Force is important and having a Spokane Valley councilmember who understands the process and the issue has the potential of creating an advocate for our City when the time comes to ask the electorate to support a voted bond issue. Mr. Calhoun said he contacted Spokane County with the Council Study Session:04-30-2019 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT proposal to include an elected official from Spokane Valley and the County agreed.Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. NON-ACTION ITEMS: 4. City Hall and Police Precinct Generators—Bill Helbig After City Engineer Helbig gave an update on the two generators, as noted in his April 30, 2019 Request for Council Action,there was brief discussion about the procurement process,with Mr. Helbig explaining that the generators are scheduled for delivery in late May or early June;that these are not an `off-the-shelf product;that the preparation at the precinct for the generator has been extensive,as noted on the installation cost;that these purchase amounts fall within the City Manager's authority so they do not have to go through the bid process;and that we have qualified bidders on our roster.Council thanked Mr.Helbig for the update. 5. Park Road Reconstruction Project Update—Gloria Mantz,Bill Helbig,John Hohman Ms. Mantz went through her PowerPoint explaining about the existing conditions on Park Road,the 2004 Bridging the Valley concept,and the project scope and status.Ms.Mantz went over the options for Council of either funding the project with $400,000 from REET (real estate excise tax) funds, paying back the federal funds of approximately $285,000, and/or focusing on the project segments with higher priorities, such as the Mission and Park intersection improvements. To further explain, Ms. Mantz stated that the engineering phase of this project was initiated in September of 2009; that the Federal Highway Administration requires projects to advance to the right-of-way or construction phase within ten years after initiating the engineering phase, and if we do not initiate the right-of-way phase by September 2019, we must pay back the federal dollars spent in the engineering phase,which total$285,163.37. Ms.Mantz noted that we cannot go for a grant application at this time and meet the deadline of September 2019. There was some Council discussion about the original 2006 design of adding a third lane for turning,with Deputy Mayor Haley stating that several people contacted her and while they'd like sidewalks,said no one wants this project. Councilmember Wick agreed that priorities have changed and Mayor Higgins stated he feels the best option would be to return the funds. Councilmember Woodard agreed with the option of returning the money; adding that the intersections need help. Mr.Hohman said there is a need to prioritize the fixing of the signal in the intersection; that the lines are sagging, and a pole got hit by a large vehicle. There was Council consensus to return the funds. 6.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins Councilmember Wick mentioned about setting up a prioritization or plan for acquiring right-of-way for sidewalks; said it seems an element of the planning process is missing; and added that some of the streets don't connect; said we used to have a plan map of where to connect streets and said perhaps the map would be a good starting talking point. Council concurred. Councilmember Woodard said he would like to have someone from the newly located Spokane County Veterans Center come talk to us to explain what they do,and why they moved to their new location. Council agreed. Councilmember Woodard also mentioned the Continuum of Care and said he would like more information on where the homeless come from,and about the count of homeless people. At Mr. Calhoun's request,Councilmember Woodard said he will get contact names to Mr. Calhoun. Council agreed. 7. Engineering Monthly Report This report was for information only and was not reported or discussed. 8. Council Check-in—Mayor Higgins Councilmember Peetz reported that she and Councilmember Thompson attended a worker's memorial awareness service which she said was very touching. Councilmember Thompson mentioned there was Council Study Session:04-30-2019 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT another shooting at a synagogue; said it is important to keep in mind our affirmation of our City as an inclusive City. 9. City Manager Comments—Mark Calhoun City Manager Calhoun stated that next week's Council meeting,May 7,2019,will be cancelled as he and several Councilmembers will be going to Washington,D.C.to meet with our federal lobbyist and others. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:09 p.m. ATTEST: L.R.Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Study Session:04-30-2019 Page 4 of 4 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 14, 2019 Department Director Approval Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information [' admin. report ❑ pending legislation [' executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading Proposed Ordinance 19-004;2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A, SVMC 17.80.140 and 19.30.010. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On December 13, 2016,City Council approved Ordinance 16-018 adopting the Comprehensive Plan and associated development regulations as required every eight years. On November 20,2018,City Council approved the 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket. On April 16,2019, Council heard an administrative report. BACKGROUND: The annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle runs from November 1St to October 31st 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 three privately initiated requests for Comprehensive Plan map amendments. In addition, the City proposed one Comprehensive Plan map amendment and six Comprehensive Plan text amendments. Properties approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment(CPA)receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. • On February 14,2019,the Planning Commission was briefed on the 2019 CPAs,and a public hearing was conducted on February 28, 2019. The public hearing was closed at that time and the Planning Commission reviewed and deliberated on each of the proposed CPAs. On March 14, 2019, the Planning Commission voted on the following Findings and Recommendations to the City Council: The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation to not approve CPA-2019-0001.Note: Commissioner Johnson recused himself due to a conflict of interest. • The Planning Commission had a split vote of 3-3 for CPA-2019-0003. A recommendation requires a majority vote, and therefore the Planning Commission is not able to forward a recommendation. • The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2019-0009 • The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation to approve CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0004 through 0008, and CPA-2019-0010. An Administrative Report was presented to City Council on April 16,2019. No public comment was taken at that time. The Council agreed by consensus for the draft Ordinance presented for first reading to include the Planning Commission recommendation on each of the proposed amendments with the exception of CPA- 2019-0003. Council directed staff to incorporate the staff report staff recommendation for CPA-2019-0003 into the draft Ordinance. The staff report concluded that the proposal was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and the draft Ordinance reflects such findings. However, as it is a draft Ordinance, Council may make amendments during either first or second reading to approve or deny any of the proposed CPAs. If Council determines to make such amendments,it must indicate the basis for such approval or denial and particularly state why the proposal does or does not meet the criteria set forth in SVMC 17.80.140(H). This criteria includes whether(1)the amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment, (2) the amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, 1 of 2 (3) the amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions, (4) the amendment corrects an obvious mapping error,or(5)the amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Note that City Council recently adopted amendments to its Governance Manual that provide that Council will not take public comment on items that have already had a public hearing. Since the 2019 CPAs were in process at the time these amendments were being considered by Council, Council will hear public comment only during the first reading. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: n/a OPTIONS: Move to advance Ordinance No. 19-004 to a second reading, with or without further amendments. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance Ordinance 19-004,Comprehensive Plan Amendments to a second reading as proposed. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger,AICP,Economic Development Manager; Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation; Draft Ordinance 19-004 with attachments; Yellow Binder Distributed Separately 2 of 2 s1j'o' s Valley ■ 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments City Council Ordinance 1st Reading May 14, 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process 2 C 0 ._ •O _ .V .N Administrative _ 0 • Study Session a O E 2-14-19 '0 Report •v � O � N 0 � O Ti N a= } E .c `-~ 'i U Public Hearing 3çlinance 1st QN 0 'E =O E O N 2-28-19 Reading _4 .� N V I 4- N = '— Q N w (1) O c Findings of Fact U Ordinance 2nd 0_ Q Z 3-14-19 Reading 1 i ffj4iftii aillh_ 1110( ir Today Privately Initiated Map Amendment i 'Study Areal I –17-1 i LiaL4 CPA-2019-0001 _ _-� _ it - 3 di I - i Applicant: Danny Davis "" SFR Owners: Circle J Mobile Home f (R-3 LU Park, LLC I i Zone) > Proposal: Change the land use LU designation from I to > SFR and the zoning 0 from I to R-3 t - - CPA-201 9-00 0 1 t t_ i a E rItrr.adwaty Ave 7E Broadviry Ave - e IV'.• � S — � • o� Parcell *Veil �` Parcell v 4 Existing Proposed , — LEGEND ❑ CPA-2019-0001 Parcel 3 ` 95 EL- Ce Transitional Regulation Buffer a. o_ Z Parcel 4 Affected Parcels -1-- . tb r CPA-201 9. 1 ,- Stud ► Area 0 0 0 5 illr r - -I ' 1 i '' 'W . ed - t,.1 i_ iming ig,,, . . ;,. , ._____ _ __ _ PLANNING COMMISSION ; a I . !tt ti tivRECOMMENDATION : a — � � I , • I 44111P litigr if 111. I .1 DENY REQUEST (VOTE: 5 TO 0 — { 411??111; — - Erse. r -- - Privately Initiated Map Amendment - Study Are. t: CPA-2019-0002 F} ,kvr 6 k Applicant: Whipple Consulting NC Engineers Owners: Advent Lutheran Church, TCF Properties, LLC Proposal: Change the land use SFR designation from SFR E?thAve —11— to -to NC and the zoning from R-3 to NC I !_ . ,... ... ..- . IIw , -,,t- ., IL, E. ____ • /12 . r' - . . .. , . . .. ... il,.. ... . . ... x C PA-2 0 1 9-0002 N. - ' 1401'L ,,lot rat, . -s, t: . ; _ Study Area - n. ' ET--- , '4'4,, '• 06, - i . - -•- -. ,.. lirat Mtr0141F rr ___-.... -,". ' ' . ......-...... - -•...../ r...kill mirli.r. . . . . a PLANNING COMMISSION glip _ 7i t -k. Iriliglil. A 1 ./4' • , . - r ... ' 1t • IV-- - ' . 1 51 I .r. „,i_it,•,., __ , .,,,, ..• RECOMMENDATION : ir Mlit4IIIIF , - "11 '-' • ,.... -- 1 - h,' ' .. • , lill_lrIVARIRD APPROVE REQUEST lik.*'• (vo T E•. 6 TO 0) • loH i til J.' a W... , + : '111111 •W , ...-J p, , .P' • . , .. .- . ._ Privately Initiated Map Amendment CPA-2019-0003 8 b. At i LRC Applicant: Joel Elgee .study Area, 11 Owners: Marguerite, LLC — Terry Ovstedal SFR/R-3 45181_0213 8817 E Proposal: Change the land use ' designation from SFR to MFR and the zoning Nre from R-3 to MFR " °°" , IIli CPA-2019-0003 ..1- 1 1 . 1- ' ' ', owl -._ • spi--------0.40 9 -.... w MO Study Area PLANNING COMMISSION - MI IP a RECOMMENDATION : isio - $ 4 _ _ . _ - rii 9 ASISA,03, _ NO RECOMMENDATIOir_N{ p ■ - U * 1 (VorE: 3ro3 ) .,,,:, - °pL 2. _11 I _.._ , 7 IL _ I. �- .. Ni . :: . 111 • y - i-41 CPA-201 l 1 .. . . CITY COUNCIL CONSENSUS: �' •_ .• r ._ ,th,- Study Area, A /l 1 " * It - �; PLACEHOLDER TO UTILIZE 11 ,i! d 5Ir STAFF RECOMMENDATION : _ -_ I ' 01 .4141 - :p N - 1{ .w i r :"A'l .., CONSISTENT WITH SVMCr � '1 „. _.. fJJ ILI, .„ .... r illa i I Ni R i - . r City Initiated Map Amendment CPA-2019-0009 11 Applicant City of Spokane Valley - : E E NiNa/toe x.29¢UFT R ap Owners: Carlson, Janson, Kjos, - - - - - is-- — -":.-----uciYArea CMU Massong, On the Rock We 45164.9151 Stand, LLC, Consolidated MISSION Irr. Dist., Henderson Legacy, 4510'4,0.328 45104.0323 °ADDRESS 0 VACANT LAND LLC and Whimsical Pig LTD 45104.032 RES NOWT Proposal: Change the land use E 3+I 15i1M]i45't designation and zoning I °"5 a5iosai,l1 — 45104.0331 �\ 1751iE 134541 136P1 IEISSION A4E MISSIONAYE. MFR MI5510N A5 from MFR to CMU $FRt_ CPA-201 9-000 9 . .. , . ,_ :___ _. - r 190 t titi-y .,. '-'''-1-----7-4411/11M __ - - - - --- Study Area 9r,{ - E 1 4 r ,l . F, A !. lit- . PLANNING COMMISSION . RECOMMENDATION: 1111' � � „Pill, • •, � }. . 4 r .,-.._.. 1, 7.------- I:. ' 7 .4."8, 'r# * ..y Y 11!}.` - • i :1i”, �' 't` No1 1 ,r' ',... , .. : . . . APPROVE REQUEST . M . � , � . �.�� f �� .->� • � rri:::1 _--cr- - - .- u 1 - - it emir , IIII . II (VOTE: 5 TO 1 ) .,06, �. E ._ ,,,..„,„ , .. , , 1 40 ik . • "�lir' { Oft:411 :• a E 1 r '{, !' e ri ik r y i P I i R 4 . r City Initiated Text Amendments CPA-201 9-0004 — Strategies --iiiiii-- Strategies for Implementation CPA-2019-0004 — Strategiesramped ir. the strategies lrrcluleGon theprevbus nenpll pages caelacevelrcnac reree- fWw�d 1w cads strafe.,the implementation males acceded laetnw al».pfores •E.-salmis Develapnletll the&relipnshin between each strategy and the valour Barents of the CPA-2019-0006 — Annexation Policies CwrrpretamvsrePlar c.i.f.,.ablead FM .andpresidesrimpkmenrrton .:�w activities.outlines a tame table Iw mmplerion.and provides a net!sense of *TI".ln;pprtatlbn relative priories Them the amatetiet are nm mandatory ter the Gin,they re an important vdrdow into Spokane Valles assepxh to the Imderertn[atbn Housing CPA-2019-0008 — 11x17 Map Appendixl'rf ' ' - "'�"""'� � CPA-2019-0005 — Transportation Chapter T -"}:17". a Ml tom- MM. t 'I I 41G14CPA-2019-0007 — Ped and Bike Maps 20-Year Transportation Improvement pqV1Rbf ! fn's les.mere ter aseyatee a se west a.s• re the Syear Tin. (* /I, SIGH CPA-2019-0010 — Twenty-year TIP �r.E.l. etprrPfe ebeansifeferdlohrerk aProps " .nalrea Waft PnRVENSF O;P reRrvsi3rrHo •amatriwalY®F i 29:000.004 7-10 yeti H CI.1�Separaeat ., Part Coal t OHCF Grate c vpaenee Swann&ae tr./etc Ghee i 75.400.000 1070 Yeti +431,essn sttnnnt4rwel tie0ira/On jahminbo irere.amaet Retools ,, P:nei Ra..S4"6'FT Intetveotion uprwe w rt»te aeahca e, Si 1400.000 7-10 yeihi 7025-7029 .--• --n Intersection t „Y �t an«fid Nanare;a Internecine ,Ade VV.signor wM rnssed e i 900.000 7-t4 years N25-202,30 9111.1..6 STS BYaN In;Hit<?M Ma vMc,. CnSlTetcOM Sop 7-OINK20252049 Impterpmem. 'd,nn wrouesmrt Ito IVer,rs hater l App clay int...nen PRep..aspic p cc c.acceasrc.Peal..41. Inanexan rmpmxsneni aced ea Immaemrnt MD 7-s0 rex 20252049 64100.6hd 3bn+tl pn:eraKaon insaisecoac Si6nsise exwseteen ward memo, Impmrenens SED 7-19 yeas 7025-2029 irnmer•MNSIMM ds 6 A0[tec 7 Leierareii6meerrents raspnal IMeticchM IMraeetM lmttnslmen1 cea±. vnprerarntM MO 7.10 rN/i 025.2021 as,s Met anteteisnedSpree.c,..., c THD 7-1a MR Y025-24t19 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 15 __._ r Appendix B Figure 27.Bikeway Network Approve 2019 proposed .w� e =� Existing&� "~ s Bikeway NHwaLk Municipal 9oundani � _-• O5 Yara Val os 0,,GIIN.Pres NG, text amendments `'11 � � ,. " �° s�e �r r -ca 5 u ,.,« —,Bl.FnerillYROJ. IMEMPI _.- hnpova Pei/B4 BFioarAill ME � New Papcosetl Blke Lane I. = ■®��ue;moi sum a�edSw,edI,Pa. P �7l�lrr n�miiiiA� p.oM.ge e CPA's-2019-0004, 0005, 0006, 0007, 0008, and 0010 • Wit.. V wama � r� -.. \...... ....00 Valley APPROVE REQUEST E VOTE: 6 TO O) - E reap ti F+nam t.eh� rt[ruk xaW}na belont.imm�ar�r�iDemes. a 037.iueom Example:Figure 27—Bikeway Network Amendments to the Draft Ordinance 16 u Council may Amend Ordinance at first or second reading to approve or deny proposed CPA's Must indicate the basis and state why the proposal does or doesn't meet the following criteria in SVMC 17.80. 140(H): Bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; Responds to a substantial change in conditions; Correct an obvious mapping error; and Addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 17 QUESTIONS 2019 Annual Comp Plan Amendments DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 19-004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, through Spokane Valley Ordinance No. 16-018, the City of Spokane Valley adopted the Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, and maps as the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Spokane Valley(the Comprehensive Plan); and WHEREAS, comprehensive plans may be amended annually pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 of the Growth Management Act(GMA); and WHEREAS, amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan may be initiated by the Planning Commission (Commission),the City Council(Council), citizens, or by the Community and Public Works Director based on citizen requests or when changed conditions warrant adjustments; and WHEREAS,the GMA requires comprehensive plans to be implemented with development regulations, including the zoning of all properties in the City that are consistent with land use map designations; and WHEREAS, the City adopted Public Participation Guidelines to direct the public involvement process for adopting and amending comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS,the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)provides that amendment applications shall be received until November 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, applications were submitted by the applicant, owner, or by City staff to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the State Environmental Protection Act chapter 43.21C RCW (SEPA) and chapter 21.20 SVMC, staff conducted an environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the proposed amendments;and WHEREAS,on February 8,2019 and February 15,2019,notice of the Commission public hearing was published in the Valley News Herald; and WHEREAS,on February 8,2019,notice of the Commission hearing was mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject properties; and WHEREAS,on February 8,2019,notice of the Commission hearing had been posted on all the subject properties; and WHEREAS,on February 14,2019,the Commission conducted a study session to review the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on February 15, 2019, after reviewing the environmental checklists, staff issued a Determination of Non-Significance(DNS)for each of the proposals,published the DNS in the Valley News Herald, and where appropriate posted the DNS on the sites and mailed the DNS to all affected public agencies; and Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 1 of 12 DRAFT WHEREAS, on February 26, 2019, the Washington State Department of Commerce was notified pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 of the City's intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS,on February 28,2019,the Commission received evidence,information,public testimony, and a staff report and recommendation at a public hearing; and WHEREAS,on February 28,2019,the Commission deliberated and voted to forward CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008, CPA-2019-0009 and CPA-2019-0010,to Council with a recommendation for approval;and CPA-2019-0001 to Council with a recommendation for denial; and CPA-2019-0003 with no recommendation,with written findings of fact setting forth the bases for such recommendations to Council; and WHEREAS,on April 16,2019,Council conducted a briefing to review the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on April 16, 2019, Council concurred to place CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0003, CPA- 2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008,CPA-2019-0009, and CPA-2019-0010 in an ordinance for consideration of approval and to place CPA-2019-0001 in the ordinance for consideration of denial;and WHEREAS, on May 14, 2019, Council considered a first ordinance reading to approve CPA-2019- 0002,CPA-2019-0003,CPA-2019-0004,CPA-2019-0005,CPA-2019-0006,CPA-2019-0007,CPA-2019- 0008, CPA-2019-0009 and CPA-2019-0010 and to deny CPA-2019-0001; and WHEREAS, on May 28, 2019, Council considered a second ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendments for CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0003, CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008, CPA-2019-0009 and CPA-2019-0010 and to deny CPA-2019-0001. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the Comprehensive Plan as described in CPA-2019-0002,CPA-2019-0003,CPA-2019-0004,CPA-2019-0005,CPA-2019-0006,CPA- 2019-0007,CPA-2019-0008,CPA-2019-0009 and CPA-2019-0010 and to deny the amendment proposed in CPA-2019-0001. Section 2. Findings. Council acknowledges that the Commission conducted appropriate investigation and study and held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, and Council hereby approves the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan map and text with the exception of CPA-2019-0001, which is denied. Council has read and considered the Commission's findings. Council's findings specific to each proposed amendment are contained in Section 4 below. The Council hereby makes the following general findings applicable to all proposed amendments: General Findings: 1. Pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW (SEPA), environmental checklists were required for each proposed Comprehensive Plan map and text amendment. 2. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. 3. The procedural requirements of SEPA and SVMC Title 21 have been fulfilled. Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 2 of 12 DRAFT 4 On February 8, 2019, individual notices of public hearing for the proposed site-specific map amendments were, or had been previously, mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of each affected site. 5. On February 8,2018 each site subject to a proposed site-specific amendment was,or had been previously,posted with a"Notice of Public Hearing"sign,with a description of the proposal. 6. On February 8, 2019 and February 15, 2019, notice of the Commission public hearing was published in the Valley News Herald 7. On February 15, 2019, Determinations of Non-Significance (DNS) were issued for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. 8. On February 15,2019,the DNS's were published in the City's official newspaper,the Valley News Herald,pursuant to chapter 21.20 SVMC. 9. On February 26,2019,the Washington State Department of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. 10. The procedural requirements in SVMC 17.80.140 for the amendment process, including public participation,notice,and public hearing requirements have been met. 11. On February 28, 2019, the Commission held a public hearing on each of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. After receiving public testimony the public hearing was closed. 12. On February 28, 2019, the Commission deliberated and voted to forward CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008, CPA-2019-0009 and CPA-2019-0010 to Council with a recommendation for approval,CPA- 2019-0003 to Council with no recommendation, and CPA-2019-0001 to Council with a recommendation for denial. 13. The Commission adopted findings for CPA-2019-0001 through CPA-2019-0010. Such findings were presented to Council. Specific findings for each Comprehensive Plan Amendment request are contained in Section 4,below. 14. The Commission and Council have reviewed the proposed amendments concurrently to evaluate the cumulative impacts. The review was consistent with the annual amendment process pursuant to SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW. 15. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan,with the exception of CPA-2019-0001, are consistent with GMA and do not result in internal inconsistencies within the Comprehensive Plan itself. Section 3. Property. The properties subject to this Ordinance are described in Attachment"A"(2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Maps). Section 4. Comprehensive Plan and Map Amendments. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, the Comprehensive Plan as adopted through Ordinance No. 16-018 is hereby amended as set forth below and in Attachment"A." The Comprehensive Plan amendments are generally described as follows: Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 3 of 12 DRAFT Comprehensive Plan and Map Amendments: File No. CPA-2019-0001: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Industrial (I) to Single Family Residential (SFR) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial (I)to Single Family Residential Urban (R-3). Applicant:Danny Davis,Circle J Mobile Home Park,LLC,3580 N Gunnar Court,Coeur d'Alene, ID 83815. Amendment Location: Parcel number 45183.9059; addressed as 622 North Park Road, located 300 feet south of the intersection of Park Road and Broadway Avenue, further located in the SW I/4 of Section 18, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington. Council Findings: 1. The public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment will not be served by the proposed amendment. Transitional regulations will limit the impacts of new development, however they will not address impacts from existing uses. It is possible that conflicts may result by allowing the extension of residential uses into areas surrounded by industrial or other types of higher intensity uses. 2. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan or the Growth Management Act(GMA)chapter 36.70A RCW. The proposal is not consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: a. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. b. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. c. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. d. LU-P12 Maintain a robust supply of productive industrial land. 3. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. 4. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. There are no known physical characteristics that would create difficulties in developing the property under the proposed designation. 7. The site does not contain any streams, rivers or lakes. There will be negligible impact on the open space areas. 8. The current zoning of the property would require transitional regulations on site to mitigate impacts of higher intensity use on a residential use. If the amendment were approved, than transitional regulations would be applied to the four adjacent parcels at the time of development and would limit their area available for redevelopment. Limited measures to mitigate such impacts as noise, traffic, and pollution of dust between incompatible uses exist. Based on issued building permits and pre-application meetings, the Commission identified the area is growing as an industrial area and the amendment would allow for incompatible residential encroachment. 9. The proposed amendment will not likely have impact on parks,recreation or schools. 10. The proposed map amendment may affect the surrounding neighborhood by increasing the incompatibility of residential and industrial uses adjacent to each other and disadvantaging industrial zoned properties by limiting buildable area. 11. There are adequate lands available to accommodate the projected future demand of residential and industrial lands. Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 4 of 12 DRAFT 12. The increase in density for the area was not contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan for the parcel. The change will have marginal impact on population density. 13. The request is in conflict with the Comprehensive goals and policies as identified in section 2 above. Council Decision: Deny the request to change the designation for parcel number 45183.9059 to Single Family Residential(SFR). File No. CPA-2019-0002: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the 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). Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers,Inc.,21 S. Pines Road, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location: Parcel number 45234.0210 addressed as 810 S. Sullivan Road,and parcel number 45234.4501 addressed as 902 S Sullivan Road;located in the SW corner of 8th Avenue and Sullivan Road, further located in the SE 1/4 of Section 23, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendment. Designating the property as neighborhood commercial will allow for neighborhood scale services to be developed across from Central Valley High School, an intensely developed school site, within walking distance to serve the residential area and student population. Infrastructure, including streets, water, sewer, and other utilities,are available to support the proposed amendment and will be provided through the course of development. 2. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the Growth Management Act (GMA) chapter 36.70A RCW. Specifically the following planning goals and policies would be met: a. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner;and b. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards; and c. ED-G1 support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley; and d. LU-P1 Encourage neighborhood scale commercial uses in residential areas. 3. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. Substantial change has not occurred since the 2016 Legislative Update to the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The proposed amendment does address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan.The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update identified areas for NC zoning and identified the need as a community priority.The amendment location was not identified in the 2016 update,but it does offer an opportunity for smaller scale commercial development in an area that is generally consistent with the criteria for NC. 6. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan were considered and the proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 7. Findings were made and factors were considered to ensure compliance with approval criteria contained in SVMC 17.80.140(H) (Comprehensive Plan amendments and area- wide rezones). 8. The Comprehensive Plan land use map amendment will not adversely affect the public's general health, safety,and welfare. Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 5 of 12 DRAFT 9. 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. Both sites have been developed with building, paving and grading activity. 10. The change to NC would not have any effect on open space, streams,rivers, and lakes. Any stormwater associated with commercial development will be retained and treated on the site. The site does not contain 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. 11. The change is compatible with adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. NC development is limited in size to reduce impacts to neighboring residential uses. Development standards limit the height and location of commercial development and together with landscaping and screening standards, will reduce the impacts to adjacent residential uses.The existing church is a permitted use in the NC zone and was developed prior to the NC development standard. Subsequent changes of use would have to be a permitted use in the NC zoning district and comply with the NC development standards. 12. Adequate community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation,and schools exist. A neighborhood commercial use will likely have minimal impact on parks,recreation or schools. Generally a commercial 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. Sullivan Road is a Principal Arterial designed to serve through trips and connect Spokane Valley with the rest of the region; 8th Avenue is an Urban Minor Arterial. Minor arterial streets provide inter- neighborhood connections, transit access, and serve both local and through trips. No impacts on community facilities are anticipated. 13. The change will benefit the neighborhood. The 2016 Legislative Update increased opportunities for neighborhood commercial development throughout the City. The community expressed a strong desire to encourage neighborhood scale commercial development. The neighborhood is already served by the larger-scale commercial and retail uses north of site along 4th Avenue and Sprague Avenue. The existing church is consistent with neighborhood commercial development. The redevelopment of the southern property from single family residential to an NC use, such as office, would allow a use that is reasonable and appropriate for the location across from the school and adjacent to a church. 14. The 2016 Legislative Update to the Comprehensive Plan increased the areas that are zoned NC. The NC zoned lands are scattered throughout the City,primarily located on arterial streets within neighborhoods. NC zoned lands are located south of the site at the intersections of 16th and Sullivan, and 24th and Sullivan. A small coffee/espresso stand has developed at 16th and Sullivan. Of the five NC-zoned properties closest to this site, the 16th/Sullivan site is the only site to redevelop from the existing use into a neighborhood commercial use. This site is located within one half mile of major retail centers at Sprague/Sullivan and smaller retail centers at 4th/Sullivan. During school periods the Central Valley High School,with a student population of over 2,300 students, adds population density that can support NC development. 15. The NC zone allows single-family dwellings (current use of the south property) and neighborhood scale commercial development. Single family uses are permitted in the NC zone and the proposed change would have no effect on the land use capacity of the property. The proposed change in land use to NC will not impact the overall density of the area. 16. The NC designation would support many of the Economic Development, Land Use, Transportation,and Housing goals. The proposed land use change will have little effect Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 6 of 12 DRAFT on the Capital Facilities and Public Services,Public and Private Utilities,Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources elements of the Comprehensive plan. Council Decision: Change the designation for parcel numbers 45234.4501 and 45234.0210 to Neighborhood Commercial(NC). File No. CPA-2019-0003: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Multi Family Residential(MFR)and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3)to Multi Family Residential(MFR). Applicant: Joel Elgee,24327 E.Maxwell Ave.,Liberty Lake,WA 99019. Amendment Location: Parcel number 45181.0213 addressed as 8817, 8819, 8821 E. Sinto Avenue, 1405 and 1407 N Marguerite Road; located in the NW corner of Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road, further located in the NE I/4 of Section 18, Township 25 North,Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; 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 Specifically the following planning goals and policies would be met: a. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner; and b. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards; and c. LU-P14 Enable a variety of housing types; and d. LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas;and e. H-G1 allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. 3. The property is located within an older,well established neighborhood and minimal new development has occurred within the area. The Safeway market that was located across the street in the Mission Argonne Business Center closed for business in March 2015. The"Altitude Trampoline Park"replaced the Safeway store within the existing building. No change has occurred since the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update. The applicant indicated in the application materials that he would like to divide the property into individual lots associated with the existing duplexes and single family residence, while establishing a vacant lot for development. The minimum lot size in the R-3 zone(7,500 sq. ft.) does not allow this, while the minimum lot size in the MFR zone (2,000 sq. ft.) makes this possible. The current situation with two duplexes and single family dwelling on a single lot is a non-conforming use. The amendment request allows the property to be brought in conformance with existing regulations and creates opportunity for additional development on the vacant lot. The land use designation change would allow the property owner to utilize the property in the most beneficial manner. 4. The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. 5. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update sought to identify deficiencies in the use and development of multi-family properties. Two multi-family zones with different density allowances were in place prior to the 2016. The 2016 update consolidated the two zones into a single MFR zone with a density allowance of 22 dwelling units per acre. The update reaffirmed existing areas that were suitable for MFR uses and identified new areas that would be suitable for future MFR uses. This site was not identified for a change to Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 7 of 12 DRAFT MFR at the time of the update. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The change to MFR will allow multi-family and/or some limited commercial development of the property. The site may transition from a residential use with residential driveways,trees,lawn,and buildings to a multi-family or office building with parking area, commercial landscaping, and stormwater treatment areas. In that case traffic into and out of the area would increase with the multi-family or commercial development. The transition would have some impact on the physical environment based on the physical change to the location. 7. Stormwater associated with multi-family or commercial development is required to be retained and treated on the site. The site does not contain 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. 8. Multi-family uses will have some impacts on the adjacent uses. The impacts may include increased traffic,taller buildings,and more noise. The transitional regulations that were discussed in the "Implications" section above were adopted to reduce the impacts of multi-family and commercial development on adjacent residential uses. These regulations along with other development standards will limit the height and location of any new buildings and together with landscaping and screening standards, will reduce the impacts to adjacent residential uses. The multi-family or limited commercial use would be compatible with the surrounding single-family and commercial uses. 9. High density residential development will generate a need for parks, recreation, and schools. If the entire property were developed to the maximum density allowed,the site could accommodate 20 new dwelling units. However,due to the existing development, only 15 additional dwelling units could be allowed if the request is granted. The additional dwelling units will place a demand on the community facilities in question. A Trip Generation and Distribution Letter contemplating the traffic impacts of the additional 15 dwelling units was submitted by the applicant. The Senior Traffic Engineer determined that the additional traffic would not affect the level of service of the intersections being impacted. Ness Elementary School, Centennial Middle School and West Valley High School are all within one mile of the property. West Valley School district determines the adequacy and need for additional schools. The district was provided an opportunity to review and comment on the amendment and did not submit any comments. The need for utilities is determined by the utility purveyor and will be addressed at the time of future development. All utility providers were given an opportunity to comment. Relevant comments have been include in this report with the agency comments. Parks and recreation needs are addressed in the City's Parks & Recreation Master Plan. Fifteen new dwelling units will not change the Comprehensive Plan level of service of 1.92 acres for every 1,000 people. Adequate community facilities exist to accommodate the proposed amendment and no negative impact will result from the change. 10. Redevelopment of the property from single-family to multi-family will provide additional housing opportunities to the community. The change will also satisfy the intent of the MFR by locating multi-family near Mission Argonne commercial center, Argonne Road, and the public transportation provided the Spokane Transit System. The change provides an opportunity for the property owner to make the existing uses conform to the requirements of the SVMC to be on individual lots and therefore reverse the nonconforming use status. 11. The R-3 zoning district allows a maximum density of six units per acre and the MFR zoning district permits up to 22 units per acre. Based on the size of the parcel,the current R-3 zone would allow the parcel to develop up to six dwelling units. Under the MFR zoning,the parcel size would allow up to 21 dwelling units resulting in a net increase of Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 8 of 12 DRAFT 15 dwelling units. The proposal would not create a significant increase in density and would allow higher density development to occur near transit and commercial centers. 12. 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. The addition of 15 dwelling units will have minimal impact on the projected population density and minimal impact on the population density in the neighborhood. 13. The MFR designation would support many of the Economic Development, Land Use, Transportation, and Housing goals. It would likely 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. The change to MFR on this site is consistent with the intent of the MFR zone to provide high density development near commercial and transportation centers. Council Decision: Change the designation for parcel number 45181.0213 to Multi Family Residential(MFR). File No.: CPA-2019-0004—CPA-2019-0008 and CPA-2019-0010 Proposal: Comprehensive Plan amendments to Chapter 2 — Goals, Policies & Strategies, and Chapter 5 — Transportation. The amendments also include the addition of a new appendix of adopted maps,and an appendix listing planned transportation improvements anticipated over a 20- year horizon. Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Council Findings: 1. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendments by ensuring that the Comprehensive Plan reflects the changing conditions and preferences of the community, as well as ensuring consistency with regional policy and other adopted plans. 2. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with Growth Management Act (GMA) chapter 36.70A RCW. Specifically the following GMA planning goals would be met as well as specific Comprehensive Plan Goals and policies: Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans. a. CPA-2019-0004: Updating implementation strategies and timelines. i. Economic Development: Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. ii. Land Use: Ensure that land use plans, regulations, review processes, and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality. iii. Transportation: Ensure that the transportation system and investments in transportation infrastructure are designed to improve quality of life or support economic development priorities. iv. Housing: Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. v. Housing: Enable the development of affordable housing for all income levels. vi. Housing: Allow convenient access to daily goods and services in Spokane Valley's neighborhoods. b. CPA-2019-0005: Text updates to pedestrian and bicycle elements. i. Transportation: Maintain and enhance a comprehensive multimodal transportation system that promotes, supports, and improves the safe, efficient, and reliable movement of people,vehicles,and goods. c. CPA-2019-0006: Annexation goal and policy additions. i. Land Use: Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. ii. Land Use: Ensure that land use plans, regulations, review processes, and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality. Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 9 of 12 DRAFT d. CPA-2019-0007: Recommended network map updates. i. Transportation: Ensure that the transportation system and investments in transportation infrastructure are designed to improve quality of life or support economic development priorities. ii. Transportation: Ensure that transportation planning efforts reflect anticipated land use patterns and support identified growth opportunities. iii. Transportation: Provide for safe and efficient freight mobility. iv. Transportation: Maintain and enhance a comprehensive multimodal transportation system that promotes, supports, and improves the safe, efficient, and reliable movement of people,vehicles,and goods. e. CPA-2019-0008: Appendix of most recently adopted maps. i. Land Use: Ensure that land use plans, regulations, review processes, and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality. f.. CPA-2019-0010: Appendix with 20-year transportation improvement plan. i. Transportation: Ensure that the transportation system and investments in transportation infrastructure are designed to improve quality of life or support economic development priorities. ii. Transportation: Ensure that transportation planning efforts reflect anticipated land use patterns and support identified growth opportunities. iii. Transportation: Provide for safe and efficient freight mobility. iv. Transportation: Maintain and enhance a comprehensive multimodal transportation system that promotes, supports, and improves the safe, efficient, and reliable movement of people,vehicles,and goods. 3. The proposed amendments do not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. 4. The proposed text amendments do not correct a mapping error. 5. The proposed amendments do not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. However, these text amendments are policy-oriented and address strategies and network-level planning rather than site-specific impacts on the physical environment. Site-specific analysis will be addressed as individual capital facility projects are brought forward at a future time. 6. These text amendments are policy-oriented and address strategies and network-level planning rather than site-specific impacts on the physical environment. Site-specific analysis will be addressed as individual capital facility projects are brought forward at a future time. 7. The proposed amendments are primarily policy oriented and have no direct impact on open space, streams,rivers, and lakes. 8. The City addresses adequacy of community facilities on a City-wide basis through capital facilities planning; annual updates to the Comprehensive Plan ensure that the City is adequately providing for the anticipated growth.These amendments recommend context- sensitive pedestrian and bicycle network improvements.Recommended facility locations and types respond to destination land uses and accommodating travel behaviors based on street and adjacent development characteristics. 9. The public benefit is furthered by ensuring the Comprehensive Plan is reflective of regional policy and current with other internal plans. 10. The proposed amendments are policy oriented and do not have a direct impact on the quantity and location of land planned for land uses. 11. The proposed amendments do not require population analysis. 12. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the Plan. Council Decision: Change the Comprehensive Plan as described in CPA-2019-0004—CPA-2019- 0008 and CPA-2019-0010. Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 10 of 12 DRAFT File No. CPA-2019-0009: Proposal: City-initiated site specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Multi Family Residential (MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) and the zoning from Multi Family Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use District(CMU). Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location: Parcel numbers 45104.9150, 45104.9151, 45104.0324, 45104.0315, 45104.0311, 45104.0307, 45104.0308, 45104.0330, 45104.0329, 45104.0323, 45104.0327 and, 45104.0328, addressed as 13303, 13507, 13515, 13519, 13607 and 13621 East Mission Avenue, located north of Mission Avenue between the intersections of Mission Avenue and McDonald Road and Mission Avenue and Mamer Road, further located in Section 4 of Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendment. The amendment provides more flexibility of uses and intensity in an area surrounded by similar zoning and uses. The amendment will allow opportunity for increases in uses providing complementary daily goods and services and the subject properties will benefit by being allowed to develop consistent with the adjacent land uses. 2. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map is consistent with Growth Management Act (GMA) chapter 36.70A RCW. Specifically the following planning goals would be met: a. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner; and b. Provides for economic development adjacent to similar zoned parcels and utilizes land for infill development within an urban area; and c. Provides a suitable land use designation consistent with the City's GMA compliant Comprehensive Plan; and d. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development; and e. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses; and f. LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas; and g. H-G1 Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community; and h. CF-P2 Optimize the use of existing public facilities before investing in new facilities. 3. The proposed amendment does respond to a substantial change in conditions due to the 2016 Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning change of the surrounding properties. The City underwent an extensive legislative Comprehensive Plan update in 2016. At that time,the subject parcels were designated consistent with the existing land uses and maintained the same land use designation. The surrounding properties to the north and west received a new land use designation of CMU. 4. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The properties will have the opportunity to transition and add a mix of uses to serve the surrounding single family, duplexes and multifamily, commercial and office services. There is no concern on effect of physical environment. 7. The site does not contain any streams, rivers or lakes. There will be negligible impact on the open space areas. Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 11 of 12 DRAFT 8. The amendment is consistent with the adjacent land use designation, and allows the properties to develop consistent with the existing CMU designation and development along the entire corridor on the north side of Mission Avenue. 9 The proposed CMU designation will have minimal impact on parks, recreation or schools. The City prepared a Trip Generation and Distribution Letter concluding there is adequate capacity. No impacts are anticipated. 10. The proposed land use designation provides equal development opportunity to the properties along the corridor which encourages development and implements the vision for corridor. 11. Since the majority of the proposed amendment area is developed the amendment would have marginal impact,but the change would allow for more intensive uses and increased density. 12. Since the properties are substantially developed,the change to CMU development is not anticipated to increase or decrease the population or density in the area. Although it is noted that additional units could be developed on site above the current density. The change should not result in significant impacts on the projected population density. 13. The CMU designation will 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. Council Decision: Change the designation for parcel numbers 45104.9150, 45104.9151, 45104.0324, 45104.0315, 45104.0311, 45104.0307, 45104.0308, 45104.0330, 45104.0329, 45104.0323,45104.0327 and,45104.0328 to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). Section 5. Map - Copies on File-Administrative Action. The Comprehensive Plan (with maps) is maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community and Public Works. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Comprehensive Plan (including maps) in a manner consistent with this Ordinance, including correcting scrivener's errors. Section 6. Liability. The express intent of the City is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This Ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health,safety,and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause,or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of May,2019. ATTEST: L.R.Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Approved as to form: Date of Publication: Effective Date: Office of the City Attorney Ordinance 19-004:2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 12 of 12 Comprehensive Plan Map Study Area E 8th Ave • b cC E 9th Ave • CPA-2019-0002 Request: `"j "'kms Owner: Advent Lutheran Church �1iae TCF Properties LLC Change the land use designation from Valley Parcel#:45234.4501, .0210 SFR to NC and the Zoning from R-3 to NC 40000 Address: 810 S Sullivan Rd Comprehensive Plan Map Study Area b a z E Sinto Ave CPA-2019-0003 Request: p175"' Owner: Marguerite LLC �(�ka ►e g Change the Land Use Designation from I' Terry Ovstedal SFR to MFR and the Zoning from R-3 to 4000*Valley Parcel#: 45181.0213 MFR Address: 8817 E Sinto Ave CPA-2019-004 Draft amendments to Chapter 2 Implementation Strategies STRATEGY PRIMARY RELATED LEAD& TIMING PRIORITY ELEMENT ELEMENT(S) PARTNERS Undertake a comprehensive branding process to create and • market an identity for Spokane Economic E.D.Division; 2017 Valleythat sells the City's inherent • • Visit Spokane HIGH y Development assets to would-be residents, employers,and visitors. Continue participation in regional E.D.Division; tourism-promotion efforts and • ValleyFest,Visit increase the City's presence in Economic • • Spokane,Sports Ongoing HIGH regional events Development Commission CenterPlace. Seek opportunities for funding and improvements for tourism related improvements such as the Evaluate • the return on investmentEconomic •• • •• E.D.Division; 2018 CenterPlace.West Lawn Visit Spokanc oir,.; HIGH Development improvements.of potential tourism anchors and allocate available funds according to the findings _ Consider • 20180musing GIS and web-based Economic • E.D.Division oing HIGH technologies to assist business Development development. Intensify targeted retail • recruitment efforthContinue toE.D.Division; 20190m.. Economic ••4-• Consultant oing MEDIUM implement the Retail Recruitment Development Plan. Evaluate local interest in the • r nr D Diyisi,.n; creation of a Business Economic Spokane MEDIUM Improvement District Development County Conduct a market analysis and E.D.Division; initial business planning for a local • Spokanc farmers'marketldentify Economic • Regional Health 2019 MEDIUM opportunities for the formation of a Development District Farmers'market at CenterPlace. Revise and update the City's • website to meet accessibility Economic •••••••• E.D.Division; uI I, ;11 It. standards,increase search engine Development optimization,improve user STRATEGY PRIMARY RELATED LEAD& TIMING PRIORITY ELEMENT ELEMENT(S) PARTNERS experience and streamline and simplify content. Evaluate and develop criteria to • assist in the evaluation of Economic •••••••• E.D.Division: 2019 annexations. Development Streamline permitting procedures Building and �o advailce • Deli environmer based on feedback Land Use • ServisesDivisio Ongoing HIGH from business and landowners, n developers,etc. Evaluate parking standards and • 2017 reduce the amount of required Land Use •-•-• Dev.Servises parking if feasible Collaborate with the private sector • to facilitate the successful Land Use • • E.D.Division HIGH redevelopment of Mirabeau Point. Public Coordinate transportation planning WorksE.D.aiu . efforts with other jurisdictions to • Engineering ensure that Spokane Valley Transportation •• • Divisions; Ongoing HIGH businesses and neighborhoods are adjacent well served. jurisdictions, STA Evaluate and where feasible, implement traffic impact fees in • areas of the City where detailed Transportation •••••••• Engineering ''n"r HIGH traffic studies have been completed. Work with STA to improve and Pullin expand transit service in the City. • 1.614 ksE.D.and 2022 • Transportation •• • Engineering MEDIUM location Divisions;STA Evaluate and consider amendments E.D.Division to the municipal code that enhance ! •••••••• Engineering; 201' grant eligibility for projects that Transportation Health District; improve safety and accessibility. STRATEGY PRIMARY RELATED LEAD& TIMING PRIORITY ELEMENT ELEMENT(S) PARTNERS Public Seek opportunities to continue to • Works fund grade separations on Transportation •• • ;Chamber HIGH Pines Roadand Barker Road of Commerce, GSI E.D.Division; Identify low-and moderate-income Spokane 2024 housing needs. Housing • • Housing LOW Authority Explore and potentially adopt a Multi Family Tax Exemption in key • • E.D.Division: 2020 areas. Housing ED Division; Continue to evaluate new housingHomebuilders 2024 •• • typologies to meet market needs. Housing LOW Association Identify needed capital facilitief- • &D.-Division improvements that are critical to Capital 044444441 awl-Rubric 2017 economic development Facilities Works Update wayfinding and signage for the entire City,and incorporate a • E.D.Division; Capital Downtown 2020 consistent aesthetic or theme •• LOW based on the outcome of the City's Facilities Partnership branding process. Identify opportunities for the expansion of Balfour Park Execute • Parks and Rec a citizen-supported vision for the Capital ••• • Dept.and E.D. 2020 MEDIUM redevelopment of the area Facilities Division surrounding the new City Hall. • Parks; Improve new and existing access Capital ••• • • Department of 2020 MEDIUM points to the Spokane River. Facilities Ecology Create a 20-year transportation project list to inform the 6-year • Ackainistgation transportation improvement Capital ••• • • Engineering 2022201 ME-131-1.144H I programEstablish criteria for Facilities and E.D. 9 GH prioritization of capital Divisions investments STRATEGY PRIMARY RELATED LEAD& TIMING PRIORITY ELEMENT ELEMENT(S) PARTNERS Establish a Facilities Conditior► Index(FCI)to provide information. for planned maintenance with set • Administration priorities and cost Capital ••• • • 2ineerin:;,` 2022 estimateslm lement an asset Street MEDIUM p Facilities management program for the Maintenance street and stormwater maintenance programs. Engineering and E.D. Work to extend and improve water, Divisions; sewer,and road infrastructure in • the Northeast Industrial Area Public and •• •• Spokane 2022 Private Utilities County; HIGH Extend sewer infrastructure to Consolidated support industrial development. Irrigation District a Extend water infrastructure tova and Consolidated support industrial development Private Uies ♦ Irrigation 2022 HIGH District Engineering • and E.D. :oordinate with utility providers Public and Division: AI the timing of capital Private •••••••• Spokane _,,, nprovement projects. Utilities County:Water Districts Leverage the Appleway and Centennial Trail to improve adjacent business opportunitiesldentify and • E.D.Division; implement opportunities,like the Parks and Open ••• • adjacent 202n s1EDI 1J Parklet and Streeteries ordinance Space businesses that take advantage of proximity and access to the Appleway and Centennial Trails. Identify and seek Seek funding to Parks develop north-south trail • • connections between Parks and Open ••• • Resource 2020 IAWMEDII ,tennial .key east west Space Conservation M corridors Office Evaluate the feasibility of • developing a public park along thc Parks and Open ________ ^�^ ^z.vrDi„v.on�•0�0^^n 2017 ME-13I-1.144 Spokane River CPA-2019-0006 Draft amendments to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies CPA-2019-006 Proposed Amendments to Chapter 2: Goals, Policies, & Strategies LU-P19 Develop criteria to 4identify, process, and assess the annexation of land into opportunities to annex lands within the UGA that will benefit Spokane Valley. LU-P20 Identify land designations for potential annexation areas in the Comprehensive Plan for the adjacent Urban Growth Areas to the city. CF-P16 Plan and coordinate the location of public facilities and utilities in potential annexation areas,. including identifying the fiscal impacts of providing the facilities, utilities, services, and maintenance. CPA-2019-0005 Draft amendments to Chapter 5: Transportation CPA-2019-005 Proposed Amendments to Chapter 5: Transportation Pg. 5-77: Pedestrian Facilities Residents and visitors in Spokane Valley walk as part of their daily travel for many reasons.Children attending school,commuters taking the bus or connecting with a carpool to get to work,and senior citizens making midday trips all require safe pedestrian amenities. Sidewalks,crosswalks,curb ramps,and small curb radii are all key features in creating a safe and welcoming environment for people to walk.Furthermore,research suggests that people are more likely to walk to their destinations when those destinations are within a reasonable walking distance and when the trip offers an engaging and aesthetically pleasing,strolling environment.To that end, providing buffers between sidewalks and lanes of traffic,such as landscaping or on-street parking,can also increase safety and comfort for pedestrians,particularly on arterial streets.The images in Figure 25 show some of these features on Spokane Valley streets. Pg. 5-78: Sidewalks are present on both sides of most principal and minor arterials in Spokane Valley as well as some collectors.The City has also prioritized providing sidewalks near schools,libraries,transit locations,and trailheads. While quiet residential streets may not require sidewalks for a safe pedestrian environment(with the exception of key routes to schools),some arterials lack sidewalk coverage,such as Mission Avenue,4th Avenue,and Adams Road.Plans for adding to the sidewalk network generally focus on filling existing gaps on arterials. In addition to sidewalks and crosswalks along streets,Spokane Valley also has paved shared-use paths for pedestrians and bicyclists.The Centennial Trail provides a dedicated east-west connection along a shared-use path. The trail Pg. 5-79: is part of a regional connection through Spokane and to the Washington-Idaho state border.The new Appleway Trail provides an additional east-west corridor for pedestrians and bicyclists along the former Milwaukee Railroad right-of-way. Spokane Valley is actively working on extending the Appleway Trail,and the City has also identified other opportunities for shared use paths along former and active rail lines. The planned network will eventually create an interconnected system linking the Appleway Trail,the Centennial Trail,and Dishman Hills Natural Area as part of a regional pathway network. Spokane Valley has a well-developed grid of arterial streets spaced roughly one-half mile apart,which is typical of communities built in the post-World War II era.While this system is efficient for vehicle travel,crossing major streets like Sprague Avenue or Pines Road can be difficult on foot or bike since signalized crosswalks are spread far apart.Additionally,crossings of Interstate 90 and Trent Avenue are limited and are often located at busy interchanges or intersections. These gaps in safe crossing locations isolate parts of Spokane Valley and lead to people driving for short trips that they could typically make on foot or via transit.The map in Figure 26 illustrates a range of pedestrian facilities in Spokane Valley,as well as recommended improvements from the Bike and Pedestrian Master Program,which is the City's adopted long-term bicycle and pedestrian plan. The City's long- term sidewalk network prioritizes improvements in areas with high numbers of short trips and concentrations of employment and housing.Recommendations also prioritize sidewalks along Safe Routes to School and in low- moderate income areas.Finally,the recommended network prioritizes sidewalks in locations with a high risk for serious-injury or fatal pedestrian-auto collisions. Existing Bicycle Facilities Similar to sidewalks,bicycle facilities are an important element in the transportation network that provide a safe and identifiable bicycling Pg. 5-80: environment.Bicyclists in the Spokane Valley can utilize a variety of facilities,including shared-use paths,bike lanes,and bike friendly routes to reach their destination as shown in Figure 27.However,gaps in the network create an environment in which cyclists must navigate through vehicle traffic or difficult arterial crossings to complete their journey,decreasing safety for motorized and non-motorized travelers alike. While the City has trails and bike lanes that form a spine of north-south and east-west connections,some of these facilities are not continuous and require bicyclists to merge in and out of traffic.Figure 27 also shows Spokane Valley's long-term plan for the bicycle network to address the gaps described above. Pg. 5-81: The existing roadway geometry in many parts of Spokane Valley includes wide lanes,on-street parking,and a high number of driveways,which make many bicyclists feel uncomfortable riding in the street. Some corridors,such as Sprague Avenue and Mission Avenue,have striped bike lanes but also high vehicle speeds and volumes.The long- term bikeway network recommendations prioritize facilities in locations with the greatest potential for improving safety,accommodating local trips,and mitigating traffic congestion. Pg. 5-93 BEST PRACTICES Modernizing Infrastructure Identifying any infrastructure that needs or will need updating or replacement prior to the point at which those investments become critical will allow Spokane Valley to budget accordingly and find funding to avoid infrastructure failures.In an era when many pieces of infrastructure have aged and budgets are constrained,this planning is valuable to the City,its residents,and employees. Maintaining Cost Effectiveness Compared to other cities in the region,residents highlighted the good state of repair with respect to street and bridge maintenance.This results in lower overall costs to reconstruct streets and more opportunities to invest in other City priorities.The City will continue to prioritize street and bridge maintenance and will continue to make informed decisions about budgeting and capital expenditures. Linking Multimodal Systems The effectiveness of a transportation network may be limited by deficiencies in the connections between transportation modes.Identifying and fixing places where there are safety concerns,a lack of facilities,or missing "last mile"connections will ensure that Spokane Valley's network functions cohesively and efficiently for all users.Policies such as a Complete Streets ordinance would guide the completion of these connections in coordination with ongoing capital improvements. Such policies improve grant eligibility and can reduce the cost of making improvements that support safe travel for all roadway users. CPA-2019-0007 Draft amendments to Figures 26, Figure 27, and Figure 46 / , 1 Appendix B Figure 26.Pedestrian Network j j _ .1%1=11 % e Source Page: 5-80 Ordinance No. 18-014 C Effective Date: August 15,2018 1.-M Nali .ii1.10 A /11#..0,-,--.-e,_ Camp Sekani •- e's Fe ■115 ParkAo. '�__ ,riPark Pedestrian Network Existing Sidewalks rf---- c___, Proposed Sidewalks EEuditl AveE .rewa 10-,_ �... — � Miuwoo. E — = New Proposed Sidewalks Felts Field Mirabeau �^ isaiPoint Park n Spokane Valley A Urban Growth Area(UGA) 1 I► 90 �L - an EII•= ■%}4 Parks,Recreation,&Open Space en Ava ane �� ' !� 'Park ! I�� ,R. EMIsslon Ave litili , � rg a 1� � 3t t ten. 0 0.5 1 1.5O-i _ .Lt E acamo Ave Miles E Broad,.Ave oun ry immimmaimilimulm mommormememommii iiW • - - - S okane ' I ;�I.a•�mJl� in Valley 90:• _ in / Dishman Hills IIIMM■■ lal 1.11� 1 . Natural Area o ■I - r 10111 MI '' c 1 %, w • .1Upplands Illi ____ .. • orry rzfr "\\, diry AP lrig." tiaI . ntl ' A 1 1 111 A Mk iri Dishman Hills ,i Tyr," Conservation Area _ AI , Niii yr r-,/ VA I _ i '' Ar A 7 /71....g Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department - Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes Aril - Morrow Park no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims Iller Creek liability for errors and omissions In its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of Conservation Area Natural>Area -- Spokane Valley,Community Development Department,Division of Planning,15091 720-5000. Appendix B Figure 27.Bikeway Network Source Page: 5-81 Ordinance No. 18-014 1111011Mell Affective t1ote: August 15,2018 Camp Sekani - te's Fer 'til ` Park /� E Upriver Dr ,� Park Z _ ,� Existing&Proposed ce, Bikeway Network I / Municipal Boundaries -�ire Way. m I a■_ I EE.e''� �-\ _. z =I Spokane Valley w --•• 6 Mirebeeu Pkwy�� - V/ Spokane Valley Urban Growth Area(UC v �'~ \ ,%.. E Euclid Ave Parks,Recreation,&Open Space �e_P Mirabear\, �� Felts Field gR` �.1BuckeyeA�K r Point Par; 1, -=' E Montg•mery Dr \\ - -- 1 Bikeway Elements «__• �_� —Existing Bike Lane ' Elntlian Ave Jam_ -.,`-ulliv _--- F ' `_ ,,`. Existing Shared Use Path an —Bike Friendly Route Valley• P.rk ion Ave EMission Ave EMiss:n Ave r_ ; - �� /—' Existing Ped/Bike Bridge Spokane - o_ • ZIIIM • a ---•Proposed Bike Lane m -,,,c, ---I •• E l 9r Fwy ■■■r Proposed Ped/Bike Bridge o Ill a � • 6 -- ...•Proposed Shared Use Path z VIII z o __ p g.Ill _ Q`eW,,Pvo --New Pro osed Bike Lane I z gPP 'New Proposed Shared Use Path-- r zt - ----1- ::-•New Proposed Bike Friendly Route - E4thAve _su u I S E4thAve I I I i I_� ••••New Proposed Ped/Bike Bridge , I II I I I I i Removed Ped/Bike Bridge IIII I Dishman Hills ,o E8th Ave ( Natural Area 3 -._.i _ Ir O OoI 0 0.5 1 1.5 ��■t_i 16th Ave ®®■ 1 Miles SC�� ` 1 '� \ CITY OfRa • E24' Spokane ®� ; ■■ll Dalley E 29th Av: E 32nd Ave E 32n1 AveDishman HillsIIIE a11111 I a Conservation Area Ave m x I in IC' IT d I N -'TI IC7- N ta � E 14th Ave E 44th Ave 7- 1 - Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes -_ no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims Iller Cr Park Creek liability for errors and omissions In its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of ee n o� rea Spokane Valley,Community Development Department,Division of Planning,15091 720-5000. u,,,r,au,, ,e� Appendix B Figure 46.School Districts,Schools, V Vjg East and Safe Routes to School Valley East Valley H•• Source Page: 282Camp Sekani •= te'sFer ii��or ie:// ali y � 0 Walley &Safe Routes to School #363 #361 Schools Al Millwood -nt ENROLLMENT �. i lementary Orchard e eaa�aAve e w y`e 0-300 Students o• center stvall:y 301-SOOStudents Felts Field Elementaky%,enior Hi.h Mirabeau St Paschal's Point Park `_, More than 800 Students Spokane - S•okane ri.- Safe Routes to School �� v.lley —Designated Routes high Seth k_ •I\ ma. 'ullivan Proposed Updates Aseen vlootlartl --,..yr Raley �� `= Park RElem eend _�% 1P — Mission Park so Elementary EMission Ave —New Designated Routes �� Learning and Arthurcentral~ Municipal Boundaries a Barker ighdValleyKindergarten Cent r7 Teaching p Centennial B N�ss North ` 9 Middle Elementary Broadway Pines LeamSchoon nd l_ ss CE nter E aroamva Ave `--! Elementary Middle Cl El J ry Cc ambo Ave e, Spokane Valley St John Elem nta r// Urban Growth Area(UGA) �� West Valley Vianney -, , Pioneerand s re e I Parks,Recreation,&Open Space City School Greenacres c 'a St John Rainbow EP I Middle g —Designated Safe Routes to School I �J Vi:nney, r ¢`I „ ES.=eue Ave \J 157 'I MEI E „ievte aNd , I Greenacres Spokane ir _ Summit St Mary's Elementary -School �) O #81 Central - 0 0.5 1 1.5 .. Dishman Hills Valley Early -)Adams Centra �PP°n• '-Element -- Miles Natural Area Learning Ce Valley Elementary High + ® McDonald Evergreen Q 1 m University Elementary Middle Saltese Up/ands 4 Elementary u-... �-, _� r Conservation Area Brrwdish _ I w , S`tr'okane Mrddle o 0 South P -s� Sunrise Central d /01.111° D mentor Elementary Valley#356 Valley Walley • Christian 111 l' 9th E32nd Ave or' , 1 Chester Elementarr -, Univer- Dishman y Hills High Conservation Area 1 Z-. Ponderosa 4nrizon4Øetary, Fel, ( 1 .--- 7F A /� Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes Il/er Creek Morrow Park no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims Conservation Area . Natural Area liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of ' Spokane Valley,Community Development Department,Division of Planning,15091 720-5000. CPA-2019-0008 Draft new Appendix A: 11"x17" Maps Tj ® Appendix B ®„� Figure 16.Future Land Use � Source Page: 4-62 Orective Date: 1,2014 ,1 Effective Date: August 15,2014 11 — _ i Land Use /d �,.. � �� _�_ S! I -�'_ �p� Municipal Boundaries r ane a _ - QSpok Valley " ` / I//�Urban Growth Area NCN MP Land Use Designation ' ' ' m '+ CMU-Corridor Mixed Use E Eur.I tlAVev E E,tB / i -1"------ , =I-Industf lal L; Felts Field �/�� . +� „ � ‘ =IMU-Industrial Mixed Use �� Spokane 0�� . ' .- 'I:� SFMF-Multi Family Residential . 1. - � �_�_ MU-Mixed Use —. �= / =NC Neighborhood Commercial �� 90,• _ =`� - i'''''---_ )/ 11 =SOS-Parks,Recreation,Open Space 1. _dwell, —� / - - e !r �' - enxssroa Ave RC Regional Commercial �1, ~" � / . SF Single Family Residen l ial MP A E Broad.Ave _ _— 0 0.5 1 1.5 • •• ' -,E Country„„, ♦ O i __ ■■. ' Miles r a ,fid ,,,,r,,,,_,Hr r , ______, J '�'` Spokane Valley rAlirir . `,,,- ' Id e I. A IiA� ,, h A./ I E 3111�� %I� 1_ , - y r \Ns, 01"/ 1 i r � 7: j. /// Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department// Notice.The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes /// < / no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(5D9)720-5000. % / Appendix B Figure 24.Transportation Network / 11° Source Page: 5-78 y m. ..f ■ Ordinance ate 1,2018 7O �� Effective Date: December 28,2016 Camp Sekani - e's Fe I '�� ti Park a� A � ; ,Park Spokane Valley �� II_ " Transportation Network � �: - itel Municipal Boundaries 1 Q Spokane Valley �- EEuaaAve me �� JUrban Growth Area(UGA; EEm ' Felts Field _..-- pliiii --' Mirabeau '�, Parks,Recreation &Open Space Point Park )1POP ____. Surface Transportation by Class �� „,..„ „, , _. —Urban Principal Arterial - Urban Minor Artcrial .� �” �. - v�a - •�°"Ave �l •� 0 1�14 - EM�es,e�A�e —Urban Major Collector ° o , - IruckRoutes iiiiim . El - -- - - _�� _ c ail ,I - r C li pir JIM IIIkgr 111 A r mg. 1 s` - - ( 1 E;aimn�Ave • Signals ouniry Vista Or � � 1 1 �� 0 0.5 1 1.5 I, E..W o s 7, —a�o�;�— Miles 0/. -r _`ila 11 Drrtor o-® Dish man Hills ., �a S okane r vr r liki Natural Area �'a li limoFT Mil Valley � 'umiii mot_� ' r Saltese Uplands - ¶7/, C-1 will iAve • • • E30,AVE For Dishman Hills H V� Conservation Area r 1 r., , , , 1 1 , , #7, r ,‘,/ , All t _- Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department I ller Creek Morrow Park Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes Conservation Area Natural Area — no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(5D9)720-5000. AppB Figure 26.Pedestrianendix Network 7Source Page: 5-80 u Ordinance ate 18-014 tl m�� ® Effective Date: August 15,2018 _k______ �� 1,....4"---�'-w� Camp Sekani e's Fe � .� *To be updated with adoption of CPA-2019-0007 Park _j„,,,,,. ..._,..1/ _ Park ��..- Pedestrian Network Existing Sidewalks Ave M� Proposed Sidewalks r---- Millwoo. z , = - Felts Field Mirabeau Point Park n Spokane Valley 111111 ,( � r��A Urban Growth Area(UGA) _. ■�AParks,Recreation,&Open Space 1101 1_ eo �` 'ulllvan 1113 �* co. aneIMO �� Park f i niit& EMlaalon Ave mon.unri ma /1/14. 0 0.5 1 1.5 AlWIFIA 0 a[sltlo Ave umoritirmini•mw.gm•aimiimml Miles ,„„„... :I ta; 1.11 . - MI1 �. - �:a.,woi�mru , s I�I� II � ■si r% �.rpm. •r =`�' - i=6 Jlr ilii s okane` III . _ M�� p 4000*Valley 7// Dishmal Hills Natural Area , ill - iiiiiiiiie kr ]0 \Th yAl Ill P J �� `.a Uplands ry itosp '�/� C. jlf..iiu�irea -q fr -464 A E ft, J ill _ :_; , , , ,,, 1 �� 1111 orFor ringre 4/01, AA kt. Dishman Hills .r, ".,,,,r Area 7- ri�� 1 r z/./ J i� / 7- ori / / . Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department A Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims Iller Creek Morrow Park liability for errors and omissions In its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of J 11 Conservation Area - Natural Area Spokane Valley,Community Development Department,Division of Planning,(509)720-50DD. j Appendix B Figure 27. Bikeway Network Source Page: 5-81 -j - !� 1111111111.11 zaa Ordinanceate 18-014IEffective Date: August 15,2018 Camp Sekani / •_ te's Fer I "To be updated with adoption of CPA-2019-0007 Park Hii/ ._-- Park !.. Existing&Proposed Bikeway Network ',(-:j Municipal Boundaries EEumd Aire w =I Spokane Valley • eEP Minwood` ' h /A Spokane Valley Urban Growth Area(UG. Felts Field a. Mirabeau .-e' Point Park ( Parks,Recreation;&Open Space r rBikeway Elements __ _� - —Existing Bike Lane ExistingShared Use Path 0 ♦ Sullivan r?t Valley; �� Park —Bike FriendlyRoute .exon Ave ane ' - - EMlssion Ave ' Existing Ped/Bike Bridge ___� .■♦.■■ --- Proposed Bike Lane E, _ r : ■ E ataldo Ave EaroadrvavAve z 1 — �� .untry Vuc ■■■. p g Proposed Ped/Bike Bridge r____,_ _ �- 111 _ Proposed Shared Use Path r i ESeo.ue Ave ._.,,.. OMiles el/ '4 7- 7 — . 00/7, MIN My. Dishman Hills ii Natural Area .;'`', -1111111-11111■._-- ✓/ a IIIII Mprk ' __ —fl- 5 ir er ee° , ' V. ■ • 1rie Spokane..� A = _ ......0 Valley 0.• , Fel . Dishm Hills or Fr Conservation Area 0 pre • #07 i -,.:„.._,._ • /All Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes Morrow Park no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims Iller Creek liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of Conservation Area r - Natural Area _ Spokane Valley,Community Development Department,Division of Planning,15091 720-5000. vv,i jAppendix B r 1 ,' r` Figure 28.Existing and Recommended jI Transit Facilities Source Page: 5-83 � -- Ordinance No. 16-018 �_-� Camp Sekani •- te's Ferry Effective Date: December 28,2016 Park / iq , / , Park Spokane Valley /./ = F / r Public Transportation _ ; " 'i Municipal Boundaries / _ npwaY QSpokancValley lir Mdl o41 e lJrhan(,rowth Area(IKEA) Felts Field Polirabeau r� % ,� Point Park i i – Parks,Recreation&Open Space = ,� High Performance Transit Network i� � \. I; —Red Line .okan i/ �- 'I►`i" 'Y1� c 4uIlivan �i Ion Aver _...10111111111111111111120.0111111. _ " ark on Blue Line I —Green Line �•a —Bus Routes Ali �� d aooVe • BusStops 0 m �•,._ 0 0.5 1 1.5 Ilimil"'' MI r , 0 Miles _�� H mow.Aoa S�� _ • i Pik i ,r \ r a• - errs or 7.ilk,Dishman Hills +_ _� 11.1 pokane Natural Area �`, • Ili ht Valley 4 �' \, to N ;2 I Saltese Uplands \� /� Conservation Area 4."" , ,Ave E ndA- q/' J Dishman Hills Conservation Area 101,1 I 7, r , 77 1 , 1 , A.._ , ,. AJJ i / / Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department / I ller Creek , Morrow Park Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes 2 Conservation Area Natural Area no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims �ll��✓l liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(509)720-5000. Appendix B �J � Figure 30.Average Daily Traffic by N D �� Year ..LIE ,.. Source Page: 5-86 A F 3925 3457 _ y= g �� Camp Sekani • e's Fer oo rn v I ' '��- i Ordinance No. 16-018 Park A Park NA ,71s 19877 °'J -Effective Date: December 28,2016 / 1� 23005 23132 v �� 2 g Most Recent ADT by Year 569 co z Municipal Boundaries / i Millwood _� o - `-_ - 2447 20 Spokane Valley 996 E e.oua Aveowe em �� 4538' 2386 • �.� �' 4051 '��,Ur ban Growth/area(UGn) ,! Felts Field 15001 • • Mirabeau e- ridit& 7568 .Point Park • Parks,Recreation,and Open Spaces N zDe30 s357 �' " Year of Most Recent Count 4M 21353 13 1,— L, �� " �' —2012 i�� ;_ Ad ularkn c°Jo //'i.• �••. Valley N M e ' l 1' > j; —2013 •.,i� 2226 _�zi�1�� 7009 5901 7685 _ - __8643 6176 4568 4138 E MIssIm Av.^ •pok;�, 0 0 0' . M n v ?.40es 8p�►'� 673 r F 90 —2015 ro cn aw �,s..._....m.� � r m N. m rn .r1.". _ v�.� 14329 - k958' 8711 8403 9937 10811 8986 8343 8946 9276 8709 9327 L 17774 61,• —•� ecOv°`ry 11034 11061 - 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 4 c..ro ^ 10133 o N 0 M w N 1 11950 �- Liberty CO so CO0 , v ^ .' so N r n 5 Zw' Lake m N CO rn N m • . M N v 1361 o Miles 23170 8130 19671 •• 16085. 13388 18995 21847 25288 22051 19948:�2D310 0 19686 18906 3409 0- 3277 ___fes•71ii 11134 o ul. 15902 4''IE•"+Mi - o m 16636ia o •- 335 1593 7,1644`• 1250 `.0 2354 co 2381. m 3630 v • •-m rn m O ro 5573 5768 8021 N c"S/: Dishman Hills 02395 1748 m 2858 u°'i 2055 M 2047 N 1968 m 1108 N Natural Area , .1- FP " otI Oi r a 5974 3687 3298 N N r Eo M Mr Spokane CON N 1775 % r • 4456 � 6855 7046 5084 4614 4854 N 4596 rc Saltese Uplands Valley ., � — Conservation Area Y sr m 1/ - o Ni �9�5 m Ili N co A _F , , 918 1478 7043 X15 2290 2654 n X88, m -.., -7" a Ave cr :6•: 10632 11209. 1P:4: .,- Easyfir�6438 Dishman Hills -. o M / `� �Conservation Area � a S N N • r/f/ m _ -. 1391 1157 3j '1393 L/, 0 27 Ad ,_ _ Iller Creek 1 / �, Morrow Park Conservation Area Natural Area _Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes l _- no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims --„ liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(5D9)720-5000. %/ j Appendix B Figure 32.2040 Average Daily Traffic v v / Forecast i r/ .Source Page: 5-89 o 290 Ordinance No. 16-018 _ m ? - -_ Effective Date: December 28,2016 —__ Camp Sekeni % •. te's Fer 6300 0 6300 0 I b 5300 Park ./41y��i Park ---_2-306 2040 Daily Traffic Forecast 2460D' 25100 / 29600 za9no Municipal Boundaries / - l _ , �tiyo� o T Q Spokane Volley ®� - goo _ _ 1 //AUrLan 6rowtliArea(U6/�) 1300 o Eama Aw, r ,, t it m We �� 111000 Parks,Recreation,and Open Spaces ® - o4300 -�� 7000 - 4106 204 4.�0-(.000 c 700 m „..-1d 00 - Mirabeau s5oo Felts Field 0 �, o �I 0 ADT / c o n � 5 c PDlnt Park �� z o s766 ��_ o m �ry9�' 3800 m —6,001 14,000 � a 9700 zloo - ii —14,001-28,000 00 4100 8 90 - �' 00 22� 5800 16500 20300 0 161 ulli✓en i� pnAm ;o i Valley �� Park28,001 42,000 Mission Park - Ennissron Ave 16'00 2900 2700 5666 8800 8200 lana° 10800 8300 6z0., A. ---' /8. 12900 rc 8 17400 '12,001-X15,700 1200 o {,.—_Fira v m 0 0 ` z3 `_ • ry t ataroo Ave EaNanwa/Au, - l---- ' p1O - N _� 11200 12500 @p ountry Vi9s Dr 14700 1A900 12900 8900 9200 `1030(] 11100 11000 10200 10400 11000 13200 `ry 12300 13000 20700 9800 2800 2300 �. ?d o -° o ,C oc0 0 0 m1 8 0 o n p c —_ o � c 8 , m o, ry � - Po ya Aoe,172 0 ��e o 37900 c 29700 _. 29300 , 23400 20800 N1960 „.So o N N �' '- E5 eAve 16p0 ^+ 27100 ,.,.., waw 0 88 27500 9 32100 34000 9 31800 5 28400 9 29000 00 25800 n 27000 26800 I 6500 5100 `vx 2 300 2,580p , 25600 r 5-17000 16000 m 9 o o 111/// °_ e60 M errs or 1400 3200 0 1100 i000 c 1010 J 0200 2700 5 2500 2100 5 2700 0 2800 7 3800 -- -- / Spokan7e Dishman Hills _ h I r _ 8 °j " ry -- /alle 5800 7700 0 10600 m 8800 Natural Area 3900N 3800 II 0700 -m 2700 4000 P 3600 0 3900 ry 3400 4100 `/ co c o Fo 0 0 N m P. ry ^ o� o I� � Saltese Uplantls I r z M - Conservation Area _ 3300 = 6700 9300 i 11400 6000 6300 6700 6200 1 �� 40•41 1300 1700 2700 3100 3700 5 4/1:4, ,, 3 ,_ 00 �yJ� �Uo '/////// '''� 4iI P 011100 13500 c 15700 11200 Dishman Hills jlo / Conservation Area e o$ moo 's 77 �,, I c� , , ,4 j /, 1700 2700 — I, 1500 j AA o h/ Product of the City f Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes 7 Iller Creek '<!G_1 Morrow Park no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims Conservation Area ' ' Natural Area liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(509)720-5000. Pi;trac�e3 Appendix B / ` pioneer Figure 45.Fire and Water Districts / Water / Trentwood Company / j Pasadena Irrigation j / isinatian x'ctk3 distrix#v - - Fire District 9 Source Page: 7-116 Hutton / Timherline �jt �, �Dle_t •� / _ enn•pliaatea 290 Mobile Ordinance No. 16-018 Camp Selma' •%Vi�� ' •-te's Ferr i cation HpmePark Effective Date: December 28,2016 Park / ,�� IIS/7�% J Park • • o trictIOW i� j I ® • Fire and Water Districts J — � i/i • • Municipal Boundaries • Spokane Q Spokane Valley City of Millwood — • Industrial C nsplidated / 4 city of City by Orchard MIIIWOOd Kaiser Park �Irriptiop .'� EEmpire W Trentwood • istrictRl9 //1 UrbanGrowlhArea(UGA) Avenue Irrigation • • 1, S O1 nnenP D'Iaajt#6 F ,T''' k�water • • Parks,Recreation,&Open Space (_%i Felts Field• p si city of Miliw od M'llwooa District. Nlirabeau �, pieo-etn6 Point Pa, �� L1Fire Disrtrict se ,e dhr / Or h dAve e - — �� I — I atipn f V r \ _ l Fire Station • Holiday - < pmeoron • Wells _ Trailer • z Mobile Court /_ Ho,n p k`�90 _ � uli jl Il CO sionA� 1i • ;_y �i Zo t )% �, 0 0.5 1 1.5 I Eton EMisspn Ave----- ili Spokane Dutr t`k19�_ 90 7►, _ �' • • City m Consolidated Miles Spokane II • _ ktrkti Spokane pislri�t�t19 Al E ataldo Ave F CoWty Water er E larnedwa Ave District. •1 .. �� Jl a jam'/ Huichir`won ■■ Modern Dectrk a • Irrigation o■ Witer Com Pant p P District al6 . • .., City.Spokane se etlbr�1 �4- I '•re•eAve FJ SCWD113 ♦/�tF \ Ind wa Carn hope rJ ,r. Spokane Valley Fire • Carnations - errs or District - • Spokane �/� Dlshman Hills I Natural Area 1 • I � _ z a Saltese Uplands Valley ., ��/East Spokane F,. p Wates_ ! Model DPtrlaxl o I icauop • q it I / I�� -- "'3 .pistrictula I v', ' Ilc�'aritatu Aram w r - I o • -- ® Irrigation � Py District'415 t� • nkL County dtstricti5 "" VIII( / ®��I Ave • F) E32nd Ave Dishman Hills I 6 ----_--=� Conservation Area r—I I L Spokane _ / — Spokane id. p•rDistric[k31t-/ —i 1/4 //A FireDistrict;8� County Water i'� . Pok /// D tncU3 Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department Hier Creek -k Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes Fif Conservation Area , no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims �� liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of 1 Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(5D9)720-5000. —� r, e„„H,e� Appendix B Figure 46.School Districts,Schools, / i, East and Safe Routes to School Valley East Valley f Trentwood a••e : for H.•• Source Page: 7-117 Elementary(] t,yview Ordinance No. 16-015 A 0 -mentary Ot" Effective Date: December 28,2016 �_ I Camp Sekani _ •= te's Fer - r Park `�� p.Park East - "To be updated with adoption of CPA-2019-0007 #363 (Valley #361 School Districs,Schools, Millwoodnt &Safe Routes to School �. i lementary Orchard ee�d�a Ave e w y`eC • a Center ENROLLS -st Vall:y ENROLLMENT Felts Field Elemenfa�yJ senior Hip h Mirabeau St Paschal's Point Park ea 0-300 Students Spokane s•okane - 301-800 Students iii V.Iley I z „high More than 800 Students • A�eeo ,V1ototlara yr Valey - ' Pa kn Riverbend Safe Routes to School ElementaryEMlaaronAve , DesignatedRoutes Mission Park 90 . 0' 11� �) Central Learning and m Arthur Barker igh gra Teaching Centennial a North `„ Valley Kindergarten Cent Municipal Boundaries B N�ss School nd D nter Middle Elementary Broadway Pines Learnin '-ss Q Spokane Valley Eeroach.Ave `--! Elementary Middle 0 ry iarabe Ave Er Elem nta i�� --- St John I - (J - - K//I Urban Growth Area(UGA) V�kst Valley Vianney CitySchool j - r-• Pioneer and e P e e` Greenacres Parks,Recreation,&Open Space c �� St John Rainbow Middle EP 2 Vianney, •, ES.,us Ave _ rE...Iona ams 1 I I I Greenacres Spokane M �-dr _ I Summit St Mary's Elementary 0 0.5 1 1.5 O -School #$1 Central - Miles .. Dishman Hi/!s Valley Early_ -)Adams CenIran �PP°n•- . i '-Element Natural Area Learning Ce Valley Elementary High + ® McDonald Evergreen f Z m university Elementary Middle Saltese Up/ands crn Ot • ° Elementary _ - ro Spokane u-- <'E I / Conservation Area /i Mod dish 40000*Valley Mrddle SouthP -s Sunrise Central o v c)_, mentar Elementary Valley#356 �l Walley ® • l Christian ®S so E32nd Ave Chester Univer-r Dishman Hills Elementary High Conservation Area I PonderosaHorizon _Elementary �" r r I-1 Alpo 7 // Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes ///er Creek Morrow Park no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims Conservation Area Natural Area liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of ' Spokane Valley,Community Development Department,Division of Planning,15091 720-5000. (////' jIf / Appendix B t Figure 51.Wetlands and Flood Areas `� 1 _. ® Source Page: 10-156 ' Ordinance No. 16-018 -� v� //// , - Effective Date: December 28.2016 Camp Sekani . te's Ferr - Illlii ' Park �r� -idr\Park --I , _ d' Hydrological Zones i� and Flood Hazard ;j` \ �� I . I Municipal Boundaries _ MEM- QSpokaneValley EEadidAve EEr,plre`ifPv z i I �Urban Growth Area(UGA) jr Millwoo Shoreline Master Plan Huffer Zone G✓7 Felts Field Mirabeau iiii �� Pont Park = Parks,Recreation,&Open Space E. �� Wetland Type / z Weiland 90 24L3anima T II 'J —Seasonal Stream �.I Valley �� ..rk -fi`- il _ ane �� / �■ e HissonAve Flood Hazard Zones �'�� ( 9%Annual Chance of Flooding z FCafoldoave =A 1%Chance ofHooding,noHkk- r e6madvravAve j z �_ �pPPPr.u)it -c _ _IL I ,FIFFIF v c ■ _.. z nPp1eN rI ■ ESprague Ave , EApplcway Blvd _Q PP U_ r r z, - 1 SCH IOkane� Pj r i7s Dishman Hills o a r Y - � Natural Area R 3 ' - U i `0t o ‘ 4000°Valley 4 r,„, �� Conservation Area 4 r/ 4, -,..- / A \� E32nd Ave �� ' 1 )'- --7---- .V„........, Fe Z7/ Dishman Hills \ice / ,I : 144 A Conservation Area •.77 .,..,„ V / i--— --- ' Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department IIIer Creek (( Morrow Park Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled fromvarious sources.The City makes onservation.,no Natural Area no claims or guarantees about the accuracy, or currency of this map and expressly disclaims 7 r) liability for errors and omissions in itscontents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(509)720-5000. Vim/ jMOOSE Appendix B ROCKY i MOUNTAIN NORTHWEST Figure 52.Priority Habitats and Species ;ELK WHITE-TAILED DEER Source Page: 10-161 / _ ■� Ordinance No8,12018 CLIFFS/BLUFFS 290- Effective Date: December 28,2016 �� URBAN NATURAL Camp Sekani L- - OPENSPACE Park I �N/// Li rl i �.� �� Priority Habitats and Species 11 290 \� 1 Municipal Boundaries - 4 _ Q Spokane Valley / - EEucrid • //�I URBAN Ave EEmpire Way .. NUr ban Gr owl()Area(UGA) / NATURAL.--- Mlllwo,,d — Parks,Recreation,&Open Space /PEN SPACE Felts Field Noirabear •, t" CLIFFS/BLUFFS ,,, , Point Park 'IL, ), Spokane '-� z 1 - MOOSE E° _ z �_', _ NORTHWEST WHITE-TAILED DEER • z L �L� ---Sullivan i PRAIRIES AND STEPPE 9ission _ a0 1.11111111111111 iy 1 . s Ave moi Valley �� park ll RIPARIAN ZONES � 1 EMissionAve -- , Air z ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK ___ 'z —� -- URBAN NATURAL OPEN SPACE s. IIIII EBr'oadway Ave — .d_ ECataldoAve eL WATERFOWL CONCENTRATIONS g' _ t WETLANDS z WAitI o: z EPodeW`YPve myJ �cea 0 0.45 0.9 1.35 O ESpral ueAve EApPlew a✓BNd -a, Miles r= � T I 1, a L :URBAN CITY OF-' Dlshman Hills � � NATURAL OPEN � 7' Natural Area - SPACE SpOkalle imiliy d Valley ir,..,1 . Saltese Uplands G5 "z -onservatiod Area 3 �, PRAIRIES NORTHWEST WETLAND ® j �� ANDSTEPPE WHIDEERILED WATERFOW OA CONCENTRATK 411, WATERFOWL OWL URBAN NATURAL CONCENTRATIONS CO4TERFA71C 9th OPEN SPACE / j� te E32ntl Ave - - - - WATERF Dishman Hills Conservation Area WETLANDS NORTHWEST 771 . WHITE-TAILED p DEER / / ROCKY • r / % MOUNTAIN ROCKY ELK /. MOUNTAIN • ELK NORTHWEST /lam ./101"1 / WHITE-TAILED RIPARIAN r� _-_"" DEER ZONES NORTHWEST -- - Product of the City of Spokane Valle,Community and Public Works Department IIIer Creek Morrow Park Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes Conservation Area Natural Area no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and'e(r9 ssly disclaims URBAN liability for errors and omissions in its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of NATURAL Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(509)720-5000. �// • ��Ir• • - �1`�'r'.t(/. `vf liv Appendix B �� `�1 1, dI ;•�/ -# / ."4.10 � ��how. it — �' Figure 53.Geological Hazards • 1290 Source Page: 10- //pper • Ordinance No. 16-018 i r __ 1 - - -- — - Effective Date: December 28,2016 Camp Sekani / ' 's Ferr, i Park Park e NIL. ' ° Geological Hazards _41' "- ' /r'er Municipal Boundaries '`,erfor 4+ Q Spokane Valley E Eucl aAve mp, z G///A,Urban Growth Arca(UGA) Millwoo��FeltsFieldMl abeau Parks,Recrea Lion,&Open Space Point Park )1,,1- a Steep Slope 30%or Greater Gcohazards L eo - Sullivan ti -..or Valley �r-_ - �` Park i, 0 0.5 1 1.5 ane P1�s�eFl P.rk �� EM7ss7on Ave Miles 491 4. ECataldoAv JI F r _ EBro'adwayAve A Z c -- 1 ECountryV sta Dr m — 7 I_- - -, w _ r way P e / �q�'�" Ar 7 1 �L_ I z f — j �c • _ SIE Sp ague Ave L CITY■/OC�■7�(.0A^ P F Appleway Blvd _ 1 / Vl1i.{��\/ a r / r- P Valley rahavIls o. I ❑I '. , Natural Area 33 I -- -`:. ` A OF j! Salt 70i �j r 0 , E32nd Ave / r j , ..t, / Dishman Hills t, • n,.., . m Ihl oori i t g - ' : Pio.; 1/111' • 1... - , � :# � Product of the City of Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department If I' 9 ` �M•ark Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources.The City makes //,,,,A,. ‘,1:. :".7 : ' # • c/ `' 1 �= • -" V no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims �- ( ,reera /( , ' i� �. �11k rev — liabilityfor errors and omissions iv its contents.To confirm accuracy contact the City of r I — f.t ,G~,- •�..-tl�l111•11 f� '` Spokane Valley,Community and Public Works Department(509)720-5000. CPA-2019-0010 Draft new Appendix B: 20-year Transportation Project List 20-Year Transportation Improvement Plan 1/31/2018 This document identifies anticipated and potential projects that fall outside the 6-year TIP. Project Type Cost Timeframe Years Grade Separation Projects Pines/BNSF GSP Construct Grade Separation at Pines/BNSF Grade $ 29,000,000 7-10 years 2025-2029 RR/Trent(SR290) Separation Park Road/BNSF Grade Construct Grade Separation at Park/BNSF Grade $ 25,000,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Separation RR/Trent(SR290) Separation Intersection Improvement Projects Pines Rd., SR-27&16th Intersection Uprade or replace traffic signal $ 3,400,000 7-10 years 2025-2029 Intersection Improvement Mirabeau&Mansfield Intersection Add traffic signal or roundabout $ 900,000 7-10 years 2025-2029 Intersection Improvement 8th&Barker Intersection Intersection Add traffic signal or roundabout TBD 7-10 years 2025-2029 Improvement Improvement Barker&Appleway Intersection Replace traffic signal or replace signal with Intersection TBD 7-10 years 2025-2029 Improvement Project roundabout Improvement Bowdish&32nd Intersection Intersection Signalize intersection or add roundabout TBD 7-10 years 2025-2029 Improvement Improvement Thierman&Appleway Adjust turning movements and signal Intersection TBD 7-10 years 2025-2029 Intersection Improvement phasing Improvement 4th&Pines Intersection Intersection Signalize intersection TBD 7-10 years 2025-2029 Improvement Improvement 8th&Park Intersection Address traffic control and lane Intersection $ 3,400,000 7-10 years 2025-2029 Improvement configuration. Improvement Sullivan&Indiana Intersection Intersection Add a second westbound left-turn lane $ 70,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Improvement Improvement Sullivan&Mission Intersection Reconfigure eastbound to include a left and Intersection $ 61,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Improvement through-right lane;retime signal Improvement Sullivan&Trent Interchange Upgrade and widen grade separation at Grade $ 27,000,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Sullivan/BNSF/Trent(SR290) Separation Fancher&Broadway Intersection Widen to include east and westbound left- Intersection TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Improvement turn lanes and remove split phase Improvement Pines&Indiana Intersection Add westbound left-turn lane,retime traffic Intersection $ 900,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Improvement signal.Connect sidewalks and bike lanes Improvement Sprague&Argonne-Mullan Reconstruct intersections in concrete Intersection $ 2,400,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Concrete Intersections pavement Improvement Sprague&Fancher Concrete Reconstruct Intersection in concrete Intersection $ 1,600,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Intersection pavement Improvement Sprague&Thierman Concrete Reconstruct intersection in concrete Intersection $ 1,300,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Intersection pavement Improvement Sprague&University Concrete Reconstruct intersection in concrete Intersection $ 1,700,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Intersection pavement Improvement Flora&Trent Intersection Signalize intersection and add left turn lanes Intersection $ 2,200,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 Improvement on Flora or convert to a roundabout Improvement Evergreen&32nd Intersection Intersection Signalize intersection or add roundabout TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Improvement Improvement Reconstruction Boone Ave.-Flora to Barker Reconstruct roadway to city standard and Reconstruct TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 address right-of-way Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curbs, Park Rd.-Broadway to Indiana sidewalk,bike lanes and new stormwater Reconstruct $ 4,500,000 7- 10 years 2025-2029 facilities Argonne&I-90 Bridge Reconstruct Argonne Rd Bridge to 3 Lanes Reconstruct $ 10,000,000 7- 10 years 2025-2029 Improvement southbound.Add 10'shared-use sidewalk. Sullivan Rd-Spokane River to Widen to 5-lane section and reconstruct Reconstruct $ 5,300,000 7- 10 years 2025-2029 Wellesley intersections at Kiernan and Marietta Sprague to 8th:Inlay&Enhancement;8th to Bowdish Road- 16th to Sprague 16th:Reconstruct as 2-lane section with Reconstruct $ 2,900,000 7- 10 years 2025-2029 curb,sidewalk,bike lanes,and new stormwater facilities Reconstruct roadway as 2-lane section with Bowdish Road-24th to 32nd curb,sidewalk,bike lanes and new Reconstruct $ 2,700,000 7- 10 years 2025-2029 stormwater facilities Extend Broadway arterial to Barker Rd with Broadway Ave.-Flora to Barker bike lanes,Realign Broadway connection Reconstruct $ 5,200,000 7- 10 years 2025-2029 east of Barker Flora Rd.-Indiana to Sprague Widen to 3-lane section with curbs,sidewalk Reconstruct TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 and new stormwater facilities Widen to 4-lane section with curb,sidewalk, Mission Ave. -Barker to City bike lanes,new stormwater facilities and Reconstruct TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 Limits turn lanes at key intersections Sullivan Rd.-24th to City Limit Widen to 5-lane section with curb,sidewalk, Reconstruct TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 bike lanes,and new stormwater facilities Bowdish Road-8th to 24th Reconstruct with curb,sidewalk,bike lanes, Reconstruct $ 2,900,000 10-20 years 2025-2029 and new stormwater facilities Widen to 5-lane section with curb,sidewalk, Barker Rd. -1-90 to Mission bike lanes,and upgraded stormwater Reconstruct $ 2,900,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 facilities 1-90&Barker Road Interchange Replace existing bridge and interchange, Reconstruct $ 26,600,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 upgrade roundabouts to two lanes Pines Rd. &1-90 Interchange Address lane configuration approaches to Reconstruct TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Mission and Indiana. Resurface,upgrade to 2-lane section with 4th Ave.-Dishman Mica to curb,sidewalk,bike lanes,and new Reconstruct TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Sullivan stormwater facilities Widen to 3-lane section with curbs, 8th Ave.-Havana to Park sidewalk,bike lanes and new stormwater Reconstruct TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 facilities Resurface and upgrade to 2-lane section 8th Ave.-Dishman Mica to with curb,sidewalk,bike lanes,and new Reconstruct TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Sullivan stormwater facilities Widen to 3-lane section with curbs, Carnahan Rd.-8th to South City sidewalk,bike lanes and new stormwater Reconstruct TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Limit facilities Resurface,add crossing treatments at Valleyway Avenue-Park to intersections,curb and sidewalk as Reconstruct TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Sullivan appropriate ITS ITS along Broadway from Pines Rd(SR-27)to Evergreen&Broadway ITS Evergreen,along Evergreen from Sprague to ITS $ 1,870,000 7- 10 years 2025-2029 16th Ave. Pines Corridor ITS-Sprague to Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor ITS $ 800,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 16th Pedestrian&Bicycle/Safety Appleway Trail-University to Extend Appleway Trail from University Road Ped& TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 Dishman Hills to Dishman Hills Bike/Safety Flora Rd.-Indiana to Sprague Construct shared-use pathway to connect Ped& TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 Appleway Trail to Centennial Trail Bike/Safety Pines Rd.-Mirabeau Parkway to Shared-use path connecting Mirabeau to Ped& TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 Trent Pines GSP Bike/Safety Install wayfinding signage to connect Ped& Connections to Millwood Trail Millwood and Spokane sections of trail, Bike/Safety $ 350,000 7- 10 years 2025-2029 paved connection from Montgomery Add ped and bike crossing treatments at 12th Ave. Crossing Ped& arterial intersections between University TBD 7- 10 years 2030-2039 Improvements Bike/Safety and Sullivan Trent Pathway-Park to Pines Shared-use pathway along Trent Ave Ped& TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Bike/Safety SR-27 @ 24th Ave Street Ped& Enhanced crossing treatment at SR-27 TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Crossing Bike/Safety Sprague Railroad Pathway Shared-use pathway along railroad line from Ped& TBD 10-20 years 2030-2039 Appleway Boulevard to West City Limits Bike/Safety Create shared-use path on north side of 1-90 Ped& North Greenacres Pathway parallel to Boone Ave.and County right-of- Bike/Safety $ 1,100,000 10-20 years 2030-2039 way Transit Coordinate with STA's improvements to STA: Sprague HPTN Transit accommodate HPTN on Sprague between Transit TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 Sidewalk Improvements Havana and 1-90 STA: Mirabeau Park&Ride Coordinate with STA to shift Mirabeau Park Transit TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 HPTN Improvements &Ride to accommodate HPTN STA:Argonne Park&Ride HPTN Coordinate with STA to locate HPTN park Transit TBD 7- 10 years 2025-2029 Facility: STA and ride facility at Argonne Road Comprehensive Plan Map � .Ave E Indiana et 90 W290 O E 190 Fwy Eamp I E I 90 FwyONRamp E Nora Ave E 190 EZgO OFF R Study Area l.m. ihk 45104.9151 ,'' = 13107 E MISSION AVi 45104.0307 /- r- .ADDRESS .„„„._, UNKNOWN 45104.0328 45104.0323 0 ADDRESS 0 VACANT 45104.9150 UNKNOWN LAND 13107 E 45104.0324 MISSION AVE 13507 E MISSION AVE 45104.0327 - 45104.0329 0 ADDRESS UNKNOWN .0 ADDRESS 45104.0308 UNKNOWN 13607 E MISSION AVE JL E Mission Ave r 45104.0315 II 45104.0311 45104.0330 11 13515 E 13519 E 13621 E MISSION AVE MISSION AVE MISSION AVE I lz I: Maxwell III Ave 11 Ism oIx IIIIZ ,Iiimillirilll E Smto Ave z II El 1.1.--i II 1 -�� ■J CPA-2019-0009 Request: [7T4'OF lia Owner: Ronnie and Bonnie Carlson, Sharon Janson,Jerry Kjos,John Massong, City initiated proposal to change landuse The Solid Rock We Stand,LLC, Valley Consolidated Irrigation District No.19, designation and zoning from MFR to CMU Henderson Legacy,LLC, Whimsical Pig LTD Partnership CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 14, 2019 Department Director Approval Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading Proposed Ordinance 19-005 2019 Official Zoning map Amendments GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A, SVMC 17.80.140 and 19.30.010 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Administrative Report—April 16,2019 BACKGROUND: The annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle runs from November 1st 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 three privately initiated requests for Comprehensive Plan map amendments. In addition, the City proposed one Comprehensive Plan map amendment. Properties approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment (CPA) receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. On February 14, 2019,the Planning Commission was briefed on the 2019 CPAs, and a public hearing was conducted on February 28, 2019. The public hearing was closed at that time and the Planning Commission reviewed and deliberated on each of the proposed CPAs. On March 14,2019,the Planning Commission voted on the following Findings and Recommendations to the City Council: • The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation to not approve CPA-2019-0001.Note: Commissioner Johnson recused himself due to a conflict of interest. • The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation to approve CPA-2019-0002. • The Planning Commission had a split vote of 3-3 for CPA-2019-0003. A recommendation requires a majority vote, and therefore the Planning Commission is not able to forward a recommendation. • The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2019-0009 An Administrative Report was presented to City Council on April 16th. No public comment was taken at that time. The Council agreed by consensus for the draft Ordinance presented for first reading to include the Planning Commission Recommendation on each of the proposed amendments with the exception of CPA- 2019-0003. Council directed staff to incorporate the staff report staff recommendation for CPA-2019-0003 into the draft Ordinance. The staff report concluded that the proposal was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and the draft Ordinance reflects such findings. However, as it is a draft Ordinance, Council may make amendments during either first or second reading to approve or deny any of the proposed CPAs. If Council determines to make such amendments,it must indicate the basis for such approval or denial and particularly state why the proposal does or does not meet the criteria set forth in SVMC 17.80.140(H). This criteria includes whether(1)the amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment, (2) the amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, (3) the amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions, (4) the amendment corrects an obvious mapping error,and(5)the amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 1 of 2 Note that Council recently adopted amendments to its Governance Manual that provide that Council will not take public comment on items that have already had a public hearing. Since the 2019 CPAs were in progress at the time this amendment was adopted,Council will hear public comment only during the first reading. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: n/a OPTIONS: Move to advance the ordinance to a second reading,with or without amendments. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance Ordinance 19-005, Official Zoning Amendments,to a second reading as proposed. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger,AICP,Economic Development Manager; Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance 19-005;Yellow Binder Distributed Separately 2 of 2 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 19-005 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP AS DESCRIBED IN CPA-2019- 0002,2019-0003,AND 2019-0009,DENYING ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS PROPOSED IN CPA 2019-0001; AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS,the City of Spokane Valley(City) adopted the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) and the Official City Zoning Map pursuant to Ordinance No. 16-018, on December 13,2016 (the Official City Zoning Map); and WHEREAS,the SVMC and Official City Zoning Map became effective on December 28,2016; and WHEREAS, comprehensive plans may be amended annually pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 of the Growth Management Act(GMA); and WHEREAS, amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan may be initiated by the Planning Commission (Commission),the City Council (Council), citizens, or by the Community and Public Works Director based on citizen requests or when changed conditions warrant adjustments; and WHEREAS,the GMA requires comprehensive plans to be implemented with development regulations, including the zoning of all properties in the City that are consistent with land use map designations; and WHEREAS, zone changes under consideration with the annual Comprehensive Plan amendments are to be considered as area-wide rezones pursuant to SVMC 17.80.140;and WHEREAS, consistent with the GMA, the City adopted Public Participation Guidelines to direct the public involvement process for adopting and amending comprehensive plans and area-wide rezones;and WHEREAS,the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)provides that amendment applications shall be received until November 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, applications were submitted by the applicant, owner, or by City staff to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; and WHEREAS,pursuant to the State Environmental Protection Act(chapter 43.21C RCW) (SEPA) and chapter 21.20 SVMC, staff conducted an environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS,on February 8,2019 and February 15,2019,notice of the Commission public hearing was published in the Valley News Herald; and WHEREAS,on February 8,2019,notice of the Commission hearing was mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject properties; and WHEREAS,on February 8,2019,notice of the Commission hearing had been posted on all the subject properties; and Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 1 of 10 DRAFT WHEREAS,on February 14,2019,the Commission conducted a study session to review the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on February 15, 2019, after reviewing the environmental checklists, staff issued a Determination of Non-Significance(DNS)for each of the proposals,published the DNS in the Valley News Herald, and where appropriate posted the DNS on the sites and mailed the DNS to all affected public agencies; and WHEREAS, on February 26, 2019, the Washington State Department of Commerce was notified pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 of the City's intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS,on February 28,2019,the Commission received evidence,information,public testimony, and a staff report and recommendation at a public hearing; and WHEREAS,on February 28,2019,the Commission deliberated and voted to forward CPA-2019-0002, and CPA-2019-0009,to Council with a recommendation for approval;and CPA-2019-0001 to Council with a recommendation for denial; and CPA-2019-0003 with no recommendation,with written findings of fact setting forth the bases for such recommendations to Council; and WHEREAS,on April 16,2019,Council conducted a briefing to review the proposed amendments;and WHEREAS, on April 16, 2019, Council concurred to place CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0003, and CPA-2019-0009 in an ordinance for consideration of approval and to place CPA-2019-0001 in the ordinance for consideration of denial; and WHEREAS, on May 14, 2019, Council considered a first ordinance reading to approve CPA-2019- 0002,CPA-2019-0003,and CPA-2019-0009 and to deny CPA-2019-0001; and WHEREAS, on May 28, 2019, Council considered a second ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendments for CPA-2019-0002, , CPA-2019-0003,and CPA-2019-0009 and to deny CPA-2019-0001. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the Official City Zoning Map as described in CPA-2018-0002, CPA-2018-0003, and CPA-2018-0009 and to deny the zoning amendments proposed in CPA-2019-0001. Section 2. Findings. Council acknowledges that the Commission conducted appropriate investigation and study and held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Official City Zoning Map, and the Council hereby approves the amendments to the Official Zoning Map with the exception of CPA-2019-0001,which is denied. Council has read and considered the Commission's findings. Council's findings specific to each proposed amendment are contained in Section 4 below. The Council hereby makes the following general findings applicable to all proposed amendments: General Findings: 1. Pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW (SEPA), environmental checklists were required for each proposed Comprehensive Plan map and text amendment. 2. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 2 of 10 DRAFT 3. The procedural requirements of SEPA and SVMC Title 21 have been fulfilled. 4. On February 8, 2019, individual notices of public hearing for the proposed site-specific map amendments were, or had been previously, mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of each affected site. 5. On February 8,2018 each site subject to a proposed site-specific amendment was,or had been previously,posted with a"Notice of Public Hearing"sign,with a description of the proposal. 6. On February 8, 2019 and February 15, 2019, notice of the Commission public hearing was published in the Valley News Herald 7. On February 15, 2019, Determinations of Non-Significance (DNS) were issued for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. 8. On February 15,2019,the DNS's were published in the City's official newspaper,the Valley News Herald,pursuant to chapter 21.20 SVMC. 9. On February 26,2019,the Washington State Department of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. 10. The procedural requirements in SVMC 17.80.140 for the amendment process, including public participation,notice,and public hearing requirements have been met. 11. On February 28, 2019, the Commission held a public hearing on each of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. After receiving public testimony the public hearing was closed. 12. On February 28, 2019, the Commission deliberated and voted to forward CPA-2019-0002, and CPA-2019-0009 to Council with a recommendation for approval, CPA-2019-0003 to Council with no recommendation, and CPA-2019-0001 to Council with a recommendation for denial. 13. The Commission adopted findings for CPA-2019-0001, CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0003 and CPA-2019-0009. Such findings were presented to Council. Specific findings for each Comprehensive Plan Amendment request are contained in Section 4,below. 14. The Commission and Council have reviewed the proposed amendments concurrently to evaluate the cumulative impacts. The review was consistent with the annual amendment process pursuant to SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW. 15. The proposed amendments to the Official City Zoning Map with the exception of CPA-2019- 0001, are consistent with GMA and do not result in internal inconsistencies within the Comprehensive Plan itself. Section 3. Property. The properties subject to this Ordinance are described in Attachment"A"(2019 Official City Zoning Amendment Maps). Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 3 of 10 DRAFT Section 4. Map Amendments. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, the Official City Zoning Map as adopted through Ordinance No. 16-018 is hereby amended as set forth below and in Attachment "A" (Maps). The Zoning Map amendments are generally described as follows: Map Amendments: File No. CPA-2019-0001: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Industrial (I) to Single Family Residential (SFR) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial (I)to Single Family Residential Urban (R-3. Applicant: Danny Davis, Circle J Mobile Home Park,LLC, 3580 N Gunnar Court, Coeur d'Alene,ID 83815 Amendment Location: Parcel number 45183.9059; addressed as 622 North Park Road, located 300 feet south of the intersection of Park Road and Broadway Avenue, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 18, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Council Findings: Pursuant to Ordinance No. 19-004, CPA-2019-0001 was denied by Council and no subsequent change to the Official Zoning map shall occur. Council Decision: Deny the request to change the zoning for parcel number 45183.9059 to Single Family Residential (SFR). File No. CPA-2019-0002: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the 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). Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers,Inc.,21 S. Pines Road, Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Amendment Location: Parcel number 45234.0210 addressed as 810 S. Sullivan Road,and parcel number 45234.4501 addressed as 902 S Sullivan Road;located in the SW corner of 8th Avenue and Sullivan Road, further located in the SE Vi of Section 23, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington Council Findings: 1. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendment. Designating the property as neighborhood commercial will allow for neighborhood scale services to be developed across from Central Valley High School,an intensely developed school site,within walking distance to serve the residential area and student population. Infrastructure, including streets, water, sewer, and other utilities, are available to support the proposed amendment and will be provided through the course of development. 2. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Growth Management Act (GMA) chapter 36.70A RCW. Specifically the following planning goals and policies would be met: a. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner; and b. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards; and c. ED-G1 support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. d. LU-P1 Encourage neighborhood scale commercial uses in residential areas. Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 4 of 10 DRAFT 3. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. Substantial change has not occurred since the 2016 Legislative Update to the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The proposed amendment does address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update identified areas for NC zoning and identified the need as a community priority. The amendment location was not identified in the 2016 update, but it does offer an opportunity for smaller scale commercial development in an area that is generally consistent with the criteria for NC. 6. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan were considered and the proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 7. Findings were made and factors were considered to ensure compliance with approval criteria contained in SVMC 17.80.140(H)(Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide rezones). 8. The Comprehensive Plan land use map amendment will not adversely affect the public's general health, safety, and welfare. 9. 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. Both sites have been developed with building,paving and grading activity. 10. The change to NC would not have any effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes. Any stormwater associated with commercial development will be retained and treated on the site. The site does not contain 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. 11. The change is compatible with adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. NC development is limited in size to reduce impacts to neighboring residential uses. Development standards limit the height and location of commercial development and together with landscaping and screening standards,will reduce the impacts to adjacent residential uses. The existing church is a permitted use in the NC zone and was developed prior to the NC development standard. Subsequent changes of use would have to be a permitted use in the NC zoning district and comply with the NC development standards. 12. Adequate community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools exist. A neighborhood commercial use will likely have minimal impact on parks, recreation or schools. Generally a commercial 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. Sullivan Road is a Principal Arterial designed to serve through trips and connect Spokane Valley with the rest of the region; 8th Avenue is an Urban Minor Arterial. Minor arterial streets provide inter-neighborhood connections, transit access, and serve both local and through trips. No impacts on community facilities are anticipated. 13.The change will benefit the neighborhood.The 2016 Legislative Update increased opportunities for neighborhood commercial development throughout the City. The community expressed a strong desire to encourage neighborhood scale commercial development. The neighborhood is already served by the larger-scale commercial and retail uses north of site along 4th Avenue and Sprague Avenue. The existing church is consistent with neighborhood commercial development. The redevelopment of the southern property from single family residential to an NC use, such as office,would allow a use that is reasonable and appropriate for the location across from the school and adjacent to a church. 14.The 2016 Legislative Update to the Comprehensive Plan increased the areas that are zoned NC. The NC zoned lands are scattered throughout the City,primarily located on arterial streets within neighborhoods. NC zoned lands are located south of the site at the intersections of 16th and Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 5 of 10 DRAFT Sullivan,and 24th and Sullivan. A small coffee/espresso stand has developed at 16th and Sullivan. Of the five NC-zoned properties closest to this site, the 16th/Sullivan site is the only site to redevelop from the existing use into a neighborhood commercial use. This site is located within one half mile of major retail centers at Sprague/Sullivan and smaller retail centers at 4th/Sullivan. During school periods the Central Valley High School, with a student population of over 2300 students,adds population density that can support NC development. 15. The NC zone allows single-family dwellings (current use of the south property) and neighborhood scale commercial development. Single family uses are permitted in the NC zone and the proposed change would have no effect on the land use capacity of the property. The proposed change in land use to NC will not impact the overall density of the area. 16. The NC designation would support many of the Economic Development, Land Use, Transportation, and Housing goals. The proposed land use change will 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. Council Decision: Change the zoning for parcel numbers 45234.4501 and 45234.0210 to Neighborhood Commercial(NC). File No. CPA-2019-0003: Proposal: Site-specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Multi Family Residential(MFR)and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3)to Multi Family Residential(MFR). Applicant: Joel Elgee,24327 E.Maxwell Ave.,Liberty Lake,WA 99019. Amendment Location: Parcel number 45181.0213 addressed as 8817, 8819, 8821 E. Sinto Avenue, 1405 and 1407 N Marguerite Road; located in the NW corner of Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road, further located in the NE 1/4 of Section 18, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment; 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 Specifically the following planning goals and policies would be met: a. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner; and b. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards; and c. LU-P14 Enable a variety of housing types d. LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas. e. H-G1 allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. 3. The property is located within an older, well established neighborhood and minimal new development has occurred within the area. The Safeway market that was located across the street in the Mission Argonne Business Center closed for business in March 2015. The "Altitude Trampoline Park"replaced the Safeway store within the existing building. No change has occurred since the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update. The applicant indicated in the application materials that he would like to divide the property into individual lots associated with the existing duplexes and single family residence, while establishing a vacant lot for development. The minimum lot Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 6 of 10 DRAFT size in the R-3 zone(7,500 sq. ft.)does not allow this,while the minimum lot size in the MFR zone (2,000 sq. ft.) makes this possible. The current situation with two duplexes and single family dwelling on a single lot is a non-conforming use. The amendment request allows the property to be brought in conformance with existing regulations and creates opportunity for additional development on the vacant lot. The land use designation change would allow the property owner to utilize the property in the most beneficial manner. 4. The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. 5.The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update sought to identify deficiencies in the use and development of multi-family properties. Two multi-family zones with different density allowances were in place prior to the 2016. The 2016 update consolidated the two zones into a single MFR zone with a density allowance of 22 dwelling units per acre. The update reaffirmed existing areas that were suitable for MFR uses and identified new areas that would be suitable for future MFR uses. This site was not identified for a change to MFR at the time of the update. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The change to MFR will allow multi-family and/or some limited commercial development of the property. The site may transition from a residential use with residential driveways,trees,lawn, and buildings to a multi-family or office building with parking area, commercial landscaping, and stormwater treatment areas. In that case traffic into and out of the area would increase with the multi-family or commercial development. The transition would have some impact on the physical environment based on the physical change to the location. 7. Stormwater associated with multi-family or commercial development is required to be retained and treated on the site. The site does not contain 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. 8. Multi-family uses will have some impacts on the adjacent uses. The impacts may include increased traffic,taller buildings, and more noise. The transitional regulations that were discussed in the "Implications" section above were adopted to reduce the impacts of multi-family and commercial development on adjacent residential uses. These regulations along with other development standards will limit the height and location of any new buildings and together with landscaping and screening standards, will reduce the impacts to adjacent residential uses. The multi-family or limited commercial use would be compatible with the surrounding single-family and commercial uses. 9. High density residential development will generate a need for parks,recreation, and schools. If the entire property were developed to the maximum density allowed the site could accommodate 20 new dwelling units. However, due to the existing development, only 15 additional dwelling units could be allowed if the request is granted. The additional dwelling units will place a demand on the community facilities in question. A Trip Generation and Distribution Letter contemplating the traffic impacts of the additional 15 dwelling units was submitted by the applicant. The Senior Traffic Engineer determined that the additional traffic would not affect the level of service of the intersections being impacted. Ness Elementary School,Centennial Middle School and West Valley High School are all within one mile of the property. West Valley School district determines the adequacy and need for additional schools. The district was provided an opportunity to review and comment on the amendment and did not submit any comments. The need for utilities is determined by the utility purveyor and will be addressed at the time of future development. All utility providers were given an opportunity to comment. Relevant comments have been include in this report with the agency comments. Parks and recreation needs are addressed in the City's Parks& Recreation Master Plan. Fifteen new dwelling units will not change the Comprehensive Plan level of service of 1.92 acres for every 1,000 people. Adequate community facilities exist to accommodate the proposed amendment and no negative impact will result from the change. Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 7 of 10 DRAFT 10. Redevelopment of the property from single-family to multi-family will provide additional housing opportunities to the community. The change will also satisfy the intent of the MFR by locating multi-family near Mission Argonne commercial center, Argonne Road, and the public transportation provided the Spokane Transit System. The change provides an opportunity for the property owner to make the existing uses conform to the requirements of the SVMC to be on individual lots and therefore reverse the nonconforming use status. 11. The R-3 zoning district allows a maximum density of six units per acre and the MFR zoning district permits up to 22 units per acre. Based on the size of the parcel,the current R-3 zone would allow the parcel to develop up to six dwelling units. Under the MFR zoning the parcel size would allow up to 21 dwelling units resulting in a net increase of 15 dwelling units. The proposal would not create a significant increase in density and would allow higher density development to occur near transit and commercial centers. 12. 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. The addition of 15 dwelling units will have minimal impact on the projected population density and minimal impact on the population density in the neighborhood. 13. The MFR designation would support many of the Economic Development, Land Use, Transportation, and Housing goals. It would likely 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. The change to MFR on this site is consistent with the intent of the MFR zone to provide high density development near commercial and transportation centers. Council Decision: Change the zoning for parcel number 45181.0213 to Multi Family Residential (MFR). File No. CPA-2019-0009: Proposal: City-initiated site specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Multi Family Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) and the zoning from Multi Family Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use District(CMU). Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Amendment Location: Parcel numbers 45104.9150, 45104.9151, 45104.0324, 45104.0315, 45104.0311, 45104.0307, 45104.0308, 45104.0330, 45104.0329, 45104.0323, 45104.0327 and, 45104.0328, addressed as 13303, 13507, 13515, 13519, 13607 and 13621 East Mission Avenue, located north of Mission Avenue between the intersections of Mission Avenue and McDonald Road and Mission Avenue and Mamer Road, further located in Section 4 of Township 25, Range 44, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. Council Findings: 1. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendment. The amendment provides more flexibility of uses and intensity in an area surrounded by similar zoning and uses. The amendment will allow opportunity for increases in uses providing complementary daily goods and services and the subject properties will benefit by being allowed to develop consistent with the adjacent land uses. 2.The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map is consistent with Growth Management Act(GMA) chapter 36.70A RCW. Specifically the following planning goals would be met: a. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. b. Provides for economic development adjacent to similar zoned parcels and utilizes land for infill development within an urban area. c. Provides a suitable land use designation consistent with the City's GMA compliant Comprehensive Plan. Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 8 of 10 DRAFT d. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. e. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. f. LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas. g. H-G1 Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. h. CF-P2 Optimize the use of existing public facilities before investing in new facilities. 3. The proposed amendment does respond to a substantial change in conditions due to the 2016 Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning change of the surrounding properties. The City underwent an extensive legislative Comprehensive Plan update in 2016. At that time, the subject parcels were designated consistent with the existing land uses and maintained the same land use designation. The surrounding properties to the north and west received a new land use designation of CMU. 4. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 5. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The properties will have the opportunity to transition and add a mix of uses to serve the surrounding single family,duplexes and multifamily,commercial and office services. There is no concern on effect of physical environment. 7. The site does not contain any streams, rivers or lakes. There will be negligible impact on the open space areas. 8. The amendment is consistent with the adjacent land use designation, and allows the properties to develop consistent with the existing CMU designation and development along the entire corridor on the north side of Mission Avenue. 9. The proposed CMU designation will have minimal impact on parks,recreation or schools. The City prepared a Trip Generation and Distribution Letter concluding there is adequate capacity. No impacts are anticipated. 10. The proposed land use designation provides equal development opportunity to the properties along the corridor which encourages development and implements the vision for corridor. 11. Since the majority of the proposed amendment area is developed the amendment would have marginal impact,but the change would allow for more intensive uses and increased density. 12. Since the properties are substantially developed, the change to CMU development is not anticipated to increase or decrease the population or density in the area. Although it is noted that additional units could be developed on site above the current density. The change should not result in significant impacts on the projected population density. 13. The CMU designation will 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. Council Decision: Change the zoning for parcel numbers 45104.9150, 45104.9151, 45104.0324, 45104.0315, 45104.0311, 45104.0307, 45104.0308, 45104.0330, 45104.0329, 45104.0323, 45104.0327 and,45104.0328 to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). Section 5. Zoning Map/Official Controls. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100, for the purpose of regulating the use of land and to implement and give effect to the Comprehensive Plan, the City hereby amends the Official City Zoning Map as set forth in Attachment"A". Section 6. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of the SVMC,or any other law, rule, or regulation referenced in the attached Zoning Map(s) is necessary or convenient to establish the Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 9 of 10 DRAFT validity,enforceability,or interpretation of the Zoning Map(s),then such provision of the SVMC, or other law,rule,or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 7. Map- Copies on File-Administrative Action. The Zoning Map is maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community and Public Works. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Zoning Map in a manner consistent with this Ordinance,including correcting scrivener's errors. Section 8. Liability. The express intent of the City is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This Ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health,safety,and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Section 9. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause,or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of May,2019. L.R.Higgins,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 19-005 2019 Zoning Map Amendments Page 10 of 10 Zoning Map Study Area E 8th Ave T41 i E 9th Ave C •- t J CPA-2019-0002 Request: So"�kane Owner: Advent Lutheran Church pTCF Properties LLC Change the land use designation from /S Y alleY Parcel#:45234.4501, .0210 SFR to NC and the Zoning from R-3 to NC Address: 810 S Sullivan Rd Zoning Map Study Area] Sint() E S� a Ave CPA-2019-0003 Request: S�'�pQlle Owner: Marguerite LLC Change the Land Use Designation from Terry Ovstedal SFR to MFR and the Zoning from R-3 to Valley AP ad 45989.0213 MFR .00° J Address: 8897 F`Sinto Ave 4 Zoning Map et, 0.a Aye E Indiana Ct ii 1 E I 9O F E 190 W290 E 190 Fwy ON Ramp E Nora Ave S 90 E290 OFF Ramp AM liii_ZAre ftl i - Laj4U Ai 45104.0307 OACORESS UNKNOWN 4510M1.0328 LLPi . aaJ4E . MESSION AVE 45€1,.0177 0 ADDRESS u 45104.0329 uxuowr+ 0 ADDRESS 45104.0309 UNKNOWN 13807 E I,i€SSIaN AVE ��' E Mission Ave Nor 45104.5315 46104.0311 „I.. 45104.0330 1ii illii-- 1 57615E 13621 E 'MISSION AVE MISSION AvE MISSION AVE h Maxwell _f •ve 11 o I J . Z ' .1' 'iI EEL U Ml • . 1 CPA-2019-0009 Request: C fH Owner:Ronnie and Bonnie Carlson, U I]e Sharon Janson,Jerry Klos,John Massong, City initiated proposal to change land use On The Solid Rack We Stand,LLC, .....OVall1 Consolidated Irrigation District No.{a, designation and zoning from MFR to CMU ,+a a Henderson Legacy,LW, Whimsical Pig LTD Partnership CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date:May 14,2019 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: nconsent n old business ®new business n public hearing n information n admin.report n pending legislation n executive session AGENDA TITLE: Mayoral Appointment: appointment of Andy Rooney to the Spokane Hotel/Motel Commission (TPA) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.101.040(2) and "Interlocal Cooperation Act Agreement for Establishment of Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area"as well as Amendment 1 and 2. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On February 10, 2004, Council approved the above- mentioned Interlocal agreement. Amendment No. 1 to that Interlocal, which approved removal of the December 31, 2008 sunset clause, was approved by Council December 11, 2007. Amendment No. 2 approved by Council August 25, 2009, amended the Special Assessments on operators of Lodging Businesses changing levy rates in Zone A,B,and C to $2.00 per room per day. BACKGROUND: The above-referenced interlocal established a `Tourism Promotion Area' which includes the unincorporated area of Spokane County and the entire area within the corporate limits of Spokane and Spokane Valley.That Agreement also establishes the Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission, the purpose of which is to advise the Board of County Commissioners on the expenditures of Special Assessment revenues by the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area to fund tourism promotion in Spokane County. Members of this Commission are selected by the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners, Spokane City Council,and Spokane Valley Council from a list of nominees prepared by the Spokane Hotel and Motel Association.All nominees must be operators of lodging businesses or employed by the operator of such a lodging business. Ex-officio members may participate in meeting discussions but shall not have voting rights.At the request of the TPA,notice of the opening was placed on the City's website. The City received a letter of nomination from the Spokane Hotel/Motel Association recommending the appointment of Andy Rooney,Mirabeau Park Hotel General Manager. The Board of County Commissioners shall appoint two members and one ex-officio member to represent the County; Spokane City shall appoint four members and one ex-officio member; and Spokane Valley Council shall appoint two members and one ex-officio member.Member terms are for three years. Spokane Valley representatives include Jody Sander and Chris Nelson; and Councilmember Brandi Peetz as ex- officio member. Chris Nelson was appointed January 8,2019 for a three-year period. On March 20,2019, staff learned that Mr. Nelson no longer works for Mirabeau Park Hotel and therefore, has resigned his commission appointment. OPTIONS: Move to confirm the appointment;do not confirm the appointment;or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to confirm the Mayoral appointment of Andy Rooney, Mirabeau Park Hotel General Manager, to the Spokane Hotel/Motel Commission for a term beginning immediately upon appointment, and expiring December 31,2021. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: n/a COUNCIL/STAFF CONTACT: Mayor Higgins, Chris Bainbridge ATTACHMENTS: Letter of recommendation from the Spokane Hotel/Motel Association;Application for Commission Appointment Sir o kcvwe. tel,/ MtTte� A-s-s 7GLQ tLC7W May 1, 2019 To Whom it May Concern: It is recommended by the Spokane Hotel Motel Association that Andy Rooney be appointed as a Spokane Hotel and Motel Commissioner representing City of Spokane Valley for a term of 3 years. The Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission advises the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County on the expenditure of Special Assessment revenues by e p‘ ane Courkty Tourism Promotion Area to fund tourism promotion in Spokane o nty. By: r'ilf Ii Date: _5/1/2019 Representing the Spokane Hotel Motel Association Its: Executive Director 18926 E Euclid Ave, Spokane Valley, WA 99027 (509) 869-0619 thansenshma@msn.com Application Form for Committees/Boards/Commissions p ''A� ojleA' Return completed form to City Clerk: jValle Spokane Valley City Hall y 10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Phone: 509-720-5102 cbainbridgena spokanevalley.org [Note: To meet an application deadline, applications may be faxed or e-mailed. However, the Clerk's office will need an original, signed application prior to appointment. One application per position please. DO NOT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION UNLESS THERE IS AN OPENING.OPENINGS ARE POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBPAGE AND ADVERTISED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS. Call the City Clerk if you have questions.] I AM INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEE: [Check one box;note requirements] [ ] Planning Commission—Must be a Spokane Valley resident.(See chapter 18.10 SVMC) Terms are for three years.Applicants are selected without respect to political affiliations,and serve without compensation. [ ] Lodging Tax Advisory Committee(LTAC)-Need not be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 3.20 SVMC) Terms are for one or two years.Committee consists of five members: One Councilmember:appointed by the Mayor,confirmed by the Council. Two who represent a business required to collect the tax(hotels,motels,etc.). Two involved in funded activities(such as a non-profit organization to increase tourism). Identify the business or organization you represent [ ] Spokane County Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee(HCDAC) HCDAC includes two Spokane Valley residents;terms not to exceed three years. Spokane Valley appointment pending final approval by Spokane County Board of Commissioners. Spokane County Application and Supplemental Application also required. [ ] Spokane County Human Rights Task Force —Terms are for four years. Must be a resident of Spokane Valley. The Board currently meets 2nd Tuesday of each month,3:30 to 5:00 at Catholic Charities, 12 E 5`h Spokane. [ ] Spokane Housing Authority(SHA)—regional committee,five members.Terms are five years. One individual directly assisted by the Authority,jointly appointed by Spokane Mayor,Spokane Valley Mayor,and Chair of Board of County Commissioners. Two individuals who work or reside within Spokane City limits. One individual who works or resides in unincorporated Spokane County. One individual who works or resides within Spokane Valley City limits. Check with the City Clerk concerning a vacancy on this committee. X]Tourism Promotion Area.Hotel Advisory Committee(aka Hotel/Motel Association)—Terms are for three years. Spokane Valley appoints two members,and one ex-officio(a member of Council). All nominees must be operators or employees of lodging business within Spokane County. [ ] Other: Name(please print): t—] No4 E. 31�..) r 3 � l( Complete residence address: I 1/80G � I�h,640,4LE w/+ O —? l Street City Zip Code Complete mailing address(if different from above address): Length of time residing at current address: I S Y•ecty--S U.S. Citizen? es [ ]no WA State registered voter?4es [ ]no What is your preferred way for us to contact you: [Note:Ifyou have an unlisted phone nwnber, or do not wish your e- mail address made public, do not include that information. Once this document is submitted to the City, it becomes subject to public disclosure.] [ ] Home Phone: [ ] Work phone: Cell Phone: SO9 -1—G, tltO [ ] Other message phone: {.4]'E-mail address: (please print clearly): 0..v-000 61 0 tYt i c oecLL.pcur K k 04eA . C o v'L [ ] Regular mail to residence or mailing address shown above EMPLOYMENT: (Please start with most recent) 1. present [ ] previous Name of employer: (h e LIQ l/-1�l Zc FiU I F L_ Address: //Do /1. Sc-i ' t ✓4& ti(�, Phone: 5d�-�Z`�' � G Position held: t,iu i-lLrkc BIW F�Cir_:K Dates of employment: ,-/Iii "ZOOS' Jc ?(€30,1-- • 2. [ ] present [previous /��L 7b/J Name of employer: Address: Ill-It to cam. S • Xz -7//TS 1,4 C -- Phone: Position held: VA--{Z oc-LS i'% C c�7 I (/!_ Dates of employment: 119 •- z.00ls 3. [ ] present b4previous l( 14 _S Name of employer: c_ w Ate.0 Address: 4-s !-FIbrJ Phone: Position held: C/-/T i f 77 N/4 E 2 Dates of employment: (7?Z— I `i S C CALL /V "-� e 4. [ ] present [ ] previous Name of employer: Address: Phone: Position held: Dates of employment: EDUCATION: .CD Name of high school ��1-3 N f e i 11�;ss;oh iv.cAddress: (CuF_1Ct_A to D(TA CL f )K S Diploma or GED:>yes [ ] no Trade school/college/university:3 01-1N S�v oct `� ` tvkhti�V t�`� « t� Name of School Address: C) 0 G'Zt-/kit/b /940(1KS Diploma: ;dyes [ ] no Degree or certification earned: CLA 1--1 N r-1 CCy A( TS 1-6.7-r- PALL//-IfoT Trade school/college/university: Name of School Address: Diploma: [ ] yes [ ] no Degree or certification earned: Other relevant certifications/licenses: VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE: Name of social, fraternal, organizations, etc. 1. [ ] current [previous 0t 'l (yr, red.4/—SPo yrin 13-1 cos) 2. [>}<current [ ] previous " y-5c 0,-470 3. [ ] current []'previous d-r E /15.14)C i) &N;4. [ ] current previous KS% 12 _fro C c A < t PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. Local, state, or national government boards, committees, or commissions on which you servef or� have served. 1. [ ] current ]'previous �/LS e T S f0 A141 2. [ ] current previous 17b I t- t1E ULi-1-L-C'f C tjAfrie Z 3. [ ] current [ ] previous 4. [ ] current [ ] previous 5. [ ] current [ ] previous REASONS forapplying for this committee, commission, board: Hai 6 C�r'1'1 ' 1 oU� .13 T-- SP U4 LE` / — / - 0 /1/6s5 By signing this application, I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that all information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further state that my appointment would not represent a ci nflict of inte a an appearance of a conflict of interest with the duties of this position. I understand this aplic. ': is subj-' to disclosure pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW. 5/ / Signature Date Signed CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 14, 2019 Department Director Approval: El Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. Report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Duplex Density Code Text Amendment 2018-0005 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 17.80.150; SVMC 19.30.040; 19.40 and 19.60 SVMC; RCW 36.70A.106; PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: 5-15-18: admin report on duplex/single family dwelling regulations 10-2-18: admin report, follow-up to May 15, 2018 meeting; trends associated with duplexes BACKGROUND: The proposed amendment is a privately-initiated code text amendment to SVMC 19.60.050 (Permitted uses matrix), SVMC 19.40.050 (development standards-cottage development), and SVMC 19.40.060 (development standards—duplexes). SVMC 19.60.050 Permitted Use Matrix identifies the uses that are permitted in each of the zoning districts. Duplexes and townhomes are a permitted use in the R-3 zoning district as indicated by "P" in the Permitted Use Matrix; cottage development is a permitted use in the R-3 zone subject to supplemental regulations. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the matrix which will add supplemental regulations for duplexes, and prohibit townhomes in the R-3 zone. The proposed amendment would also amend SVMC 19.40.060 Development Standards — Duplexes, and SVMC 19.40.050 Development Standards - Cottage Development. Language would be added to the section to limit duplexes to one duplex unit per acre and restrict the location of duplex units in proximity to other duplexes. Additional language would be added to the Cottage Development standards that preclude single ownership of cottage developments. Current cottage development regulations require that the use be approved through the Conditional Use Permit process, with adherence to a variety of supplemental conditions. Duplexes and townhome development are currently outright permitted uses with limited exceptions. The proposed amendment only affects R-3 zoned properties. The Planning Commission (Commission) conducted a study session on the proposed CTA at the January 10, 2019 meeting. On January 24, 2019, the Commission conducted a public hearing that was continued to the February 14, 2019 meeting. Following the public hearing, the Commission deliberated and voted 5-0 to recommend to the City Council that CTA-2018-0005 be denied. On February 28, 2019 the Planning Commission adopted Findings and Recommendation. OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed to first ordinance reading, or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council consensus to place on a future agenda for an ordinance first reading. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner, Community and Public Works Dept. ATTACHMENTS: A. PowerPoint Presentation B. Planning Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendation C. PC Meeting Minutes: 1/10/2019, 1/24/2019, 2/14/2019, and 2/28/2019 D. Staff Report CTA-2018-0005 with attachments E. Materials submitted from Applicant Pete Miller, Jan 24, 2019 CITY OF7 jUaiieyb City Council Meeting Administrative Report CTA-2018-0005 — Duplexes May 14, 2019 PROCESS aA '� - 'z Study Session Admin Report , , © January 8, 2019 ': May 14, 2019 ,. N <C N 5 : wc4o Public Hearing sc5' Ordinance 1St : z January 24, 2019 , Reading TBD o .- : c.) Findin s Fact Ordinance 2nd � � g of -; A February 28, 2019 Reading TBD o 40 4 iVr 'V liVi A A A Today Proposed SVMC Amendment - Overview 3 ❑ 19.60.050 SVMC Permitted use matrix Add "S" in the R-3 zone column — provides supplemental regulations for Duplexes Prohibits Townhomes in R-3 zone u 19.40.060 — Development Standards - Duplexes Add supplemental use language for duplexes ❑ 19.40.050 — Development Standards — Cottage Development Add supplemental use language for cottages y -kio\--,,---- Duplex Defined f - - 4 AI pt. ,1-e---7---,-_- - - ..;\ .„..._ _ „.,__,- ...:-, Duplex Definition : . , r _.-- - r_ 6,_____,________ _______.-10W-4 An attached building designed , a , ,-- 1 exclusively for occupancy by two -wilq 1 .-i .1'; ' , 11:; families, with separate entrancesfig -F- q - � and individual facilities for -� cooking, sleeping, and sanitation, _ter` but sharing a common or party f r wall or stacked. ; ; : 'Nrall • rL 7� �T - limillillillin Defined � � �Townhomei r 5 - - M I I_ Nr -� 1 , .,...,,r 1 ! n 4.,. Townhome Definition u y r ;, A single-family dwelling unit - _ = =~ `° -" " • . 1110----4 s constructed in groups of three or more attached units in which each unit extends from foundation to roof, open on at least two sides. Li Afiglil - ® _ ® IL ° I ' , f ..dam. 1 . ' i -i i i , , \ •3iYi.r� \ ... _ � _.. _ --.1:1 ' m , . ] . _ I. ]Cottages Defined ' 114- -I r I1 ALu I 16 I I ■-. === Q .� . � ' #-0A — E 3 3' li El � I ,e Cottage Definition :.- - I + - M fll '. A small single-family dwelling unit 4 3A —11 : . ''- s-•41 lip - # developed as a group of dwellingd7R. , ., , }., = units clustered around a common 02 -, i1 iv rpenlRgrt$ r ■ area pursuant to SVMC "�` o '• .i 19.40.050 : w ��1H1� r". ��-� 4+ IIIA ... -.._. ... • i n g g lir 1 II ging ik ANANAA Net- • el le Is E4 AgA� Zones That Allow Duplexes, _ i. F Cotta es and Townhomes =lid — wra M1Y It Edi�= Ave. - P_ .12 Fuc II tAve Ave ve .„.„.„,wAye c r. � f 1 ,: :Ave - �� kne-- az ladlerm Ave M`salon A - , � - Mls: . ►w a /Ammon Ave Mixed Use s - x $ ■1 ri -"'"...k. ; E AYe spy L J ;4.,c, = • • p' ; £ y' ~2 - - U�{�W'AS� s. I I rt7 Corridor Mixed Use -{ 7 ,ter Y -..t r. �� ._ - 3rd Are 4 7 -.. .7-_ am. - -_. t , th '� 1�7.. _.. _- -=10Rae • Multifamily BlhAve11 m: !� v CEs .' L Residential : it 16th c `-- ' " - _ L.sran■ L-116th Ave e�eeeeeee 1 gI a 2 , R-3, Single Family `—¢8 Residential Urban ' roposed amendment `, , Ave 1 • - duplexes, I Legend 4 Zoning Neighborhood •v .T .`_, - es and $ 7r R3 Ave -MF Commercial • • :se ev Iopment NC MU (Townhomes only) In the zone ,e cmu Proposed Amendment Add an "S": SVMC 19 . 60.050 indicates the use 8 is permitted subject to Permitted Uses Matrix supplemental use Residential Mixed use cominerci ncltistriai regulations. R-1 R-2 R-3 I MFR MU CMU • RC IMU I POS Dwelling, cottage SS S Dwelling, duplex P S P P P Dwelling, industrial accessory S S dwelling unit Delete "S"; Dwelling, multifamily p P P indicates the Dwelling, single-family P P P p p P use is [Dwelling, to'..rihauseSSSC prohibited. Manufactured home park S S Proposed Amendment SVMC Chapter 1 9.40 Alternative Residential Development Options 9 19.40.060 Development standards — Duplexes Duplexes shall meet the minimum lot size per dwelling unit, setback standards, maximum lot coverage, and building height standards shown in Table 19.70- 1 . Duplexes shall be limited to 1 duplex per acre. Duplexes shall have separate parcel numbers per each dwelling unit, be non-adjacent, across the street from or on opposite corner. Add supplemental use language for duplexes applicable to the R-3 zoning districts. What Does the Proposed Amendment Mean? _JI ,0 _ L, , _ _____ _ ki :` NUM eP _ Y �I / I _ mT r A — �' r i hili:-. .Q 1�u;; . ,ii 117.11►. r; ,,�1 uL7; 'f 01 t e, " _m ''IL m uL- I uL �i �4� , r " r " I ria F 01 / gf i i h � / ri _ is ' 4 ., ~ tl,6 1' - ,.. `,� \ p,_ , ga114 S .� 117 ;E 'I‘" 9 �..f ee f liffi„ ,, ,, 1 * ` T -' w� ` t *� Ii! mar ., + 7, — Prohibits 11 - - . rofii i s more an' n 100% dupl- Prohibits a. „a N . I es to development duplexes on 1 duplex/acre (2 allowed in this be across the street or in R-3 Zone adjacent lots on opposite corners example) Proposed Amendment SVMC Chapter 1 9.40 Alternative Residential Development Options il 19.40.050 Development standards — Cottage Development 19.40.050.0 Other 1 . Accessory dwelling units are prohibited. 2. In-whole purchase of any development by one 73. entity in the R-3 zone is prohibited. All other SVMC provisions that are applicable to a single-family dwelling unit shall be met. Add supplemental use language for cottages in R-3 zoning districts. What Does the Proposed . � _ _,,. 5 Amendment Mean to Cottage . .1; ----1., ,tIi1 Development? - _ ti dill p .i �-!� 2 it 41l Pc- . Ii 4 EII a 4 0 4 t 1 '11r 1 Prohibits a single —' �� -�� #_� �� _- J '� owner in the R - 3 ��-� ..gc ._.., aL �. _,. ..% _ j FL . .- I f �i 9m • zone .s - - ( �,�- �, i . . . . #116 7 1. •••I 4...''.. Cr iirr.onl y. I P - 'k f y..i #IC RUIIdI9 • 4 r 1 L Ad l+p� F a. 0 c * —, . 2'::•IIII a: i ...� 51 _. �.: • 111111 -• U 0 - -• , , _ . . d 1 . •„, 10 Staff Concerns 13 ❑ Reduces the number of duplexes that may be constructed; n Reduces available affordable housing units and alternative housing types; ❑ Affects anticipated development rights; ❑ Appears to prevent cottage development and eliminates Townhomes; n Difficult to implement; and Li Other legal considerations. Single Family Residential Permits Regional Trends 1 141 Spokane Spokane Comparison of Single Family Residential Permits 2013 -2018 Year Valley Spokane County 1000 900 2013 110 269 551 800 700 a. 2014 151 213 421 600 500 2015 167 312 526 400 300 2016 175 342 769 200 100 2017 129 314 816 0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2018 35 (138) 89 (256) 286(891) Spokane Valley —Spokane Spokane County (Updated 2018 Data with complete year information) Duplex Permits I Regional Trends - -m--- 15 a I Spokane Spokane Comparison of Duplex Permits Year Valley Spokane oka ne Count Y 2013-2018 160 2013 4 9 76 140 120 2014 26 5 67 100 2015 17 6 86 80 60 2016 24 6 35 40 - 20 2017 37 8 19 0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 t 2018 28 (142) 23 (28) 2 (11) Spokane Valley Spokane Spokane County (Updated 2018 Data with complete year information) Regional Trends Duplex as a percentage of permits a as Duplex percentage of total DU p p g Spokane Spokane permits Year Valley Spokane County 60.0% 2013 3.5% 3.2% 12.1 % 50.0% 40.0% 2014 14.7% 2.3% 13.7% 30.0% 2015 9.2% 1 .9% 14.1 % 20.0% 2016 12.1 % 1 .7% 4.4% 10.0% 2017 22.3% 2.5% 2.3% 0.0% ■■1-1:11 I..�® 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 (2018 50.7% 9.9% 1 .2% • Spokane Valley ■ Spokane • Spokane County Updated 2018 Data 88% �d Owner-occupied1 Id d . • 78% 86% HousingUnits as a P11e.,.y 78% 10% I 20% 18% percent of Total , 70% :---..---,=,--- — -=---------- '' ..-, /4i p 57% 64% 1696 a • its 4 � 31 {Housing Un �f 57% 64% OM 059/' 6% 61% 3596 wAPp''"sY 78°6 ),•:.,:b way E1Yd 67% Source: 2018 Census Data _ _28°, '_ ' I58°° 6°� 35% 91 54% so% 51% 66% 53% 78% i 60% 92% 92% I S. e 85% 79% 89% 93% Legend Vel 89% OwnerlTotal, % 81% a 1 a 70% 67% 9096 gi 2nd Ave 111-35 36-51 3 1 1 52-58 ° 59-64 82% Lo - 65-70 - 71-75 93% - 76-82 17 - 83-90 - 91-94 Planning Commission Recommendation ,8 ❑ Recommendation v Deny Request � Vote 5 - 0 NEXT STEP aA .� - 'z° Study Session Administrative CI 14 N •� y Januar 8, 2019 Report Z © = .� <C N May 14, 2019 Immi 41. W Li o Public Hearing eN ° : Z 4 January 24, 2019 t, Ordinance 1St a.., : ,� Reading TBD o w ct : Findings of Fact A1.4 February 14, 2019 Ordinance 2nd ° a' Reading TBD N4.11 A A Today 1 9 20 QUESTIONS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION CTA-2018-0005—Proposed Amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E)the Planning Commission shall consider the proposal and shall prepare and forward a recommendation to the City Council following the public hearing. The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. Background: 1. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, Spokane Valley adopted its 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update and updated development regulations on December 13,2016,with December 28,2016 as the effective date. 2. CTA-2018-0002 is a privately initiated code text amendment(CTA)to chapters 19.40 and 19.60 SVMC to add regulations within the R-3, Single-Family Residential Urban zone (R-3) that limit duplex development, prohibit townhomes, and preclude single ownership of a cottage development. 3. The Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on January 24, 2019 and conducted deliberations on February 14, 2019. The Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that the City Council deny the amendment. Planning Commission Findings: 1. Recommended Modifications The Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed amendments. 2. Compliance with SVMC 17.80.150(F)Approval Criteria a. Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(F)(1), the City may approve amendments if it finds that the proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive PIan. Findings: The proposed text amendment is not consistent with the following provisions of the Comprehensive Plan: Goal LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. Policy LU-P 14 Enable a variety of housing types Goal H-G 1 Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. Goal H-G2 Enable the development of affordable housing for all income levels. Policy H-P2 Adopt development regulations that expand housing choices by allowing innovative housing types including tiny homes, accessory dwelling units, pre-fabricated homes, co-housing, cottage housing, and other housing types. Policy H-P3 Support the development of affordable housing units using available financial and regulatory tools. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission CTA-2018-0005 Page 1 of 2 Policy H-P4 Enable the creation of housing for resident individuals and families needing assistance from social and human service providers. b. Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(F)(2),the City may approve amendments if it finds that the proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety,welfare and protection of the environment. Findings: The proposed amendment does not bear a substantial relation to the public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment based on the following reasons. The Applicant has not identified how the proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. The sole basis identified by the Applicant for the proposed amendment is to"mitigate excessive duplex/ ental buildout detrimental to homeowners." The proposed amendments create regulations that are in conflict with numerous goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and would create barriers to providing alternative and affordable housing options in the R-3 zone. Further, it creates unclear and difficult to implement regulations. The amendment does not bear a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment. 3. Conclusion: The proposed text amendment is not consistent with the approval criteria contained in the SVMC. 4. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends the City Council deny CTA-2018-0005. Attachments: Exhibit 1 —Proposed Amendment CTA-2018-0005 Approved this 28th day of February,2019 _ fi in Co mission 'iaiiman ATTEST 4720190_,--_244 6_014_4_1), Deanna Horton,Administrative xYssistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission CTA-2018-0045 Page 2 of 2 RECEIVE") Exhibit l - CTA-2019-0005 Proposed Amendment NOV 1 6 AII8 SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVLLCIME . 19.60.050 Permitted uses matrix. Parks and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space R- R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Agriculture and Animal Animal processing/handling _ l' Animal raising and/or keeping SS S S S S Animal shelter Beekeeping, commercial t' Beekeeping, hobby S S S Community garden S SS S S S S Greenhouse/nursery, commercial Kennel S S S S P P Orchard, tree farming, P P commercial Riding stable P P C Communication Facilities Radio/TV broadcasting studio P P P P Repeater facility P PP P P P P P Small cell deployment S SS S S S S S S S S Telecommunication wireless S SS S S S S S S S antenna array Telecommunication wireless SSS S S S S S S S support tower Tower, ham operator S SS S S S S S S S Community Services Community hall, club, or lodge P P P P P P P Church, temple, mosque, PPP P P P P P synagogue and house of worship Pa rlts and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space R-I R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS 1 Crematory P P P P Funeral home P P a r Transitional housing C Day Care Day care, adult P P P P P P P P P P , Day care, child (12 children or PPPP P P P P P P Fewer) Day care, child (13 children or CCCP P P P P P P more) Eating and Drinking P P P P P P S Establishment Education Schools, college or university P P P Schools, K through 12 PPP P P P P P Schools, professional, vocational P P P P P P and trade schools Schools, specialized T P P P P training,/studios Entertainment Adult entertainment and retail S Casino P P P Cultural facilities P P P P Exercise facility ,S S S S Off-road recreational vehicle use P P Major event entertainment P P P Racecourse P P P P Racetrack P P Recreational facility P P P P P P Parks and Mixed Open Residential tise Commercial Industrial Space - - r R- R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Theater, indoor P P 1' Group Living Assisted P P P P living/convalescent/nursing home Community residential facilities PPP P P P (6 residents or less) Community residential facilities P P P (greater than 6 and under 25 residents) Dwelling, congregate P •P P Industrial, Heavy Assembly, heavy P Hazardous waste treatment and S S storage Manufacturing. heavy P Processing, heavy I' Mining S Industrial, Light Assembly, light P P 11 P P Manufacturing, light P P P Processing, light P P Recycling facility S S S S Industrial service P P Lodging Bed and breakfast PPPP P hotel/motel P P P P S Recreational vehicle S park/campground Marijuana Uses Parks and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space R- R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC 1MU I POS Marijuana club or lounge , Marijuana cooperative , Marijuana processing SS Marijuana production S S Marijuana sales S S S t Medical 5 P P P P P Office Animal clinicfveterinary S S S S S , Office, professional P P P P P P P Parks and Open Space Cemetery P P P Golf course PPP P I' P P P Golf driving range CCCC P C P P �P Parks PPPP P P P P P Public/Quasi-Public , Community facilities PPPP P P P P P P P Essential public facilities R R R R R R R R i R Public utility local distribution SSSS S S S P P P S facility Public utility transmission facility ,S S S S S S S S S S S Tower, wind turbine support S S S S Residential Dwelling,accessory units /S S S S S S S S Dwelling, caretaker's residence S S S S S Dwelling, cottage S S S S Dwelling, duplex PS P P P Parks and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space R- R- R- I 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Dwelling, industrial accessory S S dwelling unit Dwelling, multifamily P P P Dwelling, single-family PPP P P P P Dwelling, townhouse S S S S S Manufactured home park S S Retail Sales and Service P P S I' P S S Transportation Airstrip, private P P Battery charging stations SSSP P P P I' P P S Electric vehicle infrastructure P P P P P P P I leliport P P Helistop C C P Parking facility—controlled P P P P P access Railroad yard, repair shop and P roundhouse Transit center P P P P P Vehicle Services Automobile impound yard P P Automobile/taxi rental P P P P P Automobile parts, accessories and P P I' P P tires Automobile/truck/RV/motorcycle P P P P painting, repair, body and fender works 1 Car wash P P S P P P Farm machinery sales and repair P P P Fueling station P P S P P P 19.40.060 Development standards — Duplexes. Duplexes shall be limited to 1 duplex per acre. Duplexes shall have separate parcel numbersjier each dwelling unit, be non-adjacent, across the street from or on opposite corners. Duplexes shall meet the minimum lot size per dwelling unit, setback standards, maximum lot coverage, and building height standards shown in Table 19.70-1. (Ord. 16-018 § 6 (Au. B), 2016). 19.40.050 Development standards— Cottage development. A. Site. 1.The design of a cottage development shall take into account the relationship of the site to the surrounding areas. The perimeter of the site shall be designed to minimize adverse impact of the cottage development on adjacent properties and, conversely, to minimize adverse impact of adjacent land use and development characteristics on the cottage development; 2. The maximum density shall be two times the maximum number of dwelling units allowed in the underlying zone; 3. Where feasible, each cottage that abuts a common open space shall have a primary entry and/or covered porch oriented to the common open space; 4. Buildings shall meet the following minimum setback standards: a. Twenty-foot front yard setback; b. Ten-foot rear yard setback; and c. Five-foot side yard setback; 5. Common open space is required and shall meet the following criteria: a. Four hundred square feet of common open space per cottage; b. Setbacks and private open space shall not be counted towards the common open space; c. One common open space shall be located centrally to the project with pathways connecting the common open space to the cottages and any shared garage building and community building; d, Cottages shall surround the common open space on a minimum of two sides of the open space; and e. Community buildings may be counted toward the common open space requirement; 6. One and one-half off-street parking spaces for each cottage is required. B. Building. 1. Cottages shall not exceed 900 square feet, excluding any loft or partial second story and porches. A cottage may include an attached garage, not to exceed an additional 300 square feet. 2.The building height for a cottage shall not exceed 25 feet. 3. The building height for any attached garage or shared garage building shall not exceed 20 feet. 4. Buildings shall be varied in height, size, proportionality, orientation, rooflines, doors,windows, and building materials. 5. Porches shall be required. C. Other. 1. Accessory dwelling units are prohibited. 2. In-whole purchase of any development by one entity in the R-3 zone is prohibited. 3. 2. All other SVMC provisions that are applicable to a single-family dwelling unit shall be met. D. Permit Type. Cottage development shall require approval of a conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 19 150 SVMC. E. SVMC Title 20, Subdivision Regulations. The design requirements of SVMC 20.20.090 are waived. (Ord. 16- 018 §6 (Att. B), 2016). Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall January 10,2019 L Chair Rasmussen called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners,staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Secretary Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Timothy Kelley Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Robert McKinley Chaz Bates,Economic Development Specialist Michael Phillips,absent-excused Michelle Rasmussen Robin Hutchins, Office Assistant Matt Walton Deanna Horton,Secretary to the Commission Hearing no objections, Chair Rasmussen excused Commissioner Phillips from the meeting. II. AGENDA:Commissioner Johnson moved to amend the January 10,2019 agenda. He offered to move exchange the study session for CTA-2018-0005 with the annual public records training in order to accommodate the waiting audience. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. III. 'MINUTES: Commission Secretary Deanna Horton noted there was a mistake in the October 11,2018 minutes regarding the outcome of a motion. She explained the vote on the motion for the Findings of Fact for CTA-2018-0003 needs to be corrected from five in favor and zero against,to four in favor,one against with Commissioner Rasmussen dissenting. The Findings will also be corrected to reflect this change. Commissioner Walton moved to amended the previously adopted minutes from October 11 to change the outcome of the vote on the Findings of CTA-2018-0003, The vote on this motion was six in favor, zero against, and this rrnotiorz passed Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the minutes from November 15 and December 13, 2018 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on this motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson reported he attended the Pines Grade Separation Project meeting on November 13, 2018, the City Council and the Human Rights Task Force meeting on January 8,2019. V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Senior Planner Lori Barlow reported the advanced agenda was looking to be very busy for the beginning of the year. She stated the Comprehensive Plan amendments would not be on the agenda until February, due to staff needing more time for review and evaluation of the proposals. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Election of Officers: Ms.Horton informed the Commission that according the rules of procedure, Commissioner Johnson had reached his term limit as Vice Chair and would not be able to be elected to that position again, However; Commissioner Rasmussen had only served one term as Chair. She then accepted nominations for the position of Chair of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Rasmussen and Commissioner Johnson were nominated for the position of chair and both accepted the nomination. The vote on this position was as follows: Commissioner Vote James Johnson Rasmussen Danielle Kaschmitter Rasmussen Timothy Kelley Rasmussen 2019-01-10 Planning Commission Minutes Paige 2 oro Robert McKinley Johnson Michelle Rasmussen Johnson Matt Walton Johnson With the vote ending in a tie, Commissioner Rasmussen stated she would step aside and allow Commissioner Johnson to take the chair position. Commissioner Johnson stated he would accept this proposal, Commissioner Walton and Commissioner Rasmussen were nominated for the position of vice chair. Commissioner Rasmussen declined the nomination, Commissioner Walton accepted. There was consensus from the entire Commission to accept Commissioner Walton as the vice chair for the 2019 year. Findings of Fact: CTA-2018-0004: A city-initiated amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) creating a new chapter 21,60, Centennial Business Park Planned Action Ordinance(PAO) Economic Development Specialist Chaz Bates explained the Findings of Fact reflected the process and decision the Commission had made regarding CTA-2018-0004,the Planned Action Ordinance, Centennial Business Park. Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the Findings ofFactfor CTA- 2018-0004. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed iii. Study Session: CTA-2018-0005: A privately initiated amendment to SVMC 19.60.050 Permitted Use Matrix, 19.40.060 Development Standards -- Duplexes, and 19.40.050 Development Standards—Cottage Development. Ms. Barlow gave the Commission a presentation explaining the privately initiated code text amendment CTA-2018-0005 which proposes to amend SVMC 19.60.050 Permitted Use Matrix, 19.40.060 Development Standards—Duplex, and 19.40.050 Development Standards— Cottages. She stated that all of the changes relate to the R-3 zoning district only, She continued in the Permitted Use Matrix the amendment proposes to change in the line for Duplexes from a `P' for permitted under the R-3 zoning district to an 'S' which would signify that there are additional regulations. On the line for townhomes it would strike the `P,' and make them prohibited in the R-3 zone. In SVMC 19.40.060 Development Standards— Duplexes, language would be added which states `Duplexes shall be limited to one duplex per acre. Duplexes shall have separate parcel numbers per each dwelling unit, be non-adjacent, across the street from or on opposite corner.' Ms.Barlow stated that when planners are looking at the Permitted Use Matrix and see the 'S' instead of the P they would then look to this language to see these additional regulations to govern where a duplex could be placed in a development. She said the currently duplexes are allowed in the R-3 and the multifamily zones. The proposal does not ask to change any of the other standards for a duplex. She then showed the Commission how it might look if a development were proposed to have a duplexes and where they could be placed. Commissioner Walton asked what would happen if a developer sold the lots in the plat, and someone wanted to come in and build a duplex on one of the lots,outside of the larger development. Would this be a way to get around the intent of the proposal? Ms. Barlow stated that in the past dedication language has been used but the City is reluctant to use this, because the only way to remove that language should the regulations change in the future would be through another process. There would have to be discussion internally as to how to implement the proposal should it be adopted. She hoped to look at these applications further in the staff report for the public hearing. Commissioner Kelley confirmed that it did not matter who owned the lots,it would only allow one duplex per acre. If the land was divided into four lots, and one person built a duplex, the other three would not be able to do so. Commissioner Rasmussen asked how many parcels of land this would affect. Ms. Barlow stated she did not know,but would try and work to figure it out,but it might not show what is completely under utilized. 2019-01-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4 Commissioner Walton asked if there are other jurisdictions had these same types of restrictions. Ms. Barlow said she could look to some jurisdictions lying further away from the City, however she had looked the surrounding jurisdictions and did not find any regulations built into those codes which were similar to this. Spokane County had used plats in the past to keep the density to a certain number, which they felt was not an effective way to manage density. In fact, Spokane County was changing their regulations to eliminate barriers in order to make it easier to develop duplexes,and they are increasing the density in some of their urban districts. Commissioner Rasmussen asked how the proposal affected the City's Comprehensive Plan in respect to the Growth Management Plan and capacity to handle population growth. Ms. Barlow stated in theory it should not have any effect, because our density is six units per acre, it does not matter if it is single family homes or duplexes, six structures verses three structures,the density is still six units. Ms. Barlow continued explaining the proposal looks to add language SVMC 19.40.050 (C) whole purchase of any development by one entity in the R-3 zone is prohibited.'This would prohibit a single owner from owning all of a cottage development. Commissioner Walton asked if this would apply to the cottage structure, meaning the entire area developed into cottages or would it apply to the land someone would purchase and create for development into that purpose? Would it be prohibited for a developer to come in, buy the land, develop a cottage development and then sell off the individual cottages as separate pieces? Ms.Barlow said the way the language is written it would prohibit the entire development being owned by a single entity. Someone could own the underlying land and common areas,but individuals would own the separate living structures. This would insure that the cottages would be owner occupied and not a rental community. After Commissioner Kelley tried to clarify how someone could develop a cottage development, Ms. Barlow said she would have to have more discussions with other staff members in order to try and work through this, because as it written this would prohibit a cottage development. Ms,Barlow stated the public hearing for this amendment has been scheduled for January 24,2019. iv. Annual Training:Public Records Act,Open Public Meetings,Appearance of Fairness. Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb gave the Commission and staff in attendance training on how to handle public records,the Public Records Act,public meetings,and the appearance of fairness. VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Johnson stated he would not be able to attend the January 24,2019 meeting. Commissioner Walton said he would like to reflect on the work the Commission put into CTA-2018- 0003,which was the city initiated amendment regarding open space requirements in mixed use zones. He said he felt like the Commission put in a tremendous amount of work, reflection and it reflects tremendous on this body. Especially when you consider the amount of regarding the subject,the very vague nature of the proposal that City Council submitted to us,in terms of having us look at this subject. I felt we created a very reasoned approach to not only addressing the concern Council brought to us,in the fee-in-lieu of but also in terms of helping to define for future development what mixed use really means. After reviewing the January 8, 2019 City Council video and looking at their decision to go against the Planning Commission, I am personally extremely disappointed in the direction the City Council chose to take. It disregards the hard work the Commission put in that, Each of you individually spent a lot of time, not only addressing the information we had, but in providing guidance to the planners. I just wanted to recognize that again. It is difficult not to take it personally when you have a lot of work you put into something and then have it disregarded by a different body, but in this case,I understand the direction the City Council chose to take,but I very strongly disagree with it. The entire intent of an elected body, as well as a body appointed by that elected body, is to govern on behalf of the people. In terms of what we have seen for public comment, from members of the community showing up at public meetings, and being engaged the public very clearly cares about maintaining the character of Spokane Valley. Simply saying we wish to take government out of actions so we can maintain the maximum amount of freedom, in my view is an abdication of our responsibilities to the community and to the citizens who elected the City Council,who appointed us as a Commission. While I understand the City Council had a role to play,and that role for their own individual sakes meant they 2019-01-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4 had to exercise their conscious to make a decision that went against the Planning Commission. I truly feel the Planning Commission created a legislative action for consideration by the elected individuals which would truly create a situation that was pro-growth and pro-character of Spokane Valley. It would have satisfied both sides of an ongoing and heated discussion that continues and was evident from watching the videos from January 8, 2019 and the meetings previous to that. I wanted to go on the record that I feel the City Council erred in making the decision they did and that this body made the correct determination by explaining what mixed use was and by also basically creating a scenario that allowed both residential and mixed use development while still discouraging the strictly residential that members of the City Council indicated they were not necessarily for, but then voted to affirm that particular stance. Commissioner Rasmussen thanked the Commission members for their support while she chaired the Commission in the last year. IX. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:12 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor and the motion passed. tiCeltdix fa4Anf / 21-fGr Michelle Rasmussen, Chair Date signed Ay?JC7i7V6-70 Deanna Horton,Secretary Regular Meeting Minutes Spolcane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall January 24, 2019 I. Chair Walton called the meeting to order at 6.02 p.m. H. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Secretary Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson, absent-excused Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Timothy Kelley Robert McKinley Michael Phillips, absent -excused Michelle Rasmussen Robin Hutchins, Office Assistant Matt Walton Deanna Horton, Secretary to the Commission Hearing no objections,Commissioners Johnson and Phillips were excused from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Rasmussen moved to approve the January 24, 2019 agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Rasmussen moved to approve the meeting minutes from January 10, 2019 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on this motion was five in favor, zero against and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: The Commissioners had nothing to report. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no administrative report. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda. Bob West, 1917 E Indiana Avenue:Mr.West spoke on the topic of building and development in the City and how extensive it has become. He feels as though the City's neighborhoods are losing their integrity. Mr. West went on to explain that he understands building is important and is good for the vitality of the City, however he expressed that the citizens of the valley have a lot of questions. Mr. West suggested implementing a dialog forum with members of the community to include members of the Planning Commission, Home Owners.Association or a City Council member to answer specifics questions the community might have. Mr. West also suggested employing an ombudsman for the City to help answer and direct the citizens with any questions they might have. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS i. Public Hearing: CTA-2018-0005, a privately initiated amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.40.050, 19.40.060 and 19.60.050, proposing changes to duplex and townhome development standards. Senior Planner Lori Barlow explained to the Planning Commission the proposed privately initiated amendment would modify SVMC 19.40.050, Development Standards--Cottage 2019-01-24 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of8 Development, 19.40.060, Development Standards — Duplexes and 19.60.050, Permitted Use Matrix. Ms. Barlow gave a presentation detailing the proposed amendment process and explained that staff has reviewed the application for environmental impact. A determination of non-significance was issued on December 28, 2018 and notice of public hearing was mailed on January 4,2019. Ms. Barlow clarified that this proposal is not site specific and has broad implications to every property that would fall within the R-3 zoning district, therefore site-specific notification requirements did not apply. In this case, notifications were published in the newspaper and posted on the City's website and at various locations throughout the City. This was to give a reasonable opportunity of awareness that the amendment was being considered. Ms. Barlow continued that the Commission conducted a study session of this proposal January 10,2019. Ms. Barlow added that the purpose of the public hearing is to consider public comment,ultimately resulting in a recommendation to be forwarded to the City Council for consideration through their review process, which would include public comment. Once a recommendation is made by the Planning Commission, it would be formalized in the Findings of Fact and that date is yet to be determined. Ms. Barlow continued, the proposal's intent is to modify the regulations applicable to duplexes, cottage developments and townhomes in the R-3 zoning district only, and will affect three sections of the City's municipal code. Ms. Barlow described that this amendment will add additional supplemental use language for both duplexes and cottage developments and will remove townhomes as a permitted use in the R-3 zone. Ms. Barlow continued that this proposal would change the Permitted Use Matrix SVMC 19.60.050 by changing Duplex in R-3 from a P (permitted)to an S indicating"additional" supplemental use regulations. This proposal would also change the Townhome matrix by deleting the S, subject to supplemental use regulations, indicating the use would be prohibited entirely in the R-3 zone. Ms. Barlow summarized that the current language for duplexes SVMC 19.40.060 defines that duplexes meet minimum lot sizes per unit, setback standards, maximum lot coverage and building height standards per Table 19.70-1. Ms. Barlow added that this proposal contained three significant components. The first component is in SVMC 19.40.060 is 'Duplexes should be limited to one duplex per acre.' Ms. Barlow noted that this language is not suggesting that each duplex have a one-acre lot but rather suggests that duplexes only be allowed at a density of one duplex per acre. The second component is in SVMC 19.40.050 is, 'Duplexes shall have separate parcel numbers per each dwelling unit.' Staff believes the intent is to allow each unit to be sold separately. The third component is to SVMC 19.40.060 is `Duplexes have to be non-adjacent, have to be across the street from or on opposite corners. ' Ms.Barlow explained that this would ultimately prevent duplexes from being located near each other in a development if more than one is permitted. Ms. Barlow illustrated that Table 19.70-1 indicates the density and dimensional standards in the R-3 zones, which include front, side and rear yard setbacks with the maximum density of six dwelling units per acre and a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet per dwelling unit. Pursuant to the code duplexes, which have two dwelling units, are required to have a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Ms. Barlow stated the existing regulations for cottage developments in SVMC 19.40.050 requires a variety of conditions that include design features and architectural standards, open space requirements, etc. Ms. Barlow advised this amendment proposes to add a one- line statement to SVMC 19.40.050 (C) Other: `In-whole purchase of any development by one entity in the .R-3 zone is prohibited.' Ms. Barlow stated staff's interpretation of the proposal is to prevent the development of 100% rental communities. In order to meet the 2019-01-24 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of S requirements of this proposal, there would have to be more than one developer at any one point in time, either during development or once developed. In conclusion,Ms.Barlow stated staff has concerns regarding the proposal. Staff reviewed the proposal in considerable detail. If adopted the proposal would reduce the number of duplexes that could be constructed,in turn reducing available affordable housing units and alternative housing types. Ms. Barlow added it was unclear how this could affect development rights. She said it is uncertain how difficult this could be to implement, as there are a variety of legal considerations. She stated that ultimately through review and analysis it staff concluded that the proposal was not consistent with the Goals and Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Barlow highlighted procedural recommendations and urged the Commission to consider the public comments provided. Ms. Barlow added that if a recommendation of approval is desired, staff requests the Planning Commissioners provide specific direction as to how to rewrite the proposal malting it implementable to alleviate staff's concerns. Chair Walton asked the Commission if they had any questions, hearing none the public hearing was opened at 6:27 PM. Commissioner Walton asked Ms.Horton to read the rules of the public hearing. Peter Miller, 18214 E Mission Avenue: Ms. Miller provided the Commissioners with a packet for review. Ms. Miller explained that she had given her testimony on January 10' 2019,and this testimony was for clarification on the matter. Ms. Miller went on to explain that the Valley Herald had an article regarding lessening the density per acre and this proposal is to lessen the density of complete duplex developments in the R-3 zone. Ms. Miller added that this proposal does not change the density or effect the Growth Management Act at all. Ms. Miller stated that there were some items in the presentation that she would like to correct. Ms. Miller advised that: NO,the applicants do not want duplexes across the street from each other. NO, they do not want duplexes on opposite corners or adjacent to one another. YES,their proposal does prohibit 100%duplex development in the R-3 zone. Ms. Miller continued that YES,the intent was that each side of the duplex have separate parcel nmbers. She explained the intent was to allow a responsible homeowner to protect their property from excess rentals. Ms. Miller stated they would like to see duplexes spread-out throughout the developments or moved to multifamily zones where they belong. Ms. Miller stated she felt public notices should state a property is being developed into duplexes,not as single family homes. She stated this is why neighbors don't know what's being built, and why they are angry about it., The notice will state how many residential lots. She continued her argument by asking, is a residential home single family or is it a duplex? Ms. Miller continued that the notices in the Valley Herald state lots larger than 10,000 square feet will allow single family homes. The citizens are tasked with researching to find out if the developments are duplexes or not. Ms. Miller argued that is not neighborhood character. Ms. Miller stated that two of duplex developments she in her area have been purchased by out of state investors,which is disheartening and makes everyone angry. Ms. Miller hopes that the Planning Commission sees fit to recommend the changes or some version thereof. Ms.Miller concluded she felt the recommendation should include a moratorium until these issues can be mitigated and the City Council can make a responsible decision. William McDonald, 17412 IC Mission Avenue: Mr. McDonald stated that three or four year ago there were a dozen duplexes built near his property.They are tightly packed.Each has four vehicles per duplex and 12 duplexes means 48 cars in a two-block space. Mr. 2019-01-24 Maiming Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 McDonald added that in his neighborhood there are apartment complexes and thousands rental units west of Flora on Indiana. With these apartments and duplexes, traffic has increased exponentially and has created an unreasonable population to square mile density in the area. Mr. McDonald stated that adding new rental duplexes to owner occupied properties will continue to decrease property value and increase population density and will further exacerbate the traffic flow. Mr.McDonald related some incidents that have occurred on his property since the duplexes were built such as, children shooting at his horses with pellet guns and bikes thrown into his pasture. Mr. McDonald stated in addition to the duplexes reducing property values this is in direct conflict with the City's increase property taxes. Mr. McDonald continued that every year the City increases his property value and his taxes even though the real story is his property value is going down due to the abundance of duplexes around him. Mr. McDonald added that these duplexes may be kept up for a few years but will eventually deteriorate due to lack of care and maintenance and occupant indifference as people that own the land care about the land. Barb Howard,' City of Spokane Valley: Ms. Howard asked what happened to the integrity of the valley. Ms. Howard asked that the Commissioners take a drive around in her neighborhood or on East Ridge. She went on to say that all of the homes on East Ridge are duplexes where the land was once agricultural. Ms. Howard argued that duplexes are not single family and that a single family home is a standalone home build for one family. She said the definition of multifamily is multiple units owned by one or more parties. Ms. Howard stated that no one is notified of short plats and people have to find out in the paper, complaining that staff has explained to her that there are noticing requirements for short plats. She explained that she understands the Commissioners are volunteers and asked them again to drive around. She added that there are traffic problems if there are train accidents due to the congestion. Ms.Howard ended by asking for an explanation how Son Rise Mobile Home Estates can be one part industrial and in the middle be multifamily? Bob West, 1917 E Indiana Avenue: Mr. West thanked the Commissioners for the work they do adding that they have a thankless job as it's tough deciphering codes and educating the public and that he greatly appreciates their work. Mr. West thanked Senior Planner Lori Barlow and Deputy City Attorney Eric Lamb for the information put together as the brief presentation given was educational. Mr. West stated for the sake of transparency to expand communication as part of recommendations and again suggested an open forum to explain the implications of this amendment and to answer questions from the community. Mr.West felt it would ease tension by giving the community a chance to interface with the Commission and would be appreciated. Barb Howard, City of Spokane Valley: Ms. Howard expressed that she keeps hearing about affordable housing and it infuriates her. Ms. Howard stated her mortgage payment is $318.00 a month. She continued that she sees rentals advertised for $1,700.00 a month to include first and last month's rent, cleaning and pet deposits. Ms. Howard argued that is a down payment on a house. John Patrouch, 18009 E Riverway Avenue: Mr. Patrouch commented on how well done the staff report was and thanked Senior Planner Lori Barlow for her work. Mr. Patrouch addressed the number of duplexes frequently noted at public meetings adding that common statements are decreased property value, damage to existing neighborhood character, and general impact of the increasing number of rentals. Mr.Patrouch stated he has experienced some issues himself on his property with a motorcyclist, and homeless groups that had to be evacuated, clarifying that before the apartments were build he didn't have any of these issues. Mr. Patrouch continued that the City has eliminated open space and has increased 2019-01-24 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 8 density of developments making no room for people to play and he is seeing an impact in his area. The neighborhood feels strongly that single-family homeownership is important and City policies on housing and open space requirements do not maintain the character of our neighborhoods. Mr, Patrouch articulated his view of the proposed amendment by North Greenacres as eliminating the rental areas in a single-family housing zone. Mr. Patrouch stated he works with a number of young individuals that are having a hard time affording housing. He expressed there has to be a way to reduce the entry-level costs into the market but does not feel adding rental duplexes as the solution. Mr. Patrouch stated he is in support of regulations that limit rentals in single-family residential zones and suggested that implementing another zoning category would be more appropriate or splitting up the R-3 zones to help protect single-family homes. Mr. Patrouch discussed the Comprehensive Plan and its language regarding maintaining a strong quality of life, enhancing local identity, developing unique neighborhood character, encourage small business to include mixed used and greater density of housing in certain areas and that the quality must be preserved. Mr. Patrouch agrees this to be true and feels that this is a community problem that needs to be resolved. Pete Miller, 18124 E Mission Avenue: Ms. Miller advised she missed information regarding colt age developments SVMC 19.40.50. Ms. Miller added that this amendment was not intended to prohibit a single developer from purchasing the property. Ms. Miller stated the purpose was to prevent a single purchaser as in Spokane Plex from buying the whole property for rental purposes. Ms. Miller added that there are options Iike moving the duplexes to multifamily. Ms. Miller added that if someone purchases property in the R-3 zone for development,they need to give site-specific notice so everyone knows exactly what is going on. Vadim Smelik, 15011 E Mission Avenue: Mr. Smelik advised he would like to provide perspective from a different generation. Mr. Smelik asked the Commission to look at the adverse effect the changes would have on lower or median income homebuyers, or individuals looking for a place to live as this change reduced availability. Mr. Smelik stated reducing the number of units would effect developers, purchasers and those trying to move to Spokane from California or out of state who need a place to live but cannot afford a home right away. Mr. Smelik stated reducing the number of unit's available increases the prices. He also argued that housing prices are not falling. He works in real estate and he has only seen prices rise in the last five years, Mr. Smelik added that these zoning changes feel like isolationists or individuals that do not want infill, or certain type of income or individuals moving in near them. Mr. Smelik stated Spokane Valley is growing and his generation wants affordable housing and different housing types from which to choose. Mr. Smelik advised there are multitudes of individuals that do not want to own a home because they see no financial benefit, property taxes, interest paid or unforeseen maintenance issues. Spokane Home Builders Association: Commission Secretary Deanna Horton stated for the record, that each commission member received a copy of a letter from the Spokane Home Builders Association. Ms.Horton explained this letter describes their opinion of the proposal and includes all backup documentation for consideration. Chair Walton asked for any objections from the commission,hearing none it was approved. Bill McDonald, City of Spokane Valley: Mr. McDonald added that individuals coming from California are not going to have difficulty affording housing here. Mr. McDonald spoke about an article in the Spokesmen regarding the over building in Seattle with an 2019-01-24 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 8 overabundance of rental properties that is driving the rental prices. Mr. McDonald continued if the City keeps building the way it is,we will have the same problem. Commissioner Walton asked for any further public comment and heard none. Commissioner Walton closed public testimony at 6::59 p.m, Commissioner Kelly asked Ms. Barlow if there are numbers of expected new residents moving into the City, he was aware the City of Spokane is expecting 2,000 new residents. Ms. Barlow advised the City does not have those totals, Ms. Barlow explained that staff relies on the Comprehensive Plan population forecast which is based on formulas stemmed from population allocations from the Spokane County. Ms. Barlow believed the City's forecasted population increase is around 14, 000 people for the 20-year planning period. Ms. Barlow continued that staff uses this number when they forecast how much land needs to be preserved for residential development and further utilizes the census population per household to determine capacity. Commissioner Kelley asked if the City has employment numbers for any of the new industrial complexes coming to the City to help determine the growth and the answer was no. Ms. Barlow advised that the Economic Development division routinely keeps a record of anticipated projects. Commissioner Kelley asked if staff could find the number of expected employees from those anticipated employers. Ms. Barlow advised she would consult with Economic Development to determine what they might have. Commissioner Rasmussen advised she would like additional information regarding the projections for housing due to density issues and Growth Management Act implications. Commissioner Rasmussen asked Ms, Barlow if there is a way of determining what impact there would be to the Comprehensive Plan necessitating housing diversity if changing the R-3 zone and reducing the number of lots were implemented. Ms. Barlow answered, in short, that there would be no impact. Ms. Barlow continued with an explanation that the City's minimum lot size for single-family residences is the same for the individual units within a duplex. Ms. Barlow gave an example that if an individual met the minimum standards allowed and built two single-family homes they could do so on two 5,000 square foot lots, which would equal 10,000 square feet. Likewise, if they wanted to build one duplex the minimum lot size would be 10,000 square feet and this would have no impact on the land capacity analysis. Ms. Barlow continued with, the assumption is that the development community would not absorb any extra land, instead of having three duplexes they would have one duplex equaling two units and would in turn be building four single family homes, the density would be maxed out. Ms. Barlow gave examples on how other jurisdictions allow duplexes based on smaller minimum lot sizes. Ms. Barlow spoke about the effects on density, if this were to change it would not allow someone to develop all of the lots to the minimum standards. It forces the developer to develop some lots larger than the 5,000 square foot minimum in order to meet the density. Ms. Barlow stated that in conclusion, lots would be developed uniformly as single family and would not affect our land use capacity in terms of meeting our population projections during this planning period. Commissioner Walton asked what the implications would be to converting single family homes to duplexes. Secondly, he asked if the City tracks the number of privately owned homes verses rental properties as derived from public comment it appeared that one type of housing unit leans toward home ownership than it does rental properties. Ms. Barlow explained that the City does not have rental verses privately owned data available. Ms. Barlow applauded the applicants for banding together and writing the amendment in detail. Ms. Barlow suggested that if the Planning Commission finds merit 2019-01-24 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 8 in the proposal there would be work to be done because at this point it is unclear how to implement the intent and/or a regulation regarding redeveloping or dividing a home. Commissioner Walton asked how would this regulation require transfer giving an example that if a developer purchased a plot of land intending to build cottages and wanted to retain ownership of the development and eventually want to rent it. How would the City enforce the sale or "taking of land"? Deputy City Attorney Eric Lamb explained that City's code provides for enforcement of any violation of any development code. As in any case, there would have to be an administrative determination that there was a violation. This proposal does not spell out what needs to happen, other than one-half of a duplex would need to change ownership in order to come into compliance with the law.Mr. Lamb added that the proposed language concerns highlighted by Ms. Barlow, and acknowledged by the applicant during public testimony,would need to be modified to better align with the intent if there is a desire to move forward. Mr. Lamb cautioned the Commissioners that there have been cases throughout the United States identifying concerns with regulations based on personal status rather than land use impacts.He continued there could be potential issues due to a clause in both the Washington State and US Constitution that protect against arbitrary decisions or unreasonable regulations. Commissioner Walton stated there is enough uncertainty and interest due to interpretation and testimony to have a second look, he would appreciate additional time and input from staff. Commissioner McKinley asked for some guidance on how to clarify the language to make this more implementable and enforceable. Mr. Lamb suggested the Commission deliberate and arrive at a decision regarding ideas they agree or disagree with in order to reach a concept. Mr. Lamb advised the Commission consider the information from the applicant and from public testimony. If the Commission decided to move the proposal forward,once a concept were determined, staff would be better served assisting with recommendations with the direction of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Rasmussen moved to continue the public hearing to the next meeting for further input. Commissioner Rasmussen added it would be beneficial to have additional commissioners input. The Commission was reminded the motion needed to be date specific. Commissioner Rasmussen amended the motion to continue the public hearing to a date specific February 14, 2019, there no discussion. The vote on the amendment was five in favor zero opposed, the amendment passed. The vote on the amended motion was five in favor, zero against and the amended motion passed. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Kaschmitter thanked the public for their comments. Commissioner McKinley thanked the public for their comments and thanked Pete Miller for her work on the proposal and comments. Commissioner Walton thanked the public for their input. He encouraged those in attendance to sign up for the email distribution lists for the Planning Commission and City Council meetings. He noted this is your voice; we are your deliberative body,which makes recommendations to the City Council.He added it is important to let their voice be heard, whether the Planning Commission makes a recommendation or the City Council takes an action, such as eliminating green space requirements in some of the zones for further development. Commissioner Walton described that was a close vote, four in favor and three opposed and let the council know if something doesn't agree with what you are looking for. That is how we communicate as a public. That is the only way we know that we are upholding your views and opinions. 2019-01-24 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 8 ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Rasmussen moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:26 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor and the motion passed. *it to Matt Walton, Vice-Chair Date signed -)d4y Robin Hutchins, Secretary Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers--City Ball February 14,2019 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 5:59 p.m. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Office Assistant Robin Hutchins took roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Timothy Kelley arrived late at 6:01 p.m. Karen Kendall,Planner Robert McKinley Martin Palaniuk,Planner Michael Phillips, absent- excused Colin Quinn-Hurts, Planner Michelle Rasmussen, absent-excused Robin Hutchins, Office Assistant Matt Walton Deanna Horton, Secretary to the Commission Hearing no objections, Commissioners Rasmussen and Phillips were excused from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the February 14, 2019 agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the meeting minutes from January 24, 2019 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on this motion was five in favor, zero against and the motion passed VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson thanked Secretary Horton for going above and beyond in providing him the materials he needed in preparation for the meeting due to his absence. Commissioner Johnson advised he attended the City Council meeting February 5, 2019 regarding the Planned Action Ordinance for the Centennial Business Park that the Commission forwarded. The Council unanimously moved the item forward for a second reading and Chair Johnson congratulated the Commission on their work. He added that he attended a lecture put on by YWCA at Gonzaga and the speaker was Jackson Cats, PHD "What does it mean to be a strong Man". The lecture was regarding gender equality and was eye opening. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Senior Planner Lori Barlow had nothing to report,but commented that she would update the advanced agenda prior to the next meeting. VIII. P UBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda. Barb Howard, City of Spokane Valley: Ms. Howard advised that her public comment from the January 24, 2019 meeting was not accurately reflected in the minutes. She stated her comment regarding East Rich was mistaken to be East Ridge. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: • 02-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 10 1. Deliberations: CTA 2018-0005, a privately initiated amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.40.050, 19.40.060 and 19.060.050, proposing changes to duplex and townhome development standards. Senior Planner Lori Barlow summarized that the amendment would modify the Permitted Use Matrix in SVMC 19.60.050. This amendment would change the Matrix to add supplemental regulations to the requirements for duplexes and would eliminate townhomes in the R-3 zone. This would also add supplemental regulations restricting duplexes to one duplex per acre,they would be required to be on separate lots with separate parcel numbers. This amendment would also add regulations dictating duplex location and proximity to each other. Lastly, this would modify Cottage Development standards by requiring that the development have more than one owner. Ms. Barlow explained that the Commissioners asked if the City had employment projections or information relative to rental verses owner occupied housing at the previous meeting. Ms. Barlow noted that she was unable to identify employment projections for the City, but she was able to collect data from the 2018 census regarding owner occupied housing units. Ms. Barlow provided a map depicting housing units at the Census tract level identifying the percentage of homes that are owner occupied within each tract. Ms.Barlow explained the Census counts each dwelling unit as well as each single family home highlighting that anything considered to be a"dwelling unit"was captured. For example, each unit within a multi-family complex is a unit that would be counted. Ms. Barlow concluded that the closer the areas are to corridors or the freeway the higher the rental rates,moving further south and east of the City the owner occupied rate increases in those lower density zones. Commissioner Kelly requested clarification asking if the percentages listed are owner occupied or rentals. Ms. Barlow explained the percentages reflect owner occupied homes. Commissioner Kelly asked how the map depicts rentals. Ms. Barlow explained that the census identified these percentages by counting everything (single family, duplexes, apartments,manufactured homes, etc.)that constitutes a dwelling unit. Continuing that some of the tracts have very dense single family residential neighborhoods, but also have a high number of apartment complexes. When these land uses are combined in the tract, the results are skewed by the high number of apartments within the complexes. The rentals are concentrated in one area; while if you look closer in the neighborhood the single family areas have a very high percentage of owner occupied homes. Commissioner Johnson stated he was surprised to see 84 %rental occupied units east of Pines Road and south of the freeway. Ms. Barlow advised that the area in question has 900 housing units and 148 of them are owner occupied. Commissioner Walton asked if the City has any current applications for new duplexes or townhomes pending. Ms. Barlow stated she does not have information on current construction permits. Information on the number of platted lots or plats under review could be compiled, but it's problematic due to the length of time that it may take a developer to record a plat following preliminary review. She continued to explain the three step process for approving a plat She concluded that it is difficult to know how many lots may be developed with duplexes versus how many lots are large enough to allow a duplex. Commissioner Johnson asked about a letter received in the packet from Leonard and Nancy Percell, stating there was no date stamp on the letter and asked when it was received. Ms. Barlow explained the letter was forwarded to the City via an email from Ms. Pete Miller who was aware that it was not provided to us in time for the public 02-14-2019 Planning Conunission Minutes Page 3 of 10 hearing. After discussion with the Iegal department it was determined it could be provided for consideration as the public hearing was still open. Commissioner Johnson asked for clarification on the number of duplexes that would be reduced. Ms. Barlow explained that table three of the staff report captures how many duplexes would be allowed under the current regulations verses how many duplexes would be allowed if this code text amendment were to be passed. Ms. Barlow explained that should you have a lot size of 10,000 to 15,000 square feet you would be allowed one duplex under the current regulations. She continued that the code text amendment as proposed insinuates you would have to have at least one acre of land and would not allow any duplex development on 10,000 to 15,000 square feet. Commissioner Johnson clarified that the 161 vacant lots that were 15,000 to 39,930 square feet would allow one to three duplexes or two to six dwelling units under the current code. Commissioner Johnson stated that under the proposed amendment up to one duplex could be developed, and that was agreed upon by Ms. Barlow. Commissioner Johnson stated that the amendment could potentially impact up to 600 dwelling units. Ms. Barlow concluded that this amendment does not affect our land capacity analysis to due underlying minimum lot size being the same for a single family dwelling as it is a duplex. Commissioner Johnson asked about developmental rights. Deputy City Attorney Eric Lamb explained that the City regulates land use and restrict rights through zoning. Mr. Lamb added that the duplex portion of this proposed regulation limits the number of duplexes,but does•not necessarily limit the number of dwelling units in total. The applicant would not be prohibited from constructing and using the land for residential purposes with the same number of dwelling units. Mr. Lamb added it may be cheaper to build duplex dwelling units, and the developer may see a different return on investment but no total loss of units allowed would occur and thus no substantial injury incurred. Mr. Lamb added that from a taking standpoint staff isn't overly concerned, but it is something to consider. Ms. Barlow concluded that if the Planning Commission recommendation is for approval, staff requests the Planning Commissioners provide specific direction as to how to rewrite the proposal making it implementable to alleviate staff's concerns. Commissioner Johnson asked about a concern heard during public comment regarding the feasibility of cottages as a viable development. Ms. Barlow explained that if this were to be implemented as written, cottage development may not be allowed. Commissioner Walton stated his concern was intent verses interpretation regarding owners selling after development and if they would be in violation. Mr. Lamb added the City does not regulate who purchases a property, since that is a private transaction between two parties. Mr. Lamb added that if the application indicated multiple owners the City would have no recourse. Commissioner Walton asked if the City has determined an interpretation on converting a single family to a duplex and how that would be regulated or impacted and the answer was no. There was discussion regarding a dwelling that could be developed as duplex and the permit review process to determine if it can be done. Ms. Barlow added that for the record the addition of accessory dwelling units(ADU) is different than converting a home to a duplex. This happens frequently and the ADU does not require a 5,000 square feet lot per dwelling unit. Hearing no further questions Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 6:40 PM During deliberation Commissioner Kelley stated the testimony from public comment was excellent and understands their passion; however,he cannot see how to implement this as presented. Commissioner McKinley added he agreed with Commissioner Kelley and had 02-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 10 nothing further. Commissioner Kaschmitter stated that she understands the desire to protect the neighborhood character and the traffic concerns,but did not feel the proposal to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. She added she is concerned with the availability of affordable housing and is not in favor. Commissioner Walton expressed his worry in trying to find a solution to the problem. He noted he has seen the uptick in apartments and duplexes. Commissioner Walton stated he understands the community character is changing and gave the elimination of the open space requirement in the Mixed Use zones as an example He finds it concerning to see a more urbanized Valley. He continued with his concerns regarding the language and how difficult it would be to achieve while keeping in line with the Comprehensive Plan and concluded that he could not support this proposal as presented. Commissioner Johnson stated he understands the feelings surrounding the quality of life as he grew up here and gave examples of his childhood. Commissioner Johnson asked what the Valley would look like if it had been decided back then that they didn't want growth. He added that change happens. He applauded the applicants for their work on the amendment and effort to impact change in a positive manner. He went to state,that as a government entity we have to consider the common good and the common good does not necessarily mean what is best for a few. He went onto explain that he agrees that owner occupied is much more desirable environment and encourages more investment into the community. Commissioner Johnson felt if there was a moratorium on development of duplexes there could be litigation. He concluded that he could not support this proposal. Commissioner Kelley moved to recommend denial of CTA 2018-0005. Commissioner Walton stated there is still opportunity for residents to engage moving forward and encouraged citizens that have concerns to come forward to the City Council or member of the Commission to voice their opinions. The vote on the motion was five in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. ii. Study Session: Proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Ms. Barlow gave some background and introduced the 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. Ms. Barlow explained that the deadline for applications was October 31, 2018 at which time the City had received three privately initiated and seven City initiated Comprehensive Plan amendments. The City Council approved the docket on November 20,2018 and the City began notification requirements and review. Ms. Barlow advised the Commission will conduct the study session and that the public hearing is scheduled February 28, 2019 with deliberations to be held on March 14, 2019. Ms. Barlow highlighted procedural recommendations and urged the Commission to consider the information provided and public comments. She noted that public comment had not been closed and the Commission would receive additional comments up to the public hearing. Commissioner Johnson confirmed that these proposals will be addressed individually but will be forwarded to the Council as a group. Ms. Barlow explained that yes, during the public hearing stage each proposal would be discussed individually to allow for ease of public comment. Each item will be addressed individually by the Commission and can be modified, approved or denied. Finally,the recommendations will be forwarded to the council as a complete package. Mr. Lamb added that the law requires these items to be considered collectively to ensure that the impacts are considered cumulatively. 02-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 10 a. CPA-2019-0004: A City Initiated Amendment to update implementation strategies to remove completed strategies, update timelines, and add new strategies consistent with the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Barlow introduced Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2019-0004. Ms. Barlow explained that this will modify some strategies in Chapter 2 to refresh some language and bring it into sync with the City's objectives. This will remove strategies that have been completed,update timelines and modify with new information. Ms. Barlow gave an example of strategies to remove such as pursuing funding for the Barker Grade separation since the money has been procured and the City is moving forward. b. CPA-2019-0006:A City Initiated Amendment to Annexation and policy additions. Ms. Barlow introduced Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2019-0006, Ms. Barlow explained that this amendment would be to modify the existing annexation policies and add one additional policy. The proposed amendment would require the City to develop criteria for processing annexation requests and would develop framework for regulations in the future. This amendment would also identify land use designations in our unincorporated urban growth area. Lastly, a policy would be modified to include that the City looks at fiscal impacts to utilities when considering annexation. c. CPA-2019-0008 A City Initiated Amendment to create a new map appendix of the most recently adopted maps. Ms. Barlow introduced Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2019-0008. Ms. Barlow explained that this introduces a new map appendix to the Comprehensive Plan. The maps are not new to the City but the appendix is new to the Comprehensive Plan. The appendix will capture the maps and attached them to the Comprehensive Plan making them more accessible to the public at a manageable size. d. CPA-2019-0005 A City Initiated Amendment to update pedestrian and bicycle component of the Transportation Element and related goals and policies. Transportation Planner Colin Quinn-Hurst introduced Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2019-0004. Mr. Quinn-Hurst explained that this amendment updates the pedestrian and bicycle components in completing the pathway and trail network. This will add language to support consideration of Complete Streets. Mr. Quinn-Hurst explained that the bicycle and pedestrian plan was first established in 2011 and the updates will revise the components to reflect changes in the network based on current conditions and practicalities. The 2011 recommendations included a network of 156 miles of sidewalk, 38 miles of bike lanes and 28 miles of new pathways. Mr. Quinn-Hurts explained that with 156 miles at$600.00 per foot for a new side walk the cost is a substantial amount of money adding up to half a billion and decades of time. Mr. Quinn-Hurst stated the City conducted a public involvement process that included attending community events and an online survey. Through the survey it was determined that the top priority for improvements was a completed sidewalk system the second priority was good pavement, and third priority was pathway and bikeway improvements followed by crosswalks. The City administered a technical evaluation looking at crashes and safety, congestion and travel patterns,to find"hot spots"where improvements would have the largest impact and fit in line with public 02-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of[0 comment. In conclusion adding text to Chapter 5 would outline these priorities, add language to support the goal of connecting the pathway network by linking the Appleway Trail to the Centennial Trail. Lastly this amendment would add language supporting eventual consideration of a Complete Streets ordinance to leverage existing funding. e. CPA-2019-0007 A City Initiated Amendment to update Figures 26, 27 and 46 to reflect changes and amendments to pedestrian and bicycle facility recommendations. Mr. Quinn-Hurst introduced Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2019-0007. Mr. Quinn -Hurst advised this proposal is to update the Sidewalk,Bicycle and School District Maps to reflect completed projects and updated networks. f. CPA-2019-00010 A City Initiated Amendment create a new appendix of transportation projects for a 20-year period that is informed by existing studies. Mr. Quinn-Hurst introduced Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2019-0010. Mr. Quinn-Hurst advised this amendment will create an appendix showing a list of 20- year transportation projects. This will be regularly updated as a resource for vetting and developing our transportation projects to make them eligible for grant opportunities Commissioner Kelley asked about the implementation of a sidewalk in R-3 residential zones on private property and how the setbacks are addressed with the homeowner. Mr. Quinn-Hurts advised that is one of the largest challenges of constructing sidewallc as property owners often have landscaping in the City right-of- way. It was discussed that the City has the authority to construct the improvement within public right-of-way and that the City pays for all sidewalk improvements when it is a City initiated project. The resident has no cost to them. g. CPA-2019-00001:A Privately Initiated Amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial(I) to Single Family Residential (SFR) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial(I) to Single Family Residential Urban(R-3). Planner Karen Kendall introduced CPA-2019-0001 a privately initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment, located 300 feet south of the intersection of Park Road and Broadway Avenue. This site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from industrial (I) to Single Family Residential (SFR) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial (I)to Single Family. Ms. Kendall went on to explain the potential incompatibility of rezoning the site to R- 3 from Industrial as it would reduce the allowable uses from a broad range of industrial uses to single family, duplex, cottages,townhomes, daycares, school and church uses. The R-3 zone would allow six dwelling units per acre and up to 12 units per acre with. cottage development. Changing the land use designation and zoning of the subject parcel will impact adjacent industrial properties as future development will be subject to transitional regulations, limiting ability for full site development. The transitional standards include greater setbacks, screening requirements and various other restrictions. Ms. Kendall explained that if approved,the transitional regulations would apply to any new development on the four parcels adjacent to the subject parcel located 02-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 10 to the west and south. Ms. Kendall went on to explain that two of the surrounding parcels have recent activity. One parcel has an active building permit and the other has gone through a pre-application meeting-both for industrial development. Commissioner Kelley asked questions regarding adding borders to residential and industrial properties and how this would affect the size of each parcel. Ms. Kendall explained that yes that would be the case, if this were to be changed to R-3 zoning it would impact the future development of the four adjacent parcels as the land surrounding the properties would become larger reducing the size of the existing. She referred to the graphic highlighting the areas affected by the transitional regulation. Commissioner Johnson asked for confirmation that one of the current parcels has development occurring. Ms. Kendall explained, one property has an active building permit and the other has completed a preliminary application meeting inquiring what they can develop on the property. The site does not have an active permit, however they are contemplating development. Ms. Kendall concluded the proposed amendment is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Walton confirmed that if this were to pass this change would isolate two parcels from the industrial zone bordering north Park Road. Commissioner Walton asked how this change would impact existing use of surrounding property's? Ms. Kendall advised the property would remain the same. If the amendment were to be approved and if the property owners choose to redeveloped the property to a nonresidential use in the future, they would have to comply with the transitional regulations. h. CPA-2019-0002: A Privately Initiated Amendment 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) Planner Marty Palaniuk presented CPA-2019-0002, explaining this is a privately initiated amendment 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). Mr. Palaniuk stated that the property is located at 8th Avenue and Sullivan Road. 8th Avenue is a minor arterial, and Sullivan Road is a principal arterial with approximately 20,000 vehicle trips per day. This is directly across the street from Central Valley High School which creates significant traffic. North of the high school there has been substantial multifamily developments creating significant density. Mr. Palaniuk stated that this site consists of two properties, one owned by the Genesis Church and one residence. There is an irrigation district located to the west of the property and a Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) easement. The easement encumbers both of the properties along the east boundary and does create some issues. Mr. Palaniuk explained the Comprehensive Plan land use designation for these properties is to have single family residential units. If approved this would change the land use designation to Neighborhood Commercial intended to provide neighborhood scaled commercial developments to serve the neighborhoods. Mr. Palaniuk explained the current zoning of R-3 limits the uses, changing the zoning would allow several additional uses to include retail, office and convenience stores. He added the 02-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page B of 10 development restrictions to the Neighborhood Commercial zone would keep the scale of the development to fit into the neighborhood. For example, height requirements would be the same and setbacks would be designed to be consistent with the adjacent residential lots. Mr. Palaniuk concluded that this proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 1. CPA-2019-0003 A Privately Initiated Amendment Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multi Family Residential (MFR) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) to Multi Family Residential(MFR) Mr. Palaniuk presented CPA-2019-0003, a privately initiated amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multifamily Residential (MFR) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban(R-3) to Multifamily Residential (MFR). Mr. Palaniuk stated the property is located near the Mullan Road and Argonne Road corridor which are both principal arterials that are heavily traveled. Mr. Palaniuk added that this corridor is mostly commercial uses with a large retail center located northeast of the site. Mr. Palaniuk continued that this site is situated on the northwest corner of Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road within an older neighborhood. The site is a single parcel with two duplexes and a single family home constructed on site. Current regulations would not permit the numerous dwellings on one lot. Mr. Palaniuk continued explaining the current uses adjacent to the site are commercial. The intent of this amendment it to change the current land use designation of Single Family Residential to Multifamily Residential. The change would allow multifamily development and low impact commercial development, and would change the zoning regulations significantly, the density would allow additional units. Mr. Palaniuk continued adding that the most significant change would be increasing the height requirements from 35 feet to 55 feet, and the setback requirements. Mr. Palaniuk concluded this is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Walton asked how would this be in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan as it is essentially creating a Multifamily Residential "island". Mr. Palaniuk explained that normally if this were a site specific rezone it would not meet the criteria. Due to this being an.amendment this is considered to be an area wide rezone, looking at the plan it seeks to situate multifamily near transportation corridors and retail centers. Ms. Barlow added that the review of the Comprehensive Plan is just as Mr. Palaniuk stated however, if this were a site specific rezone this would meet the criteria as the commercial zone located across the street is a higher intensity zone; multifamily is a less intensive zone and would meet the criteria. Commissioner Johnson asked if the development directly north was a duplex development. Mr.Palaniuk advised that there are five duplexes on the lot. It was believed the applicant approached the owners asking if they had interest in the amendment, and they declined at this time. j. CPA-2019-0009: A City Initiated Amendment Proposal to change Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential (MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). Planner Karen Kendall introduced CPA-2019-0009 a City initiated Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential to Corridor Mixed Use. Ms. Kendall explained the property involved is 18.7 acres and includes 12 parcels of land north of Mission Avenue between McDonald Road on the west and Maurer Road to the east. Ms. Kendall explained that there is a 1.50-foot-wide Bonneville Power Administration(BPA)easement 02-142019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 10 crossing the properties and noted that the properties were largely developed as the Whimsical Pig with other various owners and uses, Ms. Kendall went on to explain the surrounding uses of the site include single family residence, multifamily, professional offices, assisted living and retail. The intent of the Comprehensive Plan land use designation is to provide land that will allow light manufacturing,retail, multifamily and offices along transpiration corridors -the uses in the area currently fit the intent. Ms. Kendall explained that should this change occur;the amendment area would be allowed to further develop consistently with the adjacent land uses. Ms. Kendall continued that the zone change would allow uses that align with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan along the major transportation corridor being Mission Avenue. Ms. Kendall concluded that there is limited development opportunity for these properties. This proposal would allow development along the corridor consistent with the corridor and would not be create any nonconforming use with the change. The Corridor Mixed Use designation has no height limitations; in comparison the current Multifamily Residential zone is limed to 50 feet in height, However, there are not many buildings that currently push or exceed the 50-foot height limit. Ms. Kendall added the Corridor Mixed use has no density limits and the change may allow an increase in the density. Ms. Kendall concluded that the amendment would make the location consistent with the surrounding area and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Johnson asked if parking can be located within the easement. Ms, Kendall advised that yes there can be parking however, no buildings can be constructed in the easement. Commissioner Johnson asked if the lots to the far east • were single family homes. Ms. Kendall advised they are single family residences and there would be no transitional standards as transitional standards only apply between zones. Ms. Barlow addressed the Commission regarding procedural process and the next step will be the public hearing scheduled for February 28, 2019. Commissioner Johnson asked about public hearing notification. Ms. Barlow advised the notification went out and the City increased the notification requirement area from the 400 feet to 800 feet around the site specific requests. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Walton was appreciative to the community for their civic duty and applauded them for taking action. He stated it was with regret that he had to vote as he did. He stated the purpose of the Commission is to maintain the Comprehensive Plan in looldng out for the citizens and the future in keeping the Valley vibrant. Commissioner. Kaschmitter thanked the staff and the public for their comments. Commissioner Johnson thanked the public for their comments and understands the difficulties in loss for the quality of life. He explained the Commission is here for the common good and that is the only way it works. If it is narrowed to serve the few,that is when it fails. He thanked the Commission for their hard work. Commissioner Kelley commented on the Planned Action Ordinanc amendment the Commission passed. He noted that an article in the paper noted the council was looking at approving the amendment; but that there wasn't'going to be a requirethent for any environmental study. Mr. Lamb advised that the article misstated the details. It was determined that there may be an environmental review, but, the City will have already undertaken the environmental review. The Council is considering allowing developers to rely on the environmental review that has already been done, Commissioner Kelly asked for clarification that should someone propose a project to the industrial zone that may need additional study they will have to conduct further testing, Mr. Lamb advised that yes, that would be the case. 02-14-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page I0 of 10 XL ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Walton moved to adjourn at 8:05 p.m, The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor, zero against and the motion passed. • e2A6fre 7 James Johnson, Chair Date signed -42tir 64-4— Robin Hutchins, Secretary Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall February 28,2019 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. H. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Office Assistant Robin Hutchins took roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson Eric Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Timothy Kelley Karen Kendall, Planner Robert McKinley Martin Palaniuk, Planner Michael Phillips, absent- excused Colin Quinn-Hurst,Planner Michelle Rasmussen Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Matt Walton Ray Wright, Senior Traffic Engineer Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager Robin Hutchins, Office Assistant Deanna Horton, Secretary to the Commission Hearing no objections, Commissioner Phillips was excused from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the February 28, 2019 agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the meeting minutes from February 14, 2019 as presented. Commissioner Johnson asked to correct his comment made regarding reducing up to 600 dwelling units. His intent was to state it could impact 600 dwelling units as that was a critical point. The vote on the amended motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson went to the City council meeting and advised Councilmember Haley commented on the important topics the Commission has addressed. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Senior Planner Lori Barlow advised the City has received a privately initiated Code Text Amendment and will bring forward a City Initiated Code Text Amendment. VHI. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda. There was no public comment. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Findings of Facts: CTA-2018-0005, a privately initiated amendment of Spokane Valley Municipal Code 19.40.050, 19.40.060 and 19.60.050, proposing changes to the duplex and townhome development standards. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes nage 2 of 15 Senior Planner Lori Barlow summarized that CTA-2018-0005 has come before the Commission on several occasions, First being the study sessions, a continued public hearing and the process ending in deliberations where the Commission voted unanimously to deny the request. Ms. Barlow explained that the findings and recommendation will be forwarded to the Council for review and their process will also include public comment for those following the item. Commissioner Walton moved to forward the Findings of Fact recommendation as presented to the City Council. Commissioner Walton stated he recognized the interest and would like to see how the Council continues to look at the item. Commissioner Walton strongly recommended the Commission uphold their Findings of Fact. Commissioner Johnson clarified that his correction to the minutes was extremely important for a number of reasons. He added that if the Commission would have approved this request it would have impacted thousands of opportunities for dwelling units to be constructed and was too far reaching. The vote on the motion was six in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. ii. Public Hearing: Proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Chair Johnson read the rules of the public hearing and opened the public hearing at 6:14 p.m. Ms. Barlow reviewed the process and advised that determinations of non-significance had been issued for all amendments being considered, Should the Commission make it through to deliberations the Findings of Facts will be considered on March 14,2019 and then the recommendations will be forwarded to the Council. Ms.Barlow emphasized the notice requirements for the amendments. On January 30, 2019 the general notice was published in the newspaper, a notice was posted on site for those that are site specific and notices were mailed to property owners within 800 feet as opposed to code requirements of only 400 feet. Ms. Barlow added that three additional comments have been received for consideration and will be discussed during the applicable amendment presentation. Ms, Barlow highlighted procedural recommendations advising that tonight's meeting is for the Commission to review the materials and to consider public comment. Ms. Barlow explained that staff will be discussing the City initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments collectively. The site specific Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be presented individually. a. CPA-2019-0004: A City Initiated Amendment to update implementation strategies to remove completed strategies, update timelines, and add new strategies consistent with the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. CPA-2019-0006: A City Initiated Amendment to Annexation and policy additions. CPA-2019-0008 A City Initiated Amendment to create a new map appendix of the most recently adopted maps. Ms. Barlow introduced Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0004. Ms. Barlow explained that this will modify some strategies in Chapter 2 to refresh some language and bring it into line with the City's objectives. This will remove strategies that have been completed, update timelines and modify with new information. Ms. Barlow continued with CPA-2019-0006 advising that this would modify one existing Land Use goal and one existing Land Use policy regarding annexation and will add one additional policy. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 aC 15 Lastly,Ms. Barlow explained CPA-2019-0008 introduces a new map appendix to the Comprehensive Plan. The maps are not new to the City but the appendix is new to the Comprehensive Plan. The appendix will capture the maps and attach them to the Comprehensive Plan making them more user friendly for public access. Ms. Barlow concluded that there have been no substantive comments related to any of the amendments she presented. There was no public comment. b. CPA-2019-0005: A City Initiated Amendment to update the pedestrian and bicycle component of the Transportation Element and related goals and policies. CPA-2019-0007: A City Initiated Amendment to update Figures 26, 27 and 46 to reflect changes and amendments to pedestrian and bicycle facility recommendations. CPA-2019-0010: A City Initiated Amendment to create a new appendix of transportation project for a 20-year period that is informed by existing studies. Transportation Planner Colin Quinn-Hurst introduced Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0005. Mr. Quinn-Hurst explained that this amendment updates the pedestrian and bicycle components in completing the pathway and trail network. This will add language to support consideration of a Complete Streets ordinance. Mr. Quinn-Hurst explained that the bicycle and pedestrian plan was first established in 2011, and the updates will revise the components to reflect changes in the network based on current conditions and practicalities. The 2011 recommendations included a network of 156 miles of sidewalk, 38 miles of bike lanes and 28 miles of new pathways. Mr. Quinn-Hurst explained that with 156 miles at $600,00 per foot for a new side walk the cost is a substantial amount of money adding up to half a billion and decades of time. Mr. Quinn-Hurst stated the City conducted a public involvement process that included attending community events and an online survey. Through the survey it • was determined that the top priority for improvements was a completed sidewalk system the second was good pavement, and third was pathway and bikeway improvements followed by crosswalks. The City administered a technical evaluation looking at crashes and safety, congestion and travel patterns,to find "hot spots" where improvements would have the largest impact and they fit in line with public comment. In conclusion adding text to Chapter 5 would outline these priorities, add language to support the goal of connecting the pathway network by linking the Appleway Trail to the Centennial Trail. Lastly this amendment would add language supporting eventual consideration of a Complete Streets ordinance to leverage existing funding. Mr. Quinn-Hurst continued with CPA-2019-0007 advising this proposal is to update the Sidewalk, Bicycle and School District Maps to reflect completed projects and updated networks. Mr. Quinn Hurst highlighted CPA-2019-0010 advising this amendment will create an appendix showing a list of 20-year transportation projects. This will be regularly • updated as a resource for vetting and developing our transportation projects to make them eligible for grant opportunities. Mr. Quinn-Hurst concluded that there have been no substantive comments related to any amendments he presented, 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 15 Commissioner Johnson stated he is somewhat disappointed that the Pines Road grade separation at Trent Avenue is going to take seven years. He hopes there will be a way to accelerate the schedule to keep within the$29 million budget. There was no public comment. c. CPA-2019-00001: A Privately Initiated Amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial(1)to Single Family Residential(SFR) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial(I) to Single Family Residential Urban(R-3). Planner Karen Kendall introduced CPA-2019-0001 a privately initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment, located 300 feet south of the intersection of Park Road and Broadway Avenue. This site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial (I) to Single Family Residential (SFR) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial (I)to Single Family. Ms. Kendall went on to explain the potential incompatibility of rezoning the site to R- 3 from Industrial as it would reduce the allowable uses from a broad range of industrial uses to single family, duplex, cottages, townhomes, daycares, school and church uses. The R-3 zone would allow six dwelling units per acre and up to 12 units per acre with cottage development. Changing the land use designation and zoning of the subject parcel will impact adjacent industrial properties as future development will be subject to transitional regulations, limiting ability for full site development. The transitional standards include greater setbacks, screening requirements and various other restrictions. Ms. Kendall explained that if approved,the transitional regulations would apply to any new development on the four parcels adjacent to the subject parcel located to the west and south, Ms. Kendall went on to explain that two of the surrounding parcels have had recent activity. One parcel has an active building permit and the other has gone through a pre-application meeting, both for industrial development. Ms.Kendall concluded that staff has received standard agency comments with nothing substantive. Staff has also received three additional public comments and summarized that the concerns were specific to redevelopment of the adjacent parcels,the industrial nature of the area and traffic impacts on Park Road. Ms. Kendall concluded that this amendment is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioners Kelley asked if the property located south east of the parcel will have little to no impact and it was concluded to be true. Commissioner Kelley also questioned green zone compliance (transitional regulations) with existing parcels should this amendment be approved and it was determined that once the lots are developed they would have to comply with transitional regulations. Commissioner Johnson discussed the property located at Broadway Avenue and Park Road being commercial and the transitional impact to those surrounding it should this amendment be approved or denied. Ms. Kendall explained that it would depend on what zone they proposed to change to in order to determine what types of impacts would be associated, if any at all. Danny Davis, 2780 W lago Street, Post Falls, ID: Mr. Davis gave a presentation to the Commission and audience, Mr. Davis explained that he is the owner of the Circle J Mobile Home Park adjacent to the proposed parcel. Mr.Davis described his argument to be that the current zoning is possibly wrong today. He went on to explain that what exists today is a beautiful mobile home park consisting of sixty-one low income houses, 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 15 for seniors fifty-five and over surrounded by Industrial. Mr. Davis detailed the current uses that are allowable next to these homes to be dog kennels, animal processing, crematorium and heavy truck industrial sales. Mr.Davis explained that they believe the zoning has been incorrect since implementation. Mr.Davis continued that his proposal is in line with the City's Comprehensive Plan such as providing land uses that are essential to residents and to enable development of affordable housing for all income levels. Mr. Davis explained that their plan is to build a fifty-five and over cottage style development for seniors in turn providing innovative and affordable housing types for all income levels.Mr.Davis advised they have reached out to their neighbors to discuss the transitional zoning and understand their concerns. Mr. Davis promised that should their application be approved they will self-implement the transitional buffers onto their property as they do not want the thirty-foot buffer to encroach onto their neighbors. Mr. Davis concluded that a residential rezoning is much more compatible, will remain in line with the City's Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies, and promised their neighborhood friendly development plan would not negatively impact the surrounding properties. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr.Davis when the Circle J was purchased and what the zoning of the neighboring parcels were at that time. Mr. Davis advised they purchased the property six years prior and the zoning was Industrial at the time it was purchased. Curt Nead, 18582 W Rice Avenue, Hawser, ID: Mr. Nead stated he is representing the Crow family trust for Mr. Jim Crow at 1201 N Evergreen Road. Mr.Nead advised they share a property line with the subject property and they feel this change would negatively impact their property when it comes to the setback requirements. Mr.Nead asked without a plan in place how would the promise by the development be enforced? Mr. Nead stated their property would be made unattractive to potential buyers and would take away future opportunities. Mr. Nead concluded that developing a senior community where access would merge into active Industrial traffic on Park Road would not be conducive to safety. Mr. Nead stated they agree with staff that this is not in keeping with the City's goals and policies and believe it should be denied. Jim Chavez, 15902 E 15th Ave, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Chaves read a statement on behalf of his brother Brian Chaves whom is the property owner at N 630 Park Road adjacent to the proposed amendment. Mr. Brian Chaves is not in favor of the proposal. He respectfully requests that the Commission look at the incompatibility issues and continued that the transitional regulations will be detrimental to his property. Mr. Chaves notes that the self-imposed regulations can't be promised and he is opposed to the proposed zoning changes. Joel Elgee,24327 E Maxwell,Liberty Lake,WA:Mr.Elgee stated he is a proponent and knows the applicant personally and spoke to his good character. He stated that if Mr. Davis promises to do something he will. Mr. Elgee added that this proposed site and the surrounding properties seem to be limited with the current zoning. d. CPA-2019-0002: A Privately Initiated Amendment 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) Planner Marty Palaniuk presented CPA-2019-0002, explaining this is a privately initiated amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Neighborhood Commercial(NC)and to change the 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 15 Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Mr, Palaniuk stated that the property is located at 811i Avenue and Sullivan Road. 8t1i Avenue is a minor arterial,and Sullivan Road is a principal arterial with approximately 20,000 vehicle trips per day. This is directly across the street from Central Valley High School which creates significant traffic, North of the high school there has been substantial multifamily developments creating significant density. Mr. Palaniuk stated that this site consists of two properties, one owned by the Genesis Church and one residence. There is an irrigation district located to the west of the property and a Bonneville Power Administration(BPA) easement along the east. The BPA easement encumbers both of the properties along the east boundary and does create some issues. Mr. Palaniuk explained the intent of the Comprehensive Plan land use designation for these properties is to have single family residential units.If approved this would change the land use designation to Neighborhood Commercial, which is intended to provide neighborhood scaled coininercial developments to serve the neighborhoods. Mr. Palaniuk explained the current zoning of R-3 limits the uses to residential, changing the zoning would allow several additional uses to include retail,office and convenience stores. He added the development restrictions to the Neighborhood Commercial zone would keep the scale of the development to fit into the neighborhood. For example, height requirements would be the same and setbacks would be designed to be consistent with the adjacent residential lots. Mr. Palaniuk stated there have been no substantive comments from staff or public related to this amendment. Mr.Palaniuk concluded that this proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Walton asked if other Neighborhood Commercial zones that has been identified in the Comprehensive Plan had experienced any increase traffic flow or traffic pattern impacts following redesignation or development? Mr. Palaniuk explained that the only NC zone which had developed was a coffee/espresso stand located at 16i1' Avenue and Sullivan Road and there have been no significant traffic pattern impacts. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Palaniuk if he was aware of an easement which would allow 9th Avenue to extend to Progress Road. Mr. Palaniuk stated he was unaware of any. Commissioner Johnson was concerned that if 9th Avenue was extended it might impact the homes along 9th Avenue. Commissioner Walton asked about the residential parcel's access points onto 9th Avenue,one being from the Church parking lot and another from the daycare. Commissioner Johnson added there would be nothing to preclude them from adding access to 91h Avenue. It was concluded that the parcel with the single family residence would be allowed access to Sullivan Road and 9t1i Avenue. Ben Goodmansen-Whipple Consulting Engineers, 21 S Pines Road, Spokane Valley,WA: Mr. Goodmansen thanked the staff for their work advised they agree with the Staff Report. Mr. Goodmansen explained they feel this Land Use change is an appropriate one, not only for the immediate neighborhood but for those to the South. Mr. Goodmansen explained that the Coffee Espresso Stand on 16t1i Ave is a good Neighborhood Commercial development and he pointed out that it is on the "going home" side of the roadway. He added that they are seeing growth to the South and commercial access is becoming necessary especially on the "going home" side of the road. Mr. Goodmansen mentioned the access for the smaller parcel at 910 S Sullivan Road has two access point, one on 91h Avenue and one on Sullivan Road. Lastly, Mr. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 15 Goodmansen mentioned that the property owner Mr. Ford approached members of the neighborhood to include the church and had positive feedback. Stephen Ford, 320 S Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Ford advised he is an attorney and his current office is located at 320 S Sullivan Road where it has become increasingly commercial which is not needed for the nature of his business. Mr. Ford purchased the proposed property at 902 S Sullivan Road with intent to put a law office there. He advised he spoke to the homeowners on 9th Avenue and the cul-de-sac to discuss the proposal. He stated the response was overwhelmingly supportive.Mr.Ford explained that he would be creating a nice entry into the neighborhood and separate the neighbors from Sullivan Road. Currently the main access to 902 S Sullivan Road is off Sullivan Road with a secondary access off of 9th Ave-Avenue both appropriate for a Law Office. Mr. Ford stated he encourages the Commission to accept the recommendation. e. CPA-2019-0003 A Privately Initiated Amendment Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multi Family Residential (MFR) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) to Multi Family Residential (MPR) Mr. Palaniuk presented CPA-2019-0003, a privately initiated amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multifamily Residential (MFR) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban(R-3)to Multifamily Residential (MFR). Mr.Palaniuk stated the property is located near the Mullan/Argonne Road corridor. Both roads are principal arterials that are heavily traveled. Mr. Palaniuk added that the corridor is mostly commercial uses, with a large retail center located northeast of the site. Mr. Palaniuk continued that this site is situated on the northwest corner of Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road within an older neighborhood. The site is a single parcel with two duplexes and a single family home constructed on site. Current regulations would not permit the numerous dwellings on one lot. Mr. Palaniuk continued explaining the current uses which are adjacent to the site and are commercial. The intent of this amendment is to change the current land use designation of Single Family Residential to Multifamily Residential. The change would allow multifamily development and low impact commercial development, and would change the zoning regulations significantly. The density would allow additional units. Mr. Palaniuk added currently the Single Family Residential allows a density of up to six units per acre, multifamily would allow up to 22 units per acre. However; on this site the size would be limited to a maximum of 20 units, if the existing buildings were to be raised and multifamily was undertaken 20 units would be the maximum allowed. Mr. Palaniuk continued adding that the most significant change would be increasing the height requirements from 35 feet to 50 feet, and the setback requirements. Mr. Palaniuk stated staff did not receive any agency comments. Mr. Palaniuk stated there has been one public comment received, and they are opposed to the change, Mr. Palaniuk concluded that this proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Kelley asked for clarification that a multifamily zone has to be adjacent to a higher intensity right-of-way or like zone, and can be separated by right of way? Mr. Palaniuk explained that this being an area wide amendment and not a site specific rezone, it does not have to meet that criteria. It was also clarified that the Commercial zone across the public right of way would meet the criteria of a higher intensive zone district. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 15 Commissioner Walton added that with this being part of the Comprehensive Plan process even though it is applying to a specific parcel that requirement is not necessary even though this does border a higher use zone. Walton discussed the future opportunity created if this were rezoned as multifamily since it would allow similar rezoning of surrounding properties, or would those properties be required to apply for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. It was clarified that they would have to apply for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. Deputy City Attorney Eric Lamb advised that the staff report identifies the code requirements for Comprehensive Plan approval by looking at consistency with the Comprehensive Plan as well as substantial relation to public safety and welfare. The surrounding area plays into a lot of those points but is not necessarily a check box at this point in time. Commissioner Rasmussen asked if the owner of the parcel is seeking to subdivide the property into four different lots and read the application stating such. Ms. Barlow explained that they may have identified that specific language however if this is approved there is nothing binding them to do exactly what is written, the plan could change to include multiple options. Mr. Palaniuk explained that a pre-application meeting was done and those details were listed but it can change. Mr.Palaniuk stated that in changing this to Multifamily zoning it would be more advantageous for them to subdivide the property to have the smaller lot sizes. Mr. Palaniuk added that it could be subdivided now under the Single Family Residential zoning,however the lots would have to be bigger and the duplex lots would have to be 10,000 square feet versus 4,000 square feet under the Multifamily zoning. Commissioner Walton asked what the total size of the lot was, and it was noted to be just under an acre. Commissioner Johnson asked for confirmation that they can have parking in the transitional area as long as it has appropriate screening. Mr. Palaniuk stated if this develops as Multifamily that is correct. Joel Elgee, 24327 E Maxwell, Liberty Lake, WA: Mr. Elgee stated he was appreciative of Staffs recommendation and thanked them for their work. Mr. Elgee stated after looking at the current uses his intent would be in keeping with the City's Comprehensive Plan by providing affordable house opportunities. He continued that the intent of the owner is not to tear anything down and build new as that would not make financial sense. He explained they would keep the existing and would possibly build an eight to ten-unit apartment type structure with access off of Sinto Avenue or Marguerite Road. Mr.Elgee added that this would provide public improvements to the streets as well. Commissioner Kelley asked the applicant if he was familiar with the current vacancy rates in the Valley? Mr. Elgee advised that depending on the unit size generally they are around three percent. Commissioner Kelley confirmed that five percent is considered full occupancy. Mr. Elgee stated that up to four or five years ago the area was at 10 percent vacancy. With this being a small project this would add to that vacancy rate where it's needed. Michael Porter, 8919 E Boone Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Porter stated he and his family has lived in the area for 20 plus years and traffic is increasing on both Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road. Mr. Ported stated the neighbors will have problems with parking as the streets are narrow and stated he is not in favor of the proposal. Mae Greenwood, 8802 E Boone Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Ms. Greenwood thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak. Ms. Greenwood is concerned 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 15 with safety, traffic impacts and the on street and off street parking. Ms. Greenwood stated the neither Sinto Avenue or Marguerite Road are arterials and there is no clear access to the businesses. Ms. Greenwood thanked Mr. Palaniuk for mentioning her comment adding that the public does not know how to comment as access isn't always apparent, Ms. Greenwood stated she is opposed to this proposal. John Rohrback, 8722 E Sinto Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Rohrback stated his property is adjacent to the proposed site and his concern is with the size of the building and the appearance of the neighborhood. He is also concerned with parking, traffic and and safety of those walking the streets. Mr. Rohrback mentioned concerns with a driveway coming from Sinto Avenue. Mr. Rohrback asked that if this is approved the units be kept to a bare minimum to help with parking and traffic issues. Jolene McGuire 8810 E Sinto Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Ms. McGuire spoke about the conflicting information as to what is going to be constructed and gave examples of proposed developments. Ms. McGuire is worried about access due to the corner of Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road being a hazardous corner and is also concerned with parking. She is also concerned for her privacy in her home as being looked in upon with the height requirement changes. Ms. McGuire asked for more clarification as to what is being proposed as there are too many safety issues and she is opposed to the proposal. Daniel.Harrington, 8817 E Sinto Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Harrington is opposed to the proposal and is concerned for the safety of the children in the area as there are no sidewalks and kids play in the street. Mr. Harrington stated this would also take away his neighbors model airplane landing strip and the deer would no longer visit. Mr. Barrington stated this would not be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. He is not in favor and asked the Commission to keep the neighborhood safe. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Palaniuk what kind of improvements would be required if they were to put a 20-unit development? Mr. Palaniuk advised they would have to provide sidewalks, a swale, curb and gutter along Marguerite Road and Sinto Avenue. There was some discussion regarding dimensions for the street and sidewalk improvements. Commissioner Walton asked if under the current R-3 zoning would allow the parcel to be subdivided into. eight separate lots at 5,000 square feet minimum? Mr. Palaniuk advised the City would apply the density standard which would allow six units per acre, if changed to Multifamily it would allow for 20 units based on the size of the lot if the two duplexes and single family were removed ,from the property. Commissioner Kasclunitter asked that if sidewalks were required would it encroach onto the properties along Marguerite Road?It was concluded that all of the improvements would be along the frontage of the proposed site and no other properties would lose any frontage. Commissioner Johnson asked for clarification regarding changing the zoning when no other multifamily was contiguous to the subject parcel. Ms.Barlow explained that this can be considered regardless, because it is a Comprehensive Plan amendment, not a rezone, however if the City were looking at it via the rezoning criteria this would have to be adjacent or contiguous to a property zoned of equal or higher intensity. In this case the commercial property across the right-of-way to the east is a higher intensity use. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 of IS j. CPA-2019-0009: A City Initiated Amendment Proposal to change Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential (MER) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). Planner Karen Kendall introduced CPA-2019-0009 a City initiated Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential to Corridor Mixed Use. Ms. Kendall explained the property involved is 18.7 acres and includes 12 parcels of land north of Mission Avenue between McDonald Road on the west and Mamer Road to the east. Ms. Kendall explained that there is a 150-foot-wide Bonneville Power Administration(BPA) easement crossing the properties and noted that the properties were largely developed as the Whimsical Pig with other various owners and uses. Ms. Kendall went on to explain the surrounding uses of the site include single family residence, multifamily, professional offices, assisted living and retail. The intent of the Comprehensive Plan land use designation is to provide land that will allow light manufacturing,retail, multifamily and offices along transpiration corridors -the uses in the area currently fit the intent. Ms. Kendall explained that should this change occur;the amendment area would be allowed to further develop consistently with the adjacent land uses. Ms. Kendall continued that the zone change would allow uses that align with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan along the major transportation corridor being Mission Avenue. Ms. Kendall concluded that there is limited development opportunity for these properties. This proposal would allow development along the corridor consistent with the corridor and would not create any nonconforming use with the change. The Corridor Mixed Use designation has no height limitations;in comparison the current Multifamily Residential zone is limed to 50 feet in height. However, there are not many buildings that currently push or exceed the 50-foot height limit. Ms. Kendall added the Corridor Mixed use has no density limits and the change may allow an increase in the density from 22 dwelling units per acre to no limit however this is not likely clue to building placement,parking and landscaping. Ms. Kendall advised staff has received no public comment. Staff has however received one agency comment from Washington State Department of Transportation asking for additional transportation information. Ms. Kendal stated the City's traffic engineer provided a Trip Generation and Distribution letter concluding there is adequate capacity. Ms. Kendall concluded that the amendment would make the location consistent with the surrounding area and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Johnson asked for an explanation on the voluntary itnpact fee mentioned in the transportation report. Senior Traffic Engineer Ray Wright explained that in working with developers and consultants the City has created the Mirabeau Subarea Plan. The intent of this plan was to look at existing conditions of the streets,what developments might occur within the zoning of each and expected traffic impacts. Mr. Wright explained that within the Mirabeau Subarea Plan there is a fee associated with the specific amount of trips needed to complete the analysis. Mr. Lamb clarified that impact fees have not been adopted under the Growth Management Act. These fees are technically mitigation fees similar to those identified in the Planned Action Ordinance for the northeast industrial area. As part of environmental review, developers are required to complete the traffic analysis. Similarly, with the Mirabeau Subarea Plan there has been an agreement as to what project may be coming and provide some certainly for the cost of those trips. Developers are allowed to enter into this Subarea Plan voluntarily. Mr.Lamb added 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 of 15 that Washington State Department of Transportation wanted to clarify if the parcels were changed to Corridor Mixed Use that the City has sufficient capacity. We reviewed the proposal and concluded that we do. Commissioner Walton asked what the maximum impact of this property would be if developed at its maximum potential,then would the traffic analysis bear out or would there need to be additional improvements, Mr. Wright stated they did consider that possibility as this is a large piece of property. Mr. Wright stated that if this were converted to a hospital that it would increase the trips considerably, and that professional judgement was used to determine what can be supported. Commissioner Kelley clarified that Mr. Wright reviewed the amount of traffic which he expects new development to generate. Ms. Barlow explained that the initial answer that staff was looking for was whether or not there was capacity, and that has been addressed through analysis with Washington State Department of Transportation. Future impacts from development will be under discussion with the City and Washington State Department of Transportation, however that would not be provided to the Commission as part of the current process, Sharon Janson-13607 E Mission Ave,Spokane Valley,WA: Ms. Janson explained that there is a lot of uncertainty and she is not sure as to what can be built. She explained that her property includes the irrigation ditch, and she isn't sure what would happen to her property. Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 8:13 PM After a detailed discussion it was concluded that all City Initiated Code Text Amendments CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0008, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0007 and CPA-2019-0010 would be combined as a collective motion and vote, Commissioner Walton moved to approve all six City Initiated Code Text Amendments CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019- 0008 and CPA-2019-0010 as presented by the City, Commissioner Walton thanked the Staff for their work on each amendment. Commissioner Johnson concurred. The vote on the motion was six in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed, CPA-2019-0001 Conunissioner Johnson stated he knows a party involved and recused himself from deliberation. He passed the gavel to Commissioner Walton and left the room. Commissioner Kelley thanked the applicant, Danny Davis, for his enthusiasm and the work he had done. Commissioner Kelley continued that he would be voting against the proposal as he agreed with land owners. Commissioner Rasmussen advised she had driven the location to familiarize herself with the area. Her concern is the Industrial environment along Park Road. Commissioner Rasmussen added that she is a proponent of Cottages and alternative housing types, however she is concerned for the properties adjacent and will be voting against. Commissioner McKinley stated he was torn on the proposal and feels that if it were developed as proposed it would provide needed additional low income housing for seniors. However, the area is Industrial. Commissioner Kaschmitter explained that she sees both sides with the need for senior housing and the need for Industrial. She feels that with the current zoning of Industrial it should be left as such,adding that it is harder to rezone to Industrial. After considering 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 of 15 public comment and the difficulty to enforce the promise related to buffers she is opposed to the proposal. Commissioner Walton discussed blending uses and explained that his concern is the impact to the surrounding properties. He applauded the applicant's creativity in self-imposing the setbacks however it would not alleviate all setback requirements to the Industrial lots. Commissioner Walton concluded that there is existing Industrial infrastructure on a large portion of the mobile home park to the south and also mentioned the current application and permits. Commissioner Walton stated lie will be voting against the proposal following City recommendations. Commissioner Kelley moved to deny CPA-2019-0001 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. Commissioner Johnson returned at 8:28 PM CPA-2019-0002- Commissioner Johnson commented that this is almost what they wrote the Land Use into the code for, adding that with the light there and the traffic,the neighborhood commercial expansions are perfect for what the Commission had intended. Commissioner Kelley commented on the"going home"side of the street and how important that was; and that the City does need development here. Commissioner Walton stated he sees this as being in line with the Comprehensive Plan. He added that his only reservation would be to encourage crosswalk and signage should this be developed to prevent vehicle verses pedestrian interactions, Commissioner Walton concluded that he is in favor. Commissioner Rasmussen agreed that this is a good use and thanked the applicant for reaching out to the neighbors. Commissioner Kaschmitter stated she is in support of the proposal and thanked the applicant for speaking with the neighbors. Commissioner McKinley stated he is in support. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2019-0002 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. CPA-2019-0003 Commissioner Kelley stated he is sympathetic to public comments related to safety. He added that should this be developed there will be curbs and sidewalks that will help in regards to safety keeping people and children off of the street. Commissioner Kelley stated he is in favor of the proposal. Commissioner Walton stated he will be opposing the amendment. He stated there will be sidewalk and swales, however, they will end without connections, causing safety concerns. Commissioner Walton continued that if approved he feels it would be creating an island for additional Multifamily residential applications moving forward, creating higher uses in an area that does not have infrastructure that supports this kind of development. Commissioner Walton thanked the applicant for their ideas, is respectful of the idea for additional affordable housing, concluding that he will be voting no on this proposal. Commissioner Kaschmitter agreed with Commissioner Walton and his comments regarding the sidewalks adding that there would be access and parking issues and will not be supporting the proposal. Commissioner McKinley stated he did not believe he would be supporting the proposal. Commissioner Rasmussen stated she was on the • fence adding that she drove the site and is familiar with the road. She added that the area has several sections of duplexes and some commercial toward the end of Mission Avenue. Commissioner Rasmussen stated the environment does fit the proposal and will be voting in favor. Commissioner Rasmussen added that she understands the neighbors' concerns adding that the lots are large and there should be ample space for 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 of 15 parking, Commissioner Johnson also drove the area several times mentioning that there is a large amount of open space to the back of the properties that does not appear to be well used. Commission Johnson reiterated that his argument for having a medium density zoning and land use as this would be perfect for row houses. Commissioner Johnson stated that this may be starting a slippery slope if this is approved, however he feels that the owners of the properties will find an increase in property value that will allow them to move to an area that provides the type of life they are looking for. He continued that he feels this change is appropriate and will be voting in favor adding that once this is under development there will be infrastructure improvements that will have to be made. Commissioner Walton stated he considered the existing non-conforming uses trying to divide the lot as it exists under the current zoning and determined it could be done. Commissioner Walton spoke about lot sizes and duplex units and densities in order to conform. Commissioner Walton added if zoned Multifamily he understands the concerns from the homeowners, Commissioner Walton has concerns about access and does not feel like this is the right time for this application and will be voting against. Commissioner Johnson stated that when you look at the area as a whole it lends more to a Multifamily zone. Commission Kelley spoke about the vacancy rates being unheard of at three percent. Adding that this is a great location with access to bus service, restaurants and retail. Commissioner Walton pointed out that he sees there is a flaw in the thought process for the evening. Adding that should this be developed in the future there would be sidewalk improvements providing access to bus routes however at present the sidewalks would go nowhere. Commissioner Walton stated that he feels creating this one small area hoping for more to follow is potentially poor foresight on the part of the Commission. Commissioner Kelley asked for clarification from Commissioner Walton regarding his stance on Multifamily and it was concluded that Commissioner Walton is not opposed to Multifamily but feels this proposal would provide a "base property" that may create additional adjoining properties. Commissioner Walton concluded that right now the commission is looking at creating higher occupancy for a single property that creates a non-conforming usage iii this area. Commissioner Kelley spoke about sidewalks stating that currently there are no sidewalks and the addition of them would be a plus. Commissioner Kelley moved to approve CPA-2019-0003 as presented. The vote on the motion by a showing of hands was three in favor and three opposed. Secretary Deanna Horton highlighted procedural voting requirements that a Comprehensive Plan amendment recommendation can only be moved forward with a vote of four. It was concluded that another motion be made with a hope for a fourth or this moves forward with no recommendation. Commissioner Kelley moved to approve CPA-2019-0003 as presented, The vote on the motion by a showing of hands was three in favor and three opposed the motion fails and amendment moves forward with no recommendation. CPA-2019-0009 Commissioner Walton stated he is torn as all uses conform with the existing Multifamily Residential and is unsure as to what this change would do to future intent. He spoke about the maximum potential development for a rezone not just the current zone and spoke about traffic flow and access to the hospital. Commissioner Walton stated he is opposed at this time due to future potential. Commissioner Rasmussen asked for clarification in regards to a property addressed during public comment and if the property is within two zones. Ms. Kendall explained that the property is directly on the corner of Maurer Road and Mission Avenue or is one of the 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 14 of 15 four single family residences. Ms. Kendall provided clarification by using the map and stated that the property does span across the irrigation canal. Commissioner Johnson asked if all property to the north are Corridor Mixed Use and it was determined to be true. Commissioner Kelley moved to extend the meeting to 9:15 PM The vote on the motion was six in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. Commissioner Kelley agreed with Commissioner Walton's concerns however, he is in favor. Commissioner Kelley continued that he sees a lot of potential for development with great access to Pines Road, Evergreen Road and Sullivan Road. Commissioner Kelley added he does not believe traffic would inhibit the hospital. Commissioner Kaschmitter stated she is on the fence. She sees the potential and also sees what is existing and that it's working as is. Commissioner McKinley isn't sure why the change is needed and is not in favor. Commissioner Kaschmitter added something to consider would be changes in taxes should this be approved. Commissioner Rasmussen stated that this ties in with the Comprehensive Plan's goals and mission in bringing development and jobs. Commissioner Rasmussen added that she drove the area and this proposal fits, adding that this being a City initiated amendment this will pave the way for future development. Commissioner Rasmussen spoke on the transportation issue that once a development is proposed it will be reviewed concluding she will be voting for this proposal. Commissioner Johnson stated he also drove this area and spoke about. the expandable area for additional parking and access. He saw several units on the ground floor that could be used for medical offices and sees benefit. Commissioner Johnson added that should this be redeveloped it is exactly what the hope was. Commissioner Johnson stated in his opinion this would be a benefit to the City and is in favor, Commissioner Walton is in support of the proposal and sees great potential for mixed use opportunities. Commissioner Walton added that the use does conform with the adjoining uses, He continued he does have concern that access on Mission Avenue is not very good, however he feels most of the traffic would feed toward Pines Road if redeveloped and is in support. Commissioner Johnson added that should this be developed into medical offices that use would not be during rush hour and would be spread out throughout the day and does not see added traffic being an issue. Commissioner Johnson conclude that he is sympathetic to single family homes and feels that the residents will be in a good situation to sell their property and move to a much more single family type of environment. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2019-0003 as presented by the City. The vote on the motion was five in favor and one opposed and the motion passed. Commissioner Kaschmitter expressed her concern about apartments being moved somewhere else in the valley deeper into an R-3 zone. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner McKinley stated he will not be attending the next meeting due to work conflict. Commissioner Walton thanked the public for their comment. Commissioners Johnson apologized to the commission for CPA-2019- 0001 as lie did not realize until public testimony that he had a business relationship with one of the neighboring owners. He could have remained impartial,however perception was more important and recused himself. Commissioner Kelley stated that if Commissioner Johnson felt he could have been impartial he could have stayed. Ms. Barlow noted that with Commissioners Phillips and McKinley being absent at the next meeting and Commissioner Johnson recusing himself, that due to voting requirements we may be in a position to move the Findings to the next meeting. Commissioner 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Pnge 15 of 15 Walton asked for procedural clarifications pertaining to the voting requirements with the absentees and Commissioner Johnson recusing himself. Mr. Lamb stated that this is a written recommendation from the Planning Commission and is memorialized as part of the vote. It was concluded that under the rules of order that at least four votes are needed to move a Comprehensive Plan amendment forward. XL ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner McKinley moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:13 p.m, The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. '� James Johnson, Chairman Date signed Robin Hutchins, Secretary COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC WORKS e1 ftiftft BUILDING&PLANNING Spolne Valley. STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CTA-2018-0005 STAFF REPORT DATE: January 17, 2019 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: January 24, 2019, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: A privately-initiated text amendment to SVMC 19.40.050, SVMC 19.40.060, and SVMC 19.60.050 to add regulations within the R-3, Single-Family Residential Urban Zone (R-3)that limit duplex development,prohibit townhomes and preclude single ownership of a cottage development. APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, SVMC 17.80.150, 19.30.040. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS: Staff concludes that the proposed amendments to SVMC 19.40.050,SVMC 19.40.060 and SVMC 19.60.050 are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF CONTACT:Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: CTA-2018-0005 Application, attachment and proposed amendments to SVMC 19.40.050. SVMC, 19.40.060 and SVMC 19.60.050. Exhibit 2: Presentation Exhibit 3: May 15,2018 Council Administrative Report- Overview of Duplex Regulations in the Residential Zones Exhibit 4: October 2, 2018 Council Administrative Report—Duplex Density Issues BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. APPLICATION PROCESSING: SVMC Chapter 17.80, Permit Processing Procedures. The following table summarizes the procedural steps for the proposal. Process Date Application Submitted November 16, 2018 Department of Commerce 60-day Notice of Intent to Adopt December 10,2018 Amendment SEPA—DNS Issued December 28,2018 Published Notice of Public Hearing: January 4 and 11, 2019 PROPOSAL BACKGROUND: The proposed amendment limits the number of duplexes allowed in the R-3 zone to one duplex per acre, requires that each dwelling unit within the duplex receives a separate parcel number, and establishes standards that prevent duplexes from being constructed adjacent to other duplexes. The proposed amendment also prohibits townhomes and single entity ownership of cottage developments within the R-3 zone. The proposal modifies SVMC 19.60.050 Permitted Use Matrix, SVMC 19.40.050 Development standards—Cottage development and SVMC 19.40.060 Development standards—Duplexes. The sole basis for the proposed amendment identified by the applicant stated in the application is to Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2018-0005 "mitigate excessive duplex/rental buildout detrimental to homeowners." The application and specific language proposed are attached as Exhibit 1. Analysis: Currently duplexes and cottage developments are allowed in four zones, and townhomes are allowed in 5 zones (see Table 1 below). Duplexes are allowed as a permitted use, subject to Density and Dimensional Standards in chapter 19.70 SVMC, and cottage developments and townhomes are subject to supplemental regulations specific to each housing type as set forth in chapter 19.40 SVMC. Table 1—Current Zoning Districts that Allow Duplexes, Townhomes and Cottage Dwellings Parks and Open Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MIR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Dwelling,cottage S SS S Dwelling,duplex P P P P Dwelling, industrial accessory S S dwelling unit Dwelling, multifamily P P P Dwelling,single-family PPP P P P P Dwelling,townhouse S S S S S lulanufactured home park S S The proposed amendment has the following implications in the R-3 zone: 1. Reduces the number of duplexes that may be constructed. Pursuant to 19.70.020 Residential Standards the minimum lot size Table 2—Table 19.70-1-Residential Standards in the R-3 zone is 5,000 square feet(Table 2 - 19.70-1 R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR(11 Residential Standards). Front and Flanking Street Yard 35 15' 15 15' SVMC 19.40.060 Setback. Development Standards — Garage Setbacket 35' 20' 20' 20' Duplexes requires that Rear Yard Setback 20' 20' 10' 10' duplexes meet the minimum Minimum lot size per dwelling unit. Side Yard Setback 5 5' 5' 5' Duplexes, although one Open Space NPA wA N/A 10%gross structure, contain two areata) dwelling units, thereby Lot Size) 40,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 5,000 sq.ft. N/A requiring a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet (5,000 Lot Coverage 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% minimum lot size per unit X Maximum Density 1 dulac 4 du/ac 6 dufac 22 dulac 2 dwelling units = 10,000 Building Heighttal 35' 35' 35 50' square feet minimum lot size Page 2 of 7 Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2018-0005 per duplex). The current regulations also dictate that the maximum density for residential development in the R-3 zone is 6 dwelling units per acre(du/ac)resulting in a maximum number of 3 duplex units per acre allowed to be constructed since each duplex contains 2 dwelling units. The proposal reduces the number of duplexes allowed to be constructed per acre from 3 duplexes down to 1 duplex. 2. Reduces available both affordable housing units and alternative housing types in the R-3 zone by reducing the number of duplexes that may be constructed and eliminating townhomes as a housing alternative. Generally, duplexes provide an affordable housing option for renters versus renting a single family home. Although the rent price is market driven, the rent can be influenced by the cost of construction. Duplex construction is generally less costly than single family construction since one lot is purchased and developed, compared to two lots; mobilized construction for one building, rather than two separate buildings; and shared infrastructure such as driveways, curb cuts, yards, and utility service connections. This can be true for townhome development as well. Duplex development provides a lower risk investment opportunity than investing in single family homes. A vacant single family rental home affects an investor financially more than a duplex,which provides two rental opportunities, thus affecting the amount of rent necessary to offset the cost of a vacancy. While ensuring opportunity for real estate investment is not generally a role played by the city,ensuring affordable housing alternatives to meet the needs of the community is considered in the development regulations. Duplexes provide rental opportunities for individuals or families that desire a traditional single family neighborhood setting, a more private yard, more space for storage which includes a garage, and the ability to choose a location in a suburban-type area at a rental cost more similar to an apartment rent rather than a single family home. Duplexes become a reasonable option for persons who are not in a position to purchase a home or those that choose not to. According to the City's 2016 Comprehensive Plan Housing Element the median household income in Spokane Valley is $2,000 less than the average countywide annual earnings, and almost one-third of the City's residents earned between $25,000 and $50,000 annually. It was further noted that 51% of renters were cost burdened by rent, meaning that housing costs are greater than one-third of their income. Affordable housing continues to be a need in the City of Spokane Valley. 3. Affects anticipated to development rights. Development rights can add value to a property, as they define the development potential of that property. In this case the value of the development rights would be the difference between the fair market value of the land that is allowed a duplex versus land that is not allowed a duplex because of a nearby duplex. For example a property owner could anticipate developing a 10,000 sq. ft. lot with a duplex based on the development standards found in SVMC 19.70.020 Residential Standards,but when applying for a building permit discover that a duplex has been built, or a permit issued to construct a duplex in the vicinity which eliminates the development right to construct the duplex. The end result is uncertain development rights based on a"First in—Last out" implementation strategy unless the implementation of the proposal is only applied to lots created by plat actions occurring subsequent to the adoption of the amendment. Utilizing this approach would rely on specific plat dedication language that notes only one duplex per acre is allowed, and perhaps defines which lots are duplex lots. Staff conducted a review of the available lots in the R-3 zone that could be affected by the proposed amendment. Table 3 identifies the number of lots by a series of sizes, and further identifies how many duplexes could be developed under the current regulations compared to the proposed regulations. Under the current regulations duplexes may be constructed on individual lots that meet the minimum dimensional requirements,or allowed through plat activities that anticipates duplex lots not to exceed 6 du's/acre. Under Page 3 of 7 Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2018-0005 the proposal it is presumed that vacant lots less than 1 acre (technically the land area is 39,930 square feet as that is the threshold number where the number of allowed dwelling units(DU's)is rounded up from 5.5 DU's up to 6 DU's) would not be eligible for a duplex since the minimum density of 1 duplex/acre could not be achieved. If the proposed amendment were to be approved, the result would be a significant reduction in the number of duplexes allowed. Table 3 Survey of Available Lots by Size within the R-3 Zonel 10,000—15,000 sq. 15,000-39,930 sq. >39,931 sq.ft. >39,931 sq.ft. Lot Size ft.Vacant Lots ft' Vacant Lots with Sfdu2 Vacant Lots Number of Lots 153 161 91 564 3;number of 2;number of Number of duplexes allowed duplexes allowed duplexes allowed increases relative to increases relative to under current 1 1 3 lot size and a 6 lot size and a 6 regulations du/acre density du/acre density maximum maximum Number of duplexes allowed under the 0 0- 1 1/acre 1/acre proposed regulations3 'Source: 2018 Land Capacity Analysis conducted by COSV GIS Technician 'Sfdu means single family dwelling unit 'Assumes that plats smaller than 39,930 square feet would not be allowed to develop duplexes since the minimum density of 1 duplex/per acre could not be achieved. If the regulation were to be applied to individual lots, it is unclear how to determine the 1 acre area of influence. For example should the duplex location be the center of the area, or should the 1 acre radius extend from the duplex location as the farthest point. See Graphic#1 for examples. Graphic#1—Determining Duplex Location by Density t1UUNtA t 4. Appears to prevent cottage development. .111.111111111111•5I. P•,•1 "111. The proposed supplemental cottage development E DES ET AVE regulation is difficult to implement. While the intent is ENE. believed to be an effort to prevent rental communities © ,1 ,'•, from developing, it appears that the implementation UL would be to require more than one owner, at the time of development approval, during development, and ing,ELPE continuous operation. In many cases land is developed milli by a single entity. This could be a deterrent to cottage X= duplex location development by requiring additional ownership. .AL Historical Duplex Development The City has seen considerable duplex development from 2013 through April 2018. A comparison of the duplex permits issued during that time frame noted a steady increase by Spokane Valley compared to Spokane and Spokane County (See Graphic #2). On May 15, 2018 and October 2, 2018 staff presented Page 4 of 7 Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2018-0005 Graphic#2 information to City Council on density related issues and duplex development. The review was Comparision of Duplex Permits conducted at Council request. See attached 2013-2018 (April) Exhibits 3 and 4. 100 The growing number of duplexes in the community 80 is an issue frequently noted by citizens at public 60 hearings for subdivisions. Common statements involve concerns regarding decreased property 40 values, lack of investment by non-owner occupied 20 units, inconsistency with the neighborhood o character and impacts from the increasing number 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 of rentals within the neighborhood. However, the proposed amendment appears to raise many more Spokane Valley Spokane Spokane County issues for implementation, as well as concerns regarding the effects on affordable housing stock. If the Planning Commission chooses to recommend adoption of the proposed amendment, staff recommends that the code text amendment, or portions of the code text amendment be rewritten. Other considerations As identified above, the proposed amendment imposes additional restrictions and limitations on the allowable types of development. Any time that the City considers regulations that limit allowable development, it must be cognizant of potential constitutional issues. Takings. Generally, Washington law prohibits takings without just compensation. The courts have identified a number of instances where takings may occur. In the context of governmental regulations, there are three primary types of takings: (1) eliminating all economically viable use of the property, (2) determination that, under an extensive analysis of multiple factors, the public and governmental interest does not outweigh the economic impact to the landowner,and(3)regulatory exactions. In the present case, the second type of takin would be the most likely consideration. Staff have not conducted an extensive review of the proposed amendment,but highlight the constitutional takings issues for Planning Commission consideration due to the significant limits the proposed regulation places on development as well as the basis stated by the Applicant for the proposed amendment to protect homeownership rights. Substantive Due Process. Washington law also provides that governmental regulations may not violate substantive due process rights. Courts use a three-prong due process test: (1) they begin by determining whether the regulation is aimed at achieving a legitimate public purpose; (2) courts then evaluate whether the means used were reasonably necessary to achieve that purpose; and finally(3), whether the regulation was unduly oppressive to the landowner. Key as applicable to the present issue is identification and consideration of the public purpose that is being sought to be furthered. Here,the Applicant has only stated a desire to"mitigate excessive duplex/rental buildout detrimental to homeowners." In the land use context, it is important for Planning Commission and the City to identify land use bases and not just purposes based upon personal status. Overbreadth and Vagueness. Washington law also provides that City codes may be unconstitutional if they are overbroad or overly vague in identifying criteria for approval or disapproval. As Planning Commission noted at the study session, there are questions regarding how the provisions limiting purchase and sale of cottage developments would allow any cottage development. Staff recommends that as Planning Commission considers the proposed provision, it identify the impacts that it desires the proposed amendment to address, and that if it desires to move it forward to City Council, to more artfully articulate the proposed condition. Page 5 of 7 Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2018-0005 "Vested"Rights Another issue for Planning Commission consideration is how the proposed regulations may actually be applied where owners have an expectation that the development they desire will be allowed. Washington law and the SVMC both provide some protections for developers to allow them to have some certainty in being able to follow through with developments even if regulations change in the midst of the development process. There are several codes and laws that apply that allow developers to (1) have their applications processed under the rules in place at the time the completed application is submitted,and(2)have building permits considered under the rules in place at the time the plat was approved where the plat was designed for certain types of buildings. RCW 58.17.170 provides that subdivisions shall be governed by the"terms of approval of the final plat, and the statutes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of approval...for a period of...five years if the date of final plat approval is on or after January 1, 2015...." SVMC 17.80.170 generally mirrors state law for building permit and land disturbance permit applications. Thus, it appears that if a developer sought to build duplexes in a plat within the five year period after final plat approval,those duplexes would not be subject to the proposed regulation. As identified above, there are also questions about how the proposed regulation limiting duplexes to one acre will be implemented where there are existing duplexes in the nearby area of new duplexes. Further, the proposed amendment does not identify whether the limitation is to be implemented to"applied-for"or "constructed" duplexes. A. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 1. Compliance with Title 17 (General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.150(F)Municipal Code Text Amendment Approval Criteria i. The City may approve Municipal Code Text amendment, if it finds that (1) The proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; Staff Analysis: Staff notes that the Applicant has not identified any specific goals or policies or other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan supporting the proposed amendment. The sole basis identified by the Applicant for the proposed amendment is to "mitigate excessive duplex/rental buildout detrimental to homeowners." Staff has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and identified that the proposed amendment is not supported by the Comprehensive Plan and is not consistent with the following goals and policies: Goal LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. Policy LU-P 14 Enable a variety of housing types Goal H-G 1 Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. Goal H-G2 Enable the development of affordable housing for all income levels. Policy H-P2 Adopt development regulations that expand housing choices by allowing innovative housing types including tiny homes, accessory dwelling units, pre- fabricated homes, co-housing, cottage housing, and other housing types. Page 6 of 7 Staff Report and Recommendation CTA-2018-0005 Policy H-P3 Support the development of affordable housing units using available financial and regulatory tools. Policy H-P4 Enable the creation of housing for resident individuals and families needing assistance from social and human service providers. (2) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; Staff Analysis: Staff notes that the Applicant has not identified a clear statement as to how the proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. The sole basis identified by the Applicant for the proposed amendment is to"mitigate excessive duplex/rental buildout detrimental to homeowners." In reviewing the proposed amendment, staff believe that the amendment creates regulations that are in conflict with numerous goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and would create barriers to providing alternative and affordable housing options in the R-3 zone. Further, it creates unclear and difficult to implement regulations. The amendment does not bear a substantial relation to public health, safety,welfare and protection of the environment. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed text amendment is not consistent with the approval criteria contained in the SVMC. 2. Finding and Conclusions Specific to Public Comments a. Findings: No public comments have been received to date. b. Conclusion(s): In the absence of public comments, staff makes no conclusions. 3. Finding and Conclusions Specific to Agency Comments a. Findings: No substantive agency comments have been received to date. b. Conclusion(s): In the absence of substantive agency comments, staff makes no conclusions. B. OVERALL CONCLUSION The proposed code text amendment is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff makes no recommendation on the privately initiated code text amendment. However, if the Planning Commission recommends approval of the code text amendment, staff recommends that the proposal be rewritten with substantive changes to content considered,as well as clear land use impacts and bases to support such amendments. Page 7 of 7 CITY OF 110111.111741111111111% DEVELOPMENT CODE TT AMENDMENT APPLICATION SVMC 17.80.150 alley10210 E Sprague Avenue ! Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 • Fax: (509)720-5070 ! permitcenter(c4spokanevalley.org STAFF USE ONLY f Date Submitted: I i f IL 07 l' Received by: —7,0P Fee: S//.('' C'( PLUS #: iA File#: LT A - •:),C) I Z GC)C), PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL **THE PLANNING DIVISION WILL NOT ACCEPT YOUR APPLICATION IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** Pre-Application Meeting Request (include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) Completed Application Form ad SeVIN plication Fee El 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.) PART II - APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT NAME: T"�f.0 /Y)/LLE2 MAILING ADDRESS: f 8/Z41 E ,17/55/441 /N E-- 1 CITY: g 'p j r 149LLE STATE: W41 ZIP: 9, 0/s(� 04(APETZSAIE PHONE:SD?-244 60 70 FAX: CELL' L EMAIL: ( pyi/ii j;Aar SECTION(S)OF CODE PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED(INCLUDE CODE CITATION): /9.pc. /9, /9, 41O,CS O SUMMARY OF REQUESTED CODE AMENDMENT(S): r /c// FIPEgle T� FAru pJc eel PES Fo, '6SWEAlr S tM ,)-5 2aNE • PL-08V1.p RECEIVED Page 1of2 N O V 1 6 2 018 SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ok n0a `' '`I Sp a .000 Val ley TEXT, AMENDMENT APPLICATION REASON(S) , FOR CODE AMENDMENT(S): /m/77 ,4T- -r,CC S/V , i L4-PL.EY�� Aind'c... F cv c2,OcL7 - 'TRirw,E4774L /a p /Ylf 4r.Of)2 3 IS THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT CONSISTENT WITH THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: yrs DOES THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BEAR A SUBSTANTIAL RELATION TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, AND PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT: ,/z5 PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of applicant) I, I, )44A/CCf «F47-6 01it_LE/R , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made truthf011y and to the best of my knowledge. /141-1 ///47/„/P (Signatu e) (Date NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) / SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this / day oWtike t J r , 2d g NOTARY SEAL c4Ictit,ta_C541771Z-70 NOTARY SIGNATURE ri"Mill."N Notary Public in and for the State of Washington State of Washington �DEANNA HORTON �MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Residing at:c474-141e / � ) ! 7'moi`, JULY 2 ,2D21 nuuuuimmIiNn UNNII My appointment expires PL-03 V1.0 Page 2 of 2 • S. COMMUNITY &PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT t""'� Building &Planning Division PRE-APPLICATION MEETING WORKSHEET File No. PRE-LU-20178-0062 Meeting Date & Time: Wednesday,November 7, 2018@ 2:00 PM This pre-application meeting and$250.00 fee paid is valid for one (1)year from the date of the meeting. If proposal changes or expires,you must apply for a new meeting with application and associated fee. Project Details: Proposal: Modify duplex standards in R-3 zone and not permit townhomes in R-3 zone. Sections to be modified of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) are 19.40.060 19.60.050. See attached proposal. Applicant: Pete Miller, 18124 East Mission Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA Meeting Topics: 1. Fees total $1,850.00 (less the $250.00 paid) 2. Project discussion: a. Conflicts with goals and policies of Comprehensive Plan i. LU-G4 Ensure that land use plans, regulations, review processes, and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality. ii. LU-P 14 Enable a variety of housing types. ij. H-G1 Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs / of the community. H-G2 Enable the development of affordable housing for all income levels. iv. H-P2 Adopt development regulations that expand housing choices by allowing innovative housing types including tiny homes, accessory / dwelling units, pre-fabricated homes, co-housing, cottage housing,and other housing types. 3. Code Text Amendment process. SVMC 17.80.150 and flowchart of process provided. 4. Criteria for approval of a Code Text Amendment per Spokane Valley Municipal Code 17.80.150(F). a. The proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; and b. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. PRE LU-2018-0062 November 7,2018 Page I of 1 RECEIVED NOV 1 6 201d SPGKar'E '.'2LLL' . 19.60.050 Permitted uses matrix. Parks and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space • R- R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Agriculture and Animal Animal processing/handling P Animal raising and/or keeping SSS S S S Animal shelter S P P Beekeeping, commercial P Beekeeping, hobby S S S Community garden SSSS S S S Greenhouse/nursery. commercial P P P Kennel S S S S P P Orchard, tree farming, P P commercial Riding stable P P C Communication Facilities Radio/TV broadcasting studio P P P P Repeater facility PPP P P P P P Small cell deployment SSSS S S S S S S S Telecommunication wireless SSSS S S S S S S antenna array Telecommunication wireless SSS S S S S S S S support tower Tower, ham operator SSS S S S S S S S Community Services Community hall, club, or lodge P P P P P P P Church, temple, mosque, PPP P P P P P synagogue and house of worship .Parks and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space R- R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC lMU I POS Crematory P P P P Funeral home P P Transitional housing C Day Care Day care, adult PPPP P P P P P P Day care, child (12 children or PPPP P P P P P P fewer) Day care, child (13 children or CCCP P P P P P P more) Eating and Drinking P P P P P P S Establishment Education Schools, college or university P P P Schools, K through 12 PPPP P P P P Schools, professional, vocational P P P P P P and trade schools Schools, specialized P P P P training/studios Entertainment Adult entertainment and retail S Casino P P P Cultural facilities P P P P Exercise facility S S S S Off-road recreational vehicle use P P Major event entertainment P P P Racecourse - P P P P Racetrack P P Recreational facility P P P P P P Parks and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space R- R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU 'CMU NC RC IMU 1 POS Theater. indoor P P P Group Living Assisted P P P P living/convalescent/nursing hone Community residential facilities P P P P P P (6 residents or less) Community residential facilities P P P (greater than 6 and under 25 residents) Dwelling, congregate P P P Industrial, Heavy Assembly, heavy P Hazardous waste treatment and S S storage Manufacturing. heavy ` P Processing, heavy • P Mining S Industrial, Light Assembly. light P P P P P Manufacturing. light P P P Processing, light P P Recycling facility S S S S Industrial service p p Lodging Bed and breakfast P P P P P Hotel/motel P P P P S Recreational vehicle I S park/campground Marijuana Uses Parks and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space T R- R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU l POS Marijuana club or lounge Marijuana cooperative Marijuana processing S S Marijuana production S S Marijuana sales S S S Medical S P P P P P Office Animal clinic/veterinary S S S S S Office, professional PPP P P P 1' Parks and Open Space Cemetery P P P Golf course P P P P P P P P Golf driving range C C C C' P C P P P Parks PPP P 1' P P P P Public/Quasi-Public Community facilities PPP P P P P P P P P Essential public facilities RRRR R R R R R Public utility local distribution SSS S S S S l' P P S facility Public utility transmission facility S SS S S S S S S S S Tower, wind turbine support S SS S Residential Dwelling, accessory units S S S SS S SS Dwelling, caretaker's residence S SSS S Dwelling, cottage S S S S Dwelling, duplex PS P P P Parks and Mixed Open Residential Use Commercial Industrial Space R- R- R- 1 2 3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Dwelling, industrial accessory S S dwelling unit Dwelling, multifamily P P ,P Dwelling, single-family P P P P P P P Dwelling, townhouse S S S S S Manufactured home park S S Retail Sales and Service P P 5 P P S S Transportation Airstrip, private P P Battery charging stations S S S P P P P P P P S Electric vehicle infrastructure P P P P P P P Heliport P P Helistop t. C P Parking facility—controlled P P P P P access Railroad yard, repair shop and P roundhouse Transit center P P P P P Vehicle Services Automobile impound yard P P _ Automobile/taxi rental P P P P P Automobile parts, accessories and P P P P P tires Automobile/truck/RV/motorcycle P P P P painting, repair, body and fender works Car wash P P S P P P • Farm machinery sales and repair P P P Fueling station P P 5 P P P A 19.40.060 Development standards -- Duplexes. Duplexes shall be limited to I duplex per acre. Du slexes shall have se+crate .arcel numbers .er each dwelling unit, be non-adiacent, across the street from or on opposite corners. Duplexes shall meet the minimum lot size per dwelling unit. setback standards, maximum lot coverage, and building height standards shown in Table 19.70-1. (Ord. 16-018 § 6 (Att. B), 2016). 19.40.050 Development standards—Cottage development. A. Site. 1. The design of a cottage development shall take into account the relationship of the site to the surrounding areas. The perimeter of the site shall be designed to minimize adverse impact of the cottage development on adjacent properties and, conversely, to minimize adverse impact of adjacent land use and development characteristics on the cottage development: 2. The maximum density shall be two times the maximum number of dwelling units allowed in the underlying zone; 3 Where feasible, each cottage that abuts a common open space shall have a primary entry andior covered porch oriented to the common open space; 4 Buildings shall meet the following minimum setback standards: a. Twenty-foot front yard setback; b. Ten-foot rear yard setback; and c. Five-foot side yard setback: 5. Common open space is required and shall meet the following criteria: a. Four hundred square feet of common open space per cottage; b. Setbacks and private open space shall not be counted towards the common open space: c. One common open space shall be located centrally to the project with pathways connecting the common open space to the cottages and any shared garage building and community building: d. Cottages shall surround the common open space on a minimum of two sides of the open space, and e Community buildings may be counted toward the common open space requirement: 6. One and one-half off-street parking spaces for each cottage is required. B Building 1 Cottages shall not exceed 900 square feet, excluding any loft or partial second story and porches. A cottage may include an attached garage, not to exceed an additional 300 square feet. 2 The building height for a cottage shall not exceed 25 feet. 3 The building height for any attached garage or shared garage building shall not exceed 20 feet. 4. Buildings shall be varied in height. size, proportionality, orientation. rooflines, doors, windows, and building materials. 5. Porches shall be required. C. Other. 1, Accessory dwel9ing units are prohibited. 2. In-whole purchase of any development by one entity in the R-3 zone is prohibited. 3. 2. All other SVMC provisions that are applicable to a single-family dwelling unit shall be met. D Permit Type. Cottage development shall require approval of a conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 9.150 SVMC. E. SVMC Title 20, Subdivision Regulations. The design requirements of SVMC 20.20.090 are waived. (Ord. 16- 018 § 6 (Aft. B), 2016). CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 15,2018 Department Director Approval: El Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Overview of Duplex Regulations in the Residential Zones GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 19.40.060; SVMC 19.60.050; SVMC 19.65.130; and SVMC 19.70.020 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: SVMC 19.60.050,Table of Permitted Uses,identifies that Duplex Dwellings are allowed in the R-3,MFR, and Mixed Use Zones. The R-3, Single-Family Residential Urban Zone allows residential development at a density of 1-6 dwelling units per acre. Duplex development regulations generally note that the same standards must be met for a duplex as for a single family residence, with the exception that the minimum lot size must be provided per unit. Council has requested the duplex regulations be discussed. Staff will present an overview of the duplex regulations for discussion. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:N/A STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner Doug Powell,Building Official Marty Palaniuk, Planner ATTACHMENT: PowerPoint Presentation Spokane Valley City Council Meeting May 15, 2018 Overview of Single Family and Duplex Development Regulations Administrative Report Single Family versus Duplex (Appendix A - Definitions) Dwelling, single-family: A building, manufactured or modular ho e or portion thereof, designed exclusively for single-family resident8 �a purposes, with a separate entrance and facilities for cooking, se ing, and sanitation. IP Dwelling, duplex: An attached building designed exclusively for occupancy by two families, with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking, sleeping, and sanitation, but sharing a common or party wall or stacked. Dwelling, townhouse: A single-family dwelling unit constructed in groups of three or more attached units in which each unit extends from foundation to roof, open on at least two sides. Dwelling, multifamily: A building designed for occupancy by three or more families, with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking, sleeping, and sanitation. Single Family - International Residential Code Chapter 2 Definition WAC 51 -51 : R101 .2 Scope. The provisions of the International Residential Code for One- and Two-family Dwellings shall apply to the construction, alteration, movement, occupancy, location, removal and demolition of detached one- and two-family dwellings, adult family homes, and townhouses not to exceed three stories in height IRC Chapter 2 - Definitions Dwelling: Any building that contains one or two dwelling units used, intended, or designed to be built, used, rented, leased, let or hired out to be occupied, or that are occupied for living purposes. Dwelling Unit: A single unit providing complete independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. lip Why are Duplexes allowed in Single lb Family Neighborhoods Scale 4 i_ ` -! Duplexes and Single Family Homes are similar in size '- Designed as a single family unit sharing a commonau1 wall - _. � . . -- , Can be one story or two story; Livable area can be `- - horizontal or stacked — - -'� - - _ - , - �- -�--�--__ __ Character - AiginiOr-AF, Generallyhas typical features of a single familyhome dal Maim YP g ii gI , Garage facing the street; front door entrance to each unit II ' r ' , h ,. Similar construction to existing single family neighborhood structures Scale and Character (single family, duplex, townhouse i ii --___ tu it' ...., ....._,... ...._ ...._Ifill , ., ........_____ . ..._ and multifamily) . . _„.. ._. 4. ..., . ,_ . _ . _ . ., , 6- LI,LF LI, . - ------____- , -- -_:-, --,--,,----___-__- .4k I -------,„ - [11 U • ,:..i.., A‘,,,,, II] ......, '-‘44111111. Aldr7raglaik - s w,,,,,• -of .,. V,;'. l'I - - - mr....r. I 1 I$ .,....- 1 , .1 . 7 io.. I I I I 110-' IAI • 0" .. I .i I •,.... ii - WI • E' ::'7 V -- &...,....,___, v p 1,4 - i . . . - .... ,,,.... _ Iig--- • • c771' A. ‘ ' ''6: ''''',t - ..:7,,,::'...n','L., 11,I.,4'.-.;',. '''1=',-.- "."-••?t"..,),i; ' • _,- - g Wt.-Ay ! . , ,A'``.-' , oricir--1 ....... , ti,e..i i-. . . .t IN —7 ... .. ., ),• , UPI imi , . . . r.= . IM . "' 1 ' , . 0 w r ' ...r, - -• - -IL.% ..; .'. • ,.,..0 ..6„41111 ..L.. ::, ...ILI 111 i .......-5., 0 - ,11 t., __ii Ilk i 1., fr :Z-11 .- --- - ..' ,^ A, r , 1 '. li. : - 1 ._ . • Scale and Character _ ___ __ _ _ .. .... ..._ . _ Duplex vs . Multifamily __ . ______ : . f.Rroa¢., Awe in , iv. . mi, -Ns t5 t. R I --� , . . . , _ , .,,, __ c t - 1 '• r- 11,1111111771:' i - --r- - 4- Scale and Character f : Duplex vs . Single Family : t , �.i , y , viii-_ at.., , . . ah. ,.. 115, .1, ,, 1 43.1 If* „ma iiiir tem -14 ,,jr.: --.r ...1 ' - 1,11 I ': ' . '. 01:14' „ ° 'g,ea Ave E 8thcAve - 8 ,ii !Iiirm ' III . ill lini ti 1} , . ., _ ■ •_. . . i .la a■■y I1C o■I ■ n,y,,E'1 Cityof • T , _ i P y 1L Spokane Va I ley _1 ,___. -- . :� �� E ucidAva E� �A a la gt 'ye Buckeye ] - i i8 a. ;�-.. '44'P � _ 1 �Zoning N/lap Kr&A .,I --'.1.--.('''roe S 7 In4ianaA �� is L J.l. ,,,■� I 4'p � 6a !tissctnAvc it i gid!!` _ . __ Mission Ave �i S' v �r■�■f .i - '� Ee 4 .. _ v Broadway • w �+m ■ �`-- 0 Avg 9Rx3 iAw. a iji. V ..a� : 1.12 g 5 .` ..oadwa A e - - � l i 'y! a till- • • 11 total Zones : A : : _ . ,,�, . - _ • . .._77,7_...., . . inii• • • 4 residential • 4. „,,,..„7„,....., U �r E pf r ■ F-..-,.__ , ta ■ 18th Ave I 98t /1r/, � • 3 Mixed Use ,...■■■.■/ ■ ‘,._ . - 114. 10 - ZthAve 24th Ave ' - lir al. te • 2 Commercial ,ve ,J • 1 Industrial I. _ Legend .p >✓r/ RS MU 1 LakestRivers • 1 Parks/Open S ace -� `�'v CM municipal Boundaries ;'/,;lT R3 -RC Arterials -r ipapM"�A. '£'.' ; f'os ®IML FreewayiHirghway - NSF �! 1 8 _ali . , -NC r6 . Q $ori v c ellesle Ave #, e Zonesthat allow � • -•...,---` 0.0A11‘• . . N.- Single Family and f .7--,_______ __ • 4 • y _ i E �uClid Ave Euclid Ay: e Buckeye A } Luplex qwe ' __ 14riox Awe II r yNSW j MulauraAwa � Sh-, Mission Ave .� •3:�:t3 _ Mssi.. •ve • Mixed Use •• . t _ 81=4 t m I Aua �a a'!4!--dilmr7luieg ' :!1g e • CorridorCY 1.1 lurnT pr io, Mixed Use I___ .=. ill. ' , • • Multifamil inomm .... "'r iBlhAve I " 16x1 g-. a5 .4 ilfiS Residential •-- '. ._ate. 2 Ih Ave 2401 Ave vi • R-3, Single ..dAwe =�:; Family ._� Residential .! Legend M R3 I I Lakes/Rivers I 44111 Awe l'h n�;. Urban . MF D Municipal B. elurrdaries �. MM Frier als I I I SVMC Development Regulations - Table 19.70-1 R-1 R-2 R_3 MFRO = .0.-it and FI -<ing Street. Yard 35' 15' 15 15' Seto El ck ,. 35' u' 20 2i I' a age eUJ{Icf var Yard Setoac . C',, L'; 10 10' Virimun7 .isle YardSetback: 5 5' 5' 5' 'ti peri Space l'. . Ni., 1..1i.A 10% gross area:2• Lot Size'4' 40:000 sq. ft. 10:000 srl. ft. .5.00C sq. ft. NoA Lot Coverage 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 50.0% Maximum Ge.ri ity 1 duras 4 deur"ac G du/ac 22 du/ac Building Height''2:' 35' 35' 35' 50' SVMC 19.40. 060: Duplexes must meet the minimum lot size per dwelling unit, setbacks, max lot coverage, and building height standards shown in Table 19.70- 1 . Spokane CUrban Residential Minimum Lot Size Zones (Area in square feet) Duplex Density Single Zone Allowed (Units/acre) Family Duplex Low Density Residential X 1 -6 5,000 10,000 Low Density Residential Plus i 1 43, 560 Medium Density Residential X 6- 15 4,200 8,400 High Density Residential i X 66.15 All 1 ,600 3,200 ote: Spokane County allows duplexes in Mixed Use, Commercial, Resource !Inds, and Rural Zones. Minimum Lot Size Spokane Residential Zones (Area �• n square feet) Duplex Density Single Zone Allowed (Units/acre) Family Duplex Residential Agriculture 4-10 7,200 Residential Single Family 4-10 4,350 Residential Single Family Compact 4-10 4,350 Residential Two-Family X 10-20 1,800 4,200 Residential Multifamily X 15-30 1,800 2,900 J Residential High Density X 15 + min none None * Spokane has both a minimum and maximum density requirement. Minimum Lot Size (Area in Liberty Lake Residential Zones square feet)* Duplex Density Zone Allowed (Units/acre) Single Family Duplex R-1, Single Family Residential 4-6 5,000 R-2 Mixed Residential X 6-12 5,000 - 10,000 7,000 -12,000 R-3 Multi-Family Residential X 12 + 4,000 — 8,000 5,000 — 10,000 * Liberty Lake has both a minimum and maximum density and lot size requirement. Spokane Valley Residential and Mixed Minimum Lot Size Use Zones (Area in square feet) Duplex Density Single Zone Allowed (Units/acre) Family Duplex R-1 Single- Family Residential Estate 1 40,000 R-2 Single Residential Suburban 4 10,000 R-3, Single - Family Residential urban X 6 5,000 10,000 MFR - Multifamily Residential X 22 DU/acre 2,000 4,000 MU Mixed Use X None 2,000 4,000 CMU Corridor Mixed Use X None 2,000 4,000 Conclusions of Jurisdictional Survey w _ __ ____ -.. Comparison of Duplex Lot Size Range Allowed by Minimum Lot Adjacent Jurisdictions Size 14000 Comparison: 1200000 LL 10000 00 N a COSV IS s 8000 • 6000 similar to 1' 4000 4 0 J County 2000 0 Low Lot Size Larger Lot Size Smallest to Largest Minimum Lot Area Allowed Spokane County —Liberty Lake —Spokane —Spokane Valley Single Family Residential Permits Regional Trends -• -, M. Spokane Spokane Comparison of Single Family Residential Permits ' 2013 -2018 (present) Year Valley Spokane County 900 2013 110 269 551 800 700 2014 151 213 421 600 500 2015 167 312 526 400 300 2016 175 342 769 200 100 2017 129 314 816 0 2018 35 89 286 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 L Spokane Valley Spokane Spokane County Duplex Permits I Regional Trends • M. Spokane Spokane Comparison of Duplex Permits Year Valley Spokane County 2013-2018 (present) 100 2013 4 9 76 80 2014 26 5 67 60 2015 17 6 86 40 20 2016 24 6 35 r 0 2017 37 8 19 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2018 28 23 2 —Spokane Valley —Spokane Spokane County Regional Trends Duplex as a percentage of total DU Duplex as a percentage of permits permits 50.0% Spokane 45.0% Year Valley Spokane Spokane County 40.0% 35.0% 2013 3.5% 3.2% 12.1 % 30.0% 25.0% 2014 14.7% 2.3% 13.7% 20.0% 2015 9.2% 1 .9% 14.1 % 15.0% 10.0% 2016 12.1 % 1 .7% 4.4% 5.0% .. I_I -I -, I■■ 0.0% - 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2017 22.3% 2.5% 2.3% • Spokane Valley • Spokane • Spokane County 2018 44.4% 20.5% 0.7% Next Steps mr o Staff is reviewing density & evaluating development trends In Further Council discussion on this item CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 2, 2018 Department Director Approval: El Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Duplex Density Issues GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 19.40.060; SVMC 19.60.050; SVMC 19.65.130; and SVMC 19.70.020 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: On May 15,2018 staff provided an overview of the duplex development regulations in the residential zones to City Council. At that meeting, staff stated that a review of the density regulations was being performed and that more information would be brought to City Council at a future meeting. Staff has reviewed recent plat activity to determine if the density has been exceeded with the construction of single family dwellings or duplexes. It has been found that in two specific instances duplex development has resulted in the maximum density of 6 dwelling units per acre to be exceeded by one dwelling unit. A memo has been provided that highlights the issues. Staff will present an overview of the density issues for discussion. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:N/A STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner Jenny Nickerson, Building Official ATTACHMENT: September 26, 2018 Memo with attachments Spokane Community and Public Works Department .i Val ley 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5000 • Fax: (509)720-5075 •www.spokanevalley.org Memorandum Date: September 26, 2018 To: John Hohman, Deputy City Manager From: Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner Subject:Density Issues Associated with Land Division Recent changes were made to the Development Regulations that were intended to increase opportunity for infill development. A review of the regulations in 2016 identified that 7,500 square foot minimum lot size was a barrier to infill development. In previous years the city processed many rezone applications to reduce the minimum lot size from 7,500 square feet down to 6,000 square feet. The rezones were approved as the requests were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The 3-4 month rezone process was delaying development unneccesarily as the rezones would ultimately be approved. Analysis showed that reducing the minimum lot size to 5,000 square feet would allow more flexibility to develop lots within the irregular shaped parcels. Residential development in the R-3 zone is limited to a density of 6 dwelling units per acre of lot area (6 du/ac). The current development regulations associated with the R-3 zone allow for both single family dwelling and duplex dwelling development on individual lots. A minimum of 5000 square feet of lot area is required per dwelling unit(DU)for a total of 10,000 square feet of lot area required for a duplex. Within this memo are examples and further explanation as to how the density limitation described above has been, and could be, exceeded by duplex development. Spokane Valley residents have expressed concerns related to negative impacts to neighborhoods resulting from duplex development in the R-3 zone which has the potential to exceed the maximum allowed density. Generally,the concerns focus on decreased property values and the effects of rental properties to the owner-occupied dwellings in the neighborhoods. The current zoning regulations do not distinguish between owner-occupied and rental properties but do stipulate a maximum density allowed in all residential zones (see Table 1). Table 1 Maximum Density and Minimum Lot Size by Residential Zoning District R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR Maximum Density 1 du/ac 4 du/ac 6 du/ac 22 du/ac Minimum Lot Size 40,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft 2,000 sq. ft. Duplex Minimum N/A N/A 10,000 sq. ft. 4, 000 sq. ft. Lot Size Duplex development has been increasing over the past five years. A recent review of the building permits issued for single family dwellings compared to duplex building permits has shown a steady Page 1 increase since 2013 of duplex construction. A comparison of duplex development between City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County and City of Spokane permits noted that the City of Spokane has experienced an increase in duplex permitting from 2017 to 2018, but that Spokane County has experienced a steady decline in duplex development since 2015. Figure 1 highlights the comparison of duplex development by jurisdiction. Figure 1 The density regulation is primarily implemented during the land division process. Prior to Comparision of Duplex Permits submitting a short plat or subdivision 2013-2018 (April) application the property is reviewed to 100 determine the maximum number of lots that 80 can be created for residential development. 60 This occurs very simply with the following 40 formula: Density X Acres= Number of lots allowed. In an R-3 zone example with an 20 allowed density of 6 du/ac on a parcel that is .5 acres in size, 3 lots would be allowed (6 DU's X 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 .5 acres=3 lots). After the lots are established, —Spokane Valley—Spokane —Spokane County the lot size is reviewed at the time of a building permit application to determine that the minimum area is provided, corresponding with the proposed use,which is either a single family residence or duplex( See Table 1 for Minimum Lot Size). In 2018 staff conducted a review of platting activities that had occurred subsequent to the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulation update. The review period was January 2017 through April 2018. The review noted that during that time-frame the city had received 42 subdivision applications, (32 short subdivision applications and 10 long subdivision applications); eight of those plats had been recorded with the Spokane County Assessor's Office; and according to a review of building permits five of the plats were either developed or currently under development. The final item noted that two of the five plats had exceeded the maximum density allowed through the development of duplexes, rather than development of single family dwellings (See Table 2). Table 2 Number of Dwelling Units Allowed and Built By Plat File No. Plat Number Maximum Dwelling Units Number of Dwelling Units Built Size(in of Lots Allowed Acres) Approved SHP-2017-0005 .56 2 3 2 SHP-2017-0008 .29 2 2 2 SHP-2017-0010 1.65 6 10 11 SHP-2017-0016 .98 2 6 2 SHP-2017-0018 .79 3 5 6 Note: See attached plats for detail. A review of SHP-2017-0010 and 0018,the two plats which exceeded the density through development, indicates that all the lots created were greater than 10,000 square feet,which is the minimum lot size Page 2 required for a duplex in the R-3 zone.The physical development of the lots determined the density at build-out, and in each case the development exceeded the density by one DU. The concern is that the discrepancy between lot development and build out has become a "loop hole" for development to squeeze in additional dwellings. While the density has been exceeded by one DU in two occasions, it is not clear beyond the snap shot of time reviewed, how frequent this will occur. Other jurisdictions: Discussions with Spokane County staff indicate that the same situation occasionally occurs within County Plats, but this is not a major concern for them. In fact, as part of the County's Comprehensive Plan Update process staff has reviewed their Development Regulations to identify barriers to infill opportunities and noted that their 6 du/ac maximum density, large lot sizes, and lot standards are inhibiting infill and affordable housing opportunities. County staff's alternatives, currently under consideration by the Planning Commission and potentially focus groups, includes increasing the density from 6 du/ac, up to 8 du/ac, and allowing a bonus density up to 10 du/ac for duplex and row housing; decreasing the lot size in the Low Density Residential Zone from 5,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet; and reducing lot width requirements. Spokane County's Draft Infill Development Options report is attached for your information. Conversations with City of Spokane (COS) staff indicates that duplex development exceeding density requirements is not a concern as duplexes are only allowed in zones with a density of 10 units and greater. For information the COS minimum lot size requirements are 2,900 or 4,200 square feet depending on the zone. Possible Solutions for Discussion: The concerns identified by the neighborhood were considered in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. The following discussion highlights three options that affect duplex development through dedication language, density increases or lot sizes increases or decreases. The options could be used to either limit duplex development or eliminate the density conflict. Plat Language Dedication language could be placed on the recorded plat that stipulates which lots could be developed with duplexes, or generally identifies that the density couldn't be exceeded at the time of development. The concern with this approach is that if development regulations change in the future,the dedication language remains a controlling factor that can only be changed by a Plat Alteration process. This could be a costly and time intensive process for a developer depending on a variety of circumstances. Additionally, buyers may be unaware of a density limitation when purchasing the lot, and find out after the investment has been made,that although the lot meets the minimum area requirement for a duplex,the density limits have been reached by the previous development on the lots within the plat. County staff indicated that dedication language has been used as a means to ensure compliance with the density limits, but noted instances where the density has been exceeded as the dedication language was overlooked at the time of permit application,when the reviewers only considered the lot size. The point being dedication language increases the opportunity for error as it may conflict with the development regulations. Page 3 Density The current maximum density is 6 du/ac in the R-3 zone. However,the minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet allows for a density of 8 du/ac to be achieved. This is also true when applying the duplex minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Generally 8 du/ac is not achievable as many factors influence the design of the lots that include providing right-of-way, irregular parcel boundaries, existing development or natural features, etc.. The density forces all, or some of the lots to be larger in order to stay within the density limits. This could contribute to the higher cost to develop housing and may conflict with goals and policies within the comprehensive plan to increase opportunities for affordable housing. The density limit could be increased to 8 du/ac which would eliminate the conflict. If the density limit were increased, it would allow the development community to take full advantage of the 5,000 square foot lot size and support infill development. The density limit is identified within the Municipal Code, and not in the Comprehensive Plan. Consequently the process to consider this would only require a Code Text Amendment and not a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Lot Size Lot size for a duplex is twice the area for a single family detached dwelling (2 X 5,000 sq. ft. = 10,000 sf. ft.) Increasing the lot size for a duplex has been mentioned to eliminate duplex development from exceeding the density. However, increasing the lot size above that of a single family detached dwelling will likely act as a deterrent to duplex development as developers would be able to develop more single family lots than duplex lots. This would conflict with the Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies that direct the regulations to provide opportunities for affordable housing. Often lot sizes for duplexes are less than twice the area for a single family detached lot as it considers the elimination of the setback area (typically a 5' setback from side yard property line) between the two structures due to the common wall. All the other dimensional standards remain the same to ensure that the duplexes are consistent with the scale of development typical of single family neighborhoods. Other mechanisms may be utilized by other jurisdictions but at this time further research is required. Council Alternatives for Discussion: Before pursuing this matter, staff is requesting direction to determine if further information is desired, and/or if City Council would like the topic to be discussed by the Planning Commission. The City Council may want to consider the following action alternatives: 1. Direct the Planning Commission to review the topic and provide a recommendation through the public review process; 2. Monitor the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update process to keep informed of the modifications to their development regulations while continuing to review development trends within the City of Spokane Valley. Staff would report back at a future City Council Meeting; 3. Consider other action,which may include taking no action. Attachments: Page 4 1. Spokane County Infill Report 2. Recorded Plats 2017-April 2018 Page 5 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 Infill Development Options Low Density Residential Zones As part of Spokane County's Comprehensive Plan Update, the Department of Building and Planning is considering options to increase opportunities for infill development within the Urban Growth Area. The objective is to provide more opportunities for diverse housing types and increase housing affordability. This effort identifies barriers to certain types of residential development and provides policy and regulatory changes to increase infill opportunities. The proposed changes will affect those areas within the unincorporated Urban Growth Area that are zoned Low Density Residential. The initial review for this project was predicated on concerns within the development community that it is often difficult to develop single family residences in certain areas within the UGA. Many of these areas contain smaller parcels within established neighborhoods, which because of location and economic limitations makes development of traditional subdivisions difficult and less profitable to the point that they become unfeasible. Review and discussion has identified barriers to development including: • Lot Standards Lot standards includes dimensional requirements for lot size, setbacks, frontage and lot coverage. The standards can impede development of infill and affordable housing by limiting smaller lot compact development. Proposed Revisions Lot standard are revised to allow greater flexibility and promote infill development. • Density The current maximum density of 6 units per acre in the LDR zones can hinder infill development, especially in older neighborhoods. In some established residential areas, the sales price for a new single-family home may not provide enough revenue to make the development feasible. Higher density housing may allow development to meet this profitability threshold. Proposed Revisions Increase the maximum density to 8 units per acre in the Low Density Residential Zone. Bonus density would allow projects to increase to 10 units per acre for certain infill projects such as row housing and duplex housing. • Row Housing Row housing, which provides the opportunity for higher density development, is currently only allowed through a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The PUD process is more complex than a traditional subdivision, requiring additional design components and a lengthier process. While the PUD process has been successful for certain developments, it is seldom used. Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 1 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 Proposed Revisions Increase the maximum density to 8 units per acre. Additionally, allow subdivisions to increase to 10 units per acre for certain infill projects such as row housing and duplex housing and providing standards to reduce impacts to existing neighborhoods. • Duplex Development Duplex development, which can provide affordable housing in the UGA, is hindered by development standards that require large lot areas and preclude the development of vertical stacked duplex units where each dwelling unit is on a separate floor. Proposed Revisions Revise the definition of duplex to allow stacked units. Reduce lot area requirements for a duplex to the same lot area requirement for a single-family home. Provide a bonus density for duplexes located on corner lots where the duplex can be designed to resemble a single-family dwelling unit when viewed from the street. • Bonus Density Bonus density, which is supported by Comprehensive Plan policies, is only available in the LDR zone through planned unit developments. Providing bonus density for infill development may increase options for affordable housing in the UGA. Proposed Revisions Provide bonus density provisions for infill development including row housing and certain types of compatible duplex housing. Bonus density will allow a maximum of 10 units per acre. • Small Scale Triplex and Fourplex Development Small scale triplex and fourplex development can provide infill opportunities on sites that are difficult to develop with traditional single-family development. These areas may include isolated, smaller vacant parcels where property values make construction of new single-family homes unfeasible. Providing this opportunity while limiting density to a maximum of 10 units per acre can provide affordable housing opportunities within the urban growth area. Proposed Revisions Allow infill with triplex and fourplex units with bonus density to a maximum of 10 units per acre. Include development standards to lessen impacts to adjacent single-family development. Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 2 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 Proposed Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Additional wording underlined Deleted wording strikethrough Page UL-1, Comprehensive Plan Urban Land Use Categories Residential Categories Three separate categories for residential use are established, ranging from low to high density. Low density residential includes a density range of 1 to and including. 8 dwelling units per acre. Bonus density in the low density residential category may allow an increase to 10 dwelling units per acre for qualifying infill projects.+ceMedium density residential includes a range of greater than 6 to and including 15 dwelling units per acre and high density residential shall be greater than 15 dwelling units per acre. Design standards ensure neighborhood character and compatibility with adjacent uses. Commercial uses, with the exception of office use in high-density residential areas and neighborhood centers associated with traditional neighborhood developments, would only be permitted through changing the land use category with a comprehensive plan amendment or through a neighborhood planning process. Page UL-12, Comprehensive Plan Goal UL.9a Create a variety of residential densities within the Urban Growth Area with an emphasis on compact mixed-use development in designated centers and corridors. UL.9b Create efficient use of land and resources by reducing the conversion of land to sprawling, low density development. Policies UL.9.1 Establish low, medium, and high density residential categories to achieve population and economic growth objectives. Low density residential areas shall range from 1 to and including 6 8 dwelling units per acre. Bonus density in the low density residential category may allow an increase to 10 dwelling units per acre for qualifying infill projects. Medium density residential shall range from greater than 6 to and including 15 dwelling units per acre and high density residential shall be greater than 15.0 residential units per acre. Mixed residential densities may be established through community-based neighborhood planning, subarea planning, or approval of traditional neighborhood developments. UL.9.2 Spokane County shall seek to achieve an average residential density in new development of at least 4 5 dwelling units per net acre in the Urban Growth Area through a mix of densities and housing types. Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 3 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 Proposed Amendments to the Zoning Code Additional wording underlined Deleted wording strikethrough Chapter 14.300 Definitions 14.300.100 Definitions Dwelling, Two-Family (Duplex): A single structure containing 2 dwelling units designed exclusively for occupancy by 2 families living independently of each other, and neither unit is considered an accessory dwelling unit. To be classified as a duplex, the dwelling units must be connected by common floor/ceiling, a common wall or by a covered carport/breezeway which does not exceed a distance of 20 feet between the two dwelling units. 14.606.100 Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Urban Residential Chapter is to implement Comprehensive Plan goals and policies related to urban residential use. Residential zone classifications provide for a range of residential uses within the Urban Growth Area. The Low Density Residential (LDR) zone is primarily for single-family, duplex and row housing residential development that allows a density of 1 to and including 6 8 dwelling units per acre. Small scale, multi-family development may be permitted, consistent with density standards to provide compatibility with adjacent single-family residences. Zero lot- line housing, bonus density and other incentives are permitted to promote infill, preservation of open space, and a variety of housing types and densities. Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 4 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 14.606.220 Residential Lands Matrix Table 606-1, Residential Zones Matrix Residential Uses LDR LDR-P MDR HDR Dwelling, multi-family, small scale infill L N N N development Dwelling, multi-family N N P L Dwelling, multi-family, greater than 30 units per N N N CU acre Dwelling, single-family P P P P Dwelling, row housing L N P P Dwelling, two-family duplex P N P P Dwelling, two-family duplex - corner lot bonus L N N N density Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 5 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 14.606.230 Limited Uses with Specific Standards Uses that are categorized with an "L" in table 606-1, Residential Zones Matrix, are subject to the corresponding standards of this section. In the case of inconsistencies between section 14.606.220 (Residential Zones Matrix) and section 14.606.230, section 14.606.230 shall govern. x. Two family duplex dwelling with corner lot bonus density(LDR zone) a. A two-family duplex dwelling located on a corner lot shall be considered as a single-family dwelling for the purposes of calculating density provided the front door and driveway for each unit face opposite streets to give the appearance of a single-family residence from the street view, as illustrated below. ai ag rW j • o� x. Multi-family dwelling, small scale infill development(LDR zone) Standards to be developed 16. Row housing (LDR zone) a. Row housing development requires application and review as a Planned Unit Development under Chapter 1'1.70'1. a. Row housing shall comply with the requirements for Zero Lot Line Development under Section 14.606.300(4). b. Row housing lots with rear lot lines abutting an existing single-family neighborhood, shall require installation of a 6-foot sight obscuring fence along the rear property line which shall be constructed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. c. Preliminary plats in which 25% or more of dwellings are row houses shall be allowed a bonus density of 2 units per acre within the Low Density Residential zone. If the preliminary plat is completed in phases, each phase of the development must include at least 25% of the units as row housing units until such time as the total number of row housing units required to receive the bonus density has been reached. This requirement shall be included in the plat dedicatory wording. Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 6 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 14.606.300 Development Standards Permitted uses in the Urban Residential zones shall comply with the following development standards. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, evidence of compliance with provisions of this section shall be provided. 40. Density Standards: Table 606-2, Density Standards for Residential Zones Low Density Low Density Medium High Density Residential Residential Density Residential Plus Residential 1 to 6 8 1 unit/acre Over 6 to 15 Over 15 Density: units/acre* units/acre units/acre *Bonus densities may be allowed for planned unit developments and other infill developments as identified herein. Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 7 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 2. Lot Standards: Table 606-3, Lot Standards for Residential Zones Low Density Low Density Medium Density High Density Residential Residential Plus Residential Residential 555 70 %of lot 55 70 % of lot 55 70 %of lot Max. Building 70%of lot area Coverage area area area 35 feet 35 feet 40 feet 50 feet Max. Height 65 feet for a 65 feet for a 65 feet for a 65 feet for a college/university college/university college/university college/university Permitted uses: Minimum lot 6,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. area Minimum 50 feet 60 feet 60 feet 60 feet frontage Single family: Minimum lot 4,000 5,000 sq. 43,560 sq. ft. /1,200 2,500 sq. ft. 1,600 sq. ft. area ft. Minimum 5040 feet 90 feet 50 36 feet 20 feet frontage Duplex: Minimum lot 10,000 4,000 sq. Not applicable. 8,100 2,500 sq. ft. 3,200 1,300 sq. ft. area ft. Minimum 50 40 feet Not applicable 50 40 feet 40 30 feet frontage Row Housing: Minimum lot 2,500 sq. ft. Not applicable. 1,300 sq. ft. 1,300 sq. ft. area Minimum 36 feet Not applicable 36 feet 36 feet frontage Minimum frontage w/ 20 feet Not applicable 16 feet 16 feet vehicle access from alley Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 8 Draft, Subject to Change 6-6-18 Minimum Yard Setback: 15 feet— 15 feet— 15 feet— 15 feet— Front/flanking residence residence residence residence street 20 feet— garage 20 feet— garage 20 feet— garage 20 feet— garage Five feet plus 1 additional foot for each Side 5 feet 5 feet additional foot of structure height over 25 feet to a maximum of 15 feet. Rear(all Five feet plus 1 additional foot for each additional foot of structure height over 25 residential feet to a maximum of 15 feet. zones) Notes: 1 Setbacks are measured from the property line unless there is a border easement, in which case, the setback shall be measured from the border easement. 2. Zero-foot setbacks for side lot lines may be allowed consistent with number 4 below. 3. Front/flanking street setbacks for garages include both attached and detached structures Spokane County Comprehensive Plan Update 9 10(04<yci37 3/-35 LEGEND AUDITORS CERTIFICATE 0 SET CD .ANDT &PLASTIC CAP FINAL SHORT PLAT FIL FOR RECORD BY: NARKED'LANDTIX 2B3A0• RB• CAP SHORT PLAT SHP-2017-0005 ,,,(� DAY a:(722... -20�� IF• FOUND 7-1/C 0.0.IRON PIPE A REPLAT OF TRACT B,SP-1150-97 ��JJ / IN THE NW114 OF THE NE1i4 SECTION 17 A WNUTE5 PAST L O'CLOOVLM: NAGS Fano NAGNNL TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH,RANGE 45 EAST,W.M. AND RECORDED IN VOLUME, OF SHORT EO EASEMENT NOTE CALLOUT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 'C' PA'(S)3�� --><—%— FENCE LINE SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON I -SHEET 2 OF 2- .� tI��,r 510 - 5I LINE TABLE COU J•'AUDITOR 7� L� LINE BEARING DISTANCE / SCALE 1"s50' L1 NE/910.19'E 2600' //J(Q�9`,t37 U N8919'S6•E 2000' OTOR'S FILE NO. J-07 - -- g g U-OB FOUND 2•BRASS CAP WITH 8 N89U3'20-E 2652.93' - - - - MANHOLE RIMFOUND'V' . FOUND ISANITARY SEWER PUNCH MARKT IN - -_ MONUMENT CASE. FOUND 19.0.111—7`., - - - MISSION AVENUE 17 16 REFERENCES SE,SW&NW AS REFERENCES SW,SE&NE AS 17• PER SHORT PLAT SH19-37-06 PER SHORT PLAT SHP-2016-0006 I {" FELTS ROAD 5 FIRST ADD. ? BK.A PG.49 -I o } OPPORTUNITY �, ;' 'C6 VO.K,PG.20-23 '0' O BLOCK 26 4 CD ��'` �'' J - 6 e-' U' -I V� NAGSHARPSHARP AVENUE I- �' _I ---------- • O AO N89.2019'E 166.41' _-X N69R019'E 133.29' RB ¢I 7 GRAHAMS SUB. VR ,• 100.1.1 a 66.00' RR Tr Li- // O I BK. I.P4 87 20' f lC 20' I 30' O Q SP-AC50-97 -Ht.? 13'BEXISORDER 6 G K( I TRACT B g EXISTING PRIVATE -`r^ TRACT A I EASEMENT W r m �. ACCESS EASEMENT w BK.4,PG 77-78 = 2 1 F- -- •"a 9'; •••• ;],057 S.F. (U 11,429 S,F. • 10205 E.] 110211 E.; 1 10 $ EXISTING PRIVATE o 2 ACCESS, ASEME T r SEM1(I EASEMENT -..-� ! EASTWG 20'170' 8 " 8---_ ,�/ -- (IN TRACT A)� I I 20'EASEMENT UNITY 10'WATER MAIN R `:0 1 L J EASEAIFNT J LEASEMENT I I 30' Q SHARP LANE R I\I N8919'S6"E 371.38' 700.67' "'., ��. e L} 1_ BOONE AVENUE '1 0 1 -'F' IP 1 N8919'58"E 166.61' T9 N6919'S6'E T 133.34' r OPPORTUNITY -1 Pa.K,PG.20-13 20'120 BLOCK 54 I BLOCK 55 itis -I- /0//i//7 i PI EASEMENT NOTES Ig 4 �1T7++R.' 40 5 OAREA LOT 2 DEDICATED TO PUBUC AS ACCESS ! E'I,'— EASELENT.WATER EASEMENT,UTLITY EASEMENT. AND PERPETUAL NON-EXCLUSIVE PRIVATE SEWERyy,, '} EASEMENT ;e 2s]io ‘F•„26393T ORAL LNN INDEX DATA BASIS OF BEARINGS ALONG I THE UUWEENI D CENNTERLG LIINE OF FELTS ROAD,AS -- --- I LANDTEK !!c I 1 - + + EQUIPMENT&PROCEDURES BROADWAY AVENUE 1 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WITH A TOPCON --------- 619 N.MADEUA STREET ---+--}--+--- MAO SPOKANE,WASHINGTON 99202 I I I RIPER-V GLOBAL POSTTONING SYSTEM USING REAL 1 I I TIME KINEMATIC SURVEY PROCEDURES IN PHONE 506926.2021 VEYORSRSMNLC2A1 736 S17 T25N R44E W.M. CONJUNCTION SNC A 33 -SECOND TOTAL STATRSE ION.PROCEDURES ARES ma:2162-Ndieon FSP 10/04/2017 09:16 AM BASIS OF BEARINGS �__ _ 20' 40' 60' AUDITOR'S GER REIGATE Bearings are derived from GPS Grid 13aarings. NAG 83 t Washington North Zone. The existing plat was ' Filed thisay of12t1/i/"'20 , at //�'3/ computed and rotated to best !it to the monumenfation. .tp� The convergence, or difference between Grid North and j o'clock 1 m, in Book 31 of Short Plats,page at the request Geodetic North is 719'09.03". 1: O' I of Emerson Surveying. Auditor's Number/J Ground Distances are shown hereon, tld_ t� Z See Equipment and Procedures for more information. w ' tiT'pp GY' 10 loot 25.00' 1 25.00 C V 9 Utility Easement I /7„/„)/',„ � ty.`�J-^� U YJ per Orig. Plat \ F County Auditor -/ by Deputy Fd. 4"rebor&cap per Plat Corner not set N 87.08'58" E ® ____ due to fence Corner 72.36' �a I Wood Fence _ _ — �. I I VICINITY MAP 7. 78.97 z.0o'4')oter Easement 'No ® I 1 1""= 100" N 8708'58" E 5.51" q _-- J - Sewer Easement Garage Z LDr t (�� o I Q] U 6751 SQ. Ff. Z LOT 2 1 r -. w I I Z c0j Z o 6t 70 54. £r. m i �': I �8 I IA 46364.0303 �, House .I O C) u'w rl f-Concrete o W i o� • 76609E Brood Ave. U u," Inlet I N LI 01" 46364.0203 oV N 76675 E Broad Ave. a I p,1 j�£ I ry00 t3 NN o f at_ _ Q- Ic IP I. Gr 0� cp r0 loot i c' Imo, l0 46364.0304 _IIr-- Porch ( 2 foot Utility Easement O Easement Per Orig. Plat I. ,� 46364.0302 46364.0202 c, (Typical) r c, r _ _ _ �____./' it Seo La end $___-_-------------- ------------- i c4 / -- ------ --9 _____ 01 n 46364 0 ----------- I __O______ __52.80' A A O� 6 P ilV at _----------p____----- Fd. t/2"rebor&cap 0� N. RT PL rT7 207 per Plot' 78.91' N 8708'58"!E _ N T{B_`�B__E_ - Fd. 1 at Z'rebor \ n.6 kyr 'f LOT t a per Plat hb' 511° BLK 3 10 foot ---1 Curb Line_ _-., P Corner not set i Da 9 8707'26" E 0o due to utilities. j 4 760.03'[760.04']_ ♦ `'p�, I BROAD AVE i__—Utility Easement Concrete I S` ' per Orig.Plot Inlet _ _ --J' —._._.—._._ _ —_._._._ _ -- ._ — N' ppk' q I m 46364.0106 Corner not set N o'?, '593.012,9.°s"0 �ti'(L'LpGk' rn a due to utilities. BROAD AVE. o ygy 535 IW o 0 _ _ rn N 276925.20 ft. LEGEND L� E 2540784.27 ft. • CPS County Monument - See Note in Narrative pIa C- a 60C1 Z. • Found monument os noted N 276793.49 ft. I Z o Computed point, not found or set this survey E 2538135.72 ft. I o --C p. Set 1/2"rebor&cop PLS 38037 $1:4' 1v or as noted [ )Record plat dote m I y fIl - - - Drainage Easement per Originol Plat e Sanitary Sewer Manhole •k o Short .Plat S'IP—,2017—0008 UI A EQUIPMENT&PROCEDURES pi Water meter e I • ti 1 B ti DQ Water Valve .Martin Short Plat This Survey wos performed using a Wean CPS Receiver with RIK I the using the Washington State Reference Network(WSRN) I In the SWC of SEX of Section 36 corrections. NAD8J-20t 1 Epoch 2010 j Fd. 1/2"robot-&cap Redundant measurement using re-initiolization and multiple per Plot 7- measurements with error ellipses not greater than.OS'was achieved. a t•26N., R.44E. W.M. Methods used comply with State Low including WAC 332-130-90& �+ WAC 332-130-100. O ].F.e.., NARRA:7VE- Boundary Determination City of Spokane Volley, Spokane County, WA. ' 'Cp9 Ca 11x84,4 tt y oA4y Block 3 was computed from the record plot distances 3',. " relative to the found monumentation as shown hereon. qtr- ' the monumenfation and occupation match / ^` / .+ ',R improvements. Street monumentoion Is intact as .N' ( .. Short PIOt SI-IP-2017-0008 ab.�'la8yp�"' noted f.i Todd J. Emerson PLS 38037 �mra'Y4y LAN�9J CPS County monument Designations and Values ore v nu+w /9//�� y based on the County CPS survey by Jerry Sims filed i��r�;` EMERSON SURVEYING gan-av7 ark v.22— / �" , with the Spokane County Engineer. The values ore Ir "��' 77070 N Tamarac Lane sear II ( shown only for compliance with SV7dC 20.40.010 Cit `/_lt l'''',".20' Nine Mile Falls, WA. 99026 Dara ,f (509) 710-3200 09-14-17 s""'s of P-20 n (¢G%9 36L9 3/-7d.. S H 0 RT PLAT S H P-2 0 1 / -0 0 1 0 SPOKANE COUNTY AUDITOR FILED FOR RECORD BY05/491t sultiMtylQr,_ 201 FOUND y4 REBAR THIS_ DAY OF 11513-__-20'IP', AT 4g INNTH MON. "Ls PER RS LOCATED IN THE NW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 SECTION 21, T25N, R44E, W.M. MINUTES PAST_LI_O'CLOCK ./ M; AND /k,21RECORDED IN BOOK .2I OF SHORTS PLATS AT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON PACE(S)7a--ra RECORDS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, vp. FOUND 7/8"P,K.NAIL(HEW) WASHINGTON. &FOUND 3/8"P.K.NAIL f.,,,L _ 575'01'57"E,0.47' ,::::""cm........ ua 14Lu - - 10TH AVENUE _ N89'30i7"E 1326.12' 1326.1 04) _ f 0' __ __ _- 10__ _ _ _�__--- ------- -�-" ( - SPOKANE COUNTY AUDITOR N.a-} iu -FOUND#4 REBAR YAM CAP"KITZAN FOUND 1.25"BAR- 687.16' 667.06'(R4) O g1\ 682.96' 663.06'R4) 1 , 33141"NOO19'03"W,0.12'FROM N85'32'22"W,2,94' 4,1 g le CALCULATED POSITION 274 5J• FROM LOT 6 CORNER I N89'30'S7"E -}. m __-_.-__-__ nI �� ------I�,}-- 80.32 251.26 40' 92.87' I\ 181.85' __)-...___..___._.. \ 79.BB'(Rl) .LO, 92.92'(Ri) .- 1_ FOUND#5 REBAR IN CONCRETE BASIS OF BEARINGS lR FOUND/4 REBAR 1NTFi ;,I I N00'00'S2"E,0.23'FROM C.1I THE BEARING OF NO0.O1'D9"E ON THE WEST LINE I FOUND 1"TAG 1 I CAP"KITZAN 33141" n �1EASEMENTA I CALCULATED POSITION PER RB I� OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 21 AS t MARKED"KITZAN N0857'08"E,0.15'FROM g w SHOWN ON THE RECORD OF SURVEY AS RECORDED 33141" I I CALCULAIEO POSITION _10'unuTY UNDER BOOK 161 OF SURVEYS, PACE 8 WAS USED L w EASEMENT() m FENCEUNE 0.5'WEST .\1 =o ti 1 fl'A) w ,� OF PROPERTY LINE \�`'' FOUND Q'I AS THE BASIS OF BEARING FOR THIS PLAT. �n I. E SII0R PLAN I 1� 1'�' GN Mn Ind �1'� 6 - WATER V) SPIKE LEGEND �C! II -c1)c. ' 10993 sr N N (!�� ) r J V� $ EASEMENT 19.59'-! ^� TRACT �1080A E.� 11TH �p U FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED 1 TRACT ' I HELD BEARING PER SECTION n I A ! BREAKDDYM AND FOUND REBAR LANE • SET#4 REBAR WITH CAP OR PLUG WITH 1 : �i :ET rn ' WASHER MARKED"WCE LS 43610" 45' I • I N89'33'23"E 286.72' .89'33'23"E 80.32 N89'3323"E 251.27' , ,., w w m m 44.83(RI)C, 78.61' T 72.0°' •V 72.00' t 64.10' ~L 72.42' ( (- _.__.- ��n • FOUND 3/4" TAG MARKED M.E.M." 35157" r FOUND#4 REBAR•IWTH HELO BEARING PER / 7'90 I S n rl, (SEE NOTE PER R3) CAP"KITZAN 33141" SECTION BREAKDOWN �d.i ! g moo o, AND FOUND REBAR \,i o S FOUND GIN 8 O N try z SPIKE a SECTION CORNER 44 o o o ! 0 12TH AVEi N g 1 E. 2 3IVIIr 4 m 5 _ ( 1`+ n SECTION QUARTER CORNER 't 12582 sr w 1 2029 Sr 12030 or 1 203 1 of 1- 12102 eF! Q `;\� R E", lv X10701/10703 E.j" 10707 1070 E.ry 110715/10717 E.:'110725/10727 E. I °110805/10807 E. S _ (,,v,,- r", 5. 1 > '' I N.1234 ADDRESS m 1.,, i / (�H� z (, 1 1 .i'� ti i" ' _y 1L� $ P _1 Ei `�'G l^ FENCEUNE y>t'' _-It7 I 19 v z o i Po PROPERTY o00 �Y a 1'WESTOF NOTES Y, z z zz PROPERTY I) RIGHT OF WAYS CALCULATED PER FOUNDµREBAR WITH ,(� LINE I' LINE 1G 11TH N89'32.37"E 186.55'186.53'(R� ^ CAP"MEM 35157" J v!J�1L` I - ---------- -- R7, R2 &R4. m e LANE 97'90 {� 2) DATE OF SURVEY: AUGUST 2017. n FOUND#4 REBAR \J &ACCESS -- SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE FROM WITH CAP"MEM 351ST EASEMENT N89'34.01"E 811.74'611.58'03) nl FOUND 3/8" FOUND 3/B" ;77-----6S,--- _ _ �___ -- NAIL3) STEWAT DATITCOMPANY,ORDER A n 51' 1 L 11.63' / P.K.NAIL P.K. #17D441, DATED NOVEMBER2017. a �} 7203' 72.00' • 72.00 • 72.00' • 72.42 I y - 89:65' T ��i- 7 _150 00 61.76' \ 9, m,a, 5D,50'(R3)I _ r N89'34'01"E-36048' RECORD DOCUMENTS N 1 6.88'---- f 0' '_ i�T'H LANE- N89•74 01'E 801 88 f 0" w __ NBB'_74'°1"E 4041' __fig* __ _4 --t �•- & (-,1 (RI)RECORD OF SURVEY AS RECORDED IN BOOK 161 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 8. 45.00' 45.°0' T 45. J'$'45.00 45.00 61:82.:.'.--- 5 ��13.79' 118.58' 45.01' \ I � + 61.76'(R3) `� N ("+ g TRACT A `FOUND HOIF • N /' o (--+ (R2)SPOKANE COUNTY SHORT PLAT 84-294 AS RECORDED IN BOOK 3 OF 1WTFi LEAD -n �„� SHORT PLATS, PAGE 49. 589'35'09"W ( ( 5A I.1] 5U• - -- 11570 ----- _I o • (R3)FINAL PLAT OF DIAMOND ROCK PLACE AS RECORDED IN BOOK 30 OF 50.30'(R4) ` (M&R3) n `-7 PLATS,PAGES 46-47. 1 lA 1B 1 2A 213 JA 313 4A 118 now wl e n r..i (R4) FINAL PLAT OF PARC CENTRE AS RECORDED IN BOOK 25 OF PLATS, °'18 ) I fL� PAGES 46-47. e n r .1, p i i I , PP ROC � SIB z 1�1 (R5) RECORD OF SURVEY AS RECORDED IN BOOK 148 OF SURVEYS,PAGE 44. ai P „o0 sig DI�'�I0'RI) ROCI< Pi, cp: n n ��kS• i i ; i i (R8)RECORD OF SURVEY AS RECORDED IN BOOK 10 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 43. ' (R7)RECORD OF SURVEY AS RECORDED IN BOOK 148 OF SURVEYS,PAGE 32. L.-__ I 1 .._._.__I -_-I_-__.i._.._-I__ N89'35'09"E 493.24' � 9 rS FOUND SPIKE IN 1:4 1 12TH AVENUE _ 863.26' 663.11'(R4)___- _ _ ,-____-._- _-___LFI....J86.96. 476.06' I,�i ----- - _.---- N89'37'O9"E 1328.28'1326.26'(R3)1326.22'(R4) FOUND#4 REBAR WITH-4/ / LOCATION a15. CAP WORN SMOOTH �J m '' 44, FOUND 3"BRASS CAP MARKED N / �' 0+'"GO''Py N NE 34150 SPO CO"PER R5 Una Table EgUIPM ENT& PROCEDURES 2657.90'(RI) Line# Length DiredIon j• ' 2653.8T(R2) _ THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED W1TH A TOPCON GPS RTK SYSTEM/ 2 T 2d'i 21 2853.9t'(R5&R7) AND A 5-SECOND TOPCON GPT 3005LW TOTAL STATION THEOD •TE ', Fr N89.4T08"E 2853.90'M ,, 21 L1 20.13 N58.36'12"E ' A,... 4 "1 USING FIELD TRAVERSE PROCEDURES ACHIEVING MINIMUM CLOSU E �� 9 43610 y" 29 28 16TH AVENUE 28 L2 40.70 s0o 105OW W E STANDARDS PER WAC 332-130-090, WAC 332-130-100. �1Z��'n U �s/441 LANDS w BE FOUND 3"BRASS CAP MARKED L3 26.20 NO2'22'14'E / 7 Y/ "34150 SPO CO"PER R7 L4 26.99 NOO"25'le"W 9 FILE NO:SHP-2017-0010 1 1 F.B.: 17-1786 2/01/jCML 4WwftppLE4VVC GRAPHIC SCALE s1 ucmRA 11TH LANE SHEET 50 0 25 50 100 DATE: 02107(18 X 6URVEYIAk 2 OF 2 TRAEFIG SHORT PLAT 0 DRAWN: BAG PIANNI . .TWGENOWEERS JOB NUMBER ( IN FEET) APPROVED:JAG LANDSCAPE 21 S.PNnNESROAD SPOKANE VALLEY,WASHINGTON I inch = 50 ft OTHER SPOWWEVAO.EV,WA 9920817-1786 pH:M8,8912817 MK;5099280217 (,, '9-c3 w-w- L-17 FINAL SHORT PLAT L-19 AUDITOR'S CERTIFICATE BRASS CAP IN MONUMENT CASE BRASS CAP IN MONUMENT CASE REFERENCES FOUND: REFERENCES FOUND: F7 .„!',/$OR - CHID BY: BRASS CAP IN CURB SHORT PLAT SHP-2017-0016 CHISELED*X"IN CURB 'K �[r -5735 85.24' A PORTION OF TRACT 87 OF VERA, IPU/�� -5635 54.89' b �[! -571'W 58.91' -N72'W 80.59" .A DAY xt1L8 CHSELED*8*IN CURB IN THE NEI/4 OF THE SW1/4 OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 44 EAST,W.M., CHISELED 0 IN SIDEWALK -5455 7210' CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON -546'W 42.25' b „,,,,,,AW MINUTES PAST O'CLOCK : -N8214 94.73' ....SHEET 2 OF 2^' -N54^W 47,08' BROADWAY AVENUE p/ BRASS CAP IN CURB AN, na,IN VOLUMEC& OF SHORT IS 14— N89.48'50'W 2844.08' 844.12•-SRI - - - - -- - - -- - - -- -- - - -5851Y 45.88' - - 1322 73x204' /�` /�� _ (1322.05' .C. 'ADSf/�� -SRI) '1-7;.-. 1�J_ Cr r'AUpITOt �� :A21 ALKI AVENUE -`\p1\� a 4f 2V-4.._ ___-__—_—_—_---_ N89'S4'OI'W 1322.32—___—__.____....__...______—_---_ \ fHB� Fl1E N0. I e�_—___—_—_—___ (1322(1322.35.-S121) `� AUDIS e ITI FIRST ADDITION TO 1 I I I VERADALE HEIGHTS n I 9 I S ( IfS7 I I g 10 a 9K 2,PG 42 7 od I e o� Ido N69i . '53'32'W 475.91' -I ._. _._N8953'32'W 700.70'L _�' N8953'32'W �` N8953'32'W r/ -- I I 75.03' 87.22' /�/1// ym J f2.. VERA S N8953.32'W �¢ TRACT 87 12.81' I I LEGEND $"' BK'0',PG 30 ^ (1254'-SRH) 0 SET 1/2*REBAR&'LA IDT010 4879Y CAP O L,L� 50 / 1 N8953'32'W C KsIA GEAR SPIKE(BROKEN) ' ' 100.31' N .0 20' f5502 CSAR SPIKE&'CSI PLS 74150'WASHER I / I SCALE i'a90' MA MAC NAIL&'SPOKANE COUNTY TAG / / \ / I^ I 561• i/x'REBM,NO CAP j \ // �� PER AAFN I BASIS OF BEARINGS 7 I /�.--- 9508220291A Qp I I I L / I ALONG THE CENTERUNEOOF VAU.EYWAY OF W Q p 25' R02• 1/2'REBAR&BROKEN CAP Q� I AVENUE,AS 5405W HEREON. 0*.-.. m R93• 5/8'REBAR&BROKEN CAP \ "a3 ....'..1 WI r EE I (®.') DEVIATION FROM COMPUTED POSITION \\ OLIVE AVENUE 1....-q EQUIPMENT&PROCEDURES m` i n W▪ I^ I \(/ T CW SURVEYWAS GLOBALOUPERFORMED 8114 A SORTER USING REAL DME KINEMATIC // I p SURVEY PROCEDURES IN CONJUNCTION LU o I I + '/^ -'Q WITH HELD TRAVERSE PROCEDURES USING 8 x / 0 A 3-SECOND TOTAL STATION. F a I I SURVEY REFERENCES ( 31,658 S.F. T'`,‘, I"B) 3 14414 E OLIVE AVE n -Q (SH) RECORD SURVEY FRED IN BOON 132 OF I m R m p SUflVEYS.PAGE 36,TRIPP,2008 a a $I�Q INDEX DATA 'a (SR2) FINAL PLAT OF FOURTH ADDITION TO wpb ' S g'$ I I i IVERADALE mows FlLEO IN BOOK 8 OF i m >a a I I E PLATS.PACE 38,SIYPSON,1849 W I� , ,m IZ (SR3) FINAL PLAT OF FIRST ADDITION TO KP I I VERADALE HEIGHTS FLED IN BOCK 2,PAGE I I- p m ,� g --...-242)- 14 - 42,PAYNE 1941 O w'$ 'Q - ~� 2C5 (924) FINAL PUT TT VERA FILED IN BOOK"0", 2 PAGE 30,STRALK.7910 p O i I I 7 I a x ® w ( 414 T25N R44E W.M. '''-<<� Ia',64 2 20' �' ea IB I ¢W O x 3 oca+ SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE K I § THIS PLAT CORRECTLY §,K5 i Id' REPRESENTS A SURVEY MADE BY N09YYOYW 700.37' - ME,OR UNDER MY DIRECTION,IN L .yo O I �'a 7n CONFORMANCE WITH THE I I REQUIREMENTS OF THE OTY OF X —70"PONY E q s, SPOKANE VALLEY SUBDIVISION 15'UTILITYV-- UTILITY ( �6wm ORDINANCE 1 25' 25' EASEMENT EASEMENT W.-.RE Z SCOTT'A.MENDERS P. I 1 1 -`� CERTIFICATE NO.48797 UNE BEARING DISTANCE - 71,081 S.F. >< p 1 1 25 LI NOR'OS'19'E 25.00' 14411 E - a i i A L2 NOOVS'05'E 25.00' I VALIEYWAY AVE - qq8)18' � -10'UTILITY ( 0.FFk Ii7� "'O ' i EASEMENT (' L EASEMENT i I pPj 1b 1N �..... _ \,..._ -.// \\_ O-�-'100.34'--- 18211' I C((LIS_== .9 i-i (132275' ' -SRI) 1 A� -00 C.1 I =w41d Za 1rza 45141 p g7�'{+pg A 1722.72' 476.02' 100.34• ________ 748.38' ]�b1L LAW " )� yl�- -�--------------------- �' - - - - -� I" VALLEYWAY AVENUE In _ N89.4ro7'w 2649.44'(2849.91-SRH)+ - p y -g ( -I ~, .. LANDTEK LLC MEDINGER ADDITION I UNPLATTED I 2 SP-766-92 1 I I BK B.PG 90 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS 819 N.MADEUA STREET SPOKANE,WASHINGTON 99202 PHONE 509.928.2821 FAX 509.926.2730 LAND TEXSURVEYORSOGHAILCOM RLE 2240-FSP 02/20/2018 0141 PM ,/i'!Y3 3/-77 y SH 0 RT PLAT S H P-20 1 7-0 1 8 SPOKANE COUN Y AUDI, OR D FOR RECOR /J,►t r r ,_ _ IS LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 SECTION 21,TZ5N, R44E, W.M. DAY 01✓a' .%r 20,/ AT 2-- .- 49243'(l FOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON MINUTES PAST/ O'CLOCK�M; AND RECORDED IN 587'40'33"E 492.34' - BOOK -' / OF SHORTS PLATS AT PAGE(S U 2/RECORDS 10TH AVENUE r FOUND 1/2" 587'40'03"E 164.96' - OF SPOKANECOUNTY, WASHINGTON. FOUND 1/2" 16527' 589'44'46"E 205.00' /�,,� M.A.G NAIL .. -_.. -,--_. M.A.G.NAIL 1 (Rt) N 205.OD'(R2)MIX..0 NAIL 1 ✓ 586'16'45`E d� __ -_ ._ _ .i SPOKANE ® 118.88'118.97(Ri)] r-- , _ _ 4?"NT4'A H 0 ., FOUND/5 REBAR OUND i"ROUND BOLT FROM CENTERLINED T•- CALCU'E 0.44'OF ' \ 500'01'55"E 24.89' CALCULATED POSITION 7.71'NO0'06'S1'E OF PLAT(7.6'R2), ! I N I HELD FOR EAST UNE OF(RI) I I I W E <r ,-- Y 1 ( GRAPHICS R IPHIICCC"' SCALL'. 00 I s i J Illi isselei ! 1 IN FIT.l' ) - - 1 incl) = 50 It CURVE TABLE ..F j 1 1-„,,12'EXISTING UTILITY-•1 i-r CURVE RADIOS LENGTH DELTA ANGLE CHORD CHORD BEARING I i' EASEMENT PER(R1) I ! LEGEND Cl 20.00' 31.479009'24' 2832' 544'57'18'E C2 20.00' 31.36' 8915016" 2825' 1445'02142'E ! ' CO 20.00' 32.67' '73135151` 29.10' 1,146155`20.E _) ' 1 • SET#4 REBAR &PLASTIC CAP ty: (-.-. __ - - - I '-: . MARKED"WCE LS 43610" FOUND#4 REBAR EAST 0.33' 0 FOUND#4 REBAR W/CAP MARKED /OF RIGHT OF WAY I "KITZAN LS 33141"UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ,� ) r ^im �rt a• Z. ®LOT ADDRESS m ! "1°1 I� -I; RECORD ❑OCUMENTS ;; 1 -J1-2 n 1010 I r 1. -- '-- --- - - --- --- - v "gym I (89)ANAL PLAT OF PULVER SUBDIVISION AS 2, v RECORDED IN VOLUME 6 OF PLATS, PAGE 81. a I-- "-" - - n w N Ig pQ� R2 FINAL PLAT OF PORATH SUBDIVISION AS .. Q I RECORDED IN VOLUME 5 OF PLATS, PAGE 82. o m 16 ! Q z (R3)FINAL PLAT OF VALLEY PINES AS RECORDED i I 0 I I 't, 1'' "S'EXISTING UTILITY ( o IN BOOK 26 OF PLATS, PAGE 81. EASEMENT PER(R2) I I N89'58'00"E 109.96' I 0_ LU •• • I R ! (R4)FINAL PLAT OF OPPORTUNITY AS RECORDED IN 0] � I.. ....__ ..__ _..._. .180.07 _-_ .,,__ = VOLUME"K"OF PLATS, PAGE 20. K 1 Oa, = - ----- --- 1)Air- C BASIS OF BEARINGS 1: ' CC o o THE BEARING OF NB9'SB'00"E ON THE to 638 SE ! SOUTH LINE OF TRACT 212 AND 213,OF Z I 1:) U r !l OPPORNUNITY AS SHOWN ON THE FINAL 7 1 FOUND�a REBAR,NEST 25' 25' PLAT OF PULVER SUBDIVISION AS 1 I N89'S8'00"E 139.98' • RECORDED UNDER VOLUME 6 OF PLATS, • • 0.23'OF RIGHT OF WAYS PAGE 81 WAS USED AS THE BASIS OF I -•- I' -10'UTILITY \\�j ( BEARING FOR THIS PLAT. 25' 25' EASEMENT -I- 180.04' EQUIPMENT& PROCEDURES ' S 2 S I I THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WITH A - nO BAFn i TOPCON GPS RTK SYSTEM AND A 5-SECOND TOPCON OPT 3005LW TOTAL STATION THEODOLITE USING FIELD TRAVERSE N89'58'00'E 139.49' I of FOUND J`PIPE PROCEDURES ACHIEVING MINIMUM CLOSURE W/PIN IN MON.CASE STANDARDS PER WAC 332-130-D90, WAC '/ • 9,2'1,0`20 • 7 �I W/TiPa"X"IN CURB 332-130-100. _\ N3813'E 50.35' (i 531'03'E 59.01' 21 FOUND#4 REBAR,SOUTH 0.20' I m 12 J3 SF ^I I S65'01'W 5826' 22 / /h i OF CALCULATED POSITION '2 p,„p N38'Z4W 31.53' 2�22��Y1 ./ LOCATION VY m � FOUND e4 REBAR 5 FOOT RIGHT OF FOUND io W/CAP BENTHIN • WAY DEDICA71 e CO,?, LS 13315` \ ` iD�o FOUND B4 REBAR FOUND J'PIPE m m r 4 i9y -NW NE- OUND 1/2' 110.57' \ �. 1 q \.___,---119.95' REBAR 163.97' qh 1 W/PIN IN`ON.CASE n ,0 M.A.C.NAIL ® VAFGES-. � -�' ,v • 5.00 o... _..�, __ ___ �`�. i�i A ,, T'" • - 589'S8'000A 1029.71' I - (15.00' •w 2 15.00' N69'58'20"E 49].8]'494.04 Rt 140.00' 'A „,o ( ) N89'58'20"E 325.23' N89'S0'40"E .465.78' M g. 476/0 �o• 14.82'141.76• 558.57' - - - 120.74' • 44.86' • 889'58'07 E g In, 00- s"•-+--FOUND 1"PIPE 12TH AVENUE ry r FOUND 1/2"M.A.G.NAIL 44 wi41 IA -SW ME- ]3]11).~'� 1 Iy'? l,Li'.Y j 28 27 FILE NO: SNP-2017-18 I NOTES ( SUR/En RAL E SHEET 1) DATE OF SURVEY NOV. 14, 2017. FOUND 3"BRASS CAP,W/SPS •4J, c 28/1221 2777 x5000 ,ND 2) LEGAL DESCRIPTION,EASEMENTS&EXCEPTION NAIL&TAG"SPOKANE CO.ENC.'IN-.'.N49E 41.71' TRAFFIC Z OF Z F.B.: 17-7881 INFORMATION IS FROM VISTA TITLE, PLAT "X"IN TOP CONCRETE 1'51'POST N45W 43.11' PLANNING WHIFFLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS DATE: 2.23-18 CERTIFICATE#01271-14421 DATED DEC. 6, 2017. ! PANNING. zisSULTINOEN JOB NUMBER DRAWN: JAG 3) RIGHT OF WAYS CALCULATED PER R1, R2 AND R3 OTHER SPOKANE 97LEy,WAX90 TON 992 17-1881 APPROVED:JAG SPOKANE gHOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION 5813 E 4th Ave Ste 201 • Spokane Valley,WA 99212 • 509-532-4990 •www.SHBA.com January 21,2019 Spokane Valley Planning Commission Spokane Valley City Hall 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Re: Public Hearing on CTA 2018-0005 To: Planning Commissioners; Thank you for the opportunity to comment on CTA 2018-0005, a privately initiated code text amendment. The Spokane Home Builders Association (SHBA) has serious concerns regarding the intent of the applicants which are geared at infringing on private property rights while blocking opportunities for much needed attainable housing in the community. SHBA strongly urges the Planning Commission to recommend denial of the amendment and instead advance policy that encourages a variety of new attainable housing opportunities that meets the local market demand. The previously mentioned private code text amendment is indefensible under the City's comprehensive plan.The comprehensive plan repeatedly cites low inventory as being correlated to rising housing costs and more cost burdened residents, meaning a resident that pays a significant portion of their income for housing'. In city staff's own analysis provided to the applicants it was found that the amendment is in clear conflict with numerous provisions of the comprehensive plan including LU-G4 "Ensure that land use plans, regulations, review processes, and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality" and H-G1 "Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community." SHBA advocates for public policy that encourages a variety of housing options that meet the attainability demands of the market. As urban growth is frequently restricted by the parameters of the Growth Management Act, attached and compact housing varieties such as townhomes, duplexes and cottages become an attainable housing option to families both rental and owner occupied. A healthy housing market is reliant on an adequate availability of both rentals and home ownership which should be actively encouraged by local government development code. In their application materials,the initiating party makes their intention clear that this code amendment is geared at limiting the availability of rentals which is entirely outside of the scope of local government and is wholly counterintuitive to Spokane Valley's long range planning.This is seen specifically on page 2 under reason for code amendment "Mitigate excessive...rental buildout detrimental to homeowners."This point was emphasized by city staff at the Planning Commission study session when planning staff stated that "the intended implications are to make sure that we do not have any further duplex development in entirety." Furthermore, the City of Spokane Valley has previously given extremely clear guidance on the issue of preserving attainable housing availability. At a time when in-migration to our region continues to increase as desirable educational and professional industries grow, the attainability of housing remains a key critical community conversation. In fact, the Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce and the City of Spokane Valley have f SHBA, The Spokane Home Builders Association represents over 700 members across the Eastern Washington Counties of Ferry, Grant, Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, and Whitman. •DocSPOKANE IN HOE ' BUILDERS ASSOCIATION 5813 E 4th Ave Ste 201 • Spokane Valley,WA 99212 • 509-532-4990 •www.SHBA.com identified policy that increases home ownership opportunities as one of its legislative priorities in 2019. The Spokane Valley City Council when presented with the same exclusionary policies in front of the Planning Commission directed staff to take no action and to monitor regional analysis of development regulations taking place in Spokane County geared towards removing barriers to new housing. Adopting exclusionary housing policy which restricts growth will only serve to artificially limit the housing market and price more and more families out of home ownership in our community. The National Association of Home Builders recently released its 2019"Priced Out Model" analysis of the Spokane/Spokane Valley metro area which showed that for every$1,000 increase in the cost of a new home, 85 area families are priced out of the market'. Artificially restricting housing availability will only lead to less housing options and higher costs. The Planning Commission should reject CTA 2018-0005 in its entirety. Best Regards, CIA4:1011ZW Arthur Whitten Government Affairs Director Spokane Home Builders Association CC: Mayor Rod Higgins, City Manager Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager John Hohman 1:City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Chapter 6 Housing:http://www.spokanevalley.org/filestorage/6836/6896/7066/Comprehensive_Plan.pdf 2:http://www.nahbclassic.org/generic.aspx?genericContentlD=265844&_ga=2.25755389.1753026724.1548108408-1238269815.1486662887 f oc..1 SH BA, The Spokane Home Builders Association represents over 700 members across the Eastern Washington Counties of Ferry, Grant, Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, Stevens, and Whitman. From Pete Miller, Jan 24, 2019 ciTy c,F, spoKANE vALLLY Proposed Amendment SVMC Chapter 19.40 Alternative Residential Development Options mip,:v FssrrsTassssatuorwgnszsnmkwoasssfsstwnmatstatsstsmogmtvstssagsGm 19.40.060 Development standards — Duplexes Duplexes shall meet the minimum lot size per dwelling unit, setback standards, maximum lot coverage, and building height standards shown in Table 19.70- 1 . Duplexes shall be limited to one duplex per acre. Duolexes shall have seoarate oarcel numbers *er each dwelling unit, be non-adjacent, across the street from or on opposite corner. "1/4"- Add supplemental use language for duplexes applicable to the R.3 zoning districts. ., i, ., _ - What Does the Proposed Amendment Mean? jiik ,.. 4.?..74-,,,,, 01..;;*.lx5,- ...",:t.,„11,1,4„,, : 1,0*.oto . , _ ! ---#1 Prohibits rt"oc -t, AA 4- - - -___' •*--_-'. —*--PhrrioProhibits *--- 100% duplI duplex/acre(2 development duplexes on allowed in this be across the street in R-3 Zone adjacent lots example) or opposite corners ,---- , Proposed Amendment SVMC Chapter 19.40 Alternative Residential Development Options was Italgstrausmiestisnonammenessionammusomissanstamagabseme 19.40.050 Development standards — Cottage Development 19.40.050.0 Other 1 . Accessory dwelling units are prohibited. 2. In-whole purchase of any development by one zz' entity in the R-3 zone is prohibited. All other SVMC provisions that are applicable to a single-family dwelling unit shall be met. Add supplemental use language for cottages in all zoning districts. „ ' ' `,, zt Ave. , Road _ .,,,,,,, Long mved - - 4. -..-ip...... i--ment. at, • te develop Duplicate - - • Road & Cataldo & Roble ,i, i ,•, , ,,,„;;`,,,f.-0--f•1.',,-.. - „... „4, h Ave.- --r,-,, A 12t ,, 17, 1 - '.,.' ±4.41A." • Kx,.1-0,,,AF.,,..,0i;,, ,,,,•''.;,'",,,:,,,i,A.,,',i-,,'r",k44,V,";),'",111-.44",4 g ' ‘"""k'''''"'.'""'".''''' V'-4'0',.'.'‘. ..,''r wl-2,"-"4.-P ,--°'°' --- ' Character? .-‘1,-111Atet,:it'lliki„4; :, '403.,97134.T:F:',;-,°-,- -:: ,10..'"?,. --...°,0,,,'-' ''''-4-51'-,"° ..7'-,"",',4, -";":-;;;-,:-..;•;,.'";4, il',,..,-.r,,,;,,,AiN1 ,.r.49's•.,,;%'„,-I'',7!",',;47,:pli°,:::41,41,4tVilli''''''' -''..- ., ' . ''''''''''''4,•;":-PN:d7,N;',4''''''il,,:t:,";:k w.,p,-i,,,,,,-.pl.,..7,1440.3 --,: ---.,.,':'''';',.' • ,, s * •'''`i,(4,7*144rig77-74„,,T'1".1-,`40,t:',4,:i.lig,i44'4°- , ' -'' :.,'"• - ,!., ' • ', , , , , . ,,',' #4,..-• t Z,1 q 44',Ufff94 ci,,,,,ititt.-Av'''''-7' . - '' ' ' ' . . ,,,,o,,s,`-'uttAgi.,,,-,...,,,:e.4`;,,ff,..•,1 ,.. 40:14AW31;,y.,941,,,:-..2r , ,,,,:.f.N',o ',-,'-';',"f.f7,"'," ,:,,,,,'.. -....,,,--'' -",•• -0,,;,fik•-.0,- ,..,)-*44;;"' '" ' l' -"'f'.."'-'. ' '-'"'"`' ' .,;,w4411,;,..'ito'''''-r..„„;',. ,'V-74:,;,,..,...',,,, _ . .'„,.",''''r:,'r"?=:.1,:,"'''.-,1:4" '.41'''';'"ir4''',i 'V,0"`„,,,IA t,,,'.:t .;,,,Ir'', ji'll',4„1.• '::'4,. ,,,I,.,"'.7''''iN;;;,"iVi'll'`,".4".:.-`4:.'''' ''''';'.0*.niAlt . ',..%..:*4 : A:#..''..kk.,t0r.;01.!:0'.14:4411.4;4*',.tti44', , . 4'„-Aaz-?Azikk 4,1„silk*-0.4:4-4,..„.,,,,4c.,4.:,,,ii,-;v4.-„,,,e,„i ,..;,:; •Neighborhood ii.,,,....;.--:•!:e.' '4441':11:. i.V.,.4,,,-;ef'.%4,'..,flig';;.;,.4."'t t '',',. r''''.41 4; 4r .s.'l -- '-'4 '.‘,• ''40:- • . - 7,-,'.:.,''','' - ''',IP,',,r'idzi.-',--°'.1F1-.1T,, • ,c1,-A',-,121:..1., ,:14*k44.,lk% :1,, *,,„..,,,,,,„,„ -' '-,v11,- 1, ,,,,e,*,,t'_-f,J',4 vi ,..\''-'4"' ",-Ait"-4t°--.. 40.;,•-t'ti,‘,.„-'' z tvf. -744.5n1,7,,-6-4 -°t- i' '''454.4,,,,,:„?"4.4**.''',•.',4,Z.I' :!,..'t.1..i'*.S1'4'''—1,4'1'7 4,„".104:1,,z,".;. ''''cA34t. 2i.',''',1r' V ' ' . ::'" 4;*.k...ki:°t...t;j: '''' 4a''•4,''' ',„7.k4'41',71'..,.. ,,„.4:1,r'?,'.it _,, '4.'N.,144,7 44P:.',,''''';.' j'iki"1/4''''' '.e' T. , '' le •.'ilV.: -4,''':, ,i.''''''..11..,,r&'447 ' ,,',,'.'-''''''',. ' '' ' ' :0i*' 0 ..::.:0°P* '-• ' '!".0'S t,:''T,:-.1)`,'il',.,Ii:.•,+4,,,Z a:"R•:.-:v. '' 1.4** ' . vo-kno.,-.*„,..‘f- V. rt'A' it '',74:Vit0.X.I.,04 45 ••. .• • . ^ ''''•,e0W.'" *' '''',. ..,..:7.,- . .fr-v tt.,„. ,,,.. --„,e,,,,,f,....i.,-, ,t. ''f,''Y' - , _-, ,.„ ,., VA ..,:,;0' .,k;,-. -.. - •.-," "-- • 1 .' . ., , ;-‘,.,.. 'Att4111,'.,..- 't,tf.'1,' .-,g`,'''-''''!,PAIllt'"?::*:*'".":4;',„.40,1, , .''''''•':,",-;;(4gRA —4 ','.9.<11. %,„• fk- R f•-,---'77::::--1 .1''''"Ar"hitib....•f'ff'44 ",,,,,-,., .""k's3. .:* ,6'-'14';,,,'"•'`""' `4%-'..:-i'f,• ,,' - t`!74.'-'-'fk4f 7%',..T , $1,,f,,,-,.1,,,: -f.,-,i-,-,,.,ko,"'-'4",',. .i; 1 .....---•-------.f.,f 7",g----, 11 ;' , #1,,,A-,17,.,;."&t:4-,,!f, ,A 1,A.,,,,-45,-,-Iimit-r- '_4.4,..*42,,,c,..;,,,--‘0,....-i-.- 4 ''-' t":,' ,5;',0';.4,1“47,i; ,•,•,•1..4444),Fte -05' •,,' 1 • ""-- , '."- ''''" „ *' !.."'' !_,4:::-,--.;•J4,‘ . • ,, <-,- .,,,,,,,,N l'-.i•, ,,•`•-,,,z-, '-,:::.:,:ri,-,;„.-kl,".8-'',''i :'',',.,' leste417,t%Ilkwit„,-1 .. - 44,67,,,,-2,- -,,,,,,,, AA,' , '-11,----v' .,„,.'1, it-4,+,,,,,m,,,,,,4-44,,.- 4,''''''''',,',,",4 t'''N ''',' ,,,,.,,x.1?-, .40,4,•i, ” -'- If.`44:<,,,,,o7r,v.-4- , 'f' '' . . ' '.cifk.,.• - ''''. ri ' _ . --'' , N.,..- F17.-.---I - -/- - ii-,,14------eattlatzzzar-,,kiee tr —- -.t 4,4.4 4.4,0!„,.1, - ,. • . ''. 14;•7--... ,,,f ,..,,,,,,,,-.14.5,.,,,•,,,.d,ffeff.".$/`'IA I-,''''1,1-1,,,,k; ',' ,.. -, f'c.wf•,f,',..\ '-..;‘,,i,,,,,b,•44",,,,,,?.0f.„,',,,,,--‘, „.- :•..m.,,:i$,),,Ii-/... -..:.-,.. 1 --.....m, , • ,,,,!!!1d, ...Ir - . , --.!:.4,1- ,,, 14'"°;=:: , 1fi• •.. ' 4...- ,,,, ,,.. ,:. ..- LongRoad & CataId° A ve. Duplicate development ' -, , - i.--1,1.,,...;::::'...., , ••• :::;44„,,, : approved _ 00,,*-,-,w,, ,.''• -7,,,..0;4,1„' "4,,,,„-,44-14,51,-„L'Air ,i0A --•,'-' ''',',-,.T-4,0--;-;„,, 1,-',,k'--r4-1*. ri Aki. ,,,,,,-. t-,,, ; ' :." - Roadborhood ':*,.4*'Ngliai Imtyliw 'Yz.%'.it,,,ii`'-'41,,,,,,,i? -''' - ::,- : ' • ,- , , , - - -• .,,..,,, 12th Ave & Ro. Nbeiei r--.7. ...':, . -.4..„,,, „ ,4,, Nc-.,,,,,:64„,,,,,,40‘,!;,,,,,w., ,.,. ,,2,,,Alpiiittarwititi ..i..- •.,..,-,., vefri'l.:.,, r ,, .4.,e4. 6..,•*- c",-„. . 4 ° . , . , 1 `410-;„,..4,--24mm, o• 40,4-.-...,- -' et : 'rte' -2, ,4* -***''''- ;,-,'''';-. ,.., '''"4,44-* '' ' , ,,, *;.4,,,'„,:;:tki, ,,,t4 'II 4, „, - ,:l • 1 • VA''''''t '.- ',,,,'-. ,,,,..' i''"o• 4,0, ,,,,, ' ,''''T.-71';',-1 *,4' '`i : '.:4''''*''''', '', *, '4 '' A k;'-',',?'"),V4; '''''..n ....%•;....' . - ,, ' ..:;:i:-', ,,,°',::=4,1,..*'''''. ''''' ,444,4.”' "' „4, ,''' ,''' ,,,,'' t ,,,,co- ,, •,-,'"-9',',, ''''' ' 'It"' vt;#,.*4. -'", - • - '''%,;-,,. ;*.p,",t,--`.-q w., ,- * ;:',-,7...t .0.*•••"'ir: ''. .--",,,,,, 'r. "I '- `', i1M. t„? I 7* e777,7_,!tt:„N,iii46.,..:...,..„, 74,71, -" -,..i.„, , A .-. --k:„.., A. - "- 4.1..,7%,1 ,,,, ,,,,,4:-,,,,..4-f!t 1.1":„.,,„ i -11.110b,„ - --- • , „,ft-7-- .,., t . ., .. .imm.... . ..401111111PP---"ftwft‘.- - - -..,.....„., . . , 7-'* - *.":•'4,/„.=-''''14.-:: tiir, ';.',,,4.-414/4 treet', ' -' . w‘ - 4- ...-.1, . • ,,-4,-.4;-. •.,z,„. •i- . -,,,- T•TN :tty,,,N4.. - ,- ,)-op ,,..,i, ,,-4- 1 --.1,: ypia(-5-,,,4•A' EpO St1B 2018 0005 tug Subd� de 4 36 acres into 15 residential lots s • Os 1ovember1, 01Sat90 AM • racAOt City ofSpokane Valley City Hall m 10210EastSprague Avenue 0 t • REv vt At Cit of apokane Va%ley 4 ^ : 5 *r r•- k r x a �' r °fir' ' r S2A Co cT Com ntan4tY$c Publ#c oiks i epartment ' > Karenlenciall� 097 f <02A `__�n 1 a ~ 'x 7'`�7 3�u.. '" ry: s b v , '�i 3 w.`r'CfT�"- F,a' ` `^e a Y-. .•. -^-r..„,.... JC ,.+ r $ :n ,lam' .-,� 's,f s.^7-tr�S.'"Ts,x _.. .. _., �< . ....,—w-... i _ - .: €s. , • • .. . .... • SCA. h l t.',":7'''''.1;''''' '''''''''''.i'i4.';'::i'i'lifil41.',49,,';':'::;"1,`;''''.:::',-;;7'.: ?ii �� `^.., -‘-'-::::'''.4'.:11';',714:' t ai'd Irk �tiii-djitittiik;s� #\ ''''''+: � '� tie ��=w,. ,. � < h f -a Sr t<n i t_ 4 ,i�I' xtom, I..f � f' - t �I �'s A 1 1 1. t 'r IJ r i t �. . � , �,„.ats � .._ ° "4-1 �-� 't‘---;.--1. ' ..�.>'�:.. \,,c= a`Pi- t t 4�. s�'tet"�k:.r. r+'.''` * �.� �. P�a+'. �E' r 1 t 2 1 • ,. nr... t aEwz as'4, '`"' `�; r. ^:3 ^�*?..,:. � it�} ,„, a. .. ..« - +1Q ii lw as �'• < ,tea-... � \ r : '+ a -+:�,-�ht +" '' s. '. t; T: \OTIC[UI 11.1,! (Hf,1R1 I .; K � ' - ;..,, ,u ,Y�,.. .il m-�',.. .F..u'tr+ , �,i r+rw.cvo-ayr °'4,�z'eyt,_ -. ..:...;:. _,� x::.: .. .. N �'Ha- - �t^RtY> t'� Y, u--:. M It n N,tl � T<Y- +5 Y _ - .,.: + :.>~ ,.:. - ,.: ,-� . ;er '% i �,. :p `'�.,.,.. '--�,,: n ar . :, �r � '�Fulw, �' _'��h �_a� '°,x 'r, ?w �.„..� w r ....i.;,,,-_,...,7',.. .- tk �- = dcy:. '9 .,.�. w„, , (�$� �•'��'xi`'d-:?�.�e'�� . r`' h' �,y<, „� :�,.', , x, s.:� ;�. A�” . ,.v...•, .u�^W" '.:�,'>r' { .� �Yp"- ��' ar:+,�s r;�s-t-,-,;r:',,,:!,:-,' x. ..-off _ L c v �a k,F..F a,�a x i <s�,:.-, g;.^ ▪ ."•n ,�';:;o. *eti� ,.,.,t "S.•}-- zT'x*'" .'t ,..�Y..?, ` m.: .., ': . -�- :..-, . ,. -� a ,, ;�' .-i,_�' � : � 7,::,,,--. L,c'• ',r��e.�E,se» .,. y-' ">ur-- +.;. „� a`.q.�.. .. _ .>.; ^'s -_ -...t`"-.*•tie<S- `..- .0 ,. x ='w,,. .+ :k._�>, (=r..s�`: ,,. "x� ..:c�.vr .:.-_ ,.:: - .- .. '.-- %•-4-:, , ,.:.,,;x .,. '.._ :-- ,,' }r<wz� ,,,,^...;?.-- -...;,'=:,,,?,..� . � ,�.. ,P ' W�>: .. 'a- r�'.,`�t'.-.'�. :c,,:�.'r:?.• �,'-v',v+>�gF'di'a �x'..-",aa � .--.< -,`-'--:,"5-'-'"~„ -"X n >.;..,�,:r L s; e �, X,, t..- fir,...�.:.vn 'X�., »c:~ +"`w�.1fr'" r. `s .xaa .ts'T. :..:. .�._,-, -..,• ';" .:- :s S ^k"C�y"ra a-'�o-. ''.1;.:,•L'...'`‘-5...S. G c-,r+ ar�.- it t,�+' �•4 �..�;, �-.-.:�P '�.''c ... :,..,,: :, ; ;.x:_... x.x.. -,i:;;;',.'!..,77.' ;+^ wti'. arc c - «.=ti�"'5 ,, x' ▪ \ - - ,,-t -...-,,-4..;,,-.',,::;'...,'f;:,'--.''''---''-='_`- z- `, , w f. • n a ->:4 . +:.'ate :1 "- �*-r .-',.. .,-.:. -, '- �• ,�.-._ ,-.-_ .:'..:,_ rrr -. t .F2 t � ;::,,"`fir✓ r,:t:7 S t- st¢ k... i€_ ,rte '1 ^ •,.'�,�`r�v ,�7:a"�yas ti�a�F'a'"->,� . � ,.-�. _ ..,-r::• -,.... ;�,.�,..-1-,"‘-f.:-.:.-1`,v ':. t- .:. a tit' ''�t-��, ,"<3, � i- , .� r"`gkn�.k �y:-'�a= 'c"°`-'z. ..s ,. S,^,,.- - �,_... .._ ... ,_;rt;. '� ,t .'::' - � a .a, i„+,(s"'Y„a s. w'g-.� t'.,w�' ”`-y?, b+*S 2•, .�' "��r -> , ,. , . ?'; .-> .:.. ;, i,nz .;-.-''�5 "�,,; 'S eea, r• ,;• r r ;<t::wa.'1,'',"'`T.,^ .%'3 :, : -.: :.: s �:, as: <? �' C.4�f x *.y€.1 "-,C4:7.1. sr'" �`y..„.. _ - � .t„* t.».r „4}7 ' a'- `3 _ ,,, .. • �, .'":f t i',;.•H' s•s _`` r r".4. '1. ''<�i,•10";,h 4. ww.:r#. .;-__,-s-,-, L�",k...' w.,,, e; yx t7' ice.- ,- � ".. '-. '- '.;-� •.?'' .... ,'-,',-.--ii:',--,?:,-.--: ,.s --,�.,.-.'` '� r' 4 -'� o '" , �fi .�„�y'�-- � .h>':s, ,,.X .c � '•, .7i<s: -.; - `- (, .... <, , Ft to a,pk, Ta. - �t-r' .,+ - 5., , -'.p' r F e .. :t.- -""�- y�� ""xz :-s'.+r,-a^r „' m”. w'. ... „:`,'-2::-::-:.;'1,'',"--.7.%'31-4`,!7A-:':,‘ -,r 'k r :,.,, ar y. ,5,,;- v+ •9r { i :ra- 7'• -4. Stu:.fst't'" ..�y 'r `�-w t- `iE :',.;? �+.dt-'Ea::J ?,sc` .. '..:; . ..- ' .,'„ -- -.=:-,:.:,,,,'.:--:t1:-. _: , �� ,y^n �{ t f d_ '^ ..:rte.,.r '4^ ;�k' ;._'7G='yf” >,"a :.,.. -:.�:.:- Y°> �. , y.,.� - '-',* i 7 yrs: ��^� 3-`5`S" az.-r'x�+, � 3,r 4Vn. ',`,- ; _�.,,.,.-�.,a • -;i.. - . .„ ,:- ::t, 't --.,. t 15,E ,µ/,.., ;;f #m{ r .- i" '+ah'+3 : r _'.s. 3§:-..: tiw '!<K=,. ": +.s-, ,,... ..,_ . ..._ ;',... ,<,. :,,. .'';'4',...;',„a-s:..-.t a:,.,. .y ;r-..L� •I sof' ;: �?74 - w'�' .:R ,�N -,..:. ... .. .. . ,.,_� :,- .r.:<. ..a`-:.. ✓ . : L5i*,,:''' ,aT, ry�: Y\ s ",r n.F 'r`-a:L 5 ,'.`#r;,`,` -, :. - .... ... ..a...: , ,y,. '::•a� :: - s ti..:y7 a " sti-,:., t �� '^-4 s t•, '?.:. �Ci� }� c; ."`' ..,,.: ...... .;,,,--7-7.--..... .-„t ...z M- . .— x :::'.` 4r•.,-, '�-. � < , , '..,'"';':=";;"7:',7:".1".,, ... SJ'^ �i°'.:,� q ..,t„�€t,' � a. +.�sb e=* �.., `"'°' i . .. Pi ... L i +a„ s\ .r,. ,tfg 5 N, Y; :`''3,o- Mz -.-. o, _ ... _ .. , ._,. � ., <. ...., . ..,-s w;dtz> ...> s ? .c... �5 'a �.... „,7,.... "� Sa'R,ts, �*• ,� � ... - .» ..:.-_�. ,,.•�-” > , .. ^d ... , . -. -.. 1. � :?i4.;Q+- '^e ,an+r :fia.Ls x "�' ''',„"7":-..:-'ms *iC },,� :a :-,•; �.k"iE•� :'�� ,.. _..... _ �,. ';.-.: _ `,c :.a" S, ..<S,'— x., �...»''' -'';.: -:i„a � . `-iu"vv Y `"a.. --- r ,'» ... .'.. x..,a f` ''_':',. 7":--'- .a •,:-.. r . ;. 4.'� " ;;�.. 'T'k •-�,• r '"z..iQ_?�>.,,'�''^`ri,�, ..,, =,.-....,:.:1 < :;,'•K. - -._f.` 3 - 3 z. .,._6« .s J,, <,..i,•�iY � s� ,.�ri f a ��,�r EA,. -m �•a ``ft - ';tm �� t �* v'.. t;' ,, -,,,,";?:. .';'''7.':14:`,'4.;.,'",:"';',::, r , Sr..-_A � :..";•!*:-..;'-'-': t}1 �:t c•4 .aft?-�' . .x r,�(. rL �' �._ �;t,i?' '�; ,-.5 � �` � ' ,�U'�•.� •-" _ o F-F 4,;Z ::a.a". "ar ,s r'.° t. 2;: r ,,:,,,:",'.•-,,,- k''t,..:,...-4-,,,,,,.<.,,.., ...^4 y., t �� , "' _ 'r. �..�'''? : at,. , �^ '� -u§' rt;, +' t ,',1 �c "a t- r-x R^t ttiv 'L ,{�' ',re5• x. :r•.. t, ..: � ",.- ,. :. . 'y, , :.;" .,.r-:r r $ i? : ;,a4,,;„, ".;s '-K,k`,+ w��,,,, r-'{�`a '.� ."^L' a; _-" ,r -: l � - ... � : r t c-.i. „_ 5` �y.+,�- �"a �� ` 'N '..� y$. 5'X:c ti,- t • - ,:...: _,...' .r ,m r �,':,e'. {, .y t -1,',;,), :°`�,...•A - �� l.- „yh: ,.,.,-...,r•- ..„<-7;;;°: �we'XA +,. t . , - r - - _.", -...,..,. - ,.n 4 R '..y'i- ,<. '. ^e,. y - a 'f `,i ,s3 4 7L - « .:k ..---`--. - .y, >. -.... . t- :.., �... .mo ,,si� fi,e- �q,�`aktz' (.„fl;v�n,�CG:`•,��'**fit; '1.+.:. :i, � F '4�`-� Xr<. 5 iy �� . ,..... -. ...-'` -:.: , _:,. A ,,.. r.>:.,. �»,�,r -<. ;< .zr, "i;r :�Y. :. -, :*� ° ra �. '-(' e%'i^:i. ti�tz`.:: �. 4`:'G,� �,.a t w.- , -„ , d �... ,k, -��5e $;t, �� ` ,, �-'�' 'ica- ��p,�,�' „�-. ?�1 ."^ t,,.' �: •; � r � ..�:, w., .,.., .- - :.. ?e `�,. .,'C',',.'1%`',.-1 �...-,;„:.-,,,,.....,„;,,,,-,,,,,A,,,?-� . �t 1.; y .a�;.,.>.s � --, .,,. sal' �+� �'�h �!�r�'t:'?,. s.� .,s'..,.:- �+, `S S-: r, tE :'i,x;,41 . +h. -n i , -��.' �:3, \ `'°w r-',`�'ai`.^s�; � ,w�•;�"`?,.��' -�-� .�ky ��; $� `f+', r ' ,. :t ti;,r^'. -.;. ',.t11., ;.,i.-.... :.a;' - 'e:.�.,,..i; r .. ;'1= ,,'itis•\;.,,x J,. ','— .{ ..Sy`.;F,'4%i ',? n�'Fi r - y _,,, _....,`� :.'*_ 'et• .;�5 ..St r <.v,, �.r',. S`"-, ?^'<.',..�„ „. #,\.¢ t,« .h,. : l t'i yl`" q ., `> �, 'e:.i?`:' - • +. " r ; r .':nf r ire a ti .y:* t c ::: � ,. s :<...., -', .. t, M -., ::.4..r...,,,,e,/,‘„,,,,,,,,,,..,;,,,,,;,.;,-..;.,: v «1..•+ •''•. .4a x -.Y;;+., ,. nt . '+r ,44.. r,.,A, ,> ,,'',gvy \ _ ''l� 5�,,, ,,-, z fi. ...� E: `�',, ',a; �,� ,..< +f..,,. ; ,. 'c',,rt �,7k `"4, •+•x ,1--r. S,+u ,t ir.,, ,. c', �• `,,.- .�. ., ,,..1 - ;<., '.. 1'. ,, ,� .. .., ,'.:."'I ..,".7 , :.,. .. �"a, p,�i�<r.-x,. .� ,x ,,.,, �44 :�ti< t .�'�a ' c,m. �<`. a.. .. :. ,.r.,.:_ - �i_ ,-, � 'h ._,. �'.;.:'-_ -,`. J-- ..-, ;:, ... i ' .t,V..i ,._,I y. 4, 45�:' '� l i wtz:. ,.. .....:--L ._.-.r- _,. ,;.. ,�`-,,.. ,sem ':. 1. .- . /E. � ss ,_ e vns "�;��sc`.z>y-t - ti'} ,� '.i :z.,'S'a�> a ':. y*a x`4 «':.` . ' ,. .: -. . ,. :.. "5 ., �' ..,;:,j.,�. �-.: , :.c..,� ;- 5 ;; .f-. w„'-''.a n'k.,.,i 'h � �'*in l: .r � <Y,. �•, s�,, -�+y" n.,. _+t _ . .., ,c ,,,, , ,. . ,.... .' ,,r ..M,.S ', "\,. >z.ai;a;- t .�zC a - -t z ..;.�� _:-- ;-;;-...i:-.-';-. ,.., ,.,_ '---<. ... ,.. t. :1:•'''.' �, -. r-. -„:,t� '. ,.,16,4".';,''',:, ..,�+.. .:5' .. ar� ;y" =,:i+. +T<� �-aa,;, '''•: ,-,f �' a .`"� .,, - .F„,,.x. :. . , .n -5. .-,- 'd'ci"„... ,.. ,.. ^t{'�:� lei,y,. ;:� ��.�.• ,ti< A� J.' x t� . "`,r. °�5.�- _ .. �� s �f- � „�, - ' .,w.c. st. ,f 1�,. �.e .S .,a. �;4 �4::o-,e:. tk;;,.tiirs - "a'� ..r- z.”: '''''f''''.'..,::.,..--..- ":: r._<. « ..,� I +„ y .; ,q [:. ?u ~<.-\ .> ic3 t : -\!2y `etk; .u: i2. •"'; ..> �h '4' -� - _ 1: ,-�- :, � ti ^: ^,r' -.71, ;: `t ,.,:;>•r ,,a•Y -a*, t' t -<. a °a'�,r,L� 1;>?�> �,, �,aa ?,',`'«x `s � ~�k;. ,.,. ».. ,, ,., ..:..�r ,.,;,:, ;"'"'t..+,- ti: 'Sh ,,I.'"`!:41,2,' L ",•a„ L ,E°,ht y, X. - '•, a,. -.,;w,: -„ r '? w. t ;:'r ,.'-:./-,/ .1 : ..� ..7:',..,- ?,•�, ^; t>✓�x � �+ \ c`� ,''` { � �'SI x y . �e1<�'�s . ,..�a� '-. '�?-� -., .. ; -1r-:...K _ � f, r S .a} s, �v-:n ?r fit,., �`i,'� -, K�.s�i <.: -,z;- .. : : -a ,:- �,., :�.,. _."- s^ . .;.,-.2"--';',,,-K.: 2;,- rew,✓W } -: . a E r`-� p.t`-, -.:.1 ,�., a ',.$"",,-.. ,.-„,s.,,‘,:,r ., . ., ", - • t:., .-',::.:,,,-----_-:.--:.':'',-"7„--,,,,f;:-: .,:,::',--'1:\ ", e€ A. O k r;.-5• 'h` '''' '"at A.,i ..: ':.-._. - :. . . �,y; z'`""c, ... ..'-''.'-'7,,,. .. .. . a <.:f•1"rr �S v ''\ .:, 5�,� � -;'t? ,4,..'..4,:r4:„. ,`.. ,_„3.,. .;;. E , .<_ %wa . •, .,. „,: . , w, .,t 'S:h �, tw4 �'� rsk, ` z'`ct .�3:_..� ” ti,�e ' :'�' ,`' .._- -.. - ..,r.. ... :-: ..,:, . . � :.<. .,�,' ;.� -',:yw�'''�. � .:<...! ;�t, }} ;\'' � r,k�c \ -1. 1 ,�.;'� ``it s N^ ...�-,s,•- j i --1"�� - _, � .. -._ :, ,:-,i.';-- c.a7*-,,.• ..;.. ._ ��-'iV .,:..� .,, -4 3. a. ',,,,,,-',`,:;,:i.' 1-::, � h" .x ,a- r� ,.� r''� 'S;, t A .1`,,,,,,,.., ,- .e.,,..,,. r-,.. t'. • vs,,. '''Lt, C>;•', 4. / C- *'t*'" t^`L 1 �, s:' � :,...3 , y. G',.,- r^ ., 'w. ..J; "+ ,,.::'c --,C -.\"th " t �, 6 4J' t !" ",� 'I': . S t,. 'r ' , 5:„ J k t: .. ,., ,_..�- ..1,,.,, .',t.1. ') 4, �'•4 ( T !. ", - � 3 .-.. , - > .,�., , . ., _, t. i2'd. ,.+�. ` ';� x.- ",-v\ , „,,,„.',.?.'.2,,,-,,1---`,:r;) h , S.•;,'^-o. t 1 t x ;•r” a h , q y .,5 t ,.fs;_ y 7;r.^. .,t, \.;.-e,1.s!'";')':-:-"'''' t w_. 7 r S r= . - ''.'t-:1, ti. „,, .z lt.-a. .. T. A °''71rr.t y, ..� i I: ., . . . ' o:;, ....,5:. t �•. �z. _,� '._}' d' zl. ^. �, •�` i':f ,-;,,,,1:.11';',1,y, S " •+' -.., ,. <...- ;.. .,a,.? ,U . ,i -,. � A:£7�s`.zi k,.1 ,, t et '.t .✓ r, ,,,F4,' ... ,'. . : ,; , ","•'"..;:":''.,X- ;. Y:. „'YY:. ".tit-., 'n. ., Sal i`';.4,'r'.,1 "r W„Y1+ iY moi -1.` 141, % .S swl'L =,,,-,- "Y^fi /.,... h, ',,- 'w.. fi.-.=', T ?.1,,•:t tr:. �.rb r 3 .::,•rT : �, 'y ,.. .. .. :.._, .,..,,I o .. a - r1 ..-:, 'F: ,r.'E. ..fi.. ,',� ,�,`r. e.'-"7-,‘., a, ..,,..,;2-:;;;;;.a y5.-:- r r"'''')-;t' "''^ '"}`roi�,n ,r' -.,„:,,i.- `�` .t15`,, y"'. 't .,,,°,:i":‘•,-;.-; tib `'5,.., r. ' .,�. :. .. .,.. -,-.,',2-1;;;:r% r r.~,s :}. . .,l,t ,.;s^ ,Aet•. 'RN.,r > .- �, .a:"t L �3 w a . ra y.,lC-1 . • -`�. i � ..`. ,,,..... r+.w. ..- :... .,y... : d ... a .. ,y.. ,5 .-♦ tht .F f �,: 3 as �ey R ' ..; .., ._ ..:,,7,-, .',.:• .a.. -..:.,,.. .- -_» 1, & ,,tT,a-<. 4. :, c, ``r x � ,a, 6 4�:: t. ">•, ,-} =�:�•w. ��,yy .,< ,..,:,.:,<...:.... ... ...°,.-;'d..'....y... : rr ,.--x f;. .�„x,...'�..,..,;-: :�";.1-'.,. � <t:...". .. N, �:t.x,t'S'* 3e ., ,. ..S ?, ., / w ,., ,. `.., •� • � t:,. Y', Community &Public Works Department Valley Building&Planning Division NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING THE SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY&PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,BUILDING AND PLANNING DIVISION IS SENDING THIS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 800 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PER SVMC SECTION 17.80.120.B BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT RECORDS FROM THE SPOKANE COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OR TREASURER'S OFFICE. HEARING DATE&LOCATION:Thursday,November 1,2018 beginning at 9:00 A.M. in the Spokane Valley City Council Chambers; City Hall; 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley,WA 99206 REVIEW AUTHORITY: Hearing Examiner STAFF CONTACT:Karen Kendall,Planner,(509)720-5026,kkendall(a7spokanevalley.org. APPLICATION/DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: SUB-2018-0005 (Artier Landing Subdivision) — Preliminary plat approval to subdivide 4.36 acres into 15 lots. Lots larger than 10,000 square feet will allow single-family or duplex homes. Existing duplex on parcel 55181.2953 is being divided through an attached single-family division. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Parcel numbers 55181.2953 and 55181.2954, addressed as 18114, 18116 and 18118 East Boone Avenue,located in the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 18,Township 25 North,Range 45 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington OWNER/APPLICANT: Victor Grant, 18118 East Boone Avenue; Spokane Valley,WA 99016 SURVEYOR:LandTek,LLC; 619 North Madelia Street; Spokane,WA 99202 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A Determination of Non Significance (DNS)was made pursuant to WAC 197-11- 355 using the optional DNS process. There is no further comment on the environmental determination. APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Title 19(Zoning Regulations), Title 20(Subdivisions), and SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls), the City of Spokane Valley Street Standards; the Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual; and the Spokane Regional Health District regulations HEARING PROCESS AND APPEALS: The Hearing Examiner will conduct the hearing pursuant to the rules of procedure adopted in SVMC Title 18 (Boards and Authorities). All interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. Any appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision is based on the record established before the Hearing Examiner, pursuant to SVMC 17.90 (Appeals). All hearings are conducted in facilities that are accessible to persons with physical disabilities. STAFF REPORT AND INSPECTION OF FILE: A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the hearing. The staff report and application file may be inspected at the Community& Public Works Department Permit Center, located at the City of Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 E Sprague Ave, between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm, Monday- Friday, excluding holidays. Copies of documents are available at a reasonable cost. If you have any questions or special needs, please call Karen Kendall, Planner, Community & Public Works Department, at (509) 720-5026. Send written comments to the City of Spokane Valley Community & Public Works Department, 10210 E Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Attn: Karen Kendall,File No. SUB-2018-0005. 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. 10210 East Sprague + Spokane Valley,WA+ 99206 +(509)720-5000 +Fax(509)720-5075 ...... PagIIMIW.Y.„PIAT I:II! I 'II"': I " 7, ARTIES LANDING Lrq A , • '., , ,-i.i-,,,*,,:j.:,;,„":„:,-- 1 i I .. ' f , 1,.;, L1.„.;,.::-.-,,,1„, . „ li 1117, 1„111,..1:7-1........„.i;rri1,1•11;:.F.11„1,11,'„7.1'..r7,711 17.: 1':...;;•",1,...i,"1-;I:,;7:: IIIII ; I-III -I ' ! UPPcR cameA ADD/PON "-..,.. i '. , „ „ „,... „.„..... ' 1--.T''IEI'FIti I [III ! .I., . „ I , ,....F..-..+4,.4....... . —---- - . (rgA:;-*" :1 ll;tr; i ' . .. . , .... k 0 LI:r4 t";7..74',..=...''' "''''''''''A ti...I.T...?;r:Z,'•' , 1 1 I 7 ' l l tl.:TVZ7tttt-t" 7t,., t,7.,1•7 .lit!! ttlt t' " -P l ' 67r::,`,-'`;51- 4,7,71;Is'I I ! I I I I 1! I! I,' 1:::--„.„,„„!,___• „,, I I r17=1"'IntriP°::=Ir.:7,4.„51.7, „g7,„„IX ,,,, , .,.,? --, .;= ,-.•-:.,,,,..-71,%„., -.,,,,, ,. tr,i,,.....,,,:i.71,1z.,..,T2:;1',1,1,T.:.4..7.,v,tr:,:v.:-.', I , 1 . .m.„, ....„..-,......-.!,w.,,.„, I ! I , I „ g....0741,,fra e0,7,rc..jt -------------1 7,„1,.. ,, ,,,t, or :. rls,LANDTEK I , i P.CiT55.114.OM V.VETCRS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 14, 2019 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 2019 Budget Amendment. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: In order for the City to amend an adopted budget, State law requires the Council to approve an ordinance that appropriates additional funds. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The Council last took formal action on the 2019 Budget when it was amended on March 26, 2019 for the first time. BACKGROUND: Since the amendment of the 2019 Budget on March 26, 2019, a number of events have transpired in the normal course of operations that necessitate a second 2019 Budget amendment. They include: #001 - General Fund Provide additional appropriations (expenditures) of$483,000 comprised of: • $203,000 for the purchase and installation of a generator at City Hall. There was $200,000 in the 2018 Budget appropriated for this purchase; however, the project could not be completed before the end of 2018. The generator was discussed by Council last at the April 30, 2019 Council meeting when staff provided an update on the project. • $200,000 for the purchase and installation of a generator at the police precinct. There was $100,000 in the 2018 Budget appropriated for this purchase; however, the project could not be completed before the end of 2018 primarily due to the fact that installation costs at the precinct are much greater than what was previously anticipated. The generator was discussed by Council last at the April 30, 2019 Council meeting when staff provided an update on the project. • An increase of $80,000 in transfers out to the Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund #501 to purchase sidewalk snow removal equipment and a trailer for transporting the equipment. The equipment would be used by the City to clear snow from 35 miles of "safe routes to school" sidewalks. #101 — Street O&M Fund Increase nonrecurring expenditures by $68,000 to purchase spare traffic signal equipment. The spare equipment will be used in emergencies or after equipment failure. Many of items included in the spare equipment purchase have long lead times, which could cause traffic signals to be down for weeks without spare equipment on hand to make repairs. #501 — Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund Increase revenues and expenditures by $80,000 for the transfer in from the General Fund #001 and related purchase of sidewalk snow removal equipment and a trailer for transporting the equipment as described above. Page 1 of 2 The 2019 Budget amendment reflects the changes noted above and will affect 3 funds resulting in total revenue increases of$80,000 and appropriation/expenditure increases of$631,000. Revenue Expenditure Fund Fund Increase Increase No. Name (Decrease) (Decrease) 001 General Fund 0 483,000 101 Street O&M Fund 0 68,000 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund 80,000 80,000 80,000 631,000 OPTIONS: Future options are to accept the proposed amendments in whole or in-part. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff seek Council consensus to move forward with amendments to the 2019 Budget as presented. If Council concurs, we anticipate the following calendar of events leading to Council approval of the amending ordinance. • May 28, 2019— Public hearing on the 2019 Budget Amendment. • May 28, 2019— First reading of Ordinance #19-006 amending the 2019 Budget. • June 4, 2019 —Second reading of Ordinance #19-006 amending the 2019 Budget. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This action amends the estimated revenues and appropriations for the 2019 Budget that were adopted on November 13, 2018 and amended on March 26, 2019. There are adequate funds available to pay for these amendments. STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: • Fund level line-item detail of revenues and expenditures. • Fund summaries for all funds affected by the proposed budget amendment. Page 2 of 2 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Amendment#2\2019 05 14 Admin Report\2019 Amendment No 2 Detail v1 for RCA.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 5/7/2019 2019 Budget-Amendment#2 Line Item Detail Account Account Initial Amended Description Number Description/Justification Budget Amendment Budget #001 -General Fund Nonrecurring expenditures Heavy duty machinery&equipment 001.090.099.594.18.64.05 - Generator& installation for City Hall (carryover from 2018 Budget) 0 203,000 203,000 Heavy duty machinery&equipment 001.016.099.594.21.64.05 - Generator& installation for Precint(carryover from 2018 Budget plus revised installation cost) 0 200,000 200,000 Transfers out-#501 001.090.099.597.50.00.10 - Transfer to purchase sidewalk snow removal equipment 0 80,000 80,000 Total nonrecurring expenditures 483,000 Total of all General Fund revenues 0 Total of all General Fund expenditures 483,000 #101 -Street O&M Fund Expenditures Traffic Control Devices 101.042.099.542.64.48.44 - Spare traffic signal equipment 0 68,000 68,000 Total expenditures 68,000 #501 -Equipment Rental& Replacement Fund Revenues - Transfer to purchase sidewalk snow removal Transfer in -#001 501.501.000.397.00.10 equipment 0 80,000 80,000 Total revenues 80,000 Expenditures Heavy duty machinery&equipment 501.000.000.594.42.64.06 - Sidewalk snow removal equipment 0 80,000 80,000 Total expenditures 80,000 Totals Across all Funds Total revenues 80,000 Total expenditures 631,000 Page 1 of 1 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Amendment#2\2019 05 14 Admin Report\budget summary for amended fund 2019 no2.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 5/7/2019 2019 Budget Amendment#2 Summary of Amended Funds 2019 As 1st 2nd As Adopted Amendment Amendment Amended #001 -GENERAL FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Property Tax 12,054,400 0 0 12,054,400 Sales Tax 22,917,000 0 0 22,917,000 Sales Tax-Public Safety 1,081,900 0 0 1,081,900 Sales Tax-Criminal Justice 1,944,000 0 0 1,944,000 Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 387,000 0 0 387,000 Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,224,000 0 0 1,224,000 State Shared Revenues 1,909,800 0 0 1,909,800 Fines and Forfeitures/Public Safety 1,078,500 0 0 1,078,500 Community and Public Works 1,882,300 0 0 1,882,300 Recreation Program Revenues 628,800 0 0 628,800 Miscellaneous Department Revenue 1,000 500 0 1,500 Miscellaneous&Investment Interest 358,200 0 0 358,200 Transfers in-#105 (h/m tax-CP advertising) 30,000 0 0 30,000 Total Recurring Revenues 45,496,900 500 0 45,497,400 Expenditures City Council 545,903 66,456 0 612,359 City Manager 948,835 15,692 0 964,527 City Attorney 610,549 8,207 0 618,756 Public Safety 25,927,304 184 0 25,927,488 Deputy City Manager 267,044 4,000 0 271,044 Finance/IT 1,402,497 25,203 0 1,427,700 Human Resources 297,421 8,422 0 305,843 City Hall Operations and Maintenance 290,543 1,351 0 291,894 Community&Public Works-Engineering 1,816,141 25,476 0 1,841,617 Community&Public Works-Economic Development 1,018,772 11,965 0 1,030,737 Community&Public Works-Building&Planning 2,248,698 32,776 0 2,281,474 Parks&Rec-Administration 335,958 4,162 0 340,120 Parks&Rec-Maintenance 893,500 0 0 893,500 Parks&Rec-Recreation 253,622 1,196 0 254,818 Parks&Rec-Aquatics 491,153 0 0 491,153 Parks&Rec-Senior Center 101,215 1,692 0 102,907 Parks&Rec-CenterPlace 949,414 6,918 0 956,332 General Government 1,332,650 16,300 0 1,348,950 Transfers out-#204 (LTGO debt service) 401,250 0 0 401,250 Transfers out-#309 (park capital projects) 160,000 0 0 160,000 Transfers out-#311 (pavement preservation) 972,300 0 0 972,300 Transfers out-#501 (CenterPlace kitchen reserve) 36,600 0 0 36,600 Transfers out-#502 (insurance premium) 390,000 0 0 390,000 Total Recurring Expenditures 41,691,369 230,000 0 41,921,369 Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 3,805,531 (229,500) 0 3,576,031 Page 1 of 4 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Amendment#2\2019 05 14 Admin Report\budget summary for amended fund 2019 no2.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 5/7/2019 2019 Budget Amendment#2 Summary of Amended Funds 2019 As 1st 2nd As Adopted Amendment Amendment Amended #001 -GENERAL FUND-continued NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Transfers in-#106 (solid waste repayment) 40,422 0 0 40,422 Total Nonrecurring Revenues 40,422 0 0 40,422 Expenditures General Government-IT capital replacements 107,000 0 0 107,000 Economic Development(retail recruitment) 25,000 0 0 25,000 Public Safety(full facility generator) 0 0 200,000 200,000 Public Safety(carpet&workstation replacement) 50,000 0 0 50,000 General Government-City Hall generator 0 0 203,000 203,000 Transfers out-#122 (replenish reserve) 0 120,000 0 120,000 Transfers out-#309 (Browns Park restroom) 160,000 0 0 160,000 Transfers out-#309 (Browns Park other) 1,000,000 0 0 1,000,000 Transfers out-#312 ('17 fund bal>50%) 0 7,109,300 0 7,109,300 Transfers out-#501 (sidewalk snow removal equip) 0 0 80,000 80,000 Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 1,342,000 7,229,300 483,000 9,054,300 Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (1,301,578) (7,229,300) (483,000) (9,013,878) Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures 2,503,953 (7,458,800) (483,000) (5,437,847) Beginning unrestricted fund balance 36,817,956 36,817,956 Ending unrestricted fund balance 39,321,909 31,380,109 Fund balance as a percent of recurring expenditures 94.32% 74.85% Page 2 of 4 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Amendment#2\2019 05 14 Admin Report\budget summary for amended fund 2019 no2.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 5/7/2019 2019 Budget Amendment#2 Summary of Amended Funds 2019 As 1st 2nd As Adopted Amendment Amendment Amended SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS #101 -STREET FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Utility Tax 1,700,000 0 0 1,700,000 Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas)Tax 2,092,300 0 0 2,092,300 Multimodal Transportation Revenue 132,200 0 0 132,200 Right-of-Way Maintenance Fee 70,000 0 0 70,000 Investment Interest 6,000 0 0 6,000 Miscellaneous 10,000 0 0 10,000 Total Recurring Revenues 4,010,500 0 0 4,010,500 Expenditures Wages/Benefits/Payroll Taxes 1,044,547 13,197 0 1,057,744 Supplies 113,300 0 0 113,300 Services&Charges 2,308,818 18,156 0 2,326,974 Snow Operations 497,200 0 0 497,200 Intergovernmental Payments 855,000 0 0 855,000 Vehicle rentals-#501 (non-plow vehicle rental) 21,250 0 0 21,250 Vehicle rentals-#501 (plow replace.) 77,929 0 0 77,929 Total Recurring Expenditures 4,918,044 31,353 0 4,949,397 Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures (907,544) (31,353) 0 (938,897) NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Transfers in-#122 0 120,000 0 120,000 Transfers in-#312 907,544 0 0 907,544 Total Nonrecurring Revenues 907,544 120,000 0 1,027,544 Expenditures Spare traffic signal equipment 0 0 68,000 68,000 Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 0 0 68,000 68,000 Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures 907,544 120,000 (68,000) 959,544 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures 0 88,647 (68,000) 20,647 Beginning fund balance 784,972 784,972 Ending fund balance 784,972 805,619 Page 3 of 4 P:\Finance\2019 Budget\Amendment#2\2019 05 14 Admin Report\budget summary for amended fund 2019 no2.xlsx CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 5/7/2019 2019 Budget Amendment#2 Summary of Amended Funds 2019 As 1st 2nd As Adopted Amendment Amendment Amended INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS #501 -ER&R FUND Revenues Vehicle Rentals-#001 30,000 0 0 30,000 Vehicle Rentals-#001 21,250 0 0 21,250 Vehicle Rentals-#001 77,929 0 0 77,929 Vehicle Rentals-#001 12,750 0 0 12,750 Transfers in-#001 (CenterPlace kitchen reserve) 36,600 0 0 36,600 Transfers in-#001 (sidewalk snow removal equip) 0 0 80,000 80,000 Investment Interest 9,500 0 0 9,500 Total revenues 188,029 0 80,000 268,029 Expenditures Small tools&minor equipment 20,000 0 0 20,000 Sidewalk snow removal equipment 0 0 80,000 80,000 Total expenditures 20,000 0 80,000 100,000 Revenues over(under)expenditures 168,029 168,029 Beginning working capital 1,290,971 1,290,971 Ending working capital 1,459,000 1,459,000 Page 4 of 4 DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of May 9,2019; 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 May 21,2019, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue May 141 1. Code Text Amendment,Addressing Standards—K.Kendall; Fire Marshall Greg Rogers (20 minutes) 2.New Employee Report—John Whitehead (5 minutes) 3. Draft 2020-2025 Six-Year TIP—Adam Jackson (20 minutes) 4.BUILD Potential Grant—Adam Jackson (10 minutes) 5.Browns Park Improvements Update—Mike Stone (15 minutes) 6. Dept. of Ecology Agrmts. (Decant facility,Appleway Stormwater, Sprague Stormwater)-Helbig(25 min) 7.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 100 mins] May 28,2019,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue May 211 PUBLIC HEARING: 2019 Budget Amendment (10 minutes) 1.First Reading Ordinance 19-006,2nd amendment to 2019 Budget—Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance 19-004,Comp Plan Amendments—Lori Barlow,Mike Basinger (10 minutes) 4. Second Reading Ordinance 19-005,Comp Plan Zoning Map—Lori Barlow,Mike Basinger (10 minutes) 5.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Browns Park—Mike Stone (10 minutes) 6.Admin Report: Regional Veterans Services—Heather Drake,Operations Mgr (15 minutes) 7.Admin Report: Library Update—Aileen Luppert,Managing Librarian (20 minutes) 8.Admin Report: Annexation—Erik Lamb,Mike Basinger, Chaz Bates (20 minutes) 9.Admin Report: Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 10. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 120 mins] June 4,2019, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue May 281 ACTION ITEMS: 1.Public Hearing: 2020-2025 Six-Year TIP—Adam Jackson (15 minutes 2. Resolution 19-008 Adopting 2020-2025 Six Year Tip—Adam Jackson(no public comment) (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance 19-006,2nd amendment to 2019 Budget—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 4.First Reading Ordinance 19-007 Amending Addressing Standards—Karen Kendall (15 minutes) 5.Motion Consideration: BUILD 2019 Grant Potential—Adam Jackson (10 minutes) 6.Mayoral Appointment: Interim Planning Commissioner—Mayor Higgins (10 minutes) NON-ACTION ITEMS: 7. Spokane Conservation District Program Update—Vicki Carter, Conservation District Director (20 minutes) 8. Point in Time Count 2019 Presentation—Tija Danzig,Homeless&Rehousing Program Mgr. (30 minutes) 9.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 120 mins] June 11,2019, Special Meeting: 2020 Budget Workshop, 8:30 a.m.—2:30 p.m., 1due Tue June 41 June 11, 2019, 6 pm formal meeting cancelled June 18,2019, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue June 111 ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading Ordinance 19-007 Amending Addressing Standards—Karen Kendall (15 minutes) NON-ACTION ITEMS 2.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: mins] Draft Advance Agenda 5/9/2019 4:10:24 PM Page 1 of 2 AWC Annual Conference:June 25-28 Spokane Convention Center June 25,2019,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue June 181 1.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 2. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: mins] July 2,2019, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue June 251 1.New Employee Report—John Whitehead (5 minutes) 2.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) July 9,2019,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue July 21 Proclamation: Parks and Recreation Month 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2.Admin Report: Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) July 16,2019, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue July 91 1. Council Goals and Priorities for use of Lodging Tax—Chelsie Taylor (15 minutes) 2.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) July 23,2019,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue July 161 Proclamation:Nick Mamer Days 1.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 2. Info Only: Department Reports July 30,2019, Study Session,6:00 p.m. [due Tue July 231 ACTION ITEMS: 1.Motion: Council goals and priorities for use of LTAC funds—Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) NON-ACTION ITEMS: 2.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) August 6,2019, Study Session,6:00 p.m.—Meeting cancelled Councilmembers attend National Night Out August 13,2019,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Aug 61 1. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) August 20,2019,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Tue Aug 131 1.Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) 2. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: mins] *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Appleway Trail Amenities Right-of-Way process Camping in RVs Sign Ordinance Donation Recognition Snow Removal: Streets, Sidewalks Graffiti St. Illumination(ownership,cost,location) Health District Re SV Stats St. O&M Pavement Preservation Land Use Notice Requirements Studded Snow Tires Mirabeau Park Forestry Mgmt. Utility Facilities in ROW Naming City Facilities Protocol Veterans Services New Employee Qrt Report Water Districts&Green Space Park Lighting Way Finding Signs Park Reg. Ord. amendments PFD Presentation Police Dept. Quarterly Rpt(Jan,April,July,Oct) Draft Advance Agenda 5/9/2019 4:10:24 PM Page 2 of 2