The URL can be used to link to this page

2020, 03-12 Agenda Packet #`414* *mane ..00Valle v Spokane Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave. March 12, 2020 6:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE M. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 9, 2020, February 27, 2020 VI. COMMISSION REPORTS WI. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Study Session: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XI. ADJOURNMENT Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers —City Hall January 9,2020 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Assistant Deanna Horton called roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Danielle Kaschmitter Cary Driskell, City Attorney Timothy Kelley Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Robert McKinley Bill Helbig, City Engineer Deanna Horton, Administrative Assistant IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the amended January 9, 2020 agenda. The election of officers had been added after the agenda was published. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the December 12, 2019 minutes as written. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson reported he attended a Spokane County Human Rights task force meeting and the January 7, 2020 meeting. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no administrative report. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Election of Officers Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to suspend the rules and postpone the election of officers to a time when the full Commission has been appointed. Commissioner Kelley stated that newly appointed members would not necessarily know the people they were voting for if the elections were postponed. Commissioner Johnson stated it was possible that some previously appointed members could be reappointed, and therefore would already be aware of whom they were electing. Commissioner Kelley confirmed that four votes are necessary to be elected to each position. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. ii. Finding Fact: CTA-2019-0004, a proposed amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 22.70.020 Fencing,fence heights in residential zones. Building Official Jenny Nickerson presented to the Commission the Findings of Fact for CTA-2019-0004 which summaries the decision the Commission made during the public hearing for the code text amendment regarding fence heights in residential zones. Ms. Nickerson reminded the Commissioners the proposed amendment to the municipal code is to change where a fence is measured from, which would allow for a six foot high fence 01-09-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 measured from where the bottom of the fence hits the ground, regardless of where the ground is located. Commissioner Kelley confirmed that if there were a dirt barrier, the fence would be measured from the top of an earthen berm. The change to the code moves the measuring of the fence from the lowest point within six feet of the fence to the bottom of the fence regardless of where the fence is built. Commissioners discussed the proposed change,then moved to approve the findings. Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the Planning Commission findings and recommendations regarding CTA-2019-0004. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. iii. Public Hearing: STV-2019-0005, a proposed street vacation of portions of 12th and 13' Avenues, the alley between 12th and 13th Avenues and a portion of Chronicle Road. Chair Johnson opened the public hearing at 6:12 p.m. Ms. Barlow provided a presentation outlining the privately initiated street vacation for a portion of 12th Avenue, a portion of 13th Avenue, the alleyway in-between 12th and 13th, and a portion of Chronicle Road south of 12th Avenue and north of 14th Avenue. Ms. Barlow explained the request is located in the southwest portion of the City near the intersection of 12th Avenue and Carnahan Road. Ms. Barlow provided the Commissioners with additional items for their consideration during the public hearing. She explained the items were comments from the City of Spokane, one new slide for the PowerPoint presentation, and updated recommendations to the staff report based on the new comments received. Ms. Barlow stated a review of the water district service areas indicated that the area was outside of an identified service area, but that the City of Spokane had reached out to let staff know that Spokane Water District #3 considers it to be in their"retail water service area." These properties are in Spokane's Comprehensive Water System Plan and therefore are considered part of the Spokane system for now. There is also a Spokane sewer line located in the parcels which Spokane is requesting an easement for. She stated she had corrected the parcel numbers on the recommendation, and added a new condition based on the received comments from the City of Spokane. Ms. Barlow explained some of the potential issues with the vacation. The zoning to the south and west is single family residential, (R-3), while the rest of the parcels and area to the north is zoned multifamily residential, (MFR). Two of the parcels would be land locked if the whole request was permitted. There is a stormwater piping system which currently is located in the right-of-way (ROW) and on private property which the City needs easements to access. City staff is currently working to obtain the easements for this stormwater system, and it is possible that the system could be moved to accommodate development. The City of Spokane has a sewer main going through the properties and has requested a 30 foot wide easement if any portion of the sewer line is located outside of an easement on the subject properties. Ms. Barlow stated the City's recommendation is to maintain 12th Avenue ROW,but allow the vacation of the rest of the requested ROWs. The reason 12th Avenue should be retained, is all of the properties to the north of 12th Avenue are zoned MFR and this would allow adequate access to the property. While it is only a half ROW at this time, through the 01-09-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 development process further ROW could be obtained if it is needed for development of the property(s). Ms. Barlow stated the approval criteria was in the staff report,however she wanted to cover a question from the study session. The question was what would the difference in allowed density on the affected properties be if the ROW is retained over vacating it. Currently the properties involved in the request equal 6.82 acres, which would allow for 41 dwelling units; if the ROW were vacated the area would increase to 8.39 acres, and allow 50 dwelling units. This is a gross calculation and there is a difference when development actually occurs. If an applicant applied for a planned residential development or cottage development which could increase the density depending on existing zoning. These calculations were not figured with the wetland or the floodplain considerations taken into account. Commissioner Johnson confirmed that this would be the facts in any other zoning district. Commissioner Kelley confirmed that a boundary line adjustment of the two parcels owned by the same property owner could prevent the three parcels on the west side of Chronicle Road from becoming land locked. Ms. Barlow stated the conditions of the vacation state there should be a boundary line adjustment or elimination for the parcels. Commissioner Kelley asked if the applicant's development plans suggested that 12th Avenue could function better for them in another place, would it make sense to vacate 12th Avenue now and allow the applicant to offer a suggestion for an alternative later. Ms.Barlow responded it was possible,but at this time there is no development plan which suggests that possibility. Commissioner Johnson confirmed that should the applicant want to change the zoning on the properties they own to the south of the vacation requests,they would need to go through a Comprehensive Plan amendment, as well as a zoning change. Ms. Barlow shared that the applicants had made a request to change the Comprehensive Plan designation on the parcels to the south, which are currently designated as Low Density Residential, and the City Council made the decision to remove the request from the docket. Commissioner Johnson stated he was concerned that no water district was taking responsibility for water service on the property. Ms. Barlow stated when staff determined which agencies staff should contact regarding this proposal, there was no specific water district providing service to the parcels. This information came from Spokane County records. Both adjacent water districts stated they were not responsible,but recently the City of Spokane had reached out and stated they considered the area to be within their retail water service area. This means that while the area is not specifically in their service area, they can petition to service the area based on their Comprehensive Water Plan. It is in an area where they are allowed to grow based on their service plan. City Engineer Bill Helbig also commented that the City was responsible for the stormwater and surface water and had conditions for these waters in the findings. Commission accepted public testimony. Brad Sharp,Spokane,WA:Mr. Sharp stated he was appearing on behalf of legal council, Taudd Hume for the applicant. Mr. Sharp stated he was in support of the vacation in its entirety. Mr. Sharp said the conditions in the staff report are appropriate for the project. The boundary line elimination is one of the conditions which the applicant is currently working on now. He said after consulting with the lead attorney, the consulting engineer and the owner, they are looking at providing connectivity to those parcels in question through the project so that the concerns raised in the staff report are addressed, which included increased traffic and general access to the property. Mr. Sharp stated that he felt those concerns would be addressed with adequate or equal access, either through 12th 01-09-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5 Avenue, through the aggregated parcel as an easement, or dedication, to mitigate the concerns. The applicant would be agreeable to final plat approval be conditioned ensure connectivity being provided through 12th Avenue or another adequate ROW. Susan Moss, Whipple Consulting Engineers, Spokane Valley, WA: Ms. Moss stated she agreed with everything in the staff report, except for the removal of 12th Avenue from the request. She offered that the applicant would be agreeable to conditions in order to meet accessibility for the multifamily property. She felt conditions could be added to the approval of the vacation in order to allow the vacation of 12th Avenue. Roger Repp, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Repp stated his concern was the pond on the property. He said he thought that the water in the pond is aquifer water,and he is concerned about protecting the water and the aquifer. He said that when Target developed on the south hill, they built on what he thought was a wetland that could not be developed. He said they took a bulldozer and filled in the wetlands and it would not take much for someone to do the same thing to the pond on this property. He is concerned about the water quality. He said as an individual,he can't fight the developer's attorney. He was surprised someone was trying to develop it. Matt Walton, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Walton stated he was not an opponent or proponent, but wanted to bring up several items for consideration. He said that the proponents offer to do something after an action had taken place does not guarantee they would follow through with it. The City recommendation to retain 12th Avenue seemed to be in good character with the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Walton also suggested the City retain Chronicle Road as well. Commissioner Johnson clarified the properties to the north are not landlocked. The reason to retain 12th Avenue is not connectivity for the Low Density Residential properties, it is to support the land use designation of High Density Residential which the right-of-way abuts. Commissioner McKinley asked if the pond was aquifer water. Ms. Barlow did not know the answer, however she stated that at the time of development, the plans will be routed to the appropriate agencies with jurisdiction, including the Aquifer Board, and staff would take the necessary steps at that time. Seeing no one else who wished to test, Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Commissioner Johnson moved the Planning Commission approve the recommendation for STV-2019-0005 as presented by staff eliminating 12th Avenue from the request. Commissioner Kelley said he felt that 12th Avenue should be vacated along with the rest of the request, stating there could be a better place for access to the development and that would not be known until the development plans have been submitted. He said he would not be in favor of the motion as currently stated. Commission Johnson said he felt staff had evaluated the request extensively and that the applicants could work around 12th Avenue being left in place. He commented that previous vacations have raised the question of what happens in the future when a vacation has been allowed and the City has needed the ROW after it is gone. He felt staff had reviewed the possibility and he wanted to support the decision. Commissioner Kaschmitter stated she felt staff had reviewed the proposal and she supported leaving 12th Avenue out of the request. Commissioner McKinley stated he supported the removal of 12th from the request because of the landlocked parcels in the development. The vote on the motion was three in favor, one against with Commissioner Kelley dissenting, the motion passed. 01-09-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 iv. Study Session: Updating Planning Commission Rules of Procedure. Building Official Jenny Nickerson presented the latest version of the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure with all the changes in strike-out format. This reflects all of the changes the Planning Commission has discussed through the last few months regarding the update to the Rules of Procedure and if there are no more changes, they would be moved forward to the City Council for approval by resolution. Commissioners thanked staff for the work done to assist them in updating these Rules of Procedure. Commissioner Johnson suggested holding the approval of the Rules of Procedure for a fully appointed Commission, as was done for the election of officers. He felt covering the updated Rules of Procedure this would be a good for new commissioners. Commissioner McKinley stated he was opposed, sharing he felt as many times as they have been reviewed there was little modification which would occur and adding more voices could just postpone the approval process. Commissioners Kaschmitter and Kelley concurred with thought. Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve and forward to City Council, the Planning Commission updated Rules of Procedure. The vote on the motion was three in favor, one against with Commissioner Johnson dissenting. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner McKinley suggested everyone be careful in the snow, Commissioner Kaschmitter thanked staff again for the work on the Rules of Procedure. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner McKinley moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:15 p.m. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. James Johnson, Chairman Date signed Deanna Horton, Secretary Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers — City Hall February 27, 2020 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Assistant Deanna Horton called roll and the following members and staff were present: Fred Beaulac Jenny Nickerson, Building Official James Johnson Cary Driskell, City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Timothy Kelley Taylor Dillard, Administrative Assistant Robert McKinley Marianne Lemons, Office Assistant Sherri Robinson, absent Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager Matt Walton Chaz Bates, Economic Development Planner Deanna Horton, Administrative Assistant With consensus, the Commission excused Commissioner Robinson from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the February 27, 2020 agenda. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: The January 9, 2020 minutes were withdrawn from consideration by staff because they were incomplete. They will be finished and submitted for approval at the February 27, 2020 meeting. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Beaulac introduced himself, he was on the Planning Commission from 2003 to 2008, and appointed again in 2012. This was his fourth request to serve the City on the Commission. His background is in commercial transportation. Commissioner Johnson reported he attended the City Council meetings on January 14, January 21, February 4, February 18 and February 25. He also attended the Spokane County Human Rights task force meetings which are working on an awards banquet and a web portal where citizens can report hate crime incidents which will allow the Task Force to be able to track the incidences. They hope to have it working by summer. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Building Official Jenny Nickerson VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Election of Officers Chair Johnson called for nominations for the office of Chair. Commissioner Walton nominated Commissioner Johnson, Commissioner McKinley nominated Commissioner Kelley. In a show of hands,the vote for the office of Chair was as follows: Commissioners Beaulac, Johnson, Kaschmitter, and Walton voted for Commissioner Johnson. Commissioners Kelley and McKinley voted for Commissioner Kelley. With four votes to two, Commissioner Johnson remains the Chair for 2020. Chair Johnson called for nominations for the office of Vice-Chair. Commissioner Johnson nominated Commissioner Walton, Commissioner Kelley nominated Commissioner McKinley. In a show of hands, the vote for the office of Vice Chair was as follows: 02-27-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 4 Commissioners Beaulac, Johnson, Kaschmitter, and Walton voted for Commissioner Walton. Commissioners Kelley and McKinley voted for Commissioner McKinley. With four votes to two, Commissioner Walton remains the Vice-Chair for 2020. ii. Findings of Fact: STV-2019-0005, a proposed street vacation of portions of 12th and 13th Avenues, the alley between 12th and 13th Avenues and a portion of Chronicle Road. Senior Planner Lori Barlow explained the findings of fact presented to the Commission. She explained they reflect the decisions the Commission made during their deliberations after a study session and public hearing. The request is to vacate a portion of 12th Avenue, 13th Avenue, the alley between 12th and 13th Avenues, and Chronicle Road, west of Carnahan Road. All of these areas are unimproved. She stated that the staff I recommendation is to retain the portion of 12th Avenue, but the other portions of the privately initiated vacation request be vacated. Ms. Barlow explained that the Commission is being asked to approve the findings if they accurately represent the action that the Commission took on the matter. Chair Johnson made a motion to approve the findings offactfor the street vacation ofSTV- 2019-0005, a proposed street vacation of a portion of 12th and 13th Avenues, the alley between 12th and 13th Avenues and a portion of Chronicle Road as presented and move them forward to the City Council. Attorney Driskell put on record that Commissioner Beaulac and Commission Walton will not be voting on this item, as they had not been appointed at the time of the public hearing. The vote on the motion was four in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. iii. Annual Training: Public Records Training, Open Public Meetings City Attorney Cary Driskell gave the annual public records and open public meetings training to attending Planning Commissioners and staff. iv. Training Session: Comprehensive Plan Amendments History and Docket Overview Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager and Chaz Bates, Senior Planner introduced themselves to the Commission. Mr. Basinger gave a brief history of the development of the City's Comprehensive Plan. This included the development of the land use map, zoning areas, and the periodic update process. Staff is looking at a city-wide rezone in certain areas and Mr. Basinger wanted the Commission to understand the history of what has been done with the comp plan in the past and give an explanation of the development and implementation of the different land use zones within the City. Mr. Bates gave an overview of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process and site specific map amendments. He explained that any applications for amendment must be received by October 31st to be considered in that year's amendment process. The City does publish notice 60 days prior to the application due date. Once applications are received, they are reviewed and docketed for the City Council. The Council does have the authority to remove items from the consideration docket. Once the docket is approved, it begins the process through Planning Commission. Mr. Basinger stated that there were two items that were removed from the 2020 consideration docket. Mr. Bates clarified the timeline of the 2020 process and stated that there will be five amendments to be considered. There are four map amendments and one text amendment. The first map amendment (CPA-2020-0001) is privately initiated by Land Use Solutions and is located on McDonald. The applicant would like to change their designation/zoning from Single-Family-Residential (SFR) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). 02-27-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4 The second map amendment (CPA-2020-0002) is privately initiated by LB Stone Properties and is located on Fancher/Sprague. The applicant would like to change their designation/zoning from Industrial (I)to Regional Commercial (RC). The third map amendment (CPA-2020-0003) is privately initiated by Jay Rambo and is located at 1723/1724 N. Union. The applicant would like to change their designation/zoning from Multifamily Residential (MFR) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). The fourth map amendment (CPA-2020-0006) is city initiated and is for the East Valley School District Walker Center. The City would like to change the designation/zoning from Industrial(I)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). This would allow the school district to move their parent/child classes related to home schooling to this location and it cannot occur under the current zoning. Mr. Basinger gave information regarding the code text amendment (CPA-2020-0007). This amendment applies city-wide and implements changes to allow for alternative housing types and brings forward an area-wide rezone with implementing regulations. He explained that there was concern about duplex development throughout the city that really needed to be addressed and he feels that that the staff has come up with some good ideas that will help address some of those concerns. Staff reasoned that it would be best to have the denser housing zones located near services and transit and limit duplexes and cottage home building in the R-3 zones. He explained that staff developed a new R-4 zone that is located between Stn Avenue and Broadway Avenue. This area was determined to be a good location because it is within walking distance of the transit system that Spokane Transit Authority (STA) currently has in place. They hope to be able to incentivize alternative housing within areas that have transit and services. Mr. Basinger explained that staff is looking at 10 units per acre in the new R-4 zone. Cottage and townhome developments would be allowed in this zone but they would no longer be allowed in the R-3 zone. They will increase the units allowed to eight units per acre and increase the minimum lot size to 14,500 square feet to do a duplex within the R- 3 zone. The requirement for duplexes will only be six units per acre so the hope is that this will incentivize single family residences in this zoning area. Commissioner Kelly asked if tiny homes will be allowed in the R-4 zone. Building Official Jenny Nickerson answered that the building code will have a new appendix addressing tiny homes. A tiny home will be interchangeable with the cottage standards and a single family residential home. The only caveat to that code will be tiny homes that are on trailers or on wheels. These are considered recreational vehicles and would not be allowed in the residential zones. Commissioner Walton asked how the staff came to the density regulations in the R-3 zone. Mr. Basinger stated that staff wanted to increase the density in the R-3 zone and utilize the 5000 square foot lot size. They hope that this change will really encourage developers to go with a single-family development in the R-3 zone and keep the high density developments in the R-4 zone. Commissioner Kelly asked if there was consideration to extend this zone to skirting the industrial to the north of Sprague. Mr. Basinger answered that staff really wanted to stick to the policies and goals outlined in the current Comprehensive Plan, which states that the higher density areas would be located near transportation and services. Staff looked at some other industrial areas but this location made the most sense geographically because of its location to those services. 02-27-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4 Chair Johnson mentioned that the STA did a presentation to the City Council that they are considering expanding their services to Barker Road. Commissioner Kaschmitter commented that if the City is going to basing this R-4 change on access to services and transit on Sprague, it would be important for there to be bus service from one end of Sprague to the other end without having to change buses. Mr. Basinger agreed and said that the City is in conversations with STA about the possibility of getting additional transit service if there are more rooftops developed in this area. Chair Johnson expressed that he would like to make sure that the public is well notified of these amendment changes to the plan so that they can give their input. Mr. Basinger responded that all of these amendment changes will be broadly posted on all of the City's social networks to let people know. Commissioner Walton asked if property owners will be notified that their property is being rezoned. Mr. Basinger answered that they will not be individually notified because it is an area-wide rezone. The City is allowed to make these changes through this process without sending individual notification. However, the City will do everything possible to get notice out so that the residents are aware of any changes that happen. Commissioners Johnson and Commissioner thanked staff for all of their information and hard work. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Walton expressed that since the Commissioners are not able to get to know each other outside of Council Chambers, he wanted to give a little background on who he is and what he is about. He encouraged the other Commissioners to do the same in the upcoming meetings. He gave a quick biography of himself outlining his personal life and his values and ideas. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner McKinley moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:46 pin. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. James Johnson, Chairman Date signed Deanna Horton, Secretary CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: March 12, 2020 Item: Check all that apply nold business M new business n public hearing n information 171 study session n pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2020 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Study session GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A, SVMC 17.80.140 and 19.30.010. PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTION:None BACKGROUND: The GMA allows local jurisdictions to consider amendments to their Comprehensive Plans once each year.The City codified this process in Section 17.80.140 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC). Consistent with state law and the SVMC,staff published notice on August 23 and 30,2019, advising the public of the annual amendment process and that the City would accept applications for the 2020 cycle through October 31,2019. The notice was also sent to all agencies, organizations, and adjacent jurisdictions that may have an interest in amending the comprehensive plan. On November 19, 2019, the City Council approved the 2020 Docket. The Docket includes five proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan: four map amendments and one text amendment. On February 27, 2020, staff provided an overview on the 2020 Docket, background information on the adopted Comprehensive Plan and implementing regulations and provide additional detail on the City initiated text amendment. On February 21, 2020, the City issued a Determinations of Non-significance (DNS) for the proposed comprehensive plan amendments pursuant to Title 21, Environmental Controls of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Comments on the determination have been incorporated into the staff reports where appropriate and no appeal of the DNS was received. On March 6, 2020, notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald and each site was posted with a "Notice of Public Hearing" sign, with a description of the proposal. Individual notice of the proposals was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each amendment. The notice will be published again in the Spokane Valley News Herald on March 13, 2020. Tonight staff will present the proposed comprehensive plan amendments for review and discussion. On March 26, 2020,the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: No action recommended at this time. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger,AICP,Economic Development Manager; Chaz Bates,AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1. Presentation 2. Yellow Binder RPCA Study Session for 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 1 of 1 2020 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments March 12, 2020 Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager Chaz Bates, Senior Planner 2020 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment Timeline c 0 2020 Docket CO 131) }, .0 131) Overview _ .i 2-27-2020 4) C) O Administrative 4) } O +r 4) '� CI 4) _ Study Session Report 4) 3- 12-2020 O = > Ordinance 7 St ._ (I) Fa E co c a c = O Public Hearing — Reading C.) ,0 Q E ,I V 3-26-2020 c Q }' _ O 131) = Ordinance 2nd .- Q V c O V c Findings of Fact 0 Reading EL) a '> O 4-09-2020 Q c) w z E c.5 IIA NI NI Fii.- Today 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process I Staff Planning City Council • Facilitates Process Commission • Reviews PC • Conducts review • Conducts Public Findings and and analysis Hearing Deliberations • Prepares staff hi • Deliberates and 0 • Considers public reports and public recommendation comment notices to Council • May approve, modify, or deny requests 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 3 Notice of PHearing . .._ Published in p 3-6-2020 and 3-13-2020 �nnaX,��irAve A , Posted on property __ A _A A A' '-' ,. , 'sPe v 3-6-2020 - 3-26-2020 J :/# fr Mailed to property owners rOJOF o- dAdAlik- 1 ,/' 3-11-2020 �6 -/f/�.��/74/ T. 4, reT, '> rol .4e;r Fro IP le topirer .:; /A.414 11.40 A, , :efrAGYEI Legend2 //:, , QProject Site 2�A 400 foot buffer 1 1 1 I )esmeUAve / EZE-DesmetAve I( I1f I I I I I I I / 1 i 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session ann ■ nCommissionMaterials Yellow Binder 4,--$ .414,4N5m4„...mor„ ___ ... ,. ..,_.1.:_, _,,,,, _ ._., _„___„Ain , t„,..4_,.. .".. . _ ,4_ _ _,...„._ . . • , . . . ,-... ,.7. , ,_ , . _---7---w, ,,_ Staff Report A ..., .:„ . ... Ulf tic _1r lii tut ■■i■■J Application materials .�� m,—!� ^+ iiii1 rte__—s-- Maps SEPA Checklist City of Spokane Valley Annual Comprehensive Plan Notices Amendments Agency comments IL Ow Spokan'\'1` Public comments le . Supplemental documents 10210E. alley,Sprague Avenue Spnk�ne Walley,WA 94106 I w.Spakarte'alley.org _ I ll 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 5 Approval - SVMC 17. 80 . 140 Required Findings Additional Factors Supports public health , safety, and Effect on environment protection of the environment Effect on open space, streams, rivers, Consistent with GMA and Comp Plan and lakes Responds to change in conditions Compatibility and impact on existing Corrects an error uses and neighborhoods Addresses deficiency Adequacy and impact on services Benefit to City and Region Quantity, location and demand for land Projected population for area Other effects on Comp Plan 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket File Number Location Type / Who Description CPA-2020-0001 1311 N McDonald Map / Private Change 0.47 acres from SFR to CMU CPA-2020-0002 Fancher Road/ Sprague Map / Private Change 2.98 acres from Ito RC CPA-2020-0003 1723 & 1724 N Union Map / Private Change 6.24 acres from MFR to CMU CPA-2020-0006 EVSD Walker Center Map / City Change 8.8 acres Ito CMU CPA-2020-0007 Applies citywide Text & Area-wide Policy and corresponding implementing changes to Rezone / City maps for alternative housing types 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session CPA-2020-0001: Privately Initiated Map Amendment , w ,;, ifr , 4f, ......... _ . . _ _ _,.. _ __ .v. , to ,. , t - Applicant: Land Use 1 E Mission Ave ' I,!,, ! ., r Solutions as . 1F Owner: Tucker Roy, LLC ,2 7; , , - • : { :. , _. E Broadway Ave m ! 4 Amendment: Change from ° ti , r Single Family Residential 1 13 o (SFR) to Corridor Mixed Use 0 a , z (CMU ) �a�. .. : f� 1 i . ., Application Number: CPA-2020-0001 Proposed Change: SFR to CMU 0 100 200 300 400 50040, 0 47 ac Area: Feet 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session CPA-2020-0001: Staff Analysis . , „„ Expands the CMU by 0.5 ac •y r No critical areasiiii•-• ,,.6.4F-it,6,--,2, 1 i F „. i •, ,, .ll r 7 1. if 1 Y Supports development of s j vacant properties « . y. _ Provides land for F employment8.'-'V -- '.se, 1 , , -,,,,,o... , . :,.„,-4, ) !.. V� F*.iSupported by _ �� '� � m , � y> • "td ''� � � � + .- •transportation networkM � %- , �_� �� d ' � P r a � �Ar! �4rN �j1� " 4� ' � --,,41,, ; ,{General ) compatible with � qn l fRY1p �iF3fi1 tlC isurroundn uses iii%3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session CPA-2020-0002 : Privately Initiated Map Amendment __Alf 1 7, ...,1 , z mi. Applicant: LB Stone - 8 ■�irii° -.-4 1 CD .:J_,' Z iv w ... . _ , Properties md. . Owner: LB Stone Properties go i CD 41irr_ - .. _ ....7 . .. .• agi:V. Amendment: Change fromCU 4 � y Z ,._ Industrial ( I ) to Regional -.- . j7 • , .• . , .. , ., ... .. Commercial ( RC) = .t.:_., 7' "7" - ., 'i �4 E Sprague Ave - ,. Application Number: CPA-2020-0002 Proposed Change: I to RC 0 100 200 300 400 500CO Area: 2.98 ac Feet 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 10 CPA-2020-0002 : Analysis ___ Expands the RC by 1.4 ac :_, -... . , .. , , . No critical areas < t,, ,c,, , swi, � , ; ' a Y + — _ .._.._ ate._- Supports redevelopment .40,,r, underused propertiesi,.), ,,,41:;481.,.:..,4,,,,,,,:.:,:i.op.:::04,-7,4,-,;141,-,:.%-a,,,4t4„41,„„ii„..„.y � , ....2, ,"' � - Land for employment ,,,,, . t xY Supported by _ ,,, , :e ,, ,,, .,_.i ,w, .... _ transportation network .%, { Compatible with , `?:--4*''' ..-S``;'4. '''' (Sk_,o, ''' L'''' . ' ' ' - . 1 1 ' 14'. w—willillf4'r-' q F H. Cf � e surroundinguses 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 11 CPA-2020_0003 : privately Initiated map Amendment E Mansfield Ave 41". ..• , ,\ . .1 1 1----- 1 ji- . • ,.' , . , , Applicant: Jay Rambo ,. • i , i-:,:,. . 90 90 . . Property Owner: REVERE_ E Montgomery Ave E Mission Ave'•I Ili E Indiana Ave • .--------- . _ DEcE in INv LLc. BRILL .. I I 1.7,F7IMIIMII -- ( _ i 7 "CD - - - - 90 - --;---- ., .„ - - ,,,i • ,.. .,..„.. 7:, ' • - - init* PROPERTIES LLC 7 0_ _ _ , - _ _ . ...._ .„ , _..._..... . ,... . .. „ '"--- K ,., ..... . „ .- ',.,•i _;,:. , - „ , Amendment: Change from .• , , . NC,_Pt • . . ,. ' g ' Multifamily Residential •. . 74m __Ai ... A , . , ilt,-..,-.,_ . ( MFR) to Corridor Mixed , . ., . _,,,, ......._ --- 1 --..-304, :, ; ,, --„Ni.J.:.„ r - - il, F.A:,,.. L., .1gr'...:,' ,d, ',;1 .„" .,f-.q.kl, 1: , ,.•,. ; • ( c. .4,, 1 vii , . Pi .... ' Use (CMU ) 1 ., . IA ,,,„ ,, ,.. ,,,.,,,,.. .....,..;„ ... .. .. 1 --Ltqf"--7- II 1, , ,, , ' ,,,,. 14,,,,044,4-14.0_-, ,,, '• IF et'-4.1'Q $ r ...t,t,, •., ', - 4., -. • - 1/4.0. I -- =-,,-----7--- N, \ . , a , . /''' ,34., ..';.'1:4,4;,, .X _ _ ,_., ., _ .,_4,.* , Application Number: CPA-2020-0003 Proposed Change: MFR to CMU 0 150 300 450 600 750 1113 Area: 6.24 ac Feet _ 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session CPA-2020-0003 - Analysis Expands CMU by6 . 25ac - ¢ u� h � � , d �: '" ._.-/ til• ;. , -:,...., � 9 .�y N No critical area ,__... _,,,_..,., ,-,- s ^ fir. . 1.-__„, __.; _ Supports redevelo menu p ti. „1,1,4.' ry underused properties .:,,,_ 1,---.....--5,17VA.7?'!,:,--. �� _ , "� �T ,:M, h:+J ^,_ ,7„ ,-. ...... „,.. -2,..-..--,,,,..' ............_ _ . H ' `, ,,,,,.‘,!,,,, Supported by r a 4 transportation network4. V:. 'may F -- _ W . , r� . �� —M4Compatible with yS� -. TiII �Isurroundn uses _seml - ti [ it ..,,-_-...7.,„;,_._,,::., -7....,_„.„ _ iww, _,..,,. .t____ : ‘, „.,., . _,_ L. ,. . list ..,_ 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 13 CPA-2020_0006 : City initiated map Amendment _ . , . , Applicant: Spokane ______ 1 . , 1 - .f.-:- -., .'''''• , . •,, , i I . • •. . • . • Valley v , ;-.10' 'Imit. , .. . , I ' Owner: East Valley , . ,... . . 1 ,.,.. _ School District c •.._, , 03 , '.. ,. • > .-- .—. -- -=. Amendment: Change . , . from Industrial ( I ) to I • , ,,.-_---, . - . . , s, .. . . . _ .. : _. . Corridor Mixed Use ; ., ,, :• , _ ., . _.--;1!..... . 101.400,4 __. .IL " .- --7-.'"' L '. - ... ......_... _,--T-,'.. .-;.--72-—:':;-7.,... .r.F,--'"'1 ';•• ' '- Il' ' - - --4`1111MINEMII l'l'IMilairl'"! I . • ; - -' , I . . „ (C M U ) - '-" - ''-•;d:..,.SWaler.-, •'-' 'jr! ',:i;. •'?.2.-1.0..7,,likillitilLiital .:or,--c, i,_,• .:11 - .. P , ...7 ,b,,,, ' ',,=.. — , I ' F1' ' oia :, __, ,..._ , .i. . ',,,_, , __ • _ _ . L-: _ , ., , '-,' - - . . 1 . : `4,,O=.1s--,e7,-, .ro,:i.,----.--,-----....a..- ' 4111.111 Mt.'i!, . •...• " • . • ft •,, . ,... • -', . . _ ,... -- - 7,.. 6-E.mi•-:-2J-- - Application Number: CPA-2020-0006 Proposed Change: I to CMU 0 150 300 450 600 750 Area: 8.81 ac491 Feet _ 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 14 CPA-2020-0006 : Analysis Expands CMU by —9 ac .t. , -, \,,, : f , ,:,, ._,„ -,„, ,, No critical areas ,� i , � f , 4,,;,,,,(... , -1'4,' illimiiiii,,, widx...v.Epra..cefrut,ir. : -----"L". , ,,_.,,,,,mtill:,'..„.0,1_,,,,,._. II .,,,.: mi #...,,,,_.:i .. 4„, , ,...„,,,,. ,i441 Supportsexpanded ',,, ,,,,_- --, , education uses 3 ,.. # ____ ).!:_. --.. ..._ _ _,s____________ _ f -,--,.4. .. ,0„--.---,.-„,-: ..-__-- 7-- - -'-'-',`!-Z07i.Z'-;'`...,,-_-:-:--,. -1.,,,p--.4t,:-47,--,--- .-------:' 1. Ma W { 1- M Supported b - _ - _ _� �x imiii. • transportation network . ,0..,.. . p " Compatible with ..... „...,.... __ I ,, AY TAt � OHI. MAMiEM. surrounding uses - • 4 , r � _ ..i'� ___ ... .. _ ,n . i@@ 7< .. �. ate" "_..a '' �� ( •2 1� � rRESP9SSIN6 ' - - _ _ , ,w 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 1 CPA-2020-0007: City Initiated Text Amendment J Applicant: Spokane Valley * * t __,___-_----_-- ........- Wellesle 1 _ . z , Ave I Owner: applies citywide 1 ; .. co -, Pr I fides & Amendment: Add policies i 1 Goals, P° __ s \C iSHAt9rTEaRt:g eS 0- 10 — moil r. -"••Alli- ' '0 Hibi 910Mamlen lac , for alternative housing and i 1 awe al d -.s..,....,.....„ zr 1:1 41,i 1 re .P. i - Mt' _ _ Ihilletiv 7% - . area-wide rezone 1 1 mi pi... V.._, In I --•1...1-- - II-71-444: lid - 1TEMElf tim7M.121=111G7--IMINIIIPMgr- 1 r • a A -4,3 1 {A8411 -a 1 . r5 › •IJ;F_ i ., 1 , \ ..v 0 co .--E-3241-Ave !° cn .E 32nd 07 1 zoning cmu 0, R1 iMF RC 00, foriede:,..440 iAdow..1'''"'-- E 44th Ave _ R2 RY/140WIMVA.......m , NC 1/4 U I E 57 R3 MUth Are Lill _ R4 - - 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 16 CPA-2020-0007: City Initiated Text Amendment Background , , e 1 ,1 . _. . _1,_ .11 _f7 Concerns from residents -� ,,..m_.., - about influx of duplex , �- r, „,, -� developmentsLo� , t - i 11 Felts Field � - ° { - I F iii n Appropriate locations for :uuI' — .uuIp--\ of Ai ' ,. b a ,I,r . � JU ,. ,m1c _ W � P alternative housing t , h® �� To Ili oe7 --=q [HF 1�'9 o��l�m IW.i m p'o i :71 II Ii RI Pl Pp 111,.gl�l'�°II,' .o�. Dbjective of Amendment I11' sj IIS LEW�1` 7top.r..1111111 o mo � I ,IiIIIHI[ITII L I i. dl L ,�'NI'IA F9 C6, �.I�,I IYll I ceryl. 71mmi■ i 1111 �i,- rm I II•II v �,p� 1 Addresses concerns of 1'� o_o a- ikRffgo o o _IIP- IcAa Clu ° a° residents 1 S Denser housing supported L by transit & services17 ' Legend R3 parcels that are: Greater than 10,000 sq ft and Housing affordability yVacant or Partially Used. STA Frequent Service (15 min) \ r STA Basic Service O 11/12/2019 17 CPA-2020-0007: City Initiated Text Amendment Spokane-Kootenai Real Estate Research Committee 2020 Market - 0 • .- ... ' 'ffi eti',C, ,,,s.:".t. l,.„...... ,,,2 Forum Housing inventory is at an all-time low I - _ $385,000 ,., Low supply/high demand results in 4 beds appreciation 2 baths $285,0004 beds Increased supply results in more ------,.., ,--„..._. 2 baths affordability 1"111HRS I _ - E 11 _ 2019 median sales for SF home is $287,995 up 10.8% from 2018 r , immiiimise 11/12/2019 18 CPA-2020-0007: CityInitiated Text Amendment Amend Goals and Policies for alternative housing t es Housing types GOALS H-Gi Allow fora broad Lange of housing opportnnitles to Enable a variety of housing types at increased uttRe{om ;tr meet the needs H-G2 Enablethe deve'n P STRATEGIES HG3 pment of affordable housing for all Income levels. > Identity low-and moderate densities within 1/2 mile ofu n d e d high Allow convenient Rrlioods to daffy good and services In Spokane w housing needs v Continue to evaluate new, ha usingtypologies to meet performance transit networks. POLICIES f market Reeds vi-in Support voluntary efforts by property owners to rehabilitate and isv/mvsnii,Wira+.ariiasrrMiiiryr preserve buildings of historic value and minim character. Preserve and enhance the city's established single- HA2 rvek innovative regulatJons that expand kg chokes dcrel''allowing units,Pre-fabricated s I+ttludlrg t homes,accessory andoter housing types. homes.co housing,cottage Irousirrg; family neighborhoods by minimizing the impacts of H fi� ;aad�;,antori, � rdabfehousing units using ava;faWe H'P4 Enable the creation of housing for resident individuals and families more dense housing typologies such as duplexes needing assistance fTomsocial and human service provide s. and cottage development. Associated regulatory changes to implement policy. net.n,ort,,, C.r, 27 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 19 CPA-2020-0007: Zoning Code Changes - Map . ,6 I• 1,14:VI r ',. NIFIr. iNallr- -...mdlkik4ii lc ii - ilia ---,4104,1 . -1 ko -. i Go - E rvi a . Ave 1•11111 > OEM r— i iiiiiMI room" .l1 I J -11 us - . d. % Bi d---_------ __ alt •- jeleprinlikEWS ma It %I 1 \ i--\3 Ave 73 re It E 16th . › '', Ave 2 \\ -c, ce ..._ )ih ._„:. , . C...‘p q,. EcT, \ E CU I IL 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session 20 CPA-2020-0007: Zoning Code Changes - Text 19.20.010 Establishment of Zoning Districts Comp Plan Land Use Designation Map Symbol Zoning District Single-Family Residential R-3 Single-Family Residential Urban Single-Family Residential R-4 Single-Family Residential Urban 19.20.015 Zoning districts purpose D. R-4 — Single-Family Residential Urban. Allows for single-family residential development at an urban density that provides flexibility and promotes reinvestment in existing single-family neighborhoods. 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session CPA-2020-0007: Zoning Code Changes - Text 19.40.060 Development standards - 19.60.050 Permitted uses matrix Duplexes, Triplexes, and Fourplexes Residential Mixed Use R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR CMU MU Duplcxes_shall meet the minimum lot Group Living size per dwelling unit, setback standards, Assisted living/ P P P maximum lot coverage, and building nursing home height standards shown in Table 19.70 1. Residential Duplex development in the R-3 zone Dwelling, cottage S S S shall have a minimum lot size of 14,500 Dwelling, duplex -PS P P -R square feet. Duplex, Triplex, and Dwelling, triplex P P S Fourplex development in non-residential Dwelling, fourplex P P S zones shall meet the requirements set Dwelling, townhouse S S S forth in 19.70.050(G). Transportation E.V. infrastructure PP P P 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session CPA-2020-0007: Zoning Code Changes - Text 19.70 Residential Standards (Table 19.70-1) R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 M FR(1 Front and Flanking Street Yard Setback 35' 15' 15' 15' 15' Garage Setback(2) 35' 20' 20' 20' 20' Rear Yard Setback 20' 20' 10' 10' 10' Minimum Side Yard Setback 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' Open Space N/A N/A N/A Li8k 10% gross area(3) Lot Size 40,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft rL 4,300 sq. ft. N/Aal Lot Coverage 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 60% 60.0% Maximum Density 1 du/ac 4 du/ac du/ac 10 du/ac 22 du/ac Building Height(5) 35' 35' 35' 35' 50' 1) Where MFR abuts R-1, R-2, or R-3 zones, development shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 19.75 SVMC, Transitional Regulations. (2) Attached garages, where the garage door does not face the street, may have the same setback as the primary structure. (3) Open space requirement does not apply to single-family development in the MFR zone. (4) Single-family residential development in the MFR zone shall have a minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet per dwelling unit. Only one single-family dwelling shall be allowed per lot. (5) The vertical distance from the average finished grade to the average height of the highest roof surface. (6) Duplex development in the R-3 zone shall have a minimum lot size of 14,500 square feet. CPA-2020-0007: Zoning Code Changes - Text Appendix A Definitions Dwelling, triplex: An attached building designed exclusively for occupancy by three families, with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking, sleeping, and sanitation, but sharing a common or party wall or stacked. See "Residential, use category. " Dwelling, fourplex: An attached building designed exclusively for occupancy by four families, with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking, sleeping, and sanitation, but sharing a common or party wall or stacked . See "Residential, use category. " Dwelling, multifamily: A building designed for occupancy by three five or more families, with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking, sleeping, and sanitation . Townhouses are not considered multifamily development. See "Residential , use category. 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session CPA-2020-0007: Analysis ___... 1 . ___ Allows density to be obtained _ ,---') in the R3 zone for SF development -- i L,j Faits Feld .,. —m1 j� I - Incentivizes single-family (SF) � — �� ,,tom development - "' iii Provides a greater variety of r �r r housing types - .... c ' = a_-t..; II iiii7., Increases density in areas withim MI ;.,,z,„/,; ,,, % 7 high performance transit and ■ I services �� \, Establishes a minimum lot size ,,„- � for duplex deveIopment STA Frequent Service (15 min) STA Basic Service 3/12/2020 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Study Session Discussion Siokane` Mike Basinger, AICP 3/12/2020 �� Economic Development Manager COMMUNITY& PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING&PLANNING DIVISION Scrry aFpokane STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION v CPA-2020-0001 STAFF REPORT DATE: March 5,2020 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: March 26,2020,beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,Washington 99206. Project Number: CPA-2020-0001 Application Description: Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban(R-3)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Location: Parcel number 45152.1004 addressed as 1311 N.McDonald Road,further located in the NW 1/4 of Section 15,Township 25 North,Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington Applicant: Land Use Solutions and Entitlement, 9101 N Mt View Lane, Spokane,WA 99218 Owner: Tucker Roy LLC, 1215 N McDonald , Spokane Valley,WA 99216 Date of Application: October 2,2019 Staff Contact: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, 10210 E Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Application Exhibit 6: SEPA Checklist Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map Exhibit 7: Environment Determination Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 8: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 4: Zoning Map Exhibit 9: Agency and Public Exhibit 5: Aerial Comments A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is a privately-initiated request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation of parcel 45152.1004 from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). The existing use on the property is a single family residence owned by the applicant.The site is flat and does not contain any critical areas.The property is to the north of the McDonald Professional Center and adjacent to a vacant parcel designated and zoned CMU. The property and adjacent vacant CMU property and are being considered for future office expansion. Page 1 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0001 A 44 unit multifamily development,McDonald Place,is directly east across McDonald Road;to the north of McDonald Place is another 19 unit multifamily development. Immediately to the north and west of the subject property are single-family residences.To the south is a vacant property designated and zoned CMU;beyond the vacant property further south is the McDonald Professional Office building. The property is served by McDonald Road.McDonald Road is minor arterial with a 3-lane urban cross- section with a single-travel lane north and south,a center turn lane,with bike lanes and sidewalks on both sides of the street.The Average Daily Traffic(ADT)for this segment of McDonald,in 2015,is estimated at nearly 5,000 vehicular trips per day with a level of service of A-C. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and Characteristics: The property consists of one parcel totaling 0.46 acres in size with frontage on McDonald Road. Comprehensive Plan: Single Family Residential(SFR) Zoning: Single Family Residential Urban(R-3) Existing Land Use: A single-family home is located on the property. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: Comp Plan: Single Family Residential (SFR) North Zoning: Single Family Residential Urban(R-3) Uses: Single-family home Comp Plan: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) South Zoning: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Uses: Vacant Comp Plan: Multifamily Residential(MFR) East Zoning: Multifamily Residential(MFR) Uses: Multifamily residences (44 units) Comp Plan: Single Family Residential(SFR) West Zoning: Single Family Residential Urban(R-3) Uses: Single-family home IMPLICATIONS: The adopted Comprehensive Plan describes the CMU designation as"allow[ing] for light manufacturing, retail,multifamily,and offices along major transportation corridors. It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue, and the north-south arterials."McDonald Road is an improved north-south Minor Arterial that is consistent with the description of the CMU designation. The proposed amendment provides flexibility that can be used to support the applicants indicated desire to expand the McDonald Professional Center use to the subject property. Changing the designation to CMU,increases the allowed types of uses to include office and parking. The designation change and rezone of the site to CMU allows for a broader range of uses than the R-3 zone permits,including retail and office uses.The residences to the north and west are likely to experience impacts from the increased intensity of use on the property.Any development on the property will be subject to the adopted transitional provisions to minimize the impacts of the allowed uses.The transitional provisions include height limitations, screening and landscaping requirements. Page 2 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0001 APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: October 2,2019 Application Submitted: October 2,2019 SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issue date February 21,2020 End of Appeal Period for DNS: March 6,2020 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing March 6,2020 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: March 6& 13,2020 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: March 10,2020 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, the lead agency has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The city issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal on February 21, 2020. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Titles 19, 21, and 22 of the SVMC, a site assessment, public and agency comments, the Comprehensive Plan and associated Environmental Impact Statement. 2. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE 1. Compliance with Title 17(General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Approval Criteria i. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map amendments if it finds that: (1) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; Analysis: The proposed amendment changing the land use designation from SFR to CMU has a substantial relationship to the public health,safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. The adopted Comprehensive Plan describes the CMU designation as "allow[ingj for light manufacturing, retail, multifamily, and offices along major transportation corridors. It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue, and the north- south arterials."McDonald Road is an improved north-south Minor Arterial that is consistent with the description of the CMU designation. Additionally, the proposed amendment provides flexibility that can be used to support the applicants indicated desire to expand the McDonald Professional Center use on the subject property. Changing the designation to CMU, increases the allowed types Page 3 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0001 of uses to include office and parking. Increasing office and parking opportunities in the McDonald Road corridor has a substantial benefit to public health, safety, and welfare. The amendment area is not covered by critical areas or designated natural resources. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment are promoted by standards established by the state and the City's regulations. (2) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; Analysis: The Growth Management Act (GMA) adopts thirteen goals to guide the development of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. The request allows opportunity to provide an expansion of office use on a designated Minor Arterial with supporting infrastructure. The proposal is consistent with goals of GMA and the Comprehensive Plan. (3) The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; Analysis: The amendment does not respond directly to a substantial change in conditions from the 2016 legislative update to the Comprehensive Plan. However, the two parcels to the south of the proposed amendment were changedfrom Office to CMU as part of the 2016 legislative update as part of a larger overhaul to eliminate the Office designation, and the owner of the subject property is the same owner of the McDonald Professional Center. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The amendment is not in response to a mapping error. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: While not directly identified as a deficiency, the Comprehensive Plan has identified the following goals and policies that support increasing employment opportunities while taking advantage of existing supportive infrastructure. The proposed amendment contributes to the long-term success of the City: ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. T-G2 Ensure that transportation planning efforts reflect anticipated land use patterns and support identified growth opportunities. ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis: The change to CMU will allow for expanded office and office related uses such as parking. The change could result in more intensive development in the future, though the site immediately to the south is vacant and designated and zoned CMU. There is no concern on effect of physical environment. Page 4 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0001 (2) The effect on open space, streams,rivers, and lakes; Analysis: There are no known critical areas associated with the site,such as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat areas,frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas. The parcel is not located within shoreline jurisdiction, and there are no known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance ensures adequate protection of the critical areas and stormwater associated with commercial development will be retained and treated on the site. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis: The property is adjacent to CMU to the south and MFR to the east. To the north and west are existing single family homes on SFR designated properties. If approved, the development of the site will be subject to the transitional provisions adopted in the development regulations that will ensure projection of the adjacent homes to the north and south. Potential development consistent with the CMU zone will be compatible with properties to the south and east. The projected impact to the surrounding neighborhood is minimal. Any future development will be evaluated for compliance with all municipal requirements as it relates to adjacent uses at the time of development. (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads, public transportation,parks,recreation, and schools; Analysis: McDonald Road is a Minor Arterial and is expected to accommodate the projected change. While the subject property was not considered in the 2016 legislative update, the property immediately to the south was part of the 2016 analysis. The projected LOS for McDonald Road in 2040 is A-C, and no mitigations or transportation projects are planned for this area of McDonald Road within the 20- year planning horizon. Additionally, the subject property is approximately 0.5 acres and its overall impact to the transportation system is minimal. The subject property and the property immediately to the south are considered infill development, as such, the expansion of office in this area is ideal because of the supporting infrastructure that is in place. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis: The proposed change would allow the property to support the expansion of the McDonald Professional Center, increasing employment opportunities and growing the City's economy. The change will benefit the City and region by supporting the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goal and policy: ED-GI Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley ED-P3 Encourage businesses that provide jobs and grow local markets. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis: The proposal would add approximately 0.5 acres of CMU property to the 1,666 acres of existing CMU designated property within the City. While additional demand for CMU property may be limited, the CMU designation in this places allows for the expansion of an existing office development on the McDonald Road corridor in an area supported by existing infrastructure. The proposal is limited to a reasonable Page 5 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0001 area and if developed under CMU standards the type of use and density would be appropriate for the location. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Analysis: There is one dwelling unit proposed to be removed. While CMU allows residential development, it is not expected that residential development would occur and therefore the City would lose one single family house as a result of the amendment. The change is not expected to have significant impacts to population density in the area. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The CMU designation will support the goals and policies identified above. There will be no effect on other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, including Housing, Capital Facilities and Public Services, Public and Private Utilities, Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources. Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings:The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.The Comprehensive Plan describes the CMU designation as"allow[ing] for light manufacturing,retail,multifamily, and offices along major transportation corridors.It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue,and the north-south arterials." McDonald Road is an improved north-south Minor Arterial that is consistent with the description of the CMU designation. Additionally, the amendment is supported by the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: ED-GI Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. ED-P3 Encourage businesses that provide jobs and grow local markets. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. T-G2 Ensure that transportation planning efforts reflect anticipated land use patterns and support identified growth opportunities. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. 3. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: The Growth Management Act(GMA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan requires that public facilities and services be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy. The area is currently served with adequate public facilities and services.Modern Electric Water Company,Spokane County Environmental Services,Spokane Valley Fire District,and Central Valley School district provide water, sewer, and fire protection and schools services in this area. The projected LOS for McDonald in 2040 is A-C, and no mitigations or transportation projects are planned for this area of McDonald within the 20-year planning horizon. Urban Page 6 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0001 services are available. Specific site needs,including transportation will be addressed at the time a development is proposed for the site. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development. D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has received no public comments to date. Comments received following the date of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission at the March 12,2020 meeting. 2. Conclusion(s): Notice of Public Hearing (NOPH) was published on March 6 and March 13, 2020. The NOPH was posted on site on March 10, 2020 and mailed on March 10, 2020 to residents within a 400- foot radius of the subject property. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any agency comments of significance to date. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Senior Traffic Engineer City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering City of Spokane Valley Building&Planning City of Spokane Valley Parks&Recreation Spokane Valley Fire Department City of Millwood City of Liberty Lake City of Spokane City of Spokane Valley Police Depaitnient Spokane County,Building and Planning Spokane County,Environmental Services Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County,Fire District No. 1 Spokane County,Fire District No. 8 Spokane County Regional Health District Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Spokane Aquifer Joint Board Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) Washington State Dept of Commerce Washington State Dept of Ecology(Olympia) Washington State Dept of Ecology(Spokane) Washington State Dept of Fish&Wildlife Washington State Dept of Natural Resources Washington State Dept of Transportation Washington State Parks&Recreation Commission WA Archaeological&Historic Preservation Avista Utilities Page 7 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0001 Inland Power& Light Modern Electric Water Company Central Valley School District#356 East Valley School District#361 West Valley School District#363 Century Link Comcast Model Irrigation District#18 Consolidated Irrigation District#19 East Spokane Water District#1 Vera Water&Power Spokane County Water District#3 Spokane Tribe of Indians 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. F. CONCLUSION: For the reasons set forth in Section C(1 and 2)the proposed amendment to change the land use designation from SFR to CMU and the rezone from R-3 to CMU is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H)and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT 1 Project # '.-tom lPt 'a0i Spokane RECEIVED jVal 'y OCT 01-2019 C•MPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION t421§tgSE:char}�t ec�Lad resses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive SUB # REV. #V I tK • , Date Submitted:, `� '��l Received by: �-t Fee: 1I kc 0 0 O PLUS#: File#: CPA -0z020-000 1 PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATION Map Amendment; or ❑ Text Amendment APPLICANT NAME: Land Use Solutions and Entitlement, Dwight Hume agent MAILING ADDRESS: 9101 N Mt.View Lane CITY: Spokane STATE: WA ZIP: 99218 PHONE: 435-3108 FAx: CELL: same EMAIL: dhume@spokane- landuse.com PROPERTY OWNER: Tucker Roy LLC MAILING ADDRESS: 1215 N McDonald Suite 203 CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99216 PHONE: 710-1074 FAX: CELL: same EMAIL: Eric@ellingsen- flynn.com SITE ADDRESS: 1311 N McDonald Rd. PARCEL No.: 45152.1004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Community Mixed Use ZONING DESIGNATION: R3 PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: CMU BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): To enable expansion of applicant's adjacent office complex and provide required parking on the subject parcel. PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of S""okan�` COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION j Val ley PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) I, Eric Ellingsen , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made trut Ily and to the best of my knowledge. f /04(/? (Signature) e) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this Trek2- day of 0<-'- , 20 1 (' NOTARY SEAL NOTARY SIGNATURE r _ubaiaNotary Public in and for the State of Washington RACHEL WILHELM Notary Public Residing at: lc") 1 ` D r Q cX State of Washington 1 Commission N 204128 My Comm. Expires Nov 28, 2022 Pgrirgruirompairwqrwwrolk My appointmentexpires: It J 2 €D1 a 1J a LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, Eric Ellinqsen dba Tucker Rov LLC , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize Dwight J Hume to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 6 of Comprehensive Plan Amendment Supplement 1. State the reason for the Comprehensive plan Map Amendment. To provide for a parking area when the applicant's adjacent office property is expanded. 2. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; The proposed amendment to CMU would enable the expansion of the existing CMU office site pursuant to adopted performance standards of the adopted Municipal Code. b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; This is being submitted and processed pursuant to adopted amendment procedures. c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; N/A d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; and N/A e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment enables the applicant to expand an existing medical office complex per the demands of this location. The subject property expands the existing office site for building and parking purposes, thus responding to market demand and in compliance with applicable development regulations. 3. Describe how the proposal addresses the following specific factors; a. The effect upon the physical environment; The physical environment is urban and consist of various office and apartment complexes in proximity to the subject site. Furthermore, the adjacent property is designated Community Mixed Use, thus allowing more variations of such bulk and scale. b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; N/A c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; The site is adjacent to existing CMU office uses and will be made a part of the parking area when the office complex is expanded. The orientation is to McDonald Rd and faces 2 story apartments across McDonald. The existing office use has demonstrated compatibility with the surrounding residential uses and this extension will be similar to these improvements. Landscape screening has effectively buffered the current use. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation and schools; This amendment enables the expansion of an existing office building. No new utilities or public services will be needed. The site is served with all urban services and no new utilities are anticipated. The frontage along McDonald is currently improved with sidewalks and a center turn lane for safe ingress and egress. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, city and region; This allows the market demand for office services to remain consolidated into one site rather than displacing it into multiple sites. f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land; The site is a half-acre site and adjoins an existing major office development. This site will become part of the common office complex and provide additional parking as requested by tenants and users of the site. g. The current and projected population density in the area; The area is a mix of Community Mixed Use, Multi-Family and Single-Family zoned properties. Projected population density is unknown. This will eliminate one dwelling unit. h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed CMU designation adjoins existing CMU designations and has no effect upon roads, public services or other elements of the comprehensive plan. (End of Supplement) Project # CPA '040-20 "°a)/ RECEIVED Land Use Solutions OCT 0 2 2019 & Entitlement COSV PERMIT CENTER SUB # REV. # Land Use Planning Services 9101 N. MT. VIEW LANE Spokane, WA 99218 509-435-3108(V) dhume@spokane-landuse.com Spokane Valley Planning Department 10210 E Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Ref: Proposed Map Amendment at 1311 N McDonald Rd To whom this may concern: This site is located north and adjacent to the applicant's existing CMU designated and zoned property which currently contains the McDonald Professional Center, a two story 11000 sf medical office complex. Between this building and the subject property is a vacant portion of CMU zoned property which will be the focal point of future office expansion. With the approval of this request, the 2nd phase of office expansion can be optimized with this parcel as additional parking area. The subject property contains a single-family residence and was recently purchased by the applicant. Part of the purchase agreement allows the seller to use the house pending completion of their future home site. In addition, the seller has permission to use whatever material from this house as part of the future home construction. Then, upon vacation, the house will be demolished, and the site cleared for future office parking. As stated in the application narrative,the site is suitable for this planned expansion based upon the current land use pattern and improvements to the area. There are other two- story apartment complexes nearby and the orientation of the expansion is away from single-family housing and does not rely upon access to local access streets. Furthermore, McDonald is fully improved with adequate sidewalks, turning lanes and arterial improvements. If approved, this one-half acre addition merely provides for parking demands of the medical office uses and optimizes the development of this combined site. Respectfullyy Submitted Dwight J Hume, agent EXHIBIT 2 Vicinity Map CPA-2020-0001 I1 i min n 1 goaa, Centennial9] IE_Ermin. Ave ti p 11111 EM.ontgomery prim 1 II* .--.- r l- eMO plipE Mansfield_Aveill qi � Fire 1 - ! i Z . "District M. ■ ,..,�— alndiariave E Montgomery Ave ice_ — _fir" pE2g9 ON: Ramp E-Nora AveO,FWy E j g0 119p W290'ON Ramp 1:9119 .O1�F-Ramp X19 E29p., illI 1 . El- ValleyTP - It) 290.0F MissionAlimmismif_arrp 1111111 r EI'90-E2gp.ON F�'atzIp � Park I _EMission_Ave L 11_ L I Hl I NNW I I � E Maxwell Ave I — I ,��, III r - Z pig iiiiiii ' Wiiiiiwir„,„,1 I pO E Sinto Ave 1I Id ,. ,,I _ a b L rx MEI ►..�i••,,,�1E-Sharp BM . lu _ B L � I I— MI ImmEm •••••II ■■ 117111/,. /i o F", l —!'2I I I I x $ ane-F 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 z I a"jo Il W Sharp Ave II == 1,;a _0 II �' Avera ° I I I I I > ��1111 ■■ �■ ■ �� ::;Boomne �� i lE'B;oneLn� �� b M- ■�� ■ � �' IIS_ Va IIlI bz ■ . E Desmet Ave Z ��1�� ' �� ■ o � � 1ECataldo �� — �� j�' ��a�b : i z,'ni z .11 � -— I�I J I I I I I I 1 Barker High ' - ■��E Cataldo Aye. z' z - �,'��eo 1I�I ] 9 - E Mahlon ct d School and �z—� — ( � �1111� iii z; ��t — — " E Mallon Av_e ■11�1: _� �� Learning �I — I . DO' North : — q •=M■ h H I 1 r Pines d 11 J — Middle — _ = _ _ - — I I1 11 g —cG NI11� — — -� 1 �E Spni ngI field IAs e _ i— E Alki Ave —1 j 11111 �1I I I — — Z — 1 — — E Olive Ave I J— � - r5� _ 74uF „.,_ o J 11 E1Ualleyway A_e 111–(1-211--- L . a Z Z — I I I "4 - —'' 1 I 4 — _ _ � � 1 : -r-� -�L I - � `� �� — o_ _ a r I I �— — T `E Nixon Ave _ _ - `� r --- ',b l — - _fai' I — 'z �-�I 1 1 1 Z 1 Eam.AveI �� J ZI I I ' rZI I - 1I I I I I I I I I I II I IJ I 7L— I I I I I f Aft— z �I — -�_ � I I I Miles 0 0 0.25 0.5 1 EXHIBIT 3 Comprehensive Plan Map 1 Study Area E Sinto Ave • -71 -71 0 0 Q z Legend CMU NC E Sharp Ave I POS IMU i RC I I MF SF MU CPA-2020-0001 Request: """' Owner: Tucker Roy LLC Proposed change: Land Use �� Parcel#: 45152.1004 designation from SFR to CMU 40000 Valley Address: 1311 N McDonald Rd and Zoning from R3 to CMU EXHIBIT 4 Zoning Map 1 Study Area E Sinto Ave • -71 -71 0 Q z Legend E Sharp Ave R1 M F RC R2 NC IMU Li R3 MU POS CMU CPA-2020-0001 Request: pol�""`� Owner: Tucker Roy LLC Proposed change: Land Use arie Parcel#: 45152.1004 designation from SFR to CMU 40000 Valley Address: 1311 N McDonald Rd and Zoning from R3 to CMU EXHIBIT 5 2018 Aerial Map . 41' :�" f NL f at EMaxwelilAs ... l7, F -r.- ,I,A...",h,la' 5` `a 4 a . r Pte + ::W=,. ''' ih,., 1, II __v. F., ,....s. ,-- v . .A '. ' - '-.. ". ;14 : %It ,-. I- '''''' 711.1"'''" ' n --34.. Iti:1:::; . g. L X13I WM .I Y _ al0 Study Area X14 = 'y itiL "d. F 77-.4 i i 4 '. ;.' a. _ ..1` Try U x.1 r Ni, E 5. A. g. ,c rola t s _ r " Sha % I P e a i',^ r_ Ave ,. .1oil. cfset w� - 1 B 71 I". r _. I Asn y� , ....... . - .. I u F ,5, I 4 , 3Boone Ave � ' i :,. --� X47 11, s k. I # , d F.r 14 f. L - - . I ° f 1 s , ; - CPA-2020-0001 Request: 111 SillSill"' Owner: Tucker Roy LLC Proposed change: Land Use Parcel#: 45152.1004 designation from SFR to CMU 4000 Valley Address: 1311 N McDonald Rd and Zoning from R3 to CMU EXHIBIT 6 Project #e' °oui SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane RECEIVED SVMC 21.20 jVal ley' OCT 0 2p 2019 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 hone: (509)720-5240 • Fax:(509)720-5075 •permitcenter(a,spokanevallev.org CCSV PERiV1iT CENTER STAFF USE ONLY SUB #1 I REV. # Date Submitted: Received by: Fee: PLUS #: File#: PART I—REQUIRED MATERIAL **THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** ® Completed SEPA Checklist r4 Application Fee ❑ Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81=" by 11" or 11" by 17"size ❑ Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement(EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment.The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS.Answer the questions briefly,with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases,you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal,write "do not know" or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects.The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Part D). SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane .Valley For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 2. Name of applicant: Eric Ellingsen dba Tucker Roy LLC, 1215 N McDonald Rd. Ste 203, Spokane Valley 99216 509-710-1074 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Land Use Solutions and Entitlement, Dwight Hume agent;9101 N Mt. View Lane Spokane WA 99218;509-435-3108 4. Date checklist prepared: September30, 2019 5. Agency requesting checklist: Spokane Valley Planning 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):Spring of 2021 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? No If yes, explain. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? No If yes, explain 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Approval of an annual Comprehensive Plan Map amendment and zone change. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal.You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The subject site is approximately.50 acres and is adjacent to and northerly of the applicants 3.20 acres, zoned CMU and containing an existing two story Page 2 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley 11,000 sf medical office complex with parking. If approved, the subject site will enable the expansion of the existing medical office complex, by providing space within the subject parcel for parking and landscaping, thereby allowing the office expansion to occur on the adjacent southerly parcel. The subject site is one half acre and if approved, will be part of the existing CMU site for a total of 3.70 acres of office development. (This parcel only provides additional parking, not office location). 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan,vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The parcel is located at 1311 N McDonald Rd and is the site of an existing single-family residence. The site is located on the west side of McDonald and one lot south of the intersection with Sinto Avenue. 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? The general Sewer Service Area? Priority Sewer Service Area? (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). The subject site lies within all of the above. 14. The following questions supplement Part A: a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA)/Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of materials to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? Page 3 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane .Valley 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater?This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. If so, describe any potential impacts. B. Environmental Elements 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? None c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, much)? If you know the classification of agricultural souls, specify them and note any prime farmland. N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity?N/A, this is a non- project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. Page 4 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST . Malley If so, generally describe. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion or other impacts to the earth, if any: N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, and industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? No If so, generally describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 3. Water a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds,wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No water bodies within the vicinity. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected and the source of fill material. N/A Page 5 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST l` ane j 1ey 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? No Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? No If so, note location on the site plan. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No b. Ground: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities known. N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any(for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. Describe the general size of the system,the number of such systems,the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1. Describe the source of runoff(including stormwater)and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. Where will this water flow? When built, drainage will flow to approved storm drain retention systems. Will this water flow into other waters? No If so, describe. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters?No If so, generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: See above comment in C-1. 4. Plants Page 6 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane j Val ley• a. Circle types of vegetation found on the site: 1. Deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other 2. Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other 3. Shrubs 4. Grass 5. Pasture 6. Crop or grain 7. Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other 8. Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other 9. Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Unknown d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: 1. Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds,other 2. Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other 3. Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None c. Is the site part off a migration route? No If so, explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None 6. Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy(electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. Page 7 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST CM` kane jValley b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,generally describe. No c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 7. Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? No If so, describe. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. Fire, police 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Development to City development standards. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project(for example: traffic, equipment, operation,other)? Traffic along McDonald Rd will not adversely affect the use of this property. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example:traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site contains a vacant S/F residence. North:SF Dwelling;East:Apartments;South Medical Office; West:SF Dwelling b. Has the site been used for agriculture? No If so, describe. c. Describe any structures on the site. Vacant SF Home and garage d. Will any structures be demolished? Yes, all structures on site If so,what? Page 8 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST j Val ley e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R3 to be changed to CMU f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?SF to be changed to CMU g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? No If so, specify. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans. If any: Development pursuant to applicable adopted Spokane Valley development standards. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None b. Approximately how many units, if any,would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. One middle income housing unit, currently being rented by the seller, during construction of their new home. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas? What is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. Page 9 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST SpOkane _..#Valley. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 11. Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce?N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. What time of day would it mainly occur? b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? N/A b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? No If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? unknown If so, generally describe. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None 14. Transportation Page 10 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane s Valley a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access is to and from McDonald Rd. Sidewalks and two-way turning lane exist for safe ingress and egress to and from this site. b. Is site currently served by public transit? yes If not,what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? No If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The trips generated for the common site are part of the existing CMU portion. This will only provide off-street parking. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Development to applicable adopted development standards. 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? No If so, generally describe. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: 1. Electricity 2. Natural gas 3. Water 4. Refuse service 5. Telephone 6. Sanitary sewer 7. Septic system Page 11 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 cm.,ci ne SEPA CHECKLIST jValley. 8. Other-describe b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project,the utility providing the service,and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. N/A, this is a non- project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make • • - ion. Q 7Signature: A Date: /�'1-1 9 Submitted: /O-2—/ D. Supplemental Sheet for Non-Project Actions (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal,or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal,would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances;or production of noise? The project will generate dust during construction;but no hazardous substances are anticipated from demolition and/or clearing as such are subject to adopted regulations. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: N/A, this is a non-project action. To be determined at time of building permit review. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals,fish,or marine life?No impact a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals,fish,or marine life are: None 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?No impacts are anticipated a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None Page 12 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane Valley. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness,wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands,floodplains, or prime farmlands? No impacts a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The area is a mix of office, apartments and single-family dwellings. This allows the expansion of the existing medical office complex, thus avoiding displacement to other new sites. The area is trending toward office use in this immediate vicinity. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Development to adopted performance standards of the Municipal Code. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? No impacts on existing services are anticipated. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: None 7. Identify, if possible,whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. There are no impacts to existing state and/or federal regulations. E. Signature I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this check list. c� Date: Signature: Please print or type: Proponent: Land Use Solutions and Entitlement Dwight Hume agent Page 13 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane jValley Address: 9101 N Mt. View Lane Spokane WA 99218 Phone: 509-435-3108 Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Same as above Address: Phone: Page 14 of 14 PL-22 V1.0 City of Spokane Valley Land Use SOkane .Val Icy. — ---C MMA�i LL.L es': t 1 \ ill _ JE SIt1TO AVE , . ' I \----_ r EDES? I 1 LI Legend Layer List Valley Parcels ® Layers Valley Parcels Valley Parcels City of Spokane Valley Land Use City of Spoka• - � City of Spokane Valley Zoning E MAX'•W'ELL AVE ESItlT ,.., - ----- ---- 1 -- - E BOO NE AVE Legend Layer List Zoning Layers Yellowstone Pipeline Zoning Parcels Pv City of Spokane Valley Land Use L V): LL .�r'. t _a—F) E SINTO Il E BOO 1 E 0ESt egend Layer List Valley Parcels Layers Valley Parcels I I Valley Parcels City of Spokane Valley Land Use v City of Spokar EXHIBIT 7 COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT S�" DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE jvPOn 10210 East Sprague Avenue• Spokane Valley WA 99206 aller 509.720.5000 •Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley.org FILE NUMBERS:CPA-2020-0001; CPA-2020-0002; CPA-2020-0003; CPA-2020-0006; CPA-2020-0007 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTIONS: CPA-2020-0001: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004(0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). CPA- 2020-0002: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres) from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). CPA-2020-0003: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133,45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to CMU. CPA-2020-0006: City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Ito CMU.CPA-2020-0007: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types and area-wide rezone to implement new policies APPLICANT/OWNER: CPA-2020-0001: Land Use Solutions/Tucker Roy LLC; CPA-2020-0002: Ed Lukas/Lawrence B. Stone Properties,Lawrence B. Stone Properties#50 LLC; CPA-2020-0003: Jay Rambo/Revere-Dece III, LLC, Revere-Dece, Brill Properties LLC; CPA-2020-0006: Spokane Valley/East Valley School District; CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide. PROPOSAL LOCATIONS: CPA-2020-0001: 1311 N. McDonald Road, further located in the NW '/4 of Section 15, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington CPA-2020-0002: 5901 E. Sprague Avenue, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 43 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0003: 1723 and 1724 N Union Road, further located in the SE '/4 of Section 09, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0006: 3830 N Sullivan, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 01, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian,Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley. DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance is issued under Washington Administrative Code(WAC) 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date issued. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m.on March 6,2020.Pursuant to Title 21,Environmental Controls of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC),the lead agency has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required under Revised Code of Washington 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. STAFF CONTACT: Chaz Bates,AICP, Senior Planner,City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509)720-5337; cbates a,spokanevallev.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Mike Basinger, AICP, Economic Development Manager, City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509) 720-5333, mbasinger@spokanevalley.org spokanevalley.org DATE ISSUED: February 21, 2020 SIGNATURE: irh � APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community&Pu' is Works Department within fourteen(14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and specific factual objections made to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Schedule shall be paid at the time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 18,2020 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of I File Nos.CPA-2020-0001;CPA-2020-0002;CPA-2020-0003;CPA-2020-0006;CPA-2020-0007 EXHIBIT 8 Notice of Public Hearing City of Spokane Valley 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Hearing Date and Time: March 26,2020 beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Hearing Body: Spokane Valley Planning Commission The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Requests.The Planning Commission will conduct the public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council on each of the following applications. FILE No.: CPA-2020-0001 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004 (0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1311 North McDonald Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0002 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres)from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:North Fancher Road,Unaddressed FILE No.: CPA-2020-0003 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133, 45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1723 and 1724 North Union Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0006 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Industrial(I)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 3830 North Sullivan Road Bldg 1 FILE No.: CPA-2020-0007 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types. LOCATION OF PROPOSALS:Citywide Staff Contact: Chaz Bates,AICP,Senior Planner;(509)720-5337 cbates@spokanevalley.org Environmental Determination: The City issued a Determination of Non-significance(DNS)on February 21,2020 pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)and chapter 21.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. Staff Report and Inspection of File: A staff report will be available for inspection seven calendar days before the hearing. The staff report and application file may be inspected at the Community and Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm,Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Copies of documents will be made available at a reasonable cost. Send written comments to City of Spokane Valley,Attn: Chaz Bates, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206;or email to the project planner listed above. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing,or other impairments may contact the City Clerk at(509)720-5102 prior to the meeting so that arrangements may be made. Carrie Koudelka,Spokane Valley Deputy City Clerk Publish:March 6,2020 and March 13,2020 EXHIBIT 9 Public and Agency Comments (Will be inserted as received) COMMUNITY& PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING&PLANNING DIVISION Scrry aFpokane STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION v CPA-2020-0002 STAFF REPORT DATE: March 5,2020 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: March 26,2020,beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,Washington 99206. Project Number: CPA-2020-0002 Application Description: Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial (I)to Regional Commercial(RC) Location: Parcel number 35133.2321, located at 5901 E. Sprague Avenue, further located in the SW Vi of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 43 East, Willamette Meridian,Spokane County,Washington Applicant: Lawrence B. Stone Properties,PO Box 3949, Spokane,WA 99220 Owner: Lawrence B. Stone Properties#50 LLCs,PO Box 3949, Spokane,WA 99220 Date of Application: October 31,2019 Staff Contact: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, 10210 E Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Application Exhibit 6: SEPA Checklist Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map Exhibit 7: Environment Determination Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 8: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 4: Zoning Map Exhibit 9: Agency and Public Exhibit 5: Aerial Comments A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is a privately-initiated request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation of parcel 35133.2321 from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). The stated intent of the proposal is to allow the subject property to be combined with the two properties to the south fronting Sprague. The existing use on the property is a paved parking lot. The site is flat and does not contain any critical areas.The property is south of a vacant used motor vehicle dealership. The properties to the north are industrial food manufacturing(Franz Bakery) and industrial manufacturing. The properties on the west are regional commercial uses(Home Depot) and to the east is I-90. Page 1 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0002 The property is served by Sprague Avenue,a principal arterial,which at this location is a six-lane cross- section with dedicated left and right turn lanes and two-through lanes in each direction. The Average Daily Traffic(ADT) for this segment of Sprague is just over 20,000 vehicular trips per day with a level of service of D. The Sprague Avenue and Fancher Road intersection is identified as being reconstructed with concrete in the 10-20 year timeframe. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and Characteristics: The property consists of one parcel totaling 2.98 acres in size with frontage on Sprague Avenue and Fancher Road(no access on Fancher). Comprehensive Plan: Industrial (I) Zoning: Industrial(I) Existing Land Use: Vacant paved lot. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: Comp Plan Industrial (I) North Zoning: Industrial(I) Uses: Industrial manufacturing Comp Plan: Regional Commercial(RC) South Zoning: Regional Commercial(RC) Uses: Vacant(former used motor vehicle sales) Comp Plan: Industrial(I) East Zoning: Industrial(I) Uses: I-90 right-of-way Comp Plan: Regional Commercial(RC) West Zoning: Regional Commercial(RC) Uses: larger format retail(Home Depot) IMPLICATIONS: The adopted Comprehensive Plan describes the RC designation as"Allows for range of commercial development. It includes areas like Auto Row along Sprague Avenue,the Valley Mall, and areas along arterials near Interstate 90.Generally,the development in these areas serve the region." Sprague Avenue contains retail services that meet the needs of the larger region: Costco,Walmart,Home Depot are all located in this area on property designated RC. The I zone would not allow the development of a retail sales and service use. Changing the land use designation and zoning from Ito RC would allow uses similar to nearby uses and will not negatively impact the area. APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: May 14,2019 Application Submitted: October 31,2019 SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issue date February 21,2020 End of Appeal Period for DNS: March 6,2020 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing March 6,2020 Page 2 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0002 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: March 6& 13,2020 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: March 10,2020 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, the lead agency has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The City issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal on February 21, 2020. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Titles 19, 21, and 22 of the SVMC, a site assessment, public and agency comments, the Comprehensive Plan and associated Environmental Impact Statement. 2. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE 1. Compliance with Title 17(General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Approval Criteria i. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map amendments if it finds that: (1) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; Analysis: The proposed amendment provides the opportunity to create a parcel of greater depth to provide for larger format structure. Based on the application, the intent is to combine the two RC parcels to the south with the proposal. Both the Industrial and Regional Commercial designations and zoning districts allow for intensive uses.Providing opportunity for development and redevelopment where there is existing infrastructure has a substantial benefit to public health,safety, and welfare. The amendment area is not covered by critical areas or designated natural resources. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment are promoted by standards established by the state and the City's regulations. (2) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; Analysis: The Growth Management Act (GMA) adopts thirteen goals to guide the development of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. The request allows opportunity to aggregate parcels in an area that is already served by supporting infrastructure. The proposal does not conflict with any other GMA goals. The amendment is not in conflict with any other portions of the Comprehensive Plan. Page 3 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0002 (3) The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; Analysis: The amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions from 2016 legislative update to the Comprehensive Plan. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: While not identified as a deficiency, the Comprehensive Plan includes the following goals and policies that support increasing employment opportunities while taking advantage of existing supportive infrastructure. The proposed amendment contributes to the long-term success of the City by: ED-G1 Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. CF-P2 Optimize the use of existing public facilities before investing in new facilities. ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis: The change to RC will allow uses similarly allowed along the Sprague corridor. The change may result in a more people oriented active use in the area versus a vacant or industrial use, but the intensity would be similar to existing nearby uses. There is no concern on effect of physical environment. (2) The effect on open space, streams,rivers,and lakes; Analysis: There are no known critical areas associated with the site,such as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat areas,frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas. The parcel is not located within shoreline jurisdiction, and there are no known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed when future development occurs and stormwater associated with commercial development will be retained and treated on the site. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Page 4 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0002 Analysis: The property is adjacent to RC to the west and south; and I to the north and east. To the north are existing industrial developments and users. To the south is a vacant used motor vehicle sales lot that is under the same ownership. To the west is Home Depot. The RC designation will increase the intensity of people potentially visiting the site, this intensity is similar as the neighbors in the area. The projected impact to the surrounding neighborhood is minimal. Any future development will be evaluated for compliance with all municipal requirements as it relates to adjacent uses at the time of development. (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads,public transportation,parks,recreation, and schools; Analysis:Sprague Avenue is a Principal Arterial and is expected to accommodate the projected change. The 20 year Transportation Improvement Plan identifies a concrete intersection at Sprague and Fancher by 2039. The existing and projected LOS for this segment of Sprague Avenue is D within City's adopted standard. Additionally, the change from Ito RC is expected to have a minimal impact to the transportation network and other utilities. The subject property and the property immediately to the south are considered infill development, as such, the expansion of RC related uses in this area is ideal because of the supporting infrastructure that is in place. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis: The proposed change would allow the property to be combined with the two properties fronting Sprague Avenue, increasing employment opportunities and growing the city's economy. The change benefits the neighborhood, City, and region by supporting the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: ED-G1 Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. CF-P2 Optimize the use of existing public facilities before investing in new facilities. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis: The proposal would add approximately 3 acres of RC property to the 809 acres of existing RC designated property within the city. As of 2018 there are approximately 111 acres of vacant RC property within the city. The RC designation in this places allows for development of RC on the Sprague Avenue corridor in an area supported by existing infrastructure. The proposal is limited to a reasonable area and if developed under RC standards the type of use and density would be appropriate for the location. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Page 5 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0002 Analysis: Under the existing conditions the subject property is a paved vacant lot. It appears the property was used in conjunction with the RC designated property to the south for used motor vehicle sales, which is presently vacant. The change of the property from I to RC will not impact current or projected population density in the area. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The RC designation will support the goals and policies identified above. It would have very little to no effect on other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, including Housing, Capital Facilities and Public Services,Public and Private Utilities, Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources. Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings:The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.The Comprehensive Plan describes the RC designation as "Allow[s] for range of commercial development. It includes areas like Auto Row along Sprague, the Valley Mall, and areas along arterials near Interstate 90. Generally,the development in these areas serve the region." This area of Sprague contains retail services that meet the needs of the larger region: Costco, Walmart, Home Depot are all located in this area.Allowing the subject property to develop under RC provision is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the amendment is supported by the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: ED-G1 Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. LU-G2 Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial, industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. CF-P2 Optimize the use of existing public facilities before investing in new facilities. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. 3. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: The Growth Management Act(GMA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan requires that public facilities and services be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy. The area is currently served with adequate public facilities and services. Avista, Spokane County Environmental Services, Spokane Valley Fire District, Spokane County Water District #3,and Spokane District#81 provide electric and gas,sewer,fire protection,water,and schools services in this area. The existing and forecast level of service for the Sprague and Fancher intersection is D which is acceptable with the City's adopted standards. The only mitigation planned within the 20-year planning horizon is reconstructing the Sprague and Fancher Page 6 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0002 intersection with concrete.Urban services are available. Specific site needs will be addressed at the time a development is proposed for the site. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development. D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has received no public comments to date. Comments received following the date of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission at the March 12,2020 meeting. 2. Conclusion(s): Notice of Public Hearing (NOPH) was published on March 6 and March 13, 2020. The NOPH was posted on site on March 6, 2020 and mailed on March 10, 2020 to residents within a 400- foot radius of the subject property. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any agency comments of significance to date. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Senior Traffic Engineer City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering City of Spokane Valley Building&Planning City of Spokane Valley Parks&Recreation Spokane Valley Fire Department City of Millwood City of Liberty Lake City of Spokane City of Spokane Valley Police Department Spokane County,Building and Planning Spokane County,Environmental Services Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County,Fire District No. 1 Spokane County,Fire District No. 8 Spokane County Regional Health District Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Spokane Aquifer Joint Board Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) Washington State Dept of Commerce Washington State Dept of Ecology(Olympia) Washington State Dept of Ecology(Spokane) Washington State Dept of Fish&Wildlife Washington State Dept of Natural Resources Washington State Dept of Transportation Washington State Parks&Recreation Commission WA Archaeological&Historic Preservation Avista Utilities Page 7 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0002 Inland Power& Light Modern Electric Water Company Central Valley School District#356 East Valley School District#361 West Valley School District#363 Century Link Comcast Model Irrigation District#18 Consolidated Irrigation District#19 East Spokane Water District#1 Vera Water&Power Spokane County Water District#3 Spokane Tribe of Indians 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. F. CONCLUSION: For the reasons set forth in Section C(1 and 2)the proposed amendment to change the land use designation from Ito RC and the rezone from Ito RC is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H) and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT 1 IProject # aba IRECEIVFr COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the;, 1 2019 t$ Comprehensive Plan. STAFF USE ONLY C,OSV PERMIT CENTER Date Submitted: i/)/3//7C&%7 Received by: � SI IR :RFV PLUS #: File#: C 4 -Z02G- OW2 PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATION Map Amendment; or n Text Amendment APPLICANT NAME: Ed Lukas, owner representative MAILING ADDRESS: PO Box 3949 CITY: Spokane STATE: WA Zip: 99220-3949 PHONE: FAX: CELL:: EMAIL: (509)789-8641 (509) 343-9060 (509) 688-5385 ed@Ibstoneproperties.com PROPERTY OWNER : Lawrence B. Stone Properties #50, LLC MAILING ADDRESS: PO Box 3949 CITY: Spokane STATE: WA Zip: 99220-3949 PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: (509) 343-9000 (509) 343-9060 SITE ADDRESS: PARCEL No.: N. Fancher Road 35133.2321 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Regional Commercial ZONING DESIGNATION: Industrial PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: Regional Commercial BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): See Attached PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of S""okan ` P .0,00 Val ley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION Lawrence B. Stone Properties #50, LLC, desires to combine the subject parcel, #35133.2321 , with the two adjacent parcels, #35133.2403 and #35133.2404 immediately to the south in order to consolidate all three parcels for the construction of improvements in compliance with City of Spokane Valley codes for Regional Commercial tenants. Rezoning the subject parcel from Industrial (I) to Regional Commercial (RC) makes it compatible and consistent with the adjacent parcels and others in the surrounding area already established Regional Commercial businesses. We believe this amendment supports the economic goals and policies set forth in the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. PL-06 V1.0 Page 4 of SPokanee .000Val ley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) I, Lawrence B. Stone , (print name)swear or affirm that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. , 7>ftemzi,v1e. 5- tAa ignature) (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 2 ` day of ©o-o8112 ,201 9 TA K Pubdic State Washington l�rl NOTARY SIGNATURE My Commission Expires Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Sc em bcr 1312021 Residing at: PC)( -- / ‘,0 IM- 1 AJ My appointmentexpires: ' 113/202-I LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, Lawrence B. Stone ,owner of the above described property do hereby authorize Ed Lukas to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 5 of Re: Lawrence B. Stone Properties #50, LLC October 29, 2019 Industrial (I) to Regional Commercial (RC) Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Narrative L.B. Stone Properties Group is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment for parcel number 35133.2321, situated along the east side of North Fancher Road in the City of Spokane Valley. This parcel is currently zoned Industrial (I) and is directly adjacent to parcels 35133.2403 and 35133.2404 which are zoned Regional Commercial (RC). 1. Our company is requesting this amendment to rezone the parcel along North Fancher Road from Industrial (I) to Regional Commercial (RC) zoning to accommodate a future development which will be constructed across all three parcels, and will have future uses designated under Regional Commercial zoning. Our company believes that this parcel is ideally located for permitted uses within the Regional Commercial (RC) zone, due to it being adjacent to other Regional Commercial properties and Interstate-90. Additionally, we believe that this amendment will fully support the economic development goals and policies set forth in the current edition of the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. 2. A) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment in a number of ways. The proposed zoning change would keep Regional Commercial uses in the same area as laid out in the current comprehensive plan, thus keeping Regional Commercial uses separate from any residential areas, open space, or other pedestrian-oriented uses. The soil in the subject parcels is mostly covered with asphalt at the current time, but will be tested prior to any future development to ensure that proper protection of the environment is maintained at all times. B) This amendment is consistent with the City of Spokane Comprehensive Plan due to its alignment with the goals and policies of the Economic Development element. Page 1 of 3 Specifically, this proposed amendment would align with ED-G1, ED-G3, ED-G4, and ED- G6, while also being supported by the economic development policies laid out in the Economic Development element. C) Under the proposed amendment, it is not anticipated that there would be any substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies. D) The proposed amendment does not address or correct any obvious mapping error in the Comprehensive Plan. E) The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. A) The effect of this proposal on the physical environment will be minimal. Future development will require the site to be graded, due to an elevation change between the two lower parcels (35133.2403 and 35133.2404) and the subject upper parcel (35133.2321). If anything, the physical environment will be improved, as a contemporary new commercial building for Regional Commercial uses will replace an old used car lot and dilapidated building. B) The subject parcel, as mentioned above, is situated near the corner of North Fancher Road and East Sprague Avenue, where there is no designated open space or any existing natural areas or sources of water present that could be disturbed by any future development that may take place on the parcels. C) The proposed amendment will be highly compatible with adjacent land uses, due to all adjacent uses being either (RC) or (I) so there would not be any negative impact anticipated on the surrounding neighborhoods. The area surrounding the parcels that the proposed amendment would affect currently has a high amount of traffic with East Sprague Avenue being classified as a principal arterial, so any increase in traffic could be easily handled by Sprague Avenue and by North Fancher road, which is classified as a minor arterial. Page 2 of 3 D) The impact on community facilities would be minimal due to the existence of adequate utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools in the area. Future development may cause short-term one-lane closures of North Fancher Road for short periods of time during construction, but the time frame for such closures would be limited. E) The primary benefit to the neighborhood, city and region would be an economic one in that new family-wage jobs would be increased with the addition of new tenants in the proposed commercial building. A secondary benefit is one of an aesthetic nature and has already been mentioned, i.e. the replacement of an old, used car lot and building with a contemporarily-styled new commercial building accented with attractive landscaping. F) The total acreage for the proposed commercial site is approximately 5 1/2 acres. Density impact to the area should be minimal as adequate entrances and exits are planned from the site, along with plenty of parking for employees, customers and visitors. The demand for such use of the land is high, as demonstrated by the success of the many other commercial properties along East Sprague Avenue. G) The current population density of the area is minimal, as there is practically no residential housing built in the industrial/commercial zones in which the subject property is located. The projected population density in the area will not be affected by the development. H) It is not anticipated that there will be any effects upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT 2 Vicinity Map CPA-2020-0002 ______..,„,,....- EIT IIIIII ,■ JIII 'v, p)r. 74 00,v I fE CatAdo AKeiii—I '1?; Mil ' I I I I I 1111 o �� b� xI E Dean Ave 11.k FG — Park ElMa11on1Av_e�� .- -----— E — fi cf, Z' ■■11111 z �� ■■� ■I�� ga uoaa cool ■11 B 1 E Broadway Ave 0 Z' _ 1� P4' ■■1 I IN'g I... // E 9 z z = ME1 U 1 a E S.pr ng iel.AyelliPV - e ■ llil MIMI I I■I■ I Eeac. E A1ki Av_e ■■11■ D��,Ramp ,4i w IVIlley_Wa E OO,live_Ave..1 r ,,,,,, , ,e, E yAve IP .< 0. == 11•11111 BP =I b . [__ ■IIIII� ItE Nixon Ave Ix fl,,,,,—.--------'all . -' 0 kane 1.1 mom. rim r A I , ,—1 \ k ' -llraT A 1111■11 ill / E R1Ye �]■I ■■ E SpO-F,-.. ■■■■■■III■■1■■■1■I■■ �MEM • III. E.Sprague 11111 AIME1E L1.1 ` .i L I 1:11110 ■■1: I■ ■ice r ��. _ E_1 st_AY_e — �; Fire 111 I 1 -111■■1■ ■q ■11111111 ■ : M■11l' s' IIE�Appleway Blvd— _ District 1 pi" I 111® /1111111 11111111�i ■11111■■ 11111111111■ w w �� ^ �„ E 2ndlaveJ[1111 1111111111 f IIIIIIIIII Th1111111111 111111■I 1■1■11 �� b �1 kr] ›; r■ W 1■■ ® ® 11111111111111111111 ■11111■1■ ■1111■I ■�■� E 3rd Ave , �,.0 �5- _q, 1111 �� 1111 [flu ] ® ■1111111. ■11111111 W-I 90W285.ONRan V -'' 1■■ �� l-I90 Ezs4-oN Ramp E-4th Ave �g 11111111- 111111111, - n — 1 1111 [� Pratt.'9 11111111 1111111111 Dishman I f I 111.11111 0 1 Elementary�-iiiiii , 0 1111111 ::111■] Hills Imo; 111■ . =iii L r! ctI . �1 ' a �' M ME 1 i ,'' �gi ■11111 IIIII1 =NaturalArea 1111 ■1 : �� ' � xJ �711 ■11111111■■II �� a I■1�� b 6th�Atue /11111/11 1/11111/1 1■1111 - . 11111■■ ■11 �i■II■ t ■11■1111■1■1■111 I■■■ '' 111111111 111■1111 ■■ :1111■I r Egi� ■�\1�_ �� rt.� �� . - F ��a Dr 111■111111■1■■■I■ 111E 7th Ave ■11111 ■11111■1 ■■ E 6th Ln IE 111111111■ I, ■ ` I All 1111111110■ fi ill 11111 : ■111.111111 RMII dim .,14. 0,-,/°.' IIII,E 8th Ave 1111111/ 1111.1111■■1■■1 1111111111 ■11■1■ 11/111111�■ '-�thv ■1111111 JI■■111 11■■1111 11111■■II11■1111■ /1111111 ■111 111111■ ■1111■ 11■ 1111■■11■ 1111111■I 11111111111 1111■ I 1 1 1 11 Ill ■111111 111111■ � 11�■IIIII_IIN Ave 1111 :11111111■ ii i n il — I••• I i i l 111■■: 111111111 A 11■11■11■�■■1111111 ■111111111■ 1- 1 x 1111111 1111111■ [3' 11■11■■11■1 11■■111111111111111111 ■ - ■�) III 1111 n� ■111■: 111111 111111■11110th Ave ■1■ 11111111 11111111 ■ m�' M1■1 �' ■1■111= 111111■ 11II1111 ,th Ave III 1111=1111111111 11111111 m RW A__A_ ■`■11 1 1nim �1■ ■■n■■ ■■II■■1■1i 111u1■.■■IIIIII11■�i V milimaimme A&• �� _i II • _,�I--11■■ii.1i11111.■ ■ ■1NM E 13th Ave E 13th Ct a''�ho Miles 0 0 0.25 0.5 1 EXHIBIT 3 Comprehensive Plan Map l_mami z ■IN!!! x 0 a ‘11. 1111 E-Main-Ave 11 x U Study Area U ct L., z Illi r IA 4,,.-4-', qo � E Sprague Ave ..1. AillCMU Legend U NC c'' IPOS IMU RC MF SF MU CPA-2020-0002 Request: r-i""`� Owner: Lawrence B Stone Proposed change: Land Use designation poliarie Properties#50 LLC from Ito RC and Zoning from Ito RC 40000 Valley Parcel#: 35133.2321 Address: N Fancher Rd EXHIBIT 4 Zoning Map l_maimi z �IN!!! x 0 . 1111 III E-Main-Ave ` 11 x Study Area U w z AlAil i r_ .. A Ill qo w� E Sprague Ave ..1. qo w� a4 Legend R1 MF RC R2 NC IMU R3 MU I MIL POS CMU CPA-2020-0002 Request: r-i""`� Owner: Lawrence B Stone pol�arie Proposed change: Land Use designation Properties#50 LLC from Ito RC and Zoning from Ito RC 40000 Valley Parcel#: 35133.2321 Address: N Fancher Rd EXHIBIT 5 2018 Aerial Map - vil -- --- — ----- mom lulu , r t. 1,4e. 3., :._.„: ii,TA - ,-. �j' 4. ~t • r. ' L ^�,•.�,. �: lit 6 ' -, I T :�! ". 114111111r—mum, imp 44==--JJ . fir: l' il !� "M f .,I r Nixon s - ' • III m lei c..— _-: t' --li.,. .„1, " .. A illilL —F _ 111 r J,F, .: lIV ._ rte MainA� - P ... M, J - • -,:..rte .isv. _ - fHraM . , � � :.i�illiii+ii .. .�= �_ Study Area , • f#I I r 4 I! . , T r• . _ di I p _ yam, 'R T. w , 1 I . R a _ I - 0ear a a R .M f . ,.. ...N 1 llir,WCIA::;::1:1/4... ".;. .r IIINI _ ,Sprague AVG' '� " .- * Z { 1 i. E 1st Ave �q'�� °�• . _ moi- -JiT 7 z• f _a. 1 i - ..a Q 1 t - . J 1st Ave o . • y^� r 7� ...•4 iiii �p, `e28`SOOFF.Ra Td�1 c1' tis l t 3. � y / E 3rd Av e:_,._..-.-• ,* ,r 4 0i .- cis ••••- 011 11�or- ;--- �1. - -- A , . : JI B - _ T c, CPA-2020-0002 Request: S 011okane"' Owner: Lawrence B Stone Proposed change: Land Use designation Properties#50 LLC from 1 to RC and Zoning from 1 to RC 40000 Valley Parcel#: 35133.2321 Address: N Fancher Rd EXHIBIT 6 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST jValley SVMC 21.20 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 • Fax: (509)720-5070 •permitcenter(a),spokanevallev.org STAFF USE ONLY t� Date Submitted: 0�321� 1� 9 Received by: Fee:6ce /O 0/r PLUS #: File#: C?I - 202c -- tZ � ,t1t6c,t PART I — REQUIRED MATERIAL ^)9 02526'"Oak.' **THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE RECEIVED € Completed SEPA Checklist OCT 31 2019 € Application Fee 43 € Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81/2" by 11" or 11" by 17" size ,,-€ Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Devel t Engine • SUB # I REV. # PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement(EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know"or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Part D). For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant,"and "property or site"should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of 15 Kane SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY „Val ley A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable Fancher Commerce Center, Building 4 2. Name of applicant: Ed Lukas, owner representative for Lawrence B. Stone Properties #50, LLC, property owner. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: PO Box 3949 Spokane, WA 99220-3949 Ed Lukas, office (509) 789-8641 4. Date checklist prepared: October 30, 2019 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle. Any future project plans if any, will occur only after the Comp Plan process is finished. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Yes, consolidation of tax parcels #35133.2403, #35133.2404, and #35133.2321, and construction of a commercial building at 5901 east Sprague Avenue. Change of zoning enables consolidation of parcels without split zoning. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment performed by Alan T. Blotch Consulting Services, LLC, dated 9/19/03; and Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment performed by TechCon, Inc., dated 10/23/03. Planning Level Trip Generation and Distribution Letter. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Yes, City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. SEPA Approval 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY jValley You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) There is one (1) parcel included in the proposed map amendment. The property is currently listed and zoned as Industrial (I). The first parcel is located on North Fancher Road, near the intersection of North Fancher and East Sprague Avenue. The parcel is 2.98 ac +/- and is currently developed as a paved parking and storage area, accessed via driveways at the eastern portion. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The proposal site is near the northeast corner of East Sprague Avenue and North Fancher Road in the City of Spokane Valley. There is not a street address of record. Tax parcels: #35133.2321. The proposal site is within the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 43 East, W.M. 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? The general Sewer Service Area? Priority Sewer Service Area? (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). The proposal is within the ASA and the general Sewer Service Area. 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) / Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spill, or as a result of firefighting activities). As this is a non-project action no systems are to be constructed or put in place with this proposal. 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? As this is a non-project action no chemicals are proposed to be stored on the subject properties. 3. What protective measures will be taken to ensure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to PL-22 V1.0 Page 3 of 15 kane SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY jValley groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. As this is a non-project action that proposes no chemicals to be stored on site there are no protective measures proposed with this proposal. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? For this non-project action, no chemicals are proposed to be stored or handled on site. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? The depth to Groundwater on the subject properties is unknown at this time. 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts. For this non-project action, there is no system proposed to discharge stormwater. PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of 15 I�aIIe SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY j Val ley B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (check one)e) rolling, hilly, steep slopes,mountainous, other Site is generally flat. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Site is generally flat with 5%+/- grade at driveway leading to adjacent parcel to the north. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Gravelly loam, no farmland. 7105 Urban land gravelly substratum, 0 to 15 percent slopes. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No, there are no indications or a history of unstable soils on the subject properties. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. As this is a non-project action there is no grading of any kind proposed on the subject properties. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. As this is a non-project action the subject properties are not proposed to have any grading activities and is therefore not anticipated to have any erosion occur as a part of this proposal. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? As this is a non-project action the proposal will not be changing the percentage of impervious surfaces of the subject properties. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: As this is a non-project action no earth disturbing activities are proposed and therefore no erosion is anticipated on the subject properties. PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY ��Valley 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. For this non-project action, there are no emissions proposed, with future industrial uses associated with the construction of improvements typical building and vehicular emissions would be anticipated. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no known off-site sources of emissions that would affect the proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: There are no proposed measures at this time. 3. Water a. Surface: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Central Pre-Mix pond approximately 2,200 feet to the northeast. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No work is proposed with this non-project action. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A, this non-project action has no proposed fill or dredge activities. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A, this non-project action has no water withdrawals or diversions. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No, the subject properties are not within a floodplain. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No, the proposed non-project action has no discharges to surface waters. PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY Va1ley b. Ground: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, Groundwater is proposed to be withdrawn from this non-project action. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No wastewater is proposed to be withdrawn from this non-project action. c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1. Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. For this non-project action, no stormwater systems are proposed, stormwater will continue to flow as it currently does. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No, systems are proposed with this non-project action that would allow waste materials to enter the ground. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: No measures are proposed as no system is proposed. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? For this non-project action, no vegetation is proposed to be removed. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are no known endangered species on the subject properties. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: PL-22V1.0 Page 7of15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY jVallev For this non-project action, there is no landscaping proposed. For future development the landscaping as required by City code is anticipated to be used. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: None known. birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are no known endangered species on the subject properties. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Spokane County is within the Pacific Flyway. An online review of the available maps through the City of Spokane Valley did not list or show any, therefore no Migration route is anticipated to utilize the project site. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: There are no measures proposed with this non-project action. 6. Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. NA, for this non-project action however for future development electricity and natural gas will be made available for heating, air conditioning and lighting. Additionally, solar, wind, and other sources of power would be available if installed by the property owner. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Future development is not anticipated to affect the potential use of solar energy. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Future development may include energy conservation features as required by state, county and national energy guidelines. PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY ley 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe For this non-project action, no chemicals are proposed to be on site and would therefore have no risk of exposure, fire or explosion. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. For this non-project action, no special emergency services are required. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: For this non-project action, no measures are proposed with this proposal. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Minor traffic noise along East Sprague Avenue and North Fancher Road. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. For this non-project action, no noise is anticipated to be created. Future development may generate construction noise for a short period of time. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: For this non-project action, no measures are proposed. 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The parcel is currently developed as a paved parking and storage area. Property is vacant as of 10/18/19. Adjacent properties to the north are industrial; to the south, regional commercial. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Unknown, the subject properties are not known to have been used in agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. No permanent structures on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? For this non-project action, no structures are proposed to be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The subject property is currently zoned as Industrial (I). PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR okane AGENCY USE ONLY Val ley f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The subject property is listed as Industrial (I). g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? There is no shoreline designation of the subject properties. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. The subject property has not been classified as environmentally sensitive. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? For this non-project action, no change would occur. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? For this non-project action, no people would be displaced. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: For this non-project action, no measures are proposed. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Regional Commercial land uses are quite common in the area. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? There are no proposed structures with this non-project action. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No views would be altered or obscured by this non-project action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY jValley There are no proposed measures for this non-project action. 11. Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? For this non-project action, no light or glare is proposed to be produced. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? For this non-project action, no light or glare can be a safety hazard or interfere with views as there is none produced. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? There are existing Street lights on 8th Avenue and Sullivan Road. As well as the lights of the tennis courts and stadium of the Central Valley High School. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: For this non-project action there are no measures proposed. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None known. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposed non-project action would not displace any recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: There are no proposed measures for this non-project action. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known. b. Generally, describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. There are no known landmarks or evidence on the property. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: There are no proposed measures for this non-project action. 14. Transportation PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY jVallev a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Subject property is near the northeast corner of the intersection of East Sprague Avenue and North Fancher Road. Access to 1-90 is immediately south of Sprague Avenue. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? For this non-project action, no parking spaces would be completed. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). For this non-project action, no roads or street improvements will be completed. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. This non-project action does not occur within the immediate vicinity of these services, therefore, the non-project or any future actions are not anticipated to use alternative modes of transportation. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Unknown at this time. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: There are no anticipated impacts from this non-project action, future development of a real project would generate trips that may have impact and would be evaluated at that time. 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. For this non-project action, additional public services will not be applicable. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. There are no proposed measures for this non-project action. 16. Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY Val ley ✓ Electricity ✓ Natural gas ✓ Water ✓ Refuse service ✓ Telephone ✓ Sanitary sewer o Septic o Other b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. For this non-project action, no utilities are proposed to be used. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is re ing on them to make its decision. Signature: Date: /'� PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY jValicy D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposal would allow commercial uses to be developed, with such development there would be an increase to stormwater, vehicular and building emissions to the air as well as vehicular noise. There may also be the storage of fuel with applicable permits that would not be proposed to be released under such permits. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: For this non-project action there is no proposed measure other than City code providing landscape requirements that would serve as a buffer between a proposed project and the existing land uses. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The proposal is not anticipated to affect plants, animals, fish or marine life. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: There are no proposed measures at this time. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The property does not provide energy or natural resources for a business of industry, a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: There are no proposed measures, other than existing rules and regulations. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The proposal is not anticipated to affect environmentally sensitive or designated areas. a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: There are no proposed measures, other than existing rules and regulations. PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of 15 SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR Spokane AGENCY USE ONLY Valley 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? There are no shorelines on the subject properties, so there is not going to be an impact. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are There are no proposed measures, other than existing rules and regulations. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The proposal may increase traffic on local roads and intersections please see the planning level trip generation letter. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: There are no proposed measures at this time. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. There are no known conflicts with local, state, or federal laws. E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon this c k list. Date: /-e/ 7/1 Signature: �P Please print or type: Proponent: Ed Lukas on behalf of Lawrence B. Stone Properties #50, LLC Address: PO Box 3949, Spokane, WA 99220-3949 Phone: (509) 789-8641 Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Address: Phone: PL-22 V1.0 Page 15 of 15 EXHIBIT 7 COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT S�" DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE jvPOn 10210 East Sprague Avenue• Spokane Valley WA 99206 aller 509.720.5000 •Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley.org FILE NUMBERS:CPA-2020-0001; CPA-2020-0002; CPA-2020-0003; CPA-2020-0006; CPA-2020-0007 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTIONS: CPA-2020-0001: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004(0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). CPA- 2020-0002: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres) from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). CPA-2020-0003: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133,45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to CMU. CPA-2020-0006: City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Ito CMU.CPA-2020-0007: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types and area-wide rezone to implement new policies APPLICANT/OWNER: CPA-2020-0001: Land Use Solutions/Tucker Roy LLC; CPA-2020-0002: Ed Lukas/Lawrence B. Stone Properties,Lawrence B. Stone Properties#50 LLC; CPA-2020-0003: Jay Rambo/Revere-Dece III, LLC, Revere-Dece, Brill Properties LLC; CPA-2020-0006: Spokane Valley/East Valley School District; CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide. PROPOSAL LOCATIONS: CPA-2020-0001: 1311 N. McDonald Road, further located in the NW '/4 of Section 15, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington CPA-2020-0002: 5901 E. Sprague Avenue, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 43 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0003: 1723 and 1724 N Union Road, further located in the SE '/4 of Section 09, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0006: 3830 N Sullivan, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 01, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian,Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley. DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance is issued under Washington Administrative Code(WAC) 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date issued. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m.on March 6,2020.Pursuant to Title 21,Environmental Controls of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC),the lead agency has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required under Revised Code of Washington 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. STAFF CONTACT: Chaz Bates,AICP, Senior Planner,City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509)720-5337; cbates a,spokanevallev.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Mike Basinger, AICP, Economic Development Manager, City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509) 720-5333, mbasinger@spokanevalley.org spokanevalley.org DATE ISSUED: February 21, 2020 SIGNATURE: irh � APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community&Pu' is Works Department within fourteen(14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and specific factual objections made to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Schedule shall be paid at the time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 18,2020 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of I File Nos.CPA-2020-0001;CPA-2020-0002;CPA-2020-0003;CPA-2020-0006;CPA-2020-0007 EXHIBIT 8 Notice of Public Hearing City of Spokane Valley 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Hearing Date and Time: March 26,2020 beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Hearing Body: Spokane Valley Planning Commission The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Requests.The Planning Commission will conduct the public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council on each of the following applications. FILE No.: CPA-2020-0001 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004 (0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1311 North McDonald Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0002 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres)from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:North Fancher Road,Unaddressed FILE No.: CPA-2020-0003 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133, 45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1723 and 1724 North Union Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0006 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Industrial(I)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 3830 North Sullivan Road Bldg 1 FILE No.: CPA-2020-0007 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types. LOCATION OF PROPOSALS:Citywide Staff Contact: Chaz Bates,AICP,Senior Planner;(509)720-5337 cbates@spokanevalley.org Environmental Determination: The City issued a Determination of Non-significance(DNS)on February 21,2020 pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)and chapter 21.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. Staff Report and Inspection of File: A staff report will be available for inspection seven calendar days before the hearing. The staff report and application file may be inspected at the Community and Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm,Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Copies of documents will be made available at a reasonable cost. Send written comments to City of Spokane Valley,Attn: Chaz Bates, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206;or email to the project planner listed above. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing,or other impairments may contact the City Clerk at(509)720-5102 prior to the meeting so that arrangements may be made. Carrie Koudelka,Spokane Valley Deputy City Clerk Publish:March 6,2020 and March 13,2020 EXHIBIT 9 Public and Agency Comments (Will be inserted as received) COMMUNITY& PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT crry aF kBUILDING&PLANNING DIVISION Spoane v Ta�� STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION y CPA-2020-0003 STAFF REPORT DATE: March 5,2020 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: March 26,2020,beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,Washington 99206. Project Number: CPA-2020-0003 Application Description: Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) and to change the Zoning District from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Location: Parcel numbers 45094.0133, 45094.0134, and 45094.0121 addressed as 1723 and 1724 N Union Road, further located in the SE I/4 of Section 09, Township 25 North,Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington Applicant: Jay Rambo,PO Box 212011, Spokane Valley,WA 99214 Owners: Revere-Dece III,LLC; Revere-Dece 202 (building owner),760 SW 9th Ave St 200,Portland OR 97205; Brill Properties LLC,2910 E 57th 5-122 Spokane WA 99223 Date of Application: October 29,2019 Staff Contact: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, 10210 E Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Application Exhibit 7: Environment Determination Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map Exhibit 8: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 9: Agency and Public Exhibit 4: Zoning Map Comments Exhibit 5: Aerial Exhibit 10: Trip Generation and Exhibit 6: SEPA Checklist Distribution Letter A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is a privately initiated request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation for parcels 45094.0133,45094.0134,and 45094.0121 from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU)and to change the Zoning from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). The existing use on parcels 45094.0133,45094.0134 is a 204 unit multifamily development(Revere Ridge) and a single-family residence on parcel 45094.0121.The site is moderate to steeply sloped and Page 1 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2020-0003 does not contain any critical areas.To the east of the properties are duplexes and a self-storage facility,to the north is I-90,to the east are offices, and to the south are single family homes. The property is accessed via Union Road, a local access road that ends in a cul-de-sac at the properties. Union Road connects to Mission Avenue about 500 feet to the north and is approximately I/4 mile west of Pines Road.Union Road does not have sidewalks but sidewalks were installed along Mission in 2019, connecting to Pines on the east and Mission Park to the west.The Average Daily Traffic(ADT) for Mission Avenue at Union,in 2015,was estimated at just over 7,600 vehicular trips per day with a level of service of D. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and Characteristics: The properties consists of three parcels totaling 6.24 acres in size. Comprehensive Plan: Multifamily Residential(MFR) Zoning: Multifamily Residential (MFR) Existing Land Use: An apartment complex with approximately 200 units and a single- family home is located on one of the properties. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: Comp Plan: Industrial(I) North Zoning: Industrial(I) Uses: I-90 Comp Plan: Single Family Residential(SFR) South Zoning: Single Family Residential Urban(R-3) Uses: Single-family homes Comp Plan: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) East Zoning: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Uses: professional office Comp Plan: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) West Zoning: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Uses: Duplex homes IMPLICATIONS: The adopted Comprehensive Plan describes the CMU designation as"allow[ing] for light manufacturing, retail,multifamily,and offices along major transportation corridors. It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue, and the north-south arterials."Mission Avenue is an improved east-west Minor Arterial that generally meets the description of the CMU designation.While the subject properties do not have frontage on Mission,they are sandwiched between CMU properties to the east,west and portions to the north. The designation change and rezone of the site to CMU allows for a broader range of uses than the MFR zone,including retail and office uses.The CMU also would allow increased density. The residences to the north may experience impacts from the increased intensity of use on the property,though the Mission and Pines area already provides fairly intense uses.Any development on the property adjacent to the R-3 zone will be subject to the adopted transitional provisions to minimize the impacts to the neighboring zone. The transitional provisions include height limitations, screening and landscaping requirements. Page 2 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2020-0003 APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: October 2,2019 Application Submitted: October 2,2019 SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issue date (expected) February 21,2020 End of Appeal Period for DNS: March 6,2020 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing March 6,2020 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: March 6& 13,2020 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: March 10,2020 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, the lead agency has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The city issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal on February 21, 2020. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Titles 19,21,and 22 SVMC,a site assessment,public and agency comments,the Comprehensive Plan and associated Environmental Impact Statement 2. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE 1. Compliance with Title 17(General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Approval Criteria i. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map amendments if it finds that: (1) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; Analysis: The proposed amendment changing the land use designation from Multiple Family Residential to (MFR) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) has a relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. The adopted Comprehensive Plan describes the CMU designation as "allow[ingj for light manufacturing, retail, multifamily, and offices along major transportation corridors. It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue, and the north-south arterials. "The subject properties are between CMU properties to the west, east,and south.Access is provided by Union Road via Mission Avenue. Mission Ave is a Minor Arterial. Changing the land use designation to CMU increases the flexibility of allowed uses and allowed Page 3 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2020-0003 density on the sites in an area with supportive infrastructure, which has benefit to public health, safety, and welfare. The amendment area is not covered by critical areas or designated natural resources. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment are promoted by standards established by the state and the City's regulations. (2) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; Analysis: The Growth Management Act (GMA) adopts thirteen goals to guide the development of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. The request allows opportunity to provide an expansion of the multiple family development on the site and the opportunity to provide the neighborhood will access to daily goods and services in a centralized area with adequate public facilities; there are two projects in the 6-year TIP along Mission Avenue just south of this area to improve capacity. The proposal does not conflict with any other GMA goals. The amendment is not in conflict with any other portions of the comprehensive plan. (3) The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; Analysis: The amendment does not respond directly to a substantial change in conditions beyond the owner's control. However, the 2016 legislative update to the Comprehensive Plan eliminated the Office designation generally replacing it with the CMU designation, which was the case for the parcels to the west, east, and south. While the 2016 plan changed the designation of the surrounding vacant lands from Office to CMU, the properties subject to the amendment request had a multiple family development and the designation of Multiple Family was not changed. The CMU designation provides more flexibility than the Office and Multiple Family designations. The changing of the surrounding properties from Office to CMU created a situation whereby the subject properties may not use their property to the similarly situated properties to the west, east, and south. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The proposed amendment adds little capacity to the CMU designation; all three parcels have existing structures and two have multiple family developments on them. Changing the designation from Multiple Family Residential to Corridor Mixed Use on an existing developed parcel provides the opportunity to increase density on developed parcels using pre-existing infrastructure and provide flexibility to add service retail oriented to the area. While the proposal does not address a direct deficiency, the Comprehensive Plan identifies the following goals and policies that support the proposed change: LU-GI Maintain and enhance the character and quality of life in Spokane Valley. Page 4 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2020-0003 LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas. H-Gl Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. H-G3 Allow convenient access to daily goods and services in Spokane Valley's neighborhoods. CF-P2 Optimize the use of existing public facilities before investing in new facilities. ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis: The change to CMU will allow existing uses as well as commercial, office and higher residential development of the properties. The properties will have the opportunity to transition, add density and add a mix of uses to serve the surrounding neighborhood. There is no concern on effect of physical environment. (2) The effect on open space, streams,rivers,and lakes; Analysis: There are no known critical areas associated with the site,such as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat areas,frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas. The parcels are not located within shoreline jurisdiction, and there are no known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed should future development occur. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis: The 6.25-acre site is currently developed with a multiple family development and a one single family home. The adjacent use to the south is single family, to the west self-storage, to the east office, multiple family and vacant CMU. The CMU land use designation surrounds the amendment site to the west, east,and north. The amendment is consistent with the adjacent land use designations. If approved future development of the site will be subject to the transitional provisions adopted in the development regulations. Potential development consistent with the CMU zone will be compatible with properties to the west, east, and south. The projected impact to the surrounding neighborhood is minimal.Any future development will be evaluated for compliance with all municipal requirements as it relates to adjacent uses at the time of development. (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads,public transportation,parks,recreation,and schools; Analysis:Mission Avenue is a Minor Arterial. There are two projects in the 6-year TIP along Mission Avenue just south of this area, one of which is the intersection capacity improvement and signal modification at Pines/Mission. Site-specific improvements and their impact to this project would be identified through the development review process, and development on the parcels within the Mirabeau Subarea Study area. Page 5 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2020-0003 The subject properties are considered infill development, as such, the expansion of allowed uses and increased densities are supported by the infrastructure that is in place. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood,City, and region; Analysis: The proposed change would allow the property to increase density and support infill development in an area planned for growth. The change may support increased housing opportunities, office, employment, or access to daily goods and services. The change benefits the neighborhood, city, and region by supporting the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goal and policy: ED-GI Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley ED-P3 Encourage businesses that provide jobs and grow local markets. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis: The proposal would add approximately 6.5 acres of CMU property to the 1,666 acres of existing CMU designated property within the city. While additional demand for CMU property may be limited, the CMU designation in this place would allow for increased options for development including retail services serving the existing multiple family development. The proposal is limited to a reasonable area and if developed under CMU standards the type of use and density would be appropriate for the location. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Analysis: Under the existing conditions and there is one dwelling unit proposed to be removed. While CMU allows residential development, it is not expected that residential development would occur and therefore the City would lose one single-family house as a result of the amendment. The change is not expected to have significant impacts to population density in the area. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The CMU designation will support the goals and policies identified above. It would have very little to no effect on other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, including Housing, Capital Facilities and Public Services,Public and Private Utilities, Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources. Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings:The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.The Comprehensive Plan describes the CMU designation as"allow[ing] for light manufacturing,retail,multifamily, and offices along major transportation corridors.It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue,and the north-south arterials."The subject properties are between CMU properties to the west,east,and south.Access is provided by Union Road via Mission Avenue.Mission Ave is a Minor Arterial. Changing the land use designation to CMU increases the flexibility of allowed uses and allowed density on the sites in an area with supportive infrastructure. Additionally, the amendment is supported by the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: ED-GI Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley Page 6 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2020-0003 ED-P3 Encourage businesses that provide jobs and grow local markets. LU-G1 Maintain and enhance the character and quality of life in Spokane Valley. LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas. H-G1 Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. H-G3 Allow convenient access to daily goods and services in Spokane Valley's neighborhoods. CF-P2 Optimize the use of existing public facilities before investing in new facilities. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. 3. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: The Growth Management Act(GMA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan requires that public facilities and services be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy. The area is currently served with adequate public facilities and services.Modern Electric Water Company, Spokane County Environmental Services, Spokane Valley Fire District, and East Valley School district provide water, sewer, and fire protection and schools services in this area. Regarding transportation,future development on the subject properties would be subject to the Mirabeau Subarea Update,which identified costs for developments within the area to ensure the City will have the street infrastructure needed to support planned development.As a result, it is expected that sufficient roadway capacity exists or is programmed to exist with future road improvements on the City street system to accommodate the uses resulting from the CPA. Urban services are available. Specific site needs will be addressed at the time a development is proposed for the site. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development. D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has received no public comments to date. Comments received following the date of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission at the March 12,2020 meeting. 2. Conclusion(s): Notice of Public Hearing (NOPH) was published on March 6 and March 13, 2020. The NOPH was posted on site on March 6, 2020 and mailed on March 10, 2020 to residents within a 400- foot radius of the subject property. Page 7 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2020-0003 E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any agency comments of significance to date. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Senior Traffic Engineer City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering City of Spokane Valley Building&Planning City of Spokane Valley Parks&Recreation Spokane Valley Fire Department City of Millwood City of Liberty Lake City of Spokane City of Spokane Valley Police Department Spokane County,Building and Planning Spokane County,Environmental Services Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County,Fire District No. 1 Spokane County,Fire District No. 8 Spokane County Regional Health District Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Spokane Aquifer Joint Board Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) Washington State Dept of Commerce Washington State Dept of Ecology(Olympia) Washington State Dept of Ecology(Spokane) Washington State Dept of Fish& Wildlife Washington State Dept of Natural Resources Washington State Dept of Transportation Washington State Parks&Recreation Commission WA Archaeological&Historic Preservation Avista Utilities Inland Power& Light Modern Electric Water Company Central Valley School District#356 East Valley School District#361 West Valley School District#363 Century Link Comcast Model Irrigation District#18 Consolidated Irrigation District#19 East Spokane Water District#1 Vera Water&Power Spokane County Water District#3 Spokane Tribe of Indians Page 8 of 9 Staff Report CPA-2020-0003 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. F. CONCLUSION: For the reasons set forth in Section C(1 and 2)the proposed amendment to change the land use designation from MFR to CMU and the rezone from MFR to CMU is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H)and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 9 of 9 EXHIBIT 1 Spokane ,�r�Valley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: I0-;27 ( 1 ,Received by: CL Fee:11/(oOQ ,d a PLUS#: File#: CPA- J 2-0.20 -" Ocx)3 PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATIOI�roject # ��- t;} �i RECEIVED X Map Amendment; or El Text Amendment OCT 2 9 2019 COSV PERMIT CENTER APPLICANT NAME: Jay Rambo SUB # RFC # MAILING ADDRESS: PO Box 142011 CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99214 PHONE: 509-879-0865 FAX: CELL: EMAIL: jay@jrambo.net PROPERTY OWNERS: Revere-Dece III Inv, LLC, Revere-Dece 202 Building Owner, LLC and Brill Properties, LLC MAILING ADDRESS: 760 SW 9th Ave., St. 200 / 2910 E. 57th Ae. 5-122 CITY: Portland / Spokane STATE:OR/WA ZIP: 97205 / 99223 PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: 45094.0133, 45094.0134 and SITE ADDRESS: 1723 and 1724 N. Union PARCEL NO.: 45094.0121 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi-Family Residential (MFR) PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) ZONING DESIGNATION: Multi-Family (MF) PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: Corridor Mixed Use(CMU) BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): Change from Multi-Family Residential to Corridor Mixed Use to more fully conform with the surroundinq designations. PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of 5 S ikane\ P /0 Val ley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III - AUTHORIZATION ,�/� / (Signature of legal owner or applicant) I, XL) / ! L,P�I print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made trutfull :n• to the best of my k , •dge. (Si. inv ature) (Date) D Rt.bo(�—vz NOTARY STATE OF N) Mu I4-nor , ss: COUNTY OF&Pelf/WE e ) ,c SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this -/-Z-n 8. day of OG'ttV;l-ef , 20 11 NOTARY SEAL '•� ��1 I / NOTARY SIGNATURE y ,��A OFFICIALSTEW Notary Public in and for the State of W R�err,o12- ;� : � � CHRISTIE STEWART � NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON � COMMISBION NO.949274 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 12,2020 Residing at: VanaO O t?e , w My appointment expires: —12-2-62Z LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, Iva3 /'4 , - t I , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize Jav Rambo to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 5 of 5 p Valley COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III - AUTHORIZATION /� / t (Signature of legal owner or applicant) I, (i . t(A , Ccii K 3!, (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. 104.E a©/r . �=/ �te) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 2 2nd day of OCLOL9e , 20 19 NOTARY SEAL NOTARY SIGNATURE SEAN C SALMON • Notary Public N Public in and for the State of Washington State of Washington Commission if 205368 My Comm. Expires Dec 19, 2022 �� (N� 3� it Residing at: ^(J� .S fak.ns �r^��r wA 99o357 My appointmentexpires: Dec. 19 202 LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, C.inl1r4..1AM - , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize Jay Rambo to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 5 of 5 Below in bold text are the approval criteria, in italic text is the analysis in responding to criteria. a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; The proposed amendment would be entirely consistent with the surrounding zoning designations and thereby be consistent with public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment. b. 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; The proposed amendment would modify the zoning and make all of the adjoining properties consistent with the CMU designation. c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the owner's control but rather modifies the uses of the property so that it may be developed consistently with the neighboring properties. d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. There is no apparent reason or justification for the differing zones in the Comprehensive Plan. Additional factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: a. The effect upon the physical environment; Other than adding structures to the parcels, the proposal will have no adverse effect on the physical environment. b. The effect on open space,streams, rivers, and lakes; The proposed change should have no effect on any open space, streams, rivers or lakes. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; The current zoning designation essentially does not allow the owners of Parcel #45094.0139 to utilize their property as the City does not allow the development of mixed zones in a single project. Since it is necessary for Parcel#45094.0121 to provide access to Parcel#45094.0139(as Parcel#45094.0139 does not otherwise have access), it is necessary for Parcel#45094.0121 to have its zoning designation modified so that Parcel#45094.0139 may be utilized. If the zoning for Parcel#45094.0121 is modified, the remaining two parcels(45094.0133&.0134)should be modified as well to be consistent with all adjoining parcels. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools; The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment should have no impact on utilities, roads, public transportation,parks, recreation and schools since this infrastructure is already in place and would merely be utilized by the community as a whole. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; The neighborhood would benefit as Parcel#45094.0121 would be able to be utilized as currently allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; The land quantity, location and demand for this land is such that it would be immediately utilizable in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. g. The current and projected population density in the area; and While there may be no density limitation for the CMU zone, it will be necessary for the parcels to comply with the parking and transitional requirements imposed by the City of Spokane Valley. h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. There should be no effects on other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. EXHIBIT 2 Vicinity Map CPA-2020-0003 =NUMMI■ E Grace r ve ...■■■■■■■■ ■ ■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■ ■11111 ■ ■■1111111■ E Buckeye_Av_e_ I. I ' I I •�."'■"'...11111111 E Marietta IL1 1111111111•11111111 Mirabeau E Buckeye Ln I pm .� *�j;ikA��k�� • f��I� k - EMariettaAvg ■I+ Lk I\S I lb .. I IN E_Montgomery Dr ip E Jackson Ave °z _ ■ ■ • ,_((ct.a. .�1 I11r1111r4' ��JJ4k �r r___F___ ECarlisleAZ ii. m� �G E Ermin. Aye , ; , a _ pi__, IIT _ z��— „it ElMansfieldAV �� —,', Fire . ... -e_________------- ---Y E_Knox_Ave �— h District Spo - u = = _ V. A. �� gomery FIr7cliana Awe E Mon ome Ave kMIIMMUNIMIN I 1111dld �� Ed 90 W289�On E I 90 Fwy �—w, �� 89�N-RaM ENora--Ave �:Orli� FI:90=E289-ORF-Ramp .Z90 IL =, ■ ��11111 �a L z 1 ' — �1_IILLIyi�_,/�C �� — E�AugustaLn i MOW Mission ' Ali 1 I leh OEM. A ■ ■ E i it slro — H �� _ x ■ a I — — E Maxwell Ave b x -rEMaxwellLn=J� = ■ H ■- - .■■■ � x - ro E ictoryiLn ■■�■■r■■►� ■■ ■ II �� I � p� MO a z ■ CD TEM — M.M.—run ��(—,ESintoLn� MEM —■ I d T�` — � . 114 IIIIIM x -11 111174 a -� - � 1 2 _E sh�a ve 1111 -- - -��_ _ mid ■1■■11■■1■1 'z• H 1 I , il inIII1 r z - I I I I�, I EBoo eAie ■ — VBalfourCt .4 MI:,, z ■n ■p ■p 1111111 111■ ia••• II I I I-• - �� Desmet I Ay,I z 111/11/11 '° ...11111111? 1� ■ -dam b E � m � � - I : �l �z� E� 11111111110 - y i �— I=1� ■■s■ b g ■ ■ �1 z X11 Em g.1■■.1 Barker High. E in Aqe� iii rMO �■ $ o; °g° 111 E CaYaldo Ave 1� 9 7.: now School and II �1.1111 M� E Mallon Awve -4 a M G7 5 . Mallon Ct Learning ■ ll M` NI IMMO me z z m .11 .a❑ : 'North - - ■ L ■■111111 •I■l ■111=I 1I ■■ii ■■■ r- I ■11 E Broadway_Ave ' ' ' IME ��■ �� Pines 11111114 J- II �; J ■1111U11111 .. Middle :r1111111 _' --P- n ' P4 : [-VI■IF 111■ ' E Sp�gfield Ave Eg Broadwa r --—y �t mom. 1111111 ■ �� 1 z , y ■■■■■■■■■■ �,IIIIII�� ...... = 1��■ ■ ■ 1111111 ■�� —■ 11 � Elementary ■■■■■■P•• E AlkiAye MINI ■■■■ ■11■■ •••• z i ■■■ •_•■■1■u1u■■.!1111iM•UU■ 11= . 111111I1= U11•MM_.1 Z E•1.11111111.■■■■■■ 111■ Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 EXHIBIT 3 Comprehensive Plan Map �� E Montgomery Ave E 190 W289 E I 90 Fwy E I 90 Fwy Study Area • E I 90 E289 OFF Ra ,. '1 lir E Nora Ave liIl— ._ A — - - o :z z L E Mission Aye I. I I i_ Legend _1 111 CMU NC — I POS IMU Mil RC E Maxwell Ave 71 MF _ F - I - MU CPA-2020-0003 Request: 1.614 Spokane Owner: Revere-DeceIII LC Proposed change: Land Use Revere-Dece 20202BuBuilding Owner LLC ill Properties LLC designation from MF to CMU 400000 Valle Parcel#: Br 45094.0133, .0134,.0121 and Zoning from MF to CMU Address: 1723/1724 N Union Rd EXHIBIT 4 Zoning Map �� E Montgomery Ave E 190 W289 E I 90 Fwy Study Area • E 1 90 E289 OFF Ra ,. '1 lir E Nora Ave liIl- - — o :z z L E Mission Aye I. Legend R1 MF RC R2 NC IMU 3 4 E-Maxwell Ave R3 MU I _ ill POS CMU v I I I I 1 1 CPA-2020-0003 Request: Spol�arie OWller. Revere-DeceIII Inv LLC Proposed change: Land Use Revere-Dece 202 Building Owner LLC ill Properties LLC designation from MF to CMU 400000 Valle Parcel#: Br 45094.0133, .0134,.0121 and Zoning from MF to CMU Address: 1723/1724 N Union Rd EXHIBIT 5 2018 Aerial Map ---ir mak' 'tel - rt +�r `-- _ _h :- FYI • ° t1� • `h4 i Y {..h `f Fli' { syr'4r 4..`•llf:X :'..7.0' 47. 4,4-..e.. . - !I. . ,:re- .4 'L2.Y .�• ' F. Wil • F"t`' IIF ,r yr.a c`,"_. A. t .4' ,_` r f! r , . . o .L'--./..--..3 - .'"'''. — .,401 'le. ' . . ;..'''''. .: ' I i4 ?.:T'L '-a • • T . cam' ♦ • 40_ $ ,wip�.p4. - - _ 4. ■ z ilit lit Ili I • ,., �Ivlontgomer+Y. .j -..E Indiana ._' , E Indiana A� Montgomeroy a� aye'-' -1 w Study Area • I T :_ • , . , , . . .. „ ... .. - - . ,,.._ L,,,,, 1 1 .. : . , ,.. . .........,_ ,:.._....,,,,,i .. ..._ ---J i , • . . , EyI 90 W289 On Ramps I 90 Fwy r - ` I. I :1- Fwy" EI 90 E2.�OFF Rte` _ith }�i� I -„,-10„V- . s amp •. . .... . . . m... . , valley . cil Enos Ame NOiFter: _ - Park 3 ft '0 Avie Augusta - o c24 AveAt �• = � T G z Y- 3 Mission Ave r L . . i 1.. - r._, 1.. immilirlt• ': EM'Mtme EMaxwe1 iiiiiiii ` • H !IlEuu in® I, . , , .... 1 i' :'• II. jil i - I rip,. , T . - • r Mit• Arlir iiii _ ,. . E RIM IMP ' •. * J K .• liaIN • °" ,.. - .. CPA-2020-0003 Request: Spokane Owner: III Proposed change: Land Use Revere-Dece 20202Building Owner LLC ill Properties LLC designation from MF to CMU .000 Valle Parcel#: Br 45094.0133, .0134,.0121 and Zoning from MF to CMU Address: 1723/1724 N Union Rd EXHIBIT 6 S1 ()iv SEPA CHECKLIST p SVMC 21.20 ..osValley• 10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 • Fax: (509)720-5075 •permitcenter@spokanevalley.org STAFF USE ONLY Project #CPA -2112,0-b0 j RECEIVED Date Submitted: Received by: Fee: PLUS #: File#: OCT 2 9 2019 COSV PERMIT CFNTFR SUB #E-1 REV. # 1 PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL - **THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** ❑ Completed SEPA Checklist ❑ Application Fee ❑ Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81/2" by 11" or 11" by 17" size ❑ Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement(EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS; Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D). PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley• For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable Revere Ridge Apartments 2. Name of applicant: Jay Rambo 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: PO Box 142011, Spokane Valley, WA 99214 509-879-0865 4. Date checklist prepared: October 24, 2019 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Checklist is required as part of Comp Plan Amendment. Not sure of proposed timing. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Not aware of any applications pending for government approval. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Not aware of any government approvals for permits needed for our proposal. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of SEPA CHECKLIST oof Valley This is necessary as part of the Comp Plan Amendment. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The location of this proposal is at 45094.0133, 45094.0134 & 45094.0121 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? No. The general Sewer Service Area? Yes. Priority Sewer Service Area? (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) /Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of(including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). None. 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? No. 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. No chemicals will be stored in sufficient quantities to warrant concern 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? No. PL-22 v1.0 Page 3 of ""`" SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane ��Valley b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Approximately 100+ feet to groundwater. 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts. Property owners will work with City of Spokane Valley staff to contain runoff. B. ENVIRONMENTALELEMENTS EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1 ) Earth a. General description of the site (check one): Ij'flat, /rolling, I I hilly, (l steep slopes, I I mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. pci ,. � ,✓i,_, . d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not aware of any unstable soils. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. There is no proposed grading at this time.. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Any potential erosion would be mitigated and contained in conjunction with the requirements of the City of Spokane Valley. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not known at this time. PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of S` okane SEPA CHECKLIST P Valle y h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2) Air EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. No air emissions are anticipated at this time. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. 3) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of S` 'okane SEPA CHECKLIST P Val ley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No. c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. There should be no runoff. What runoff there is will be contained and treated on site in accordance with the requirements imposed by the City of Spokane Valley. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: No. PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of kane SEPA CHECKLIST po Eley. EVALUATION FOR 4) Plants AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ❑ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ❑ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other (.shrubs Mgrass ❑ pasture I crop or grain ❑ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ❑ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other O other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Grass and small shrubs c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: A Landscape Plan will be developed in conjunction with the City of Spoakne Valley. 5) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: J birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ❑ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:None. PL-22 V1.0 Page 7 of t'�"kai SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 6). Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and possibly gas will be used for lighting and possibly heating. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe None. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic noise from 1-90. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. There would be no meaningful increase in noise from the property. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of ""`" SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane .Valley' EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 8). Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Multi-Family Residential and Commercial. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. Apartments and garages. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Garages may possibly be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Multi-Family f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Multi-Family Residential g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not Applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? No. If so, specify. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not known at this time. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The project should not displace anyone. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not Applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None. PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of Sokane SEPA CHECKLIST P Valle 400*Val EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not known at this time. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. 10). Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not known at this time. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11 ). Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? None. What time of day would it mainly occur? b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 14 SOOkarie SEPA CHECKLIST EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Parks and trails. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? No. If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? No. If so, generally describe. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Union Road. Show on site plans, if any. b. Is site currently served by public transit? No. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Approximately 500 feet. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? Not known. How many would the project eliminate? None. PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of 01/\ Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST •000ValleY d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? Assume a private road will be necessary. If so, generally EVALUATION FOR describe (indicate whether public or private). Private road or driveway. AGENCY USE ONLY e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? No. If so, generally describe. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? Not known. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? Probably not. If so, generally describe. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at th site: I./Gl tricity, ❑natural gas, ❑Gvater, 1,4 refuse service, telephone, sanitary, sewer, ❑ septic system, other- describe b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of ` kane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: _ A1 ✓" to 2---LA . Date Submitted: D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? No. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Owners with work with City Oof Spokane valley staff to mitigate any increases. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? No affect. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: No measures should be needed. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? No. PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of T'�kalle SEPA CHECKLIST _Valley a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands. floodplains, or prime farmlands? No affect. a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: No measures needed. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Not likely. PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of pol�ane SEPA CHECKLIST S .0000Valley a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts Are none are needed. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Not likely. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: None. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. There should be no conflicts. E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon this check list. Date: t . __ ( l Signature: 4_ Art Please print or type: Proponent: Address: Phone: Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Jay Rambo Address: PO Box 142011, Spokane Valley, WA 99214 Phone: 509-879-0865 PL 22 V1.0 Page 15 of EXHIBIT 7 COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT S�" DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE jvPOn 10210 East Sprague Avenue• Spokane Valley WA 99206 aller 509.720.5000 •Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley.org FILE NUMBERS:CPA-2020-0001; CPA-2020-0002; CPA-2020-0003; CPA-2020-0006; CPA-2020-0007 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTIONS: CPA-2020-0001: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004(0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). CPA- 2020-0002: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres) from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). CPA-2020-0003: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133,45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to CMU. CPA-2020-0006: City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Ito CMU.CPA-2020-0007: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types and area-wide rezone to implement new policies APPLICANT/OWNER: CPA-2020-0001: Land Use Solutions/Tucker Roy LLC; CPA-2020-0002: Ed Lukas/Lawrence B. Stone Properties,Lawrence B. Stone Properties#50 LLC; CPA-2020-0003: Jay Rambo/Revere-Dece III, LLC, Revere-Dece, Brill Properties LLC; CPA-2020-0006: Spokane Valley/East Valley School District; CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide. PROPOSAL LOCATIONS: CPA-2020-0001: 1311 N. McDonald Road, further located in the NW '/4 of Section 15, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington CPA-2020-0002: 5901 E. Sprague Avenue, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 43 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0003: 1723 and 1724 N Union Road, further located in the SE '/4 of Section 09, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0006: 3830 N Sullivan, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 01, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian,Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley. DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance is issued under Washington Administrative Code(WAC) 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date issued. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m.on March 6,2020.Pursuant to Title 21,Environmental Controls of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC),the lead agency has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required under Revised Code of Washington 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. STAFF CONTACT: Chaz Bates,AICP, Senior Planner,City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509)720-5337; cbates a,spokanevallev.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Mike Basinger, AICP, Economic Development Manager, City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509) 720-5333, mbasinger@spokanevalley.org spokanevalley.org DATE ISSUED: February 21, 2020 SIGNATURE: irh � APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community&Pu' is Works Department within fourteen(14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and specific factual objections made to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Schedule shall be paid at the time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 18,2020 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of I File Nos.CPA-2020-0001;CPA-2020-0002;CPA-2020-0003;CPA-2020-0006;CPA-2020-0007 EXHIBIT 8 Notice of Public Hearing City of Spokane Valley 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Hearing Date and Time: March 26,2020 beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Hearing Body: Spokane Valley Planning Commission The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Requests.The Planning Commission will conduct the public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council on each of the following applications. FILE No.: CPA-2020-0001 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004 (0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1311 North McDonald Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0002 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres)from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:North Fancher Road,Unaddressed FILE No.: CPA-2020-0003 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133, 45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1723 and 1724 North Union Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0006 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Industrial(I)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 3830 North Sullivan Road Bldg 1 FILE No.: CPA-2020-0007 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types. LOCATION OF PROPOSALS:Citywide Staff Contact: Chaz Bates,AICP,Senior Planner;(509)720-5337 cbates@spokanevalley.org Environmental Determination: The City issued a Determination of Non-significance(DNS)on February 21,2020 pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)and chapter 21.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. Staff Report and Inspection of File: A staff report will be available for inspection seven calendar days before the hearing. The staff report and application file may be inspected at the Community and Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm,Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Copies of documents will be made available at a reasonable cost. Send written comments to City of Spokane Valley,Attn: Chaz Bates, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206;or email to the project planner listed above. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing,or other impairments may contact the City Clerk at(509)720-5102 prior to the meeting so that arrangements may be made. Carrie Koudelka,Spokane Valley Deputy City Clerk Publish:March 6,2020 and March 13,2020 EXHIBIT 9 Public and Agency Comments (Will be inserted as received) COMMUNITY& PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING&PLANNING DIVISION Scrry aFpokane STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION v CPA-2020-0006 STAFF REPORT DATE: March 5,2020 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: March 26,2020,beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,Washington 99206. Project Number: CPA-2020-0006 Application Description: Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial (I)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial (I)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Location: Parcel numbers 45013.9024 addressed as 3830 N Sullivan,further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 01, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian,Spokane County,Washington Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 10210 E Sprague, Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Owners: East Valley School District#361, 3820 N Sullivan, Spokane Valley WA 99216 Date of Application: October 31,2019 Staff Contact: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, 10210 E Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Application Exhibit 7: Environment Determination Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map Exhibit 8: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 9: Agency and Public Exhibit 4: Zoning Map Comments Exhibit 5: Aerial Exhibit 10: Trip Generation and Exhibit 6: SEPA Checklist Distribution Letter A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is a city-initiated request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation for parcel 45013.9024 from Industrial(I)to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) and to change the Zoning from Industrial(I)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). The existing use on parcel 45013.9024 is East Valley School District's Walker Center,which includes EVSD administrative services and maintenance building. The building also has classrooms that were used for the District's professional and trade school services. The site is flat and does not contain any critical areas. The properties to the west,north, and east are industrial uses,to the south are retail service and industrial uses. The property has frontage along Sullivan but is accessed via B Street of the industrial park.B Street Page 1 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0006 is a local access road that services the Spokane Industrial Park and connects the property to Sullivan Road which is a Principal Arterial. The site is served by public transit Route 96 of Spokane Transit Authority (STA), and sidewalks only exist on Sullivan.The Average Daily Traffic(ADT)for Sullivan Avenue at B Street,in 2015,is estimated at just over 19,000 vehicular trips per day with a level of service of D. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and Characteristics: The properties consists of one parcel totaling 8.81 acres in size. Comprehensive Plan: Industrial (I) Zoning: Industrial (I) Existing Land Use: East Valley School District's Walker Center(EVSD administration and formerly professional and trade school). SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: Comp Plan: Industrial(I) North Zoning: Industrial(I) Uses: Industrial distribution Comp Plan: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) South Zoning: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) Uses: Hotel and offices Comp Plan: Industrial(I) East Zoning: Industrial(I) Uses: Industrial services Comp Plan: Industrial(I) West Zoning: Industrial(I) Uses: Industrial(Spokane County transfer station) IMPLICATIONS: The adopted Comprehensive Plan describes the CMU designation as"allow[ing] for light manufacturing, retail,multifamily, and offices along major transportation corridors. It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue,and the north-south arterials." Sullivan is an improved north-south Principal Arterial that generally meets the description of the CMU designation. The proposed amendment provides flexibility that can be used to support the applicants indicated desire to provide educational services for K-12 that are currently prohibited in the I zone. APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: October 2,2019 Application Submitted: October 2,2019 SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issue date February 21,2020 End of Appeal Period for DNS: March 6,2020 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing March 6,2020 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: March 6& 13,2020 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: March 10,2020 Page 2 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0006 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, the lead agency has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The city issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal on February 21, 2020. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Titles 19, 21, and 22 of the SVMC, a site assessment, public and agency comments, the Comprehensive Plan and associated Environmental Impact Statement. 2. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE 1. Compliance with Title 17(General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Approval Criteria i. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map amendments if it finds that: (1) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; Analysis: The proposed amendment provides more flexibility of uses on a property allowing East Valley School District to broaden and enhance their educational service mission. Under the Industrial zone educational activities are limited to professional, vocational and trade schools. While this may continue to be an essential component to EVSD curriculum,flexibility is needed to meet existing and future demand for other educational services. Changing the designation to Corridor Mixed Use, increases the allowed types of educational services legally permitted to occur in the existing facility. Increasing educational opportunities to local youth has a substantial benefit to public health, safety, and welfare. The amendment area is not covered by critical areas or designated natural resources. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment are promoted by standards established by the state and the City's regulations. (2) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; Analysis: The Growth Management Act (GMA) adopts thirteen goals to guide the development of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. The request allows opportunity to strengthen EVSD mission to provide for education of local youth in an area with adequate public facilities. The proposal does not conflict with any other GMA goals. The amendment is not in conflict with any other portions of the Comprehensive Plan. Page 3 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0006 (3) The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; Analysis: The amendment does respond to a substantial change in conditions from 2016 legislative update to the Comprehensive Plan.At that time the subject parcel was not changed from the designation in place since at least 2014. Since the 2016 legislative update, EVSD has experienced changes in enrollment and interest in vocational education, under the existing designation only professional, vocational and trade schools are allowed in the Industrial designation changing the designation to CMU allows EVSD to adapt the educational services they provide in a location they own and have made substantial improvements for educational purposes. The demographic and interest shifts are beyond EVSD control the proposed change allows them to continue to serve district educational needs. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: While not directly identified as a deficiency, the Comprehensive Plan has identified the following goal and policy that support workforce development and education, which are integral to the long-term success of the City: ED-G5 Support and encourage the development of a strong workforce that is globally competitive and responds to the changing needs of the workplace ED-P16 Support local educational institutions in the development of educational and training programs that meet the needs of businesses. ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis: The change to CMU will allow existing uses as well as more expanded educational uses. The change could result in more intensive development in the future, though the site is currently developed. There is no concern on effect of physical environment. (2) The effect on open space, streams,rivers, and lakes; Analysis: There are no known critical areas associated with the site,such as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat areas,frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas. The parcel is not located within shoreline jurisdiction, and there are no known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed should future development occur. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis: The property is generally surrounded by Spokane Industrial Park to the north and east; however, the property is not part of the Spokane Industrial Park. The property to the south is designated and zoned Corridor Mixed Use. The institutional use on the proposed site is generally compatible with both the light industrial uses to Page 4 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0006 the north and east and the retail service uses to the south. The projected impact to the surrounding neighborhoods is minimal. Any future development will be evaluated for compliance with all municipal requirements as it relates to adjacent uses at the time of development. (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads,public transportation,parks,recreation, and schools; Analysis: B Street is a local access street and Sullivan Road is a Principal Arterial. There are two capacity related projects in the 6-year TIP near the project area: intersection improvement at Sullivan and Wellesley and improvement to Sullivan and SR 290 (Trent) interchange. The site is served by Spokane Industrial Park, Avista, Spokane Valley Fire District, and East Valley School district provide water and sewer, electricity and natural gas,fire protection, and school services in this area. The subject properties are considered infill development, as such, the expansion of allowed uses and increased densities are supported by the infrastructure that is in place. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis: The proposed change would allow the property and structure owned by EVSD to be used for educational purposes beyond professional, vocational and trade school use, increasing the school district's ability to provide educational services. The change benefits the neighborhood, City, and region by supporting the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goal and policy: ED-G5 Support and encourage the development of a strong workforce that is globally competitive and responds to the changing needs of the workplace ED-P16 Support local educational institutions in the development of educational and training programs that meet the needs of businesses. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis: The proposal would add approximately 9 acres of CMU property to the 1,666 acres of existing CMU designated property within the City. While additional demand for CMU property may be limited, the CMU designation allows for additional educational uses, which has been indicated as needed from the school district. The proposal is limited to a reasonable area and if developed under CMU standards the type of use and density would be appropriate for the location. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Analysis: Under the existing conditions and the Industrial designation there is very little population that resides in the area. While CMU allows residential development, it is not expected that residential development would occur. The proposed change in land use designation is not expected to have significant impacts to population density in the area. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The CMU designation will support the Economic Development goal and policy identified above. It would have very little to no effect on other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, including Land Use, Transportation, and Housing, Capital Facilities and Public Services,Public and Private Utilities,Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources. Conclusion(s): Page 5 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0006 For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings:The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.The Comprehensive Plan describes the CMU designation as"allow[ing] for light manufacturing,retail,multifamily,and offices along major transportation corridors.It is primarily used along Sprague Avenue,and the north-south arterials."The subject property is accessed via B Street and fronting Sullivan Road. Changing the land use designation to CMU increases the flexibility of allowed uses and allowed density on the sites in an area with supportive infrastructure. Additionally, the amendment is supported by the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: ED-G5 Support and encourage the development of a strong workforce that is globally competitive and responds to the changing needs of the workplace ED-P16 Support local educational institutions in the development of educational and training programs that meet the needs of businesses. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. 3. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: The Growth Management Act(GMA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan requires that public facilities and services be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy. The area is currently served with adequate public facilities and services. Spokane Industrial Park, Avista, Spokane Valley Fire District, and East Valley School district provide water and sewer,electricity and natural gas,fire protection,and schools services in this area. Regarding transportation, there are two capacity related projects in the 6-year TIP near the project area: intersection improvement at Sullivan and Wellesley and improvement to Sullivan and SR 290(Trent) interchange. The expected volumes and corridor improvements necessary to maintain operations are identified and estimated for inclusion in City plans. It is expected that sufficient roadway capacity exists or is programmed to exist with future road improvements on the City street system to accommodate the uses resulting from the CPA. Urban services are available. Specific site needs will be addressed at the time a development is proposed for the site. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development. D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has received no public comments to date. Comments received following the date of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission at the March 12,2020 meeting. 2. Conclusion(s): Notice of Public Hearing (NOPH) was published on March 6 and March 13, 2020. The NOPH was posted on site on March 6, 2020 and mailed on March 10, 2020 to residents within a 400- foot radius of the subject property. Page 6 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0006 E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any agency comments of significance to date. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Senior Traffic Engineer City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering City of Spokane Valley Building&Planning City of Spokane Valley Parks&Recreation Spokane Valley Fire Department City of Millwood City of Liberty Lake City of Spokane City of Spokane Valley Police Department Spokane County,Building and Planning Spokane County,Environmental Services Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County,Fire District No. 1 Spokane County,Fire District No. 8 Spokane County Regional Health District Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Spokane Aquifer Joint Board Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) Washington State Dept of Commerce Washington State Dept of Ecology(Olympia) Washington State Dept of Ecology(Spokane) Washington State Dept of Fish&Wildlife Washington State Dept of Natural Resources Washington State Dept of Transportation Washington State Parks&Recreation Commission WA Archaeological&Historic Preservation Avista Utilities Inland Power& Light Modern Electric Water Company Central Valley School District#356 East Valley School District#361 West Valley School District#363 Century Link Comcast Model Irrigation District#18 Consolidated Irrigation District#19 East Spokane Water District#1 Vera Water&Power Spokane County Water District#3 Spokane Tribe of Indians Page 7 of 8 Staff Report CPA-2020-0006 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. F. CONCLUSION: For the reasons set forth in Section C(1 and 2)the proposed amendment to change the land use designation from I to CMU and the rezone from I to CMU is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H)and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT 1 Sokan�` p COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION jUalley STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: 3( Zai 9 Received by: G_K Fee:/474- PLUS #: ee:PLUS #: File#: CPO _202o —0004 Project # (161-- 014P -capiP REOEIVED PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATION ba 1 2019 [✓Map Amendment; or ❑ Text Amend@@3V PERMIT CENTER SUB#1 1 REV. # APPLICANT NAME: City of Spokane Valley MAILING ADDRESS: 10210 E Sprauge Ave CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99206 PHONE: 509-720-5000 FAX: CELL: EMAIL: PROPERTY OWNER : East Valley School District#361 MAILING ADDRESS: 3830 N Sullivan Road WA CITY: Spokane Valley ZIP: 99216 PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: SITE ADDRESS: East Valley School District#361 PARCEL No.: 45013.9024 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial (I) PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) ZONING DESIGNATION: Industrial (I) PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): During the last periodic update the activities occurring on the property were not appropriately accounted for and the Industrial designation was applied to the property. The designation and zone change will more accurately reflect existing school related uses. PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of po Se 1 COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION P Val ley Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Supplement a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; The proposed amendment provides more flexibility of uses on a property allowing East Valley School District to broaden and enhance their educational service mission. Under the Industrial zone educational activities are limited to professional, vocational and trade schools. While this may continue to be an essential component to EVSD curriculum, flexibility is needed to meet existing and future demand for other educational services. Changing the designation to Corridor Mixed Use, increases the allowed types of educational services legally permitted to occur in the existing facility. Increasing educational opportunities to local youth has a substantial benefit to public health, safety, and welfare. The amendment area is not covered by critical areas or designated natural resources. The public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment are promoted by standards established by the state and the City's regulations. b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; The Growth Management Act(GMA) adopts thirteen goals to guide the development of local comprehensive plans and development regulations. The request allows opportunity to strengthen EVSD mission to provide for education of local youth in an area with adequate public facilities. The proposal does not conflict with any other GMA goals. The amendment is not in conflict with any other portions of the comprehensive plan. c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change inconditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; The amendment does respond to a substantial change in conditions from 2016 legislative update to the Comprehensive Plan. At that time the subject parcel was not changed from the designation in place since at least 2014. Since the 2016 legislative update, EVSD has experienced changes in enrollment and interest in vocational education, under the existing designation only professional, vocational and trade schools are allowed in the Industrial designation changing the designation to CMU allows EVSD to adapt the educational services they provide in a location they own and have made substantial improvements for educational purposes. The demographic and interest shifts are beyond EVSD control the proposed change allows them to continue to serve district educational needs. d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error;and The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. While not directly identified as a deficiency, the Comprehensive Plan has identified the following goal and policy that support workforce development and education, which are integral to the long-term success of the city: ED-G5 Support and encourage the development of a strong workforce that is globally competitive and responds to the changing needs of the workplace ED-P16 Support local educational institutions in the development of educational and training programs that meet the needs of businesses. 2. The proposal addresses the following specific factors; a. The effect upon the physical environment; PL-06 V1.0 Page 4 of S OkaI1� COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION P Valley The change to CMU will allow existing uses as well as more expanded educational uses. The change could result in more intensive development in the future, though the site is currently developed. There is no concern on effect of physical environment. b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; There are no known critical areas associated with the site, such as wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat areas, frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas. The parcel is not located within shoreline jurisdiction, and there are no known surface water quality or quantity issues. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed should future development occur. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; The property is generally surrounded by Spokane Industrial Park to the north and east; however, the property is not part of the Spokane Industrial Park. The property to the south is designated and zoned Corridor Mixed Use. The institutional use on the proposed site is generally compatible with both the light industrial uses to the north and east and the retail service uses to the south. The projected impact to the surrounding neighborhoods is minimal. Any future development will be evaluated for compliance with all municipal requirements as it relates to adjacent uses at the time of development. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks, recreation and schools; The project site takes access from A neighborhood commercial use will likely have minimal impact on parks, recreation or schools. Sullivan Road is a Principal Arterial which is designed to serve through trips and connect Spokane Valley with the rest of the region. The site is served by public transit Route 96 of Spokane Transit Authority (STA). e. The benefit to the neighborhood, city and region; The proposed change would allow the property and structure owned by EVSD to be used for educational purposes beyond professional, vocational and trade school use, increasing the school district's ability to provide educational services. The change benefits the neighborhood, city, and region by supporting the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goal and policy: ED-G5 Support and encourage the development of a strong workforce that is globally competitive and responds to the changing needs of the workplace ED-P16 Support local educational institutions in the development of educational and training programs that meet the needs of businesses. f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land; The proposal would add approximately 9 acres of CMU property to the 1,666 acres of existing CMU designated property within the city. While additional demand for CMU property may be limited, the CMU designation allows for additional educational uses, which has been indicated as needed from the school district. The proposal is limited to a reasonable area and if developed under CMU standards the type of use and density would be appropriate for the location. g. The current and projected population density in the area; and Under the existing conditions and the Industrial designation there is very little population that resides in the area. While CMU allows residential development, it is not expected that residential development would PL-06 V1.0 Page 5 of COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION Spokane Valley occur. The proposed change in land use designation is not expected to have significant impacts to population density in the area. h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. The CMU designation will support the Economic Development goal and policy identified above. It would have very little to no effect on other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, including Land Use, Transportation, and Housing, Capital Facilities and Public Services, Public and Private Utilities, Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources. PL-06 V1.0 Page 6 of S „O''^n�� COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION p Valley PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. (Signature) (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of , 20 NOTARY SEAL NOTARY SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: My appointmentexpires: LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 7 of r .. r 9 I 7r/ ir e 1 , ....... .-. ., ,,......, ' H I 1 1 I, 0 I ' "1 ..! 'r ! C i k t11Aa -7- 0 'A k, 14. ' "I r.•. re , , —i.)-leset . , ,,ri _,„_...... F ill fIle br =MO. SI. O. 'fil.S' k,.„ ,,,-,, , ., = . .. ... ._ ............._ . I ,, op", ci) r, t if.... A 4''' Z th:' '' - 1114 ililliliwor I - eh ' ...-" C'' ''. ''''' ' ' :2 I v , , . .._. , Ir....... — - ...v.- I ... ''' 1 ,- rnewsrmeak.,...._-___._4- ---1 ,....„ .0..-,......,... l• ' , flA.‘ I "' I ' 14.1Nralliftill111111 -to'4)h . -. is r . 1 --,..._— ' .. ssa _ *Mom \,, ,...,...- 4 . A .. ° -• ,- ^ 910 IN ftg.,-... ' ' , , 1 IA . ..- .- ^ - ..‘ AA&....,,410194 a __ • . :7 ..7Z:i.,4-Artirt-r '\X'-'-'."-li-7,1 •`: Application Number: CPA-2020-0006 Proposed Change: Ito CMU 1---- 1 Area: 8.81 ac 0 150 300 450 600 750 1121/ Feet EXHIBIT 2 Vicinity Map CPA-2020-0006 a■.x■■■ ■g ■■■■■ o= Ess... I - --- -- - — i� - - \ i i i - = East East Valley Senior High` ` /-E g in 'Ot f 11 � _ _ �� ,_bm Spokane I_ II j� — Valley At, d Broad_y��■■■■■ ■ It w , - E East Valley Sc I� �4 �� ■� �- I — Middle �� hoo1 ISS - �■�1111 ire County z E. ■� z �_ z ■■■■■■il+t a ► 1111 M 1 m 11■ 1,�■1. z Minna ��rg E Wellesley Ave ■■■■■■■■■■. q ��IIII� ■ Trentwood- L��1�■�■1�". • 1 ni . ii i 1 r.J. _ ■'■— — z 11�1�11�� ■ b ■ !HI g Sk1ar, ■ x ■U. �� E zer �� !�1— EHero ��111E !r:€L _�� Uld_Dr ° Id Eireffililli iirE+L ngfALeZi � mm_% lllllllE rn mm p41..� _ — -- ----�� iIjiiju (— ,11„E Rich Ave��. 1'� 1MM= • �ll�m.=IIIII. ��IIII�p1111111111�� —• II�%1111MM■1111111 %III 111111111■mum �� zl 1 — i ll_ �■ NA jE Rockwell ' !. [ifj' (-mr1iPI■■■■ I! w t_IAv • Tien ——. i_UI ■111 Z ,�— E Trent Ave EB Off Ramp -- __ �—'— Mr Lacrosse iLn 1111 1 aIle I,9 ;1111111111 ,I II E Industrial Park A St 4111 , 1 E Kiernan A E Industrial Park B St Il i il iIS 1 II ct P. W. P. E Industrial Park C St 11 IIII �� z El i y II II � Pi � z JI� � Industrial Park D St � �z ll = z _- __ — -- � __= a ��E Industrial Park E StT. '' �, Z ■11111 IEFaMewT 'j__iL / Al 7d ■ </ ■ a eta Ave ... w w owe azo // rrr z _ „,_„,_,. Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 EXHIBIT 3 Comprehensive Plan Map Study Are _ E"Industrial Via:St cipz E.Kiernan Ave 3 Industrial Parks B St Legend CMU Me NC I POS - IMU RC - MF SF MU CPA-2020-0006 Request: Stamm Owner: East ValleySchool pol�arie Proposed change: Land Use District#361 designation from Ito CMU Valley Parcel#: 45013.9024 and Zoning from Ito CMU Address: 3830 N Sullivan Rd EXHIBIT 4 Zoning Map Study Are _ E"Industrial Via:St cipz EKiernan Ave Y 3 Industrial Park B St -d Legend R1 MF RC R2 NC IMU R3 MU POS CMU CPA-2020-0006 Request: **am Owner: East Valley School Proposed change: Land Use District#361 designation from Ito CMU 40000 Valley Parcel#: 45013.9024 and Zoning from Ito CMU Address: 3830 N Sullivan Rd EXHIBIT 5 2018 Aerial Map Or ,,ccc rfre:og Y a a '4% +• ' o Off Ra - -- gTirent Pie E�T►fentAve � �W o p�Ramp E,Trent zW o Off Ramp ---a.+ ` �.+y'" ` a I r_ I „_..... . . . Study Area . ..., . i c.,t... . ..... . t . .4•411-milliej . Ay- W - x E Industrial Park A-St- 110-66 %,,, N‘. _sw 1. r rm. _.ra .. I'm , :.• $ 4.: ...,. ? d lk - 1 ',16 — ..j :, 1:: II; J.: 4. ...,.. EP l _ 11. 4-- „Itt it'' • . , . . t•••:.'i pm! 1, I - I - t . • a Kiernan Qma Industrial ParkB St - c • • ,,,F • r 1- ti (---A . �-0,--,g Fr cam' _ Y - g3-'. i - ii , I i. 6 !I'i �_ •u y �' t 1 .. • . z; aY �,.� _ 1 Industrial C #1■ �„.. - - -- • �- ... AIS -- _ - r wra CPA-2020-0006 Request: SpokaHI"' -ft.. Owner: East Valley School Proposed change: Land Use neDistrict#361 designation from Ito CMU 4. Valley Parcel#: 45013.9024 and Zoning from 1 to CMU Address: 3830 N Sullivan Rd EXHIBIT 6 ►.70"okane SEPA CHECKLIST pSVMC 21.20 jValey 10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 ♦ Fax: (509)720-5075 ♦permitcenternspokanevalley.org STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: October 31. 2019 Received by: Fee: Not Applicable_ PLUS #: File#: CPA-2020-0006 Project #C.1-O9tP ' RECEIVED PART I — REQUIRED MATERIAL "THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT Pituv I. D* 2U19 ❑ Completed SEPA Checklist COSY PERMIT CENTER ❑ Application Fee SUB# REV. # ❑ Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81/2" by 11" or 11" by 17"size ❑ Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST; The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions.An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS; This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS; Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D). PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of 14 "i`" SEPA CHECKLIST pokane j Valley For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: CPA-2020-000X. An amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan. 2. Name of applicant: City of Spokane Valley 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, Economic Development Division, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 4. Date checklist prepared: October 31, 2019 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Anticipated adoption May 2020. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? No. If yes, explain. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. An Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)was completed for the City's Comprehensive Plan. The document is titled 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS) and supporting Development Regulations. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? None If yes, explain. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Approval by City Council 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The amendment is to change approximately 9 acres of Industrial (I) designated land to Corridor Mixed (CMU). The change would allow for additional educational uses, which has been indicated as needed from the school district. PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of 14 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST jValley' 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The proposal is located at 3830 N Sullivan Road, parcel number 45013.9024, or 47.692425, -117.195908. 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)?Yes. The general Sewer Service Area? No. Priority Sewer Service Area? No. (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA)/Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). This is a non-project action changing the future land use map and does not evaluate a specific future use. 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? This is a non-project action changing the future land use map and does not evaluate a specific future use. 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. This is a non-project action changing the future land use map and does not evaluate a specific future use. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? This is a non-project action changing the future land use map and does not evaluate a specific future use. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Unknown. PL-22 V1.0 Page 3 of 14 Clan`� SEPA CHECKLIST pokane jValley 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts. This is a non-project action changing the future land use map and does not evaluate a specific future use. Any future changes will be reviewed under existing stormwater regulations. B. ENVIRONMENTALELEMENTS EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 1) Earth a. General description of the site (check one):❑ flat,El rolling, ['hilly, ❑ steep slopes, ❑ mountainous, other The site is flat and developed. Future development would be analyzed under separate SEPA process. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 0 percent. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. This is a non-project action changing the future land use map. The site is currently developed and the application does not evaluate a specific future use. Any future changes will be reviewed under a separate SEPA process. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? No. If so, describe. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. Not applicable. c. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Not applicable PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of 14 "i`�kaSEPA CHECKLIST pone 4•jValley" 2) Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust EVALUATION FOR automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke)during construction and when the AGENCY USE ONLY project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal?Yes. If so, generally describe. The site is adjacent to the Spokane Industrial Park,which has various industrial users. No emissions or odors were observed in a recent site visit. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable. 3) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? Not applicable. If yes, please describe and attach available plans. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of 14 "i'`" SEPA CHECKLIST clan �Va.11ey 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? No. If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not applicable. c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The site is currently developed. This is a non-project action changing the future land use map and does not evaluate a specific future use. Any future changes will be reviewed under existing stormwater regulations. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The proposal is a non-project action and does not have a direct effect on the surface, ground or runoff water. PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of 14 ►Jpokane SEPA CHECKLIST Walley EVALUATION FOR 4) Plants AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ❑ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ✓evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ❑shrubs ❑ grass ▪ pasture ❑ crop or grain 111 wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ❑ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ❑ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None proposed. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The proposal is a non-project action development of any future development will be analyzed under a separate SEPA. The city has adopted development standards to preserve and enhance vegetation. 5) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: none observed ❑ birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ❑ mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ❑ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? Not applicable. If so, explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The proposal is a non-project action. Future re-development of the site will be analyzed under a separate SEPA. The city has adopted development standards to preserve and enhance fauna. PL-22 V1.0 Page 7 of 14 ""`" ne SEPA CHECKLIST Spokane olog*Valley EVALUATION FOR 6). Energy and natural resources AGENCY USE ONLY a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe: The proposal is a non- project action changing the land use designation from Industrial to Corridor Mixed Use, while the amendment does not contemplate a specific use the, the CMU designation is more restrictive than the I in terms of environmental health hazards. Future re-development of the site will be analyzed under a separate SEPA. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Not applicable. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not applicable. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The site is adjacent to the Spokane Industrial Park, which has various industrial users. No equipment and operation noises were observed in a recent site visit. The site is adjacent to Sullivan Road a Principal Arterial and traffic noise was observed. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of 14 Spokane#411444111111111111kSEPA CHECKLIST 400fValley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 8). Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?The site is currently used by East Valley School District as administration building and a maintenance building. The site is north of commercial uses on Sullivan and west of Spokane Industrial Park. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not known. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are two main buildings on site for about 24,000 sq ft. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Industrial. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Industrial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?The number of employees and students that may work and attend classes is known. There are no residents. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not applicable. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of 14 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST .jValley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10). Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. 11). Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 14 Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? East Valley has middle and high school about 3/4 miles to the north and Sullivan Park is about 1 mile to the south of the project site. Sullivan Park connects to the Spokane River and the Centennial Trail. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:The city's adopted comprehensive plan adopts a level of service for park space. The city has an adopted Park and Recreation Master Plan that provides strategies meet adopted levels of service for projected growth. 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site is served by B Street of the Spokane Industrial Park. Sullivan Road, a Principal Arterial, provides access to Spokane Industrial Park. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes the site is served by Spokane Transit Route 96 a stop is available adjacent to the site. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of Spokane SEPA CHECKLIST Valley d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to EVALUATION FOR existing roads or streets, not including driveways? Not applicable. If so, AGENCY USE ONLY generally describe (indicate whether public or private). e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? Not applicable. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The city's adopted comprehensive plan adopts a level of service for transportation services. The city has an adopted 20-year Transportation Improvement Plan that identifies projects to meet adopted levels of service for projected growth. 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable. 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: ❑ electricity, ❑ natural gas, ❑water, ❑ refuse service, ❑ telephone, ❑ sanitary sewer, ❑ septic system, ❑ other- describe. The site is developed and has access to a variety of utilities including water, sewer, refuse service, and electricity. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Not applicable. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them o make s decision. Signature: — Gr -Cf Date Submitted: l0/V/2-40/� PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of SpIn SEPA CHECKLIST okane Valley D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposed amendment is not likely to increase emissions to air, production of noise, and discharge to water. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Consistent with the FEIS of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, the city adopted implementing regulations while mitigating impacts to the natural environment including an updated critical areas ordinance. On a planning level the adopted regulatory scheme has been identified as sufficient to avoid and reduce impacts to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise. Site specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon these adopted regulations within the Spokane Valley. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The proposed amendment anticipated not to have impacts on plants and animals. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Consistent with the FEIS of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, the city adopted implementing regulations while mitigating impacts to the natural environment including an updated critical areas ordinance. On a planning level the adopted regulatory scheme has been identified as sufficient to protect and conserve plants and animals. Site specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon these adopted regulations within the Spokane Valley. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?The proposed amendment anticipated not to have impacts on energy and natural resources. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Consistent with the FEIS of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, the city adopted implementing regulations to protect and conserve energy and natural resources. On a planning level, the adopted regulatory scheme has been identified as sufficient to protect and conserve energy and natural resources. Site specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon these adopted regulations within the Spokane Valley. PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of "T'`" SEPA CHECKLIST pokane 0Valley 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?The proposed amendment will not impact environmentally sensitive areas as none exist on the site. a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Not applicable. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The proposed amendment will not affect any shorelines as none are near or on the site. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Not applicable. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities?The proposed amendment may increase demand on transportation and public services if the site is redeveloped or developed more intensively. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: The Comprehensive Plan adopts a level-of-service for transportation. The Final Environmental Impact Statement for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and the 6-year Transportation Improvement Program identifies the necessary projects to maintain the adopted LOS. These transportation and public service projects are implemented both by the city and state and at the project level through concurrency. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal does not conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Any specific issues that may arise during the development of the site will be identified and addressed based upon regulations within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. E. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon this cheek list. Date: /(D �( 7C/ ' Signature: a SLC— Please print or type: Proponent: City of Spokane Valley Address: 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of '`" SEPA CHECKLIST pokane �valley Phone: (509) 720-5000 Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, City of Spokane Valley Economic Development Division Address: 10210 E Sprague Ave Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: 509-720-5337 PL-22 V1.0 Page 15 of EXHIBIT 7 COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT S�" DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE jvPOn 10210 East Sprague Avenue• Spokane Valley WA 99206 aller 509.720.5000 •Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley.org FILE NUMBERS:CPA-2020-0001; CPA-2020-0002; CPA-2020-0003; CPA-2020-0006; CPA-2020-0007 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTIONS: CPA-2020-0001: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004(0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). CPA- 2020-0002: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres) from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). CPA-2020-0003: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133,45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to CMU. CPA-2020-0006: City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Ito CMU.CPA-2020-0007: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types and area-wide rezone to implement new policies APPLICANT/OWNER: CPA-2020-0001: Land Use Solutions/Tucker Roy LLC; CPA-2020-0002: Ed Lukas/Lawrence B. Stone Properties,Lawrence B. Stone Properties#50 LLC; CPA-2020-0003: Jay Rambo/Revere-Dece III, LLC, Revere-Dece, Brill Properties LLC; CPA-2020-0006: Spokane Valley/East Valley School District; CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide. PROPOSAL LOCATIONS: CPA-2020-0001: 1311 N. McDonald Road, further located in the NW '/4 of Section 15, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington CPA-2020-0002: 5901 E. Sprague Avenue, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 43 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0003: 1723 and 1724 N Union Road, further located in the SE '/4 of Section 09, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0006: 3830 N Sullivan, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 01, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian,Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley. DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance is issued under Washington Administrative Code(WAC) 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date issued. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m.on March 6,2020.Pursuant to Title 21,Environmental Controls of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC),the lead agency has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required under Revised Code of Washington 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. STAFF CONTACT: Chaz Bates,AICP, Senior Planner,City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509)720-5337; cbates a,spokanevallev.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Mike Basinger, AICP, Economic Development Manager, City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509) 720-5333, mbasinger@spokanevalley.org spokanevalley.org DATE ISSUED: February 21, 2020 SIGNATURE: irh � APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community&Pu' is Works Department within fourteen(14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and specific factual objections made to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Schedule shall be paid at the time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 18,2020 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of I File Nos.CPA-2020-0001;CPA-2020-0002;CPA-2020-0003;CPA-2020-0006;CPA-2020-0007 EXHIBIT 8 Notice of Public Hearing City of Spokane Valley 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Hearing Date and Time: March 26,2020 beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Hearing Body: Spokane Valley Planning Commission The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Requests.The Planning Commission will conduct the public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council on each of the following applications. FILE No.: CPA-2020-0001 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004 (0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1311 North McDonald Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0002 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres)from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:North Fancher Road,Unaddressed FILE No.: CPA-2020-0003 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133, 45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1723 and 1724 North Union Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0006 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Industrial(I)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 3830 North Sullivan Road Bldg 1 FILE No.: CPA-2020-0007 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types. LOCATION OF PROPOSALS:Citywide Staff Contact: Chaz Bates,AICP,Senior Planner;(509)720-5337 cbates@spokanevalley.org Environmental Determination: The City issued a Determination of Non-significance(DNS)on February 21,2020 pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)and chapter 21.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. Staff Report and Inspection of File: A staff report will be available for inspection seven calendar days before the hearing. The staff report and application file may be inspected at the Community and Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm,Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Copies of documents will be made available at a reasonable cost. Send written comments to City of Spokane Valley,Attn: Chaz Bates, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206;or email to the project planner listed above. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing,or other impairments may contact the City Clerk at(509)720-5102 prior to the meeting so that arrangements may be made. Carrie Koudelka,Spokane Valley Deputy City Clerk Publish:March 6,2020 and March 13,2020 EXHIBIT 9 Public and Agency Comments (Will be inserted as received) EXHIBIT 10 Project Name: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment File #: CPA-2020-0006 Parcels: 45013.9024 This Trip Generation and Distribution Letter (TGDL) is being prepared to support the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) application for a city initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) for changing an existing Industrial (I) to a Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) land designation. This letter estimates the trip generation of the current zoning versus the trip generation that could occur if the land were developed under the proposed new land use. Project Description CPA-2020-0006 is at the northeast corner of Sullivan Road and B Street. The CPA is situated west of the City of Spokane Valley's (City) Northeast Industrial Area (NIA), as shown in Figure 1. I 1 ' ' I `� F�1 1;y N Trent ' a ' ` ., •1 ,o55 ` Ave/Sullivan Rd .�...� _ _ -4 _ r -e . I CPA-2020-0006 rrr — " • " w . _. 1_ r- . y' r ` City'of Spokane f r- _',r�-- „ e : . Valley's NIA aall 190 Exit291 B s r ,F '.' ' P` Sullivan Rd ,.. - "�r r- • AVS""➢ ." — ...4 . .„...„.,..,. ., .,-. . . .i. , ., , .. ni e - - w - '�`r~ e9 - .... - - Figure 1. Vicinity Map 1 1 Page Trip Generation There is 1 parcel for this proposed comprehensive plan amendment measuring at 8.81 acres.The parcel is currently owned by the East Valley School District and is used for administrative, educational, and maintenance purposes. Under the current Industrial zoning and development in the area, the allowable and likely uses would be a general office building and/or a fast food restaurant. A land-to-building ratio of 4.5 is typical in the City, which would result in a building square footage of 85,280. The total expected trips for existing and available property in the proposed comprehensive plan amendment using the current land us is shown in Table 1 for both the AM and PM peak periods. Table 1. Expected Trips for Existing Zoning AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume Directional Volume @ Directional Land Use (934) Zoning (1,000 @ 40.19 Distribution 32.67 PM Distribution sf) AM Trips 51% 49% Trips per 52% 48% per Unit Unit In Out In Out Fast Food w/Drive thru I 3.5 141 72 69 115 60 55 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume Directional Volume by Directional Land Use (150) Zoning (1,000 by Fitted Distribution Fitted Curve Distribution sf) Curve 86% 14% 16% 84% In Out In Out General Office Building I 81.78 104 89 15 95 15 80 Corridor Mixed Use under the City's zoning allows for apartments, general and medical/dental offices, retail and commercial development, storage, education, and restaurant uses. Given the expected building square footage of 85,280 sf, a variety of permitted and likely land uses were identified for evaluation in the CMU zone, as noted below: • 47,000 sf General Office Building • 25,000 sf School District Office • 9,780 sf Shopping Center (Retail/Commercial) • 3,500 sf fast food restaurant The potential development if the City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment is permitted includes the land uses and expected peak hour trips summarized in Table 2. 2IPage Table 2. Estimated CMU Generated Trips (Redevelopment) AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume by Directional Volume by Directional Land Use (710) Zoning (1,000 Fitted Distribution Fitted Distribution sf) Curve 86% 14% Curve 16% 84% In Out In Out General Office Building CMU 47 71 61 10 56 9 47 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume @ Directional Volume @ Directional Land Use (538) Zoning (1,000 2.36 AM Distribution 2.04 PM Distribution sf) Trips per 76% 24% Trips per 17% 83% Unit Unit In Out In Out School District Office CMU 25 59 45 14 51 9 42 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume @ Directional Volume @ Directional Land Use (820) Zoning (1,000 0.94 AM Distribution 3.81 PM Distribution sf) Trips per 62% 38% Trips per 48% 52% Unit Unit In Out In Out Shopping Center CMU 9.78 10 6 4 38 18 20 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume @ Directional Volume @ Directional Land Use (934) Zoning (1,000 40.19 AM Distribution 32.67 PM Distribution sf) Trips per 51% 49% Trips per 52% 48% Unit In Out Unit In Out Fast Food w/Drive thru CMU 3.5 141 72 69 115 60 55 Subtracting the peak hour trips for the current zoning of I from those that would be expected if CMU were allowed to develop gives a difference between the two land uses. The City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment could have a net increase on traffic volumes of 36 during the AM peak hour and 50 during the PM peak hour. This is summarized in Table 3. Table 3. Trip Generation (Redevelopment) Summary Summary Zoning AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Trips Existing Potential I 245 161 84 210 75 135 Future Potential CMU 281 184 97 260 96 164 Net New Trips CMU 36 23 13 50 21 29 3IPage A separate analysis was conducted based on the expected land use solely as an educational facility by the East Valley School District. The expected land uses consistent with school expectations were identified for evaluation in the CMU zone, as noted below: • 25,000 sf School District Office • 16,200 sf Elementary School • 1,800 sf Automobile Care Center The potential development if the City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment is permitted including only educational land uses and expected peak hour trips is summarized in Table 4. Table 4. Estimated CMU Generated Trips (Education) AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume @ Directional Volume @ Directional Land Use(538) Zoning (1,000 2.36 AM Distribution 2.04 PM Distribution sf) Trips per 76% 24% Trips per 17% 83% Unit In Out Unit In Out School District Office CMU 25 59 45 14 51 9 42 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume @ Directional Volume @ Directional Land Use(520) Zoning (1,000 6.97 AM Distribution 1.37 PM Distribution sf) Trips per 76% 24% Trips per 17% 83% Unit In Out Unit In Out Elementary School CMU 16.2 113 86 27 23 4 19 AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Units Volume @ Directional Volume @ Directional Land Use(942) Zoning (1,000 2.25 AM Distribution 3.11 AM Distribution sf) Trips per 76% 24% Trips per 17% 83% Unit In Out Unit In Out Automobile Care Center CMU 1.8 5 4 1 6 1 5 Subtracting the peak hour trips for the current zoning of I from those that would be expected if CMU were allowed to develop with educational uses gives a difference between the two land uses. The City Initiated Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment could have a net decrease on traffic volumes of 68 during the AM peak hour and 130 during the PM peak hour. A summary of the existing potential development and the two CPA potential development trip generation impacts is provided as Table 5. Table 5. Overall Trip Generation Summary Summary(school use) Zoning AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Existing Potential I 245 161 84 210 75 135 Future Potential (Redevelopment) CMU 281 184 97 260 96 164 Future Potential (Education) CMU 177 135 42 80 14 66 4IPage Traffic Trip Distribution Using current traffic information for Sullivan Road and the CPA-2020-0006 location, a trip distribution based on a percentage of trips is shown in Figure 2. .11"-- woad Ave a E Wauealey Ave n E Horoy Ave * N • TRENTWOOD E Rich Ave - VELOX CPA-2020-0006 E Industrial - 0 E Kern 50 0 'rtal Park B SI Z r � n 50% trial Park C St f E I kJu-tr.aI Park D St A 0. m r E Industrial Park E St m E Euclid Ave °40 Ave E Buckeye AT y E Matrelca pole E i1 ra SPokar'o e.Montgomery Dro. er V'i¢ Figure 2. Trip Distribution Traffic Mitigation Given the similarity and wide range in potential development between Industrial and Corridor Mixed Use, the resultant range in trip generation could net either an increase in trips or a decrease in trips. The ultimate trip generation is entirely dependent on the direction of development on the parcel and whether it remains as an educational use. As a result, any necessary mitigation is expected to be bore by the development. The City initiated an evaluation of the street network traffic operations through the Sullivan Corridor Study in 2015 and an update that is currently underway. The expected volumes and corridor improvements necessary to maintain operations were identified and estimated for inclusion in City plans. As a result, it is expected that sufficient roadway capacity exists or is programmed to exist with future road improvements on the City street system to accommodate the uses resulting from the CPA. ski GEtv6, .`tU`� wAsy,,�ceg� ez ! '• c,~ -off D 4,1 or rVik fi9StpNM.E� 5 ' Page COMMUNITY& PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILDING&PLANNING DIVISION Scrry aFpokane STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION v CPA-2020-0007 STAFF REPORT DATE: March 5,2020 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: March 26,2020,beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,Washington 99206. Project Number: CPA-2020-0007 Application Description: Amend Chapter 2 Goals and Policies to provide policy guidance for increased housing density with access to support services like transit and commercial services; and provide implementing regulations. Location: Citywide Applicant: City of Spokane Valley, 10210 E Sprague, Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Owners: Various owners Date of Application: October 31,2019 Staff Contact: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, 10210 E Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) General Provisions, Title 19 SVMC Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 SVMC Environmental Controls. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Application Exhibit 4: SEPA Checklist Exhibit 2: Comprehensive Plan Text Exhibit 5: Environment Determination Amendments Exhibit 6: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 3: Spokane Valley Municipal Exhibit 7: Agency and Public Code Amendments Comments A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The periodic update the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations identified that minimum lot sizes were a barrier to infill development. The analysis also showed that many subdivision requests were happening in conjunction with a rezone request(rezone from R-3 to R-4)to reduce the minimum lot size from 7,500 square feet to 6,000 square feet. Generally,these subdivision/rezones were approved as the requests were consistent with the rezone criteria and supported by the Comprehensive Plan. The process for the subdivision/rezone added approximately 3-4 months to development permits and the process would often result in frustrated residents as the rezones would ultimately be approved consistent with city policy and regulations despite public opposition. To reduce the negative impacts to both residents and the development community,the periodic update reduced the number of implementing zoning districts.To provide flexibility to develop irregular shaped parcels,common in the City,the minimum lot size was reduced to 5,000 square feet in the R-3 zone,but Page 1 of 7 Staff Report CPA-2020-0007 the density was maintained at six-dwelling units per acre. These changes were intended to make infill development easier and minimize impacts to neighborhoods. As the economy has improved,infill and new development has been intensifying. Duplexes,in particular, have been increasing over the past five years as compared to single-family dwellings.Duplex development has occurred both as infill development(isolated developments of one or two duplexes)and as"duplex subdivisions" (multiple new lots sized for accommodating duplexes). In 2018,the City began hearing citizen concerns related to negative impacts to neighborhoods resulting from duplex development in the R-3 zone. Generally,the concerns were in areas with larger lots that easily accommodated"duplex subdivisions". In May 2019,the City Council directed staff to prepare a City Initiated Amendment for the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Docket that would provide additional policy guidance to identify the most appropriate location for alternative housing types to reduce the disproportional impacts in certain neighborhoods. IMPLICATIONS: If adopted the amendment will add two policies to guide the development of alternative housing types along with implementing zoning code amendments. These amendments include changes to the zoning map creating a new R-4 zoning district. It is anticipated that the new R4 classification would provide more housing options for residents where there is frequent public transit and commercial services. APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Application Submitted: October 21,2019 SEPA Determination of Non-Significance Issue date February 21,2020 End of Appeal Period for DNS: March 6,2020 Date of Posted Notice of Public Hearing March 6,2020 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: March 6& 13,2020 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: March 10,2020 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) SVMC, the lead agency has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The city issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal on February 21, 2020. The determination was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, the application, Titles 19, 21, and 22 of the SVMC, a site assessment, public and agency comments, the Comprehensive Plan and associated Environmental Impact Statement. 2. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. Page 2 of 7 Staff Report CPA-2020-0007 C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE 1. Compliance with Title 17(General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Approval Criteria i. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map amendments if it finds that: (1) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; Analysis: Housing is an important component of the economic infrastructure of the city. Ensuring that there is a variety of housing types is an important competitive advantage for economic development. The proposed amendment will allow the city to more closely align its housing needs with locations within the city to ensure adequate infrastructure is available. This will also enable the provision of quality, affordable housing for all Spokane Valley residents. (2) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; Analysis: The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) stipulates that the housing element serves to encourage the availability of affordable housing to residents of all economic backgrounds, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage the preservation of existing neighborhoods. The proposed amendment will provide increased housing options in locations that have adequate infrastructure that can affordably support increased densities. (3) The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; Analysis: The amendment is not related to a specific piece of property. It does, however, respond to a substantial change in conditions from 2016 legislative update to the Comprehensive Plan. This change relates to increased duplex development in neighborhoods with larger lots. This amendment looks to incentivize alternative housing development where there is frequent transit and commercial services. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The Comprehensive Plan identifies that the city will need an additional 6,389 homes by 2037(3,962 single family homes and 2,417 multifamily). The plan also identifies that the median household income in the city was about$2,000 less than the average countywide annual earnings.Additional data indicates that residents are cost- burdened with 51%of renters and 26%of homeowners spending at least 33 percent of their monthly budget on rent or mortgage payments. The following adopted goals, policies, and strategy support the proposed amendment: Page 3 of 7 Staff Report CPA-2020-0007 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. Strategy: Continue to evaluate new housing typologies to meet market needs. ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Analysis: The proposed amendment is policy oriented and as a non-site specific amendment does not have a direct effect on the physical environment. Future development that may result will be evaluated under city regulations for physical development. (2) The effect on open space, streams,rivers,and lakes; Analysis: The proposed amendment is policy oriented and does not have a direct effect on open space, streams, rivers and lakes. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed should future development occur. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis: The proposed amendment is policy oriented and includes implementing development regulations that are aimed to protect neighborhood character and locate alternative housing in areas with frequent transit and commercial services. (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads,public transportation,parks,recreation, and schools; Analysis: Capital Facilities Policy CF-P6 recommends that facilities and services meet minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards. LOS standards have been adopted for water, sewer, transportation, stormwater, law enforcement, libraries,parks, street cleaning, public transit, fire, and schools. The proposed amendment seeks to take advantage of available infrastructure to minimize the need to develop and maintain new infrastructure. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis: Increasing housing options that protect neighborhood character and minimize the need for new infrastructure can potentially reduce housing costs and thereby reducing the amount of city residents paying more than 33 percent of their income toward housing, which would benefit the neighborhood, city and region. The change benefits the neighborhood, City, and region by supporting the following adopted Comprehensive Plan goal and policy: ED-P8 Provide and maintain an infrastructure system that supports Spokane Valley's economic development priorities. LU-GI Maintain and enhance the character and quality of life in Spokane Valley. LU-G4 Ensure that land use plans, regulations,review processes, and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality LU-P14 Enable a variety of housing types. Page 4 of 7 Staff Report CPA-2020-0007 LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas. H-G3 Allow convenient access to daily goods and services in Spokane Valley's neighborhoods. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis: The proposed amendment does not change the location or quantity of land designations. Implementing changes to the zoning code may increase densities in locations with adequate infrastructure support, and may reduce densities in other locations. Any future change would be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the demand forecasted. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Analysis: The implementing regulations may increase density in areas that are supported by adequate infrastructure and may reduce densities in other locations. The proposed amendment is not expected to have significant impacts to population density on a citywide level. Implementing regulations will be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the demand forecasted. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The proposed amendment will support the Comprehensive Plan's housing goals,policies, and strategies. The amendment will not have a direct impact on other Comprehensive Plan elements. Implementing regulations will be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the demand forecast. Conclusion(s): For the reasons outlined above the proposed amendment is consistent with SVMC 17.80.140(H). 2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings:The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.The Comprehensive Plan identifies that the city will need an additional 6,389 homes by 2037 (3,962 single family homes and 2,417 multifamily). The plan also identifies that the median household income in the city was about $2,000 less than the average countywide annual earnings. Additional data indicates that residents are cost-burdened with 51%of renters and 26% of homeowners spending at least 33 percent of their monthly budget on rent or mortgage payments.The following adopted goals and implementing strategy from the Comprehensive Plan support the proposed amendment: 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. Strategy: Continue to evaluate new housing typologies to meet market needs b. Conclusion(s)The proposed amendment is consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan 3. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: The Growth Management Act(GMA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan requires that public facilities and services be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy. The City has adopted minimum Levels of Service (LOS) standards Page 5 of 7 Staff Report CPA-2020-0007 for water, sewer,transportation, stormwater,law enforcement,libraries,parks, street cleaning, public transit,fire, and schools.The proposed amendment seeks to take advantage of available infrastructure to minimize the need to develop and maintain new infrastructure. Specific site needs will be addressed at the time of development. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development. D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has received no public comments to date. Comments received following the date of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission at the March 12,2020 meeting. 2. Conclusion(s): Notice of Public Hearing (NOPH) was published on March 6 and March 13, 2020. The NOPH was posted on site on March 6, 2020 and mailed on March 10, 2020 to residents within a 400- foot radius of the subject property. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has not received any agency comments of significance to date. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Senior Traffic Engineer City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering City of Spokane Valley Building& Planning City of Spokane Valley Parks&Recreation Spokane Valley Fire Department City of Millwood City of Liberty Lake City of Spokane City of Spokane Valley Police Department Spokane County,Building and Planning Spokane County,Environmental Services Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County,Fire District No. 1 Spokane County,Fire District No. 8 Spokane County Regional Health District Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Spokane Aquifer Joint Board Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) Washington State Dept of Commerce Washington State Dept of Ecology(Olympia) Washington State Dept of Ecology(Spokane) Washington State Dept of Fish&Wildlife Washington State Dept of Natural Resources Washington State Dept of Transportation Washington State Parks&Recreation Commission Page 6 of 7 Staff Report CPA-2020-0007 WA Archaeological&Historic Preservation Avista Utilities Inland Power& Light Modern Electric Water Company Central Valley School District#356 East Valley School District#361 West Valley School District#363 Century Link Comcast Model Irrigation District#18 Consolidated Irrigation District#19 East Spokane Water District#1 Vera Water&Power Spokane County Water District#3 Spokane Tribe of Indians 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. F. CONCLUSION: For the reasons set forth in Section C(1 and 2)the proposed amendment to amend the Comprehensive Plan and adopt implementing zoning regulations, including the area-wide rezone of properties to a new R-4 zoning district change the land use designation from Ito CMU and the rezone from Ito CMU is consistent with the requirements of the SVMC 17.80.140(H)and the Comprehensive Plan. Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT 1 S" kan�' p COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION jUalley STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: (jr rt 31, 20/q Received by: C-2 Fee: Ci•fyjittfiet,41 PLUS #: File#: c: W ?G20-- 0067 PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATIOI�ject # l'�1r'ft -caoo1 RECEIVED ❑ Map Amendment; or Text Amendment b(T 31 2019 APPLICANT NAME: City of Spokane Valley COSY PERMIT CENTER SUB #1 REV. # MAILING ADDRESS: 10210 E Sprauge Ave CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99206 PHONE: 509-720-5000 FAX: CELL: EMAIL: PROPERTY OWNER: Not Applicable—Citywide Applicability MAILING ADDRESS: WA CITY: Spokane Valley ZIP: 99216 PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: SITE ADDRESS: Various (Citywide Applicability) PARCEL NO.: N/A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: N/A PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: N/A ZONING DESIGNATION: N/A PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: N/A BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): During the last periodic update the city adopted policies and regulations that support the increase of housing, such as: reduced lot sizes, SEPA infill exemption area, and cottage housing. The proposed amendment will provided additional policy guidance to narrow the focus of the location of alternative housing types to locations with access to support services like transit and commercial services; and to reduce impacts in neighborhoods disproportionately impacted by alternative housing types. PL-06 V1.0 Page 3 of • Spokane OF. 11111111111111%, COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION jValley Proposed Text On page 2-27 of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, add the following: H-P5 Enable a variety of housing types at increased densities within %mile of funded high performance transit networks. H-P6 Preserve and enhance the city's established single-family neighborhoods by minimizing the impacts of more dense housing typologies such as duplexes and cottage development. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Supplement a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; Housing is an important component of the economic infrastructure of the city. Ensuring that a variety of housing types that match the city's needs is an important competitive advantage for economic development. The proposed amendment will allow the city to more closely align its housing needs with locations within the city to ensure adequate infrastructure is available. This will also enable the provision of quality, affordable housing for all Spokane Valley residents. b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; The Washington State Growth Management Act(GMA) stipulates that the housing element serves to encourage the availability of affordable housing to residents of all economic backgrounds, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage the preservation of existing neighborhoods. The proposed amendment will provide increased opportunities to increase housing options in locations that have adequate infrastructure that can affordably support increased densities. c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change inconditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; The amendment is not related to a specific piece of property and does not respond to a substantial change in conditions from 2016 legislative update to the Comprehensive Plan. d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error;and The amendment is not in response to a mapping error and would not correct any error. e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan identifies that the city will need an additional 6,389 homes by 2037(3,962 single family homes and 2,417 multifamily). The plan also identifies that the median household income in the city was about$2,000 less than the average countywide annual earnings. Additional data indicates that residents are cost-burdened with 51%of renters and 26% of homeowners spending at least 33 percent of their monthly budget on rent or mortgage payments. While adopted goals, policies, and strategies enable the city to address these needs, the proposed amendment provides additional tools and opportunities to meet the city's housing needs. 2. The proposal addresses the following specific factors; a. The effect upon the physical environment; The proposed amendment is policy oriented and as a non-site specific amendment does not have a direct effect on the physical environment. Future development that may result would be evaluated under city regulations for physical development. PL-06 V1.0 Page 4 of Spokane` COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION jValley b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; The proposed amendment is policy oriented and does not have a direct effect on open space, streams, rivers and lakes. The City's critical areas ordinance will ensure that adequate protection of the critical areas and adjacent land use are addressed should future development occur. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; The proposed amendment is policy oriented and as a non-site specific amendment does not have a direct effect on the neighboring properties. However, the intent of the amendment would be to development implementing development regulations that are aimed to protect neighborhood character and locate additional housing in locations with adequate infrastructure that supports the added housing. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks, recreation and schools; Capital Facilities Policy CF-P6 recommends that facilities and services meet minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards. LOS standards have been adopted for water, sewer, transportation, storm water, law enforcement, libraries, parks, street cleaning, public transit, fire, and schools. The proposed amendment seeks to take advantage of available infrastructure to minimize the need to develop and maintain new infrastructure. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, city and region; Increasing housing options that protect neighborhood character and minimize the need for new infrastructure can potentially reduce housing costs and thereby reducing the amount of city residents paying more than 33 percent of their income toward housing costs, which would benefit the neighborhood, city and region. Further, the amendment further implements the goals of the adopted Comprehensive Plan, especially Housing Goal 1 — `Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs." f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land; The proposed amendment do not change the location or quantity of land designations. Future changes to the zoning code may increase densities in locations with adequate infrastructure support, and may reduce densities in other locations. Any future change would be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the demand forecasted. g. The current and projected population density in the area;and While primarily policy oriented, the amendment does not directly effect a specific area. The implementing measures may increase density in areas that are supported by adequate infrastructure and may reduce densities in other locations. The proposed amendment not expected to have significant impacts to population density on a citywide level. Future development code changes would be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the demand forecasted. h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment will support the Comprehensive Plan's housing goals, policies, and strategies. While primarily policy oriented it will not have a direct impact on other Comprehensive Plan elements, future amendments to the development code would be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and the demand forecast, especially as it relates to Transportation, Capital Facilities and Public Services, Public and Private Utilities, and Parks and Open Space. PL-06 V1.0 Page 5 of Spokane`` COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION jValley PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. (Signature) (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of , 20 NOTARY SEAL NOTARY SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: My appointmentexpires: LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. PL-06 V1.0 Page 6 of EXHIBIT 2 CPA-2020-0007 (City Initiated Text Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan) On page 2-27 of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, add the following policies: H-P5 Enable a variety of housing types at increased densities within%mile of funded high performance transit networks. H-P6 Preserve and enhance the city's established single-family neighborhoods by minimizing the impacts of more dense housing typologies such as duplexes and cottage development. EXHIBIT 3 19.20.010 Establishment of Zoning Districts. The City has established the following zoning districts: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Designation Symbol Zoning District Single-Family R-1 Single-Family Residential Residential Estate Single-Family R-2 Single-Family Residential Residential Suburban Single-Family R-3 Single-Family Residential Residential Urban Single-Family R-4 Single-Family Residential Residential Urban Multifamily MFR Multifamily Residential Residential Mixed Use MU Mixed Use Corridor Mixed Use CMU Corridor Mixed Use Neighborhood NC Neighborhood Commercial Commercial Regional Commercial RC Regional Commercial Industrial I Industrial Industrial Mixed Use IMU Industrial Mixed Use Parks, Recreation, P/OS Parks/Open Space and Open Space 19.20.015 Zoning districts purpose. A. R-1—Single-Family Residential Estate. Preserves the distinct character of existing single-family large lot development,while allowing for a limited number of large animals. B. R-2—Single-Family Residential Suburban. Preserves existing single-family development patterns,while allowing for development that is similar in size and scale to the surrounding neighborhood. C. R-3—Single-Family Residential Urban.Allows for single-family residential development at an urban density that provides flexibility and promotes reinvestment in existing single-family neighborhoods. D. R-4—Single-Family Residential Urban.Allows for single-family residential development at an urban density that provides flexibility and promotes reinvestment in existing single-family neighborhoods. E. MFR—Multifamily Residential.Allows for multifamily housing located near business and commercial centers, the arterial street system,and public transit.Adjacent single-family zones are protected through transitional standards. €F. MU—Mixed Use.Allows for two or more different land uses within developments. Mixed-use developments can be either vertical or horizontally mixed,and could include employment uses such as office, retail,and/or lodging along with higher-density residential uses,and in some cases,community or cultural facilities.Adjacent residential zones are protected through transitional standards. €G.CMU—Corridor Mixed Use.Allows for light manufacturing, retail, multifamily,and offices along major transportation corridors.Adjacent residential zones are protected through transitional standards. H. NC—Neighborhood Commercial.Allows for small-scale neighborhood retail and office uses while allowing for single-family development. #I. RC—Regional Commercial.Allows a broad range of retail,wholesale,service,and other compatible uses,with a wide range of development types.Adjacent residential zones are protected through transitional standards. +i. I—Industrial.Allows all types of industrial development such as manufacturing, processing,fabrication, assembly,disassembly,and freight-handling.Transitional standards protect adjacent nonindustrial zones from industrial uses that have significant noise,odor,or aesthetic impacts. 4K. IMU—Industrial Mixed Use.Allows retail,office, light manufacturing,and other light industrial uses such as contractor yards.Transitional standards protect adjacent nonindustrial zones from industrial uses that have significant noise,odor,or aesthetic impacts. SEL. P/OS—Parks/Open Space. Protects and provides for parks,open space,and other natural physical assets of the community. 19.60.050 Permitted uses matrix. Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Parks and Open Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Agriculture and Animal Animal processing/handling P Animal raising and/or keeping S S S S S S Animal shelter S P P Beekeeping,commercial P Beekeeping,hobby S S S Community garden S S S S S S S Greenhouse/nursery,commercial P P P Kennel S S S S P P Orchard,tree farming,commercial P P Riding stable P P C Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Parks and Open Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Communication Facilities Radio/TV broadcasting studio P P P P Repeater facility P P P P P P P P Small cell deployment S S S S S S S S S S S Telecommunication wireless S S S S S S S S S S antenna array Telecommunication wireless S S S S S S S S S S support tower Tower,ham operator S S S S S S S S S S Community Services Community hall,club,or lodge P P P P P P P Church,temple,mosque, P P P P P P P P synagogue and house of worship Crematory P P P P Funeral home P P Transitional housing C Day Care Day care,adult P P P P P P P P P P Day care,child(12 children or P P P P P P P P P P fewer) Day care,child(13 children or C C C P P P P P P P more) Eating and Drinking Establishment P P P P P P S Education Schools,college or university P P P Schools,K through 12 P P P P P P P P Schools, professional,vocational P P P P P P and trade schools Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Parks and Open Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Schools,specialized training/studios P P P P 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 Theater,indoor P P P Group Living Assisted P P P living/convalescent/nursing home Community residential facilities (6 P P P P P P 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 Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Parks and Open Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS 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 S park/campground Marijuana Uses 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 P P P P P P P 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 P P P P P P P P P Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Parks and Open Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Public/Quasi-Public Community facilities P P P P P P P P P P P Essential public facilities R R R R R R R R R Public utility local distribution S S S S 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 Dwelling,duplex P 4S RS Dwelling,triplex 3 S Dwelling,fourplex i S 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 Manufactured home park S S Retail Sales and Service P P S 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 Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Parks and Open Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Helistop C C P Parking facility—controlled access P P P P P 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 S P P P Heavy truck and industrial vehicles P P sales,rental,repair and maintenance Passenger vehicle, boat,and RV P P P sales,service and repair Towing P P P P Truck stop P P Warehouse,Wholesale,and Freight Movement Auction house P P P Auction yard (excluding livestock) P P Catalog and mail order houses P P P P P Cold storage/food locker P P Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Parks and Open Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR MU CMU NC RC IMU I POS Freight forwarding P P Grain elevator P P Storage,general indoor P P S P P P Storage,general outdoor S S S S P P Storage, self-service facility P P P P P P Tank storage, critical material S S above ground Tank storage, critical material S S S below ground Tank storage, LPG above ground S S S S S S Warehouse P P P P P Wholesale business P P P P P 19.40.060 Development standards—Duplexes,Triplexes,and Fourplexes. Duplex development in the R-3 zone shall have a minimum lot size of 14,500 square feet. Duplex,Triplex, and Fourplex development in non-residential zones shall meet the requirements set forth in 19.70.050(G). 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. 19.70.020 Residential standards Residential development shall meet the standards shown in Table 19.70-1. Standards for alternative residential development are set forth in Chapter 19.40 SVMC,Alternative Residential Development Options,and standards for planned residential developments are set forth in Chapter 19.50 SVMC, Planned Residential Developments. Table 19.70-1—Residential Standards R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 MFR111 Front and Flanking 35' 15' 15' 15' 15' Street Yard Setback Garage Setback(2) 35' 20' 20' 2L 20' Rear Yard Setback 20' 20' 10' 1C 10' Minimum Side Yard Setback 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' Open Space N/A N/A N/A N/A 10%gross area(3) Lot Size+4 40,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 5,000 sq.ft u 4,300 sq.ft. N/Au Lot Coverage 30.0% 50.0% 50.0% 60% 60.0% Maximum Density 1 du/ac 4 du/ac &8 du/ac 10 du/ac 22 du/ac Building Height(5) 35' 35' 35' 35' 50' (1) Where MFR abuts R-1, R-2,or R-3 zones,development shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 19.75 SVMC,Transitional Regulations. (2) Attached garages,where the garage door does not face the street, may have the same setback as the primary structure. (3) Open space requirement does not apply to single-family development in the MFR zone. (4) Single-family residential development in the MFR zone shall have a minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet per dwelling unit.Only one single-family dwelling shall be allowed per lot. (5) The vertical distance from the average finished grade to the average height of the highest roof surface. ll Duplex development in the R-3 zone shall have a minimum lot size of 14,500 square feet. APPENDIX A DEFINITIONS Dwelling:A building or portion thereof designed exclusively for residential purposes. Dwelling,accessory unit:A freestanding detached structure or an attached part of a structure that is subordinate and incidental to the primary dwelling unit located on the same property, providing complete, independent living facilities exclusively for a single housekeeping unit, including permanent provisions for living,sleeping,cooking, and sanitation.See"Residential, use category." Dwelling,accessory unit—industrial:A dwelling unit within a primary building located in the Industrial zone for occupancy by a person or family for living and sleeping purposes. Dwelling,accessory unit—industrial mixed-use:A dwelling unit within a primary building located in the Industrial Mixed-Use zone for occupancy by a person or family for living and sleeping purposes. Dwelling,caretaker's residence:A dwelling unit provided for the purpose of on-site supervision and security that is occupied by a bona fide employee of the property owner.See"Residential, use category." Dwelling,congregate:A residential facility under joint occupancy and single management arranged or used for lodging of unrelated individuals,with or without meals, including boarding or rooming houses,dormitories, fraternities and sororities,and convents and monasteries.See"Group living, use category." Dwelling,cottage:A small single-family dwelling unit developed as a group of dwelling units clustered around a common area pursuant to SVMC 19.40.050 as now adopted or hereafter amended. 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.See"Residential, use category." Dwelling,fourplex:An attached building designed exclusively for occupancy by four families,with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking,sleeping,and sanitation, but sharing a common or party wall or stacked.See"Residential, use category." Dwelling,multifamily:A building designed for occupancy by three five or more families,with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking,sleeping,and sanitation.Townhouses are not considered multifamily development. See"Residential, use category." Dwelling,single-family:A building, manufactured or modular home or portion thereof,designed exclusively for single-family residential purposes,with a separate entrance and facilities for cooking,sleeping,and sanitation.See "Residential, use category." 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.See"Residential, use category." Dwelling,triplex:An attached building designed exclusively for occupancy by three families,with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking,sleeping,and sanitation, but sharing a common or party wall or stacked. See"Residential, use category." Dwelling unit:One or more rooms,designed,occupied,or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters,with an individual entrance,cooking,sleeping,and sanitary facilities for the exclusive use of one family maintaining a household. Dwelling,triplex:An attached building designed exclusively for occupancy by three families,with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking,sleeping,and sanitation, but sharing a common or party wall or stacked. See"Residential, use category." Dwelling,fourplex:An attached building designed exclusively for occupancy by four families,with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking,sleeping,and sanitation, but sharing a common or party wall or stacked. See"Residential, use category." Dwelling, multifamily:A building designed for occupancy by thrcc five or more families,with separate entrances and individual facilities for cooking,sleeping,and sanitation. Townhouses are not considered multifamily development. See"Residential, use category. EXHIBIT 4 Sill SEPA CHECKLIST po ane SVMC 21.20 Walley 10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509)720-5240 • Fax: (509)720-5075 •permitcenter(&spokanevalley.org STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: October 31. 2019 Received by: Fee: PLUS #: File#: CPA-2020-0007 PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL **THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** ❑ Completed SEPA Checklist ❑ Application Fee ❑ Reduced Site Plan of proposal in 81/2" by 11" or 11" by 17" size ❑ Trip Distribution and Generation Letter, if requested by Development Engineering. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions.An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or"does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON-PROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS(Part D). PL-22 V1.0 Page 1 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4.000 Val ley For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: CPA-2020-0007. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Name of applicant: City of Spokane Valley 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, Economic Development Division, Spokane Valley,WA 99206 4. Date checklist prepared: October 31, 2019; minor updates for clarity February 4, 2020 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Spokane Valley 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Anticipated adoption May 2020. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal?Yes. If yes, explain. The proposed amendment will provide additional policy guidance related to housing. It's expected that implementing development regulations would follow, if adopted. Those development regulations are considered under this SEPA process. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)was completed for the City's Comprehensive Plan. The environmental document is titled 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan FEIS(FEIS)and supporting Development Regulations. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? None If yes, explain. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Approval by City Council 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site.There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The proposed amendments will provided policy and regulatory guidance to narrow the focus of the location of alternative housing types to locations with access to support services like transit and commercial services; and to reduce impacts in neighborhoods disproportionately impacted by alternative housing types. PL-22 V1.0 Page 2 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The proposal is a non-project action. Projects that might result in impacts were analyzed in the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan FEIS and supporting Development Regulations. 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? Not applicable. The general Sewer Service Area? Not applicable. Priority Sewer Service Area? Not applicable. (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay zone Atlas for boundaries). 14. The following questions supplement Part A. a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) /Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA). 1. Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of Stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). Not applicable. 2. Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or underground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? Not applicable. 3. What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. Not applicable. 4. Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a Stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? Not applicable. b. Stormwater 1. What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Not applicable. 2. Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts. Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 3 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley EVALUATION FOR B. ENVIRONMENTALELEMENTS AGENCY USE ONLY 1 ) Earth a. General description of the site (check one):❑ flat,❑ rolling, ❑hilly, ❑ steep slopes, ❑ mountainous, other Varies citywide. The proposal is a non-project action. Development of individual sites will be analyzed under a separate SEPA. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Not applicable. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Not applicable. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? Not applicable. If so, describe. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Also indicate source of fill. Not applicable. c. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Not applicable PL-22 V1.0 Page 4 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4.000Val ley 2) Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, EVALUATION FOR automobile,odors, industrial wood smoke)during construction and when the AGENCY USE ONLY project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that mayaffect your proposal? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable. 3) Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Not applicable. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 5 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Not applicable. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? Not applicable. If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Not applicable. Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not applicable. c. Water runoff(including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow?Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Not applicable. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters?Not applicable. If so,generally describe. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The proposal is a non-project action and does not have a direct effect on the surface, ground or runoff water. PL-22 V1.0 Page 6 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley EVALUATION FOR 4) Plants AGENCY USE ONLY a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ❑ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ❑ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ❑ shrubs ❑ grass ❑ pasture ❑ crop or grain ❑ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ❑ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ❑ other types of vegetation A variety of plants exist citywide. The proposal is a non-project action. Development of individual sites will be analyzed under a separate SEPA. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not applicable. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The proposal is a non-project action development of individual sites will be analyzed under a separate SEPA. The city has adopted development standards to preserve and enhance vegetation. 5) Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: ❑ birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: ❑ mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: ❑ fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. c. Is the site part of a migration route? Not applicable. If so, explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: A variety of animals exist citywide. The proposal is a non-project action. Development of individual sites will be analyzed under a separate SEPA. The city has adopted development standards to preserve and enhance fauna. PL-22 V1.0 Page 7 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 6). Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing,etc. Not applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. 7) Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? Not applicable. If so, describe: 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Not applicable. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not applicable. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Not applicable. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 8 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 8). Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The proposal is non-project action that applies citywide. Land use varies across the city. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Areas within the city have been historically used for agriculture; the city has no designated agricultural lands. c. Describe any structures on the site. The proposal is non-project action that applies citywide. A variety of structures exist across the city. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? There are a variety of zone classifications across the city, ranging from low density single-family to industrial. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? There are a variety of land use designations across the city, ranging from single-family to industrial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? There are a variety of shoreline designations across the city. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes the city has critical areas within its jurisdiction. The proposal is a non-project action and will not impact these area. Future projects will be subject to the adopted critical areas ordinance as applicable. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? This is a non-project action; the comprehensive plan forecasts that the city will have a total population of 109,913 by 2037. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not applicable. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: This is a non-project action that aims to increase housing opportunities within the city. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 9 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 9) Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10). Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. 11 ). Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 10 of 14 pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 12) Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are a variety of recreational opportunities across the city. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Not applicable c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:The city's comprehensive plan has a level of service for park space. The adopted Park and Recreation Master Plan provides strategies to meet adopted levels of service for projected growth. 13). Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. The proposal applies citywide. Places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state or local preservation registers will be identified at the time of project development and will be evaluated under a separate SEPA process. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. 14). Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Not applicable. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Not applicable. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable. PL-22 V1.0 Page 11 of pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to EVALUATION FOR existing roads or streets, not including driveways? Not applicable. If so, AGENCY USE ONLY generally describe (indicate whether public or private). e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? Not applicable. If so, generally describe. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? Not applicable. If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The city's comprehensive plan adopts a level of service for transportation services. The city has a 20-year Transportation Improvement Plan that identifies projects to meet adopted levels of service for projected growth. 15) Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)?Not applicable. If so, generally describe. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable. 16) Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: ❑ electricity, ❑ natural gas, ❑water, ❑ refuse service, ❑ telephone, ❑ sanitary sewer, ❑ septic system, ❑ other- describe. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Not applicable. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: PL-22 V1.0 Page 12 of pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (Do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposed amendments are anticipated to increase emissions to air, production of noise, and discharge to water as a result of increased development over the next 15 years. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the FEIS for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Consistent with the FEIS of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, the city adopted implementing regulations while mitigating impacts to the natural environment including an updated critical areas ordinance. On a planning level, the adopted regulatory scheme has been identified as sufficient to avoid and reduce impacts to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise. Site specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon these adopted regulations within the Spokane Valley. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The proposed amendment is anticipated to have impacts on plants and animals by increased development over the next 15 years. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the FEIS for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Consistent with the FEIS of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, the city adopted implementing regulations while mitigating impacts to the natural environment including an updated critical areas ordinance. On a planning level the adopted regulatory scheme has been identified as sufficient to protect and conserve plants and animals. Site specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon these adopted regulations within the Spokane Valley. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The proposed amendment anticipated to have impacts on energy and natural resources by increased development over the next 15 years. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the FEIS for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: Consistent with the FEIS of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, the city adopted implementing regulations to protect and conserve energy and natural resources. On a planning level, the adopted regulatory scheme has been identified as sufficient to protect and conserve energy and natural resources. Site specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon these adopted regulations within the Spokane Valley. PL-22 V1.0 Page 13 of pokane SEPA CHECKLIST 4000 Valley 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The proposed amendment anticipated to have impacts on environmentally sensitive areas by increased development over the next 15 years throughout the city. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the FEIS for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Consistent with the FEIS of the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan, the city adopted implementing regulations while mitigating impacts to environmentally sensitive areas including an updated critical areas ordinance. On a planning level the adopted regulatory scheme has been identified as sufficient to avoid, protect and reduce impacts to environmentally sensitive areas. Site specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon these adopted regulations within the Spokane Valley. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Impacts to the shoreline area is known.While the proposed amendment may increase development, it's likely these increases will occur outside shoreline jurisdiction as these locations are generally designated for low density residential development, but the location and extent of those regulatory changes will occur later. a. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The city has an up-to-date shoreline master program. The recent comprehensive plan and FEIS are consistent with the SMP. Site specific impacts will be reviewed and mitigated at the time of development based upon these adopted regulations and policies. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The proposed amendment anticipated to increase demands on transportation and public services from increased development over the next 15 years throughout the city. The amendment is within the scope of impacts analyzed in the FEIS for the 2017- 2037 Comprehensive Plan and supporting development regulations. a. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: The Comprehensive Plan adopts a level-of-service for transportation. The FEIS for the 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plan and the 6-year Transportation Improvement Program identifies the necessary projects to maintain the adopted LOS. These transportation and public service projects are implemented both by the city and state and at the project level through concurrency. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal does not conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. Any specific issues that may arise during the development of individual projects will be identified and addressed based upon regulations within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. E. SIGNATURE PL-22 V1.0 Page 14 of iokane SEPA CHECKLIST _.Valley I, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency may withdraw any Determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon this check list. Date: Signature: Please print or type: Proponent: City of Spokane Valley Address: 10210 East Sprague Avenue; Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: (509) 720-5000 Person completing form (if different from proponent): Name: Chaz Bates, Senior Planner, City of Spokane Valley Economic Development Division Address: 10210 E Sprague Ave Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: 509-720-5337 PL-22 V1.0 Page 15 of EXHIBIT 5 COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT S�" DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE jvPOn 10210 East Sprague Avenue• Spokane Valley WA 99206 aller 509.720.5000 •Fax: 509.720.5075 •planning@spokanevalley.org FILE NUMBERS:CPA-2020-0001; CPA-2020-0002; CPA-2020-0003; CPA-2020-0006; CPA-2020-0007 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTIONS: CPA-2020-0001: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004(0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). CPA- 2020-0002: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres) from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). CPA-2020-0003: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133,45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to CMU. CPA-2020-0006: City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Ito CMU.CPA-2020-0007: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types and area-wide rezone to implement new policies APPLICANT/OWNER: CPA-2020-0001: Land Use Solutions/Tucker Roy LLC; CPA-2020-0002: Ed Lukas/Lawrence B. Stone Properties,Lawrence B. Stone Properties#50 LLC; CPA-2020-0003: Jay Rambo/Revere-Dece III, LLC, Revere-Dece, Brill Properties LLC; CPA-2020-0006: Spokane Valley/East Valley School District; CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide. PROPOSAL LOCATIONS: CPA-2020-0001: 1311 N. McDonald Road, further located in the NW '/4 of Section 15, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington CPA-2020-0002: 5901 E. Sprague Avenue, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 43 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0003: 1723 and 1724 N Union Road, further located in the SE '/4 of Section 09, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0006: 3830 N Sullivan, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 01, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian,Spokane County, Washington CPA-2020-0007: Spokane Valley/Citywide LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley. DETERMINATION: Determination of Non-Significance is issued under Washington Administrative Code(WAC) 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date issued. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m.on March 6,2020.Pursuant to Title 21,Environmental Controls of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC),the lead agency has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required under Revised Code of Washington 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. STAFF CONTACT: Chaz Bates,AICP, Senior Planner,City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509)720-5337; cbates a,spokanevallev.org RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Mike Basinger, AICP, Economic Development Manager, City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, PH: (509) 720-5333, mbasinger@spokanevalley.org spokanevalley.org DATE ISSUED: February 21, 2020 SIGNATURE: irh � APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community&Pu' is Works Department within fourteen(14)calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be written and specific factual objections made to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with SVMC 17.90 Appeals, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Schedule shall be paid at the time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. City of Spokane Valley February 18,2020 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of I File Nos.CPA-2020-0001;CPA-2020-0002;CPA-2020-0003;CPA-2020-0006;CPA-2020-0007 EXHIBIT 6 Notice of Public Hearing City of Spokane Valley 2020 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Hearing Date and Time: March 26,2020 beginning at 6:00 p.m. Hearing Location: Spokane Valley City Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Hearing Body: Spokane Valley Planning Commission The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Requests.The Planning Commission will conduct the public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council on each of the following applications. FILE No.: CPA-2020-0001 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45152.1004 (0.47 acres)from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1311 North McDonald Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0002 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 35133.2321 (2.98 acres)from Industrial(I)to Regional Commercial(RC). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:North Fancher Road,Unaddressed FILE No.: CPA-2020-0003 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:Privately initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcels 45094.0133, 45094.0134,and 45094.0121 (6.24 acres total)from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1723 and 1724 North Union Road FILE No.: CPA-2020-0006 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:City initiated map amendment to change the designation for parcel 45013.9024(8.8 acres)from Industrial(I)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 3830 North Sullivan Road Bldg 1 FILE No.: CPA-2020-0007 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated text amendment to Chapter 2 Goals and Policies for alternative housing types. LOCATION OF PROPOSALS:Citywide Staff Contact: Chaz Bates,AICP,Senior Planner;(509)720-5337 cbates@spokanevalley.org Environmental Determination: The City issued a Determination of Non-significance(DNS)on February 21,2020 pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)and chapter 21.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). Hearing Procedures: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct the hearing pursuant to Planning Commission rules of procedure. Interested persons may testify at the public hearing and may submit written comments and documents before or at the hearing. The Planning Commission may limit the time given to speakers. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. Staff Report and Inspection of File: A staff report will be available for inspection seven calendar days before the hearing. The staff report and application file may be inspected at the Community and Public Works Department, located at the Spokane Valley City Hall, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm,Monday-Friday, excluding holidays. Copies of documents will be made available at a reasonable cost. Send written comments to City of Spokane Valley,Attn: Chaz Bates, 10210 E. Sprague Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99206;or email to the project planner listed above. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing,or other impairments may contact the City Clerk at(509)720-5102 prior to the meeting so that arrangements may be made. Carrie Koudelka,Spokane Valley Deputy City Clerk Publish:March 6,2020 and March 13,2020 EXHIBIT 7 Public and Agency Comments (Will be inserted as received)