DEIS_Final_Draft_11-15-20_compiled
PAINTED HILLS DEVELOPMENT
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS)
SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
November 2020
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
29
This page intentionally left blank.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
30
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................1
1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................1
1.2 BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................................1
1.3 PUBLIC SCOPING PROCESS ........................................................................................1
1.4 SCOPE OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ....................3
SECTION 2. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ..............................5
FACT SHEET .........................................................................................................................5
2.1 PURPOSE AND NEED....................................................................................................6
2.2 LAND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES ..................................................................7 2.2.1 Alternatives Analysis in this DEIS .............................................................................8 2.2.1.1 Alternative 1: No Action ....................................................................................8 2.2.1.2 Alternative 2a: Planned Residential Development—High Infiltration ..............8 2.2.1.3 Alternative 2b: Planned Residential Development-- Low Infiltration ...............9 2.2.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Consideration ......................................................10 2.2.2.1 Low Impact Subdivision Alternative ........................................................10 2.2.2.2 Standard Subdivision Alternative .............................................................12 2.2.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................20 2.2.4 Permits and Approvals Required for Implementation ..............................................20
SECTION 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSEQUENCES ..........................................................................................21
3.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT (GROUND AND SURFACE WATER) ......................21
3.1.1 Affected Environment ...............................................................................................21
3.1.1.1 Existing Hydrologic Conditions ......................................................................21
3.1.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................28
3.1.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................28
3.1.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High Infiltration ..........28
3.1.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration ..........28
3.1.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................29
3.1.3.1 Alternative 1.....................................................................................................29
3.1.3.2 Alternative 2a ...................................................................................................29
3.1.3.3 Alternative 2b...................................................................................................29
3.1.4 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................29
3.2 BUILT ENVIRONMENT (LAND USE AND FLOOD HAZARD AREAS) ...............29
3.2.1 Affected Environment ...............................................................................................29
3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................33
3.2.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................33
3.2.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development-High Infiltration .............33
3.2.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development-Low Infiltration .......37
3.2.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................41
3.2.4 Indirect Effects ..........................................................................................................42
3.2.5 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................42
3.3 TRANSPORTATION .....................................................................................................43 3.3.1 Affected Environment ...............................................................................................44 3.3.1.1 Study Area .......................................................................................................44 3.3.1.2 Existing Conditions ..........................................................................................46
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
31
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page ii
3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................49 3.3.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................49 3.3.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development High Infiltration Rate .....51 3.3.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration Scenario......................................................................................................56 3.3.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................58 3.3.4 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................59
3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL ...........................59 3.4.1 Air Quality ................................................................................................................59 3.4.1.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................59 3.4.1.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................61 3.4.1.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................62 3.4.1.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................63 3.4.2 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................................63 3.4.2.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................63 3.4.2.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................66 3.4.2.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................66 3.4.2.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................67 3.4.3 Biological Resources ................................................................................................67 3.4.3.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................67 3.4.3.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................72 3.4.3.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................73 3.4.3.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................73 3.4.4 Environmental Health ...............................................................................................73 3.4.4.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................73 3.4.4.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................73 3.4.4.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................74 3.4.4.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................74 3.4.5 Geology .....................................................................................................................74 3.4.5.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................74 3.4.5.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................74 3.4.5.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................75 3.4.5.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................76 3.4.6 Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources ....................................................76 3.4.6.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................76 3.4.6.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................77 3.4.6.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................77 3.4.6.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................78 3.4.7 Noise .........................................................................................................................78 3.4.7.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................78 3.4.7.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................79 3.4.7.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................79 3.4.7.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................80 3.4.8 Public Services ..........................................................................................................80 3.4.8.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................83 3.4.9 Recreation .................................................................................................................85 3.4.9.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................85 3.4.9.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................87 3.4.9.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................87 3.4.9.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................87
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..............................................................................88
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
32
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................1
1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................1
1.2 BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................................1
1.3 PUBLIC SCOPING PROCESS ........................................................................................1
1.4 SCOPE OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ....................3
SECTION 2. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ..............................5
FACT SHEET .........................................................................................................................5
2.1 PURPOSE AND NEED....................................................................................................6
2.2 LAND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES ..................................................................7 2.2.1 Alternatives Analysis in this DEIS .............................................................................8 2.2.1.1 Alternative 1: No Action ....................................................................................8 2.2.1.2 Alternative 2a: Planned Residential Development—High Infiltration ..............8 2.2.1.3 Alternative 2b: Planned Residential Development-- Low Infiltration ...............9 2.2.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Consideration ......................................................10 2.2.2.1 Low Impact Subdivision Alternative ........................................................10 2.2.2.2 Standard Subdivision Alternative .............................................................12 2.2.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................20 2.2.4 Permits and Approvals Required for Implementation ..............................................20
SECTION 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSEQUENCES ..........................................................................................21
3.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT (GROUND AND SURFACE WATER) ......................21
3.1.1 Affected Environment ...............................................................................................21
3.1.1.1 Existing Hydrologic Conditions ......................................................................21
3.1.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................28
3.1.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................28
3.1.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High Infiltration ..........28
3.1.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration ..........28
3.1.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................29
3.1.3.1 Alternative 1.....................................................................................................29
3.1.3.2 Alternative 2a ...................................................................................................29
3.1.3.3 Alternative 2b...................................................................................................29
3.1.4 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................29
3.2 BUILT ENVIRONMENT (LAND USE AND FLOOD HAZARD AREAS) ...............29
3.2.1 Affected Environment ...............................................................................................29
3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................33
3.2.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................33
3.2.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development-High Infiltration .............33
3.2.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development-Low Infiltration .......37
3.2.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................41
3.2.4 Indirect Effects ..........................................................................................................42
3.2.5 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................42
3.3 TRANSPORTATION .....................................................................................................43 3.3.1 Affected Environment ...............................................................................................44 3.3.1.1 Study Area .......................................................................................................44 3.3.1.2 Existing Conditions ..........................................................................................46
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
33
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page ii
3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................49 3.3.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................49 3.3.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development High Infiltration Rate .....51 3.3.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration Scenario......................................................................................................56 3.3.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................58 3.3.4 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................59
3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL ...........................59 3.4.1 Air Quality ................................................................................................................59 3.4.1.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................59 3.4.1.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................61 3.4.1.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................62 3.4.1.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................63 3.4.2 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................................63 3.4.2.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................63 3.4.2.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................66 3.4.2.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................66 3.4.2.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................67 3.4.3 Biological Resources ................................................................................................67 3.4.3.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................67 3.4.3.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................72 3.4.3.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................73 3.4.3.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................73 3.4.4 Environmental Health ...............................................................................................73 3.4.4.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................73 3.4.4.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................73 3.4.4.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................74 3.4.4.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................74 3.4.5 Geology .....................................................................................................................74 3.4.5.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................74 3.4.5.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................74 3.4.5.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................75 3.4.5.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................76 3.4.6 Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources ....................................................76 3.4.6.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................76 3.4.6.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................77 3.4.6.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................77 3.4.6.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................78 3.4.7 Noise .........................................................................................................................78 3.4.7.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................78 3.4.7.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................79 3.4.7.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................79 3.4.7.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................80 3.4.8 Public Services ..........................................................................................................80 3.4.8.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................83 3.4.9 Recreation .................................................................................................................85 3.4.9.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................85 3.4.9.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................87 3.4.9.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................87 3.4.9.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................87
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..............................................................................88
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
34
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page iii
LITERATURE CITED .........................................................................................................92
TABLES Table 1-1: Painted Hills Site Tax Lots .......................................................................................1 Table 2-1. Project Purpose and Need v. Low Impact Subdivision ..........................................12 Table 3-1: Transportation Impact Analysis Land Use Types (TIA Table 5) ...........................43 Table 3-2: Level of Service Descriptions ................................................................................44 Table 3-3: Year 2015 Existing Intersections Levels of Service (Table 2 of TIA) ...................49 Table 3-4: Background Projects and Vested AM & PM Trips Table 4 of TIA) .....................50 Table 3-5: 2025 Levels of Service, without the Project, with the Background Projects (Table 7 of TIA) .....................................................................................................50 Table 3-7: Year 2025 Levels of Service, with the Project, with the Background Projects (Table 19 of the TIA) ...............................................................................53 Table 3-8: Alternative 2A and 2B ADT Comparison – PM Peak Hour Trips .........................56 Table 3-9: Background Projects and Vested AM & PM Trips ................................................59
FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Vicinity Map ...........................................................................................................2
Figure 2-3 Alternative 2a Site Plan including Gustin Ditch Improvements ............................14
Figure 2-4: Alternative 2b Site Plan including Gustin Ditch Improvements ...........................16
Figure 2-5: Alternatives 2a and 2b Comparison ......................................................................18
Figure 3-1: Chester Creek 1997 Flood Event – Aerial Photo ..................................................22
Figure 3-2: Flooding West of Chester Main Channel (Viewing Eastward on Thorpe) ...........22
Figure 3-3: Flooding East of Chester Main Channel (Viewing Westward on Thorpe) ...........23
Figure 3-4: Current Drainage Features ....................................................................................26
Figure 3-5: Spokane Valley - Rathdrum Prairie Sole-Source Aquifer ....................................27
Figure 3-6: Existing FEMA Mapped Floodplain Areas ..........................................................31
Figure 3-7: Proposed Drainage Features ..................................................................................39
Figure 3-8: Alternatives 2a and 2b – Existing & Future Floodplain Areas .............................40
Figure 3-9: Study Area Intersections .......................................................................................48
Figure 3-10: View of the Site from S. Madison Road .............................................................64
Figure 3-11: View of the Site from E. Thorpe Road ...............................................................64
Figure 3-12: View of the Site from S. Dishman-Mica Road ...................................................65
Figure 3-13: Former Clubhouse and Associated Parking ........................................................65
Figure 3-14: Priority Habitat & Species ..................................................................................71
Figure 3-15: Service District Boundaries ................................................................................84
Figure 3-16: Public Recreation Opportunities .........................................................................86
APPENDICES
Appendix A ............................................................................................ Public Comment Index
Appendix B ........................................................................................................ SEPA Checklist
Appendix C ..................... Impact Comparison Table – Alternative 2a v. Standard Subdivision
Appendix D ...................................... Standard Subdivision Alternative Environmental Review
Appendix E ........................................................................ Operation and Maintenance Manual
Appendix F............................................................................................ Traffic Impact Analysis
Appendix G ................................................................ Painted Hills PRD Biological Evaluation
Appendix H ....................................................................................... Cultural Resources Survey
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
35
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 1
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The subject site of this Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is an approximately
99.3-acre former golf course located in the City of Spokane Valley, referred to herein as the
“Painted Hills site.” The Painted Hills site can be generally described as within the southeast
(SE) quadrant of Section 33, Township 25 North. Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian. (See
Figure 1-1: Vicinity Map). The site is primarily vacant. Although no longer in operation and
no longer maintained, the former golf course use is evident by the presence of former fairways,
greens and other golf course features. Table 1-1 identifies the tax lots that compose the subject
site, along with the ownership and current zoning designation of the site. The golf course use
terminated in 2013 when the site was purchased by the current owner.
Table 1-1: Painted Hills Site Tax Lots
Tax Lot Owner Zoning Size (Acres)
45334.0109 Black Realty, Inc. R3 0.87
45334.0108 Black Realty, Inc. R3 0.87
45334.0113 Northwest Renovators Inc. R3 0.27
45334.0110 Black Realty, Inc. R3 0.87
44041.9144 Black Realty, Inc. R3 8.24
45334.9135 Northwest Renovators Inc. R3 1.68
45334.0114 Northwest Renovators Inc. R3 0.60
45336.9191 Black Realty, Inc. R3 85.07
45334.0106 Northwest Renovators Inc. R3 0.87
TOTAL 99.34
1.2 BACKGROUND
On July 24, 2015, NAI Black, herein identified as the “applicant” submitted a Planned
Residential Development (PRD) application request to the City of Spokane Valley to construct
a new mixed-use development that would include single family residential estate lots, standard
single-family lots, cottage or townhome units, multi-family units, commercial development,
and open space on the 99.3-acre former golf course site. In its review of the application, the
City determined that probable significant adverse impacts could result from stormwater and
floodwater improvements and traffic generated by the project.
1.3 PUBLIC SCOPING PROCESS
On September 8, 2017, the City issued a determination of significance (DS) for the proposed
action that identified that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared to
evaluate the effects of the project on the natural environment (ground and surface water), the
built environment and transportation.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
36
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dis
h
m
a
n
-
M
i
c
a
R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 1-1Vicinity Map
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
0 0.40.2 MilesSource: GIS data provided by the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County.
Legend
Residential Development Boundary
Spokane Valley Boundary Hwy 27Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A______________________________________________________________________________________________37
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 3
Following the September 8, 2017 issuance of the DS, a public scoping period was held
including a public scoping meeting on September 25, 2017. From this public scoping comment
period, 251 comments were received. In the weeks following this meeting it was determined
that certain project modifications could be made that would improve the design of floodwater
improvements on the site and simplify the long-term management responsibility for these
improvements. Between the Fall of 2017 and July 2018, the applicant refined the design of the
PRD alternative (Alternative 2a in this DEIS document) and, on August 20, 2018 submitted a
supplemental State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist that described the refined
project design and included additional environmental documentation regarding the
environmental effects of the applicant’s proposed action (See Appendix A). After review of
this supplemental SEPA Checklist, the City issued a revised DS, dated October 26, 2018. 124
public comments were received in response to the reissued DS. Comments issued in response
to the 2017 and 2018 DS documents are summarized in a table included in Appendix B Public
Comment Index. Since the time of the 2018 DS, the applicant has been conducting additional
analysis and design refinements for the preferred alternative. These refinements include
updates and modifications to the stormwater and floodwater management system to ensure that
the project design satisfies City and FEMA requirements.
1.4 SCOPE OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
The DS stated that an EIS should be prepared for the revised project that addresses the natural
environment (ground and surface water); built environment (land use, including relationship
to land use plans regarding flood hazard areas); and transportation, including importation of
fill. The DS further stated that the alternatives to be analyzed in the EIS should include a “No
Action” alternative, the applicant’s Preferred Alternative and an “Alternative 2 Alternative
Configuration.” The DS stated that this Alternative 2 Alternative Configuration was intended
to evaluate “other reasonable alternatives for achieving the proposal’s objective on the same
site according to the existing development regulations.”
As discussed further in this document, alternative configurations were considered for the
project consistent with the DS. These alternative configurations included a “low impact
alternative” that substantially avoided development within designated 100-year floodplain
areas and a “standard subdivision” alternative that provided standard single family detached
lots throughout the site. After considering these alternatives, it was determined that the low-
impact alternative did not sufficiently meet the Purpose and Need for the project which, as a
private development, includes the need for a reasonable economic return to the owner and
project investors. Further, it was determined that the standard subdivision proposal resulted in
marginally increased environmental effects and therefore did not sufficiently meet the criteria
for a reasonable alternative consistent with WAC 197-11-440(5)(b). Consequently, these
alternatives were eliminated from further consideration. A summary of these alternatives that
were considered and subsequently eliminated from further consideration is included in Section
2.2 of the EIS.
This document is focused on evaluating the environmental impacts of two alternatives as noted
below:
Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative): This alternative assumes no development of the site.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
38
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 4
Alternative 2 (PRD): This alternative represents development of the site through a PRD as
permitted under section 19.50 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and includes significant
stormwater management improvements including a gallery of infiltration dry wells.
Because a design infiltration rate within the planned ponds/drywells will not be known until a
drywell is installed per City Standard Plans and tested, the precise design infiltration rate
cannot be determined at this time. As a consequence, the applicant has developed two PRD
scenarios for analysis in this document. These two PRD scenarios are referenced in this
document as Scenario 2a and Scenario 2b. Scenario 2a assumes high infiltration rates and
therefore a smaller (1.4-acre) stormwater management facility and a Scenario 2b assumes
lower infiltration rates and therefore a larger (9.3-acre) stormwater management facility.
Due to the fact that these scenarios are very similar in design and intended land uses, they have
been combined into one alternative and the environmental effects of the alternative are
presented as a range throughout this document.
After receiving additional public comments in response to the second DS issuance, the City
determined that additional environmental elements would be addressed in the document but to
a lesser degree than the primary environmental elements listed in the DS. Those additional
elements are included in this document and include:
Air Quality
Aesthetics
Biological Resources
Environmental Health
Geology
Historic, Cultural and Archaeological Resources
Noise
Public Services
Recreation
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
39
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 5
SECTION 2. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FACT SHEET
Proposal/Title: Painted Hills Development Draft Environmental
Impact Statement
Description of Proposal: Planned development of the former Painted Hills
golf course site to include a mix of residential and
commercial uses integrated with open space areas.
Description of Alternatives: Two primary alternatives are analyzed: the No
Action Alternative (Alternative 1) and the Planned
Residential Development (PRD) Alternative, which
includes two variations, a “High Infiltration
Alternative” (Alternative 2a) and a “Low Infiltration
Alternative” (Alternative 2b).
Location:
99.3 acres located at Section 33, Township 25
North. Range 44 East, West Meridian
Project Proponent: City of Spokane Valley
Tentative Date of Implementation: July 2020
Name and Address of Lead Agency and
Contact:
City of Spokane Valley, Contact: Lori Barlow
Responsible Official: Lori Barlow
Required Local Approvals: 1. Preliminary Plat/ Planned Residential
Development (PRD)
2. Transportation Concurrency Certificate
3. Street Plan Approval, ROW Permits (COSV)
4. Sanitary Sewer Plan Approval (Spokane
County)
5. Water Plan Approval (Water District 3)
6. Building Permits (COSV)
7. Landscape Plans (COSV)
8. Grading and Erosion Control Permit (COSV)
9. Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency (SRCAA)
& Washington Department of Ecology
(WDOE) Air Quality Permits (as applicable)
10. City Floodplain Development Permit & Land
Disturbance Permit (COSV)
11. Floodplain Development Permit & Land
Disturbance Permit (Spokane County)
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 6
Project Manager and Principal
Contributors to Final EIS:
City of Spokane Valley
Contact: Lori Barlow, Senior Planner
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
(EIS Review and Approval)
DOWL
Contact: Read Stapleton, AICP
720 SW Washington Street; Suite 750
Portland, OR 97205
(EIS Preparation)
Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Contact: Ben Goodmansen
21 S. Pines
Spokane Valley, 99206
(Civil Engineering and Stormwater
Hydrology)
WEST Consultants, Inc.
Contact: Ken Puhn, P.E.
2601 25th St SE #450
Salem, OR 97302
(Floodplain Impact Analysis)
Biology, Soil, & Water, Inc.
Contact: Larry Dawes
3102 N. Girard Road
Spokane Valley, WA 99212-1529
(Biological Resources)
Date of Issuance of Final EIS: TBD
Scheduled Date of Final Action:
Location of Copies of Final EIS for Public
Review:
PENDING CONFIRMATION FROM
CITY
Location of Copies of Final EIS
for Purchase and Cost of Copy to Public:
PENDING CONFIRMATION FROM CITY
2.1 PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the proposed action is to relieve the under-supply of housing in the Spokane
Valley area by implementing a mixed use residential development that furthers the goals and
policies of the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and satisfies the owner’s
investment return requirement.
According to Rob Higgins Executive Vice President of the Spokane Association of Realtors, Spokane County has limited housing inventory; current inventory as of November 2020 is 74 new construction single family residential properties, and 337 existing single-family residential properties, for a total of 411 properties currently on the market. This represents a supply of approximately one week of housing inventory.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 7
The City of Spokane Valley has long recognized the site of the proposed action as being subject
to more intense development. The site is currently designated as Single Family Residential and
zoned as R-3. R-3 is the City’s “urban residential” category which allows a potential density
of up to 6 units per acre “provides flexibility and promotes reinvestment in existing single-
family neighborhoods.” (SVMC 19.20.015(C)). The City zoned the property R-3 to enable
maximum residential buildout of the site while recognizing the potential limiting
environmental factors. Consistent with the planning goals of the Growth Management Act
(GMA) codified in Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 36.70A.020, development should be
encouraged “in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be
provided in an efficient manner.” Local plans and policies implement the GMA and limit new
urban development to areas within the Urban Growth Area (UGA) and constrain the supply of
available land.
Further, Spokane County is subject to explicit limitations on UGA expansions as stipulated in
Section 10 of a 2016 Settlement Agreement with parties who appealed the county’s 2013 UGA
expansion. Given the limited ability of Spokane County to expand UGAs and the fact that the
proposed development site is one of the largest contiguously owned buildable tracts of
residential land in Spokane Valley, the Painted Hills site represents a unique opportunity to
provide needed housing supply. Because the UGA constrains potential development in other
areas in the region and other environmental or infrastructure limiting factors may restrict
developable sites within the UGA, there are few, if any, tracts within Spokane County that
allow development to occur on the same scale as the Painted Hills site.
The proposed action also satisfies the reasonable investment backed expectations of the
applicant. The applicant acquired the property for the purpose of redevelopment after a long-
tenured golf facility became financially unfeasible. The need for the use of the planned
residential overlay aspect allows for the applicant to develop the site in the manner preferred
by the City of Spokane Valley while providing for floodwater facilities that enhance the open
space and recreational value of the project. As discussed further in the DEIS, the expense of
the facilities required to develop the project are financially significant and can only be offset
by the development of the proposed action at the scale provided for by the applicant. The
contemplated land uses and density of the proposed action are not subject to review because it
fits within the adopted development regulations of the City. See RCW 36.70B.030(3).
This DEIS has been prepared in accordance with the Washington State Environmental Policy
Act (SEPA, RCW 43.21C). This DEIS is not a decision document. The primary purpose of this
DEIS is to disclose the potential environmental impacts of implementing the proposed action.
2.2 LAND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
This section describes and compares alternatives evaluated in this DEIS and alternatives that were considered for evaluation but ultimately eliminated.
This DEIS analyzes a no-action alternative and one action alternative with two variations. It
presents a discussion of the potential impacts of Alternative 1: No-Action Alternative and
Alternatives 2a and 2b, variations of a PRD on the site.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 8
Additional alternatives were initially considered for evaluation in this DEIS. These included a
“Low Impact Standard Subdivision” alternative that would have avoided development within
most of the 100-year floodplain areas within the site and a “Standard Residential Subdivision
Alternative” with similar stormwater and floodwater management features as the PRD
alternative. These alternatives and the reasons for their exclusion from more detailed analysis
in this DEIS are discussed further below.
This document includes a detailed discussion of impacts to environmental elements identified
as a potential concern in the DS. The primary environmental categories analyzed in detail in
this EIS include natural environment (ground and surface water); built environment (land use,
including relationship to land use plans regarding flood hazard areas); and transportation.
Secondary environmental elements that were not addressed in the DS are addressed in brief
summaries in this document. These environmental elements include air quality, aesthetics,
biological resources, environmental health, geology, historic, cultural and archaeological
resources, noise, public services, and recreation.
2.2.1 Alternatives Analysis in this DEIS
This DEIS analysis evaluates and summarizes the anticipated environmental effects of two
primary alternatives: a No Action alternative and a PRD alternative with two design variations.
These alternatives are described further below.
2.2.1.1 Alternative 1: No Action
The No Action Alternative provides a baseline for comparing the effects of the action
alternatives. The No Action Alternative assumes that no on-site or off-site improvements occur
in conjunction with or as a result of a project on the Painted Hills site.
2.2.1.2 Alternative 2a: Planned Residential Development—High Infiltration
Alternative 2a involves the redevelopment of a 99.3-acre former golf course into a PRD within
the City of Spokane Valley. The site will consist of approximately 42 estate single family
residential lots, 206 standard single-family residential lots, 52 cottage-style single family
residential lots, 228 multi-family residential units, 52 mixed use multi-family residential units
integrated with approximately 13,400 square feet of retail/commercial use, 9,000 square feet
of future stand-alone retail commercial use and the preservation of the club house and
associated parking as a commercial area. Additionally, the site will include greenspace totaling
approximately 30 acres including a 10-acre park and wildlife travel corridor. A network of
asphalt trails will also be provided. The project will include the construction of streets and
sidewalks to access the lots, as well as water, sanitary sewer and dry utility facilities to serve
each lot. Off-site and on-site storm drainage and channel improvements will be made that will
result in the removal of approximately 48 acres of the site from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) one percent annual-chance-floodplain (100-year floodplain).
Stormwater improvements occurring on the site and on the site frontages will include the
replacement of existing culverts under Thorpe Road with a box culvert structure, installation
of a concrete lined channel to a pipe system leading to treatment and infiltration facilities; and
routing and disposal of flood and seasonal flows that cross Madison Road into a new Painted
Hills floodwater management system.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 9
In addition to on-site improvements, Alternative 2a includes replacing a ditch northeast of the
project site (referred to herein as the “Gustin Ditch”) with a 36-inch pipe. Additionally, the
proposal would deepen an off-site pond detention basin and install 18 drywells in the pond
bottom to increase the infiltration capacity of the pond receiving flows from the Gustin Ditch.
This pond is referred to herein and in supporting materials as the “triangle pond.” These
improvements to the Gustin Ditch and to the triangle pond will eliminate the possibility of the
floodwater inflows to the site from the east as modeled in the current FEMA floodplain
insurance study for the area. Further details regarding the design and impacts of the floodwater
management improvements with the two PRD variations are provided in the individual
environmental element sections of this EIS.
Street frontage improvements along Dishman-Mica Road, Thorpe Road and Madison Road
will include curb, gutter, landscape planter strips and/or swales, and sidewalks and/or trails. It
is expected that, upon the completion of site grading activities that a FEMA Letter of Map
Revision (LOMR) will be completed that would also result in the removal of approximately
44 acres of off-site properties from the FEMA 100-year floodplain. Upon completion of the
project, approximately 92 acres will be removed from the FEMA 100-year floodplain on the
project site and on off-site properties.
2.2.1.3 Alternative 2b: Planned Residential Development-- Low Infiltration
Alternative 2b, like Alternative 2a, involves the redevelopment of the 99.3-acre former golf
course into a PRD within the City of Spokane Valley. The primary difference between the two
alternatives is that Alternative 2b includes a significantly increased floodwater infiltration pond
adjacent to the gravel drywell infiltration gallery at the northern limits of the site. The
infiltration pond is larger in Alternative 2b to address recent (January 2020) infiltration testing
that indicates slower infiltration might occur on the site when compared to infiltration testing
conducted on the site in May of 2016. Therefore, the two variations of the PRD alternative
(Alternatives 2a and 2b) provide an analysis of two floodwater storage scenarios on the site (a
high infiltration rate scenario and a lower infiltration rate scenario) and the minor PRD
refinements that occur on the site around the floodwater storage area.
The Alternative 2b development plan consists of 48 estate single family residential lots, 224
standard single-family residential lots, 273 multi-family residential units, 52 mixed use multi-
family residential units integrated with approximately 13,400 square feet of retail/commercial
use, 9,000 square feet of future stand-alone retail commercial use and the preservation of the
club house and associated parking as a commercial area. Additionally, the site will include
open space areas totaling approximately 30 acres including a 10-acre park and wildlife travel
corridor. The same off-site stormwater infrastructure improvements completed under
Alternative 2a would also be constructed under Alternative 2b. Further details regarding the
design and impacts of Alternative 2b are provided in the individual environmental element
sections of this EIS.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10
2.2.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Consideration
Through the process of considering alternatives to the applicant’s preferred alternative, the
development team considered two other possible alternatives for review and discussion in the
DEIS. These alternatives are discussed further below.
2.2.2.1 Low Impact Subdivision Alternative
In considering alternatives to the preferred alternative—PRD Alternatives 2a and 2b—the
applicant considered a residential development on the site that would effectively avoid
development within nearly all mapped 100-year floodplain areas. This alternative is reflected
in Figure 2-1. This Lowe Impact Subdivision Alternative would allow the development of
approximately 205 small single family residential “cottage” lots with widths varying between
20 and 40 feet. After considering this alternative it was determined that the alternative failed
to meet the objectives (purpose and need) of the proposal, as is required under WAC 197-11-
440(5)(b). Specifically, Table 2-1 below provides an analysis of the Low Impact Subdivision
Alternative relative to the project purpose and need.
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dish
m
an
-Mica R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 2-1
Low Impact Residential Subdivision
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Drawing not to scale. This design was developed by Whipple Consulting Engineers. DOWL is not responsible for the content presented. 72 ywH123 4
5
6
78910
11
12
1314151617181920
2122232425
26 2728293031323334
35363738394041424344454647484950
515253545556575859606162
636465666768
6970
717273747576777879808182838485
868788899091929394
9596979899100101102
104105106107108109110111112
113114115116117118119120
122123124125126127
128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158 159
160161162164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204
103
121
163
205
1
2 3 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44 45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
777879808182838485
86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94
9596979899100101102
104 105 106 107108109 110 111 112
113114115116117118119120
103
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135136137 138 139 140 141 142 143144145 146 147 148 149
150
151152153
154
155
156
157
158
159
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193
194195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
163
205
DISHMAN-MICA RD.SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
09/14/20 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS2528 NORTH SULLIVAN ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99216PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYING
TRAFFICPLANNINGLANDSCAPEOTHER
PAINTED HILLS
14, SEC. , T. N., R. E., W.M.SE 33 25 44 SW14, SEC.34, T.25N., R.44E., W.M. 14, SEC. , T. N., R. E., W.M.NE 4 24 44
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
COTTAGE LOT LAYOUT 1 OF 1
SLS1"=60'
N/A
X
W E
S
N
C
1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )
GRAPHIC SCALE
060 60 120
60
30
SITE DATA
P:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\02-12-18 RES LAYOUT OUTSIDE OF FLOOD ZONE\1166-COTTAGE LOT LAYOUT.dwg, 10/15/2020 8:51:36 AM, 407efa601ad3421a91ce, AutoCAD PDF (General Documentation).pc3
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 12
Table 2-1. Project Purpose and Need v. Low Impact Subdivision
Project Purpose and Need
Elements Low Impact Subdivision
Improve regional undersupply of
housing and fulfill the City’s plan
for residential development at urban
densities of 6 units per acre.
205 residential units over the 99.3 acres site fails to
realize the development potential on the site as
designated by the City and as needed to fulfill a
regional undersupply of housing. Development of the
Low Impact Subdivision alternative would only
achieve a gross density of approximately two units
per acre, far below the plan-designated capacity of six
units per acre. Therefore, this alternative fails to
adequately address the housing need within Spokane
Valley and the greater Spokane metropolitan area.
Satisfy investment backed
expectations of the applicant.
The proposed project is a private development funded
by private investment and, as such, requires that the
developer can attain financial returns necessary to
satisfy investor obligations and to fund the public
infrastructure required for the project. These
infrastructure investments include water, sanitary
sewer, road and stormwater infrastructure
improvements, including improvements to Thorpe
Road water passages that regularly flood. The
financial return gained from the development of 205
cottage lots is insufficient to satisfy these investment-
backed expectations for the project.
2.2.2.2 Standard Subdivision Alternative
The applicant also considered the development of the site as a standard subdivision. This
alternative is illustrated on Figure 2-2 and would involve the same general improvements and
fill requirements associated with Alternative 2a. Further, because it would be developed under
the City’s standard subdivision requirements and not through a PRD, this alternative would
not require setting aside 30 percent of the site for open space. A thorough analysis of this
alternative was conducted and the conclusion was reached that this alternative resulted in
marginally greater environmental impacts when compared to Alternatives 2a and 2b.
Consequently, the alternative failed to meet the standard under WAC 197-11-440(5)(b) which
requires that reasonable alternatives should have a “lower environmental cost or decreased
level of environmental degradation.” This alternative was therefore eliminated from further
discussion and analysis in the DEIS. A summary comparison of the environmental impacts
associated with the Standard Subdivision alternative is included in Appendix C and an
unabridged version of the environmental analysis conducted for the standard subdivision is
included as Appendix D.
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dish
m
an
-Mica R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 2-2
Standard Subdivision
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Drawing not to scale. This design was developed by Whipple Consulting Engineers. DOWL is not responsible for the content presented. 72 ywHFigure 2-3 Alternative 3 Site Plan
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dish
m
an
-Mica R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 2-3
Alternative 2a
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Drawing not to scale. This design was developed by Whipple Consulting Engineers. DOWL is not responsible for the content presented. 72 ywHDISHMAN-MICA RD.
SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166
JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
2/8/19 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS21 SOUTH PINES ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYING
TRAFFICPLANNINGLANDSCAPE
OTHER
PRD PAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2B
14, SEC. , T. N., R. E., W.M.SE 33 25 44 SW12, SEC.34, T.25N., R.44E., W.M. 14, SEC. , T. N., R. E., W.M.NE 4 24 44
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
VICINITY MAP P0.1
BNG
1"= 200'
N/A
X
W E
S
N
C
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-4
R-4
R-3
C
SPOK
A
N
E
COUN
T
Y
L
O
W
DENS
I
T
Y
RESID
E
N
T
I
A
L
SPOK
A
N
E
COUN
T
Y
LOW
D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
MULTI-FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
ESTATELOTS
floodpond
COMMERCIAL
COMMERCIAL
LEGEND
VICINITY MAP
THORPE ROAD MADISON ROADDISHMAN
-M
ICA
RO
AD
ZONINGWILBUR ROADE 40th Ave.HWY 27GUSTIN PIPE
3/05/19
COMPLETE UPDATE WITH REVISED FLOOD CONTROL PLAN43/05/19
trianglepond
A
COTTAGES
P:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\1166 PPLAT-P0.1-VICINITY MAP.dwg, 11/11/2020 1:51:34 PM, DWG To PDF.pc3
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 15
This page intentionally left blank.
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dish
m
an
-Mica R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 2-4
Alternative 2b
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Drawing not to scale. This design was developed by Whipple Consulting Engineers. DOWL is not responsible for the content presented. 72 ywHDISHMAN-MICA RD.
SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166
JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
2/8/19 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS21 SOUTH PINES ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYING
TRAFFICPLANNINGLANDSCAPE
OTHER
PRD PAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2B
14, SEC. , T. N., R. E., W.M.SE 33 25 44 SW12, SEC.34, T.25N., R.44E., W.M. 14, SEC. , T. N., R. E., W.M.NE 4 24 44
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
VICINITY MAP P0.1
BNG
1"= 200'
N/A
X
W E
S
N
C
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-4
R-4
R-3
C
SPOK
A
N
E
COUN
T
Y
L
O
W
DENS
I
T
Y
RESID
E
N
T
I
A
L
SPOK
A
N
E
COUN
T
Y
LOW
D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
MULTI-FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
ESTATELOTS
floodpond
COMMERCIAL
COMMERCIAL
LEGEND
VICINITY MAP
THORPE ROAD MADISON ROADDISHMAN
-M
ICA
RO
AD
ZONINGWILBUR ROADE 40th Ave.HWY 27GUSTIN PIPE
3/05/19
COMPLETE UPDATE WITH REVISED FLOOD CONTROL PLAN43/05/19
trianglepond
P:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\1166 PPLAT-P0.1-VICINITY MAP.dwg, 11/11/2020 9:51:04 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 17
This page intentionally left blank.
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dish
m
an
-Mica R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 2-5
Alternatives 2a & 2b Comparison
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Drawing not to scale. 72 ywHAlternatives 2A & 2B Comparison Spokane Valley, Washington | October 22, 2020
DISHMAN-MICA RD.SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166
JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
2/8/19 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS21 SOUTH PINES ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYING
TRAFFIC
PLANNING
LANDSCAPEOTHER
PRD PAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2B
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
PRELIMINARY PLAT COVER P0.0
BNG
1" = 200'
N/A
X
W E
S
N
C
PROJECTLOCATION
LOCATION MAP
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-4
R-4
R-3
C
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
RESID
E
N
T
I
A
L
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
RESID
E
N
T
I
A
L
UNIT/LOT DATA
PROPERTY AREA BREAKDOWN
LEGEND
ASSESSORS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTPAINTED HILLSSE 1/4, SEC. 33, SW 1/2 SEC 34 T. 25 N., R. 44 E. & SEC. 4, T. 24 N., R. 44 N., W.M.SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
SITE OVERVIEW
SITE DATA TABLE
ENGINEERING (CONTACT)SURVEYOR DEVELOPER
THORPE ROAD MADISON ROADDISHMAN
-M
ICA
ROAD
SHEET INDEX
REVISED FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM, ALL SHEETS19/18/16
REVISED VICINITY MAP-P0.1. ADDED SHEET P1.3210/19/16
ADDED SFHA BOUNDARY TO SHEETS P3.0-P3.5. ADDED SHEET P3.635/30/17
LOT DATA
FRONTAGE20' +30' +40' +50' +60' +70' +80' +TOTAL
P:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\Alt 2 Prel plat\1166 PPLAT-P0.0-COVER.dwg, 10/21/2020 11:41:07 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3DISHMAN-MICA RD.SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166
JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
2/8/19 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS21 SOUTH PINES ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYING
TRAFFIC
PLANNINGLANDSCAPEOTHER
PRD PAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2B
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
PRELIMINARY PLAT COVER P0.0
BNG
1" = 200'
N/A
X
W E
S
N
C
PROJECTLOCATION
LOCATION MAP
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-4
R-4
R-3
C
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
RESID
E
N
T
I
A
L
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
UNIT/LOT DATA
PROPERTY AREA BREAKDOWN
LEGEND
ASSESSORS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTPAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2BSE 1/4, SEC. 33, SW 1/2 SEC 34 T. 25 N., R. 44 E. & SEC. 4, T. 24 N., R. 44 N., W.M.SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
SITE OVERVIEW
SITE DATA TABLE
ENGINEERING (CONTACT)SURVEYOR DEVELOPER
THORPE ROAD MADISON ROADDISHMAN
-M
ICA
ROADP:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\1166 PPLAT-P0.0-COVER.dwg, 10/21/2020 11:38:28 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3DISHMAN-MICA RD.SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166
JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
2/8/19 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS21 SOUTH PINES ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYING
TRAFFICPLANNING
LANDSCAPE
OTHER
PRD PAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2B
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
PRELIMINARY PLAT COVER P0.0
BNG
1" = 200'
N/A
X
WE
S
N
C
PROJECTLOCATION
LOCATION MAP
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-4
R-4
R-3
C
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
RESID
E
N
T
I
A
L
UNIT/LOT DATA
PROPERTY AREA BREAKDOWN
LEGEND
ASSESSORS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTPAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2BSE 1/4, SEC. 33, SW 1/2 SEC 34 T. 25 N., R. 44 E. & SEC. 4, T. 24 N., R. 44 N., W.M.SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
SITE OVERVIEW
SITE DATA TABLE
ENGINEERING (CONTACT)SURVEYOR DEVELOPER
THORPE ROAD MADISON ROADDISHMAN
-M
ICA
RO
AD
P:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\1166 PPLAT-P0.0-COVER.dwg, 10/21/2020 11:38:28 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3Alternative 2A Site Overview1” = 400’Alternative 2B Site Overview1” = 400’
SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
(SOUTH)
ESTATE LOTS
COMMERCIAL
(NORTH)
MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
(SOUTH)
ESTATE LOTS
COMMERCIAL
(NORTH)
MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL
COTTAGE LOTS
DISHMAN-MICA RD.SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166
JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
2/8/19 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS21 SOUTH PINES ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYING
TRAFFIC
PLANNING
LANDSCAPEOTHER
PRD PAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2B
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
PRELIMINARY PLAT COVER P0.0
BNG
1" = 200'
N/A
X
W E
S
N
C
PROJECTLOCATION
LOCATION MAP
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-4
R-4
R-3
C
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW
D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW
D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
UNIT/LOT DATA
PROPERTY AREA BREAKDOWN
LEGEND
ASSESSORS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTPAINTED HILLSSE 1/4, SEC. 33, SW 1/2 SEC 34 T. 25 N., R. 44 E. & SEC. 4, T. 24 N., R. 44 N., W.M.SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
SITE OVERVIEW
SITE DATA TABLE
ENGINEERING (CONTACT)SURVEYOR DEVELOPER
THORPE ROAD MADISON ROADDISHMAN
-M
ICA
ROAD
SHEET INDEX
REVISED FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM, ALL SHEETS19/18/16
REVISED VICINITY MAP-P0.1. ADDED SHEET P1.3210/19/16
ADDED SFHA BOUNDARY TO SHEETS P3.0-P3.5. ADDED SHEET P3.635/30/17
LOT DATA
FRONTAGE 20' +30' +40' +50' +60' +70' +80' +TOTAL
P:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\Alt 2 Prel plat\1166 PPLAT-P0.0-COVER.dwg, 10/21/2020 11:41:07 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3DISHMAN-MICA RD.
SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166
JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
2/8/19 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS21 SOUTH PINES ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYINGTRAFFICPLANNING
LANDSCAPE
OTHER
PRD PAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2B
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
PRELIMINARY PLAT COVER P0.0
BNG
1" = 200'
N/A
X
W E
S
N
C
PROJECTLOCATION
LOCATION MAP
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-4
R-4
R-3
C
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
RESID
E
N
T
I
A
L
UNIT/LOT DATA
PROPERTY AREA BREAKDOWN
LEGEND
ASSESSORS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTPAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2BSE 1/4, SEC. 33, SW 1/2 SEC 34 T. 25 N., R. 44 E. & SEC. 4, T. 24 N., R. 44 N., W.M.SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
SITE OVERVIEW
SITE DATA TABLE
ENGINEERING (CONTACT)SURVEYOR DEVELOPER
THORPE ROAD MADISON ROADDISHMAN
-M
ICA
ROADP:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\1166 PPLAT-P0.0-COVER.dwg, 10/21/2020 11:38:28 AM, DWG To PDF.pc3DISHMAN-MICA RD.SPOKANE VALLEY,WA
DRAWN:
PROJ #:
REVIEWED:
DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 88
13-1166
JOB NUMBER
SHEET
TRW
13-1166
2/8/19 WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.
WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS21 SOUTH PINES ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227
CIVILSTRUCTURAL
SURVEYINGTRAFFICPLANNING
LANDSCAPE
OTHER
PRD PAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2B
VERTICAL:
HORIZONTAL:
SCALE:
REVISIONSNO. DATE BY
PRELIMINARY PLAT COVER P0.0
BNG
1" = 200'
N/A
X
W E
S
N
C
PROJECTLOCATION
LOCATION MAP
R-3
R-3
R-2
R-4
R-4
R-3
C
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
SPOK
A
N
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
LOW
D
E
N
SI
T
Y
RESID
E
N
TI
A
L
UNIT/LOT DATA
PROPERTY AREA BREAKDOWN
SINGLE FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
ESTATE LOTS
LEGEND
ASSESSORS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTPAINTED HILLS - ALTERNATE 2BSE 1/4, SEC. 33, SW 1/2 SEC 34 T. 25 N., R. 44 E. & SEC. 4, T. 24 N., R. 44 N., W.M.SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
SITE OVERVIEW
SITE DATA TABLE
ENGINEERING (CONTACT)SURVEYOR DEVELOPER
THORPE ROAD MADISON ROADDISHMAN
-M
ICA
ROAD
SINGLE FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
MULTI-FAMILYRESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL(SOUTH)
COMMERCIAL(NORTH)
FLOOD AREA
P:\WCE_WORK\2013 WCE PROJECTS\2013-1166 Walker - Painted Hills GC\DWG\1166 PPLAT-P0.0-COVER.dwg, 10/22/2020 3:33:51 PM, DWG To PDF.pc3
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 19
This page intentionally left blank.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 20
2.2.3 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is intended to avoid or to minimize the potential environmental impacts related to
the action alternatives that are proposed. The definition of mitigation under SEPA, that will be
used for the purposes of this analysis can be found in WAC 197-11-768 where:
“Mitigation” means:
(1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action;
(2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to
avoid or reduce impacts;
(3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment;
(4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action;
(5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
resources or environments; and/or
(6) Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.
Mitigation measures are addressed in the individual chapter sections devoted to the
environmental elements considered in this document.
2.2.4 Permits and Approvals Required for Implementation
It is anticipated that the following local, state and federal permits will be required to implement
the development contemplated under Alternative 2.
Local Permits/Authorizations
Preliminary Plat/ PRD
Transportation Concurrency Certificate (Complete dated 2-23-17)
Street Plan Approval, ROW Permits (COSV)
Sanitary Sewer Plan Approval (Spokane County)
Water Plan Approval (Water District 3)
Building Permits (COSV)
Landscape Plans (COSV)
Grading and Erosion Control Permit (COSV)
Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency (SRCAA) & Washington Department of
Ecology (WDOE) Air Quality Permits (as applicable)
City Floodplain Development Permit & Land Disturbance Permit (COSV)
Floodplain Development Permit & Land Disturbance Permit (Spokane County)
State Permits/Authorizations
Construction Stormwater General Permit (CSWGP)
Federal Permits/Authorizations
FEMA Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and LOMR
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 21
SECTION 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSEQUENCES
3.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT (GROUND AND SURFACE WATER)
The following section provides a description of the existing conditions of ground and surface
waters within the study area and the potential for the project alternatives to affect ground and
surface water quality. The ecological features of Chester Creek including habitat functions of
the creek and the associated riparian buffer are described in Section 3.4.3.1 Biological
Resources.
3.1.1 Affected Environment
3.1.1.1 Existing Hydrologic Conditions
The project site is in the Chester Creek basin in the southeastern portion of Water Resource
Inventory Area (WRIA) 57. Chester Creek originates south of the project site in an area
dominated by agricultural lands and rural home sites. The creek flows generally northward,
crosses through the southwest corner of the project site through a concrete box culvert and
terminates in an infiltration basin located approximately four miles south of the Spokane River
and northwest of the project site adjacent to Dishman-Mica Road. Peak flooding in the Chester
Creek basin typically occurs in winter, unlike the Spokane River system where flooding
typically occurs in early spring. Warm winds and rain can melt snow rapidly, leading to short-
duration runoff flooding during winter storms (Michael Baker Inc. 1990). During flood events,
Chester Creek has been noted to overtop its banks south of the project site and floodwaters
collect in topographically low areas east of the main channel (See Figure 3-1, Chester Creek
1997 Flood Event - Aerial Photo). These floodwaters from south of Thorpe Road eventually
reach the project site through three 15-inch culverts located under Thorpe Road approximately
500 feet east of where the main channel of Chester Creek crosses Thorpe Road. Under higher
flow conditions water also flows over the road and onto the project site at this same location
as shown in Figures 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 22
Figure 3-1: Chester Creek 1997 Flood Event – Aerial Photo1
Figure 3-2: Flooding West of Chester Main Channel (Viewing Eastward on Thorpe)2
1 Photo source: WEST Consultants, Inc.; Originally provided by Spokane County. Photo date and flood event
type unknown.
2 Photo taken by Whipple Engineering on March 14, 2017.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 23
Figure 3-3: Flooding East of Chester Main Channel (Viewing Westward on Thorpe)3
Spokane Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer
The Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Sole Source Aquifer, which is the primary water source
for over 700,000 people in the Spokane region, underlies the project site. The aquifer is a large
underground formation consisting of gravels, cobbles, and boulders and is reported to store 10
trillion gallons of water (MacInnis et al 2009). The aquifer extends from western Idaho to the
eastern area of Washington State. This underground formation extends south from near the
Bonner County-Kootenai County line in Idaho west of Lake Pend Oreille. From there it
extends south toward Coeur d’Alene Lake and then west into Washington through the
Spokane River Valley as shown in Figure 3-5. The aquifer follows the valley and terminates
near the confluence of the Spokane and Little Spokane Rivers west of the City of Spokane.
Water is contributed to the aquifer by adjacent lakes, streams, the Spokane River, and
precipitation. This highly permeable area of deposits is covered in many locations by a
relatively thin topsoil layer and is therefore susceptible to pollution. The Spokane Valley-
Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer was designated a Sole Source Aquifer in 1978.
On the project site the aquifer is overlain by a relatively slow-draining topsoil layer.
Groundwater depths vary on the site. Multiple geotechnical borings have been conducted on
the site by Inland Pacific Engineering Company (IPEC). Field investigations and borings have
been taken in different locations and at different times of the year. Geotechnical borings were
3 Photo taken by Whipple Engineering on February 17, 2017.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 24
taken at multiple times between April and October 2014 at locations immediately adjacent to
Chester Creek along the site. These borings found groundwater depths ranging from 7.5 to
18 feet, with shallower depths closer to Thorpe Road. (IPEC, Feb 12, 2015 / Revised Aug 29,
2016) Borings taken up to a depth of 25 feet near the Chester Creek crossing of Dishman-Mica
failed to reach the water table. Geotechnical borings taken in January 2015 found groundwater
depths ranging from 11 to 47 feet throughout the south-central portion of the site. (IPEC, July
23, 2016). Additional borings taken in March 2016 at the north end near the planned
stormwater infiltration facility found depths of 71 feet and deeper. Therefore, the composite of
investigations completed for the site indicate a moderately deep to very deep groundwater table
profile across the site, with the deepest locations at the north end of the site near the location
of the planned stormwater infiltration facility.
It should be noted that multiple infiltration tests have been conducted on the site. These include
both full-scale drywell tests and bore hole infiltration tests to determine the potential
infiltration rates expected from the proposed drywell facilities.
IPEC completed a full-scale drywell test on the site on May 6, 2016 and the results from this
analysis were documented in an August 21, 2017 report. This test determined that each drywell
should be assumed to have a design “outflow” rate of 1.05 cfs after applying a safety factor of
safety of 1.1. For a gravel gallery design the design outflow rate is divided by 600 square feet.
The 600 sf of surface area represents the interface surface of an inverted cone. The interface
surface is between the native soil and the drywell rock placed around each drywell. This
calculation results in a design infiltration rate of 1.8 x 10-3 cfs/square foot.
A full-scale drywell test, as conducted with the IPEC study, is considered the best method to
determine the actual operation or outflow rate that a drywell would have. The installation
method involves first excavating the native soil, then lining the area with a geofabric material,
covering all exposed native material, installing drywell barrels and then backfilling the voids
with drain rock. Once the drain rock is placed, geofabric is installed over the top of the drain
rock up to the cone of the drywell and then backfilled. This method ensures the highest
infiltration rates into the native soil material and best replicates the function of the proposed
drywells.
In a 2019 review of the Whipple Consulting Engineers infiltration design for the preferred
alternative, the City of Spokane Valley’s third-party engineering consultant, Stantec,
recommended additional infiltration testing, within the site area where the proposed infiltration
pond will be located. This was due to the fact that the full-scale drywell that was tested was
230 feet from the location of the gravel/drywell gallery in Alternative 2a to avoid impacts
within the 100-year floodplain. In response to this request, the applicant hired Budinger &
Associates, Inc. to perform additional infiltration testing within the location of the
gravel/drywell gallery. Because the future gravel/drywell gallery is within the 100-year
floodplain, the City determined that the installation of a drywell in this location would exceed
minimum SEPA review thresholds. Therefore, a full-scale drywell test was not conducted in
this location, as was done with the May 2016 IPEC test, and instead Budinger & Associates
conducted infiltration testing using bore holes.
The bore hole testing utilized an 8-inch diameter steel casing drilled down to a depth of 60
feet. For the infiltration test the bottom 30 feet of a bore hole was filled with pea gravel. The
casing pipe was then lifted 30 feet exposing the pea gravel to the native soil. It has been noted
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 25
by the engineers that this method introduces a layer of fine silty material against the casing
pipe. With the removal of the casing pipe the layer of silty material remains between the
interface of the native soil and the pea gravel and can inhibit infiltration. Once established the
bore holes were filled with water and a constant hydraulic head was maintained. The measured
water provided an outflow rate for the bore hole. An average of the observed rates from three
bore hole tests resulted in an infiltration rate of 4.6296 x 10-6 cfs/square foot, which is less than
the IPEC full scale drywell test. This result is documented in the June 1, 2020 Budinger report.
While the results of the two infiltration tests vary considerably, WCE believes that the true
design infiltration rate lies somewhere in between. As a result, the applicant has prepared two
alternatives under the preferred development. Alternative 2a has been designed with
stormwater management facilities assuming high infiltration rates per the May 2016 IPEC
study and Alternative 2b was developed to reflect the much slower infiltration rates of the
Budinger & Associates, Inc. study. These two variations of Alternative 2 are discussed in
greater detail throughout this document.
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dis
h
m
a
n
-
M
i
c
a
R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 3‐4 Existing Drainage Features- Site & Off-site
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
0 2,0001,000 FeetSource: GIS data provided by Whipple Consulting, the City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County.
Current Drainage Features
Triangle Pond
Painted Hills Site Hwy 27Chest
e
r
C
r
e
e
k
Culvert
Gustin Ditch
!!!!
!
!
!
!
e
e
e
e
e
ee e ee
e
e
Stream/ Stormwater Flow
eDirection of Flow eeee
e
e
e
e
!
!
!
Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA, Sources: Esri, Garmin, USGS, NPS
Figure 3‐5 Spokane Valley - Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
0 105MilesSource: GIS data provided by Spokane County and USGS, NOAA, ESRI, and NPS.
^_
Legend
Water Bodies
Aquifer Boundary ^_Painted Hills Site
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 28
3.1.2 Environmental Consequences
3.1.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
Under Alternative 1, there will be no physical improvements on-site or off-site that would
affect stormwater flows or change ground conditions. Floodwaters that currently reach the
project site will continue to reach the site and will remain on site until they are able to infiltrate
to the aquifer.
Under Alternative 1, there would be no impacts to the channel of Chester Creek. Floodwaters
would continue to reach the site as they currently do and would remain onsite until they are
able to infiltrate naturally to the underlying Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer.
Because no change to ground conditions would occur, Alternative 1 would not result in any
effects on the Spokane Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer.
3.1.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High Infiltration
Under Alternative 2a, the widening of Thorpe Road to meet City road standards would require
a 15-foot extension of the Chester Creek bridge. Additionally, a new box culvert would be
installed at Thorpe Road in the location where three 15-inch pipes currently convey
stormwaters onto the Painted Hills site from the property to the south. Floodwater that enters
the project site under this alternative would be collected in a series of pipes and swales and
would infiltrate into the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie aquifer via an engineered
infiltration basin. No change in volumes of water that reach the aquifer via the project site are
anticipated to occur under Alternative 2a.
Under Alternative 2a, there would be no direct impact to the channel of Chester Creek from
the widening of Thorpe Road.
Under Alternative 2a, there would be no impact to the volume of the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum
Prairie aquifer. Water that currently recharges the aquifer would continue to recharge the
aquifer through permeable areas on-site including the infiltration pond installed in the northeast
corner of the development and therefore no impacts to the existing groundwater levels are
anticipated.
3.1.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration
Under Alternative 2b, as with Alternative 2a, the widening of Thorpe Road to meet City road
standards would result in an additional 15 feet of the main channel of Chester Creek being
bridged by the new roadway surface.
As described for Alternative 2a, under Alternative 2b, floodwater that enters the project site
would be collected in a series of pipes and swales and would infiltrate into the underlying
aquifer via an engineered infiltration basin. The volumes of water that convey through the
project site to planned stormwater management and infiltration facilities under Alternative 2b
would be identical to Alternative 2a.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 29
As described for Alternative 2a, under Alternative 2b, there would be no direct impact to the
channel of Chester Creek from the widening of Thorpe Road; and there would be no impact to
the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie aquifer. Water that currently recharges the aquifer would
continue to recharge through the permeable floor of the infiltration basin proposed in the
northeast corner of the site.
3.1.3 Mitigation Measures
3.1.3.1 Alternative 1
No mitigation measures would be employed with Alternative 1 as no impacts would result.
3.1.3.2 Alternative 2a
Stormwater quality and quantity management methods would be consistent with the Spokane
Regional Stormwater Manual (SRSM). These may include the installation of grassed
percolation areas, evaporation ponds, drywells, and gravel galleries depending upon soil types
at the locations of the proposed facilities. Stormwater management methods from the Eastern
Washington Low Impact Design (LID) manual or LID ponds may be employed to minimize
the extent of runoff from new on-site impervious surfaces created with the on-site
development.
3.1.3.3 Alternative 2b
Under Alternative 2b, stormwater quality and quantity management methods would be the
same as those described for Alternative 2a, except that under Alternative 2b the permeable
infiltration basin adjacent to the dry wells would be larger.
3.1.4 Cumulative Effects
Because on-site and regional development would be required to employ stormwater quality
and quantity management measures consistent with the SRSM, no cumulative effects are
anticipated.
3.2 BUILT ENVIRONMENT (LAND USE AND FLOOD HAZARD AREAS)
3.2.1 Affected Environment
Land Use/Zoning
The current land uses adjacent to the site include a mix of dense residential development on
former agricultural land, remaining undeveloped small tracts of agricultural land, and forested
land with varying densities of residential development. The site is currently a non-operating
golf course, and the former club house has been repurposed as a commercial restaurant.
The current zoning classification is R-3, Single Family Residential, and the current
Comprehensive Plan designation of the Painted Hills site is Low Density Residential (LDR).
From the north property line, dense residential development extends northward into the City.
A church and residential development border the Painted Hills site at the northwest (NW)
corner. A Central Valley School district campus including University High school, Chester
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 30
Elementary School and Horizon Middle School is located northeast (NE) of the site. From the
east property line (S. Madison Road) hay fields and pasture extend 250 to 500 feet toward the
toe of the surrounding forested slopes. Low density rural residential development extends east
up the forested hillsides. Commercial and single-family residential development extends south
from Thorpe Road except for the Chester Creek drainage and associated flood plain areas
which are mainly forested and small tract agriculture. Undeveloped forested hillsides extend
about 1,200 feet east to the densely developed Ponderosa neighborhood. A mixture of
commercial and residential land uses extends NW along Dishman-Mica Road.
Sources of Flooding
Floodwaters have been known to enter the project site from two separate locations: 1) from a
split flow path originating from the main channel of Chester Creek south of the project site
(known as the Golf Course Overflow Reach), and 2) from the hills to the east of Madison Road
which borders the eastern boundary of the subject property. The effective FEMA Flood
Insurance Study (FIS), as shown on Figure 3-6, indicates that floodwater could enter the site
from a third location during the 1% annual-chance-flood event (100-year flood). Based on the
FIS, floodwaters originating from an unnamed tributary to Chester Creek near State Route
(SR) 27 could potentially reach the project site from the northeast.
Floodwater enters the project site from the south when the main channel of Chester Creek
overflows its banks approximately 3,000 feet upstream (south) of Thorpe Road. This
floodwater flows north along a topographically low area east of the main channel of the creek
and reaches the project site through three 15-inch culverts located under Thorpe Road
approximately 500 feet east of where the main channel of Chester Creek crosses Thorpe Road.
Under higher flow conditions water also flows over the road and onto the project site at this
same location.
The floodwater originating from south of the project site does not rejoin the mainstem of
Chester Creek due to topography and the presence of a small on-site levee system located along
the right bank of the main channel, as well as the Dishman-Mica Road embankment located
north of the levee. Instead, the floodwater remains on the site until it infiltrates (WEST 2016).
Runoff also reaches the project site from the east. Water from the hillside above and east of
Madison Road flows to a flat area adjacent to the east side of Madison Road and is conveyed
onto the project site through four 15-inch culverts (a fifth culvert exists but does not convey
water onto the site because the outlet is buried), (Personal Communication with Ken Puhn,
WEST Consultants 2018). The area east of Madison Road is included in the mapped FEMA
100-year floodplain as shown on Figure 3-6.
There are no natural outlets for flood water once it reaches the project site. Once the site is
inundated, water remains until it can infiltrate to the aquifer below. Depending upon the
amount of floodwater present, the southern portion of the project site can remain flooded for
up to 40 days. (Biology, Soil & Water 2019)
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dis
h
m
a
n
-
M
i
c
a
R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 3‐6 Existing FEMA Mapped Floodplain Areas
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
0 2,0001,000 FeetSource: GIS data provided by West Consultants, Inc., the City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County.
Existing Floodplain
Floodway
1 % Annual Chance Flood Hazard (100-year Floodplain)0.2 % Annual Chance Flood Hazard (500-year Floodplain)Hwy 27
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 32
An unnamed tributary to Chester Creek near Highway 27 east of the site currently conveys
stormwater flows towards the site via a 36-inch culvert (which currently limits flow volume
capacity) and this culvert empties into a perched ditch that flows west across the Gustin
property (Parcel Number 45344.9108). The floodwater flows through the ditch and into the
old borrow pit (triangle detention pond) within the triangular parcel located northeast of E
40th Avenue (Parcel Number 45343.9052). The existing ditch has been maintained over
the years by the property owner (Gustin) to ensure that any floodwater that comes out of
the culvert under Highway 27 will be conveyed to the existing triangle detention pond. This
off-site area is included in the mapped FEMA 100-year floodplain. The south embankment
of the perched ditch is considered by FEMA to be a levee that is not certified to contain the
100-year flood, therefore the FEMA FIS also includes mapping that represents a failure of the
south bank during in which floodwaters move south to a lower elevation and then flow west to
the project site, bypassing the triangle parcel pit.
FEMA Floodplain Designation
FEMA’s 100-year floodplain designation has both regulatory and financial implications that
affect development. From a regulatory perspective, any development within the 100-year
floodplain in Spokane Valley triggers review under Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)
Section 21.30 (Floodplain Regulations). For properties within unincorporated Spokane
County, floodplain development triggers review under Spokane County Code (SCC) Section
3.20 (Flood Damage Protection). These regulations stipulate measures that must be taken in
order to change site grades within a floodplain, including compensatory measures to mitigate
potential off-site flooding if fill is proposed within a floodplain. The regulations also include
floodproofing measures for new structures in the floodplain and other development standards.
Adoption of these local standards is necessary for a community to participate in FEMA’s
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) which enables a community to have access to flood
insurance. If a property can successfully be removed from FEMA’s mapped 100-year
floodplain through FEMA’s LOMR process, it can be relieved of both the regulatory burden
of compliance with the local floodplain ordinance and also of the financial burden of the
requirement to obtain flood insurance, which is a requirement of any Federal Housing
Authority (FHA)-insured mortgage.
Due to the lack of an outlet, and the potential for floodwaters to enter the site from two separate
locations, the project site is designated by FEMA as a compensatory storage area in the 2010
Flood Insurance Study (FEMA 2010). Additionally, much of the project site is included in the
mapped FEMA 100-year floodplain. See Figure 3-6, Existing Mapped FEMA Floodplain
Areas.
The overall purpose of the “compensatory” designation is to ensure that development activities
do not cause an adverse impact on flood elevations within the designated compensatory storage
area, or upstream or downstream of the development. The designation is intended to ensure
that there is no increase in the volume of water reaching the downstream sites due to reduced
infiltration capacity or due to fill within the area that could cause an increase to flood elevations
on neighboring properties.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 33
Under the compensatory storage area designation, any loss of flood storage capacity on the site
due to placement of fill must be mitigated with an equivalent compensatory volume of storage
or through a reduction in flows such that the net condition causes no adverse impact to the base
flood or floodway elevations within the storage area. In addition, loss of infiltration capacity
due to placement of fill or impervious surfaces must be mitigated in such a way that the
decrease in infiltration capacity will cause no adverse impact to the base flood or floodway
elevations within or upstream or downstream of the storage area. In summary, development
activities within a compensatory storage area must be compensated or mitigated to ensure no
adverse impacts to flood levels.
3.2.2 Environmental Consequences
3.2.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
Under Alternative 1, there would be no modifications to the existing system of culverts and
ditches that convey floodwater onto the project site. There would be no change in the mapping
of the 100-year flood plain on-site or off-site and the project site would maintain its FEMA
compensatory storage area designation. Under this alternative when Chester Creek overtops
its banks south of the project site, floodwaters would potentially inundate the property south
of Thorpe Road and flow under, and potentially over Thorpe Road to reach the project site.
Floodwaters that reach the site from the south would reside on the project site and on the
property to the south, and naturally infiltrate to the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie aquifer.
No impacts to land use or the extent of the 100-year floodplain are anticipated under
Alternative 1 because no alterations would be implemented on or adjacent to the project site.
Therefore, all properties that are currently subject to the floodplain regulations and the NFIP
would remain as currently mapped by FEMA.
3.2.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development-High Infiltration
Sources of Floodwater
Under Alternative 2a the Chester Creek floodwaters will continue to reach the site and will be
received and managed through a series of conveyance and recharge improvements. The
potential source of floodwater from the unnamed tributary to Chester Creek NE of the project
site will be eliminated due to placement of the existing Gustin Ditch into a pipe that connects
directly to the triangle pond detention basin where stormwaters will infiltrate.
Floodplain Map Modifications and Floodwater Management Improvements
Under Alternative 2a the project proposes to address the FEMA requirements associated with
the compensatory storage area designation through obtaining a CLOMR which will seek to
remove most of the floodplain from the project site based on the proposed flood control
facilities and fill. The CLOMR process involves FEMA's evaluation of the hydrologic or
hydraulic characteristics of a flooding source on a site or sites and the result of modifications
of the existing regulatory floodway, the effective Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), or the Special
Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). The letter is a conditional authorization to amend the NFIP map.
The CLOMR allows FEMA to recognize specific areas as above the 100-year base flood
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 34
elevation through applicant-completed fill and grading activities. Once land modifications are
completed, the applicant must request a LOMR to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) to
finalize the removal of specific areas from the 100-year floodplain designation. "As-built"
certification and other data must be submitted to support the revision request.
Under both Alternative 2a and 2b, the floodplain map revision process would result in the
removal of approximately 48 acres of FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain from the Painted
Hills site, and another 44 acres of 100-year floodplain from off-site properties. See Figure 3-
8, Alternatives 2a and 2b - Existing and Future Floodplain Areas. As noted on this figure, the
entire off-site area immediately east of Madison Road currently designated as 100-year
floodplain would lose its floodplain designation and the potential for ponding in that area from
riverine flood flows would be effectively eliminated. Alterative 2a (as well as 2b) would also
remove currently designated floodplain between the northeast corner of the project site and SR
27, including the Gustin property.
Under Alternative 2a, floodwaters would be controlled and managed, and compensatory
storage requirements would be addressed on-site through a combination of enhanced
conveyance facilities (culverts and pipes), infiltration galleries, and imported fill.
Overflows from the Chester Creek channel on the south side of Thorpe Road would be
conveyed north under the road through a new 30-foot by 3-foot deep box culvert with
capacity to pass 500-year flood flows along the Golf Course Overflow Path without
overtopping Thorpe Road. This new box culvert would replace the existing set of three,
undersized 15-inch culverts. On the north side of the new box culvert, floodwater would
enter an open channel that connects to a sloped headwall holding two 48-inch concrete
pipes. These pipes would have capacity to convey flood volumes up to the 500-year flood.
The two 48-inch pipes would extend north for approximately 2,100 feet along Madison
Road, and connect to each of the existing 18-inch culverts in Madison Road. These
connections would allow the design flow rate of 15 cfs from the Madison Hills to be added
to the 91 cfs, for a total design flow rate of 106 cfs.
The two 48-inch pipes would end at a vertical headwall where the floodwater would be
released onto a concrete pad and flow across a level spreader into a sloped, 269 cfs
capacity biofiltration swale. Suspended solids in the floodwater would be filtered out by
tall grasses planted in the biofiltration swale. At the end of the biofiltration swale, the
water would enter a settling pond where additional suspended sediments would precipitate
to the floor of the pond. Water would be retained in the settling pond until the pond depth
exceeds 1 foot, at which point the water would flow over a 20-foot-wide rock weir into
either a 1.4 or 9.3-acre infiltration pond that would be 2 feet below the elevation of the
rock weir.
The floodwater infiltration system is designed to ensure that floodwater can infiltrate on-
site under normal ground conditions as well as in situations where the ground is frozen
and infiltration through the ground is not possible or is extremely limited. Under normal
conditions, floodwater will have the opportunity to infiltrate through all permeable
surfaces after exiting the two 48-inch pipes, including the biofiltration swale, the settling
pond, the infiltration pond, and the gravel infiltration gallery containing the dry wells.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 35
When the ground is frozen and infiltration through the ground surface is restricted, and
water levels within the gravel gallery rises by 1 foot in elevation, the water would crest
over the rims of the 48 planned drywells and infiltrate into the native soils. The infiltration
trenches would have a design capacity of 162 cfs, per the IPEC infiltration rate.
Under Alternative 2a, the flood control system would have the capacity to handle the peak
100-yr event in the flood modeling scenario in which existing non-certified levees fail and
a flow rate of 106 cfs multiplied by a “factor of safety” of approximately 1.5 reaches the
system (Whipple 2018).
In addition to managing the floodwater from off-site that enters the project site, Alternative 2a
would also modify the Gustin Ditch located off-site to the northeast of the project site, from an
open ditch to a 36-inch pipe, to eliminate floodwaters from entering the site from sources to
the east. The piping of the Gustin Ditch would remove the future possibility of the ditch
flooding the lowlands to the south if the south embankment were to fail as depicted in the
FEMA FIS. Alternative 2a would also deepen the triangle pond detention basin and install 18
new drywells in the pond bottom to increase the infiltration capacity of the pond and to further
protect against potential flooding of the area west of SR 27 and east of the project site.
The implementation of Alternative 2a will require the flood hazard management system to
remain in optimal condition in perpetuity. For conservative planning purposes, each element
of the system has been designed to accommodate more water than the design storm.
The functioning of the 48-inch pipes that capture and convey Chester Creek overflow water to
the infiltration basin at the north end of the site, and the infiltration basin itself are of particular
importance because of the potential consequences of their failure. Due to their importance in
preventing on-site flooding, the conveyance pipes have been designed to accommodate a
“factor of safety” that assumes that 1.5 times more water (145 cfs) would reach the facility
than the modeled design storm (106 cfs). In addition, the facilities have been designed for a
100-year lifespan. The infiltration pond installed with both Alternatives 2a and 2b has been
designed to infiltrate 290.76 ac – ft over a period of weeks, and the dry well galleries have
been included in the design to effectively infiltrate the peak flow rate of the 100-year storm for
when the infiltration capacity of the infiltration pond is compromised due to frozen ground
conditions. The gravel gallery and dry wells will continue to function when the surrounding
native soils are frozen to ensure that floodwater will not back up into surrounding areas.
Specific guidance for maintaining each element and the overall system operating optimally is
presented in Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Manual (Appendix E).
It is anticipated that the maintenance of the flood control system will be the responsibility of a
homeowner’s association (HOA) formed for the Painted Hills project. The HOA’s designated
contractor would mow the pond, visually inspect for debris and the buildup of silts in the
bottom of catch basins and manholes, and have the debris removed by a vactor truck to ensure
that the system and its infiltration capacity is adequately maintained.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 36
Phasing
Under Alternative 2a the flood management improvements would be constructed in the first
phase of development before any new residential or commercial development would be
initiated. The initial phase would include all improvements for managing floodwaters that enter
the site from off-site sources. Specifically, it is expected that the following improvements
would occur in Phase 1:
Excavate the park area and north pond area and use the excavated material to fill
against the existing levee adjacent to the Chester Creek channel. Fill will be placed by
special inspection to the compaction requirements of the geotechnical engineer.
Excavate gravel gallery and place fabric, rock and drywells
Form final contours of the park area, north pond, settling pond, and bioswale. Seed and
establish proposed grasses on the bottom of these features and on sloped surfaces.
Install a 30-foot by 45-foot by 3-foot depth box culvert in Thorpe Road.
Form concrete open channel and headwall.
Install two (2) 48-inch pipes along the west side of Madison Road with manholes at
connection points to 18-inch culverts that will receive stormwater flows coming from
the east side of Madison Road.
In addition to these improvements, it is anticipated that Phase 1 would include the clearing and
grubbing of future development areas, including the removal of the existing organic soil layer
in the northeast corner of the site to expose the more-permeable gravel layer located
immediately below it.
The cleared soil will be stockpiled on site and erosion control measures would be implemented
consistent with the local grading and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) construction stormwater permitting requirements for the project.
Under Alternative 2a, once the site has been cleared, the southern open space area would be
excavated, creating a depression that would serve as a temporary repository to capture any
floodwater that enters the project site during this initial construction phase. Following the
excavation of the southern open space depression, excavation of the infiltration basin on the
north end of the project site would be completed. The capacity of these two basins would be
designed to capture and infiltrate a 100-year storm event, should such an event occur while the
project is under construction The material excavated to create the two basins would be
evaluated for its suitability as fill material and if it is deemed suitable, would be placed along
the existing on-site levee east of the main channel of Chester Creek to bolster the flood
protection capacity of this existing non-certified levee and begin the overall filling of the site.
Flood Management Facilities and Maintenance
Critical flood management facilities include the on-site infiltration basin and dry well galleries,
the two 48-inch pipes that would convey floodwaters from off site to the infiltration facilities
at the north end of the site, the off-site pipe that would convey water that currently flows
through Gustin ditch, and the off-site Gustin pond and associated drywells.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 37
According to the manufacturers’ specifications, the anticipated useful life of the conveyance
pipes is 100 years and the anticipated useful lifespan of the dry wells, because they will be
mostly underground and will not be exposed to the effects of weathering, is likely greater than
100 years.
The Homeowners Association (HOA), consisting of the owners of each residential, multi-
family, and commercial lot within the Painted Hills PRD project would be responsible for the
continued operation and maintenance, including repair and replacement as needed, of these
facilities.
The Operations and Maintenance Plan for Painted Hills Residential Development Flood
Control System & Plat Amenities (O&M Plan) includes detailed descriptions of how the
facilities would be maintained, and includes provisions for a Sinking Fund to be set up to
receive regular HOA member deposits to be used for paying future costs and debts. Future
costs could include planned and unplanned operation and maintenance costs along with future
replacement costs for the storm drainage facilities.
Per the O & M Manual, the developer will initiate the sinking fund with a deposit value that
represents the future cost to replace the flood control system and a year of the annual cost for
maintenance, and operation of all open space and common facilities (at full build-out)
throughout the project. This also includes the off-site improvements at the Gustin Ditch and
Triangle Pond. In addition to the developer’s initial contribution, the fund would be fulfilled
and grown through monthly or yearly HOA fees from lot owners within the PRD.
Per the O & M Manual the HOA would be required to provide an annual report to the Spokane
Valley Public Works Department describing the general status of the sinking fund account,
and describing specific inspections, findings, and maintenance performed. A detailed summary
of the estimated operation, maintenance and replacement costs for common areas and storm
and floodwater management facilities is provided in the O&M Manual in Appendix E.
Spokane County and the City of Spokane Valley and their authorized agents would be granted
access rights for routine inspection and emergency repairs of the flood control facilities but
would not incur the responsibility to perform these functions at any time.
3.2.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development-Low Infiltration
Sources and Extent of Floodwater
The sources and extent of floodwater that have been known to enter the project site in the past
will be the same for Alternative 2b as 2a.
Floodplain Map Modifications and Floodwater Management Improvements
The floodplain map revision for on-site and off-site areas for Alternative 2b would be identical
to Alternative 2a. Under Alternative 2b, the floodplain map revision process would eventually
result in the removal of approximately 48 acres of FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain from
the Painted Hills site, and another 44 acres of 100-year floodplain from off-site properties.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 38
Under Alternative 2b, as with Alternative 2a floodwaters would be controlled and managed,
and compensatory storage requirements would be addressed on-site through a combination of
enhanced conveyance facilities (culverts and pipes), infiltration galleries, and imported fill.
The only difference between the floodwater management systems associated with the two PRD
scenarios is that under Alternative 2b, in order to accommodate the lower infiltration
capacity of the native soils, the infiltration pond would occupy 9.3 acres, 7.9 acres more
than the Alternative 2a infiltration pond
Phasing
As described for Alternative 2a, under Alternative 2b the flood management improvements
would be constructed in the first phase of development. This initial phase would include all
improvements for managing floodwaters that enter the site from off-site sources. As described
for Alternative 2a, under Alterative 2b it is expected that the following improvements would
occur in Phase 1:
Excavate the north settling pond area and use the excavated material to fill against the
existing levee adjacent to the Chester Creek channel. Fill will be placed by special
inspection to the compaction requirements of the geotechnical engineer.
Excavate gravel gallery and place fabric, rock and drywells.
Form final contours of the park area, north pond, settling pond, and bioswale. Seed and
establish proposed grasses on the bottom of these features and on sloped surfaces.
Install a 30-foot by 45-foot by 3-foot deep box culvert in Thorpe Road.
Form concrete open channel and headwall.
Install two (2) 48-inch pipes along the west side of Madison Road with manholes at
connection points to 18-inch culverts that will receive stormwater flows coming from
and the east side of Madison Road.
The Gustin Pipe and Triangle Pond construction as an offsite improvement can be
constructed at any point during the first construction phase.
If the construction of the flood control system has to be phased over a winter season, and a flood occurs during construction, the first steps of construction will provide a great deal of mitigation for that flood event. As the north pond is located in the regional low point, whatever level of flood event occurs will continue to gravity flow to the excavated pond. The floodwaters would travel as they currently do or within portions of the completed construction. It is not anticipated that construction activities will redirect floodwater where it has not been currently mapped.
Flood Management Facilities and Maintenance
The flood management facilities installed with Alternative 2b and the maintenance
requirements for these facilities are identical to those of Alternative 2a.
2040208021202160
220022402060
2020
2100
22802
1
4
0
2180
23202000 21202040
2 0 0 0
2 200
2120
2120
208023202080
2 0 2 0
2160 20802020
2320
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dish
m
an-Mica Rd Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Figure 3-7Alternative 2A/2B Proposed Drainage &Floodwater Management FeaturesPainted Hills Residential Development DEIS
0 2,0001,000
FeetSource: GIS data provided by Whipple Consulting, the City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County.
Proposed Drainage Features
Triangle Pond Property Hwy 27Chester Creek
Replace 18" Culvert Residential Development Boundary
"
!
!
!
!
!2-48" Pipes "Box Culvert
"
Infiltration Basin Biofiltration Swale
Open Space / Emergency Flood(Alt 2)
Pipe Containing Gustin Ditch
Open Trench
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dish
m
an
-Mica R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Figure 3-8
Alternative 2A/2B- Existing & Future Floodplain
Areas
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
0 0.40.2
MilesSource: GIS data provided by West Consultants, Inc., the City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County.
Existing Floodplain Areas
Floodway
1 % Annual Chance Flood Hazard (100-year Floodplain)
0.2 % Annual Chance Flood Hazard (500-year Floodplain)
Alternative 2 Resulting Floodplain Areas
Floodway
1 % Annual Chance Flood Hazard (100-year Floodplain)
0.2 % Annual Chance Flood Hazard (500-year Floodplain)72 ywH
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 41
3.2.3 Mitigation Measures
Under Alternatives 2a and 2b, the following mitigation measures will be required to control
potential impacts from floodwaters on the built environment.
An HOA would be established for the purpose of managing a maintenance program for
open spaces and infrastructure throughout the project, including the on-site flood and
stormwater infrastructure.
An O&M Manual will be established for the HOA and will govern the management
and maintenance of all stormwater and floodwater management facilities (See
Appendix E. Operation and Maintenance Manual). This O&M Manual provides
detailed maintenance requirements for all critical storm and flood water infrastructure
elements, which include:
o Vegetation and erosion control maintenance of all on-site open space areas
o Catch basins and stormwater manholes throughout the project
o Cross culverts (18-inch) and flap gates from Madison Road
o Bio-infiltration swale
o Roadside swales
o Settling pond
o Infiltration field and drywells
o Access roads and parking pads (to allow for the parking of maintenance
vehicles)
o 36-inch storm pipe within the Gustin Ditch (off-site improvement)
o Triangle pond improvements including drywells and gravel access maintenance
road
The HOA will be responsible for securing a “contracted entity” (CE) for long-term
maintenance of critical infrastructure. Responsibilities of the CE will include:
o Annually inspecting the pipe openings on each end to ensure there is no
blockage or damage to the ends;
o Every three years or after substantial runoff, performing a TV inspection of the
pipe looking for blockages, damage, etc. Visual inspection can be made at pipe
manhole locations by authorized maintenance personnel.
o Removing sediment build-up from the 48-inch pipes installed with the project.
o Repairing any sections of damaged pipe,
o Visually inspecting the concrete channel, headwalls, and trash racks for damage
or corrosion that would compromise the trash rack integrity twice per year.
o In August or September, prior to each rainy season, inspect each trash rack to
ensure that there is no debris present and, if so, clear the debris.
o Following large storm events or rapid snow melt events perform a visual
inspection and remove any deleterious debris and trash.
A sinking fund for the repair and maintenance of critical floodwater management
infrastructure will be established and maintained in perpetuity to ensure the long-term
viability and capacity of the HOA to maintain the critical flood infrastructure. The
required maintenance and replacement items for floodwater infrastructure are included
in detail in the O&M Manual in Appendix E.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 42
A performance surety bond will be required by the City of Spokane Valley during the
construction of the facility, to ensure its completion.
3.2.4 Indirect Effects
Potential indirect effects could result from the removal of the 100-year floodplain designation
from approximately 44 acres of off-site properties. By reducing regulatory and financial
barriers to development of these off-site properties, Alternatives 2a and 2b could indirectly
enhance and facilitate the development of these off-site properties, which are predominantly
zoned for low density residential use by the City and County. Environmental impacts of those
off-site developments would be addressed through individual local regulatory and SEPA
reviews.
3.2.5 Cumulative Effects
No cumulative effects are anticipated when considering the proposed action alternatives and
other activities in the project vicinity.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 43
3.3 TRANSPORTATION
In conjunction with the land use application that was submitted to the City for the Painted Hills
PRD project (Alternative 2a), a traffic impact analysis (TIA) was completed on September 14,
2016 by Whipple. The TIA is incorporated into this DEIS by reference and includes detailed
information regarding existing (2015) and future (2025) traffic conditions surrounding the
Painted Hills site. (See Appendix F)
Future traffic conditions were reported both with and without implementation of the PRD
project to determine the extent to which the PRD project might be responsible for any level-
of-service (LOS) deficiencies on the local transportation network. The TIA uses trip generation
estimates for the project based on specific land use code categories from the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. From those estimates,
the TIA evaluates how study intersections perform under current and future conditions relative
to city-adopted LOS standards. The land uses designated for the project in the TIA and the
corresponding ITE codes are provided in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1: Transportation Impact Analysis Land Use Types (TIA Table 5)
Description Number of
Units / KSF ITE Land Use Code
Cottage Style Single Family Lots 52 Units Residential Townhouses — 230
Single Family Residential 206 Units Single Family Residential — 210
Single Family Residential Estate Type 42 Units Single Family Residential — 210
Apartments 228 Units Apartments — 220
Apartments (mixed use) (North) 52 units Apartments — 220
Commercial Development (North) 13.4 KSF Shopping Center — 820
Commercial Development (South) 9.0 KSF Shopping Center — 820
Existing Restaurant (South) 4.0 KSF Quality Restaurant — 931
To supplement the 2016 TIA, Whipple prepared a letter, dated November 13, 2018, addressed
to Ray Wright at the City of Spokane Valley, which concludes that the traffic volumes recorded
for the Painted Hills PRD in the 2016 TIA remain reasonably accurate (with a variation of
approximately one percent or less in volume) based on recent traffic counts collected.
Therefore, the findings from the 2016 TIA continue to present a reasonable assessment of the
expected impacts of the Painted Hills PRD on the surrounding road network. A summary of
the 2016 TIA findings is described further below.
The standards below are established by the City consistent with Chapter 5 of the Spokane
Valley Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 3 of the Spokane Valley Street Standards. LOS
designations provide a means for evaluating operational performance of intersections. As
identified in Figure 29 of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, LOS designations are
described as noted in Table 3-2.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 44
Table 3-2: Level of Service Descriptions
Level of Service Description
A Free-flowing conditions
B Stable operating conditions
C Stable operating conditions, but individual motorists are affected by the
interaction with other motorists
D High density of motorists, but stable flow
E Near-capacity operations with speeds reduced to a low but uniform speed
F Over capacity with long delays
As noted on page 5-85 of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, the City requires the
following minimum LOS within the City:
A minimum of LOS D is required for major arterial corridors.
A minimum of LOS D is required for signalized intersections not on major arterial
corridors.
A minimum of LOS E is required for unsignalized intersections (LOS F is acceptable
if the peak hour traffic signal warrant is not met).
3.3.1 Affected Environment
3.3.1.1 Study Area
The overall transportation network in the vicinity of the Painted Hills site consists of a state
route, urban principal arterials, collectors, and local access roads as described further below.
Dishman-Mica Road extends south and southeast from Sprague Avenue to SR 27, for
approximately 7.4 miles. Dishman-Mica Road is a northwest/southeast two-way, two-and five-
lane minor-principal arterial. Dishman-Mica Road is an arterial that serves the residential
neighborhoods extending from Sprague Avenue to Bowdish Road. Dishman-Mica Road
intersects with 8th Avenue, 16th Avenue, 32nd Avenue, University/Schafer Road and Bowdish
Road with small commercial uses located at or near the intersections of 16th Avenue,
University Road and Bowdish Road. Dishman-Mica Road then winds through a rural area
before intersecting with SR 27. Within the study area the posted speed limit on Dishman-Mica
Road is 45 miles per hour (MPH).
University Road is a north/south, two-way minor arterial, ranging from two to five lanes, that
serves a large residential area south of Interstate 90. It runs south from Nora Avenue, and
crosses several major arterials, until it intersects with Dishman-Mica Road. University Road,
between Mission Avenue and Sprague Avenue, is a three-lane roadway. From Sprague Avenue
to 4th Avenue, it transitions to a five-lane roadway. South of 4th Avenue to Dishman-Mica
Road, it reduces to a four-lane roadway and continues to Dishman-Mica Road where the
roadway transitions into Schafer Road. University Road is posted at a 35 MPH speed limit
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 45
within the study area. The University Road section includes bike lanes from 16th Avenue to
Mission Avenue, and sidewalks from Dishman-Mica Road to Mission Avenue.
Schafer Road is a north/south, two-way, two-lane, collector that serves a large residential area
south of Dishman-Mica Road. Schafer Road runs south from Dishman-Mica Road to 44th
Avenue. Schafer Road, between Dishman-Mica Road and 44th Avenue is a two-lane roadway
with shoulders, but no sidewalk or bike lanes. Schafer Road is posted at 35 MPH within the
study area.
Bowdish Road is a north/south, two-way, two-lane, minor arterial serving a large residential
area south of Interstate 90. Bowdish Road runs south from Mission Avenue, and crosses
several major arterials, until it intersects with Sands Road. Bowdish Road, between Mission
Avenue and Dishman-Mica Road is a two-lane roadway. South of Dishman-Mica Road,
Bowdish Road crosses the Union Pacific Railway and becomes a local access roadway. Sands
Road branches off Bowdish Road and continues to 44th Avenue. Bowdish Road is posted at
25 MPH on the local access portion, and is posted on the minor arterial as 35 MPH.
SR 27 is a north/south, two-way State Highway ranging from two to five lanes. SR 27 extends
south from Spokane Valley to Pullman, Washington and serves the many small farming
communities of the Palouse. Within the City of Spokane Valley, SR 27 follows the Pines Road
alignment between Trent Avenue and 16th Avenue. South of 16th Avenue, SR 27 shifts to the
Blake Road alignment and serves the surrounding urban residential uses and a small cluster of
commercial uses at the intersection of SR 27 and 32nd Avenue. From Trent Avenue to 16th
Avenue, the posted speed limit is 35 MPH. From 16th Avenue to the 41st Avenue alignment,
the posted speed limit is 45 MPH. Beyond 41st Avenue, SR 27 generally has a speed limit of
55 MPH.
16th Avenue is an east/west, two-way, two- and three-lane minor arterial that extends east
from Bluff Drive (west of Dishman-Mica Road) through the City of Spokane Valley to
Shamrock Street (South of Shelley Lake). 16th Avenue generally serves residential land uses
as well as commercial land uses located at the intersections of arterials. The posted speed limit
on 16th Avenue is 35 MPH with the exception of the University Elementary, McDonald
Elementary, and Evergreen Jr. High School zones where the posted speed limit is 20 MPH
with beacons. The 16th Avenue Road section from Dishman-Mica Road to Sullivan Road
includes sidewalks and bike lanes.
32nd Avenue is an east/west, two-way principle arterial ranging from two to four lanes. 32nd
Avenue extends east from Dishman-Mica Road to Sullivan Road and serves mostly urban
residential uses, but also provides access for commercial uses and University High School. The
posted speed limit is 35 MPH with the exception of University High School zone where the
speed limit is 20 MPH when children are present. The 32nd Avenue road section has sidewalks
from Dishman-Mica Road to SR 27, and bike lanes from University Road to SR 27. Additional
sidewalks and bike lanes are present from Evergreen Road to Best Road.
Pines Road is a north/south two-way, two-, three-, and five-lane state route and collector that
extends south from Trent Avenue to 40th Avenue. From 16th Avenue to 32nd Avenue, Pines
Road is a proposed collector. From 32nd Avenue to 40th Avenue, Pines Road is a collector.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 46
Pines Road serves residential uses and a commercial land use located on the northwest corner
of Pines Road and 32nd Avenue. The speed limit on Pines Road is 35 MPH, with the exception
of the South Pines Elementary school zone, where the speed limit is 20 MPH with flashing
beacons. The Pines Road roadway section includes sidewalks along its entire length and
includes bike lanes from 22nd Avenue to 32nd Avenue.
Evergreen Road is a north/south, two-way urban principle arterial ranging from two to six
lanes. Evergreen Road extends south from Indiana Avenue to 32nd Avenue and intersects with
eight other minor and major arterials in the City of Spokane Valley. From Indiana Avenue to
Interstate 90, Evergreen Road has six lanes. From Interstate 90 to 4th Avenue, Evergreen Road
is a five-lane road. From 4th Avenue to 16th Avenue, Evergreen is a three-lane road. From
16th Avenue to 32nd Avenue, Evergreen Road is a two-lane roadway. The area surrounding
Evergreen Road is generally single-family residential uses and small pockets of commercial
uses located at or near the arterial intersections. The posted speed limit on Evergreen Road is
35 MPH. Evergreen Road includes sidewalk from 32nd Avenue to 24th Avenue and from 16th
to Indiana. Evergreen Road has a bike lane from 32nd Avenue to Sprague Avenue.
Sullivan Road is a north/south, two-way, two-, three- and five-lane urban principal arterial
that extends south from Wellesley Avenue to just beyond 32nd Avenue. Sullivan Road serves
East Valley High School and Central Valley High School, residential, and commercial uses.
The posted speed limit is 35 MPH. The Sullivan Road roadway section includes sidewalks and
bike lanes from 16th Avenue to 32nd Avenue, and sidewalks from 16th Avenue to Wellesley
Avenue.
Madison Road is a north/south, two-way, two-lane collector road that extends south from the
intersection of Pines Road and 40th Avenue, which is northeast of the site, through Thorpe
Road, until eventually changing into Mohawk Drive. Madison Road is posted at 35 MPH and
provides access to residential roads on its east and west side. Madison Road has no sidewalks
or bike lanes.
Thorpe Road is an east/west, two-way, two-lane collector that extends east from Dishman-
Mica Road to Madison Road. Thorpe Road generally serves commercial land uses. The posted
speed limit on Thorpe Road is 35 MPH.
3.3.1.2 Existing Conditions
Consistent with City procedures, the scope of the TIA was determined after meetings with
Public Works staff, the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Spokane County
transportation staff and the public. As determined through this scoping process, the applicant
studied both AM and PM peak hour operations. The AM peak hour data was generally
collected between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM, and PM peak hour data was collected between 4:00
PM and 6:00 PM. For the TIA, the following intersections were studied. See Figure 3-9 for a
map illustrating the Traffic Study Intersections relative to the Painted Hills site.
32nd Avenue & University Road
Dishman-Mica Road & University/Schafer Road
32nd Avenue & Bowdish Road
Dishman-Mica Road & Bowdish
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 47
Dishman-Mica Road & Apartment. Access (Proposed)
Dishman-Mica Road & Sundown Drive (Proposed)
Dishman-Mica Road & S. Commercial. Access (Proposed)
Dishman-Mica Road & Thorpe Road
Thorpe Road & Commercial. Access (Proposed)
16th Avenue & Pines Road
16th Avenue & SR 27
32nd Avenue & Pines Road
Madison Road & Painted Hills Avenue (Proposed)
Madison Road & 41st Avenue (Proposed)
Madison Road & 43rd Avenue (Proposed)
Madison Road & 44th Avenue (Proposed)
Madison Road & Thorpe Road
32nd Avenue & SR 27
32nd Avenue & Evergreen Road
32nd Avenue & Sullivan Road
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 48
Figure 3-9: Study Area Intersections
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 49
Using methods from the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual as implemented in Synchro,
version 9 – Build 902, the TIA reported existing operational conditions as noted in Table 3-3.
Because some of the study intersections do not yet exist and would be constructed as a part of
the Painted Hills PRD project, those intersections are not included in Table 3-3.
Table 3-3: Year 2015 Existing Intersections Levels of Service (Table 2 of TIA)
INTERSECTION
(S) signalized
(U) unsignalized
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS
32nd Avenue & University Road S 11.5 B 11.4 B
Dishman-Mica Road &University/Schafer Road S 15.7 B 16.5 B
32nd Avenue & Bowdish Road S 13.1 B 11.7 B
Dishman-Mica Road & Bowdish Road S 12.0 B 11.1 B
Dishman-Mica Road & Thorpe Road U 10.7 B 10.4 B
16th Avenue & Pines Road U 20.2 C 32.4 D
16th Avenue & SR 27 S 27.7 C 25.5 C
32nd Avenue & Pines Road S 23.5 C 17.7 B
Madison Road & Thorpe Road U 11.0 B 9.5 A
32nd Avenue & SR 27 S 19.6 B 23.0 C
32nd Avenue & Evergreen Road U 10.6 B 17.7 C
32nd Avenue & Sullivan Road U 11.1 B 12.1 B
3.3.2 Environmental Consequences
3.3.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
As a part of the 2016 TIA, Whipple evaluated traffic operations at the study intersections in
the year 2025 without implementation of the Painted Hills PRD project. This 2025 no-build
scenario reflects the anticipated conditions that would occur under Alternative 1.
In order to approximate traffic volumes under this no-build scenario, Whipple assumed that
regional traffic volumes would grow over the 10-year evaluation period (from 2015 to 2025)
at a rate of 1.1 percent per year. In addition to this general 1.1 percent growth factor, the TIA
also incorporated traffic volumes from other development projects that had not been built but
had been approved by the City and Spokane County for development.
These approved and vested projects, and their associated traffic volumes are identified in
Table 3-4.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 50
Table 3-4: Background Projects and Vested AM & PM Trips Table 4 of TIA)
Background Project Remaining
Lots/ units
AM Peak. Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Total In Out Total In Out
Paxton Addition 13 lots 10 3 7 13 8 9
The Creek at Chester 44 lots 33 9 24 44 29 15
Pine Valley Ranch Apts. 132 units 69 14 55 90 59 31
Elk Ridge Heights 78 lots 59 15 44 79 51 28
Total Vested - 171 41 130 226 147 83
As noted in Table 3-5, acceptable LOS were projected for all study intersections in the year
2025 for Alternative 1, except the intersection of 16th Avenue and Pines Road. At this
intersection, the southbound approach experienced delays that exceeded the City’s level of
service threshold for the PM peak hour. However, it is anticipated that paired signalized
intersections will be installed at this location that will improve conditions to an LOS C in this
location. No other system deficiencies were identified under Alternative 1.
Table 3-5: 2025 Levels of Service, without the Project, with the Background Projects (Table 7 of TIA)
INTERSECTION
(S) signalized
(U) unsignalized
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS
32nd Avenue & University Road S 12.2 B 11.9 B
Dishman-Mica Road & University/Schafer
Road S 16.4 B 17.2 B
32nd Avenue & Bowdish Road S 15.2 B 13.5 B
Dishman-Mica Road & Bowdish Road S 12.8 B 11.8 B
Dishman-Mica Road & Thorpe Road U 11.3 B 10.9 B
16th Avenue & Pines Road
Paired Signalized Intersections
U
(S)
26.2
(30.5)
D
(C)
66.4
(33.7)
F
(C)
16th Avenue & SR 27
Paired Signalized Intersections
S 33.6
(42.3)
C
(D)
30.3
(28.4)
C
(C)
32nd Avenue & Pines Road S 27.0 C 21.9 C
Madison Road & Thorpe Road U 12.1 B 9.9 A
32nd Avenue & SR 27 S 22.3 C 28.2 C
32nd Avenue & Evergreen Road U 11.2 B 23.6 C
32nd Avenue & Sullivan Road U 12.0 B 13.2 B
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 51
Construction-Related Project Impacts
As no construction would occur under Alternative 1, there would be no construction-related
traffic impacts that could result from this alternative.
3.3.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development High Infiltration Rate
The TIA analyzes the ability of the scoped intersections to meet adopted LOS standards in the
year 2025 after incorporating the background growth rate, background projects, and the
anticipated project trips, including the conversion of the clubhouse into a 4,000 square feet
(SF) restaurant facility.
It is anticipated that the Painted Hills PRD Alternatives 2a would generate new trip volumes
as noted in Table 3-6, which is a copy of Table 14 from the TIA). It should be noted that, while
the 4,000 SF restaurant trips were forecasted in the 2016 TIA, the restaurant use has now
occupied the clubhouse structure and is in operation (Whipple, 2016).
The proposed development new trips generated on the transportation system are shown in the
table below.
Table 3-6: Estimated Trip Generation – Alternative 2a
Land Use Code (LUC)
AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Vol. per
LUC
Directional
Distribution
Vol.
per
LUC
Directional
Distribution
In Out In Out
LUC #230 Townhouses (Cottage Style) (Table 6) 23 4 19 28 19 9
LUC #210 Single Family Residential (Table 7) 155 39 116 201 127 74
LUC #210 SFR (Estate Lots) (Table 8) 32 8 24 42 26 16
LUC #220 Apartment (Table 9) 117 23 94 138 90 48
LUC #220 Apartment (mixed use) (Table 10) 27 5 22 32 20 12
LUC #820 Shopping Center (Table 11) 13 8 5 40 20 20
LUC #820 Shopping Center (Table 12) 9 6 3 34 16 18
LUC #931 Quality Restaurant (Table 13) 4 2 2 30 20 10
Total 380 95 285 545 338 207
Average Daily Trip Ends (ADT)
Land Use Code (LUC) Rate ADT
LUC #230 Townhouses (Cottage Style) (Table 6) - 303
LUC #210 Single Family Residential (Table 7) - 1,962
LUC #210 SFR (Estate Lots) (Table 8) - 400
LUC #220 Apartment (Table 9) - 1,517
LUC #220 Apartment (mixed use) (Table 10) - 346
LUC #820 Shopping Center (Table 11) - 573
LUC #820 Shopping Center (Table 12) 385
LUC #931 Quality Restaurant (Table 13) 360
Total - 5,846
It should also be noted that, because of the mixed-use nature of Alternative 2a, a trip
internalization factor is applied to the trip generation rates of the residential uses that would
occur under this alternative. That internalization factor applies a reduction or discount factor
on the typical generation rate for the residential uses to address the fact that some of the retail
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 52
and service needs of the residents of the PRD project will be satisfied by the 22,400 SF of
commercial space located within the project. This internalization factor varies by residential
use type but ranges between approximately 2.4 and 3.0 percent of the PM peak hour trip
generation for the residential uses. Based on these assumptions and application of the ITE
manual, Alternative 2 is estimated to generate vehicular trips consistent with the figures
represented in Table 3-6.
As shown above, Alternative 2a is anticipated to generate 380 new AM peak hour trips, with
95 new trips entering the site, and 285 new trips exiting the site via the eight access
opportunities previously noted. In the PM peak hour, the project is anticipated to generate 545
new trips, with 338 new trips entering the site, and 207 new trips existing the site.
When adding the trips generated from Alternative 2a to the local road system, considering
background traffic volumes and vested project trips, the TIA determined that all intersections
can meet City-adopted LOS standards, except for the intersection of 16th Avenue and Pines
Road, which also failed to meet LOS standards in the no-build scenario (Alternative 1).
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 53
Table 3-7: Year 2025 Levels of Service, with the Project, with the Background Projects (Table 19 of the TIA)
INTERSECTION
(S) signalized
(U) unsignalized
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Delay
(sec) LOS
32nd Avenue & University Road S 12.4 B 12.4 B
Dishman-Mica Road & University/Schafer
Road S 16.9 B 18.3 B
32nd Avenue & Bowdish Road S 15.6 B 14.7 B
Dishman-Mica Road & Bowdish Road S 15.7 B 13.3 B
Dishman-Mica Road & Apt. Access U 13.2 B 10.4 B
Dishman-Mica Road & Sundown Drive U 12.6 B 10.8 B
Dishman- Mica Road & S. Comm. Access U 11.5 B 11.3 B
Dishman-Mica Road & Thorpe Road U 11.9 B 11.9 B
Thorpe Road & Comm. Access U 9.0 A 9.1 A
16th Avenue & Pines Road
• Paired Signalized Intersections
U
(S)
27.3
(31.1)
D
(C)
99.2
(34.8)
F
(C)
16th Avenue & SR 27
• Paired Signalized Intersections
S 35.9
(44.6)
D
(D)
31.3
(28.6)
C
(C)
32nd Avenue & Pines Road
• NB Right Turn
S 32.3
(27.6)
C
(C)
26.0
(24.7)
C
(C)
Madison Road & Painted Hills Avenue U 11.1 B 10.8 B
Madison Road & 41' Avenue U 10.7 B 10.5 B
Madison Road & 43rd Avenue U 10.5 B 10.2 B
Madison Road & 44th Avenue U 9.7 A 9.6 A
Madison Road & Thorpe Road U 12.4 B 10.4 B
32nd Avenue & SR 27 S 23.2 C 29.8 C
32nd Avenue & Evergreen Road U 11.6 B 26.1 D
32nd Avenue & Sullivan Road U 12.3 B 13.5 B
Alternative 2a extends the delay experienced at this intersection from 66.4 seconds during the
PM peak hour under background conditions to 99.2 seconds. These results are noted in
Table 3-7 above. Therefore, the addition of trips from Alternative 2a does not create any new
LOS failures, but does result in additional delays at the intersection of 16th Avenue and Pines
Road.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 54
In addition to the LOS failure at the intersection of 16th and Pines Road, the TIA found that
there are three instances in the 2025 forecast in which the stacking queues at intersections
exceed allowable City standards. These are described in detail on Page 54 of the 2016 TIA and
are as follows:
16th Avenue & SR 27
The eastbound through approach is expected to go from a queue length of 586 feet to
645 feet, an increase of 59 feet. This reported queue exceeds the available space by
526 feet.
The westbound through approach is expected to go from a queue length of 310 feet to
319 feet, an increase of 9 feet. This reported queue exceeds the available space by
149 feet.
32nd Avenue & Pines Road
The eastbound through approach is expected to go from a queue length of 562 feet to
708 feet, an increase of 146 feet. This reported queue exceeds the available space by
218 feet.
32nd Avenue & SR 27
The westbound through approach is expected to go from a queue length of 470 feet to
497 feet, an increase of 27 feet. This reported queue exceeds the available space by
305 feet.
The westbound left turn approach is expected to go from a queue length of 246 feet to
238 feet, a decrease of 8 feet. This reported queue exceeds the available space by 88
feet.
As noted on Page 72 of the TIA, the study also considered traffic operations in the year 2030,
which was considered “buildout plus 5 years” at the time of the study. The TIA included the
following findings regarding traffic operations in 2030 resulting from the Painted Hills PRD
project, including background growth and vested projects.
There is a LOS deficiency identified at the intersection of 16th Avenue & Pines Road,
as the southbound approach is estimated to have 133.7 seconds of average delay.
The LOS deficiency identified at the intersection of 16th Avenue & Pines Road,
originally caused by the background trips and worsened by this project, can be
brought back to an acceptable LOS by signalizing the intersection and pairing the
signal timing with the signal at the intersection of 16th Avenue & SR 27.
There are five future queue deficiencies at three intersections with two of those
intersections operating at acceptable LOS. These deficiencies were the result of the
background growth rate and the background projects as identified within this study
and are only incrementally worsened or kept the same by this project. A review of the
City of Spokane Valley Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), shows that there are
no public improvement projects identified to mitigate the discrepancies at the
following intersections and movements:
o 16th Avenue & SR 27, Eastbound Thru, Westbound Thru
o 32nd Avenue & Pines Road, Eastbound Thru
32nd Avenue & SR 27, WB Thru, Westbound Left Turn
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 55
o Construction-Related Project Impacts (Alternative 2a)
It is anticipated that the project will result in construction-related traffic associated with site
grading and site development activities. These impacts are discussed in a November 13, 2018
memorandum prepared by Whipple. As noted in the memorandum, it is anticipated that mass
grading activities will require the placement and compaction of 328,289 cubic yards (CY) of
material. This material will need to be imported to the site as “loose” dirt which will require
compaction on the site. Whipple estimates that, due to a 15 percent shrink/swell factor, the
required loose fill import volume is approximately 377,532 CY.
It is assumed that site grading will occur over an approximately four-year period and that the
material will be delivered via dump trucks that carry a volume of approximately 30 CY. Based
on these assumptions, it is estimated that approximately 12,584 dump trucks will be required
to fill the site over a four-year period. This equates to 25,168 truck trips to and from the site.
Below is a more detailed analysis of potential impacts of the fill material.
Truck Volumes, Traffic Operations and Phasing
Dump truck trips to the site could occur at any time throughout the year during the initial mass
grading period of the project, which is assumed to occur over an approximately four year period
at the onset of the project.4 During this period, fill material could be accepted year round and
stockpiled when/as necessary Accordingly, if truck trips were to occur consistently during
work days over this four-year period approximately 11.24 trucks per day would arrive at the
site or approximately 22.47 truck trips per day, assuming 280 work days per year.
If truck trips to the site were significantly curtailed or limited during the cold weather months,
then a more conservative annual work window of between April 1st and November 15th could
be considered when estimating truck volumes. In this scenario, an approximately 31-week
annual mass grading period could occur with approximately 155 business days. In that
scenario, it is estimated that the project fill activities will result in approximately 20.3 trucks
per day / 40.59 truck trips per day during the initial four-year annual work window.
As a consequence, it can be reasonably deducted that truck volumes over the initial fill period
for the project would be between approximately 11.24 and 22.3 trucks per day and between
approximately 22.47 and 40.59 truck trips per day.
The haul route for these dump trucks will be via Dishman-Mica Road, a Principal Arterial that
experiences a total Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of approximately 22,700 trips near Appleway
Avenue and 4,800 ADT near Thorpe Road. Therefore, the dump truck-related trips are
estimated to represent less than one percent of the ADT of this facility on average. Dishman-
Mica Road has been designated by the City as a Principal Arterial.
4 The first year improvements will include the establishment of stormwater / floodwater conveyance and
management facilities to ensure that stormwaters and floodwaters are managed and recharge on site. The four-
year initial rough grading period is different than the full buildout period of the project, which is estimated occur
over a period of 10-years, including the final construction of buildings on the site.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 56
If the mass grading schedule for the project were prolonged beyond the estimated four-year
window, the approximate number of truck trips per day would decrease respective to the mass
grading time period.
It is anticipated that truck deliveries would occur during daylight hours and within the City of
Spokane Valley’s allowed construction window of 7 AM to 10 PM, per SVMC 7.05.040(k)(3).
Safety
Truck trips will enter and exit the site through controlled accesses from Dishman-Mica Road.
These accesses will be designed with stabilized entrances to reduce the potential for dirt and
construction debris to occur on the road that could pose as a hazard to motorists and bicyclists.
Access points on Dishman-Mica Road will be designed to ensure safe sight distances per the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and local
standards to ensure that turning movements into and out of the site will have adequate vision
clearance.
3.3.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration
Scenario
The total traffic generation resulting from the land uses of Alternative 2b is nearly identical to
Alternative 2a, with a slight overall decreased number of trips. Table 3-8 illustrates the land
use differences between these two PRD variations. As a consequence, the impacts and
necessary mitigation for Alternative 2b are assumed to be identical to Alternative 2a.
Table 3-8: Alternative 2A and 2B ADT Comparison – PM Peak Hour Trips5
Land Use
Alternative 2a Alternative 2b Net
Difference Units
/ ksf
PM Peak Hr
Trips
Units /
ksf
PM Peak Hr
Trips
Cottages 52 52 0 0 -52
SFR – Standard 206 201 224 217 +16
SFR – Estate 42 42 48 48 +6
MFR 228 138 273 174 +36
MFR–Mixed Use 52 32 52 32 0
Commercial N 13.4 26 13.4 26 0
Commercial S 9 34 9 34 0
Commercial S 4 30 4 30 0
Total 555 531 -24
Construction Related Impacts
Alternative 2b would generate significantly fewer construction related trips than Alternative
2a due to the greater floodplain storage volume required on the site and the reduced need for
imported fill. Specifically, Alternative 2b would require approximately 104,630 CY of
5 Note: All trip generation rates included in this table are from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Trip Generation Manual, 9th edition, the manual in place on February 23, 2017 when the traffic concurrency
approval for the PRD Alternative 2a was issued by the City. The ITE 10th edition has reduced the trip generation
rate for multi-family residential from 0.65 to 0.45 PM peak hour trips per unit. This is the only ITE manual change
for planned uses within the PRD.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 57
imported fill material on the site compared to 328,289 CY of imported fill material for
Alternative 2a.
Because the total net fill volume for Alternative 2b is only approximately 31% of the total net
fill volume anticipated with Alternative 2a, it is calculated that the truck trips associated with
Alternative 2b will be approximately 8,022 total truck trips.
As with Alternative 2a, the haul route truck trips under Alternative 2b will be via Dishman-
Mica Road, an arterial facility.
Construction-related Impacts
Like Alternative 2a, Alternative 2b would also require a substantial amount of fill material to
bring development areas above the 100-year base flood elevation. Alternative 2b would require
less fill to be brought in from off-site than Alternative 2a, because material excavated to create
the much larger Alternative 2b infiltration pond would be used elsewhere on the site. The total
required imported fill with Alternative 2b is approximately 104,630 CY. Using the same
15 percent shrink/swell factor applied to determine the amount of “loose” material that would
need to be imported to the site under Alternative 2a, it is estimated that a total of approximately
117,697 CY of fill material would need to be imported under Alternative 2b.
Truck Volumes, Traffic Operations and Phasing
Based on an average dump truck volume of approximately 30 CY, it is estimated that
3,923 dump trucks will be required to bring the material to the site or 7,846 dump truck trips
to and from the site. Assuming this material is delivered to the site over a four-year period,
with 280 workdays per year, it is assumed that approximately 3.5 trucks per day would arrive
at the site, or approximately seven truck trips per day over this period.
If the mass grading period each year is condensed to the April 1 to November 15th time frame,
then the estimated number of trips per day in each of the first four years of development is
approximately 6.3 trucks per day or 12.6 truck trips per day.
As with Alternative 2a, the haul route for these dump trucks will be via Dishman-Mica Road,
a Principal Arterial that experiences a total ADT of approximately 22,700 trips near Appleway
Avenue and 4,800 ADT near Thorpe Road. Therefore, the dump truck-related trips are
estimated to be less than one percent of the ADT of this facility on average.
As with Alternative 2a, truck trips would occur generally between 7 AM to 10 PM, per SVMC
7.05.040(k)(3), consistent with City of Spokane Valley allowed construction work windows.
Therefore it is estimated that between approximately 3.5 and 6.3 trucks per day and between
approximately seven and 12.6 truck trips per day would result from Alternative 2b.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 58
Safety
As with Alternative 2a, truck trips will enter and exit the site through controlled accesses from
Dishman-Mica Road. These accesses will be designed with stabilized rock entrances to reduce
the potential for dirt and construction debris to occur on the road that could pose as a hazard
to motorists and bicyclists. Access points on Dishman-Mica Road will be designed to ensure
safe sight distances per the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) and local standards to ensure that turning movements into and out of the
site will have adequate vision clearance.
3.3.3 Mitigation Measures
Alternative 1
No mitigation would occur under Alternative 1, as no action would occur on the site. However,
it is assumed that background conditions on the site would result in a LOS failure at
16th Avenue and Pines Road that would require the city or others to signalize the intersection
and pair the signal timing with the signal at 16th Avenue and SR 27.
Alternative 2a
Based upon the conclusions within the TIA, it is recommended that the following mitigation
measures would be implemented in conjunction with the construction of Alternative 2a.
Frontage improvements to Dishman-Mica Road, Thorpe Road, and Madison Road
shall be completed in conjunction with site development.
A two-way, left-turn lane will be installed on Dishman-Mica Road north of the
Chester Creek Bridge.
Bicycle and pedestrian facilities per the City of Spokane Valley Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan will be completed along the site frontages.
A northbound right-turn lane should be considered at the intersection of 32nd Avenue
& Pines Road. Coordination with the City of Spokane Valley and the Central Valley
School District will be required.
When warranted by the development conditions, the project should contribute its
participating percentage in a project to signalize the intersection of 16th Avenue &
Pines Road.
A haul route plan will be developed and managed to ensure that truck trips to and
from the site during construction use Dishman-Mica Road for site access over the
duration of site construction.
Stabilized construction entrances will be provided to minimize the potential for dirt
and debris to be carried onto the road by exiting construction vehicles.
Alternative 2b
It is anticipated that the mitigation measures required with the implementation of Alternative
2b would be the same as those listed in Alternative 2a above.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 59
3.3.4 Cumulative Effects
Vested and unbuilt projects were considered in the background traffic volumes that were
incorporated into the TIA, thereby addressing the potential cumulative transportation effects
of the action alternatives when concerned with other on-going developments. The other
regional projects that were considered in the TIA and their associated traffic volumes are noted
in Table 3-9.
Table 3-9: Background Projects and Vested AM & PM Trips
Background Project Remaining
Lots/ units
AM Peak. Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Total In Out Total In Out
Paxton Addition 13 lots 10 3 7 13 8 9
The Creek at Chester 44 lots 33 9 24 44 29 15
Pine Valley Ranch Apts. 132 units 69 14 55 90 59 31
Elk Ridge Heights 78 lots 59 15 44 79 51 28
Total Vested - 171 41 130 226 147 83
3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL
3.4.1 Air Quality
3.4.1.1 Affected Environment
Air quality can directly affect human health with cardiovascular and other health complications
resulting from exposure to air pollutants. These can include human-generated pollutants
(carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide[CO2], and lead, from automobiles and industrial sources);
naturally generated pollutants (fine particulate matter in forest fire smoke), or a combination
of both. Dust and non-toxic nuisance odors are also a component of air quality.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for six criteria pollutants known to impact human health. The six criteria
pollutants include carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), ozone (O3), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), lead (Pb), and nitrogen oxide (NOx). In the past, Spokane has been in nonattainment
for both carbon monoxide (CO) and Particulate Matter (PM10).
In the Spokane region currently, there are two pollutants of primary concern, fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) and ground-level ozone6. While industry contributes about 20 percent of the
PM2.5 and ground-level ozone air pollution, most of the pollution in the Spokane area results
from transportation (vehicle emissions) and home heating.
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly into the air like other pollutants but is produced
when NOx formed by combustion processes, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from
many sources, combine. These ozone-producing pollutants come from local sources, such as
cars, trucks, industrial boilers, power plants, paints, solvents, and other commercial and
consumer products.
6 https://www.spokanecleanair.org/air-quality
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 60
According to the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency (SRCAA), during the winter months
wood heating is the largest source of fine particle pollution (SRCAA 2019). Stable weather
patterns typical of the winter in Spokane Valley trap smoke near the ground, intensifying the
problem. SRCAA may restrict outdoor burning during periods of poor air quality. In addition,
local fire officials issue outdoor burn restrictions during fire safety season.
Air quality in the Spokane region generally becomes worse during the winter heating season
due to the presence of fine particles from wood fires and during the hot, summer months in
which ozone levels increase and (in recent years) regional forest fires occur. The Spokane area
is not currently in non-attainment for ozone, PM2.5 or PM10; however, over the past 10 years
ozone concentrations have approached non-attainment levels7.
Spokane Clean Air began monitoring for PM2.5 in 1999, shortly after the PM2.5 health-based
standard was established by EPA8. The health-based standard for PM2.5 has been exceeded during
the winter months due to wood stove smoke in 9 of the past 19 years, including 2013, 2014, 2015,
and 2017. The health-based standard for PM2.5 has been exceeded in July, August, and/or
September due to forest fire smoke in 2014, 2015, 2017 (16 days), and 2018 (13 days) (SRCAA,
2016, 2019).
In recognition of the effect of wood heating on air quality, Washington State has several laws
addressing wood stoves including:
RCW 70.94.450, which establishes the policy of the state to control, reduce, and
prevent air pollution caused by wood stove emissions; encourages Ecology to educate
the public about the effects of wood stove emissions and other heating alternatives;
and promotes the desirability of achieving better emission performance and heating
efficiency from wood stoves.
RCW 70.94.455, which establishes standards for solid fuel burning devices and
provides for the state building code to require an adequate source of heat other than
wood stoves in all new and substantially remodeled residential and commercial
construction.
RCW 70.94.473, which provides that, during an air pollution episode, alternatives to
wood burning will be used in buildings with alternative sources of heat, and for those
without alternatives, only certified wood stoves can be used.
The City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code (Section 7.05.040 Nuisances Prohibited) requires
the control of dust that could potentially cause a nuisance to City residents.
7 https://www.spokanecleanair.org/documents/our_air/Ozone%20Trends%20Chart%20Jun%202017.jpg
8 The PM2.5 health-based standard is 35 micrograms per cubic meter of air (equivalent to 100 on the AQI)
averaged over 24 hours, midnight to midnight. Prior to 1999, monitoring was done for smoke and dust particles
combined (PM10- Particulate Matter 10 microns in diameter and smaller). Particulate matter (PM) has been
measured by Spokane Clean Air since health-based air quality standards were established in 1971. The first
standard was for Total Suspended Particulates, then revised in 1987 to Particulate Matter 10 microns and smaller
(PM10). In 1997, EPA established an additional standard for Fine Particles (PM2.5).
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 61
Under the current vegetated, undeveloped conditions, minimal air pollutants are generated
from the site.
3.4.1.2 Environmental Consequences
3.4.1.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
Under Alternative 1, no changes to current air quality conditions are anticipated. The existing
on-site vegetation would continue to function as a carbon “sink” rather than a source of
atmospheric carbon.
3.4.1.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High Infiltration
Under Alternative 2a, impacts to air quality would occur both during construction and during
the operational lifetime of the project following construction.
During construction, there would be tailpipe emissions from on-site construction equipment,
and construction-related on-road vehicles including dump trucks, delivery trucks and the
personal vehicles belonging to construction workers. These tailpipe emissions will add VOCs,
NOx, CO, CO2, and ground-level ozone to the air.
During construction, some fugitive dust could be expected, although wind-erosion control
prevention measures will be implemented to minimize these effects.
In addition, some construction elements, such as asphalt paving operations may cause odors
detectible to some people away from the project site. The effect of such odors would be short-
term.
Once the project has been constructed, the additional approximately 300 single family
residential units, 280 multi-family units, and 26,400 SF of commercial use would generate air
emissions that could include carbon dioxide, CO, NOx, and VOCs. Sources of these emissions
could include natural gas and electricity-powered home appliances and space-heating systems,
gasoline or electricity-powered yard maintenance equipment, gasoline or electricity-powered
vehicles generated by the project. Additionally, wood stoves, if used within the project site,
could also be a source of fine particulate (PM2.5) emissions.
It is unlikely these emissions would cause ambient concentrations to exceed the NAAQS for
NOx, CO, SO2, and Pb because historically these pollutants have not approached non-attainment
levels in the Spokane area. Emissions associated with the project could potentially result in ozone
and PM 2.5 concentrations that exceed NAAQS because the area has had concentrations of ozone
that approach non-attainment concentrations for the past 10 years and has exceeded the health-
based standard for PM 2.5 for 9 of the past 19 years, including 2017 and 2018. The emissions
associated with a residential development would be consistent with the planned intent of the project
site, which is designated for residential development by the City of Spokane Valley and for urban
development within the Spokane County UGA.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 62
3.4.1.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration
Impacts to air quality under Alternative 2b will be similar to those described for Alternative 2a
with the following exceptions:
Alternative 2b provides 18 more single-family residences than Alternative 2a, and the
additional single-family residences may result in the production of slightly more fine
particulates from wood burning stoves than under Alternative 2a.
Construction-related impacts to air quality will likely be less with Alternative 2b due
to the reduced amount of imported fill material required and the few number of truck
trips to and from the site.
3.4.1.3 Mitigation Measures
Construction: During construction, the following best management practices will be followed
to ensure that air quality effects are minimized to the extent possible:
Well-maintained construction equipment and trucks will be used to reduce emissions;
vehicles and equipment will be fitted with emission-controlling components such as
air filters and catalytic convertors.
Prolonged periods of idling vehicles and other engine-powered equipment will be
avoided.
During construction, areas of exposed soils will be regularly sprayed with water or
other dust suppressants.
Cleared area that will be exposed for prolonged periods will be paved, planted with a
vegetation ground cover, or covered with gravel.
Loads in trucks will be covered to ensure that dust and soil does not fly off and
pollute the air.
A program and schedule for road sweeping will be submitted concurrent with
submittal of an application for the first phase or sub-phase of development.
Woody vegetation cleared from the site will not be burned but will instead be ground
or chipped on-site or hauled to an off-site location.
Operations: The following measures could reduce air quality effects associated with either
Alternative 2a or 2b:
Implementation and enforcement of Spokane Clean Air burn bans/restrictions by the
HOA to minimize the length and intensity of poor air quality conditions during the
winter months.
Incorporation of open spaces, such as in Alternatives 2a and 2b, and retention of
vegetation and planting of trees within the project can help mitigate atmospheric
carbon indirectly generated as a result of the project.
Revegetation of open space areas and other areas of the site disturbed by construction,
and the planting of street trees.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 63
3.4.1.4 Cumulative Effects
Local air quality, which is already compromised at times during the winter months in most
years due to current levels of wood smoke-generated pollution would likely be further
diminished for potentially longer periods of time during the winter months due to the added
emissions from the project. The incremental air quality impacts of the project are consistent
with the anticipated implementation of the City’s comprehensive plan, which designates the
site for residential development.
3.4.2 Aesthetics
3.4.2.1 Affected Environment
The Painted Hills site, which was previously a golf course, is currently a vacant field with
scattered trees associated with the former golf course. The former golf course clubhouse
located at the southwest corner of the site remains and is currently operated as a restaurant with
associated parking. Vegetation on the site is primarily field grasses with intermittent deciduous
and evergreen trees that line the former fairway areas.
Uses surrounding the site include:
Low density residences located to the east and on the east side of South Madison
Road;
A single-family residential subdivision located adjacent to the northern limits of the
site;
A convent, the “Carmel of the Holy Trinity”, located adjacent to the northwest
boundary of the property;
A church, owned by the Chester Community Church, also adjacent to the northwest
limits of the site; and
Vacant land, zoned Corridor Mixed Use, located west of the site on the opposite side
of South Dishman-Mica Road.
In addition to the views from these surrounding properties, the site can be viewed by passing
motorists from the surrounding roads: South Madison Road (Figure 3-10), East Thorpe Road
(Figure 3-11) and South Dishman-Mica Road (Figure 3-12). The site is not designated as a
scenic resource and there are no scenic by-ways or other scenic areas designated on or adjacent
to the site.
There are currently no sources of noise or light on the site, except for the commercial use of
the former clubhouse and the parking lot area, which includes overhead parking lot lighting.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 64
Figure 3-10: View of the Site from S. Madison Road
Figure 3-11: View of the Site from E. Thorpe Road
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 65
Figure 3-12: View of the Site from S. Dishman-Mica Road
Figure 3-13: Former Clubhouse and Associated Parking
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 66
3.4.2.2 Environmental Consequences
3.4.2.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
Because Alternative 1 would not result in any changes to the site, no aesthetic impacts are
expected to result from this alternative.
3.4.2.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
Development of the site under Alternative 2a would convert most of the central, east, and
northwest areas of the site into a mixed-use community. Remaining undeveloped areas of the
property would be retained as community open space. Under the City’s development standards
for the R-3 zone, the maximum height of a residence is 35 feet. It is anticipated that new homes
within the community would adhere to this maximum height standard. Open space areas would
be landscaped and would include community amenities such as trails, benches, playground
equipment and other features. Streetlights conforming to the City’s public works standards
would be incorporated into the development along perimeter public routes and new local roads.
Parking lot lighting in the commercial area at the southwest corner of the site would be
designed to meet City requirements.
No aesthetic impacts are anticipated from off-site stormwater infrastructure improvements
because these improvements will be at or below the existing ground surface and are not
anticipated to result in any significant change in the character of these affected areas.
During the initial public review of the PRD application, representatives of the Carmel of the
Holy Trinity convent reviewed and commented on the application. As noted in their November
15, 2018 letter addressed to the City of Spokane Valley, convent representatives indicated a
concern regarding a potential “influx of noise, traffic and other disturbances that are likely to
arise both during construction of the project and upon its completion.” As noted in the
November 15, 2018 letter, the project applicant has met with representatives of the convent to
come to an agreement regarding specific measures that will be implemented to minimize and
reduce aesthetic impacts of the project on this neighboring property.
3.4.2.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low
Infiltration
As described for Alternative 2a, under Alternative 2b, most of the central, east, and northwest
areas of the site would be converted into a mixed-use community. Remaining undeveloped
areas of the property would be retained as community open space. As with Alternative 2a,
under Alternative 2b, building heights, and streetlighting site would be designed to meet City
requirements, and no aesthetic impacts are anticipated from off-site stormwater infrastructure
improvements.
3.4.2.3 Mitigation Measures
Alternative 1
No mitigation measures would be necessary under the no action alternative.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 67
Alternatives 2a and 2b
Streetlights and parking lot light fixtures would incorporate shields to ensure
compliance with City foot-candle lighting requirements, mounting heights, and
wattage.
Mitigation measures would be implemented consistent with those listed in the
November 15, 2018 letter received from the Carmel of the Holy Trinity convent.
3.4.2.4 Cumulative Effects
City and County development standards governing screening, setbacks, landscaping, light,
glare, building height, and other provisions are expected to adequately address the aesthetic
effects of individual development projects. Therefore, no significant cumulative aesthetic
effects are expected to result when considering the action alternatives in conjunction with other
potential development in the project vicinity.
3.4.3 Biological Resources
3.4.3.1 Affected Environment
The affected biological environment of the Painted Hills site is defined in the February 28,
2019 Biological Evaluation (BE), Critical Areas Report and Habitat Management Plan,
prepared by Biology, Soil & Water, Inc. (Biology, Soil, and Water Inc. 2019) The BE study
area evaluated the biological resources within a half mile radius of the Painted Hills site and
the potential impacts from Alternatives 2a and 2b.
As identified in the BE, the subject property is located within the Chester Creek valley with
forested foothills on the east and west sides of the valley. The BE describes the habitats within
the study area as a “mosaic of urban developed, fragments of conifer forest, and small tract
agriculture.” As described in the BE, undeveloped forested hillsides extend about 1,200 feet
east of the densely developed Ponderosa neighborhood. The BE notes that “large mammals
that are willing to cross highways and residential developments interspersed with open
farmland will find connectivity to a few hundred acres of wooded and sparsely populated
foothills extending south and west from the Painted Hills site to Dishman Hills.”
When the Painted Hills site operated as a golf course, the entire property was planted in non-
native turf grasses with sparse conifer and deciduous trees lining some of the fairways. The
turf grass was maintained by treatment with herbicides and regular mowing and maintenance
of the golf course grounds. These practices virtually eliminated the native herbaceous plant
community. Since the golf course operations and maintenance have ceased, noxious weeds
have invaded the site.
Honey willows were planted inside the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of Chester Creek
whose channel was historically dredged and maintained for flood control. The banks of the
channel are covered with Reed canarygrass. Outside the OHWM of the stream channel where
the vegetation was not mowed or maintained, the vegetative community is dominated by
Canarygrass. Teasel, tansy, thistle, wormwood, and lettuce.
Threatened or Endangered Species
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 68
As identified in the BE, listed threatened and endangered species that occur in Spokane County
include the Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis),
Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), Water Howellia (Howellia auqatilis) and Spalding’s Silene
(Silene spaldingii). The BE presented the following findings regarding the potential presence
of these species on the site:
Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus): These birds nest in areas with at least
25 acres of contiguous riparian woodland. Because the largest area of this habitat type
on the site is less than one tenth of the minimum size suitable for the Yellow-billed
Cuckoo, the BE concluded that there is no suitable habitat for the yellow billed
cuckoo existing on the site.
Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus): Waterfalls and dams prevent the upstream and
downstream migration of bull trout into the Spokane River and its tributaries in the
vicinity of the Painted Hills site. There is no known population of bull trout in the
project area; therefore, no Bull Trout habitat exists.
Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis): Typical lynx habitat is dense coniferous forest
areas with sapling/pole thickets, rock outcrops and wetlands at elevations of around
4,000 to 4,500 feet. The Painted Hills site is at an elevation of approximately 2,015
feet. Lynx dens typically occur in mature old growth stands with substantial deadfall
and in areas where they can predate on snowshoe hare. No lynx on the site were
observed in the field visits to the site and the Painted Hills site does not provide lynx
habitat conditions.
Spalding’s catchfly (Silene spaldingii): Spalding’s catchfly is a plant species that is
listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as threatened in Washington
State. Field studies conducted in support of the BE for the project failed to identify
the presence of this plant on the site and the BE notes that “previous years of
cultivation, followed by the planting of turf grasses, years of mowing and herbicide
applications” have likely impacted the ability of the plant to grow on the site.
Water Howellia (Howellia aquatilis): Howellia is an aquatic plant that is often found
in seasonal wetlands, ponds and lakes. No evidence of this plant was observed
through field visits conducted to support the preparation of the BE.
Species of Concern
The project BE also evaluated the presence of USFWS-listed species of concern on the site
and evaluated the site for the presence and/or habitat of the following species that are listed in
Spokane County.
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus): The BE found that bald eagles do not
routinely forage in the Action Area and no nest sites were observed on the Painted
Hills site.
Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia): No historical observations have
occurred in the project vicinity and no individuals, nests, or other signs were observed
during the site survey.
California Floater (Anodonta californiensis): This is a freshwater mussel and there
are no instances on the site.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 69
Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis): This raptor nests on rocky ledges or high ground
vantage points and would not occur on the site.
Giant Columbia Spire snail (Fluminicola Columbiana): This species occurs in
cold, unpolluted medium to large streams, which do not occur within the project area.
Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus): This robin-sized gray, black and white
bird prefers nesting in big sagebrush and antelope bitterbrush. The BE determined
that development at the Painted Hills site would not have an effect on this species.
Longeared Myotis (Myotis evotis): This species of vesper bat is sometimes found in
crevices in small basalt rock formations. This species often roosts in Ponderosa pine
trees over 30 centimeters (cm) in diameter and over 12 meters high. The BE
identified that no significant effect would occur to this species.
Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis): Goshawks select relatively closed canopy
coniferous/boreal forest habitat for nesting. Therefore, the Painted Hills site does not
provide nesting goshawk habitat.
Olivesided Flycatcher (Contopus cooperi): This species is found in boreal and
western coniferous forests and the Painted Hill site does not provide this habitat.
Pallid Townsend’s Bigeared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens): This
species is found in eastside mixed conifer forest, shrub-steppe areas and riparian-
wetland areas. In Washington, old buildings, silos, concrete bunkers, barns, caves,
and mines are common roost structures. The Painted Hills site does not provide this
habitat.
Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus): Two subspecies of peregrine falcons occur in
Washington state at present, Falco peregrinus pealei (Peale’s peregrine falcon) and
Falco peregrinus anatum (Continental peregrine falcon). Peale's peregrine falcon is a
coastal subspecies and are not found in eastern Washington. Therefore, the BE
evaluated the potential presence of Continental peregrine falcon on the site. Historic
use of Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, more commonly known as “DDT”,
throughout eastern Washington eliminated this subspecies from former breeding sites
in eastern Washington. Since the ban of the use of DDT in 1972, attempts have been
made to re-establish the Continental peregrine falcon in eastern Washington and
captive-reared young birds have been released at several sites in Spokane County.
The process of re-introducing falcons into the wild is called "hacking". Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) does not currently use any hack sites in
the vicinity that could be impacted by the project. Further, because Peregrine falcons
nest on cliffs or even man-made structures such as buildings or bridges, the Painted
Hills site does not provide nesting habitat.
Redband Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): There are no fish-bearing streams on the
Painted Hills site or in the project action area; therefore, the project action area does
not provide redband trout habitat.
Sagebrush Lizard (Sceloporus graciosus): As suggested by its name, the Sagebrush
lizard occupies habitats where sagebrush is prevalent, and the Painted Hills site does
not provide such habitat.
Westslope Cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi): There are no fish-bearing
streams on the Painted Hills site or in the project action area and therefore, the project
action area does not provide Redband trout habitat.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 70
Palouse Goldenweed (Haplopappus liatriformis): The Palouse goldenweed is a
perennial grassland forb found in the Palouse bioregion of Idaho and southeastern
Washington and does not occur on the Painted Hills site.
WDFW Priority Species
White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus): As illustrated on Figure 3-15, the
Painted Hills site is not mapped by WDFW as White-tailed deer habitat, which is
mapped to occur on wooded lands to the east and south. However, deer utilize the site
as they do with all undeveloped parcels in the area.
Elk (Cervus canadensis): The Painted Hill site falls within the northern extent of the
mapped Elk Habitat polygon in the Spokane Valley. The site does not provide cover
or refugia required by elk and is therefore not elk habitat, but elk moving through the
general area between Mica Peak and Dishman Hills could potentially cross the
Painted Hills site to travel between these habitats. However, there is no documented
record of regular use of the site by elk.
Gray Wolf (Canis lupus): The Painted Hills site is mapped as Gray wolf habitat and
it is possible that wolves could travel through the site in search of prey. Because of
the presence of small domesticated mammals in the residential areas proximal to the
site, the wolves could present a hazard to these neighboring residences. On May 5,
2011, wolves were delisted from the federally endangered species list in the eastern
one-third of Washington state.
Wetlands
National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps indicate the possible presence of two wetlands on the
Painted Hills site. Field studies evaluated these sites and included seasonal hydrologic
monitoring at test pits in these locations. The results of the on site evaluation were that,
although seasonal high-water conditions occur in the winter when snow or frozen ground
conditions occur, wetland hydrologic conditions do not occur during the growing season and
these sites therefore did not meet the hydrologic conditions necessary for these areas to be
considered jurisdictional wetlands. This determination was verified by the Washington
Department of Ecology (DOE), who conducted a field visit on June 8, 2016.
Riparian Areas
The Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Water Type Map defines Chester
Creek as a Type F waterway—a stream used by fish or that could potentially be used by fish.
The Type F designation for Chester Creek is a result of fish presence at specific upstream
locations. However, the onsite reach of Chester Creek does not provide fish habitat (Dawes,
Larry. Personal comms. April 10, 2019).
44th Ave Madison RdPines RdSands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
Dish
m
an
-Mica R
d Bowdish Rd Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community, WDFW
Figure 3-14
Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife
Priority Habitats & Species
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
0 2,0001,000
FeetSource: GIS data provided by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County. 72 ywHChester Creek
Gustin Ditch
Northwest White-Tailed Deer / Rocky Mountain Elk
Rocky Mountain Elk
Rocky Mountain Elk
Gray Wolf(General Occurancein Township)
Freshwater EmergentWetland
Freshwater EmergentWetland
Freshwater Forested / Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Forested / Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested / Shrub Wetland
Rocky Mountain Elk
Gray Wolf (General Occurance in Township)
Northwest White-Tailed Deer / Rocky Mountain Elk
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 72
Chapter 21.40 of the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code designates Chester Creek, as a
Type F stream with a width of greater than 15 feet at bankfull stage, requires a standard riparian
buffer or “riparian management zone” of 100 feet. Biology, Soil & Water, Inc. (2019)
delineated the Chester Creek OHWM in the field on March 31, 2015, to establish the extent of
this buffer. OHWM flags were surveyed and plotted on the site plan map by Whipple
Consulting Engineers.
3.4.3.2 Environmental Consequences
Calculation of the extent of impacts to the Chester Creek riparian buffer was completed in
2019 and was based on the proposed lot configuration that was presented as Alternative 2 in
the 2019 DEIS submittal. As described in Section 2.2 Land Development Alternatives, the
2019 Alternative 2 has been replaced by Alternatives 2a and 2b in this current SEPA
documentation. The extent of permanent impacts to the riparian buffer resulting from
Alternatives 2a or 2b would be less than those calculated for the 2019 Alternative 2. Once an
alternative is selected, the exact extent of riparian buffer impact and required mitigation would
be calculated for that alternative prior to the submittal of permit documents to the City of
Spokane Valley.
3.4.3.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
Under Alternative 1, there would be no physical changes to the site. Vegetation established
and maintained under the former golf course use would continue to exist on the site but would
not receive the extent of grounds maintenance that occurred under golf course operation.
Existing built features on the site, including the restaurant, maintenance building, former cart
paths and two cart path bridges would continue to occupy the regulated riparian buffer of
Chester Creek. No other impacts to biological resources are anticipated to occur under
Alternative 1.
3.4.3.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
Under Alternative 2a, portions of the existing cart path that currently occupy the regulated
riparian buffer would be demolished, removed from the buffer area, and revegetated, resulting
in an increase in the areal extent of vegetated riparian buffer. New permanent riparian buffer
impacts would occur as a result of a planned expansion of the restaurant parking area and for
the required expansion of Thorpe Road. These improvements would result in approximately
3,665 SF and 1,383 SF of permanent buffer loss, respectively.
Permanent impacts to the riparian buffer would be allowed under the SVMC through a
combination of buffer averaging and buffer reduction. All impacts to riparian buffers due either
to permanent removal or through buffer averaging would be mitigated at ratios either equal to
or greater than what is required in the SV critical areas ordinance to ensure that these impacts
do not result in a reduction in the ecological function and values of the riparian area.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 73
3.4.3.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low
Infiltration
Impacts to riparian buffers under Alternative 2b would be the same as those described under
Alternative 2a and would be mitigated as described for Alternative 2a.
3.4.3.3 Mitigation Measures
Impacts to City-regulated riparian buffers shall be mitigated to ensure no net loss of
overall buffer area consistent with the applicable City critical areas ordinance.
Disturbed buffer areas and buffer replacement areas shall be mitigated with plantings
installed at the industry standard rate of 350 stems per acre or 837 total plants. These
will include a mixture of native grasses, trees, and shrubs.
3.4.3.4 Cumulative Effects
No cumulative effects on biological resources are expected to result from the project.
3.4.4 Environmental Health
3.4.4.1 Affected Environment
Because the site has primarily been used as open space as a golf course, the site does not have
a known history that would indicate the presence of environmental health hazards. Further, no
evidence exists of environmental health risks on the site. Ecology’s online “What’s in My
Neighborhood” mapping tool indicates that there are no designated clean-up sites on the site
or in the immediate vicinity of the project (DOE, 2018).9 The nearest site is approximately 1.5-
miles to the north. Further, the Ecology Spills Map does not indicate any history of hazardous
spills on the site.10 Lastly, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services TOXMAP
Environmental Health Maps (2018) doesn’t show any other toxic chemicals in the area and
indicates that the nearest landfill to the site is approximately 2.25-miles to the southeast.
Site surveys have not revealed any past septic fields on the property. There is one known well
on the site. Well logs from the Washington State Department of Conservation and
Development indicate that this well was dug in 1950. It is expected that this well will be
decommissioned and capped with future site development.
3.4.4.2 Environmental Consequences
3.4.4.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
The No Action alternative is not anticipated to have any environmental health impacts as no
changes would occur.
3.4.4.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
9 https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/neighborhood/
10 https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/storymaps/spills/spills_sm.html
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 74
Alternative 2a would have the potential to cause environmental health effects due to the
following:
Dust and construction equipment emissions during site construction
Noise from construction equipment.
3.4.4.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low
Infiltration
Similar to Alternative 2a, Alternative 2b would have the potential to generate environmental
health effects from dust and construction equipment emissions and from construction noise.
3.4.4.3 Mitigation Measures
It is anticipated that environmental health effects from Alternatives 2a and 2b would be
mitigated through the following measures:
Site construction will be conducted consistent with SVMC Section 7.05.040
(Nuisances Prohibited) which includes limits on smoke, soot, toxic substances, noise,
and other public health hazards.
Site construction will abide by the maximum allowable levels for environmental
noise related to site construction as governed by Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) Section 173-60.
3.4.4.4 Cumulative Effects
No cumulative effects on environmental health are anticipated to result from the project.
3.4.5 Geology
3.4.5.1 Affected Environment
The Painted Hills site is generally flat, sloping less than one percent from south to north with
some localized short, steeper slopes associated with remnant golf course features including tee
boxes, greens, and road embankments.
The majority of the site is mapped by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) as
Narcisse silt loam, zero to three percent slopes, prime farmland. The edges of the site are
mapped as Hardesty ashy silt loam, zero to three percent slopes, prime farmland; Urban land-
Springdale, disturbed complex zero to three percent slopes; Endoaquolis and Fluvaquents, zero
to three percent slopes, prime farmland if drained; and Phoebe shay sandy loam, zero to three
percent slopes, prime farmland if irrigated.
Across most of the project site beneath the topsoil, there is a layer of somewhat poorly drained
alluvial soils, and below this layer are glacially deposited sands and gravels.
There is no known history of unstable soils on the site or within the immediate vicinity.
3.4.5.2 Environmental Consequences
3.4.5.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 75
No impacts to surface soils are proposed under Alternative 1.
3.4.5.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
Under Alternative 2a the native soils will be covered by imported fill and developed for
residential or residential and commercial uses. The property will be graded to create the streets,
drainage ponds/swales, building pads, parking lots and park features. Grading may require up
to 377,532 cubic yards of imported material after accounting for a 15 percent shrink factor.
This material will come from the nearest source approved per City and County standards and
brought to the site following City guidelines.
Approximately 30 percent of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces after
completion of the project.
Due to the placement of fill and the site development features proposed under Alternative 2a,
the opportunity for surface water and precipitation to recharge the underlying aquifer will be
limited to the proposed infiltration basin, roadside swales, and dry wells.
Some erosion from wind and minor erosion from rain could occur on-site during construction.
Because of the flatness of the site, the potential for erosion caused by surface water is limited
and would be localized to the area of work.
3.4.5.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low
Infiltration
As described for Alternative 2a, site grading activities associated with Alternative 2b would
cover most of the site with imported fill. The property would be graded to create the streets,
drainage ponds/swales, and areas future residences. Alternative 2b is expected to require the
import of approximately 117,697 CY of “loose” fill material prior to compaction on the site.
Approximately 25 percent of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces after
completion of the project.
As described for Alternative 2a, due to the placement of fill and site development features
under Alternative 2b, the opportunity for surface water and precipitation to recharge the
underlying aquifer will be limited to the proposed infiltration basin, roadside swales, and dry
wells.
Some erosion from wind and minor erosion from rain could occur on-site during construction.
Because of the flatness of the site, the potential for surface water erosion is limited and would
be localized to the area of work.
3.4.5.3 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce or control erosion under the
two action alternatives, Alternatives 2 and 3.
Measures as required by the SRCAA and WDOE permits would be followed.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 76
An erosion control plan that complies with the Eastern Washington Stormwater
Management Manual (EWSWMM) and SRSM would be developed for the project
and will be implanted during construction.
Erosion control measures to be implemented during construction may include using
silt fences, wattles, sediment basins, inlet protection, watering and hydro-seeding as
allowed/required by the SRSM and the EWSWMM.
Following construction, soils would be stabilized by paving, building, and
landscaping/vegetation.
3.4.5.4 Cumulative Effects
Alternatives 2a and 2b are not expected to result in cumulative effects to surface geology, as
there are no known on-going or concurrent projects that, when considered in conjunction with
the action alternatives, could generate cumulate effects.
3.4.6 Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources
3.4.6.1 Affected Environment
The affected environment of the Painted Hills site is described in detail in an April 2018
Cultural Resource Survey, prepared by Plateau Archaeological Investigations, LLC (PAI) and
incorporated into this DEIS by reference (PAI, 2018). As described in the study, PAI conducted
an intensive pedestrian survey over the Painted Hills site and supplemented that with desktop
research. Upon completion of the study, PAI concluded that development of the Painted Hills
PRD project (Alternatives 2a and 2b) “will result in No Historic Properties Affected, and no
further archaeological investigations are recommended prior to, or during, execution of this
project.”
Although this survey revealed no indication that cultural or historic materials would be
encountered during construction, PAI recommended that all ground-disturbing activities
associated with the project be conducted under the guidance of an Inadvertent Discovery Plan
(IDP) due to interest expressed in the project by the Spokane Tribe of Indians. The IDP is
included with the cultural resources survey, which is included with this DEIS as Appendix H.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 77
3.4.6.2 Environmental Consequences
3.4.6.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
No potential impacts to historic, cultural or archaeological resources would result from
Alternative 1 as no site disturbance would occur.
3.4.1.2.2 Alternative 2a--Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
As noted in the cultural resource survey, subsurface probing on the Painted Hills site revealed
irregular sediments that “generally did not fit those predicted by the NRCS model” due to the
extensive landscaping and site grading that occurred with the construction of the Painted Hills
Golf Course. Due to the site disturbance that has occurred on the site and the lack of evidence
of any Native American or historic-era cultural materials or features, no impacts are anticipated
to result from the construction activities associated with Alternative 2a. However, site
construction activities will occur under the guidance of an IDP as outlined in the Cultural
Resources Survey included in Appendix H of the Cultural Resources Survey to ensure that any
potential inadvertent discovery is promptly addressed.
3.4.6.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low
Infiltration
As described for Alternative 2a, areas of site disturbance for Alternative 2b would occur within
the same site limits as those evaluated in the cultural resources survey. As a consequence, no
impacts to Native American or historic-era cultural materials would be expected to result from
Alternative 2b. However, site construction activities would occur under the guidance of an IDP
as outlined in the Cultural Resources Survey in Appendix H to ensure that any potential
inadvertent discovery is promptly addressed.
3.4.6.3 Mitigation Measures
On-site and off-site ground disturbance activities would follow the inadvertent discovery plan
included in the April 2018 Cultural Resource Survey document. This inadvertent discovery
plan includes the following measures:
If ground-disturbing activities reveal potential Native American or historic-era
cultural materials or features, a professional archaeologist shall be contacted
immediately. The archaeologist shall meet the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for
a professional archaeologist as defined at 36CFR61 (See Appendix H). Construction
within 200 feet (60 meters) of the discovery will stop, and the area will be secured to
protect the find from additional damage. The archaeologist will document the find,
prepare a brief written statement, and take photographs of the find for submission to
the lead agency and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) at the Department
of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). The find will also be reported to
the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) of the Spokane Tribe of Indians. It is
the responsibility of the lead agency, Washington State Department of Archaeology
and Historic Preservation, to contact the affected Tribes. This consultation process
will take place even if the pre-contact or historic-era cultural materials appear to have
lost their depositional integrity. Work within 200 feet (60 meters) of the find will not
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 78
resume until a plan for management or preservation of the materials has been
approved. Following the project, the archaeologist will provide a report detailing the
procedures and results of the investigation.
During the investigation, the archaeologist will observe rules of safety and will
comply with any safety requirements of the excavation contractor and project
engineers. Entry into any excavation will only be done under the direct supervision
and approval of the construction foreman (or his or her agent) and verification that
entry and exit is safe.
If a burial, human remains, suspected human remains, funerary objects, sacred
objects, or items of cultural patrimony are encountered during any aspect of this
project, operations will cease in accordance with the RCW Chapters 27.44, 68.50, and
68.60. All work within 200 feet (60 meters) of the find will cease, the area around the
discovery will be secured, and any requirements of the lead agency shall be followed.
Work within 200 feet (60 meters) of the find will not resume until a plan for
management or preservation of the materials has been agreed upon by all parties.
o If the lead agency does not explicitly state procedures, the Spokane Valley
Police Department, the Spokane County Medical Examiner, and the SHPO at
the DAHP will be notified in the most expeditious manner possible. The find
will also be reported to the THPO of the Spokane Tribe of Indians. Reporting
is to be done by the lead agency (DAHP), or a federal or state funding or
permitting agency. The find will be treated with dignity. People who have
contact with the find will not take photographs, contact the press, call 911, or
discuss the find with the public in any manner. The find will be covered, and
the location kept secure.
o The coroner and law enforcement agency with jurisdiction will evaluate the find
to determine whether it is a crime scene or a burial. If human remains are
determined to be associated with an archaeological site (burial), and if there is
any question of the cultural affiliation of the burial, or whether the burial is
prehistoric, the DAHP and any affected tribes will be notified to assist in the
determination prior to beginning any extensive excavations.
3.4.6.4 Cumulative Effects
No on-going or future activities are expected to occur on-site that would result in cumulative
effects when considered in conjunction with any of the project alternatives.
3.4.7 Noise
3.4.7.1 Affected Environment
Noise levels in the project area are relatively low, as would be expected in a low-density semi-
rural setting. Noise in the area is typically generated by vehicular traffic on the surrounding
roads, and residential equipment such as lawn mowers and chain saws. Noise from recreational
vehicles and snowmobiles, in season, may also be present.
The proposed project is subject to State of Washington and City of Spokane Valley noise
standards and regulations.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 79
State of Washington noise regulations are found in WAC 173-60. Traffic traveling on public
roadways is exempt from the State of Washington’s maximum allowable noise levels, as is
construction noise that occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
Section 7.05.40 K. of the SVMC provides thresholds and standards for controlling the nuisance
impacts of noise within the community. This section includes exemptions regardless of time
of day for normal use of public rights-of-way, sounds created by motor vehicles when regulated
by Chapter 173-62 WAC (noise emission standards for new motor vehicles and noise emission
standards for the operation of motor vehicles on public highways), sounds created by surface
carriers engaged in commerce or passenger travel by railroad, and sounds created by safety
and protective devices where noise suppression would defeat the intent of the device or is not
economically feasible. In addition, sounds originating from temporary construction sites as a
result of construction activity are exempt from the provisions of SVMC 7.05.040(K)(1)
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., or when conducted beyond 1,000 feet of any
residence where human beings reside and sleep at any hour:
3.4.7.2 Environmental Consequences
3.4.7.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
Under Alternative 1 noise levels on and near the project site would remain at current low levels
typical of rural residential areas.
3.4.7.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
Under Alternative 2a noise levels would increase beyond current noise levels both during the
construction phase and indefinitely once the project construction is completed.
During the construction phase noise from construction, land clearing, and fill delivery and
placement equipment as well as structure construction would increase for the short term.
Following completion of construction, noise would be generated by residential traffic and other
residential sources including yard maintenance equipment, domestic pets, occupants, and park
use for the long term.
The increase in population under Alternative 2a would likely lead to noise levels that are higher
than current levels. It is unlikely that the increase would be measurable, but it may be perceived
by residents in terms of the frequency to which they experience noise disturbance.
3.4.7.2.3 Alternative 2b– Planned Residential Development—Low
Infiltration
Under Alternative 2b, noise levels would increase beyond current noise levels both during the
construction phase and indefinitely once the project construction is completed, to
approximately the same degree as described for Alternative 2a.
3.4.7.3 Mitigation Measures
Under either Alternative 2a or 2b, construction will be limited to times prescribed in City code.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 80
3.4.7.4 Cumulative Effects
There are no known off-site sources of noise that could present cumulative effects when
considered in conjunction with the action alternatives.
3.4.8 Public Services
The location of service districts, including schools, irrigation, water currently serving the
project vicinity are identified on Figure 3-15 Service District Boundaries.
3.4.8.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
No impacts to public services are anticipated to result from the no-action alternative as no
additional demand on services would occur.
3.4.8.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
Alternative 2a would result in approximately 300 single-family residential units, 228 multi-
family units and 52 mixed-use residential units. Approximately 13,400 SF of commercial use
will occur within the mixed-use buildings and approximately 9,000 SF of new retail use will
occur within a newly created 92,865 SF lot located along Dishman-Mica Road. The 4,000 SF
former clubhouse building will be retained in restaurant use and, as a result, would not
represent a change in impact on public services.
Based on current demographics, it is expected that approximately 1,377 people would reside
in the project at full project buildout. Further, it is anticipated that approximately 45 employees
would work in the 22,400 SF of new retail space that would result with Alternative 2 .11 Similar
to the projected schedule of residential development, it is anticipated that development of the
commercial retail uses will be market-driven and would occur over the approximately 10-year
buildout period of the project.
The following paragraphs summarize the anticipated effects of these uses and the new residents
and employees on schools, parks, fire, public safety, water and sanitary sewer services.
Schools
Based on the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimate data,
approximately 15.2 percent of Spokane Valley’s population is between the ages of 5 and 17
years old. Extrapolating this number to the Painted Hills project results in an estimated 209
students who would reside within the project upon completion of Alternative 2a.
While the precise cohort of elementary school, middle school and high school students is not
known, if general student population were proportionately distributed to the number of grades
in elementary (six grades), middle school (three grades), and high school (four grades), it is
11 Assumes approximately 1,000 square feet of retail space per employee and two shifts per day, or approximately
500 square feet of retail area per employee. (U.S. Energy Information Administration (2016) -
https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2012/bc/cfm/b2.php)
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 81
assumed that the development of Alternative 2a would result in the following increases in
student population:
Elementary School – Approximately 10 new students per year or 96 total students
over the approximately 10-year buildout of the project.
Middle School – Approximately five new students per year or 48 total students over
the approximately 10-year buildout of the project.
High School – Approximately six new students per year or 64 total students over the
approximately 10-year buildout of the project.
It is expected that the residential and retail uses included under Alternative 2a would represent
a net benefit to the school system as new property taxes from the 22,400 SF created would add
revenue to the current tax base.
During the public comment period for the Painted Hills PRD project, the school district
reviewed and commented on the application. In their comment letter, the district notes that,
due to school capacity issues, it is likely that students from the Painted Hills site would likely
not attend schools within the boundary area that includes the site. The comment letter also
indicates that students from the area will likely not attend Chester Elementary. The school
district has provided no objection to the project.
Fire
In response to the submittal of the Painted Hills PRD application, the Spokane Valley Fire
District submitted a letter, dated August 31, 2015, that provides development-specific
recommendations for ensuring adequate access provisions are made for the fire department to
access the site.
Public Safety
It is expected that additional service calls will occur from future residences and businesses
within the site, but these uses are not anticipated to create a significant increased demand for
public safety services. Per communications with City of Spokane Valley staff, it is not
anticipated that Alternative 2a would generate a significant impact to City services.12 The City
regularly reviews large development proposals and, in instances where a significant new user,
such as a big-box retail project, creates enough demand to warrant special adjustments in
service, the City will make those adjustments to its service contract with Spokane County. It
is anticipated that the gradual increase in population, employment and business activity on the
site can be commensurately addressed through adjusted service levels.
Water
In conjunction with the Painted Hills PRD submittal, a Certificate of Water Availability was
filed with the Spokane Valley Planning Department on July 24, 2015. This certificate, signed
by the site’s water purveyor, Spokane County Water District #3, acknowledges that the
12 Pers comms with Morgan Koudelka, City of Spokane Valley, January 14, 2019.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 82
proposed project is consistent with the district’s Department of Health (DOH) approved water
system plan.
Sanitary Sewer
Service to the site is provided by Spokane County Environmental Services. As noted in the
July 24, 2015 certificate of sewer availability letter provided by the county, the district
acknowledges that sanitary sewer service is available and can be provided to serve the project.
3.4.8.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development – Low
Infiltration
Alternative 2b would result in approximately 272 single-family residential units, 273 multi-
family units and 52 mixed-use residential units. Approximately 13,400 SF of commercial use
will occur within the mixed-use buildings and approximately 9,000 SF of new retail use will
occur within a newly created 92,865 SF lot located along Dishman-Mica Road. The 4,000 SF
former clubhouse building will be retained in restaurant use and, as a result, would not
represent a change in impact on public services.
Based on the 2013 to 2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, it is anticipated
that each single-family unit would be occupied by approximately 2.5 residents, and that each
of the 280 multi-family units would be occupied by approximately 2.24 residents. As such, it
is expected that approximately 1,408 people would reside Alternative 2b at full project
buildout. The number of employees who would work within the project would be identical to
Alternative 2a.
The following paragraphs summarize the anticipated effects of the uses and residents of
Alternative 2b on schools, parks, fire, public safety, water and sanitary sewer services.
Schools
Based on the U.S. Census Bureau ACS 5-year estimate data, approximately 15.2 percent of
Spokane Valley’s population is between the ages of 5 and 17 years old. Extrapolating this
number to Alternative 2b results in an estimated 214 students who would reside within the
project upon completion of Alternative 2b.
While the precise cohort of elementary school, middle school and high school students is not
known, if general student population were proportionately distributed to the number of grades
in elementary (six grades), middle school (three grades), and high school (four grades), it is
assumed that the development Alternative 2b would result in the following increases in student
population:
Elementary School – Approximately 10 new students per year or 98 total students
over the approximately 10-year buildout of the project.
Middle School – Approximately five new students per year or 46 total students over
the approximately 10-year buildout of the project.
High School – Approximately seven new students per year or 70 total students over
the approximately 10-year buildout of the project.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 83
As such, the total forecasted increase and effects of the Alternative 2b is substantially similar
to Alternative 2a.
Fire
In response to the submittal of the Painted Hills PRD application, the Spokane Valley Fire
District submitted a letter, dated August 31, 2015, that provides development-specific
recommendations for ensuring adequate access provisions are made for the fire department to
access the site. These recommendations would not be substantially altered by the design
modifications of Alternative 2b.
Public Safety
It is expected that additional service calls will occur from future residences and businesses
within the Alternative 2b development scenario, but these uses are not anticipated to create a
significant increased demand for public safety services similar to Alternative 2a.
Water
In conjunction with the Painted Hills PRD submittal, a Certificate of Water Availability was
filed with the Spokane Valley Planning Department on July 24, 2015. This certificate, signed
by the site’s water purveyor, Spokane County Water District #3, acknowledges that the
proposed project is consistent with the district’s department of health (DOH) approved water
system plan. The project changes proposed under Alternative 2b do not alter the scale of a
development in a significant manner to suggest any concerns regarding water serviceability.
Sanitary Sewer
Because the scale of development under Alternative 2b is approximately the same as
Alternative 2a, no additional impacts on sanitary sewer service are anticipated and the
certificate of service availability received for Alternative 2a represents a reasonable assurance
that the Alternative 2b can be developed without significant impacts on sanitary sewer service.
3.4.8.4 Cumulative Effects
There are no known cumulative effects from other on-going projects or activities that, when
considered in conjunction with the action alternatives, could result in any discernible effects
on public services.
Spokane County Water District #3
Vera Irrigation District #15
Model Irrigation District #18
Spokane County Water District #3
Spokane County Water District #3
Modern Electric Water Company
Browns Park
Terrace View Park / Pool
Castle Park
44th Ave
24th Ave
Schafer RdSaltese Rd
Pines RdMadison RdBlake Rd25th Ave
dR sdnaS40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
24th Ave
16th Ave
Bowdish RdPines RdUniversity RdDish
m
an
-Mica R
d Evergreen RdMcDonald Rd32nd AveDishma
n
-Mi
c
a Rd
Legend
Painted Hills Boundary
Figure 3-15
Service District Boundaries
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Source: GIS data provided by the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County. 0 4,0002,000 Feet
Dishman Hills
Natural Area
Fire Districts
Water Districts
Spokane County
Fire District 8 72 ywHn
CVSD
School
Complex
Notes: Central Valley School District #356, Spokane County Sherrif, Spokane County EnvironmentalServices, and Spokane County Library Districtcover the entire extent of this map.There is no park district in Spokane Valley. #Spokane Valley
Fire District #
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 85
3.4.9 Recreation
3.4.9.1 Affected Environment
While the Painted Hills site is a former golf course, it has not been in operation since 2012 and
the site is not designated for public recreation purposes. In the interim period and before site
development would begin for the proposed PRD application, the applicant plans to re-open the
former driving range from the golf course as an interim source of revenue from the site. It is
expected that the driving range operation would cease once the PRD site is under construction.
Public recreational opportunities near the Painted Hills site include two city parks, Browns
Park (8.2 acres) and Castle Park (2.7 acres), both of which are within one mile of the site. Per
the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, these parks are categorized as neighborhood
parks, which are intended to generally serve residents within a half-mile radius, provide ample
recreational opportunities for children, and be accessible by walking and bicycling. As noted
in Figure 50 of the City’s comprehensive plan, Browns Park offers sports fields, sand
volleyball courts, playgrounds, picnic areas, shelters, and restrooms, while Castle Park
provides open space.
In addition to these city-managed neighborhood parks, additional recreational open space areas
are located at the school complex immediately northeast of the Painted Hills site, where
University High school, Chester Elementary School, and Horizon Middle School are located.
This complex occupies approximately 76.7 acres and includes a large outdoor recreation area
with tennis courts, multiple baseball/softball fields, and soccer and football fields.
Per the Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2013 Update, Table 5-2, the City has adopted a level
of service standard for public parks to achieve an equivalent of 1.92 acres of park land per
1,000 residents. According to the 2013-2017 ACS 5-Year Estimates, the average household
size in Spokane Valley is 2.50 people for owner-occupied households and 2.24 people for
renter-occupied households13.
Proposed Trails
Per the City of Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2013 Update, there are two
trails proposed near the site (Figure 3-16). The Spokane Valley Loop – Southern Segment is a
3.5-mile segment that runs east-west from Sullivan Road to Dishman Road along 32nd
Avenue. The Chester Creek Connection is a proposed one-mile segment connecting the
Spokane Valley Loop at 32nd Avenue with Chester Creek.
13 U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
Browns Park
Terrace View Park / Pool
Castle Park
44th Ave
24th Ave
Schafer RdSaltese Rd
Pines RdMadison RdBlake Rd25th Ave
dR sdnaS40th Ave
Thorpe Rd
24th Ave
16th Ave
Bowdish RdPines RdUniversity RdDish
m
an
-Mica R
d Evergreen RdMcDonald Rd32nd AveDishma
n
-Mi
c
a Rd
Legend
Painted Hills Site
Figure 3-16
Public Recreation Opportunities
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Source: GIS data provided by the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County.
0 4,0002,000 Feet
Dishman Hills
Natural Area
City Parks
County Parks
Proposed Trail
Chester Creek
Connection
Spokane Valley Loop -
Southern Segment
72 ywHn
CVSD
School
Complex
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 87
3.4.9.2 Environmental Consequences
3.4.9.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
Under Alternative 1, no site development would occur that would generate new residents.
Therefore, no additional demands would be placed on parks and recreation facilities in the
community.
3.4.9.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
Alternative 2a is anticipated to generate approximately 300 single-family residential units,
228 multi-family units, and 52 mixed-use residential units. Based on the 2013-2017 ACS
5-Year Estimates, it is anticipated that each single-family unit would be occupied by
approximately 2.5 residents, and that each of the 280 multi-family units would be occupied by
approximately 2.24 residents. This would result in a total population of approximately
1,377 residents upon completion of the project, which is anticipated to occur over a period of
approximately 10 years or longer as the housing market dictates. Based on the City’s
comprehensive plan level-of-service target of 1.92-acres of park space per 1,000 residents, the
project would create demand for approximately 2.64 acres of park space in the community. As
noted in the site plan included on Figure 3-18 of this document, Alternative 2a incorporates
approximately 30 acres of open space, including a 10-acre park which will fulfill the
recreational demands of the new development.
3.4.9.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low
Infiltration
Based on the 2013 to 2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, it is anticipated
that each single-family unit would be occupied by approximately 2.5 residents, and that each
of the 280 multi-family units would be occupied by approximately 2.24 residents. As such, it
is expected that approximately 1,408 people would reside Alternative 2b at full project
buildout.
Based on the City’s comprehensive plan level-of-service target of 1.92-acres of park space per
1,000 residents, the project would create demand for approximately 2.70 acres of park space
in the community. Alternative 2b incorporates approximately 30 acres of open space, including
a 10-acre park which will fulfill the recreational demands of the new development.
3.4.9.3 Mitigation Measures
As a Planned Residential Development, Alternative 2b must comply with SVMC Section
19.50.060, which requires at least 30 percent of the gross land area be dedicated for “common
space for the use of its residents.”
3.4.9.4 Cumulative Effects
The City conducts periodic reviews of its parks and recreation needs for the broader
community and last updated its Parks and Recreation Master Plan in 2013. Through regular
review and update of the community plan, the City anticipates and plans for necessary
recreational needs throughout the community. Therefore, any cumulative effects of population
growth within the broader community have been considered and integrated with the City’s
parks and recreation system planning efforts.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 88
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ACS American Community Survey
ADT Average daily traffic
BE Biological evaluation
BFE Base flood elevation
CE contract entity
cfs Cubic feet per second
CLOMR Conditional Letter of Map Revision
CM Centimeter
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon dioxide
COSV City of Spokane Valley
CSWGP Construction Stormwater General Permit
CY Cubic yards
DAHP Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement
DNR Washington Department of Natural Resources
DOE Washington Department of Ecology
DOH Department of Health
DS Determination of significance
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EWSWMM Eastern Washington Stormwater Management Manual
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 89
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHA Federal Housing Authority
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FIS FEMA Flood Insurance Study
GMA Growth Management Act
GSF Gross square feet
HOA Homeowners’ association
IDP Inadvertent Discovery Plan
IPEC Inland Pacific Engineering Company
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
kWh Kilowatt hours
LDR Low Density Residential
LID Low Impact Design
LOMR FEMA Letter of Map Revision
LOS Level of service
LUC Land use code
MPH miles per hour
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NE northeast
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NOx Nitrogen oxide
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NW northwest
NWI National Wetland Inventory
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 90
O3 Ozone
OHWM Ordinary highwater mark
O&M Operation and maintenance (manual)
PAI Plateau Archaeological Investigations
Pb Lead
PM2.5 Particulate matter, generally 2.5 micrometers in diameter (fine)
PM10 Particulate matter, generally 10 micrometers in diameter
PM Particulate matter
PRD Planned Residential Development
RCW Revised Code of Washington
ROW Right-of-way
SCC Spokane County Code
SE southeast
SEPA Washington State Environmental Policy Act
SF Square feet
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area
SFR Single-family residential
SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer
SO2 Sulfur dioxide
SR State Route
SRCAA Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency
SRSM Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual
SVMC Spokane Valley Municipal Code
THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
TIA Traffic impact analysis
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 91
TIP Transportation Improvement Plan
UGA Urban Growth Area
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
VOC Volatile organic compounds
Vol. Volume
WAC Washington Administrative Code
WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
WDOE Washington Department of Ecology
WRIA Water Resource Inventory Area
WSDOT Washington Department of Transportation
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 92
LITERATURE CITED
Biology, Soil & Water, Inc. 2019. Biological Evaluation, Critical Areas Report and Habitat
Management Plan. February 28, 2019.
FEMA. 2010. Flood Insurance Study. Spokane County, WA and Incorporated Areas. Study
number 53063CV000A. July 6, 2010.
Koudelka, Morgan. 2019. City of Spokane Valley. Personal communications. January 14,
2019.
MacInnis, J.D., Jr., Lackaff, B.B., Boese, R.M., Stevens, G., King, S., Lindsay, R.C. 2009. The
Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer Atlas 2009.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations, LLC. 2018. Cultural Resource Survey of the Painted
Hills Residential Development Project. April 1, 2018.
Spokane Association of Realtors. 2008-2017. Comparable Statistics: Residential Site Built and
Condo in Spokane County. Presented by Sabrina Jones-Schroder, J.D.
Spokane-Kootenai Real Estate Research Committee. 2018. The Real Estate Report: Regional
Research on Spokane, Kootenai, Bonner Counties. Volume 42, Number 1. Spring
2018.
Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency. 2019. Air Pollutants of Concern.
https://www.spokanecleanair.org/air-quality
Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency. 2016. Spokane County Ozone Levels, 8-hour data, 3-
year averages.
https://www.spokanecleanair.org/documents/our_air/Ozone%20Trends%20Chart%20
Jun%202017.jpg
US Environmental Protection Agency. 2018. Draft Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks: 1990 – 2016. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-
greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks
Washington Department of Ecology. 2018. Spills Map Online Mapping Tool.
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/storymaps/spills/spills_sm.html
Washington Department of Ecology. 2018. “What’s in my Neighborhood” Online Mapping
Tool. https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/neighborhood/
Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2016. Traffic Impact Analysis, Painted Hills PRD.
September 14, 2016.
Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. 2018. TIA Supplemental Letter. November 21, 2018.
US Census Bureau. American Community Survey, 5-year Estimates.
US Department of Health & Human Services. 2018. TOXMAP, Environmental Health Maps.
https://toxmap.nlm.nih.gov/toxmap/
US Energy Information Administration. 2016. Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption
Survey. Released December 2016.
https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2012/bc/cfm/b2.php
APPENDIX A
SEPA Checklist
APPENDIX B
Public Comment Index
This page intentionally left blank.
APPENDIX C
Impact Comparison Table – Alternative 2a v. Standard Subdivision
Appendix C. Alternative 2a (Planned Residential Subdivision) v. Standard Subdivision Impacts Summary
Alternative 2a—PRD Impact Summary Standard Subdivision Alternative Impact Summary Comparative Analysis Finding
Natural Environment
Ground water
A series of pipes, swales and basins for
treatment and management of surface water
are installed to manage stormwater before it
reaches the aquifer.
No change is anticipated in volumes of water
that reach the aquifer via the project site.
No impact to the Spokane Rathdrum Prairie
aquifer. Water that currently recharges the
aquifer would continue to recharge through
permeable areas and through the infiltration
pond installed at the northern limits of the site.
Same treatment and management of surface water
before it reaches aquifer as under Alternative 2a.
No change in volumes of water that reach the aquifer
via the project site are anticipated under the
Standard Subdivision Alternative.
No impact to the Spokane Rathdrum Prairie aquifer.
Water that currently recharges the aquifer would
continue to recharge through permeable areas and
through the infiltration pond installed at the
northern limits of the site.
Similar level of impact between
Alternative 2a and the Standard
Subdivision Alternative.
Surface water
Addition of culverts and creation of swales and
ponds to manage floodwater that enters the site
There would be no direct impact to the channel
of Chester Creek from the widening of Thorpe
Road.
Includes 30-acre +/- undeveloped park area in
southern portion of the site available to store
floodwaters
Same addition of culverts and creation of swales and
ponds as under Alternative 2a
There would be no direct impact to the channel of
Chester Creek from the widening of Thorpe Road.
No 30-acre park is provided to store floodwaters.
Similar level of impact between
Alternative 2a and the Standard
Subdivision Alternative.
Built Environment
Land use
42 estate single family residential lots,
206 standard single-family residential
lots
52 cottage-style single family
residential lots,
228 multi-family residential units,
52 mixed use multi-family residential
units integrated with
approximately 13,400 square feet of
retail/commercial use,
9,000 square feet of future stand-
alone retail commercial use
30% greenspace totaling
approximately 30 acres with trails that
include a 10-acre park and wildlife
travel corridor
The southern portion of the site will be filled for
residential lots and would not be available to receive
floodwater because the park in this area would be
omitted from the design—
543-lot subdivision
No new commercial or multifamily
residential development
No greenspace or trails
The Standard Subdivision Alternative
has a greater impact on site land use
due to a reduction in open space (30
fewer acres)
Flood hazard areas
The required loose fill import volume is
approximately 377,532 CY
48 on-site acres and 44 off-site acres will be
removed from 100-year floodplain
Approximately 660,240 CY of fill material would need
to be imported under the Standard Subdivision
Alternative.
Considerably more fill under the
Standard Subdivision Alternative
Transportation
Construction-related truck trips: over a four-
year period or approximately 22.47 truck trips
per day
Alternative 2a is anticipated to generate 380
new AM peak hour trips, with 95 new trips
entering the site, and 285 new trips exiting the
site via the eight access opportunities previously
noted. In the PM peak hour, the project is
anticipated to generate 545 new trips, with 338
new trips entering the site, and 207 new trips
exiting the site.
5,846 ADT and 545 PM Peak Hour Trips
Approximately 40 truck trips (one trip to the site and
one return trip) would occur per day over the
duration of the site grading activities over a 4-year
period.
The Standard Subdivision Alternative would require
more fill than Alternative 2a, primarily due to the
filling of the open space area located just north of
East Thorpe Road. The total required fill volume with
the Standard Subdivision Alternative is approximately
574,122 CY.
5,529 ADT and 573 PM Peak Hour Trips
The Standard Subdivision Alternative generates
approximately 317 fewer average daily trips but
generates approximately 28 more PM peak hour
trips. This is due to the higher PM peak hour trip
generation of the single-family residential units and
the fact that no internalization trip reduction factor is
applied with the Standard Subdivision Alternative
because no commercial uses would be included.
More construction (fill) generated
truck trips under the Standard
Subdivision Alternative
The Standard Subdivision Alternative
generates approximately 317 fewer
average daily trips but generates
approximately 28 more PM peak hour
trips.
Environmental Elements Not Analyzed in Detail
Air quality
Impacts to air quality under the Standard Subdivision
Alternative will be similar to those described for
Alternative 2a with the following exceptions:
The Standard Subdivision Alternative provides a
greater number of single-family residences than
Alternative 2a, with 543 total single-family residences
compared to 300 single family residences in
Alternative 2a. The additional single-family residences
are more likely to be a source of fine particulates from
wood burning stoves.
The Standard Subdivision Alternative does not
incorporate 30% of the gross site area to public open
space, therefore providing less area that can serve as
a “carbon sink.”
Construction-related impacts to air quality will likely
be greater with the Standard Subdivision Alternative
The Standard Subdivision Alternative
is likely to generate more smoke from
wood stoves because it provides more
single-family residences. The Standard
Subdivision Alternative would also
result in greater impacts to air quality
from construction-related exhaust.
due to the greater degree of imported fill material
required.
Aesthetics
Alternative 2a will convert most of the central,
east and northwest areas of the site into a
mixed-use community. Remaining areas of the
property will be retained as community open
space.
Most of the field and open space areas on the site
would be converted to urban development.
The Standard Subdivision Alternative
will have somewhat greater impact on
local aesthetics
Biological Resources
The combined buffer impacts equal
approximately 15,619 SF. Buffer averaging, and
enhancement plantings are proposed to ensure
that these impacts do not result in a reduction
in the ecological function and values of the
riparian area.
Fill material placed on the east stream bank will
cover an approximately 104,132 SF of area. This area
will be replanted with native grasses, trees and
shrubs, representing a significant enhancement over
existing conditions.
The Standard Subdivision Alternative
has considerably more impact to
critical area buffers
Environmental
Health
Dust, noise, and exhaust from construction Dust, noise, and exhaust from construction Similar level of impact between
Alternative 2a and the Standard
Subdivision Alternative.
Geology
Grading may require the movement of up to
450,000 cubic yards of material, with up to
330,000 cubic yards of imported material
Due to the placement of fill and site
development features proposed under
Alternative 2a the opportunity for surface water
and precipitation to recharge the underlying
aquifer will be limited to the proposed
infiltration basin, roadside swales, and dry wells.
574,122 CY of fill material, which will require the
import of approximately 660,240 CY of “loose” fill
material prior to compaction on the site.
Due to the placement of fill and site development
features proposed under Alternative 2a the
opportunity for surface water and precipitation to
recharge the underlying aquifer will be limited to the
proposed infiltration basin, roadside swales, and dry
wells.
Considerably more fill under the
Standard Subdivision Alternative
Historic, Cultural &
Archaeological
Essentially no impacts Essentially no impacts Similar level of (non) impact between
Alternative 2a and the Standard
Subdivision Alternative.
Noise
During the construction phase noise from
construction, land clearing, and fill delivery and
placement equipment as well as structure
construction will increase for the short term.
Following completion of construction, noise will
be generated by residential traffic and other
residential sources including yard maintenance
equipment, domestic pets, occupants, and park
use for the long term.
The increase in population under the Standard
Subdivision Alternative would likely lead to
noise levels that are higher than current levels.
It is unlikely that the increase would be
measurable, but it may be perceived by
During the construction phase noise from
construction, land clearing, and fill delivery and
placement equipment as well as structure
construction will increase for the short term.
Following completion of construction, noise will be
generated by residential traffic and other residential
sources including yard maintenance equipment,
domestic pets, occupants, and park use for the long
term.
The increase in population under the Standard
Subdivision Alternative would likely lead to noise
levels that are higher than current levels. It is unlikely
that the increase would be measurable, but it may be
Similar level of impact between
Alternative 2a and the Standard
Subdivision Alternative.
residents in terms of the frequency to which
they experience noise disturbance.
perceived by residents in terms of the frequency to
which they experience noise disturbance.
Public Services Based on current demographics, it is expected
that approximately 1,377 people would reside in
the project at full project buildout. Further, it is
anticipated that approximately 45 employees
would work in the 22,400 SF of new retail space
that would result with Alternative
The Standard Subdivision Alternative is anticipated to
create 543 single-family residential units, which
would result in approximately 1,358 new residents at
full buildout of the community.
Slightly fewer individuals under the
Standard Subdivision Alternative but
all in Single-family units—more
impacts under the Standard
Subdivision Alternative due to more
single-family units
Recreation
Alternative 2a is anticipated to generate
approximately 300 single-family residential
units, 228 multi-family units and 52 mixed-use
residential units. Based on the 2013-2017
American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates,
it is anticipated that each single-family unit
would be occupied by approximately 2.5
residents, and that each of the 280 multi-family
units would be occupied by approximately 2.24
residents. This would result in a total population
of approximately 1,377 residents upon
completion of the project, which is anticipated
to occur over a period of approximately 10 years
or longer as the housing market dictates. Based
on the City’s comprehensive plan level-of-
service target of 1.92-acres of park space per
1,000 residents, the project would create
demand for approximately 2.64 acres of park
space in the community. As noted in the site
plan included on Figure 3-15 of this document,
Alternative 2a incorporates approximately 30
acres of open space, including a 10-acre park
which will fulfill the recreational demands of the
new development.
The Standard Subdivision Alternative is anticipated to
create 543 single-family residential units, which
would result in approximately 1,358 new residents at
full buildout of the community. Based on the City’s
comprehensive plan target of 1.92-acres of parks
area per 1,000 residents, the Standard Subdivision
Alternative would generate the need for
approximately 2.61 acres of park area.
The Standard Subdivision Alternative
would generate need for park areas
that Alternative 2a would not; the
Standard Subdivision Alternative
would result in greater impact than
Alternative 2aa
APPENDIX D
Standard Subdivision Alternative Environmental Review
APPENDIX D – STANDARD SUBDIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ANALYSIS
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT (GROUND AND SURFACE WATER)
Under the Standard Subdivision Alternative, as with Alternative 2a, the widening of Thorpe Road to
meet City road standards will result in an additional 15 feet of the main channel of Chester Creek to be
bridged by the new roadway surface.
As described for Alternative 2a, under the Standard Subdivision Alternative floodwater that enters the
project site will be collected in a series of pipes and swales and will infiltrate into the Spokane Rathdrum
Prairie aquifer via an engineered infiltration basin. No change in volumes of water that reach the aquifer
via the project site are anticipated to change under the Standard Subdivision Alternative.
As described for Alternative 2a, under the Standard Subdivision Alternative there would be no direct
impact to the channel of Chester Creek from the widening of Thorpe Road.
Under the Standard Subdivision Alternative there would be no impact to the Spokane Rathdrum Prairie
aquifer. Water that currently recharges the aquifer would continue to recharge through permeable
areas and through the infiltration pond installed at the northern limits of the site.
Stormwater quality and quantity management methods consistent with those identified for Alternative
2a would be employed with be employed.
Because on-site and regional development will be required to employ stormwater quality and quantity
management measures consistent with the SRSM, no cumulative effects are anticipated.
BUILT ENVIRONMENT (LAND USE AND FLOOD HAZARD AREAS)
Under the Standard Subdivision Alternative, the approach to controlling and managing floodwaters, and
meeting compensatory storage requirements will be the same as the approach proposed under
Alternative 2a. Management and control of floodwaters will be achieved on-site through a combination
of enhanced conveyance facilities (culverts) and infiltration galleries. Development areas where future
roads and buildings will be located will be elevated above the 100-year floodplain through the
placement of imported fill.
As proposed under Alternative 2a, The Standard Subdivision Alternative proposes to modify existing
floodplain areas through a CLOMR, the preliminary FEMA remap authorization before a LOMR is
finalized.
As described for Alternative 2a, the sources of floodwater under The Standard Subdivision Alternative
remain unchanged. The potential for floodwater to enter the site from the unnamed tributary to
Chester Creek northeast of the project site will be eliminated due to the placement of the existing
Gustin Ditch into a pipe that connects directly to the triangle pond which would serve as a detention
basin.
Under the Standard Subdivision Alternative, as under Alternative 2a, floodwaters that leave the Chester
Creek channel south of the site will no longer flow over Thorpe Road or inundate the southern portion
of the project site.
Under this alternative, unlike under Alternative 2a, the southern portion of the project site would be
filled for residential lots and would not be available to receive floodwater because the park in this
vicinity would be omitted from the design.
As described for Alternative 2a, on-site and off-site flood conveyance and storage improvements
completed under The Standard Subdivision Alternative would also remove off-site areas from the 100-
year floodplain. The area east of Madison Road currently designated as 100-year floodplain would lose
its floodplain designation and the potential for ponding in that area would be significantly reduced.
Similarly, the potential for flooding on the property to the northeast of the project site from the
unnamed tributary to Chester Creek near SR 27 due to replacement of the Gustin Ditch with a 36-inch
pipe, and the deepening and addition of drywells to the bottom of the triangle pond. The 100-year
floodplain designation would be removed from the currently designated floodplain between the
northeast corner of the project site and SR 27, including the Gustin property.
The changes in floodplain designation proposed under the Standard Subdivision Alternative would allow
new development in areas, both on-site and off-site, that had been previously subject to development
restrictions due to 100-year flood mapping.
TRANSPORTATION
The Standard Subdivision Alternative proposes the development of 543 residential lots and would not
include any new commercial retail or multi-family uses within the project. The Alternative would,
however, continue to include the operation of the former golf course clubhouse as a 4,000 SF
restaurant.
Using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition designation (Land Use Code #210) for single family
residential units, an average of 9.52 vehicular trips per day and one PM peak hour trip per unit is
assumed. Therefore, a total of 5,169 ADT and 543 PM peak hour trips are assumed to occur from the
residential use under the Standard Subdivision Alternative.
Because the 2016 TIA included trips estimated from re-use of the golf course clubhouse, those trips have
also been added to the estimated trip generation of the standard subdivision to ensure that the baseline
assumptions of traffic impacts of Alternatives 2a and 3 are consistent. As noted in Table 3-8 below, The
Standard Subdivision Alternative generates approximately 317 fewer average daily trips, but generates
approximately 28 more PM peak hour trips. This is due to the higher PM peak hour trip generation of
the single-family residential units and the fact that no internalization trip reduction factor is applied with
The Standard Subdivision Alternative because no commercial uses would be included.
Table 1: ADT and PM Peak Hour Trip Comparison – Alternatives 2a and 3
Alternative ADT PM Peak Hour
Trips
Alternative 2a – PRD (inc. 4,000 GSF restaurant) 5,846 545
Standard Subdivision Alternative – Standard Subdivision (inc.
4,000 GSF restaurant)
5,529 573
*Trip counts include 360 ADT and 30 PM peak hour trips associated with the 4,000 square foot
restaurant operating at the former golf clubhouse.
Construction-related Impacts
Like Alternative 2a, the Standard Subdivision Alternative would also require a substantial amount of fill
material to bring development areas above the 100-year base flood elevation. The Standard Subdivision
Alternative would require more fill than Alternative 2a, primarily due to the filling of the open space
area located just north East Thorpe Road. The total required fill volume with The Standard Subdivision
Alternative is approximately 574,122 CY. Using the same 15 percent shrink/swell factor applied to
determine the amount of “loose” material that would need to be imported to the site under the
Standard Subdivision Alternative, it is estimated that a total of approximately 660,240 CY of fill material
would need to be imported under The Standard Subdivision Alternative. Based on an average dump
truck volume of approximately 30 CY, it is estimated that 22,008 dump truck deliveries would be
required to bring this fill material to the site. Assuming this material is delivered to the site over a four-
year period, with 280 work days per year, it is assumed that approximately 20 truck deliveries would
occur per day or approximately 40 truck trips (one trip to the site and one return trip) would occur per
day over the duration of the site grading activities. The haul route for these dump trucks will be via
Dishman-Mica Road, a Principal and Minor Arterial, that experiences a total ADT of approximately
22,700 trips near Appleway Avenue and 4,800 ADT near Thorpe Road. Therefore, the dump truck-
related trips are estimated to represent less than one percent of the ADT of this facility.
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL
Air Quality
Impacts to air quality under The Standard Subdivision Alternative will be similar to those described for
Alternative 2a with the following exceptions:
The Standard Subdivision Alternative provides a greater number of single-family residences than
Alternative 2a, with 543 total single-family residences compared to 300 single family residences
in Alternative 2a. The additional single-family residences are more likely to be a source of fine
particulates from wood burning stoves.
The Standard Subdivision Alternative does not incorporate 30% of the gross site area to public
open space, therefore providing less area that can serve as a “carbon sink.”
Construction-related impacts to air quality will likely be greater with the Standard Subdivision
Alternative due to the greater degree of imported fill material required.
Aesthetics
Under the Standard Subdivision Alternative, most of the field and open space areas on the site would be
converted to urban development. As a standard subdivision, the project would not be subject to the 30
percent open space requirement found in SVMC Section 19.50.060, and therefore resulting open spaces
would primarily be limited to the riparian buffer along Chester Creek, landscape areas and the flood basin
located on the north side of the site.
Cumulative Effects
City and County development standards governing screening, setbacks, landscaping, light, glare, building
height and other provisions are expected to adequately address the aesthetic effects of individual
development projects. Therefore, no significant cumulative aesthetic effects are expected to result when
considering the action alternatives in conjunction with other potential development in the project vicinity.
Biological Resources
Environmental Consequences
Riparian buffer impacts would occur with the Standard Subdivision Alternative. The riparian buffer
adjacent to the restaurant parking lot will be reduced by up to 25% (for a minimum buffer of 75-feet) in
the location of a proposed parking lot expansion. This would result in an approximately 3,665 SF buffer
reduction/impact. Like Alternative 2a, the Standard Subdivision Alternative also includes a 1,383 SF
impact area resulting from the Thorpe Road expansion. These are the only two areas of permanent
riparian buffer impacts under the Standard Subdivision Alternative and result in a total impact area of
approximately 5,048 SF.
The Standard Subdivision Alternative would also involve temporary riparian impacts resulting from the
placement of fill material on the east side of the streambank to bring land areas farther to the east
above the 100-year base flood elevation and suitable for residential development. The buffer in this
area is currently planted non-native golf course turf grass and is almost totally devoid of woody
vegetation. No permanent loss of buffer would occur in this area. Existing cart paths would be removed
and new trails of approximately the same width would be constructed as a replacement and for
community use. Fill material placed on the east stream bank will cover an approximately 104,132 SF of
area. This area will be replanted with native grasses, trees and shrubs, representing a significant
enhancement over existing conditions.
Environmental Health
Similar to Alternative 2a, the Standard Subdivision Alternative has the potential to generate
environmental health effects from dust and construction equipment emissions and from construction
noise.
Geology
As described for Alternative 2a, site grading activities associated with the Standard Subdivision
Alternative will cover most of the site with imported fill. The property will be graded to create the
streets, drainage ponds/swales, and areas future residences. The Standard Subdivision Alternative is
expected to require 574,122 CY of fill material, which will require the import of approximately 660,240
CY of “loose” fill material prior to compaction on the site.
Approximately 25% of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces after completion of the
project.
As described for Alternative 2a, due to the placement of fill and site development features under the
Standard Subdivision Alternative the opportunity for surface water and precipitation to recharge the
underlying aquifer will be limited to the proposed infiltration basin, roadside swales, and dry wells.
Some erosion from wind and minor erosion from rain could occur on-site during construction elements.
Because of the flatness of the site, the potential for surface water erosion is limited and would be
localized to the area of work.
Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources
Areas of site disturbance for the Standard Subdivision Alternative would occur within the same site
limits as those evaluated in the cultural resources survey. As a consequence, no impacts to Native
American or historic-era cultural materials are expected to result from the Standard Subdivision
Alternative. However, site construction activities will occur under the guidance of an IDP as outlined in
Appendix A of the Cultural Resources Survey to ensure that any potential inadvertent discovery is
promptly addressed.
Noise
The Standard Subdivision Alternative noise levels will increase beyond current noise levels both during
the construction phase and indefinitely once the project construction is completed.
During the construction phase noise from construction, land clearing, and fill delivery and placement
equipment as well as structure construction will increase for the short term. Following completion of
construction, noise will be generated by residential traffic and other residential sources including yard
maintenance equipment, domestic pets, occupants, and park use for the long term.
The increase in population under the Standard Subdivision Alternative would likely lead to noise levels
that are higher than current levels. It is unlikely that the increase would be measurable, but it may be
perceived by residents in terms of the frequency to which they experience noise disturbance.
Public Services
The Standard Subdivision Alternative is anticipated to create 543 single-family residential units, which
would result in approximately 1,358 new residents at full buildout of the community. This alternative
would not include any new commercial uses and no change would occur at the clubhouse building, which
is assumed to continue to operate as a restaurant. As the use of the clubhouse would not change, the use
of the clubhouse is not expected to have a change in impact on public services.
The following paragraphs summarize the anticipated effects of the Standard Subdivision Alternative on
schools, parks, fire, public safety, water and sanitary sewer services.
Schools
Based on the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimate data, approximately
15.2% of Spokane Valley’s population is between the ages of 5 and 17 years old. Extrapolating this number
to the Standard Subdivision Alternative, an estimated 206 students would reside within the project upon
the completion of the Standard Subdivision Alternative.
While the precise cohort of elementary school, middle school and high school students is not known, if
general student population were proportionately distributed to the number of grades in elementary (six
grades), middle school (three grades), and high school (four grades), it is assumed that the development
of the Standard Subdivision Alternative would result in the following increases in student population:
Elementary School – Approximately 9.5 new students per year or 95 total students over the
approximately 10-year buildout of the project.
Middle School – Approximately 4.7 new students per year or 47 total students over the approximately
10-year buildout of the project.
High School - Approximately 6.4 new students per year or 64 total students over the approximately
10-year buildout of the project.
Fire
Because the demands for fire service would be similar to Alternative 2a and the fire district has provided
specific development and design requirements for that alternative, there are no anticipated challenges
with obtaining fire district service for the Standard Subdivision Alternative.
Public Safety
It is expected that additional service calls will occur from future residences and businesses within the site,
but these uses are not anticipated to create a significant increased demand for public safety services. Per
communications with City of Spokane Valley staff, the level of additional activity created under the
Standard Subdivision Alternative would not generate a significant impact to public safety services.1 The
City regularly reviews large development proposals and, in instances where a significant new user, such
as a big-box retail project, creates enough demand to warrant special adjustments in service, the City will
make those adjustments to its service contract with Spokane County. However, similar to Alternative 2a,
the gradual increase in population resulting from the Standard Subdivision Alternative can be
commensurately addressed through regular level-of-service adjustments occurring through the City’s
periodic review and adjustment of its public safety contract with the County.
Water
Due to the fact that the Standard Subdivision Alternative would have a water demand that is very similar
to Alternative 2a and Spokane County Water District #3 has acknowledged their ability to serve the
project, there are no anticipated impacts or unique challenges to provide water to the site under the
Standard Subdivision Alternative.
Sanitary Sewer
Because the water demand under the Standard Subdivision Alternative would be similar to Alternative 2a
and Spokane County Environmental Services has acknowledged their ability to serve Alterative 2, there
are no anticipated impacts or unique challenges to provide sewer service under the Standard Subdivision
Alternative.
Cumulative Effects
There are no known cumulative effects from other on-going projects or activities that, when considered
in conjunction with the action alternatives, could result in any discernible effects on public services.
Recreation
Environmental Consequences
The Standard Subdivision Alternative is anticipated to create 543 single-family residential units, which
would result in approximately 1,358 new residents at full buildout of the community. Based on the City’s
comprehensive plan target of 1.92-acres of parks area per 1,000 residents, the Standard Alternative
would generate the need for approximately 2.61 acres of park area.
Cumulative Effects
The City conducts periodic reviews of its parks and recreation needs for the broader community and last
updated its Parks and Recreation Master Plan in 2013. Through regular review and update of the
community plan, the City anticipates and plans for necessary recreational needs throughout the
community. Therefore, any cumulative effects of population growth within the broader community have
been considered and integrated with the City’s parks and recreation system planning efforts.
1 Pers comms with Morgan Koudelka, City of Spokane Valley, January 14, 2019.
APPENDIX E
Operation and Maintenance Manual
Page 1
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN
FOR PAINTED HILLS PLANNED RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM & PLAT
AMENITIES
Abbreviations
PRD – Planned Residential Development
HOA – Homeowner’s Association
C.E.- Contracted Entity
COSV- City of Spokane Valley
OHWM- Ordinary High Water Mark
AHJ- Agency Having Jurisdiction
OSHA- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Owner: Black Realty Inc.; or HOA as created via the Washington Secretary of State.
Party(s) responsible for Operations & Maintenance:
1) Black Realty Inc. until the formation of an HOA is complete.
2) Painted Hills PRD Homeowners Assn.
3) Contracted Maintenance Entity
4) Community Oversight – per CFR 65.6(a)(12) the City of Spokane Valley (COSV)
Manager or designee, and Spokane County Manager or designee (offsite facilities) will
be responsible for assuring that the maintenance activities are accomplished based on the
governing jurisdictional boundary.
Parent Parcel Number(s)-COSV: 45336.9191, 45334.0106, .0108, .0109, .0110, .0113, .0114, .9135,
44040.9144
LOCATED IN SECTION 33 & 34, T25N, R44E & SECTION 4, T24N, R44E, W.M.
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
The above parent parcels contain the Painted Hills PRD flood control drainage system.
The residential lot owners, commercial property owners and multi-family property owners of Painted
Hills PRD, are benefitting from these flood control facilities. The homeowner’s association of this
project, which is comprised of residential, multi-family and commercial lot owners, is responsible for
(details described later):
The continued operations and maintenance, including repair and replacement as needed, of these
facilities, see PRD Flood Control Plans.
Providing funds to finance the continued operation and maintenance of these facilities,
The administration of this agreement with each property owner within the PRD being bound by
this agreement and with the responsibilities to be shared equally between each Painted Hills PRD
property owner, (see fee schedule for applicable percentages) or contracted entity.
Establishing a maintenance committee and designating an HOA member to be responsible for the
administration of this plan,
Providing an annual report each October to Spokane Valley Public Works describing the general
status of the sinking fund account, and
Page 2
Providing an annual report each October to Spokane Valley Public Works describing specific
inspections, findings and maintenance performed, see checklist.
This operations and maintenance plan runs with the land and is binding upon the Painted Hills PRD
Homeowners Association property owners, their heirs, successors and assigns.
The parties mentioned above are primarily responsible for all operations and maintenance of facilities
mentioned herein and the administration of this plan.
Offsite Parcel Number(s)-County: 45336.9108 (Gustin Ditch), 45343.9052 (Triangle Pond)
LOCATED IN SECTION 34, T25N, R44E, W.M.
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
The above offsite County parcels are also a part of the Painted Hills PRD flood control drainage system.
The residential lot owners, commercial property owners and multi-family property owners of Painted
Hills PRD, are benefitting from these flood control facilities. The homeowner’s association of this
project, which is comprised of residential, multi-family and commercial lot owners, is responsible for
(details described later):
The continued operations and maintenance, including repair and replacement as needed, of these
facilities, see Gustin Pipe Plan set.
Providing funds to finance the continued operation and maintenance of these facilities,
The administration of this agreement with each property owner within the PRD being bound by
this agreement and with the responsibilities to be shared equally between each Painted Hills PRD
property owner, (see fee schedule for applicable percentages) or contracted entity.
Establishing a maintenance committee and designating an HOA member to be responsible for the
administration of this plan,
Providing an annual report each October to Spokane County Public Works describing the general
status of the sinking fund account, and
Providing an annual report each October to Spokane County Public Works describing specific
inspections, findings and maintenance performed, see checklist.
This operations and maintenance plan runs with the land and is binding upon the Painted Hills PRD
Homeowners Association property owners, their heirs, successors and assigns until such time as the
Gustin property (Parcel No. 45344.9108) develops and then the owner of that parcel will assume
responsibility for this plan. Parcel No. 45343.9052 (triangle pond) is covered by a storm drainage
easement granted to Spokane County as recorded in Book 659 Page 1803.
Spokane County assumes no responsibility at all for any operations or maintenance of the facilities
mentioned herein or the administration of this plan. Spokane County and the City of Spokane Valley and
their authorized agents are granted access rights for routine inspection and emergency repairs, but in
doing so incur no responsibility to perform these functions at any time.
1.00 PURPOSE
This plan is to provide:
1. General operations and maintenance responsibilities for the facilities described herein, and
2. Cost estimates of the assessments to be paid by each property owner mentioned herein for the
funding of this maintenance.
Page 3
2.00 GENERAL OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
Parent Parcel(s) Drainage Facilities-COSV
The Painted Hills PRD flood control drainage and existing Chester Creek system is intended to collect
and discharge stormwater runoff generated by upstream basins and stormwater from adjacent properties
as is identified on FEMA panel (53063C0751D, effective date July 6, 2010) as compensatory storage or
pass through storm flows. The PRD drainage facilities consist of a box culvert under Thorpe Road with a
concrete channel, headwall and trash rack, two 48” pipe mainlines between the box culvert and discharge
facility with another concrete headwall and trash rack at the outlet, WSDOT catch basins/manholes, a bio-
infiltration swale, settling pond with two 48” pipe outlets, headwall and trash rack (upstream, and
downstream), and a infiltration field/pond with associated drywells that receives runoff form the settling
pond. The system also includes 4-18” cross culverts under Madison Road that connect easterly of to the
two 48” pipe mainlines.
A portion of stormwater runoff from the upstream basins south of the project flows in the Chester Creek
channel under Thorpe Road continuing northwesterly under Dishman-Mica Road. This channel is also a
part of the system and will need to be maintained in conjunction with the City of Spokane Valley
The remainder of stormwater runoff from upstream basins south of the project flows under Thorpe Road
via the PRD box culvert then flows into the pipe system, through the grassed bio-infiltration swale and
into settling pond, until discharging into the infiltration pond at the north end of the site where the flow is
stored and infiltrated into the ground.
Stormwater runoff from upstream basins east of the project flows under Madison Road into 18” culverts
and outfalls into the two easterly 48” pipelines via WSDOT catch basins/manholes.
It is important to provide adequate maintenance activities to ensure that the flood control facilities remain
silt and debris free, as this silt and debris will affect their performance. Additionally, vegetation must be
maintained to prevent erosion of the system. Maintenance details are discussed below in Section 3.0.
Offsite Parcel(s) Drainage Facilities- County
The offsite County triangular pond located to the east of the Painted Hills project site (off of 40th Avenue
and west of Hwy. 27) is a part of the Whipple Consulting Engineers (WCE) Gustin Pipe Plan set. This
triangular pond and Gustin ditch are part of the County’s existing stormwater and floodplain system. The
improvements to this existing County storm system includes the addition of a 36” storm pipe running
parallel and within the existing Gustin Ditch, stormwater drywells, and a gravel access/maintenance road
to the pond bottom.
The existing Gustin Ditch (Parcel No. 45344.9108) is intended to collect and discharge stormwater runoff
into the triangle pond (Parcel No. 45343.9052) that is generated by upstream basins and from adjacent
properties as is identified on FEMA panel (53063C0751D, effective date July 6, 2010).
It is important to provide adequate maintenance activities to ensure that the flood control facilities remain
silt and debris free, as this silt and debris will affect their performance. Additionally, vegetation must be
maintained to prevent erosion of the system. Maintenance details are discussed below in Section 3.0.
Page 4
3.00 MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS AND SCHEDULES
All inspections and repairs are to be performed by or directly overseen by qualified professionals and
personnel (contracted entity) per this schedule and following major events. Maintenance tasks are to be
performed soon after the need is identified and before the facility is to perform unless otherwise agreed to
by the City or County for offsite drainage facilities. Repairs or replacements are to be completed
immediately upon their identification unless otherwise agreed to by the City or County. Only qualified
individuals may enter confined spaces and all OSHA rules must be followed. Major repairs or
reconstruction will need to be designed, approved, and inspected by professional engineers and the City
of Spokane Valley or Spokane County for applicable offsite facilities.
Parent Parcel(s) Drainage Facilities-COSV
The drainage facilities consist of several elements including: box culverts, existing Chester Creek
channel, storm drain mainline, culverts, outlet structure, bio-infiltration swale, inlet structure, infiltration
pond and associated drywells, manholes, catch basins, access roads, headwalls with trash racks, fencing,
and plant material. These elements are located as shown on the attached exhibit. The following describes
these facilities and the minimum required maintenance.
A comprehensive visual inspection of the complete PRD flood control drainage facilities should be
conducted twice a year. More frequent inspections for various elements may be required as described
below. For long duration storms, greater than 24 hours, the drainage facilities should be inspected during
the storm event to identify any developing problems and safely correct them before they become major
problems. Signs shall be posted notifying all residents to look for “potential” problems and to notify the
homeowners’ association of those observations.
In general, it is important to provide adequate maintenance activities to ensure that the vegetated areas
and structures remain silt, dirt and debris free because accumulations of these will affect the facilities
function for stormwater storage volume as well as the ability of the drywells and pond bottom to
discharge stormwater. Should these facilities silt up or become clogged, the flood control system will not
function as intended putting the PRD at risk of flooding. Therefore, periodic maintenance is a must.
Irrigation of Drainage Facilities-COSV
The Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s Association and qualified personnel (contracted entity) shall ensure
that all drainage facilities are properly irrigated on a regular schedule to maintain and promote healthy
vegetation. Proper irrigation of vegetation is imperative to help to prevent erosion of channels, slopes, and
swale and pond bottoms. Personnel shall be careful not to overwater or erosion or excessive saturation
may result. This includes the roadside swales and/or landscape strip along Dishman Mica Road, Thorpe
Road, and Madison Road.
Box Culvert-COSV:
There are three box culvert crossings adjoining the project site; two are under Thorpe Road and one is
under Dishman Mica Road. These box culverts are within the public road right of way and will be
maintained by the agency having jurisdiction (AHJ) of the roadway. Any problems noticed while
inspecting or maintaining other elements of the system should be reported to the AHJ.
Page 5
LOCATION AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION (AHJ)
Thorpe Rd near Madison Rd-Proposed City of Spokane Valley
Thorpe Rd near Dishman-Mica Rd-Existing City of Spokane Valley
Dishman-Mica Rd-Existing City of Spokane Valley
Chester Creek-COSV:
In addition to the instructions listed below, see Appendix B, Chester Creek, Operation & Maintenance
Manual from “Geotechnical Evaluation, Levee Evaluation and Certification, 4403 South Dishman-Mica
Road, Spokane County, Washington” prepared by Inland Pacific Engineering Company Project No. 14-
037, dated February 12, 2015, Revised August 29, 2016. As part of the project, stream buffer mitigation
impact areas are also necessary due to grading operations (fill) within the Chester Creek buffer area.
Maintenance of the required buffer mitigation areas are essential to restore and enhance the disturbed
riparian areas that provide a natural cover and provide food for native species; this will be accomplished
by re-establishing vegetation and by noxious weed control/reduction, and providing adequate irrigation
for healthy vegetative growth. For the complete report, including the planting schedule and guidelines for
planting and maintaining healthy vegetation in these mitigated areas, see the see the Biological
Evaluation, Critical Areas Report, and Habitat Management Plan for Painted Hills completed Larry
Dawes of Biology Soil & Water, Inc. provided in the Appendix (dated 02/28/19). It should be noted, that
some maintenance items listed below are taken directly from the above-mentioned report; mitigation
requirements listed below are also required for a minimum of five years if performance goals are met, or
until performance goals are met following the 5-year minimum requirement. The Performance goals are
listed in the maintenance items below, and the City of Spokane Valley and Larry Dawes of Biology Soil
& Water, Inc (or other professional Biologist) will determine if these goals have been satisfied after 5-
years. Annual maintenance of the mitigation areas should still continue after the required performance
goals are met, to ensure healthy vegetative growth and provide erosion control; however, the required
amount of vegetation and monitoring reports will not be stipulated or required by the City of Spokane
Valley.
Chester Creek extends across the southwest corner of the site from Thorpe Road northwesterly for
approximately 900 feet where it crosses under Dishman-Mica Road. The creek carries seasonal flows
from the foothills to the south. The site is protected from flood flows by an existing levee along the
northerly side of the creek and along the north side of Dishman-Mica Rd to Wilbur Rd. The intent of the
Painted Hills PRD fill project is to fill on the landward (north easterly) side existing levee, which will
provide further protection from flooding on the interior landward side of the painted Hills Development.
After the project is filled, the creek channel will need to be maintained to ensure flood carrying capacity
is not diminished. Maintenance of the channel, up to the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) shall be
the responsibility of the City of Spokane Valley, while maintenance above the (OHWM) including
obtaining permits to perform the maintenance, shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD
Homeowner’s Association in coordination with the City of Spokane Valley.
Maintenance items (above the OHWM) include:
Regular mowing, grass should be kept at 3 inches or more in height but shall not exceed 12
inches, with the last mowing occurring to allow 8-10 inches of growth prior to winter
Removing trash, debris, noxious weeds plus items that reduce the amount of vegetative cover,
Removing any starts of woody vegetation that appear in the channel side slopes. Only native
grasses shall be used in the channel,
Page 6
Repairing any holes caused by burrowing animals and human activity such as utility work,
ORV’s or vandalism on the channel side slopes, traps for burrowing animals shall be used if
required,
Inspecting the channel side slopes making sure there are no breaches or breaks or erosion and
check for root and tree start invasion. Immediately repair with a sandy loess soil, compacted in
place, or bentonite type soil, and follow up after the storm event with seeding or sodding the
repair and more substantial maintenance activities if needed,
Repairing mowing damage,
Removing and replacing of the native grass and underlying soil if it becomes degraded to the
extent that the grass is not healthy and/or wilted,
Annually inspecting all mitigation areas to ensure re-establishment of vegetation in compliance
with the Biological Evaluation Report mentioned above,
Annually Inspecting the mitigation areas for noxious weed in the Spring to determine if the
previous year’s weed control measures were adequate, and to make preparations for the current
year accordingly,
Filling out the levee checklist and include the checklist in the annual report to the City.
Providing adequate irrigation for all required vegetative growth, especially for the Chester Creek
stream buffer mitigation impact areas,
Performance Goal-Ensuring herbaceous vegetations reaches 80% areal cover with native grasses
after five years, (year 1=20%, year 2=30%, year 3=50%, & year 5=80%) for buffer mitigation
areas,
Performance Goal -Ensuring a 100% survival of tree and shrub plantings and 80% survival every
year after for five years until performance goals are met for buffer mitigation areas,
Notifying the City of Spokane Valley (COSV) immediately if any observed functionality of the
mitigation areas is failing (unhealthy looking or wilting vegetation),
Storm Drain Mainline, Concrete Channel, Headwalls, and Trash Rack, and Outlet Pipes -COSV:
The storm drain mainline consists of 5,251 linear feet of 48” pipe from the downstream end of the new
box culvert at Thorpe Rd and Madison Rd, running parallel to Madison Rd and ending at the bio-
infiltration swale at the north end of the site. The bio-infiltration swale further outlets to the settling pond
that discharges to the large infiltration pond through (2)-48” outlet pipes that have concrete headwalls and
trash racks on the upstream and downstream side if the outlet pipes. The pipes need to be maintained to
prevent sediment and trash build-up in the bio-infiltration swale and the infiltration field/pond and
associated drywells. The concrete channel and associated headwalls and trash racks located downstream
of the Thorpe Road box culvert also needs to be inspected for physical integrity to prevent a breach/leak
in the channel or headwall and to ensure no obstructions are blocking the passage for stormwater, and to
prevent unauthorized entry into the storm system. Maintenance of the storm drain mainline shall be the
responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s Association and/or the contracted entity (C.E.).
Maintenance items include:
Annually inspecting the pipe openings on each end to ensure there is no blockage or damage to
the ends,
Every three years or after substantial storm runoff, performing a TV inspection of the pipe
looking for blockages, damage, etc., visual inspection can be made at pipe manhole locations by
authorized maintenance personnel,
Removing sediment build-up from the pipe,
Repairing any sections of damaged pipe,
Visually inspecting twice a year the concrete channel, headwalls, and trash racks for damage or
Page 7
corrosion that would compromise the trash rack integrity.
Prior to each rainy season (August or September), inspecting each trash racks ensuring that there
is no debris present,
Following large storm events or rapid snow melt events performing a visual inspection and
remove any deleterious debris and trash,
Instructing those performing other maintenance functions on the system to report any observed
damage to the trash rack.
Catch Basins-COSV:
The mainline pipe system has WSDOT Type II catch basins at pipe junctions and angle points. Along
Madison Road there are catch basins connected by pipe to the mainline pipe system to drain overflow
from the roadside swales. Catch basins need to be maintained to prevent blockage of flow within the
system. Contact a professional or have the contracted entity remove the debris, trash and sediment
buildup, such as AAA Sweeping LLC. HOMEOWNERS ARE NOT TO ENTER THE
MANHOLES/CATCH BASINS. Maintenance of the catch basins shall be the responsibility of the
Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
During routine landscape maintenance of roadside swales, removing any debris from catch basin
grates,
Annually inspecting catch basins for trash and sediment build-up and removing trash,
When sediment build-up fills ½ the depth of the sump (about 1 foot), removing the sediment,
Annually inspecting catch basin grates and lids to ensure they are properly seated and are
structurally sound,
Every five years, inspecting the structure walls to ensure the concrete walls are in good condition
and the joints remain sealed,
Instructing those performing other maintenance functions on the system to report any missing lids
or grates.
Cross Culverts (Flap Gates)-COSV:
The cross culverts consist of 18” CMP pipe crossing under Madison Road flowing from east to west in
four locations. The culverts connect into WSDOT Type II catch basins on the 48” storm drain mainline.
The cross culverts need to be maintained to prevent the reduction of seasonal flows within the pipes. The
reduction in flow may be caused by sediment or trash build-up within the pipe or obstruction of the pipe
entrance on the east side of Madison Rd. Maintenance of the cross culverts from the inlet up to, but not
including the flap gates shall be the responsibility the City of Spokane Valley. However, the flap gates
shall be the responsibility of the of the Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
Annually inspecting the flap gates to ensure proper operation,
Every three years performing a TV inspection of the flap gates looking for blockages, damage,
corrosion, etc., and notifying the City of Spokane Valley if the pipes themselves need
maintenance,
Removing sediment build-up from the flap gates,
Repairing any sections or components of the flap gates.
Page 8
Bio-infiltration Swale/Channel, Roadside Swales, and Settling Pond-COSV:
The bio-infiltration swale/channel consists of a grass lined channel approximately 320 feet long with a 6-
foot bottom width and 2:1 side slopes and approximately 6-feet in depth. The swale needs to be
maintained to perform the function of removing any remaining contaminants including fugitive silts prior
to storm water entering the infiltration pond, with adequate irrigation provided for vegetation
establishment. Following the bio-infiltration channel is a settling pond to further reduce the sediment
loading in the infiltration pond. The settling pond then discharges to the large infiltration pond through
(2)-48” outlet pipes with headwalls and trash racks (see the Stormdrain Mainline Section on page 6 of this
report for inclusion of the outlet pipes, headwalls and trash racks). Additionally, roadside swales along
Dishman Mica Road, Thorpe Road, and Madison Road, require similar maintenance as the bio-infiltration
swale/channel that includes removing any sediment buildup or debris from the swales, and adequately
irrigating the swale to promote a heathy growth of grass. Maintenance of the bio-infiltration swale,
roadside swales, and settling pond shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s
Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
Annually inspecting the bio-infiltration swale/channel bottom and side slopes to ensure there is a
covering of grass, grass can be mowed no shorter than 8 to 10 inches, once annually,
Annually inspecting the settling pond bottom and side slopes to ensure there is a covering of
grass, grass can be mowed no shorter than 8 to 10 inches,
Removing accumulations of sediment that bury the grass cover for the channel, swales, and pond,
Reseeding any bare or dead areas of grass for the channel, swales, and pond,
Removing any noxious weeds within the channel, swales, and pond (spraying is acceptable),
Providing adequate irrigation for the bio-infiltration channel, swale, and pond (including side
slopes),
Annually inspecting the roadside swale bottoms and side slopes to ensure there is a covering of
grass, grass should be mowed in the same manner as residential home yards
Infiltration Field/Pond and Associated Drywells-COSV:
As previously mentioned, the infiltration pond receives runoff from the settling pond through (2)-48”
outlet pipes. The infiltration pond is comprised of 48-double depth drywells, and the drywells need to be
maintained to prevent or reduce sediment buildup in the drywell barrel so as to not reduce infiltration into
the surrounding ground. The infiltration field/pond bottom also needs to remain free of debris and
sediment build-up as it is the first point of infiltration. The Maintenance of the drywells and infiltration
pond shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
Visually inspecting twice a year the inside of the drywell barrel(s) by removing the grate to look
into the structure. Have all debris and trash removed. Sediment must be removed before buildup
reaches the bottom of the lowest slot out of the drywell in the barrel wall. Contact a professional
to remove the debris, trash and sediment buildup. HOMEOWNERS ARE NOT TO ENTER THE
DRYWELL, as these drywells are 12-feet in depth with no internal ladder system.
Removing accumulations of sediment that bury the grass cover,
Page 9
Fencing-COSV:
The fencing of various system elements needs to be maintained to restrict access to those elements and to
protect the public. Maintenance of the fencing shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD
Homeowner’s Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
Visually inspect twice a year the entire fencing system for damaged fence fabric, posts, gates,
signs, etc.
Prior to each rainy season (August or September), inspecting each access point ensuring that
locks and gates are functional.
Instructing those performing other maintenance functions on the system to report any observed
breaches or damage to the fencing.
Access Roads/Parking Pads-COSV:
The access roads/parking pads to various system elements need to be maintained to allow maintenance
vehicles access to those elements for periodic maintenance and emergency repairs to protect the public.
Maintenance of the access roads/parking pads shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD
Homeowner’s Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
Visually inspecting annually, the entire access road/parking pad system for rutting, potholes, etc.
Regrade and repair with additional aggregate as needed.
Removing vegetation from the aggregate surface.
Instructing those performing other maintenance functions on the system to report any observed
damage to the access roads/parking pads.
Interior Asphalt Pathway, exterior Asphalt Pathway, and Concrete Sidewalk-COSV:
The interior asphalt pathway, the exterior asphalt pathway (Madison Road & Dishman Mica Road), and
concrete sidewalk (Dishman Mica Road & Thorpe Road) that provide pedestrian access around and
through the project site need to be maintained to allow safe pedestrian travel. Maintenance of the asphalt
pathways and concrete sidewalk shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s
Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
Visually inspecting annually, the entire pathway and sidewalk for rutting, potholes, cracking of
concrete or tree root intrusion, and repair or replace with additional asphalt or concrete as needed.
Removing vegetation or debris from the surface.
Instructing those performing other maintenance functions on the system to report any observed
damage to the asphalt pathway or concrete sidewalk.
Offsite Parcel(s) Drainage Facilities-County
The existing Gustin Ditch (Parcel No. 45344.9108) is intended to collect and discharge stormwater runoff
into the triangle pond (Parcel No. 45343.9052) that is generated by upstream basins and stormwater from
adjacent properties as is identified on FEMA panel (53063C0751D, effective date July 6, 2010).
Currently, stormwater runoff from the upstream basins is routed under Hwy 27 through a 36” culvert into
Page 10
the Gustin Ditch where the storm water flows to the west to the exiting pond. The improved drainage
system will consist of a 36” conveyance pipe running parallel and within the existing Gustin Ditch (Parcel
No. 45344.9108) to intercept the upstream basin stormwater. This existing flow will continue to discharge
to the existing triangle pond (Parcel No. 45343.9052) through the 36” storm outlet pipe. The triangle pond
will also have 18- stormwater drywells and a gravel road installed to provide access for maintenance to
the pond and stormwater drywells. These existing flows normally infiltrate into the existing pond bottom,
however, during larger storms the stormwater will overflow into the drywells and infiltrate into the
ground. The additional stormwater capacity provided by the drywells will capture and eliminate the
existing FEMA designated 100-Year Storm Event that would have theoretically continue to West if these
drywells were not installed.
A visual inspection of the drainage facilities should be conducted twice a year. For long duration storms,
greater than 24 hours, the drainage facilities should be inspected during the storm event to identify any
developing problems and safely correct them before they become major problems. It is important to
provide adequate maintenance activities to ensure that the drainage facilities remain silt and dirt free, as
this silt and dirt will affect their performance. Additionally, vegetation must be maintained to prevent
erosion of ditch and/or pond sides and to prevent flow restrictions within the ditch and/or pond from the
build-up of dead vegetation and tree and shrub invasion. Maintenance details are further discussed below.
Gustin Ditch with Pipe and Catch Basins-County:
The 36” PVC pipe needs to be maintained to ensure there is no debris or vegetation blocking the flow of
stormwater through the pipe. The pipe mainline has two 12” PVC cross culverts near the end of the pipe
mainline to further capture runoff from overland flow from the Gustin Ditch Property (Parcel No.
45344.9108). The ditch needs to be maintained to ensure a strong, healthy, dense vegetative cover and
that it is free of debris. Maintenance of the ditch and outfall shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills
PRD Homeowner’s Association until such time as the Gustin property (Parcel No. 45344.9108) is
developed. At that time the owner(s) of the new development shall assume responsibility for maintenance
of the ditch and levee.
Maintenance items include:
Regular mowing, grass should be kept at 3 inches or more in height but shall not exceed 12
inches, with the last mowing occurring to allow 8-10 inches of growth prior to winter,
Removing trash, debris, noxious weeds plus items that reduce the amount of vegetative cover,
Removing any starts of woody vegetation that appear in the ditch. Only native grasses shall be
used to repair at removal areas,
Repairing any holes caused by burrowing animals and human activity such as utility work,
ORV’s or vandalism on the ditch side slopes,
Inspecting the ditch side slopes, and bottom making sure there are no breaches or breaks or
erosion and check for root and tree start invasion. Immediately repair with a sandy loess soil,
compacted in place and follow up after the storm event with seeding of the repair with native
grasses and more substantial maintenance activities if needed,
Repairing mowing damage,
Removal and replacement of the grass and underlying soil if it becomes contaminated to the
extent that the grass is not healthy.
Annually inspecting the pipe openings on each end to ensure there is no blockage or damage to
the ends,
Every three years or after substantial storm runoff, performing a TV inspection of the pipe(s)
looking for blockages, damage, etc., visual inspection can be made at pipe manhole locations by
Page 11
authorized maintenance personnel,
Removing sediment build-up from the pipe,
Repairing any sections of damaged pipe.
Catch Basins-County:
The Gustin Ditch pipe system has County Manholes (48” and 72” diameter) at pipe junctions and angle
points. Catch basins need to be maintained to prevent blockage of flow within the system. Contact a
professional or have the contracted entity remove the debris, trash and sediment buildup, such as AAA
Sweeping LLC. HOMEOWNERS ARE NOT TO ENTER THE MANHOLES/CATCH BASINS.
Maintenance of the catch basins shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s
Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
During routine landscape maintenance of roadside swales, removing any debris from catch basin
grates,
Annually inspecting catch basins for trash and sediment build-up and removing trash,
When sediment build-up fills ½ the depth of the sump (about 1 foot), removing the sediment,
Annually inspecting catch basin grates and lids to ensure they are properly seated and are
structurally sound,
Every five years, inspecting the structure walls to ensure the concrete walls are in good condition
and the joints remain sealed,
Instructing those performing other maintenance functions on the system to report any missing lids
or grates.
Triangle Pond & Drywells-County:
The pond bottom needs to be maintained to ensure there is no debris, vegetation or sediment preventing
the infiltration of storm water through the bottom of the non-irrigated pond. Also, that no debris,
vegetation or sediment buildup rise to a level that would allow it to enter into the drywells. Drywells need
to be maintained to prevent or reduce sediment buildup in the drywell barrel that would reduce infiltration
into the surrounding ground. Maintenance of the pond and drywells shall be the responsibility of the
Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s Association until such time as the Gustin property (Parcel No.
45344.9108) is developed. At that time the owner(s) of the new development shall assume responsibility
for maintenance.
Maintenance items include:
Periodically visually inspect the grate and remove any deleterious debris and trash.
Biennially visually inspect the inside of the drywell barrel(s) by removing the grate to look into
the structure. Have all debris and trash removed. Sediment must be removed before buildup
reaches the bottom of the lowest slot out of the drywell in the barrel wall. Contact a professional
to vacuum out the debris, trash and sediment buildup. HOMEOWNERS ARE NOT TO ENTER
THE DRYWELLS.
Fencing-County:
The fencing around the triangle pond needs to be maintained to restrict access to those elements and to
protect the public. Maintenance of the fencing shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD
Homeowner’s Association or the C.E.
Page 12
Maintenance items include:
Visually inspect twice a year the entire fencing system for damaged fence fabric, posts, gates,
signs, etc.
Prior to each rainy season (August or September), inspecting each access point ensuring that
locks and gates are functional.
Instructing those performing other maintenance functions on the system to report any observed
breaches or damage to the fencing.
Access Roads/Parking Pads-County:
The access roads/parking pads to the triangle pond need to be maintained to allow maintenance vehicles
access to those elements for periodic maintenance and emergency repairs to protect the public.
Maintenance of the access roads/parking pads shall be the responsibility of the Painted Hills PRD
Homeowner’s Association or the C.E.
Maintenance items include:
Visually inspecting annually, the entire access road/parking pad system for rutting, potholes, etc.
Regrade and repair with additional aggregate as needed.
Removing vegetation from the aggregate surface.
Instructing those performing other maintenance functions on the system to report any observed
damage to the access roads/parking pads.
4.00 SINKING FUNDS
A sinking fund is an account that is set up to receive regular deposits which are to be used for paying off
future costs and debts. The sinking fund monies will be used to pay for planned and unplanned operation
and maintenance costs along with certain future replacement costs for the storm drainage facilities. The
sinking fund calculation should be revised as necessary to account for actual expenses and changes in
rates.
In setting up the fund, first the future replacement costs are estimated and then they are converted to
annual costs (or deposits) by the following calculations. These calculations assume that the inflation rate is
3% (for estimating the future replacement costs), the typical interest rate is 2% (for estimating the annual
costs) and the number of years before replacement is 20 (expect for buffer mitigation area replacement.
Equations and guidance for using other rates and years can be found in Appendix A.
1) Estimate the value that the item will have in the future when it is time to replace it using the
following equation:
FV=PV*1.8061, where: FV = future value
PV = present value
2) Estimate how much money will need to be deposited each year in a bank account in order to have
enough money accumulated in time to pay for the replacement using the following equation.
A=FV*0.0412, where: A = annual payment (or deposit)
FV = future value (from step 1, above)
Page 13
Sinking Fund Calculation Results:
The developer shall provide $95,000 to initiate the set-up of maintenance funds, and provide for one year
of maintenance.
The following values are the results of the calculations which are shown on the following page. The fund
calculations shall be updated once the actual cost of operation and maintenance items are contracted. As
contracts are renewed, the costs shall be adjusted accordingly.
Annual cost for regular operation and maintenance $152,392
Annual cost for replacements $76,979
Total annual costs $229,370
Total monthly costs (= total annual costs /12)$19,114.18
*Number of units (SF lots +MF lots) +(Commercial) 596+(18,400sf/100SF)=615
Monthly cost per lot (= total monthly costs /# lots)$31.08
Total annual cost per lot/unit $372.96
*Note: Number of units is based on 255-single family lots, 49 cottage units/lots, 240 apartment units, 52
mixed use apartment units, and 18,400 square feet of commercial building area divided by 1,000 square
feet (for an equivalent unit/lot).
Page 14 Sinking Fund Calculations-Parent Parcel(s)-COSVUnit Annual Price = CostComprehensive System InspectionEA2$1,000 $2,000 Drywell CleaningEA48 $500 $24,000 Catch Basin CleaningEA23 $300 $6,900 Mowing Channel EmbankmentsEA4 $2,000 $8,000 Mowing Roadside SwalesEA4 $2,000 $8,000 Debris Removal – culverts, catch basins, bio-swale, channels, drywells, manholesEA4 $2,000 $8,000 Channel/Trash Rack InspectionEA9 $500 $4,500 Pipeline TV Inspection – mainline, culverts, (3 years)LF5,750 $3 $17,250 Manhole/Catch Basin InspectionEA23 $100 $2,300 Fence, Access Road, Parking Area, Sign MaintenanceEA1 $500 $500 Swale & Pond Reseeding/Noxious Weed RemovalEA1 $500 $500 Reseeding/Noxious Weed Removal for buffer mitigation area EA1 $5,000 $5,000 1st Year Monitoring Report + ASBUILT ReportLS 1 $6,500 $6,500 Annual Monitoring Report (after 1st year)LS 1 $1,000 $1,000 Annual Report PreparationEA1 $1,500 $1,500 ContingencyLS1 20% $19,190 Total $115,140 REGULAR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS-COSVDescriptionUnitsAnnual Quantity x
Page 15 UnitPrice =Drywell (48) (25%)EA 12 $10,000 $120,000 20 0.03 $216,733 0.02 $8,920 48” ADS N-12 HDPE pipeline (5,251) (25%) LF 1313 $150 $196,913 20 0.03 $355,646 0.02 $14,637 48” ADS N-12 HDPE culvert pipes (120 LF) (100%)LF 120 $150 $18,000 20 0.03 $32,510 0.02 $1,338 24” CMP pipeline (136) (100%)LF 136 $70 $9,520 20 0.03 $17,194 0.02 $708 18” PS46 ASTM F679 PVC (pipeline-future) (40) (100%)LF 40 $40 $1,600 20 0.03 $2,890 0.02 $119 15” Perforated HDPE (underdrain) (40) (100%) LF 40 $30 $1,200 20 0.03 $2,167 0.02 $89 12” SDR-35 ASTM D3034 PVC pipe to mainline(44) LF 44 $24 $1,056 20 0.03 $1,907 0.02 $78 12” CMP pipe to outfall (119) (100%)LF 119 $30 $3,570 20 0.03 $6,448 0.02 $265 WSDOT Catch basin, Type II (12)EA2 $4,500 $9,000 20 0.03 $16,255 0.02 $669 Catch basin, Type I (12)EA2 $1,500 $3,000 20 0.03 $5,418 0.02 $223 Infiltration & Settling Pond -seeding (189,644+7,172 )+ Roadsides Swale Seeding (49,187 ) + Landscape Strip Seeding (2,471 )SF 248474 $0.10 $24,847 20 0.03 $44,877 0.02 $1,847 Trash Racks (8) (100%)EA8 $2,000 $16,000 20 0.03 $28,898 0.02 $1,189 Signs (4) (25%)EA1 $200 $200 20 0.03 $361 0.02 $15 Buffer Mitigation Area (25%) of total cost of VegetationLS5 $6,785 $33,925 5 0.03 $39,328 0.02 $7,557 2” Asphalt pathway (9702 LF interor + 2,482 LF Madision Rd+ 822 LF Dishm. Rd)SY 14501 $10 $145,013 20 0.03 $261,910 0.02 $10,779 6” CSTC Access Rd (1,113 LF) (25%)CY 2087 $40 $83,480 20 0.03 $150,774 0.02 $6,205 Fencing (132 LF)LF 132 $35 $4,620 20 0.03 $8,344 0.02 $343 PC Concrete Sidewalk (Dishm.-356 LF+ 1356 LF Thorpe)SY 991 $36 $35,664 20 0.03 $64,413 0.02 $2,651 Total $57,635 REPLACEMENT COSTS-Parent Parcel(s)-COSV(for more information on calculations in this table see Appendix A)UnitsQuantity x Present Value, PVnInflation Rate, i1Future Value, FVInterest Rate, i2Annual Payment, A Notes: n = number of years to replacement LS means Lump Sum, EA means Each, SY means square yard, LF means Linear Feet, CY means Cubic Yards Quantity x is based on either a complete replacement (100%) or assumed 25% of the total rounded to the nearest whole number
Page 16 Sinking Fund Calculations-Offsite Parcel(s)-County Unit Annual Price = CostComprehensive System InspectionEA2$500 $1,000 Drywell CleaningEA 18 $500 $9,000 Manhole CleaningEA 9 $300 $2,700 Mowing Ditch EmbankmentsEA 4 $2,000 $8,000 Debris Removal – culverts, catch basins, pond ditch, drywells, manholesPipeline TV Inspection – mainline, culvertsLF 1,481 $3 $4,443 Manhole InspectionEA 9 $100 $900 Fence, Access Road, Parking Area, Sign MaintenanceEA 1 $500 $500 Pond Reseeding/Noxious Weed RemovalEA 1 $500 $500 ContingencyLS 1 20% $6,209 Total $37,252 EA 4 $1,000 $4,000 REGULAR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS-COUNTYDescriptionUnitsAnnual Quantity x
Page 17 UnitPrice =Drywell (12) (25%)EA 12 $10,000 $120,000 20 0.03 $216,733 0.02 $8,920 36” PS46 ASTM F679 PVC pipeline (1441) (25%) LF 361 $150 $54,150 20 0.03 $97,801 0.02 $4,025 12” SDR-35 ASTM D3034 PVC pipeline (136) (100%)LF 136 $70 $9,520 20 0.03 $17,194 0.02 $708 Type I -48-County ManholeEA 2 $4,500 $9,000 20 0.03 $16,255 0.02 $669 72" County ManholeEA 5 $7,500 $37,500 20 0.03 $67,729 0.02 $2,788 Triangle Pond-seeding (17,060 SF) (100%)SF 17060 $0.10 $1,706 20 0.03 $3,081 0.02 $127 Signs (4) (25%)EA1 $200 $200 20 0.03 $361 0.02 $15 6” CSTC Access Rd (770 LF) (25%)CY 214 $40 $8,556 20 0.03 $15,452 0.02 $636 Fencing (560 LF) (100%)LF 560 $35 $19,600 20 0.03 $35,400 0.02 $1,457 Total $19,344 REPLACEMENT COSTS Offsite Parcel(s)-County (for more information on calculations in this table see Appendix A)UnitsQuantity x Present Value, PVnInflation Rate, i1Future Value, FVInterest Rate, i2Annual Payment, A
Page 18
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has reviewed the above information and determined it to be
appropriate for the improvements proposed for this plan and has caused this instrument to be executed on
this day of __________________________, 20____.
Signature:
Name (print):
Title:
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ) ss
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is/are
the individual(s) who personally appeared before me, and who acknowledged that he/she/they executed
and signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and
purposes mentioned in this instrument.
Dated this __________ date of ______________________, 20____.
NOTARY PUBLIC
In and for the State of Washington,
Residing at
My appointment expires:
Page 19
Appendix A
The future replacement costs can be estimated and then converted to annual costs (or deposits) by the
following calculations.
1) Estimate the value that the item will have in the future when it is time to replace it using an
assumed (best estimate) inflation rate and the following equation:
FV=PV*(1+i1)n , where:
FV = future value i1 = inflation rate
PV = present value n = number of years to replacement
Example values for the factor: (1+i)n
n, years
5 10 15 20
i1 0.02 1.1041 1.2190 1.3459 1.4859
0.03 1.1593 1.3439 1.5580 1.8061
0.04 1.2167 1.4802 1.8009 2.1911
0.05 1.2763 1.6289 2.0789 2.6533
2) Estimate how much money will need to be deposited each year in a bank account in order to have
enough money accumulated in time to pay for the replacement using an assumed (best estimate)
interest rate and the following equation:
A=FV* i2 / [(1+i2)n-1], where:
A = annual payment i2 = interest rate
FV = future value n = number of years to replacement
Example values for the factor: i2/[(1+i2)n-1]
n, years
5 10 15 20
i2 0.02 0.1922 0.0913 0.0578 0.0412
0.03 0.1884 0.0872 0.0538 0.0372
0.04 0.1846 0.0833 0.0499 0.0336
0.05 0.1810 0.0795 0.0463 0.0302
Page 20
Appendix B – Chester Creek Channel, Operation & Maintenance
Manual
Modified from “Geotechnical Evaluation, Levee Evaluation and Certification, 4403 South
Dishman-Mica Road, Spokane County, Washington” prepared by Inland Pacific Engineering
Company Project No. 14-037, dated February 12, 2015, Revised August 29, 2016.
Page 21
CHESTER CREEK CHANNEL ABOVE THE
ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
MANUAL
FOR
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Painted Hills PRD Homeowners Association
IPEC Project No. 14-037
WCE Project # 13-1166
Updated January 2020
By
Inland Pacific Engineering Company
3012 North Sullivan Road
Building S-5, Suite C
Spokane Valley, WA 99216
&
Whipple Consulting Engineers
21 S Pines Road
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Page 22
1.00 PURPOSE
This Operations and Maintenance manual is intended to provide general operations and
maintenance guidelines for the Chester Creek channel located at 4403 South Dishman-Mica
Road in Spokane County, Washington. The intent of the Painted Hills PRD project is to fill on
the landward (north easterly) side existing levee, which will provide further protection from
flooding on the interior landward side of the painted Hills Development. This O & M has been
amended from the original Chester Creek Levee O & M provided by Inland Pacific Engineering
Company. After the project is filled, the creek channel will need to be maintained to ensure flood
carrying capacity is maintained. Maintenance of the channel, up to the Ordinary High Water
Mark (OHWM) shall be the responsibility of the City of Spokane Valley. Maintenance above the
(OHWM) including obtaining permits to perform the maintenance, shall be the responsibility of
the Painted Hills PRD Homeowner’s Association in coordination with the City of Spokane
Valley. This general maintenance for the Chester Creek channel is inclusive whether in or out of
Spokane County public road rights-of-ways. Implementation of these guidelines will ensure that
the channel’s flood carrying capacity is maintained.
2.00 INTRODUCTION
The east side of the channel is typically at a 2.3:1 to 3:1 (H:V) slope. The land side of the channel is
also at a 3:1 slope from the Dishman-Mica Road bridge to approximately 300 feet southeast.
Between this point and Thorpe Road, the land side slope is much less and, in some areas, relatively
level with the crest. As mentioned above, the intent of the Painted Hills PRD project is to fill on
the landward (north easterly) side existing levee. This existing levee was constructed by the
previous landowner for the development of the golf course on the property and we believe it was
constructed in the early 1990’s by the property owner.
3.00 GENERAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
3.10 Operation – During flood periods, the creek channel side slopes above the (OHWM)
should be patrolled to locate possible sand boils, unusual wetness of the landward slope, or
breaches. The inspector may look for indications of sliding or sloughing, that scouring action is
not occurring, that the channel is not being overtopped, and that no other conditions exist that
might adversely affect the integrity of the channel side slopes. Any damage or observed issues
below the (OHWM) should be reported to the City of Spokane Valley immediately.
Boils – A boil is a condition where enough pressure is produced by high water levels
so that water is piped through or under the channel bottom and channel side slopes
with sufficient velocity to carry earthen materials to the landward side of the channel.
If not controlled, these particles of earthen materials will be eroded from within the
channel, causing subsidence to the channel section. The continuation of this process
Page 23
may result in a break in the channel side slopes, allowing flood waters to flow over
the crest or through the channel side slopes.
Scour – Careful observation should be made of the creek channel side slopes to detect
potential erosion due to current action. Careful observation at the locations of bridge
structures should be made. In general, current velocities in Chester Creek are not
expected to cause significant scouring.
Creek Channel Topping – If the anticipated high-water level will exceeds the top
elevation of the channel , steps should be taken to provide emergency topping to raise
the channel side slope above forecasted water levels. These steps could include
sandbagging or hauling additional fill to raise the channel wall height.
3.11 A post-flood assessment of the creek channel side slopes above the (OHWM) should be
completed within 24 hours of the event. The assessment should document any damage to the
channel caused by flood waters. Any repairs necessary should then be completed after review
and evaluation of options. Any damage or observed issues below the (OHWM) should be
reported to the City of Spokane Valley immediately.
3.20 Maintenance – Maintenance activities for the creek channel above the (OHWM) are
described in this section. Below is a maintenance description for each of the elements affecting
channel conveyance performance.
Inspections – channel inspection should include a visual inspection of the channel
channel side slope sat a minimum of every 12 months for signs of erosion or
settlement. Preferably, the inspection should be completed in the fall prior to the
rainy season. The inspections should include the following:
o Unusual settlement, sloughing, or material loss of grade.
o Caving on both the creekside and landside of the channel which might
affect stability of the channel section.
o Seepage or saturated areas that may be occurring.
o Drainage in the creek is in good working condition facilities are not being
clogged.
o That the channel is shaped to drain properly to onsite Painted Hills PRD
drainage facilities.
o Ensuring that no unauthorized vehicles are located on the channel bottom
and channel side slopes.
o Rodent damage along the channel side slopes.
Erosion Protection – The channel side slope vegetation is a grass cover. The
grass should be mowed to a minimum height no shorter than 8 inches.
Page 24
No trees should be growing on the creek channel bottom or side slopes. No
excavations, structures, or other obstructions should be on the creek channel
bottom or side slopes.
Remove accumulation of drift, grass clippings, or other objectionable materials
from the creek channel side slopes.
Attached is a checklist for the annual or post-flood inspection.
Page 25
CHESTER CREEK CHANNEL
4403 SOUTH DISHMAN-MICA ROAD
SPOKANE COUNTY, WA
CREEK CHANNEL CHECKLIST (ABOVE THE OHWM ONLY)
Date: _______________________________________________________
Item Location and Description Action
Has the creek channel side
slopes settled or lost cross
section?
Has stream action caused any
slope washing or scouring?
Has there been any seepage or
saturated areas?
Has vegetation been
maintained?
Have weeds been removed?
Dates?
Condition of any riprap?
Have there been any authorized
or unauthorized encroachments?
Have burrowing animals been
exterminated/removed and the
creek channel channel side
slopes repaired?
Is the creek channel free of
obstructions and/or debris?
Are there any areas where the
creek is affecting the channel
side slopes?
Has there been any recent high-
water events?
Miscellaneous conditions:
Note: Use additional sheets as necessary.
Signed:
Title:
Page 26
Appendix C – Letter of Map Revision (LOMR)
To be inserted once completed.
WESNCSITE ELEMENT PLANC1.3JPP 1" = 200'N/AXDISHMAN-MICA RD.SPOKANE VALLEY,WADRAWN:PROJ #:REVIEWED:DATE:DATUM: NAVD - 8813-1166JOB NUMBERSHEETTRW13-116604/20/20WCETBM S-5 OF THE SOUTH PONDEROSA SEWER PROJECTWITH AN ELEVATION OF 2005.87 (NAVD29)=2009.67(NAVD88) WAS USED FOR THE VERTICAL DATUM FOR THISMAP.WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS2528 NORTH SULLIVAN ROADSPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99216PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227CIVILSTRUCTURALSURVEYINGTRAFFICPLANNINGLANDSCAPEOTHER SPOKANE VALLEY PAINTED HILLS PRDVERTICAL:HORIZONTAL:SCALE:REVISIONSNO. DATE BY 08-12-16JPP ORIGINAL PREPARATION1Reviewed for Conformance toStreet Standards andAccepted per Chapter 1.2Not ReviewedDate AcceptedAcceptance CommentsCity of Spokane ValleyDevelopment EngineeringCity of Spokane ValleyProject/Permit No.:SUB-2015-0001(Subdivision)FPD-2016-0007(Flood Plain Development)EGR-2016-0066(Engineered Grading)08-14-18JPP REVISED PLANS201-03-20JMH REVISED PLANS3DISHMAN-MICA ROADTHORPE ROADMADISON ROAD
40TH AVENUEHIGHWAY 27
WILBER ROAD
MADISON RD EASEMENT PLAN-
APPENDIX F
Traffic Impact Analysis – Provided Under Separate Cover
APPENDIX G
Painted Hills PRD Biological Evaluation
APPENDIX H
Cultural Resources Survey
CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT COVER SHEET
Author: Adam J. Sackman and David A. Harder
Title of Report: Cultural Resource Survey of the Painted Hills Residential
Development Project
Date of Report: April 2, 2018
County: Spokane Section: 04 Township: 24 North Range: 44 East
Section: 33 and 34 Township: 25 North Range: 44 East
Quad: Freeman Acres: 100
PDF of report submitted (REQUIRED) Yes
Historic Property Inventory Forms to be Approved Online? Yes No
Archaeological Site(s)/Isolate(s) Found or Amended? Yes No
TCP(s) found? Yes No
Replace a draft? Yes No
Satisfy a DAHP Archaeological Excavation Permit requirement? Yes # No
DAHP Archaeological Site #:
Submission of PDFs is required.
Please be sure that any PDF submitted to
DAHP has its cover sheet, figures,
graphics, appendices, attachments,
correspondence, etc., compiled into one
single PDF file.
Please check that the PDF displays
correctly when opened.
Cultural Resource Survey of the Painted
Hills Residential Development Project,
Spokane Valley, Washington
By:
Adam J. Sackman and
David A. Harder
April 2018
Cultural Resource Survey of the Painted
Hills Residential Development Project,
Spokane Valley, Washington
Prepared for:
Black Realty, Inc.
107 South Howard Street, Suite 500
Spokane, Washington 99201
By:
Adam J. Sackman and
David A. Harder
April 2018
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 i
ABSTRACT
Cultural Resource Survey of the Painted Hills Residential Development Project
Black Realty, Inc., Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc., and Northwest Renovators, Inc. are making
preparations to move forward with plans to construct 300 single family homes, 280 multifamily
units, a neighborhood commercial center, and open space at the Painted Hills Residential
Development. The area of potential effect (APE) covers 100.0acres and lies in Section 04 of
Township 24 North, Range 44 East; and Sections 33 and 34 of Township 25 North, Range 44 East
of the Willamette Meridian.
During permitting, the City of Spokane Valley received comments from Randy Abrahamson, Tribal
Historic Preservation Officer of the Spokane Tribe of Indians, requesting a cultural resource survey
and an Inadvertent Discovery Plan. Based on these requests, a cultural resource survey is required
for State Environmental Policy Act compliance and to consider the potential impacts to historic
properties prior to project execution. To that end, Black Realty, WCE, and NWR have retained
Plateau Archaeological Investigations LLC (Plateau) to conduct the cultural resource survey of the
proposed undertaking.
Pre‐field research included the review of known archaeological resources within a 1.0‐mile radius
of the APE, as inventoried at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation (DAHP). This review was completed using DAHP’s secure electronic database known
as the Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Data (WISAARD).
This database includes recorded archaeological resources, historic property inventories (HPIs),
National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) and Washington Heritage Register (WHR)
properties, identified cemeteries, and previously conducted cultural resource surveys found
throughout the state. The DAHP’s predictive model places the APE in areas of “High Risk” and
“Very High Risk” for encountering cultural resources, stating that “survey [is] highly advised” for
this location.
The fieldwork was completed in a manner consistent with RCW 27.53.030, and included inspection
techniques to identify both surface and subsurface archaeological resources. Plateau archaeologists
conducted an intensive pedestrian survey over the entire APE and excavated 31 subsurface probes.
The pedestrian survey and subsurface investigations for the project resulted in no newly recorded
archaeological resources. Plateau recommends that the proposed undertaking will result in No
Historic Properties Affected, and no further archaeological investigations are recommended prior
to, or during, execution of this project.
Given concerns voiced by the Spokane Tribe of Indians during the permitting process, Plateau
recommends all ground disturbing activities be conducted under the guidance of the attached
Inadvertent Discover Plan.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 ii
KEY INFORMATION
PROJECT
Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
LOCATION
East of Dishman Mica Road, north of Thorpe Road, and west of Madison Road
DAHP PROJECT NUMBER
2016‐10‐07132
USGS QUADS
Freeman, Washington 7.5 minute, 1973
LEGAL LOCATION OF PROJECT
Section 04 of T24N, R44E; and Sections 33 and 34 of T25N, R44E
ACREAGE
100 acres
PROJECT DATA
No previously recorded historic properties
No new cultural resources located and/or recorded
AUTHORS
Adam J. Sackman and David A. Harder
MANAGING AGENCY
Spokane County
PROJECT UNDERTAKEN AND REPORT PREPARED FOR
Black Realty, Inc.
FIELD NOTE DISPOSITION
Archived at the office of Plateau Archaeological Investigations LLC, Pullman.
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
David A. Harder, M.A.
DATE
April 2, 2018
CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS
I certify that this investigation was conducted and documented
according to Secretary of Interiorʹs Standards and Guidelines
and that the report is complete and accurate to the best of my
knowledge.
Signature of Reporter
April 2, 2018
Date
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
ABSTRACT ......................................................................ii
KEY INFORMATION............................................................. iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................ iv
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................. iv
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..........................................................1
STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES .....................................................1
LOCATION AND GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ...........................1
REGIONAL PRECONTACT BACKGROUND.........................................6
REGIONAL HISTORIC BACKGROUND .............................................8
Spokane Valley............................................................12
Project Area...............................................................12
PLACES OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE...........................................13
PRE‐FIELD RESEARCH...........................................................14
Previous Archaeological Research............................................15
EXPECTED PROPERTIES .........................................................15
FIELD METHODS AND RESULTS .................................................16
RECOMMENDATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN ...............................21
WORKS CITED ..................................................................22
APPENDIX A: INADVERTENT DISCOVERY PLAN (IDP) ............................27
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of the Project Area within Spokane Valley ...........................2
Figure 2. The Project Area shown on a portion of the Freeman USGS map ................3
Figure 3. The Project Area and field investigation on an aerial photograph...............17
Figure 4. Overview of the Project Area..............................................18
Figure 5. The Craft & Gather Café located in the southwest portion of the Project Area ....18
Figure 6. The tree stand located in the western portion of the Project Area ...............19
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Subsurface Probe Results ..................................................20
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 iv
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION
Black Realty, Inc. (Black Realty), Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. (WCE), and Northwest
Renovators, Inc. (NWR) are proceeding with plans for the development of Painted Hills Residential
Development—a 100.0‐acre site into 300 single family homes, 280 multifamily units, a
neighborhood commercial center, and open space. The area of potential effect, (APE) is located east
of, and adjacent to S. Dishman Mica Road, north of and adjacent to E. Thorpe Road, and west of
and adjacent to S. Madison Road in Spokane Valley (Figure 1). Anticipated impacts include
excavations, compaction of sediments, and other ground‐disturbing construction activities. The
APE is situated within Section 04 of Township 24 North, Range 44 East; and Sections 33 and 34 of
Township 25 North, Range 44 East of the Willamette Meridian (Figure 2). The APE will be
hereafter referred to as the ʺProject Area.ʺ
During permitting, the City of Spokane Valley received comments from Randy Abrahamson, Tribal
Historic Preservation Officer of the Spokane Tribe of Indians, requesting a cultural resource survey
and an Inadvertent Discovery Plan. Based on these requests, a cultural resource survey is required
for State Environmental Policy Act compliance and to consider the potential impacts to historic
properties prior to project execution. To that end, Black Realty, WCE, and NWR have retained
Plateau Archaeological Investigations LLC (Plateau) to conduct the cultural resource survey of the
proposed undertaking.
STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
The cultural resource survey of the Painted Hills Residential Development project is intended to
identify potential archaeological resources and potential historic properties in the Project Area prior
to the proposed construction. The pre‐field research was designed to identify any known cultural
properties located in or near the Project Area. Fieldwork procedures are intended to identify areas
of moderate to high probability for Native American and European American cultural materials.
This report describes the pre‐field research, field efforts, results, and management plan for the
project.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project Area is within the Columbia Basin, situated between the Rocky Mountain and Cascade
Mountain ranges. The region consists of large open plains and gently rolling hills amidst the
Channeled Scablands, which are features that resulted from Pleistocene‐era mega‐floods ranging
in size from small stream‐like trenches to large coulees measuring miles wide and hundreds of feet
deep. Elevations in this region range between 200 feet (ft) (61 meters [m]) above mean sea level
(AMSL) near the Columbia River to over 4,500 ft (1,372 m) AMSL in outlying ridges and low
mountains (Fenneman 1946; Hunt 1967).
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 1
Figure 1. The project location within Spokane Valley.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 2
Figure 2. The Project Area on a portion of the Freeman USGS map.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 3
According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (2018), the Project Area contains a five
soil types: Narcisse silt loam (72.3%), Endoaquolls and Fluvaquents (9.4%), Ubran land‐
Opportunity disturbed coplex (7.5%), Phoebe ashy sandy loam (6.7%), and Hardesty ashy silt loam
(4.1%). The soils are primarily alluvially derived and typical of drainageways and flood plains.
Narcisse silt loam is found throughout the center of the Project Area, and represents the
predominant soil type within the Project Area. It is an alluvium mixed with loess and ash, found
within drainageways. It is stratigraphically characterized as silt loam (0‐14 inches [in] [0‐35.6
centimeters [cm]), atop loam (14‐25 in [35.6‐63.5 cm]), over very fine sandy loam (25‐34 in [63.5‐86.4
cm]). Endoaquolls and Fluvaquents is a mixed alluvium matrix, found in drainageways, stream
terraces, and flood plains. It is located along the western extreme of the Project Area. It is a mixed
alluvium found on flood plains, drainageways, and stream terraces. It is stratigraphically
characterized as loam (0‐11 in [0‐ 27.9 cm] over sandy and fine sandy loam (11‐60 in [27.9‐152.4
cm]). Phoebe ashy sandy loam is found in the eastern extreme of the Project Area. It is a sandy
glaciofluvial deposit, with minor amounts of volcanic ash and loess, typically found in outwash
plains. It is stratigraphically characterized as ashy sandy loam to an average depth of 16 in (40.6
cm), over varying quantities of sand and loam (16‐44 in [40.6‐111.8 cm]). Urban land‐Opportunity,
disturbed complex is characterized by sandy and gravelly glaciofluvial deposits with a minor
amount of volcanic ash and loess in the upper part, and is found on outwash plains. This soil
profile is typified by very gravelly ashy loam (0‐7 in (0‐17.8 cm) over extremely gravely ashy loam
(7‐13 in) atop a layer of extremely gravelly loam (19‐43 in). Hardesty ashy silt loam is located in
the northeastern portion of the project area. It is an alluvially derived, volcanic ash material, found
in depressions, drainageways, and stream terraces. It is stratigraphically characterized as ashy silt
loam, to an average depth of 32 in (81.3 cm), over ashy very fine sandy loam (32‐39 in [81.3‐99.1
cm]), atop ashy loamy very fine sand (39‐60 in [99.1‐152.4 cm]).
The predominant draw for Native American and Euroamerican populations in this region was, and
still is, the extensive river systems. The most significant environmental feature is the Columbia
River, which flows for more than 1,200 miles (mi) (2,000 kilometers [km]) from the base of the
Canadian Rockies in southeastern British Columbia to the Pacific Ocean at Astoria, Oregon. Ten
major tributaries—the Cowlitz, Deschutes, Kootenay, Lewis, Okanogan, Spokane, Snake,
Wenatchee, Willamette, and Yakima—complete the drainage system. The Project Area lies4.0 mi
(6.9 km) south of the Spokane River and 54.0 mi (86.9 km) east‐southeast of the confluence of the
Columbia and Spokane rivers. Liberty Lake is located approximately 7.3 mi (11.8 km) east‐
northeast of the Project Area. Several small and seasonal waterways also run near the Project Area,
including Chester Creek, which runs through the southwest quadrant of the Project Area.
The vegetation around the Project Area falls within the Artemisia tridentata—Agropyron spicatum
habitat type, characterized by arid sagebrush steppe (Daubenmire 1970; Taylor 1992). Big
sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) and bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum) are dominant in
this environment. The plant community includes threetip sagebrush (Artemisia tripartita), gray
horsebrush (Tetradymia canescens), spiny hopsage (Grayia spinosa), green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 4
viscidiflorus), and gray rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus). Grasses and forbs include needle and
thread (Stipa comata), Stipa thurberana (no common name known), bottlebrush squirreltail (Sitanion
hystrix), Cusick’s bluegrass (Poa cusikii), Indian paintbrush (Castilleja spp.), lupine (Lupinus spp.),
plantain (Plantago patagonica), longleaf phlox (Phlox longifolia) and balsamroot (Balsamorhiza
sagittata). Additional species of flora thrive along the shores of the Columbia River, including
bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), willow (Salix spp.) and currant
(Ribes spp.) (Daubenmire 1970). Many of these plants have been incorporated in Native American
use as medicinal plants, food sources, and other employment.
The Project Area lies within a region that historically contained an abundance of life. It is likely,
though, that Native Americans had access to an even larger variety of creatures during the past that
played a role in aboriginal use, settlement, and travel patterns in relation to the Project Area.
Mammals include sagebrush voles (Lemmiscus curtatus), Great Basin pocket mice (Perognathus
parvus), deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), bushy‐tailed wood rat (Neotoma cinerea), Washington
ground squirrel (Spermophilus washingtoni), northern pocket gopher (Thomomys talpoides), yellow
bellied marmot (Marmota flaviventris), white‐tailed hare (Lepus townsendii), Nuttal cottontail
(Sylvilagus nuttallii), porcupine (Erethizon dorsatum), beaver (Castor canadensis), and muskrat
(Ondatra zibethica) mountain sheep (Ovis canadensis), coyote (Canis latrans), bobcat (Lynx rufus),
badger (Taxidea taxus), and long‐tailed weasel (Mustela frenata). The occasional bison (bison bison)
is also thought to be available prehistorically (Burt and Grossenheider 1961; Ingles 1965; Schroedl
1973).
Many types of fowl were also available in the past including Swarth blue grouse (Dendragapus
obscurus pallidus), Columbian ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus affinis), Columbian sharp‐tailed grouse
(Pedioecetes phasianellus), western sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus phaios), mallard duck (Anas
platyrhynchos platyrhynchos), western harlequin duck (Histrionicus histrionicus pacificus), American
common merganser (Mergus merganser americanus), the lesser snow goose (Chen hyperborea
hyperborea), and the Great Basin Canada goose (Branta canadensis moffitti). Seasonally available birds
such as Gadwall (Anas strepera), wood duck (Aix sponsa), redhead (Aythya americana), and the
northern ruddy duck (Oxjura jamaicensis rubida) resided in the region in the summer. Winter game
birds of the region included canvasback (Aythya valisineria) and American greater scaup (Aythya
marila nearctica) (Lothson 1977).
The climate in the Columbia Basin was cool and moist at the end of the last glacial period.
Gradually, climatic conditions became markedly warmer and dryer by approximately 9,000 years
before present (B.P.). The warm dry climatic trend reached its maximum around 6,500 B.P. and
then conditions reverted to a cooler and moister regime (Fryxell and Daugherty 1962).
Comparatively, the present climate is arid with mild moist winters and hot dry summers (Meining
1968). The mean seasonal temperatures recorded at the Spokane WSO Airport weather station
(#457938) between 1889 and 2012 are 29.6E Fahrenheit (F) in winter and 66.9E F in the summer.
Extreme temperatures of ‐25E F and 108E F have been recorded at the same station. Yearly
precipitation averages 16.3 inches (Western Regional Climate Center 2018).
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 5
REGIONAL PRECONTACT BACKGROUND
The Project Area is included in the Plateau culture area, which corresponds roughly to the
geographic region drained by the Fraser, Columbia, and Snake rivers. The Plateau culture area is
bordered on the west by the Cascade Mountains and on the east by the Rocky Mountains. The
northern border of the culture area is in Canada where it gives way to Arctic culture patterns. The
southern border of the Plateau culture area mixes gradually with the Great Basin culture area
(Walker and Sprague 1998:1‐3).
A cultural chronology provides a time line describing the adaptation, material culture, subsistence,
and sometimes settlement patterns of the people who inhabit a specific area. A cultural chronology
for the Upper Columbia River region was developed by Goodale et al. (2004) which identifies four
distinct cultural phases: the Upper Columbia Forager Period (6,200 to 4,200 B.P.), the Upper
Columbia Collector I Period (3,799 to 2,000 B.P.), the Upper Columbia Collector II Period (1,999 to
600 B.P.), and the Upper Columbia Collector III Period (599 to 100 B.P.). The culture chronology
of the Upper Columbia has been discussed at length in Goodale, Prentiss, and Kuijt (2004), and, if
pertinent, will be discussed further within the results of this report.
Ethnography
The Project Area falls within lands traditionally occupied by the Upper Spokane and Coeur d’Alene
Indians, both Interior Salishan groups of Native Americans, a language shared with neighboring
Kalispel, Pend d’Oreille, and Flathead groups (Ross 1998). Three bands of Spokane lived in eastern
Washington—Lower Spokane, with a principal settlement near Little Falls; Middle Spokane,
occupying Hangman or Latah Creek; and Upper Spokane, who lived along the Little Spokane River
and upriver from the junction of Hangman Creek. Ross (1998:271) notes that the Middle and Upper
Spokane considered themselves “all one people.” Traditional Coeur d’Alene territory extended
over the drainage and headwaters of the Spokane River (Palmer 1998). Prior to Euroamerican
settlement into the area, the Coeur d’Alene were subdivided into three divisions—the Spokane
River‐Coeur d’Alene Lake division, the Coeur d’Alene River division, and the Saint Joe River
division.
Villages and food procurement followed the seasons. Winter habitation sites were occupied during
the coldest months of the year. People probably settled in for the winter in mid‐ or late‐October.
During the next four or five months they relied upon stored foods and any game that could be
taken. In early spring, winter supplies began to dwindle and people began making forays to gather
emergent root crops (Nelson 1973). Spring, summer, and fall hunting and gathering took place at
areas away from the winter villages as did berry collecting, root gathering, and processing. Task
groups often went to specific areas to hunt, to quarry toolstone, to collect berries, or to gather other
resources such as tules to make mats (Aikens 1993:90). Salmon runs took place at predictable times
of the year and provided a valuable resource for immediate use and to store for winter provisions
(Schalk 1977). By the end of summer, reserves of dried salmon and prepared roots were stocked
for winter.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 6
Ethnographically, the Spokane lived in three types of settlements: permanent winter villages,
temporary summer and fall villages, and summer camps for hunting, plant gathering, and mineral
and lithic exploitation (Ross 1998:272). Winter villages, located along the Spokane River, included
hunting grounds, resource areas, burial grounds, and sacred sites. Conical semi‐subterranean pit
houses were constructed for winter villages using poles covered with layers of tule mats or a
permanent double‐apsidal lodge with inverted V pole construction with tule mats. Summer fishing
villages supported relatively large polyglot populations that came together to fish, trade, and
entertain. Temporary villages were comprised of many families and located in seasonal resource
areas. Smaller temporary tule mat structures were used in summer villages and camps (Ross 1998).
The Coeur d’Alene also had different house constructions for the different seasons. Unlike the
Spokane, they did not make use of the semisubterranean pit houses (Palmer 1998). Instead, a
conical family house was used in the winter and summer gatherings. A communal single or double
lean‐to lodge was used for gatherings and training quarters for young men.
For the Spokane, fishing commenced in May at several major fisheries along the Spokane River
(Ross 1998). Set nets, traps, leisters, harpoons, hooks, gaffs, and dip nets were used. In sections of
narrow streams, crushed granite was used to line stream beds to afford better visibility. The Coeur
d’Alene were skilled fishermen, using angling, gaffing, spearing, and netting techniques to catch
trout, whitefish, and salmon (Palmer 1998:316). Traps, including screens, cylindrical traps, trap
doors, large salmon traps, and weirs were also employed. While many fishing stations were near
Lake Coeur d’Alene, along the Saint Joe River, and on Hangman Creek, the Coeur d’Alene would
travel to Spokane Falls and parts of Spokane River for salmon. Others bought dried salmon from
the Spokane.
Sprague (2005:41) notes that the Coeur d’Alene had the greatest variety of water craft of any
Plateau group. Ethnographic accounts recognized several types of bark‐covered canoes, including
the flat keel sturgeon nose, curved keel sturgeon nose, and the Kalispel variant of the sturgeon‐
nose; the Kutenai “Eastern” type elk hide canoe; dugout canoe; tule rafts; and bull boats. Water
craft were used for basic transportation, fishing, and hunting. Canoes were used as a base of
operation when collecting the water potato (Sagittaria latifolia), which grows in soft mud
underwater. Canoes were used in fun pastimes, such as canoe racing and tipping, which in turn
strengthened “canoe fighting” (warfare) skills (Sprague 2005:52). Emphasizing the importance of
the canoe in the Coeur d’Alene lifeway is its use in death, pounded on to announce a death, much
like a church bell; fragments of canoes were used as burial markers; and the canoe makes an
appearance in mythology, most notable is the star constellation called “the canoe“ (Sprague
2005:53); and religion.
In the winter, the Spokane used snowshoes, toboggan, and frozen animal hides to transport heavy
loads. The introduction of the horse in the mid‐eighteenth century greatly increased their mobility
and changed their socioeconomic patterns. Now they were able to travel greater distances and
carry heavier loads, as well as having contact with remote Native American cultures.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 7
REGIONAL HISTORIC BACKGROUND
Contact with peoples on the west coast of the continent was well established by the end of the
eighteenth century by British, Spanish, and Russian trading vessels that made regular visits to the
coastline. These trading expeditions began the first contact between aboriginal groups and outside
cultures. Written historic accounts of the area, though, really begin when Lewis and Clark
journeyed through the region in 1805.
In 1809, Oregon Territory saw an influx of trappers and fur traders, beginning with the Canadian
owned North West Company as they made their way into the region and built Spokane House in
1810, located near the confluence of the Spokane River and Hangman Creek. Spokane House
became the first permanent European settlement in the State of Washington (McCart and McCart
2000:213). For a time, Spokane House thrived as both a trading center and a gathering place for fur
traders. Despite its successes, Spokane House was abandoned in 1816. By that time, trading routes
had shifted largely to the Columbia River, leaving the Spokane house no longer logistically or
economically important (Meinig 1968). In 1825, the Hudson Bay Company closed Spokane House
and moved its local operations north to Fort Colvile at Kettle Falls.
Subsequent to the opening of the Oregon Trail in 1840, Euroamerican settlers flooded the area,
bringing trade, religion, and disease into Native‐occupied areas. In 1846, the United States took
control of the Oregon territory in the Oregon Treaty. With increasing population, economic, and
political pressures of emigrants and the Whitman massacre, the Territory of Oregon (Oregon
Territory) was officially established in 1848. By 1850, nearly 12,000 emigrants had passed through
the Plateau region along the Oregon Trail (Beckham 1998; Walker and Sprague 1998). With the
establishment of the Oregon Territory in 1848 and Washington Territory in 1853, federal
involvement proliferated. Treaties between Native tribes and the new state and federal
governments were soon underway.
Washington Governor Isaac Stevens, also appointed as Superintendent of Indian Affairs by
President Pierce, worked jointly with Joel Palmer, Superintendent of Indian Affairs in Oregon, to
negotiate a series of treaties between 1854 and 1855. These treaties were difficult to maintain in
light of the Chinook jargon used in negotiations, rapid influx of miners following the several
“rushes,” and settlers who were eager for property. Almost immediately after signing the Walla
Walla Council Treaty of 1855, gold was discovered on several promised reservations in the Plateau,
and miners began to confiscate the mineral‐rich lands. The introduction of disease, treaty
violations, and other stresses introduced by the new settlers caused mistrust and eventually,
warfare. Several battles took place in the area between 1855 and 1858 during the Plateau Indian
War.
Between 1853 and 1854 Lieutenant Mullan, who volunteered for the Northern Survey under
Washington’s Governor Isaac I. Stevens, passed through the Scabland area surveying land for an
ideal military road. Mullan was aided by Indian guides in the exploration of over 3,000 square mi
(5,000 square km)—from the headwaters of the Missouri River, through the Rocky and Bitterroot
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 8
mountains, and into southern Washington state (Mullan 1909:12a‐14a). The 6,000 mi (10,000 km)
oceanic ride around Cape Horn to the Pacific Ocean and the 2,000 mi (3,335 km) wagon route from
the Midwest to Oregon state were secondary options over the newly proposed wagon and rail
route. With the aide of the War Department’s Corps of Topographical Engineers and Office of
Exploration and Surveys, and the Interior Department’s Pacific Wagon Road Office, funding of
road construction began.
With the establishment of the Oregon Territory, federal involvement proliferated. Treaties between
Indian tribes and the new state and federal governments were soon underway, but were difficult
to maintain in light of the rapid influx of miners following the several “rushes” and settlers who
were eager for property. The introduction of disease and other stresses introduced by the new
settlers caused mistrust and, eventually, warfare. Several battles took place in the Oregon Territory
between 1855 and 1858.
During this period of unrest, efforts were made to limit the incursion of emigrants and others into
Indian territories. Prohibition of settlement was strictly maintained, and General Wool pointed out
“the army cannot furnish guards to farm houses dotted among hostile tribes” (Meinig 1968:165).
The settlement prohibition was only a temporary solution to an inevitability. People settled and
volunteer militias attacked indiscriminately and fueled the fire under uncertain relations.
The unrest continued to culminate, leading to several battles throughout the region. The Steptoe
Battlefield Site, located in Rosalia (approximately 45 mi [75 km]) southeast of the Project Area, and
3.0 mi (4.8 km) south of Steptoe Butte. Many historical accounts have been published telling
various views of the event including those of Lieutenant John Mullan and Lieutenant Colonel
Steptoe (United States War Department [USWD] 1859), Edith Erickson (1985), and James Estes
(1974).
On May 8, 1858 Colonel Steptoe departed from Fort Walla Walla with the intention of going to Fort
Colville. When the party reached the Palouse River, they were warned by members of the Spokane
Tribe that they were not welcome and that any attempt to pass through the Spokane country would
be resisted. On May 15, his command camped near present‐day Rosalia, and reached present‐day
Four Lakes the following day. It was noted that the Indians were congregating in ever larger
numbers and word was sent to Steptoe that the party must not advance further or the company
would be attacked. Steptoe began the return journey toward Walla Walla early on the morning of
May 17. As daylight broke, it became apparent that greater than 1,000 Spokane, Coeur d’Alene,
Palouse, and Yakima warriors were surrounding the soldiers.
Steptoe’s party continued to move south, but as it strung out, harassment by the Indians increased.
The mayhem turned to a moving fire fight that was sometimes reduced to hand to hand combat
with the flank of the company taking the brunt of the punishment. Before noon, the first soldier
was killed and at about noon the first officer, Lieutenant Gaston, was killed. Within a half hour,
Captain Taylor was mortally wounded. Soon thereafter, Steptoe and his command took control
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 9
of the hilltop on which the memorial is placed in Rosalia overlooking Ingossomen Creek (Pine
Creek). The troops laid out a defensive circle and were able to maintain their position until
nightfall. After nightfall, four men and the two howitzers were buried. Steptoe and his men
abandoned their supplies and pack animals on the hilltop and stealthily slipped away. They
moved at a very quick pace and arrived at the Snake River (about 90 mi [150 km] south) at about
10:00 PM on the night of May 18. Totaled, five men were killed, two mortally wounded, thirteen
slightly or severely wounded, and one missing (USWD 1859:62‐63). At least nine Indians were
killed and an unknown number wounded.
Later that summer, Colonel George Wright led the Ninth Infantry (approximately 570 men) and
30 Nez Perce scouts along the route that Steptoe had followed to punish those involved in the
killing of U.S. soldiers at the Battle of Steptoe (Mullan 1909:12a‐14a). On August 31, 1858, they
camped at Basset Spring, approximately halfway between the towns of present‐day Medical Lake
and Cheney (Stimson 1999:16; Trafzer and Scheuerman 1986). The next morning, the men awoke
to spot the hills 2.0 mi (3.2 km) to the north dotted with Indians. Wright deployed his men, and
initiated the Battle of Four Lakes. It was a bloody contest, with the Spokane and their allies being
introduced to the minnié balls and long‐range rifles, foes they were not prepared to meet (Ruby and
Brown 1970).
The Spokane fled to the Spokane River where they nursed their wounded. After a three‐day
respite, Colonel Wright and his men pursued the Spokane and allied forces, meeting up with them
on the Spokane Plains. As Wright’s men entered the Plains on September 5 the Indians used the
distraction of grass fires (on land now occupied by Fairchild Air Force Base) to get closer to the
soldiers (Stimson 1999:16; Trafzer and Scheuerman 1986). Wright saw the ruse, and ordered his
men to attack through the flames. Ruby and Brown (1970:133) note that the battle covered 25 mi
(41.7 km) of “hills, ravines, coulees, woods, rocks, bare ground.” The battle lasted one day and like
the Battle of Four Lakes, the Spokane and their allies left behind the detritus of battle, with the
bodies of the wounded and dead having been carried away, leaving Wright no idea to their
casualties (Ruby and Brown 1970).
After the battles, Wright told Spokane Garry that the Indians needed to “...put your faith in me and
trust to my mercy,” this, of course, after delivering up their arms, women, and children. If not, the
tribe would be “exterminated” (Stimson 1999:16). While Spokane Garry took this to his people,
Wright continued east toward Coeur d’Alene territory. Near the Idaho border the men came across
about 800 horses (considered both wealth and war machines to the Indians). The events of what
happened next differ, but culminate in the destruction of horses and property, known as the
Spokane Horse Massacre.
Some sources report that the army captured Indian horses after engaging the herders in a fire fight
(Trafzer and Scheuerman 1986:89), while other sources note that the horses were being led by old
women and children who fled at the sight of the army (Brown 1961:252). The horses, belonging to
Palouse Indians, were corralled while soldiers set fire to wheat fields and lodges filled with stored
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 10
wheat and oats belonging to the Coeur d’Alene. On September 9, 1858, the slaughter of the horses
began. The exact destruction is unknown. Of the lodges and food, Colonel Wright stated “many
barns filled with wheat and oats, also several fields of grain with numerous caches of vegetables,
dried berries and kamas, all destroyed or used by the troops” (USWD 1859:56). The estimate of
horses killed ranges between 590 and 1,000 mares and colts.
The Spokane Horse Massacre (or Horse Slaughter Camp) site has an ambiguous location. Sources
note that for some years after the massacre, the site of the Spokane Horse Massacre was marked
by the presence of mounds of bleached horse bones (Brown 1961:258; Ruby and Brown 1970:137).
GLO Cadastral surveys of this area took place in the 1870s; however, there is no specific mention
of this area in the surveyors’ notes regarding any evidence of the Spokane Horse Massacre. In 1965
a monument marked the location of the site less than 1.0 mi (1.6 km) west of the Washington/Idaho
border along the southern banks of the Spokane River. The monument has since been relocated
to a position approximately 1.0 mi (1.6 km) east (Larsen and Axton 2001b:6).
Following the Spokane Horse Massacre, the army headed east, leaving a band of destruction in
their wake. The slaughter of horses and destruction of homes and fields was too much for the
Coeur d’Alene, and they entered into a treaty with Wright on September 17, 1858. A week later,
Wright held council with the Pend Oreilles, Kalispel, Colville, Palouse, Columbia, and San Poil at
a pre‐arranged location on Latah Creek, near present‐day Waverly, looking for surrender terms,
or a reprisal to Steptoe’s defeat (Frey 2001:85). Wright was holding Owhi captive and used him to
lure Qualchan into the camp. Upon his arrival to the camp, Qualchan was hung along with six
others. Owhi was killed when he tried to escape a few days later (Beckham 1998; Patton 1979).
This same day (September 24, 1858) the Spokane surrendered. These unfortunate turns brought
about a new life for the Native American tribes of Washington—the reservation.
Major smallpox epidemics in 1846 and between 1852‐1853 severely impacted the Spokane
population. In 1881, the Spokane Reservation was established in a greatly reduced area of their
traditional lands. A decrease in land meant a decrease in food resources. The installation of dams
beginning in 1911 at Little Falls prevented salmon, a major food source, from coming upstream.
Non‐Native American settlement, disease, and other factors, have taken a toll on the Spokane
population, and it was not until the mid‐1920s that the population began to see a growth.
The Executive Order of 1873, signed by President Ulysses S. Grant, began a series of land
relinquishments by the Coeur d’Alene. Reservation boundaries were delineated as 590,000 acres.
Congress enacted an 1891 act further reducing sovereign lands to 400,000 acres. In 1894 the federal
government reimbursed the Coeur d’Alene Tribe $15,000 for a one‐mile strip of land east of Lake
Coeur d’Alene, where squatters had formed the town of Harrison. In 1910, the Dawes Act, or
General Allotment Act, of 1887 finally took hold in northern Idaho, reducing land ownership to
some 104,000 acres. In 1908 and 1911, the Coeur d’Alene residents of southern Lake Coeur d’Alene
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 11
were evicted, and the $11,000 compensation was used by the state to develop Heyburn State Park.
Currently 70,000 acres are owned by the Tribe and Tribal members within a reservation boundary
of some 345,000 acres of sovereign land inclusive of the town centers of Benewah, DeSmet,
Plummer, Sanders, Tensed, and Worley (Coeur d’Alene Tribe 2016).
Spokane Valley
The Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce was established in 1921, tentatively uniting the
unincorporated townships of Austin, Chester, Dishman, East Trent, Evergreen, Greenacres, Irwin,
Opportunity, Trent, Trentwood, Orchard Park, Velox, Verdale, and Yardley. Apple farming was
the primary industry of the region in early years. Competition from the Wenatchee and Yakima
valleys, coupled with disease and adverse weather conditions would cause many local farmers to
seek other opportunities, and by 1955 the apple industry in Spokane Valley had died. Apple
production was replaced by timber‐focused industries, such as wooden matches and paper.
Residents of the valley resisted incorporation until 2002, when voters finally approved, by a margin
of 51.3 percent to 48.7 percent (Kershner 2012).
Project Area
The 1878 General Land Office (GLO) survey plat of Township 24 North, Range 44 East depicts two
roads, running north/south, and several trails cutting across the landscape. One of these roads is
shown to be near the Project Area, roughly following the current alignment of the Dishman Mica
Road, running through the center of Section 04 (McMicken 1878a). The GLO survey plat for
Township 25 North, Range 44 East depicts several roads traversing across the region, both north
and south of the Spokane River. Roads are shown near the Project Area, roughly following the
current alignments of the Dishman Mica Road and WA‐27. No built environments are depicted
within the Project Area (McMicken 1878b).
The 1901 Spokane USGS topographic map shows the Oregon Railraod and Navigation Company
railroad line running west of the Project Area, along the current alignment of the Union Pacific
Railroad. An unnamed road runs parallel to the railroad, roughly following the modern alignment
of Dishman Mica Road. Two structures are shown west of these roads, in the southwest corner of
the Project Area. No other built environment are depicted in or near the Project Area. The 1949
Greenacres map shows E. Thorpe Road in its current alignment, south of the Project Area. No other
changes are depicted from the previous map within the Project Area.
The Spokane County Assessor’s SCOUT parcel explorer identifies that the golf course, club house,
storage garage, and associated paving, located in the southwest portion of the Project Area, were
constructed in 1988. A residential shed was added in 2000. Structures identified in the early USGS
topographic maps were likely removed at this time. The golf course closed in 2012.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 12
PLACES OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE
Traditional Cultural Places (TCP) are important for the “role the property plays in a community’s
historically rooted beliefs, customs and practices” as stated in the National Register Bulletin 38 (U.S.
Department of the Interior 1990). Although these properties can be difficult to identify and
evaluate, an initial search of pertinent publications can be helpful toward identifying the types of
properties that may be expected. The National Register Bulletin 38 goes on to state that “examples
of properties possessing such significance include:
•a location associated with the traditional beliefs of a Native American group about
its origins, its cultural history, or the nature of the world;
•a rural community whose organization, buildings and structures, or patterns of land
use reflect the cultural traditions valued by its long‐term residents;
•an urban neighborhood that is the traditional home of a particular cultural group,
and that reflects its beliefs and practices;
•a location where Native American religious practitioners have historically gone, and
are known or thought to go today, to perform ceremonial activities in accordance
with traditional cultural rules of practice; and
•a location where a community has traditionally carried out economic, artistic, or
other cultural practices important in maintaining its historic identity.”
The Project Area falls within lands traditionally occupied by the Upper Spokane Indians and the
Coeur d’Alene Indians (Palmer 1998; Ray 1936; Ross 1998). Three bands of Spokane lived in eastern
Washington—Lower Spokane, with a principal settlement near Little Falls; Middle Spokane,
occupying Latah (Hangman) Creek; and Upper Spokane, who lived along the Little Spokane River
and upriver from the junction of Latah Creek. Ross (1998:271) notes that the Middle and Upper
Spokane considered themselves “all one people.” There were also three divisions of Coeur
d’Alene—the Spokane River‐Coeur d’Alene Lake Division, Coeur d’Alene River Division, and Saint
Joe River Division (Palmer 1998).
Verne Ray (1936) records several camps, villages, and settlements near the Project Area. The small
Upper Spokane winter camp of sqami’n’ was located along the north side of the Spokane River, 6.3
mi (10.1 km) north of the Project Area (Ray 1936:136). The fall and winter Upper Spokane village
of simina’tculks (“place where many crows are found”) was located on the north side of the Spokane
River, near the neighborhood of Hillyard, [7.0] mi (11.3 km) north of the Project Area. The village
was an important location for fishing, hunting, and grazing (Ray 1936:136). The Coeur d’Alene
camp of mu ‘lc (“cottonwood”) was located at the southern end of Liberty Lake, near a swamp. The
camp was recorded to be home to about 30 people (Ray 1936:132) and lies7.6 mi (12.3 km) east of
the Project Area. The important Upper Spokane fishing and hunting village of qu’yu (“place where
the Oregon grape [Berberis aquifolium] grows”) was situated along Latah Creek, 8.5 mi (13.6 km)
west of the Project Area. Both salmon and trout were taken from the creek, and abundant deer,
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 13
antelope, and beaver were accessible in the surrounding lands (Ray 1936:136. A relatively small
Coeur d’Alene camp, tcana ‘kwaqan (“two inlets at an angle”) was home to two families, located
about 2.0 mi (3.2 km) south of Liberty Lake (Ray 1936:133) and 8.5 mi (13.7km)east of the Project
Area. Situated on both sides of Spokane River, at the falls, sqlaxa’łku (referring to the falls) was a
large Upper Spokane permanent village located on both sides of the river, situated 8.6 mi (13.9
km)west of the Project Area. The location was used for spear and basket trapping fishing (Ray
1936:136). The Upper Spokane camp of tccłsi’uytsu m (“place where many woodpeckers are
found”) was located along Latah Creek, 9.5 mi (15.3 km) southwest of the Project Area, and
traditionally as a location for large deer drives (Ray 1936:137).
Numerous collections of published legends were consulted to identify points of mythological
significance near the Project Area. These include publications by Franz Boas (1917), Ella Clark
(1969), Richard Erdoes and Alfonso Ortiz (1984), Verne Ray (1933), M. Terry Thompson and Steven
Egesdal (2008), and Deward Walker (1982). While no legends were found relating specifically to
the Project Area, references to the Spokane River were recorded.
Clark (1969:116‐117) relates The Origin of the Spokane River. It is said that the Spokane lived in terror
of a huge monster that consumed all the fish and wildlife, was so strong as to uproot large trees
with a single swipe of his hand, and no hunter could kill him. A Spokane girl was collecting berries
near the location where the Spokane River now spills into the Columbia River. She came upon the
monster sleeping on a hillside. She ran to her village and soon the people had the sleeping monster
tied up and were beating him. The monster awoke angry, broke through his bindings, and ran
eastward toward Lake Coeur d’Alene. As he did, he cut a deep channel and when he reached the
lake the water rushed through this channel and into the Columbia River.
PRE‐FIELD RESEARCH
Pre‐field research included the review of known archaeological resources within a 1.0‐mi (1.6‐km)
radius of the Project Area as inventoried at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation (DAHP) in Olympia, Washington. This review was completed using DAHP’s
secure electronic database known as the Washington Information System for Architectural and
Archaeological Data (WISAARD). This database includes recorded archaeological resources,
historic property inventories (HPIs), National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) and
Washington Heritage Register (WHR) properties, identified cemeteries, and previously conducted
cultural resource surveys found throughout the state.
Plateau also conducted cartographic analysis of landform, topography, proximity to water using
topographic maps, and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) online soil survey.
Secondary historic resources, on file at the DAHP and the Plateau office in Pullman, were consulted
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 14
to identify other potential historic resources. In addition, available survey and overview reports
and ethnographic accounts of the region were consulted. This background review allows for the
identification of previously recorded historic and archaeological resources within or near the
Project Area.
Previous Archaeological Research
A review of previously recorded cultural resources and archaeological surveys was completed
through the WISAARD on March 7, 2018. The review covered all or portions of Sections 03, 04, and
05 of Township 24 North, Range 44 East; and Sections 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, and 35 of Township
25 North, Range 44 East. This review revealed no cultural resources within 1.0 mi (1.6 km) of the
Project Area. The closest cultural resource is 45SP240, located approximately 4.0 mi (6.4 km) north
of the Project Area, along the south bank of the Spokane River. Site 45SP240, a precontact cairn,
is constructed with a series of large boulders (Wyss 1989).
Two cemeteries are recorded within 1.0 mi (1.6 km) of the Project Area. The Chester Community
Cemetery (45SP586), is located off of E. 44 Avenue and E. Sands Road. It is 6.4 acres in size and was
established in 1908. It is located 0.1 mi west of the Project Area. The South Pines Cemetery
(45SP641), located 0.5 mi northeast of the Project Area, at 13126 E. 32nd Avenue, was officially
established in 2001, and is still active (DAHP 2018a).
There have been two previously conducted cultural resource surveys within 1.0 mi (1.6 km) of the
Project Area. The cultural resource survey for the Dishman‐Mica Road project, between 40th
Avenue and Mohawk Drive was carried out in 1999. The survey covered a 1.6 mi portion of
Dishman Mica Road, including a portion adjacent to the current Project Area. The survey resulted
in no newly discovered cultural resources (Axton et al. 1999). The cultural resource survey for the
Sun Acres Pump Station project was carried out in 2015, 0.5 mi northwest of the Project Area. The
survey covered a 10.0‐acre area, and resulted in no newly discovered cultural resources (Corley
2015).
Two HPIs have been recorded within 1.0 mi (1.6 km) of the Project Area. Property 163655, located
at 12705 E. Apache Pass Road, is a single family house dating to 1964. The property lies 0.8 mi (1.3
km) southeast of the Project Area. No determination has been made regarding the property’s
eligibility for inclusion on the NRHP. Property 193075, located 0.9 mi (1.4 km) northwest of the
Project Area, at 10817 E. 32nd Avenue, is a 1945 single family house. No determination has been
made regarding the property’s eligibility for inclusion on the NRHP (DAHP 2018a).
EXPECTED PROPERTIES
Previous archaeological investigations correlate Native American sites with areas that have
relatively flat terrain, well drained soils, close proximity to water, and sweeping vistas. Major
rivers, such as the Columbia, provided corridors where animals and people moved across the
landscape. It is along these rivers that ethnographers and archaeologists have documented large
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 15
village sites. Residence and food procurement was tied to the seasons, with small creeks typically
associated with seasonal hunting and plant gathering by relatively small, task‐oriented groups of
people. Task campsites might manifest themselves as low‐to‐moderate densities of stone tools
which are concentrated in one or more loci, hearths, and middens.
Visits through this area may manifest themselves as isolated finds. Typically an item lost or
discarded, an “isolate,” provides important information about the types of areas exploited by past
populations but is not considered eligible for listing on the NRHP.
The DAHP’s predictive model places the Project Area in areas of “High Risk” and “Very High
Risk” for encountering cultural resources, stating that “survey [is] highly advised” for this location
(DAHP 2018a).
FIELD METHODS AND RESULTS
Survey work was completed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and
Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716, September 29, 1983) and under
the supervision of Principal Investigator, David Harder. Plateau archaeologists Adam Sackman
and Brandon McIntosh conducted the cultural resource survey over four days in March 2018. The
limits of the Project Area were identified using parcel information provided by WCE and
referenced using Spokane County’s SCOUT parcel explorer (Spokane County 2018). Survey
conditions were variable, with fluctuating cloud cover and scattered showers throughout the three
days of survey.
The Project Area includes 100.0 acres of land situated at the former Painted Hills Golf Course. The
land, although overgrown, is still recognizable as manicured parkland with non‐native plant
species throughout. Chester Creek flows through the southeast quadrant of the Project Area. The
property lies east of S. Dishman Mica Road, north of E. Thorpe Road, and west of S. Madison Road.
Prior to the field visit, a utility locate was requested under ticket #18086709. This locate identified
numerous subsurface utilities along Thorpe Road and Madison Road, including electric, fiberoptic,
and gas. No utilities were located within the previous golf course.
An intensive pedestrian survey was conducted over the entire Project Area (Figure 3). Transects
oriented north/south, and spaced at distances no greater than 20 m (65.6 ft). Ground surface
visibility was generally fair (approximately 40%), with sparse grasses and low‐growing vegetation
throughout the majority of the Project Area (Figure 4). Three structures are situated in the
southwest of the Project Area, and associated paved parking spaces obstructed surface visibility
in this area (Figure 5). A small stand of trees lies in the northwest portion of the Project Area, and
surface visibility was reduced (approximately 20%) within this area (Figure 6).
No Native American or historic‐era cultural materials or features were observed during the
pedestrian survey.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 16
Figure 3. The Project Area and field investigation on an aerial photograph.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 17
Figure 5. The Craft & Gather Café located in the southwest
portion of the Project Area. View to the north.
Figure 4. Overview of the Project Area. View to the south.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 18
Figure 6. The tree stand located in the western portion of the Project Area. View to the west.
The archaeologist excavated 31 subsurface shovel probes (SSPs) within the Project Area (Table 1).
The SSPs were organized into two strings. The two strings were oriented north/south, with one
string located in the eastern half of the Project Area (101‐118) and one in the west (201‐210). Three
additional SSPs were excavated along Chester Creek in opportunistic locations (SSP 301‐303). The
31 SSPs ranged in depth from 22‐104 cm (8.7‐40.9 in), and averaged 79.0 cm (31.1 in). Sediments
exposed during subsurface probing were irregular, and generally did not fit those predicted by the
NRCS model. This is likely due to extensive landscaping and associated soil turbation during the
construction of the Painted Hills Golf Course.
No Native American or historic‐era cultural materials or features were observed during
excavations.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 19
Table 1. Subsurface Probe Results
SSP Easting Northing Depth (cm) Stratigraphy Cultural
Material
101 481890 5273372 100 Strat I (0‐95 cm), Strat II (95‐100 cm) None
102 481891 5273391 104 Strat I (0‐70 cm), Strat II (70‐104 cm) None
103 481890 5273411 60 Strat I (0‐35 cm), Strat II (35‐60 cm) None
104 481891 5273431 102 Strat I (0‐90 cm), Start II (90‐102 cm) None
105 481891 5273451 50 Strat I (0‐45 cm), Start II (45‐50 cm) None
106 481891 5273599 104 Strat I (0‐35 cm), Start III (35‐104 cm)None
107 481891 5273619 102 Strat I (0‐20 cm), Start III (20‐102 cm)None
108 481891 5273639 100 Strat I (0‐35 cm), Start III (35‐100 cm)None
109 481891 5273659 65 Strat I (0‐60 cm), Start III (60‐65 cm)None
110 481891 5273679 70 Strat I (0‐40 cm), Start III (40‐70 cm)None
111 481892 5273827 40 Strat IV (0‐40 cm)None
112 481892 5273847 48 Strat IV (0‐48 cm)None
113 481892 5273867 51 Strat IV (0‐51 cm)None
114 481892 5273887 48 Strat IV (0‐48 cm)None
115 481892 5273906 33 Strat IV (0‐33 cm)None
116 481893 5274070 63 Strat V (0‐63 cm)None
117 481893 5274089 78 Strat I (0‐18 cm), Strat V (18‐78 cm)None
118 481893 5274109 22 Strat II (0‐22 cm)None
201 481692 5273600 110 Strat I (0‐110 cm)None
202 481693 5273620 102 Strat I (0‐32 cm), Strat II (32‐102 cm)None
203 481693 5273640 103 Strat I (0‐35 cm), Strat II (35‐103 cm)None
204 481693 5273659 100 Strat I (0‐40 cm), Strat II (40‐100 cm)None
205 481693 5273679 100 Strat I (0‐42 cm), Strat II (42‐100 cm)None
206 481693 5273828 40 Strat VI (0‐40 cm)None
207 481693 5273848 41 Strat VI (0‐41 cm)None
208 481693 5273867 32 Strat VI (0‐32 cm)None
209 481693 5273887 38 Strat VI (0‐38 cm)None
210 481693 5273907 42 Strat VI (0‐42 cm)None
301 481664 5273449 100 Strat VII (0‐15 cm), Strat VIII (15–40 cm), Strat I
(40‐100 cm)
None
302 481745 5273388 80 Strat VII (0‐35 cm), Strat I (35‐80 cm)None
303 481765 5273318 83 Strat I (0‐83 cm)None
NAD83, UTM Zone 11
Stratigraphic Unit Descriptions:
Strata I: Very dark brown (10YR2/2) silt loam
Strata II: Dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4) gravelly (gravel>80%) loamy sand
Strata III: Dark brown (10YR3/3) sandy gravel (gravel=60%)
Strata IV: Very dark brown (10YR2/2) sandy gravel (gravel>80%)
Strata V: Dark yellowish brown(10YR4/6) silty loam (gravel=20%)
Strata VI: Dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4) sandy gravel (gravel>90%)
Strata VII: Very dark brown (10YR2/2) sandy loam
Strata VIII: 10YR4/4 course Sand
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 20
RECOMMENDATIONS AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Plateau archaeologists conducted an intensive pedestrian survey over the entire Project Area, and
excavated 28 subsurface probes. Subsurface probes ranged in depth from 22‐104 cm (8.7‐40.9 in).
The pedestrian survey and subsurface investigations for the project resulted in no newly recorded
archaeological resources. Plateau recommends that the proposed undertaking will result in No
Historic Properties Affected, and no further archaeological investigations are recommended prior
to, or during, execution of this project.
Given concerns voiced by the Spokane Tribe of Indians during the permitting process, Plateau
recommends all ground disturbing activities be conducted under the guidance of the attached
Inadvertent Discover Plan (Appendix A).
Should ground‐disturbing activities reveal any cultural materials (e.g., structural remains,
Euroamerican artifacts, or Native American artifacts), activity will cease and the Washington State
Historic Preservation Officer should be notified immediately. The results and recommendations
in this document concern the specified APE. The proponent is advised that the results and
recommendations reported herein do not apply to areas of potential effect altered or expanded after
the cultural resource survey. A supplementary cultural resource review will be necessary should
the APE be altered or changed, as per 36 CFR 800.4.
If ground disturbing activities encounter human skeletal remains during the course of construction,
then all activity will cease that may cause further disturbance to those remains. The area of the find
will be secured and protected from further disturbance to those remains. The area of the find will
be secured and protected from further disturbance until the State provides notice to proceed. The
finding of human skeletal remains will be reported to the county medical examiner/coroner and
local law enforcement in the most expeditious manner possible. The remains will not be touched,
moved, or further disturbed. The county medical examiner/coroner will assume jurisdiction over
the human skeletal remains and make a determination of whether those remains are forensic or
non‐forensic. If the county medical examiner/coroner determines the remains are non‐forensic,
then they will report that finding to the DAHP who will then take jurisdiction over the remains.
The DAHP will notify any appropriate cemeteries and all affected tribes of the find. The State
Physical Anthropologist will make a determination of whether the remains are Indian or Non‐
Indian and report that finding to any appropriate cemeteries and affected tribes. The DAHP will
then handle all consultation with the affected parties as to the future preservation, excavation, and
disposition of the remains.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 21
WORKS CITED
Aikens, C. Melvin
1993 Archaeology of Oregon. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management,
Portland, Oregon.
Axton, Susan, Stephen Emerson, and Dennis C. Regan
1999 A Cultural Resources Survey of Dishman‐Mica Road Between 40th Avenue and Mohawk Drive,
Spokane County, Washington. On file (#1340655) at the Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation in Olympia, Washington.
Beckham, Stephen D.
1998 History Since 1846. In Handbook of North American Indians: Plateau, v.12, edited by
Deward E. Walker, Jr., pp.149‐173. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.
Boas, Franz (editor)
1917 Folk‐tales of the Salish and Sahaptin Tribes. Collected by James A. Teit, Marian K.
Gould, Livingston Farrand, and Herbert J. Spinden. Memoirs of the American Folk‐Lore
Society 11. Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
Brown, William Compton
1961 The Indian Side of the Story. C.W. Hill Printing Company, Spokane, Washington.
Buehner, Chanel, and Barbara L. Fisher
2013 Evergreen SP05UB187. On file (#1683747) at the Department of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation in Olympia, Washington.
Bureau of Land Management
2017 Land Patent Search: Section 19 of Township 25 North, Range 45 East. Electronic
document, blm.gov, accessed November 3, 2017.
Burt, William H., and Richard P. Grossenheider
1961 A Field Guide to the Mammals. The Peterson Field Guide Series, Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston, Massachusetts.
Clark, Ella E.
1969 Indian Legends of the Pacific Northwest. University of California Press, Berkeley,
California.
Coeur d’Alene Tribe
2016 Tribal website. Electronic document accessed at www.cdatribe.com on February 4, 2016
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 22
Corley, Jackie
2015 Sun Acres Pump Station Cultural Resource Survey. On file (#1686511) at the Department
of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia, Washington.
Daubenmire, Rexford
1970 Steppe Vegetation of Washington. Washington Agricultural Experiment Station Technical
Bulletin 62. Washington State University, Pullman.
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
2018a WISAARD. Electronic document, dahp.wa.gov, accessed March 7, 2018.
Erdoes, Richard and Alfonso Ortiz
1984 American Indian Myths and Legends. Pantheon Books, New York, New York.
Erickson, Edith E.
1988 Rosalia: Battlefield to Wheat Field, 1858‐1988. Compiled by Edith E. Erickson, Rosalia,
Washington.
Estes, James F.
1974 Tales of the Palouse Hills. Steptoe Publications, Spokane, Washington.
Fenneman, N.M.
1946 Physical Descriptions of the United States. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
Frey, Rodney
2001 Landscape Traveled by Coyote and Crane. The World of the Schitsu’umsh (Coeur d’Alene
Indians). In Collaboration with the Schitsu’umsh. University of Washington Press,
Seattle, Washington.
Fryxell, Roald and Richard D. Daugherty
1962 Schematic Geoarchaeological Chronology for Eastern Washington and Related Areas.
Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington.
Goodale, Nathan B., William C. Prentiss, and Ian Kuijt
2004 Cultural Complexity: A New Chronology of the Upper Columbia Drainage Area. In
Complex Hunter‐Gatherers: Evolution and Organization of Prehistoric Communities on the
Plateau of Northwestern North America, edited by William C. Prentiss and Ian Kuijt, pp.
36‐48. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.
Hunt, C.B.
1967 Physiography of the United States. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco,
California.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 23
Ingles, Lloyd G.
1965 Mammals of the Pacific States. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.
Kershner, Jim
2012 Spokane Valley—Thumbnail History. Historylink.org accessed November 3, 2017.
Lothson, Gordon A.
1977 Archaeological Reconnaissance and Phase II Testing of Oroville Urban Levees. Washington
Archaeological Research Center, Progress Report No. 52, Washington State University,
Pullman, Washington.
McCart, Joyce and Peter McCart
2000 On the Road with David Thompson. Fifth House Publishers, Calgary, Alberta.
McMicken, William
1878a Cadastral map for Township 24 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian. Electronic
document, blm.gov, accessed March 7, 2018
1878a Cadastral map for Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian. Electronic
document, blm.gov, accessed March 7, 2018
Meinig, Donald W.
1968 The Great Columbia Plain: A Historical Geography, 1805‐1910. University of Washington
Press, Seattle.
Mullan, John
1909 Miners and Travelers’ Guide. Ye Galleon Press, Fairfield, Washington. Reprinted in 1991
Natural Resources Conservation Service
2017 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document www.nrcs.usda.gov accessed October 13, 2017.
Nelson, Charles M.
1973 Prehistoric Culture Change in the Intermontane Plateau of Western North America. In
Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory, edited by C. C. Renfrew, pp. 371‐390.
Gerald Duckworth, London.
Palmer, Gary
1998 Coeur d’Alene. In Plateau, edited by Deward E. Walker, Jr, pp. 313‐326. Handbook of
North American Indians, Vol. 12, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian
Institution, Washington DC.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 24
Ray, Verne F.
1933 Sanpoil Folk Tales. Journal of American Folk‐Lore 46(180):129‐187.
1936 Native Villages and Groupings of the Columbia Basin. Pacific Northwest Quarterly
27(2):99‐152.
Ross, John Alan
1998 Spokane. In Plateau, edited by Deward E. Walker, Jr., pp. 271‐282. Handbook of North
American Indians, Vol. 12, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian
Institution, Washington D.C.
Ruby, Robert H., and John A. Brown
1970 The Spokane Indians: Children of the Sun. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman,
Oklahoma.
Schalk, Randall F.
1977 The Structure of Anadromous Fish Resource. In For Theory Building in Archaeology,
edited by L.R. Binford, pp. 207‐249. Academic Press, New York.
Schroedl, Gerald F.
1973 The Archaeological Occurrence of Bison in the Southern Plateau. Reports of Investigations
No. 51. Laboratory of Anthropology. Washington State University, Pullman,
Washington.
Spokane County
2018 SCOUT. Online resource, cp.spokanecounty.org/scout/map, accessed March 7, 2018.
Sprague, Roderick
2005 Canoes and Other Water Craft of the Coeur d’Alene in Journal of Northwest Anthropology,
v. 39, no. 1, pp 41‐62.
Stimson, William
1999 Spokane: A View of the Falls, An Illustrated History. American Historical Press, Sun Valley,
California.
Taylor, Ronald J.
1992 Sagebrush Country: A Wildflower Sanctuary. Mountain Press Publishing Company.
Missoula, Montana.
Thompson, M. Terry and Steven M. Egesdal (editors)
2008 Salish Myths and Legends: One People’s Stories. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln,
Nebraska.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 25
Trafzer, Clifford E., and Richard D. Scheuerman
1986 Renegade Tribe: The Palouse Indians and the Invasion of the Inland Pacific Northwest.
Washington State University Press, Pullman, Washington.
U.S. Department of the Interior
1990 Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties in National
Bulletin #38. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, Interagency Resources
Division.
U.S. Geological Survey
1901 Topographic Map: Spokane, Washington 15ʹ Series
1951 Topographic Map: Greenacres, Washington 7.5ʹ Series.
U.S. War Department
1859 Report of the Secretary of War, Communicating, in Compliance with a Resolution of the Senate:
A Copy of the Topographical Memoir and Map of Colonel Wrightʹs Late Campaign Against the
Indians in Oregon and Washington Territories. February 15, 1959. 35th Congress, 2nd Session,
Senate Executive Document No. 32. Printed by William A. Harris, Washington, D.C.
Walker, Deward E., Jr.
1982 Myths of Idaho Indians. The University Press of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho.
Walker, Deward E., Jr. and Roderick Sprague
1998 History Until 1846. In Handbook of North American Indians: Plateau, v. 12, edited by
Deward E. Walker, Jr., pp. 138‐148. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.
Western Regional Climate Center
2018 Spokane WSO, Washington (#457938) weather station. Electronic document,
www.wrcc.sage.dri.edu, accessed March 7, 2017.
Wyss, Marilyn
1989 State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form: 45SP240. On file at the
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in Olympia, Washington.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 26
APPENDIX A:
Inadvertent Discover Plan
(IDP)
The Painted Hills Residential Development,
Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan
Treatment of Archaeological
Materials Discovered During
Project Implementation
By:
Adam J. Sackman and David A. Harder
April 2018
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Black Realty, Inc. (Black Realty), Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. (WCE), and Northwest
Renovators, Inc. (NWR) are proceeding with plans for the development of Painted Hills Residential
Development—a 100.0‐acre site into 300 single family homes, 280 multifamily units, a
neighborhood commercial center, and open space. The area of potential effect, (APE) is located east
of, and adjacent to S. Dishman Mica Road, north of and adjacent to E. Thorpe Road, and west of
and adjacent to S. Madison Road in Spokane Valley (Figure 1).
Black Realty, WCE, and NWR retained Plateau Archaeological Investigations, LLC (Plateau) to
complete the cultural resource survey and identify potential impacts to cultural and historical
resources. The APE covers 100.0 acres and falls within Section 04 of Township 24 North, Range 44
East; and Sections 33 and 34 of Township 25 North, Range 44 East of the Willamette Meridian
(Figure 2). The survey was subsequently reported in Cultural Resource Survey of the Painted Hills
Housing Development, Spokane Valley, Washington (Sackman and Harder 2018).
Pre‐field research consisted of a file review completed through the Washington Information System
for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD) on December 19, 2017. The review
covered all or portions of Sections 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, and 35 of Township 25 North, Range 44
East. This review revealed no cultural resources, two cemeteries, two previous cultural resource
surveys, and two HPIs within 1.0 mi (1.6 km) of the Project Area. This database includes recorded
archaeological resources, historic property inventories (HPIs), National Register of Historic
Properties (NRHP) and Washington Heritage Register (WHR) properties, identified cemeteries, and
previously conducted cultural resource surveys found throughout the state of Washington.
Additionally, a review of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) records, both General Land Office
(GLO) online records and land patent information, was completed. Topographic maps and aerial
photos were reviewed to identify additional indicators of past land use.
A field investigation of the APE was conducted by Plateau in March of 2018 and included an
intensive pedestrian survey and the excavation of 28 subsurface shovel probes. The field
investigation identified no new cultural resources within the APE.
Given concerns voiced by the Spokane Tribe of Indians during the permitting process, Plateau
recommended that all ground‐disturbing activities be conducted under the guidance of this
Inadvertent Discover Plan.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
29
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Figure 1. The project location in Spokane Valley.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
30
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Figure 2. The Project Area on a portion of the Freeman USGS map.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
31
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Laws and Regulations Regarding Archaeological and Cultural Resources
Several laws and regulations, set forth on both federal and state levels, address concerns for burials,
rock cairns, archaeological sites, historic structures, and other cultural resources. Those pertinent
to this project are The State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 27.44 of the Regulatory Code of
Washington and Chapter 68.60 of the Regulatory Code of Washington.
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires state agencies to consider the effects of
undertakings on historic properties and consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) as appropriate to help identify the APE and the level
of effort necessary to comply. This is intended to be done prior to the expenditure of funds or
issuance of a license or permit, although it is recognized that some properties may not be identified,
recognized, or discovered until the project begins.
Chapter 27.44 of the Regulatory Code of Washington offers protection for Indian burials, cairns,
glyptic markings, and historic graves on private and public property. This regulation provides civil
and criminal penalties for the intentional disturbance or removal of these types of properties.
Chapter 68.60 of the Regulatory Code of Washington outlines protections for cemeteries, historic
graves, and other human remains. This chapter further outlines procedures pertaining to the
inadvertent discovery of human remains.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
32
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Inadvertent Discovery Plan
Proper application and management of this IDP requires that a professional archaeologist be
contacted if ground‐disturbing activities reveal potential Native American or historic‐era cultural
materials or features (Figure 3, Figure 4, and Figure 5). The archaeologist shall meet the Secretary
of the Interior’s standards for a professional archaeologist as defined at 36CFR61 Appendix A.
Construction within 200 ft (60 m) of the discovery will stop, and the area will be secured to protect
the find from additional damage. The archaeologist will document the find, prepare a brief written
statement, and take photographs of the find for submission to the lead agency and the SHPO at the
DAHP. The find will also be reported to the THPO of the Spokane Tribe of Indians. It is the
responsibility of the lead agency, Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, to contact the affected Tribes. This consultation process will take place even if the
pre‐contact or historic‐era cultural materials appear to have lost their depositional integrity. Work
within 200 ft (60 m) of the find will not resume until a plan for management or preservation of the
materials has been approved. Following the project, the archaeologist will provide a report
detailing the procedures and results of the investigation.
During the investigation, the archaeologist will observe rules of safety and will comply with any
safety requirements of the excavation contractor and project engineers. Entry into any excavation
will only be done under the direct supervision and approval of the construction foreman (or his or
her agent) and verification that entry and exit is safe.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
33
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Figure 3. Reduction of a lithic blank to a tool (Andrefsky 1998:158)
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
34
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Figure 4. An illustration of a housepit and the resulting
archaeological feature (Sappington 1994: 153).
Figure 5. An example of logo changes over time, which can aid
in determining the date of historic artifacts.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
35
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Discovery of Human Remains
If a burial, human remains, suspected human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or items of
cultural patrimony are encountered during any aspect of this project, operations will cease in
accordance with Regulatory Code of Washington 27.44, 68.50, and 68.60. All work within 200 ft (60
m) of the find will cease, the area around the discovery will be secured, and any requirements of
the lead agency shall be followed. Work within 200 ft (60 m) of the find will not resume until a plan
for management or preservation of the materials has been agreed upon by all parties.
If the lead agency does not explicitly state procedures the Spokane Valley Police Department, the
Spokane County Medical Examiner, and the SHPO at the DAHP will be notified in the most
expeditious manner possible. The find will also be reported to the THPO of the Spokane Tribe of
Indians. Reporting is to be done by the lead agency (DAHP), or a federal or state funding or
permitting agency. The find will be treated with dignity. Do not take photographs, contact the
press, call 911, or discuss the find with the public in any manner. Cover the find and keep the
location secure.
The coroner and law enforcement agency with jurisdiction will evaluate the find to determine
whether it is a crime scene or a burial. If human remains are determined to be associated with an
archaeological site (burial), and if there is any question of the cultural affiliation of the burial, or
whether the burial is prehistoric, the DAHP and any affected tribes will be notified to assist in the
determination prior to beginning any extensive excavations.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
36
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Protocol to Follow When No Archaeologist is Present
If an archaeologist is not on‐site when cultural materials (e.g., pre‐contact artifacts and/or features,
historic‐era artifacts and/or features) are uncovered, the following steps shall be followed:
Suspend work within 200 ft (60 m) of the find.
Take a photo of the artifact(s) or feature(s). Include a common object such as a quarter, a
tape measure, a person, or a pickup as a scale to show the size of the find.
Take photos of the location of the find from several angles and distances.
Record a GPS point if possible.
Contact Plateau by telephone to notify us of the find.
Provide an email with photos and any additional information you are able to gather.
Precontact Artifacts Precontact artifacts can include stone, wood, or bone tools. Stone tools are
the most common artifact encountered since they do not deteriorate over time.
Precontact Features Precontact features can include fire pits, hearths, burn deposits, ash, rock
alignments, rock mounds, and midden deposits.
Historic‐Era Artifacts Historic‐era artifacts may include various items manufactured from metal,
glass, or wood. If an individual identifiable historic artifact is encountered, the above
protocol should be followed. “Historic‐era artifacts” does not include “recent” items such
as chip bags, styrofoam, modern beverage cans and bottles, or other typical roadside debris.
Historic‐Era Features Any identifiable remains of buildings, foundations, rock alignments, or rock
mounds might be historic‐era features.
Human Remains Human remains, suspected human remains, burials, funerary objects, sacred
objects, or items of cultural patrimony are to be treated in the manner outlined above.
Additionally, Plateau is to be notified by phone immediately.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
37
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
Emergency Dispatch in Spokane County
Emergency Dispatch 911
Spokane Valley Police Department 509‐477‐3300
Sheriff, non‐emergency 509‐477‐2240
Spokane County Coroner 509‐477‐2296
509‐447‐0235 (fax)
Spokane Tribe of Indians
Randy Abrahamson, Tribal Historic 509‐258‐4315
Preservation Officer 509‐258‐6965 (fax)
randya@spokanetribe.com
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
DAHP Reception 360‐586‐3065
DAHP fax 360‐586‐3067
Guy Tasa, State Physical Anthropologist
360‐586‐3534 Guy.Tasa@dahp.wa.gov
Rob Whitlam, State Archaeologist
360‐586‐3080 Rob.Whitlam@dahp.wa.gov
Plateau Archaeological Investigations
Main Office/Fax 509‐332‐3830
David Harder, Archaeologist 509‐336‐1525 (cell) dharder@plateau‐crm.com
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
38
The Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley, Washington
Inadvertent Discovery Plan and Treatment of Archaeological Materials
WORKS CITED
Andrefsky, William A., Jr.
1998 Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology,
University Printing House, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Lyon, Joshua
2015 The Collector’s Ultimate Guide to Canning Jars. Electronic document,
countryliving.com, accessed February 7, 2017.
Sackman, Adam and David A. Harder
2018 Cultural Resource Survey of the Painted Hills Residential Development, Spokane Valley
Washington. On file at the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in
Olympia, Washington.
Sappington, Robert Lee
1994 The Prehistory of the Clearwater River Region, North Central Idaho. University of
Anthropological Reports, No. 95. Alfred W. Bowers Laboratory of Anthropology,
University of Idaho, Moscow.
Plateau Archaeological Investigations ~ 2018 Appendix A
______________________________________________________________________________________________
39