DEIS_Final_Draft_4-2-21_minus_Appendices
PAINTED HILLS DEVELOPMENT
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS)
SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
April 2021
This page intentionally left blank.
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 ........................................................................................3
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....................................................................................................7
2.2 LAND DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES ..................................................................8 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 .................................................................................................17 2.2.4 Permits and Approvals Required for Implementation ..............................................17 Relationship of FEMA and Local Review Processes ..................................................18
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 ...................................................................................34
3.2.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................34
3.2.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development-High Infiltration .............34
3.2.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development-Low Infiltration .......42
3.2.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................44
3.2.4 Indirect Effects ..........................................................................................................45
3.2.5 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................45
3.3 TRANSPORTATION .....................................................................................................45 3.3.1 Affected Environment ...............................................................................................47 3.3.1.1 Study Area .......................................................................................................47
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page ii
3.3.1.2 Existing Conditions ..........................................................................................49 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................50 3.3.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action ................................................................................50 3.3.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development High Infiltration Rate .....52 3.3.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration Scenario......................................................................................................57 3.3.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................59 3.3.4 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................60
3.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL ...........................61 3.4.1 Air Quality ................................................................................................................61 3.4.1.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................61 3.4.1.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................62 3.4.1.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................63 3.4.1.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................64 3.4.2 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................................64 3.4.2.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................64 3.4.2.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................69 3.4.2.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................69 3.4.2.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................70 3.4.3 Biological Resources ................................................................................................70 3.4.3.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................70 3.4.3.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................75 3.4.3.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................76 3.4.3.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................76 3.4.4 Environmental Health ...............................................................................................76 3.4.4.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................76 3.4.4.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................76 3.4.4.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................77 3.4.4.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................77 3.4.5 Geology .....................................................................................................................77 3.4.5.1 Affected Environment ......................................................................................77 3.4.5.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................78 3.4.5.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................78 3.4.5.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................79 3.4.6 Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources ....................................................79 3.4.6.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................79 3.4.6.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................79 3.4.6.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................80 3.4.6.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................81 3.4.7 Noise .........................................................................................................................81 3.4.7.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................81 3.4.7.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................82 3.4.7.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................82 3.4.7.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................82 3.4.8 Public Services ..........................................................................................................82 3.4.8.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................86 3.4.9 Recreation .................................................................................................................86 3.4.9.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................86 3.4.9.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................................90 3.4.9.3 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................90 3.4.9.4 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................90
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..............................................................................91
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page iii
LITERATURE CITED .........................................................................................................95
TABLES
Table 1-1: Painted Hills Site Tax Lots .......................................................................................1 Table 2-1. Project Purpose and Need v. Low Impact Subdivision ..........................................10 Table 3-1: Transportation Impact Analysis Land Use Types (TIA Table 5) ...........................46 Table 3-2: Level of Service Descriptions ................................................................................46 Table 3-3: Year 2015 Existing Intersections Levels of Service (Table 2 of TIA) ...................50 Table 3-4: Background Projects and Vested AM & PM Trips Table 4 of TIA) .....................51 Table 3-5: 2025 Levels of Service, without the Project, with the Background Projects (Table 7 of TIA) .....................................................................................................51 Table 3-6: Estimated Trip Generation – Alternative 2a...........................................................53 Table 3-7: Year 2025 Levels of Service, with the Project, with the Background Projects (Table 19 of the TIA) ...............................................................................54 Table 3-8: Alternative 2A and 2B ADT Comparison – PM Peak Hour Trips .........................58 Table 3-9: Background Projects and Vested AM & PM Trips ................................................60
FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Vicinity Map ...........................................................................................................2
Figure 2-1 Low Impact Subdivision ........................................................................................11
Figure 2-2 Standard Subdivision .............................................................................................13
Figure 2-3 Alternative 2a Site Plan including Gustin Ditch Improvements ............................14
Figure 2-4: Alternative 2b Site Plan including Gustin Ditch Improvements ...........................15
Figure 2-5: Alternatives 2a and 2b Comparison ......................................................................16
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 ..........................................................32
Figure 3-7: Proposed Drainage Features ..................................................................................36
Figure 3-8: Alternatives 2a and 2b – Existing & Future Floodplain Areas .............................37
Figure 3-9: Painted Hills Flood Management System Element Locations ..............................40
Figure 3-10: Study Area Intersections .....................................................................................66
Figure 3-11: View of the Site from S. Madison Road .............................................................67
Figure 3-12: View of the Site from E. Thorpe Road ...............................................................67
Figure 3-13: View of the Site from S. Dishman-Mica Road ...................................................68
Figure 3-14: Former Clubhouse and Associated Parking ........................................................68
Figure 3-15: Priority Habitat & Species ..................................................................................74
Figure 3-16: Service District Boundaries ................................................................................88
Figure 3-17: Public Recreation Opportunities .........................................................................89
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 ............... Flood Management System Element Failure Risk and Impact Summary
Appendix F............................................................................................ Traffic Impact Analysis
Appendix G ............................................................................... Truck Haul Plan Memorandum
Appendix H ................................................................ Painted Hills PRD Biological Evaluation
Appendix I ........................................................................................ Cultural Resources Survey
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page iv
This page intentionally left blank.
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 (COSV), 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. The driving range is in operation as a
commercial driving range until the City’s issuance of an approval on the Planned Residential
Development (PRD) request. 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 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.
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 27
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 3
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.
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 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 Federal Emergency Management Agency (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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 4
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 for the
Painted Hills site as noted below:
Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative): This alternative assumes no development of the site.
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 (SVMC) 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 one action
PRD alternative with two variations (Alternative 2a and Alternative 2b) for analysis in this
document. Alternative 2a assumes high infiltration rates and therefore a smaller (1.4-acre)
stormwater management facility and Alternative 2b assumes lower infiltration rates and
therefore a larger (9.3-acre) stormwater management facility.
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
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 (COSV)
Tentative Date of Implementation: Fall 2021
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, Right-of-Way (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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 7
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. The 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.
The City of Spokane Valley has long recognized the Painted Hills site 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 and “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 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. 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)].
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 8
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 (Alternative 1) and one action PRD alternative with
two variations (Alternatives 2a and 2b).
Additional alternatives were initially considered for evaluation in this DEIS. These included a
“Low Impact Standard Subdivision” alternative that 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
The alternatives analyzed in this DEIS 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 residential project on the Painted Hills site.
2.2.1.2 Alternative 2a: Planned Residential Development—High Infiltration
Alternative 2a (Figure 2-3) involves the redevelopment of the Painted Hills site into a PRD
within the City of Spokane Valley. The project 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 Painted Hills project will include the construction of
streets and sidewalks to access the lots, as well as water, sanitary sewer and dry utility facilities
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 9
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 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.
In addition to on-site improvements, Alternative 2a includes replacing a ditch northeast of the
Painted Hills 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 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 (Figure 2-4), like Alternative 2a, involves the redevelopment of the Painted
Hills site course as a PRD within the City of Spokane Valley. The primary difference between
the two alternatives is that Alternative 2b significantly increases the size of the 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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 10
design and impacts of Alternative 2b are provided in the individual environmental element
sections of this EIS. A comparison between Alternative 2a and Alternative 2b is shown on
Figure 2-5.
2.2.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Consideration
Through the process of considering alternatives in addition to the applicant’s preferred
alternative—PRD Alternatives 2a and 2b, the development team reviewed two other possible
alternatives for evaluation in the DEIS. These alternatives are discussed further below.
2.2.2.1 Low Impact Subdivision Alternative
In addition to the preferred alternative, 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 Low 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 review, the applicant determined the
alternative failed to meet the project purpose and need as required under WAC 197-11-
440(5)(b). Table 2-1 provides an analysis of the Low Impact Subdivision Alternative relative
to the project purpose and need.
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 necessary
public infrastructure. These infrastructure
investments include water, sanitary sewer, road and
stormwater 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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 12
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. The applicant conducted a
thorough analysis of this alternative and concluded 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 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 2-1
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
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
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
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 17
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 and as noted below:
“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 environmental elements of Section 3. Affected
Environment and Environmental Consequences.
2.2.4 Permits and Approvals Required for Implementation
The following local, state, and federal permits will be required to implement the development
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 18
Relationship of FEMA and Local Review Processes
In its review and consideration of this DEIS, the City has requested that the applicant provide
a summary of the relationship between FEMA’s review process and the City’s review process
and how the array of outcomes from FEMA’s review might affect the applicant’s project and
the local review process. This section offers a brief discussion of these issues.
First, because the installation of dry wells for infiltration testing requires SEPA review, the
applicant must complete the EIS review process prior to installing the dry wells. Because the
dry well testing is necessary to confirm the final flood management system design, the
applicant intends to file the CLOMR request to FEMA after the City completes the EIS review
process and makes a final local decision on the PRD request. The applicant would then install
the dry wells, make any design refinements, if necessary, and then proceed with the CLOMR
submittal to FEMA.
Submittal of the CLOMR requires the City floodplain administrator to sign a “Community
Acknowledgment Form” (CAF). The applicant anticipates that the City will sign the CAF after
the installation of the dry wells and after the applicant’s design team makes any final system
design refinements, if deemed necessary.
The applicant anticipates submitting a grading permit request to the City after the PRD
approval and anticipates that the City’s grading permit review would occur concurrent with
FEMA’s review of the CLOMR. It is expected that the CLOMR review process will require a
minimum of 12 weeks of review. Because it is expected that the CLOMR review and the City
construction document review will be occurring at the same time, the applicant expects that
any system design revisions requested/required by FEMA to ensure approval of the CLOMR
will be integrated with revisions to the construction document package as necessary before the
City issues final approval of the construction document.
In the event that the CLOMR review results in changes to the PRD, such changes would require
review and consideration by the City per the provisions of SVMC 19.50.070(B), which
stipulate the process for review of changes to approved PRDs. Per SVMC 19.50.070.B(1), if
such revisions are determined to affect “precise dimensions or siting of buildings, but which
do not affect the basic character or arrangement of buildings approved in neither the final plan,
the density of the development, nor the open space requirements” they can be approved by the
city manager in conjunction with the building permit and without further land use review.
SVMC 19.50.070.B(1) further stipulates that “dimensional adjustments shall not vary more
than 10 percent from the original” in order for the changes to be allowed without a revision to
the approved PRD.
In the event that FEMA’s CLOMR review requires modifications to the approved PRD in a
manner that exceeds the thresholds of SVMC 19.50.070.B(1), then such changes are
considered a “major adjustment.” In such an instance, then the project revisions will require
submittal of the adjustment for review by City staff and for final review and approval by the
City hearing examiner. If this occurs, it is anticipated that the PRD revision process would
proceed concurrent with FEMA’s review of the revised design.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 19
The process for addressing SEPA compliance for project changes after the issuance of an FEIS
is addressed in WAC 197-11, Sections 600-640. The array of SEPA review possibilities for
project changes could include (A) no review necessary consistent with WAC 197-11-600(2)
(B) an EIS addendum is prepared that finds that the revisions do not substantially change the
analysis of significant impacts and alternatives per WAC 197-11-600(4(c); or (C) a
supplemental EIS is prepared documenting that substantial changes are proposed that will
likely have significant adverse environmental impacts or new information is provided
indicating a proposal's probable significant adverse environmental impacts per WAC 197-11-
600(4)(d). Because the analysis provided in this DEIS contemplates and addresses the range
of environmental effects that can be expected to result from the range of infiltration test results,
it is anticipated that the SEPA review process necessary for any design refinements needed to
address FEMA’s review would be conducted consistent with (A) above and WAC 197-11-
600(2).
The FEMA map revision process concludes with a final LOMR. The LOMR process is
completed upon the final installation of fill and flood management improvements per the
specifications of the CLOMR and after as-built conditions are provided to FEMA to certify
that improvements have been installed consistent with the CLOMR request.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 20
This page intentionally left blank.
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 project site 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 Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 (Figure
3-4).
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
Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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
taken at multiple times between April and October 2014 at locations immediately adjacent to
3 Photo taken by Whipple Engineering on February 17, 2017.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 24
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 Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 cubic feet per
second (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 (SF). 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 used 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 by the
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 25
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
Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 have no
impacts 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 Painted Hills
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 Painted Hills site and therefore no impacts to the existing groundwater levels are
anticipated.
Groundwater mounding beneath infiltration structures such as the infiltration pond proposed
under Alterative 2a can cause localized flooding in situations where there is a subsurface
limiting layer at or just below the bottom of the structure. Based on the results of infiltration
tests described in Section 3.1.1.1, soils underlying the Painted Hills site are alluvial soils with
fine particles on top of coarse sands. These coarse sands are reported to extend 70 feet below
the ground surface. Based on the presence of this deep deposit of permeable material,
groundwater mounding beneath the proposed infiltration system is not 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 require a 15-foot extension of the Chester Creek bridge.
Under Alternative 2b, stormwater quality and quantity impacts would be the same as those
described for 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 Painted Hills site.
3.1.3 Mitigation Measures
3.1.3.1 Alternative 1
There are no impacts with Alternative 1, therefore no mitigation measures would be required.
3.1.3.2 Alternative 2a
Mitigation for Alternative 2a would consist of stormwater quality and quantity management
methods 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 used to minimize the extent of runoff from new on-site impervious surfaces
created with the onsite development.
3.1.3.3 Alternative 2b
Mitigation for Alternative 2b would consist of the stormwater quality and quantity
management methods as those described for Alternative 2a above, 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 Uses and Zoning
The current land use of the Painted Hills site is a non-operating golf course. The former club
house that has been repurposed as a commercial restaurant. On February 5, 2021, the City of
Spokane Valley approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) request (CUP-2020-0004) that
allows for the re-utilization of the former Painted Hills golf course driving range as a
commercial driving range use on the site. The driving range will not require any new
improvements and will occupy an approximately 7.38-acre location within the Painted Hills
site.
The driving range will be located northeast of the existing restaurant building and customers
of the driving range facility will park in the existing parking lot. The no action alternative
assumes that the driving range will continue as a land use on the property. SEPA review for
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 30
the driving range facility occurred in conjunction with the City’s review of CUP-2020-0004
and the City’s SEPA documentation for the driving range is incorporated by reference.
Pursuant to Condition 7 of the CUP approval, the driving range approval will expire upon the
City’s issuance of an approval on the PRD request filed under SUB-2015-0001/PRD-2015-
0001.The current land uses adjacent to the Painted Hills site include a mix of dense single-
family residential development on former agricultural land, remaining undeveloped small
tracts of agricultural land, and forested land with varying densities of residential development.
Land uses surrounding the project site include, north of the property line into the City, dense
residential development. 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 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.
The current zoning classification of the Painted Hills site is R-3, Single Family Residential,
and the Comprehensive Plan designation is Low Density Residential (LDR).
Sources of Flooding
Floodwaters have been known to enter the Painted Hills site from two separate locations: 1)
from a split flow path originating from the main channel of Chester Creek south of the Painted
Hills 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 Painted Hills site. The effective
FEMA Flood Insurance Study (FIS), as shown on Figure 3-6, indicates that floodwater could
enter the Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills site from the northeast.
Floodwater enters the Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 31
located north of the levee. Instead, the floodwater remains on the Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills site can remain flooded
for up to 40 days. (Biology, Soil & Water 2019)
An unnamed tributary to Chester Creek near Highway 27 east of the Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills site, bypassing the triangle parcel pit.
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 33
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 Painted Hills site from
two separate locations, the Painted Hills site is designated by FEMA as a compensatory storage
area in the 2010 Flood Insurance Study (FEMA 2010). Additionally, much of the Painted Hills
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.
Under the compensatory storage area designation, any loss of flood storage capacity on the
Painted Hills 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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 34
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 Painted Hills site. There would be no change in the
mapping of the 100-year floodplain on-site or off-site and the Painted Hills site would maintain
its FEMA compensatory storage area designation. Under this alternative, when Chester Creek
overtops its banks south of the Painted Hills site, floodwaters would potentially inundate the
property south of Thorpe Road and flow under, and potentially over Thorpe Road to reach the
Painted Hills site. Floodwaters that reach the site from the south would reside on the Painted
Hills 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 Painted Hills
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
impacts from the potential source of floodwater from the unnamed tributary to Chester Creek
NE of the Painted Hills 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 applicant 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 Painted Hills 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
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 Alternatives 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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 35
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 impact of the potential for
ponding in that area from riverine flood flows would be effectively eliminated. Alterative 2a
(as well as Alternative 2b) would also remove currently designated floodplain between the
northeast corner of the Painted Hills site and SR 27, including the Gustin property.
The intent of the development of the floodwater management infrastructure is to permanently
remove the flood risk that currently exists both on and off the Painted Hills site. The capacity
and redundancies built into the proposed flood management system will have the positive
impact of preventing flooding in the areas proposed to be removed from the 100-year
floodplain designation.
One potential adverse impact that could result from the removal of the FEMA floodplain
designation from the Painted Hills site or off-site properties could be that the implementation
of the flood management system provides a sense of security to potential homebuyers,
encouraging them to purchase a home on a site they believe to be safe from flooding. In the
unlikely event that the flood control infrastructure fails, these homeowners could be
temporarily displaced until the system failure is remedied and flood damage is repaired.
Potential points of failure associated with the proposed flood control infrastructure and related
impacts are discussed in detail later in this section.
Under Alternative 2a, the impacts from floodwaters would be controlled and managed, and
compensatory storage requirements would be addressed on the Painted Hills 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 100-yr levee-failure scenario).
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 38
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 eliminate flooding impacts by ensuring
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. 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 the existing non-certified levee
upstream of Thorpe Road fails, 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 impacts of floodwater from off-site that enters the Painted Hills
site, Alternative 2a would also modify the Gustin Ditch located off-site to the northeast of the
Painted Hills 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
Painted Hills 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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 39
100-year lifespan. The infiltration pond installed with both Alternatives 2a and 2b has been
designed to infiltrate 290.76 acre-feet 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.
Individual elements of the proposed flood management system have the potential to fail under
extreme circumstances. However, if properly maintained, the likelihood of failure of any one
element is small. Each element has been designed to withstand water volumes in excess of the
100-year storm and stormwater conveyance pipes have been sized to accommodate between
1.3 and 3 times the quantity of water predicted to be produced by the 100-year design storm.
While the likelihood of the flood management system failing is very small, the following
section describes possible system element failures, the location of potential failures, the range
of severity of such failures, and the risks posed to the Painted Hills site and off-site properties
from such failures.
Extreme yet unlikely circumstances potentially leading to system failure include earthquakes,
volcanic eruptions, extreme flood events (500-year or greater flood), intentional damage due
to vandalism, and long-term failure to maintain system elements.
The severity of the impacts resulting from system failure would depend upon the degree of
failure. Minor malfunctions such as a leaking or partially blocked conveyance pipes would
likely result in localized ponding or minor flooding in the immediate vicinity of the
malfunction. Compete failure of one of the system elements during an extended, extreme flow
event could result in major property damage and possibly human injury both on and off site.
Appendix E includes a summary table of the flood management system elements that, if
compromised or failed, would have the potential to interrupt the flood management
conveyance plan and could cause flood risk. Figure 3-9 illustrates the locations of these flood
elements.
The applicant anticipates that the short- and long-term maintenance of the flood control system
will be the responsibility of a management entity contracted by a homeowner’s association
(HOA) formed for the Painted Hills project. The HOA’s designated management contractor
would mow the pond, visually inspect for debris and the buildup of silts in the bottom of catch
basins and manholes, periodically use telescoping video (TV) to assess the condition of the
pipes and have the debris removed by a vactor truck to ensure that the system and its infiltration
capacity is adequately maintained.
Figure 3-9Painted Hills Flood ManagementSystem Element LocationPainted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Source: GIS data provided by Spokane County and USGS, NOAA, ESRI, and NPS.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 41
Phasing
Under Alternative 2a, the flood management improvements would be constructed in the first
phase of Painted Hills development before any new residential or commercial development
would be initiated. The first phase would include all improvements for managing floodwaters
that enter the Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills site 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 Painted Hills project.
Under Alternative 2a, after the Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills 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
Painted Hills site.
Flood Management Facilities and Maintenance
Critical flood management facilities for the Pained Hills site 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 Painted Hills site, the off-site pipe that would
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 42
convey water that currently flows through Gustin ditch, and the off-site Gustin pond and
associated drywells.
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 the conveyance
pipes will be mostly underground and will not be exposed to the effects of weathering, their
useful life is likely greater than 100 years.
The 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 HOA will
maintain a contract with a third-party vendor to conduct all system maintenance as stipulated
by the final adopted Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Manual.
The O&M Manual will include the Painted Hills Residential Development Flood Control
System & Plat Amenities Plan that will provide detailed descriptions of how the facilities will
be maintained, and will include provisions for a Sinking Fund to be set up to receive regular
HOA member deposits to be used for paying future costs and debts. The O&M Manual will
also stipulate that the HOA maintain a maintenance bond to ensure that resources are available
in perpetuity for any and all system maintenance requirements that might exceed the sinking
fund capacity. Future costs could include planned and unplanned operation and maintenance
costs along with future replacement costs for the storm drainage facilities.
The responsibilities of the HOA contractor will include the off-site improvements at the Gustin
Ditch and Triangle Pond. The Sinking Fund to provide the contracted services to maintain the
on-site and off-site infrastructure would be fulfilled and grown through monthly or yearly HOA
fees from lot owners within the PRD.
Per the O & M Manual, the HOA will 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.
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 Alternative 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 43
Under Alternative 2b, as with Alternative 2a floodwater impacts would be controlled and
managed, and compensatory storage requirements would be addressed at Painted Hills 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 Alternative
2a and Alternative 2b 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, which
is 7.9 acres more than the Alternative 2a infiltration pond.
A potential impact of removing Painted Hills on-site and off-site properties from the
FEMA 100-year floodplain is that these properties would no longer carry the requirement
for flood insurance. Therefore, homeowners within the Painted Hills site and off-site
property owners could experience uninsured property damage if the flood management
system were to fail catastrophically. Proposed system design and operational and
maintenance protections are discussed throughout this document to minimize the potential
for such system failures.
Phasing
As described for Alternative 2a under Alternative 2b, the flood management improvements
would be constructed in the Phase 1 of development. Phase 1 would include all improvements
for managing floodwaters that enter the Painted Hills 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 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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 44
Flood Management Facilities and Maintenance
The flood management facilities, the system maintenance requirements, and potential impacts
associated with Alternative 2b would be identical to those for Alternative 2a.
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 short- and long-term
maintenance program for open spaces and infrastructure throughout the Painted Hills
project, including the on-site and off-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. This O&M
Manual will provide 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 of each year, 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 HOA Sinking Fund for the repair and maintenance of critical floodwater
management infrastructure will be established and maintained in perpetuity to ensure
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 45
the long-term viability and capacity of the HOA to maintain the critical flood
infrastructure. The required maintenance and replacement items for floodwater
infrastructure will be included in a final O&M Manual adopted prior to City approval
of the final plat.
A performance surety bond will be required by the City of Spokane Valley during the
construction of the facility to ensure its completion.
A maintenance bond will be secured by the HOA and maintained in perpetuity to ensure
the long-term financial capacity of the HOA to maintain and repair various flood
system improvements.
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.
3.3 TRANSPORTATION
A traffic impact analysis (TIA) was completed on September 14, 2016 by Whipple for the
Painted Hills PRD project. 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 Painted
Hills PRD project to determine the extent to which the PRD project may contribute to level-
of-service (LOS) deficiencies on the local transportation network. The TIA uses trip generation
estimates for the Painted Hills 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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 46
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.
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 47
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 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
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 48
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.
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 49
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 as determined after meetings with Public
Works staff, the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Spokane County
transportation staff and the public 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
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 50
32nd Avenue & SR 27
32nd Avenue & Evergreen Road
32nd Avenue & Sullivan Road
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
Trip Generation Impacts
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 Alternative 1, 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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 51
These approved and vested projects, and their associated traffic volumes are identified in
Table 3-4.
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 LOS
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 52
In conjunction with the CUP-2020-0004 request for the commercial driving range, a trip
generation and distribution letter was submitted that documented that the proposed driving
range will generate approximately 219 average daily trips, with an average of nine PM peak
hour trips per day. Because Condition 7 of the CUP approval for the driving range requires the
closure of the driving range upon issuance of construction approvals associated with the PRD
(SUB-2015-0001/PRD-2015-0001), the driving range trips would be eliminated from the
system before any PRD-generated trips would occur. However, if the PRD were not
implemented, it is assumed that the driving range trips would continue on the system.
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.
Safety Impacts
As no action would occur under Alternative 1, there would be no safety-related traffic impacts
that could result from this alternative.
3.3.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development High Infiltration Rate
Trip Generation Impacts
The TIA analyzes the ability of the study area intersections to meet adopted LOS standards in
the year 2025 after incorporating the background growth rate, background projects, and the
anticipated Painted Hills PRD project trips, including the conversion of the clubhouse into a
4,000 SF restaurant facility.
It is anticipated that Alternative 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).
Under Alternative 2a, new trips generated on the transportation system are shown in the
Table 3-6.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 53
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
Due to 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 and service needs of the residents
of the Painted Hills 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 Painted Hills site, and 285 new trips exiting the site via the eight
access opportunities previously noted. In the PM peak hour, the Painted Hills PRD 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 Alternative 1—No Build.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 54
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. 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.
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 55
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 the Painted Hills PRD
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:
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 56
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
Construction-Related Project Impacts
It is anticipated that the Painted Hills PRD project will result in construction-related traffic
associated with site grading and site development activities. These impacts are discussed in
memoranda prepared by WCE dated November 13, 2018; and February 15, 2021. As noted in
the memos, 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 related to importing 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.
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 57
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.
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).
The increased truck traffic would impact non-construction related users of the local roadway
system. Potential impacts to local users would include traffic delays due to additional truck
traffic on the roads, and inconvenience and potential danger caused by fugitive dust and spilled
fill materials on the roadways. In addition, additional traffic could result in damage to existing
roadway infrastructure including pavement surfaces, signs, and guardrails. Per the City of
Spokane Valley Haul plan requirements item #5, any damage to the public roadway or roadway
elements is the responsibility of the contractor.
Safety
Truck trips will enter and exit the Painted Hills 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 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.
The additional truck traffic would temporarily also pose potential safety risks to local users of
the roadway system. Increased truck traffic would increase the potential for vehicle collisions
and vehicle pedestrian accidents.
3.3.2.3 Alternative 2b – Planned Residential Development—Low Infiltration
Scenario
Trip Generation Impacts
The total traffic generation resulting from the land uses of Alternative 2b is nearly identical to
Alternative 2a, with a slight overall decrease in the number of trips. Table 3-8 illustrates the
land use differences between Alternative 2a and Alternative 2b. As a result, the trip generation
impacts for Alternative 2b are assumed to be identical to Alternative 2a.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 58
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 is anticipated to result in construction-related traffic associated with site grading
and a substantial amount of fill material to bring development areas above the 100-year base
flood elevation. These impacts are also discussed in a memoranda prepared by WCE dated
November 13, 2018; and February 15, 2021. INSERT As noted in the memoranda, like
Alternative 2a, Alternative 2b would require a substantial amount of fill material to bring
development areas above the 100-year base flood elevation, however, Alternative 2b would
generate significantly fewer construction related trips than Alternative 2a. Alternative 2b
would require less imported fill than Alternative 2a because material excavated to create the
larger Alternative 2b infiltration pond (due to greater floodplain storage volume required on
the site) would be used elsewhere instead of importing fill. Specifically, Alternative 2b would
require approximately 104,630 CY of 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 percent of the total net fill volume anticipated with Alternative 2a,
it is estimated that the truck trips associated with Alternative 2b will be approximately 7846
total round trips. As with Alternative 2a, the haul route truck trips under Alternative 2b will be
via Dishman-Mica Road, designated by the City as a Principal Arterial.
Below is a more detailed analysis of potential impacts related to importing of the fill material.
Truck Volumes, Traffic Operations and Phasing
Like Alternative 2a, 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. During this period, fill material
could be accepted year-round and stockpiled when necessary. However, as compared to
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 59
Alternative 2a, the number of truck trips is less. If truck trips were to occur consistently during
workdays over this four-year period, under Alternative 2b, approximately 3.5 trucks per day
would arrive at the site or approximately 7.0 truck round trips per day, assuming 280 workdays
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 1 to November 15th time
frame could be considered when estimating truck volumes. In this scenario, an approximately
31-week annual mass grading period could occur with approximately 155 workdays. In this
scenario, 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 round 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.
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.
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.
Safety
As with Alternative 2a, truck trips will enter and exit the painted Hills 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, bicyclists and pedestrians. Access points on Dishman-Mica Road
will be designed to ensure safe sight distances per the AASHTO and local standards to ensure
that turning movements into and out of the site will have adequate vision clearance.
The additional truck traffic would also pose potential safety risks to local users of the roadway
system. Increased truck traffic would increase the potential for vehicle collisions and vehicle
bicycle or pedestrian accidents.
3.3.3 Mitigation Measures
Alternative 1
No mitigation would be required under Alternative 1, as no action would occur on the site.
However, it is assumed that existing 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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 60
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. A draft of this Truck Haul Plan is provided as
Appendix G.
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.
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 61
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 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.
According to the 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
6 https://www.spokanecleanair.org/air-quality
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 62
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.
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.
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 63
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.
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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 64
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.
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;
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 65
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 (Figures 3-12 and 3-13). 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 (Figure 3-14), which includes overhead parking
lot lighting.
Browns Park
Terrace View Park / Pool
Castle Park
44th Ave
24th Ave
Schafer RdSaltese
R
d
Pines RdMadison RdBlake Rd25th Ave
Sands Rd40th Ave
Thorpe RdHerald Rd24th Ave
16th Ave
Bowdish RdPines RdUniversity RdEvergreen RdDi
s
h
m
a
n
-
M
i
c
a
R
d McDonald Rd32nd AveDis
hman
-M
i
c
a
Rd
Legend
Painted Hills Boundary
Source: GIS data provided by the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County. 0 4,0002,000 Feet
Dishman Hills
Natural Area
Figure 3-10
Study Area Intersections
Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS Hwy 27n
CVSD
School
Complex
4
31
2
8
1011
56
7
9
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 19 20
1 32nd Ave & University Rd
2 Dishman-Mica Rd & University/Schafer Rd
3 32nd Ave & Bowdish Rd
4 Dishman-Mica Rd & Bowdish Rd
5 Dishman-Mica Rd & Apt Access (Proposed)
6 Dishman-Mica Rd & Sundown Dr. (Proposed)
7 Dishman-Mica Rd & Comm. Access (Proposed)
8 Dishman-Mica Rd & Thorpe Rd
9 Thorpe Road & Comm. Access.
10 16th Ave & Pines Rd
11 16th Ave & SR 27
12 32nd Ave & Pines Rd
13 Madison Rd & Painted Hills Ave (Proposed)
14 Madison Rd & 41st Ave (Proposed)
15 Madison Rd & 43th Ave (Proposed)
16 Madison Rd & 44th Ave (Proposed)
17 Madison Rd & Thorpe Rd
18 32nd Ave & SR 27
19 32nd Ave & Evergreen Rd
20 32nd Ave & Sullivan Rd
Study Area Intersections
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 67
Figure 3-11: View of the Site from S. Madison Road
Figure 3-12: View of the Site from E. Thorpe Road
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 68
Figure 3-13: View of the Site from S. Dishman-Mica Road
Figure 3-14: Former Clubhouse and Associated Parking
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 69
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 70
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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 71
Threatened or Endangered Species
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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 72
California Floater (Anodonta californiensis): This is a freshwater mussel and there
are no instances on the site.
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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 73
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.
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 use 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 3-15
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 75
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 76
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.
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 77
3.4.4.2.2 Alternative 2a – Planned Residential Development—High
Infiltration
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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 78
3.4.5.2 Environmental Consequences
3.4.5.2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action
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 CY 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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 79
Measures as required by the SRCAA and WDOE permits would be followed.
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 I.
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 80
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 I 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 I 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 IDP included in the April
2018 Cultural Resource Survey document. This IDP 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 I). 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
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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 81
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.
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)
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 82
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, 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.
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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 83
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
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.
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 84
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
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
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 85
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.
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.
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 86
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 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.
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) (Figure 3-17), 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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 87
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
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 3-16
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 #
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 Painted Hills Residential Development DEIS
Figure 3-17
Public Recreation Opportunities
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 90
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 91
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
CAF Community Acknowledgment Form
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
CUP Conditional Use Permit
CY Cubic yards
DAHP Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
DDT DichlorodiphenyltrichloroethaneS
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 92
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
EWSWMM Eastern Washington Stormwater Management Manual
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHA Federal Housing Authority
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FIS FEMA Flood Insurance Study
GMA Growth Management Act
HOA Homeowners’ association
IDP Inadvertent Discovery Plan
IPEC Inland Pacific Engineering Company
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
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 93
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 94
TIP Transportation Improvement Plan
TV Telescoping Video
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 95
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
Painted Hills Residential Development Spokane Valley, Washington
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Page 96
This page intentionally left blank.