2008, 02-19 Special Joint Council/Planning Commission Meeting MinutesMINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
Special Joint Meeting /Study Session
Spokane Valley City Council/Spokane Valley Planning Commission
6:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Attendance.
Councilmembers
Rich Munson Mayor
Dick Denenny Deputy Mayor
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember
Rose Dempsey Councilmember
Steve Taylor, Councilmember
Diana Wilhite, Councilmember
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember
Others in attendance:
Michael Freedman of Freedman, Tung & Bottomley
Troy Russ of Glatting Jackson Consultants
Approximately 50 citizens in attendance
Staff
Dave Mercier, City Manager
Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager
Kathy McClung, Comm Dev Dir
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager
Steve Worley, Senior Engineer
Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief
Micki Harnois, Associate Planner
Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
Planning Commissioners
Ian Robertson, Chair
Marcia Sands
Gail Kogle
Craig Eggelston
Fred Beaulac
John Carroll
Art Sharpe
Deputy Mayor Denenny called the meeting to order, explained that Mayor Munson should be arriving
late, welcomed everyone to the meeting, and asked that Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners
introduce themselves. Deputy Mayor Denenny introduced Senior Planner Scott Kuhta. Mr. Kuhta
explained that he is the project manager for this project, and that tonight's meeting is really a continuation
from last fall's meeting wherein Michael Freedman, of Freedman, Tung & Bottomley, gave an orientation
on the draft sub -area plan and covered Books I and II of the Plan. Mr. Kuhta said tonight's discussion
will focus on Book III of the Plan, and he introduced Michael Freedman, and Glatting Jackson Consultant
Troy Russ.
Mr. Freedman gave a few introductory remarks about last November's orientation sessions regarding the
public review drafts, said that this is a three -phase process with phase two organized around a series of
focus groups and community workshops, which lead to key inputs to recommendations of this draft plan;
that the next phase will be the formal public hearings; but that tonight's goal is to continue the orientation
to a very detailed plan, and he urged Councilmembers and Commissioners to feel free to alert Mr.
Freedman of any desired changes or concerns now so the issues can be addressed prior to the public
hearing process. Mr. Freedman read the Plan's Purpose as stated in the draft plan, and said that tonight's
focus is not on the City Center but on the transportation net improvements; and he then turned the
presentation over to Troy Russ of Glatting Jackson.
In going through the PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Russ explained that transportation is an important
element of the Plan as it enables cities to make choices; that last March they gave an update on the data
that was available at the time, but the Regional Transportation Model has now been updated.
Mr. Russ explained that the framework of transportation choices includes the element of what it is we
want to achieve; and to determine that we must determine how transportation affects the choices to make
on this corridor; that we need to think of the transportation system as defining what properties can
become and not become, and to consider how transportation relates to land use. He explained that since
Joint Council /Planning Commission Meeting 02 -19 -08 Page 1 of 4
Approved by Council: 03 -25 -08
the early 1900's, engineers have told us to move cars as if nothing else matters, and make more pavement
and wider roads; that street size is based on demand, but we never quite met that demand, as changes in
transportation induce traffic changes; that roads were widened to reduce cost and delay, but when that
delay is reduced, people rationalize that they can now travel further to shop and live further away from
schools, and then that triggers retail changes as well, and that this has resulted over the last fifty years in
vehicle miles of travel growing faster than the population itself, and we see longer commutes and
decreased transit ridership, so the process failed. He also explained that all this change affects people's
health, as kids don't walk or ride their bikes to school as they live further away from the schools, and
when health is affected, insurance premiums are affected. Mr. Russ said we need some alternate
strategies.
Mr. Russ said there isn't a single mode of attack and that the automobile and more pavement doesn't
mean more efficiency. He explained that the object is to move people not cars, to try to improve the
quality of the trip and maybe get people to live closer to where they work. He said that cities generally
manage the problem by having more connection streets which gives more citizens more choices; and that
having three two -lane streets carry traffic more efficiently then one six -lane highway as we lose
efficiency when we go larger than three lanes; that two two -lanes carry more than a four -lane; that speed
also matters, and going faster than 30 -35 lends to result in more room between cars thereby allowing less
cars on the roadway; and that higher speeds are also not compatible with pedestrians and bikes. In their
analysis, he explained that they found that only a very small percentage (4 %) of all trips on the
Sprague /Appleway Corridor are from people passing through (end to end on the corridor); and that all the
rest of the travelers are local. Mr. Russ said that if trips are 96% local, that changes the land use concept
perspective; that we want lower travel speeds , open access to properties and good connectivity.
Mr. Russ in explaining trip purpose, said that 70% of all trips occur within three miles of an individual's
home; that when we create a city center, transportation challenges must be addressed; that there will be a
need to create a roadway that would enable a mixed use city center to strengthen businesses along the
corridor and eliminate the confusion of the one way and create a safe environment for all modes of travel;
that the purpose of the street is not just automobiles but pedestrians as well. He explained that the options
before us are (1) keep what we have, (2) extend the one -way couplet from University east; (3) create the
hybrid of a two -way system from Dishman Mica east then two -way all the way east but one way west to
I -90; and (4) do it all as a two -way street. Mr. Russ said that the options have been evaluated and they
recommend the two -way system, even though the one -way is the fastest, but speed he explained, is not the
utmost concern. Mr. Russ reminded everyone that this plan is taking into account the projected traffic
volumes for the year 2030. [Mayor Munson arrived at 6:45 p.m.] Mr. Russ said that the rationale for their
street configuration is as mentioned: it strengthens businesses along the corridor, eliminates conflicts and
confusion, keeps the desirable level of service, and establishes a clean gateway to the City. To implement
this plan, Mr. Russ explained that there are several stages. He explained that Stage One is $6 million to
establish the transportation framework and enable the City Center which includes converting Sprague to
two -way between Argonne and University and reducing Sprague from seven to five lanes between
Argonne and University; and converting Appleway to a two -way street from Dishman -Mica to
University; Stage Two is $14.3 million, and to strengthen the City Center and extend the network, they
recommend extending Appleway from University to Evergreen, and convert Sprague to two -ways
between University and Evergreen; State Three is $6.6 million to give the City Center an address and
invest in auto row by converting Sprague to two -way between Argonne and I -90, and converting
Appleway to two -ways from Thierman to Dishman -Mica; Stage Four is $12.9 million to extend the
network and continue to invest in Sprague by having Appleway as a three -lane street to Sullivan, and
reducing Sprague from seven to five lanes between Evergreen and Sullivan; and that Stage Five is not
included in this plan, to extend the network and continue to invest in Sprague; all for a grand project total
of approximately $37 million, with approximately $19 million of that used for Appleway and its
extension. At the conclusion of Mr. Russ' presentation, Mr. Kuhta mentioned that the entire subarea plan
Joint Council /Planning Commission Meeting 02 -19 -08 Page 2 of 4
Approved by Council: 03 -25 -08
is up for review and will be the subject of an upcoming public hearing set for March 13, and that he
encourages Council and Commissioners to contact staff with questions. Mayor Munson opened the floor
for questions and discussion. Discussion included levels of service at various intersections; the one -way
versus two -way options; where public /mass transit fits in; and of a perceived concern of downgrading
some property from commercial to residential and the mention that there are over 1,000 individual pieces
of property in question; and Commission Chair Robertson mentioned he wants to ensure no property
would be downgraded. Mayor Munson opened the floor for public comments.
Dick Behm, 9405 E Sprague: mentioned that the $6 million first phase of the corridor between Argonne
and University includes landscaping, but the said that portion already has landscaping, and he questioned
if the $6 million figure is accurate. Mr. Russ responded that the landscaping doesn't match the
expectations that Freedman, Tung & Bottomley put in the plan; and that the road will change for that
section of Sprague.
Carlos Landa: asked about the opportunity for a shopping center at Sprague and Pines; and regarding
Stage 4 gaining a block for redevelopment at Thierman, he asked about the locations proposed. Mr. Russ
said the drawing is not to scale and shows where the round -about would be and where the ramp was. Mr.
Landa also mentioned that the outside boundaries seem to be irregular, and he asked if the plan excludes
the old library building from the plan as he feels the old library should be in the plan; and added that we
"killed Sprague when it went one - way." Mr. Freedman responded that he sees no problem as for the most
part properties in the plan are in front and touching Sprague, or are contiguous and would benefit from
being part of the corridor, and there is nothing wrong in extending the direction all the way up to Main if
that is the direction the Commissioners and Council want to move.
Commissioner Sands agreed that the size and the number of parcels of the subarea plan needs to be kept
in some kind of check; and in dealing with Sprague /Appleway Couplet and the extension, she feels it
would be correct to keep it as planned, that it would become a logical extension once implemented, but to
keep it smaller to implement.
Rusty Barnes, 9612 E Sprague stated that he heard about this plan and was hopeful it would change as he
feels the one -way each way is confusing and difficult to find buildings; that he lost one of his retailers and
feels going two -way will help him regain full occupancy of the building.
Mayor Munson asked how long it would it take to convert phase one to have the area two -way, and Mr.
Kuhta said he would have to research that question.
Philip Rudy, 720 N Argonne: mentioned that the plans he studied have height limitations of 60 feet or
five stories, and if that is correct, he feels that should be increased in certain areas; and he said if we are
encouraging light rail, he prefers monorail. Councilmember Taylor mentioned that it would be interesting
to compare other city's height limits, and Mr. Kuhta mentioned that the newly adopted UDC has a city
center zoning category that has regulations with unlimited height regulations, and where we would put the
city center, has a maximum height of six stories.
Mr. Freedman spoke to the height comment, and said that the height for the city center would be six
stories and 75 feet; but it tapers down to Appleway; and for neighborhood centers like at Pines and
Sprague, the height limit is four floors and 53 feet; and that he recommends the Commissioners and
Council consider that we have miles and miles and miles of property to cover with new investment; and a
very tall building in one spot would pull in more, but the area can only supply so much net new retail per
year; and placing a high -rise in the city center would absorb the first couple of years of market; that there
is a need to balance the type of investment that the market will likely invest in, and he doesn't think the
Joint Council /Planning Commission Meeting 02 -19 -08 Page 3 of 4
Approved by Council: 03 -25 -08
market will invest in six stories, but would in three stories; and that we need to be careful not to create
any kind of incentive for a one -of- a type investment.
Richard Bryant, South Valley: said he agrees with Dr. Rudy on the height requirement; and said there is
no place to stay on Sprague; no major hotel chain; but if we could raise that height limit, it might entice a
major hotel with a parking garage.
There was also discussion on the importance of the library bond with Mr. Freedman explaining that as
you visit some city centers, some feel real and some don't; but none feel like strips; and when you add a
civic building into a city center it changes from a shopping center to a general public purpose and looks
like the heart of town, and said that he believes the library is crucial to support the city center.
Dick Behm on behalf of Spokane Valley Business Association: said there is a lot of distrust in
government and he mentioned some of the history about paving Sprague Avenue and the widening of
lanes by the County which took his business and property under condemnation; and then later that they
didn't want those lanes and wanted to reduce it back and wanted to give the property back, but at that
point he couldn't do anything with it; he said that about fifty people lost their life savings and went out of
business; and he mentioned how small businesses support the city and community activities and we need
to make sure we have credibility and will follow through to make it good.
Prior to closing the meeting, Mayor Munson reminded everyone of the April 5 Mayor's Ball. There being
no further business, Mayor Munson adjourned the meeting at 7:35 p.m.
AA
ATTEST. 07# and Munson, . yor
- Christine Bainbridge, qty Clerk
Joint Council/Planning Commission Meeting 02 -19 -08 Page 4 of 4
Approved by Council: 03 -25 -08
Transportation
Options
Transportation Options
Today's Configuration
_-- Gaiewy Grnmo- W Comm
&atm, Caa^na+en1 5,4+42:.. -,
n7 Leer E.pome. ram,
arY Cale Ns flwrMd��
No changes to Sprague
-0lY-BaYeeord— _.._
a..11emna Awes.
Crossover brings EB traffic back to Sprague
nvgwrwoe Cemerv_
•
Transportation Options
Extend One -way Couplet
' L.r
. DKFenm MI6
■ry Cc.", Ea,:e.en ire'
Lny 4n,, NeN'bah.W. —
iaW Use ls4wN
CM Comer
wt.
Wi0M1111 AtisR •
One -way EB extension of Appleway and
one -way conversion of Sprague
L. r _J
2 -lane, one way EB
4
Transportation Options
Two -way System east of Dishman -Mica
ON 4ngr ,Expero:e..Zone
.smv Nc.Sn.Mnuod:._
Sole, ConrAVUaI Se_ t '--\
aw -n Mn, —. ; •
operations unchanged •
•
oa
5 -lane Two -way
Nexlwanmod Cent•rc•
?1.e-Tt.. r-'4 CSC `>✓ .. anag
.I 3 - lane, twaway
Two -way extension of Appleway, one -way couplet operations
converted to two -way streets from University to Argonne
5
N.:ynow.w r.
Transportation Options
Two -way System from 1 -90 east.
Full two -way operations
Galway taertercal 5er.nt. --\
boomer
Full two -way operations
4- lane, two-w
5 -lane, two -way
F
1 ' J LlL
imam. Aomor
L.j
3 -lane, two-way
Two -way extension of Appleway, one -way couplet operations
converted to two -way streets from 1 -90 to Argonne
Evaluation &
Recommendations
Evaluation
(SRTC changes in the model)
No -Build
Couplet
Extension
Hybrid
Couplet/
Two -Way
Complete
Two -Way
Corridor LOS Standards (Class III Arterial)
Average Corridor Trove; r iesprrho;:r
0 2 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
471
Firt
Level of Set Fntina
D
B A
No -Build
Couplet
Extension
Hybrid
Couplet/
Two -Way
Complete
Two -Way
Corridor Travel Times
0 13 10 15 20 25 30 35 - =0 - _ 50
Faster
D
Slower
Analysis
Travel Time Delay Time Total Travel
(min) (min) Time (min)
Existing Conditions
EB
WB
12.7
11.8
6.7
11.0
19.0
22.8
Extended One -Way Couplet
WB
EB
12.4
11.2
2.0
2.2
14.4
13.4
Hybrid (Couplet through auto row)
EB
WB
12.4
11.2
2.0
2.6
14.4
13.8
Complete Two -Way
EB
WB
11.2
12.4
5.4
2.5
16.6
14.9
No -Build
Couplet
Extension
Hybrid
Couplet/
Two -Way
Complete
Two -Way
Corridor Travel Times
0 13 10 15 20 25 30 35 - =0 - _ 50
Faster
D
Slower
Extended One -Way Couplet
Conclusions
Livable streets
performance measures
Corridor LOS
Travel Times (min)
Vehicle Miles/
Distance
Traveled
Multimodal
Capacity
Bike /Ped
Access
Business Visibility
Today's Roads
D
22.8
N/A
MEDIUM
MEDIUM-
LOW
MEDIUM-
LOW
MEDIUM -
LOW
Extended One - Way
Couplet
B
13.4
HIGHER
LOW
LOWER
LOWEST
LOWER
Two - Way with
Couplet West
of Argonne
B
13.8
SLIGHTLY
HIGHER
MEDIUM
HIGHER
MEDIUM -
HIGH
HIGHER
Two - Way
C
14.9
LOWER
HIGH
HIGHEST
HIGHEST
HIGHEST
Extended One -Way Couplet
EB
WB
4.4
4.0
Two -Way with Couplet west of Argonne
EB
WB
4.5
4.0
Two -Way
EB
WB
7.0
4.2
Travel Time Between Argonne d 1 -90
Difference of around 2.5 minutes - EB
Total Travel
Time (min)
Conclusions
Livable streets performance measures
Corridor LOS
Travel Times (min)
Vehicle Miles/
Distance
Traveled
Multimodal
Capacity
Bike /Ped
Access
Business Visibility
Today's Roads
D
22.8
N/A
MEDIUM
MEDIUM-
LOW
MEDIUM-
LOW
MEDIUM -
LOW
Extended One - Way
Couplet
B
13.4
HIGHER
LOW
LOWER
LOWEST
LOWER
Two - Way with
Couplet West
B
13.8
SLIGHTLY
HIGHER
MEDIUM
HIGHER
MEDIUM -
HIGH
HIGHER
Two - Way
C
14.9
LOWER
HIGH
HIGHEST
HIGHEST
HIGHEST
Recommendations
5
Complete Two -way Conversion of Appleway & Sprague
3 -lane, two -way
1. Helps to enable the City Center
2. Strengthens businesses along the corridor
3. Establishes a clear gateway to City and eliminates confusion related to one -
way system
4. Eliminates conflict points
5. Maintains a desirable level of service (LOS C)
6. Worth the additional 2 minutes of delay vs. the Hybrid Altemative.
Staging the Implementation
Stage 1 - $6,000,0000
Establish the Transportation Framework & Enable City Center
Slanes,ane.woy SPRAGUE.
5 lanes, two - way
7 !anes, two -way
I<
Iw Si 15
IS tc11
APPL.EWAY 4lanes, one -way ,; 3 lones, two
0
m
z
Convert Sprague to two -way between Argonne and University & Reduce Sprague from 7 to
5 lanes between Argonne & University.
Convert Appleway to a two -way street from Dishman -Mica to University.
Stage 2 - $14,300,000
Strengthen City Center & Extend the Network
Extend Appleway from University to Evergreen.
Convert Sprague to two -way between University and Evergreen.
Stage 3 - $6,600,000
Give the City Center an Address, Invest in Auto Row
1 1 I ; i_
Projects:
Convert Sprague to two -way between Argonne & 1 -90.
Convert Appleway to two -way Street from Thierman to Dishman -Mica.
Stage 3
Give the City Center an Address, Invest in Auto Row
Stage 3
Give the City Center an Address, Invest in Auto Row
Remove slip lane and allow eastbound traffic to continue on Sprague
Stage 3
Give the City Center an Address, Invest in Auto Row
Extend off -ramp to allow direct access to Sprague
Stage 3
Give the City Center an Address, Invest in Auto Row
Restore a 600' x 250' (3.5 acre) block to the street network
s laves two -way
31mse.swo•wey
lanes, two -way
5 lanes, two -way
lanes. !wo -L•ioy
1 -f—
SPRAGUE
I —�
<
0% I cr
1
APPLEWAY 4lams Iwo -way
Stage 4 - $12,900,000
Extend the Network and Continue to Invest in Sprague
1
Z
zt 1< I F; I
Si 15 • WI
1 - —
1 1
TOWN
CENTER
Projects:
Extend Appleway as a 3 lanes street to Sullivan
Reduce Sprague from 7 to 5 lanes between Evergreen and Sullivan.
Stage 5 — Beyond the Planning Horizon
Ensure Permanent Success
Ally corridor access lo 1 -90 from poth Sprague and Applew9y
1 E-- 1 -f- 1 1 -4--
Construct Roundabout to connect Appleway to Eastbound 1 -90 on- ramps.
SUM MARY OF IM PLEM ENTAIION STAGES
Stage 1
Stage 2
Srengt hen Qty Center & Extend the Network
Stage 3
Establish the Transportation Framework & Enable Qty Center
Cove the Qty Center an Address, Invest in Auto R w S 6600.000
Stage 4
Gve the Qty Center an Address, Invest in Auto Fbw
Stage 5
Extend the Network and Cont inue to Invest in Prague
PRaECT TOTALS
Traffic Fealignment and Sreet Ftconstruct ion
Fight - of - Way Defiaen
S 6.000,000
S 14.300,000
3 10,200,000
Not Included
S 37,100,000