2010, 03-23 Regular Meeting MinutesMINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
Formal Meeting Format
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the meeting.
Attendance:
City Staff
Tom Towey, Mayor
Mike Jackson, Acting City Manager
Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor
Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember
Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director
Dean Grafos, Councilmember
Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir.
Brenda Grasse], Councilmember
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Absent:
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Bob McCaslin, Councilmember
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
INVOCATION: In the absence of the pastor, Jack Dempsey gave the invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Towey led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all councilmembers were present except
Councilmember McCaslin. It was moved by Councilmember Grafos, seconded and unanimously agreed,
to excuse Councilmember McCaslin from tonight's meeting.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann, seconded and unanimously
agreed to approve the agenda.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS:
COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
Councilmember Gothmann: reported that he attended the Housing Community Development Advisory
Committee (HCDAC) meeting where they considered an appeal, and he said there have been no further
recommendations so the first recommendations will go forward to the Board of County Commissioners;
he attended the State of the County address given by Commissioner Richard; explained that the Spokane
Regional Health Department held an executive meeting; said that Dr. Larry Jecha of the Franklin Health
Department provided interim services for this area for the last two years and said his service was
appreciated and Councilmember Gothmann said he would be traveling to Kennewick in about a month to
make a presentation to express such appreciation to Dr. Jecha. Councilmember Gothmann also reported
he attended a Chamber of Commerce special breakfast which recognized the outstanding contributions
made by the Spokane Valley Foundation, including awarding numerous scholarships, and said that
Foundation is also working toward starting a community senior volunteer program; and lastly said he
attended today's jail tour.
Councilmember Dempsey_ said she attended today's jail tour; attended the County's State of the County
address; participated with Parks and Recreation Director Stone's presentation of Discovery Park to the
Sunrise Rotary club; attended a regional development workshop in Post Falls hosted by members from
the University of Idaho and Washington State University satellite offices regarding the protection of the
aquifer and development along the I -90 corridor; attended the Clean Air Agency annual retreat yesterday
Council Regular Meeting 3 -23 -2010 Page 1 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -13 -2010
where they discussed that it is not a good time to raise any fees and said they hope to continue funding the
car emissions test program for low income citizens.
Councilmember Grafos said he attended the STA (Spokane Transit Authority) board meeting and said
STA will be forced to reduce their service by about 2% in 2010 and perhaps about 7% for 2011 and 2012
and said they also had a presentation by Planning Director Karl Otterstom on the issue of the Milwaukee
right -of -way, and said Executive Director Susan Meyer was given authority to move forward and
negotiate the issue with Spokane County; said he attended the GMA (Growth Management Act) Steering
Committee where they discussed the time period for updating comp plans, and that the projected
population increase for Spokane Valley over the next twenty years is about 18,700.
Councilmember Grassel said she attended the Japanese Citizens luncheon; attended today's jail tour;
attended the Regional Sustainability Conference hosted by the University of Idaho and Washington State
University concerning the aquifer; and attended a Spokane River Forum at CenterPlace where they
discussed such issues as the Shoreline MasterPlan and the TMDL (total maximum daily load).
Councilmember Schimmels said he spent the week in Washington, D.C. visiting with our representatives
and senators; attended the SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) meeting and said they have
committed enough funds for the Sprague /Sullivan intersection project.
MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Towey said he went to Washington, D.C. and met with our delegates and
other mayors and discussed common challenges; prior to that trip he attended a Liberty Lake Kiwanis
presentation with Mike Stone concerning our Discovery Playground, and he mentioned the May 13 grand
opening ceremony; said that yesterday was the kick -off for the 2010 census and Mayor Verner has
challenged us to see which municipality can get the highest percentage of returned census, and he urged
everyone to return their census, adding that this is the first time Spokane Valley will be counted in a
census and that it is important to get the right count as billions of dollars of funding are allocated to cities
based on population; and said that he also attended today's jail tour.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited public comments; no comments were offered.
1. PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Amended 2010 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP ) — Steve
Worle
Mayor Towey opened the public hearing at 6:23 p.m. Public Works Director Kersten, standing in for Mr.
Worley, explained the proposed changes for the 2010 TIP as per his handout, and said that the Sprague
resurfacing project is proposed but not funded, that the Jobs Bill was passed about a week ago but the
details of that plan are not yet available, and said he is hopeful we can acquire some of those funds. Mr.
Kersten also mentioned the ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) of tying signals together with fiber so
that during peak hours, the traffic will flow smoothly without traffic having to stop at every light; and said
that the resolution to approve the amended 2010 TIP will come before council April 13. Mayor Towey
invited public comment; no comments were offered and Mayor Towey closed the public hearing at 6:30
p.m.
2. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any
member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered
separately.
a. Approval of the following claim vouchers:
VOUCHER LIST DATE
WNOUCHER NUMBERS:
TOTAL AMOUNT
3/04/2010
19721 - 19742
$103,471.78
3/04/2010
19743 —19766,301100022
$145,090.84
3/11/2010
19772 - 19788
$15,114.33
3/11/2010
3100 -3101, 3111, 19767 - 19771
$278,241.12
GRAND TOTAL
$541,918.07
Council Regular Meeting 3 -23 -2010 Page 2 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -13 -2010
b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending March 15, 2010: $255,642.50
c. Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Meeting with County Commissioners of March 8, 2010
It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent
agenda.
NEW BUSINESS
3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 10 -006 Amending Adult Entertainment Regulations — Cary Driskell
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and
seconded, to advance the ordinance to a second reading on a future agenda. Deputy City Attorney
Driskell went over the background of this proposal as per his attached Request for Council Action form,
said that adult retail activity is not defined in the new proposed Code because that is primarily a zoning
issue and said if these rules are adopted, it would apply to all existing and future adult entertainment
facilities. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Mr. Driskell also
mentioned that should Council wish to review it, the complete legislative record is held in the Clerk's
office. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed.• None. Abstentions: None. Motion
carried.
4. Motion Consideration: Place Consideration of the Subarea Plan (SARP) on the Annual Comprehensive
Plan Amendment Document — Mike Connelly
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to place the revision, amendment or repeal of
the SARP on the docket for annual Comprehensive Plan amendments to be considered in 2011. City
Attorney Connelly explained that this is one of the actions contemplated in a memorandum he presented a
few weeks ago regarding the process to amend or repeal the SARP and said that it complies with state law
regarding comprehensive plan amendments. Mayor Towey invited public comment.
Mike King, business address 9300 E Sprague said SARP is a plan for the future for Spokane Valley; that
it is a ten, twenty and thirty-year plan, a vision of the future to be made and amended along the way; he
said it is not a perfect plan but it is a plan, and since the SARP is a vision, questioned where we would be
thirty years from now without a plan. He asked council, what is their plan and vision, and asked if it is to
destroy what is already created; he said the plan needs to be amended not thrown out; and again
mentioned that he hasn't seen this council's plan. He asked Council not to destroy what hundreds of
citizens worked toward, but to continue to amend it now and in the future; and suggested as the Mayor
had previously suggested, creating a review committee, and again encouraged council to have a plan.
Phillip Rudy, 5647 N Fruithill, Dr. Rudy said he owns a business on Argonne and Broadway; he said the
last major developer prior to adoption of the SARP was a lock and storage on East Sprague; and said if
SARP was removed and we go back to the original allowances of what to put in, that we would be
allowing more lock and storage companies, and said he would hate to see that as the future of Spokane
Valley.
Dick Behm, 9405 E Sprague said he is disheartened with what council has done in the last three months;
that business owners' plans for remodeling have disappeared; that you can't build and locate on Sprague
now; that rents in the area are $8 to $10 a square foot and said that is not viable; that they've stopped
development and stopped progress just for the impression that SARP will go away; he said Council has
made embarrassing statements about what they plan to do and it has discouraged people up and down the
street; and said that the previously mentioned letters came from developers and real estate people and not
from people on Sprague, and were not from those businesses on the street that need council's support and
are not getting it.
Susan Scott, business 205 S Evergreen said she favors placing the revision, amendment or repeal of the
SARP plan on the 2011 docket for the comprehensive plan amendments; that the SARP meetings may
Council Regular Meeting 3 -23 -2010 Page 3 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -13 -2010
satisfy legal requirements but they failed in revealing the true purpose and details of the plan; said it is a
rezone of over 1,000 properties and affected property owners never received substantive notice that their
zoning was being changed; said under this plan, tremendous power is shifted to the subjective discretion
of the Community Development Director and recourse is available but expensive; said there were errors
and omissions in the deliberative process and never any consideration of how many existing businesses
and property owners would be negatively impacted when those buildings and signs were made
nonconforming; said the plan is a huge attack on private property rights; and said what started out as a
simple site for a city hall and city center, has mushroomed into an out of control extreme makeover of six
miles of privately owned valley corridor; that negotiations for a land purchase for city hall have been
terminated; the success of the city center was pegged on having two civic buildings at its center, and she
asked what is the practical point of even keeping this alive, and said there are better, more honest ways to
revitalize that respect private property rights and the existing investment on the corridor.
There were no other public comments. Attorney Connelly reminded everyone that this motion is to place
the matter on the agenda and not change the comprehensive plan or the uniform development code.
Councilmember Gothmann distributed copies of his "SARP Comp Plan Issues" paper and explained that
it refers to eight letters previously noted by Councilmember Grafos, which Mr. Gothmann said there are
only eight letters dealing with the SARP plan, and of those eight letters all are development regulation
issues and said none of those would satisfy the need for a comprehensive plan change; but said regarding
a comp plan amendment, he would like to address the issue of whether Apple:way should be in the
Comprehensive plan. Councilmember Grafos said the only way to deal with the problems of the plan is to
go through each parcel and make sure we are honest with all property owners, and said he would like a
map showing all the parcels included in SARP, to list the properties and what entitlements that could be
done prior to 2007, and then again with the adoption of SARP, and to include notations of when a
property is or became nonconforming, and to show the properties prior to 2007, and with the SARP
adoption. Councilmember Dempsey said she does not see this as a positive step for our city; that
businesses cannot plan and now it will be a year before anyone can start to do anything, whether it is
developing or starting a business. Deputy Mayor Schimmels suggested this would give us time to air out
these problems; there's a prescribed way on addressing these issues, that time is in our and the public's
favor; that the economic situation is probably causing more havoc then anything council could do at this
point, and said he would welcome anyone who comes in with a request for a permit; said that we can
solve most of those problems; and said he feels this is needed.
Councilmember Grassel said, and Attorney Connelly confirmed, that everything stays in place until
changed; and permits can be applied for under the existing plan and businesses can operate either
conforming or nonconforming; and Councilmember Dempsey questioned who would come in under these
rules when the rules could change. Councilmember Grafos said the rules have changed twice: in 2007
and 2009, and said the problem is people don't understand what they can do with their properties; and
said regarding the list previously mentioned, he said regarding issue of boat sales with the White Elephant
Boat Sales Business, that boat sales were permitted prior to the 2007 zone change. Councilmember
Gothmann countered that they were permitted within the development regulations which is not a comp
plan issue; and Councilmember Grafos said the business was built in 1974, adding that he just wrote the
earnest money for that building, and said that the zone in 1974 was B3 which allowed boat sales, RV
sales and other sales when that property was inherited from Spokane County in 2004; and he said it did
not become prohibited until 2007 when the prior council changed all the zoning in the city; and then
changed it again in 2009 and again downzoned those properties; and suggested again that Council
examine each parcel affected by the SARP. Councilmember Grassel said her plan for the community is to
review the comprehensive plan, the SARP plan, and get real community input, that from the beginning
there was not legitimate community input regarding what this City's future should look like; that she
talked to business owners along Sprague who told her they had numerous concerns about the direction the
city was going, and said she feels that is evident in that there are four new councilmembers; and said
Council Regular Meeting 3 -23 -2010 Page 4 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -13 -2010
unless you are a business owner, you can't feel the frustration and disenchantment with government and
the way the process was treated over the last three years; and said she wants the business owners back to
the table with a true plan involving the citizens and getting citizen support Vote by acclamation on the
motion to place the revision, amendment or repeal of the SARP on the docket for annual Comprehensive
Plan amendments to be considered in 2011: In favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and
Councilmembers Gothmann, Grafos, and Grassel. Opposed: Councilmember Dempsey. Abstentions:
None. Motion carried.
City Attorney Connelly said the next step is the SARP review, which will continue over the next six
months until Council sends it to the Planning Commission for consideration; that the more immediate
concern is review of the SARP zoning by reviewing each category one at a time to see if uses allowed or
disallowed were or are appropriate and to examine the conditions of what would be development
appropriate; he urged council to read Book I to see what limitations are there now, and reminded
everyone that changes cannot be inconsistent with Book I; he said staff and Council will go through each
zone by category and after legal analysis, determine if we can continue the way it is now or if a comp plan
change is needed; he said staff will answer questions about nonconforming and allowable versus
nonallowable uses, and include a map to show what is and what was appropriate; and can have a
summary for council's review of the economic data compiled to date and any new data council wants; and
he explained that after a few meetings dealing with those issues, council can then Make each zone one at a
time and discuss the specific uses. Community Development Director McClung said she wants to
generate ideas on how Council wants to proceed with the public process and of what kind of public
information does Council want staff to put out for each of the zoning districts; and stated that the normal
notification process would be newspaper notices, notice on our website, and use of staff's database of
hundreds of e-mail contacts that we have acquired over the last four years. Councilmember Grafos said he
wants to see how many and which parcels were /are affected by the SARP, that he understands there are
1300 parcels, and he suggests staff notify them by individual letter explaining that the zoning and
property entitlements and rights have been affected by city action, to include specific language in the
letter that we are talking about zoning and property rights, and this first phase would be to give them the
information and let them come in and comment; and he suggested having a meeting with property owners
and to include a banker, some appraisers to talk about how zoning affects values and how nonconforming
use affects value, and have insurance brokers included as well; and to inform the property owner whether
their property is currently nonconforming, and what is and is not allowed in that zone.
After discussion on the process, Mr. Jackson summarized that the first step would be to review with
Council the zoning changes that will not conflict with the comp plan, and said staff will come back with a
process on how to review that to make a decision on any comp plan changes needed for next spring; and
he asked Council to think about what council wants regarding public input, and which rapid changes or
long term changes are desired. Councilmember Grafos suggested that first, staff should identify those
changes on all parcels, to start with one zone prior to 2007, then compare that with after 2007 and
compare that with SARP changes; and to notify those property owners and discuss with them, then
determine what to do immediately. Mr. Connelly said we can have preliminary meetings for the general
issues, then go to specific zones and notify property owners zone by zone to discuss the mentioned issues.
Mr. Jackson said staff will work to provide a schedule and keep Council updated on the progress.
Councilmember Gothmann added that this needs to be market - driven, that Council needs to know what
the market is and what's happening and said it is important to get an update on that, as the focus of the
original plan was to satisfy what was happening on the market at the time. City Attorney Connelly said
the existing economic studies can be provided, and staff will work to put these issues together.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments.
Michael Poulin, 14819 E 4` Avenue: said he was concerned with the Sheriff's presentation last meeting
concerning a new jail; that he was never asked if he wanted a new jail and speculated if anyone had been
Council Regular Meeting 3 -23 -2010 Page 5 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -13 -2010
asked; said that most jurisdictions are emptying jails and prisons as fast as they can, but that somehow we
need a new jail just because the Sheriff's office stated it; said the cost to house an inmate is approximately
$110 a day; that diversionary programs have proven successful in reducing jail populations but that those
programs were cut in favor of programs which inflate jail populations; said he has had a difficult time
getting data from the Sheriff's Office on the percentage of prisoners which are nonviolent or victimless
crimes, and said it appears the Sheriff's Office just wants to talk about gangs, which talk generates fear
which generates impetus for a new jail; and he mentioned an upcoming ballot issue to legalize cannabis,
and he reminded everyone that the United States imprisons more than any other nation; and he suggested
people have the political courage needed to change the way we deal with those problems.
Jean Boyd, 151 S Adams Street also advocated for not having a new jail but for de- criminalizing
cannabis and other nonviolent and victimless crimes; said she feels we will see a large number of younger
voters at the November election; that a new jail is based on monetary factors and she mentioned that there
are over two million people incarcerated in this country, and said this area has an opportunity to be an
example of what is possible; that the American people are hurt by mandatory minimums, unfair drug laws
and prohibition in general and she mentioned the LEAP organization: Law Enforcement Against
Prohibition; said we have alternatives and she urged everyone to re -think this issue, stating that she feels
the rich and powerful are pushing this agenda forward; that it is an unhealthy environment as fear breads
more fear.
Mayor Towey called for a recess at 7:25 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:36 p.m.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
5. Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Plan Update — Suzanne Tresko, Russ Menke
Spokane Regional Solid Waste System Director Russ Menke, along with Recycling Coordinator Suzanne
Tresko gave an update on the final Spokane County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for
Council's future consideration to adopt via a resolution. Per their PowerPoint presentation, they explained
the history of the development of the system, explained that the waste management plan is required per
statute, discussed the plan sections and major recommendations, and the schedule; for adopting the plan,
and Mr. Menke encouraged Councilmembers to take a tour of the facility. Mr. Menke said the complete
plan is available on their website. Discussion included the idea of extending Spokane Valley's and
Liberty Lake's agreements which are now scheduled to expire the end of 2011; that interlocals with other
cities expire between 2014 and 2016, with mention by Mr. Menke that he is not in favor of that position.
Mr. Connelly said staff will continue to discuss this issue with council on the options, and that this will
come back as a resolution for council's future consideration, and h explained that further issues must be
resolved about waste disposal and whether to partner with the County, and to resolve the interlocal issue
before the current interlocal expires the end of 2011. Mr. Menke added that a resolution in terms of
adopting the plan will not bind the city as the City of Spokane Valley could always develop its own plan
any time. Mayor Towey said he will arrange for a tour and looks forward to seeing; the facility.
6. Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) Draft Interlocal — Neil Kersten/Mike Connelly
City Attorney Connelly explained that SRTC would like to amend the current interlocal, which was
agreed to in 2003; and explained that the legal basis for the organization and the specific proposed
changes are discussed in detail in his memorandum attached to this council packet. Mr. Connelly briefly
went over those proposed changes, and encouraged Council to let him know of any other desired changes.
Mr. Connelly said there are also sections of the interlocal where he seeks clarification, and will send out a
letter soon in that regard. Mr. Connelly said the prominent proposed changes where he seeks clarification
include classifying Spokane Valley as an "other member" to the agreement ( 44 of his memorandum),
and the basis for the change in the voting power of the County that requires any amendment be passed by
consent of the County and sixty percent of the cities and towns. Council had no objection to Mr.
Connelly sending the letter seeking clarification.
Council Regular Meeting 3 -23 -2010 Page 6 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -13 -2010
7. Advance A eg nda
Councilmember Grafos said he would like to start the process of advertising the city manager position,
and acknowledged that a meeting concerning that issue is set for this Friday. Councilmember Grafos also
said he would like to add to the agenda to authorize the City Manager to begin negotiation with Spokane
County involving the STA on the possible purchase of the Milwaukee right -of -way. Councilmember
Gothmann said a question for Council to consider is the rationale for purchasing that land, although he
realizes there are suggestions to use it for traffic relief, or would Council want to purchase it for economic
development and does Council want to get into that business, and said that Council needs to determine
what the need is, and how much to pay for it; and that the issue needs discussion. City Manager Jackson
said that is a good starting point for staff to arrange discussion with the County and STA and find out
what they are considering; then come back and report to council; and said he can contact the County and
the STA so they are aware of our interest. City Attorney Connelly added that use of this corridor as a
transportation corridor is defined by our comp plan now; and any change would require a comp plan
amendment. Councilmember Grassel also spoke of the Parks and Recreation Masterplan including the
Spokane River, and Mr. Jackson said staff will review the Park Master plan and comp plan and see what
mention there is of the river and river access.
Information Only: Department Monthly Reports, Refreshment Policy, and Taylor Cottages PUD were for
information only and were not reported or discussed.
Executive Session: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to
adjourn into Executive Session for approximately thirty minutes to discuss pending litigation, and that no
action is anticipated upon return. Council adjourned into executive session at 8:20 p.m. At
approximately 8:55 p.m., Mayor Towey declared council out of Executive Session, and it was moved,
seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m..
Council Regular Meeting 3 -23 -2010 Page 7 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -13 -2010
SIGN -IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: March 23, 2010
GENERAL CITIZEN COMMENTS
'OUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTE
Please sign in if you wish to make Dublic comments.
NAME
PLEASE PRINT
TOPIC OF CONCERN
YOU WILL SPEAK
ABOUT
YOUR COMPLETE
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
He
SIGN -IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: March 23, 2010
GENERAL CITIZEN COMM - E
'OUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE ]
Please sign in if ou wish to make public comments.
NAME
PLEASE PRINT
TOPIC OF CONCERN
YOU WILL SPEAK
ABOUT
Y_ OUR COMPLETE
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
vu
Far
My name is Susan Scott - 205 S. Evergreen Rd.
I am here to night to speak in favor of placing the revision, amendment: or repeal of the
Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan on the 2011 docket for Comprehensive Plan
amendments.
While the impressive list of SARP meetings and workshops may satisfy some legal
requirement, they failed miserably in revealing the true purpose and critical details of the
plan.
The plan, vigorously marketed as "revitalization" was in fact a stealth .rezone of over
1,000 properties. Affected property owners NEVER received substantive notice that
their zoning was being changed.
Another unpublicized goal of the SARP was the incremental introduction of "form based
coding" into Spokane Valley. The adoption of the subarea plan on the corridor, would
provide the toehold needed to introduce form based coding, to the rest of the properties in
the city. Under this new model, a tremendous amount power is shifted, to the subjective
discretion of the Community Development Director or their designee. Recourse is
available but expensive.
Form based coding puts the municipal muscle of the planning department on steroids.
In my opinion, in spite of the countless hours invested, there were some glaring errors
and omissions in the deliberative process leading up to the adoption of the SARP. There
was NEVER any consideration of how many existing businesses, and property owners
would be negatively impacted when their uses, buildings and signs were made non-
conforming by the new zoning and regulations in the SARP.
This plan is a huge attack on private property rights, and its implementation on the
corridor does far more to damage the economic viability of existing commerce and
property values, than any perceived impact based on the direction of traffic.
What started out as a simple 8 - 20 acre site for a city hall and city center, mushroomed
into an out of control extreme makeover of six miles of privately owned valley corridor.
The wheels have been coming off this plan since the library bond failed. Negotiations for
a land purchase for city hall have been terminated. The success of the city center was
pegged on having two civic buildings at its center. What is the practical point of even
keeping this boondoggle alive?
There are better, more honest ways to "revitalize" that respect private property rights and
the existing investment on the corridor.
Thank you.
SARP Comp Plan Issues ??
In response to 17 letters presented by CM Dean Grafos, Community Development Director
McClung noted that eight (1 -8 below) had concerns over SARP, two (9 -10) involved industrial
uses in commercial zones, and the remaining (11 -17) had various concerns. Examining the
SARP issue letters:
1. Orville Barnes objected to siting to the street. He could give no details, but had heard from
someone else that siting for one project was disapproved. Response: changes can be made if
Council wishes. DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ISSUE
2. and 3. Pring Corporation (Brad Pring and Kirk Owsley), objected to temporary City Center
restrictions limiting core development. No projects have been affected. Response: If Council
is not moving forward on a city center, this part of the Plan can be removed. DEVELOPMENT
REGULATION ISSUE
4. Marshall Clark wanted a bank at Bowdish and Sprague, but such a use was disallowed.
Property is now used for a residence and a convenience store. Response: Council can make
changes if they wish. Also, a similar bank plan was proposed in 2008, but the site was too
small. DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ISSUE
5. Hite Crane wanted to relocated to 7102 and 7202 Sprague. Response: This is a
commercial zone and such uses would be incompatible with such a zone, as expressed by car
dealers. DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ISSUE
6. Boat Sales not permitted at 12606 E. Sprague. Response_ Such use was not approved by
the City and no further comment can be made since it is under appeal. DE VELOPMENT
REGULATION ISSUE
7. Three Sign companies had sign issues. Response: Such issues are expected when new
regulations are adopted. Council can make changes. DEVELOPMENT REGULATION ISSUE
8. "Do Not Occupy" sign at 9126 E. Sprague. Response: Posted by the fire marshal since it
appeared a vacant building with inadequate egress was being occupied. D EVELOPMENT
REGULATION ISSUE
Bill Gothmann
3 -23 -10