2010, 10-26 Regular Meeting Minutes
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
Formal Meeting Format
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Attendance: City Staff
Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager
Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, Acting City Attorney
Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Dean Grafos, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir.
Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief
Bob McCaslin, Councilmember Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner
Lori Barlow, Associate Planner
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
INVOCATION: Pastor Al Hulten of Valley Assembly Church 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.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously
agreed to approve the agenda.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a
COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
Councilmember Gothmann: said he attended an SVBA (Spokane Valley Business Association) Meeting;
a Carrington College Ceremony to celebrate their name change; went to the AWC (Association of
Washington Cities) Spokane Legislative meeting; a Chamber breakfast meeting where they heard about
the pros and cons of the ballot initiatives; a Spokane Regional Health Department Executive Committee
Meeting, and said that the ABCD Program (Access to Baby and Child Dentistry) has received national
recognition for its impact in confronting dental disease among medicade-insured children under six; went
to the fifth year/open house at CenterPlace; attended a 9-1-1- Board Meeting where they continue to work
with Motorola to develop the radio system around the county which will service all the first responders;
and said he went to the Housing Community Development Advisory Committee Meeting, which group is
responsible for distribution of HUD (Housing and Urban Development) grants, and CDBG funding
(Community Development Block Grant). Councilmember Gothmann said Spokane Valley has three
members on that 18-member committee, and he explained some of the uses and purposes of those funds;
he said on infrastructure grants, there was previously decided to set aside 20% of funds for Spokane
Valley projects; and said an upcoming decision will be Whether Spokane Valley will be its own
entitlement area or continue with the County, and said he recommends staying with the current system
through the County, and he said that 20% set-aside will likely soon be re-evaluated.
Councilmember Dempsey: said she also attended the SVBA meeting; the CenterPlace Open House; and
said the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency will soon have its bi-annual audit and she attended their
opening business for the audit, and said there was a change in the program that the treasurer was using but
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 1 of 10
Approved by Council: 11-09-2010
otherwise, nothing extraordinary is coming up; said she also attended a Wastewater Advisory Committee
meeting, and said decisions will be upcoming regarding the stormwater rates, and discussion on how to
keep those rates low; said she met with Joe Tortorelli concerning the TBD (Transportation Benefit
District) option that the County is working to form, which would likely raise the car tab fees, and said that
this Council has decided not to do anything in that regard without a vote from the citizens, and said that
Mr. Tortorelli said that the municipalities working regionally on this issue could accomplish more
together than individually.
Councilmember Grafos: said he went to the Growth Management Board meeting; the STA (Spokane
Transit Authority) Board meeting where they presented their 2011 budget and their projected cuts of three
to seven percent through 2015, and said his priority would be to minimize the impact of these cuts to the
Spokane Valley citizens; and he attended the fifth year anniversary celebration at CenterPlace.
Deput~/ Mayor Schimmels: reported that he went to the AWC Regional meeting; and went to a HUB
meeting with the Freight Mobility Board; went to a Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC)
Board meeting; participated in a Solid Waste Advisory workshop last week, and said that Spokane
County has put out an interlocal about the governance issue at the Waste-to-Energy Plant.
Councilmember Grassel: said she went to the AWC Regional meeting; the GMA meeting to hear an
update on the process of the Growth Management meeting through the planners; said she chaired the
Lodging Tax Advisory Committee regarding the funds which come to the city through lodging taxes, and
that she will be brining a report and recommendation to council on funding disbursing during an
upcoming December council meeting; and reported that she went to the CenterPlace open house.
Councilmember McCaslin: no report.
MAYOR'S REPORT: reported that he attended the AWC Conference here in Spokane; went to
"HireAbility Day" where the community honored businesses hiring employees with disabilities; that he
was invited by the Washington State Attorney General to listen to a presentation regarding gang and
gang-related activities; and that he went to the Fifth Anniversary Celebration at CenterPlace.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments.
Chris Wetherell, 7712 E Utah Avenue: said he's looking out for the safety and health of the community;
that he has been plagued with train horn noise, and said people are tired of the noise; said that Union
Pacific Railroad is breaking the law and he asked whose responsibility is it to enforce these rules; said
that Union Pacific has been caught sitting for hours at a time, although they disagree; he said the trains
block intersections to homes making kids cross in an unsafe manner; he asked why we don't have
improved safety measures that are at other crossings; said last January he started a petition for the
establishment of quiet zones and got 172 signatures; and said if nothing else happens, they need
alternative safety measures; that the newspaper previously reported that Park Road got a grant to build a
median so cars wouldn't go around it and said he is curious what happened to that situation.
Mike Dixon, 2805 N Ella Road: said he lives in the West Valley School District just outside Millwood;
said years ago he didn't have an issue with railroad tracks with the Union Pacific; that the railroad
companies were cautious and slow in the past, but during the last five years there has been a significant
increase in the noise, including train horns at 3:00 a.m. with them holding down the horns from Millwood
to the Police Academy; he said it wakes up everyone, and during the day while kids are playing on the
playground, they have to hold their ears when the train goes by; he said he asked them why they hold the
horn down and the response was they thought it was funny; he said he witnessed on at least two occasions
where emergency vehicles were not able to get through, and he asked Council to consider the quiet zones.
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 2 of 10
Approved by Council: 11-09-2010
Erick Erickson, 1111 N Bowdish; said he works for the railroad and they hold the horns down not
because they want to, but federal law says they have to hold the horn for 22 seconds; he said he's losing
some of his hearing; said the other day he turned in an STA bus that went in front of him while he had the
lights going; he said federal law dictates how to honk the horn. He said he's not trying to upset people,
but if he doesn't do it, he could lose his job. He also mentioned there are "blue signs" on all crossings
giving information about how to contact someone regarding the railroad.
Mike Dixon, 2805 N Ella Road: said he agrees that this is the law; but said there is a difference between
holding the horn down from Millwood to the police academy versus the short blasts required by law; said
he doesn't see this happening during the day but more during the night.
Chris Wetherell, 7712 E Utah: said the law is to blow the horn twenty seconds before the intersection; but
with the establishment of quiet zones, it would make the intersection safer so they would not be required
to born the horn; and said whatever the City did with the previously established quiet zones, he would like
that done in this case as well.
Wayne Harlow, 8115 E. Euclid: said noise is a factor as when they blow the horn they blast it and the
houses shake and said if there is any way to make the area a quite zone, it would be greatly appreciated.
Mark Bohn, 7720 Utah: said he lives between Park and Vista and that the train traffic has increased quite
a bit in the last two years making it almost ridiculous now to live there; said the trains are longer, and
louder and when they vent out their brakes "it'll blow your eardrums out," and he said pictures on the
walls in his house shake; and that the train was left running outside his house for twelve hours.
Henry Valder, homeless: said he wanted to speak regarding the panhandling ordinance; said he has a copy
of a brief from the Center for Law and Justice; said an officer spoke to him about panhandling and asked
him for his discharge papers; said he feels those questions are not relevant and are of a personal nature;
said the officer kept his hand on his taser the entire time he was speaking with him; said the officer told
him he'd go to jail if he stayed out there; said you'll be seeing him on Pines and another spot and said he
would like the opportunity to address this to a judge and state attorney if he goes to jail.
Mike, homeless: said he agrees with what the previous speaker just said; that the intent is not to put
homeless people in jail; and he would come back and talk more to council one-on-one to give them a
special invitation to a fundraiser for the area homeless.
John Howard, 11616 East Jackson. regarding the roundabout on Mansfield and Montgomery and Wilbur,
he said that this is very unsafe; that no one yields and drivers are crossing through the center; he'd like it
taken away and have a four-way stop installed.
Jan Eastman, 11608 East Jackson: voiced her concerns about the above-mentioned round-about; said kids
play on it in the middle of the night and they have to call the police to remove the kids; said on the way
here tonight two cars in front of her failed to yield; she said is it not safe and she would like it removed.
John Howard, 11717 East Jackson: wanted council to know that it was he who turned in the petition to do
away with the roundabout.
1. 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.
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 3 of 10
Approved by Council: 11-09-2010
a. Approval of the following claim vouchers:
VOUCHER LIST DATE WNOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT
10-07-2010 3317, 3318, 3320, 3321, 3333, 21151, $220,621.57
21169-21173
10-08-2010 21174-21215; 93010029, 1005100018 $1,911,777.66
10-08-2010 21216-21217 $160.00
10-08-2010 21218-21249 $71,980.66
10-13-2010 21250-21278 $144,867.33
10-13-2010 21279 $75.00
10-15-2010 21280-21301 $76,739.66
10-18-2010 3335-3338 $56,089.09
GRAND TOTAL $2,482,310.97
b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending October 15, 2010: $246,432.32
c. Approval of City Council Formal Format Meeting Minutes of October 12, 2010
d. Approval of City Council Study Session Format Meeting Minutes of October 19, 2010
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent
agenda.
NEW BUSINESS:
2 Motion Consideration: Elimination of Subarea Plan as part of Comprehensive Plan Process - Kathy
McClung
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to pursue option #1 in the form of a
recommended option to the Planning Commission which will eliminate SARP from the Comprehensive
Plan. [Note: Option #1 is "Revoke the SARP and go back to the 2007 pre-SARP zoning."] Community
Development Director McClung explained that last month Council discussed a range of options on how to
handle the comprehensive plan, and the options ranged from eliminating the SARP plan to doing nothing;
and after discussion at that previous council meeting, the majority of council preferred pursuing option
#1. Director McClung said this is not the final decision, but is a kick-off for looking at the SARP when
we look at the comp plan update and that it gives staff a place to start; or she said staff could be working
for the next eighteen months and still not be where council prefers. Director McClung explained that this
is just the beginning of the public process; that the comprehensive plan deadline is November 1 so this
will be the last time before that deadline for items, although she said that the full SARP plan is already on
the docket. Director McClung said that one item not discussed previously but was raised by Public Works
in previous discussions concerns the extension of Appleway and how the removal of the SARP could
potentially influence the environmental assessment for the extension of Appleway; and said that Public
Works Engineer Worley is available for any questions. There were no questions from council and Mayor
Towey invited public comment, and asked those making comments to try to keep their remarks to three
minutes.
Dennis Johnson, 4149 S Sundown Drive: said she has lived here since 1950; that there have been lots of
changes and most not positive and said he is starting to feel the same way about incorporation; that he
voted for the present council based on their campaign to get rid of SARP.
Rich Munson 12404 E 27`" Avenue: said he thinks it is appalling that Council is not doing anything to
replace SARP; he questioned if perhaps Council was being asked to do this to appease a special interest
group; or if it is too much work, to consider resigning; said council needs to invest in the City's future,
with this plan or another option.
Barbara Rogers, 18 N Oliver Road: said traffic has been increasing and now they have to stop at every
light; said she wants the road to stay the way it is.
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 4 of 10
Approved by Council: 11 -09-20 10
Dick Behm, 9405 E Sprague Avenue: he read from his prepared statement and explained he was speaking
for himself and his family; that he feels this Council is acting irresponsibly if they get rid of SARP; he
said hasty decisions have unintended consequences; and that it is obvious some councilmembers don't do
their homework or read the packet material before the meeting; he said making snap decisions to please
one person is not acceptable, and said the City needs a plan.
Chuck Hafner, 2417 S Sunnybrook Lane: said he received an e-mail that said the City was doomed; said
he doesn't like scare tactics; that we have to work together; that he is not for continuing SARP; that five
councilmembers were elected to eliminate SARP; and that he wants to make sure we are financially sound
and then move forward.
Carla Kaley, 10516 E Main Avenue: said she'd like to help council focus more as it seems we're off
track and myopic and thinking way too small; that we have to have patience with change, and need to
stick with something long enough to have it pay off, said she believes if we don't carry this out this City
won't make it.
Carlos Landa, 12019 E Sprague: said he developed one of the first shopping centers; said he won't take
his money and run but he re-built his shopping center; that his building is now about 80% vacant and the
couplet didn't do anything to improve it; he said that SARP might, but if Council eliminates that with no
future and no planning, we'd still be looking at vacancies and it might even create urban blight if nothing
is done.
Todd Whipple, Whipple Consulting Encei : said he supports the motion to send SARP back to the
Planning Commission; that hundreds of people participated in the plan but many complained about SARP
and were told throughout the process that they didn't understand; he said SARP has over 1,000 properties
and 7.5 miles is too great of an issue for a plan of that scope; said he doesn't believe any other city ever
tried a plan with such a large scope.
Steve Neill, 10820 E 18`x' Avenue: said a decision was made last November when the former
councilmembers were voted out; and said the special interest group is the group of people who voted
those other guys out; and he said he is asking council to end it.
Shana Reynolds, 4921 N Lucille Road: said she feels it is not appropriate to continue with SARP; said
nothing is wasted if we learned from it; but said she can't open a business the way things are now and that
the plan doesn't encourage new businesses, especially from young people; and said meeting the
conditions of the SARP is almost impossible.
Mark Henderson, Pool World, 13524 E Sprague: said he supports ending SARP; said the plan split his
property into two zones and jeopardized his ability to get adequate financing on building purchase or
expanding the value of his property; he suggested we start small with U-City area and do SARP at the
city center and show everyone what it will look like, and if it is so great, others will want to follow.
Mike Dixon, 2805 N Ella Road: said the couplet killed the businesses and has created an eyesore; said
maybe it is easier now to get to the freeway but that's all it's used for; said SARP and the couplet need to
be resolved; that the first priority is to preserve businesses, and the second is travel to the freeway; and he
asked council to do their homework and make sure making they are making the right decisions.
Dwight Hume, 9101 N Mountain View Lane, Spokane: said he supports the recommendation to have
SARP re-visited and to pull it from the citywide plan and from ongoing debate.
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 5 of 10
Approved by Council: 11-09-2010
Robert Olson H & H Molds, 119 S Adams: said he favors going with option #1; said they have fire
codes, building codes, federal regulations from DOE, EPA, etc. and choosing option 1 would really help;
said that some businesses that complained the most were zoned out of it; he asked what does the city want
to do; said it is a business environment and not a walking environment; and that Council shouldn't make
special deals for one party and not the other; and he suggested council set the direction of where they
want to go and don't make it look like a Portland.
Phillip Rudy, 5647 N Ella with business at 720 N Argonne: said he wants it returned to two-ways; said
businesses that developed there came because of the advantages of being on a couplet.
Steve Wineinger, 10021 E Knox, with Pro-Sign: voiced his support of the motion to put SARP back on
the table for discussion; said he was part of forming this city and that he contributed money and time and
sat in on the original planning and zoning committee; said when SARP was first addressed, he put his
concerns into writing about how it would play out and said his worst fears have been unfolding; said he
doesn't understand why we would hire someone from California to tell us how to live.
Mayor Towey called for a short recess at 8: 00 p. m., and reconvened the meeting at 8:15 p. m.
Milt Neumann, 903 S Blake Road: said he and his wife Alice are the founders of A-Z rentals; that they
own several store locations; that he is concerned that council is considering killing this; he said study after
study shows this should be two-way; said they can take Appleway separately; but Sprague is not
pedestrian friendly; that he likes this area but it seems the atmosphere in Idaho is a little better; said he
doesn't want to move as this is his home; and asked Council not to kill SARP unless have an absolutely
alternate plan that makes sense.
Grant Rodkey, 424 S Sullivan Road: said he doesn't like SARP plan; said if businesses want to expand
they'll have to spend money; that Council should not force their views on others; that councilmembers
were sworn to uphold the rights of property owners; that the marketplace should determine the survival of
a business instead of an edict from an oligarchy.
Dennis Johnson, 4149 S Sundown Drive: said Sprague has been fading but the couplet didn't kill it; said
the University Mall was fading before the Valley Mall was ever developed; said Tidyman's is closing
because they couldn't come to agreement with their landlord; he suggested Council try to attract some
small niche-type manufacturing business.
Mike King 9300 E Sprague, commercial realtor: said if SARP is killed, Council needs to have some kind
of a plan; said he's asking council to come up with a plan to re-develop Sprague Avenue; that he
conducted a survey this spring and the number of years of vacancies between University and Argonne are
184 years of accumulated vacancies in just that small stretch; said one-way kills small businesses which is
the lifeblood of a community; and he asked council to put a plan together and create something and look
to the future.
Susan Scott, 205 S Evergreen Road: in reading her statement, said the final SARP public hearings drew
overwhelming public opposition but the prior Council ignored it, so the citizens voted them out; pursuing
a city center she said is moving into hallucination territory; that SARP is responsible for non-conformity
on numerous business owners and she urged the elimination of SARP.
Dan Geiger, native of Spokane and owns property in the Valley: said he painfully read the SARP; the
parts that affect private property rights is ridiculous; and said he feels it is not a bad thing if we have to
throw away the $1.2 million already spent on this.
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 6 of 10
Approved by Council: 11-09-2010
Barry Curry, 8022 E Sprague Avenue: stated that forty different uses were taken away suddenly with
SARP and that SARP is very restrictive on property rights.
Laura Durkey, 10917 E 17`x' Avenue: said if you can't use your own property as you see fit, then you
don't own that property in the fullest sense, and said that SARP should go.
Jean Repp, 3120 S Raymond Circle: said her property was re-zoned down to B1; that she fought to get B2
restored; that she has a small choice of what she can do on her own property; she urged Council to vote
against this plan and give back the rights of property owners on property they paid for.
James Magnuson: (City Clerk Bainbridge read his letter into record); stated he writes on behalf of
University City, Inc., and lie urged repeal of SARP and to restore the pre-plan zoning.
There were no further public comments.
Councilmember Gothmann said that regarding a comment of Mr. Hafner, that there was an agreement
with Mr. Magnuson, but it was an agreement not to purchase but to continue to negotiate and that
agreement was signed; he said several have said we need to run a city like a business but said we can't
run a city like a business so that when a recession comes we shut it down, as the city has to continually
provide services; he said he also heard we don't want high-density businesses, and said to him, that is
equivalent to saying we don't want high density businesses like Millwood or Coeur d'Alene or anyplace
else around here has; he said he feels we can support high density businesses in a city center; he said
many speakers have assumed that SARP is a one or two-way solution or curse; we said whether SARP is
repealed or not, it does not take care of the one-way/two way question; said in hindsight, he feels council
tried to develop a plan for the entire corridor instead of doing it one segment at a time; in said the part of
Sprague that still has the most vibrant businesses is the part between 1-90 and University; said it is a fact
that small businesses prefer two-way streets; he said nonconformity will continue to exist with or without
SARP; said he thinks we need a plan and objects to the motion because it does not address the surplus of
retail uses in the City, it doesn't address the appearance of the corridor, that it may deter some retailers,
there is no requirement for aesthetic improvement, and that we may have to repay $300,000 because we
would not complete the environmental assessment; and said if we don't have SARP, we need another
plan.
Councilmember McCaslin said the alternative plan is called private enterprises system; and that it is the
private sector driven by the profit motive, and that government should step out of the way of the
investors; and that government continually gets involved in the private sector creating hurdles for the
private investment; and said Sprague will continue to die as long as there are sixteen different zones.
Councilmember Grafos said a simple solution to the one way/two way is to put it on the ballot and let
taxpayers decide; regarding traffic, he said when Spokane County created that couplet there were about
28,000 cars a day traveling that stretch, and now there's about 42,000 cars, and said if you like the
congestion and the delays before the completion of the couplet in 2000, then people will really love it in
2011.
Councilmember Dempsey said there were 23,000 cars before but that was on one road, and now there are
two roads and said we don't have the congestion referred to; said she was initially not fond of SARP as
she felt it went too far; that she was in favor of a city center and thought U-City was the best spot; then
when SARP came out she said she was shocked, but said the plan passed and it was in effect for six
weeks when the new council came on board; and said that's all the time the plan had to work when it was
starting to be dismantled; she said this is a plan we can work with and it can be altered, and there have
already been a number of changes; and stressed that we need a plan.
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 7 of 10
Approved by Council: 11-09-2010
At 9:00 p.m., it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the
meeting for one hour.
Councilmember Grassel said she feels SARP might have had good intentions, but it has created
unnecessary dissention and it defies common sense; said she feels it was great to have taken this year to
review the comp plan and invite business and property owners to come review it, and said that many of
those owners told her they had no idea of the number of sub-categories they would have to adhere to; and
said she finds it interesting that members of this council who have spoken against this plan, have no
concept of running a business; that they have never taken money out of their life savings to open a
business or ever spent time running a business, or signing the front of a paycheck or not taking a pay
check so you can pay your employees; and as policy makers she said she finds it appalling that this plan
went through without understanding the consequences that were being directed to business owners; and
said as council goes through this process, she hopes a number of ideas will be developed; and said that
85% of people told her that they went to those previous meetings and were basically shut down as the
plan was in place and there was no opportunity for members of the public to invest their ideas.
Deputy Mayor Schimmels said he has had conflicts with this plan for the last one and a half years; that he
didn't vote for it; that he could see somewhat of the stance that we may be in today and said we are there
deep; said you can't treat business as council tried to treat them and succeed; said he feels we tried to do
too much too soon; that regarding the couplet, said he has always said leave Sprague alone but would
never offer to spend any of our city money on anything west of Argonne/Mullan; that he thinks there is a
natural intersection there for the one-way in all directions; that it was the original county plan and said he
feels it should stay that way; said Council does have a plan and the number one thing is to reverse SARP;
and said the bottom line is to enable business to survive in the valley.
Mayor Towey said that SARP has been around for quite a while and lots of discussion held on its pros
and cons; that his concern is the health of the small business, not twenty years from now but right now;
and asked if council is putting road blocks in front of those businesses that wake up every morning and go
to work and "pound it out every day." Mayor Towey asked if we are putting obstacles in front of them or
encouraging them to make a profit. He said he started as a candidate a year ago February and made his
view known that he intended to end the SARP, and said he is going to honor all those who voted for him
and that he will vote for the process to begin regarding repealing SARP. At the request of Councilmember
McCaslin, City Clerk did a roll call vote: In Favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and
Councilmembers McCaslin, Grassel, and Grafos. Opposed: Councilmembers Gothmann and Dempsey.
Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
3 Motion Consideration: Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment for City Center Zone - Kathy
McClung
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to refer an amendment of the Comprehensive
Plan to the Planning Commission for consideration to delete all provisions of the Subarea Plan, Book
One, that relate to the City Center designation as well as an amendment of the Uniform Development
Code to delete all provisions of the Subarea Plan, Books Two and Three, that relate to the City Center
District Zone, and to re-designate the properties affected, as Mixed Use Corridor in the Comprehensive
Plan (book One) and the Uniform Development Code (Book Two), and to amend the Comprehensive Plan
Map and Official Zoning Map to reflect the same. This motion is made on an emergency basis pursuant
to RCW 36 70A. 130(2). Attorney Connelly said that this is the motion to begin the public process to
consider an emergency amendment to amend the comp plan and the Uniform Development Code to
repeal the city center designation in its entirety and replace it with a mixed use zone; he said this is
brought forward separately as an emergency plan, because it would have become effective, if the process
was completed, sometime around the end of the year as opposed to being a part of the annual
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 8 of 10
Approved by Council: 11-09-2010
comprehensive plan changes that will become effective some time in the spring of next year when the
annual comp plan process is complete. Mr. Connelly said the council packet material lists the state
regulatory statutes dealing with this issue, as well as a previous memorandum he supplied about a month
ago outlining the legal basis for this approach. If this process goes to the Planning Commission and
comes back to Council, he said, the findings in an ordinance will be based in large part on the record that
is being developed; and said a number of findings that could be included are also listed in the council
packet materials, and gave as an example the revenue forecasts that we anticipated a few years ago will
not be realized, that sales and property tax will be significantly lower; and that there doesn't appear to be
funds for significant development at this time, and that the assumed public contributions to a city center,
i.e. a City Hall, infrastructure improvements, and other public buildings that were going to form the
catalyst for this downtown center, are not happening and are not included in the 2011 budget; and what's
left are the restrictions without the benefits, which in some opinions creates an economic hardship and
could create an emergency if that is council's choice. Mr. Connelly said his materials identify exactly
what would have to change, what would have to be removed from the comp plan and from the
development code so the Planning Commission can examine the specific language and make a decision
for a recommendation to Council; and said council's options are not to take this action and deal with city
center as part of the overall review, which is probably the safety option in terms of potential challenges;
or approve this motion which would send the matter to the Planning Commission on a fast track to then
be returned to Council with the Commission's recommendation for final consideration; and he said the
emergency provisions of the comp plan have been used by several communities in circumstances similar
to that which is before council tonight, but they have not been tested, so there is no court of record case,
and said it is always a bit of a question without that court guidance. Mayor Towey invited public
comment; no comments were offered. Councilmembers Dempsey and Gothmann said they object to this
process being called an emergency, and each said they would vote against the motion. Vote by Roll Call:
In Favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and Councilmembers McCaslin, Grassel, and Grafos.
Opposed.- Councilmembers Gothmann and Dempsey. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
4. Motion Consideration: Legislative Agenda - Mike Jackson
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to adopt the 2011 Legislative Agenda. City
Manager Jackson mentioned that the items were re-ordered to reflect budget and policy requests, and he
briefly went over the titles and issues, after which Mayor Towey invited public comment. No comments
were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and
Councilmembers Grafos, Gothmann, Dempsey and Grassel. Opposed: Councilmember McCaslin.
Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments. Grant Rodkey, 424 S Sullivan
Road: regarding law enforcement, he said it is becoming evident we have a problem developing with
"light fingers on triggers." He said apparently the Creach family has hired investigators; mentioned an
article he read about "sour grapes" and the increase of $3 million for law enforcement; and asked with the
recent shootings should some of this be funneled to use tasers instead of live bullets where the officer's
life is not threatened; said regarding a question of if we need more law enforcement in the valley, said
every time he turns around he sees officers; and said he is concerned with them "serving and protecting"
or "shooting and intimidating." Deputy Mayor Schimmels mentioned that the $3 million dollar figure is
very bogus and not the case with our budget.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:
5. Planning Commission Work Program - Kathy McClung
Community Development Director McClung said that Council had asked for a schedule of items which
had been discussed for the past weeks, and said that schedule is included in the council packet materials;
she said she prioritized them as she thought Council wanted; said the two scheduled November planning
commission meetings fall on holidays but the Commission has agreed to hold a special meeting
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 9 of 10
Approved by Council: 11-09-2010
November 18; she said the code amendment which has already gone to the Planning Commission will
come to Council in November; then the emergency comprehensive plan amendment begins, which goes
to the Planning Commission November 18, with a December 9 public hearing, and assuming that ends in
one meeting, it would come to Council in January; she said the chicken code amendments is noted to go
to the Commission in January and Council in February; then we would move to the big comprehensive
plan amendment, and assuming the Commission finishes it in one or two settings, it should come to
Council in March or April; and she said regarding the remaining code amendments, which are minor, by
the time we get them to the Planning Commission, will come after the comprehensive plan amendment,
and said she recommends we hold off on those and get the other items done; and she asked for comments
from Council about switching the rest of the Sprague Appleway code amendments with the chicken code
amendments, or any other suggested changes. Councilmember Dempsey said she feels the chicken code
amendment should be done before spring. Councilmember Grafos said he has no objection to leaving that
chicken code amendment as scheduled; and there were no other council comments or suggestions.
6. Easement Extinguishment Request - Cary Driskell
Acting City Attorney Driskell explained that prior to incorporation, Spokane County obtained a right-of-
way easement across property that was to be developed as the Healing Lodge of the Seven Nations, a
youth alcohol and drug treatment facility just east of McKinnon Road; that the city inherited this
easement upon incorporation, which easement was intended to provide access to property further south,
which is no longer needed as that access is provided by the subsequent construction of East 14`" Avenue;
and said that the United States Department of Health and Human Services has requested this
extinguishment and our public works department has determined that the right-of-way easement is not
needed and agrees the extinguishment is appropriate; and therefore, if there are no council objections, Mr.
Driskell asked that we place a resolution on an upcoming agenda to extinguish the agreement and
easement. There were no objections from council.
7. Overview of Lodging Tax Process - Ken Thompson
Finance Director Thompson briefly explained the process for disbursing lodging tax grant funds and that
each year the City puts out a call for proposals to use local lodging tax receipts to promote tourism, and
he referenced state law and our Municipal Code; and said applications for next year's funding have
already been presented to the committee and this matter is scheduled to come before Council later this
year.
8. Advance Agenda
Councilmember Gothmann suggested putting the quiet zone issue on an upcoming agenda; and there were
no council objections.
INFORMATION ONLY: The following items were for information only and were not reported on or
discussed: 9) Department Reports; 10) Railroad Quiet Zones; I1) Spokane County Library District Third
Quarter Report; 12) 2011 Budget Message.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimous.agreed to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
/d
ATTES / Thomas E. Towey, Mayor
1ko
hristine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Regular Meeting 10-26-2010 Page 10 of 10
Approved by Council: 11 -09-20 10
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
SIGN-IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: October 26, 2010
GENERAL CITIZEN COMMENTS
YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTE
Please sign in if you wish to make public comments.
NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOUR COMPLETE TELEPHONE
PLEASE PRINT YOU WILL SPEAK ADDRESS
ABOUT
fwv r4 .v 0011, 9 A0 -4-k y
I A t t~r~ J -o C
fZCJ /s7h r. r7Z'cJ
rf /
cm~
&&e < ivo2 E. i 992Np z? 3W
olsow
aak
100 Za k/
5 A-I(L V4 veo, (6 e- C6(
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
SIGN-IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: October 26, 2010
GENERAL CITIZEN COMMENTS
YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTE
Please sign in if you wish to make public comments.
NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOUR COMPLETE TELEPHONE
PLEASE PRINT YOU WILL SPEAK ADDRESS
ABOUT
Ns '(~l-t„iLl ~ wr ZoK-~ 770- E:. LkT 3f-1.(oov
~s 7-22o 7-827 0,,& PIO 1", 9'6-,r= <3 SzG~y
41 L
9A W~ ~/L Rio v~ ~o-v~.5 S t Evcz-r
(C~ ~ ~J,!' J ~ 6~ c~ i~ ~ --~y',.Jr is l~ ,e'C3
a~vs - X90
All
fi~~ O/1~ ~vl~/'Zon/~S ~Q, t~~ w►q- 99a/Z 7
Q I ' -
Mayor Towey
City Council Members
My name is Richard Behm and my address is 9405 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley
WA. 99206
I am here tonight representing myself and my family. We have been in business and
owned commercial property on Sprague Ave since 1950. 60 years. 4 generations.
There are not too many original family owned businesses left on Sprague. The
Hollenback's Pring's, Behm's, Falco's and Peters, there y be a few more. We all
have experienced many changes to Sprague Ave. from 4 lane to 7 lane & back 5 lane
and one-way. We have managed to survive them all, some with great difficulty.
I am speaking tonight as the representative of the Behm Family and Behm's Center.
We are very knowledgeable about the problems on Sprague Ave.
This Council is irresponsible, hasty decisions have unintended consequences.
Influence from special interests have some members making decisions without
public input or research. It is quite obvious that some members of this Council do
not do their homework or even read their packet before a Council Meeting. Making
snap decisions to please one citizen or business person really is not acceptable when
the results of that decision affects the whole city.
Why would ANYONE want to work hard to establish or expand their business if
they believe the Spokane Valley City Council is just going to TAKE IT AWAY!
The very reason a large majority of the business community supported
incorporation of Spokane Valley was the poor planning and unrestricted
development by Spokane County. WE DO NOT NEED TO RETURN TO THAT
TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT!
THIS CITY NEEDS A PLAN FOR THE FUTURE!
Some members of the Council believe they have a mandate to kill the Sprague
/Appleway Revitalization Plan. I don't believe that. Some Special Interests would
like unrestricted development, but I remember that hundreds of citizens
participated along with business and property owners in over 70 workshops, public
meetings, hearings and Council Meetings to help plan a future and a vision for the
City of Spokane Valley.
The Sprague/Appleway Revitalization plan was the result. Granted, not everyone is
pleased with that result. But remember the GOAL. To revitalize Sprague Ave. and
Create an Identity for Our City. A City Center and a vibrant Business Community
that every citizen can be proud of. I am sure everyone would agree with these goals,
the question is how do we achieve them.
The responsibility of this Council is to represent all the citizens and have a plan for
the future of the City. Over the last 7 years the City has spent approximately 1.2
million dollars in planning to develop SARP. It would be irresponsible for this
Council to waste 7 years of work and over a million dollars in tax payer money by
Passing both Motion Considerations items 2 & 3.
A plan is important. Without one, businesses are unsure of the future and reluctant
to invest in our city. SARP is not perfect and needs changes, but it is a roadmap to
the future, please do not destroy it. Involve the citizens and business community to
revise it if necessary, but keep our vision of the future alive.
Thank you,
Dick Behm
~I
Susan Scott S. Evergreen Rd. 0/26/10
You can cite a lengthy list of meetings and workshops as proof of public participation. But
was substantive notice actually given to the parties that were to be directly impacted by the
plan? Were those impacts addressed at the workshops and meetings? NO!
Once the facts began to trickle out and citizens realized SARP was more than just paint,
landscaping and pretty pictures, the final public hearings drew overwhelming public
opposition. The prior Council's response was to ignore the opposition and take cover in the
endorsements of the Spokane Valley Business Association and the Chamber of Commerce
as they proceed to adoption by emergency ordinance.
Citizens subsequently found their voice at the ballot box and the current council has worked
hard to address their concerns.
A simple quest for a 20 acre City Center somehow morphed into a 200 acre City Center
District underwritten by a rezone and redistribution of entitlements for unsuspecting property
owners and businesses down a six mile corridor.
According to the highly paid experts, the ultimate success of a City Center hinged on-
• A location at a major crossroads near freeway access
✓ A parking structure
✓ Two or more civic buildings - a library and city hall
✓ The successful purchase of land for a new city hall
✓ Two story buildings with residential space above retail shops
✓ An interested developer and buy-in from anchor tenants
✓ The purchase of the Old Milwaukee Right of Way and extension of the Couplet
✓ And of course, the whole hearted support of the community.
Are any of these things present? NO!
(You will note that restoring traffic to two-way on Sprague was never an essential component
for the success of the City Center.)
There is a fine line between vision and hallucination. In spite of all the good intentions,
pursuing a City Center, in the face of these odds, is moving into hallucination territory.
This summer, the city honored a citizen with a well deserved reception and day of recognition
for a decade of hard work to get 200 properties removed from the Chester Creek floodplain
map. Those efforts relieved property owners from the burden of buying expensive federally
mandated flood insurance.
Tonight there is an option before the council that will have an even greater benefit for 2 to 3
times that number of properties. It's not the feds this time but our own city, imposing the
burden. The SARP is responsible for inflicting the stigma of non-conformity on an incredible
number of existing buildings and businesses on the corridor. Revoking the SARP will remove
that stigma and economic burden on those owners. They will be relieved of the need to buy
expensive replacement insurance for their existing structures. It will also restore a more
favorable relationship with their bankers.
I urge the council to support the elimination of the SARP and the restoration of the 2007
Zoning that tells you what you can do instead of what you must do. Look to the land the city
already owns at Mirabeau for a Civic Center. Move forward with visions that are
economically feasible, based in reality and respect property rights.
Thank you.
VEL)
PETITION OCT 2 $ 2ft
rah ~ ~
We the undersigned would like to have the roundabout at Wilbur. Mansfield and
Montgomery removed. This is unsafe. People do nd'yield. They drive over the middle.
Some drivers have a hard time figuring it out. It does not give access to all roads.
Name Phone
lvog-Ao
r ~ C-
L - l ~
/Z-)SO-
L/ ell-
61-
For more information contact Barb Howard 927-0975 or Jan Eastman 922-0616.
PETITION T ~6 zq
j J
We the undersigned would like to have the roundabout at Wilbur, Mansfield and
Montgomery removed. This is unsafe. People do nQTyield. They drive over the middle.
Some drivers have a hard time figuring it out. It does not give access to all roads.
Name Phone
i
r
- _ r ( So 4,3
t
' ~i 0 o? For more information contact Barb Howard 927-0975 or Jan Eastman 922-0616.
PETITION
We the undersigned would like to have the roundabout at Wilbur, Mansfield and °k°'~,, y ,
Montgomery removed. This is unsafe. People do noT-yield. They drive over the midde"
Some drivers have a hard time figuring it out. It does not give access to all roads.
Name Phone
0 LAA (~!C r-7) --S ~9, S,- Ll
~
o-~
I
lylaIC 4-11-7 V,3 36,
For more information contact Barb Howard 927-0975 or Jan Eastman 922-0616.
PETITION
Jr'r
We the undersigned would like to have the roundabout at Wilbur. Mansfield and
Montgomery removed. This is unsafe. People do nol yield. They drive over the middle.
Some drivers have a hard time figuring it out. It does not give access to all roads.
Name Phone
7L 17
Q C i
t
For more information contact Barb Howard 927-0975 or Jan Eastman 922-0616.
PETITION
We the undersigned would like to have the roundabout at Wilbur. Mansfield and
Montgomery removed. This is unsafe. People do nd yield. They drive over the middle.
Some drivers have a hard time figuring it out. It does not give access to all roads.
Name Phone
Fllq~
u~
(/god `304~ 7
s~N~ More S a a-~ - 56 7 ~
gay os
--~~-~L(
9~ysc~8
For more information contact Barb Howard 927-0975 or Jan Eastman 922-0616.
PETITION I
We the undersigned would like to have the roundabout at Wilbur, Mansfield and
Montgomery removed. This is unsafe. People do nolyield. They drive over the middle.
Some drivers have a hard time figuring it out. It does not give access to all roads.
Name Phone
CD ef ra
i
For more information contact Barb Howard 927-0975 or Jan Eastman 922-0616.
PETITION
We the undersigned would like to have the roundabout at Wilbur, Mansfield and
Montgomery removed. This is unsafe. People do nd yield. They drive over the middle.
Some drivers have a hard time figuring it out. It does not give access to all roads.
Name Phone
7
For more information contact Barb Howard 927-0975 or Jan Eastman 922-0616.
1
PETITION' i
d
We the undersigned would like to have the roundabout at Wilbur. Man sfield an
Montgomery removed. This is unsafe. People do no7yield. They drive over the middle.
Some drivers have a hard time figuring it out. It does not give access to all roads.
Name Phone
For more information contact Barb Howard 927-0975 or Jan Eastman 922-0616.
fr~SpoNaoeTraosit
RECEIVED
October 20, 2010
OCT 21 2010
Mayor Tom Towey
Spokane Valley City Hall City of Spokane Valley
11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, Washington 99206
Dear Mayor Towey:
Pursuant to RCW 36.57A.055, a special meeting of the Public Transportation Improvement
Conference (PTIC) will be held on Thursday, November 17, 2010, at 4:30 pm at the City
Council Chambers, 808 West Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, Washington 99201.
The purpose of the meeting is to review the composition of the PTBA Board, also known as the
Spokane Transit Authority Board, in conformance with the statutory requirement of review every
four years.
This review will help determine whether a change in the composition of the STA Board is
necessary, or appropriate. Pursuant to RCW 36.57A.050, each of the governing bodies of the
component cities within the PTBA and the county legislative authority shall each select one ✓
elected official serving at the pleasure of the governing body to sit on this review committee.
Please provide notice of action taken by your City Council designating your representative at the
Public Transportation Improvement Conference to the attention of Jan Watson, Clerk of the
Authority, 1230 West Boone Avenue, Spokane, WA 99201, by November 10, 2010. Jan's
email is iwatson@spokanetransit.com.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
4' 1-1V~
E. Susan Meyer
Chief Executive Officer
328-RIDE
spokanetransit.com 1230 W Boone Avenue 509.325.6000
TTY 456-4327 Spokane, Washington 99201-2686 509.325.6036
V i
H. JAMES MAGNUSON
ATTORN EY AT LAW
1250 NORTHWOOD CENTER COURT
POST OFFICE BOX 2288
COEUR D'ALENE, IDAHO 83816-2288
TELEPHONE (208) 666-1596
FAx (208) 666-1700
October 21, 2010
The Honorable Mayor Tom Towey
City of Spokane Valley, Washington
11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Dear Mayor Towey:
I am writing on behalf of University City, Inc., an owner of real property in the Spokane
Valley.
I understand that the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley will be considering
repeal of the Sprague Subarea Plan ("SARP") zoning. Further, it is my understanding that the
City is considering repealing the plan and restoring preplan zoning.
I am writing to urge the City Council to repeal SARP and restore preplan zoning.
The City Center zoning, which is part of SARP, assumes that public-private partnerships
would make the City Center zoning viable. When SARP was developed, the City planned on
developing public spaces and public structures in the City Center zone. Without this partnership,
the City Center cannot be developed and the property will languish underutilized. With pre-SARP
zoning the property has a much better chance in today's economic times of being redeveloped,
resulting in increasing the tax base and vitality of the area. As such, we would urge the Council to
repeal the City Center zoning of SARP and return the property to its pre-SARP zoning.
Thank you for your attention on this.
Ve ruly yours,
H JA GNUSO
ttorn y at Law
HJM:slb
cc: Brenda Grassel (position 1) Gary Schimmels (p sition )
Dean Grafos (position 2) Bob McCaslin (posits
Rose Dempsey (position 3) Bill Gothmann (position 6)
Mike Jackson (City Manager)
Kathy McClung (Community Development Director)