Loading...
2011, 04-12 Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meetings Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, Apri112, 2011 Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance• Citv Staff: Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, Acting City Attorney Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Ken Thompson, Finance Director Dean Grafos, Councilmember Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Arne Woodard, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Absent• Christina Janssen, Assistant Planner Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager Mike Basinger, Senior Planner Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: In the absence of a pastor, Councilmember Gothmann 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 Grassel. It was moved by Councilmember Grafos, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Grassel fi°om tonight's meeting. 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 Woodard: said he attended last night's State of the City address which was well presented and well received; and also attended a Knights of Columbus lunch today. Councilmember Gothmann: reported that he attended a SNAP meeting; went to a Valley Business show which was well attended; went to a Solid Waste Task Force meeting where they discussed different constructs for a regional solid waste governing committee; attended the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) meeting with that Board's new director and said a call for projects is coming up soon in connection with the Urban Corridor Program. In connection with the TIB, Councilmember Gothmann said that three cities were asked to change their scope of project, and two out of three included more roundabouts; he said there is some legislative support for preservation programs but the TIB indicates cities would have to show some initiative to fund its own program and it would depend on the total assessed valuation of the cities; he also mentioned that a citizen called to ask that the Indiana Extension Project funds be withdrawn, but Councilmember Gothmann explained that those decisions are at the discretion of cities and not the TIB. Councilmember Gothmann said he also attended the 9-1-1 Board meeting; and he looked at the Appleway Court low-cost housing, and said the location is good; he also attended the Senior's Fair at CenterPlace; and had lunch with members of Meals on Wheels where concerns were voiced about the Taylar Cottages, which he said is not within the Spokane Valley Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 1 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 jurisdiction; he also attended the Government Affairs meeting in connection with the Chamber of Commerce. Councilmember Grafos: reported he attended last night's State of the City address, and commended the Mayor for his presentation. Deputy Mayor Schimmels: said he attended the State of the City address and said it was well done; that in the past few weeks, he attended a Spokane Regional Transportation Council meeting with our counterpart in Kootenai County, and said he met with a group of federal representatives regarding us joining forces as far as transportation is concerned; said the Census Bureau put on an elaborate meeting but there were no decision made; he reported that he and Mayor Towey attended a meeting with the downtown library representatives last week, as well as members from the EPA, and said there were about thirty-five different agencies in attendance, that there were no conclusions; and that he went to a Good Roads meeting where a group of local contractors and some elected officials met concerning the betterment of roads in Spokane County; and said he attended an STA (Spokane Transit Authority) Operations Committee meeting. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Towey reported that he enjoyed himself last night at the State of the City address, that there was a good turnout with lots of good comments; and he mentioned the future State of the City meetings and encouraged everyone to attend. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments, and explained that since there is only one action item on tonight's agenda, that there will only be one opportunity for general public comments instead of the normal two opportunities. 1. Brian Millspau�h, 216 N Walnut Street; regarding the HiJD housing proposed for Walnut Street, he said that this is not a religious issue but is a zoning issue and said it is inappropriate to include a religious aspect; he said there were comments made that they were afraid of the elderly; and he mentioned some past quotes about "when they talked about those retarded seniors, those dirty poor people" and "it is disturbing to think that human beings can have such negative stereotypes and such horrifically bad views of the poor; ." said shamed the person who made those statements for not doing their research. Mr. Millspaugh said at the last two committee meeting, those things were never said; and he said the only negative comment was a rhetorical comment by one of the people from Catholic Charities who said "don't worry folks; we don't just take people that drool and stink." Mr. Millspaugh said as someone dying from an illness, he drools and stinks, and said that comment wasn't funny. Concerning the elderly, he said his parents are elderly; and said Councilmember Grassel lives across the street from his parents; and he said he is not afraid of his parents. He said if he had heard comments like that, that he would have stood up and gotten mad as that is not a fair question; and he said the first rule of debate is to "come to the table with clean hands" and if you don't, then he questioned why someone would be trusted; and he said that Catholic Charities came to the table with dirty hands and tried to slip this through without public notification, which causes trust issues in a very small community where everyone just wants to get along. 2. Bill Mihalic, 10824 E. Steve Lane, Spokane Valle� said since he had a letter published in the Valley Voice, and mailed Council another letter on March 28, 2011, he hopes Council has had time to review his position for the proposed housing on St. John Vianney property; he said he is not a newcomer to contested events; he said at the last council meeting, he watched a review of slides of parcels under consideration for a building permit, and that the staff inember described each location, but when she got to the last slide, she stated "this is St. John Vianney property, of x acres, and we oppose." He said he expects more from his tax dollar; and asked on what grounds was this opposed; and he said she was perhaps opposing his Constitutional right to practice his faith, and said it is evident that the Planning Commission is not aware of rights of the church to practice their faith; which he said includes feeding and housing the poor and needy; and said you are mandated under the first exercise clause of the First Amendment to grant the building permit. He said freedom of religion is a basic human right that no Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 2 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 government may lawfully decline; is not a gift of the state but is rooted in the inherent dignity of the human person. He said he feels a cloud of negativity exists and asked if people are growing too old to have a purpose, and said it's time to help our fellow man. 3. Mary Pollard, N Greenacres Chair: said there is an immediate and urgent need to provide a safe way to cross Mission; said they need a signal in the meantime, or a four-way stop and she wants to make sure we figure out the proportionate share to be collected on different development projects so the last project won't have to pay the most; she said the GMA (Growth Management Act) requires concurrency on transportation, and she is asking for pedestrian safety at the Mission and Long intersection. 4. Jerr Brooks 18303 E. Mission Avenue: said the City is doing a great disservice to him and his neighbors with the project to make Mission Avenue a major thoroughfare between the Spokane Valley Mall and Liberty Lake; he said the proposed couplet was designed with the developer, Centennial Properties, in mind; and said the plan did not consider the scope of community needs, and when the plan was made, there was a clear violation of SEPA requirements; he said the City filled out the Environmental Checklist in such a way that it wouldn't trigger any serious review of impacts; he said the Routing Memorandum from the Environmental Checklist review of December 3, 2010 failed to include Central Valley School District, State Parks, impacted property owners, the North Greenacres Neighborhood, and the Friends of Centennial Trail; he said there are seventy-two homes on Mission Avenue between Flora and Barker that will now be impacted by high traffic and an increased exposure to diesel particulates. He said North Greenacres is a single-family neighbarhood and the long term changes were not considered, and said it is shameful that they are continuously forced to endure quality of life changes without input. 5. Kiendra Bullock, Executive Directar for Voices, a low-income advocacy organization in Spokane that works on civic engagement; said as a representative for their membership, she asks that Council reconsider the project for the H[JD housing and Catholic Charities, and not because no one is empathetic to senior citizen or low income housing, but because her organization looks at it as a tax dollar issue; and said anytime there is a proposed HiJD housing, tax dollars are involved, and people are made to feel empathetic to the situation since it is for affordable housing, which is what her organization works on; however, she said in this State and in our City and in Spokane there are several affordable housing property owners who receive tax breaks for offering affording housing, but said they make it very difficult for people to actually get into those homes, or they actually end up being slumlords, or after those homes are built and they re-zone neighborhoods, they sell those large properties and said the intended purpose many times is lost after a few years; she asked Council that befare they re-zone a neighborhood and offer a huge apartment complex, to consider doing a thorough review of the properties that are available for rent in Spokane Valley, to look at what properties are listed as affordable housing, and then ask how to change the current situation without the band aid of just building more; and without the accountability of the property owners providing upkeep, she said she doesn't see the need to build more. 6. Pete Miller, 18142 E. Mission: in reading her statement, it stated that on September 11, 2007, she submitted her opinion regarding zone changes in North Greenacres, and she attached a letter to that to remind Council of what was a very poor relationship between the previous Council and North Greenacres Residents; she addressed road improvements on Mission Avenue and asked to have the impact mitigated of what was once a quiet neighborhood with a reduced speed zone; she said dividing the neighborhood with a minor arterial conflicts with the comprehensive plan; said their neighborhood transportation plan was submitted to Council in 2005 which plan included a roundabout at Long and Mission; said a speed limit for the eventual school zone will slow traffic sporadically and the park will draw pedestrian traffic from the new developments in Greenacres and Riverwalk; and said that 35 miles-per-hour is too fast and that many drivers push the limit to 40; that Broadway is a minor arterial and also conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan; that the SEPA checklist review for Indiana/Mission asked if there were any plans or Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 3 of ]2 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 further activity related to that proposal, and that the "no" answer was grossly misstated; and that Mission Avenue has a speed limit of 30 miles-per-hour and she sees no reason why the same criteria that allows a reduced speed limit in an area with fewer homes, cannot be applied to Mission Avenue between Barker and Flora. 7. Stacy Bjordahl 505 W Riverside, Suite 500: regarding the pending comprehensive plan amendments for consideration, and the potential repeal of the Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan; she said Mr. Grafos and others might recall that in 2008 she represented a number of property owners who owned property along the Sprague/Appleway corridor; and said at that time those property owners were specifically opposed to the adoption of the Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan for several reasons, mainly because a lot of the properties were being down-zoned and there would be restrictions on property use, the architectural guidelines, sight-restrictions, parking, pre-determined streets and also that at that time, it was a plan and not yet in adoption; she said she supports the repeal of that Plan; she said she is working with CarMax, a company that is considering relocating here on one of the properties impacted by the SARP, and said if it is not repealed, it could adversely affect their ability to select that particular proposal, and she urged Council to move that item forward. 8. John McNamara 10312 Ashcroft Place, Henrico, Vir i�ia: said he is a real estate manager with CarMax, and concerning the potential repeal of the SARP plan; said his company is the leading retailer of used cars in the country; he said they are a Fortune 500 retailer, have 104 stores in 50 markets and did $9 billion in sales this year and sold over 350,000 cars; he said they have a transparent process and no haggle pricing with money-back guarantee along with guaranteed products, and Internet shopping; and said they are also a Fortune 100 best companies to work for for the eighth year in a row; he said they are interested in a site on Sprague, where Dishman Dodge is on Sprague, there is a nine-acre piece next to it which is currently undeveloped with a small abandoned building on it; and they are interested in developing that into a state-of-the-art car retail facility; said it would be a multi-million dollar building; and said their developments look more like a Target or Costco than the typical car dealer; he said they would like to come to the city but in their preliminary research through the SARP documentation, they found many specifics which would preclude them from developing that site, and to force them to look at other options like the City of Spokane; he urged council to consider this, and said he knows his company can bring a great deal of jobs in service, merchandising, and sales. 9. Rebecca Taylor, 508 N. Locust: regarding the St. John Vianney project; said she has lived in her neighborhood far about ten years, her kids play at the St. John Vianney playground and not everyone in that neighborhood opposes this project; she said she thinks it is a good idea, and knows that Catholic Charities does a good job in building and maintaining housing; and said the Parish will not allow it to not be maintained; said she is having trouble paying her bills and cannot imagine living on a fixed income, and feels it is a benefit for the neighborhood to have elderly people staying there who will take care for the neighborhood, and said her best neighbors are the elderly. 10. Ken Currv, 625 N Herald: said he lives a block away from the St. John Vianney; said he doesn't oppose having a senior housing, but said there is a nice lot off Herald and Main and Sprague with a bus stop which would facilitate their needs for transportation, and said they could put in a chapel in the housing at Main and Herald and Sprague if they wanted to; said he is a catholic and has attended St. John Vianney; but a low income housing apartment down the street increases traffic and the violation of speed limits; and increases the police having to come in; said he has seen a lot of activity in that other area; he said that piece of properly has been vacant for years, but the other place on Walnut is a residential area. 11. Kellv Clinger, 312 N Herald: said he is a third generation of that general area on Walnut road and many of those homes are about an acre, adequate for four, tri or quad-plexes if owners should sell; said the idea of building the HUD development there is wonderful on one aspect; said he is all for the elderly, Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 4 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 but is concerned about the location; that a 40 unit structure will create more congestion; and said if it will be all elderly that's fine, but asked when it will be just elderly; and said how long before someone says that is discrimination against others; he said they have a place on Main off Herald, and the police officers are there constantly, as well as helicopters at 2:00 a.m. looking for people jumping over the fence from the apartment complex; and said that doesn't have anything to do with this if we can just keep it elderly and exclude the problem of additional traffic; and he asked if there is a guarantee that the property in the future doesn't change hands and that would be turned into just another apartment complex; and said if this area is re-zoned, anyone selling their house on his street or Walnut Road will also give them the right to zone their property for a multi-family structure. 12. Michael Smith, 404 N. Walnut: said he lives directly across from the properly in question; said this has nothing to do with the elderly, but is all economics; said his wife spent her entire inheritance buying a beautiful home there, and due to the economic downturn, almost all the equity is gone; and if this re- zoning happens, it was mentioned that our property values will go up but said that is not true; he said every morning there are parents running late taking their kids to school end up speeding almost 50 miles- per-hour down Walnut; and said he has almost been hit backing out of his driveway; that this is about economics and the American dream washing down the toilet; he said it has nothing to do with the elderly; and if it gets re-zoned and an institution goes up in their front yard, he feels he is getting steamrolled. 13. Elizabeth Stout, 608 N Herald: said she is not against senior housing; she said at the meeting at the church, it was said it would be a facility that would be at least 40 units, 600 to 700 square feet, and possibly not more than two stories; she said she went to the open house at Appleway Court and after making that comparison, said she was glad she could get a visual idea; that they have 37 units, three stories, and 500 to 550 square feet, and they have 37 parking spaces plus an additional ten or fifteen; and she said after seeing that, she can't visualize something that size being in that Walnut Area on that lot; she said she knows they are proposing to build another senior housing right next to Appleway Court in the near future; and said she feels it would have to be at least three stories to facilitate that many people. 14. Levi Strauss, 302 N Walnut Road: said his neighborhood surrounding St. John Vianney is a nice, quiet, friendly neighborhood; that historic Walnut trees line the road giving the neighborhood charm; he said widely spaced homes gives a park like setting to the neighborhood, and said neighbors take pride in ownership by keeping impeccable yards; he said Walnut Road is one of the most beautiful streets in Spokane Valley; behind their doors is no more intolerance than lurks in any Spokane Valley neighborhood; he said their fears are no less than anywhere else; and said they do have drastic fears their neighborhood will lose its charm; there are currently 35 residential homes on Walnut Road with an apartment complex near Sprague with 20 units; he said they fear a zoning change will allow a 52-unit mega complex which would increase the number of dwellings on Walnut Road by 100%, and said such a complex does not fit and is way too big for the narrow streets; he said when St. John Vianney purchased the property they knew it was limited to a twelve-unit complex and perhaps the church should have looked for property that was more appropriate, and now the church wants to change the zoning to fit their needs without any care of what happens to the neighborhood; and said they feel a 52-unit complex would destroy their nice, friendly, quiet neighborhood; and fear traffic and crime will increase, and the school adjacent to the project will put children's safety at risk; and that the aesthesis of the neighborhood will be compromised; and he asked Council to try to envision what this proposed monstrosity will look like 50 to 100 years from now; and whether any Councilmember would like such a complex built next door to them; he said the valley has lots of open spaces zoned for these projects; he said they voted for Council to look out for the best interests of the community; and to allow this complex in a residential neighborhood would be an injustice, and that this is the wrong place, wrong time. 15. Thomas Dixon, 608 N Farr Road: said his street is the back side of St. John Vianney; spoke of the various places he has lived in the past, including on or near air bases; and when those airbase missions Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 5 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 changed, or new aircraft arrived, homeowners and cities litigated against the military because of the noise; said he was a follower of the Catholic religion during his early military years, and learned from his parents what their generation had in mind was to develop parishes; that they didn't have a lot of money; so the idea was parishes would purchase land like over here in 1954 when there wasn't much around, then they'd build a church and support buildings and schools, and when the church was paid off, they'd turn the church into a gym and start a new church; and there were ideas for the property purchased in 1954 prior to all the houses; and said with every new addition and change, nearby residents always prefer the status quo; and said with the Catholic Charities putting in this building, it can only do good for the area; it will increase traffic, but it will be good for the area because it will be for low-income seniors; and said he has been told by them that once they purchase a property and improve that properiy, they cannot turn around and sell that property for approximately forty years; and said he supports the project even though his wife disagrees. 16. Shell_y Stevens, 312 N Walnut: said she got her Saturday morning paper and saw another letter to the editor regarding this project; she said they are communicated to as a neighborhood via letters to the editor; that they were told it is unfortunate they weren't notified of this proposed zoning change because it caused the neighbors to spread rumors; and said they were notified by the City of Spokane Valley via a public hearing notice, which was the first they heard about this proposal; she said that the latest letter to the editor was from Rev. Charles Scope, a Senior Priest in the Spokane Valley; she said that Rev. Scope did not specify good in his reference to the St. John Vianney parishioners being their neighbors, and said they are thankful for that, because good neighbors stop when they are asked to stop; she said the history of the buildings on the St. John Vianney property were built on what she assumes were properly zoned parcels; and said that St. John Vianney is attempting to build an apartment complex on residentially zoned property; and said regardless of who would live there, it will hurt the neighborhood; and said the issue is not low income senior housing, but increased traffic, decreased property values, and more people living on a single acre of land then what occupies the entire make-up of Walnut Road; and said this is too much and too many people for a rural neighborhood. She further stated that the property on Walnut Road with the blue house on it, which is where the monstrosity will be built, was purchased by James Mulvanney when Mrs. Rucker, a former parishioner passed away; and said the property was used as a rental prior to the purchase by the church. She said the good neighbors on Walnut Road, including herself, rescued all the abandoned pets off that property and gave them good homes; they helped a few of the children living on that property, attend their church's Christian church camp; and fed those children who lived at the rental and gave them rides to school. She said they know what good neighbors do and they have been doing it for years; and said they will not be guilted into feeling bad because they are protecting what is theirs. She said when St. John Vianney purchased the property, they assured the neighbors they were going to use this property to build a complex of maybe four to twelve units, for retired priests and low- income senior housing; and the neighborhood was thrilled with this prospect; and said image their dismay when they were notified that the church was trying to re-zone their parking lot to build this monstrosity; and said this is a manipulation by the Church; and that further manipulation is to bring up RLUIPA [Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act], a federal law that does not apply in this case; and she said the property can be re-sold, or if the properiy can change to something else in forly years, or if used for commercial purposes, RLUIPA does not apply, and she cited Michigan State vs. the Supreme Court, 2007. 17. Shirle_y Pantaleo, 10414 E. Holman Road: she read her statement, and gave a copy to the Clerk for later distribution to the Council. In summary the statement concerns the low income housing proposal; that she wanted to put a face on one of the many who require affordable low income housing; that after the death of her father, her mother was unable to remain in the home she grew up in and stayed with family members until she was able to move into a low income HLJD apartment; and said she deeply resents the implications that she has heard from some Walnut Street neighbors, that seniors are undesirable and a threat to the community; and that her mother was one of the most unselfish, hard Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 6 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 working, kind individuals she ever met, and was a person who was entitled to have affordable, safe housing; and she urged Council to approve the zoning change. 18. John Adams. 10101 E. Main: said he owns Manor Vale Apartment Complex, which is the one referenced earlier with police and helicopters frequenting the apartments; said he took a two-month vacation and when he came back there was a child molester living there, and after that there was a fire; said he is providing low income housing through Section 8 HUD; that he has owned his complex for twenty-six years and being a landlord is not fun, but he tries to do this for the community; and said the Walnut Road is a very nice area, and if you put an apartment complex there it will be nothing but trouble; and said that 90% of the people will be okay but the 10% you can never get rid of which causes the problems; and said if the church wanted senior housing, they should come talk to him and he'd sell them his place and convert it to a senior housing place; and said he'd be willing to help the church if they want to have senior housing. 19. Lvnn Worthington, 9808 E. Vallevwav: said she lives across from the parking lot where the school and the gym are; said they get a lot of traffic but it's great; there's walkers, bikers, kids learning to ride their bikes; that it's a great neighborhood. She said St. John Vianney is asking for a zone change from low-density residential to medium and then to multi-family medium density residential; and said this is way over the top and not acceptable; said they are asking for approval from the City and not from their neighbors, to re-zone their already packed parking lot, to build a monstrosity in her neighborhood; and said that 80-90% of residents in a six block radius oppose this proposal; and said the church doesn't seem to care about that or about angering their neighbors with a complex that will change the whole face and feel of their quiet neighborhood; and she asked Council to preserve the neighborhood and property values; and said a complex built for 50 apartments is a commercial building and could be re-sold by the church. She said when the City of Spokane Valley was incorporated in 2003, there was a concern that a lack of resources would cut all the valley's ties to its community history; in 2004 Linda Yeoman, a preservation consultant with the Spokane County Historical Preservation office stated that "if the City does nothing, it may lose some of its history" and said Ms. Yeoman also listed some Spokane Valley homes and neighborhoods worth preserving, one of which is the bungalow built in the 1920s and earlier near St. John Vianney's church; and she asked council not to allow a lack of resources, fiscal responsibility or fear of repercussions to affect council's decisions tonight and to please preserve their neighborhood; and she gave the clerk some copies of letters from Linda Yeomans. 20. Karen Strauss, 302 N Walnut Road: said she is not for the church and their 52 unit complex; said their street is a wonderful, beautiful road; and if a 52-unit complex comes in, it will change the neighborhood totally with different people going up and down the street; and with senior citizens, that's ok she said, but said they have no sidewalks and people will be going up and down their streets; she said parents drive fast through their streets and don't slow down; said that she has talked to a lot of her neighbors and they are not happy with this proposal; said that the church indicated they have a high turnover in their neighborhood but said they do not as many have lived there for 25 years or more; and she doesn't want to see her road become a mess with more traffic; and wants the neighborhood to remain a nice, quiet place. 21. Sandra Holder. 9814 E. Valle,�-vaX: also voiced her opposition to this proposal; said it is not the right place for a 40-51 unit complex; there are other locations more suitable; said none of the complexes they were directed to for comparisons are located in residential areas; and said she asked about them using the land on Sprague and Herald, about 8.4 acres, and said she was told it was too expensive; and said purchasing property for the right deal doesn't give them the right to put in a 40-51 unit complex there; as it's not the right place for something that large; said she has a deaf child and she and her daughter have rights as citizens; said she heard the project could become a model neighborhood project, and questioned if that means they are implying the neighborhood is not now a model neighborhood; and said she feels it is a very nice neighborhood; and said she isn't sure how a two or three story building could blend into the Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 7 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 neighborhood; and that Valleyway could still open in the future; that she lives on a dead-end street and her daughter can't hardly play out there now because of the church traffic, and this would only increase traffic and decrease her safety; said when she asked about sewer and water issues they were told we were at sewer capacity and the current water pressure is not good; that she is for providing low income housing for the elderly, just not there. 22. Mark Zielfelder, 417 N. Herald: explained that he plans to stay at his residence for a long time; that he puts money into his home to increase the home's value, but adding a complex like makes him feel like he's throwing that money down the drain; said that other 20-unit complex results in all kinds of people coming out of there, and results in police and ambulances on their street; and said there are also neighbors next door who rent and said they have had constant problems with those neighbors too; which shows that if you don't own the property, you don't take the pride in that property; and said people speed on their street now and traffic has increased since Winco came in on Sprague; said they voiced their concerns to Crime Check and to the Police which only helped for a short period. 23. Marie E. Raschko-Sokol, St. John Viannev Pastaral Council Chair: said St. John Vianney was not prepared to give formal testimony tonight, but plans to do so at the meeting where this comes on the agenda for action; but said she wanted to clarify a point, and that is the housing project is a 38 to 40 unit building built by HUD, and is not a 52 unit building, nor has it ever been stated that it would be a 52-unit building; she said the building has not been designed; that they are willing to work with the neighbors in the future to build that design; and that they will be presenting further at the appropriate time. 24. Levi Strauss, 302 N Walnut: said from what he understands, this re-zoning would allow for a 52-unit complex. 25. Rob McCann, Executive Director at Catholic Charities, corner of Division and Fifth in Spokane: said he is grateful for all the comments and that it is needed and an important dialogue; that he is very excited to build this property; he said this project represents an opportunity to transform lives and change hearts; and said as they have done for almost one hundred years in this community, they will hopefully build the project to not only transform the lives of those who will live there, but the neighbors as well, and change in a good way; he said it is difficult to image a world where we are unable to help the least among us; that they have a long track record which is visible, and said they have projects clearly in residential neighborhoods, and the neighbors in those neighborhoods enjoy Catholic Charities being there; he said they have a vision for this project, which is to serve people who desperately need help; and they don't want to have seniors choosing between paying for food or for prescriptions; and when Catholic Charities does a H[JD project, it must be senior housing for forty years; and even beyond that, he said they have many projects well beyond that time span and said he is confident this property will always be senior housing; he said they will not be putting Valleyway through, and they are not building a 52-unit monstrosity; but a 38-40 unit, tastefully designed, well-maintained property as is everything in their portfolio; and said even in the 40�' year, they will keep this as designed, and said they would be more than willing to sign a development agreement with the City so stating. He added that all the residents who live in their housing undergo criminal and financial backgound checks, as well as those who work at Catholic Charities, including the 5,000 volunteers; and said he has no fear they would ever put anyone in those units who would be inappropriate for that neighborhood or who would endanger anyone. 26. ShellY Stevens, 312 N Walnut: said she believes everyone has learned in the past two years by what's happened in government and by what's happened in the past five years with Metropolitan Mortgage; that contracts don't mean a lot, and people's word doesn't mean a lot; and said a guarantee that this will maintain senior housing for 40 years means nothing to her based on what everyone has seen happen in this country over the last five years. Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 8 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 27. Karen Strauss. 302 N Walnut Road: said St. Pascal's is a vacant school and church over there; and she wondered why this project isn't built over there where it's empty; said over there would be more appropriate and saves the neighborhood from a 52-unit complex; and said if you build this on the St. John Vianney property, she is concerned about the children over there; that "you can have a lot of elderly people wandering around; and they could just as easily wander around, and I just fear for the children's safety." There were no further comments and Mayor Towey extended his appreciation for everyone voicing their concerns; and said Council has some tough decisions to make and to make those decisions, Council needs information from both sides; and again extended his thanks for all the comments, and Mayor Towey explained that this project will come back to Council next week for a first reading consideration, and if that passes, to a second reading the following week; or council has the option not to go forward; and at those first and second readings, council will take further public input; and that the final decision will be done by majority council vote. Mayor Towey called for a recess at 7:34 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:51 p.m. 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. a. Approval of the following claim vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE W/VOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 03/18/2011 3476, 3478, 3479, 3480 $57,446.05 03/18/2011 22395-22416 (-22405) $21,960.52 03/25/2011 22417-22478 $171,965.63 03/25/2011 22479-22504 $153,843.12 03/29/2011 22505-22506 $60.00 03/31/2011 5221-5225 $689.50 03/31/2011 22506-22531, 331110017 $1,530,345.24 04/O1/2011 22532-22552 $41,724.59 04/OS/2011 22554, 1026910 $854,066.51 GRAND TOTAL $2,832,101.16 b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending March 31, 2011: $358,603.28 c. Approval of City Council Minutes of March 22, 2011 Special Meeting, Executive Session d. Approval of City Council Minutes of March 22, 2011 Formal Meeting Format e. Approval of City Council Minutes of March 28, 2011 Special Joint Meeting £ Approval of City Council Minutes of March 29, 2011 Study Session Format g. Approval of City Council Minutes of April 5, 2011 Special Meeting, Executive Session h. Approval of City Council Minutes of April 5, 2011 Study Session Format It was moved by Depury Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. NEW BUSINESS 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 11-006 Livestock in Mixed Use — Christina Janssen It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded, to advance Ordinance 11-006, amending Title 19 concerning permitted and accessory uses, and animal raising and keeping, to a second reading as drafted. After Assistant Planner Janssen explained the proposal per the Request for Council Action form included in the agenda packet materials, Mayor Towey invited public comment. Chris Pettybone, 18009 E. Kelly said that she lives behind the Greenacres Shopping Center and said there are many large animals throughout the corridor; said this change makes sense and she urges Council to support the proposal. Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 9 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 There were no further comments. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed.• None. Motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 3. Street Vacation Procedure, STV 01-11 — Scott Kuhta Planning Manager Kuhta explained that an application was received from the Spokane Valley Fire Department to vacate a portion of a street right-of-way accessing Fire Station No. 6 at 6306 East Sprague; and he briefed council on the steps needed for a street vacation. Mr. Kuhta said next week staff will bring forth a resolution setting a public hearing for this matter before the Planning Commission. There were no objections to proceed as noted. 4. Broadwav Avenue Stormwater Drainage Project — Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten explained the project as per his Request for Council Action form, and showed the area in question on his accompanying map which showed the older sections circled in red, and said those areas are in bad shape, and that they plan to do re-surfacing with funds from the street fund. Mr. Kersten said in past years there have been serious drainage issues with the medium to larger storms where this area flooded and the drywells failed as there are no catch basins; he said they don't have the money budgeted in stormwater fund, but have more than adequate dollars within the fund balance, and he asked for council consensus to move ahead with that, adding that Mr. Thompson would be bringing forth a budget amendment soon that could include this project; that the cost for the property acquisition and drainage work is approximately $458,000, which includes $70,000 to $80,000 for the cost of the land. Mr. Kersten mentioned that there is no treatment for the old drywells and they don't meet the current standards, so when they go bad, they would put in a swale; and said there is approximately $2 million in the stormwater fund, and that this could qualify for APA funds, and that we receive about $500,000 every year which could be used for the design and construction of the project; he added that this just came up as they got into the design and realized there is a better way to have a final project; that they could go after just the numbers for the drywells, but they would end up spending a large among of money to restore the drywells. Councilmembers concurred that staff move ahead with this and bring it back as part of the budget amendment. 5. Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Mike Basin� Planner Basinger went over the revised schedule of the comprehensive plan amendments, explaining that tonight is an administrative report and that the first ordinance readings will be scheduled for next week, thereby allowing legal counsel to brief Councilmembers tonight on the development of the 2011 comp plan amendments for the ordinance. Councilmember Woodard stated that he was a member of the Planning Commission when CPA 02-11, which is the St. John Vianney proposal was discussed; said he is a Catholic, and that although he believes he can be impartial, to be fair to the neighborhood and the church, and keeping in mind the citizens are his first concern, said he will recuse himself from this topic, and he left the room at 8:17 p.m. Planner Basinger via his PowerPoint presentation, went over the specific goals and policies used to form staff's recommendation relative to CPA 02-11. Attorney Connelly added that the proposal by St. John Vianney is a request for a zone and comp plan change, that there is no specific use to bind the property owner and this can be considered as a legislative change and the question is, does Council want multi-family here or not; that if council says yes, then an option is to proceed at a later meeting with an ordinance first reading. However, Mr. Connelly explained, the more complicated question is, when you look at what would happen if they made a special application for a building permit, and said if that happens, then LUPA and federal statutes would likely come into play; that it is not totally black and white, but in the Ninth Circuit it is likely the court would say we have to come up with a way to accommodate the use, which is an accessory to the church's mission. Mr. Connelly further explained that if a building permit is ultimately requested, we'd have to probably proceed, although we could condition it; and that another alternative, which allows Council some control, is to continue the matter for thirty days and instruct staff and the property owners to come up with terms Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 10 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 and conditions that would restrict the impact of such development, and to bring that back in the form of a development agreement, which necessitates holding a public hearing. After council discussion, council agreed to proceed with the plan of using a developer agreement and to schedule that as a future agenda item. [Councilmember Woodard returned to the council chambers.] Attorney Connelly explained that the next topic is the proposal sent to the Planning Commission for the elimination of SARP (Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan) and the SARP zoning that was part of that plan; he said the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal council sent and the Planning Commission recommended SARP not be eliminated. Mr. Connelly said that this Council may or may not agree with the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and he would like to talk through the key points in those recommendations and get council feedback; and said once we have that, he will bring this forth as a separate ordinance as it has some special characteristics. Mr. Connelly then went through the Planning Commission findings, and explained to Council that they are located in the packet under tab 3 in the March 10, 2011 memorandum concerning the "Removal of the Subarea Plan" and said those findings are italicized in that document. Concerning the Finding: Planning Commission is concerned if the plan is eliminated the conditions along the corridor will continue to decline without a plan, " Councilmember Woodard said he agrees with the finding that it will decline along Sprague, but disagrees it will improve with SARP. Councilmember Gothmann said he agrees with the finding that it will continue to decrease if there is no plan, and said there is no evidence about the affect of SARP since it was only in effect for a few months. Councilmember Grafos said he agrees with the decline along Sprague, but disagrees that SARP will stop that decline. Mayor Towey said he disagrees with the finding and said restrictions on businesses by governments in itself restricts business, and that he thinks SARP has a negative impact on economic development today and disagrees with the Planning Commission final recommendation. Concerning the Finding: Planning Commission was concerned there was insufficient public input to determine community support or opposition to plan. Councilmember Grafos said he disagrees as there were meetings with all property owners to discuss impacts to properties and what they could do; and said he didn't see any of the Planning Commissioners at those meetings, or a lot of the council members at those meetings, and if they had come, they would likely have a different feeling. Councilmember Gothmann stated that if Councilmembers had attended, they would be violating the Open Meetings Law; that it was not a council meeting; and further stated he feels there was insufficient public input; that it was determined that 195 property owners out of 200 did not attend. Deputy Mayar Schimmels said that the bi- monthly meetings were held on the different topics, that he never heard anything that was defending the SARP in an overall connotation; but said he disagrees with the Planning Commission on two items: he said the zoning is very restrictive and there is no flexibility in the zoning language. Mr. Connelly said the findings contain a number of other specific issues, and he asked council to go through them and let him know if there are specific findings council agrees or not with; and he asked about the additional finding that it would create too much commercial land. Councilmember Woodard said that the people should be able to do what they want to and this is an issue of property rights; said we have to look at regulations and how we are trying to dictate to them on how they can use their land; he said we have to get away from the regulations on where to put the lot, signage, and so many things; that we make it very expensive and no one wants to come here; and we have to open up things if we want a vital commercial atmosphere. Mayor Towey voiced his agreement with Councilmember Woodard and said we need economic development and need to make sure our regulations don't hamper business but encourage it. Attorney Connelly asked if there were any other specifics council wants to address, and said that a Planning Commission conclusion is they believe a decrease in employment could result by removing SARP. Councilmember Woodard said he heard the testimony from CarMax, which is a good indication of the affect of SARP; that we won't have employment with SARP; and said that the Planning Commission said without SARP there is no plan, but he said there is a plan, but no one is listening; that he has a plan about how to stimulate and build the best city but it doesn't include more regulations or tougher restrictions but includes freedom and liberty. Deputy Mayor Schimmels said he knows we're in a Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 11 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 severe economic downturn, as in fifteen months we have only had one building permit on that stretch of roadway. Councilmember Grafos said SARP was put together in a different environment and at a different economic time; that the majority of retailers along there including the owners of University City came forward asking for relief of the massive regulatory burdens of SARP, that it affects over 1,000 properties and almost 1,000 acres; he said he is completely against this plan. Councilmember Woodard asked if the SARP no longer existed, could people still use those regulations and Mr. Jackson said generally speaking, yes, but there could be some setbacks or other design standards at issue. Attorney Connelly said he has a sense that this is not unanimous, but the majority of council want to proceed with an ordinance rescinding the SARP, and four councilmembers shook their heads yes. Mr. Connelly said he will put together a first reading of an ordinance for next week and incorporate findings from tonight; and that next week council can make changes as desired; and said the other comp plan matters will be in a separate ordinance, and that the multi-family request by the church will be continued for 30 days as staff explores a development agreement. Council concurred. 6. Advance A�enda — Mayor ToweX Councilmember Woodard mentioned a concerned citizen asked him to address the issue of Mission east of Flora and of the need to slow down traffic in order to protect people going go the park; and that prior to the completion of the park, there are safety issues to consider. City Manager Jackson said that staff discussed this and will come back at some point with additional information for council. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8.�54 p.m. �.� ATTEST: , omas E. Towey, Mayor � X � � � �`�" �iristine Bainbridge, Crty Clerk -- Council Regular Meeting 04-12-2011 Page 12 of 12 Approved by Council: 04-26-2011 GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT SIGN-IN SHEET SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 12, 2011 GENERAL CITIZEN COMMENTS YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTE Please si n in if ou wish to make u blic comm ents. NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOUR COMPLETE TELEPHONE PLEASE PRINT YOU WILL SPEAK ADDRESS ABO T d��-�l X� d� K� b% R�� ��B �/�4n'R J�� �PaK �� ►� 5h�-�28 s6�3 ' \ Ytis T�-�m-`�� C - t�Cf Ye.,E1R- � �q. '� C� 5 �-�E �- � � �1 Ibc� ��-2 �e� _� � �S �- �cd 12e Z�, �✓ 9 2 � �1� Nn� ��c C�i��T�� o�a�y. ���ti-� ����.� �� � � ,� r �n � �v'. � �� �r ► ��r �✓��<� �� �'�8 _ � p y f� �� �ia � � � . 3oa,. dV 1��, L �VI ,S�'raN T nl, ��Z � VVO��h� `�- � .� _ � �� �� � -� � �� ��� I�aS. ►201 S� a ?'I_ �Z o �J `�'�Z - ` r� r� �i �i d�nre �(�'� er �"� ;°�''� 31� ti. t-tera- r� ��3 � ; h C f �' -f S b�- v� L � � � � v�`^^ �ah Sb�(N`12�std't' S� Z'Sa Sa1�W� ��c� co� G� - Soc (03��- Gr��r�.sk- A, `�" �"�`� 3 ���r��a � V GENERAL PUBLI� COMMENT SIGN-IN SHEET SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 12, 2011 GENERAL CITIZEN COMMENTS YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTE Please si n in if ou wish to make ublic comments. NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOUR COMPLETE TELEPHONE PLEASE PRINT YOU WILL SPEAK ADDRESS ABOUT Y/. p c�� a' ��� ����y� oi �-�� ,�,,�. �? . 3 � 2, �.,� r r � r�n a •� �i� � � Q r� r' �� --�'' L7 cI !r G� � � k , � }�h�ss,o,� �� ��� � vv��ssio� g _ � �,� � � �- ��3 ��, cc.. ( 03� ���� g � �J �- � � �rle � u�u�ncrl� !�1- C.ac�� 3 - �2� � Y ,,yti ' � � �\ I / �� � ��� � f ) � j��, , ►' h r�� � s� a� � LOW INCOME SENIOR HOUSING Spokane Valley City Council 4/12/11 Name Thomas Dixon - 608 North Farr Road, Spokane Valley, WA Comments Child of 1950's -- son of Air Force officer -- lived near 13 airbases GA - CA, M N- TX During that time, cities throughout nation offered land to attract federal installations — economic & residential Presence of air bases spawned development. Homes — schools — shopping After college, I joined — lived on/near 14 airbases over 26-year career On nearly every base, when new acft arrived (sometimes mission change), homeowners & cities litigation and talks concerning acft NOISE ■ Base was established — people built & moved in — complained about noise During years as military dependent & active duty, I was of Catholic Faith Learned how Catholic communities planned to establish & support parishes ■ Purchase land ■ Build church & support bldgs. ■ Build school ■ When church paid off, build new — larger church, convert old to gymnasium ■ Pay off school & new church, add facilities as appropriate As with every new addition or change, nearby residents always prefer status quo (as mentioned w/my Air Force experience) Moved here in 1996, in part due to presence of St John Vianney parish I SUPPORT Catholic Charities addition, though wife & I have differing view � Shirley Pantaleo,10414 E. Holman Rd Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Spokane Valley City Council Re:Low Income Housing -- I wish to put a face on just one of the many individuals who require affordable low income housing. Due to circumstances which she couldn't control, my mother worked all of her life to support her family due to my dad's illness. After the death of my father and the failure of her heating system, she was unable to remain in the home she grew up in. She was able to move in with my family for a few months until her name rose to the top of the list and she was able to move into a low income HUD apartment. This apartment was about 600 feet and had a small kitchen, a living room/dining area, full size bedroom and a bathroom that had a medical emergency help line available. It was also on a bus line that enabled her to continue working to support herself. There was no insurance money after my father's death. She continued working until the age of 66 when she had to retire because of health reasons. That is when she started to collect her Social Security payments of under $500 per month. She used this money to pay her rent, $100 per month for her supplemental health insurance, prescriptions, groceries, and other necessities. My mom was raised by her father in the Depression and made do with very little. After my family & my brother's family were forced to relocate from Pennsylvania because the steel mill had closed, my brother moved to Florida. My mother was able to again obtain low income housing in Florida. She loved her small apartment & the friends she made while living there, until we needed to transfer her to a nursing home before her death. I deeply resent the implications I have heard from some Walnut Street neighbors, that seniors who are in need of affordable low income housing are undesirable and a threat to the community. My mom was one of the most unselfish, hard working, kind individual I ever met and she was entitled to have affordable, safe housing. It would never even occur to her to hurt a small child. Her grandchildren were her greatest joy. My mother's story is typical of seniors who require affordable housing. By the way, should catastrophic medical expenses deplete our savings, my S.S. check is $566 per month. Where do I go if my husband dies first? Rockwood South is located at 25 & Rockwood and believe me, that neighborhood is every bit as beautiful as Walnut Street and the neighbors there don't seem to have a problem with that facility. Is someone with low income like my mother, to be denied safe housing because they can't afford the $2000 per month at Rockwood after buying in, or even the $800 plus rent for an apartment in Spokane Valley? I urge the Council to approve this zoning change. Thank you StJohn Vianney (2) My name is Bill Mihalic, I live at 10824 East Steve Lane, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Since I have had a letter published in the Valley Voice and mailed you another letter on March 28, 201 l, I hope you had time to review my position and azguments for the proposed housing on St John Vianney property. I am not a newcomer to contested events having served as a Township Supervisor, Naval Officer during WW II and Union President of an IBEW local. At the last meeting of council, I watched a lady review slides of pazcels under consideration for a building permit. She described each location. However, when she got to the last slide, she stated, "T'his is St John Vianney property of X acres and we oppose". I expect more for my tax dollars. Oppose? On what grounds? That comment was like a kick to my solar plexus. She was, perhaps inadvertently, opposing my constitutional right to practice my faith. It is evident that the planning commission is not aware of rights of the church to practice their faith. This includes feeding and housing of the poor and needy. In fact, you aze mandated under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to grant the building permit. Freedom of religion is a basic human right that no government may lawfully deny, it is not a gift of the State, but instead is rooted in the inherent dignity of the human person. I can't help but feel that a cloud of negativity exists. Are we growing too old to have a plupose? Are our walkers and wheel chairs in your way? Kindly say, "excuse me" so we can move aside and not impede your progress. The case of Tent City cited in my letter was approved by the City of Mercer Island and prevailed over Mercer Island Citizens for Fair Process in the court. Although a tent city is legal, St John Vianney's intent is to continue being a good neighbor by creating a quality permanent structure. While the TUA (temporary use agreement) is temporary, there are 33 cases of various uses referenced during this trial. One went to the Supreme Court of Ohio, but the churches prevailed in all cases. To prolong this discussion is self-serving and time consuming. It's time to move on. It is time to be the Good Samaritan and help our fellow man. Isn't that the role of a good community? , I ha.ve a copy of the Judge's decision in the Tent City case and the background on RLUIPA . I can leave this with the City Clerk, if you wish, for your perusal• — � e L/ C I oG1 S' L A"1 D c�t 5T /i. S7 / T U�7"'j o,,vig L/� �� T�� k�b ��' �I �P" ����l��i��- Cz,,��or� �- Zar� � � �� „� � � � �� � �� • � ��.a,w� �Kw. ;��F 1 23) Declaration ofJeremy Culumber Re: Scheduling SummaryJudgment Motion 2 Hearing (Mazch l0, 2009); 3 24) Declaration ofJane Ryan Koler in Support ofResponse to Methodist Chruch and SHARE/WHEEL's Motion for Summary Judgment (April 12, 2009); 4 25) Fourth Declaration of Tara Johnson (Apri120, 2009); 5 6 26) Declaration of Jane Ryan Koler in Support of Plaintiff's Motion to Shorten Time to Hear PlaintifJ''s Motion [o Allow Filing of Overlenglh Reply Brief � (Apri121, 2009); 8 27) Fifth Declaratian of Tara Johnson, and attachments thereto (Apri123, 2009); and 9 10 g) The pleadings, papers and other evidence presently on file with the Court Clerk. THE PARTIES' MOTIONS AND CROSS-MOTIONS were consolidated by the 2 Court on September 22, 2008, and were heazd together. The Court decided these motions 13 after hearing argument by counsel for the parties on April 24, 2009, and considered that 14 argument in addition to and in conjunction with the foregoing pleadings, memoranda, 15 affidavits and other evidentiary materials. 16 gASED ON THE FOREGOING and pursuant to CR 56(c), the Court finds as 17 follows: (1) There are no disputed material facts with respect to Defendant City of Mercer 18 Island's Motion for Summary Judgment Re: All Remaining Claims dated August 28, 2008, 19 the City of Mercer Island's request for Summary Judgment on the merits as set forth in the 20 City's Response brief in Opposition to Summary Judgment dated April 13, 2009, or Plaintiff 21 Mercer Island Citizens for Fair Process's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment dated 22 September IS, 2008; (2) that the issues presented the parties' motions are pure questions of 23 law, and that law is clear; (3) as a matter of law and based on the undisputed facts in the 24 record Plaintiff s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment fails, and Plaintiff cannot establish 25 liability against the City of Mercer Island for a due process violation or for damages or 26 attomey's fees under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and §1988 or for any other relief and, therefore, 27 ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY NDGMENT TO DEFENDANT CITY, DENYING PLAIIVTIFF'S MOTION FOR S.J., x�Twc BUCKLIN dc MCCORMACK, ING r.s. AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE - 7 �„�,�„ruw !00 fIFTM AVEMIE.6UIiE �1�1 gFj1T'RE, WAEMINGTON M7 W J110 /hqNE: (7W)f2}ONt FAX: (700I t21W2] . � 1 Plaintiff's Motion for summary judgment must be denied; and (4) that as a matter of law �' � 2 and based on the undisputed facts in the record, Defendant City of Mercer Island is e�pttfod 3 to dismissal of all claims against the City in the Plainttff's �i�t A�d Co�plaint and, 4 therefore, the ��ty of Ivt�� ��� �� @�t�t�@� t(d ���f� h1��iL-!�� $1i��� ��'I�'� 5 Motion for Summary Judgment Re: All Remaining Claims dated August 28, 2008 and on the 6 merits of Plaintiff s remaining claims as set forth in the City's Response in Opposition to 7 P{aintif�s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment dated April 13, 2009. 8 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY: 9 ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Defendant City of Mercer Istand's 10 Motion for Swnmary Judgment Re: All Remaining Claims dated August 28, 2008, and the 11 City's request for Summary Judgment on the merits as set forth in its Response in 12 Opposition to Plaintiff s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment dated April 13, 2009, is 13 hereby GR�NTED; and, it is hereby further 14 ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Plaintiff s Cross-Motion for I S Summary Judgment dated September I 5, 2008 is hereby DENIED; and, it is hereby further 16 ORDERED, ADNDGED AND DECREED that all of the remaining claims and 17 causes of action in the Plaintiff s First Amended Complaint are hereby dismissed with 18 prejudice, and PlaintifFs First Amended Complaint is hereby dismissed in its entirety, and 19 without costs to the Plainti�; and, it is hereby further 2p , Defendant Cit 21 I vu ing party on ', to 22 a ' ts. 23 DATED this � day of April, 2009. 24 25 HONO BLE MICHAEL FOX, JUDGE 26 � 27 ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO DEFENDANT CITY, DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR S.J., K�►„NC, BUCKIlN & MCCORMACIC �NC., r.s. AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE - 8 A7TORNEYS�TLAW !00 FIFTFI �VEIN� SIME �1N 6EATTlE. WAWIIGTON H/0a-7175 . PNqE: (Y06/621Nl1 FAX: C�1717-Nt� Page 1 of 2 RLUIPA.org � � . Home . Back r� ound . Scholarship . Media • Cases • Resources Background The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act was passed by Congress on July 27, 2000, and was signed by President Clinton on September 22, 2000. Its language was drawn from a similar bill (the "Religious Liberty Protection Act") offered in Congress in 1998 and again in 1999. The following documents will provide the reader/researcher with detailed additional information about the law: • The full text of The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act . President Clinton's statement upon signing the law, September 22, 2000 . All Bill Summary & Status Info: House, Senate . Bill Status: House, Senate . Cosponsors: House, Senate . Legislative History: House (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Bill Report 106-219), Senate . Hearings: o The Subcommittee on the Constitution of the House Judiciary Committee held hearings on May 12, 1999, on HR 1691 ("Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1999"); on June 16 and Julv 14, 1998 on HR 4019 ("Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1998"); and a series of hearings on July 14, 1997, February 26, 1998 and on March 26, 1998 ("Protecting Religious Freedom After City of Boerne v. http://www.riuipa.com/index.php/topic/20.htm 4/11/2011 Page 2 of 2 Flores") The committee also held an earlier, more general hearing, on July 23, 1996 ("Legislation to Further Protect Religious Freedom"). In 1995, the subcommittee held a series of field hearings on "Religious Liberty and the Bill of Rights" on June 8, June 10, June 23, July 10 and July 14. o The Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on June 23 and September 9, 1999 on "Issues Relating to Religious Liberty Protection, and Focusing on the Constitutionality of a Religious Protection Measure." (U.S. Government Printing Office document 67-066.) ■ The Senate Judiciary Committee website offers the prepared statements of Senators and wimesses at both the June 23, 1999 hearing and the September 9, 1999 hearing, but the site does not appear to be well maintained. The better aption is probably to access the full transcript contained in the GPO document referenced above even though the file sizes are very large and they will take quite a while to download on a dialup connection. ■ On June 23, 1998, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on S.2148, the "Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1998," which, with modifications, later became RLiJIPA. The Committee web site posts the prepared statements of Senators and witnesses at the hearing. ■ On October l, 1997, the Senate Judiciary Committee also held oversight hearings on "Congress' constitutional role in protecting religious liberty in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in the case of City of Boerne v. Flores," but the committee web site provides only the list of witnesses. Da any of these question apply to you? . Is your worship space under attack by the zonin� board? . Do you know a prisoner denied religious freedom? . Got a c�uestion? . Want to help? Receive our monthly E-Update on all religious liberty issues. Your Email Address � � http://www.rluipa.com/index.php/topic/20.htm 4/ 11 /2011 �f'tstoric �'reser�ation �lanning � I�esign Lir►da Yeomans, Principal 501 West 27� Avenue, Spokane, WA 99203 lindayeomans@comcast. net (509) 456-3828 Historic Register Nominations - Cultural Resource Management -- Investment Tax Credit Applications April 7, 2011 City of Spokane Valley City Council 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Proposed New Construction and New Use on North Walnut Road in Spokane Valley, WA Dear City of Spokane Valley City Council, As you are aware, new construction and new use—whether appropriate or not—is being proposed far property which is located along North Walnut Road in the North Walnut Road neighborhood in Spokane Valley, WA. You may not be aware, however, that the aforementioned North Walnut Road neighborhood may be eligible for historic register listing as an historic district�ne of the few areas in the valley that may qualify as a historic landmark. The North Walnut Road neighborhood is composed of mostly single-family homes that were built 50 years or more ago and is fairly well-preserved—a rarity when so much has been altered or lost. Taken together, the homes form a nearly contiguous facade of intact historic architecture that illustrates a variety of styles and building products popular during the first half of the 20`�' century. The homes are good examples of Tudor Cottage, Tudor Revival, Colonial Revival, Craftsman and vernacular styles, and all face North Walnut Road which is, surprisingly, lined with true walnut trees. One house is particularly significant to the North Walnut Road neighborhood and the Spokane Valley as a Craftsman-style bungalow which is clad with smooth, round cobblestones. Washed by decades of moving snow, ice, and water, smooth round cobblestones are indigenous to waterways and the Spokane Valley, and help tell the unique geologic story of the area. In summary, the North Walnut Road neighborhood is a"diamond-in- the-rough," an architecturally significant historic neighborhood that helps to convey the special development, settlement, and history of part of the Spokane Valley. May I ask you to only allow proposals for new construction and new use that do not damage, disturb, or destroy existing significant historic environments? Please look at what exists today to guide what may be architecturally compatible and use-appropriate for tomorrow. .� n � Sincerely, �, ���� �� Linda Yeomans �-= Xc: Shelly Stevens, 312 N. Walnut Road, Spokane Valley, WA (shelly.stevens@rbc.com) A persona! resume for Ginda �eomuns Professional Planner, Historian, and Preservation Consultant Historic Preservation P(anning & Design, Principal 501 West 27"' Avenue, Spokane, WA 99203, (509) 456-3828 lindayeomans@comcast net SELECTED AWARDS 2010 "Rising Star" Award from Spokane Convention & Visitors Bureau 2009 Washington State Preservation Award for Rehabilitation of Certified Historic Property (in collaboration with contractors for owners of the Arctic Club Hotel, Seattle) 2005 Washington State Preservation Award for Rehabilitation of Certified Historic Property (in collaboration with contractors for owners of the Spokane Club/American Legion Building, Spokane) 2002 Washington State Preservation Award for Rehabilitation of Certified Historic Property (in collaboration with contractors for owners of the Holley-Mason Building, Spokane) QUALIFICATIONS Historic Register Nominations Washington State Multiple Property Historic Resource /nventories Federal /nvestment Tax Credit Certifications Cultural Resource Management Team & Individual Leadership Published Author Project Management Education Volunteer Activities . Founding, managing, and directing Historic Preservation Planning & Design, a successful consulting business since 1997. • Completing and presenting National, Washington State, and Spokane Historic Register Nominations—both individual nominations and district nominations—for significant historic houses, districts, gardens/landscapes, and commercial buildings with a current total of more than 200 listed properties located in Washington and Idaho. • Preparing Multiple Property Historic Resource Inventories for the Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation for more than 1,500 properties located throughout Washington State. . Preparing and submitting Federal Investment Tax Credit Applications for Certified Rehabilitation of Historic Properties, resulting in a total of more than $40 million dollars in tax savings to multiple property owners. • Organizing and directing more than 25 historic home, garden, & neighborhood tours in Spokane for a variety of groups and organizations, including Spokane Preservation Advocates, Allegro Baroque & Beyond, Friends of the Moore-Tumer Heritage Gardens, Manito-Cannon Hill Neighborhood, and the Northwest Museum of Arts & Culture (mostly volunteer work). • Authoring articles about historic homes, gardens, buildings, towns, and neighborhoods for multiple historic home tours, City of Spokane Parks & Recreation Dept, various newsletters, concert programs, and books and magazines. • Teaching classes/giving field trips-tours on historic preservation and historic architectural styles in Spokane and Eastern Washington through the Corbin Art Center, 2003-05. EDUCATION BA Urban/Regional Planning & Design, EWU, Cheney, WA, 1996 BA Fine Arts/Architectural History/Art History, WSU, Pullman, WA, 1973 On September 11 2007, I submitted to the Council, my opinion regarding zone changes in North Greenacres. I have attached that letter (see attachment 1) to remind this Council of what was a very poor and contentious relationship between the previous Council and the residents of North Greenacres. Looking back, with the exception of a neighborhood park, we have gained little and progress has won the war. I want to specifically address the road improvements on Mission Avenue intended to accommodate pass through traffic connecting to Indiana and Mission Parkways. We are once again (see attachment 2) requesting that the City mitigate the impact of what once was a quiet neighborhood with a reduced speed zone based on the following: 1. Dividing the neighborhood with a minor arterial is in conflict with the comprehensive plan. Minor Arterials: The minor arterial street system interconnects with and augments the principal arterial system. It accommodates trips of moderate length at a lower level of travel mobility than principal arterials. This system places more emphasis on land access than the principal arterial system. Such a facility may carry local bus routes and provide intra-community continuity, but ideally does not penetrate identifiable neighborhoods. 2. North Greenacres was defined by previous Council as not meeting "neighborhood" standards with lack of participation and evidenced by Councils' recorded meeting which prompted my 9/11 response. Council gave planning the impetus to manipulate code and create higher density developments. I find it ironic that we are now regarded as one of the most active and involved "neighborhoods" in the City of Spokane Valley even though our "participation" at that time was more intense. 3. Also ironic, is the fact our neighborhood transportation plan was submitted to the City in 2005. That plan included a roundabout at Long and Mission and was intended to slow increasing and often speeding traffic. We were aware of imminent traffic issues at that time and we seem to have been left out of the equation once again. 4. A speed limit for the eventual school zone will slow traffic sporadically. However, the park will draw much pedestrian traffic from the new developments in Greenacres and Riverwalk to the east due to postage stamp sized lots in both areas. We have already witnessed children playing in the streets in Greenacres. There are no "yards" large enough to play in. 35 MPH is too fast to brake for an unexpected pedestrian encounter, especially when drivers push the limit to 40 PLUS MPH as proven by the death of a young man on Flora Rd. last year. 5. Broadway is also on the map as a minor arterial and also conflicts with the Comprehensive Plan. Broadway and Mission are approximately one half mile apart. Does that mean we are going to be in the middle of a central business district? Don't misunderstand my intentions. Broadway will help to mitigate a small amount of Mission's increased pass through traffic and it won't be near enough. Minor Arterials: The spacing of minor arterials may vary from one tenth to one half mil (1I10 —112) in central business districts, and two (2) to three (3) miles in suburban fringes, but is normally not more than one (1) mile in fully developed areas. 6. On the SEPA Checklist Review for Indiana/Mission extension project and resulting DNA, question number 7, page 2 asked if there were any plans or further activity related to or connected to that proposal. The "NO" answer seems obviously and grossly misstated in an effort to facilitate the city's agenda. Increased traffic will directly impact 74 property owners on Mission Ave. and the neighborhood in general. 7. Mission Ave. west of Sullivan has a speed limit of 30 MPH while driving through a residential area. I see no reason why the same criteria, that allows a reduced speed limit in an area with fewer homes, cannot be applied to Mission Ave. between Barker and Flora. Thank you for your attention, Pete Miller 18124 E Mission (509) 869-6070 • ,',., �.. � C �� C-�( Yf'�.-��' `°' � September 11, 2007 I listened to you closed session tapes of last Wednesday. Mr. Gothman — Thank you for your comments supporting public testimony and the planning commission recommendations. This is what I heard when you deliberated title 20: Steve Taylor recommended changing the 40,000 square foot zoning in R1 to 25,000 square feet based upon, what I understood to be, a series of letters from Lynn Vogue. He stated there would be no substantial changes in the neighborhood. He also stated if every lot could be subdivided, the areas affected by that change would see less that 15% ownership take advantage of that zoning change. Rather than create a regulation to accommodate Mr. Vogue you wisely chose to keep the 40,000 square foot zone. Greenacres seems to be a different story. The Planning Commission felt that because the North Greenacres community was the ONLY ONE to pay for and receive approval for a zone change from R7 to R 3.5 they were entitled to keep it. Mr. Taylor stated the community's rezone was ONLY temporary. If the applicants thought their efforts were going to be TEMPORARY, YOU CAN'T honestly believe they would waste their time, effort and money. HERE is ALSO what I heard during that taped meeting: 1) The area is ripe for RE-development 2) I could hear two council members joking in the background stating and I quote, " you mean DE- velopment. " 3) Maintenance of the area is not very high. 4) Residents in the area are not visualizing the difference between 4 or 6 homes per acre. 5) We need to do it now or we'll have to do it somewhere else, (referring to giving Greenacres what I call the shaft). 6) Steve Taylor recommended the Greenacres zoning changes based upon a lack of input from citizens. In the Ponderosa's case, I must assume ONE is enough. 7) Bill Gothmann countered and stated there were 700 comments supporting the 10,000 square foot zoning. He counted them. The majority of the council gives us no credence. This is NOT just Mary Pollard's opinion. This is the opinion of an outspoken majority of many Greenacres citizens. The neighborhoods outcome is obvious. With a simple developer up- zone application, we suddenly have a determination of non-significance and a HIGHER density. Mr. Connelly advised you, again I quote, "When you deviate from planning commission recommendation, it would be helpful if you worked with staff and TRY and tie it to something in the comp plan. You need findings to justify the change. You make the decisions we have to defend in court." Bill Gothman stated leaving the 10,000 square foot zoning in Greenacres north of Mission WILL STILL MEET GMA requirement and you chose to ignore it. I am asking that you do not create or go in search of a regulation to deprive North Greenacres of the 10,000 square foot zoning recommendation. Pete Miller 18124 E Mission Greenacres .���- ���.�,w�� z North Greenacres Neighborhood May 23, 2006 ■ Pianning Committee city of Spokane Valley Dear Honorable Ma or & Council Members Washington y � Chairwoman May 3, 2006, North Greenacres Neighborhood held a neighborhood meeting Mary Pollard at Greenacres Christian Church. One of the items of concern was reducing 17216 E. Baldwin the speed limit on Mission Ave and making it consistent with the Mission Gree 99016 � WA just west of Sullivan by reducing it to 30 miles an hour. We were advised Board that only the council can make this change. We are formally requesting that Kurt Parker the council protect their citizens by reducing the speed limit due to all the Gail Sherrodd Diane Johnson traffic cutting through this area. Nancy Miller 7ohn Patrouch In addition Bob & Laurel Ladd , we would like to request that Mission Avenue road Brian & Sue Wood improvements between Flora and Barker Rd. be only a two lane with bike Sue Bracken paths in order to make this pedestrian friendly environment. Nancy Miller, North Greenacres Transportation Chair attended a training seminar that the Department of Transportation held here a week ago and .;, _ ��•'�y� discovered that the sidewalks ending abruptly into existing properties and �'#� . ����� �" not blending into the shoulder of the rod — the available pedestrian walk area is a violation of the ADA and opens the city to lawsuits. We have also ��' thought it strange to begin utilizing a sidewalk and then be cut off by a .� �. swale — a handicapped person would have to back track to the corner to utilize the shoulder of the road or to walk next to the curb in order to have a ' continuous terrain to travel on. �;''` � ,; These three issues need to be addressed. - �,r�-' Sincerely, �:�: Mary Pollard Chairwoman �� , � - North Greenacres Neighborhood , r . \ �� �'.