Loading...
Agenda 01/10/2013 SUIZ1c' Valleyv Spokane Valley Planning Commission Agenda City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. January 10, 2013 6:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL A. Election of Officers IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: December 13, 2012 VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject that is not on the agenda VII. COMMISSION REPORTS VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. NEW BUSINESS: a. Study Session: Shoreline Management Program Update: Public Access Plan 2. DISCUSSION: a. Follow-up discussion on manufactured housing regulations. X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XI. ADJOURNMENT COMMISSIONERS CITY STAFF BILL BATES-CHAIR JOHN HOHMAN,CD DIRECTOR KEVIN ANDERSON SCOTT KUHTA,PLANNING MGR,AICP CHRISTINA CARLSEN ROD HIGGINS ROBERT MCCASLIN STEVEN NEILL CART HINSHAW,SECRETARY JOE STOY-VICE CHAIR WWW.SPOKANEVALLEY.ORG CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Review Meeting Date: January 10, 2013 Item: Check all that apply: ❑consent ❑old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin.report ❑ pending legislation FILE NUMBER: Shoreline Master Program Update AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Study Session—Draft Public Access Plan BACKGROUND: The City's Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update team has completed a Draft Public Access Plan for the SMP Update. The Public Access Plan is the fifth phase of the Shoreline Update process, and is an elective component of the Shoreline Management Act (SMA). Protecting public access to the State's shorelines is one of the three major policies of the SMA, and public access to publicly owned shorelines is a preferred use. The Washington Administrative Code (WAC 173-26- 221(4)(b)) identifies the principals and standards that must be addressed in SMPs. But, WAC 173-26- 221(4)(c) also notes that a jurisdiction may develop master program provisions for an effective public access system, rather than addressing public access on a site-by-site basis. The Public Access Plan provides an evaluation of the existing public accesses to the City of Spokane Valley's (COSV) shorelines, a description of existing recreational uses, and recommendations to improve both public access and public recreational uses within the shoreline jurisdiction. It will be incorporated into the SMP and is supported by other SMP elements. This plan is intended to be a coordinated planning document that can be used to support planning efforts of other agencies responsible for recreational opportunities in the shoreline, including the City Parks Department and Washington State Parks. Staff will discuss the Draft Public Access Plan, and the WAC guidelines applicable to the Plan. At this time the Planning Commission is tasked with reviewing the document, conducting a public hearing, considering public input, and finally providing a recommendation to the City Council. The draft Plan is attached for your review. Attorney Tadas Kisielius has completed a review of the Draft Public Access Plan to identify areas where the draft plan may exceed, meet, or fall below the state guidelines. He has provided input that has been incorporated in to the draft during document development. Mr. Kisielius will attend the Planning Commission public hearing to discuss his review of the document and answer questions. A public hearing has been scheduled for January 24, 2013 with deliberations to follow. Public notice for the hearing has been completed as required. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Shoreline Management Act (SMA) under RCW 90.58 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: Numerous discussions regarding SMP Update. APPROVAL CRITERIA: RCW 90.58 and WAC 173-26 define the process for approval of an SMP and require that the document be consistent with the goals and policies of the SMA. STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow,AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Public Access Plan 1 of 1 PUBLIC ACCESS PLAN City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program Update ruDIiC review urat December 31, 2012 1 4 , ` s .. .... a , ay, .., _ ._,.,, . + n r -: 'IWO fir IP S gy _. w41y- 1 i p° h K I! ' r � .x t r f 1 Iil r r Prepared for: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department Spokane Valley City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Prepared by: URS Corporation 920 N. Argonne Road, Suite 300 Spokane Valley, WA 99212 URS Project Number 36310035 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 3 2. INTEGRATION WITH OTHER COMMUNITY PLANS 6 2.1 Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Master Plan 6 2.2 Washington State Parks 7 2.4 Spokane River Forum 8 2.5 Friends of the Centennial Trail 9 3. PUBLIC ACCESS AND PUBLIC USES 8 4. SHORELINE CONDITIONS 12 4.1 Segment 1 Upstream City Limits to Flora Road 12 4.2 Segment 2 Flora Road to Trent Avenue 13 4.3 Segment 3 Trent Avenue to Coyote Rocks 15 4.4 Segment 4 Orchard Avenue Area 15 5. PUBLIC ACCESS PLAN 17 6. IMPLEMENTATION 18 Tables Table 3-1: Shoreline Access within the COSV Table 3-2: Typical Shoreline Uses within the COSV Table 5-1: Proposed Shoreline Access Improvements Table 5-2: Proposed Direct River Access Improvements Table 5-3: Proposed Future Shoreline Day Use Areas Figures Figure 3-1: Existing Public Access Figure 3-2 Major Use Areas Figure 5-1 Public Access Plan URSCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012, Public Review Draft 1 Acronyms COSV City of Spokane Valley DNR Washington Department of Natural Resources Ecology Washington Department of Ecology GIS Geographical Information Systems OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark RCW Revised Code of Washington ROW Right-of-Way RSP Riverside State Park SCD Spokane Conservation District SMA Shoreline Management Act SMP Shoreline Master Program SRCT Spokane River Centennial Trail State Parks Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission URS URS Corporation(author) WAC Washington Administrative Code WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife URSCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 11 SECTIONONE INTRODUCTION 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Summary Shoreline public access is one of the major policies of the SMA. Public access to the shoreline includes the ability of the general public to reach, touch, and enjoy the water's edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent locations. This document provides an evaluation of the existing public accesses to the City of Spokane Valley's (COSV) shorelines, a description of existing recreational uses, and recommendations to improve both public access and public recreational uses within the shoreline jurisdiction. This Public Access Plan is part of the COSV's Shoreline Master Program Update (SMP) and is supported by other elements of the SMP. This plan is intended to be a coordinated planning document that can be used to support planning efforts of other agencies responsible for recreational opportunities in the shoreline, including the City Parks Department and Washington State Parks. As described in this plan, the public currently enjoys significant access opportunities in the COSV due to public ownership of a large percentage of the shorelines and because of the existing recreational infrastructure within the river corridor. While existing access and recreational uses are abundant, this plan identifies opportunities to improve existing accesses for both shoreland and direct river users as well as identifies areas suitable for low intensity development of new user areas. Within the COSV the public is provided with direct access to much of the Spokane River corridor which includes State Park land, the Spokane River Centennial Trail (SRCT), and the Spokane River. This plan addresses the public's ability to access to the river corridor including the SRCT, as well as direct, physical access to the Spokane River, itself. Much of the land within the river corridor is owned by Washington State Parks and is classified and managed for "Resource Recreation". The Resource Recreation classification requires that recreational use and development be in balance with sustainable natural resource protection. As described below, this balance promotes public access to the shorelines but limits those opportunities to access the shoreline to planned locations to maintain the integrity of the trail and the natural surroundings. The rights of navigation and water dependent uses are protected. Portions of the SRCT and the Spokane River Water Trail' (proposed) are located within the COSV's shoreline jurisdiction. Both trails are promoted as regional trails that link to adjacent jurisdictions and benefit the entire region. Protection of natural resources and the visual character of the river corridor is important to attract users to these regional trails. This plan does not include Shelley Lake because the lake is privately owned and surrounded by private property and the Homeowners Association has indicated that they would like to continue to limit access such that there are no existing or potential opportunities for public access to the 1 The Spokane River Trail is a proposed water trail stretching from the headwaters of the Spokane River to its confluence with the Columbia River. The Spokane River Trail was proposed by the Spokane River Forum in 2010 to promote river use and protection. -1UMiCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 3 SECTIONONE INTRODUCTION Lake. The Central Pre-mix and Flora Road gravel pits identified in the City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, URS, 2010 will not be regulated as shorelines of the state until operations cease. Potential future uses of the Sullivan Road gravel pit are discussed as they are relevant to future public access within the river corridor. Public access and uses were determined based on the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (URS, 2010), the Shoreline Advisory Group meetings, and discussions with user groups and property owners including State Parks, Spokane Canoe and Kayak Club, the Northwest Whitewater Association, Friends of the Centennial Trail, COSV Parks and Recreation Department, and the Spokane River Forum. Additionally, where available, staff reviewed planning documents drafted by these various organizations. Field trips were performed during the summer of 2012 to verify information about existing public access and potential access opportunities. This plan was circulated for public comment and public hearings will be held. 1.2 Statutory and Regulatory Framework The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) states that: "The public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of natural shorelines of the state shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible... " (RCW 90.58.020). Additionally, the SMA indicates that: "Alterations of the natural conditions of the shorelines of the state, in those limited instances when authorized, shall be given priority for. . .development that will provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of people to enjoy the shorelines of the state."(RCW 90.58.020). In addition, increased public access is an important element of shoreline planning for Shorelines of Statewide Significance like the Spokane River (WAC 173-18-360; RCW 90.58.020; WAC 173-26-250). Consistent with these goals, the SMA requires local jurisdictions to include a public access element in their SMP that makes "provisions for public access to publicly owned areas" and a recreational element "for the preservation and enlargement of recreational opportunities, including but not limited to parks, tidelands, beaches, and recreational areas;. . ." RCW 90.58.100. According to Ecology's regulations, "Public access includes the ability of the general public to reach, touch, and enjoy the water's edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent locations.." WAC 173-226-221(4)(a). Shoreline public access basic principles included in WAC 173-26-221(4)(b) are: • Promoting the right to access waters held in public trust while protecting property rights and public safety. • Protecting the rights of navigation and space needed for water-dependent uses. COSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 4 SECTIONONE INTRODUCTION • Protecting the public's opportunity to enjoy physical and aesthetic qualities of the shorelines. • Regulating design, construction and operation of permitted uses to minimize interference with and enhance the public's use of the water. According to Ecology's regulations, the COSV "should plan for an integrated shoreline area public access system that identifies specific public needs and opportunities to provide public access." The planning process "shall also comply with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations that protect private property rights." WAC 173-26-221(4)(c). This plan implements these various statutory and regulatory requirements. In addition to this plan, the COSV will adopt regulations governing public access. COSY Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 5 SECTIONTWO INTEGRATION WITH OTHER COMMUNITY PLANS 2. INTEGRATION WITH OTHER COMMUNITY PLANS In general, public access planning guides public acquisition and development efforts in a systematic way to achieve a usable network of public access, parks, and other public sites. The following plans were reviewed to ensure that the shoreline planning process is coordinated with existing public access and recreation plans. 2.1 Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Master Plan The COSV Parks and Recreation Master Plan provides the foundation for the City's park and recreation programs. In summary, the Plan provides the following guidance and policies related to the Spokane River corridor. The City Parks department adopted the current draft in April 2006 and is scheduled to update the Parks Plan starting in the fall of 2012. The current parks plan provides a summary of the Needs Assessment (Chapter 5) of the 2004/2005 Household Recreation Survey. The survey had several key findings related to the river corridor including: • Residents indicated that acquiring additional land along the Spokane River was very important. • The SRCT is considered to have the third highest "usage" of various recreation areas in the Valley. • 31% of the respondents stated they do not use park facilities. • When asked what projects should have priority, acquisition of riverfront property and development of a city-wide trail system were cited most often. Chapter 2 of the Parks and Recreation plan provides key findings and policies related to the river corridor that recognize the relationship between the river as a natural resource and the recreational opportunities and seek to protect the resource while managing, maintaining and expanding recreational opportunities. These are summarized below. "Several natural resource areas in Spokane Valley are important for recreation. These lands may be environmentally sensitive and have limited development potential, but they are often conducive to park, open space, and recreation uses. The most notable natural resource is the Spokane River and its adjoining riparian corridor and flood zone."(P&R Plan, page 2-1.) • Policy 2-C: Seeks to protect or preserve significant natural resource for present and future generations. o Objective 2-C (1): seeks to acquire riparian corridors where feasible to protect these natural resources and to offer potential sites for trail development. o Objective 2-C (2): Develop effective natural resource management plans for significant natural areas within parks and other City-owned or controlled lands to ID management priorities and to guide development and restoration decisions. .uRScosy Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 6 SECTIONTWO INTEGRATION WITH OTHER COMMUNITY PLANS o Objective 2-C (3): Directly and /or cooperatively acquire and protect land within the flood zone of the Spokane River and other drainage corridors. Plan park and recreation facilities and public access to these areas where appropriate. Chapter 6 of the Parks and Recreation plan provides recommendations for improvements to the city park system that includes the following elements related to the river corridor. • Develop a comprehensive trails system utilizing the SRCT along the Spokane River as the backbone element. • Sullivan Park: Provide "better access and a viewpoint to the Spokane River". • Mission Avenue Trailhead: This site should be developed into a formal trailhead including parking, staging area and kiosk. • Myrtle Point: Develop a master plan for this park; develop an access from the south; consider a boat launch; develop a picnic area; develop a paved trail from the CT to this site. Under 6.6 Riverfront Access, the Plan states the Spokane River offers a unique recreation resource to the City. Attempts should be made to acquire additional property as it becomes available. Barker Bridge is an example of a potential site that could offer a boating access point. (P&R Plan, pg 6-43). 2.2 Riverside State Park Classification and Management Plan Washington State Parks prepared the Park Classification and Management Plan (C.A.M.P.) for Riverside State Park in March 2005. Riverside State Park is a 14,000 acre park along the Spokane and Little Spokane rivers. The SRCT is managed by Riverside State Park staff as an extension of the Park. In general the C.A.M.P. seeks to balance recreation opportunities with ecosystem protection. Because State Parks shares management of the SRCT located outside Riverside State Park, most of the SRCT is not covered in the CAMP plan. Even though the C.A.M.P. plan does not directly address the portion of the SRCT within the COSV, the plan provides guidance on how this section of the SRCT will be managed. Relevant portions of the CAMP plan are summarized below. • Park-Wide Recreational Resource/Facility Issues and Management Approaches Issue (Table 5) Interpretation and environmental education (760PW-R1): Programmatic Activities: Park staff should coordinate with region staff and the agency Interpretive Supervisor to solicit cooperation of local school districts, higher education institutions, museums, and other organizations and individuals to develop and implement an enhanced environmental education and historical/cultural education program for RSP. An Interpretive Center within Riverside State Park should be used as a hub of a linked system of interpretive signs and kiosks distributed throughout Riverside State Park and the SRCT. Such a linked system of interpretation could develop a thematic context .ultScosy Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 7 SECTIONTWO INTEGRATION WITH OTHER COMMUNITY PLANS focused on the past 12,000 years of changing land-use patterns along the Spokane River Valley. • Centennial Trail Sub-area Issues and Management Approaches (Table 8): Protection of wildlife habitat/natural ecosystems (760CT-N2): Land Classification: Those lands outside of RSP proper and within the trail corridor itself or development areas for trailheads, parking, etc. are classified as Resource Recreation, which requires that recreational use and development be in balance with sustainable natural resource protection. • Appropriate recreational uses (760CT-R2): Land Classification: The trail corridor itself, outside RSP proper, including sufficient areas for development of trailheads, parking, restrooms, and other ancillary facilities as necessary is classified as a Recreation Area so as not to limit development of trail uses and amenities. Park Policy: Park planning and management should attempt to accommodate the following existing and potential uses to a level that is consistent with protection of park natural and cultural resources and provided standards for recreational experience are met: walking, cycling, in-line skating, skating, running/jogging, wheel chair use, dog walks on leash, equestrian uses (where adjacent), nature viewing, baby strolling, fishing, river access, organized events, canoe/kayak put-in, picnicking, community links (trails), comprehensive interpretive program, CT extensions. • Maintenance,preservation, and improvement of facilities (760CT-R3): Park Recreational Resource Management Program: Capital Projects: 1) Resurface trail. 2) Develop trailhead at Sullivan Road. 3) Provide drinking fountains where feasible. 4) Explore the feasibility of building a parallel soft trail for equestrian use. 5) Comprehensive interpretation project for the entire trail, including potential for interpretive signs, brochures, and programs. In addition to the policies articulated in the CAMP, we understand that State Parks discourages uncoordinated, multiple trail access points, both formal and informal. State Parks prefers to limit access points to planned locations in order to maintain the integrity of the trail and of the natural surroundings and to facilitate the flow of traffic along the trail. State Parks has articulated this goal in conversations with COSV staff and has taken this position in response to specific development projects that have requested access to parks property or the SRCT. 2.4 Spokane River Forum The Spokane River Forum is a non-partisan, non-profit organization that creates materials, events and activities to promote regional dialogs and partnerships for sustaining a healthy river system while meeting the needs of a growing population. The Spokane River Forum is leading the effort to create a Spokane River Water Trail that will begin at the discharge of Coeur D'Alene Lake and extend to the confluence of the Columbia River. The Spokane River Forum has identified areas within the COSV shorelines as river access areas for the regional Spokane .uRSICOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 8 SECTIONTWO INTEGRATION WITH OTHER COMMUNITY PLANS River Water Trail. The major areas identified include direct river access at Barker Road, Sullivan Road, and at the Centennial Bridge (Plantes Ferry/Coyote Rocks). The Spokane River Forum identified other significant access points as part the Spokane River Water Trail including Sullivan Hole beach, Mission Avenue, and Mirabeau Point. 2.5 Friends of the Centennial Trail The Friends of the Centennial Trail promote and coordinate activities and improvements along the regional CT. Within the COSV desired projects include improving the parking areas at Barker Road and Mission Avenue by paving and landscaping in order provide more attractive and safe parking facilities and to reduce the cost of maintenance. An equestrian area and trail system on the north bank has been part of CT planning since early in its inception but is no longer a high priority. In general, access and public use of the CT is considered good within the city limits. Friends of the CT indicated that it was important not to disrupt traffic flow along the trail in order to provide for safe, nonhazardous trail use. Multiple trail access points, both formal and informal are discouraged and will need to be reviewed by State Parks early in the design process. COSY Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 9 SECTIONTHREE PUBLIC ACCESS AND PUBLIC USES 3. EXISTING PUBLIC ACCESS AND PUBLIC USES A goal of the COSV and of the SMA is to preserve the existing levels and quality of public access in the COSV. Public access to the Spokane River shorelines within the COSV is considered good and appears to meet the needs of the majority of users. According to the most recent recreation survey of the Spokane River system2 use along the Spokane River was considered to have sufficient amenities and was reported as not crowded, even though other sources document a high volume of use of the River Corridor, including an estimated 2 million uses in 2008 on the SRCT3. The 2004 recreational survey evaluated the entire river system as well as Lake Coeur D'Alene and Lake Spokane and does not specifically distinguish the portion of the Spokane River in the COSV. However, its general conclusions are applicable to the portion of the River in the COSV. Additionally, the survey's assessment of the abundant recreational opportunities is reflected in information provided by several local interest groups summarized in Section 2, above. Recreational opportunities benefit from the large percentage of public ownership within the river corridor. The 2006 City Parks and Recreation Plan shows that linear parks within the COSV, including the SRCT, are only slightly deficient with a need for an additional of 0.7 acres in 2005 and an estimated 60 acres in 2025 to meet the desired level of service of 1.36 acres per 1,000 residents4. In addition, discussions with user groups indicate that existing access is generally good, though improvements to accommodate specific user groups are needed. Important areas providing public access to the river corridor are shown in Table 3-1 and on Figure 3-1. There are many informal paths from private property that are used by residents to access the SRCT and the river that are not included in the table. In addition to these existing access points, there are two potential access points described later in the document that may be appropriate locations for development of future access to the river and the SRCT. Table 3-1 Existing Access to the River Corridor within the COSV Access SRCT River Spokane Parking Ownership Description Access Access River Trail Barker Yes Yes Yes Yes SP - south, Gravel Parking lot on south side for Road COSV — CT access. Limited parking on north bridge at north side boater access. Flora Road Yes Yes, No No COSV/SC South side- used by neighborhood. limited North side parking limited, no signage. Mission Yes Yes, Yes Yes COSV Gravel right of way used by Ave limited neighborhood and local/regional kayakers to access CT, river, and Sullivan Hole. 2 Recreation Facility Inventory and User Surveys Report Spokane River Project,No.2545,prepared by Louis Berger for Avista,2004. 3 Friends of the Centennial Trail website,http://www.spokanecentennialtrail.org/ 4 COSV Park and Recreation Master Plan,2006 Table 5.1. URSCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 8 SECTIONTHREE PUBLIC ACCESS AND PUBLIC USES Sullivan Rd Yes Yes, Yes Yes SP/COSV Formal city park owned by SP/ limited managed by COSV. Access improvements planned with new bridge. Mirabeau Yes Yes, Yes Yes SP Scenic and a popular location to Point limited access the CT and river. Trent Yes No No Yes SP CT access where Trent Avenue Avenue crosses the river. Parking is informal in public ROW. Plantes Yes Yes, Yes Yes SP Parking within SC and included due Ferry limited to its importance for river access at the west end of the COSV. Notes: 1. SP=State Parks ownership,COSV=City of Spokane Valley ownership, SC=Spokane County. The paved, ADA accessible SRCT Trail begins at the Idaho state line and ends at Nine Mile Falls, Washington with a length of 37 miles of which 11 miles are within the COSV. The SRCT path generally follows the contours of the Spokane River, allowing access for many types of outdoor non-motorized recreational activities. The SRCT provides the public opportunities for walking, running, and biking and provides a means to access adjacent areas (fields and woods) that have informal trails and support activities such as birding, fishing and quiet aesthetic enjoyment of the river corridor. Along much of its length within the SRCT the SRCT is separated from adjacent private properties either by vegetated buffers and/ or high banks. These natural surroundings contribute to the aesthetics of the river corridor and help to screen adjacent development and uses. The natural surroundings are appropriately interrupted at a limited number of access points. Generally, most activities occur or are accessed from the south bank since access to the north bank is limited with the exception of Sullivan Park. Direct use of the river includes fishing, swimming, boating and summertime floating. Boating and floating activities require river put-ins and take-outs in order to run the river. The Spokane River Water Trail, promoted as a regional trail, has identified put-ins and take-outs along the river from Coeur D'Alene Lake to the Columbia River. Four of these regionally important river accesses are located within the COSV. The Barker Road, Mission Avenue, Sullivan Road, and Mirabeau Point accesses are used for direct river access during warm weather. The Plantes Ferry access was lost when Upriver Drive was realigned and now boating use is limited downstream of Mirabeau Point. The Spokane River Forum and State Parks are in the process of acquiring funding to replace the Plantes Ferry access. Within the COSV are located three popular local and regional kayak park and play features known as Sullivan Hole, Mini-Climax Wave and the Zoo Wave. Fishing occurs throughout the length of the river but during summer the area between Sullivan Road and Mirabeau Point is popular due to cold aquifer water entering the river. Table 3-2 provides a summary of typical uses found within the river corridor. Figure 3-2 shows the location of significant use areas. .uRSCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 9 SECTIONTHREE PUBLIC ACCESS AND PUBLIC USES Table 3-2 Typical Shoreline Uses within the COSV Use Location Public ADA Access Notes Access (1) CT Uses(hike,bike) Along the Good Good Trail related activities. CT Swimming River Good Generally poor Swimming at dispersed beaches. No ADA accessible beach,few amenities at beaches. Dispersed uses --- --- --- Protection of adjacent land uses and natural areas is important for these activities. -Fishing River Good Generally poor -Birding Wood/Fields Good Good along trail -Quiet Wood/Fields Good Good along trail Floating River Good Difficult Includes inner-tubing and recreational summer rafting. Whitewater Boating River Good Boat access improvements are needed to advance the Spokane River Water Trail including ADA access at major put-ins. -Barker Road --- Good Possible Access good, parking needs to be retained and expanded at this high use area. Improvements to boat access could make this site ADA compliant. -Sullivan Road --- Moderate Difficult Erosion has occurred on the slopes due to high use and no defined paths. Improvements are expected when the new Sullivan Road Bridge is constructed. -Mirabeau Point --- Good Possible River access is good for small boats. A long steep path to climb for larger boats and rafts. A dirt road exists to the river that could be used for vehicle or ADA access. -Plantes Ferry --- Poor Possible Boating activity for rafts and larger boats is limited due to no access. Currently there is a proposal to construct a ramp near the CT parking lot. Kayak Park and Play River -Mini-Climax --- Moderate No Access is by a steep eroding bank. Better Wave path to river is needed. -Sullivan Hole --- Good No A good example of a multi-use feature on the river. Popular with floaters, boaters, swimmers, fishermen and kayakers. Accessed from Mission Road. -Zoo Wave --- Difficult Possible The least used of the kayak park and play spots due to lack of vehicle access. Notes: 1. ADA access is a non-technical evaluation of the possibility of adding ADA compliant access for the various uses. Public access on the north shore is limited to public right of ways, the Barker Road boat put-in, and Sullivan Park. There are many old dirt roads and informal trails within the shoreline jurisdiction that are used for hiking, mountain biking and by fisherman to access fishing areas. .uitSCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 10 SECTIONTHREE PUBLIC ACCESS AND PUBLIC USES Use is more limited than on the south shore, in part because much of the adjacent land is zoned industrial and there are few user amenities such as the SRCT. Access is considered adequate along the north shore for current and anticipated future uses. While public access is generally good on the south bank there are few user amenities to provide user services or to attract users to the river corridor beyond the SRCT and the river access uses described in Table 3-2 above. User amenities can include public facilities and services such as public bathrooms, water fountains, benches, picnic areas, and parking as well as potential commercial uses such as private bike and boat rentals, shuttle service and restaurants. COSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 1 1 SECTIONFOUR SHORELINE CONDITIONS 4. SHORELINE CONDITIONS Shorelines included in this evaluation include the portions of the Spokane River corridor that are located within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley. This includes shorelines from the eastern City boundary (River Mile [RM] 91) to the western City boundary (RM 81.5), excluding the area within the Town of Millwood (RM 82.1 to RM 83.4). The evaluation is divided into the four river segments used for the Shoreline Inventory. 4.1 Segment 1 — Upstream City Limits to Flora Road Character of the River Corridor: The river corridor through this segment is a mix of residential and open space. Areas on the north side of the river include residential and industrial uses. The south side of the river is predominately single family residential. In many areas the residential uses are separated from the public uses by high steep banks or vegetated buffers. This segment provides some isolation and urban wilderness for trail and river users. The river contains many of the whitewater rapids that make the Spokane River a popular summer float. In the residential areas there are many informal trails used to access the SRCT and for neighborhood swimming and fishing areas. It is considered by many users as a very attractive part of the SRCT and river. Since much of the shorelines are already developed the character of the river corridor is not expected to change substantially. Access and Use of the River Corridor: Access to the river corridor occurs predominately at Barker Road and to a lesser extent Flora Road on both the north and south sides of the river. Eden Road (closed City right-of-way) is used for neighborhood access. Recreational use is relatively heavy with access provided by the Barker Road SRCT parking area on the south bank and the Barker Road Boat Launch on the North bank. The existing parking appears adequate for both SRCT use and at the north bank boat launch. The Barker Road access is easily accessible from I-90 and Trent Avenue. The nearest commercial area for user services (food, drink, gas) is near the Barker Road/Sprague Avenue intersection with additional services at Harvard Road in Liberty Lake (gas, restaurant, hotel). The KOA campground is located approximately 0.5 miles north of the Barker Road Bridge. Key Use Areas: Key use areas are: • Barker Road Bridge where the gravel SRCT parking area (south side) and the boat launch (north side) are popular destinations for users. Parking and access is adequate for current users. • Flora Road (North) North shore area east of Flora Road is an area used by hikers and fisherman to access the river. Parking is limited. • Flora Road (South) Direct river access at Flora Road is used as a small boat launch, for swimming, fishing, and neighborhood SRCT access. Parking is very limited. cOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 12 SECTIONFOUR SHORELINE CONDITIONS 4.2 Segment 2 — Flora Road to Trent Avenue Character of the River Corridor: The river corridor through this segment is a mix of isolated wooded areas, expansive fields and commercial development. This river segment is generally adjacent to large parcel mixed uses on south side and industrial uses on the north side with an area of existing residential use on the south (portion of Greenacres). Much of the land is currently undeveloped. Recreational use is heavy through this river segment and includes SRCT trail uses, fishing, boating and floating. It is anticipated that additional commercial/mixed use development will occur adjacent to the shoreline jurisdiction. Future development will likely result in increased use of the river corridor and additional access requirements to service future developments. This segment provides some isolation and an urban wilderness experience for trail and river users but is expected to change as the area is developed and becomes more urbanized. Access and Use of the River Corridor: Access to the river corridor predominately occurs at Mission Avenue, Sullivan Park and Mirabeau Point. Other access points include E. Indiana Road, a public right of way near the Walt Worthy office building, Spokane Mall access, and the Trent Avenue access. Use of these access points is limited due to limited parking, little historical use, or lack of signage. Mission Avenue is an important access used by kayakers to access the popular Sullivan Hole park and play area. Sullivan Park is a formal city park located on the north side of the river. Sullivan Park is easily accessible from I-90 and Trent Avenue. Mission Avenue and Mirabeau Point are both used to access the river corridor but are more difficult to find due to lack of signage. All of these areas are close to the Spokane Valley Mall which can provide services (food and drink) to users of the river corridor. Mirabeau Point is convenient to services on Pines and Trent Avenues while Mission Avenue is convenient to the Spokane Valley Mall and the Hanson development located east of the mall. Key Use Areas: Key use areas within this segment include both river corridor access and specific high use areas. River Corridor Access: • Mission Avenue is used by the neighborhood to access the SRCT. The Mission Road access is used for direct river access for fishing and swimming and is very important to local and regional kayakers to access the Sullivan Hole play spot. Much of the nearby property is zoned mixed use. Currently (year 2012) approximately 200 apartments are being constructed on a portion of the property adjacent to this access. It is anticipated that the increased population will increase use in this area. • Sullivan Road provides access to Sullivan Park on the north side of the river and the Spokane Valley Mall on the south side of the river. Sullivan Park is a major shoreline access point used for day use (picnicking and swimming), for direct river access, and for parking to access the SRCT, located on the south side of the river requiring users to cross Sullivan Bridge. The proposed Sullivan Bridge improvements will provide safe pedestrian access and improvements for direct river access. Designated SRCT parking cOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 13 SECTIONFOUR SHORELINE CONDITIONS and trail signage does not exist at the Spokane Valley Mall but trail users do park there to access the SRCT. • Mirabeau Point provides an important access to the SRCT and the river. Activities at Centerplace introduce visitors to the river corridor. Parking, trail and river access are adequate at Mirabeau Point. • The Trent Avenue access can be improved. Trent Avenue is a high traffic area and this access is minimal signed and not very attractive for users. With improvements this area could become an important area to access the SRCT. River Corridor Use Areas: • Sullivan Hole is the most popular kayak play spot on the river. Nearby is the Mini- Climax wave used by kayakers at higher river flows. The area has seen increasing multi- use activities including fishing, swimming and picnicking. Upstream of Sullivan Hole, on the north side of the river is located a large sandy beach that is currently only accessible from the water or by foot. In the future, when the Sullivan Road gravel pit is closed access to this beach may be feasible along the existing gravel pit access road. • Mission Avenue is a high use area for river access. Development of nearby properties will bring increased use to this area. Currently many users access the river down a steep, eroded trail right by the access. Signage and low intensity development (picnic tables, benches and signage) at the nearby old "Lions Park" would provide an appropriate day use area. • A popular beach is located downstream of Sullivan Park on the north side of the river. This beach is accessible from Sullivan Park. Development of a trail and signage would be appropriate to direct users to this area. • The Zoo Wave is a kayak park and play area located downstream of the Union Pacific Railroad Bridge and upstream of Mirabeau Point. There is no parking and the feature is typically accessed when running the river. The south shoreline adjacent to the Zoo Wave is a large flat river bench that is suitable for day use and may be an appropriate area to construct ADA access. • Mirabeau Point is a high use area that is suitable for development of low intensity day uses to help direct users to low impact areas. Suitable development might include better definition of the trail system, fencing, development of an overlook and picnic areas. Additional planning to protect these area while maintaining uses will be required by City and State parks. • Fishing is popular between Sullivan Bridge and Mirabeau Point. Informal trails lead to the fishing areas. Future Use Areas: During this review of river corridor access and users the following areas were noted as possible areas that could benefit access to the SRCT and the river in the future. • Completion of mining activities at the Sullivan Road gravel pit is not expected in the near future but when completed a 160 acre cold water lake will exist. This lake is a window into the Spokane aquifer and uses will need to be limited to protect the region's water supply. The combination of a large lake adjacent to the river corridor provides an .uRScOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 14 SECTIONFOUR SHORELINE CONDITIONS opportunity to increase access to the north side of the river; including the large beach by Sullivan Hole and for economic development of the strip between the lake and the river. • The undeveloped land east of Mirabeau Point is zoned mixed use. Additional access close to the Union Pacific railroad Bridge should be considered when developed. A new SRCT/river access near this location would provide access to the SRCT, the Zoo Wave and adjacent day use area, and linkage to the COSV Millwood trail currently under design. • There is no direct SRCT access from the Pinecroft property. Depending on the type of development an additional public access point may be appropriate for users in this area to access the SRCT. 4.3 Segment 3 —Trent Avenue to Coyote Rocks Character of the River Corridor: The river corridor through this segment is characterized by well vegetated, high steep bank, decreasing in elevation at Myrtle Point, Plantes Ferry and Coyote Rocks. Myrtle Point park is an undeveloped park owned by the COSV is located in this river segment. Through much of this segment river corridor uses are isolated from the adjacent uplands. Due to the steep banks and the Myrtle Point Park, the character of this segment is not expected to substantially change. Access and Use of the River Corridor: Through much of this segment the COSV has jurisdiction on only the south bank. Land uses along this segment include the City's Myrtle Point Park and the Coyote Rocks residential development. Recreational use is relatively heavy at the beaches by Coyote Rocks with access from the Plantes Ferry SRCT parking lot is located on the north bank (Spokane County jurisdiction). The only legal access to the south bank from within the COSV is at Trent Avenue. Access from the residential areas to the south is difficult due to the lack of public parking and a legal access to the SRCT and Myrtle Point. The nearest commercial area for services (food, drink, gas) is along Trent Avenue. Most users enter this area from the north side Plantes Ferry Parking lot. Key Use Areas: Key use areas are: • Myrtle Point is located on the south bank of Plantes Ferry and is undeveloped. The area is used for swimming and fishing. The area should remain as a conservation area due to its connection with the highlands to the north but is appropriate for development of low intensity day uses such as picnicking and swimming. Access to the area from neighborhood to the south should be improved and the area has been identified as needing boat access to fill in a gap of the Spokane River Trail. • The Trent Avenue access has potential to direct users to the river corridor. Trent is a high traffic road and an inviting entrance to the river would be suitable here. 4.4 Segment 4—Orchard Avenue Area Character of the River Corridor: .ustsCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 15 SECTIONFOUR SHORELINE CONDITIONS The river in this segment is impounded by Upriver Dam and is lake like. Through this segment the COSV has jurisdiction on only the south bank. This segment is almost entirely residential. The residential properties extend to the river and are generally fully developed to the waters edge. Access and Use of the River Corridor: Uses include swimming, fishing and boating. This is the only shoreline within the COSV that is suitable for docks and motor boats. There is no public access located in this area of the city. Key Use Areas: • There are no public key use areas within this segment. COSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 16 SECTIONFIVE PUBLIC ACCESS PLAN 5. PROPOSED SHORELINE ACCESS AND USER IMPROVEMENTS As described above, the Spokane River corridor has significant existing public access opportunities. Based on current information, these existing access opportunities are adequate to meet demand for current and anticipated future uses. This section addresses improvements to existing access and new access areas that may be proposed. When identifying potential future access improvements, the COSV acknowledges the efforts of Washington State Parks and the City Parks department to balance development of recreational opportunities against preservation of the natural environment that is important to the recreational experience. Accordingly, COSV seeks to implement the preferred approach of Washington State Parks and Friends of Centennial Trail goal of limiting proliferation of uncoordinated, multiple access points and instead focusing improvements on existing access points or developing new day use areas or access points at select, appropriate planned locations. The proposed improvements described below have been developed from comments received at public meetings and from communications with user groups and with park managers. Proposed improvements are consistent with proposed shoreline Environmental Designations, existing park management plans, and the preservation of high-quality conservation areas. Improvements to existing access areas and for the development of future use areas will need to comply with the Goals, Policies, and Regulations as adopted by the City. Figure 5-1 shows the location of these proposed improvements. Improvements to Existing Shoreland Access Access to the SRCT is good. Improvements to existing access points can include improvements to the existing parking areas to reduce maintenance, provide stormwater treatment, and provide ADA access. Additionally, improvements on existing access points can address other issues such as improved signage, ADA compliance or construction of new amenities at appropriate locations including public bathrooms, water fountains, benches, picnic areas, and paved parking. Table 5-1 provides a summary of proposed improvements to existing access areas commonly used to access the SRCT and the land within the shoreline. Table 5-1 Proposed Shoreland Access Improvements Access Proposed Improvements Barker Road- Pave, landscape and provide stormwater treatment for the existing gravel SRCT parking area. South Parking area and SRCT trail access are ADA accessible though the slopes to and on the trail appear to be steep. Barker Road- Increase parking for direct river access. Purchase of additional property may be necessary to North provide sufficient parking when Barker Road is widened. Provide an ADA compliant path to the river put-in. Mission Ave Pave, landscape and provide additional parking, including ADA parking. Bathroom/changing room would be helpful. Sullivan Park Parking and amenities are sufficient. Provide an ADA compliant river put-in/takeout when the new bridge is constructed. _UMCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 17 SECTIONFIVE PUBLIC ACCESS PLAN Mirabeau Parking and ADA access are good. Park Trent Avenue Pave,landscape,bathroom, signage for trail access. Myrtle Point Provide public access and parking from the south side. Improvements to Existing Direct River Access Direct river access is used for river floating, fishing, swimming, and kayak park and play activities. Floating the river is a popular activity for summertime innertubers and the whitewater community which includes kayakers, canoeists, and rafters. Existing boat accesses are not ADA compliant and it is difficult to launch larger rafts and drift boats using a trailer. The lack of a useable takeout at the west side of the city near Plantes Ferry/Coyote Rocks creates an impediment to boat use on the river. Table 5-2 provides a summary of proposed improvements that benefit river users. Table 5-2 Proposed Direct River Access Improvements Access Proposed Improvements Barker Road - See Table 5-1 and 5-2. North Mission Ave See Table 5-1 and 5-2. Sullivan Park Access to the river is difficult and high use has resulted in erosion. Provide ADA compliant boat ramp. Mirabeau Park Access and signage adequate for use. Myrtle Point Support user groups and State Parks to identify and construct a boat launch in this area. /Plantes Ferry COSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 18 SECTIONFIVE PUBLIC ACCESS PLAN Spokane River —Future Use Areas Trail and river use is expected to increase in the future as populations increase and vacant land is developed within or adjacent to the shoreline jurisdiction. It may become appropriate to improve public access opportunities to address any unmet demand for access or to compensate for impacts to existing access opportunities. Any development of future access areas will need to be coordinated with both City and State Parks and located and designed consistent with the COSV's SMP. If additional new access areas are requested they must be designed for public access, including parking and signage. When considering potential future access improvements, the COSV will balance development of recreational opportunities against preservation of the natural environment that is important to the recreational experience. Consistent with Parks policies, COSV will limit proliferation of uncoordinated, multiple access points and seek to focus on new day use areas or access points at select, appropriate planned locations identified below. Table 5-3 includes proposed access improvements that have been identified as suitable areas to improve access to popular shoreline use areas while protecting more sensitive areas. The proposed new day use areas are located in disturbed areas or areas subject to development pressure that are suitable for development of low impact day uses. Low impact development of these sites, utilizing existing trails and dirt roads can be accomplished with little ecological impact to the shorelines. The development of these low intensity user areas will benefit the shoreline environment by directing shoreline users to areas that minimize disturbances to the shoreline vegetation. Table 5-3 Proposed Future Shoreline Day Use Areas Access Proposed Improvements Eden Road Currently used as neighborhood access. If the river bench alongside the river is developed into a day use area, opening Eden Road and providing parking is warranted. In the past the Greenacres neighborhood has rejected proposals to make this a formal SRCT access. Mission Potential day use area at"Lions Park". Provide picnic tables,benches and Improve signage. Ave/Lions Park Mirabeau-East New parking and access near the UP RR bridge to support access to the Zoo Wave and a potential day use area located on the river bench near the Zoo Wave. Mirabeau Park Provide day use area along heavily used rock and river,picnic tables and benches. Pinecroft Provide public parking and public access to the SRCT at the Pinecroft subdivision if warranted by development uses. Myrtle Point Provide/stabilize beach access,provide a day use area. Spokane River—Economic Development New development along or adjacent to the river corridor such as restaurants, recreational equipment stores, and similar enterprises attracts users and provides needed services. There are limited services available near the shorelines and potential development of gathering places at or near busy road corridors (Barker Road, Sullivan Road, Mirabeau Point, or Trent Avenue) could -URSCOSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 19 SECTIONFIVE PUBLIC ACCESS PLAN provide services for shoreline users. The shoreline is a sensitive environment with lots of public use and oversight. Any future development within the shoreline will need to be located in appropriate areas to avoid net loss of shoreline ecological functions and any ecological impacts associated with a new development will need to be mitigated. COSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 17 SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 6. IMPLEMENTATION Public access improvements within the shoreline may be proposed by applicants including public agencies. These voluntary public access improvements if requested and constructed as part of a proposed development should be consistent with this plan and with the SMP and must benefit the community. New shoreline public access should be integrated into the platting and site development planning process. In general, the COSV chooses to implement the approach of Washington State Parks and Friends of SRCT of discouraging uncoordinated, multiple access points, and, instead, focusing any improvements on existing or planned locations identified in this document in order to maintain the integrity of the river corridor, the SRCT and its natural surroundings and to facilitate the flow of traffic along the SRCT and Spokane River. Areas identified in this plan for access and use improvements are located in part on public lands. Implementation of proposed access improvements will therefore require that the COSV coordinate with State Parks. It is expected that any planning and implementation of publically funded improvement projects will be coordinated through each parks capital improvement plan. In addition to voluntary improvements proposed by applicants, state shoreline regulations require private projects to provide public access in certain circumstances. However, the regulations acknowledge limitations on the requirement to provide public access. First private projects are not required to provide access on-site when a public access plan supports more effective public access opportunities. As identified above, this plan identifies planned locations for future access to discourage proliferation of multiple uncoordinated accesses such that on-site access will not typically be required unless consistent with the improvements identified in this plan. Second, private projects are not required to provide access if the requirement would violate constitutional or other legal limitations. The most critical constitutional limit on development conditions requiring public access is the doctrine of "regulatory takings," which requires local government to show a "nexus"5 and "rough proportionality"6 for such conditions (also known as the "Nollan/Dolan" analysis). These principles, which originated under a federal constitutional takings analysis, have similarly been applied in a Washington constitutional context. Based on these constitutional principles', access can be required of private property owners in the 5 The City must show that an"essential nexus"exists between a legitimate state interest and the permit condition. The focus here is on the nature of the permit condition and the need to show that its nature is related to an adverse impact of the proposed development. 6 To comply with the requirement of"rough proportionality,"the City must show that the degree of the exactions demanded by the permit conditions bears the required relationship to the projected impact of the proposed development. The focus here is on the degree of the permit condition and the need to show that its degree is related to the extent of the adverse impact. Public access conditions may raise other constitutional issues, such as substantive due process and equal protection,but the takings evaluation outlined above typically addresses most issues related to public access. A publication providing guidance on these and other legal issues has been produced by the Washington Attorney General's Office. Public access policies and regulations proposed by the City should be evaluated under the takings framework described in the Attorney General Guidance to satisfy the requirements of RCW 36.70A.370. COSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 18 SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY shoreline context if demand for access exceeds current capacity' or if existing access opportunities are impaired.9 As described earlier, it is not anticipated that development within the shoreline will create a demand that exceeds existing capacity because existing access to the shorelines within the COSV is generally good and current information suggests that these existing access opportunities are adequate to meet demand for current and anticipated future uses. However, if a private project proposes to remove or impact existing public access (physical or visual), then the City will typically impose a condition related to public access to mitigate this impact to a degree similar to the impact to existing public access that is created by the proposed project. 8 For example,if a private project increases the demand for public access to shorelines,then the City can typically impose a condition related to public access to mitigate this impact,again,to a degree that is proportional to the amount of increased demand. 9 For example,if a private project proposes to remove or impact existing public access(physical or visual),then the City can typically impose a condition related to public access to mitigate this impact to a degree similar to the impact to existing public access that is created by the proposed project. COSV Public Access Plan, December 31, 2012 Public Review Draft 19 FIGURES i erryrail/ess rJ —— — . Trent Ave �� ,�„ I _ �� ,�.,, �- 1 •` to Centennial Tail Access a tfi, a ® 1 i a • _ L7 r-1 -,� MrabeauPOnt "'�t 4 . . Centennial Trail Access) I - • - _ q '•State Park • v ' • 1 Barker-North _. _ -g - - - �- Flora-North \�� River Access deg R .,. = 1' - River Access - - - , , ..41114141111111t: _ \-Barker-South \\\ Sullivan Park 'g Centennial TraJ Centennial Tra/ .Flora-South Access River Access a ;`Ceneial Trail A ccess r ppp } • • J'�. _ _ - Mission Ave r _• -I., I 'S_ Centennial Trail) - • "(` e+ River Access U ` �• - �•_ r - 1111•Map Features Figure 3-1 Existing Public Access e Spokane River Centennial Trail " ' City of Spokane Va ey Jurisdiction Boundaries s Public Access Plan Lot Lines I I I Shoreline Master Program Update D Existing Public Access o moo s000 November zor2 F URSeet I01.111.111111.. Myrtle Point City Pa k � Coyote Rocks Q Swimming Area .mot- •� ` .t :@.' >.MimbeauP .f._ �> _ I 1 hf 9 e O. ■ ' r , mavoxe �.• p ,_ • �:FI Road Heath — -I I Q • e 'F - R..N rth&SONh a ® D ® s �s nllllrl4i —. — M Q 3 Is r \gll. '.A 0a.. - 6 :o - i,1 f " J- . n A tl N Jl I 4A-44R 4y7 ir--r — 11/1 i � 1i ' ,k2 r • ri '44'Map Features Figure 3.2 Major Use Areas � Spokane River Centennial Trail ' City of Spokane Va ey Jurisdiction Boundaries s Public Access Plan Lot Lines Shoreline Master Program Update D Existing Public Access o a000 s000 November 2012 Feel Recreation Sites • Public Access ?Myrtle'POint From the South Day USe Area Plantes Ferry 0 ii. Boat Laurc _— f (othest - - '' :.+ , 't it /f Etlen Roatl _ � -•Y 5F y'." / ® P s. P, 1� DaY USe Area 'dE -" Trent Ave J J _y (Future) t -4, Pme loft ', r _ eAaa aa,. \ t "1 I I L . ,. �� r . � � rw i , Sullivan Road 1 .+. ' �. y , Mirabeau Point - •r Gravel Pit I "+■ m • Day U.Area - (Future) Sullivan Hole Bark R tl North _ .. Mirabceu East - Beach Access (Increase Parking, __- - 1 I Day USe Area ADA Accessible Bast Launch) • (Future) (Future) O 0 tF. t Barker Rced South �� (Pave and Landscape)AI X111 . 'k -11.■ Mr ditizrUp Illlgill�L :-mss,.'®�... — °_ Sullivan Park F°". N 9 — (Provide Boat Launch) - - " *• I. 'iQ ( crease Parking,Bathrooms) - Mission&e • Day Use Area Pave In rkin Ba ms) • s rk . 41410 DaY USe II Lio•Pa 'ih• (FutureArea) - f 111 : �- - #- - - 1111' . - Map Features Figure 5-1 Public Access Plan � Spokane River Centennial Trail `v'` °' City of Spokane Va ey Jurisdiction Boundaries s Public Access Plan Lot Lines Shoreline Master Program Update Access Boundaries o MOO soon November 2012 URS Feet A Existing Public Access CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Review Meeting Date: January 10, 2012 Item: Check all that apply: E discussion ❑ old business ❑new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin.report ❑ pending legislation FILE NUMBER: N/A AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Discussion—Manufactured Home Regulations GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 19.40.120 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: On November 8, 2012, the Planning Commission discussed issues related to manufactured home regulations. The Commission recommended a change to the SVMC to allow used manufactured homes in manufactured home subdivisions. BACKGROUND: On November 8, 2012, the Planning Commission discussed state and local regulations pertaining to manufactured housing. Staff proposed a change to zoning regulations that would allow used manufactured homes to be placed in manufactured home subdivisions. This discussion is a follow-up to determine if the Planning Commission believes that staff should approach City Council to further discuss manufactured home regulations. NOTICE: N/A APPROVAL CRITERIA: N/A OPTIONS: Planning Commission may request that staff discuss further with Council; or Planning Commission satisfied with current regulations. RECOMMENDATION: N/A STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, Director Scott Kuhta, AICP, Planning Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 5 -Housing 2. Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 10—Neighborhoods 3. Introduction and Overview of Manufactured Home Legislation 4. SVMC—Manufactured Home Regulations 1 of 1 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 5 — HOUSING 5.0 Introduction Housing and neighborhoods are the warp and woof of community fabric, providing shelter for families and the basis for the most fundamental of social interaction. Home ownership is recognized as a stabilizing force in community development objectives, although it does not meet the needs of all families or individuals. The cost of housing is only one of a number of complex and inter-related variables that will determine affordability for different segments of the population. Age, family status, employment, income, transportation and lifestyle choice are also important in determining the need for housing in the present, as well as for the purpose of forecasting future housing demand. The continued viability and desirability of Spokane Valley neighborhoods will depend on the quality of housing stock, adjacent land uses, traffic patterns, schools and freedom from the fear of crime. Neighborhood development standards should preserve the character of existing neighborhoods, provide for infill development, encourage redevelopment where necessary, and minimize cut-through traffic and safety concerns. Standards are established by development regulations intended to implement the Comprehensive Plan. Actual housing stock is ordinarily provided by the private sector, with funding augmented through public and non-profit agencies for special populations. Special populations include the housing needs of low and moderate income families and individuals, the elderly, the disabled, persons with debilitative conditions or injuries, and the homeless. 5.1 Planning Context 5.1.1 Washington State Growth Management Act The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)1 provides the following guidance applicable to housing and neighborhoods: • Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. • Reduce inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. • Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. • Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. • Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. GMA further requires "[a] housing element ensuring the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods"that includes2: • An inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs that identifies the number of housing units necessary to manage projected growth; • A statement of goals and policies for housing preservation, improvement, and development; RCW 36.70A.020(2) 2 WAC 365-195-310 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 1 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • Identification of sufficient land area for the number of needed housing units, including government assisted housing, housing for low income families, mobile/manufactured housing, multiple family housing, and special needs housing; • A strategy and policy for meeting the housing needs of all economic segments of the community. The Comprehensive Plan should provide for innovative land management techniques, including but not limited to density bonuses, cluster housing, planned unit developments, and the transfer of development rights.3 5.1.2 County Wide Planning Policies The County Wide Planning Policies (CWPPs) observe that the marketplace generally meets the housing demands of the "upper income segment of the population." The CWPPs focus on "mechanisms to increase the availability of affordable housing for middle- and lower-income households. They also promote accessibility to service/activity centers, jobs and public transportation for special needs populations, and fair housing. Policy Topic 7 -Affordable Housing Policies 1. Each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan shall specify the strategies for attaining its affordable housing objectives. These strategies should include a diverse mix of housing types and prices, including low-income housing. 2. Each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan shall include policies and strategies to promote accessibility to service/activity centers, jobs, and public transportation for special-needs populations. 3. All jurisdictions should establish consistent residential development regulations and standards within Urban Growth Areas. 4. Each jurisdiction's development policies, regulations and standards should provide for the opportunity to create affordable housing in its community. Such policies may include regulatory tools, such as inclusionary zoning, performance/impact zoning, mixed-use development, and incentives for increasing density to promote greater choice and affordable housing. 5. Each jurisdiction shall ensure that standards in existing or future development regulations facilitate rehabilitation, restoration and relocation of existing structures, or new construction of affordable housing. 6. In conjunction with other policy topics, coordinate housing, transportation, and economic development strategies to ensure that sufficient land and densities for affordable housing are provided in locations readily accessible to employment centers. 7. Each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan and development regulations shall recognize and incorporate the mandates of federal and state fair housing laws, particularly as they relate to siting and development of housing for special-needs populations. 5.1.3 Other Statutory Requirements 5.1.3.1 Washington State Growth Management Acts The adequacy of housing stock to supply the needs of all segments of the population should incorporate a "regional perspective.... with the understanding that the population planned for is county-wide"with attention given to the removal of"regulatory barriers." 3 RCW 36.70A.090 4 CWPP Policy Topic 7 5 WAC 365-195-070 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 2 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 5.1.3.2 Fair Housing Act The Fair Housing Act6 prohibits discrimination based on race, national origin, creed, color and family status. It includes the sale of property and leases/rentals where the lessor owns more than three units for sale or rent. 5.1.3.3 Affordable Housing Inventory' A 1993 legislative amendment requires that all cities and public agencies develop an inventory of public properties no longer needed for use and which may be available for affordable housing. The inventory is to identify individual property locations, size, and current zoning category. Public agencies include all school districts and the state departments of Natural Resources, Transportation, Social and Health Services, Corrections, and General Administration. The inventory is provided to the Washington Office of Community Development (OCD) and is to be updated annually by November 1. The inventory is available from OCD upon written request. 5.1.3.4 Accessory Dwelling Units The Housing Act of 19938 requires that all Washington cities with a population over 20,000 permit accessory residential housing in all residential areas under such conditions and requirements as the community may establish. 5.2 Inventory and Analysis of Existing and Projected Housing Needs 5.2.1 Population The types of households in Spokane Valley help determine the kinds of housing we may need in the future. As the following chart (figure 5.1) reveals, the majority of households in Spokane Valley consist of married couples, with or without children, who own their own home. The majority of married couples live in owner-occupied housing, although there is still a great demand for rental housing for married couple families. The population of single mothers who live in rental housing is more than double that of single mothers who own their own homes. Single parents of both sexes tend to be renters. This suggests that more rental housing should be placed near schools and day care facilities, or alternatively that such support facilities should be encouraged in close proximity to housing for these families. Although preferences for ownership or rental vary with individuals, choices for families of modest means may be severely limited. As a result, rental housing located close to public transportation routes and employment centers improves access to schools and services,thereby reducing transportation costs. The population of single women over the age of 65 is also more than double that of single men the same age. Average life expectancy continues to climb, and an increasing percentage of Spokane Valley's population will be 65 and over in the next 10 to 20 years because of the natural aging of the population, relocation to housing meeting special needs, and because of the availability of affordable housing. Because women tend to live longer than men, this population will be predominantly female. Statistically, elderly females have lower incomes than their male counterparts due to lack of or reduced pensions and other retirement provisions. The elderly are nevertheless reluctant to forego the independence and familiarity associated with living in their own homes. As a result, federal and state policy has shifted from one of providing institutionalized care for seniors, to a more home-based or "aging in place" policy. Many seniors, and most of those over 75, require some level of in-home services, a need that increases within advancing age. A continuum of care that makes available in-home services, progressing through assisted living, congregate care and long-term facilities should be located near medical and community services and shopping. Barrier-free design and handicap access become increasingly important for this segment of the population. 624 CFR 100.20S RCW 35.21.687 8 RCW 43.63A.215 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 3 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Figure 6.1 Spokane Valley Household Makeup 2000 70% 60% 50% 40% ❑Owners 30% ❑Renters 20% 0 \ea ecs g h e5s ecs 6 bt 6 O06c ac “0e r \e , e.c\ �e r \e di �s\rg ,e�\ s\rg s r\e Source: 2000 U.S. Census Figure 5.1 does not include persons living in group facilities such as nursing homes or assisted living facilities. The "Other” category includes those populations of both sexes who are living with unrelated roommates. It is apparent from the chart that there is a great demand for this kind of housing arrangement as well. Special populations also include persons with debilitative conditions or injuries, including HIV/AIDS, the disabled, and the homeless. The 2003-2004 Spokane County Consolidated Plan identified domestic violence, followed by mental health problems and alcohol/drug abuse as the most common reasons for homelessness. Approximately 71 families and 189 single adults affected by one or more disabilities were homeless during this time period. Central Valley School District's homeless liaison estimates that in the three Valley school districts, Central Valley, West Valley, and East Valley, in the spring of 2004, there were 279 homeless children; while by the reporting period at the end of June, 2004, approximately 600 children were homeless at some time during the school year. 5.2.2 Age Cohorts Compared to Spokane County as a whole, Spokane Valley had a smaller percentage of children under 17 years old (26 percent compared to 30 percent in the County)9. On the other hand, Figure 5.2 Percentage Population by Age 2000 30.00%7 25.00%-Z 20.00%7 15.00%/ ©County 10.00-7 ❑Spokane Valley 5.00 0.00% Under 18 18-24 25-44 45-64 65+ years Source:2000 U.S. Census 9 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census 2000 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 4 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 14 percent of the Spokane Valley population was 65 or older in 2000, compared to 12 percent in all of Spokane County. Age characteristics are important in determining the type of housing and services required. Families with school age children are concerned about access to schools and recreation. The availability of and access to public transportation is often of critical importance in single-parent households, more so where economic resources are limited. The elderly require such services as home delivered meals, respite care, recreation services, in-home care, congregate, and nursing care facilities. Proximity and access to medical services and shopping is important to senior citizens, who are likely to be more dependent on family, friends and public transit service than other sectors of the population. 5.2.3 Income and Housing Affordability A "Household" is a Figure 5.3 Incomes 2000 domestic unit consisting of the members of a $50,000 family who live together along with non-relatives $40,000 such as servants'o. The U.S. Census Bureau uses $30,000 ❑Spokane County the term "family" to refer ❑Spokane Valley to a group of two or more $20,000 ❑Spokane people related by birth, $10,000 marriage, or adoption who reside together. As Ilk$0 figure 5.3 shows, Household Family Spokane County's 2000 y Source: 2000 Census median income for all households was $37,308, compared to Spokane Valley's median household income of $39,052 and the City of Spokane's at $39,893. The Department of Housing and Urban Development calculates income as a percentage of area median income: 30% Extremely Low Income 31-50% Very Low Income 51-80% Low Income 100% Median Income 120% Upper Income Housing is considered affordable when a family is spending not more than 30 percent of its monthly income on rent and utilities, or 25 percent on principal, interest, taxes and insurance, or three times their annual income if purchasing a home. For a three-person very low-income family in Spokane Valley (see Table 5.1), the monthly rent excluding utilities must be less than $350, or if they are buying a home, it must cost less than $40,000 at 2003 prices. Table 5.1 2000 H.U.D.Income Levels by Household Size #Persons per Household 1 2 2.5* 3 4 Extremely Low Income(30%of median) $10,744 $13,103 $13,939 $14,775 $16,401 Affordable House Payment"' $224 $273 $290 $308 $342 to American Heritage Dictionary Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 5 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 5.1 2000 H.U.D.Income Levels by Household Size #Persons per Household 1 2 2.5* 3 4 Affordable Rent $269 $328 $348 $369 $410 Affordable House Prices**** $32,232 $39,308 $41,817 $44,326 $49,202 Very Low Income(50%of Median) $19,050 $21,838 $23,232 $24,625 $27,334 Affordable House Payment*** $397 $455 $484 $513 $569 Affordable Rent $476 $546 $581 $616 $683 Affordable House Prices**** $57,149 $65,513 $69,695 $73,876 $82,003 Low Income(80%of median)** $30,480 $34,940 $35,312 $39,401 $43,735 Affordable House Payment*** $635 $728 $736 $821 $911 Affordable Rent $762 $874 $883 $985 $1,093 Affordable House Prices**** $91,439 $104,821 $105,936 $118,202 $131,204 Median Income(100%of median) $38,100 $43,675 $46,463 $49,251 $54,668 Affordable House Payment*** $794 $910 $968 $1,026 $1,139 Affordable Rent $952 $1,092 $1,162 $1,231 $1,367 Affordable House Prices**** $114,299 $131,026 $139,389 $147,752 $164,005 Upper Income(120%) $45,720 $52,410 $55,756 $59,101 $65,602 Affordable House Payment*** $952 $1,092 $1,162 $1,231 $1,367 Affordable Rent $1,143 $1,310 $1,394 $1,478 $1,640 Affordable House Prices**** $137,159 $157,231 $167,267 $177,303 $196,806 Source:2000 Census figures for Spokane County median family income and percentage calculation. * Average Spokane County Household = 2.46 persons. Approximates the median for all households in the county. ** Because of the way HUD calculates this income level, it is actually 76% of the median income rather than 80% although it is called 1.80. *** An affordable housing payment is 25% of monthly income, P.I.T.I. Affordable rent and utilities is 30% of monthly income. ****The affordable home price is calculated at three times the annual income. Housing in the Spokane area is comparatively affordable, although the cost of housing has shown significant increases recently. In 2000, the median single-family home in Spokane County was $113,200, rising to $191,600 in the third quarter of 2006. The average home price has also risen to $168,700, up 21.5% from the fourth quarter of 200411. "Washington Center for Real Estate Research,4th Quarter 2005 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5- Housing Page 6 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 5.2 Washington Counties—Fourth Quarter 2005 Median Mortgage Monthly Median Housing Median Price Rate Payment Family Affordability Household Income Index(HAI) Income Spokane $168,700 5.83% $638 $53,827 135.5 $42,001 Washington $275,700 5.83 $1,118 $69,130 96.0 $41,244* Source:Washington Center for Real Estate Research, Estimates, Fourth Quarter 2005 OFM Estimate,October 2005 The Housing Affordability Index measures the ability of a middle income family to carry the mortgage payments on a median price home. When the index is 100, there is a balance between the family's ability to pay and the cost. Higher indexes indicate housing is more affordable. All loans are assumed to be 30 year loans. It is assumed 25% of income can be used for principal and interest payments. Figure 5.4 compares housing affordability in Spokane County with the State of Washington for each quarter, beginning with the second quarter of 2002. Figure 5.4 Housing Affordability Index Trends 2002-2006 250 - 200 150 �_� ., _.. --Spokane • 100 V ♦ , • •■ 4 tWashington 50 0 I 9 1 o`1' o`�'C9" Cr1/ o 05' 05' 05' o°' o°' o°`' o°`' o o`'' o`'' o C§6 C§6 oc0 oc0 Source: Washington Center for Real Estate Research, Estimates Rents in Spokane County also compare very favorably with the State of Washington as a whole, as shown on Table 5.3. Table 5.3. Spokane Apartment Market Statistics September 2007 Market(County) Average Average Rent Number of Number Vacancy Size September Units2007 Vacant Rate 2007 Spokane County 835 sq.ft. $579 9,125 356 3.9% Washington n/a $811 229,014 10,646 4.6% Source: Washington Apartment Market,September 2005 Update,Washington Center for Real Estate Research Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 7 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Figure 5.5 provides a comparison of rents for different size units in Spokane County and Spokane Valley based on the survey of 50% or 100% of multi-family complexes with ten or more units constructed after 1963. It does not include rent subsidized units. Figure 5.5 Contract Rent Comparison 2006 $900- - $800 - $700 -- J �— $600 = ❑Spokane County 2006 $500- — _ ❑Spokane Valley 2006 $400-- — ❑Spokane County 2005 $300 ®Spokane Valley 2005 $200 $100— $0 e a�oocc` \^tea �tisoa �tiNoa ores P� ^�a ,o a ,�a �,°a Source:Spokane-Kootenai County Real Estate Report Fall,2006 5.2.4 Housing Inventory Historically, owner-occupied housing predominates in Spokane County as shown in Figure 5.6. A significant portion of the existing housing stock was constructed in the 1970s and 80s, with Figure 5.6 Spokane County single-story ranch and split level Occupied Housing Units floor plans typical. In these neighborhoods, lot sizes range 200,000 163,611 between 10,000 square feet and 128,403 141,61 40,000 square feet. The 150,000 . majority of the housing available ■ ■■ ■ ❑Renter in Spokane Valley today is fairly 100,000 homogenous although much ■Owner was laid out in isolated 50,000 J11 subdivisions disconnected from - ‘.1 the urban fabric. 1980 1990 2000 Source: US Census Bureau Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 8 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Figure 5.7-Comparison of Spokane Valley Housing Types Spokane Valley Housing 2006 7% 24%� •Single Family 4% 65% ❑Duplex •Multi-family ❑Manufactured homes Source: Washington Center for Real Estate Research, Fall 2006 While mobile home parks and duplexes are located throughout the City, the balance of the housing stock tends to be two and three story apartment buildings, providing only a narrow range of choices. An increasing number of families find it difficult to obtain suitable housing. This affects empty nesters, couples who have raised their families and who, for life-style reasons, no longer need or want a large single-family house and the associated maintenance. Young adults, students, young married couples, and low income workers often cannot find suitable or affordable housing. Figure 5.7 provides a comparison of housing types in Spokane Valley. As one might predict in an urbanizing area, the City of Spokane Valley contains a higher percentage of multi-family units than is typically found in the unincorporated area. The housing stock in Spokane Valley is in generally good condition. Pockets of substandard housing can be found in older neighborhoods and in aging mobile home parks, concentrated within Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) target areas. These areas are defined by the U.S. Census Bureau as block groups containing a high percentage of persons with incomes in low- and moderate range. (See Map 5.1). Many of these neighborhoods have been adversely affected over the years by roadway construction and encroaching commercial/industrial uses. Approximately 31 mobile/manufactured home parks are located within Spokane Valley, with 1,199 spaces for lease. Table 5.4 summarizes the facilities providing assisted or congregate care for the elderly/disabled. Table 5.4 Assisted/Congregate Care March 2005 Facility Occupied Total Beds Beds Nursing Homes 431 464 Boarding Homes 490 601 Adult Family Homes 235 325 Total 1,156 1,390 Source: Spokane Valley Community Development Department Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 9 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Twenty-six properties within Spokane Valley offer rental properties to low and moderate income individuals and families, for a total of 1,075 units. Ten (465 dwelling units) are served for the elderly. An additional three properties (61 units) are designed to serve the disabled. (See Map 5.1) The Spokane Housing Authority offers several programs designed to assist individuals with housing costs, including public housing units, Section 8 vouchers or certificates, first time homebuyer down payment assistance, reduced interest rate loans, and cash supplements for utilities or home maintenance. The Northwest Housing Solutions (formerly Spokane Housing Authority) owns 24 units of public housing in Spokane Valley. In January 2004, 329 (21 percent of the total units administered by the Spokane Housing Authority) Section 8 certificates and/or vouchers were being used in Spokane Valley, although a total of 2,665 households in Spokane Valley are currently receiving housing assistance or living in subsidized housing owned and operated by the Spokane Housing Authority. An additional 1,425 low-income households have applied to SHA for housing assistance but as of yet have not received it. Spokane Neighborhood Action Programs (SNAP) provides programs to empower low income individuals and families with opportunities promoting financial independence. The SNAP Economic Development programs offer financial tools and education to promote sound money management and investment in assets, including business ownership, home ownership, higher education and transportation. SNAP also provides weatherization and repair for qualified low income families. Twenty-three organizations offer emergency shelter and/or transitional housing in the Spokane Region, with approximately 622 emergency shelter beds and 699 transitional housing beds, most of which are located in the City of Spokane. There are no shelters located in Spokane Valley. However, the city is currently served by programs located in the City of Spokane for victims of domestic violence. The YWCA provides 40 shelter beds, as well as crisis intervention and support services. There is also an unmet need for emergency housing in Spokane Valley for victims of domestic abuse. The City of Spokane Valley's continued participation through the 2009 CDBG program period in the Spokane Consortium provides funding for housing and neighborhood improvements within these areas. The Spokane Valley Community Center is a key resource in referring persons needing housing assistance. 5.2.5 Future Housing Needs On November 30, 2004, by Resolution No. 4-1009, the Spokane Board of County Commissioners reviewed the City's Land Capacity Analysis and approved a population allocation of 20,666 within the current corporate limits for the 20-year planning period. The number of potential new dwelling units was based on estimates of average densities of four dwelling units/acre (du/a) for low density residential; (LDR), eleven du/a for medium density residential (MDR) and seventeen du/a for high density residential areas. Persons/household was estimated at 2.5 persons. Approximately 1,478 net acres were deemed developable, allowing for an estimated 8,408 new dwelling units. Since that time, in conjunction with the development of this Comprehensive Plan, the City Council determined that the actual growth of the City during the twenty-year planning period would not be confined to the 2006 city limits, revising the 2006-2026 population growth estimate to 38,614. This additional population may necessitate an expansion of the Urban Growth Area to accommodate some of the estimated additional 15,445 housing units that will be required. The request for an additional population allocation was submitted to Spokane County on February 6, 2006. According to the Northeast Washington Housing Solutions, the Spokane area has an un-met need of 3,420 housing units that are affordable to those families at or below 50% of Median income within the region. In order to meet this backlog and meet new demand by 2020, Spokane Valley would need to create 350 affordable housing units per year. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 10 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The Spokane County 2005-2009 Consolidated Plan estimates that an additional 77 emergency/transitional shelter beds would be needed to meet the current demand for homeless individuals and families using services outside of the City of Spokane. 5.3 Housing & Neighborhood Issues12 In common with many urbanizing areas, creation of higher density residential development close to existing neighborhoods is viewed with suspicion and concern. The concerns of residents may be alleviated if proper consideration is given to the preservation, character and vitality of the existing neighborhoods. Similarly, design regulations which provide adequate transition between different uses will be essential in preserving both existing and new development. Encouraging the preservation and improvement of existing housing stock and neighborhoods remains of paramount importance. Affordability is often threatened by gentrification as the supply of desirable properties dwindles. Strategies to offset these effects will continue to be important in providing affordable housing. The highest residential densities should be located close to urban services and public transit. Diversity in housing stock should include row houses, townhouses, condominiums, and mid-rise residential units close to jobs, shopping, entertainment, and social and human services. Zoning codes should encourage developers to build projects that produce identifiable public benefits. The public benefits might include creative designs that are sensitive to community and neighborhood values, dedication of land or right-of-way for public use, and construction of urban amenities, community facilities, and other public spaces. Setting aside a number of units for low and moderate income families is another strategy which should be considered. While Planned Unit Development (PUD) is often cited as a method for encouraging new development, provisions which create an additional financial responsibility for low and moderate income residents such as private streets or other amenities should be discouraged. New housing should be more diverse, contributing to community character and relating better to the neighborhood environment. It should reassure residents that they will be able to afford to live close to their jobs, friends, and families. It will also help preserve and maintain neighborhoods that include a healthy mix of ages and incomes. 5.4 Goals and Policies As with many cities, Spokane Valley will have limited funds with which to pursue its housing goals. The City will have to use its resources in a focused and prioritized manner to have a positive impact on the supply of affordable housing. It will be imperative that Spokane Valley make strategic investments of the limited resources available. Goal HG-1 Encourage diversity in design to meet the housing needs of the residents of the community and region. Policies HP-1.1 Consider the economic impact of development regulations on the cost of housing. HP-1.2 Streamline the development review process and strive to eliminate unnecessary time delays and expenses. HP-1.3 Establish development regulations and incentives for greater diversity of housing types, costs and designs, that may include bonus incentives, clustering, and transfer of development rights. HP-1.4 Encourage mixed-use residential/commercial development in designated areas throughout the City with the use of developer incentives and design standards. HP-1.5 Encourage the development of three- and four-bedroom rental units along transit corridors and within walking distance of schools and recreational facilities. 12 SEE ALSO CHAPTER 10-NEIGHBORHOODS Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 11 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan HP-1.6 Encourage the development of housing for seniors and other special populations along transit corridors and within walking distance of shopping and medical facilities. Goal HG-2 Encourage the use of affordable housing initiatives of regional organizations with a record of providing safe and affordable housing. Policies HP-2.1 Encourage appropriate sitting of public housing programs. HP-2.2 Target appropriate resources in low income areas identified by the U.S. Census Bureau. HP-2.3 Encourage homeownership initiatives which could include housing cooperatives and lease-purchase ownership. HP-2.4 Encourage the activities of affordable housing providers where appropriate. HP-2.5 Encourage the referral services of appropriate agencies in assisting individuals and families of modest means. HP-2.6 Encourage new affordable housing within one-quarter mile of transit corridors. Goal HG-3 Encourage meeting the housing needs of special populations including the elderly, mentally ill, victims of domestic abuse, persons with debilitative conditions or injuries, and the homeless. Policies HP-3.1 Assist local service organizations and self-help groups to obtain funding that supports Goal HG3. HP-3.2 Ensure that access to special needs housing is provided in a manner consistent with fair housing laws. HP-3.3 Coordinate City actions with local agencies and shelter providers to address homelessness. HP-3.4 Make periodic assessments of housing needs. HP-3.5 Encourage the location of new facilities for the special populations identified above within one-quarter mile of transit corridors. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 7-31-2008) Chapter 5— Housing Page 12 of 12 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 10 — NEIGHBORHOODS 10.0 Introduction Neighborhoods — their character, their livability, their development — these are some of the vital elements of the attractiveness of a city. Neighborhoods are the most immediate symbols of the context in which we live our lives. Empowering neighbors and neighborhoods is vital to encourage a sense of control and balance to the life of the average citizen. While many of the complex issues and opportunities facing the City are addressed effectively at the city-wide level, others require a more specific solution. In addition, neighborhoods and sub-areas may face unique issues which differ from those in other parts of the community. 10.1 Planning Context The Washington Growth Management Act' and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) provide for the inclusion of optional elements2 relating to physical development in the Comprehensive Plan. Neighborhood and sub-area plans may be included, provided they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The initial adoption of a neighborhood/sub-area plan that does not otherwise modify the comprehensive plan policies and designations applicable to the sub-area is not limited to the annual update and may be enacted at any time3. 10.2 Neighborhood/Sub-Area Planning 10.2.1 Purpose. Neighborhood/sub-area plans should be used to create, enhance or maintain civic identity and to revitalize under-utilized areas. Infill development is the process of developing or redeveloping under-utilized parcels of land within existing urban areas that are already provided with services. Infill development policies help utilize existing utilities and services before considering costly extensions. Neighborhood/sub-area plans include plans for residential neighborhoods, industrial/commercial development, mixed-use development and joint planning areas. The adoption and incorporation of neighborhood/sub-area plans into the Comprehensive Plan adds greater detail, guidance and predictability to the Plan. This chapter of the Comprehensive Plan provides Neighborhood/sub-area organizations a tool to provide advisory input to city government regarding all issues of governance in their respective geographic area. By accepting this advisory input, the City Council may receive greater citizen input in its decision and policy-making endeavors. A Neighborhood/sub-area is a geographic neighborhood/sub-area within the City of Spokane Valley and could include adjacent jurisdictions and joint planning areas. The extent of a neighborhood is variable and may be defined by tradition, common interests and uses, period of building and development, or subdivision patterns. Neighborhood boundaries may include such features as major streets, natural geographic boundaries or other physical features. A neighborhood-based organization is an entity composed of individuals, businesses and/or institutions associated with one or more specific neighborhoods that are recognized by the City as a partner in communicating information and providing assistance in securing public participation. Neighborhood/sub-area planning will provide stakeholders a greater opportunity to be involved in a planning process that is more identifiable and predictable. Local residents, business owners and property owners will gain a clearer understanding of the potential changes that may affect their neighborhoods. RCW 36.70A.080 2 WAC 365-195-345 3 RCW 36.70A.130 Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 10 —Neighborhood/Sub-area Page 1 of 3 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 10.2.2 Process. Guidelines and options will be developed for the planning process in the development of neighborhood/sub-area plans. 10.3 Goals and Policies Goal NG-1 Maintain consistency between adopted Neighborhood/sub-area plans and the City Comprehensive Plan. Policies NP-1.1 Conduct periodic review of sub-area plans for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Goal NG-2 Preserve and protect the character of Spokane Valley's residential neighborhoods. Policies NP-2.1 Maintain and protect the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. NP-2.2 Review and revise as necessary, existing land use regulations to provide for innovation and flexibility in the design of new residential developments, accessory dwelling units, and in-fill development. NP-2.3 Encourage the development of parks and the dedication of open space in and adjacent to residential areas. Open space dedication shall be proportionate to the size of the development. NP-2.4 Preserve site characteristics that enhance residential development (trees, bodies of water, vistas, and similar features) using site planning techniques such as clustering, planned unit developments, transfer of development rights, and lot size averaging. NP-2.5 Allow zone changes within the Low Density Residential category only when specific criteria are met. Criteria may include: • Substantial changes within zone change area. • Clear mapping errors. • Adequate facilities and services (e.g. sewer, water capacity). • Consistency with densities in the vicinity of the zone change. NP-2.6 Establish appropriate design guidelines with buffer zones and transition requirements to protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses and adverse impacts associated with arterials, freeways and rail corridors. NP-2.7 Encourage rehabilitation and improvement programs to conserve and upgrade existing properties and buildings. NP-2.8 Encourage programs targeted at neighborhood preservation, including Weed and Seed, housing rehabilitation and crime prevention programs, such as Neighborhood Watch, McGruff Houses, etc. NP-2.9 Integrate retail developments into surrounding neighborhoods through attention to quality design and function. Encourage neighborhood retail and personal services to locate at appropriate sites where local economic demand and design solutions demonstrate compatibility with the neighborhood. Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 10 —Neighborhood/Sub-area Page 2 of 3 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan NP-2.10 Develop guidelines and options for Neighborhood/sub-area associations which facilitate the refinement of Neighborhood/sub-area plans. Goal NG-3 Encourage neighborhood/sub-area planning for commercial, industrial and mixed use properties to enhance the quality, vibrancy and character of existing development. Policies NP-3.1 Establish regulations and identify potential incentives that encourage multi-use areas that integrate a broad range of appropriate and compatible land use activities, and encourage the development and redevelopment of land in conformance with the SVCP. NP-3.2 Encourage the remediation of environmentally contaminated sites to return the land to productive commercial and industrial use. NP-3.3 Encourage commercial development that is designed and scaled in a manner that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Goal NG-4 Work with Neighborhoods/sub-areas to determine the need, if any, and the preferred approach for outreach activities in order to maintain the flow of information between the city and its citizens. Policies NP-4.1 Work with schools and non-profit organizations to identify and address housing and neighborhood concerns. Adopted April 25, 2006 Chapter 10 — Neighborhood/Sub-area Page 3 of 3 Introduction and Overview of Manufactured Housing Legislation 2004 Legislation Sets New Direction for Manufactured Housing Regulation The 2004 legislature significantly changed the landscape of local land use regulation of manufactured homes by the passage of SB 6593 (Laws of 2004,ch. 256),which became effective on July 1,2005.This law requires that,to protect"consumers'choices in housing," cities and counties must regulate manufactured homes built to federal manufactured housing construction standards no differently than they regulate other types of homes. A second impetus for the 2004 legislation was,according to the legislative intent expressed in Section 1 of SB 6593,to provide for"affordable homeownership and rental housing." Whatever one's views regarding manufactured housing,it cannot be disputed that manufactured housing today is quite different from the mobile homes of twenty or thirty years ago or more. "Mobile homes," as they are commonly thought of, are no longer being built, and"manufactured housing" has taken their place.Manufactured housing is much more like traditional site-built housing than was the traditional mobile home. The manufactured housing industry contends that there is no appreciable difference between the two.Being generally less expensive than site-built housing,manufactured housing can provide viable housing opportunities for low income families. Prior to SB 6593,Washington cities and counties seemingly had the authority to regulate the location of manufactured homes through zoning and even to ban them entirely.While local governments were (and still are) "preempted" by federal law(the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974)from enacting construction,safety,and energy standards that are stricter than those established by federal regulations adopted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD),HUD had acknowledged that the federal legislation did not limit the authority of local governments to regulate the location of manufactured housing, as long as they do not do so based on compliance or noncompliance with stricter construction, safety, and energy standards.And,in Washington Manufactured Housing Assn. v. Public Utility District No. 3, 124 Wn.2d 381, 385 (1994), the state supreme court,in dicta,noted that it is "clear that zoning laws that ban manufactured housing or limit them to certain areas are not preempted if they are silent as to construction or safety standards." SB 6593,however,eliminated any previous ability of local governments in the state to restrict where manufactured housing- at least certain manufactured housing-could locate. See RCW 35.21.684; RCW 35A.21.312,and RCW 36.01.225 Nevertheless,cities and counties may under this legislation require that that these manufactured homes: (1)be new manufactured homes(but see below); (2)be set on a permanent foundation; (3)comply with any local design standards that may apply to all other homes in the neighborhood in which the manufactured home is to be located; (4)are thermally equivalent to the state energy code; and/or(5) otherwise meet requirements for a"designated manufactured home" in RCW 35.63.160. (Because a "designated manufactured home" under that defmition is one that includes at least two sections,cities and counties may still regulate "single-wide" manufactured homes differently than other types of homes.) 2008 Legislation Further Restricts Local Regulation This legislation was amended by the 2008 legislature to provide that cities and counties may not prohibit a mobile or manufactured home from locating in an existing mobile home park or manufactured housing community(existing before June 12,2008)based on the age or size of that mobile or manufactured home. See RCW 35.21.684;RCW 35A.21.312,and RCW 36.01.225. Local jurisdictions are still permitted to place age and dimension criteria on manufactured housing that is sited outside of mobile and manufactured housing communities,or on housing to be sited in new mobile home parks or manufactured housing communities(SSB 5524). 2009 Legislation Permits Recreational Vehicles as Housing The 2009 legislature added a further limitation on the authority of cities and counties regarding manufactured/mobile home communities.Under EHB 1227 (Laws of 2009,ch. 79),which became effective on July 26,2009,cities and counties may not have an ordinance that prevents the entry or requires the removal of a recreational vehicle used as a primary residence in manufactured/mobile home communities.However,cities and counties may enact requirements that utility hookups in manufactured/mobile home communities meet state and federal building code standards for these communities and that a recreational vehicle contain both an internal toilet and an internal shower(unless the manufactured/mobile home community provides toilets and showers). See RCW 35.21.684(3),RCW 35A.21.312(3),and RCW 36.01.225(3). Many local manufactured housing ordinances in this state have been on the books for a number of years and do not necessarily reflect the current state of the law or of the industry. The Washington Manufacured Housing Association has developed "model"regulations for local governments to adopt for the purpose of complying with SB 6593. See Documents below.The model regulations do not,however, address the 2008 legislation, SSB 5524,or the 2009 legislation,EHB 1227. Revised Code of Washington (RCW)Definitions "Mobile home" means a factory-built dwelling built prior to June 15, 1976,to standards other than the United States department of housing and urban development code, and acceptable under applicable state codes in effect at the time of construction or introduction of the home into the state.Mobile homes have not been built since the introduction of the United States department of housing and urban development manufactured home construction and safety act; "Used mobile home" means a mobile home which has been previously sold at retail and has been subjected to tax under chapter 82.08 RCW,or which has been previously used and has been subjected to tax under chapter 82.12 RCW,and which has substantially lost its identity as a mobile unit at the time of sale by virtue of its being fixed in location upon land owned or leased by the owner of the mobile home and placed on a foundation(posts or blocks)with fixed pipe connections with sewer,water,and other utilities. "Mobile home lot" means a portion of a mobile home park or manufactured housing community designated as the location of one mobile home,manufactured home,or park model and its accessory buildings, and intended for the exclusive use as a primary residence by the occupants of that mobile home,manufactured home,or park model; "Mobile home park," "manufactured housing community," or "manufactured/mobile home community" means any real property which is rented or held out for rent to others for the placement of two or more mobile homes,manufactured homes,or park models for the primary purpose of production of income,except where such real property is rented or held out for rent for seasonal recreational purpose only and is not intended for year-round occupancy; "Mobile home park cooperative" or"manufactured housing cooperative" means real property consisting of common areas and two or more lots held out for placement of mobile homes,manufactured homes,or park models in which both the individual lots and the common areas are owned by an association of shareholders which leases or otherwise extends the right to occupy individual lots to its own members; "Mobile home park subdivision" or"manufactured housing subdivision" means real property,whether it is called a subdivision,condominium,or planned unit development,consisting of common areas and two or more lots held for placement of mobile homes,manufactured homes,or park models in which there is private ownership of the individual lots and common,undivided ownership of the common areas by owners of the individual lots; "Manufactured home" means a single-family dwelling built according to the United States department of housing and urban development manufactured home construction and safety standards act,which is a national preemptive building code.A manufactured home also: (a)Includes plumbing,heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems; (b)is built on a permanent chassis; and(c)can be transported in one or more sections with each section at least eight feet wide and forty feet long when transported, or when installed on the site is three hundred twenty square feet or greater; "New manufactured home" means any manufactured home required to be titled under Title 46 RCW, which has not been previously titled to a retail purchaser,and is not a"used mobile home" as defined in RCW 82.45.032(2). "Designated manufactured home" is a manufactured home constructed after June 15, 1976, in accordance with state and federal requirements for manufactured homes,which: (a)Is comprised of at least two fully enclosed parallel sections each of not less than twelve feet wide by thirty-six feet long; (b)Was originally constructed with and now has a composition or wood shake or shingle,coated metal,or similar roof of nominal 3:12 pitch; and (c)Has exterior siding similar in appearance to siding materials commonly used on conventional site- built uniform building code single-family residences. Spokane Valley Municipal Code Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations January 2, 2013 Appendix A, Definitions: Manufactured home subdivision: A subdivision designed exclusively for manufactured housing. Manufactured (mobile) home: A pre-assembled dwelling unit transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when attached to the required utilities certified by the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. The term "manufactured home" does not include a "recreational vehicle." Manufactured (mobile) home park: A site having as its principal use the rental of space for occupancy by two or more manufactured (mobile) homes, and the accessory buildings, structures, and uses customarily incidental to such homes. 19.40.120 Manufactured housing. A. Pursuant to the requirements of RCW 35.21.684, the City does not discriminate against consumers' choices in the placement or use of a home that is not equally applicable to all homes. This section applies only to manufactured housing units placed on individual lots. B. Homes built to 42 U.S.C. 70 Sections 5401 through 5403 standards (as they may be amended) are regulated for the purposes of siting in the same manner as site-built homes, factory-built homes, or homes built to any other state construction or local design standard; provided, however, that the manufactured home shall: 1. Be a new manufactured home; and 2. Be set upon a permanent foundation, as specified by the manufacturer, and that the space from the bottom of the home to the ground be enclosed by concrete or an approved product which can be either load-bearing or decorative; and 3. Comply with all local design standards, including the requirement for a pitched roof with a slope of not less than 3:12, applicable to all other homes within the neighborhood in which the manufactured home is to be located; and 4. Be thermally equivalent to the state energy code; and 5. Otherwise meet all other requirements for a designated manufactured home as defined in RCW 35.63.160. C. This section does not override any legally recorded covenants or deed restrictions of record. A"new manufactured home" means any manufactured home required to be titled under RCW Title 46, which has not been previously titled to a retail purchaser, and is not a used mobile home as defined in RCW 82.45.032(2). A"designated manufactured home" is a manufactured home constructed after June 15, 1976, in accordance with state and federal requirements for manufactured homes, which: 1. Is comprised of at least two fully enclosed parallel sections each of not less than 12 feet wide by 36 feet long; and 2. Was originally constructed with and now has a composition or wood shake or shingle, coated metal, or similar roof of nominal 3:12 pitch; and 3. Has exterior siding similar in appearance to siding materials commonly used on conventional site-built International Building Code single-family residences. D. An existing single wide manufactured home may be replaced with a new single wide manufactured home when replacement is initiated within 12 months of the date of damage which represents less than 80 percent of market value, or removal of existing habitable manufactured home. (Ord. 12-007 § 2, 2012; Ord. 08-026 § 3, 2008; Ord. 07-015 § 4, 2007). 19.40.130 Manufactured home parks. A. Manufactured home parks shall require approval of a binding site plan, which includes a detailed site development plan in compliance with the development standards of this code. B. The site development plan will be reviewed and approved for compliance with ordinances and standards by the Spokane County utilities department, Spokane County regional health district and other appropriate agencies. C. Manufactured housing parks shall not exceed seven units per acre with a minimum of 3,600 square feet per space. D. The maximum building coverage for each manufactured home space shall be 50 percent; provided, that open patio covers, awnings, and/or carports shall not be considered buildings when calculating this coverage. E. Each manufactured home space shall be a minimum of 45 feet in width with direct frontage on a public or private road. F. The minimum setbacks for manufactured homes at park perimeter are as follows: 1. Twenty-five feet from all public rights-of-way. 2. Side yard: 10 feet from park perimeter at the overall site lot side line. 3. Rear yard: 10 feet from park perimeter at the overall site lot rear line. Three feet for any accessory structure such as patio covers, awnings and/or carports. G. Minimum setbacks for individual in-park spaces: 1. Front and flanking yards: four feet. 2. Side and rear yard: five feet. 3. Accessory structures such as patio covers, awnings, and/or carports: three feet. (Ord. 07-015 § 4, 2007). Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes Council Chambers— City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. December 13, 2012 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Bates called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance III. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS Present Absent CITY STAFF Bill Bates-Chair John G. Carroll Rustin Hall Rod Higgins r- Steven Neill Fred Beaulac r- r Joe Stoy—Vice Chair p r Deanna Griffith, secretary Haer excused. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Stoy moved to approve the agenda as presented. The motion was passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Neill moved to approve the November 8, 2012 minutes as presented. The motion was passed unanimously. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioners had nothing to report. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Community Development Director John Hohman thanked outgoing Planning Commissioner Rustin Hall. Mr. Hall commended the quality of City staff and expressed his appreciation and Planning Commission Minutes 12-3-12 Page 1 of 3 honor to be a member of the Planning Commission. Chair Bates also thanked Mr. Hall for his efforts. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. Unfinished Business: The Commission reviewed Findings and Recommendation document for CTA-04-12, amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.40.120, 19.40.140, 19.60.010, 19.70.010, and 19.70.020 in order to clarify home occupations in nonresidential zones; clarify Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) in nonresidential zones; clarify Recreational Vehicle (RV)use in nonresidential zones; establish residential development standards in nonresidential zones; establish standards for manufactured homes in manufactured home subdivisions. Mr. Higgins moved to approve the Findings as presented. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the Findings. B. New Business: Senior Planner Lori Barlow led a discussion with the Planning Commission on an increasing trend in building permits for oversized shops/storage structures with a small dwelling unit internal to the structure; where the shop appears to be the primary use located on a parcel. The department recently issued a building permit for a shop with a very small dwelling unit on the upper floor and has received a complaint regarding the structure. Ms. Barlow showed pictures of the shop, which overwhelms the adjacent homes and is out-of- character for the neighborhood. The Municipal Code does not specifically address these types of structures and does not quantify the area that must be dedicated to living space in order to meet the definition of primary use. Ms. Barlow explained that the following definitions have been considered collectively to provide staff with the basis to make a determination regarding the use: Accessory; Dwelling Unit; Principal Structure; and Principal Use. Currently, staff has made the interpretation that the primary use allowed, which is the dwelling, must consume the largest area within the structure in order to be consistent with the intent of the code and protect the character of the neighborhood. A prior administrative interpretation required that at least 51% of the structure be the dwelling portion; however, subsequent interpretations required the dwelling portion of the structure to only meet minimum building code requirements for a dwelling, which can be as small as 300 square feet and include cooking, sleeping and sanitary facilities. Ms. Barlow discussed potential code changes that would address these circumstances. The Planning Commission agreed that staff should consider changes to the Municipal Code. Staff will brief City Council to determine if they also agree that a Code Text Amendment would be appropriate, and then follow up as necessary. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER There was nothing for the good of the order. Planning Commission Minutes 12-3-12 Page 2 of 3 XI. ADJOURNMENT The being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 7 p.m. Cake was served for outgoing Commissioner Rustin Hall. Bill Bates, Chairperson Deanna Griffith, PC Secretary Date signed Planning Commission Minutes 12-3-12 Page 3 of 3