The URL can be used to link to this page

2021, 01-12 Formal MeetingAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT Tuesday, January 12, 2021 6:00 p.m. Remotely via ZOOM Meeting 10210 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting NOTE: In response to Govemor Inslee's March 24, 2020 Proclamation concerning the COVID-19 Emergency, which waives and suspends the requirement to hold in -person meetings and provides options for the public to attend remotely, physical public attendance at Spokane Valley Council meetings are suspended until the Governor's order has been rescinded or amended. Therefore, until further notice, a live feed of the meeting will be available on our website and on Comcast channel 14. Public comments will only be accepted for those items noted on the agenda as "public comment opportunity," will be accepted via the following links, and must be received by 4:00 pm the day of the meeting. • Sign up to Provide Oral Public Comment at the Meeting via Calling -In • Submit Written Public Comment Prior to the Meeting • NEW: Join the Zoom WEB Meeting CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PROCLAMATION: Martin Luther King, Jr. Day GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY 111: Use the link above to sign up for oral public comments and indicate if you want to speak at General Public Comment Opportunity [1] or [2]. Citizens may only speak at one or the other, but not both. If there is no indication of which comment opportunity, you will be placed in the first. The link will guide you to directions to sign up for oral public comments. This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except agenda action items, as public comments will be taken on those items where indicated. Please keep comments to matters within the jurisdiction of the City Government. This is not an opportunity for questions or discussion. Diverse points of view are welcome but please keep the remarks civil. Remarks will be limited to three minutes per person. NEW BUSINESS: 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of Claim Vouchers on January 12, 2021, Request for Council Action Form: $4,994,889.83 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 31, 2020: $566,476.00 c. Approval of Minutes from December 22, 2020 Regular Council Meeting d. Approval of Minutes from January 5, 2021 Study Session 2. First Reading Ordinance 21-001: Planned Res Dev Findings of Fact — L. Barlow, E. Lamb [public hearing held, no public comment] 3. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments to LTAC — Mayor Wick [public comment opportunity] Council Agenda January 12, 2021 Page 1 of 2 GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY 121: Use the link above to sign up for oral public comments and indicate if you want to speak at General Public Comment Opportunity [1] or [2]. Citizens may only speak at one or the other, but not both. If there is no indication of which comment opportunity, you will be placed in the first. The link will guide you to directions to sign up for oral public comments. This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except agenda action items, as public comments will be taken on those items where indicated. Please keep comments to matters within the jurisdiction of the City Government. This is not an opportunity for questions or discussion. Diverse points of view are welcome but please keep the remarks civil. Remarks will be limited to three minutes per person. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 4. Montgomery & Bessie Street Vacation STV-2020-0002 — Connor Lange 5. Potential Grant Opportunity, Local Bridge Program — Adam Jackson 6. Potential Grant Opportunity, National Hwy System Asset Mgmt — A. Jackson 7. Advance Agenda INFORMATION ONLY (will not be reported or discussed): CITY MANAGER COMMENTS 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION [RCW 42.30.110(1)(b) and (1)(i)] Potential Land Acquisition and Litigation ADJOURNMENT Council Agenda January 12, 2021 Page 2 of 2 S�kiii Val ley It rocCamation City of'pokaue Wa5biugtou Jaen. Dr. j 1arttn'utbjer Ring, Yr WHEREAS, The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who was born January 15, 1929, devoted his life to justice and equality for people of all races and economic standings through non-violent means, which led to the establishment of many federal and local laws prohibiting discrimination and fostering human rights; and WHEREAS, Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement helped change public policy from segregation to integration, resulting in the repeal of the Post -Reconstruction Era state laws mandating racial segregation in the South known as the "Jim Crow Laws," thereby lending to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and other anti -discrimination laws aimed at ending economic, legal, and social segregation in America; and WHEREAS, Dr. King stated in his speech, that `even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream, It is a dream that one day this nation will rise up, live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal;" and WHEREAS, Dr. King believed that service was the soul's highest purpose,' and was the path to happiness and greatness; and that `Life's most persistent and urgent question is: What are you doing for others. " and WHEREAS, We acknowledge that Martin Luther King Jr. day is an opportunity to discuss, teach, and reflect on King's legacy; and a day to examine contemporary human issues through the lens of King's work and ideas; and WHEREAS, On the third Monday of January, the United States celebrates Martin Luther King Jr. Day to ensure his legacy is not forgotten. NOW, THEREFORE 1, Ben Wick, Mayor of the City of Spokane Valley, on behalf of the Spokane Valley Councilmembers, do hereby proclaim and recognize January 18, 2021 as Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and I urge Spokane Valley citizens to learn about and honor the legacy of this man and his mission. Dated this 12th day of January, 2021. Ben Wick, Mayor CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2021 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ® consent old business ❑ new business public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER 12/17/2020 12/21/2020 12/23/2020 12/23/2020 12/23/2020 12/30/2020 12/31/2020 12/31/2020 01/04/2021 01/07/2021 LIST VOUCHER NUMBERS 7373, 7384, 7385, 7388, 7389, 7388, 7389, 7391 52478-52506 52507-52514, 11586529, 11606882 52515-52535 52536-52559 52560-52563 52564-52569 52570-52597 52598-52618 52619-52644 TOTAL AMOUNT $92,047.60 $234,199.59 $4,026,612.64 $112,287.54 $137,913.81 $9,430.53 $8,540.52 $60,198.36 $255,094.09 $58,565.15 GRAND TOTAL: $4,994,889.83 #001 - General Fund 001.011.000.511. 001.013.000.513. 001.013.015.515. 001.016.000. 001.018.013.513. 001.018.014.514. 001.018.016.518. 001.040.041. 001.040.042. 001.040.043. 001.076.000.5 76. 001.076.300.576. 001.076.301.571. 001.076.302.576. 001.076.304.575. 001.076.305.571. 001.090.000.511. 001.090.000.514. 001.090.000.517. 001.090.000.518. 001.090.000.519. 001.090.000.540. 001.090.000.550. 001.090.000.595. Explanation of Fund Numbers fou City Council City Manager Legal Public Safety Deputy City Manager Finance Human Resources Engineering Economic Development Building Parks & Rec—Administration Parks & Rec-Maintenance Parks & Rec-Recreation Parks & Rec- Aquatics Parks & Rec- Senior Center Parks & Rec-CenterPlace General Gov't- Council related General Gov't -Finance related General Gov't -Employee supply General Gov't- Centralized Serv. General Gov't -Other Services General Gov't -Transportation General Gov't -Natural & Eco. General Gov't -Pavement Preser. 001.090.000.560. 001.090.000.594 nd on Voucher Lists General Gov't -Social Services General Gov't -Capital Outlay Other Funds: 101 — Street Fund 103 — Paths & Trails 105 — Hotel/Motel Tax 106 — Solid Waste 120 — CenterPlace Operating Reserve 121 — Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 — Winter Weather Reserve 204 — Debt Service 301 — REET 1 Capital Projects 302 — REET 2 Capital Projects 303 — Street Capital Projects 309 — Parks Capital Grants 310 — Civic Bldg. Capital Projects 311 — Pavement Preservation 312 — Capital Reserve 314 — Railroad Grade Separation Projects 402 — Stormwater Management 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 501 — Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 — Risk Management RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve attached list of claim vouchers. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchlist 12/17/2020 2:13:45PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 7373 12/18/2020 002227 IDAHO TAX COMMISSION Ben96925 7384 12/18/2020 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLAN Ben96927 7385 12/18/2020 000682 EFTPS Ben96929 7388 12/18/2020 007303 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 457 RO Ben96931 7389 12/18/2020 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 457 PL/ Ben96933 7391 12/18/2020 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A EXEC PL Ben96935 6 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 6 Vouchers in this report 001.231.50.03 001.231.14.00 001.231.11.00 001.231.23.00 309.231.18.00 001.231.14.00 Description/Account Amount IDAHO STATE TAX BASE: PAYMENT Total : 401A: PAYMENT FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 457 ROTH OPTION: PAYMENT Total : Total : Total : 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION: PAYI Total : 401 EXEC PLAN: PAYMENT Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : 1,752.55 1,752.55 36,270.66 36,270.66 40,434.32 40,434.32 1,974.45 1,974.45 10, 912.31 10,912.31 703.31 703.31 92,047.60 92,047.60 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 12/17/2020 2:13:45PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 12/21/2020 3:25:21PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52478 12/21/2020 00246E KENWORTH SALES COMPANY SPOIN4251551 101.000.000.542 SNOW PLOW REPAIR PARTS (2 PLOW 1,281.96 SPOIN4255222 101.000.000.542 SNOW PLOW REPAIR PARTS (2 PLOW, 1,139.15 Total: 2,421.11 52479 12/21/2020 007882 MAUL FOSTER &ALONGI INC 40844 001.040.319.558 0319-HAP CONSULTING 15,086.75 Total : 15,086.75 52480 12/21/2020 004267 SKILLPATH SEMINARS 12320171 001.040.042.558 VIRTUAL SEMINAR 12/18/2020 99.99 Total : 99.99 52481 12/21/2020 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 51505565 001.076.300.576 WORK CREW INVOICE SEPTEMBER 2( 4,606.78 Total : 4,606.78 52482 12/21/2020 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 110100281 101.042.000.542 NOVEMBER 2020 ENGINEERING 54,220.18 Total : 54,220.18 52483 12/21/2020 007637 COMMONSTREET CONSULTING LLC CSROW 20309 314.000.223.595 0223-RIGHT-OF-WAY SERVICES 742.80 Total : 742.80 52484 12/21/2020 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE 46 JG6453 L002 314.000.223.595 CIP 0223: DESIGN REVIEW & APPROV/ 1,573.94 Total : 1,573.94 52485 12/21/2020 003682 EPIC LAND SOLUTIONS INC 1120-0857 303.000.249.595 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 838.34 Total : 838.34 52486 12/21/2020 003261 FEHR & PEERS 141853 314.000.223.595 0223-TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 9,739.60 Total : 9,739.60 52487 12/21/2020 000683 DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES 478113 303.000.300.595 0300-TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 1,538.06 Total : 1,538.06 52488 12/21/2020 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 51402 309.000.315.594 CIP 0315: ADVERTISING 187.20 Total : 187.20 52489 12/21/2020 002306 TERRELL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MICHAEL 4134 309.000.315.594 0315-DESIGN SERVICES 1,045.00 Total : 1,045.00 Page: 3 vchlist 12/21/2020 3:25:21 PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52490 12/21/2020 007671 HORROCKS ENGINEERS INC 52491 12/21/2020 000566 AGING & LONG-TERM CARE EA WA 52492 12/21/2020 007114 CARDINAL INFRASTRUCTURE LLC 52493 12/21/2020 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL 52494 12/21/2020 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY 52495 12/21/2020 004754 WAPRO 52496 12/21/2020 001816 BENTHIN &ASSOCIATES 52497 12/21/2020 000683 DAVID EVANS &ASSOCIATES 52498 12/21/2020 003238 KPFF CONSULTING ENGINEERS 52499 12/21/2020 000780 UNION PACIFIC RR CO 52500 12/21/2020 000796 BUDINGER &ASSOCIATES INC 52501 12/21/2020 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 52502 12/21/2020 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 58979 2021 1855 Nov 2020 1042 30908 12/1/2019 3307 477914 350015 90102077 P20788-3 587879 0073199-1518-2 303.000.318.595 001.143.70.00 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.018.013.513 001.143.70.00 311.000.323.595 314.000.143.595 314.000.311.595 303.000.275.595 001.040.041.558 001.040.041.543 402.402.000.531 Description/Account Amount 0318-TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY SERVIC Total : Total : Total : FINANCIAL SUPPORT 2021 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EMPLOYEE BACKGROUND CHECKS Total : ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES 2021 Total : 2021 RENEWAL: C KOUDELKA PROJECT 323 SURVEY WORK 0143-DESIGN SERVICES Total : Total: Total: PROJECT 311 PHASE 1 ANALYSIS Total : CIP 0275: ENGINEERING REVIEW Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total: ADVERTISING: FEDERALA/E CONSUL Total : 2,720.82 2,720.82 12,020.00 12,020.00 6,500.00 6,500.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 489.00 489.00 25.00 25.00 5,227.50 5,227.50 45,608.26 45,608.26 5,513.31 5,513.31 866.32 866.32 23,607.20 23,607.20 59.25 59.25 WASTE MGMT: VACTORING WASTE NC 18,350.20 Total : 18,350.20 Page: vchlist 12/21/2020 3:25:21PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52503 12/21/2020 003210 WEST CONSULTANTS INC. 52504 12/21/2020 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 52505 12/21/2020 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 52506 12/21/2020 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 29 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 29 Vouchers in this report Description/Account Amount 014454 402.000.000.531 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AR175000 AR175001 AR175002 AR175003 AR175004 AR175005 AR175006 AR175007 AR175008 001.011.000.511 001.018.014.514 001.018.016.518 001.013.000.513 001.013.015.515 001.040.043.558 001.040.041.543 101.042.000.542 001.076.000.576 COPIER COSTS: COPIER COSTS: COPIER COSTS: COPIER COSTS: COPIER COSTS: COPIER COSTS: COPIER COSTS: COPIER COSTS: COPIER COSTS: Total : WEST WING/COUNCII IT HR OPS/ADMIN LEGAL PERMIT CTR CPW ENGINEERING/E MAINTENANCE SHOF Total : 50320223 001.040.043.558 COUNTY IT SUPPORT: NOVEMBER 20' Total : 50320153 402.402.000.531 STORMBILL APPLICATION USAGE Total : Bank total : 108.11 108.11 81.52 12.16 33.08 138.56 210.77 77.13 344.30 5.38 110.54 1,013.44 13,731.43 13,731.43 1,260.00 1,260.00 234,199.59 Total vouchers : 234,199.59 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 12/21/2020 3:25:21PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: .4' vchlist 12/23/2020 8:00:35AM Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52507 12/23/2020 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Nov -Dec 2020 001.040.043.558 PETTY CASH: 19836, -37, -38, -39, -40, - 21.81 Total : 21.81 52508 12/23/2020 007943 HOLLING, DANNA 2020-10127836 001.016.000.342 FARU REFUND: PAYMENT ID 83470401 65.00 Total : 65.00 52509 12/23/2020 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. PAY APP 4 311.000.267.595 0267-CONSTRUCTION 11,300.00 Total : 11,300.00 52510 12/23/2020 000307 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER NOVEMBER 2020 001.016.000.589 STATE REMITTANCE 20,534.88 Total : 20,534.88 52511 12/23/2020 007280 PATTERSON, MARCI EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 8.69 Total : 8.69 52512 12/23/2020 000308 SPOKANE CO PROSECUTING ATTY NOVEMBER 2020 001.016.000.589 CRIME VICTIMS COMPENSATION REM 321.33 Total : 321.33 52513 12/23/2020 006071 TAX RECOVERY SERVICES LLC 1076 101.042.000.316 UTILITY TAX AUDIT 39,227.33 Total : 39,227.33 52514 12/23/2020 002651 WOODARD, ARNE EXPENSE OCT-NOV 2020 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 13.80 EXPENSES AUG 2020 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 18.40 EXPENSES SEPT 2020 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 18.40 Total : 50.60 11586527 12/21/2020 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION FLORA PARK LAND 312.000.000.594 FLORA PARK LAND ACQUISITION 2,091,600.00 Total : 2,091,600.00 11606882 12/31/2020 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 9290201885 001.016.000.521 LE CONTRACT DECEMBER 2020 1,863,483.00 Total : 1,863,483.00 10 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 4,026,612.64 10 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 4,026,612.64 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 12/23/2020 8:00:35AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 12/23/2020 8:33:28AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52515 12/23/2020 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS INC 0000045211 101.042.000.594 8TH/DISHMAN-WIRE/EQUIP REPLACE, 4,461.72 Total : 4,461.72 52516 12/23/2020 006328 KREM-TV 11-2020 Summary Bill 001.040.042.558 ADVERTISING 21,375.00 Total : 21,375.00 52517 12/23/2020 007907 LEMONADE GRAPHIC DESIGN 112005 001.040.042.558 FALL LAYOUT 2020 2,000.00 Total : 2,000.00 52518 12/23/2020 007941 THE WATERSHED COMPANY 2020-1693 001.040.324.558 0324 SMP REVIEW 1.826.25 Total : 1,826.25 52519 12/23/2020 000143 CITY OF SPOKANE IN-034503 001.040.043.558 OCT 2020 HEARING EXAMINER 6.375.00 Total : 6,375.00 52520 12/23/2020 001770 CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY CO S010061791.001 001.033.000.518 REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES: C 52.12 Total : 52.12 52521 12/23/2020 000869 EVCO SOUND & ELECTRONICS 16858 001.143.70.00 FIRE AND SECURITY MONITORING SE 665.82 Total : 665.82 52522 12/23/2020 002975 FREEDOM SALES AND SUPPLY LLC 2020686 001.033.000.518 FLAG FOR CITY HALL 584.57 Total : 584.57 52523 12/23/2020 001133 PATRIOT FIRE PROTECTION INC. 2215913 001.223.40.00 RETENTION RELEASE 634.90 Total : 634.90 52524 12/23/2020 001860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 1 B12975 001.040.043.558 SUPPLIES FOR CITY HALL 27.81 Total : 27.81 52525 12/23/2020 007988 PRESSLER FORENSICS, INC. F020025.00-2 001.000.322.518 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,475.00 Total : 1,475.00 52526 12/23/2020 006351 PROFESSIONAL CRANE INSPECTIONS 200406-1 001.016.016.521 PRECINCT LIFT REPAIR 1,842.59 200406-2 001.016.016.521 PRECINCT LIFT SERVICE CALL 196.02 Total : 2,038.61 Page: c vchlist 12/23/2020 8:33:28AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52527 12/23/2020 003231 SHERWIN WILLIAMS COMPANY 52528 12/23/2020 000337 UPS 52529 12/23/2020 007705 CT NORTHWEST 52530 12/23/2020 000683 DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES 52531 12/23/2020 001104 MCCAIN INC. 52532 12/23/2020 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER LLP 52533 12/23/2020 004740 THOMSON REUTERS-WEST 52534 12/23/2020 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER LLP 52535 12/23/2020 007678 RANDALL DANSKIN PS 21 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 21 Vouchers in this report 6493-5 000031V836480 KI112015 478090 INV004531601 46211-30-2020 49211-30-2020 49411-30-2020 49911-30-2020 843439291 48011-30-2020 135541 001.016.016.521 001.040.043.558 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.090.000.594 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 314.000.143.595 001.033.099.518 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES FOR PRECINCT SHIPPING CHARGES Total : Total : CONTROLLER - MISSION/BARKER CAE Total : TRAFFIC SERVICES 10/11/2020-11/14/2 Total : TRAFFICLINK PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SUBSCRIPTION CHARGES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : 130.02 130.02 2.33 2.33 2,607.13 2,607.13 3,235.93 3,235.93 40, 515.61 40,515.61 667.00 2,793.75 253.00 115.00 3,828.75 838.42 838.42 15,506.05 15,506.05 4,106.50 4,106.50 112,287.54 112,287.54 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 12/23/2020 8:33:28AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: vchlist 12/23/2020 9:10:46AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52536 12/23/2020 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION #19 52537 12/23/2020 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #6 52538 12/23/2020 001944 LANCER LTD 52539 12/23/2020 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 52540 12/23/2020 004535 SHRED -IT USA LLC 52541 12/23/2020 005012 SPOKANE CO ENVIRONMENTAL 52542 12/23/2020 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST #3 52543 12/23/2020 006178 WALTER E NELSON CO 52544 12/23/2020 006984 Al TREE SERVICE LLC 52545 12/23/2020 000958 AAA SWEEPING LLC Nov 2020 Nov 2020 November 2020 0478881 Nov 2020 November 2020 8180970537 December 2020 December 2020 #1 November 2020 #2 429266 3193 3199 69221 69222 52546 12/23/2020 002931 ALL WESTERN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 110726 402.402.000.531 001.076.305.575 001.076.300.576 001.018.014.514 001.076.302.576 101.042.000.542 001.090.000.518 001.076.300.576 402.402.000.531 402.402.000.531 001.018.014.514 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 402.402.000.531 402.402.000.531 101.000.000.542 Description/Account Amount UTILITIES: CPW NOV 2020 UTILITIES: NOV 2020 PARKS AND CP Total : UTILITIES: PARKS AND CPW NOVEMBI Total : BUSINESS CARDS Total : UTILITIES: NOVEMBER 2020 PARKS UTILITIES: NOV 2020 CPW DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION Total : Total : SPOKANE CO SEWER CHARGES DEC Total : WATER CHARGES FOR DECEMBER #1 WATER CHARGES FOR NOVEMBER #2 Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE Total : TREE REMOVAL TREE REMOVAL AND SERVICE Total : STREET SWEEPING STORM DRAIN CLEANING Total : 122.55 126.85 249.40 271.00 271.00 69.69 69.69 1,395.32 12,906.72 14,302.04 172.05 172.05 1,577.47 1,577.47 110.32 1,154.62 1,264.94 204.19 204.19 3,375.90 11,979.00 15,354.90 95,912.10 3,895.64 99,807.74 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SU 16.08 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 12/23/2020 9:10:46AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52546 12/23/2020 002931 002931 ALL WESTERN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY (Continued) Total : 16.08 52547 12/23/2020 004046 AMERICAN ONSITE SERVICES 367827 101.000.000.542 PORTABLE RESTROOM: MAINTENANC 50.28 Total : 50.28 52548 12/23/2020 002562 CD'A METALS 677683 101.000.000.542 SNOWPLOW REPAIR PARTS 1,358.55 Total : 1,358.55 52549 12/23/2020 003255 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS INV657142 101.143.70.00 TOWER RENT 216.57 Total : 216.57 52550 12/23/2020 002920 DIRECTV INC 051738547X201205 101.042.000.543 CABLE SERVICE FOR MAINTENANCE : 74.24 Total : 74.24 52551 12/23/2020 005505 EMERALD SERVICES INC 84617640 101.042.000.543 RECYCLING FOR MAINT. SHOP 174.24 Total : 174.24 52552 12/23/2020 007740 EVERGREEN STATE TOWING LLC 57008 101.000.000.542 SERVICE FOR SANDER TRUCKS 381.15 Total : 381.15 52553 12/23/2020 005474 FREIGHTLINER NORTHWEST PC001497464:02 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 4.57 PC001500182:01 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 54.45 Total : 59.02 52554 12/23/2020 002466 KENWORTH SALES COMPANY SPOCM15624620 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES -612.56 SPOIN4300583-3 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 282.65 SPOIN4329360 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 142.96 SPOIN4344447 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 399.12 Total : 212.17 52555 12/23/2020 001546 NORCO INC 34209427986 101.042.000.542 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 22.19 Total : 22.19 52556 12/23/2020 003090 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS 098902/3 402.402.000.531 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 54.44 Total : 54.44 52557 12/23/2020 004197 NORTHWEST RADIATOR 48158 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 821.98 Page: I3 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 12/23/2020 9:10:46AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52557 12/23/2020 004197 004197 NORTHWEST RADIATOR (Continued) Total : 821.98 52558 12/23/2020 003549 NW SANDBLAST & PAINT LLC 52559 12/23/2020 005049 PEDERSON, MICHAEL ROY 90385 101.000.000.542 SERVICE FOR SNOWPLOW #206 299.48 Total : 299.48 NOVEMBER 2020 101.042.000.542 DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL 900.00 Total : 900.00 24 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 137,913.81 24 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 137,913.81 I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 12/30/2020 11:39:55AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52560 12/30/2020 001606 BANNER BANK 6368 Nov 2020 101.042.000.543 WA STATE DEPT OF L & I 30.10 6368 Nov 2020 001.018.016.518 FMCSA D&A CLEARINGHOUSE 62.50 6368 Nov 2020 106.000.000.537 GIE MEDIA INC 26.00 6368 Nov 2020 001.090.000.518 PAESSLER.COM 2,744.48 6368 Nov 2020 6368 Nov 2020 6368 Nov 2020 6368 Nov 2020 6368 Nov 2020 001.033.000.518 ACE HARDWARE -ARGONNE 001.090.000.586 AMAZON WEB SERVICES 101.042.000.543 WA STATE DEPT OF L & I 001.033.000.518 MAVERIK 001.033.000.518 HOME DEPOT Total: 31.53 261.43 62.00 12.18 130.18 3,360.40 52561 12/30/2020 001606 BANNER BANK 3169 Nov 2020 001.076.305.575 QTY 43 - SKATE DETERRENTS FOR 986.85 3169 Nov 2020 001.076.305.575 VIDEO ONLY 1,633.49 3169 Nov 2020 001.076.305.575 DISPLAYS 2 GO 560.09 3169 Nov 2020 001.076.305.575 HOME DEPOT 54.75 3169 Nov 2020 001.076.301.571 MICHAEL'S 21.74 3169 Nov 2020 001.076.000.576 NRPA 99.50 3169 Nov 2020 001.076.301.571 USPS 55.00 Total : 3,411.42 52562 12/30/2020 001606 BANNER BANK 9392 Nov 2020 001.016.016.521 GTS INTERIOR SUPPLY 191.09 9392 Nov 2020 001.040.043.558 MAIL BOX CENTER 70.71 9392 Nov 2020 001.040.043.558 PERMIT TECH NATION 200.00 9392 Nov 2020 001.018.013.513 SPOKESMAN REVIEW 9.99 9392 Nov 2020 001.040.043.558 CONTRACTOR RESOURCE 195.89 9392 Nov 2020 001.040.043.558 NEW CODE BOOKS 1,216.88 9392 Nov 2020 001.016.016.521 WA DEPT OF L & I 130.95 Total : 2,015.51 52563 12/30/2020 001606 BANNER BANK 8573 Nov 2020 402.402.000.531 WSU URBAN IPM & PESTICIDE 180.00 8573 Nov 2020 001.018.016.518 CRAIGSLIST 25.00 8573 Nov 2020 001.018.016.518 CRAIGSLIST 25.00 8573 Nov 2020 001.018.016.518 AWC 50.00 Page: /Y vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 12/30/2020 11:39:55AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52563 12/30/2020 001606 BANNER BANK (Continued) 8573 Nov 2020 001.033.000.518 MILLER PAINT 132.42 8573 Nov 2020 001.018.016.518 ACE HARDWARE -ARGONNE 5.86 8573 Nov 2020 001.013.015.515 MRSC 35.00 8573 Nov 2020 001.016.016.521 LOWES 189.92 Total : 643.20 4 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 9,430.53 4 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 9,430.53 I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: 2' vchlist 12/31/2020 8:28:12AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52564 12/31/2020 006455 ACI NORTHWEST INC 52565 12/31/2020 008003 HOME CENTER DESIGN & 52566 12/31/2020 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT 52567 12/31/2020 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE 52568 12/31/2020 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 52569 12/31/2020 004917 WHITE, KARLA 6 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 6 Vouchers in this report BLD-2020-4011 BLD-2020-3673-3675 DEC 2020 55072.0318 14801552 EXPENSES 001.040.043.322 001.040.043.322 101.042.000.543 001.013.015.515 001.090.000.566 001.018.014.514 Description/Account Amount PERMIT REFUND: BLD-2020-4011 Total : PERMIT REFUND: BLD-2020-3673-3675 Total : SUPPLIES: CITY HALL, PRECINCT, MAI Total : RECORDING DEED ON FLORA PROPE Total : 3RD QTR 2020 LIQUOR PROFITS/EXCI Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : 70.00 70.00 606.75 606.75 575.53 575.53 106.50 106.50 7,121.25 7,121.25 60.49 60.49 8,540.52 8,540.52 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 12/31/2020 8:28:12AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been fumished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 12/31/2020 10:00:54AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52570 12/31/2020 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY 30958 001.040.042.558 Q2-2020 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 6.250.00 Total : 6,250.00 52571 12/31/2020 004801 INLAND NW ECONOMIC ALLIANCE 12/15/2020 001.040.042.558 INEA MEMBERSHIP & EMS' LISTINGS/, 1,633.80 Total : 1,633.80 52572 12/31/2020 007882 MAUL FOSTER &ALONGI INC 41127 001.040.319.558 0319-HAP CONSULTING 6,599.55 Total : 6,599.55 52573 12/31/2020 002534 PEAK SOFTWARE SYSTEMS 022519 001.143.70.00 SPORTSMAN SQL SOFTWARE 2020 4,112.80 Total : 4,112.80 52574 12/31/2020 000129 WRPA 6120 001.143.70.00 2021 ANNUAL CONFERENCE REG: K. N 125.00 6131 001.143.70.00 2021 ANNUAL CONFERENCE REG: T. C 172.00 6145 001.143.70.00 2021 ANNUAL CONFERENCE REG: CAI 172.00 6146 001.143.70.00 2021 ANNUAL CONFERENCE REG: P. E 172.00 Total : 641.00 52575 12/31/2020 004278 ARCHITECTS WEST INC 11156 001.040.042.558 SPOKANE VALLEY TOURISM STUDIES 3,280.00 Total : 3,280.00 52576 12/31/2020 000135 APA 1203 001.018.016.518 JOB POSTING FEE 100.00 Total : 100.00 52577 12/31/2020 008005 CONCENTRA 321848840 001.018.016.518 EMPLOYEE DOT PHYSICAL 152.00 Total : 152.00 52578 12/31/2020 007672 MULTICARE CENTERS OF 142249 101.000.000.542 EMPLOYEE PHYSICAL EXAMS 960.00 Total : 960.00 52579 12/31/2020 000150 ALLIED FIRE & SECURITY 919143 001.143.70.00 SECURITY SERVICES AT CENTERPLA( 160.66 Total : 160.66 52580 12/31/2020 007630 ANYTIME TOWING LLC 00029941 001.076.000.576 TOWING- 250.47 Total : 250.47 52581 12/31/2020 003172 BROADCAST MUSIC INC 38839536 001.076.300.576 BASE LICENSE FEE: CENTERPLACE 871.00 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 12/31/2020 10:00:54AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52581 12/31/2020 003172 003172 BROADCAST MUSIC INC (Continued) Total : 871.00 52582 12/31/2020 000823 DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRIES 332273 001.076.302.576 DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRIES 211.40 332276 001.076.302.576 DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRIES 76.20 Total : 287.60 52583 12/31/2020 000007 GRAINGER 9736868135 001.076.300.576 SUPPLIES 229.34 Total : 229.34 52584 12/31/2020 008006 LAMAR TEXAS LIMITED 112054282 001.076.305.575 ADVERTISING FOR CENTERPLACE 1,500.00 112054283 001.076.305.575 ADVERTISING FOR CENTERPLACE 1,000.00 112054284 001.076.305.575 ADVERTISING FOR CENTERPLACE 1,000.00 Total : 3,500.00 52585 12/31/2020 001944 LANCER LTD 0478931 001.076.000.576 BROCHURES 400.75 Total : 400.75 52586 12/31/2020 007136 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 1LV3-JXL9-3X79 001.040.043.558 BUILDING SUPPLIES 50.74 Total : 50.74 52587 12/31/2020 007808 AMENTO GROUP INC 112033 001.000.322.518 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: CITY HALL 7,897.50 Total : 7,897.50 52588 12/31/2020 007965 ARGUS JANITORIAL INV09035 001.033.000.518 JANITORIAL SVCS: CITY HALL, PRECIP 10,054.86 Total : 10,054.86 52589 12/31/2020 001770 CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY CO S010064957.001 001.040.043.558 REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES: C 0.70 Total : 0.70 52590 12/31/2020 000869 EVCO SOUND & ELECTRONICS 17081 001.040.043.558 SERVICES AT CITY HALL 340.86 Total : 340.86 52591 12/31/2020 007994 INLAND NW PARLIAMENTARY LAW DEC 15, 2020 001.040.043.558 ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES 12.00 Total : 12.00 52592 12/31/2020 000675 RAMAX PRINTING &AWARDS INC 33181 001.040.043.558 CLOCK & ENGRAVING - PC MEMBERS 157.91 Total : 157.91 Page: 2,0 vchlist 12/31/2020 10:00:54AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52593 12/31/2020 006924 RSD SPOKANE 52594 12/31/2020 001969 SUNSHINE DISPOSAL 52595 12/31/2020 007159 THE HOME DEPOT PRO 52596 12/31/2020 003210 WEST CONSULTANTS INC. 52597 12/31/2020 007231 WESTERN EXTERMINATOR COMPANY 28 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 28 Vouchers in this report 16261742-00 16261742-01 16261973-00 16261994-00 16262012-00 16262043-00 1645284 588072744 014458 6682564 001.000.322.518 001.000.322.518 001.000.322.518 001.000.322.518 001.000.322.518 001.000.322.518 001.016.016.521 001.033.000.518 001.040.043.558 001.033.000.518 Description/Account Amount REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBU REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBU REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBU REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBU REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBU REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DISTRIBU Total : CLEANUP AT THE PRECINCT SUPPLIES FOR CITY HALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : Total : Total : PEST MGMT SERVICES AT CITY HALL Total : Bank total : 457.38 47.80 18.94 1,350.51 178.15 343.04 2,395.82 13.61 13.61 99.12 99.12 9,585.10 9,585.10 161.17 161.17 60,198.36 Total vouchers : 60,198.36 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 12/31/2020 10:00:54AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: vchlist 01/04/2021 1:41:50PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52598 1/4/2021 004267 SKILLPATH SEMINARS 52599 1/4/2021 003653 PARTSMASTER 52600 1/4/2021 001860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 52601 1/4/2021 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING INC. 52602 1/4/2021 003208 RODDA PAINT CO. 52603 1/4/2021 002520 RWC GROUP 52604 1/4/2021 001969 SUNSHINE DISPOSAL 52605 1/4/2021 003318 TACOMASCREW PRODUCTS INC 52606 1/4/2021 001660 TITAN TRUCK EQUIP CO INC 12320171 23613523 23618540 1646155 46682 46683 46684 46685 09516111 XA106000409:01 XA106002196:01 XA106002196:02 XA106002341:01 1673276 24176081 24176082 24176219 24176220 001.040.042.558 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.543 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 101.000.000.542 1279625 101.042.000.542 Description/Account Amount VIRTUAL SEMINAR 12/18/2020 Total: SMALL TOOLS/MINOR EQUIPMENT REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES Total : REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES Total : WINTER RESPONSE 2020 STREET & STORMWATER MAINTENAN STREET & STORMWATER MAINTENAN STREET & STORMWATER MAINTENAN Total : SUPPLIES Total : VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES Total : TRANSFER STATION CPW NOVEMBER Total : VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SU VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SU VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SU VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINTENANCE SU Total : 99.00 99.00 367.05 134.00 501.05 29.24 29.24 14,203.50 17,639.60 4,536.15 10,064.99 46,444.24 27.48 27.48 682.56 25.96 75.72 197.81 982.05 1,151.81 1,151.81 217.26 33.41 398.30 70.28 719.25 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 367.92 Total : 367.92 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 01/04/2021 1:41:50PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52607 1/4/2021 005267 UTILITY TRAILER SALES OF IDAHO 23128PS 101.000.000.542 VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINT. SUPPLIES 396.70 Total : 396.70 52608 1/4/2021 000030 AVISTA November 2020 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: CPW MASTER AVISTA NOVE 25,768.05 November 2020 001.076.302.576 UTILITIES: PARK MASTER AVISTA NOV 7,097.03 Total : 32,865.08 52609 1/4/2021 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 December 2020 402.402.000.531 WATER CHARGES FOR DECEMBER 2C 241.78 Total : 241.78 52610 1/4/2021 006729 JAKT FOUNDATION 2020 #2 001.090.000.560 2020 SOCIAL SVCS/ECON DEV GRANT 490.00 Total: 490.00 52611 1/4/2021 008004 NORTHWEST WINTERFEST 2020 #1 105.000.000.557 2020 LODGING TAX GRANT #1 15,000.00 Total : 15,000.00 52612 1/4/2021 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 143592232001 001.018.014.514 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 8.04 143676784001 001.018.014.514 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 65.56 143678281001 001.018.014.514 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 10.66 Total : 84.26 52613 1/4/2021 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 51505630 001.016.000.523 DECEMBER 2020 INMATE HOUSING 116,961.21 Total : 116,961.21 52614 1/4/2021 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST #3 December 2020 #2 402.402.000.531 WATER CHARGES FOR DECEMBER #2 158.02 Total : 158.02 52615 1/4/2021 000404 SPOKANE VALLEY HERITAGE MUSEUM December 2020 001.090.000.560 2020 SOC SER/ECO DEV REIMBURSED 918.62 Total : 918.62 52616 1/4/2021 007594 STREETSCAN INC 10330 101.042.000.542 SOFTWARE LICENSE & SUPPORT 13,218.00 Total : 13,218.00 52617 1/4/2021 004800 URS ELECTRONICS INC 782214 101.042.099.542 TRAFFIC CAMERA 4,040.63 Total : 4,040.63 52618 1/4/2021 007996 TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS 18184 001.040.041.558 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20,397.75 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 01/04/2021 1:41:50PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52618 1/4/2021 007996 007996 TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS (Continued) 21 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 21 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Total : 20,397.75 Bank total : 255,094.09 Total vouchers : 255,094.09 Page: vchlist 01/07/2021 9:20:52AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52619 1/7/2021 004898 ETTER, MCMAHON, LAMBERSON, 52620 1/7/2021 007136 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 52621 1/7/2021 004046 AMERICAN ONSITE SERVICES 52622 1/7/2021 007718 APPLETREE 52623 1/7/2021 002635 AVIDEX INDUSTRIES LLC 52624 1/7/2021 001770 CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY CO 52625 1/7/2021 003188 GENERAL FIRE EXTINGUISHER SERV 52626 1/7/2021 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 52627 1/7/2021 001860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 52628 1/7/2021 007741 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DIST 52629 1/7/2021 007120 TSHIMAKAIN CREEK LABORATORY 52630 1/7/2021 000487 YMCA OF THE INLAND NW Stmt No 1 1 WLD-HWCN-RHCH 369188 000019-492-011 1141963 S010070640.001 S010073375.001 93197 1510876 1C36242 1C42525 1C85870 16262300-00 2036401 OCT-NOV 2020 314.000.143.595 001.076.305.575 001.076.300.576 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.300.576 001.076.302.576 Description/Account Amount BARKER PROJECT PARK SUPPLIES Total : Total : PORTABLE RESTROOMS AT PARKS Total: ANSWERING SERVICE FOR CENTERP Total : SUPPLIES FOR PARKS Total : PRESSURE RELIEF VALVES FOR HOT PRESSURE RELIEF VALVES FOR HOT Total : FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC AT CENTERI Total : DEC 2020 MONTHLY CLEANING AT CEI Total : SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total : SUPPLIES: CENTERPLACE Total : ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING AT PARKS Total : 3,004.50 3,004.50 241.67 241.67 289.00 289.00 41.49 41.49 843.98 843.98 602.54 479.63 1,082.17 234.46 234.46 8,085.09 8,085.09 147.54 45.74 -59.46 133.82 40.16 40.16 25.00 25.00 OPERATING EXPENSES/MGMT FEE 0( 4,954.14 Page: vchlist 01/07/2021 9:20:52AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 52630 1/7/2021 000487 000487 YMCA OF THE INLAND NW 52631 1/7/2021 000444 ARCTIC LIGHTING & ELECTRIC 52632 1/7/2021 001860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 52633 1/7/2021 007988 PRESSLER FORENSICS, INC. 52634 1/7/2021 007741 REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES DIST 52635 1/7/2021 007159 THE HOME DEPOT PRO 52636 1/7/2021 007995 WALL AND COMPANY LLC 52637 1/7/2021 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 52638 1/7/2021 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 52639 1/7/2021 008008 BYRD REAL ESTATE GROUP LLC 52640 1/7/2021 007114 CARDINAL INFRASTRUCTURE LLC 52641 1/7/2021 000675 RAMAX PRINTING &AWARDS INC 52642 1/7/2021 006178 WALTER E NELSON CO (Continued) 756 1057514 F020025.00-3 16262311-00 589454990 589702802 1905-2909-1750-328 589075 51536 2361 1869 33231 429265 001.033.000.518 001.040.043.558 001.000.322.518 001.000.322.518 001.033.000,518 001.016.000.521 001.033.000.518 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 001.090.000.513 001.011.000.511 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 Description/Account Amount Total : ELECTRICAL MONITORING - PRECINC Total : SUPPLIES FOR CITY HALL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REFRIGERATION SUPPLIES SUPPLIES FOR CITY HALL SUPPLIES FOR CITY HALL Total : Total : Total : Total : LAWN MAINTENANCE:MAWN MAINTEF' Total: Total : Total : Total : Total : LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION SERVICES (ADULT SHELTER) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ROSEWOOD STAINED PIANO FINISH F Total : 4,954.14 3,339.08 3,339.08 15.21 15.21 3,170.00 3,170.00 686.07 686.07 104.60 4,354.91 4,459.51 5,300.00 5,300.00 46.61 46.61 53.55 53.55 15,000.00 15,000.00 6,500.00 6,500.00 103.46 103.46 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CPW ENGINEERIN1 209.64 Total : 209.64 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 01/07/2021 9:20:52AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 52643 1/7/2021 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 589076 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 30.02 589077 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 34.76 589078 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 58.46 589696 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 33.00 589697 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 24.49 589698 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 15.80 589699 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 85.32 589700 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 75.84 Total : 357.69 52644 1/7/2021 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 51535 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 35.70 51537 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 68.85 51561 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 99.45 51562 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 25.00 51563 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 28.90 51564 001.040.043.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 90.95 Total : 348.85 26 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 58,565.15 26 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 58,565.15 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 01/07/2021 9:20:52AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2021 Department Director Approval: Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 31, 2020 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 336,200.47 $ 10,265.00 $ 346,465.47 Benefits: $ 207,186.88 $ 12,823.65 $ 220,010.53 Total payroll: $ 543,387.35 $ 23,088.65 $ 566,476.00 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Spokane Valley, Washington December 22, 2020 Mayor Wick called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held remotely via Zoom meeting. Attendance: Councilmembers Ben Wick, Mayor Brandi Peetz, Deputy Mayor Pam Haley, Councilmember Tim Hattenburg Councilmember Rod Higgins, Councilmember Linda Thompson, Councilmember Arne Woodard, Councilmember Staff Mark Calhoun, City Manager John Hohman, Deputy City Manager Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Cary Driskell, City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Greg Baldwin, Development Services Coordinator Lesli Brassfield, Economic Development Specialist Jeff Kleingartner, Public Information Officer Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Councilmembers Higgins and Woodard had nothing to report. Councilmember Haley said she attended the Continuum of Care board meeting and they said the young adult shelter is moving forward and they are looking to locate it near SCC, and they are working on a draft template to determine how their five-year plan to address homelessness has gone. She said she also attended the STA board meeting and they adopted the 2021 capital and operating budgets and they approved the Spokane Police Department contract that places one police officer in the plaza and he will provide training to the security officers. Councilmember Thompson said she attended the City of Spokane's legislative meeting and they discussed how the legislative agendas of our cities can be woven together and how agencies can work together with our legislators, and later that afternoon she discussed the City's legislative agenda again at the GSI legislative forum. She said at the AWC Board of Directors meeting they discussed operational items, the budget and the legislative agenda, and proposed changes that were adopted by the board to include equity and diversity training in the leadership section for their municipal leadership certificate. Deputy Mayor Peetz said that at the Valley Chamber committee meeting, Deputy City Manager Hohman and Mr. Basinger gave a presentation to include the Fair and Expo project on the Chamber's legislative agenda and it was approved. She said the school districts also provided updates and she said Ridgeline High School is on schedule. Councilmember Hattenburg said the owners of Valley Bowl have offered their facility to use as a COVID vaccination center. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Wick said that SRTC offered the interim Executive Director position to Kevin Wallace; and he asked for a moment of silence in remembrance of Ed Mertens who recently passed away and was a key figure in the City's incorporation efforts. Regular Formal Council Meeting: 12-22-2020 Page 1 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT PROCLAMATION: n/a GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY 111: Bob West, Spokane Valley, wished Councilmembers and staff a Merry Christmas, he thanked the Council and staff for everything they accomplished in 2020, and he thanked Mike Stone for his service and wished him well in retirement. NEW BUSINESS 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. a. Approval of Claim Vouchers on Dec. 22, 2020, Request for Council Action Form Total: $4,599,042.48 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 15, 2020: $402,589.90 c. Approval of November 17, 2020 Council Meeting Minutes — Study Session d. Approval of November 24, 2020 Council Meeting Minutes — Formal e. Approval of December 8, 2020 Council Meeting Minutes — Formal f. Approval of December 15, 2020 Council Meeting Minutes — Special w/4th District Legislators g. Approval of December 15, 2020 Council Meeting Minutes — Study Session It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. 2. Proposed Resolution 20-016 for 2021 Fees — Chelsie Taylor It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to approve Resolution 20-016 repealing and replacing Resolution 19-019, and approving the Master Fee Schedule for 2021. Finance Director Taylor said there are a few changes since the report given to Council at the December 8th meeting, highlighted in blue in the packets. She said the most significant change is the statement on schedules A and C for an automatic annual increase at eighty percent of any change to the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) west region, which is typically used by the City in contracting, and capping any increase at a maximum of four percent regardless of the CPI-U increase. Ms. Taylor said future resolutions would come back before Council with proposed adjustments for approval. There were no registered public comments. Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY 121: Barb Howard, Spokane Valley, spoke against Secure Investments Corporation and questioned Council as to how her water got contaminated. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 3. Marketing and Communications 2020 Report — Lesli Brassfield Public Information Officer Kleingartner and Economic Development Specialist Brassfield presented their slideshow that highlighted the marketing accomplishments for 2020 which focused on City branding and community engagement, tourism and event development, and economic and business development; and they discussed how the pandemic impacted their marketing efforts and responses to assist community businesses. 4. House Bill 1590 Update — Cary Driskell City Attorney Driskell said that in 2020 the Governor signed House Bill 1590 amending RCW 82.14.530 and providing for a new way to implement sales and use tax beyond what the statute allowed before. He said it provides that a 0.1 percent sales and use tax increase can be approved by Council without a vote of the people; at least sixty percent of the funds raised would have to be used for affordable housing and up to forty percent of the funds could be used for mental health and behavioral health treatment diagnoses facilities. 5. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick Councilmember Haley said she would like to discuss options for dealing with abandoned cars parked on the streets. Mr. Driskell said he can provide an administrative report at a future meeting that will discuss both abandoned and legally parked cars. Regular Formal Council Meeting: 12-22-2020 Page 2 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT 6. INFORMATION ONLY: Campaign Donations and Potential Conflicts of Interests was not reported on or discussed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: City Manager Calhoun proposed that the Winter workshop typically held in February be skipped in 2021 and resumed again in 2022 due to COVID-19 and a potential six -hour Zoom meeting to conduct the workshop, adding that topics typically discussed at the workshop, such as the public safety contracts, can be addressed throughout the year in study sessions. He said City Attorney Driskell has been working with WSDOT to process the paperwork to complete the acquisition of the 45-acre Flora property from WSDOT and we are just waiting on confirmation of closing. Related to that, he said that Governor Inslee included our 2021 state legislative agenda request for the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Grant program to reimburse $1 million of the $2.1 million that we paid for the Flora property in his 2021-2023 capital budget. Mr. Calhoun said the December 29th Council meeting will be cancelled and City buildings will be closed December 24th and 25th, and December 31st beginning at noon through January Pt. He then mentioned that Parks and Recreation Director Stone is retiring effective January 4th and he acknowledged his work and accomplishments throughout the Spokane region for the past 43 years; and he then highlighted some of the accomplishments of the City over the past year. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:23 p.m. ATTEST: Ben Wick, Mayor Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk Regular Formal Council Meeting: 12-22-2020 Page 3 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Spokane Valley, Washington January 5, 2021 Mayor Wick called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held remotely via Zoom meeting. Attendance: Councilmembers Ben Wick, Mayor Brandi Peetz, Deputy Mayor Pam Haley, Councilmember Tim Hattenburg Councilmember Rod Higgins, Councilmember Linda Thompson, Councilmember Arne Woodard, Councilmember Staff Mark Calhoun, City Manager John Hohman, Deputy City Manager Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AMENDED AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda. PROCLAMATION: Mayor Wick read the proclamation for Community Risk Reduction Week, January 18 — 22, 2021. NEW BUSINESS 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Planned Residential Development Moratorium — Lori Barlow, Eric Lamb Mayor Wick opened the hearing at 6:03 p.m. Deputy City Attorney Lamb said that Council adopted Ordinance 20-028 on November 24, 2020 that established a moratorium on the submission, acceptance, processing, modification and approval of Planned Residential Developments (PRDs) and that City staff has begun their review of a city -initiated code text amendment to CH 19.50 SVMC. Senior Planner Barlow said that PRDs are regulated through CH 19.50 SVMC and she said these regulations have been in our City code since 2007 and originated from Spokane County when we incorporated in 2003. She said the regulations identify the purpose of PRDs and she said PRDs are allowed in all residential zones and that all types of residential developments are allowed in PRDs. She said CH 19.50 also identifies the applicable development standards for PRDs, including minimum lot size, density, setback, commercial area allowed and open space requirements. She said in 2020, a Comprehensive Plan amendment addressed concerns about the influx of duplexes, added New Housing Policies and associated development regulations and she said in reviewing the PRD regulations they are looking to see that they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and the needs of the community. Mr. Lamb said the City desires flexibility for alternative development and we also want to protect the existing neighborhoods so we are looking to find a balance between appropriate development flexibility and the appropriate amount of protection. He said the purpose of the moratorium is to prevent incompatible uses and to protect the characteristics of neighborhoods. He said moratoriums are allowed by state law and they preserve the status quo; this moratorium is on new applications only and he said any applications that were in process before the moratorium are not impacted. He said the Planning Commission will establish appropriate modifications or repeal of CH 19.50 SVMC and forward a recommendation to Council. He said staff recommends maintaining the moratorium while the regulations are evaluated and staff is looking for Council direction to prepare the ordinance adopting the findings of fact that will come before Council at a subsequent meeting. Study Session: 01-05-2021 Page 1 of 2 Approved by Council: DRAFT Todd Whipple, Whipple Consulting Engineers, spoke in opposition to the moratorium and asked that it be modified to allow townhouses and duplexes but not apartment complexes. Written public comments were received by the following people and will be attached to the approved minutes: Todd Whipple, Whipple Consulting Engineers — opposed to the moratorium Kim Alexander, Spokane Valley — in favor of the moratorium Marilyn Pearson, Spokane Valley — in favor of the moratorium Rudy Werle, Spokane Valley — in favor of the moratorium Ann Carey, Spokane Valley — in favor of the moratorium Michael Reents, Spokane Valley — in favor of the moratorium Mayor Wick closed the public hearing at 6:31 p.m. Council consensus to maintain the moratorium. 2. Mayoral Appointments: Councilmembers to Committees — Mayor Wick It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to confirm the Mayoral appointments of Councilmembers to the committees and boards as listed on the January 5, 2021 Request. for Council Action form. Mayor wick said the appointments are the same as they were in 2020 with the addition of the AWC Scholarship Committee. Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 3. Mayoral Appointments- Planning Commission — Mayor Wick It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz and seconded to confirm the Mayor's nomination of Walt Haneke and Nancy Pete Miller to the Planning Commission. for terms beginning immediately and ending December 31, 2023, and Paul Rieckers to complete the unexpired term ofJJJohnson, effective immediately and ending December 31, 2021. James JJ Johnson, Spokane Valley, thanked Council for the opportunity to serve on the Planning Commission the last five years as both Vice Chair and Chair of the Commission. Vote by acclamation: in favor: unanimous. Opposed: none. Motion carried. 4. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick No comments. 5. Council Comments — Mayor Wick No comments. 7. City Manager Comments — Mark Calhoun Mr. Calhoun said the state legislative session begins next week and lobbyist Murray is seeking guidance from Council at to whether they would be in support of easing of some of the marijuana regulations. It was the consensus of Council that they are opposed to easing marijuana regulations. Mr. Calhoun then asked for Council guidance pertaining to whether they would be in support of implementing an income tax and reminded Council that on November 26, 2019 Council approved a resolution opposing income taxes. It was the consensus of Council to stay with the resolution in opposition to income taxes. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Peetz, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. ATTEST: Ben Wick, Mayor Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk Study Session: 01-05-2021 Page 2 of 2 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2021 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ❑ admin. report Department Director Approval: El ® new business ® public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading Proposed Ordinance No. 21-001 adopting findings of fact for the moratorium on PRD applications established pursuant to Ordinance No. 20-028 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.63.220; 36.70A.390; RCW 36.70A. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On November 17, 2020, during advance agenda, City Council agreed to have staff review the applicability of chapter 19.50 SVMC (PRDs). On November 24, 2020, City Council adopted an emergency moratorium on new PRD applications pursuant to Ordinance No. 20-028. On January 5, 2021, City Council held a public hearing on Ordinance No. 20-028 and the moratorium on PRD applications. BACKGROUND: In 2016, the City of Spokane Valley (City) adopted its 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update (Legislative Update). The City significantly increased flexibility in development options within the City by allowing for more diverse permitted types of development within each zoning district with fewer design and development restrictions, while still maintaining the same protections for existing neighborhoods and uses by incorporating transitional standards and rezoning many areas of the City. As part of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, the City adopted policies H-P5 ("Enable a variety of housing types at increased densities within 1/2 mile of funded high performance transit networks) and H-P6 ("Preserve and enhance the City's established single-family neighborhoods by minimizing the impacts of more dense housing typologies such as duplexes and cottage development") to further expand alternative housing types from established single-family neighborhoods to areas closer to established services necessary to support those housing types. To implement the 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, the City adopted a new single-family zoning district identified as "R-4 Zoning" to allow for additional density, development flexibility, and more alternative housing types, including duplexes, townhouses, and cottages, within such zone, and amended the Zoning Map to provide for the locations for the new R-4 zone. The City amended allowable uses within the existing "R-3" single-family zoning district to encourage further density growth in the R-4 zone where transit and services are readily accessible. Recently, the City has received and processed applications for planned residential developments (PRDs) for multi -family and other incompatible uses within single-family zoning districts. The City has received citizen complaints that such uses are inconsistent and incompatible with surrounding existing uses and are contrary to the intended purpose of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update, 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, and implementing development regulations. Based on such citizen comments, on November 17, 2020, City Council agreed to have staff review chapter 19.50 SVMC which governs PRDs and to determine its value, applicability, and need for such provisions given the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update, 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, implementing development regulations, and the types of residential uses allowed by such Plan and regulations. While such review occurs, applicants may still submit applications for PRDs that may be inconsistent and incompatible with surrounding single-family residential neighborhoods and with the Comprehensive Plan and recently adopted alternative housing regulations. Accordingly, staff believed that a moratorium on submission, acceptance, processing, modification or approval of any new PRD application is appropriate while the City reviews the applicability of chapter 19.50 SVMC and City Council adopts any modifications, repeal, or other changes to the municipal code regarding PRDs. RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35A.63.220 authorize the City to adopt a moratorium on PRD applications without conducting a public hearing and without utilizing the City's standard approval process through the Planning Commission and multiple readings by City Council. A moratorium preserves the status quo so that new plans and regulations will not be rendered moot by intervening development. After adoption of the moratorium, the City Council must conduct a public hearing on the moratorium within 60 days and adopt findings of fact for the moratorium. Additionally, the proposed moratorium includes a work plan and can be effective for up to 365 days from the date of adoption. After adoption of the moratorium, the City will work through the work plan and develop policy and final regulations through its standard process. A moratorium may be extended if the City conducts a public hearing on the ongoing work plan and extension of the moratorium and adopts findings of facts for the extension. Pursuant to the requirements of RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35A.63.220, on November 24, 2020, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 20-028, which declared an emergency and established a moratorium on the submission, acceptance, processing, modification, or approval of any new PRD applications or licenses. The moratorium applies upon the effective date, so it does not impact existing PRD applications or prior approved PRDs. Further, Ordinance No. 20- 028 set a public hearing for Tuesday, January 5, 2021, established a work plan to review the applicability of chapter 19.50 SVMC and to adopt such modifications or repeal as are determined to be appropriate, adopts preliminary findings of fact, and established an effective period of up to 365 days for the moratorium. Finally, Ordinance No. 20-028 was designated as a public emergency and was effective upon adoption. The City has already begun the process of reviewing chapter 19.50 SVMC. On December 10, 2020, Planning Commission conducted a study session to receive background information on planned residential developments under chapter 19.50 SVMC. Pursuant to state law and Ordinance No. 20-028, the City Council held a public hearing on the moratorium on January 5, 2021. At the public hearing, the City Council received written and oral testimony on the moratorium. Pursuant to state law, the City is now required to adopt findings of fact regarding the moratorium. Proposed Ordinance No. 21-001 will adopt findings of fact justifying the adoption of Ordinance No. 20-028 and the establishment of a moratorium on non-exempt planned residential development applications as required by law. The City will continue on the work plan to review chapter 19.50 SVMC. Once the work plan is complete and City Council adopts any amendments to chapter 19.50 SVMC, the moratorium would be repealed. Since the Council has conducted the public hearing, it may consider suspending the rules and adopting Ordinance No. 21-001 on a first reading. OPTIONS: (1) Move to advance to a second reading, with or without further amendments; or (2) Move to suspend the rules and adopt Ordinance No. 21-001 adopting findings of fact justifying the adoption of Ordinance No. 20-028 and establishment of a moratorium on non- exempt planned residential development applications. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to suspend the rules and adopt Ordinance No. 21-001 adopting findings of fact justifying the adoption of Ordinance No. 20-028 and establishment of a moratorium on non-exempt planned residential development applications. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A. STAFF CONTACT: Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney; Lori Barlow, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Ordinance No. 21-001 2. Ordinance No. 20-028. 3. Copies of written comments received by the City at the January 5, 2021 public hearing. 4. The video recording of the hearing may be viewed at: https://spokanevalley.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view id=3&clip id=904 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 21-001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT SUPPORTING THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 20-028 AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MORATORIUM ON THE SUBMISSION, ACCEPTANCE, PROCESSING, MODIFICATION, AND APPROVAL OF PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATIONS, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City is authorized to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws," which includes the adoption of regulations governing land uses within the City; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 provides that "[a] legislative body that adopts a moratorium or interim zoning ordinance, without holding a public hearing on the proposed moratorium or interim zoning ordinance, shall hold a public hearing on the adopted moratorium or interim zoning ordinance within at least sixty days of its adoption, whether or not the legislative body received a recommendation on the matter from the planning agency. If the legislative body does not adopt findings of fact justifying its action before this hearing, then the legislative body shall do so immediately after this public hearing. A moratorium or interim zoning ordinance adopted under this section may be effective for not longer than six months, but may be effective for up to one year if a work plan is developed for related studies providing for such a longer period. A moratorium of [or] interim zoning ordinance may be renewed for one or more six-month periods if a subsequent public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each renewal." RCW 36.70A.390 provides substantially similar language and authority for agencies planning under the GMA, including the City, to adopt moratoria; and WHEREAS, a moratorium enacted under RCW 35A.63.220 and/or RCW 36.70A.390 is a method by which local governments may preserve the status quo so that new plans and regulations will not be thwarted or rendered moot by intervening development; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390 both authorize the enactment of a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control prior to holding a public hearing, provided the City conducts a public hearing on the moratorium within 60 days of the date of adoption of the moratorium; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390, on November 24, 2020, the City adopted Ordinance No. 20-028 establishing a moratorium upon the submission, acceptance, processing, modification or approval of any non-exempt planned residential development permit application; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220, RCW 36.70A.390, and Ordinance No. 20-028, on January 5, 2021, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the adoption of Ordinance No. 20-028 and the establishment of a moratorium on planned residential development permit applications; and WHEREAS, written public testimony was received from interested parties and City Council heard testimony from interested parties during the public hearing; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390, the City Council is required to adopt findings of fact after conducting the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows: Ordinance 21-001, PRD Moratorium Findings Page 1 of 5 DRAFT Section 1. Findings of Fact. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390, on January 5, 2021, the City Council conducted a public hearing on Ordinance No. 20-028 and the establishment of a moratorium on non-exempt planned residential development applications. The City Council hereby adopts the following as findings of fact in support of Ordinance No. 20-028 and the establishment of a moratorium on non-exempt planned residential development applications as set forth in Ordinance No. 20-028: 1. In 2016, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") adopted its 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update ("Legislative Update") and implementing regulations. The City significantly increased flexibility in development options within the City by allowing for more diverse permitted types of development within each zoning district with fewer design and development restrictions while still maintaining the same protections for existing neighborhoods and uses by incorporating transitional standards and rezoning many areas of the City. The Comprehensive Plan includes specific goals and policies to support such actions, including, but not limited to LU-G1 ("Maintain and enhance the character and quality of life in Spokane Valley"), LU-P7 ("Protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses and adverse impacts associated with transportation corridors"), and LU-P16 ("Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial uses"). 2. As part of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, the City adopted policies H-P5 ("Enable a variety of housing types at increased densities within 'A mile of funded high performance transit networks) and H-P6 ("Preserve and enhance the City's established single-family neighborhoods by minimizing the impacts of more dense housing typologies such as duplexes and cottage development") to further expand alternative housing types from established single-family neighborhoods to areas closer to established services necessary to support those housing types. 3. To implement the 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, the City adopted a new single-family zoning district identified as "R-4 Zoning" to allow for additional density, development flexibility, and more alternative housing types, including duplexes, townhouses, and cottages, within such zone, and amended the Zoning Map to provide for the locations for the new R-4 zone. The City amended allowable uses within the existing "R-3" single-family zoning district to encourage further density growth in the R-4 zone where transit and services are more readily accessible. 4. The City has previously adopted its "Planned Residential Development" ("PRD") regulations set forth in chapter 19.50 SVMC. Pursuant to SVMC 19.50.010, the PRD regulations were intended to "[e]ncourage imaginative design and the creation of permanent open space by permitting greater flexibility in zoning requirements than is generally permitted by other sections of the SVMC; [p]reserve or create environmental amenities superior to those generally found in conventional developments; [c]reate or preserve usable open space for the enjoyment of the residents; [p]reserve, to the greatest extent possible, the natural characteristics of the land including, but not limited to, topography, natural vegetation, waterways, and view; [e]ncourage development of a variety of housing types; and [p]rovide for maximum efficiency in the layout of streets, utility networks, and other public improvements and infrastructure." 5. The City has received and processed applications for PRDs for multi -family and other incompatible uses within single-family zoning districts. The City has received citizen complaints that such uses are inconsistent and incompatible with surrounding existing uses and are contrary to the intended purpose of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update (including, but not limited to LU-G1, LU-P7, LU-P16), 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments (H-P5 and H-P6), and implementing development regulations. 6. Pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City of Spokane Valley is authorized to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws," which includes the adoption of regulations governing land uses within the City. Ordinance 21-001, PRD Moratorium Findings Page 2 of 5 DRAFT 7. The City Council has requested staff conduct a review of chapter 19.50 SVMC to determine its value, applicability, and need for such provisions given the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update (including, but not limited to LU-GI, LU-P7, LU-P16), 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments (H-P5 and H-P6), implementing development regulations, and the residential uses allowed pursuant to such Plan and regulations. 8. On November 17, 2020, the City Council requested that City staff review chapter 19.50 SVMC to determine its ongoing applicability given the variety of development types and options available as a result of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update, 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, and implementing development regulations. City staff have begun review of chapter 19.50 SVMC and on December 10, 2020, Planning Commission conducted a study session on PRD regulations. 9. As of November 24, 2020, the City had accepted and processed new PRD permit applications. Once a PRD permit application is submitted, it may be vested to be reviewed and considered for approval under the regulations in effect at the time the fully complete application was submitted. Thus, review and processing of new PRD permit applications during the ongoing review of chapter 19.50 SVMC could result in more inconsistent and incompatible development within single-family residential zones and would defeat the intended purposes for reviewing the applicability of chapter 19.50 SVMC. 10. Additional time is necessary to allow the City to continue the development and completion of the review of chapter 19.50 SVMC. 11. A moratorium provides the City with additional time to review and amend its public health, safety, and welfare requirements and zoning and land use regulations related to planned residential development applications while preserving the status quo during that review. 12. RCW 36.70A.390 provides that "A county or city governing body that adopts a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control without holding a public hearing on the proposed moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control, shall hold a public hearing on the adopted moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control within at least sixty days of its adoption, whether or not the governing body received a recommendation on the matter from the planning commission or department. If the governing body does not adopt findings of fact justifying its action before this hearing, then the governing body shall do so immediately after this public hearing. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control adopted under this section may be effective for not longer than six months, but may be effective for up to one year if a work plan is developed for related studies providing such a longer period. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance or interim official control may be renewed for one or more six-month periods if a subsequent public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each renewal." 13. A moratorium enacted under RCW 35A.63.220 and/or RCW 36.70A.390 is a method by which local governments may preserve the status quo so that new plans and regulations will not be rendered moot by intervening development. 14. RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390 both authorize the enactment of a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control prior to holding a public hearing, provided a public hearing is held within 60 days of the adoption of the moratorium. 15. New proposals for PRDs that may be submitted pending the completion of the review of chapter 19.50 SVMC pose an imminent threat to public health and safety because they can permanently alter the built environment and create inconsistent and incompatible land uses within existing single-family residential zones, thereby thwarting the intended residential planning set forth in the City's Comprehensive Ordinance 21-001, PRD Moratorium Findings Page 3 of 5 DRAFT Plan (including but not limited to LU-G1, LU-P7, LU-P16, H-P5 and H-P6) and implementing development regulations. 16. A moratorium on the acceptance and processing of new PRD permit applications while chapter 19.50 SVMC is being reviewed and revised will maintain the status quo by prohibiting new PRD applications from being accepted, vested, and processed while such review is ongoing. 17. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 20-028, City Council adopted a work plan to address the issues involving the City's regulation of planned residential development permit applications. 18. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-880 and WAC 197-11-800, the adoption of Ordinance No. 20-028 and establishment of the moratorium is exempt from the requirements of a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act. 19. Notice for a public hearing on Ordinance No. 20-028 and the establishment of a moratorium on non-exempt planned residential permit applications was published in the Spokane Valley News Herald on December 18, 2020, December 25, 2020, and January 1, 2021. Notice for the public hearing was published on the City's website. Notice of the public hearing was provided as required by law. 20. On January 5, 2021, City Council conducted a public hearing on the adoption of Ordinance 20-028 and the establishment of a moratorium on non-exempt planned residential development permit appl ications. 21. The City Council received written testimony from six interested parties (five in support and one opposed) and one interested party spoke at the public hearing. The City Council has given due consideration to all public testimony received. 22. The adoption of Ordinance No. 20-028 and the establishment of a moratorium on planned residential development permit applications is consistent with the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 23. The City Council finds that the emergency immediate moratorium imposed and established by Ordinance No. 20-028 is appropriate and necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, public safety, public property and public peace. 24. Since Ordinance No. 20-028 adopted a work plan, establishing the moratorium for 365 days, unless repealed, extended, or modified by City Council, it is appropriate pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390. Section 2. Duration. The moratorium set forth in Ordinance No. 20-028 shall be and remain in effect as of the effective date of Ordinance No. 20-028 and shall continue in effect for a period of 365 days from the effective date (11:59 p.m. November 23, 2021), unless repealed, extended, or modified by the City Council after subsequent public hearing(s) and entty of appropriate findings of fact, pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390. Section 3. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority set forth herein and prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Ordinance 21-001, PRD Moratorium Findings Page 4 of 5 DRAFT Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley was provided by law. Passed by the City Council this day of January, 2021. Ben Wick, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Date of Publication: Office of the City Attorney Effective Date: Ordinance 21-001, PRO Moratorium Findings Page 5 of 5 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 20-028 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AN IMMEDIATE MORATORIUM ON SUBMISSION, ACCEPTANCE, PROCESSING, MODIFICATION, AND APPROVAL OF PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATIONS, ESTABLISHING A WORK PLAN, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING, DECLARING AN EMERGENCY NECESSITATING IMMEDIATE ADOPTION OF A MORATORIUM, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, in 2016, the City of Spokane Valley ("City") adopted its 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update ("Legislative Update") and implementing regulations. The City significantly increased flexibility in development options within the City by allowing for more diverse permitted types of development within each zoning district with fewer design and development restrictions while still maintaining the same protections for existing neighborhoods and uses by incorporating transitional standards and rezoning many areas of the City. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan includes specific goals and policies to support such actions, including, but not limited to LU-G1 ("Maintain and enhance the character and quality of life in Spokane Valley"), LU-P7 ("Protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses and adverse impacts associated with transportation corridors"), and LU-P16 ("Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial uses"); and WHEREAS, as part of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, the City adopted policies H-P5 ("Enable a variety of housing types at increased densities within 'A mile of funded high performance transit networks) and H-P6 ("Preserve and enhance the City's established single-family neighborhoods by minimizing the impacts of more dense housing typologies such as duplexes and cottage development") to further expand alternative housing types from established single-family neighborhoods to areas closer to established services necessary to support those housing types; and WHEREAS, to implement the 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, the City adopted a new single-family zoning district identified as "R-4 Zoning" to allow for additional density, development flexibility, and more alternative housing types, including duplexes, townhouses, and cottages, within such zone, and amended the Zoning Map to provide for the locations for the new R-4 zone. The City amended allowable uses within the existing "R-3" single-family zoning district to encourage further density growth in the R-4 zone where transit and services are readily accessible; and WHEREAS, the City has previously adopted its "Planned Residential Development" ("PRD") regulations set forth in chapter 19.50 SVMC. Pursuant to SVMC 19.50.010, the PRD regulations were intended to "[e]ncourage imaginative design and the creation of permanent open space by permitting greater flexibility in zoning requirements than is generally permitted by other sections of the SVMC; [p]reserve or create environmental amenities superior to those generally found in conventional developments; [c]reate or preserve usable open space for the enjoyment of the residents; [p]reserve, to the greatest extent possible, the natural characteristics of the land including, but not limited to, topography, natural vegetation, waterways, and view; [e]ncourage development of a variety of housing types; and [p]rovide for maximum efficiency in the layout of streets, utility networks, and other public improvements and infrastructure"; and WHEREAS, the City has received and processed applications for PRDs for multi -family and other incompatible uses within single-family zoning districts. The City has received citizen complaints that such uses are inconsistent and incompatible with surrounding existing uses and are contrary to the intended purpose of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update (including, but not limited to LU-G1, LU-P7, LU-P16), 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments (H-P5 and H-P6), and implementing development regulations; and Ordinance 20-028 Page 1 of 5 WHEREAS, the City Council has requested staff conduct a review of chapter 19.50 SVMC to determine its value, applicability, and need for such provisions given the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update (including, but not limited to LU-G1, LU-P7, LU-P16), 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments (H-P5 and H-P6), implementing development regulations, and the residential uses allowed pursuant to such Plan and regulations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City is authorized to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws," which includes the adoption of regulations governing land uses within the City; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 provides that "A legislative body that adopts a moratorium or interim zoning ordinance without holding a public hearing on the proposed moratorium or interim zoning ordinance, shall hold a public hearing on the adopted moratorium or interim zoning ordinance within at least sixty days of its adoption, whether or not the legislative body received a recommendation on the matter from the planning agency. If the legislative body does not adopt findings of fact justifying its action before this hearing, then the legislative body shall do so immediately after this public hearing. A moratorium or interim zoning ordinance adopted under this section may be effective for not longer than six months, but may be effective for up to one year if a work plan is developed for related studies providing for such a longer period. A moratorium of [or] interim zoning ordinance may be renewed for one or more six-month periods if a subsequent public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each renewal." RCW 36.70A.390 provides substantially similar language and authority for agencies planning under the GMA, including the City, to adopt moratoria; and WHEREAS, a moratorium enacted under RCW 35A.63.220 and/or RCW 36.70A.390 is a method by which local governments may preserve the status quo so that new plans and regulations will not be thwarted or rendered moot by intervening development; and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390 both authorize the enactment of a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control prior to holding a public hearing, provided the City conducts a public hearing on the moratorium within 60 days of the date of adoption of the moratorium; and WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 197-11-880, the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act; and WHEREAS, on November 17, 2020, the City Council requested that City staff review of chapter 19.50 SVMC to determine its ongoing applicability given the variety of development types and options available as a result of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Legislative Update, 2020 Comprehensive Plan amendments, and implementing development regulations. City staff have begun review of chapter 19.50 SVMC; and WHEREAS, the City is currently accepting and processing new PRD permit applications. Once a PRD permit application is submitted, it may be vested to be reviewed and considered for approval under the regulations in effect at the time the fully complete application was submitted. Thus, review and processing of new PRD permit applications during the ongoing review of chapter 19.50 SVMC could result in more inconsistent and incompatible development within single-family residential zones and would defeat the intended purposes for reviewing the applicability of chapter 19.50 SVMC; and WHEREAS, additional time is necessary to allow the City to continue the development and completion of the review of chapter 19.50 SVMC; and Ordinance 20-028 Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, new proposals for PRDs that may be submitted pending the completion of the review of chapter 19.50 SVMC pose an imminent threat to public health and safety because they can permanently alter the built environment and create inconsistent and incompatible land uses within existing single-family residential zones, thereby thwarting the intended residential planning set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan (including but not limited to LU-G1, LU-P7, LU-P 16, H-P5 and H-P6) and implementing development regulations; and WHEREAS, a moratorium on the acceptance and processing of new PRD permit applications while chapter 19.50 SVMC is being reviewed and revised will maintain the status quo by prohibiting new PRD applications from being accepted, vested, and processed while such review is ongoing; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the emergency immediate moratorium imposed and established by this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, public safety, public property and public peace. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows: Section 1. Preliminary Findings. The City Council hereby adopts the above recitals as findings of fact in support of this Ordinance. Section 2. Moratorium Established. A. The City Council hereby declares an emergency and imposes an immediate moratorium upon the submission, acceptance, processing, modification or approval of any non-exempt permit applications or licenses by or for planned residential developments under or pursuant to chapter 19.50 SVMC and as identified as a Type III "planned residential development permit" in Table 17.80-1. For purposes of this moratorium, "non-exempt permit applications or licenses" shall mean (i) any planned residential development application or license submitted after the effective date of this Ordinance, and (ii) any planned residential permit application or license that was submitted but not determined fully complete under SVMC 17.80.100 by City staff on or before the effective date of this Ordinance. This moratorium is adopted pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390. B. Except as otherwise provided herein, this moratorium shall not affect the acceptance, processing, or approval of any exempt planned residential development permit applications or licenses under or pursuant to chapter 19.50 SVMC and as identified as a Type III "planned residential development permit" in Table 17.80-1. For purposes of this moratorium, "exempt permit applications or licenses" shall mean any planned residential development application or license submitted and determined to be fully complete under SVMC 17.80.100 by City staff on or before the effective date of this Ordinance and which may be subject to vested rights as provided under Washington law. C. This moratorium shall not affect any planned residential development permit or license approved and issued for a planned residential development prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. D. All non-exempt planned residential development permit applications or licenses shall be rejected and returned to applicant pursuant to this moratorium. With regard to the City's acceptance of any exempt planned residential development permit application or license, such acceptance shall only allow processing to proceed, but shall not constitute an assurance that the application will be approved. Section 3. Work Plan. The following work plan is adopted to address the issues involving the City's consideration and regulation of planned residential developments and chapter 19.50 SVMC: A. The City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission ("Planning Commission") is hereby authorized and directed to hold public hearings and public meetings to fully receive and consider Ordinance 20-028 Page 3 of 5 statements, testimony, positions, and other documentation or evidence related to the public health, safety, and welfare aspects of planned residential developments and the applicability of chapter 19.50 SVMC under the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the Planning Commission shall consider the applicability of chapter 19.50 SVMC under the City's Comprehensive Plan and implementing regulations and shall develop proposals for planned residential developments and modifications or repeal of chapter 19.50 SVMC and other applicable regulations to be forwarded and recommended to the City Council for its consideration. B. Upon receipt of a recommendation from Planning Commission, City Council shall consider the Planning Commission recommendation and adopt such modifications or repeal of chapter 19.50 SVMC and other applicable regulations for planned residential developments as it determines to be necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare and considering the applicability of chapter 19.50 SVMC under the Comprehensive Plan. Section 4. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and 36.70A.390, the City Council shall conduct a public hearing on this moratorium on January 5, 2021 at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to hear and consider the comments and testimony of those wishing to speak at such public hearing regarding the moratorium set forth in this Ordinance. The hearing will take place at the City of Spokane Valley City Halt in City Council Chambers, if allowed by law, or if in -person meetings are still prohibited due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, via ZOOM meeting, and will be hosted by the City of Spokane Valley, 10210 East Sprague, Spokane Valley, 99206. Immediately after conducting the public hearing, the City Council shall adopt findings of fact on the subject to this moratorium and either justify its continued imposition, cancel the moratorium, or modify the moratorium as determined necessary. Section 5. Duration. The moratorium set forth in this Ordinance shall be in effect as of the date of this Ordinance and shall continue in effect for a period of 365 days from the date of this Ordinance, unless repealed, extended, or modified by the City Council after subsequent public hearing(s) and entry of appropriate findings of fact, pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390. Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority set forth herein and prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 8. Declaration of Emergency; Effective Date. The City Council hereby declares this Ordinance is designated as a public emergency necessary for the protection of public health, safety, and welfare to prohibit development that may be incompatible and inconsistent with established single-family residential neighborhoods in a manner that thwarts the intended purpose to review chapter 19.50 SVMC and the modifications or repeal of chapter 19.50 SVMC that may eventually be adopted by the City Council. This moratorium must be imposed as an emergency measure to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and to prevent the submission of a flood of applications to the City in an attempt to vest development rights for an indefinite period of time while review of chapter 19.50 SVMC occurs. This Ordinance does not affect existing vested rights, nor will it prohibit development within the City since all other allowable uses in residential zones are not affected by this moratorium. Based on the reasons and declaration of emergency stated herein, this Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the City Council. Ordinance 20-028 Page 4 of 5 Passed by the City Council this 24th day of November, 2020. U.] ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved : ,f`•� Form: Of ice of ,` City Attorney Ben Wick, Mayor Date of Publication: I Effective Date: November 24, 2020 Ordinance 20-028 Page 5 of 5 lam W-191 L Ummen 4WC E Whipple Consulting Engineers. Inc. January 4, 2021 Spokane Valley City Council 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 509-720-5000 RE: Ordinance No. 20-028; Moratorium on Planned Residential Development Permit Applications Dear Mayor Wick, As a Professional Civil Engineer working within the development community of the City of Spokane Valley since it's inception, I am writing to voice my opposition of City Council's intention to place a blanket moratorium on Planned Residential Development Permit Applications. I believe this moratorium would be a disservice to residents and ultimately direct development in our community away from a dwindling but necessary resource for our citizens: affordable housing. Per the Spokane Valley Housing Action Plan Housing Needs Assessment (Exhibit 1), released in October 2020, our greatest housing need is for properties similar in kind to triplexes, cottages and townhomes. These properties provide an affordable option for both Millennia's in need of housing and Baby Boomers looking to dowusize. The City of Spokane Valley has only 9% of this type of housing, yet, "around 44% of all City of Spokane Valley households in 2018 need housing priced below the median income." Additionally, according to an analysis by AdvisorSmith (Exhibit 2), the City of Spokane Valley was listed as the city with the third highest rent increase in the United States from September 2019 to September 2020, increasing by 11.3%. With an underproduction of 1,463 housing units currently and a future need of 5,197, a lack of affordable housing is clearly a growing problem within our community. Passing this moratorium would take the City of Spokane Valley backwards, especially in relation to our neighbors, the City of Spokane and Spokane County. Spokane County has passed File 19-CPA-01 (Exhibit 3) an amendment promoting infill develop within the Urban Growth Area, and the City of Spokane calls our areas, "missing middle," duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes a, "housing availability crisis." (Exhibit 4) In place of the proposed blanket moratorium, I would suggest encouraging Planned Residential Developments and amending this ordinance to only prohibit Apartment development within PRD's, while allowing for the development of duplexes, townhomes, and similar housing type our City is so obviously in desperate need of. I am grateful for you taking the time to read my thoughts on your proposed moratorium. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any further questions. Sincerely • Todd R. Whipple, P.E. President, Whipple Consulting Engineers 21 South Pines Rd. • Spokane Valley, WA 99206 PO Box 1566 • Veradale, WA 99037 Phone 509-893-2617 • Fax 509-926-0227 • WhippleCE.com • Info@WhippleCE.com Civil, Structural, Traffic, Survey, Landscape Architecture and Entitlements SPOKANE VALLEY HOUSING ACTION PLAN HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY REPORT, OCTOBER 2020 City of Spokane Valley The City of Spokane Valley is developing a Housing Action Plan (HAP) to identify ways to meet housing needs now and into the future. The HAP is made possible due to a Washington State Department of Commerce Housing Bill 1923 Grant. The HAP will include strategies and implementing actions to encourage greater housing diversity and affordability, access to opportunity for residents of all income levels, and should address both affordable and market -rate housing needs. An initial step in the HAP process is to define the range of housing needs by analyzing the best available data that describes the area's housing and associated demographic, workforce, and market trends over the past few decades, This assessment helps answer questions about the availability of different housing types, who lives and works in the Spokane Valley area, and what range of housing is needed for all income levels through 2037, the planning horizon for the HAP which is also aligned with the 20-year growth target for the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. Housing analysis is an important exercise since a community's housing needs tend to continually evolve based on changes in the broader economy, local demographics, and regulatory environment. The City of Spokane Valley, like other communities in the Spokane County region, has changed and grown over the years, leading to greater demand for different housing types. Analyzing housing needs is complex because it represents a bundle of services that people are willing to or able to pay for, including shelter and proximity to other attractions (e.g.,jobs, shopping, recreation); amenities (e.g., type and quality of home fixtures and appliances, landscaping, views); and access to public services (e.g., quality of schools, parks). Because it is difficult to maximize all of these services while minimizing costs, households must make decisions about trade-offs and sacrifices between needed services and what they can afford. n�Spokane Valley In addition, housing markets function ata regional scale, which makes it challenging for individual jurisdictions to adequately address issues without regional partnerships. The following summary compares the City of Spokane Valley with Spokane County and the City of Spokane to provide a more complete picture of the county -wide housing landscape while also offering insights on localized versus regional trends, and a more nuanced view of housing market dynamics. Various U.S. Census Bureau, county assessor, and housing market datasets were used to assess the housing stock, workforce, demographics, and expected demand. The housing needs assessment findings are organized in the following topic areas: Executive Summary National Trends Spokane Valley Housing Trends Spokane Valley Demographics Spokane Valley Housing Affordability Spokane Valley Housing Needs Forecast Spokane Valley Workforce Trends Spokane County Trends This document and analyses were produced by: ECONorthwest ECONOMICS • FINANCE PLANNING 2 City of Spokane Valley I Housing Need_ Assessment > Spokane Valley's population growth and housing development has remained steady for most of the decade. From 2010 to 2018, Spokane Valley's population grew by 7%, adding 6,055 mew residents. (Demographics Section). The City of Spokane Valley needs about 6,660 new housing units by 2037 when its population is expected to reach about 109,913 people. This includes 1,463 housing units to address housing underproduction over the last decade. Around 351 units per year should be produced through 2037 to meet forecast housing needs which means slightly more would need to be built per year than the average produced from 2010 and 2019 (345 housing units built per year). Spokane Valley should continue to support robust housing growth and advance strategies in support of housing growth for a diversity of housing types and affordability levels. (Housing Forecast Section). > Housing needs change over a person's lifetime. It is important to track shifts among the share of different age groups to better comprehend how housing needs change as community demographics fluctuate. Spokane Valley's millennial population (25-34 years) almost doubled, growing substantially from 10% to 15% of the population total (from 12,148 to 21,144 persons). Millennial population growth could explain the decline in Spokane Valley's median age to 35.2 years by 2018, a rate below the Washington State and Spokane County's median age of almost 38 years. (County Trends Section). > Another growing sector is the senior population (65+). During 2012-2018, seniors grew from 13% to ➢ 5% of the total population settling at an estimated total of 20,910 persons, a total similar to the millennial population sector. Spokane County projections from 2020 to 2030 estimate that the 65+ population will expand from 18% to 22% of the total population — a trend that is consistent with other communities across the country. Homeownership rates increase as age increases and younger and older people are more likely to live in single -person households which tend to be smaller in size. The aging of the Baby Boomer generation (born 1946-1964) could generate greater demand for living assistance and low -maintenance middle housing options such as townhomes. (County Trends Section). > Household incomes have increased in Spokane Valley. Spokane Valley's median household incomes for owners grew by nearly 25% between 2012 and 2018 (from $61,873 to $77,299). Renter incomes increased too by almost 12% from $34,417 to $38,498 during the same time period. Overall, these trends indicate increasing pressure on the already limited supplies of moderate and middle -income housing (60-120% AMI) and if they continue, will lead to increased financial hardships for households across the City. (Affordability Section). Population growth coupled with housing underproduction throughout Spokane Valley and the region has added pressure on an already limited housing supply and contributed to rising housing costs. While rents have grown more than 15% since 2010 in the city, home prices increased by more than 48%. The escalating cost of housing is a top concern for people finding very few options of housing affordable at their income level. Home -ownership is increasing becoming out of reach and when people cannot find housing fitting within their financial means, they can end up becoming cost burdened, meaning they pay more than one-third of their gross income for housing. Affordable housing problems have not affected all households evenly, Low and moderate -income households have been disproportionately affected. In fact, over 65% of extremely low-income households renting and owning were severely cost burdened, meaning paying more than 50% of their income on housing. In addition, 83% of low-income renters (30-50%), 56% low-income Housing Needs Assessment I City of Spokane Valley 3 Executive Summary home owners, and over one-third of moderate -income (50-80%) owners and renters were cost burdened, meaning paying more than 30% of their income on housing. Overall, the low -to -moderate income households (less than 80% of AMI) tend to be more cost -burdened. (Affordability Section), > Spokane Valley's housing stock mostly consists of single-family detached homes (66%) and lacks housing diversity needed to accommodate future demand particularly associated with aging baby boomers and young households forming. The city has a low supply (9%) of "missing middle" housing (e.g., townhomes, duplexes, quad homes, and cottages) which allows more seniors to downsize and remain in their community, while also providing more options for working families to get a foothold in great neighborhoods. (Housing Section). > Between 2012 and 2018, the share of 2 and 4-person households grew in Spokane Valley, while the number of 1-person households fell. In contrast, the City of Spokane's share of 1 to 3-person households grew. This trend shows Spokane Valley's housing tilting towards 2-bedroom housing and larger family -friendly housing with at least 2 bedrooms. (Demographics Section). > Spokane Valley's workforce, including around 51,305 workers, increased by 11%from 2010-2017. Growth in industry sectors with salaries below 100% AMI is fueling demand for moderate -to middle -income housing. > As a result of the shifting demographics in Spokane Valley, at least 6,660 housing units are needed by 2037. If units are allocated based on recent income distribution trends, the majority of new housing units needed through 2037 would be for households earning over 100% AMI (56% of total units), and one-third of the total should be below 80% AMI. Overall, the findings indicate increased demand for moderate to middle -income housing options (60-120% AMI) that can mostly be met through single- family attached housing (e.g., townhomes and quad homes) and housing serving senior's needs. Median Income Levels* When examining household income levels, the Area Median Income (AMI) and Median Family Income (MFI) are helpful benchmarks for understanding what different households can afford to pay for housing expenses. Since housing needs vary by family size and costs vary by region, HUD produces a median income benchmark for different family sizes and regions on an annual basis. These benchmarks help determine eligibility for HUD housing programs and support the tracking of different housing needs for a range of household incomes. The median income value (100%) primarily used for this analysis •s an annual income of $65,200 for a family of four (Spokane County rate for 2018). Below 3C% of AMI is extremely low income (under $19,560). 30 to 50% of AMI is very low income ($19,560- $32,600). 50 to 60% of AMI is low income ($32,600- $39,120). 60 to 80% of AMI is moderate income ($39,120-$52,260), 80 to 120°%o AMI is middle income ($52,260-$78,240), and above 120% AMI is high income (above S78,240). • To put these numbers into perspective, a dishwasher earns an estimated $26,580 per year on average and would be very low income. A pharmacy tech earns $40,940 annually and would be moderate income in the cities of Spokane and Spokane Valley metropolitan area. • Income levels tend to vary throughout a lifetime and homeownership rates tend to increase as income increases. *Source of AMI: Spokane County/US Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 2018, and Occupational Employment Statistics, US Bureau of Labor, 2019, Spokane -Spokane Valley Metropolitan.https://static.spokanecity.org/documents/chhs/ programs/homeinvestment/2018-spokan e-home-incom e- and-rent.pdf 4 City of Spokane Valley 1 Housing Needs Assessment National Housing Trends Key National Demographic Trends Associated with Housing Nuclear family households, the predominant type of household of the mid 20th Century, shrunk from 40% in 1970 to 20% in 2018 while the share of single -person households increased from 15% in 1970 to 28% in 2018, to take over as being the most prevalent household type. This trend could lead to fewer persons per household which would increase demand for housing units. America is aging, and the number of seniors will continue to grow over the next few decades to an estimated share of around 22% over age 65 by 2050. This is a big increase since only around 16% of US (and Washington state) residents were over 65 in 2018. Seniors are projected to outnumber children for the first time ever by 2035. In addition, around one-third of Americans between 18-34 years are living in their parent's homes (as of 2018) and the median age for first marriage increased to almost 30 in 2016. This trend could decrease housing demand for 18-34 aged persons or at least delay it. Nationwide, the Hispanic/Latino population is predicted to be the fastest growing racial/ethnic group over the next few decades and these households tend to include multiple generations, requiring more housing space. Over the coming decade, minorities will make up a larger share of young households and constitute an important source of demand for both lower -cost rental housing and home -ownership opportunities. Note: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the production of housing in many regions and the ability to pay for housing consistently which will likely exacerbate housing availability and stability. Parts of this analysis relied on pre-COVID data. Sources: AARP (2018) Making Room for a Changing America, U.S. Census Bureau Annual Social and Economic Suppiements 1950 and 1970, 2015 U.S. Census ACS, Washington State Office of Finance and Management, U,S. Census Bureau, 2019. Housing Needs Assessment I City of Spokane Valley 5 Spokane Valley Housing Trends 38,730 Number of total housing units as of mid 2020 Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020 3,445 Number of housing units built between 2010-2019 Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020 345 New housing units built on average every year since 2010 Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020 1.04 City Ratio of Housing Units to Households > Between 207 0-207 9 Source: Washington State Office of Finance and Management (OFM), 2019, ECONorthwest calculations. Note: The housing units to household ratio should be above one since healthy housing markets should have more housing units to allow for vacancy, demolition, second/vacation homes, and broad absorption trends. Because Wash- ington State does not have a regional approach to planning for housing production, ECONorthwest compared this city ratio to the Spokane County ratio of 7.07 to determine the amount of housing underproduction. Number of Units Number of Units Built by Year, 2010-2019 1,000 800 600 400 - 285 2Ci7 21b 220 200 1 119 0 111 II 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 437 625 657 474 Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020 Housing Type Built by Decade, as of Mid-2020 8,000 cn c 6,000 cn 0 4,000 0 2,000 F z 0 Oy -cS) pc" -1 2to4 5to29 _•30to49 o50to99 ■100+ Housing Scale 345 age Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020. Note: Housing with 5 or more units is considered multifamily and housing with 5 or less units is single-family Share of Housing By Type, as of Mid-2020 Housing Type Single-family Detached Apartment/Condo Single-family Attached Mobile/Manufactured Home Average Age % of Housing 46 36 38 38 66% 20% 9% 5% Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020. Note: Single-family attached includes duplexes, triplexes, and quad homes. 6 City of Spokane Valley Housing Needs Assessment Spokane Valley Housing Trends Age of Housing by Type 1-1 Single -Family Detached Average Year Built Single -Family Attached Pre-1940 1940-1959 1960-1979 1980-1999 2000-2020 Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020 Type of Housing Built by Decade, as of Mid-2020 Mobile/manufactured home (n = 1,702) Detached single-family (n = 25,655) Condominium (n = 774) Attached single-family (n = 3,442) Apartment (n = 7,157) Year Built } iJ -�a 0% 25% 50' 75% 100% Share of units ® ( IL Pre-1940 1940-1959 1960-1979 1980-1999 2000-2020 Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020. Apartment Housing Needs Assessment I City of Spokane Valley 7 Spokane Valley Housing Trends 8 Overall, Spokane Valley lacks housing diversity particularly due to low supplies of single-family attached housing (comprising 9% of the total housing) such as town homes, triplexes, and cottages in single-family areas. The city could encourage the development of a variety of housing types and sizes to accommodate the diverse needs of residents through their changes in age and family size. Housing Units Built as of Mid-2020 Decade Before 1940 1940's 1950's 1960's 1970's 1980's 1990's 2000's 2010's Percent of Units 4% 0 6°i 0 11% 6% 20% 11% 18% 14% 10% Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020. 6% Change in number of households 2012 2018 Households 36,365 38,478 Source: OFM, retrieved in 2020 Housing Type o • • r y i....t; . :t�i , ' T1'�i~"%�" r {�- I 4 yi'�.f'"�.e;Ss.� f'1:. � r i ".��y. a Lr '�)yj. -IIal�) ,. -r.� • �Yl`i� • �� ! 7• •,. fi,'.: •1'y •��fi Tway.; i a1'*� ��1 i�'t' f3r11�,a�y'yt tia: 7� s�ryl'j ril ►3yV ►�u r l .1 1 t. v. Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020 Housing Unit Density Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020 City of Spokane Valley 1 Housing Needs Assessment I N. Housing Type • Detached single-family Attached single-family Mobile/manufactured home Apartment Condominium Unit Count 1 2-4 0 5-20 21-60 Spokane Valley Demographics 7% Change in population Change in Household Size, 2012 & 2018 5,000 4,000 2010 2018 °, 3,000 Source: OFM, retrieved in 2019. z Population 89,755 95,810 2,000 1,000 ▪ 0 1 2 O/ v -1,000 O - -2,000 Change in median renter -3,000 Household income 2012 Median Income 2,671 418 3,876 1 2 3 4 People per Household 2018 Source: PUMS (2012, 2018) $34,417 $38,498 Source: PUMS (2012, 2018). Note: All values are in 2078 inflation -adjusted dollars, 25% Change in median owner household income Number of Households 1 Income Distribution by AMI, 2012 & 2018 50% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 13% 10%10% ®{_. 2012 2018 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% 80-100% Median $61,873 $77,299 Household Income as a % of AMI Income ■ 2012 n2018 Source: PUMS (2012, 2018). Note: All values Source: PUMS (2012, 2018) are in 2078 inflation -adjusted dollars. 48% Increase in median home sales price 2010 2020 Median $202,461 $300,000 Sales Price Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020. Values are in 2020 inflation adjusted dollars. Notes: A household would need to earn over 100% AM! to afford the 2020 median home sales price. The Zi!!ow Horne Valley Index shows a 59% increase between 2010-2020 to 8283,374 for middle price -tiered hornes. 56°° 46% 1 Income Distribution by AMI and Tenure, 2018 Renter Owner I•s; 6`� 1B% 1 i r• 100%+ 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Share of Households Household Income as a % of AMI u 0-30% 30-50% 50-80% n 80-100% ■> 100% Source: PUMS, 2018 Housing Needs Assessment I City of Spokane Valley 9 Spokane Valley Housing Affordability Cost Burdened > A household who pays more than 30% of their income on housing. Severely Cost Burdened ) A household who pays more than 50% of their income on housing. 1,663 Number of income restricted housing units as of mid-2020 Source: ECONorthwest analysis of public affordable housing data. Note: Restricted to low and moderate -household incomes. 15% Increase in average rent for 2-bedroom apartment 2010 Average Rent Source: Costar. All values are in 2020 infla- tion -adjusted dollars. Notes: Average rents for a 2-bedroom apartment in Spokane County increased by 13% during the same time period. This 2020 average rent would be affordable to those earning 659% AMf or more. 2020 5.2% $983 $1,131 2-bedroom apartments were vacant as of mid-2020 Source: Costar, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Notes: 0n average during the last decade, the vacancy rate was 5.4°% for 2-bedroom apart- ments. This is a standard rate of vacancy, indicating that the supply for this product type should be adequate to meet demand. This trend is similar to county and state rates. Share of Households Share of Households z Number of Units Share of Cost Burdened and Severely Cost Burdened Households by Tenure, 2018 Owners I^ ■cost Burdened nSe;ErdyCost Burdened Renters 66 2G: 20s 6% 2,;. Household Income as a °% of AMI MN I■ -1 WC'. i Source: PUMS, 2018. Notes: Low and moderate -income households below 50% AMI tend to be more cost burdened and higher incomes above 100% AMI less since their larger income go further to cover expenses. Owners tend to be less cost burdened due to rnortgage lending stipulations; however it can occur when households with mortgages see income decline. Cost burden does not consider accumulated wealth and assets. Housing Units Affordable by AMI and Tenure, 2018 O.'inet' 16,000 10,000 5,000 80s 0 0-30% Source: PUMS, 2018 Renter 8,021 6,059 30-60% 60.60% 1,933 1111 80-100 % I Iousehold Income as a ': of AMI 1,4r4 100% 10 City of Spokane Valley I Housing Needs Assessment Financially Attainable Housing Types Another way to evaluate housing needs is to consider the different types of housing generally affordable to different household incomes in comparison to the current housing stock. As shown in the below exhibit, the 2018 area median income was $65,200 for a family of four in Spokane County (100% AMI). Housing types affordable to households below this median annual income tend to be limited to apartments, manufactured homes, multiplexes (duplexes, triplexes, and quad homes) and townhomes. Much of this housing is rented, particularly when priced for lower income households earning below 80% AMI and most of the housing below 50% AMI (extremely low and very low income) tends to be government subsidized. • Around 44% of all the City of Spokane Valley households in 2018 need housing priced below the median income (100% AMI), yet this housing is inadequate since only 31 e%o of the current housing stock includes multiplexes, townhomes, apartments, and manufactured homes. Housing above the median income is predominantly newer construction and owner -occupied. This housing typically includes single-family detached homes, higher -priced single-family attached homes, and condominiums. Households earning above the median income tend to have more housing options available to them especially when considering that most of the current housing stock is single-family detached (around 66% in the City of Spokane Valley). Most Spokane Valley residents living in single-family detached housing own their home (86%) rather than rent (ACS 1-Year, 2018). If your household earns ... $19,560 $32,600 $52,260 $65,200 $78,240 (30%ofAMI) (50% of AMI) (80%ofAMI) (100% of AMI) (120% of AMI) Then you can afford ... $489 $815 PER MONTH FIR 1,107nH $1,304 %FR n'nr:ni $1,630 $1,956 .IF 1.10'11r FIR h10�11h Housing types generally affordable to these households are ... Single -Family Detached manufactured homes In parks/on lots cottage cluster small -lot single-family large -lot single-family Single -Family Attached duplex, trl-plex, quad -plea, townhomes higher -priced products low -amenity apartments (rental) apartments (5+ units) Common characteristics ... LESS EXPENSIVE Predominantly renter occupied & existing construction Government subsidized Multifamily condominium MORE EXPENSIVE Predominantly owner occupied & new construction Source: ECONorthvvest. Note: All values are in 2019 inflation -adjusted dollars. Housing Needs Assessment I City of Spokane Volley 11 Spokane Valley Housing Needs Forecast 109,913 Projected population by 2037 (medium projection) Source: *Population Projections Appendix 742 Average annual population growth projected from 2018 to 2037 Source: OFN1, 2019; -Population Projections Appendix; ECONorthwest calculation 6,660 Projected number of units needed by 2037 Source: OFM, 2019; *Population Projections Appendix; ECONorthwest Calculation 351 Average number of new units needed to add annually from 2019 to 2037 Source: OFM, 2019; *Population Projections Appendix; ECONorthwest Calculation, This number is higher than the 345 average housing units built from 2010-2019. 20/O Increase in annual housing production to reach 2037 housing need forecast -City of Spokane Valley Appendix A: SEPA Analysis 2017-2037 Comprehensive Plari Housing Units Needed Through 2037 Underproduction Future Need Housing Need 1,463 5,197 6,660 Source: PUMS, 2018; *Appendix; ECONorthwest Calculation. Note: Underproduction is the estimated number of housing units needed to satisfy the housing shortfall over the last decade. Future need is the number of housing units needed from 2020 to 2037 (based on the OFM forecast).. Housing Units Needed as a Share of Existing Stock Existing Units 38,730 Housing Need % of Existing Units 6,660 17% Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020; ECONorthwest Calculation Housing Units Needed by AM! Through 2037, Based on 2018 Trends AMI # of Units 0-30% % of Units 550 8% 30-50% 625 9% 50-80% 1,039 16% 80-100% 686 10% 100%+ 3,760 56% Source: PUMS, 2018;*Appendix; ECONorthwest Calculation HUD Affordability Level by Housing Type, 2018 AMI Studio 1-bed 2-bed 3-bed 30% $342 $366 $440 $509 50% $570 $612 $734 $848 80% $912 $978 $1,174 $1,356 100% $1,140 $1,222 $1,468 $1,695 Source: HUD, 2018. Notes: The dollar values are for Spokane County and the AMI values were adjusted to include the family size that would be appropriate for the housing type. These are fair market rent values. 12 City of Spokane Valley I Housing Needs Assessment Spokane Valley Employment Trends Employment Trends Understanding Spokane Valley's workforce profile and commuting trends helps provide insights on the housing needs of workers today and into the future. Factors such as job sector growth and the city's commuting patterns may have implications for how many people are able to both live and work within the city. If such factors indicate many people are commuting into the city for work, it could be possible that the city does not have enough housing to accommodate its workforce or enough housing matching their needs and affordability levels. This employment profile for Spokane Valley highlights trends associated with workforce and wage growth. As shown in the employment table, an estimated total of 51,305 people are part of the workforce in the City of Spokane Valley as of 2017. Overall jobs grew by around 11% from 2010 - 2017 in the city. • Among this total, the largest share works in retail trade (almost 20% of total), manufacturing (13%), and health care/social assistance sectors (12%). Removing small job sectors (below 5% of the total), the employment sectors experiencing high increases in job growth between 2010-2017 were educational services (120%) and construction sectors (45%), both with an average salary below $50,000, which could indicate increasing demand needed for housing below 100% AMI (such as moderate -income housing). Access to Employment* Transit and auto access to regional employment was derived using 45-minute travel sheds for each mode. ECONorthwest calculated the number of jobs available within these travel sheds in each industrial sector catego- ry for the Spokane County region (2-digit NAICS). The transit travel sheds originated from every transit stop within the city while the auto travel sheds originated from the center of all block groups in the city. Spokane Valley km Drive time Transit time -Transit and drive time of 45 minutes or less, departing at 7:00 AM, mid -week Source: US Census LODES database, 2017 and census block geometries, 2010: Spokane Transit Authority database; ECONorthwest Calculations. This analysis demonstrates how a large majority of jobs are more accessible by driving an automobile rather than taking public transit. In total, 260,178 jobs are within a 45-minute drive from the City of Spokane Valley while far fewer jobs, estimated at 63,115, are located within the 45-minutes transit shed. One quarter of the jobs are available via transit compared to driving within 45 minutes or less from the original location. The denser urban areas within the small orange area could be analyzed for potential opportunities to include housing development that is more transit -oriented. Mapping out commute sheds can be useful for estimating the extent of the regional housing market since most employed home buyers and renters tend to search for units with their commute in mind. Housing Needs Assessment 1 City of Spokane Valley 13 Spokane Valley Employment Trends Spokane Valley Employment Numbers Industry (2-digit NAICS Code) Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting Access to Regional Employment Employees % # Change % Change Average Salary % Jobs by % Jobs by (2017) (2010-2017) (2010-2017) (2018) Auto Transit 1.1% 513 777% $34,444 88% 19% Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 0.2% 35 69% $31,467 93% 14% Utilities 0.6% 46 19% $69,936 92% 21% Construction 6.1% 978 45% $46,683 93% 15% Manufacturing 13% -172 -3% $46,532 96% 16% Wholesale Trade 7.1% 684 23% $44,029 98% 24% Retail Trade 19.6% -278 -3% $33,904 97% 27% Transportation and Warehousing 3.9% 375 23% $49,020 97% 10% Information 0.8% -127 -23% $40,373 97% 24% Finance and Insurance 4% 343 20% $43,927 99% 36% Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 1.2% 59 10% $31,836 97% 30% Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 2.8% 289 26% $48,292 97% 31% Management of Companies and Enterprises 1.2% 293 87% $46,964 98% 24% Administrative and Support and Waste Management and 7.8% 600 18% $31,520 97% 29% Remediation services Educational Services 7.1% 1,978 120% $48,057 93% 22% Health Care and Social Assistance 12.2% -409 -6% $41,440 98% 23% Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 0.3% -116 -42% $34,583 71% 9% Accommodation and Food Services 7.5% 299 8% $28,307 97% 26% Other Service 2.5% -102 -7% $31,734 96% 24% Public Administration 0.9% -188 -28% $52,425 97% 13% Source: US Census LODES database, 2017 and census block geometries, 2010; ECONorthwest. Note: Median earnings was sourced from ACS 2018 5-year estimates at the tract level, joined to jurisdictional boundaries and summarized as the median for each industry by jurisdiction. Several estimates are missing, likely due to insufficient numbers of employees within that industry/jurisdiction pair: The estimated total number of Spokane Valley employees in 2017 is 57,305. The 207 9 average annual salary for Spokane County was S50,234 (includes all industries) and this means housing below 80% of the AMI would be affordable to those earning this average salary. 14 City of Spokane Valley 1 Housing Needs Assessment Spokane Valley Commuting Trends Approximately 32% of Spokane Valley's workforce lived and worked in Spokane Valley in 2017. This share increased above 2070 levels (26%). Around 40,029 workers (74%) of the total City of Spokane Valley workforce live elsewhere and commute into Spokane Valley for work while 30,476 workers (26%) live in Spokane Valley and commute elsewhere for their work. Among those working outside of Spokane Valley, 37% work in Spokane, 5% work in Liberty Lake, 2% work in Seattle, and 2% work in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Around 7 % of the workforce commutes to Airway Heights, Post Falls Idaho, , and Cheney. The remaining 7 9% commutes to other locations. The high rate of commuting to the City of Spokane Valley could be due to a shortage of affordable housing or suitable housing not meeting the needs of the workforce or it could mean they prefer living elsewhere in the region. Commuting Flow, 2017 Source: US Census LODES database, 2017; Census On the Map. Note: Dark green arrow is showing persons commuting into town (40,029) and the light green arrow (30,476) shows persons commuting out of town. Commuting Trends, 2017 Seattle Spokane Bellingham Yakima Coeur d'Alene, ID Olympia Spokane Valley Tacoma Cheney Post Falls, ID Medical Lake Airway Heights Liberty Lake 64% 66% 52% 48% 46% 36% 32% 30% 21% 20% IMO a Living and working in city Living in city, working outside 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Source: US Census LODES database, 2017; Census On the Map Housing Needs Assessment I City of Spokane Valley 15 Spokane County Trends Change in Household Size, 2012 & 2018 5,000 Change in population • 4,000 3,876 > Between 2010 and 2018 3,000 2.3h3 2,671 d �,000 1,982 86; 2.0 r 8 _ 1 1,719 2010 2018 - 1,000 418 Population 471,221 507,950 o um Source: OFM, retrieved in 2020 - -1,000 I z -2,000 -1,296 -1,903 -3.000 8% 4,228 4,347 70/0 Change in number of households ) Between 207 2 and 2018 2012 2018 Households 196,529 209,897 Source: OFM, retrieved in 2020 21% Change in median renter Household income ) Between 207 2 and 2018 2012 2018 Median Income Source: PUMS (2012, 2018). Note: All values are in 2018 inflation -adjusted dollars. 9% $28,726 $34,749 Change in median owner household income > Between 207 2 and 2018 2012 2018 Median $68,833 $74,969 Income Source: PUMS (2012, 2018) 1 2 3 People per household Spokane County Spokane is Spokane Valley Source: PUMS (2012, 2018) Income Distribution by AMI, 2012 & 2018 60% a 50% O 40% • 30°%° 0 • 20% 15% 10°i° 12'% 11 % 0-30% 11-1 16% 15% 11%9% 30-50% 50-80% 80-100% Household Income as a % of AMI ■ 2012 rr 2018 Source: PUMS (2012, 2018) 4 Income Distribution by AMI and Tenure, 2018 Renter Owner 19% 54% 100%+ 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Household Income as a % of AMI ra 0-30% 30-50% ca 50-80% u 80-100% ■ > 100% 16 City of Spokane Valley 1 Housing Needs Assessment Spokane County Trends 13% Change in average rent for 2-bedroom apartment > Between 2070 and 2020 Average Rent 2010 2020 $968 $1,094 Source: Costar. Note: All values are in 2018 inflation -adjusted dollars. 50% Change in median home sales price > Between 207 0 and 2020 2010 2020 Median Sales Price Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020. Note: All values are in 2078 inflation -adjusted dollars, $184,000 $275,000 Housing Units Built by Decade, as of Mid-2020 Decade Percent of Units Before 1940 11% 1940's 5% 1950's 8% 1960's 5% 1970's 15% 1980's 10% 1990's 19% 2000's 17% 2010's 9% Source: Spokane County Assessor, 2020 Share of Households Share of Households Share of Households Population by Age, 2012 & 2018 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 12's 30% Spokane County 11% 20% 10% 0% 2012 2018 W Under 5 years to 35 to 44 years Spokane 15% 2012 2018 Spokane Valley 13% 15 10% 15% 2012 2018 t 5 to 18 years ❑ 18 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 45 to 64 years ■ 65 years and older Source: ACS(2012, 2018); PUMS 1-Year Estimates Cost Burdened and Severely Cost Burdened by Tenure, 2018 100% g1% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 100% 80% 60% 40 % 20% 0% 86% 56% 25'. 83% IT Owners is Cost Burdened rJ Severely Cost Burdened 38% 16% Renters 39 % I 13% 3% II.0% 0-30% 30-5016 50-80% 80.100 % Household Income as a °%b of AMI Source: PUMS, 2018 s% 0% 13% 9% 100%+ Housing Needs Assessment I City of Spokane Valley 17 Spokane County Trends About 82%, or 739,770, of Spokane County residents live and work in Spokane County. About 78%, or 37,388 of Spokane County residents work outside Spokane County. Most of Spokane County residents work in City of Spokane or City of Spokane Valley. Commuting Flow, 2017 Source: JS Census LODES database, 2017; Census On the Map. Note: Dark green arrow is showing persons commuting into town (45,333) and the light green arrow (31,388) shows persons commuting out of town. Cities Where Spokane County Residents Work, 2017 Coeur d'Alene, ID 1 1% Medical Lake, WA I 1 % Cheney, WA Airway Heights, WA Seattle, WA Liberty Lake, WA Spokane Valley, WA All Other Locations Spokane, WA 18% 24% 47% 0% 20% 40% 60% Source: US Census LODES database, 2017; Census On the Map 18 City of Spokane Valley I Housing Needs Assessment ithdVISCH MNCE COVERAGES INDUSTRIES • Cities Where Rents Are Rising and Falling the Most Take a look at our deep dive into the largest changes in U.S. rental prices. Adrian Mak October 13, 2020 In this analysis, AdvisorSmith examined the trends in rental prices in over 500 U.S. cities to determine where rents are rising and falling the most. The arrival of the coronavirus pandemic in the year 2020 has created major changes for many Americans in their ways of life, affecting everything from work to school, creating changes in the economy, as well as affecting decisions about where to live. One place where the pandemic has caused major waves is in the residential rental market, with dramatic increases and decreases in rents in certain communities in the country. We examined rent prices for studios, 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-bedroom rental units in September 2020, and compared these to average rents in 2019 for cities around the country. For each city, we determined the weighted average increase or decrease in rents based upon each city's composition of rental housing units. We then ranked the top 100 cities where rents are rising and falling the most. Among the cities included in our analysis, we found that rents increased an average of 0.9% during the study period. However, the range of rent changes was very wide, with the largest decrease being-34.7%, and the largest increase being 12.5%, as Americans made new choices about where to live based on shifts in the economy. Read on to discover more about the cities where rents are rising and falling the most. Cities Where Rents Are Rising the Most .1 5.1 12.5 The cities where rents rose the most in the past nine montns include cities on the outskirts of major metropolitan areas, as well as some midsize cities. In particular, numerous cities on the outskirts of the Atlanta. Phoenix, and Baltimore metropolitan areas were represented among the top 25. Additionally, there were strong rent increases in San Bernardino and Riverside counties in Southern California. Other smaller and midsize cities represented in the top 25 included the Spokane metropolitan area; Huntsville, AL; Jackson, MS; August, GA; and Boise, ID. Rank City Rent Increase Weighted Avg Weighted Avg Rent Rent (2019) (Sep 2020) 1 Stockbridge, GA 12.5% $1,300 $1,396 2 Avondale, AZ 11.6% $1,373 S1,481 3 Spokane Valley, 11.3% $1.112 $1,186 WA 4 Chino, CA 10.8% $1,915 $2,037 5 East Point, GA 10.7% $1,169 $1,239 6 Coeur d'Alene, ID 10.7% $1,048 $1,113 7 Huntsville, AL 10.5% $1,004 $1,068 8 Ridgeland, MS 10.4% $1,253 $1,332 9 Goodyear, AZ 10.0% $1,553 $1,662 10 Augusta, GA 9.6% $977 $1,032 Showing 1 to 10 of 100 entries ', Previous Next :`,, Cities Where Rents Are Felling the Most -34.7 __ -2.6 Rents fell dramatically in some of the nation's most expensive cities for renters. The top three spots were taken by cities in Texas and North Dakota with economies focused on oil and energy. With the price of oil plunging due to a reduction in driving during the coronavirus pandemic, demand for housing in these communities has fallen substantially. Also highly represented in the top 25 were cities in the San Francisco Bay Area, New York City, the Boston metropolitan area, and a few suburbs of Washington, D.C. Many of these cities, which have some of the highest rents in the country, contain professional and technical workers, many of who have been working from home for much of the year. Rank City Rent Weighted Avg Rent Weighted Avg Rent (Sep 2020) 1 Odessa, TX -34.7% $937 $699 2 Midland, TX -30.9% $1,226 $943 3 Williston, ND -24.1% $1,114 $951 4 San Francisco, -19.7% $2,695 $2,270 CA Decrease % (2019) 5 Mountain -17.4% $2,959 $2,606 View, CA 6 Menlo Park, -15.2% $3,311 $2,952 CA 7 Sunnyvale, CA -14.8% $2,737 $2,455 8 Redwood City, -14.1 % $2,820 $2,540 CA 9 Palo Alto, CA -13.3% $3,104 $2,814 10 Coral Gables, -12.9% $1,870 $1,704 FL Showing 1 to 10 of 100 entries cr, Previous Next Methodology AdvisorSmith examined data on rental prices from Zillow and Apartment List from 540 U.S. cities to determine the cities where rents are falling and rising the fastest. In order to construct these lists, we first determined the average rental prices for studios, 1-bedroom, 2- bedroom, 3-bedroom, and 4-bedroom rental housing units in each city during the calendar year 2019. We also found the average rental prices for studios, 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom, 3-bedroom, and 4-bedroom rental housing units in each city for September 2020. We calculated the percentage difference between rental prices for each size housing unit between the 2019 average and September 2020. Next, we used U.S. Census data in order to determine the composition of the rental housing stock in each city. We weighted the percentage difference in rental prices for each housing unit size by the percentage of housing units that comprised each housing unit size to give us a weighted rental price change for each city. We then ranked the cities by this percentage change in order to determine the top 100 cities where rents are rising and falling the most quickly. We also calculated the weighted average rental price in each city by applying the percentage composition of housing units by size to the rents for each housing unit for both the 2019 average period as well as the September 2020 period. Sources 1. Zillow Home Value Index (Data Provided by Zillow Group) 2. Apartment List Data & Rent Estimates 3. U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Physical Housing Characteristics for Occupied Housing Units f Share V Tweet in Share 20-09 BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING THE SPOKANE COUNTY ) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FINDINGS OF FACT ) AND DECISIONS FOR THE 2019 ANNUAL AMENDMENTS ) FINDINGS OF FACT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND CONCURRENT ) AND ZONE RECLASSIFICATION, IN FILES NO. 18-CPA-05, ) DECISIONS 19-CPA-02, 19-CPA-03, 19-CPA-04, 19-CPA-06, 19-CPA-07, ) AND TEXT AMENDMENT FOR FILE NO. 19-CPA-01 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 36.32.120(6) RCW, the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, hereinafter referred to as the "Board," has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business, and in the name of the County to prosecute and defend all actions for and against the County, and such other powers as are or may be conferred by law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 36.70 RCW, the Board has created a Department of Building and Planning, hereinafter referred to as the "Department," and a Planning Commission, hereinafter referred to as the "Commission" (Resolution No. 76-698); and WHEREAS, in compliance with RCW Chapter 36.70 the Board adopted a Comprehensive Plan for Spokane County on December 22, 1980, and has subsequently amended said Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Washington Laws, 1993, First Special Session, Chapter 6, effective June 1, 1993, Spokane County is required under RCW 36.70A.040 to conform to the requirements of the Growth Management Act Chapter 36.70A RCW (GMA); and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.020 identifies goals to guide the development and adoption of comprehensive plans and development regulations; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 36.70 and 36.70A RCW, the Board adopted a Comprehensive Plan for Spokane County on November 5, 2001 (Board Resolutions 1-1059 and 1-1060); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 36.70 and 36.70A RCW, the Board on May 25, 2004, under Spokane County Resolution No. 04-0461, adopted a new Zoning Code to implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and said regulation becoming effective June 1, 2004; and WHEREAS, Chapters 36.70 and 36.70A RCW, requires the Spokane County Zoning Code to be consistent with the goals and policies of the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, Spokane County plans under Chapter 36.70A RCW, which dictates comprehensive plans are subject to continuing review and evaluation and if needed amended and revised, generally no more frequently than once per year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of RCW 36.70A.140, the Board adopted Public Participation Program Guidelines on February 24, 1998 under Resolution 98-0144 and adopted amendments to the policies under Resolution No. 98-0788 and No. 06-0869; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 36.70 RCW, the Board created a Planning Commission, hereinafter referred to as the "Commission," which may make recommendations concerning the adoption, rejection, or revision of comprehensive plans and official controls that implement comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan provides that amendments thereto may be initiated by the Board, the Planning Commission, and the Planning Director based on citizen requests or when changed conditions or emergency circumstances warrant adjustments to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, in 2019, the Department received six (6) Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments and/or four (4) Concurrent Zone Reclassifications requests prior to the deadline of March 29, 2019, for which the Board initiated public review and processing under File No. 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-02,19-CPA-03, 19-CPA-04, 19-CPA-06, 19-CPA-07. 18-CPA-05 was holdover from the 2018 cycle with delays due to transportation issues; and WHEREAS, in 2019, the Department submitted a request for a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to the Urban Land Use Chapter of the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan and to Chapter 14.606 of the Spokane County Zoning Code, for which the Board initiated public review and processing under File No, 19-CPA-01; and WHEREAS, the Department, as detailed in the staff reports and part of the record, circulated proposals for the 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Concurrent Zone Reclassifications, and Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to various agencies and departments for review and comment, including the Washington State Department of Commerce on May 16, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) evaluated the 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendment requests and found them consistent with SRTC's Regional Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, on or before September 30, 2020, after review of the proposals for compliance with applicable regulations and consideration of agency comments, the Department, pursuant to WAC 197-11 and Section 11.10.230(3) of the Spokane County Environmental Ordinance, issued separate Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for 19-CPA-01, 19-CPA-02, 19-CPA-04, 19-CPA-06 and Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-03, 19-CPA-07; and WHEREAS, following issuance of the SEPA threshold determinations, the Department provided for the appropriate comment period, at least fifteen days, and provided notice of a public hearing before the Commission for October 15, 2020, to receive public testimony and begin review and consideration of proposed amendment files: 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-02, 19-CPA- 03, 19-CPA-04, 19-CPA-06, 19-CPA-07, 19-CPA-01 and prepared staff reports for each proposal; and WHEREAS, the Department provided at least a fifteen (15) day comment period following issuance of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) and Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) pursuant to WAC 197-11-340(2), with the comment period ending on October 14, 2020; and WHEREAS, No appeal of the SEPA determination was timely or otherwise filed; and WHEREAS, on December 8, 2020 the Board received, the Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendations, and set it for consideration on December 15, 2020 at a public meeting; and WHEREAS, the Department Director, at the Board's regular public meeting on December 8, 2020 advised the Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendations concerning the proposed 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Concurrent Zone Reclassifications, and Text Amendment has been received and recommended it be noticed for consideration at a public meeting on December 15, 2020; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2020, the Board having considered the Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendations, all public testimony and submitted written comments of record, staff reports, information contained in the six (6) Comprehensive Plan Amendments identified as 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-02, 19-CPA-03, 19-CPA-04, 19-CPA-06, 19-CPA-07, four (4) Concurrent Zone Reclassifications identified as 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-02, 19-CPA-06, 19-CPA-07, and one (1) Text Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan identified as 19-CPA-01, being fully apprised of the requirements under the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43.21C RCW), the Spokane County Zoning Code, and other applicable County Development Regulations, the Chair of the Board accepted motions and seconds on each proposal and unanimously determined it in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to adopt the Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendations and voted as follows: 3-0 to approve 18-CPA-05 as recommended by the Commission; 3-0 to approve 19-CPA-02 as recommended by the Commission; 3-0 to approve 19-CPA-03 as recommended by the Commission; 3-0 to approve 19-CPA-04 as recommended by the Commission; 3-0 to approve 19-CPA-06 as recommended by the Commission; 3-0 to approve 19-CPA-07 as recommended by the Commission; 3-0 to approve 19-CPA-01 as recommended by the Commission; and WHEREAS, a copy of the Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendations includes a summary of each proposed annual amendment and a map illustrating the location and land use change requested along with the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission for each amendment is attached as Attachment "A" and incorporated herein by reference; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board that in adopting the Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendations and in further support of approving the amendments file 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-02, 19-CPA-03, 19-CPA-04, 19-CPA-06, 19-CPA-07, and 19-CPA-01, it does hereby make the following additional Findings of Fact: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Board adopts the preceding recitals as Findings of Fact and incorporates the same by reference as though fully set forth herein to the extent they do not conflict with these below additional Findings of Fact. 2. The applications for six (6) Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, four (4) Concurrent Zone Reclassifications, and one (1) Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment were received prior to March 29, 2019, the application deadline, and properly initiated. 3. The Board has received and considered the Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendation Report which includes six (6) Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, (4) Concurrent Zone Reclassifications, and one (1) Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment. 4. The Commission and the Board have provided for timely notice and continuous review, evaluation and public participation in consideration of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Concurrent Zone Reclassifications, and Text Amendment, consistent with Chapter 36.70 RCW, Chapter 36.70A RCW, Chapter 365-195 WAC, Chapter 365-196 WAC, and the County's adopted Public Participation Program Guidelines for the proposed amendments as documented in the staff reports on the Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments, included a. Legal notice of the public hearing as required by Washington State Law and County ordinance, was published in the official newspaper for Spokane County, the Spokesman Review on September 30, 2020. b. Notice was also published on an interactive website dedicated to land use planning in Spokane County. This website included information and directions on how to provide public comment to the proposals included. c. Public notice mailed to government agencies, neighborhood organizations, business organizations and other interested groups and organizations. d. Notice of intent to adopt sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce on or before July 1, 2020 as required by RCW 36.70.106. e. The Department sent the proposed map amendments and related State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documents to Spokane County jurisdiction and agencies for coordination, review and comment on or before September 30, 2020. f. Signs describing the proposed amendments, including maps thereof, and providing notice of hearing regarding the proposed amendments at the boundary of the properties subject to the proposed amendments, Notice of Hearings, opportunity for public comment, and maps describing the proposed amendments were sent via USPS Mail to owners of and taxpayers for properties within 400' feet (urban) and 1000' feet (rural) of the boundaries of the properties subject to the proposed amendment area. 5. The proposed Concurrent Zone Reclassifications in the 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment Files No. 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-02, 19-CPA-06, and 19-CPA-07, are consistent requirements of Chapter 14.402 Spokane County Zoning Code relative to the respective Concurrent Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 6. The environmental reviews for proposed amendments in Files No. 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-02, 19-CPA-03, 19-CPA-04, 19-CPA-06, 19-CPA-07, and 19-CPA-01 are consistent with State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, pursuant to RCW.70A.100, RCW 36.70A.130 (1), (2), (3), WAC 197-11-340, WAC 197-11-340(2), and Section 11.10.230(3) of the Spokane County Environmental Ordinance and the Board acknowledged and concurs with the Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) and Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) issued on each. 7. File No. 18-CPA-05, Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Zone Reclassification, the Board in further support of its approval specifically makes the following supplemental findings: a. It was subject to public testimony and written comment in opposition to the proposal; and b. Adoption of the proposal is consistent with the text of the Comprehensive Plan and the applicable Goals and Policies cited in the Department of Building and Planning staff report. 8. File No, 19-CPA-02, Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Zone Reclassification, the Board in further support of its approval specifically makes following supplemental findings: a. It was subject to public testimony and written comment in opposition of the proposal; and b. Adoption of the proposal is consistent with the text of the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Goals and Policies cited in the Department of Building and Planning staff report. 9. File No. 19-CPA-03, Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the Board in further support of its approval specifically makes the following supplemental findings; a. It was subject to public testimony and written comment in opposition of the proposal; and b. Adoption of the proposal is consistent with the text of the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Goals and Policies cited in the Department of Building and Planning staff report. 10. File No. 19-CPA-04, Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the Board in further support of its approval specifically makes the following supplemental findings; a. It was subject to public testimony and written comment in opposition of the proposal; and b. Adoption of the proposal is consistent with the text of the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Goals and Policies cited in the Department of Building and Planning staff report. 11. File No. 19-CPA-06, Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Concurrent Zone Reclassification, the Board in further support of its approval specifically makes the following supplemental findings; a. It was subject to written comment in opposition of the proposal; and b. Adoption of the proposal is consistent with the text of the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Goals and Policies cited in the Department of Building and Planning staff report. 12. File No. 19-CPA-01, Proposed Text Amendment to the Urban Land Use Chapter of the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan and to Chapter 14.606 of the Spokane County Zoning Code, the Board in further support of its approval specifically makes the following supplemental findings; a. It was subject to public testimony in support of the proposal; and b. Adoption of the proposal is consistent with the text of the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Goals and Policies cited in the Department of Building and Planning staff report 13. The Board fully considered the above identified Comprehensive Plan Amendments to the goals and substantive and procedural requirement of all statutes, codes, regulations and all applicable Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, the State Environmental Policy Act (RCW 43.21C), the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, Countywide Planning Policies, and Spokane County code, and finds merits of granting the amendments as conditioned outweigh any perceived inconsistencies noted in comments and testimony and are in the best interest of county residents. 14. The Board having carefully considered the Commission's Findings of Fact and Recommendations and find the Commission's considerations, deliberations, and actions appropriate to allow full public participation and thorough vetting of the proposed amendments, and adopts them by reference as the Board's factual findings and adopts the recommendations in approving the proposals so far as they are consistent with the Board's findings and the decisions herein and as summarized in Attachment "A". 15. The Board finds adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Concurrent Zone Reclassification on File No. 18-CPA-05; adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Concurrent Zone Reclassification on File No. 19-CPA-02; adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment for 19-CPA-03; adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment for 19-CPA-04; adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Map and Concurrent Zone Reclassification on File No. 19-CPA-06; adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Map and Concurrent Zone Reclassification on File 19-CPA-07; and adoption of the Text Amendment to the Urban Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and to Chapter 14.606 of the Spokane County Zoning Code on File 19-CPA-01, are individually and collectively in the best interest of the public's health, safety, and welfare. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board the proposed 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification concurrent therewith under File No. 18-CPA-05 is adopted, as shown in Attachment "A". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board the proposed 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification concurrent therewith under File No. 19-CPA-02 is adopted, as shown in Attachment "A". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board the proposed 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment herewith under File No. 19-CPA-03 is adopted, as shown in Attachment "A". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board the proposed 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment herewith under File No. 19-CPA-04 is adopted, as shown in Attachment "A". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board the proposed 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification concurrent herewith under File No. 19-CPA-06, as shown in Attachment "A". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board the proposed 2019 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification concurrent herewith under File No. 19-CPA-07 is adopted, as shown in Attachment "A". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board the proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan Text amendment to the Urban Land Use Chapter and to Chapter 14.606 of the Spokane County Zoning Code herewith under 19-CPA-01 is adopted, as shown in Attachment "B". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the files in the Spokane County Public Works Department of Building and Planning, Spokane County Planning Commission, and the Board of County Commissioners along with the record of all public hearings related to this matter are incorporated herein by this reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk of the Board is directed to publish a notice of adoption pursuant to RCW 36.70.290 (b). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to send a copy of this decision to the Washington State Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 within 10 days of adoption. 1/� ' PASSED AND ADOPTED this .2g11'z-day G.'e 'r month 20.2b PGIN14/14(1*--. NA VASQUEZ, Clerk tta�Jf the Boa 20- 0982 year. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AL FRENCH, CHAIR 7cor JOSH KERNS, VICE CHAIR MARY L. Y, COMMIS � r STONER Attachment "A" Planning Commission Recommendations and Maps for the following File No. 18-CPA-05, 19-CPA-02,19-CPA-03, 19-CPA-04, 19-CPA-06, 19-CPA-07, 19-CPA-01 BoCC Decision Summary File # Applicant Existing Comp Plan/Zoning Proposed Comp Plan Proposed Zoning Site Size in Acres Planning Commission Recommendation BoCC Decision 18-CPA-05 J.R. Bonnett LDR MDR MDR 25.5 Approved 7-0 Approved 3-0 19-CPA-01 Spokane County Text Amendment Approved 7-0 Approved 3-0 19-CPA-02 Dwight Hume LDR HDR HDR 1.9 Approved 7-0 Approved 3-0 19-CPA-03 CJW Properties RCV ML ML 160 Approved 7-0 Approved 3-0 19-CPA-04 Greg Henning RCV ML ML 20 Approved 6-1 Approved 3-0 19-CPA-06 Melissa Murphy LDR HDR HDR 0.7 Approved 7-0 Approved 3-0 19-CPA-07 Whipple Consulting Engineers LDR HDR HDR 1.7 Approved 7-0 Approved 3-0 Project No. 18-CPA-05: State Highway 291 (Nine Mile Road) Proposal: Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) Project No. 19-CPA-02: Hawthorne Road and Waikiki Road Proposal: Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR) Project No. 19-CPA-03: Grove Road Proposal: Rural Conservation to Mineral Lands Comprehensive Plan 21.12 1 Mineral Lars 21.1114111114 Il z : . ___ ..._ ___. __ ,___Is ..•• I Rural Conservation .s saaspr Project No. 19-CPA-04: Austin Road Proposal: Rural Conservation to Mineral Lands �x3 Rural Conservation ,Pig to Mineral Land 1 cat,. , Project No. 19-CPA-06: Hawthorne Road Proposal: Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR) Project No. 19-CPA-07: Wandermere Road Proposal: Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR) Attachment "B" Text Amendment File No. 19-CPA-01: Urban Land Use Chapter of the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan and to Chapter 14.606 of the Spokane County Zoning Code Proposed Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Additional wording underlined Deleted wording strikethrough Page UL-1, Comprehensive Plan Urban Land Use Categories Residential Categories Three separate categories for residential use are established, ranging from low to high density, Low density residential includes a density range of 1 to and including-6 8 dwelling units per acre. Bonus density in the low density residential category may allow an increase to 10 dwelling units per acre for qualifying infill projects. elMedium density residential includes a range of greater than 6 to and including 15 dwelling units per acre and high density residential shall be greater than 15 dwelling units per acre. Design standards ensure neighborhood character and compatibility with adjacent uses, Commercial uses, with the exception of office use in high -density residential areas and neighborhood centers associated with traditional neighborhood developments, would only be permitted through changing the land use category with a comprehensive plan amendment or through a neighborhood planning process. Page UL-12, Comprehensive Plan Goal UL.9a Create a variety of residential densities within the Urban Growth Area with an emphasis on compact mixed -use development in designated centers and corridors. UL.9b Create efficient use of land and resources by reducing the conversion of land to sprawling, tow density development. Policies UL.9.1 Establish low, medium, and high density residential categories to achieve population and economic growth objectives. Low density residential areas shall range from 1 to and including 5 8 dwelling units per acre. Bonus density in the low density residential category may allow an increase to 10 dwelling units per acre for qualifying infill proiects. -m Medium density residential shall range from greater than 6 to and including 15 dwelling units per acre and high density residential shall be greater than 15.0 residential units per acre. Mixed residential densities may be established through community -based neighborhood planning, subarea planning, or approval of traditional neighborhood developments. UL.9.2 Spokane County shall seek to achieve an average residential density in new development of at least 4 5 dwelling units per net acre in the Urban Growth Area through a mix of densities and housing types. Proposed Amendments to the Zoning Code Additional wording underlined Deleted wording strikethraugh Chapter 14.300 Definitions 14.300.100 Definitions Dwelling, Two -Family (Duplex): A single structure containing 2 dwelling units designed exclusively for occupancy by 2 families living independently of each other, and neither unit is considered an accessory dwelling unit. To be classified as a duplex, the dwelling units must be connected by a common floor/ceiling, a common wall or by a covered carport/breezeway which does not exceed a-distance-ef 20 feet between the two dwelling units. To be considered a common wall, at least 50 % of the wall shall be physically connected to the wall of the contiguous unit. To be considered a common ceiling, at least 50 % of the ceiling area shall be physically connected to the ceiling of the contiguous unit. Chapter 14.606 Urban Residential Zones 14.606.100 Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Urban Residential Chapter is to implement Comprehensive Plan goals and policies related to urban residential use. Residential zone classifications provide for a range of residential uses within the Urban Growth Area. The Low Density Residential (LDR) zone is primarily for single-family, duplex and row housing residential development that allows a density of 1 to and including 6 S dwelling units per acre and up to 10 units per acre for qualifying infill projects. Small scale, multi- family development may be permitted, consistent with density standards to provide compatibility with adjacent single-family residences. Zero lot -line housing, bonus density and other incentives are permitted to promote infill, preservation of open space, and a variety of housing types and densities. 14.606.220 Residential Lands Matrix Table 606-1, Residential Zones Matrix Residential Uses LDR LDR-P MDR HDR Dwelling. multi -family, small scale infill L N N N_ W development Dwelling, multi -family N N P L Dwelling, multi -family, greater than 30 units per acre N N N CU Dwelling, single-family P P P P Dwelling, row housing L N P P Dwelling, two-family duplex P N P P Dwelling, two-family duplex - corner lot bonus L N N N density 14.606.230 Limited Uses with Specific Standards Uses that are categorized with an "L" in table 606-1, Residential Zones Matrix, are subject to the corresponding standards of this section. In the case of inconsistencies between section 14.606.220 (Residential Zones Matrix) and section 14.606.230, section 14.606.230 shall govern. x. Dwelling, Two-family Duplex with corner lot bonus density (LDR zone) a. A two-family duplex dwelling located on a corner lot shall be considered as a single-family dwelling for the purposes of calculatinp, density provided the front door and driveway for each unit face opposite streets to give the appearance of a single-family residence from the street view, as illustrated below. x. Dwelling, Multi -family. small scale infill development (LDR zone) a. Multifamily development shall be limited to triplex or foumpiex dwellings located on a single parcel/lot not smaller than 13,000 sq. ft. b. A bonus density of 2 dwelling units per acre is provided allowing a maximum density of 10 units per acre. c. Rear or side lot lines abutting an existing single-family development shall require installation of a 6-foot sight obscuring fence along the rear/side property lines. d. Landscaping shall be required consistent with Chapter 14.806. Landscaping and Screening Standards Landscaping type and width of plantings shall be consistent with Section 14.806.130. e. Parking shall be required consistent with Chapter 14.802, Off -Street Parking and Loading Standards, and shall comply with the standards for a multi -family dwelling. f. Permit applications shall require a technical review meeting following submittal of a detailed site plan, consistent with Chapter 14.410, Building Permit Review. Row housing (LDR zone) a- tow-hecrsing-developnieat-r-equiresapplisatien-arid viev; -Tla ►rye it-9eueleprogrit tinder -Chapter 14.701. a. Row housing shall comply with the requirements for Zero Lot Line Development under Section 14.606.300(4). b. Preliminary plats in which 25% or more of dwellings are row houses shall be allowed a bonus density of 2 units per acre within the Low Density Residential zone for a maximum density of 10 units per acre. If the preliminary plat is completed in phases, each phase of the development must include at least 25% of the units as row housing units until the total number of row housing units required to receive the bonus density has been reached. This requirement shall be included in the plat dedicatory wording. c. Row housing lots with rear/side lot lines abutting an existing single-family neighborhood shall require installation of a 6-foot sight obscuring fence and 5 feet of Tvpe 1 landscaping along the rear/side property line. Street frontage shall require five feet of Type 3 landscaping which includes installation of street trees. The fencing and landscaping improvements shall be installed prior to final plat approval. In the case of delays caused by weather conditions, appropriate arrangements with the Department shall be macle to ensure construction. 14.606.300 Development Standards Permitted uses in the Urban Residential zones shall comply with the following development standards. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, evidence of compliance with provisions of this section shall be provided. 40. Density Standards: Table 606-2, Density Standards for Residential Zones 2. Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Plus Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Density: 1 to 6 8 units/acre* 1 unit/acre Over 6 to 15 units/acre Over 15 units/acre "Bonus densities may be allowed for planned unit developments and other infill developments as identified herein. Lot Standards: Table 606-3, Lot Standards for Residential Zones Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Plus Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Max. Building Coverage 55 % of lot area 55 % of lot area 65 % of lot area 70% of lot area Max. Height 35 feet 65 feet fora college/university 35 feet 65 feet for a college/university 40 feet 65 feet for a college/university 50 feet 65 feet for a college/university Permitted uses: Minimum lot area 6,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft. Minimum frontage 50 feet 60 feet 60 feet 60 feet Single family: Minimum lot area 4.000 57989 sq. 43,560 sq. ft. 4,200 2,500 sq. ft. 1,600 sq. ft. ft. Minimum frontage 5040 feet 90 feet 60 36 feet 20 feet Duplex: Minimum lot area 10 000 4,000 sq. Not applicable. 8;400 2,500 sq. ft. 3;2U0 1.300 sq. ft. ft, Minimum frontage 50 40 feet Not applicable 50 40 feet 40 30 feet Row Housing: Minimum lot 2,500 so. ft. Not applicable. 1.300 sq. ft. 1,300 sq. ft. area Minimum 36 feet Not applicable 36 feet 36 feet frontage Minimum 20 feet Not applicable 16 feet 16 feet frontage w! vehicle access from alley Minimum Yard Setback: Front/flanking street 15feet — residence 20 feet — garage 15feet — residence 20 feet — garage 15feet — residence 20 feet — garage 15feet — residence 20 feet — garage Side 5 feet 5 feet Five feet plus 1 additional foot for each additional foot of structure height over 25 feet to a maximum of 15 feet. Rear (all residential zones) Five feet plus 1 additional foot for each additional foot of structure height over 25 feet to a maximum of 15 feet. Notes: 1 Setbacks are measured from the property the setback shall be measured from line unless there is a border easement, in which case. the back of the sidewalk. structures 2. Zero -foot setbacks for side lot lines may be allowed consistent with 14.606.300(4). 3. Front/flanking street setbacks for garages include both attached and detached Amend Chapter 14.806, Landscaping and Screening Standards as follows: 14.806.130 Landscaping Requirements for Multi -family. Small Scale Infill Development Landscaping provisions for infill multi -family development (Chapter 14.606) are intended to ensure an environmental quality that complements the objectives of the residential development and to provide screening to adjacent uses. 1. A multi -family infill development project shall not be approved until the Department approves a landscape plan. consistent with this chapter. 2. Required landscaoina shall be consistent with the requirements for a clear view triangle. 3. Rear/side lot lines shall require installation of a 6-foot sight obscuring fence and 5 feet of Type 1 landscaping. Street frontage shall require five feet of Type 3 landscaping which includes installation of street trees. The fencing and landscaping improvements shall be installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. In the case of delays caused by weather conditions. appropriate arrangements with the Department shall be made to ensure construction of landscape improvements. 4. Modifications to protect drainage features. easements. or Facilities shall be allowed in accordance with Section 14.806.040. 5Ix): A,NE Novel t=:oronevinis (COVID- i°,:l) Preparedness Update - Learn more about local prepaiation prevention. quici. till'_, ?, additional resources, latest news Coronavlrus. cane:C-::led or postponed event rl-Iforn-cation, '.i- [ rfore. spokanecity live v work . enjoys, engage v Oe ,cruise 22nc What is the "missing middle" in hou What is the "missing middle" in housing options? Maren Murphy, AICP — Assistant Planner, 509.625.6737 Tuesday, December 22, 2020 at 12:46 p.m. Detached Singl'.family louse. Missing Middle Housing e II la It Dup ex: FourplexCottage Triplex: Side By Slde Stacked Court Townhouse Stacked Stacked Live -Work Mid -rise A buzzword has surfaced to describe the challenges many cities are experiencing and Spokane is one of them. What does it mean when you hear the term "missing middle" in reference to housing? The term was coined by Daniel Parolek in 2010. The Opticos Design founder defines the term as "house -scale buildings with multiple units in walkable neighborhoods." To define these units visually think of building types such as duplexes, triplexes, courtyard buildings and cottage courts. City of Spokane - Mur 15,507 likes Like Page •r,. •rr GOVERNk Court C Would yo 6 Comment 9 What does this mean for current housing options in Spokane? Single-family detached homes make up 69 percent of housing in the City of Spokane. Duplexes, triplexes and other house -scale buildings with less than five units make up 9 percent of housing inventory. Multi -family housing includes apartments and condominiums and accounts for 21 percent of housing in the City, The Draft Housing Needs Assessment Fact Packet provides data on housing trends and the types of housing built since before the 1940s, The nine percent of single family attached housing units represents the "missing middle," and includes housing types such as duplexes, fourplexes, cottage courts, and multiplexes. Explained by Opticos Design founder Parolek, they are called "Missing" because they have typically been illegal to build since the mid-1940s in many cities around the country: and "Middle' because they sit in the middle of a spectrum between detached single-farnily homes and mid -rise to high-rise apartment buildings, in terms of form and scale, as well as number of units and often. affordability. But none of the types of Missing Middle Housing is new, In the City of Spokane, duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, cottage housing, and other types of house -scale buildings were more commonly built pre-1940s, and still exist in neighborhoods all over the city today. In many cases, these types are beloved buildings that are part of our culture heritage and add to Spokane's historic charm. However, development of attached single-family housing has slowed down since the 1980s. Parolek explains that the rise of local zoning regulations and demand for detached single-family housing after WWII accelerated the trend away from Missing Middle Housing. How does this impact current housing needs in the City of Spokane? The obvious impact Is the current housing availability crisis. Additionally, one could consider it a housing identity crisis. It's the age-old question of "what comes first, the chicken or the egg?" If there aren't many examples of single- family attached housing opportunities, it's no surprise that they aren't sought after in planning or zoning discussions. Duplexes, triplexes and other examples of Missing Middle Housing units often appeal financially to homes with median household incomes. These housing types are typically smaller than single-family detached houses or suburban houses, and they also can cost less. The Missing Middle Housing concept looks at these house -scale buildings as an opportunity to provide solutions along a spectrum of affordability. It also helps address a lack of these housing types that could deliver modestly priced homes in existing residential neighborhoods, and support walkability, locally -serving retail, and public transportation options. If you would like to learn more about housing in the City of Spokane visit the Housing Action Plan page, More Information: • Missing Middle Housing • Opticos Design Presents... You're Too Dense • AARP California • Part 1: An Introduction to Missing Middle Housing • Part 2: How to Implement Missing Middle Housing o Part 3: How Missing Middle Housing Can Be Applied Universally • Missing Middle Housing Book Review • Planetizen - Missing Middle Housing: Thinking Big and Building Small to Respond to Today's Housing Crisis • The Architect's Newspaper: Opinion: The answer to America's housing crisis might be hiding in plain sight • Lincoln Institute of Land Policy — Gentle Infill • CityLab: How Portland's Landmark Zoning Reform Could Work More About... • Affordable Housing • Apartments • Community • Condominium • Duplex # Homes • Houses • Live • Neighborhoods • Planning • Rent • Rental • Townhouse Older ALSO ON SPOKANECITY months E4go 1 Yout ik)v , J,T,o,, • ils.ornmen: in :1 1:01 Comments Community a Privacy Policy Login 0 1Z7 Recommend t Sort by Best spokanecity f You Tube la City of Spokane • Washington USA SOS W. Spokane Fas Blvd. Spokane. WA 99201 nr 50c.1755 CITY cr,:i8c: V El Terms of Use Your Privacy Legal Notices e u otAtu-rnme Carrie Koudelka From: K.Alex. <sinnie4u@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 12:56 PM To: Council Meeting Public Comment Subject: City Meeting on Planned Residential Developments or PRDs Comments As per your web site located at https://www.spokanevalley.org/content/6836/6890/17829.aspx: Written public comments must be received by 4:00 p.m. on the day of the Council meeting. To submit your written comments, send an email to councilmeetingpubliccomment(uspokanevallev.orq and include the following information: • Date of the meeting which you are providing comment:: 5 January, 2020 • Agenda Item Topic:: Mixed use in Planned Residential Developments Moratorium • Your First and Last Name:: Kim Alexander • City of Residence:: Spokane Valley • Your Comment:: See below. It is now 12.54 PM 5 January, 2021 I am sending this email for the Tuesday January 5th 2021 meeting of the public comment period regarding the Public Residential Development Moratorium in Spokane Valley Washington where I survive, and the proposed Newport Silicon Smelter which is also a PRD issue for us albeit north of us as an example of MIXED USE. "Planned Residential Developments is a category the city of Spokane Valley adopted into its code in 2016," and I believe it is a bad decision, one made by those in the city who were invested in real estate and the money it generates for locals and out of state companies as long term investments. It allows multiple types of housing, including apartments, single family houses and commercial stores, to be built in one project; such developments are technically allowed in any part of the city. Show me where this has been happening? -- (https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2021/jan/05/city-of-Spokane-valley-to-hold-public-hearing-for-/) It's not just about MONEY is it? Or is it? What happened to our QUALITY OF LIFE HERE? Every INCH of empty property lately in our city (coughs) has been used to build apartments and storage units, many by out of state LLC's with monthly leases too expensive for the average worker to afford, so they need room mates which increases density. Has this helped the homeless population? Has this helped our workers? Has this helped our poverty levels? I don't think it has. In fact, it's made real estate companies and construction companies and probably many on our zoning boards and committees filthy rich in the process. How many of the people involved in the code changes in 2016 had/have a vested interest in real estate or construction companies in or out of the valley? And that also includes ROADS and SEWERS and all the other infrastructure people use to create your so called "planned residential developments" which are just glorified strip malls with NO GREEN SPACE and in many places they are blocking out our views of our valley and surrounding mountains as well as reducing our quality of life. "Spokane Valley Mayor Ben Wick said the original intent behind that category was to allow developers to create functional communities and offer flexibility. He said the City Council adopted several other changes in 2020 including creating a new zone, but did not include any changes to Planned Residential Developments (PRD) that limited where they could go, or what was included." - - https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2021/jan/05/city-of-spokane-valley-to-hold-public-hearing-for-/ So do you all actually LIVE near any of these so called "planned residential developments"? Do you have to deal with the NON STOP CONSTRUCTION NOISE, t DUST AND ACTIVITY? I think not. I can tell you now that many of us do not like living around 24/7 construction, increased traffic congestion, increased population density, longer waits at lights, no plowing or deicing of our roads in winter, no traffic safety or enforcement, having to organize to stop apartments from being built in our single family residential areas, having stores built in or near our residential communities, lack of bus line access for those without vehicles, lack of sidewalks on city roads for pedestrians, increases in schools being built which brings more traffic and congestion, I mean I could go ON AND ON AND ON just like your PRD is doing to destroy our community with urban sprawl. Not to mention the load on our electricity, energy in general, air pollution, larger heat sinks from impervious surfaces, increased water supply/aquifer, increased run off to sewer lines and water reclamation and the list just goes on ad infitum. At some point, it has to involve more about our "quality of life" here rather than how much money can be made off a parcel of land zoned for some rich person to make off others rent or lease payments in a huge apartment complex being built next door. Did you know these people go door to door to our HOMES wanting us to sell our property to them so they can subdivide it and build apartments on it next door to single family homes???? Seriously do you even realize how many houses or apartments can be put on ONE ACRE OF LAND IN OUR CITY? You're treating this land as if it's out in the country but it isn't. It is becoming a super urbanized area every day with more undesirable characteristics for a healthy peaceful life, which I believe are two main reasons people want to live or remain here. I think you the city who represents US the residents needs to revise (Plan codes) OUR PRD and exclude multi -use in our residential areas, take us back to R3(?)where only single family areas remain that way instead of a mixed use where everything is the same or could be homogenized into a big blur of a strip mall interspersed with houses, or as it looks now, apartment complexes that are over priced for the middle class, and storage units. That idea deletes residential areas into yes, mini communities with any type of business in the immediate areas and dilutes our quality of life as residents. I think you need to continue with the moratorium on all real estate construction that is not single family use until you can figure. out how to better PLAN FOR OUR COMMUNITY by changing the Mixed Use code in our long term plan for the city. Seriously I'm about ready to get a petition together to annex parts of the city areas to stop you from destroying our open green space with apartments, storage units and more business strip malls. Dare I remind you who would pay for those elections? And you must also work more with the county who is encroaching on our city boundaries with even MORE developments that causes our city more congestion etc. I'd also like to mention that we have a Canadian company coming in in Newport trying to force in a Silicon smelter using COAL to fire their furnaces to melt rocks. 2 We'll also get that air and dust pollution in our community and I think the city needs to take a stand on stopping this from happening to our community. The winds blow out of the north to us and I think it's something you could discuss and look in to in terms of helping to stop the destruction of NE Washington state and all areas downwind from the Silicon Smelter in Newport. Below is a link to the data on this project. https://canss.org Please let me know you received this email and If it will be read at the meeting? I'd like it to be read and entered into the record. Thank you. CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. 3 eat 1 spa:v ia, (mt ma Carrie Koudelka From: Marilyn Pearson <marilynpearson2002@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 1:02 PM To: Council Meeting Public Comment Subject: Planned Residential Development Moratorium public comment Meeting date 1/5/21 Marilyn Pearson Spokane Valley WA I want to add my voice to those of my Spokane Valley neighbors who are disturbed by the invasion of huge apartment complexes into our neighborhoods. I feel like all you care about is that more tax more tax money will be paid to the city but no regard is being given to quality of life or esthetics. Please keep the apai luients and multi family dwellings out our residential neighborhoods. We do not want our city to be one another Seattle!! We want out hills to still be covered with beautiful trees and still see open spaces. What has happened at mission & flora is horrible and they're still building!! There is nowhere for the apt. Dwelling children to play. No green spaces anywhere. Our new Riverbend school will be overcrowded very soon. Why must they build so many units? The multi family development on Adams and 28th is horrible and the once large lot rural feel of that neighborhood destroyed!They don't other than for greedy developers to make more money and greedy city management. Stop building so many apartments & fourplexes! ! ! PLEASE Thank you for reading my comment. Marilyn Pearson Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. 1 v4'-6rn I Carrie Koudelka From: Rudy <rudyw4700@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 2:00 PM To: Council Meeting Public Comment Subject: PRD Moratorium • Date of the meeting which you are providing comment - January 5, 2021 • Agenda Item Topic - PRD Moratorium • Your First and Last Name Rudy Werle ® City of Residence - City of Spokane Valley ® Thank you for the opportunity to comment. • I applaud the City Council for issuing a temporary moratorium on Planned Residential Developments. While I believe we all agree more housing is needed for the public, but not in residential neighborhoods. I live in the Ponderosa area and moved here to be in a residential community of single family homes. Checking Police records there is an increase in crime with apartment complexes, including parking issues where streets are clogged with vehicles affecting ingress and egress for homeowners and emergency vehicles. There is plenty of land available outside of residential neighborhoods that could accommodate apartment or multi family structures to be built without destroying the tranquility of residential developments. • Please allow residential neighborhoods to remain without towering apartments taking away privacy, home values and the security of families who have relied on zoning to ensure the safe and secure single family homes they have lived in for years. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. i 1 t) C rnttlh4 Carrie Koudelka From: Ann Carey <bobandann03@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 1:21 PM To: Council Meeting Public Comment Subject: Public Hearing on PRD Moratorium ® Date of the meeting which you are providing comment - January 5, 2021 ® Agenda Item Topic - PRD Moratorium • Your First and Last Name - Ann Carey • City of Residence - City of Spokane Valley ® Your Comment I believe the City Council acted in the best interests of the City of Spokane Valley neighborhoods and residents when they issued the moratorium on Planned Residential Developments. Not only did the code for PRDs allow loopholes for developers, but it also created issues because increased density does not always match the character of single family neighborhoods. Additionally, multi -family developments would be better placed in areas that can support that housing type. For example, areas with established transit systems and the services necessary to support those housing types. While growth within a city is necessary, it is important that it be done thoughtfully and with the interests of everyone, including possibly impacted existing neighborhoods, etc. One only needs to drive past a few apartment complexes that have been crammed into single family neighborhoods to see that they don't fit -- figuratively (because it changes the look and feel of a neighborhood, usually in a negative way) and literally (cars overflowing from apartments parked on side streets, etc). Please allow the beauty of the City of Spokane Valley to remain, with existing single family neighborhoods kept intact and denser housing options put where they make the most sense. Otherwise the City logo will need to change to an outline of apartment buildings. Thank you for allowing me to provide comments regarding this issue. Ann Carey. CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. i �� binL c:.611iL0114 Carrie Koudelka From: Mike Reents <Mike.Reents@nationalbeef.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 3:18 PM To: Council Meeting Public Comment Subject: FW: PRD Moratorium To Spokane Valley Council: • Date of the meeting which you are providing comment - January 5, 2021 • Agenda Item Topic - PRD Moratorium • Your First and Last Name Michael Reents • City of Residence - City of Spokane Valley • Thank you for the opportunity to comment. o I applaud the City Council for issuing a temporary moratorium on Planned Residential Developments. While I believe we all agree more housing is needed for the public, but not in residential neighborhoods. I live in the Ponderosa area and moved here to be in a residential community of single family homes. Checking Police records there is an increase in crime with apartment complexes, including parking issues where streets are clogged with vehicles affecting ingress and egress for homeowners and emergency vehicles. There is plenty of land available outside of residential neighborhoods that could accommodate apartment or multi family structures to be built without destroying the tranquility of residential developments. • Please allow residential neighborhoods to remain without towering apartments taking away privacy, home values and the security of families who have relied on zoning to ensure the safe and secure single family homes they have lived in for years. Thanks, Michael Reents Sent from Mail for Windows 10 arising! Do not, click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender, and know the; content is safe. CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. i CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2021 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Mayoral Appointment: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 67.28.1816; Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.20.040 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: n/a BACKGROUND: Per state statute, the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee shall consist of five members: two representatives of businesses required to collect the tax, two members involved in activities authorized to be funded by the tax, and one City Councilmember. Two vacancies exist, one for a member involved in activities authorized to be funded by the tax, and the other for a member who represents a business required to collect the tax. Ads announcing the vacancies ran in the Valley News Herald, the Spokesman Review, and the Exchange, and notice of the openings was also placed on the City's website. The deadline to receive applications was 4:00 p.m. December 11, 2020. Two LTAC member's terms expired December 31, 2020: (1) Wayne Brokaw, Spokane Fair and Expo (2) Lee Cameron, Mirabeau Park Hotel We received applications from the following people for consideration for the LTAC appointments: Entities which Collect the Tax Lee Cameron, Mirabeau Park Hotel Grant Guinn, GL8 Hospitality Entities Involved in Activities Funded by the Tax Wayne Brokaw, Spokane County Fair Board Peggy Doering, Valleyfest Tom Stebbins, JAKT Foundation OPTIONS: Confirm or not, the Mayor's recommendation for appointments. If the Mayor's recommendation is not confirmed by Council, the Mayor may either make another recommendation or the matter can be postponed. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I move to confirm the Mayoral appointments to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee, of Grant Guinn, representing a member authorized to collect the tax; and of Wayne Brokaw, representing a member involved in activities authorized to be funded by the tax, with each of their terms beginning immediately upon appointment and expiring December 31, 2022." BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: n/a STAFF/COUNCIL CONTACT: Mayor Wick ATTACHMENTS: Applications :•1/19/2014 22:04 FAX ■ *. •� Application Form for Cornrnittees/Boards/Commiss'ions UECC 1 1 202 Return completed form to City Clerk: City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley City Hall Qftice of the City Clerk 10210 Bast Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 9920o Phone:509-720-5:10'2 S.SI;a.i!lbl-Idge.l;,`,fp3d,lsdt.n4v:d11P.y,,urs [Note: To meet an application deadline, applications may be Nutt or e-tuailed, However, Inc Clerk's office will need an original, signed application prior to appointment. One application per position please. DO NOT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION UNLESS THERE IS AN OP'ENiNG. OPENINGS ARE POSTE) ON 11111 CI'I'Y'S WEBPAGE AND ADVERTISED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS. Call the City Clerk if you haver questions.] lle Ej 001 RECEIVED I AM INTERESTED T " ! 'Y'IIS ON THE F'QX..LQWIN(: COMMITTEE: [Check one box; note requirements] 1 l Plltl)11int; Comrnis;Jrn— Mild he R Spokane Valley resident. (See e.hapte:r 18.10 SVM.C) tom ate: for three years. Applicants arc sciected without respect to political affiliations, and serve without compensation, X'T ,.0dging Tax Advisory Cotnlnittee (l.; l'A,t„;) -Need not he a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 3.20 SVMC) ertna arc for one or two years. Committee consists of five members: Onc Coundhnember: appointed by the Mayor, confirmed by the Council. Two who representa business requited to collect the tax (hotels, motels, vie,). '.I'wo involved in funded activities (such as a non-profit organization to increase tourism). Identify the business or organization you represent . - t.. s [ ..I 1)Pkil .tg,.Q ninl:y HOWittg .4_C,MR111.114Y..Dt _ ci ipm �nt !� g).,IY_COntroitWO LEI AQ� 11CDAC, includes two Spokane Valley residents; terms ❑ot to exceed three years. Spokane Valley appointment. pending final approval by Spokane County Board of Commissioners, Spokane County Application and Supplernental Application also.required• [ ) Spokerig. 13Cd:1y Unman piglets TaskEtit44:. -. Torras are for four years. Must be a resident of Spokane Valley. The Board currently meets 2'"t Tuesday of each month, 3:30 to 5:00 at Catholic Charities, 12 E; ,5't Spokane. 1. ) Q, s il913 1.1 Aut)orily MIA) ,,.. regional committee, five members. Terms are five; years, One individual directly assisted by the Authority, jointly appointed by Spokane Mayor, Spokane Valley Mayor, and Chair of Board of County Commissioners. Two individuals who work or reside within Spokane City limits, Onc individual who works or resides in unincotporal d Spokane County. One individual who works or resides within Spokane Valley City innifs. Check with are City Clerk aancerntng n wWmU_V Olt 7110 committee. [ ] T utrisln prolxtalipzl Artfl. S1.ke1Istiyirsory 4'o!ptitto (aka Betel/MRtel As>sogi134is11)). ••• Tarots are for three years. spnkanc Valley appoints two members, and one ex-ofticiu (a member of Cotlneil). All nominees must be operators or employees of lodging business within Spokane County. [ .1 Other: .. _._._ ....aucalccco'cosookMW..Wr _ = _......iau/114 �.uuJu.Gov.,.......,.....vrm..�.��.v�%s-��svv Name (please print): vr_ l a--y E'. r' ?.... , Complete residence address;q Pk/ _ 1 'fro lrna-,S MAGI{- Rd. `-,.ite'npr ,oa `r Street City L Zip Code Complete mailing address (if different from above address): Length of time residing at current address: jO_ t.. y tr,._S 1,3.8, Citizen es [ ,]rta \VA State registered voter? yeti [ ]no What is your preferred way for us to contact you: [Note:.fyou have can unlisted phone member, or do not wish your 0- mail address !made public, do not Include that information. Once this document is submitted to the City, It becon,e,s° RuhJ c1 to public disclosure.] [ ] 1-fome Phone: _...- ... . [ ].Work phone: -- m �Cell Phone: S4q.°'.. .. .5 .1.eZl..,.. C ] Other message phone: f ] F.-mail address: (please print clearly): [ ] Regular mail to residence or trailing address shown above EMPLOYMENI: (Please start with most recent) .1. [ ,I present [).4I previous _Gt 61/ 'Name of employer: i��1''/._!!.� 9Qs _�� 7. �-- ,�X�._.._ -e_ .../i/. ------ br.. -.� Address: Y 6 47, 7 ernL Q Pie 1� �i Pho:nt :67a �53 , .D - Position held:,'k Djrt..e,_*y Dates of employmentoLt _ • 1/04/2014 13:11 FAX tttl '■ 1/1 :■ 3. (j current [JSrevious 4. I; ] current I•evious 5, [ j current [ t'evious REASONS yyfor applying // /7i P l/7 2, [ ] present [ evious Name of employer: " ),t/"L; k,s/'L i / Address: e, �Ja Phone: Position hold:/it ,- �� :y s_latr Dates of employment: xti. C c 2-- ' rVL /3,4/44.1 lj 0 01 3. [ 1 present [t irevio is Name of employer: Address: igiee Position held. 4. [ j present [ ] previous Name of employer: _ , Address: Position held: Phone: tf' o 4-71+ 7 � � .� tes of etnployment/9 ,J7eanD Phone: Dates of employment: --,-----_ ED1[JCATjON; _ Nat. of high school . ,4 c tLc'Jj z. 4 Address: ce ��•� 4-14 iplo or GED: [Wes [ j no — ,.. Trade school/college/university: Name of School Diploma: Jes [ ] no Trade school/college/university: Name of School Diploma: [ yes [ no Other relevant certifications/licenses: N" 'EER _X ' E Address: t✓ i 7 Degree or certification earned:$,/_,,,�`, �✓tc Address: Degree or certification earned: Name of social, fraternal, organizations, etc. 4P.�,„--- _ ►�r' ?t `}� -° ter» 1 - }� -- " $ /' y "T'f^ -d is , (D pl a l7'7,v►'1i ate:"- PROFES$IONA14 ORGAN AVO.N% Local, state, or national government boards, committees, or eorrunissions on whic h you serve or have served. 1. I,� current [ j previous �_ �`�.� . -, 1' 2. [ utrent [ j previous "g , ,a'4 ..-. IVAdi iic v)? ir7,7)-1 S, /On_ this committee, commission, board: /3e1 Fly signing this application, 1 certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that all infoi'ination is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I tirrther state that my appointment would not represent a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest with the duties of this position. I understand this application is subject to disclosure pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW, Signature 41 /, 4o2 Date Signe RECEIVED pp Ui m i lei Form for Committees/Boards/Commissions � City of Spokane Valle i ok une Return completed form to City Clerk: y 71Ui, , Spokane Valley City Hall Office of the City Clerk 10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: 509-720-5102 cbainbridue((r spokanevalley.or2 [Note: To meet an application deadline, applications may be faxed or e-mailed. However, the Clerk's office will need an original, signed application prior to appointment. One application per position please. DO NOT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION UNLESS THERE IS AN OPENING. OPENINGS ARE POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBPAGE AND ADVERTISED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS. Call the City Clerk if you have questions.] I AM INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEE: [Check one box; note requirements] [ ] Planning Commission — Must be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 18.10 SVMC) Terms are for three years. Applicants are selected without respect to political affiliations, and serve without compensation. IX Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) - Need not be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 3.20 SVMC) Terms are for one or two years. Committee consists of five members: One Councilmember: appointed by the Mayor, confirmed by the Council. Two who represent a business required to collect the tax (hotels, motels, etc.). Two involved in funded activities (such as a non-profit organization to increase tourism). Identify the business or organization you represent [ ] Spokane County Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee (HCDAC) HCDAC includes two Spokane Valley residents; teens not to exceed three years. Spokane Valley appointment pending final approval by Spokane County Board of Commissioners. Spokane County Application and Supplemental Application also required. [ ] Spokane County Human Rights Task Force — Terms are for four years. Must be a resident of Spokane Valley. The Board currently meets 2" Tuesday of each month. 3:30 to 5:00 at Catholic Charities, 12 E 5°i Spokane. [ ] Spokane Housing Authority (SHA) — regional committee, five members. Terms are five years. One individual directly assisted by the Authority, jointly appointed by Spokane Mayor, Spokane Valley Mayor, and Chair of Board of County Commissioners. Two individuals who work or reside within Spokane City limits. One individual who works or resides in unincorporated Spokane County. One individual who works or resides within Spokane Valley City limits. Check with the City Clerk concerning a vacancy on this committee. [ ] Tourism Promotion Area, Hotel Advisory Committee (aka Hotel/Motel Association) — Terms are for three years. Spokane Valley appoints two members, and one ex-officio (a member of Council). All nominees must be operators or employees of lodging business within Spokane County. [ ] Other: Name (please print): SEE i. Cf mE / A/ Complete residence address: /K) 7 A%• ,.1LL/ t/RAJ PI) SPc t<i -A2 1J +4 L L "y 97437* Street City Zip Code Complete mailing address (if different from above address): Length of time residing at current address: 1 " i° "yg, s U.S. Citizen? [yes [ }no WA State registered voter? [yes [ ]no What is your preferred way for us to contact you: [Note: Ifyou have an unlisted phone number, or do not wish your e- mail address made public, do not include that information. Once this document is submitted to the City, it becomes subject to public disclosure] [ ] Home Phone: [ ] Work phone: [ ] Cell Phone: . _ _ [ ] Other message phone: [ ] E-mail address: (please print clearly): L. CAMF, otO C•.> rVtttZRPy =r�u' p ►R14: ftCu L. - �'". meet [ ] Regular mail to residence or mailing address shown above EMPLOYMENT: (Please start with most recent) 1. C] present [ ] previous Name of employer: 011 Rik rJJ M±. PA EZV I-k L.. Address: 11 )O t.). Stu.t LOAN g2t7. SouSPoKAM IAACI-6>c,1494. Phone: Position held: OtoME4V111.mov—1 't.gita '(l1rlr'}t li]R Dates of employment: j'2oo P1 Mci-AS 2. [ ] present previous Name of employer: S , r-" C;' m -ram` ofy a Address: Phone: Position held: Dates of employment: 3. [ ] present [ ] previous Name of employer: Address: Position held: 4. [ ] present [ ] previous Name of employer: Address: Phone: Dates of employment: Position held: Phone: Dates of employment: EDUCATION: Name of high school P2i I !; L, t a.t t Cott Address: (Tei t._� (L] Diploma or GED: J yes [ ] no Trade school/college/university: Name of School G{}fl. 5 irn (43 t, r t? si1yi" Address: pa L..tii R i 14.)>r1-. Diploma: [j(j yes [ ] no Degree or certification earned: 13 a Rt.L)' Trade school/college/university: Name of School Diploma: [ ] yes [ ] no Address: Degree or certification earned: Other relevant certifications/licenses: l,t 9e1 Stel/tv Cv/T=-rZ S i 7r aci> LL A-�� Ci'©r.oR c:15 S ifJ (3C1SiAJP.4 VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE: Name of social, fraternal, organizations, etc. 1. [ j current [ ] previous 5 Po h"" .n..)12. Co r. " 2. [>Q current [ ] previous L-TA C. 00OK=7 n'i?E+?2'13 ISZ 3.'[ ' current [X] previous f(AtL SI?OR'i`S` C'Gt = BEDtt-1 17 4. [ ] current [jt] previous GRot((tJ Th iZo PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. Local, state, or national government boards, committees, or commissions on which you serve or have served. 1. [,.:, current [ ] previous r I f 4 rig (.J, t7 4141 'L iv) 0 2. [ ] current [' previous 1,0 a1. cn,> 3. [?y] current [ ] previous 'Lk LA.) Lt.L j N` 4. [ ] current [ ] previous 5. [ ] current [ ] previous _L.nnt C'r.Otitsf1 t i TEP a c} seg (t7 REASONS for applying for this committee, commission, board: 491-`R 0,0/7) m 1. 13r r->' 1/61-43' i '. 'Pt i..S, Ni" -7 a r....) pf ort4 T7 °1..1)ty t�cIL.L Sr~ F;tr( NOM - ku s Rcr s dCIR 1I4Sr�1'77Jy (! PJazill r By signing this application, I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that all information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further state that my appointment would not represent a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest with the duties of this position. I understand this .pplicat;� n 's s ,bj ct to disclosure pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW. Signature • pokane ,•Valley Application Foniro for CotpAnittees/Boards/Commissions City of Spokane Valley Return completed furn to City Clerk: Office of the City Clerk spokanc:. \/:11Icy Fdst Sot ;.1.21k! A Nri._'!MC:. Spokane Val lev. WA 99206 509-720-S102 [Note: To meet an application loolicatitm:, may ht• However, th1 lIrk_yd au original, signed application prior to appointment_ One appl ft:Atm pct. oositton 01,7:Kt-. 1)0 NOT SUBMIT AN 0 HERE IS AN OPENING. OPENINGS ARE POSTED L \VI..1;PAGE AND ADVERTISED 111 1 Call the City Clerk if you have questions.] RECEIVED UEC 1 0 2020 I AM TNTERESTED IN SERVINC fffl.FOLLOWING COMMITTEE: [Check one box; note requirements] [ Planning Commission —Must be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter I 8.10 SVIVIC) Terms are ibr three years. Applicants are selected Nvithout respect to politiLal affiliations, and serve without compensation. IX] Lodging Tax Advisory CommitteeALTAC) - Need not be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 3.20 SVMC) Terms are for one or two years. Committee consists of five members: One Councilmember: appointed by the Mayor, confirmed by the Council. Two who represent a business required to collect the tax (hotels; motels, cte.). Two involved in funded activities (such as a non-profit organization to increase tourism). Identify the business or organization you represent 1 1 Spokane County Housing and Community Development Advisory Cormnittee (HCDAC) HCDAC includes two Spokane Valley residents; terms not to exceed three years. Spokane Valley appointment pending final approval by Spokane County Board of Commissioners. Spokane County Application and Supplemental Application also required. [ ] Spokane County Human Rights Task Force — Terms are for four years. Must be a resident of Spokane Valley. The Board currently meets 2thl Tuesday of each month, lz:7() to 5:00 at Catholic Charities, 12 E 5th Spokane. [ j Spokane Housing Authority (SHA) — regional committee, five members. Terms are five years. One individual directly assisted by the Al11101-i JO in 4 y appOillted hy Spokane iVlayor, Spokane Valley Mayor, and Chair ot' Board of County Commiiisioiini.s. Two individuals who work or reside within ;*oktitie City One individual who works u esides in unincorporated Spok:Ine County. One individual who works or ivsitlei-i within 1u>kau Valley Lit limits. Checit with the City Clerk COFICeritlii!; Y,ICanCy0i, ilUS CO/Win j Tourism Promotion Area, Hotel Ad: ;igv Commincu (aka loteL vioicl Association) — Terms are for three years. Spokane Valley appoints two ITtelTO)CrS, °tie css-ttflieitt (a tnentbe 1ro;ineil). All nominees must he operators or employees of lodgii o_t business within Spokane County. [ 1 Other: Name (please print): cs 113' Complete residence address: 11 J.6 Lk. vto) ek.4.2)Ce4 ("Le, '-,-.5roe_keinel „ILA • „. City Zip C Complete mailing address (if d: c:ss): Length of time residing at ennui! .iddress: U.S. Citizen? L,jyes [ ]no WA State registered voter? [E.-Ales [ [no What is your preferred way for us to contact you: [Note: Ifyou have an unlisted phone number, or do not wish your e- mail address made public, do not include that injOrmation. Once this document is submitted to the City, it becomes subject to public disclosure.] [ ] Home Phone: [ ] Work phone: Phone:(5:09 [ ] Other message phone: [J E-mail address: (please print clearly): Regular mail to residence or mailing address shown above EMPLOYMENT: (Please start with most recent) I. [] present [ ] previous Name of employer: Oci, fict Address: y e-i V _ 13,c-c5 Position held: 1/4.- P- 60>e 3 G, i) 0 itt PhonettZ 9\ Z- Z.- - 3,2-2 Dates of employment: Ar 6,x)/ 2. [ ] present [ t, previous Name of i'�'�I employer: l Address: j 2 ` . GO t Phone Position held ‘_ c./Le Dates of employment: / C`;c-2 3• f. ] present [ ] previous Name of employer: Address: Phone: Position held: Dates of employment: 4. [ ] present [ ] previous Name of employer: Address: Phone: Position held: Dates of employment: EDUCATION: Name of high school Diploma or GED: [ ]-yes [ ]no Trade school/colle Teiunivcrsity: Name of School Diploma: [ 'ryes [ ] no Address: t-e. Address: ,, > _(' -t a _E,.? 0 Trade school/college/university: Name of School . I c� t. � - (t`41—t tie y Address: Diploma: [ ] yes [ ] no Degree or cer (cation earned: . Degree or c1 rtitication earnelf: Other relevant certifications/licenses: VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE: Name of social, fraternal, organizations, etc. 1. [}i:urrcnt [ ] previous 2. [, ]'current [ ] previous t .. c 3. [ Current [ ] previous 4.[ ] current [ ] previous PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. Local, state, or national government boards, committees, or commissions on which you serve or have served. t l . [;,]'current [ } previous 11I C: f-1 4d.�- 2. [ j-current [ ] previous t v. cr. e• 3. [.] current [ ] previous 4. [ ] current [ ] previous 5. [ ] current [ ] previous 'N!V r 2 SONS S for applying for this committee, commission, board:`/ a,( C i i et ./ C..0/I,' �-"�`. .t:'� , r'..r�ic. P .,_S.� �l E .' .-/ _! ,?.„)? 1Z tom 1 By signing this application, I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that all information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further state that my appointment would not represent a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest with the duties of this position. I understand this application is subject to disclosure pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW. %c' Date Signed Application Form for Committees/Boards/Commissions Spokane e _.Valley° Return completed form to City Clerk: Spokane Valley City Hall 10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: 509-720-5102 cbainhridrre. spokanevalle org [Note: To meet an application deadline, applications may be faxed or e-mailed. However, the Clerk's office will need an original, signed application prior to appointment. One application per position please. DO NOT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION UNLESS THERE IS AN OPENING. OPENINGS ARE POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBPAGE AND ADVERTISED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS. Call the City Clerk if you have questions.] I AM INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEE: [Check one box; note requirements] [ ] Planning Commission —Must be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 18.10 SVMC) Terms are for three years. Applicants are selected without respect to political affiliations, and serve without compensation. [ Lodging. Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) - Need not be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 3.20 SVMC) Terms are for one or two years. Committee consists of five members: One Councilmember: appointed by the Mayor, confirmed by the Council. Two who represent a business required to collect the tax (hotels, motels, etc.). Two involved in funded activities (such as a non-profit organization to increase tourism). Identify the business or organization you represent f r,.t b A}; -11,4 jr IG4iJ [ ] Spokane County Housing and Community Development Adviory Committee (HCDAC) / HCDAC includes two Spokane Valley residents; terms not to exceed three years. Spokane Valley appointment pending final approval by Spokane County Board of Commissioners. Spokane County Application and Supplemental Application also required. [ ] Spokane County Human Rights Task Force — Terms are for four years. Must be a resident of Spokane Valley. The Board currently meets 2°d Tuesday of each month, 3:30 to 5:00 at Catholic Charities, 12 E 5th Spokane. [ ] Spokane Housing Authority (SHA) — regional committee, five members. Terms are five years. One individual directly assisted by the Authority, jointly appointed by Spokane Mayor, Spokane Valley Mayor, and Chair of Board of County Commissioners. Two individuals who work or reside within. Spokane City limits. One individual who works or resides in unincorporated Spokane County. One individual who works or resides within Spokane Valley City limits. Check with the City Clerk concerning a vacancy on this committee. [ ] Tourism Promotion Area, Hotel Advisory Committee (aka Hotel/Motel Association) — Terms are for three years. Spokane Valley appoints two members, and one ex-offrcio (a member of Council). All nominees must be operators or employees of lodging business within Spokane County. [ ] Other: Name (please print): CPMT` Complete residence address: 10°O E P� 'P-c€ 4•si'- "�$� ^ 9q tote Street City Zip Code Complete mailing address (if different from above address): Length of time residing at current address: 5 ya U.S. Citizen? [dyes [ ]no WA State registered voter? yes [ ]no What is your preferred way for us to contact you: [Note: If you have an unlisted phone number, or do not wish your e- mail address made public, do not include that information_ Once this document is submitted to the City, it becomes subject to public disclosure] [ ] Home Phone: [ ] Work phone: [ ] Cell Phone: [ ] Other message phone: )tE-mail address: (please print clearly): 3rctn+ iA i r% A f 1/104- .11 , [ ] Regular mail to residence or mailing address shown above EMPLOYMENT: (Please start with most recent) 1. [present [ ] previous Name of employer: 6 d ? it s,= Address: d ac09 = Pl tr" Lid Phone: << `i ip 050 Position held: try1,9,AJ4-t;;;06.- P,,412-tr✓i Dates of employment: Oz f 2. [ ] presentprevious Name of employer: �.r47 P V4 t1 J Address: 62 Sc c-I c J 416 Phone: 2:73Z Sao(' Position held: VPlJ �'� rZ D ��'�lr 'Dates of employment: 110) 20)b - / 0J'�i' 3. [ ] present previous. Name of employer: Address: 7130 ,:EWE-S Uf ,i) ; j3�E�( '� i Phone: Position held: gP Oi/< -- Dates of employment: ' iJ lr 4, - io j zoj t, 4. [ ] present [ ] previous Name of employer: Address: Position held: EDUCATION: Phone: Dates of employment: Name of high school UN, c,e.-.i E-r>( j--i 674-Sc+-tv15L Address: , t:.itAr [1-x-7I (.4A- Diploma or GED: [yes [ ] no Trade school/college/university: Name of School' d,(‘ j - 41t-.AW, ; Address: CS 2-4 {Gti, to-n-&4 % S ► i -B- Diploma: Ell -yes [ ] no Degree or certification earned: ~ j fz"..t_ t'1b,•nT Trade school/college/university: Name of School Address: Diploma: [ ] yes [ ] no Degree or certification earned: Other relevant certifications/licenses: VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE: Name of social, fraternal, organizations, etc. ]] 1. [ ] current {,previous 7 . Sr o1 its J �271t tE,� r / 5�� %�+ "3" 2 - 2. [ ] current [ ] previous I 3. [ ] current [ ] previous 4. [ ] current [ ] previous PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. Local, state, or national government boards, committees, or commissions on which you serve or have served. 1. [ ] current ,] previous LA ;YU 2. [ ] current ['previous t. • _As tixwe\-11 3. [ ] current previous aoff_s S j 4. [ ] current [ ] previous 5. [ ] current [ ] previous REASONS for applying for this conunittee, commission, board: i fitA Ali e-an? (�NIDim CE- -:S RtG{<- cif/ l' i C3 + '-5 t it Z_ ` i 'Vs`) r l r 1fvsi U Es,� r�ccyJ Qpe-ro By signing this application, I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that all information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further state that my appointment would not represent a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest with the duties of this position. I understand this applic 'on 's su[pject to disclosure pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW. Signs '. re Date Signed RECEIVED OEC 1 1 2020 City of Spokane Valley Office of the City Clerk Application Form for Committees/Boards/Commissions Spokan' ems'` Return completed form to City Clerk: Spokane Valley City Hall Vdiley10210 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Phone: 509-720-5102 cbainbridgc(dspokanevallev.ure [Note: To meet an application deadline, applications may be faxed or e-mailed. However, the Clerk's office will need an original, signed application prior to appointment. One application per position please. DO NOT SUBMIT AN APPLICATION UNLESS THERE IS AN OPENING. OPENINGS ARE POSTED ON THE CITY'S WEBPAGE AND ADVERTISED IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS. Call the City Clerk if you have questions.] I AM INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEE: [Check one box; note requirements] [ ] Planning Commission — Must be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 18.10 SVMC) Terms are for three years. Applicants are selected without respect to political affiliations, and serve without compensation. [x] Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) - Need not be a Spokane Valley resident. (See chapter 3.20 SVMC) Terms are for one or two years. Committee consists of five members: One Councilmember: appointed by the Mayor, confirmed by the Council. Two who represent a business required to collect the tax (hotels, motels, etc.). Two involved in funded activities (such as a non-profit organization to increase tourism). Identify the business or organization you represent JA'tT Foundeaon [ ] Spokane County Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee (HCDAC) HCDAC includes two Spokane Valley residents; terms not to exceed three years. Spokane Valley appointment pending final approval by Spokane County Board of Commissioners. Spokane County Application and Supplemental Application also required. [ ] Spokane County Human Rights Task Force — Terms are for four years. Must be a resident of Spokane Valley. The Board currently meets 2nd Tuesday of each month, 3:30 to 5:00 at Catholic Charities, 12 E 5's Spokane. [ ] Spokane Housing Authority (SHA) — regional committee, five members. Terms are five years. One individual directly assisted by the Authority, jointly appointed by Spokane Mayor, Spokane Valley Mayor, and Chair of Board of County Commissioners. Two individuals who work or reside within Spokane City limits. One individual who works or resides in unincorporated Spokane County. One individual who works or resides within Spokane Valley City limits. Check with the City Clerk concerning a vacancy on this conrnriuee. [ ] Tourism Promotion Area. Hotel Advisory Committee (aka Hotel/Motel Association) —Terms are for three years. Spokane Valley appoints two members, and one ex-officio (a member of Council). All nominees must be operators or employees of lodging business within Spokane County. [ ] Other: Name (please print): Thomas W. Stebbins Complete residence address: 12428 N West Newman Lake Drive Newman Lake, WA 99025 Street City Complete mailing address (if different from above address): PO Box 85 Newman Lake, WA 99025 Length of time residing at current address: 13 years U.S. Citizen? [ x]yes [ ]no WA State registered voter? [x ]yes [ ]no Zip Code What is your preferred way for us to contact you: [Note: If you have an unlisted phone number, or do not wish your e- mail address made public, do not include that information. Once this document is submitted to the City, it becomes subject to public disclosure.] [ ] Home Phone: [x] Work phone: 509.621.0125 [ ] Cell Phone: [ ] Other message phone: [ x] E-mail address: (please print clearly): tom@Jaktfoundation.org [ ] Regular mail to residence or mailing address shown above EMPLOYMENT: (Please start with most recent) I . [ xJ present [ ] previous Name of employer: self Address: Position held: Phone: Dates of employment: 1/1/97 to current 2. [ ] present < ] previous Name of employer: Michigan State University Athletics Address: East Lansing, MI Position held: Assistant AD for Marketing and Promotions 3. [ ] present [ x] previous Name of employer: Washington State University Athletics Address: Pullman, WA Position held: Director Marketing & Promotions Phone: Dates of employment: 94-95 Phone: Dates of employment: 1986-1994 4. [ ] present [ ] previous Name of employer: Address: Phone: Position held: Dates of employment: EDUCATION: Name of high school Capital High School Address: Helena, MT Diploma or GED: [x ] yes [ ] no Trade school/college/university: Name of School Montana State University Address: Bozeman, MT Diploma: [ x] yes [ ] no Degree or certification earned: BS in Business Finance Trade school/college/university: Name of School St. Thomas University Address: Miami, FL Diploma: [x] yes [ ] no Degree or certification earned: MS in Sports Administration Other relevant certifications/licenses: VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE: Name of social, fraternal, organizations, etc. I. [ current [ ] previous Spokane Rotary Club #21 since 1996 2. [ ] current [x] previous Spokane Hoopfest 1999 - 2008 3. [ ] current [ ] previous 4. [ ] current [ ] previous PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. Local, state, or national government boards, committees, or commissions on which you serve or have served. I. [ ] current [x] previous Newman Lake Flood Control Zone District Advisory Board 2. [ ] current [x] previous Spokane Rotary Club #21 Board 2002 - 2006 3. [ ] current [ ] previous 4. [ ] current [ ] previous 5. [ ] current [ ] previous REASONS for applying for this committee, commission, board: to help build the Spokane Valley sense of community and grow as a destination for staying at Spokane Valley lodging properties. A robust calendar of events creates community and a desire to stay near the action. By signing this application, I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that all information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further state that my appointment would not represent a con ict of interest or a ea nce of a conflict of interest with the duties of this position. I understand this applicis sutjgt'to di uant to chapter 42.56 RCW. Signat re .20 Date ig r ed CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2021 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ information Department Director Approval: n old business n new business n public hearing ® admin. report n pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report — Street Vacation STV-2020-0002 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 22.140; Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35A.47.020 and RCW 35.79 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: At the September 22, 2020 City Council meeting, Council approved Resolution 20-013 setting October 22, 2020 as the date for a public hearing before the Planning Commission. BACKGROUND: The City received an application for a street vacation of a portion of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue on August 7, 2020 from Diamond Rock Financial LLC/TCF Properties, the owners of one of the adjacent properties (45074.0223). There are several owners surrounding the area to be vacated including two parcels owned by Kenneth Ward (45074.2309 & 45074.9084), one owned by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (45077.0002), four parcels owned by Montgomery Apartments LLC (45074.0222, 45074.0221, 45074.0220 & 45074.0219) and a small portion of property owned by Argonne/Montgomery Storage LLC (45071.9089). The application is requesting a street vacation of 470 feet of Montgomery Avenue and 195 feet of Bessie Road. The total area to be vacated for Montgomery Avenue is approximately 18,887 square feet and the total area to be vacated for Bessie Road is approximately 4,635 square feet. The undeveloped right-of-way widths range between 25-feet to 60-feet wide. As stated in the application materials, Diamond Rock/TCF Properties is making the request for the following reasons: 1. The proposed right-of-way to be vacated is currently undeveloped (dedicated in 1955) and provides no public access at this time, having no potential for connection to the north with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line directly to the north. 2. Both Bessie Road and a portion of Montgomery Road are not full right-of-way widths and therefore would be substandard for today's use. These right-of-ways are difficult to maintain due to being unimproved. 3. The vacation will allow maximum use of abutting properties for infill development. The 25 feet of half right-of-way for Bessie Road was dedicated as part of the Vista Gardens No. 4 Plat on August 5th, 1955. For Montgomery Road, 15 feet of right-of-way was dedicated as part of the Vista Gardens No. 4 Plat completing the 30-foot half section and 60-foot full section of right-of-way (to the east). Neither section of roadway has ever been improved, with the exception of a curb return and drywell at the southeast corner of the intersection of Bessie and Mansfield Avenue. The right-of-way described does not contain any utilities that would need to be relocated as part of the vacation process. However, Spokane Valley Public Works is requiring the existing curb return be removed and replaced with new Type 'A' curbing along Mansfield Avenue per Standard Plan R-102. The existing drywell is also required to be removed and replaced with a Type 'A' drywell approximately 7feet to the south at the new curb line along Mansfield per Standard Plan S-102. The drywell will be located within the right-of-way for Mansfield Road and does not need an easement. These requirements have been made conditions of approval. RCA Administrative Report for STV-2020-0002 Page 1 of 4 The vacation of Montgomery Avenue would leave parcels 45074.0222, 45074.0221 and 45074.0220 (owned by Montgomery Apartments LLC) without street frontage or access. There is common ownership with parcel 45074.0219, the eastern most parcel, which abuts a portion of undeveloped Montgomery Avenue not included in the street vacation request and all four parcels are zoned Multi -family Residential. Therefore, either an access easement or boundary line adjustment application is necessary to aggregate those lots with parcel 45074.0219 prior to recording the street vacation. This requirement has been made a recommended condition of approval. The vacation of Bessie Road would leave parcel 45074.9084 (owned by Kenneth Ward) without street frontage or access. Kenneth Ward also owns parcel 45074. 2309, the property immediately to the south. Therefore, either an access easement or boundary line adjustment application is necessary to aggregate the lot prior to recording the street vacation. This requirement has been made a recommended condition of approval. The Planning Commission conducted a study session on October 8, 2020 and a public hearing on October 22, 2020. Following public testimony and deliberations, the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the proposal (as described in the staff report prepared in advance of the Public Hearing) to vacate a portion of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue. The recommendation included dividing the right-of-way up to each abutting owner. The findings and recommendations were approved by the Planning Commission on November 12, 2020. Staff has received additional information regarding the division of the right-of-way proposed to be vacated from the applicant since the recommendation from Planning Commission's recommendation. SVMC 22.140.040 directs City Council to consider the Planning Commission's findings, conditions and/or limitations appropriate to preserve the public use or benefit, the division of the vacated right-of- way among abutting property owners, and lastly whether to require compensation for the right-of-way and when it is to be paid. Division of Vacated Right -of -Way to Abutting Property Owners: SVMC 22.140.040 provides that vacated right-of-way shall belong to abutting property owners, with half to each abutting property owner "unless factual circumstances otherwise dictate a different division and distribution of the street...." As mentioned above, the right-of-way for Bessie Road was dedicated as part of the Vista Gardens No. 4 Plat on August 5th, 1955. Therefore, the entire 25-feet of Bessie Road right- of-way should be retained by Lot 7 of the Vista Garden No. 4 Plat (parcel # 45074.0223). Correspondence was received from the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway on October 22, 2020 after the public hearing, stating that the railroad did not have any interest in retaining the vacated right-of-way. The 15-feet of right-of-way would provide no benefit to the railroad and therefore, the entire half right-of- way should be retained by the properties to the south of the BNSF property (parcel numbers 45074.0223, 45074.0222, 45074.0221 and 45074.0220). However, the owner of the Argonne/Montgomery Storage LLC property (45071.9089) expressed interest in retaining the 30-feet of right-of-way adjacent to their property. The changes proposed to the Planning Commission's recommendation would alter Condition #2 & #8 of the proposed Conditions of Approval because the right-of-way and zoning would not be divided with each abutting property receiving half the right-of-way. Compensation for Right -of -Way: Council established Resolution 07-009 to provide parameters on requiring compensation. Within the Resolution, Section 1(Policy); states "The cost for property received as a result of a vacation initiated by an adjacent property owner shall equal 50% of the appraised value of the vacated property received" Section 1.1.b allows the property values to be averaged, if value of adjacent properties differs. The table below includes the analysis for associating an estimated appraised value for the vacated property. RCA Administrative Report for STV-2020-0002 Page 2 of 4 Parcel Number Appraised Market Land Value (2020) 45074.0223 45074.0222 45074.0221 45074.0220 45074.0219 45071.9089 $37,800 $21,280 $21,280 $22,400 $22,400 $176,600 Lot Size in Square 2 Feet ft Appraised Value per Square 2 Foot ft 32,287 8,293 9,993 10,567 10,568 44,151 2 Average appraised value per ft Square feet of Bessie Road & Montgomery Avenue Appraised value for the area of street vacation 50% of appraised value Subtracting amount paid for application processing $1.17 $2.56 $2.12 $2.12 $2.12 $3.99 $14.08/6 = $2.34 2 23,522 ft 2 23,522 ft x $2.34 = $55,041.48 $55,041.48 x 50% = $27,520.74 $27,520.74 - $ 1,365.00 = $26,155.74 Estimated value of Bessie Road & Montgomery Avenue = $26,155.74 Therefore, 50% of the appraised value for the unimproved portions of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue minus the application fees total $26,155.74. Section 1.4 of Resolution 07-009 allows City Council to take an alternative approach, if it is determined the public interest is better served. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Division of vacated right-of-way • The entire 25 foot width of Bessie right-of-way vacated to parcel 45074.0223 from which it was originally platted as part of the Vista Gardens Number 4 Plat on August 05, 1955. • The entire width of Montgomery Avenue adjacent to the BNSF Railway property vacated to the properties owned by Diamond Rock and Montgomery Apartments LLC (parcel numbers 45074.0223, 45074.0222, 45074.0221 and 45074.0220). • Remainder of Montgomery Avenue vacated half to each abutting owner. Modified Conditions Summary: • Condition 2 regarding the parcel numbers receiving vacated right-of-way • Condition 8 regarding zoning modified to account for ownership change Compensation based upon Resolution 07-009 and RCW 35.79: • Impose up to $26,155.74 at City Council discretion, paid by owners receiving vacated property prior to recording survey finalizing the vacation. OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed with first ordinance reading as proposed with Staff Recommendations; or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consensus to proceed with a first ordinance reading at the January 19, 2021 Council meeting. STAFF CONTACT: Connor Lange, Planner RCA Administrative Report for STV-2020-0002 Page 3 of 4 ATTACHMENTS: 1. PowerPoint Presentation 2. Approved Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation 3. Additional property ownership information for vacation 4. Approved Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 8, 2020 5. Approved Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 22, 2020 6. Approved Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 12, 2020 7. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission, including exhibits RCA Administrative Report for STV-2020-0002 Page 4 of 4 Street Vacation STV-2020-0002 Diamond Rock/TCF Properties, LLC City Council Administrative Report January 12, 2021 1 Process c Study Session w) 10-8-2020 EPublic Hearing © 10-22-2020 •5, Findings of Fact 11-12-2020 Administrative Report Ordinance 1st Reading Ordinance 2nd Reading r Today Conditions Satisfied Staff Review 44 44 etZ etZ 2 0_ 03 2 • • >% 3 Proposed Street Vacation 4 0 8 SP 83-247 216 45074.0239 25' ROW 41' 30' ROW 10( 3 45077.4392 *�'1�� 167, 45074.0221 45074.0220 6 4' 45074.0219 160 45074.0223 7 22 4 50' ROW 25' CAS EASEMENT 290' 45074.0222 6 8 5 9 4 10 11 SP 91-733 45071.9089 Row MONTGOMERY AVENUE 45074.0246 2 12 VISTA GARDENS NO. 4 BLOCK 1 MANSFIELD AVENUE 1 13 SARGENT ROAD PER SYLVIA COURT ADDTION N W E EXHIBIT 1 PROJ #: 20-2859 DATE: 07/30/20 DRAWN: EJW APPROVED: DAC SCALE: 1 °=1 00� STREET VACATION EXHIBIT BESSIE & MONTGOMERY SP❑KANE VALLEY, WASH INGT❑N 4WC E WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS CIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 12528 NORTH SULLIVAN ROAD SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON 99216 PH. 509-893-2617 FAX 509-926-0227 APPLICANT'S REASONS FOR REQUEST: ➢ The proposed vacation is currently undeveloped (dedicated in 1955) and provides no public access. ➢ Bessie Road and a portion of Montgomery Road are substandard for today's use and difficult to keep maintained. ➢ Allow maximum use of abutting properties 4 City Council Considerations ➢ Planning Commission findings ■ Commission recommended half -width to all abutting owners ➢ Conditions and/or limitations deemed appropriate to preserve public use or benefit ■ Zoning may need to be modified depending on who gets vacated ROW ➢ Specifies which portion of street goes to abutting property owners and ■ Abutting ownership, location of ROW, and original creation of ROW create potential issues ➢ Feasibility to require compensation based upon Resolution 07- 009 and RCW 35.79. 5 Planning Commission Recommendation: Voted 7-0 to approve the proposal to vacate Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue with 10 conditions of approval. PC Recommendation —half to adjoining property owners WARD, KENNETH L VRD, KENNETH L HAUSE, MICHAEL 5 f RONNESTPD, MARY L H4IJSE, MI❑ LAEL S f RONNESfAD, MARY L WARD, KENNETH L CF-IPPIPERY FRENCH, DAVID REAL ESTATE B & STEVEN C 2015 LLC WARD, KENNETH L FIOR INI, APRON W & ANGEL D DIAMOND R OCK FINANCIAL LLctrcF PROPERTIES LLC MATTINGLY, IZEAH & 1 ESSIC4 GPLLPRDO,'„ R AFAEL CaHALAN. J ODEE A & ]PIES R vo.K I m,icz YAMEDA, 'KENNETH $�;INE2 VAN, HIN1 PHAN/kIM, PN-i TRPN MOh1T OIvERY APARTMENTS LLC FR EDERICK. ALICE C ROLE, HDWARD 5 MONTGOMERY APARTMENTS LLC MCOJLLOCH, PAAJLJ& TRPCY L MONTGOMERY APARTMENTS LLC KELLER, MATTHEW'W MONTGOMER APARTMENTS LLC MCCALLUM, DALE LAN, SHERI L ESM ANDERSON ENTERPRISES I LLC SG-lvuEDA, MIG-IAFL H 8e .GALES, MARK H LORRAINE L KNEFF JLETIN M MCLAIN, WILLIAM W & CYNTHIA C SELLS, ROSS J RJ HS, DOLORES PRGONNE/MONTGOIvERY STORAGE, LLC SCOTT, LONNIE D HUMBLE, FREDL 30 60 120 NASH, CAMELLIA L f MLNOZ, MAX J ANDRPDE. HECTOR & ROSA MCCABE, BRIAN P BPJSMIv� ESM ENTERPRISES I, LLC E2i1 ANDERSON ENTERPRISES I LLC 180 240 F eet 8 Who gets vacated ROW: Additional Information >25 Feet of right-of- way was dedicated as Bessie Road from Lot 7 of Vista Gardens No. 4 Plat >BNSF does not have interest in retaining the vacated right-of- way 664.45' `.CENTER OF SECTION 1 0 O • 1---- • Lu 0• CENTERLINE NPRY R/W 157.0' cro 6 76 5' - 5 89' 05' W 5 76 664.45'— MONTGOMERY a 8 76.5' co 9 76.5' OD 4 CD 76.5 3 76 5' w CD rn 76.5 2 76 5' iQ 76 5' cc 76 5' 12 76 5' MANSFIELD S 69.07' W 663.85' AVE 60,5' 0 76 5' 0 76 G 5' 76 5 6 76.3' 76 c 5' 76 5` 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 .. M7 N ] cc OD''I N] — n 9 Who gets vacated ROW? SVMC 22.140.040(C) Pursuant to RCW 35.79.040, the city council, in approving a street vacation request, shall specify that the vacated portion of the street or alley shall belong to the abutting property owners, one-half to each, unless factual circumstances otherwise dictate a different division and distribution of the street or alley to be vacated. 10 Staff recommended distribution of ROW ➢ Division addresses half -width of Bessie and BNSF ownership WAR KENNETH L 'WARD, KENNETHL HPJJSE. MICHAEL S { RONNESfAD, MARY L HWJSE, MICFI EL S f ROhNESTPD, MARY L OIAMPEI€Y MT. REAL ESTATE .•nor 2015 LLC WARD, KENNETH L FRENCH, DAVID B & STEVEN C WAR D, KENNETH L FIOR INI, AJAR ON W & ANGEL ID GALLARDO, R AFAEL it1,561•12. I m.,mn DIAMOND ROOK FINANCIAL LLC/rOF PROPERTIES LLC MATTINGLY,. IZEPH JESSICA ".'.. CANAL AN 3 Y)FE A & JPMES R YAMEDA ENNETH & INEZ VAN, HINH PHA! KIM, PNH TRAN MONTGONER Y APARTMENTS LLC FR EDERIOK.. AL ICE C R OLE, HauVARD 1 ""FR. PJ•DSEN, MICHAEL E MONTGOMERY APARTMENTS LLC MONTGOMERY APARTMENTS LLC MCCLLLO•3-I, PALL 3 EK TRACY L THOW SON G N ...'.�; DEXTER, SCOTTD84 MICFELLE L rc LPNG, SFERI L MONTGOMERY APARTMENTS LLC KELLER, MrTTHEWW PJ_KKERMPIy. PJJSTIN J & AYTLYN A SPRINGER, EDulf.ARD J E&M ANDERSON ENTERPRISES I LLC MCCALLLM, DALE SCH WED A. MICHAEL H & LORRAINE L KNEFF, JLLSTIN M GALES, MARK MCI_AIN, WILLIAM W & CYNTHIA C SELLS, ROSS 3 RJCHS, DSORES RC ARGONNE/MONTGOMERY S„T d L.LC SCOTT, LONNIE D HLMBLE, FRIED' L KRUM, MPJ Hft EVER, DOROTHY I .rn E & M NASH, ENTERPRISES CAME LLI4 L f I, LLC MLNOZ, MAX 3 ANDRPDE. HECTOR & ROSA MCCABE, BRIAN P EMv1 ANDERSON ENTERPRISES I LLC OHM ANN P L 0 30 60 120 180 240 Feet VI 11 If ownership is modified, zoning would be modified to match vacated property: Current Proposed Condition 8: • The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation, and all area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the districts. The adopting Ordinance shall specify this zoning district extension inclusive of the applicable zoning district designations. Modified Condition 8: • The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extendedto the center of such vacation except in the case of bessie Road in which the entire 25 feet of right-of-way shall be retained by parcel 45074.0223 from which it was originally platted as part of the Vista Gardens Number 4 Plat on August 05, 1955 and Montgomery Avenue adjacent to the BNSF Railway property in which all right-of-way shall �e retained by the properties owned Diamond Rock and Montgomery Apartments LLC (parcel numbers 45074.0223, 45074.0222, 45074.0221 and 45074.0220). All area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the districts. The adopting Ordinance shall specify this zoning district extension inclusive of the applicable zoning district designations. 12 Estimated Value of Vacation per RES 07-009: 45074.0223 45074.0222 45074.0221 45074.0220 45074.0219 45071.9089 $37,800 $21,280 $21,280 $22,400 $22,400 $176,600 Lot Size Squa Appraised Value per Square 2 2 Feet ft) Foot ft ) 32,287 8,293 9,993 10,567 10,568 44,151 2 Average appraised value per ft Square feet of Bessie Road & Montgomery Avenue Appraised value for the area of street vacation 50% of appraised value Subtracting amount paid for application processing $1.17 $2.56 $2.12 $2.12 $2.12 $3.99 $14.08/6 = $2.34 23,522 ft 2 23,522 ft x $2.34 = $55,041.48 x 50% = $27,520.74 $27,520.74 - $ 1,365.00 = $26,155.74 Estimated value of Bessie Road & Montgomery Avenue 4$26,155.74 2 ($55,041.48) ,a .qRF1.9as wRmwvRmpwvRmmpmmmpmmmmpwvRmmpmas wRmwvRmmpmas wRmNwRmmpmmmpmmmmpmmmmpmmmmmp9aeppp< 13 Summary of Staff recommendations • Ownership: • Entire 25 foot width of Bessie right-of-way vacated to parcel 45074.0223 from which it was originally platted as part of the Vista Gardens Number 4 Plat on August 05, 1955. • Entire width of Montgomery Avenue adjacent to the BNSF Railway property vacated to the properties owned Diamond Rock and Montgomery Apartments LLC (parcel numbers 45074.0223, 45074.0222, 45074.0221 and 45074.0220). • Remainder of Montgomery Avenue vacated half to each abutting owner. • Modified Conditions Summary: • Condition 2 regarding the parcels numbers receiving vacated right-of-way • Condition 8 regarding zoning modified to account for ownership change • Compensation based upon Resolution 07-009 and RCW 35.79. • Impose up to $26,155.74 at City Council discretion, paid by owners receiving vacated property prior to recording survey finalizing the vacation. 14 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION STV-2020-0002 Street vacation of a portion of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E) the Planning Commission shall consider the proposal and shall prepare and forward a recommendation to the City Council following the public hearing. The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. A. Background: 1. Chapter 22.140 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), governing street vacations, was adopted in September 2007 and became effective on October 28, 2007. 2. The privately -initiated street vacation, STV-2020-0002, proposed to vacate 195-feet of Bessie Road and 470-feet of Montgomery Avenue. 3. The Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing and conducted deliberations on October 22, 2020. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of STV-2020-0002 to the City Council as presented. B. Planning Commission Findings: Compliance with SVMC 22.140.030 Planning Commission review and recommendation Finding(s): 1. Whether a change of use or vacation of the street or alley will better serve the public? The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved with the exceptions noted, and no utilities are located within the right-of-way. The right-of-way is overgrown with weeds and hasn't been maintained by the City in the past. The street vacation would eliminate the unmaintained right-of-way and allow that area to be improved and maintained by the adjacent properties through infill development. Infill development on these parcels will enhance the City's tax base and remove undeveloped right-of-way from the City's maintenance division. 2. Whether the street or alley is no longer required for public use or public access? The subject right-of-way is unimproved and not being utilized for public access. There are no means of future connection that would enhance public access because much of the right-of-way is substandard to the City's current standards. City staff determined that the existing street network provides sufficient level of service and the right-of-way is not anticipated to be needed in the future. 3. Whether the substitution of a new and different public way would be more useful to the public? Public access is not needed in this area because no properties currently utilize the right-of-way for access and the aggregation of the properties would alleviate the need for an access road. The infill development that occurs will either provide access on -site via private streets or from the currently developed right-of-way via private driveways. There is no need for a new and different public way. However, as discussed in the background section an access easement or boundary line adjustment application will be needed for parcel 45074.9084 & 45074.2309 owned by Kenneth Ward and parcels 45074.0222, 45074.0221, 45074.0220 and 45074.0219 owned by Montgomery Apartments LLC due Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2020-0002 Page 1 of 4 to their only access being from the undeveloped portions of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue. However, due to the common ownership among these parcels, a BLA or access easement is feasible. 4. Whether conditions may so change in the future as to provide a greater use or need than presently exists? Based on the comprehensive plan it is not anticipated that changes will occur in the future that would require the use of the Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue right-of-way for public access. 5. Whether objections to the proposed vacation are made by owners of private property (exclusive of petitioners) abutting the street or alley or other governmental agencies or members of the general public? The adjacent property owners who signed the application include Kenneth Ward (45074.2309; 45074.9084), Montgomery Apartments LLC (45074.0219; 45074.0220; 45074.0221; 45074.0222) & Argonne/Montgomery Storage LLC (45071.9089). The only adjacent land owner who did not sign the application was the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway who received the application materials and provided no objection to the proposal. Significant public comment was received on the proposal. The primary objections concerned the potential for a multi -family development on parcel's 45074.0219; 45074.0220; 45074.0221; 45074.0222. However, the application before the Planning Commission was only to review the merits of the street vacation. Multifamily uses are currently permitted in the multi -family zoning district, and subject to the administrative review by staff for consistency with the regulations. The street vacation has no effect on the permitted uses. Conclusion: The findings confirm criteria set forth in SVMC 22.140.030 have been met. C. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends the City Council approve STV-2020- 0002 for Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue subject to the following: 1. Initial work to satisfy conditions of the street vacation (File No. STV-2020-0002), including all conditions below shall be submitted to the City for review within 90 days following the effective date of approval by the City Council. 2. The vacated property shall be transferred into the abutting parcels (45074.2309; 45074.9084; 45074.0219; 45074.0220; 45074.0221; 45074.0222; 45071.9089) as shown on the record of survey created and recorded with Spokane County Auditor's Office pursuant to condition 9. 3. A Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) application to consolidate the parcels is required to be submitted and approved prior to recording the record of survey for the street vacation for parcels 45074.0219; 45074.0220; 45074.0221 and 45074.0222 and parcels 45074.9084 and 45074.2309 to ensure access is maintained. The BLA can be accommodated with the record of survey for the street vacation. 4. Prior to recording the street vacation of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue the following Development Engineering requirements shall be satisfied: a. The existing curb return at the northeast corner of Bessie Road and Mansfield Avenue shall be removed and Type 'A' curb shall be installed along Mansfield Avenue across the vacated portion of Bessie Road per Standard Plan R-102. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2020-0002 Page 2 of 4 b. The existing drywell at the northeast corner of Bessie Road and Mansfield Avenue shall be removed and replaced with a new Type 'A' drywell approximately 7' to the south at the new curb line along Mansfield Avenue per Std. Plan S-102. A Type 1 (bypass) metal grate shall be installed with the drywell per Std. Plan S-121. c. Construction within the public right-of-way shall be performed under the direct supervision of a licensed Washington State Professional Engineer and in accordance to the Spokane Valley Street Standards. All work is subject to inspection by the City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering Construction Inspector. d. Upon completion of the improvements, a Construction Certification package per SVSS Chapter 9 shall be submitted and approved prior to recording of the Street Vacation Ordinance. e. A Warrant Surety shall be provided for the public improvements per SVSS Chapter 9. 5. Following the City Council's passage of the Ordinance approving the street vacation, a record of survey of the area to be vacated, prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington, including an exact metes and bounds legal description, and specifying any and all applicable easements for construction, repair and maintenance of existing and future utilities and services, shall be submitted by the proponent to the City Manager, or designee, for review. 6. The surveyor shall locate a monument at the intersection of the centerline of the vacated right-of-way with each street or right-of-way in accordance with the standards established by the SVSS. 7. All direct and indirect costs of title transfer of the vacated street from public to private ownership, including but not limited to, title company charges, copying fees, and recording fees shall be paid by the proponent. The City shall not and does not assume any financial responsibility for any direct or indirect costs for the transfer of title. 8. The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation, and all area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the districts. The adopting Ordinance shall specify this zoning district extension inclusive of the applicable zoning district designations. 9. The record of survey and certified copy of the Ordinance shall be recorded by the City Clerk in the office of the Spokane County Auditor. 10. All conditions of City Council authorization shall be fully satisfied prior to any transfer of title by the City. Approved this 12th day of November, 2020 Planning Commission Chairman Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2020-0002 Page 3 of 4 ATTEST Marianne Lemons, Office Assistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2020-0002 Page 4 of 4 From: Susan Moss To: Connor Lanae Subject: FW: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me Date: Thursday, October 22, 2020 6:15:27 PM Attachments: image003.pna image005.emz image006.pna image001.emz Connor, I believe I sent this to you in July. BNSF don't want any right of way. Also, Keneth Ward, will not receive any right of way due to the original plat and his portion was already vacated. Call if you want to talk. Best regards, Susan Moss, ASLA Landscape Architect 509-893-2617 ONCE Whipple Conaultl"r.; = "S VICE jXOY rda5 s. 7,n4 AINCANIvdt*nr svro t s rn the Pokr.o.vYfj+tlioa.N. Surve}tirvj. $rdk.,crw!JTi. Yr F"rag, tvir,„ c3.:d PiduuMrsy awl Law:Is...Am. Ar[rwtcrura , 4 w.. Fein•! .-.rF.,re 'irv-s i. .".•.?. MI6 •: rgd.r.r tam From: Bilderback, Blaine E <Blaine.Bilderback@bnsf.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 7:19 AM To: Susan Moss <smoss@whipplece.com>; Norton, Mark A <Mark.Norton@bnsf.com>; Karls, Don W <Donald.Karls@BNSF.com>; Bye, Sandra <Sandra.Bye@BNSF.com>; McReynolds, Doug <Doug.Mcreynolds@BNSF.com> Subject: RE: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me Susan, we would contend that neither Bessie or Montgomery were platted beyond the edge of the RR property. We don't object to the abandonment, but we are not interested in acquiring any of the remnants of the platted streets, which I would think would only be the pieces outside of the area I've circled. Thanks Blaine SP 9' - YS! 4S17, aiEYa 70C.' tx27R1HERH PACIFIC 5i1L*AT RC* aria u %1STx GA40EM5 K + ECLOCk 50' R9i STREET VAGATeDN Ex.H,BIT BESSIE dS MMONTG❑MERY w, T14,ra PLAT VIYTA OA.RDLNG NU, 1 i FfincArif VALLtY, RAIRHIr T8n dd.. nal.rwia rs.;e tee" a-iro� �py�-.a mom Original Message From: Susan Moss [mailto:smossPwhipplece.com] Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 4:59 PM To: Bilderback, Blaine E <Blaine.BilderbackPbnsf.com>; Norton, Mark A <Mark.Norton( bnsf.com>; Karls, Don W <Donald.KarlsPBNSF.com>; Bye, Sandra <Sandra.ByePBNSF.com>; McReynolds, Doug <Doug.Mcreynolds( BNSF.com> Subject: RE: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me External Message Thank you Blaine. I look forward to hear back from you. Best regards, Susan Moss, ASLA Landscape Architect 509-893-2617 Original Message From: Bilderback, Blaine E <Blaine.BilderbackPbnsf.com> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 2:52 PM To: Susan Moss <smossPwhipplece.com>; Norton, Mark A <Mark.NortonPbnsf.com>; Karls, Don W <Donald.KarlsPBNSF.com>; Bye, Sandra <Sandra.ByePBNSF.com>; McReynolds, Doug <Doug.McreynoldsPBNSF.com> Subject: RE: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me Susan, we would treat the vacation like an acquisition, which means there is a certain amount of due diligence we would need to complete before we would accept the property. I sent this request over to the acquisition group to review. Thanks Blaine Original Message From: Susan Moss [mailto:smossPwhipplece.com] Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 4:28 PM To: Bilderback, Blaine E <Blaine.BilderbackPbnsf.com>; Norton, Mark A <Mark.NortonPbnsf.com>; Karls, Don W <Donald.KarlsPBNSF.com>; Bye, Sandra <Sandra.ByePBNSF.com>; McReynolds, Doug <Doug.McreynoldsPBNSF.com> Subject: RE: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me External Message Blaine, Did I send you enough information for the Street Vacation we are wanting to do in Spokane Valley, WA? Please contact me as soon as you can. Best regards, Susan Moss, ASLA Landscape Architect 509-893-2617 Original Message From: Susan Moss Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 1:23 PM To: Bilderback, Blaine E <Blaine.BilderbackPbnsf.com>; Norton, Mark A <Mark.NortonPbnsf.com>; Karls, Don W <Donald.KarlsPBNSF.com>; Bye, Sandra <Sandra.ByePBNSF.com>; McReynolds, Doug <Doug.McreynoldsPBNSF.com> Subject: RE: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me Attached is an aerial of the site in Spokane Valley and a drawing of the ROW we wish to apply for a street vacation. I have also attached the application. I will be updating the City Council letter and if you want some language in that I can add it. Thanks for your help. Best regards, Susan Moss, ASLA Landscape Architect 509-893-2617 Original Message From: Bilderback, Blaine E <Blaine.BilderbackPbnsf.com> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 12:56 PM To: Norton, Mark A <Mark.NortonPbnsf.com>; Karls, Don W <Donald.KarlsPBNSF.com>; Bye, Sandra <Sandra.ByePBNSF.com>; Susan Moss <smossPwhipplece.com>; McReynolds, Doug <Doug.McreynoldsPBNSF.com> Subject: RE: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me Susan, can you send me an aerial map of the area in the street you are planning to vacate? Thanks Blaine Original Message From: Norton, Mark A Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 2:54 PM To: Bilderback, Blaine E <Blaine.BilderbackPbnsf.com> Subject: FW: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me Blaine, Is this something your team handles? Thanks, Mark Original Message From: Karls, Don W Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 1:41 PM To: Norton, Mark A <Mark.NortonPbnsf.com> Subject: FW: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me Hi Mark Does this one go to your team? Thanks Don Original Message From: SMOSSPWHIPPLECE.COM <SMOSS( WHIPPLECE.COM> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 10:33 AM To: Karls, Don W <Donald.KarlsPBNSF.com> Subject: bnsf.com E-mail - Please Contact Me Form submitted by: (SMOSSPWHIPPLECE.COM) on Thursday, June 18, 2020 at 12:33:24 ReferringURL: https://imsva9l-ctp.trendmicro.com:443/wis/clicktime/v1/query? u rl=https%3a % 2f% 2fwww. bnsf.com % 2fa bout % 2d bnsf% 2fcontact%2dus%2fi ndex. htm l&u m id=86DB816 2-A8B3-5905-BD9C-A9C85D5077D5&auth=00e18db2b3f9ca3ba6337946518e0b003516e16e- 5d0bf687996ac9b97fd600a421583cfa2f362586 To: Don Karls From: SUSAN MOSS, ASLA Email: SMOSSPWHIPPLECE.COM Message: We are in the process of a Street Vacation in Spokane Valley, WA. The 30' right of way is adjacent to BNSF and my clients Can I send you the information we have and have BNSF authorize this street vacation for your half of the ROW, which BNSF will retain? CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. From: Susan Moss To: Connor Lanae Subject: Kenneth Ward issue Date: Thursday, October 22, 2020 7:37:58 PM Connor, I talked to Ken and he doesn't want the r of w. We are adding access to his site on our plans. Best regards, Susan Moss, ASLA Landscape Architect 509-893-2617 IWCE Whipple Consulting Engine wCE gimwndas tmd Cvntdoororrif simnel in Mt, isoilovouv tom. LO+rd 5rrr . Givf, 59 icdoarim'+e £rafhe £rgiiiipow1,t d rrrr „r:,r surd Landscape .err : r ,: fry: CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers — City Hall October 8, 2020 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held remotely via ZOOM meeting. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Administrative Assistant Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: Fred Beaulac Walt Haneke, absent James Johnson Danielle Kaschmitter Bob McKinley Sherri Robinson John Hohman, Deputy City Manager Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Bill Helbig, City Engineer Jerremy Clark, Senior Traffic Engineer Connor Lange, Planner Taylor Dillard, Administrative Assistant Marianne Lemons, Office Assistant There was consensus from the Planning Commission to excuse Commissioner Haneke from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the October 8, 2020 agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero against and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the September 24, 2020 minutes as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero against and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Chairman Johnson reported that he continues to attend the Human Rights Task Force meetings. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Building Official Jenny Nickerson reminded the Commission that there will be a special Planning Commission meeting held on November 5, 2020 to discuss impact fees for the South Barker corridor. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: 1 10-08-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 a. Findings Of Fact: CTA-2019-0005, A proposed amendment to Title 20, Subdivisions Planner Connor Lange requested approval of the findings of fact from the meeting on September 24, 2020 regarding the proposed amendment to Title 20. This document will formalize the Planning Commission's actions and the recommendation will be submitted to the City Council for approval. Commissioner Beaulac moved to approve the findings of fact and forward to City Council. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero against and the motion passed. b. Study Session: STV-2020-0002, A privately initiated street vacation for a portion of East Montgomery Avenue and Bessie Road Planner Connor Lange gave a staff presentation. He explained that the City received an application on August 7, 2020 from Diamond Rock Financial, LLC/TCF Properties requesting a street vacation of 470 feet of Montgomery Avenue and 195 feet of Bessie Road. The area is located east of Vista Road, west of Sargent Road, south of Trent Avenue and north of Mansfield Avenue. The four parcels along Montgomery Avenue where the vacation is being requested are owned by the same person and the City will require that the owner aggregate those properties to avoid any access issues. Bessie Road is 25 feet of right-of-way and Montgomery is 30 feet in the smallest section and 60 feet in the largest section of right-of-way. Chairman Johnson asked for clarification about how the four lots will be accessed if the street is vacated. Mr. Lange answered that the property will still be accessed from the unvacated portion of Montgomery Avenue. Commissioner Robinson asked the zoning of the properties. Mr. Lange answered that the property off Bessie Road is zoned R-3 and the four properties on Montgomery are zoned multi -family residential (MFR). Commissioner Robinson asked if the surrounding properties have been notified about the requested change. Mr. Lange answered that a notice of public hearing has been sent out to all owners of properties within 400 feet of the proposal. Mr. Lange explained that there are three main items that staff reviews when processing a street vacation request: street connectivity, traffic volumes, & future development/access. During the review process, staff determined that there is sufficient street connectivity. Due to the location of the railroad to the north of the property, Bessie Road cannot be connected to Trent Rd. However, there is good access from Mansfield Avenue & Sargent Road providing circulation onto Montgomery Avenue. The applicant's reason's for request is as follows: 1) The proposed vacation is currently undeveloped (dedicated in 1955) and provides no public access at this time, having no potential for connection to the north with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line directly to the north. 2) Both Bessie Road and a portion of Montgomery Road are not full right-of-way widths and therefore would be substandard for todays use. 3) The vacation will allow maximum use of abutting properties for infill development. 2 10-08-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 Commissioner Beaulac asked if the railroad has been notified about this request. Mr. Lange answered that notification has been sent but the City has not received any comments from them. Commissioner Beaulac commented that he would really like to know their thoughts on the proposal. Mr. Lange responded that he would try to reach out to them for comments. Chairman Johnson asked about the comment from Whipple Engineering regarding the proposed subdivision of the lot on Bessie Road into three separate lots. Mr. Lange responded that there is a formal request for short plat on that property that has been deemed incomplete due to this proposed street vacation. With no other questions, Mr. Lange said that a public hearing will be held on October 22, 2020 and he will provide answers to those questions posed by the Commission. c. Administrative Report: Impact Fees for the South Barker Corridor Deputy City Manager John Hohman introduced the agenda item. He explained that the City of Spokane Valley does not currently have impact fees in place. The City would like to implement impact fees for new developments occurring along the Barker Road corridor. When a new project comes in for development, there will be a set dollar amount per trip that a developer pays which will be used by the municipality to improve the infrastructure that is impacted by the development. Senior Traffic Engineer Jerremy Clark stated there are two process used to determine project mitigation, traffic concurrency and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Traffic concurrency ensures that the transportation system has sufficient capacity to accommodate any proposed development. In order to have a consistent process, the City has street standards that must be met for each proposed development. All projects must have a trip generation and distribution letter (TGDL) which provides an estimate of how many trips will be coming onto the transportation network and where they will be occurring. The number of trips generated determines if a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is required for a proposed development. These tools are used to determine what kind of mitigation will be required from a developer. SEPA has its own set of requirements and processes but they are separate from concurrency. Mr. Clark explained that the City has done some in-depth studies of areas with substantial growth potential and limited roadway capacity. These areas include the Northeast Industrial area, Mirabeau subarea, North Pines subarea, and the South Barker corridor. Mr. Hohman explained the cost of preserving current infrastructure in the existing configuration. There are roads throughout the City that are deficient and can't support the amount of activity and development happening. The City struggles with funding their street maintenance programs. Historically, the estimated cost to maintain City streets is approximately ten million dollars and the average actual expenditures is six million dollars leaving a deficit of four million dollars each year. The ten million estimate is for preservation only and does not include lane widening, intersection operations, or other needed improvements. The City needs to find additional funding to accommodate growth and maintain current service levels. 3 10-08-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5 Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb explained that the City is looking to identify the fair share impacts of new developments on an even basis so that citizens are not paying for the impacts. He stated that currently mitigation is only required if the level of service drops below acceptable levels based on the addition of a new development. Impacts occur from all developments but only the last developer who tips levels of service over the acceptable levels contributes to mitigation. The mitigation received from that developer will only be required based on that development's proportionate share. SEPA allows the City to address "probable significant adverse environmental impacts" on projects. Traffic is considered to be an environmental impact under SEPA but mitigation cannot be duplicated if it imposed by other regulations. Mr. Lamb stated that there are current process limitations because traffic concurrency is limited to designated corridors and areas. There are substantial exemptions in place through both SEPA and traffic concurrency such as short plats, multi -family dwellings up to sixty units and commercial buildings up to 30,000 square feet. However, impacts still occur from exempt areas, especially in regards to traffic impact. These limitations put the City in a situation where new development is not paying for their impacts to City infrastructure. Due to this shortfall in revenue, the City is looking into the possibility of implementing traffic impact fees. Mr. Lamb explained that impact fees are statutorily authorized mechanisms to have development pay for their proportionate impact on services and infrastructure and may be limited to an identified geographical area. It's a fair assessment of fees which gives certainty to developers regarding the amounts that will have to be paid. The fees are easy to collect because they are due at the time of building permit. The fees are established by an adopted rate schedule for each development activity and must be based on a specific formula or calculation. Chairman Johnson asked if the collected fees can be used city-wide for transportation related projects. City Engineer Bill Helbig answered that statutorily it is required that the fees received must be used within the area that they were collected. Mr. Helbig stated that the City has conducted a substantial study of the South Barker corridor. The study shows that this area has potential for significant future development and the level of service is degrading. The study recommends the need for mitigation and identifies fair share costs. It identifies seven recommended improvement projects throughout the corridor for a total of approximately 18.8 million dollars. Mr. Helbig explained that a public hearing on this agenda item will be held at a special meeting of the Planning Commission on November 5, 2020 and a Findings Of Fact will be held on November 12, 2020. It will then be forwarded to the City Council on November 24, 2020. Commissioner Beaulac asked for a report showing what other municipalities are charging for impact fees because he wants to make sure that the City is adopting fees that are competitive. Mr. Helbig stated that he will submit that report at the next meeting. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Mr. Hohman stated that Mayor Wick will select someone to fill the vacancy on the Planning Commission at the October 20, 2020 City Council meeting. The 4 10-08-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 City has received three applicants for the position. XL ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:33 p. m. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. James Johnson, Chair Deanna Horton, Secretary /4/i(-/gazz) Date signed 5 Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers — City Hall October 22, 2020 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held remotely via ZOOM meeting. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Administrative Assistant Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: Fred Beaulac Karl Granrath Walt Haneke James Johnson Danielle Kaschmitter Bob McKinley Sherri Robinson Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Bill Helbig, City Engineer Jerremy Clark, Senior Traffic Engineer Connor Lange, Planner Deanna Horton, Administrative Assistant Marianne Lemons, Office Assistant IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the October 22, 2020 agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the October 8, 2020 minutes as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, one abstention, zero against and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Haneke apologized for missing the last meeting. Commissioner Granrath stated that he is excited to be on the Planning Commission. Chairman Johnson reported that he continues to attend the Human Rights Task Force meetings. VI1. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Building Official Jenny Nickerson welcomed Commissioner Granrath to the Planning Commission. She also reminded the Commission that all meeting videos are on the Spokane Valley website for review. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: 1 10-22-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 8 a. Public Hearing: STV-2020-0002, A privately initiated street vacation for a portion of East Montgomery Avenue and Bessie Road The public hearing was opened at 6:06 p.m. Planner Connor Lange gave a presentation regarding an application received by the City on August 7, 2020 from Diamond Rock Financial, LLC/TCF Properties requesting a street vacation of 470 feet of Montgomery Avenue and 195 feet of Bessie Road. The area is located east of Vista Road, west of Sargent Road, south of Trent Avenue and north of Mansfield Avenue. The four parcels along Montgomery Avenue are owned by the Montgomery Apartments, LLC, the two properties along Bessie Road are owned by Diamond Rock and Kenneth Ward and the adjacent property on East Montgomery Avenue is owned by Argonne/Montgomery Storage, LLC. All four of these property owners signed the submitted application in support of the street vacation. Mr. Lang stated that he reached out to the Burlington Northern Railroad and they expressed that they do not have any issues with the vacation. Mr. Lange said that the applicant's reason for this request is as follows: 1) The proposed vacation is currently undeveloped (dedicated in 1955) and provides no public access at this time. 2) Both Bessie Road and a portion of Montgomery Avenue are not full right-of-way widths and therefore would be substandard for today's use. Bessie Road is 25 feet of right-of-way and Montgomery is 30 feet in the smallest section and 60 feet in the largest section of right-of-way. 3) The vacation will allow maximum use of abutting properties for infill development. Mr. Lange stated that the public hearing notice was posted as required, was published in the Valley Herald twice, written notice was sent to the property owners adjacent to the properties along Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue and signs were posted at each end of the proposed vacation area. Mr. Lange explained that the right-of-way to be vacated is unimpro\ cd, is not currently being utilized for public access, and is overgrown with weeds. Infill development on these adjacent parcels will enhance the City's tax base and remove undeveloped right-of- way from the City's maintenance division. Also, there are no means of future connection that would enhance public access because much of the right-of-way is substandard to the current City street standards and the existing street network provides a sufficient level of service for the adjacent properties. Mr. Lange stated that staff condition number eight (submitted in the packet) states: The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation and all area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the district. However, staff is recommending a change to that condition that would dedicate all of the vacated street along Bessie Road to Diamond Road Financial, LLC because the entire right-of- way was dedicated during the creation of the Vista Gardens subdivision. The proposed staff condition reads as follows: The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation except in the case of Bessie Road in which the entire 25 feet shall be included with parcel 4507-1.0223 (owned by Diamond Rock Financial, LLC) from which it was 2 10-22-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 8 originally platted as part oj'the Vista Gardens Number -1 Plat. All area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the district. Commissioner Haneke asked why this same logic would not apply to the right-of-way along Montgomery Avenue that is being given to the railroad. Mr. Lange answered that the right-of-way in that area was not dedicated at the same as Vista Gardens. Only fifteen feet of Montgomery Avenue was dedicated during the subdivision plat. Chairman Johnson asked if the property owner Kenneth Ward was notified that the street vacation is being given solely to the other piece of property. Mr. Lang answered that he had not been notified. Chair Johnson asked if Kenneth Ward was specifically told that he would be getting any of the property. Mr. Lang answered that he was not because the allocation is based on how the original plat map was dedicated and based on the plat map the property would not be entitled to any additional area. However, Kenneth Ward did sign the original application in support of the request. Chair Johnson opened the public testimony. Administrative Assistant Deanna Horton read 27 written comments that were received on October 21, 2020 into the record. The comments were all in opposition to the street vacation request. 1) Alice Marie Bristow, 8720 E Montgomery Avenue, objected due to increased traffic, decrease in property value, increase in taxes, less safety for older people, wear and tear on streets and utilities, more noise in the neighborhood, possible increased crime, and poorer air quality. 2) Matthew Keller, 8603 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because Diamond Rock Financial, LLC will build a three-story apartment complex which is in conflict with the Cities housing policy #6, it will strip him of his privacy in his backyard where he installed a $10,000 vinyl fence, the property would be a better site for storage units, the proposed development will attract a cluster of crime and drugs, and the proposed street vacation is needed to meet fire code. 3) Tracy McCulloch, 8521 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because the future development of the properties owned by Diamond Rock Financial, LLC and Montgomery Apartments will violate the housing policy #6 of the Cities Comprehensive Plan and will cause impact to the neighborhood including increased traffic, increased noise and loss of privacy to the adjacent properties. 4) Sara and Christopher Wilson, 8720 E Mansfield Avenue, objected due to increased traffic, making Sargent and Mansfield a more dangerous intersection due to the increased traffic, more people will affect the nice quiet neighborhood, possible increase in crime, and decreased property value. 5) Johnathan E Hannel, 8721 E Mansfield Avenue, objected to an addition of apartment complexes due to increased traffic, children being unable to play outside because of traffic threat, increase in crime, and decrease in property value. He requested that the City not sell or allow the use of Montgomery Avenue by Diamond Rock Financial, LLC. 6) Sarah and Tom McKeever, 8820 E Montgomery Avenue, objected due to additional traffic on an unmarked road, increased crime rate and decreased property value. 7) Izeah and Jessica Mattingly, 8504 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because it will negatively affect their way of life in the neighborhood and it will increase traffic which is already a problem in the neighborhood. She stated bringing section eight 3 10-22-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 8 housing to the neighborhood is not a good idea and she is worried about an increase to the crime and drug rate and a decrease in property values. 8) Austin and Kaytlyn Auckerman, 8602 E Mansfield Avenue, objected due to decreased property values and an increase in traffic. They also expressed concern about a "problem house" (owned by one of the applicants) where a resident visited their home demanding drugs and threatening to kill them. When this incident was investigated by the police, they found drugs being sold out of the home. He stated that allowing this build to pass would promote and increase this type of behavior, especially if it is Iow income housing. 9) Donna (Thompson) Messinger, 8520 E Mansfield Avenue, objected due to a decrease in property value, traffic congestion will increase, dangerous for children to go to the 2 bus stops in the neighborhood, the roads in the neighborhood cannot handle the traffic for a 3-story apartment complex, and the trains going past Mansfield causes traffic delays at Vista and Trent and the complex will make these delays worse. 10) Ross Sells and Sarah Spencer, 8621 E Mansfield Avenue, objected due to increase in vehicle traffic, increase in crime and decrease in property values. 11) Dale A McCallum II, 8607 E Mansfield Avenue, objected due to increased traffic flow and crime, decreased property values, proximity to railroad, petroleum line, loss of privacy, and risk to children's bus stops. 12) Elizabeth Vazquez, 8621 E Knox Avenue, objected due to increased traffic flow, increased crime rates, increased noise and decrease of privacy for neighborhood. 13) Emogene Sweigle, 2214 N Sargent Road, objected due to increased traffic flows on already overloaded streets and decreased property values. 14) Hector Andrade, 8709 E Mansfield Avenue, objected due to the decrease in safety for neighborhood children, potential for more/bigger accidents, increased crime, vandalism, and homelessness in the neighborhood. 15) Mark Krum, 8702 E Mansfield Avenue, objected due to property value, taxes, traffic congestion, crime/undesirables, environmental impacts, railroad/property conflict, fire/emergency service, neighborhood unity, and noise pollution. 16) Patrick Ohmann, 8716 E Mansfield, objected due to increase in traffic and that the neighborhood will no longer be quiet. 17) Kimberly McKinley, 8715 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because the proposal is an infringement on single home dwellers and owners of property in the neighborhood. She stated that they do not need any additional traffic because people already speed on Montgomery and kids and pets are being put in danger. She also expressed concern about Diamond Rock creating a neighborhood problem around Pasadena Elementary. 18) Brian P McCabe, 8708 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because property values will drop after being as high as they have ever been, drug use/traffic are usually close behind an influx of low-income habitation, fear of crime rates increasing in a safe and close-knit community. 19) Danny Tryon, 2310 N Margeurite, objected because the traffic on the streets has increased multiple times since 1972. The neighborhood is family friendly with lots of kids and pets, but the construction of the Maverik gas station and convenience store has tripled the traffic and people do not adhere to the speed limit. He stated the neighborhood does not need the impact of opening up more streets and more building because it is already congested enough. 20) Paul Cockburn and Alexandra Hill, 2302 N Marguerite Road, objected because they just bought their home to get away from apartments. They stated that apartments will 4 10-22-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 8 cause crime, drugs, high traffic, and theft. He stated that apartments need to be built elsewhere and not in their neighborhood. 21) Bill and Kathy Bartlett, 2218 N Marguerite Road, objected because they are concerned about children and elderly safety, heavy traffic associated with a large number of occupants in a small area, children walking to bus stops, danger to pedestrians, more theft/break-ins, property taxes will increase to support additional utilities and infrastructure repairs, and decrease in property values. 22) Danny A and Susan Packard, 8815 E Knox Avenue, objected due to an increase in traffic and speeding on Knox Avenue. 23) Yamada, 8510 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because of continuing crime, concern over major gas line by the railroad track, decrease in property values, increase in traffic, and apartment complexes attract drug and foot traffic. 24) Lonnie Scott, 8704 E Montgomery Avenue, objected because the area is not able to handle the current traffic, additional traffic will put children at risk, development so close to the train tracks will only draw those who cannot afford a better location which will increase crime and drugs, and lower property values. 25) Mike and Lorraine Schweda, 8608 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because there will be increased occupants, foot and car traffic, and the safety of railroad access. They also stated there are no street lights on Mansfield Avenue which has caused an increase in vandalism, car break-ins, gas robbing, and vehicle/car/yard thieves. They stated that they are also concerned about fire and police protection access, decrease in property values and more drug activity. They do not feel that this proposal will be an asset or improvement to what already exists. 26) Kris and Jessica Taylor, 8805 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because the vacation would infringe on the surrounding homes by decreasing privacy, property values, and safety, and increasing traffic volumes. The proposed development would violate housing policy #6 and they stated frustration that Diamond Rock would propose a plan for their gain and knowingly violate this policy. 27) Barbara Sturn, 8415 E Mansfield Avenue, objected because low income housing brings trouble and they just got rid of three drug houses, congested streets that are already crowded and don't have stop signs, decrease in property values, and the residents will lose their view of Mount Spokane. She asked if anything is sacred anymore or if everything is about money. Todd Whipple, Whipple Consulting Engineers representing the applicant, stated that he understood the comments from the residents regarding high density but the zoning for the properties had already been approved and determined. Therefore, the developers could move forward with the multifamily project regardless of the whether or not the street vacation was approved. He encouraged the Planning Commission to approve the request. Chairman Johnson asked if the transition requirements would apply between railroad and multifamily. Building Official Nickerson responded that the railroad does not have a zoning classification associated with it. Therefore, there are no requirements for buffering or transition. During this time, an attendee, Sheri Lang continued to interrupt the meeting by unmuting and interjecting herself into the discussion. While trying to gain control over the interruption, Commissioner McKinley asked Secretary Horton why she just did not allow Ms. Lang to continue to speak. Ms. Horton explained that in order to speak, the public needed to notify staff ahead of time so that staff would be able to maintain control over the meeting. Commissioner McKinley stated that he felt that the Commission should 5 10-22-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 8 allow the member of the public to speak on this matter even though she did not request to speak through the proper channels. There was discussion between the Commissioners regarding whether or not to allow the public to speak. They decided to allow Ms. Lang only to speak. Sheri Lang, Spokane Valley, stated that she lives on the corner of Sargent Road and Montgomery Avenue and she felt that this request for street vacation would substantially affect her. She stated that if a large apartment building is built, the only exit for those residents would be past her home onto Sargent Road. She said there should be an easement granted through the Diamond Rock property so that the apartment traffic could funnel onto Bessie Road. She also expressed concern about Ken Ward not being notified about him not maintaining his portion of Bessie Road. Ms. Horton noted that through the chat function Mr. Whipple had requested to speak again to rebut some of the testimony. There was consensus from the Commission to move forward without allowing any additional public comment. The public hearing was closed at 7:20 p.m. Commissioner Haneke suggested that rather than vacating Bessie Street, changing it to a one-way street. Ms. Nickerson responded that it would be very difficult to make that designation without a specific proposal for development on the undeveloped properties. Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb stated that a determination on that sort of change would have be made by traffic engineering during the proposal. Commissioner Robinson commented that this request was for the street vacation only and the decisions regarding zoning have already been determined. Development on these properties is going to continue regardless of the street vacation determination. Commissioner Beaulac moved to recommend approval of STV 2020-002, the proposed street vacation for Montgomery Avenue and Bessie Road to the City Council subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Beaulac asked if the traffic light at Montgomery Avenue and Argonne Road could be adjusted for additional traffic if the apartments are built. Senior Traffic Engineer Jerremy Clark answered that the corridor along Argonne Road has automated traffic signal performance measures already set up and they could be reviewed in real time so that adjustments could be made as volumes change. Commissioner Haneke commented that he would like Kenneth Ward to be notified that he will not be receiving any of the vacation right-of-way. Commissioner Beaulac stated that his motion is recommending approval of the street vacation subject to the original written staff conditions without any changes to the allocation of Bessie Road (the right- of-way will be split between both property owners). The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. A brief break was called at 7:42 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 7:53 p.m. b. Study Session: Impact Fees for the South Barker Corridor City Engineer Bill Helbig introduced the agenda item. He explained that the City is proposing a code -text amendment to implement transportation impact fees along the South Barker Road corridor. He explained that the City currently uses two process to determine project mitigation, traffic concurrency and the State Environmental Policy Act 6 10-22-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 8 (SEPA). Both processes are based on proportionate share of the proposed project and they require each project to do a unique, project specific evaluation each time. These evaluations are done by following the City's Street Standards. He stated that currently mitigation is only required if the level of service drops below acceptable levels based on the addition of a new development. Impacts occur from all developments but only the last developer who tips levels of service over the acceptable levels contributes to mitigation. The mitigation received from that developer will only be required based on that development's proportionate share. Mr. Helbig stated that there are current process limitations because traffic concurrency is limited to designated corridors and areas. There are substantial exemptions in place through both SEPA and traffic concurrency such as short plats, multifamily dwellings up to 60 units and commercial buildings up to 30,000 square feet. However, impacts still occur from exempt areas, especially in regards to traffic impact. Mr. Helbig explained that impact fees are statutorily authorized mechanisms to have development pay for their proportionate impact on services and infrastructure and may be limited to an identified geographical area. He stated that the City has conducted a substantial transportation study of the South Barker corridor. The study identifies seven recommended improvement projects throughout the corridor for a total of approximately $18.8 million dollars. If the impact fees are implemented, they will cover about 19% of the improvement amount. Chairman Johnson asked if the City had looked into interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions. Deputy City Attorney 1?rik Lamb answered that the City has not engaged in any formalized discussions yet. However, there has been ongoing discussions with Liberty Lake and Spokane County regarding the need for cooperation addressing traffic impact. The City is aware that these agreements will be needed in the future but feels that the impact fee adoption is the first step. Mr. Helbig stated that if these fees are adopted, there will need to be code changes made to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). A new chapter will need to be added to Title 22 adopting and imposing Transportation Impact Fees (Chapter 22.100). Some additional updates will need to be made to 17.90 regarding appeals, 17.110.010 regarding fees and penalties, and 22.10.010 regarding authority. Also, Chapter 3 of the Spokane Valley Street Standards will also need to be updated. Mr. Lamb explained that these changes are primarily set forth by state law because there are very specific requirements that have to be met in the code language. The language specifically states that these fees are only for the Barker Corridor based on the traffic studies completed. He explained the highlights regarding the new SVMC Chapter 22.100 including the assessment procedure, the deferral process, exemptions, credits, appeals and refunds. Mr. Helbig presented the proposed rates. The proposed rate for South Barker is $1,272 per PM peak trip. The adopted SEPA mitigation fee for the Northeast Industrial Area is $2,831 per PM peak trip so this new impact fee is substantially lower than other adopted fees. He also showed a comparison of the proposed rates to other municipalities adopted fees. 7 10-22-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 8 Mr. Lamb stated that there will be a public hearing on this agenda item at a special meeting of the Planning Commission on November 5, 2020 and a Findings of Fact will presented at November 12, 2020. The findings will then be forwarded to the City Council on November 24, 2020. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: None was offered. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to adjourn the meeting at 8: 55 p. m. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. James Johnson, Chair Deanna Horton, Secretary //4/zczo Date signed 8 Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers — City Hall November 12, 2020 I. Chairman Johnson called the special meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held remotely via ZOOM meeting. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Administrative Assistant Taylor Dillard took roll and the following members and staff were present: Fred Beaulac Karl Granrath Walt Haneke James Johnson Danielle Kaschmitter Bob McKinley Sherri Robinson Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Bill Helbig, City Engineer Taylor Dillard, Administrative Assistant Marianne Lemons, Office Assistant IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the November 12, 2020 meeting agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Staff noted a correction on page 4, paragraph 3, sentence 4 of the minutes. The number of trips was corrected from 30 trips to 20 trips. Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the November 5, 2020 minutes as corrected by staff. There was no additional discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: There were no commission reports. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: There was no administrative report. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a. Findings Of Fact: STV-2020-0002: A privately initiated street vacation for a portion of East Montgomery Avenue & Bessie Road. Planner Connor Lange reminded the Planning Commission the findings support the decision to recommend approval to the City Council of STV-2020-0002 based on the deliberations that were held on October 22, 2020. 1 11-12-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 2 Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the Findings of Fact for STV-2020-0002 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. b. Findings Of Fact: CTA-2020-0005 — Impact Fees For The South Barker Road Corridor Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb reminded the Planning Commission that findings support the decision to recommend approval of CTA-2020-0005 regarding impact fees for the South Barker Road Corridor to the City Council. Commissioner Kaschmitter made a motion to approve the Findings of Fact for CTA- 2020-0005. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commission Kaschmitter stated that her Planning Commission term is up at the end of 2020 so her last meeting will be in December. Chairman Johnson stated that he will be resigning his position on the Planning Commission at the end of 2020 so his last meeting will also be in December. They both thanked the Planning Commission members, the staff, and the community for allowing them to serve. Commissioner Haneke commented that his term will be up in December but he would like to request reappointment for another term XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:21 p. m. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. es Johnson, Chair Deanna Horton, Secretary /Z/3®�zezv Date signed 2 COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC WORKS Spakar�e Valley BUILDING & PLANNING STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FILE: STV-2020-0002 STAFF REPORT DATE: October 15, 2020 FILE NO: STV-2020-0002 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: Request to vacate 470 feet of Montgomery Avenue and 195 feet of Bessie Road. STAFF PLANNER: Connor Lange, Planner, Community & Public Works APPLICANT: Todd Whipple, Whipple Consulting Engineers, 21 S Pines Rd, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 PROPERTY OWNER: Diamond Rock Financial LLC/TCF Properties, 320 S Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley, WA, 99037 PROPOSAL LOCATION: The portion of right-of-way proposed to be vacated is located between Vista Road (west) and Sargent Road (east) and adjacent to nine parcels (45074.0223, 45074.0222, 45074.0221, 45074.0220, 45074.0219, 45071.9089, 45077.0002, 45074.9084 and 45074.2309) further located in the east half of Section 08, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane Valley, Washington. BACKGROUND: The City received an application on August 7, 2020 from Diamond Rock Financial LLC/TCF Properties, the owner of one of the adjacent properties (45074.0223). The application is requesting a street vacation of 470 feet of Montgomery Avenue and 195 feet of Bessie Road. The total area to be vacated for Montgomery Avenue is approximately 18,885 square feet and the total area to be vacated for Bessie Road is approximately 4,631 square feet. The undeveloped right-of-way widths range between 25-feet to 60-feet wide. The property owner is making the request for the following reasons: 1. The proposed vacation is currently undeveloped (dedicated in 1955) and provides no public access at this time, having no potential for connection to the north with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line directly to the north. 2. Both Bessie Road and a portion of Montgomery Road are not full right-of-way widths and therefore would be substandard for today's use. These right-of-ways are difficult to maintain due to being unimproved. 3. The vacation will allow maximum use of abutting properties for infill development. Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 1 of 11 October 15, 2020 The 25 feet of right-of-way for Bessie Road and 30-60 feet of right-of-way for Montgomery were dedicated as part of the recording for Vista Gardens No. 4 Plat on August 5th, 1955. Neither section of roadway has ever been improved, with the exception of a curb return and drywell along Mansfield Avenue. The right-of-way described does not contain any utilities that would need to be relocated as part of the vacation process. However, Spokane Valley Public Works is requiring the existing curb return be removed and replaced with new Type 'A' curbing along Mansfield Avenue per Standard Plan R-102. The existing drywell is also required to be removed and replaced with a Type 'A' drywell approximately 7-feet to the south at the new curb line along Mansfield per Standard Plan S-102. These requirements have been made conditions of approval. The vacation of Montgomery Avenue would leave parcels 45074.0222, 45074.0221 and 45074.0220 (owned by Montgomery Apartments LLC) without street frontage or access. There is common ownership with parcel 45074.0219 the eastern most parcel and all four parcels are zoned Multi -family residential. Therefore, either an access easement or boundary line adjustment application is necessary to aggregate those lots with parcel 45074.0219 prior to recording the street vacation. This requirement has been made a condition of approval. The vacation of Bessie Road would leave parcel 45074.9084 (owned by Kenneth Ward) without street frontage or access. Kenneth Ward also owns the property immediately to the south parcel 45074.2309. Therefore, either an access easement or boundary line adjustment application is necessary to aggregate the lot prior to recording the street vacation. This requirement has been made a condition of approval. APPROVAL CRITERIA: 1. SVMC — Title 20 (Subdivision Regulations) 2. SVMC — Title 21 (Environmental Controls) 3. SVMC — Title 22 (Street Vacations) 4. City of Spokane Valley Street Standards ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Vicinity Map Exhibit 2: Application Material Exhibit 3: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 4: Agency Comments I. PROPERTY INFORMATION Size and Characteristics The unimproved right of way area is approximately 18,885 of proposed vacation: square feet for Montgomery Avenue and 4,631 square feet for Bessie Road. The entirety of the subject right-of-way is unimproved and covered in grass and weeds. With the exception of the curb return and drywell at the intersection of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue. Adjacent Single Family Residential (SFR) and Multifamily Residential Comprehensive Plan (MFR) Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 October 15, 2020 Page 2 of 11 Designation: Adjacent Zoning: Single -Family Residential (R-3) and Multi -family Residential (MFR) Adjacent Land Use(s): Parcel 45074.0222, 45074.0221, 45074.0220, 45074.0219 and 45074.9084 are all vacant. Parcel 45074.2309 is developed with a duplex, 45074.0223 has a single-family residence, 45071.9089 is additional paved parking and a drainage swale and 45077.0002 includes the railroad yard. II. STAFF ANALYSIS OF STREET VACATION PROPOSAL A. COMPLIANCE WITH SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE (SVMC) TITLE 22.140.030 Findings: 1. Whether a change of use or vacation of the street or alley will better serve the public? The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved with the exceptions noted, and no utilities are located within the right-of-way. The right-of-way is overgrown with weeds and hasn't been maintained by the City in the past. The street vacation would eliminate the unmaintained right-of-way and allow that area to be improved and maintained by the adjacent properties through infill development. Infill development on these parcels will enhance the City's tax base and remove undeveloped right-of-way from the City's maintenance division. 2. Whether the street or alley is no longer required for public use or public access? The subject right-of-way is unimproved and not being utilized for public access. There are no means of future connection that would enhance public access because much of the right- of-way is substandard to the City's current standards. City staff determined that the existing street network provides sufficient level of service and the right-of-way is not anticipated to be needed in the future. 3. Whether the substitution of a new and different public way would be more useful to the public? Public access is not needed in this area because no properties currently utilize the right-of- way for access and the aggregation of the properties would alleviate the need for an access road. The infill development that occurs will either provide access on -site via private streets or from the currently developed right-of-way via private driveways. There is no need for a new and different public way. However, as discussed in the background section an access easement or boundary line adjustment application will be needed for parcels 45074.9084, 45074.0222, 45074.0221 and 45074.0220 due to their only access being from the undeveloped portions of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue. However, there is common ownership among those parcels which makes a BLA or access easement feasible. 4. Whether conditions may so change in the future as to provide a greater use or need than presently exists? Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 3 of 11 October 15, 2020 Based on the comprehensive plan it is not anticipated that changes will occur in the future that would require the use of the Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue right-of-way for public access. 5. Whether objections to the proposed vacation are made by owners of private property (exclusive of petitioners) abutting the street or alley or other governmental agencies or members of the general public? The adjacent property owners who signed the application include Kenneth Ward (45074.2309; 45074.9084), Montgomery Apartments LLC (45074.0219; 45074.0220; 45074.0221; 45074.0222) & Argonne/Montgomery Storage LLC (45071.9089). The only adjacent land owner who did not sign the application was the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway who received the application materials and provided no objection to the proposal. An email was received on October 7, 2020 from a neighboring property owner Sheri Lang (2321 N Sargent Road; 45074.0246) who indicated an intent to submit formal public comments in objection to the street vacation but no comments have been submitted to date. Conclusions: The findings confirm criteria set forth in SVMC 22.140.030 have been met. B. COMPLIANCE WITH SVMC TITLE 21 — ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS The Planning Division has reviewed the proposed project and has determined that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(2)(i) and SVMC 21.20.040 from environmental review under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). III. PUBLIC COMMENTS Findings: No public comments have been received following the notice of public hearing issued, mailed and posted on October 2, 2020. A Notice of Public Hearing sign was posted on the property October 2, 2020 in two separate locations and public hearing notices were mailed to all owners adjacent to the parcels abutting the right-of-ways being vacated. Notices were posted in the Spokane Valley Public Library, City of Spokane Valley main reception area and CenterPlace Event Center on October 20, 2020. Lastly, the notice was published in the Spokane Valley Herald on October 2, 2020 and October 9, 2020. Conclusion(s): Staff concludes that adequate public noticing was conducted for STV-2020-0002 in accordance with adopted public noticing procedures. IV. AGENCY COMMENTS Notice was provided to agencies and service providers on September 28, 2020. Comments were received from the following agencies and are attached as exhibits to this staff report. Where Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 4 of 11 October 15, 2020 necessary, comments have been incorporated into the recommended conditions of approval in Section V. Agency Received Comments Comments Dated City of Spokane Valley Public Works Yes 10-2-20 Spokane Valley Fire DistrictNo.1 Yes 10-12-20 Spokane County Environmental Services Yes 6-8-20 (w/ application) Spokane Regional Health District No Avista Utilities Yes 10-1-20 Spokane Transit Authority No City of Spokane Valley Police Department No Century Link Yes 6-19-20 (w/ application) Comcast Yes 6-8-20 (w/ application) Spokane County Water District #3 Yes 6-16-20 (w/ application) WA Archaeology and Historic Preservation No WA Department of Transportation No Yellowstone Pipe Line Company Yes 10-13-20 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Yes 10-15-20 Findings: Notice of application was routed to jurisdictional agencies, utilities, and public districts for review and comment. As discussed in the Background section Spokane Valley Public Works is requiring the curb return be removed and replaced to run along Mansfield Avenue and remove and replace the existing drywell. Access easements or boundary line adjustments to aggregate several lots are necessary to ensure access is maintained after the vacation of Bessie and Montgomery. These requirements have been made conditions of approval. No other substantive agency comments have been received to date. Conclusion(s): Staff concludes that jurisdictional agencies, utilities, and or public districts have no concerns regarding the proposed street vacation for Montgomery Avenue and Bessie Road so long as conditions are met. V. OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS Staff concludes that STV-2020-0002 as proposed is generally consistent, or will be made consistent, through the recommended conditions of approval based on the approval criteria stated herein. RECOMMENDATION: Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 5 of 11 October 15, 2020 Approve the request to vacate 470 feet of Montgomery Avenue and vacate 195 feet of Bessie Road subject to the following: 1. Initial work to satisfy conditions of the street vacation (File No. STV-2020-0002), including all conditions below shall be submitted to the City for review within 90 days following the effective date of approval by the City Council. 2. The vacated property shall be transferred into the abutting parcels (45074.2309; 45074.9084; 45074.0219; 45074.0220; 45074.0221; 45074.0222; 45071.9089) as shown on the record of survey created and recorded with Spokane County Auditor's Office pursuant to condition 9. 3. A Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) application to consolidate the parcels is required to be submitted and approved prior to recording the record of survey for the street vacation for parcels 45074.0219; 45074.0220; 45074.0221 and 45074.0222 and parcels 45074.9084 and 45074.2309 to ensure access is maintained. The BLA can be accommodated with the record of survey for the street vacation. 4. Prior to recording the street vacation of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue the following Development Engineering requirements shall be satisfied: a. The existing curb return at the northeast corner of Bessie Road and Mansfield Avenue shall be removed and Type 'A' curb shall be installed along Mansfield Avenue across the vacated portion of Bessie Road per Standard Plan R-102. b. The existing drywell at the northeast corner of Bessie Road and Mansfield Avenue shall be removed and replaced with a new Type 'A' drywell approximately 7' to the south at the new curb line along Mansfield Avenue per Std. Plan S-102. A Type 1 (bypass) metal grate shall be installed with the drywell per Std. Plan S-121. c. Construction within the public right-of-way shall be performed under the direct supervision of a licensed Washington State Professional Engineer and in accordance to the Spokane Valley Street Standards. All work is subject to inspection by the City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering Construction Inspector. d. Upon completion of the improvements, a Construction Certification package per SVSS Chapter 9 shall be submitted and approved prior to recording of the Street Vacation Ordinance. e. A Warrant Surety shall be provided for the public improvements per SVSS Chapter 9. 5. Following the City Council's passage of the Ordinance approving the street vacation, a record of survey of the area to be vacated, prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington, including an exact metes and bounds legal description, and specifying any and all applicable easements for construction, repair and maintenance of existing and future utilities and services, shall be submitted by the proponent to the City Manager, or designee, for review. 6. The surveyor shall locate a monument at the intersection of the centerline of the vacated right - Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 6 of 11 October 15, 2020 of -way with each street or right-of-way in accordance with the standards established by the SVSS. 7. All direct and indirect costs of title transfer of the vacated street from public to private ownership, including but not limited to, title company charges, copying fees, and recording fees shall be paid by the proponent. The City shall not and does not assume any financial responsibility for any direct or indirect costs for the transfer of title. 8. The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation, and all area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the districts. The adopting Ordinance shall specify this zoning district extension inclusive of the applicable zoning district designations. 9. The record of survey and certified copy of the Ordinance shall be recorded by the City Clerk in the office of the Spokane County Auditor. 10. All conditions of City Council authorization shall be fully satisfied prior to any transfer of title by the City. Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 7 of 11 October 15, 2020 EXHIBIT 1 Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 8 of 11 October 15, 2020 150 300 Feet Mansfield Ave „ CSBo 0 o t Iob-, Vicinity Map STV 2020-0002 Spokane Valley, WA Knox Ave OaolpAgolm CHIC ° Dao LEDA MEago ° - 1A00 EXHIBIT 2 Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 9 of 11 October 15, 2020 STREET VACATION APPLICATION tiore\nSVMC 22.140 ..►Valley. Phone: (509) 720-240 ♦ Project # mod-° )2 RECEIVED 10210 E Sprague Avenue ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 Fax: (509) 720-3g 40p7niterla spokanevallev.ore STAFF USE ONLY CSV PERMIT CENTER Date Submitted: Received by: PLUS #: File #: S I 1 R ire: RFV PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL **THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED*" • Completed Appli Application Fee ion Form ,e, • Written Correspondence from Utility Purveyors &-Telephone Cable ` le.ctric _ Other (Specify) .Water District Mire Distract .--G-as Utility 4—Sewer Utility • Vicinity Map -- Submit a map showing the general area of the proposed vacation Q'Record of Survey, if available, for the subject street and/or alley proposed for vacation, and abutting proper s, streets and alleys within 100 feet on all sides of the proposed vacation. CiA4-D ‘ `I ritten Evidence of all easements, allowances or reservations, if available, pertaining to the street and/or alley proposed for vacation. PART II - APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT NAME: Whipple Consulting Engineers MAILING ADDRESS: 21 S. Pines Rd CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA Zip: 99206 PHONE: (509) 893-2617 FAX: (509) 926-0227 CELL: EMAIL: toddw©whipplece.com PROPERTY OWNER No. 1: Diamond Rock Financial LLCfTCF Properties MAILING ADDRESS: 320 S Sullivan Road CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99037 PHONE: 509.924-8964 CELL: EMAIL: crapodennis@gmail.com if more than two (2) abutting property owners. include information and written authorization on a separate sheet of paper for each. 241 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation NAME OF STREET/ALLEY TO BE VACATED: N Bessie Road and E Montgomery DIMENSIONS OF STREET/ALLEY TO BE VACATED: 25' ROW on Bessie and 30'-60' ROW on Montgomery SQUARE FEET OF STREETIALLEY TO BE VACATED: 0.54 acres ABUTTING TAX PARCEL No(s).: 45074.0219, 45074.0220, 45074.0221, 45077.0002. 45074.9084 45074.0222, 45074.0223, 45074.2309, ADDRESSES OF ABUTTING PARCELS: 8419, 8507 E Mansfield Ave. I ZONING DESIGNATION: R3 THE FOLLOWING IS CRITERIA EVALUATED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN FORMULATING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. ON A SEPARATE SHEET OF PAPER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS SHALL BE ANSWERED IN A DETAILED MANNER; 1. How DOES A CHANGE OF USE OR VACATION OF THE STREET/ALLEY IMPROVE SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC? 2. I5 THE STREET OR ALLEY NO LONGER REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC USE OR PUBLIC ACCESS? EXPLAIN. 3. WOULD SUBSTITUTION OF A NEW AND/OR DIFFERENT PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY BETTER SERVE THE PUBLIC? EXPLAIN. 4. How WILL USE OR NEED FOR THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY BE AFFECTED BY FUTURE CONDITIONS? EXPLAIN. 5, WILL EASEMENTS BE RETAINED FOR ALL UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD UTILITIES? THE REQUESTED VACATION IS LOCATED IN THE SERVICE AREA OF WHAT UTILITY COMPANIES. (SPECIFY)? 6. DOES THE RIGHT-OF-WAY INCLUDE STORMWATER DRAINAGE FACILITIES (SPECIFY)? PLEASE NOTE: PER RCW 35.79,040 (TITLE TO VACATED STREET/ALLEY), THE PROPERTY WITHIN A PUBLIC STREET OR ALLEY VACATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL BELONG TO THE ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS, ONE-HALF (1 /2) TO EACH. THEREFORE, PROPERTY OWNER SHALL BE REQUIRED TO SIGN THE STREET VACATION APPLICATION. PER RESOLUTION 07-009 OF THE CITY OFSPOKANE VALLEY, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE CHARGES FOR STREET/ALLEY VACATION PURSUANT TO RCW 36.79.030 PL-15 V1.0 Page 3 of 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of owner or authorized representative) I, Susan M. Moss truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. (Signature) STATE OFWASHINGTON) (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made NOTARY 7/;' (Date) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 0 113 day of 014 , 20a 0 NOTARY SEAL 111111W\NO~` ‘,//i/t&I 161 oil NO ARY SIGAIAT RE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: 1165719_3 &, iNke, 0,e8-vc 36-17es u/f} My appointmentexpires: LEGAL OWNER NO. 1 AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal o (s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; 1, , owner of lot 7, block 1 of Vista Gardens No 4 final Plat do hereby authorize WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this street vacation application. PL-15 V1.0 Page 4 of 2E59 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation PART III - AUTHORIZATION STATE OFWASHINGTON) COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this NOTARY SEAL a CASEY G CUSHMAN Notary Public State of Washington My Appointment Expires Oct 7, 2020 NOTARY JO ki-N day of L NOTARY SIGNATURE ,20 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: Spq1k.0.-c- My appointmentexpires: l0/7/1.0.2,4=1 LEGAL OWNER NO. 2 AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s), the owner mtast provide the following acknowledgement: I,r�,\ -` ��-kr -owner of Argonne/Montgomery Storage, LLC do hereby authorize WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS to represent me and my interests In aP matters regarding this Street Vacation application. PROPERTY OWNER No. 2: Argonne/Montgomery Storage, LLC MAILING ADDRESS: 8915 E Montgomery STE B CITY: Spokane STATE: WA ZIP: 99212 t� PHONE: 5 C7Ci E, 4;) J %' i „FAX: CELL: Cis b to V3 c's'•)orvlrj CSC EMAIL: r e a Q. 1 .,, 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation PART III - AUTHORIZATION NOTARY STATE OFWASHINGTON) COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this (,� day of 202 C� NOTARY SFAL ORADE r+'111/,,, o� • •40 .9\P • :• �Q �t� tia�� 2 F. co 0 11, • o - Residing at: ;� • ,STA' E`0`,�1'L```i. 0 /AR SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington C My appointmentexpires: 10 \ LEGAL OWNER NO. 3 AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owners), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; G-i .,wu44.4+.I /yteIR 0� I, rrt •�r+Ga 'q 71f.rs , c,c L , owner of Tots 3-6, block 1 of Vista Gardens No 4 Final Plat do hereby authorize WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS to represent me and my interests in all matters rgrding this street vacation application. ir PROPERTY OWNER No. 3: Montgomery Apartments, LLC MAILING ADDRESS: PO BOX 19351 CrTY: SPOKANE STATE: WA ZIP: 99219 PHONE: FAX: CELL:953-9999 GARY@SCHIMMELSCONSTRUCTION.COMP EMAIL: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation PART III -- AUTHORIZATION NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF SPOKANE } SUBSCRI BED AND SWORN to before me this day of 3e er� , 2020 ftlO RY SIGNATURE Notary Public in and -far the State of Washington Residing at: p400, Cu,rri-il My appointment expires: It/ .z,00 LEGAL OWNER NO. 3 AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal awner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, Kenneth L Ward , owner of 8419 E Mansfield Ct. do hereby authorize WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this street vacatign application. PROPERTY OWNER No. 4: Kenneth L Ward MAILING ADDRESS: / z. 2 0 », c� rf « 5't i CITY: STATE: WA Zip: 9' T/ C 3 PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: ! 1 June 18, 2020 W.O No. 2020-2659 Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. City of Spokane Valley, City Council 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Street Vacation of Bessie Rd and Montgomery Ave. Dear City Council, This letter will serve as the criteria evaluation by the Planning Commission for the Street Vacation of Bessie Rd and Mansfield Ave., per the City of Spokane Valley Street Vacation Application questions. Our discussion of the vacation can be seen below in bold. This streets being vacated are Bessie Road from Mansfield to Montgomery and Montgomery from Bessie Road to the east side of lot 3, block 1 of Vista Gardens No. 4 final plat. Properties adjacent to the vacations are parcel numbers 45074.0223, 45074.0219-4.0222, 45077.0002 and 45071.9089. This street vacation will provide the highest and best use for the properties in Vista Gardens No. 4 block 1. This vacation of approx. 0.54 acres will aid in the design of adjacent lots bringing unused ROW into real property and increase City tax base. See the roadway vacation exhibit for more details. 1. How does a change ofuse or vacation of the street/alley improve service to the public? These ROW's are undeveloped surplus land in the City, full of weedy and unkept land of no beneficial use. This ROW diminishes the adjacent properties enjoyment and value through the lack of maintenance. By allowing the vacation the City will reduce their service area of 0.54 acres of untended and weedy ROW for maintenance of streets, utilities and drainage benefitting the public and supplementing the City budget and limiting liability. 2. Is the street or alley no longer required for public use or public access? Explain. Upon vacation and development the subject street vacation is proposed because there will be no need for public access, utilities or drainage facilities for the adjacent lots. No lot will be land locked by this and will provide the highest and best use for said lots. 21 South Pines Rd. • Spokane Valley, WA 99206 PO Box 1 566 • Veradale, WA 99037 Phone 509-893-2617 • Fax 509-926-0227 • WhippleCE.com • info@WhippleCE.com Civil, Structural, Traffic, Survey, Landscape Architecture and Entitlements 3. Would substitution of a new and/or different public right-of-way better serve the public? Explain. NO, the ROW being vacated is not in a location where another dedicatory process would be appropriate to serve the travelling public. 4. How will use or need for this right-of-way be affected by future conditions? Explain. Urban development in these lots is best satisfied with the vacation of the ROW and therefore no affect would be possible. 5. Will easements be retained for all underground and overhead utilities? The requested vacation is located in the service area of what utility companies. (specify)? At this time no facilities have been installed, therefore no easements are anticipated. 6. Does the right-of-way include stormwater drainage facilities (specify)? No, as an unirnproved ROW none were ever constructed. Should you have any further questions regarding the project or this narrative, please call our office at (509)893-2617. Sincerely, us: oss, A.S.L.A. Whipple Consulting Engineers 4WC E Whipple Consulting Engineers, Inc. June 19, 2020 W.O. No. 2019-2659 City of Spokane Valley Planning Department 10210 E Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Re: Bessie Rd and Montgomery Ave. Street Vacation Narrative Dear Connor, This letter is intended to serve as the project development narrative The project proposes to vacate the right of way on Bessie Rd north from Mansfield Ave to Montgomery Ave. and Montgomery Ave. east from Bessie Rd to the east side of Lot 3, Block 1 of Vista Gardens No 4 Final Plat, approximately 0.54 acres. The adjacent lots are lots 3-7 of Vista Gardens no.4 Block 1 Plat, lot 1 of SP 91-733 Argonne/Montgomery Storage, LLC, and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway parcel 45077.0002. The subject property is located in a portion of NW % Section 7, T 25 N., R 44 E., W.M. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway has declined to accept the Right of Way which would typically go to BNSF, see the attached email. Also see the Street Vacation exhibit 1 for more information, Sewer System Spokane County environmental services has no sewer lines or services located in this street vacation. Water System Spokane County Water District #3 has no water lines or services located in this street vacation. Power and Dry Utilities a� ista, CenturyLink, and Comcast have no lines or services located in this street vacation. Stormwater There are no stormwater facilities located in this street vacation. If you have any questions or comments in regard to this letter please feel free to contact us at (509) 893- 2617. Sincerely, Susan M. Moss, PLA, ASLA 21 South Pines Rd. • Spokane Valley, WA 99206 ' PO Box 1566 • Veradale, WA 99037 Phone 509-893-2617 • Fax 509-926-0227 • WhippleCE.com • Info@WhippleCE.com Civil, Structural, Traffic, Survey, Landscape Architecture and Entitlements 9 5 45077.0002 SP 83-247 439' 30' ROW 26' 290' 45074.0223 216' 45074.0239 160 7 25' ROW w� 41' 22 25' GAS EASEMENT 45074.0222 6 8 64' SP 91-733 45071.9089 � I� 60' ROW MONTGOMERY AVENUE 45074.0221 5 9 167' t 45074.0221 45074.0219 4 3 10 45074.0246 2 11 12 VISTA GARDENS NO. 4 BLOCK 1 13 50' ROW MANSFIELD AVENUE SARGENT ROAD PER SYLVIA COURT ADDTION W N S E EXHIBIT 1 PROJ #: 20-2659 DATE: 07/30/20 DRAWN: EJW APPROVED: DAC SCALE: 1 °= 1 00' STREET VACATION EXHIBIT BESSIE Sc MONTGOMERY SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON 4WC E WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS CIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 12528 NORTH SULLIVAN ROAD SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON 99216 PH: 509-893-2617 FAX: 509-926-0227 Dale A/IG. .5 ,/955 Date DEDICATION KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that James H. Warehouse and Alpha H Warehouse have laid off and platted into lots and streets the /and shown upon this map to be known as 'VISTA GARDENS No. 4e, a subdivision of the NE%4 of the NW%4 of the SE%4 of Section 7, T. 25 N. R 44 E.W.M., except the right of way of the Northern Pacific Rai/way Company and except a parcel of /and /5 feet in width across part of the said NE% of NW74 of SE%¢ of Section 7 adjacent to the said railway right of way on the south: and they do hereby dedicate to the public for the use of the public the streets shown upon this map. All /ofs sha// be residential. No structure shall be erected altered, p/aced or permitted to remain on any portion of this tract other than a single or a multiple family dwelling, private garage and other out -buildings which may be incidental to the residential use of the /and. No dwelling having a f/oor space of less than 800 square feel exclusive of porches and garages shall be per- mitted upon any /of. All buildings in this subdivision must be of new construction. No /ofs in this subdivision will be sold until after domestic water is made available to said lots or /of. The foregoing covenants and limitations of use are made for the protection of each of the lot owners in said'v/STA GARDENS No.4." Shout any one or more than one of these covenants or knife/ions of use be breached by any lot owner or other person, then any one or more than one of the other owners of lots or property in said 'y/STA GARDENS No.4" may enforce the said covenants and /imitations of use in any manner provided by law for his own benefit or for the benefit of any or a// other owners of lots or property 4 the subdivision. Executed of . -k.yxr Washington, this o `•'/ day of c.: r' ,/955. AW, -, .I ..� .•.. I ` . ' n - yrC lT o.1. ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SS On this . 2' day of J...... • r ,/955 before me personally appeared James H. Warehouse and Alpha H Warehouse, to me Known to be the identical persons who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged the same to be their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes herein mentioned. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, / Mve hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. My commission expires • • e� i / ; /. r /i '.1:.a..% ! �• /' �u-r =. ° Notarry Publid='in and for the State of Washington residing at -•..-.. Washington. ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE /, Clarence E.Simpson, a licensed Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor hereby certify that this plat represents a true and correct copy of the official records and survey made by me and that the lot corners and monuments have been set. % hereby certify that the required taxes on the herein plat/ea' land " Date aural S'tly /955 Spokane tv'�-�-G By 0 Spokane County Treasurer Examined and Approved: / Examiged and Approved: (� G 1EExamined and Approved: Date /7rc9Nii"/ have been paid. Deputy Spokane County Engineer ,/955 j.�•"kan� County Planning Commission By /955 5p.4ane County Commissioners By chairr LJ Chairman Course SET 05'W 664.45 5 0' 06'E 657.20 N89°09'E 663.25 NORTH 657.85 TOTALS 2642.75 DIFFERENCE NW I/4,NW I/4,SE1/I ENTER OF SECTION CENTERLINE NPRY R/W iS t / 4 1996 5 Y - 0 -0 a3B 6 - / -5 89•05' W - /664.45'---- rMONTGOMERY- - AVE - NE COR, NW I/4,5E I/4,SEC 7 FOUND 3/1F PIPE 663.25.- 2 7 137.0' 765' 76 5' 8 76.5' 9 76.5. 76 5' 4 765' 3 76 5' 76.5' 2 6 5' 62.89' 78.6 10 76.5' 765' 12 765' 13 62.39' ( I1 25 MANSF/ELD 5 89.07' W 663.135' 4" AVE. S •r, 1 IL FOUND 3/4" PIPE 60.5' 8 76.5' 75 5. 7 76 5' 76 5' 6 765' 76 5' 5 76.5' 12. 9 65 5' 10 765' 76 5' 12 76.5' 76.5' 4 O 13 76.5' 76 5' 3 76 5' 14 765' 765' 2 76.5' 15 765' 62.30' N.\ 78.05' SW OOR,NEI/4,/ NW 1/4, 5E 1/4 FOUND 3/4" PIPE IN CONC. C' KNOX LATITUDES AND DEPARTURES Distance North South East West 10.63 664.36 - 657.20 1.15 9.84 65/85 667.69 667.83 664.33 664.36 .14 .03 663.18 0 0 N 89•09' E LEGEND 1 16 25. 25' 71,80' d ' 20' 130' Eli Lei L: FOUND 3/4" PIPE 1 1 5 25 z -J J 66325.- - - 25' I 0 0 AVE" r-----r' WEST VALLEY ADDITION I No. 2 1 ?[ FINAL PLAT SE CAA✓ NE I/44 NWJ/4 SE I/4 6p8' FOUND SPIKE 20' 20' VISTA A GARDENS N0 4 SET I/2"X30" REINF. ROD SET 3/4" IRON PIPE FOUND MONUMENT AS SHOWN SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY WATER MAINS (SIZES AS SHOWN' SUBURBAN SPOKANE WATER G0. A SUBDIVISION IN THE NE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SEC. 7, T.25 N.,R.44 E.,W.M. SCALE I' 50' JULY 1955 SPOKANE COUNTY ,WASHINGTON CLARENCE E. SIMPSON PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER DEDICATION KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Seipp, husband and wife, have caused the land shown hereon as Short Plat follows: F. V. Seipp and Sylria L. to be platted into Tracts 483-247 and described as Lot 1 of SYLVIA COURT ADDITION, as per plat thereof recorded in Volume 14 of Plats, page 38; Situate in the County of Spokane, State of Washington. No more than one dwelling structure shall be placed on any one lot, nor shall any lot be further subdivided for the purposes of creating additional lots or building sites without filing a replat. Individual driveway access permits are required prior to issuance of a building permit for driveway approaches to the County road system. Subject to specific application approval and issuance of permits by the Health Officer, each lot is authorized the use of an individual onsite sewage system. The public water system as approved by County and State health authorities and the local fire district and purveyor will be installed within this plat, and the subdivider will provide for individual domestic water service as well as fire protection to each lot prior to sale of each lot. Use of private wells and water systems is: prohibited. The duplex structure for Tract A shall not be locoted closer than 58.70 feet from the front lot line. Poona' %: Reber N L CURVE A" LI - 27°00'00" R - 208,26 T = 50. 00 L = 98.14 8 Fermi % "Reber 4 u • 6▪ o • j'� woe -.tea • sro4, 11. aC N• P• ,3 ,54 37 94 1/ 1 0 O 07, R R. 0 O SAY 6100Of Found Yz"deter i tu/ cep I' 74,4 9 F,_5,d rfxa.- /5.0/ 75.00 i O O 0 O 0 25 30 p 91 62 Z0. ,� .SB9'S4'DO'!N /6w✓YiReLir/ a,61'33•ZZ /a./B eR'/233.iV _N 75.000 'e't� COURT h S . 3°54 e2o W' t P:vs �LD.. N JfiRR-/• rS F1 fi 1 spikeMP / L is 2 0 L Fn nA RR Spine 25 The Owner(s) or Successor(s) in interest agree to authorize the County to place their name(s) on a petition for the formation of a ULID by petition method pursuant to RCW 36.94 which the petition includes the Owner(s) property and further not to object by the signing of a protest petition against the formation of a ULID by resolution method pursuant to RCW Chapter 36.94 which includes the Owner(s) property. PROVIDED, this condition shall not prohibit the Owner(s) or Successor(s) from objection to any assessment(s) on the property as a result of improvements called for in conjunction with the formation of a ULID by either petition or resolution method under RCW Chapter 36.94. Each new dwelling unit shall be double plumbed for connection to future area -wide collection systems. IN WITNESS WHERE OF our seal this we have hereunto set our hand and affixed day of JAtC��12 �4 y 1984. N SCALE I" = 50' Found R/.r"Pipes F. V. S i p Via L. Seipp LEGEND Scale 1" = 50' o = Set 1/2" Rebar Plastic Cap #706 • = Found, as noted, The bearing of 5 00°06'00" E for Bessie Road as per Sylvia Court Addition was used as the basis of bearing for this plat. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE This map correctly represents a survey mad my direction in conformance with the SuPlz. at the request of F. V. Seipp. under Act Charles E, Si'psg0z t:� ACKNOWLEDGEME'sft.. STATE OF WASHINGTON)SS COUNTY OF SPOKANE) On this 9 day of January 1984, before me -- personally appeared F. V. Seipp arfd F'-•'- ', Cii.u. husband and •44e; as the individuals who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged the same to be their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purpose herein mentioned. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. My commission expires 8/ /8 5 , C f. Notary Public in rand for the State of Washington,residing at Spokan c , Washington COUNTY ,q DITOR fILEn• ° 3 e.2-/9 3 8 S POP: AN LOINrY. WASH. lrraty f COUNTY ENGINEER EXAMINED ANn APPROVED THIS aIDAY OF M4/2.c, f 19 8_4 9,6 SPOK 4 CO NTY E G/NEER COUNTY HEALTH OFFICEREXAMINED ANO APPROVED THI laDAY OF [•\RAnti- , 19 P± POKANE OUNT HEALTH OFFICER COUNTY TREASURER 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE REQUIRED TAXES ON THE HEREON PLATTED L •• HAV BE FULLY PAID THISO SAY 0 • SP K E COUNT R 1E' TY COUNTY PLANNING EXAMINED AND APPROVED THIS Z3 DAY pF /UG , SHORT PLAT ADMINISTRATOR COUNTY ASSESSOR EXAMINED AND APPROVED THIS 23_ DAY OF MARCH 1964 POK NE COUNT Y AS SS'OR DEPUTY --COUNTY UTILITIES DI RECTOREXAMINED AND APPROVEL THIS 11IPA DAY OF lr,.sl _ , I9& SPOKANE COUNTY UTI ITIES DIRECTOR CLARENCE E. SIMPSON ENGINEERS N. 909 ARGONNE ROAD SPOKANE, WASHINGTON SPOKANE COUNTY SHORT PLAT 83 — 247 SEC. 7 ,T.25 N,R.44 E.W.M. 3/5/ Johanna Herzog From: Byus, Dave <Dave.Byus@avistacorp.com> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 12:32 PM To: Johanna Herzog Subject: RE: [External] 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Johanna, I don't think we have any issues with the proposed street vacation but I am waiting for a reply back from our Transmission Engineering department. I sent them another email a couple of minutes ago so hopefully I can get back to you shortly. Thanks Dave From: Johanna Herzog [mailto:jherzog@whipplece.com] Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 3:48 PM To: Byus, Dave <Dave.Byus@avistacorp.com> Cc: Susan Moss <smoss@whipplece.com> Subject: [External] 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Hello Dave, I am reaching out in regards to a Street Vacation on N Bessie Road and E Montgomery Avenue. If you could please send comments or easement documents regarding this Street Vacation, that would be greatly appreciated. The Street Vacation will run along the full 25' ROW of N Bessie Rd. and the full ROW along E Montgomery Ave as shown in the attached drawings. Attached are pdfs of the vicinity map and Street Vacation exhibit for your use, Let me know if you need our preliminary application if it was helpful last time. The project plan in conjunction with this street vacation is to subdivide parcel 45074.0223 into three lots. We are currently not far along and will coordinate with you further as the time comes and we prepare further plans and applications. Can you provide preliminary comments, easement concerns within 100' and/or concerns regarding this vacation? This correspondence will be submitted to the City of Spokane Valley with our street vacation packet. Please contact me or Susan Moss if you have any questions. Thank you for your help. Hanna Herzog Civil Engineering intern Wh,0),Y. Enginr_D;r.. rr;c Phone: 509.893.2617 Fax: 509.926.0227 1 (WC E Whipple Consulting Engineers WCE peovldes t. av7d Deveacgarr rnr Serv+ces in The foRovio rg areas. Land 54/rverly, $aructural.aw Tp..erc Eng.r Tang. Lana Fat arMrMJ ana 1Niase. a rlrtfhlccfurc Jl SOMM pine-% Road • Books" Valley, WA 99104 WP+pp#CF c!VT/ USE CAUTION - EXTERNAL SENDER Do not click on links or open attachments that are not familiar. For questions or concerns, please e-mail phishing@avistacorp.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addresseets) and may contain confidential andior privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or an agent of the intended recipient. or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments 2 Johanna Herzog From: Byus, Dave <Dave.Byus@avistacorp.com> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 8:22 AM To: Johanna Herzog Subject: RE: [External] 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Hi Johanna, Transmission Engineering got back to me this morning regarding our transmission line currently in RR ROW north of the proposed road vacation. Avista currently does not have any utilities (gas or electric) installed within the proposed street vacation and as a result we have no comments or issues with the proposal. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks Dave Byus Real Estate Representative # I/ISTA. PO Box 3727 MSC-25 Spokane, WA 99220 1411 E Mission Ave. MSC-25 Spokane, WA 99202 P 509.495.2'013 C 509,993 7852 http `r'www a vistautilities.corn •ia CalloWegrei T,, email (including any attachments) may contain cdnfidentiat and privileged r ,� -- n� .,n �ne u- a ,,r ,r «, 7 c+au�. _�:;� r „nnir� i� � ,�, _, n. 31; r,ir'udF;7 rectorent, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system Thank ¥cu From: Byus, Dave Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 12:32 PM To: Johanna Herzog <jherzog@whipplece.com> Subject: RE: [External] 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Johanna, I don't think we have any issues with the proposed street vacation but I am waiting for a reply back from our Transmission Engineering department. I sent them another email a couple of minutes ago so hopefully I can get back to you shortly. Thanks Dave 1 From: Johanna Herzog [mailto:Iherzog@whippiece..com] Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 3:48 PM To: Byus, Dave <iaveByus@avistacorp.com> Cc: Susan Moss <smoss(twhipplece.com> Subject: [External] 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Hello Dave, f am reaching out in regards to a Street Vacation on N Bessie Road and E Montgomery Avenue. If you could please send comments or easement documents regarding this Street Vacation, that would be greatly appreciated. The Street Vacation will run along the full 25' ROW of N Bessie Rd. and the full ROW along E Montgomery Ave as shown in the attached drawings. Attached are pdfs of the vicinity map and Street Vacation exhibit for your use. Let me know if you need our preliminary application if it was helpful last time. The project plan in conjunction with this street vacation is to subdivide parcel 45074.0223 into three lots. We are currently not far along and will coordinate with you further as the time comes and we prepare further plans and applications. Can you provide preliminary comments, easement concerns within 100' and/or concerns regarding this vacation? This correspondence will be submitted to the City of Spokane Valley with our street vacation packet. Please contact me or Susan Moss if you have any questions. Thank you for your help. Hanna Herzog Civil Engineering Intern Whipple Consulting Engineers Ins. Phone: 509.893.2617 p Fax: 509.926.0227 iWC E Whipple Consulting Engineo r:'. WCE prowees Land Development seiveeS An The 1090ve IR) areas LandSidverng, 044i. Sv.ucturaf and Tr,vtrc Engs *erant, Lana Ptintufl9 and [Aritt$cdpe ArchrteCture. 71 South F ne, USE CAUTION - EXTERNAL SENDER Do not click on links or open attachments that are not familiar. For questions or concerns, please e-mail phishing@avistacorp.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged inforrnation and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or an agent of the intended recipient. or if [his message has been addressed to you in error. please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments 2 Johanna Herzog From: Depner, Colin <CDEPNER@spokanecounty.org> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 9:43 AM To: Johanna Herzog; Knudson, Chris Cc: Susan Moss Subject: RE: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation There is no public sewer within the proposed vacation area. Sewer connection requirements would not change for any of the involved properties, particularly for the following parcel numbers, which are required to connect upon development: • 45074.0222 • 45074.0221 • 45074.0220 • 45074.0219 Colin Depner Spokane County Environmental Services 1026 W. Broadway Ave. 4th Floor Spokane, WA 99260 509-477-7282 cdepner@spokanecounty.org Video Inspection Requests sewerTVrequest spokaneco!J Electronic Plan Submittal ESPIanReview )spokanecou:7ry From: Johanna Herzog [mailto:jherzog@whipplece.com] Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 4:14 PM To: Depner, Colin <CDEPNER@spokanecounty.org>; Knudson, Chris <CKnudson@spokanecounty.org> Cc: Susan Moss <smoss@whipplece.com> Subject: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Hello Colin and Chris, I am reaching out in regards to a Street Vacation on N Bessie Road and E Montgomery Avenue. If you could please send comments or easement documents regarding this Street Vacation, that would be greatly appreciated. The Street Vacation will run along the full 25' ROW of N Bessie Rd. and the full ROW along E Montgomery Ave as shown in the attached drawings. Attached are pdfs of the vicinity map and Street Vacation exhibit for your use. Can you provide comments, easement concerns within 100' and/or concerns regarding this vacation? This correspondence will be submitted to the City of Spokane Valley with our street vacation packet. Please contact me or Susan Moss if you have any questions. 1 Thank you for your help. Hanna Herzog Civil Engineering Intern VVhlpple Consulting Engineers, Inc. Phone: 509.893.2617 1 Fax: 509.926.0227 WCE Whipple Consulting Engineers WCE prova. ar a Dove/op/war se rvices 7n The lo.'ocrono ar?its. Liir d Swv y nti Cr., Srfuctut,itafilxl Tri#ac Etajnirefor79, Lana f Oton-o9 JITkJ L viand peAtthoteC ut'e. WhinVoeCf r,no% 2 Johanna Herzog From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Harvey, Traci <HarveyT@SpokaneValleyFire.com> Thursday, June 11, 2020 2:22 PM Johanna Herzog; Inspections Susan Moss RE: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation We would have no easement documents associated with a street vacation; our main concerns would be related to fire flow/hydrants and access for future development. All specific fire department requirements shall be conditioned on future commercial permits. SAVE A TREE VD .arral phAro st,hrliCtrw�s rJ p,l (7e r PI r• dr'd Thanks Traci Harvey Fire Protection Erwineer Spokane Valley Fire Department 2120 N. Wilbur Spokane Valley, WA 99206 51)9-892-4183 Work 509-892-4144 Fax From: Johanna Herzog [mailto:jherzog@whipplece.comj Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 3:35 PM To: Inspections <Inspections@SpokaneValleyFire.com>; Harvey, Traci <HarveyT@SpokaneValleyFire.com> Cc: Susan Moss <smoss@whipplece.com> Subject: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Hello Traci, I am reaching out in regards to a Street Vacation on N Bessie Road and E Montgomery Avenue. If you could please send comments or easement documents regarding this Street Vacation, that would be greatly appreciated. The Street Vacation will run along the full 25' ROW of N Bessie Rd. and the full ROW along E Montgomery Ave as shown in the attached drawings. Attached are pdfs of the vicinity map and Street Vacation exhibit for your use. Can you provide comments, easement concerns within 100' and/or concerns regarding this vacation? This correspondence will be submitted to the City of Spokane Valley with our street vacation packet. Please contact me or Susan Moss if you have any questions. Thank you for your help. Hanna Herzog Civil Engineering Intern ul.'hrr�r�le Consu unq rriquleers Inc. Phone: 509.893.2617 I Fax: 509.926.0227 IWC E Whipple ConsultIrtg Engineers 'LICE peewees Land Development serves 01 the !feat%.r1g afe S: Land SUn-y:rrt.1. Cn.:. Struck:: aJaria Traftr Engeerhoi7, Loma a Ptanr ngiw1t.whilsc:,neArcnatecture. ]t South R,nen Road Yar.m WA SYfl $ WhTfiJeCr ce.w CM 2 Johanna Herzog From: Fisher, Brent <Brent_Fisher@comcast.com> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 11:30 AM To: Johanna Herzog; Susan Moss Cc: Richardson, Bryan Subject: RE: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Attachments: Bessie & Montgomery (Comcast).pdf Hanna, Comcast should have no objection to this proposed street vacation as it will have little to no impact our existing services. Our facilities are all aerial at this location and we are built on what appear to be primarily Avista poles. I've attached a pdf showing the three existing poles that we have services on in the immediate vicinity of this project. Thank you, Brent Fisher Comcast Spokane Construction Specialist 2 509-755-4804 brent fisher@comcast.com From: Richardson, Bryan <Bryan_Richardson@cable comcast.com> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 7:24 AM To: Fisher, Brent <Brent Fisher@cable.comcast.com> Subject: FW: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation This should be in your area and I would not take away the joy of you doing it. From: Johanna Herzog <jherzog@whipplece.com> Sent: Friday, June 5, 20204:13 PM To: Richardson, Bryan <Bryan Richardson@cable.comcast.com> Cc: Susan Moss <smossfc@wnipol con» Subject: [EXTERNAL] 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Hello Bryan, I am reaching out in regards to a Street Vacation on N Bessie Road and E Montgomery Avenue. If you could please send comments or easement documents regarding this Street Vacation, that would be greatly appreciated. The Street Vacation will run along the full 25' ROW of N Bessie Rd. and the full ROW along E Montgomery Ave as shown in the attached drawings. Attached are pdfs of the vicinity map and Street Vacation exhibit for your use. Can you provide comments, easement concerns within 100' and/or concerns regarding this vacation? This correspondence will be submitted to the City of Spokane Valley with our street vacation packet. Please contact me or Susan Moss if you have any questions. Thank you for your help. Hanna Herzog Civil Engineering intern Whipple Con5ultiro Eccprieers, Phone: 509.893.2617 Fax: 509.926.0227 WC E Whipple consulting Enguteers WCEPITN'ilc's Lam./ Deveiopment serv.cef, in the follow r19 arcaS Land Survey:0y, Structural Ana trarliC EngaVeign9, Lana Mann") mid arktsCape ArOlfecturr, P,,,1 • .."-;1.06 Vd., 1, 7 4^i T1;174. Ilk 2 E MONTGOMER'Y AVE E MANSFIELD AVE E;4j21 z cn z8703 a Johanna Herzog From: Justin Van Dyke <jvandyke@scwd3.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 10:34 AM To: Johanna Herzog Subject: RE: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation - Checking in The only comments we have are Lots 2 through 6 will not be eligible for water service unless they have frontage along a water main. So by vacating the owner's ability to loop a waterline around the entire parcel may pose a concern for later water accessibility and development of those lots. Justin Van Dv-ke, ssistant tlauager Spokane Conn.ty- Water District #3 1225 N. YardleySt. Spokane Valley. WA 99212 Office: (509) 5 36-012 = Fax (509) 534-3?60 Fred: j van. dyke . scv.wd3.c.t From: Johanna Herzog [mailto:jherzog@whipplece.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 10:24 AM To: Justin Van Dyke <jvandyke@scwd3.org> Cc: Susan Moss <smoss@whipplece.com> Subject: 2659 Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation - Checking in Hi Justin, I am checking in about a request for comments I sent out last week regarding a Street Vacation application for Bessie Rd and Montgomery Ave. If you could please send comments or easement documents that Water District 3 might have regarding this Street Vacation, that would be greatly appreciated. The Street Vacation will run along the full 25' ROW of N Bessie Rd. and the full ROW along E Montgomery Ave as shown in the attached drawings. Attached are pdfs of the vicinity map and Street Vacation exh[bit for your use. Can you provide comments, easement concerns within 100' and/or concerns regarding this vacation? This correspondence will be submitted to the City of Spokane Valley with our street vacation packet. Please contact me or Susan Moss if you have any questions. Thanks for your help, Hanna Herzog Civil Engineering intern Phone: 509.893.2617 Fax: 509.926.0227 Johanna Herzog From: Sent: To: Subject: Welch, Mark <Mark.Welch@CenturyLink.com> Friday, June 19, 2020 10:34 AM Johanna Herzog Mansfield Mark Welch Engineer II 904 N. Columbus St., Spokane, WA, 99202 tel: 509.835.4604 cell: 509.703.2705 mark.welch(d)centurylink.com p 4 Mc CenturyLink• PROJECT 5 ITE Hoit,Cfrpet J MANSFIE D AVENUE LU uJ I . z CO 1 13.t.ks' E MONTGOMERY AVENUE PROJ #: 20-2659 DATE: 6/2/20 DRAWN: SOP REVIEWED: TRW SCALE: NTS STREET VACATION VICINITY MAP B507 E MANSFIELD AVENUE SPOKANE VALLEY, WA E X- 1 AWC E WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS PH: 509-893-2617 Vacation of Bessie Road That portion of Bessie Road lying between the South right of way of Montgomery Avenue, and the North right of way of Mansfield Avenue. Vacation of Montgomery Avenue That portion of Montgomery avenue lying between the Westerly right of way of Bessie road and the East line of Lot 3, Block 1 of Vista Gardens No 4, as recorded in Book 4 of Plats, Page 28, Records of Spokane County, Washington. First American First American Title Insurance Company 40 E Spokane Falls Blvd Spokane, WA 99202 July 04, 2020 Johanna Herzog Whipple Consulting Engineers, LLC P.O. Box 1566 Veradale, WA 99037 Phone: (509)893-2617 Fax: (509)926-0227 Title Officer: Tiffany Ipock Phone: (509)835-8957 Fax No.: (866)537-9602 E-Mail: tipock@firstam.com Order Number: 3510272 Escrow Number: 3510272 Buyer: Owner: Property: 8507 E Mansfield Ave Spokane, Washington 99212 Attached please find the following item(s): Guarantee Thank You for your confidence and support. We at First American Title Insurance Company maintain the fundamental principle: Customer First! Project #` RECEIVED AUG - 7 2020 COSV PERM T CENTER SUB # REV. #id Form 5003353 (7-1-14) Page 1 of 9 'Guarantee Number: 3510272 CLTA #14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) Waahinntr n First American Guarantee Subdivision Guarantee ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company GUARANTEE NUMBER 5003353-3510272 SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE LIMITS OF LIABILITY AND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS OF THIS GUARANTEE, FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a Nebraska corporation, herein called the Company GUARANTEES Whipple Consulting Engineers, LLC the Assured named in Schedule A against actual monetary loss or damage not exceeding the liability stated in Schedule A, which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. First American Title insurance Company 4.7,1 ,;42-4,1,d,,4 f)ennic. J rytm etrl Purs.ltlerit Greg L Smiih S•ectc•tary This jacket was created electronically and constitutes an original document Forrn 5003353 (7-1-14) 1Page 2 of 9 'Guarantee Number; 3510272 CLTA #14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-7q Wachinntnn: First American Schedule A Subdivision Guarantee ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company GUARANTEE NUMBER 3510272 Order No.: 3510272. Liability: $2000.00 Name of Assured: Whipple Consulting Engineers, LLC Date of Guarantee: June 25, 2020 The assurances referred to on the face page hereof are: 1. Title is vested in: Fee: $350.00 Tax: $31.15 DIAMOND ROCK FINANCIAL, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS TO A 90% INTEREST, AND TCF PROPERTIES, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AS TO A 10% INTEREST 2. That, according to the public records relative to the land described in Schedule C attached hereto (including those records maintained and indexed by name), there are no other documents affecting title to said land or any portion thereof, other than those shown under Record Matters in Schedule B. 3. The following matters are excluded from the coverage of this Guarantee A. Unpatented Mining Claims, reservations or exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof. B. Water rights, claims or title to water. C. Tax Deeds to the State of Washington. D. Documents pertaining to mineral estates. 4. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown herein. 5. This Guarantee is restricted to the use of the Assured for the purpose of providing title evidence as may be required when subdividing land pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 58.17, R.C.W., and the local regulations and ordinances adopted pursuant to said statute. It is not to be used as a basis for closing any transaction affecting title to said property. 6. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment, guarantee or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it. Form 5003353 (7-1-14) Page 6 of 9 Guarantee Number: 3510272 CLTA #14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75)1 Wachinntnnl First American Schedule B Subdivision Guarantee i,sLF_ Er First American Title Insurance Company GUARANTEE NUMBER 3510272 RECORD MATTERS 1. General Taxes for the year 2020. The first half becomes delinquent after April 30th. The second half becomes delinquent after October 31st. Tax Account No.: Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Amount Due: Assessed Land Value: Assessed Improvement Value: Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Amount Due: Assessed Land Value: Assessed Improvement Value: 45074,0223 1st Half $ 1,727.66 $ 1,727.66 $ 0.00 $ 37,800.00 $ 202,700.00 2nd Half $ 1,727.67 $ 0.00 $ 1,727.67 $ 37,800.00 $ 202,700.00 2. Municipal assessments, if any, levied by the City of Spokane. 3. Said premises lie within the boundaries of Spokane Water District No. 3 and are subject to future assessments by said district. 4. Deed of Trust and the terms Grantor/Trustor: Grantee/Beneficiary: Trustee: Amount: Dated: Recorded: Recording Information: and conditions thereof. Steve Mcmullen as Trustee of The 8507 Mansfield Trust Diamond Rock Financial, LLC, A Washington Limited Liability Company, to A 90% Interest, and Tcf Properties, LLC, A Washington Limited Liability Company, as to A 10% Interest Ford & Dalton, Ps $225,000.00 December 03, 2018 December 06, 2018 6766695 A notice of trustee's sale recorded March 16, 2020 as 6901852 of Official Records. 5. Any and all offers of dedication, conditions, restrictions, easements, boundary discrepancies or encroachments, notes and/or provisions shown or disclosed by Short Plat or Plat Amended Final Plat Vista Gardens No. 4 recorded in Volume 4 of Plats, Page(s) 37. Form 5003353 (7-1-14) Page 7 or 9 Guarantee Number: 3510272 Calk #14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) Washinnton 6. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: 8829976 In Favor of: The Washington Water Power Company, a Washington corporation For: Electric transmission and/or distribution system 7. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: 6264,107 In Favor of: Sprint Communications Company L.P., and Level 3 Communications, LLC For: Telecommunications easement Informational Notes, if any Form 5003353 (7-1-14) Page 8 of 9 Guarantee Number: 3510272 CLTA 414 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) WAchinntnn First American Schedule C Subdivision Guarantee ISSUED EY First American Title Insurance Company C IAF-!,V, .L7 P410IRFh 3510272 The land in the County of Spokane, State of Washington, described as follows: LOT 7, BLOCK I, AMENDED FINAL PLAT OF VISTA GARDENS NO. 4, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 4 OF PLATS, PAGE 37, CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, IN SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON. Form 5003353 (7-1-14) Page 9 of 9 Guarantee Number: 3510272 CLTA #14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) Washinatnn EXHIBIT 3 Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 10 of 11 October 15, 2020 Spakan e' 4000 Val ley Community & Public Works Building & Planning Division NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING THE SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY & PUBLIC WORKS IS SENDING THIS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 400 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT RECORDS FROM THE SPOKANE COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OR TREASURER'S OFFICE. Due to the restrictions on public gatherings arising from the COVID-19 outbreak, this hearing will be conducted remotely using web and telephone conference tools, as described below. Hearing Date: Thursday, October 22, 2020 beginning at 6:00 p.m. Meeting Details: Join Zoom meeting by computer, smartphone, or tablet at: A link to the Zoom meeting will be provided on the agenda and posted to the City's webpage: www.spokanevalley.org/planningcommission. Application/Description of Proposal: Request by Diamond Rock Financial LLC/TCF Properties, to vacate 470 feet of Montgomery Avenue and 195 feet of Bessie Road. Applicant: Whipple Consulting Engineers, 21 S Pines Road, Spokane Valley WA 99206 Owner: Diamond Rock Financial LLC/TCR Properties, 320 S Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley WA 99037 Location of Proposal: The portion of right-of-way proposed to be vacated is located between Vista Road (west), Sargent Road (east) and Mansfield Avenue (south). The undeveloped right-of-way is adjacent to nine parcels (45074.2309, 45074.9084, 45074.0223, 45074.0222, 45074.0221, 45074.0220, 45074.0219, 45077.0002 and 45071.9089) located in the NW quarter of the SE quarter of Section 7, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane Valley, Washington. Approval Criteria: Section 22.140 (Street Vacations) of the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC); Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code; the City of Spokane Valley Street Standards; the Regional Stormwater Manual; and the Spokane Regional Health District regulations. Hearing Process and Appeals: The Planning Commission will conduct the remote hearing pursuant to the rules of procedure adopted in SVMC Title 18 (Boards and Authorities). The public is encouraged to submit written comments prior to the hearing by sending the comments to Connor Lange, 10210 E Sprague Ave, Spokane Valley, WA 99206, or email to clange@spokanevalley.org. Comments will need to be submitted no later than 4:00 PM on October 22, 2020 in order for them to be received and prepared for submission into the record. Comments received will be entered into the record at the time of the public participation portion of the Public Hearing. If you would like to deliver comments to City Hall you may contact City Hall at (509) 720-5000 prior to 4:00 PM on October 22, 2020 to schedule an appointment for delivery and allow staff to scan and include in the report. Comments received through US Mail will be included if they are received prior to the hearing. All interested persons may testify at the remote public hearing via the zoom meeting address and/or phone number. Interested persons will need to sign up to speak no later than 4:00 p.m. on October 22, 2020 at the link provided in the agenda posted at the link referenced above. Use the link above to sign up for oral public comments. The link will direct you to directions to sign up for oral public comments. This is not an opportunity for questions or discussion. Remarks will be limited to three minutes per person. Written comments and documents may only be submitted prior to the hearing. Any appeal of the Planning Commission's decision will be based on the record established before the Planning Commission, pursuant to SVMC 17.90 (Appeals). The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation on the request to the Spokane Valley City Council. Environmental Determination: The Planning Division has reviewed the proposal/project and has determined that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 and City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC); Title 21 (Environmental Controls) from environmental review under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Staff Report and Inspection of File: A staff report will be available for inspection seven (7) calendar days before the hearing. The staff report and application file may be inspected by logging on to the Spokane Valley SmartGov Public Portal at this web address: ci-spokanevalley-wa.smartgovcommunity.com/Public/Home Go to applications and search for STV-2020-0002 to review or download the staff report. If you have any questions, please contact Connor Lange, Planner, Building & Planning Division, at clangegspokanevalley.org. 10210 East Sprague • Spokane Valley, WA • 99206 • (509) 720-5240 • Fax (509) 720-5375 EXHIBIT 4 Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2020-0002 Page 11 of 11 October 15, 2020 From: Bvus, Dave To: Connor Lanae Subject: RE: [External] STV-2020-0002 Agency Routing Date: Thursday, October 1, 2020 9:40:30 AM Attachments: imaae002.aif image003.gif imaae004.ioq Connor, I reviewed this back in June with Whipple. I don't have any issues or comments to add for this proposed street vacation. Thanks Dave Byus Real Estate Representative El PO Box 3727 MSC-25 Spokane, WA 99220 1411 E Mission Ave. MSC-25 Spokane, WA 99202 P 509.495.2013 C 509.993.7852 http://www.avistautilities.com This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system. Thank you. From: Connor Lange [mailto:clange@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 4:39 PM To: Chad Riggs <criggs@spokanevalley.org>; Traci Harvey <harveyt@spokanevalleyfire.com>; Chris Johnston <crjohnston@spokanesheriff.org>; CDEPNER@spokanecounty.org; CKnudson@spokanecounty.org; Bruner, Jennifer S. <JBRUNER@SpokaneCounty.org>; Megan Bickley <MBickley@SpokaneCounty.org>; Grepp@spokanecounty.org; Spokane Regional Health District <psavage@srhd.org>; Spokane County Water District #3 <scwd3@comcast.net>; figgg@wsdot.wa.gov; Spokane Transit Authority <kotterstrom@spokanetransit.com>; Hanson, Sydney (DAHP) <Sydney.Hanson@dahp.wa.gov>; Byus, Dave <Dave.Byus@avistacorp.com>; Karen. Stoddard (karen.stoddard@centurylink.com) <karen.stoddard@centurylink.com>; Comcast <bryan_richardson@cable.comcast.com>; Chad.M.Polak@p66.com Subject: [External] STV-2020-0002 Agency Routing Hello all, Attached is the formal Agency Routing for the street vacation of a portion of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue, comments are due back by October 12, 2020. Please let me know if you have any questions. Connor Lange I Planner 10210 E. Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 720-5332 I clange@spokanevalley.org Io This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act, chapter 42.56 RCW. USE CAUTION - EXTERNAL SENDER Do not click on links or open attachments that are not familiar. For questions or concerns, please e-mail phishingPavistacorp.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or an agent of the intended recipient, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments. CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. From: Semenick, Stephen To: Connor Lanae Cc: Hellman, Johan Subject: RE: Street Vacation Date: Thursday, October 15, 2020 1:38:40 PM Connor, The vacation should not have any impact on existing BNSF operations. Only concern I'd have is long term planning for the vacated property. If additional residences are established I'd want to be sure that drainage was not diverted to BNSF ROW and trespasser mitigation was evaluated. Thanks, Stephen Semenick, PE Manager Public Projects — WA, OR, & B.C. BNSF Railway Company 2454 Occidental Ave S, Suite 1A Seattle, WA 98134 Office: 206.625.6152 Cell: 817.422.2486 From: Connor Lange <clange@spokanevalley.org> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 10:40 AM To: Semenick, Stephen <Stephen.Semenick@BNSF.com> Cc: Hellman, Johan <Johan.Hellman@BNSF.com> Subject: RE: Street Vacation *** This email includes an ATTACHMENT from outside of BNSF and could contain malicious links. Ensure email is from a trusted sender before opening the attachment. Never enter your login credentials if prompted. Click the Email Alert button on the Outlook toolbar to send SPAM email to Security. EXTERNAL EMAIL Attached are the application materials for review by BNSF. From: Hellman, Johan <Johan.Hellman@BNSF.com> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 10:36 AM To: Connor Lange <clange(isookanevallev.org>; Semenick, Stephen <Stephen.Semenick(iBNSF.com> Subject: Re: Street Vacation Hey Connor. Apologies, looping in Steve on this one. Thanks, Johan On Oct 15, 2020, at 9:57 AM, Connor Lange <clange( sookanevallev.org> wrote: EXTERNAL EMAIL Hello Johan, I appreciate the response but I didn't see Mr. Semenick cc'd on the email and haven't heard anything from him. Do you have any updates? Thank you From: Hellman, Johan <Johan.Hellman(@BNSF.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 11:12 AM To: Connor Lange <clange( sookanevallev.org> Subject: Street Vacation Thank you, Connor. I am looping in my colleague Steve Semenick from BNSF's Public Projects team. Be well, Johan Johan Hellman Executive Director of Public Affairs I BNSF Railway To: Johan Hellman From: Connor Lange Email: clange( sookanevallev.org Message: Hello Johan, I am reaching out to you from the City of Spokane Valley because there is a proposed street vacation application immediately adjacent to the BNSF railroad and wanted to ensure there are no concerns from the railroad regarding the project. If you could send me an email I could provide you with the application materials. We physically mailed them to the main office in Fort Worth but I figured I would try to reach someone directly who deals with the pacific northwest. The location is Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue, just north of Mansfield Avenue. Thank you Connor Lange, Planner, City of Spokane Valley CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. From: Polak, Chad M To: Connor Lanae Subject: RE: STV-2020-0002 Agency Routing Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 10:02:16 AM Attachments: imaae001.ioq Hi Connor, Was looking at this one as well, with the vacation of the ROW does not appear to have any issue with the YPL pipeline as we are in the BNSF ROW at this location just to the north of the city ROW that is to be vacated. Let me know if there are any questions. Sincerely, Chad M. Polak Agent, Real Estate Services 0: (+1) 303.376.4363 1 M: (+1) 720.245.4683 3960 East 56th Avenue l Commerce City, CO 80022 Phillips 66 From: Connor Lange <clange@spokanevalley.org> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 5:39 PM To: Chad Riggs <criggs@spokanevalley.org>; Traci Harvey <harveyt@spokanevalleyfire.com>; Chris Johnston <crjohnston@spokanesheriff.org>; CDEPNER@spokanecounty.org; CKnudson@spokanecounty.org; Bruner, Jennifer S. <JBRUNER@SpokaneCounty.org>; Megan Bickley <MBickley@SpokaneCounty.org>; Grepp@spokanecounty.org; Spokane Regional Health District <psavage@srhd.org>; Spokane County Water District #3 <scwd3@comcast.net>; figgg@wsdot.wa.gov; Spokane Transit Authority <kotterstrom@spokanetransit.com>; Hanson, Sydney (DAHP) <Sydney.Hanson@dahp.wa.gov>; dave.byus@avistacorp.com; Karen. Stoddard (karen.stoddard@centurylink.com) <karen.stoddard@centurylink.com>; Comcast <bryan_richardson@cable.comcast.com>; Polak, Chad M <Chad.M.Polak@p66.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL]STV-2020-0002 Agency Routing Hello all, Attached is the formal Agency Routing for the street vacation of a portion of Bessie Road and Montgomery Avenue, comments are due back by October 12, 2020. Please let me know if you have any questions. Connor Lange I Planner 10210 E. Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 720-5332 I clange@spokanevalley.org This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act, chapter 42.56 RCW. CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. From: Justin Van Dyke To: Connor Lanae Subject: RE: STV-2020-0002_Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Date: Thursday, October 15, 2020 9:49:07 AM Attachments: imaae002.Dnq imaae003.ioq Yes that works great for us. Thanks for the update and the condition of approval on your part. Outlook Signature_NEW From: Connor Lange [mailto:clange@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 3:26 PM To: Justin Van Dyke <jvandyke@scwd3.org> Subject: STV-2020-0002_Bessie and Montgomery Street Vacation Hello Justin, I am reaching out to you for clarification regarding some comments you made on June 16th, 2020 during the initial proposal to Whipple Consulting Engineers regarding the street vacation. You indicated that the street vacation may hinder development of Lots 3-6 because they will no longer have access to the main in the street. However, as a condition of approval the City is going to require Lots 3-6 (all owned by Montgomery Apartments LLC) be consolidated and the access and water would be brought through the existing right-of-way east of the proposed vacation (see attached). Would this consolidation alleviate those concerns you posed in your original comments? Thanks! Connor Lange I Planner 10210 E. Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 720-5332 I clange@spokanevalley.org Io This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act, chapter 42.56 RCW. CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders. FIRE DEPT October 12, 2020 Connor Lange City of Spokane Valley 10210 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 BRYAN COLLINS, FIRE CHIEF 2120 N. Wilbur Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 928-1700 Main (509) 892-4125 Fax spokanevalleyfire.com RE: STV-2020-0002 Technical Review Street Vacation of Montgomery Avenue and Bessie Road between Vista Road/Sargent Road/Mansfield Avenue The Spokane Valley Fire Department has completed a review for the above referenced project and takes no exception to the "Street Vacation" as proposed. All specific fire department requirements shall be conditioned on future associated platting action or commercial permits. If there are any questions please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, • FYI) i Traci Harvey Fire Protection Engineer Spokane Valley Fire Department 0,1\a, Spokane .0•00Valley Community & Public Works Department 10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509) 720-5000 • Fax: (509) 720-5075 • www.spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Connor Lange, Planner From: Chad Riggs, Senior Engineer Date: October 1, 2020 Re: STV-2020-0002: Montgomery Ave and Bessie Rd Street Vacation Recommended Conditions of Approval Development Engineering requires the following items to be addressed prior to street vacation finalization: General 1) The existing curb return at the northeast corner of Bessie Road and Mansfield Avenue shall be removed and Type 'A' curb shall be installed along Mansfield Avenue across the vacated portion of Bessie Road per Standard Plan R-102. 2) The existing drywell at the northeast corner of Bessie Road and Mansfield Avenue shall be removed and replaced with a new Type 'A' drywell approximately 7' to the south at the new curb line along Mansfield Avenue per Std. Plan S-102. A Type 1 (bypass) metal grate shall be installed with the drywell per Std. Plan S-121. 3) Construction within the public right-of-way shall be performed under the direct supervision of a licensed Washington State Professional Engineer and in accordance to the Spokane Valley Street Standards. All work is subject to inspection by the City of Spokane Valley Development Engineering Construction Inspector. 4) Upon completion of the improvements, a Construction Certification package per SVSS Chapter 9 shall be submitted and approved prior to recording of the Street Vacation Ordinance. 5) A Warrant Surety shall be provided for the public improvements per SVSS Chapter 9. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2021 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Potential Grant Opportunity — Federal Highway Bridge Program GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is anticipating approximately $85 million of Federal Local Bridge program funds for local agency bridge projects. The purpose of this program is to improve the condition of bridges through replacement, rehabilitation, and preventative maintenance. Applications are due February 19, 2021. A prioritized, recommended list of projects will be submitted to the WSDOT Local Programs Director by August 2021, who will make final decisions on project awards. Announcements are expected by September 2021. Awarded funds can be available as early as 2022. Based on the program requirements, Spokane Valley has one eligible project for preventative maintenance funding: the Mission Avenue Bridge over Evergreen Road (Bridge #SpokV-4518). The proposed project would sandblast the existing bridge deck's top wearing surface to roughen it up and remove grime and grease, then apply a primer and polymer surface seal application immediately followed by an aggregate application to provide traction and an added strength to the sealed surface. The anticipated project duration is two to three weeks. The preliminary project scope is estimated not to exceed $275,000. A 13.5% local match is required from the City. However, if funds are authorized before November 30, 2024, the local match for the construction phase is waived. The proposed project is similar to the City's 2019 application to this same WSDOT funding program, which was awarded $337,625. The application was for the northbound Sullivan Road Bridge over the Union Pacific Railroad tracks located north of the Spokane River (Bridge #SpokV-4510). This previously awarded project will go to construction in Spring 2021. OPTIONS: Discussion. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff requests Council consensus to proceed with the proposed project. A final cost estimate and recommended match amount will be brought to Council for a motion consideration at the January 26, 2021 City Council meeting. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The City's total potential local match responsibility is estimated not to exceed $37,125 ($7,425 for PE + $0 for ROW + $29,700 for CN). It is anticipated that the project will authorize construction funds prior to November 30, 2024, thus waiving the $29,700 CN local match. STAFF CONTACT: Adam Jackson, Planning & Grants Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Project Vicinity Map Proposed Project Vicinity Map '44110,4k Proposed Project: Mission Ave. Bridge #4518 over Evergreen Application/Award in 2021 Proposed Construction in 2023 Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action January 12, 2021 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Potential Grant Opportunity — National Highway System Asset Management Program GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is anticipating $50 to $75 million of National Highway Performance Program federal funds for preserving roadways that are part of the National Highway System (NHS). For Spokane Valley, eligible street segments consist only of Principal Arterial streets. The program will evaluate an agency's use of pavement management strategies and an agency's level of investment to preserve and maintain their roadway system, thereby focusing on cost-effectiveness, emphasizing pavement rehabilitation over reconstruction. Application scoring is based on a 100 point score: - 0, 7, or 15 Points Pavement Condition Index (PCI) 0, 7, or 15 Points International Roughness Index (IRI) 0 — 35 Points Cost Effectiveness 0 — 35 Points Level of Maintenance Effort (by the applicant) Applications are due February 8, 2021 and final award selections will be announced in Summer 2021. Construction must be authorized by August 31, 2023. After comparing the program requirements against the City's Principal Arterial streets and their applicable PCI and IRI scores, there are two projects that maximize points in the PCI and IRI categories, elevating them above other potential segments. Staff is evaluating the competitiveness of the two projects and will provide a final recommendation at the January 26, 2021 City Council meeting (applicants can submit up to 3 applications). One project is the preservation of Broadway Ave. between Yardley Rd. to Fancher Rd., with an estimated total cost of $1,00,000. The second project is Sullivan Rd. between Sprague Ave. and 8th Ave. with an estimated total cost of $2,500,000. However, the $2,500,000 total for the Sullivan project includes elements that are not eligible for the NHS funds (i.e. stormwater and intelligent transportation system (ITS) improvements). It is estimated that the eligible preservation elements of the Sullivan Rd project will not exceed a total cost of $1,800,000. There is no minimum match requirement for NHS funds and the "local match" is not part of the scoring criteria. However, applicants providing a match will likely score better in the "Cost Effectiveness" scoring category because it reduces the requested amount of NHS funds. During the last call for projects in 2017, the NHS awarded project's had a median award of $1,377,661 and an average award of $1,876,753. OPTIONS: Discussion. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff requests Council consensus to proceed with the two projects and return on Jan. 26, 2021, with a recommendation to apply for the most competitive single project. Staff continues to refine the application estimates and a final cost estimate and recommended local match amount will be provided to Council on Jan. 26, 2021. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The NHS funds are available at 100% and do not require a minimum local match. For this program, the purpose of a local match would be to lower the requested NHS funding amount to make Spokane Valley projects as competitive as possible. Staff is considering the following NHS grant amounts and local match amounts: Project Name NHS -Eligible Total Cost NHS Grant Request (%) Local Match (%) Broadway Ave. (Yardley to Fancher) $1,000,000 $1,000,000 (100%) $0 (0%) Sullivan Rd. (Sprague to 8th) $1,800,000 (80%) $1,440,000 80% $360,000 (20%) STAFF CONTACT: Adam Jackson, Planning & Grants Engineer ATTACHMENTS: None To: From: Re: DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of January 6, 2021; 11:45 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative Council & Staff City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings Jan 19, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue Jan 121 ACTION ITEMS: 1. 1st Reading Ordinance 21-002: Montgomery & Bessie Street Vacation STV-2020-0002 NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. Retail Recruitment Update — Chaz Bates, Scott VonCannon of Retail Strategies 3. Pavement Management Ad -hoc Committee — Bill Helbig, Adam Jackson 3. CARES Act Update — Chelsie Taylor 4. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick — CLange (10mins) (15 minutes) (20 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 60 mins] Jan 26, 2021, Regular Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue Jan 19] 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. 2nd Reading Ordinance 21-002 Montgomery & Bessie Street Vacation STV-2020-0002— CLange (10 mins) 3. Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opportunity, Local Bridge Program — Adam Jackson (10 minutes) 4. Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opp, National Hwy System Asset Mgmt — A. Jackson (10 minutes) 5. SCLD Update — Patrick Roewe, Spokane County Library District (20 minutes) 6. Report on Bid Award, Barker Grade Separation Project — Bill Helbig (15 minutes) 7. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick (5 minutes) 8. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports 9. Info Only: Department Quarterly Reports [*estimated meeting: 75 mins] Feb 2, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. 1. Proposed Amendments to SCLD Interlocal Agreement — Cary Driskell 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick Feb 9, 2021, Regular Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick Feb 16, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick Feb 23, 2021, Regular Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick 3. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports [due Tue Jan 26] (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 15 mins] [due Tue Feb 2] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 10 mins] [due Tue Feb 9] (5 minutes) [due Tue Feb 16] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 10 mins] Draft Advance Agenda 1/7/2021 2:25:05 PM Page 1 of 2 *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Abandoned Vehicles / Parking in ROW Appleway Trail Amenities Arts Council Sculpture Presentations Artwork & Metal Boxes Core Beliefs Resolution Flashing Beacons/School Signage Health District Stats Mirabeau Park Forestry Mgmt. Park Lighting PFD Presentation SPEC Report/Update SRTC Interlocal Agreement St. Illumination (owners, cost, location) St. O&M Pavement Preservation Vehicle Wgt Infrastructure Impact Water Districts & Green Space Way Finding Signs Draft Advance Agenda 1/7/2021 2:25:05 PM Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2021 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ❑ admin. report Department Director Approval ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ® executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EXECUTIVE SESSION: Land Acquisition; Litigation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 42.30.110(1)(b) and RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I move that Council adjourn into executive session for approximately 30 minutes to discuss land acquisition and litigation and that no action will be taken upon return to open session." BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell ATTACHMENTS: