All right, good morning, everyone.

I am going to call this meeting to order.

This is the January 22nd 2026 meeting of the City of Spokane Valley Hearing Examiner.

My name is Andy Cotcamp, and I've been appointed by Spokane Valley to serve as a land use hearing examiner.

And one of my jobs is to render decisions on on plat applications as they're authorized to come before me.

I will consider any testimony and evidence presented at today's hearing, as well as all the written materials that are already on file in order to make my decision.

Now the hearing process has certain rules.

I'll still try to conduct the meeting in a relaxed and informal manner, but we still have a procedure we're going to use.

Take each item separately, and for each item, staff will present their report and make whatever recommendations that they wish to make.

Then the applicant or the applicant's representative is given an opportunity to present their testimony and evidence.

It is the applicant that has the burden approved to show compliance with all the applicable rules and regulations.

Then if somebody from the public came to testify, I'll give you that chance to do so.

And if there is any testimony in opposition to the project, I will give the applicant an opportunity to submit whatever rebuttal testimony they wish to make.

Because the applicant has the burden of proof, the applicant has the last opportunity to present testimony and evidence.

Now, if you are going to testify, I'll have you come up to the podium here to the left side of your left side of the hearing room.

I'll have you state your name and address, and if you're going to give testimony, I'll swear you in as a witness.

And since there are some members of the public here today, you should understand that I may or I may not ask questions for either of the proposals today.

I've read all of the materials several times.

I'm very familiar with the project as being proposed.

My job is not to ask questions to try to help one side or hurt one side.

Uh into the fact that I may not ask questions uh today.

I do have the option following this uh uh hearing to keep the record open for uh the admission of additional written testimony, but in any event, my written decision will be made within 10 working days after I close the public record.

Um I've reviewed the item items on today's agenda.

I don't have any interest in either of the properties or the proposals to be heard today.

I will be able to fairly and objectively consider each item outside of receiving and reviewing the staff report along with all the attachments to the staff report.

Um all those exhibits.

I've not had any communication regarding the item that's on today's agenda.

So, with those representations, if there is anybody here today who objects to my participation as the hearing examiner, uh if so, you need to come forward and state so at this time.

The one thing I forgot to note is that I will I told you I'd make my decision within the next 10 working days.

Uh my decision is final and conclusive unless it is appealed.

Appeals are by means of what's called a land use petition action.

Those have to be filed with Spokane County Superior Court within 21 days of the date of the issuance of my decision.

And if the appeal isn't timely filed, your appeal would be barred.

So I wanted to make sure everybody understood that as well.

We'll turn to the first item on today's agenda.

This is uh the subdivision application SUB 2025-0004.

This is an application to uh create 30 residential lots on 5.22 acres of property located uh here in Spokane Valley that is more specifically described in the staff report as well as in all the application materials.

For the record, I'll admit into the record exhibits one through 17 that are referenced in the staff report.

Exhibit 18 will be the staff report.

Exhibit 19 is a January 20, 2026 letter from the applicant to the hearing examiner, and exhibit 20 is an applicant PowerPoint, and we'll turn this matter over to staff for their presentation.

Morning, Mr.

Hearing Examiner.

Levi Basener, associate planner with the City of Spokane Valley here to present the staff report and recommendation to regarding the subdivision 2025-0004, known as the 24th Avenue subdivision.

The property is located here.

It comprises two parcels on the south side of 24th Avenue between Adams and Progress Road, located at the southern boundary for the city of Spokane Valley, the city limits being at the southern boundary for the proposed development.

The as I said before, the project comprises two parcels under separate ownership, totaling 5.22 acres.

The proposal will create 30 residential lots.

It will create one new, these lots will be served by one new public street with a cul-de-sac, and also two private streets coming off that new public street.

There are two existing houses on this property, which will remain and will be part of two of the uh two of the 30 lots proposed.

All existing uh all other outbuildings be removed from the site.

The uh along 24th Avenue, there will be new uh sidewalks and frontage improvements, including drainage, curb and gutter installed as part of the project, along with a new off-street path to uh Sunrise Elementary School proposed required as a mitigation measure, which I'll explain later in the presentation.

One thing to note is as part of the application, this subdivision application, the uh the applicant was also needed to apply for an administrative exception.

And the reason for this is it regards the two existing houses.

After dedication of public right-away for the new street, which will public street, which will serve the proposed development, the two existing houses would be out of compliance with our setback requirements, the city setback requirements.

This would be from the flanking street setback for lot one, which is on the right here, that existing house, and from the 20-foot garage setback for the existing house on lot two, which is on the left, sorry, lot 28.

The uh sorry, I lost my train of thought here.

Anyway, the uh because these uh these houses would not meet setback requirements after the dedication of public right-of-way, the applicant needed to needed to apply for an administrative exception, which is allowed for in cases where the applicant is voluntarily dedicating public right of way, they may ask for an administrative exception from setback standards.

In this case, the administrative exception was approved with conditions that that include the existing driveways serving these houses be moved from 24th Avenue to the new public street as shown on this site exhibit here, that a minimum of two paved off-street parking spaces be provided within the new driveway areas or within the site outside of the dedicated right-of-way.

In addition, the applicant will be installing a uh two-foot-tall concrete wall outside of the uh opposite the garage on lot 28.

This is to ensure that no parked cars will block the future sidewalk being put in on 20 on the new public street, being that these are adjacent sidewalks and there's limited space between the road and the property line.