Professional Documents
Culture Documents
opportunity to continue the F erris/Adams Trail to the west. We request a recommendation that fully supports the stop light and associated intersection improvements. 5. Ferris/Adams Trail and Gateway The stop light at Palouse and Regal is a good first step in connecting the eastern and western sides of the Center as is the excellent pedestrian/swale d esign a long Palouse Highway. We request that the DRB s eek additional d etails on the a lignment of the Ferris/Adams trail through the other projects p er the ISP. Questions to resolve include: How will the trail cross the KXLY site to link with 46th a venue to the west, considering the revised alignment of the trail a long Palouse Highway? How/where do users cross Palouse Highway to a ccess the site and existing trail to the north along the Ray Street alignment towards F erris High School?
Clarifying
the
eastern
connection
is
an
opportunity
to
harmonize
with
staff
suggestions
to
establish
a
gateway
element
on
the
east
s ide
of
the
Center.
We
request
that
the
DRB
suggest
that
this
gateway
element
b e
on
the
far
eastern
end
of
the
site.
6. Future
Urban
District
A
topic
discussed
at
the
DRB
Collaborative
Workshop
was
whether
this
s ite
p lan
supports
the
establishment
of
a
future
urban
d istrict
p er
s ection
5.6
of
the
Developers
Agreement
The
question
is,
Can
this
site
evolve
to
m eet
the
criteria
for
a
District
C enter
found
in
the
Spokane
Comprehensive
Plan
and
the
definition
of
CC1
Pedestrian
Emphasis/Auto
Accommodating
zone
in
the
Spokane
Municipal
Code?
Neighborhood
research
into
Targets
site
requirements
uncovered
a
document
that
contains
specific
instructions
for
d eveloping
a
Target
s tore.
It
includes
prototypical
building
and
site
p lans
and
outlines
Targets
expectations
and
requirements
for
developers.
It
outlines
restrictions
on
site
d evelopment,
restrictions
on
building
h eights
and
specifies
parking
d ensity
requirements
(Target
Developer
Guide
version
2.13,
pages
3.31
and
3.35,
s ee
footnotei
below).
These
requirements,
taken
in
toto,
may
impede
the
sites
evolution
into
an
urban
district.
This
is
because
n o
building
(multi-story
or
otherwise)
can
b e
taller
than
the
Target,
and
b ecause
Target's
parking
d ensity
requirements
do
not
a llow
in-fill
d evelopment
in
the
parking
lots.
We
emphatically
request
that
the
Design
Review
Board
suggest,
and
the
Planning
Director
act,
to
reconcile
these
issues
with
the
requirements
of
the
Developers
Agreements
and
the
vision
of
the
Spokane
Comprehensive
Plan.
It
is
important
to
resolve
this
issue
as
it
will
recur
on
the
other
properties
in
the
District
Center
if
an
owner
entered
s imilar
agreements.
i
Targets
Developer
Guide,
version
2.13
states
the
following:
a)
Tenant
parapet
heights
in
the
shopping
center
must
be
equal
in
height
with,
o r
lower
than
the
parapet
height
of
the
Target
building.;
b)
Adjacent
tenant
and
outlot
buildings,
subject
to
Targets
approval,
must
be
reasonably
compatible
to
Targets
building
in
colors,
materials,
height,
signs,
and
architectural
theme,
and
must
n ot
be
higher
than
the
Target
building
height,
unless
approved
by
the
Target
Real
Estate
Manager
(Page
3.31) .
The
following
Target
minimum
requirements
must
apply
to
each
tract
within
the
entire
shopping
center
development:
1)
Retail
=
4.0
spaces
/
1,000
SF
of
building
area.
2)
Restaurant
less
than
5,000
SF
=
10.0
spaces
/
1,000
S F
o f
building
a rea.
3)
Restaurant
of
5,000
SF
b ut
less
than
7 ,000
SF
=
15.0
spaces
/
1,000
SF
of
building
area.
4)
Restaurant
of
7,000
SF
or
more
=
20.0
spaces
/
1,000
SF
of
b uilding
area.
5)
Uses
with
d rive-up
window
service
must
provide
s tacking
for
5
cars
per
window
o r
lane.
Notify
the
Target
Development
Manager
if
local
requirements
e xceed
the
p arking
ratios
listed
above
(Page
3.35).
2 | P a g e