The Spokane Plan Commission on July 23 recommended City Council adopt revisions to code sections governing private streets, alleys and shared driveways, after a lengthy public comment period that highlighted safety concerns and administrative discretion.

Staff presented amendments intended to clarify definitions, permit private streets in unit-lot subdivisions, require the city engineer to designate whether a route is a street, alley or driveway, and reorganize private‑street standards for readability and transparency. The presentation noted encouragement of shared driveways in higher density housing but said the code needs clearer language because recent development projects revealed ambiguity.

Public testimony focused heavily on the Ash Place neighborhood and other infill proposals. Several residents and neighborhood advocates, including Dennis Flynn and Ann Marie Liebhaber, said dead-end shared driveways and alleys without sidewalks or hammerhead turnarounds create safety risks for children, older adults and people with disabilities. Neighbors asked the commission to preserve legislative oversight and not delegate too much authority to the city engineer.

Developers and others described administrative delays caused by unclear definitions and said reliance on private driveways has already arisen in infill projects, creating situations in which applicants were told to ask neighbors to change addresses. Commissioners and staff discussed real-world practice: unit‑lot subdivisions and certain apartment complexes sometimes use shared driveway access, and the code already contains a practice-based threshold (staff said a limit of nine users has been used administratively and is reflected in unit‑lot language).

Commissioner debate centered on whether the code should specify numeric thresholds (for example, setting a limit of parcels served by a shared driveway) and whether the engineer's decisions should carry an administrative appeals path. Commissioner Francis unsuccessfully proposed an amendment to limit shared-driveway service to "up to 4 parcels." Several commissioners and staff raised concerns that a single numeric threshold could be arbitrary and could conflict with existing unit‑lot subdivision rules that reference up to nine units; staff urged a broader review as part of the comprehensive-plan/code rewrite.

The commission ultimately approved the staff-recommended ordinance text with one procedural addition: a motion to add findings of fact that document the commission's concern about definitions and the need for additional clarification of what constitutes a driveway versus a private street. The commission voted 5-1 on the motion to recommend City Council adopt the street/alley/driveway changes; one commissioner voted no.

Staff and commissioners noted this is part of a larger body of work on infill and street design that will surface again during comprehensive-plan updates and further code amendments. The commission directed staff to include language in the findings documenting concerns about driveway definitions and the differences between driveways and private streets so City Council will have those concerns on the record.

The recommendation advances to City Council for final consideration; staff said additional code cleanup may follow in later phases of the comp‑plan/code update.