Minutes - 09/08/2005Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Approved Minutes
Council Chambers -City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave
September 8, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER
Commissioner Crosby called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm.
Staff attending the meeting: Marina Sukup, Director of Community Development,
Greg McCormick, Planning Manager, Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner, Mike Basinger,
Associate Planner and Deanna Griffith, Administf`ative Assistant
311. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
_Tbe Commission, audience, and staff recited the pledge of Allegiance.
111. ROLL CALL
Commissioner Mauiac - Present Bill Goth mann -Present
Ccrnmiss € ner Blum - Present Commissioner Kogle Present
Commissioner lnhn G. Carroll - Present Ian: Robertson - Present
David Crosby - Present
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Cvrnr AIWofW GoMmr0170 moved t tfte % rber 9, 2005 agenda be
approved as wrfttm. Corrtrr i"As rrer KagAe .seconded the m orlon.
Mohian paw' UfrafrirnOus#
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was n7oved by Co mismoner Kogle se dL-d by Commissioner
Beaufac ffiat the minutes of the August 25, 2005, Planning Cammmimdan
eddy be acwpted as written. Afodan passed unanimousfy.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT
No Public Comment
VII. COMMISSION REPORTS
Commissioner Crosby reported that he attended a meeting to discuss impact fees
and how to work with dhem. It was well attended by several groups and some
elected officials. All other commissioners had nothing to r rt.
September 8, 2005 Ranming f:~ammaslon Minutes page I of a
Spokimc Vallcy Planning Commissicm Minutcs
• VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
None.
VIII. COMMISSION BUSINESS
A. NEW BUSINESS:
Public Hearing for PUD 04-046. Commissioner Crosby opens the
hearing at 6:09 pm. Director Sukup explained to the Commission the
background for making this change. She also answered questions from
the Commissioners.
Meg Arpin, representing Black Rock. Ms. Arpin explained that this is
a significant change. She stated that over 70% of the city does not
connect, with an arterial or collector. None of these areas can change in
future with this wording. Ms Arpin explained that she had spoken to the
City's engineers; they indicated to her that they did not write or have any
input to this ordinance. According to Ms. Arpin, they do not want more
access to arterials or collector streets. This wording is contrary to good
transportation planning, according to Ms. Arpin. Ms. Arpin expressed this
• ordinance doesn't promote new growth. This should only apply to
environmental/special cases. She indicated that she was aware of two
PUDs were in process, six others are waiting for this ruling.
lames Pollard, 17216 E. Baldwin, the dates on staff report are
incorrect, stating this had already been finished. Director Sukup stated
that this was an error on her part. She would amend the dates before it
is signed.
Mary Pollard, 17216 E Baldwin, Mrs. Pollard requested some
clarification on the changes. Was this in the ordinance when it was in
effect with the County, Director Sukup said that no it was not in the
county document, it was changed last November (2004) She stated that
she does not approve'of having this ordinance changed. Mrs. Pollard
shared that the neighborhood is not developed outside of the PUD to
handle the cars that are generated by these PUDs. The rest of the area
roads are underdeveloped and it places a large burden on the community.
Maybe in the future the roads will be able to handle this increased traffic
but not now. Mrs. Pollard would like to have the Comp Plan in place
before this is changed. Mrs. Pollard said that passing this change is
premature and feels it is only catering to the developer. Unapproved of
• by rest of the North Greenacres community. Leads out onto roads there
should be no changes in Phase I regulations, no bonus densities. Adding
September 8, 2005 Planning Commission Page 2 of 8
Spokane Valley Planning Commission Minutes
density without impact fees it forces the cost of development on rest of
• community.
Kathy Tabbert, 18505 E. 4t' Ave., Ms. Tabbert stated she is directly
affected by the PUD which first brought this question to light. She lives
across the street from this development. The road that is being accessed
is only 19 feet wide. The winter seasons do not allow enough room for
cars and kids to both be on road. The road is unimproved and all the run
off from the development will be running into her yard. Ms. Tabbert feels
that the builder gets preference. She feels that the PUD only increases
traffic in the area along with high densities when the roads unable to
handle it. Ms. Tabbert shared that she has an autistic child and worries
that her child will not be safe with the changes that are going on. Ms.
Tabbert feels that we will allow the developers tear up road just for their
own purposes and the developers do not understand needs of the
community. Ms. Tabbert said she is worried for children walking on
street. Ms. Tabbert said this issue is more than just changing a
requirement but is also about the problems they developer is to rush this
and not dealing with dangerous road conditions.
Brian Main, property owner/developer of a PUD now. Mr. Main stated
• that this change does not affect his project now, but He is concerned
about the future development. Mr. Main feels growth will not continue if
you choose to limit it now. It will affect the potential for growth. The
Spokane County recognizes the need for housing. They are working with
the housing authority in order to acquire a grant. Mr. Main stated that
changes to the ordinance could cancel out the program by making it too
expensive for moderate/low income brackets to afford housing. He said he
felt it will cancel program because of the restriction, making it more
expensive for the developer. How will citizen be able to afford homes in
future? Mr. Main stated that the county has agreed to open the West
Plains to higher density. Mr. Main said he feels the commission should
think about it.
Tom Tabbert, 18505 E. 4th, Mr. Tabbert said he was part of the appeal
against the current development. He said that many of the neighbors feel
that this type of development is awkward, but recognizes this is not the
issue tonight. Mr. Tabbert encourages Commissioners to look at this
development. Mr. Tabbert submits pictures taken earlier in the day. The
road is 18 ft. wide. 80 or more cars went by this point between Barker
and the elementary school, around 8:00-8:30 am. Mr. Tabbert wants to
address the safety issue for families, children. Mr. Tabbert said we do not
have a definition for of an arterial. He said there is no room for
• pedestrians, now you want to add 22 more houses. Mr. Tabbert feels that
September B, 2005 Planning Commission Page 3 of 8
Spokane Valley Planning Commission Minutes
• we need to stop and look at what we are doing. 70% of the Valley is
rural. Mr. Tabbert would like to know what acceptable? Mr. Tabbert
spoke to some of the neighbors today and they are feeling like this has
already been decided and railroaded and that it won't make any
difference. Mr. Tabbert submits a letter with pictures from Steve Hormel.
Ms. Arpin stepped to the podium and asked to be allowed to address the
statements made by the last two people testifying. Commissioner Crosby
explained to Ms. Arpin that if he allowed her to give a rebuttal then he would
have to allow all of the people who spoke to come up to the podium again. Ms.
Arpin stated that was fine with that she had already made the comment in her
testimony previously.
The commission began their discussion. Commissioner Crosby states that before
discussion we should have a motion. There was discussion between the
commissioners as to whether they were ready to have a motion. Commissioner
Crosby informed the commission that if the commission is not discussing a
motion then they cannot have any discussion either for or against it.
Commissioner Gothmann made a motion that the sentence read "all PUDs having
greater than 8 residential units have direct access to a designated collector or
arterial." Commissioner Beaulac second. Why 8 units? Commissioner Gothmann
• said that he just picked a number to get things started. Commissioner
Gothmann made a motion that the sentence read "all PUDs having greater than
8 residential units have direct access to a designated collector or arterial."
Commissioner Beaulac seconded the motion.
There was then considerable discussion as to what it would mean to change the
ordinance. Questions were raised as to what information they would like to have
to make a better decision. Issues raised were traffic, concurrency, levels of
service, peak trips. Commissioner Gothmann made a motion to table the item
until the staff can provide the information needed to make an educated decision,
to the next meeting date of 10/13/2005. Commissioner Blum second.
Commissioner Carroll feels it is not enough time for the staff to be able to come
back with all the information the commission is requesting. Commissioner
Crosby calls for the vote on this motion. Commissioner Gothmann and
Robertson vote for, Commissioners Beaulac, Kogle, Carroll and Blum against.
Motion fails.
Return to the main motion, approve with amendment of 8 houses. Discussion.
What other information desired? Traffic counts, concurrency, LOS.
Commissioner Blum said that he had 2nd the previous motion but would like to
have information, before he votes on it. Call for the vote on original motion
• (more than 8) Commissioner Gothmann yes, Commissioner Beaulac no,
September 8. 2005 Planning Commission Page 4 of 8
Spokane Vallcy Planning Commission Minutas
• Commissioner Kogle no, Commissioner Carroll no, Commissioner Robertson
abstain, Commissioner Blum no. The motion is defeated.
Commissioner Beaulac made a motion to table until 10/13 in order to get as
much information as possible not only transportation but concurrency, levels of
service and anything else that might help this body make their decision.
Commissioner Robertson 2nd. Discussion. Would more public testimony be
accepted? It is closed at this time. The public testimony can be re-opened. Do
we have to re-notify? Not if you re-open it tonight. Re open for 10/13, you do
have to notice it. Stated that 4 commissioners are looking for more information
before make a decision. Mr. McCormick/Director Sukup can continue public
hearing? Can continue to a date certain tonight. Take care of table first.
Amend now? Take care of it later. Director Sukup, City Council has asked the
same question as the commission is this evening about PUD. Director Sukup is
preparing a primer for the council which she will share also with the Commission.
Commissioner Carroll, looking for a set of criteria that allows PUDs but also
minimizes the impacts that occur in unsafe areas. Vote to table the amendment
item will table to 10/13, staff to provide information on the issues we have
clarified tonight. Commissioners Blum, Robertson, Carroll, Beaulac and
Gothmann vote in favor, Commissioner Kogle votes no, 5 to 1, tabled to 10/13.
Leaves floor open to continue the Public Hearing to 10/13. Commissioner Blum
moves that we re-open and continue the public hearing in regard to the PUD
ordinance amendment to 10/13/05. Commissioner Robertson second. There is
discussion. Commissioner Gothmann more opportunity to discuss with public the
better decision you can make, Commissioner Kogle agreed. Motion passes 6 in
favor. Public Hearing is continued to 10/13.
Public Hearing - Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Crosby opens
the public hearing in regard to the Comprehensive Plan at 7:33.
Hal Sarff, 13505 E. Broadway. - Mr. Sarff is not a resident but is a
developer for a private senior independently living facility located at this
address. Most land around this property is zoned UR-22. Mr. Sarff would
like to see the parcel below this address be changed to medium density.
The parcels are across the street, 13420 E. Broadway. 3.7 and 2.25
acres. Have option on these parcels. Would like to have this zoned to
medium density. Engineers want to extend Blake Rd. south of Broadway.
Have an agreement not to fight county on the north side of Broadway.
But does not make sense south through private development. Children
going to school, thinks a light for children to cross road would be a good
addition. Not against impact fees. Thinks they should be taken care of as
long as those fees are used for improvements roadways, sidewalks, and
• the like.
September 8, 2005 Planning Commission Page 5 of 8
Spokane Valley Planning Commission Minutcs
• Bob Scarfo, 514 W. 25th Ave. Not a resident of SV. Has been
reviewing comp plan and would like to lay out some things for
consideration on the larger picture. Things no evident in comp plan. Did
not get a sense that the plan was looking 20 yrs, ahead. Trends are
coming is end of cheap oil and less driving. Creates more density and
pedestrian oriented. 2nd trend, the aging of the county. 3rd trend is
flexible packages for re-hire back to work. 4th trend. Work force facing
higher demands on time and work. Move closer to work, less travel.
Failing health is another concern and walking is not only a means of travel
but helps with your health, walking is a good exercise. In the end a city
center will create people using alternative methods of getting around,
demand high density around the city to keep things closer to home.
Mary Pollard, 17216 E. Baldwin Rd. - Mrs. Pollard stated she is the
chairman of the North Greenacres Neighborhood Group. Had a meeting
to address traffic, attended by Engineer Steve Worley. 85 people
attended the discussion. They talked about traffic issues surrounding the
I-90/Barker interchange, linking Indiana with a road for a pass through to
Liberty Lake. Mrs. Pollard stated that most residents and some of the
developers would prefer to have the extension of Indiana link with Boone
• Ave. Would like to see a policy that allows engineers to develop roads
with the character of the neighborhood in mind. Include transit,
sidewalks. Developer Greenstone wants to have Mission downgraded as it
fits into his development. Feels that the railroad right of way is a better
thing for a connector than mission. Too much traffic now, too many kids
walking down the street.
James Pollard, 17216 E. Baldwin Rd. Mr. Pollard is submitting a
written statement by a neighbor who would not attend. Pete Miller,
18124 E. Mission. Mr. Pollard stated that Ms. Miller wrote that Mission is a
minor arterial. There is no change to the comp plan concerning road
widths in the area. Her suggestion is to state the road diagrams in the
comp plan are only a suggestion and not an actual standard. Boone is
listed as a minor 3 lane road.
Dave Black, not a resident, but a developer. He owns a piece of property
on Carnahan Road, just south of 8"' Ave. Is currently zoned as
public/quasi-public. Would like to have it down graded to house a self-
storage facility he would like to build there. He bought it from a church, it
is across from a quarry. Please consider changing it so that he can
develop it.
Bob Boyle, Hanson Industries - talk about Hanson Center east. Talk
• about Indiana going east. Change it from the turn that would go through
September 8, 2005 Planning Commission Page 6 of 8
Spokane Valley Planning Commission Minutes
Centennial Properties and put it through Boone. The curve now is what is
• in the plan, inherited from county. Sewer line also follows that path. It
would be a straighter too. Next talk about the zone in the area, it will go
to a mixed use zone, we support that. We have worked with the staff as
to what we would like to see there. Last issue. Aesthetic corridor for
Indiana. We inherited it from the county. We would like the planning
commission to drop that designation from Sullivan to Flora. It is not a
gateway to the city. It is not a major focal point coming into the city.
Can see that Sullivan to Pines might be because it leads to another
corridor.
Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner. Wants to make sure that some suggestions
be places on the record for consideration by the commission. Information
comes from Mr. Boyle, who just spoke, with Hansen Industries, Mr.
Dullanty, in regard to auto dealers, Mr. Cragg with the Industrial Park and
a specific request to change the property at 102 N. McDonald Rd. to
commercial, there is a defensive arts academy and dance studio.
Commissioner Crosby closes the public hearing regarding the comp plan
comments at 8:06 pm.
• B. OLD BUSINESS - Comp Plan deliberations. We are now at the point
where we are going to be approving changes that have already been made to
the comp plan chapters and propose that they be added as amended.
Begin with chapter 7, economic development. Director Sukup realizes that the
planning commission does not have her version of the chapter for consideration.
She asks that the commission go to another chapter while she makes copies of
what they should be looking at.
Commission moves to chapter 8, natural environment. After the review of
changes Commissioner Kogle makes a motion to accept chapter 8 natural
environment as amended. Commissioner Beaulac seconds, passed as revised.
Chapter 10, Neighborhood Chapter. Commissioner Robertson makes the motion
to include Chapter 10, Neighborhood/Sub-Areas to the Comp Plan as amended.
Second by Commissioner Beaulac. Several concerns are raised in regard to this
chapter. Have we decided to include this chapter in the plan? Not, yet but we
are at that. Look at changes made, than vote to include. Commissioner Carroll
states that he believes that there are no implementation tools in place for these
goals and procedures. He feels it is a bastion of prejudice and bias. Does not
address how to guide the neighborhood. Commissioner Blum is concerned that a
small group could come in and try to force the way they want it. Commissioner
Robertson says he believes the plan will allow for this. Commissioner Beaulac
• agrees. Commissioner Gothmann states that all the information was in the plan
already we just moved it to its own chapter. Commissioner Carroll expresses his
September 6, 2005 Planning Commission Page 7 of 8
Spokane Valley Pla fining Commissim Minutes
concern that people will come in and say they represent a neighborhood and
they don't. Commissioner Beaulac shared that we do not have regulations yet to
support many of the things we have proposed so far but they are the next step.
Vote, to include Neighborhoods as amended: vote is as follows Commissioner
Gothmann yes, Commissioner Beaulac yes, Commissioner Kogle yes,
Commissioner Carroll no, Commissioner Robertson yes, Commissioner Blum no.
Chairman Crosby states it passes with a 4 to 2 vote. Commissioners Carroll and
Blum directly request that Commissioner Crosby vote and that his vote is stated
for the record. Commissioner Crosby votes no, noting that it is 4 to 3 and the
chapter is included as revised.
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
Decision to meet next Thursday for another meeting at 6:00 pm Sept. 15. A
note from staff that Manna and Greg will be gone to a Planner's Conference and
Scott Kuhta will be in charge that evening.
XI. AD30URNMENT
Commissioner Robertson motioned for adjournment, seconded by Commissioner
Kogle to adjourn at 9:00 pm. Passed
SUBMITTED:
APPROVED:
c
5xd W~-
DGriffith, Adm& i a 've Assistant DavW-Crosby, Chairman
•
September 8. 2005 Planning Commission Page 8 of 8