Loading...
Minutes - 07/22/2004Spokane Valley Planning Commission Approved Minutes Council Chambers -City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. July 22, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gothman.n called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. II. PLE P OF ALLEGIANCE The Conunission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulac - present Bob Blum - Present David Crosby -Present Gai I Kog;le -Present Bill Gothmann - Present Ian Robertson - Present John G. Carroll - Present IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council Chambers were packed with citizens wishing to testify at the Public Hearing proposing; a UR-1 Zone. Commissioner Beaulac moved that the agenda be amended so that the Public Hearing on Interim Zone UXI be held first. in order to accommodate the numerous citizens present to provide testimony. Motion passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved ky Commissioner Robertson and seconded by Commissioner Crosby that the minutes of*the July 8, 2004 Planning Commission meeting be approved as presented Motion passed unanimously. Vt. PUBLIC COMMENT Richard Berkseth, 3715 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA Mr. Berkseth stated that there was a lack of background information for the three hearings scheduled tonight, and suggested that the City provide citizens with copies of Requests for Commission Action and backup at future Public Hearings. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Robertson reported on the Joint Planning; Commission meeting held earlier in the day. He handed out a suggestion for how Neighborhood Associations could work in parallel with the City during the Comprehensive Flan process. Commissioner Robertson further recommended that a group of neighborhood association members and a liaison from the Planning; Commission work with the City to resolve neighborhood issues. He requested that this topic be discussed at a future Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Crosby provided the City Council with an Ad Hoc Sign Committee progress report on July 20'h. Designation of aesthetic corridors and the prohibition against new billboards are two issues the Council has asked the Committee to address. He explained that the Committee is still working to review and revise the Sign Code "Definitions" section. The next meeting of the Ad Hoc Sign Committee will be on Tuesday, August 3, 2004 at 8:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers. V-111. ADIN11NISTRATIVE REPORTS ills. Suh-up stated that the City has received two new Street Vacation Requests recently. City Council will have the first reading on these requests, after CTED has prepared its statements. Then the Council will set a hearing date before the Planning Conunission for the requests. LX. CONfNIISSION BUSINESS A. OLD BUSINESS: There was no old business. B. NEW BUSINESS: Public Hearing: Proposal to amend Ordinance No.03-053 to provide interim zoning pursuant to Chapter 1.4.615 Urban Residential Estate (UR-1) Zone. At 6:45 p.m., Chairman Gothmann opened a public hearing to consider a proposal to amend Ordinance No.03-053 to provide interim zoning pursuant to Chapter 14.615 Urban Residential Estate (UR-1) Zone. Mr. Gothmann read aloud Item No.9.A.I from the City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, regarding conduct of persons wishing to speak at a Public Hearing. Members of the public were encouraged to fill out a blue card or sign a list if they wished to speak or officially weigh in on the topic. Personal comments were limited to three minutes, and group representatives were given five minutes to speak. Ms. Sukup explained that two well-established Spokane Valley neighborhoods, currently designated by the Comprehensive Plan as Low Density Residential, have requested consideration of a regulatory mechanism which would permit the keeping of a limited number of large animals, primarily horses on their property. These neighborhoods were originally established over twenty-five years ago to allow the keeping of such animals, a practice that was permitted under a previous zoning classification. The proposed Urban Residential Estate (UR-1) Zone provides for this request on an interim basis up to twelve months, until better design standards can be developed. Ms. Sukup explained that the Planning Commission must vote to adopt the Interim Zoning Work Plan 2 and Findings of Fact in addition to the amended ordinance before forwarding the proposal to City Council. Commissioners asked for clarification on several matters, including setbacks and lot sizes. Commissioners Carroll, Goth.man.n, Robertson and Beaulac stated that they live in or adjacent to the neighborhoods which might be rezoned if Ordinance No. 03-053 is amended as proposed. The proposal to establish an interim Urban Residential Estate (UR-1) Zone was open to Public Testimony at 6:55 p.m. Public Testimony in favor of UR-1 proposal: Chuck Hafner, 4710 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA. Speaking on behalf of both the Ponderosa and Rotchford Acres Neighborhoods. Mr. Hafner presented the Commission with an envelope containing citizen petitions signed by over 600 residents of the Ponderosa and Rotchford Acres neighborhoods in favor of having their one-acre tracts rezoned as Urban Residential UR-1. He also handed the Commissioners copies of a memorandum detailing the reasons that citizens of these neighborhoods desire this change in zoning. Mr. Hafner and many of the citizens present had discovered the change in their neighborhood zoning from SR-1 to UR- 7 only last year, and they have been working with Ms. Sukup since then to resolve the issue. Residents don't want their neighborhoods to become segmented or degraded by unrestrained growth. He asked the Planning Commission to consider the wishes of hundreds of citizens and make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the proposed amendment to Ordinance No.03-053, establishing an interim Urban Residential Estate (UR-1) Zone in the Spokane Valley. Gail G. Stiltner, 10119 E. 44t°, Spokane Valley, WA. Ms. Stiltner spoke in favor of the proposal. She does not want her neighborhood to retain its current UR-7 zoning designation. Ttichard C. Behm, 3626 S..Ridgeview Drive, Spokane Valley, WA. Began to speak to the development of a controversial P.U.D. in the Ponderosa Area. Chairman Gothmann reminded him and the other citizens present that this public hearing was not called to discuss the P. U. D. Michelle Wolkey, 4617 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA. Ms. Wolkey is in favor of the UR-1 Zone. She and her husband considered many neighborhoods before settling in the Ponderosa. They have lived there since 1999. She urged the Planning Commission to keep the area at one house per acre. I S~ '1 Richard Berkseth, 371-5 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, A Mr_ Berkseth asked the ommissicn if approval of the LJR-1 interim zone proposal would affect the high density development plans in the adjacent UR 3.5 Zone. hakaan othmarn explained that the interim ?-One 0LLId affect oWy those people with properties inside the indieated boundaries. Mr. Berkseth is in favor of the proposed L-1. -,orne, but stated his ob] . ectiion to high density development outside the area boundaries, Don A. O'Nea1, 10001 E. 48`h, Spokane Valley, WA. Chairman Goth mann thanked r. O' teal publicly for helping hirn save his house from bunting d4uuig the firestorm several years ago. Mr. O'Noal spoke in Favor ofthe'UR-I proposal. He stated that ifthe Ponderosa continued to he designated as LIX-7, the neighborhood could potentially g-row by 2,400 units in vacant lots within the proposed UR-1 boundaries. This makes the High density residential units proposed outside the UR-1 limits pale in comparison, David French, 4221 & Driftwood Drive, Spokane Valley, N'4A. Mr. French spoke in favor of the UR-1 proposal. He has 11YW. at his present address for twelve years and likes the lame lots in his neighborhood. Jean Gulden, Ifl22.6 F, 44tH, Spokane Valley, WA. pls. Gulden spoke in fa oa- of the lJf~-1 proposal. 1-ier family moved to the Ponderosa for the open spaces. She hopes that the City will make this change to the Zoning Code so that money will not become the motivating factor for Valley Ian downers' development decisions. A rural lifestyle is precious to Valley citizens, and the zone change that switched the Ponderosa to UR-7 was "legislation with0LIE representation". Other cirizens present who were in favor of the proposed amendrneat to Ordiirtanee N o.03-053 but didn't wish to speak ere.- Carolyn Blom, 4324 S. Farr Toad, Spokane Valley, WA Robert S. Behm, 11416 E. 44t4 Avenue, Spokane Valley, A Cheryl parr, 4314 & Locust Road, Spokane Valley, Carol Carkup, 4711 S. Highway Court, Spokane Valley, WA John & Corinne Hennessy, 4620 S. Woodruff.Road, Spokane Valley Roberta Meyers, A009 h.. 48'", Spokane Valley, WA Tick Sherman, 1309 S. Shamrock, Spokane Valley, WA Tom Patti ]Faulkner, 121.5 S. Pioneer, Spokane Valley, WA Vern & Veniece Lindernulder, 1207S. Pioneer, Spokane Valley, WA Bob Elaine Fulton, 9700E. Holman, Spokane Valley, WA .Diane Fritz, 462.1 & Farr Road, Spukrinc Vrillcy, WA Greg Sofia, 10824 E. Ferret Drive, Spokane Valley, WA Cindy Barrington, 1.015 S. Homestead, Spokane Valley, WA 4 ff Barbara Tevis, 4003 S. Ridgeview, Spokane Valley, WA Jon Hiebert, 3820 S. Sundown, Spokane Valley, NVA Pat & Dee Nolan, 9715 E. 45th, Spokane Valley, WA Tim & Barb awter, 11525 E. 48th, Spokane Vallee, W John & Diaue Janes, S. 1509 Rotchford Dr., Spokane Valley, WA Pat Littlechild, S. 4619 Raymond Road, Spokane Valley, WA Linda Bosse, 4704 S. Raymond Read, Spokane V alley, WA enevieve M. Harding, 4213 S. Bowdi9h Rd., Spokane Valley, WA Cary & Connie hallender, 10005 B. 44th Ave., Spokane Valley, "V4. Ben Corder, 3620 S. Mercy t., Spokane alley, NVA Stan Short, 4422 S. Farr Rd., Spokane Valley, NVA Chet Reilly, 1112 S. Homestead t.. Spokane Valley, NVA Chris Ryan, 10002 E. 50`h Ave., Spokane Valley, WA Tim & Peg Smith, S. 1313 Rotchford Dr., Spokane Valley, WA Diane c Mike Rice, 15722 E. 14'h Ave., Spokane Valley, WA Jirn Morgan, 1011 S. Rotchford Dr., Spokane Valley, A Caleb Wirth, 1012 S. Rotchford, Spokane Valley, WA Margaret Bur.kner, 9921 E. 44`', Spokane Valley, A Deborah Julius Weiler, 4815 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA 1. & Van Spradley, 9518 IE'~. 44`h Ave, Spokane Valley, WA Dora L. ro;user, 43J8.9. Farr Rd., Spokane Valley, WA .rack & :Kathleen BoIyard, 104:15.)1+. inimaron, Spokane Valley, WA John B. James 11,1509 S. Rotchford, Spokane Valley, A Rebecca L. O'Neal, 4720 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA Mary 'Farley, 48 S. Farr Road, Spokane Valley, WA Maureen & Henry. Hunter,10920 E. 48"' Ave., Spokane Valley, WA Mary Lightroot, 9604 E. Halman Rd., Spokane Valley, WA Beverly Barber, 961.8 Ufalman .Rd., pokanc Valley, WA Russel E. Carlson, 10911 E. 48"', Spokane Valley, A J)onna R. Carinon, 4822 S. Farr Rd,, Spokane Valley, WA Sue & Scott Tarmana, 15708 E. 11"', Spokane Valley, A Mark Amy Roney, 10004 E. 481h Ave., Spokane Valley, NVA Linda Morgan Garrott, 9719 E. 44"' Ave., Spokane. Valley, WA )Penny Livingston, 4316 S. University, Spokane Valley, WA Public Testimonv oPmsed to UR-1. Proposal: David Worahood, 10620 E. immaroa Dr., Spokane Valley, WA Mr. Worahood spoke against the proposal. He has lived in the Pondcrosia since 1957, tend originally purchased his property with the thought that he would build a smaller 110 4lse on the lot to move to in his later years. He will not be able to do this if the area he lives in is zoned TJR-1. AleutraI Public Testimon~': Meg Arpin, :1:1:17 L 35`4 Avenue, Spokane, WA 99203 Ms. Arpin is an attorney represent) the client K T. L.L. . Her client doesn't opp~~,e the proposal to rezone specifi ed areas, however believes the current language of the UR-1 Zone could be utilized in other Valley neighborhoods for which it was not intended. Ms. Arpin handed out a proposed amendment to add to Chapter 14.615, Section 14.615.100 Purpose and Intent of the Urban Residential Estate (UR-1) Zone proposal. The proposed change of language follows (key: eld-Rage; proposed new language): The purpose of the UR-I zone is to preserve the character and vitality of eeki6ngfudly developed neighborhoods consisting primarily of I-acre lots which ivere created through a formal platting process pursuant to ROY 58, more than twenty-five (25) years ago and which have historically permitted the keeping of a limited number of large animals and livestock. Lots are presently served by a public water system and may require connection to a public sewer system. 77ue residential character necessitates the provision of paved roads and other public facilities. The UR-1 Zone is not intended to circumvent the intent ofthe Comprehensive Plan that residential development within the Urban Growth Area (UGA) be urban in nature. Commissioner Crosby asked what the term "'fully developed" meant. Ms. Sukup explained that any area that is developed 95% or more is considered fully developed. Janice Kerbistein, 9716 E. 45th Avenue, Spokane Valley, OVA Ms. Kerbistein asked Mr. Gothmann to read the last sentence of Ms. Arpin's proposed language. She had some reservations about the 95% figure. Ms. Sukup explained that this is a planning rule of thumb, but it is not hard and fast. Commissioner Blum stated that the wording of the ordinance shouldn't be changed halfway through the Public Hearing. Corinne Hennessy, 4620 S. Woodruff Rd., Spokane Valley, WA Asked that Chuck Hafner speak on behalf of the neighborhoods regarding the proposed change of language. She agrees with Commissioner Blum regarding the late submittal of additional language. Tom Beyda, 9403 Holman, Spokane Valley, WA Mx. Beyda asked the Planning Commission to advise the crowd present how to effectively provide input into issues that impact the areas they live in. Commissioner Gothmann encouraged the citizens present to become involved in the Comprehensive Plan process through attendance at Council, 'tanning Commission and Community Meetings; chock the website regularly for updates; and attend Hearings with the Hearing Examiner hearings. 6 Bruce Miller, 9718 E. 44th, Spokane Valley, WA Mr. Miller spoke mentioned a recent land use action before County Commissioners regarding a subdivision application to split 40 acres into smaller parcels. Meg Arpin, 1117 E. 35t' Avenue, Spokane, WA 99203 Spoke to Bob Blum's concern, and explained that if this amended ordinance is not reworded, the City of Spokane Valley will not be in compliance with the GMA. Michelle Wolkey, 4617 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA Ms. Wolkey is also an attorney, and feels that Ms. Arpin's request for a change in language defeats the purpose of the public hearing. She registered a formal objection to Ms. Arpin's request. Morgan Garrett, 9719 E. 44th, Spokane Valley, WA Ms. Garrett rides her horse on the streets Ponderosa, sometimes past the area that is potentially going to become high density residential. She does not relish the thought of high density residential development in her neighborhood. Tom Walker, 10415 E. herrett, Spokane Valley, WA F Mr. Walker didn't want the closeness of his neighborhood to be lost to high density residential. At present, neighbors take care of one another. Sheila Woolstencroft, 10320 E. 44a' Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA Ms. Woolstencroft asked Jean Gulden to address the crowd a second time. Ms. Gulden asked the Commission to remember that the people who invest the most time, energy and money into land development are typically wealthier than the people who actually live in the areas being developed. Chuck I3afner, 4710 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA. Spcakin7 on behalf of both the Ponderosa and Rotchford Acres Neighborhoods. Mr. Hafner reminded Commissioners and staff that the citizens of these areas have spent a year determining what is right for the neighborhoods. He doesn't think that an amendment to the language should be taken into consideration at this time. Richard Berkseth, 3715 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, WA Mr. Berkseth asked why some of the outlying areas of the Ponderosa weren't also being rezoned. Because the outlying areas are zoned for high density development, the proposed P.U.D. can still be built as proposed. 7 - The Public Testimony portion of the hearing was closed at 7:50 p.m. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Planning Commission recommend the proposal to amend Ordinance No. 03-053 to provide interim zoning pursuant to Chapter 14.6.15 Urban Residential Estate (UR-1) Lone, as presented, to City Council for approval. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Blum. Commissioners Beaulac, Blum, Carroll, Gothmann, Kogle and Robertson voted in favor of the motion. Commissioner Crosby opposed Motion passed 6-1. Commissioner Crosby explained that he moved against recommendation for a UR-1 Zone, because he believes in the long run it will be a disservice to the community. The City is obligated to provide housing for all economic levels, and urban growth is inevitable. He advised the crowd to keep informed of the Comprehensive Plan development to see if this interim zone becomes permanent. Commissioner Kogle suggested that ills. Arpin's amended language be presented to the City Council during its deliberations of the UR-1 Zone. Commissioner Robertson spoke to the issue of subdividing acre lots within the boundaries of the proposed UR-1 Zone, and verified with Ms. Sukup that exceptions could be made for folks like Mr. Worahood. It was moved by Commissioner.lleaulac and seconded by Commissioner Kogle to submit the Findings of Fact and the If ork Plan with the proposal to amend Ordinance No. 03-053 for City Council action. Commissioners Beaulac, Blum, Carroll, Gothmann, Kogle and Robertson voted in favor of the motion. Commissioner Crosby voted in opposed Motion passed 6-1. The Public Hearing ended at 8:15 p.m. Commissioners took a brief break. The meeting reconvened at 3:22 p.m. Public Hearing: Proposed ordinance amending Ordinance No.03-053 relating to Administrative Exceptions and Administrative Variances. At 8:23 p.m., Chairman Gothmann opened a public hearing to consider a proposed ordinance to amend Ordinance No.03-053 relating to Administrative Exceptions and Administrative Variances. This ordinance amendment is being recommended so that Administrative Variances can be handled administratively, and will not have to go before the Hearing Examiner. 8 Public Testimony was opened at 8.30 p.rn. -Richard Rork wth, 371.5 S. Woodruff, Spokane Valley, 4'A Mr, Berkseth spoke in favor oftllis proposed amendment, but asked for a clarification of the, fi•wr side, and back yard setback. information. s- Sukup provided a complete explanation of proposed minimum setback standards. Public Testimony was closed at 8;34 p, m. Commissioner Crosby moved to recamurend the proposed ocdfn.raree ainanding rdinancc No. 03-053 relating to A dinin istrative Exceptions an d A dministrative Variances to City C'oancil for approval The motion was seconded by Corrrarrissionur Kogle. Motion passed tin animousfy. Public Hearing: Proposed ordinance establishing Section 4.15.1- Residential Standrrds; rind Section 4.15.2 - Nan-Residential Dimensional Standards. Chairman othinann opened the Public Rearing at 8,35 p.m. Ms. Sukup provi&A a brief background of this proposal ordinance. It would conw]idate dimemional standards for development into two tables, residential and non-residential. It also amends residentia] front yard, garage, side yard, and rear yard setbacks and deletes dimensional requirements within Planned Unit Developments (P.U.D.s). These proposed dimensional standards have been distribuUxi to the Spokane Hornebuilders Mwc;iation. The otiunission discussed issues re,lated to the deletion ofP.U,.D. standards and the, reduction of side yard setbacks. Commissioner Carroll was concerned that the City was opmiii- itself up to development of hiZh houses cn small lots - leading to urban `=canyons of darluiess and doom Public Testimony began at 9.41 p.m. Richard Berkseth, 37X5 S. Woodruff, pokane Valley, A Mr. Berk eth was concerned about reduction of front yard (15 feet) and side yard (5 feet) setback-s, and doesn't think they are adequate. 1-la would like the Valley to remain suburban by retaining the ful12 5 foot setback from the front property line. h+ir. 13erkseth asked the Comrrmission to tab] e this proposal and review it further. Steve Fisher, 721 N. Pines Road, Spokane Valley, Mr. Fi-,her is a property owner, developer and real estate profes-,ional in the Spokane Valley. He spoke in favor of the proposal, because it would help him offer his customers a larger variety of property options and would offer developers more flexible constriction standards. Public Testimony was closed at 9:10 p.m. Commissioner Crosby moved to recommend the proposed ordinance establishing Section 4.15. 1 - Residential Standards, and Section 4.1 S.2 - Alon-Residential Dimensional Standards of the .S'pokane Valley Uniform Development Code. Commissioner 1►ogle seconded the motion. Commissioners Beaulac, Blum, Crosby, Gothmann, Kogle and Robertson voted in favor of the ordinance. Commissioner Carroll voted against the proposal. !Motion passed 6-1. The Public Hcaring ended at 9:13 p.m. X. FOR THE GOOD OF Tk1.E ORDER Commissioner Crosby asked that staff, on behalf of the Planning Commission, extend a thank you to the people who participated in the Greenacres public meeting, including Tim Harris, Representative John Ahern, and Representative Lynn Schindler. He publicly thanked Ms. Sukup for her continued presence at these meetings. Ms. Sukup asked Commissioner Robertson for an electronic copy of his Neighborhood Action Plan so she can distribute it to interested members of the public. Xf. ADJOURININIENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:16 p.m. APPRO itfiam H. Gothill~' ,Chairman 10