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