Loading...
2006, 01-31 Study Session MinutesDRAFT Present: Councilmembers: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Steve Taylor, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Tuesday, January 31, 2006 Mayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the meeting. Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Greg McCormick, Planning Manager Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner Mike Basinger, Associate Planner Marina Sukup, Community Development Dir. Tom Scholtens, Building Official Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Introductions: The following employees were introduced then greeted by Council: Building Official Tom Scholtens introduced Permit Specialist Anita Blake and Building Inspector II Doug Powell; and Planning Manager Greg McCormick introduced Planning Intern Carl DeSimas. Council Deliberation on Draft Comprehensive Plan: As a housekeeping item, Mayor Wilhite mentioned that since our Community Development Director would be involved in two public hearings February 9, and Ms. Sukup would like to be involved in those hearings as well as deliberation on the housing and neighborhood, Mayor Wilhite suggested switching dates for deliberation of housing and neighborhoods, with Natural Environment, which would put discussion of Natural Environment for the February 9 meeting, and Housing and Neighborhoods at the February 21 meeting. Council concurred to make that change. Draft Comprehensive Plan Public Comment Revisions Map and Spreadsheet Senior Planner Kuhta explained that he has received additional public comments since he updated the spreadsheet, and he will cover those at the end of this list. Council and staff then went through the various comments with the following results: M36: a request by Mr. Bouge to divide his Ponderosa property into two parcels. As this is more of a zoning implementation issue, staff recommends no change at this time. M37: a request by Laurie Peterson to have an "office" designation at the NE corner of Alki and Marguerite. Staff recommends either no change or to review the entire block to Margeruite. Councilmember Denenny stated his preference to walk the area before making a decision, and there was Council consensus to go look at the area in question. M38: a suggestion for medical office zone as an implementing zone, with assisted living identified as permissible use. Staff stated this is more of a zoning or implementation issue; adding that the new designation of "office" would not preclude assisted living. Council consensus for no decision at this time. M39: a request for this Greenacres property to have commercial zoning reinstated. Staff recommends change to Neighborhood Commercial as property has had historic commercial uses. Council concurs. Minutes Study Session 01 -31 -06 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: 02 -14 -06 DRAFT M40: general comment to support medical corridor concept. M41: owner wants to build a mini - storage. Staff stated concerns about commercial property with frontage on Valleyway; and that medium density residential would allow multi - family and other uses. After Council discussion on whether to change the area to commercial, it was Council consensus to view the site. M42 and M43: similar general comments on the corridor and their support of office designation. M44: a repeat of M39 M45: currently property is low density residential; requestor wants to put in an insurance office and suggests corridor mixed use. Council discussed the corridor mixed use designation, and all parking lots and buffering, and determined it would view the site. M46: property is not in the City. M47: the suggestion is to have consistent categories for bike and pedestrian map. This issue will be addressed later during the map process. M48: supports the office designation; no change requested. M49: requestor wants a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for self - storage facility but does not specify a proposed category to the recommended low density residential. Staff states the correct designation for a self - storage facility would be commercial light; and staff recommends adding self - storage as a CUP in residential zones as part of the comp plan implementation zoning. It was Council consensus to discuss this request when zoning implementation is addressed. M50 and M51: no action needed M52: Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce site (currently mixed use corridor), request does not specify a proposed category but requests to be zoned B -2, similar to other properties along Sprague. Staff states not all areas along Sprague are B -2, some are higher usage. Staff recommends no change as keeping property Corridor Mixed Use is consistent with adjacent properties. Council does not recommend change. M53 and M55: both want higher usage as believe lots (M53) are unsellable as single family; and that property (M55) is surrounded by regional businesses and would like UR -22 zoning. Staff explains these are transition areas, and suggests looking at making changes all the way east to the commercial designation; other suggestions include the area from Pines to Union; suggestion that perhaps office would be a better transition; other choices for M55 were regional commercial or high density. Senior Planner Kuhta will designate a parcel number to make clear which areas are to be considered, and will bring back for further review. M56: property fronts I90, has high density residential comp plan designation, and requestor wants corridor mixed use. Staff suggests considering office designation due to freeway proximity. It was Council consensus to view the site. M57: The request is for Boone to be an improved roadway. The Planning Commission recommended Mission as the arterial. This issue was previously discussed in the transportation plan. Minutes Study Session 01 -31 -06 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: 02 -14 -06 DRAFT M58: he doesn't own the property (the letter writer); but looking at two parcels wants medium density residential rather than designation of low density residential. Staff recommends changing to the medium density but to do so for all property south to commercially designated property along Trent. After council discussion of the area and consideration of medium or high or other designation, council determined it will view the site. M59 and M61 (there is no M60): both requests are from the same person; and they request mixed use. Staff recommends mixed use designation for both requests. Council concurs. M62 and M63: general comments supporting the office designations. Additional correspondence: M64: letter from Ron Medler who owns some duplexes on East Mission in the low density designation; request is for medium density residential as he wants to build two or more duplexes across from the old senior center. Staff feels medium density is more consistent with what the owner has on the ground; the zone is UR 3.5, and across from the senior center is UR 22; and staff recommends changing that low density designation to make it consistent. Council concurs. Brian Chavez January 29, 2006 letter concerning 15302 E. Valleyway. Councilmember Gothmann stated he received a telephone call from Mr. Chavez, and once Mr. Gothmann realized the nature of the call, referred Mr. Chavez to the Planning Department. Discussion included the UR7 and UR 3.5 designations; and whether low density residential would be appropriate. It was Council consensus to view the area. Laurie Hopkins and Susan Bracken (not related) e -mails of 1 -31 -06 concerning their support for more parks. Fax from Pat Kenney Realty regarding 123 N Argonne: as noted in the January 6, 2006 letter to Ivan White (property owner) from Heather Kauer, the sale of vehicles at 123 N Argonne is currently prohibited by the City's Interim Zoning Code. Mr. McCormick reiterated that this request is not a comp plan issue but rather is a current zoning question and the current zoning does not allow the use they seek. Mayor Wilhite called for a short recess at 7:40 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:50 p.m. Regarding M37, City Manager Mercier encouraged Council to remember some of the things that Michael Freedman spoke of concerning Argonne Mullan as one of the principle economic corridors in the community; and in working on this 20 -year plan, rather than thinking of the end of the area being the realign of the facing parcel, to perhaps think about bringing it out to the neighboring parallel road; as that would provide additional area for that designation to grow into, and possibly end up an easier buffer to look at the face of office buildings across the street from there. City Attorney Connelly added that Council should also keep in mind they are planning to provide growth to residential and high density for the next 20 years; and there is a need to keep pace with commercial and retail to maintain the 60/40 split, which is 60% office /retail /commercial, and 40% residential; and the danger of not keeping areas of growth available for office retail commercial, is the split could end up upside down financially. Councilmember Munson added his concern about the mix of low- income housing throughout there; that many of the homes are 60 to 70 years old; and he does not want to go too far into reducing the level of available low- income housing. Council reiterated the desire to view the area. Mr. Kuhta brought attention to an e -mail from Deborah Firkins addressing numerous parcels. Mr. Kuhta stated that he would map these parcel comments and bring this back when Council re- addresses the various areas after Council has had opportunity to view those areas. Minutes Study Session 01 -31 -06 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: 02 -14 -06 DRAFT LAND USE, LUP 14.8 — Billboards Cap and Replace: Mayor Wilhite explained there was a misunderstanding of the definition of cap and replace; that this was brought up at the last comp plan discussion, and it was suggested to bring the issue back when all Councilmembers can consider the issue. Councilmember Gothmann suggested adding the words "on site" to "cap and replace" and that would mean if a sign were destroyed, another sign could not be placed in any other location other than the original sign's location. Community Development Director Sukup stated that the Sign Committee had a specific concept in mind when they discussed cap, and that was there would be an absolute, finite number of billboards within the entire City; and if one were to come down, another could be erected based on the current sign regulations. Based on that definition, it was moved by Mayor Wilhite and seconded by Deputy Mayor Taylor, to have cap and replace defined as brought forward by the Planning Commission per Ms. Sukup's definition of Cap and Replace, which is to have a finite number of billboards within the City. Council discussion included reinterpreting the definition as to replace on site only; that a vote taken prior to incorporation indicated people do not like billboards; that that vote was advisory only; and that perhaps the proposed definition still allows too much latitude. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment on the motion, and no public comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Taylor, and Councilmembers DeVleming and Schimmels. Against: Councilmembers Gothmann, Munson, and Denenny. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. UTILITIES: It was decided that throughout the chapter, "private utilities" would be changed to "public and private" utilities, including the chapter title on page 1. 6.5 Goals & Policies Council began deliberation on page 10. Council discussed some goals and policies and did not discuss others where they had no comments or suggested changes. Even after lengthy discussion, Council chose not to make any changes to several goals and policies, and therefore, only those goals and policies with recommended changes are noted below. During the discussion, franchise agreements were mentioned and City Attorney Connelly said he will research to see if we have water district franchise agreements. There was council consensus for the following changes: PUP 3.2: Change to read: "Promote joint planning and coordination of public and private utility activities by providing timely notice to affected private and public utilities of City construction projects, including the maintenance and repair of existing roads." PUP 3.5: Change to read: "Based upon applicable regulations, the City should require the undergrounding of utility distribution lines in new subdivisions. The City should encourage the under grounding of utility distribution lines in new construction and significantly reconstructed facilities, consistent with all applicable laws." PUP 3.6: Change to read: "Based upon applicable regulations, the City should work with the utilities..." PUP 3.7: Change to read: "The city should work with appropriate entities to prepare right -of -way vegetation plans to ensure that the needs of landscaping and screening are balanced with the need to prevent negative impact to the utilities." It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded, and unanimously passed to extend the meeting to 9:15 p.m. Minutes Study Session 01 -31 -06 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: 02 -14 -06 PUP 3.11: Because this goal incorporated by reference (rather than using as a guide or other similar verbiage) the Regional Utility Corridor Plan without having the entire Plan available for review, staff (Greg McCormick and Scott Kuhta) will re -word this goal and bring back for further Council consideration. PUP 3.12: Council consensus to delete this as it was determined this should be in the franchise agreement rather than stated here as a policy. OTHER CHANGES: 6.2.3 Vera Water & Power — Description of Utility Third line from bottom of first paragraph:... and Vera located on the northwest corner of Sullivan Road and 36 - not 38 Second paragraph: Vera purchases the "majority" (not 100 %) of its power from the Bonneville Power Administration. Planning Manager McCormick mentioned that a Comcast representative is here tonight, and that Comcast is now providing telephone service; so there may be some necessary text changes to be made based on that new information. It was Council consensus that councilmembers may submit any scrivener's errors found throughout the entire Comprehensive Plan, to the City Clerk who will make the changes without further council approval. Mayor Wilhite announced that this completes the utilities chapter, other than those issuing for further refinement; and the next comprehensive plan discussion will focus on economic development. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. ATTEST: 4 II hristine Bainbridge, City Clerk Diana Wilhite, Mayor Minutes Study Session 01 -31 -06 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: 02 -14 -06