Loading...
2008, 12-02 Study Session MinutesPresent: Councilmembers: Rich Munson, Mayor Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Diana Wilhite, Councilmember Absent: Steve Taylor, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Tuesday, December 2, 2008 Mayor Munson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the meeting. Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner John Whitehead, Human Resources Manager Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Bill Miller, IT Specialist Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Taylor from tonight's meeting. ACTION ITEM L(added agenda item) A ii/r n°:tOns derat OrTI da C su VApproval _J ohn Whitehead It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann and seconded to close City Hall Friday, December 26, 2008, for the entire workday, and to remain open for the entire workday Wednesday, December 31, 2008. Human Resources Manager Whitehead reported that last year Council approved closing City Hall the entire day Christmas Eve, which was a Monday, and to remain open the entire day New Year's Eve; and he asked for Council's consideration in closing City Hall on Friday, December 26, 2008. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Councilmember Dempsey asked about the rationale for staying open on New Year's Eve, and City Manager Mercier said that in previous years, many people travel for the Christmas holiday but many do not leave town for the New Year's holiday, therefore we would be able to provide service throughout the day on New Year's Eve. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. REGULAR STUDY SESSION ITEMS: 1. Smart Routes — Eve Nelson, Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) SRTC Senior Transportation Planner Eve Nelson explained that Smart Routes is the Spokane area's plan to significantly increase transportation choices for walking and bicycling by making safer and more convenient trails, sidewalks and bike facilities; that in 2007, the Rails to Tails Conservancy (RTC) invited the Spokane area to participate in their nationwide effort to double the active transportation spending in the next federal Transportation Budget, and as part of the doubling, the RTC envisions a $2 billion dollar program serving at least forty communities, with $50 million per community over six years, to promote the growth of biking, walking and connections to transit. Ms. Nelson explained that the Smart Routes plan will add fifteen miles of sidewalks to connect people to transit, employment centers, shopping destinations, schools, and entertainment; that it will complete crucial gaps and remove hazardous crossings along the Centennial Trail, will complete the Fish Lake Trail section closer to Spokane, will install new bicycle /pedestrian bridges to increase connections and safety, will extend and connect active transportation facilities with under - served communities, and will implement education and Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 Study Session Meeting Minutes: 12 -02 -08 Page 1 of 5 encouragement programs to increase walking and bicycling; and she showed a map of the proposed project types. Ms. Nelson said SRTC is asking for support from Spokane Valley to help create a regional voice in their collective efforts to make this request at the federal level; adding that the future of this project is to continue their outreach to businesses and others, and confirmed that the trail will be wheelchair accessible with a five to eight -foot wide paved trail. In response to question concerning why have the trail run parallel to the Centennial Trail, Ms. Nelson said there are some river crossings on the Centennial which prohibit access to schools on the other side of the river; and also in response to question, she noted that once the pavement is in, other grants will be sought to cover the maintenance and operation, including the question of police patrolling; and that lighting for safety will be an issue addressed during the design features section of the plan. Ms Nelson also mentioned that the focus on this trail is to serve a trip purpose rather than a trail strictly recreational in nature; and that they would appreciate a letter of support from this Council for this program. Mayor Munson asked if there was a time constraint, and Ms. Nelson replied that there is none. Mayor Munson said that Council will add this topic as a future topic of discussion, and Council thanked Ms. Nelson for her presentation. 2. Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan — Scott Kuhta Community Development Director McClung explained that tonight's deliberation session will include revisiting Section 2 Orientation; review of staff's comparisons of current development projects with the applicability section of the proposed development regulations; review of our adopted non - conforming regulations compared to other cities; that staff will also present an overview of the Spokane Valley Chamber's presentation of the concept redevelopment; and then Council will begin deliberations on specific requests for individual properties. As a visual aid, Ms. McClung displayed "easel pad post -it- notes" showing the goals for tonight's meeting, i.e. (1) Nonconforming issues; (2) Short review of how the plan works (examples from Chamber of Commerce); (3) Boundaries of the plan (individual parcel requests); and (4) District zones; and for Council's quick review, the large easel post -it notes also displayed the definition of "New Construction" i.e. New Construction: defined as an entirely new structure or the reconstruction, remodel, rehabilitation or expansion of a building costing more than 50% of the assessed or appraised value of the existing structure and land. Ms. McClung also explained that nonconforming uses are legally established uses when the code was originally adopted; and she said that since then, there have been code changes and these nonconforming uses deal with the physical part of the development that might not meet the code, such as setbacks. Ms. McClung explained about nonconforming uses and rebuilding after damage, and she compared what we are proposing to other municipalities such as the City of Spokane (which she said was not helpful and was difficult to compare), the City of Kent and Federal Way as they are similar to our city's size, and the city of Liberty Lake; and that she found that what we are proposing is more generous then what others are providing [see attached copies of PowerPoint slides for examples of projects and comparisons]. Council/staff discussion included mention that a nonconforming provision generally is for one year and that property owners may replace a nonconforming provision with another nonconforming provision under certain conditions; other examples of what could or could not be allowed with nonconforming uses including expansion onto an adjacent parcel if such were under the same ownership; appraisal methods and assessment methods versus market value, including mention that not everyone can afford an independent appraisal; that Federal Way code has "assessed or appraised value — whichever is greater" and that such would be beneficial to the property owner; and of the desire to make such clarification in our plan. Continued discussion of nonconforming uses and examples resulted in Council consensus to accept the changes to the nonconforming use definition, and to accept the definition of new construction. Council also asked if staff could keep updating the website once consensus has been reached on various points; and Mr. Kuhta replied it is possible, but difficult to keep updating the website until the Council recommended full draft is ready for further public review. Study Session Meeting Minutes: 12 -02 -08 Approved by Council: 12 - 09 - 08 Page 2 of 5 In an effort to further clarify the development standards, Mr. Kuhta then reviewed those standards and the mechanisms of the code; including the various site development regulations, street and open space regulations, parking regulations, architectural regulations, and signage regulations, and reviewed how those development regulations are set out including the various charts accompanying each section; which resulted in Mayor Munson asking staff to develop a FAQ (frequently asked questions) list for the public because many have expressed that the plan is confusing to read and complicated. Community Development Director McClung added that once the plan is implemented, there will be informational handouts explaining the processes, and what is and is not allowed, which will be beneficial to staff and to the public. Mayor Munson called for a short recess at 7:26 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:35 p.m., at which time Mr. Kuhta reviewed the Valley Chamber's presentation, followed by discussion on individual letters concerning property issues, with the following results: 1. Scotts property — no consensus to leave this in the plan or take out; this will be discussed again when full council is present 2. Nishamora — not in the plan 3. Valley Best Way — keep in plan as that business can continue as it is grandfathered 4. Ruby motors — come back during the "use" discussion 5. Grafos property — extend nonconforming south across Sprague at approximately Moore (confirm at boundary discussion); everything east keep existing zoning There was also discussion on rights -of -way, the need for 100' as required by the comp plan; the need to have zoning consistent with the comp plan, adjacent properties and future developments; discussion on Mr. Kuhta's handout specific to address the neighborhood centers and how they were identified and developed, mentioning we are trying to get away from strip- retail and have more compact centers; mention of moving the neighborhood centers and the impact that might cause; and that pre- located streets will be a separate discussion on the regulations proposed and when that is discussed, Public Works staff should be included in that discussion. 3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Munson City Manager Mercier mentioned the winter retreat is scheduled for Monday, January 5, and will include the legislative agenda and that we will compare our legislative agenda with legislative agendas of other entities to get a sense of what everyone in the regional wants to accomplish. Deputy Mayor Denenny mentioned he has an article from CH2M Hill regarding the TMDL and the UAA, and should any councilmember wish a copy, to please let him know. Mr. Mercier also mentioned that another element is being added to the legislative agenda, that of fuel purchases; and he briefly explained about his visit with Senator McCaslin concerning the proposal to consider adding gasoline and diesel fuels to the list of commodities bought via a State bid, and the idea that all the cities, counties, school districts, and other special purpose districts be granted access to the high volume discount cost per gallon; which should result in reduced operating expenses and lower costs for all due to the high volume bid purchasing and lawful relief of federal fuel tax expenses. Mayor Munson mentioned the upcoming Planning Commission appointments, and said we received fourteen applications, and he asked that Councilmembers give him their recommendations prior to the end of this week. 4. Information Only: The following agenda items were for information only and were not reported or discussed: Contract updates for Senske and YMCA Aquatics, Transportation Benefit District Update, Draft Memorandum of Understanding, Prosecutor Services, STA Funds regarding Intersections, Spokane County Library District Third Quarter Report and Department Reports. Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 Study Session Meeting Minutes: 12 -02 -08 Page 3 of 5 5. Council Check-in — Mayor Munson. Mayor Munson mentioned several upcoming meetings: December 10 meeting where representatives from Spokane County will discuss the wastewater treatment plant; and said the meeting is scheduled for 9:00 a.m. to noon likely in the County's Human Resources meeting room. December 11 meeting with stakeholders and EPA and the DOE to work out the details of concerns; that the EPA will hold a press conference in the morning, and the post lunch session will likely last several hours. Mayor Munson said he and others meet with Jay Manning of the DOE who indicated they want to work with us; and Mayor Munson said that he asked the state legislators to put some political pressure on this issue as an entire County should not be shut down based on unachievable rules. Councilmember Gothmann asked about the financial projection for sales tax and Mr. Mercier said that the figures we received are about two months behind the sales transactions; and that last week he was alerted to the September receipts, which were approximately $200,000 lower for September; but that we have budgeted reserves, and the 2009 budget is balanced. 6. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier - N/A There being no further business, Mayor Munson adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. ichar, Munson, Mayor Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 Study Session Meeting Minutes: 12 -02 -08 Page 4 of 5 NOTES FROM EASEL POST -IT `STICKY NOTES" New Construction: defined as an entirely new structure OR the reconstruction, remodel, rehabilitation or expansion of a building costing more than 50% of the assessed or appraised value of the existing structure and land. Tonight's Goals 1. Nonconforming issues 2. Short review how plan works (examples from Chamber of Commerce) 3. Boundaries of plan (individual parcel requests) 4. District zones Applicability City Center: New construction Additions 20% + of floor area Other district zones: New construction Exterior improvements (all zones) exceeding 20% value of building & land must meet architectural standards Nonconforming — as proposed Add assessed/appraised value clarification Scotts property — no consensus Nishamora — not in the plan Valley Best Way — keep in plan Ruby Motors — come back when "use" discussion Grafos — extend nonconforming south across Sprague at approx Moore (confirm at boundary discussion); everything east keep existing zoning Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 Study Session Meeting Minutes: 12 -02 -08 Page 5 of 5 Non - conforming Considerations Goals for Nonconforming Provisions • Provide some flexibility for existing uses after codes change. • Long Term- Bring non - conforming uses, development and buildings into compliance with current codes. Investment in non - conforming development usually discouraged. Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 ice- -i1, 1 Types of Nonconformances • Use • Development • Rebuilding after Damage SARP • New regulations apply to: — City Center : • New construction (new buildings or reconstruction or expansion valued more than 50% of building and land) • AND additions greater than 20% of building area • AND exterior improvements more than 20% of building and land shall conform to architectural regulations. Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 2 SARP • Other districts: — New construction (new buildings or reconstruction with value of more than 50% of building and land) — Exterior improvements with.a value of 20 %+ of building and land shall conform to the architectural standards. SARP • Refers all nonconforming issues back to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 3 Nonconforming (NC) Use • SVMC- conformance after 12 months discontinuance. Owner may replace use with another NC use under certain conditions. • LL- 12 months discontinuance and no expansions. • FW- OK as long as not abandoned. • Spokane- Depends on what zone it is in. Conditional use permits issued in some cases. • Kent- Can transfer NC rights. Director can approve expansions. Example (NC Use) • Used car dealership- not in Auto Row • SVMC- - can continue in current location as long as use is not discontinued for 12 months. — May be expanded within same lot. — Another NC use can occupy the site if under certain conditions: • More conforming than previous use • Has no greater demand on traffic • Does not adversely affect neighbors Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 4 NC Use Example • LL- same except can't be expanded • FW- almost the same except can't be expanded • Spokane- Depends on zone. May require conditional use permit. • Kent- Same as SVMC. Director can approve expansions. NC Development • SARP- - In City Center- Bring into compliance if new construction or (if floor area 20 % +) or — In Other- Bring into compliance if new construction. — All property 20 %+ assessed or appraised value of building and land- compliance architectural . • LL- Cannot be made more NC. • FW- Proportionate to change or conformance if 50 %+ assessed or appraised value. • Spokane- Depends on zone • Kent - Must be brought into conformance if there is change in use. Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 5 NC Development Example • New Winco —Old Homebase building • Land Value- $1,132,490 • Improvements- $4,488,000 • Total- assessed value- $5,620,490 • Project Value- $6,200,000 • SARP- definition of new construction includes remodel costing more than 50% of assessed value of structures and land. — Would require complete conformance with all codes University City/West Valley School District Example Land Value- $471,890 Building Value- $515,400 Total- $987,290 Project value- $643,330 Exterior Improvements- $100,000 SARP- 50% of total land and building value= $493,645 Require conformance If only doing exterior Improvements 20 %+ of building and land= 197,450 Does not require compliance with architectural regulations Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 6 University Example • , Liberty Lake- Can't be made more non- conforming • FW- 50% of assessed value= $493,645 — Conformance would be required. • Spokane- Depends on the zone. • Kent- Conformance would have been required because it is a change of use. Damaged Improvements • SVMC- Must be replaced with conforming if damage is 80 %+ of market value of the structure. • LL- if 50 %+ of replacement cost, then must meet new standard. • FW- Must be replaced with conforming if 75 %+ of appraised or assessed value. Different standards for city center. • Spokane- In most cases, must be replaced with conforming if 60 %+ value of improvements. • Kent- May be replaced as long as within one year. Approved by Council: 12 -09 -08 7 Spol�ne Valley December 2, 2008 Senator Bob McCaslin Fourth Legislative District PO Box 40404 Olympia WA 98504 -0404 Subject: Cost Saving Suggestion — State Motor Fuels Bid Dear Senator McCaslin: I am following up on our brief conversation of this afternoon. Again, there is no shortage of people approaching the Legislature asking for funding of one type or another. In fact, the City of Spokane Valley is seeking state support for two capital budget items about which you have already signed a letter of support. This City also wants to assist the Legislature in identifying ways to save taxpayers money. Toward that end, we offer a suggestion that should cost little for the state to implement, but carries the potential for huge taxpayer savings at all levels of government. Background The State now acquires a variety of commodities via state bids and allows other echelons of government the opportunity to purchase the same supplies from the successful bidders. By aggregating its purchases through high volume bids, the State and its political subdivisions reap significant savings. The system works. Proposed Action Some of the highest cost commodity expenses impacting government operations are the market costs of motor fuels that power gasoline and diesel vehicles relied upon to provide services to citizens. Yet, we are not aware of a State bid for acquiring these fuels types. We propose consideration of adding gasoline and diesel fuels to the list of commodities bought via a State bid. And, we propose that all of the cities, counties, school districts, and the more than 1200 special purpose district doing the business of the public in Washington be granted access to' the high volume discount cost per gallon. We believe that fuels purchased in this manner are also free of the federal fuel tax. Hence, there is a two -part opportunity to reduce operating expenses; lower costs for all due to high volume bid purchasing and lawful relief of federal fuel tax expenses. Please let us know what you think of the proposal and when and how you might act on it. Thank you for your consideration. David Mercier, City Manager CC: Representative Larry Crouse Representative Matt Shea Spokane Valley City Council 11707 E. Sprague Ave. • Suite 106 • Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 921 -1000 • Fax (509) 921 -1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org District Office: PO Box 1384 Veradale WA 99037