Agenda 09/10/2015 *Wane
Valle
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Special Meeting Agenda
City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 E. Sprague Ave.
September 10, 2015 6:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 27, 2015
VI. COMMISSION REPORTS
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
A. Public Hearing: CTA-2015-0005, Proposed amendments to
Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapter 17.80 Permit
Processing Procedures, Chapter 18.20 Hearing Examiner,
Appendix A— Definitions
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Council Chambers—City Hall,
August 27,2015
Chairman Stoy called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the
pledge of allegiance. Ms.Heath took roll and the following members and staff were present:
Kevin Anderson Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Heather Graham Marty Palaniuk,Planner
Tim Kelley Deanna Horton,Administrative Assistant
Mike Phillips
Susan Scott
Joe Stoy
Sam Wood Elisha Heath, Secretary of the Commission
Commissioner Wood moved to approve the August 27, 2015 agenda. The vote on the motion was seven in
favor, zero against, the motion passes.
Commissioner Wood moved to accept the July 9, 2015 minutes as presented. The Commission approved
minutes with a vote on the motion of seven in favor, zero against.
COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Kelley reported he attended the Traders Club Meetings.
Commissioner Wood attended the Painted Hills Preservation Association meeting, as well as the Spokane
Home Builders Association Government Affairs Meeting. The other Commissioners had no reports.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT:
Planner Marty Palaniuk reported the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) has been approved by the
Department of Ecology and will take effect September 4, 2015. October 1, 2015 the city of Rockford is
holding a short course on local planning 6:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. at the Rockford Council Chambers.
PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment.
COMMISSION BUSINESS:
Study Session CTA-2015-0005 Proposed Amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)
Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures, Table 17.80-1 — Permit Type and Land Use
Application; SVMC Chapter 18.20 Hearing Examiner, Section 18.20.030 — Powers and Duties;
SVMC Appendix A,Definitions.
Planner Marty Palaniuk gave a presentation to the Commission outlining the proposed amendments
to SVMC 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures, Table 17.80-1 Permit Type and Land Use
Application; SVMC Chapter 18.20 Hearing Examiner, Section 18.20.030 Powers and Duties; SVMC
Appendix A, Definitions. These are amendments to the SVMC to provide consistency and reflect
changes in the SMP. There is some code compliance housekeeping included in this amendment.
Within Appendix A staff deleted the shoreline specific definitions from the development code. If one
of the definitions were to change staff would only need to update one document. Mr. Palaniuk listed
the definitions that had been deleted. The proposed amendment will also modify Chapter 17.80,
Table 17.80-1,which is a table of all the permits the City processes,and clarifies what type of permit
applies to each land use application. The SMP establishes the process for the following permits: a
shoreline letter of exemption; a shoreline conditional use permit; a shoreline variance; and a
substantial development permit. Additional language will be added to the end of this section to call
out any procedures and processes within the SMP that may also apply to the permit.Within the table:
• added a shoreline letter of exemption;
• deleted shoreline permit exemption,a dock permit;
• added a shoreline conditional use permit, a shoreline nonconforming use/structure review,
and shoreline variance to the table in Type II permits.
08-27-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 2
In Section C if anything in the SMP applies to a specific permit as far as processing then that
protocol will be followed One area would be under decision,when one of these permits is issued it is
subject to Department of Ecology review. The amendment will also modify Chapter 17.90 Decision
and Appeals which calls out to whom the shoreline permits will be appealed. There are proposed
changes to the code enforcement section. Commissioner Stoy asked if the Shoreline Hearing Board
is the Hearing Examiner or if it is a different entity. Mr. Palaniuk replied that it is a different entity.
The amendment calls out the specific permits that will be reviewed by the Shoreline Hearing Board.
This amendment also modifies SVMC 18.20.030 Powers and Duties of the Hearing Examiner. Staff
removed the conditional use permits from the SMP from matters that the Hearing Examiner will hear
and add shoreline letter of exemption.
Commissioner Kelley asked if the approval authority for a permit is determined by type; is this
information from an old or new procedure. Mr. Palaniuk replied the approvals are the way it is right
now and will remain the same. The addition of Shoreline Permits to Type II is the only change. Mr.
Kelley asked if these permits will be approved by the Department. Mr. Palaniuk stated that is correct
but any shoreline permit will require Department of Ecology review and they have the opportunity to
return it to the City or approve it.
Commissioner Wood inquired about the logic behind the Hearing Examiner no longer hearing
shoreline conditional use permits and variances under the shoreline master program. . Originally the
Hearing Examiner under the former SMP heard shoreline conditional use permits. It was decided that
a public hearing was not required for that approval since it goes through the Department and then on
to Department of Ecology, which has a public comment section. Mr. Driskell stated this was done to
streamline the process, and not duplicate the process. Mr. Wood clarified the Hearing Examiner's
decision on conditional use permits would not be binding because Department of Ecology could
change that ruling.
Mr. Wood asked for clarification of administrative approval and department approval. Mr. Palaniuk
clarified that administrative approval would be done with the Senior Planner and Department
approval would be done by the Department Director.
Commissioner Graham asked about when the opportunity was for public comment period on
shoreline conditional use permits. Mr. Palaniuk responded a notification is placed in the official
newspaper. Commissioner Stoy asked why the Hearing Examiner would need to hear the appeal of a
building permit. Mr. Driskell clarified citizens need to have the ability to appeal the determination or
issuance of a building permit if they felt it was issued in error or they are opposed to the building,
they need an avenue to challenge it. . They would appeal that to the Hearing Examiner and they
could appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision to Superior Court.
Commissioner Anderson asked if it was possible to recommend approval of the amendment tonight
since it is housekeeping issue. Mr. Palaniuk clarified that it is a proposed amendment to the SVMC
which requires a public hearing; it could not be moved forward then. The public hearing has been
noticed for September 10. Mr. Driskell further clarified the need to follow the stated process.
Commissioner Wood asked if the conditional use permits outside the SMP will still be heard by the
Hearing Examiner. Mr. Palaniuk stated this portion of the SVMC is not being changed.
GOOD OF THE ORDER: Nothing presented.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
Joe Stoy,Chairperson Date signed
Elisha Heath, Secretary
08-27-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Planning Commission Action
Meeting Date: September 10, 2015
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business
® public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin.report ❑ pending legislation
FILE NUMBER: CTA-2015-0005
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing—Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Text Updates
to achieve consistency with the Shoreline Master Program(SMP).
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City-initiated Code Text Amendment to update Spokane Valley
Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures, Table 17.80-1 —Permit Type and
Land Use Application; Chapter 17.90 Appeals, Table 17.90-1 — Decision/Appeal Authority, SVMC
Chapter 18.20 Hearing Examiner, Section 18.20.030 — Powers and Duties; SVMC Appendix A
Definitions.
Proponent: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.106; SVMC 17.80.150 and 19.30.040
PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: A study session was conducted at the August 27, 2015 planning
commission meeting.
BACKGROUND: On December 9,2014 the City Council approved Ordinance No. 14-020, adopting the
Shoreline Master Program (SMP) in order to submit the document to the Department of Ecology (DOE)
for review and approval. On August 21, 2015 DOE approved the SMP with an effective date of
September 4, 2015. As a result,the SVMC must be modified to be consistent with the permit procedures
and defmitions contained in the updated SVMC.
The updated SMP has new or modified definitions that are inconsistent with SVMC Appendix A-
Definitions. The changes are reflected in the amendment to Appendix A.
Because DOE is the final review authority for shoreline conditional use permits they are classified as a
Type II permit in SVMC 17.80 and will no longer be heard by the HEX. A public hearing before the
HEX creates a significant time and cost burden to the applicant. It would provide very little public
benefit for the HEX to hold a hearing and author a decision only to have DOE overrule the decision upon
review.
The updated SMP establishes permitting processes for several shoreline permits including shoreline
variance, shoreline conditional use and shoreline substantial development permits. Permits are approved
and appealed based on their permit classification (Type I, II, III, or IV). Since DOE approves the SMP,
the agency becomes a partner with the City in implementing the program. Shoreline permits issued by the
City are reviewed by DOE for consistency with the SMP before becoming effective. Therefore, shoreline
permits are appealed to the Shorelines Hearings Board which is outside the normal appeal process for a
land use decision. The appeal authority for shoreline permits is further clarified in changes to Table
17.90-1 —Decision/Appeal Authority.
The shoreline letter of exemption is called out as a Type I permit that is appealed to the HEX to avoid
ambiguity. This change is reflected in the amendment to SVMC Title 18.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Forward the proposed amendment to City Council with a
recommendation to approve.
STAFF CONTACT: Martin Palaniuk, Planner
RPCA for CTA-2015-0005 Public Hearing
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Amendments
2. Staff Report
3. Presentation
RPCA for CTA-2015-0005 Public Hearing
Chapter 17.80
PERMIT PROCESSING PROCEDURES
Sections:
17.80.010 Purpose and applicability.
17.80.020 Types of development applications.
17.80.030 Assignment of development application classification.
17.80.040 Exempt activities.
17.80.050 Development application requirements.
17.80.060 Final decision authority.
17.80.070 Required application procedures.
17.80.080 Pre-application conference.
17.80.090 Counter-complete determination.
17.80.100 Fully complete determination.
17.80.110 Notice of application.
17.80.120 Notice of public hearing.
17.80.130 Final decision.
17.80.140 Type IV applications—Comprehensive Plan amendments, development agreements associated
with a Comprehensive Plan amendment, and area-wide rezones.
17.80.150 Type IV applications—Text amendments to the uniform development code.
17.80.160 Optional consolidated review process.
17.80.010 Purpose and applicability.
A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standardized decision-making procedures for reviewing
development and land use applications within the City. This chapter is intended to:
1.Assure prompt review of development applications;
2. Provide for necessary public review and comment on development applications;
3. Minimize adverse impacts on surrounding land uses;
4. Encourage flexibility and innovation in the design and layout of development proposals; and
5. Ensure consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations.
B.Applicability. This chapter applies to all development applications identified in the SVMC. (Ord. 07-015 §4,
2007).
17.80.020 Types of development applications.
Land use and development applications will be classified as follows:
A.Type I procedures apply to permits and decisions issued administratively;
B.Type II procedures apply to administrative actions that contain some discretionary criteria;
C. Type III procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain discretionary approval criteria;
D. Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision, or large-
scale implementation of public policy;
E. Exempt applications defined in SVMC 17.80.040. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.030 Assignment of development application classification.
A. Assignment by Table. Land use and development applications shall be classified pursuant to the following
table:
Table 17.80-1 —Permit Type and Land Use Application
Type Land Use and Development Application SVMC Cross-
Reference
Accessory dwelling units 19.40.100
Administrative determinations by community development director, public works Multiple
director, or building official
Administrative exception 19.140
Administrative interpretation 17.50.010
Boundary line adjustments and eliminations 20.80
Building permits not subject to SEPA 21.20.040
Floodplain development 21.30
Grading permits 24.50
Type I Home occupation permit 19.40.140
Shoreline letter of exemption 21.50
Minor modifications of development agreements 19.30.015(1)
Record of survey to establish lots within a binding site plan 20.60.040
Right-of-way permits 22.130.100
Shoreline permit exemption (dock permit) 21.50
Site plan review 19.130
Temporary use permit 19.160
Time extensions for preliminary subdivision, short subdivision or binding site plan 20.30.060
Alterations—Preliminary and final subdivisions, short subdivisions, binding site 20.50
plans
Binding site plan—Preliminary and final 20.50
Binding site plan—Change of conditions 20.50
SEPA threshold determination 21.20.060
Shoreline conditional use permit 21.50
Type 11 Shoreline nonconforming use or structure review 21.50
Shoreline substantial development permit 21.50
Shoreline variance 21.50
Short subdivision—Preliminary and final 20.30, 20.40
Preliminary short subdivision, binding site plan—Change of conditions 20.30
Wireless communication facilities 22.120
T e III Conditional use permits 19.150
yp Planned residential developments 19.50
Table 17.80-1 —Permit Type and Land Use Application
Type Land Use and Development Application SVMC Cross-
Reference
ross-
Reference
Plat vacation 20.70.020
Preliminary subdivision—Change of conditions 20.50
Subdivisions—Preliminary 20.30
Variance 19.170
Zoning map amendments (site-specific rezones) 19.30.030
Annual Comprehensive Plan amendments (text and/or map) 17.80.140
Area-wide zoning map amendments 17.80.140
Type IV
Development agreements associated with Comprehensive Plan amendments 17.80.140
Development code text amendments 17.80.150
B.Assignment by Director. Land use and development applications not defined in SVMC Table 17.80-1 shall
be assigned a type by the director, unless exempt under SVMC 17.80.040. When one or more than one
procedure may be appropriate, the process providing the greatest opportunity for public notice shall be
followed.
C. Shoreline letters of exemption, shoreline substantial development permits, shoreline conditional use permits,
shoreline variances, and shoreline nonconforming use or structure review shall be processed pursuant to the
procedures set forth in SVMC 17.80, subject to any additional or modified procedures provided in SVMC 21.50,
including submittals, completeness review, notices, hearings, and decisions.
17.80.040 Exempt activities.
A. Exemptions. Unless specified elsewhere in this title, the following development activities are exempt from
the procedural requirements of this chapter:
1. Normal or emergency repair or maintenance of public or private buildings, structures, landscaping, or
utilities.
2.A change of any legally established use is exempt; unless the change of use requires:
a. An increase in the number of parking spaces provided;
b. A conditional use permit under Chapter 19.150 SVMC;
c.A site plan approval under Chapter 19.130 SVMC; or
d. Review by SEPA.
3. Final subdivisions, short subdivisions, and binding site plans.
4. Building permits that are not subject to SEPA.
5. On-site utility permits not obtained in conjunction with a specific development application including,
but not limited to, sewer hook-ups,water hook-ups, right-of-way permits, and fire department permits.
6. Sign permits.
7. Interior remodeling and tenant improvements unless site plan review is required under Chapter 19.130
SVMC.
B. Other Regulations. Applications exempt under this section remain subject to all other applicable standards
and requirements of the SVMC. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.050 Development application requirements.
A.Application Forms.All applications shall be made on forms provided by the department. The director shall
have authority to modify application materials.
B. Submittal Information.All applications shall include the information required in applicable provisions of this
code as identified in SVMC Table 17.80-2 and other additional information required by the department.
C. Fees. Fees as required by Chapter 17.110 SVMC. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.060 Final decision authority.
The final decision for application type shall be made by:
A. Type I —the department.
B.Type II —the department.
C. Type III —the hearing examiner.
D. Type IV—the city council preceded by a recommendation by planning commission. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.070 Required application procedures.
The required procedures for Type I, II, and III applications are set forth in the following table. The specific
procedures required for Type IV applications are set forth in SVMC 17.80.140 and 17.80.150.
Table 17.80-2—Permit Type and Land Use Application
Pre- Counter- Fully complete Notice of Notice of Final
Application application complete determination application public decision
Type conference determination 17.80.100 17.80.110 hearing and notice
17.80.080 17.80.090 17.80.120 17.80.130
I
0 X X N/A N/A X
*II **O X X X N/A X
III X X X X X X
X Required 0 Optional N/A Not Applicable
*Does not apply to SEPA threshold determinations. Refer to SVMC 21.20.070(B)(2)for noticing
requirements.
**Except for short subdivisions and binding site plans which require a pre-application meeting.
(Ord. 09-010§ 1, 2009; Ord. 07-015§4,2007).
17.80.080 Pre-application conference.
A. Purpose. To provide the City and other agency staff with a sufficient level of detail about the proposed
development; to enable staff to advise the applicant of applicable approvals and requirements; to acquaint the
applicant with the applicable requirements of the SVMC and other laws; and to identify issues and concerns in
advance of a formal application.
B. Pre-Application. Type II and III applicants shall schedule a pre-application conference and provide
information requested in advance of the meeting.
C. Pre-Application Waivers.The director may waive the pre-application conference if determined that the
proposal has few development-related issues, involves subsequent phases of an approved development, or is
substantially similar to a prior proposal affecting substantially the same property. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.090 Counter-complete determination.
A. Determination and Application Content. Prior to accepting an application, the department shall determine
whether the application is counter-complete.A counter-complete application shall contain all information
requested in the applicable form. Review for counter-complete status does not include an evaluation of the
substantive adequacy of the information in the application.
B. Incomplete Application. If the department determines that the application is not counter-complete, the
application shall be rejected and the applicant advised of the information needed to complete the application.
C. Counter-Complete Application. Counter-complete applications shall be accepted for review for fully complete
determination. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.100 Fully complete determination.
A. Determination. Once a counter-complete application has been accepted, the department shall,within 28
calendar days, provide a written determination delivered by mail or in person to the applicant that the
application is fully complete, or if incomplete, a list of what is required to make the application complete. The
names of agencies of local, state, or federal governments that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the
application to the extent known by the City will be provided to the applicant.
B. Incomplete Application. If the necessary information is not provided by the applicant within 60 days, the
department shall:
1. Reject and return the application;
2. Issue a decision denying the application, based on a lack of information. The applicant may reinitiate
the fully complete review process without additional fees; provided, that the required information is
provided by a date specified by the department; or
3. The applicant may withdraw the application by submitting a request in writing and may be entitled to
the return of up to 80 percent of the fees submitted.
C. Fully Complete Application. If the department determines that any application is fully complete, the
department shall, within 14 calendar days, issue a notice of application pursuant to SVMC 17.80.110.
D. Request for Additional Information.A fully complete determination shall not preclude the City from
requesting additional information, studies or changes to submitted information or plans if new information is
required or substantial changes to the proposal occur.
E. Revocation.An application's fully complete and vesting status may be revoked if the department determines
that the applicant intentionally submitted false information.
F. Within 14 calendar days after an applicant has submitted additional information identified by the City as
necessary for a complete application, the City shall notify the applicant whether the application is complete or
what additional information is necessary. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.110 Notice of application.
A. Contents.Within 14 calendar days after an application is determined fully complete, the department shall
issue a notice of application.
1.All notices of applications shall include the following:
a. The case file number(s), the date of application, and the date a fully complete application was
filed;
b.A description of the proposed project and a list of project permits included with the application,
as well as the identification of other permits not included in the application, to the extent known to
the City;
c. The proposed SEPA threshold determination, if applicable;
d. The identification of any existing environmental documents that may be used to evaluate the
proposed project;
e.A statement of the public comment period; a statement that the public has the right to comment
on the application, receive notice of the decision, and request a copy of the decision once made,
and a statement of any appeal rights;
f. The name of the applicant or applicant's authorized representative and the name, address, and
telephone number of a contact person for the applicant, if any;
g.A description of the site, including current zoning and nearest road intersections, sufficient to
inform the reader of its location and zoning;
h.A map showing the subject property in relation to other properties or a reduced copy of the site
plan;
i. The date, place, and times where information about the application may be examined and the
name and telephone number of the City representative to contact about the application; and
j.Any additional information determined appropriate by the department.
2. In addition to the requirements listed in subsection (A)(1)of this section, a Type II notice of application
shall state:
a. That failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may
result in the denial of the application;
b. That all evidence relied upon by the department to make the decision shall be contained within
the record and is available for public review, and that copies can be obtained at a reasonable cost
from the department;
c. That after the comment period closes, the department shall issue a Type II notice of decision.
3. In addition to the requirements listed in subsection (A)(1)of this section, a Type III application shall
state:
a. That a staff report will be available for inspection at least seven days before the public hearing,
and written comments may be submitted at any time prior to the closing of the record for the public
hearing.
B. Distribution of Notice of Application. The notice of application shall be published in an appropriate regional or
neighborhood newspaper or trade journal and sent to the following persons by regular mail:
1. The applicant;
2.All adjacent property owners of record as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll;
3.Any governmental agency entitled to notice; and
4.Any person filing a written request for a copy of the notice of application.
C. Type I Exception.A notice of application is not required for Type I applications.
D. Comment Period.The department shall allow 14 calendar days for Type II applications and 30 calendar
days for Type III applications after the date the notice of application is mailed and posted on the subject
property, for individuals to submit comments.Within seven calendar days after the close of the public comment
period, the department shall mail to the applicant a copy of written public comments, including e-mail
communications timely received in response to the notice of application together with a statement that the
applicant may submit a written response to these comments within 14 calendar days from the date the
comments are mailed. The department, in making this decision, shall consider written comments timely
received in response to the notice of application and timely written responses to those comments, including e-
mail communications, submitted by the applicant. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.120 Notice of public hearing.
A public hearing is required for Type III applications.
A. Content of Notice of Public Hearing. Notices of public hearing shall contain the following information:
1. The application and/or project number;
2. Project summary/description of each project permit application;
3. The designation of the hearing body;
4. The date, time, and place of the hearing and a statement that the hearing will be conducted in
accordance with the rules of procedure adopted by the hearing body;
5. General project location, vicinity, address, and parcel number(s), if applicable;
6. The name of the applicant or applicant's authorized representative and the name, address and
telephone number of a contact person for the applicant, if any;
7. The SEPA threshold determination, or description thereof, shall be contained in the notice, along with
any appropriate statement regarding any shared or divided lead agency status and phased review and
stating the end of any final comment period;
8.A statement regarding the appeal process; and
9. The date when the staff report will be available and the place and times where it can be reviewed.
B. Distribution of Notices of Public Hearing. Notices of public hearing shall be mailed, posted, and published at
least 15 days prior to the hearing date and shall be distributed as follows:
1. Notice by Mail. All property owners within 400 feet of the subject property by first class mail.Where
any portion of the property abutting the subject property is owned, controlled, or under the option of the
project property owner,then all property owners within a 400-foot radius of the total ownership interest
shall be notified by first class mail. Property owners are those shown on the most recent Spokane
County assessor's/treasurer's database as obtained by the title company no more than 30 calendar days
prior to the scheduled public hearing. In addition, notice shall be sent to the following:
a.Agencies with jurisdiction (SEPA);
b. Municipal corporations or organization with which the City has executed an interlocal agreement;
and
c. Other persons who the City determines may be affected by the proposed action or who
requested such notice in writing.
2. Notice by Sign.A sign a minimum of 16 square feet(four feet in width by four feet in height) in area
shall be posted by the applicant on the site along the most heavily traveled street adjacent to the subject
property. The sign shall be provided by the applicant. The sign shall be constructed of material of
sufficient weight and reasonable strength to withstand normal weather conditions. The sign shall be
lettered and spaced as follows:
a.A minimum of two-inch border on the top, sides, and bottom of the sign;
b. The first line in four-inch letters shall read "Notice of Public Hearing";
c. Spacing between all lines shall be a minimum of three inches; and
d. The text of the sign shall include the following information in three-inch letters:
i. Proposal;
ii.Applicant;
iii. File number;
iv. Hearing (date and time);
v. Location; and
vi. Review authority.
3. Notice by Publication. Publish one notice in an appropriate regional or neighborhood newspaper or
trade journal. (Ord. 07-015 § 4, 2007).
17.80.130 Final decision.
A. Timeline to Make Final Decision —Type I.The department shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a
Type I application within 60 calendar days after the date the application was accepted as fully complete, unless
accompanied by a SEPA checklist. Time spent by the applicant to revise plans or provide additional studies or
materials requested by the City shall not be included in the 60-day period.An applicant may agree in writing to
extend the time in which the department shall issue a decision. The department's decision shall address all of
the relevant approval criteria applicable to the development application.
B. Timeline to Make Final Decision —Type II and III. The final decision on a Type II and III application shall be
made not more than 120 calendar days (90 days for subdivisions)after the date a fully complete determination
is made. This period shall not include:
1. Time spent by the applicant to revise plans or provide additional studies or materials requested by the
City;
2. Time spent preparing an environmental impact statement;
3. Time between submittal and resolution of an appeal; or
4.Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the City in writing.
C. Contents of Final Decision. The final decision on Type II and III applications shall contain the following
information:
1. The nature of the application in sufficient detail to apprise persons entitled to notice of the applicant's
proposal and of the decision;
2. The address or other geographic description of the subject property, including a map of the site in
relation to the surrounding area,where applicable;
3. The date the decision shall become final, unless appealed;
4.A statement that all persons who have standing under Chapter 17.90 SVMC may appeal the decision;
5.A statement in boldface type briefly explaining how an appeal can be filed, the deadline for filing such
an appeal, and where further information can be obtained concerning the appeal;
6.A statement that the complete case file, including findings, conclusions, decisions and conditions of
approval, if any, is available for review. The notice of final decision shall list the place,days, and times
where the case file is available and the name and telephone number of the City representative to contact
about reviewing the case file;
7.A statement of the facts demonstrating how the application does or does not comply with applicable
approval criteria;
8.A statement of the basis of decision pursuant to the SVMC and other applicable law;
9. The reasons for a conclusion to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application;
10. The decision to approve or deny the application and, if approved, conditions of approval necessary
to ensure the proposed development will comply with applicable law; and
11. The date the final decision is mailed.
D. Notice of the Final Decision.All final decisions shall be sent by regular mail to the following:
1. The applicant;
2.Any governmental agency entitled to notice;
3.Any person filing a written request for a copy of the notice of application or the final decision; and
4. Any person who testified at the hearing or who provided substantive written comments on the
application during the public comment period and provided a mailing address. (Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.140 Type IV applications — Comprehensive Plan amendments, development
agreements associated with a Comprehensive Plan amendment, and area-wide rezones.
A. Initiation. Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide rezones may be initiated by any of the following:
1. Property owner(s)or their representatives;
2.Any citizen, agency, neighborhood association, or other party; or
3. The department, planning commission, or city council.
B.Applications.Applications shall be made on forms provided by the City.
C. Application Submittal.
1.Applicant Initiated. Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide rezones shall be subject to a
pre-application conference, counter-complete, and fully complete determinations pursuant to SVMC
17.80.080, 17.80.090, and 17.80.100. The date upon fully complete determination shall be the date of
registration with the department.
2. Non-Applicant Initiated.After submittal of a non-applicant-initiated application, the application shall be
placed on the register.
D. Register of Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Area-Wide Rezones. The department shall establish and
maintain a register of all applications.
E. Concurrent and Annual Review of Register.
1. Sixty days prior to November 1st in each calendar year, the City shall notify the public that the
amendment process has begun. Notice shall be distributed as follows:
a. Notice published in an appropriate regional or neighborhood newspaper or trade journal;
b. Notice posted on all of the City's official public notice boards; and
c. Copy of the notice sent to all agencies, organizations, and adjacent jurisdictions with an interest.
2.All registered applications shall be reviewed concurrently, on an annual basis and in a manner
consistent with RCW 36.70A.130(2).Applications registered after November 1st of the previous calendar
year and before November 1st of the current calendar year shall be included in the annual review. Those
registered after November 1st of the calendar year shall be placed on the register for review at the
following annual review.
3. Emergency Amendments. The City may review and amend the Comprehensive Plan when the city
council determines that an emergency exists or in other circumstances as provided for by RCW
36.70A.130(2)(a).
F. Notice of Public Hearing. Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide rezones require a public hearing
before the planning commission.
1. Contents of Notice.A notice of public hearing shall include the following:
a. The citation, if any, of the provision that would be changed by the proposal along with a brief
description of that provision;
b.A statement of how the proposal would change the affected provision;
c.A statement of what areas, Comprehensive Plan designations, zones, or locations will be directly
affected or changed by the proposal;
d. The date, time, and place of the public hearing;
e.A statement of the availability of the official file; and
f.A statement of the right of any person to submit written comments to the planning commission
and to appear at the public hearing of the planning commission to give oral comments on the
proposal.
2. Distribution of Notice. The department shall distribute the notice pursuant to SVMC 17.80.120(B).
G. Planning Commission Recommendation—Procedure. Following the public hearing, the planning
commission shall consider the applications concurrently, and shall prepare and forward a recommendation of
proposed action for all applications to the city council. The planning commission shall take one of the following
actions:
1. If the planning commission determines that the proposal should be adopted, it may, by a majority vote,
recommend that the city council adopt the proposal. The planning commission may make modifications
to any proposal prior to recommending the proposal to city council for adoption. If the modification is
substantial, the planning commission must conduct a public hearing on the modified proposal;
2. If the planning commission determines that the proposal should not be adopted, it may, by a majority
vote, recommend that the city council not adopt the proposal; or
3. If the planning commission is unable to take either of the actions specified in subsection (G)(1)or(2)
of this section, the proposal will be sent to city council with the notation that the planning commission
makes no recommendation.
H. Approval Criteria.
1. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map amendments if it
finds that:
a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,welfare,
and protection of the environment;
b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with
the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment;
c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property
owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies;
d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or
e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan
amendments:
a. The effect upon the physical environment;
b. The effect on open space,streams, rivers, and lakes;
c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods;
d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public
transportation, parks, recreation, and schools;
e. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region;
f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the
demand for such land;
g. The current and projected population density in the area; and
h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
I. City Council Action.Within 60 days of receipt of the planning commission's findings and recommendations,
the city council shall consider the findings and recommendations of the commission concerning the application
and may hold a public hearing pursuant to council rules. The department shall distribute notice of the council's
public hearing pursuant to SVMC 17.80.120(B).All annual amendments to the Comprehensive Plan shall be
considered concurrently. By a majority vote of its membership, the city council shall:
1.Approve the application;
2. Disapprove the application;
3. Modify the application. If the modification is substantial, the council must either conduct a public
hearing on the modified proposal; or
4. Refer the proposal back to the planning commission for further consideration.
J. Transmittal to the State of Washington.At least 60 days prior to final action being taken by the city council,
the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development(CTED)shall be provided
with a copy of the amendments in order to initiate the 60-day comment period. No later than 10 days after
adoption of the proposal, a copy of the final decision shall be forwarded to CTED. (Ord. 10-004 §2, 2010; Ord.
07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.150 Type IV applications —Text amendments to the uniform development code.
A. Initiation. Text amendments to this code may be initiated by any of the following:
1. Property owner(s)or their representatives;
2.Any citizen, agency, neighborhood association, or other party; or
3. The department, planning commission, or city council.
B.Applications.Applications shall be made on forms provided by the City.
C. Application Submittal.
1.After submittal of an applicant-initiated application, the application shall be subject to a pre-application
conference, counter-complete determination, and fully complete determination pursuant to SVMC
17.80.080, 17.80.090, and 17.80.100.
2.After submittal, the application shall be placed on the next available planning commission agenda.
D. Notice of Public Hearing.Amendments to this code require a public hearing before the planning commission.
1. Contents of Notice.A notice of public hearing shall include the following:
a. The citation, if any, of the provision that would be changed by the proposal along with a brief
description of that provision;
b.A statement of how the proposal would change the affected provision;
c. The date, time, and place of the public hearing;
d.A statement of the availability of the official file; and
e.A statement of the right of any person to submit written comments to the planning commission
and to appear at the public hearing of the planning commission to give oral comments on the
proposal.
2. Distribution of Notice. The department shall distribute the notice to the applicant, newspaper, City Hall
and the main branch of the library.
E. Planning Commission Recommendation—Procedure. Following the public hearing, the planning commission
shall consider the proposal and shall prepare and forward a recommendation to the city council. The planning
commission shall take one of the following actions:
1. If the planning commission determines that the proposal should be adopted, it may, by a majority vote,
recommend that the city council adopt the proposal. The planning commission may make modifications
to any proposal prior to recommending the proposal to city council for adoption. If the modification is
substantial, the planning commission must conduct a public hearing on the modified proposal;
2. If the planning commission determines that the proposal should not be adopted, it may, by a majority
vote, recommend that the city council not adopt the proposal; or
3. If the planning commission is unable to take either of the actions specified in subsection (E)(1)or(2)
of this section, the proposal will be sent to city council with the notation that the planning commission
makes no recommendation.
F. Approval Criteria. The City may approve amendments to this code if it finds that:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan;
and
2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health,safety,welfare, and protection
of the environment.
G. City Council Action.Within 60 days of receipt of the planning commission's findings and recommendations,
the city council shall consider the findings and recommendations of the commission concerning the application
and may hold a public hearing pursuant to council rules. The department shall distribute notice of the council's
public hearing pursuant to SVMC 17.80.120(B). By a majority vote, the city council shall:
1.Approve the application;
2. Disapprove the application;
3. Modify the application. If modification is substantial, the council must either conduct a public hearing
on the modified proposal; or
4. Refer the proposal back to the planning commission for further consideration.
H. Transmittal to the State of Washington.At least 60 days prior to final action being taken by the city council,
the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development(CTED)shall be provided
with a copy of the amendments in order to initiate the 60-day comment period. No later than 10 days after
adoption of the proposal, a copy of the final decision shall be forwarded to CTED. (Ord. 09-010 § 1, 2009; Ord.
07-015 §4, 2007).
17.80.160 Optional consolidated review process.
A. Optional Consolidated Review Process. This optional process provides for the consideration of all
discretionary land use, engineering, and environmental permits issued by the City if requested in writing from
the applicant. Permit decisions of other agencies are not included in this process; but public meetings and
hearings for other agencies may be coordinated with those of the City.Where multiple approvals are required
for a single project, the optional consolidated review process is composed of the following:
1. Pre-Application Meeting. A single pre-application meeting will be conducted for all applications
submitted under the optional consolidated review process.
2. Determination of Completeness.When a consolidated application is deemed complete, a consolidated
determination of completeness will be made pursuant to SVMC 17.80.100.
3. Notice of Application.When a consolidated application is deemed complete, a consolidated notice of
application will be issued pursuant to the provisions of SVMC 17.80.110.
4. Comment Period. The consolidated application shall provide for one comment period for all permits
included in the consolidated application.
5. The City will issue a decision(s)for Type I or Type II permits prior to scheduling a public hearing for
any companion Type III permit.Appeals of administrative permits that are part of a consolidated
application will be heard in a single, consolidated open record appeal hearing before the hearing
examiner on the same agenda as the companion Type III application.
6. Notice of Public Hearing.A single notice of public hearing will be provided for consolidated permit
applications. The notice will include the Type III permit to be heard and any open record appeals of
administrative portions of the consolidated application.
7. Notice of Decision. The hearing examiner shall issue a single notice of decision regarding all Type I
and Type II appeals and all Type III project permit applications subject to a public hearing. (Ord. 07-015
§4, 2007).
Table 17.90-1 —Decision/Appeal Authority
Land Use and Development Decisions Appeal Authority
Type I and II decisions Hearing examiner(SVMC 17.90.040); further
appeal to superior court(Chapter 36.70C RCW)
Building permits Hearing examiner(SVMC 17.90.040); further
appeal to superior court(Chapter 36.70C RCW)
Type III decisions except zoning map amendments Superior court(Chapter 36.70C RCW)
Type III zoning map amendments City council (SVMC 17.90.070); further appeal to
superior court(Chapter 36.70C RCW)
Type IV decisions Superior court
Matters subject to review pursuant to RCW 36.70A.020 Growth Management Hearing Board
Shoreline development permitsShoreline substantial Shoreline Hearings Board (RCW 90.58.180)
development permits, Shoreline conditional use permits, and
Shoreline variances
Compliance and enforcement decisions (Chapter 17.100 Appeal authorityHearinq Examiner(SVMC
SVMC) 17.90.040); further appeal to superior court
(Chapter 36.70C RCW)
Notice and order of violation Hearing examiner(SVMC 17.90.010); further
appeal to superior court
Chapter 18.20
HEARING EXAMINER
Sections:
18.20.010 Authority.
18.20.020 Appointment.
18.20.030 Powers and duties.
18.20.040 Removal.
18.20.050 Ex parte communications.
18.20.060 Conflict of interest.
18.20.010 Authority.
The hearing examiner system is established in accordance with the provisions of RCW 35A.63.170,
36.706.120(3)and Chapter 58.17 RCW et seq. (Ord. 09-023 § 1, 2009; Ord. 07-015 § 4, 2007).
18.20.020 Appointment.
A.The hearing examiner is appointed by the city manager with regard only for qualifications for the duties of
the office. The city manager alternatively may contract for hearing examiner services or may appoint one or
more hearing examiners pro tem.
B. The qualifications for the office of hearing examiner include a license to practice law in the state of
Washington, expertise in land use law and planning and the training and experience necessary to conduct
administrative or quasi-judicial hearings and to issue decisions and recommendations on land use planning and
regulatory matters. (Ord. 09-023 § 1, 2009).
18.20.030 Powers and duties.
A. The hearing examiner shall be under the administrative supervision of the city manager.
B. The hearing examiner shall have the following powers and duties:
1.Annually provide a written report to the city manager, city council and director of the
community development department that states the number and type of hearings conducted
and decisions issued during the past year, the outcome of such decisions, recommendations for
improving the hearing examiner system, and pertinent observations and recommendations
regarding land use policies and development regulations.
2. Upon request, meet with the city manager, city council or director of community development
department to discuss the written report.
3. Receive and examine available information, make site visits, take official notice of matters,
conduct public hearings, prepare a record thereof, and enter findings, decisions or
recommendations.
4.As a part of the conduct of public hearings, the hearing examiner shall have the authority to:
a. Conduct pre-hearing conferences;
b. Require the submittal of information;
c. Schedule and continue hearings;
d. Rule on all evidentiary and procedural matters, including motions and objections
appropriate to the proceedings;
e. Receive evidence and cause preparation of the record;
f. Regulate the course of hearings and the conduct of the parties and their agents;
g. Maintain order during the hearing process;
h. Render decisions and issue written findings and conclusions;
i. Include in a decision the conditions of approval necessary to ensure that the application
complies with the applicable criteria for its approval; and
j. Revoke any approval for failure to comply with the conditions imposed by the hearing
examiner where specifically authorized by the UDC or state law.
5. The hearing examiner shall hear the following matters:
a. Variances;
b. Conditional use permits;
c. Special use permits;
d. Shoreline letter of exemption appealsConditional use permits and varianccs undcr the
shoreline master program;
e. Preliminary plats;
f.Appeals from any administrative decision of the department of community development
or the building official in the administration or enforcement of the Spokane Valley Uniform
Development Code or other land use code or regulation;
g.Appeals on State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)determinations;
h. Site-specific zone changes of property, including any environmental determination
(under SEPA);
i. Planned unit developments, including any environmental determination (under SEPA);
and
j.Any other applications or appeals that the city council may refer by motion or ordinance,
specifically declaring that the decision of the hearing examiner can be appealed to the city
council.
6.All hearings before the hearing examiner shall be scheduled and conducted in the manner set
forth in Appendix B.
7.Appeals of any decision of the hearing examiner shall be as is set forth in Chapter 17.90
SVMC. (Ord. 09-023 § 1, 2009; Ord. 07-015 §4, 2007. Formerly 18.20.020).
18.20.040 Removal.
The hearing examiner or hearing examiner pro tern may be removed by the city manager without cause; or, if
serving under a contract, according to the terms or upon its expiration. (Ord. 09-023 § 1, 2009).
18.20.050 Ex parte communications.
A. No person may communicate ex parte, directly or indirectly,with the hearing examiner. The hearing
examiner may not communicate ex parte with opponents or proponents of any application unless the hearing
examiner makes the substance of such communication part of the public record and provides the opportunity
for any party to rebut the substance of such communication as provided by law. The hearing examiner may
reopen the hearing record prior to a final decision to address such matters.
B. This section does not prohibit ex parte communication regarding procedural matters, communication by the
hearing examiner with his/her staff or the city attorney's office, communication by the hearing examiner for the
sole purpose of conveying information regarding the specifics of an application, or communication by the
hearing examiner with city departments for the purpose of obtaining information or clarification, so long as the
information or clarification received by the hearing examiner is made part of the record. (Ord. 09-023 § 1,
2009).
18.20.060 Conflict of interest.
The hearing examiner may not participate in a public hearing or decision-making process where such
participation would constitute a conflict of interest pursuant to Chapter 42.23 RCW. Similarly, the hearing
examiner may not participate in a public hearing or decision-making process where such participation would
violate the appearance of fairness doctrine,set forth in Chapter 42.36 RCW, unless the parties to such hearing
or decision consent to or waive their right to object to such participation. (Ord. 09-023 § 1, 2009).
APPENDIX A
DEFINITIONS
A. General Provisions.
1. For the purpose of this code, certain words and terms are herein defined. The word "shall" is always
mandatory. The word "may" is permissive, subject to the judgment of the person administering the code.
2.Words not defined herein shall be construed as defined in Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary.
3. The present tense includes the future, and the future the present.
4. The singular number includes the plural and the plural the singular.
5. Use of male designations shall also include female.
B. Definitions.
Ecological function, no net loss of: The aggregate impact of an improvement, disturbance or encroachment
of a shoreline which does not result in an overall lose of ecological function. Any shoreline degradation is
concurrently offset by an enhancement of ecological function on the same site or on property within 1,000 feet
of the site which equals or exceeds the scope and ecological value (or function) of the degraded resource.
Ecological functions or shoreline functions: The work performed or role played by the physical, chemical,
constitute the shoreline's natural ecosystem. See WAC 173 26 200(2)(d).
Nonconforming use, shoreline: A use located within thc shoreline jurisdiction which docs not conform
to thc requirements of thc Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW).
Ordinary high water mark (OHWM): A mark that will bc found by examining the bed and banks and
ascertaining where the presence and action of waters arc so common and usual, and so long continued
in all ordinary y ars, as to mark upon thc soil a character distinct from that of thc abutting upland. In
any area where thc ordinary high water mark cannot be found, thc ordinary high water mark adjoining
freshwater shall bc thc line of m an high water.
and physical character of the shoreline, consistent with WAC 173 26 211 (1) and (5).
Shoreline protection: Structural and nonstructural methods to control flooding or address erosion impacts to
property and dwellings or othcr structures caused by natural proccsccs, such as currcnt, flood, wind, or wave
action.
Shoreline restoration: The revegetation of a shoreline site cleared of vegetation and not covered by
structures or occupied by other improvements following completion of a project.
the dollar amount set forth in Chapter 90.58 RCW and Chapter 173 26 WAC for any improvement of property in
the shoreline of the state.
diversion structures and facilities for water supply, irrigation and/or fisheries enhancement; flood water and
drainage pumping plants and facilities; hydroelectric generating facilities and appurtenant structures; structural
facilities that provide water sports equipment and services, restaurants providing water views, recreational
vehicle parks, and public parks.
quantities of water.
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SCITY PLANNING DIVISION
pokane STAFF REPORT TO THE
lle PLANNING COMMISSION(REVISED)
CTA-2015-0005
STAFF REPORT DATE: September 3,2015
HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: September 10, 2015, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City
Hall Council Chambers, Valley Redwood Plaza Building, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 101,
Spokane Valley,Washington 99206.
PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: City-initiated Code Text Amendment to update Spokane Valley Municipal
Code (SVMC) 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures, Table 17.80-1 — Permit Type and Land Use
Application; SVMC 17.90 Appeals; SVMC 18.20 Hearing Examiner, Section 18.20.030 — Powers and
Duties; SVMC Appendix A Definitions. The changes are designed to achieve consistency between the
SVMC and the Shoreline Master Plan and to remove duplicative compliance and enforcement language.
PROPONENT: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department, 11707 E Sprague Ave,
Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206
APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC)
Title 17 General Provisions.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: Forward the proposed amendment to City Council with a
recommendation to approve.
STAFF PLANNER: Martin Palaniuk,Planner, Community and Economic Development Department
REVIEWED BY: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner, Community and Economic Development
Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit 1: Proposed text amendment to SVMC Title 17, 18, and Appendix A
A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1. APPLICATION PROCESSING: SVMC Chapter 17.80, Permit Processing Procedures. The
following summarizes application procedures for the proposal.
Process Date
Pre-Application Meeting: N/A
Application Submitted: N/A
Determination of Completeness: N/A
SEPA Determination: Issued August 14,2015
Notified Department of Commerce: August 3,2015
Published Notice of Public Hearing: August 21 & 28,2015
Sent Notice of Public Hearing to staff/agencies: August 12,2015
CTA-2015-0005
Page 1 of 4
DRAFT—September 3,2015
Staff Report CTA-2015-0005
2. PROPOSAL BACKGROUND:
On December 9,2014 the City Council approved Ordinance No. 14-020, adopting the Shoreline
Master Program(SMP)in order to submit the document to the Washington State Department of
Ecology(DOE) for review and approval. On August 21,2015 DOE approved the document with
an effective date of September 3,2015. The SVMC must be modified to be consistent with the
permit procedures and defmitions contained in the updated SMP.
The updated SMP contains a Definitions section with words that are specific to the SMP. Under
the proposed amendment,those words are removed from the SVMC Appendix A—Definitions.
Words applicable to both the updated SMP and the SVMC will remain in SVMC Appendix A-
Definitions. These changes are reflected in the amendment to Appendix A-Definitions.
The updated SMP also identifies permit processes for several shoreline permits including the
shoreline letter of exemption, shoreline conditional use, shoreline substantial development, and
shoreline variance permits.
Permits are reviewed and approved based on their permit type classification in SVMC 17.80.
Permits are classified as one of four permit types;Type I, II, III,or W. The review and approval
process for each type of permit is different and becomes increasingly more complex.
The proposed amendment classifies a shoreline letter of exemption as a Type I permit. Shoreline
Letters of Exemption are issued to a project or action exempt from a shoreline substantial
development permit. Projects are reviewed and conditioned administratively and in most cases
are not subject to DOE review. Because the decision-making authority is administrative and the
DOE review is limited,the appeal authority is the HEX.
The proposed amendment classifies shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline variance,
and shoreline conditional use permit as Type II permits. Shoreline Conditional Use permits will
no longer be heard by the HEX with the change reflected in the amendment to SVMC chapter
18.20 Hearing Examiner Powers and Duties. The rationale for this change is that the final review
authority for a Shoreline Conditional Use permit is DOE. The City provides their local decision
after a public comment period and forwards it to DOE who holds the authority to deny, approve,
or conditionally approve the local decision. The HEX in this case adds an unnecessary layer to
the permitting system without providing significant benefit to protecting the environment.
SVMC chapter 21.50 is the Shoreline Master Plan which contains additional procedures that
apply to a shoreline permit beyond that provided in SVMC 17.80. Additional language was
added to SVMC 17.80 to call-out the fact that these additional procedures are contained within
the SMP and will also apply to the shoreline permits.
The proposed amendments will modify SVMC Titles 17, 18 and Appendix A as follows:
Appendix A Definitions,eliminate the following definitions as they are no longer accurate or
contained within the definitions section of the SMP:
1. Ecological function,no net loss of;
2. Ecological functions or shoreline functions;
3. Landfill, shoreline;
4. Nonconforming use, shoreline;
5. Ordinary high-water mark(OHWM)
6. Shoreline environment;
7. Shoreline protection;
8. Shoreline restoration;
9. Shoreline substantial development;
10. Water dependent;
Page 2 of 4
Staff Report CTA-2015-0005
11. Water-related;
12. Water-related industry.
SVMC 17.80.030,Table 17.80-1 —Permit Type and Land Use Application: Add"Letter of
Exemption" and remove "Shoreline permit exemption(dock permit)" from the Type I section of
the table;Add"Shoreline Conditional Use Permit","Shoreline nonconforming use or structure
review, and"Shoreline Variance"to the Type II section of the table
SVMC 17.80.030(C)was added to clarify that additional or modified procedure provided in
SVMC 21.50 may apply.
SVMC 17.90 Table 17.90-1 Decision/Appeal Authority was modified to specify the shoreline
permits that are appealed to the Shoreline Hearings Board. Compliance and enforcement
language was modified.
SVMC 18.20.030 Powers and Duties: Eliminate"Conditional use permits and variances under
the shoreline master program"from the matters the hearing examiner will hear and add"shoreline
letter of exemption appeals".
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT
AMENDMENT
1. Compliance with Title 17(General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code
a. Findings:
SVMC 17.80.150(F)Municipal Code Text Amendment Approval Criteria
i. The City may approve Municipal Code Text amendment,if it finds that
(1) The proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the
Comprehensive Plan;
Staff Analysis: Chapter 8 - Natural Environment Element of the Comprehensive
Plan includes the goals and policies of the Shoreline Master Program as goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendments are consistent with the SMP
and because the goals and policies of the SMP are included as goals and policies of
the Comprehensive Plan they are therefore consistent with both.
(2) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health,safety,
welfare,and protection of the environment;
Staff Analysis: The amendments are consistent with the Shoreline Master Program
whose purpose is to protect the public interest in the shoreline,preserve the natural
character of the shoreline,advocate long term over short term benefit,protect the
resources and ecology of the shoreline,increase public access to publicly owned
shoreline areas, and increase public recreational opportunities in shoreline areas. For
this reason the amendments bear a substantial relation to public health,safety,
welfare,and protection of the environment.
b. Conclusion(s):
The proposed text amendment is consistent with the approval criteria contained in the SVMC.
2. Finding and Conclusions Specific to Public Comments
a. Findings:
No public comments have been received to date.
b. Conclusion(s):
Page 3 of 4
Staff Report CTA-2015-0005
Public noticing has not been initiated for CTA-2015-0005 as of the date of this report.
3. Finding and Conclusions Specific to Agency Comments
a. Findings:
No agency comments have been received to date.
b. Conclusion(s):
C. OVERALL CONCLUSION
The proposed code text amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plans policies and goals.
D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Forward the proposed amendment to City Council with a recommendation to approve.
Page 4 of 4
SpokaneCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VLANIflNG DIVISION
Planning Commission
Public Hearing
September 10, 2015
Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update
Amendments
Spokane Valley Municipal Code
Title 17, Title 18 and Appendix A
.0•N,
� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
Background
• Ordinance No. 14-020 adopted the Shoreline
Master Program (SMP) December 17, 2014
• Department of Ecology approved the updated
SMP August 21, 2015
• Updated SMP becomes effective September 3,
2015
SpokaneCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VLANIflNG DIVISION
Purpose of Amendments
Update the Spokane Valley Municipal Code
(SVMC) to reflect changes in the updated
Shoreline Master Program
Code compliance housekeeping
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENTmum �ivisioN "'
j�
�
SVMC Changes
• SVMC Appendix A — Definitions
• SVMC 17.80 — Permit Processing Procedures
• SVMC 17.90 - Appeals
• SVMC 18. 20.030 — Powers and Duties
j� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 'P G �ivisioN "'
SVMC Appendix A
• Deletes shoreline specific definitions that are
included in the Shoreline Master Program
definitions.
Stioikane COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
Appendix A - Definitions
Ecological function. no net lose of: The aggregate impact of an improvement, disturbance or encroachment
of a shoreline which does not result in an overall los of ecological function. Any shoreline degradation is
concurrently offset by an enhancement of ecological function on the same site or on property within 1,000 feet
of the site which equals or exceeds the scope and ecological value (or function) of the degraded resource.
Ecological functions or shoreline functions: The work performed or role played by the physical, chemical,
constitute the shoreline's natural ecosystem. See WAC 173-26-200(2)(d).
Ecologist, qualified: A person who has obtained an undergraduate and/or graduate degree in one of the
environmental sciences such as but not limited to biology, zoology, botany, wildlife management or
bioengineering from an accredited college or university and has a minimum of two years of field experience
evaluating the impacts of human encroachments on riparian fish and wildlife habitats and on riparian vegetation
species.
6
Siiokane COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
Appendix A - Definitions
Landfill: A licensed facility for the sanitary disposal of solid waste.
Landfill. shoreline: The placement of soil, excavated material or spoil within the shoreline jurisdiction.
Landscape materials sales lot: The retail sale of organic and inorganic materials including, but not limited to,
soil and soil amendment, bark, sod, gravel, pea gravel, hardscape products, crushed rock, river rock and
landscape boulders primarily used for landscaping and site preparation purposes. The exclusive sale of
horticultural or floricultural stock that is permitted in a commercial greenhouse or nursery-wholesale shall not be
considered landscape materials.
SPOkane COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
Appendix A - Definitions
Nonconforming: A lot, use, building, or structure, which was legal when commenced or built, but which does
not conform to subsequently enacted or amended regulations pursuant to SVMC 19.20.060.
Nonconforming use, shoreline: A use located within the shoreline jurisdiction which does not conform to the
requirements of the Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 ROW).
Nursing home: See "Convalescent home/nursing home."
SPOkane COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
Appendix A - Definitions
Orchard, tree farming, commercial: A planting of trees producing fruit and/or nuts and the cultivation of trees
for the purpose of sale.
Ordinary high-water mark (OHWM): A mark that will be found by examining the bed and banks and
ascertaining where the presence and action of waters arc so common and usual, and so long continued in all
the ordinary high-water mark cannot be found, the ordinary high-water mark adjoining freshwater shall be the
line of moan high water,
Overlay zone: A zoning designation that supplements the provisions of the underlying zone within a specified
geographic area.
9
Sikokane COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
Appendix A - Definitions
Shorelands or shoreland areas: Those lands extending landward for 200 feet in all directions as measured
on a horizontal plane from the ordinary high-water mark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward
200 feet from such floodways: and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes {ROW
98.88.030(2)(d)).
Shoreline environment: The classification of shorelines based on the existing use pattern, the biological and
physical character of the shoreline, consistent with WAC 173 26 211v1.) and (5).
10
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
Appendix A - Definitions
property and dwellings or other structures caused by natural proces-ses, such as current, flood, wind, or wave
action.
Shoreline restoration: The rovcgctation of a shoreline site cleared of vegetation and not covered by
structures or occupied by other improvements following completion of a project.
Shoreline substantial development: Any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds
the dollar amount sct forth in Chapter 90.58 ROW and Chapter 173 26 WAC for any improvement of property in
the shoreline of the state.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
Appendix A - Definitions
Water dependent: A use or activity dependent on a waterfront location including, but not limited to, bridges,
marinas, dams for domestic/industrial water supply, flood control, and/or hydroelectric production; water
diversion structures and facilities for water supply, irrigation andior fisheries enhancement; flood water and
drainage pumping plants and facilities; hydroelectric generating facilities and appurtenant structures; structural
and nonstructural flood damage reduction facilities, and stream bank stabilization structures and practices.
Water related: A use or activity not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront location including, but not limited to,
facilities that provide water sports equipment and services, restaurants providing water views, recreational
vehicle parks, and public parks.
Water related industry: Water related industries arc those requiring water transportation or those which seek
the advantage of water transportation as an alternative to other modes, and those which use or recycle large
quantities of water.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 'P G �ivisioN "'
j�ley
SVMC 17 . 80 . 020
• Modify Table 17 .80- 1 - Permit Type and Land
Use Application by adding four new permit
types and eliminating one .
• Add language to identify procedures that may
apply in SVMC 21 . 50
Sikokane iey
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . NNING DIVISION
SVMC 17.80-1 Permit Types and Land Use Application
Type IHome occupation permit 19,40140
Shoreline letter of exemption 21 ,50
Minor modifications of development agreements 19.30.015(1)
Record of survey to establish lots within a binding site plan 20,60,040
Right-of-way permits 22.13 ,100
Shoreline permit exemption (dock permit) 21 ,50
Site plan review 19.130
Temporary use permit 19.160
Time extensions for preliminary subdivision, short subdivision or binding site plan 20,30,060
Sikokane COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . NNING DIVISION
SVMC 17.80-1 Permit Types and Land Use Application
Alterations — Preliminary and final subdivisions, short subdivisions, binding site 20.50
plans
Binding site plan — Preliminary and final 20.50
Binding site plan — Change of conditions 20.50
SEPA threshold determination 21 ,20,060
Shoreline conditional use permit 21 .50
Type II Shoreline nonconforming use or structure review 21 .50
Shoreline substantial development permit 21 ,50
Shoreline variance 21 .50
Short subdivision — Preliminary and final 20,30, 20,40
Preliminary short subdivision, binding site plan — Change of conditions 20,30
Wireless communication facilities 22,120
Sikokane COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
SVMC 17.80-1 Permit Types and Land Use Application
B. Assignment by Director. Land use and development applications not defined in SVMC Table 17.80-1 shall
be assigned a type by the director. unless exempt under SVMC 17,80,040, When one or more than one
procedure may be appropriate. the process providing the greatest opportunity for public notice shall be
followed.
C. Shoreline letters of exemption, shoreline substantial development permits, shoreline conditional use permits,
shoreline variances, and shoreline nonconforming use or structure review shall be processed pursuant to the
procedures set forth in SVMC 17.80. subject to any additional or modified procedures provided in SVMC 21 .50,
including submittals, completeness review. notices, hearings, and decisions.
j� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 'P G �ivisioN "'
SVMC 17 . 90
• Modify Table 17 .90- 1 — Decision/Appeals
Authority to specifying permits that are
appealed to the Shoreline Hearings Board .
• Compliance and enforcement housekeeping
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
SVMC 17 . 80 Permit Types
Shoreline development p€rmitsShoreline substantial Shoreline Hearings Board (RCV1r' 90.58. 180)
development permits. Shoreline conditional use permits. and
Shoreline variances
Compliance and enforcement decisions (Chapter 17. 100 .Appeal authoritl HeanngExaminer (SVMC
SVMC) 17.90.141): further appeal to superior court
(Chapter 36.700 ROW)
Notice and order ofviolation Hearing examiner (SVhvlC 17.90.0-1 0); further
appeal to superior court
j� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 'P G �ivisioN " -
SVMC 18 . 20 . 030 Powers and duties
• Remove "Conditional use permits and
variance under the shoreline master program"
from matters the hearing examiner shall hear.
• Add "Shoreline letter of exemption appeals"
ley
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION
SVMC 18 . 20 Hearing Examiner
5. The hearing examiner shall hear the following matters:
a. Variances;
b. Conditional use permits;
c. Special use permits;
d. Shoreline letter of exemption appealsConditional use permits and variances under- the.
shoreline master program;
e. Preliminary plats;
f. Appeals from any administrative decision of the department of community development
or the building official in the administration or enforcement of the Spokane Valley Uniform
Development Code or other land use code or regulation :