PC APPROVED Minutes 08-27-15 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.
1,0 , � '�
Joe Stoy, Chairperson Date signed
\aC-A07gi(L
Elisha Heath, Secretary
08-27-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 2