Loading...
Agenda 08/10/2006 SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Council Chambers - City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Avenue August 10, 2006 6:00 to 9:00 pm I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES VI. PUBLIC COMMENT VII. COMMISSION REPORTS VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS New Business — Public Hearing — Comprehensive Plan Amendment Old Business — Ad-Hoc Sign Committee Discussion Titles 17 and 18 of the Uniform Development Code X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XI. ADJOURNMENT COMMISSIONERS CITY STAFF Gail Kogle, Chair Marina Sukup, AICP Robert Blum, Vice-Chair Greg McCormick, AICP Fred Beaulac Scott Kuhta, AICP John G. Carroll Mike Basinger, Assoc Planner David Crosby Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Ian Robertson Deanna Griffith Marcia Sands www.spokanevalley.orq CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: August 10, 2006 Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ® public hearing E information ❑ admin. report ® pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council: An ordinance establishing a procedure for amending the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan which supersedes certain portions of 13.100.103 through 13.900.110 and 14.00, 14.402 and 14.500 of the Spokane County Code, which may be in conflict, adopted as interim development regulations; providing for severability and effective date. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.130(2)(a), WAC 365-195-805(3) and (4). PREVIOUS COUNCIUCOMMISSION ACTION TAKEN: The 2006-2026 Comprehensive Plan was adopted on April 25, 2006 and was effective on May 10, 2006. Planning Commission discussed Title 17 of the proposed UDC on July 27, 2006. BACKGROUND: The City may amend its Comprehensive Plan only once a year. Only the adoption of sub-area plans, the adoption or amendment of shoreline master programs, and capital facilities programs amended in conjunction with annual budgets are excepted from this requirement. The interim regulations adopted by the City provide a schedule for annual updates based on the County's original adoption schedule. The proposed ordinance will amend the interim regulations to establish November 1st of each year as the submittal deadline for requests for amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, with actual amendment to follow on or about the first of June. The proposed language is generally consistent with the draft proposal for Title 17. It does not include reference to other proposed provisions which have not been enacted. The proposed ordinance was sent to the Community Trade & Economic Development Department (CTED) on July 18, 2006. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) as a non-project action was issued on July 18, 2006. The end of the comment period for this determination was August 5, 2006. OPTIONS: Approve, approve with amendments or corrections and/or provide staff with direction. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: `7 move to recommend approval of an ordinance establishing a procedure for amending the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan which supersedes certain portions of 13.100.103 through 13.900.110 and 14.00, 14.402 and 14.500 of the Spokane County Code, which may be in conflict, adopted as interim development regulations;providing for severability and effective date. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: Draft regulations CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKAND COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE No. 06- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR AMENDING THE SPOKANE VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PROVISIONS WHICH SUPERSEDE THOSE INCLUDED IN SPOKANE COUNTY CODE 13.100.102 THROUGH 13.900.110 AND 14.400, 14.402 AND 14.500 IN CONFLICT, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,the City of Spokane Valley has amended SVMC 10.30.010 by repealing the interim comprehensive plan and adopting the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS,the City of Spokane Valley is required to adopt development regulations to implement the provisions of the comprehensive plan pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040, and WHEREAS,the Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, contemplate a process for annual amendments to that plan; and WHEREAS,the City of Spokane Valley is required to ensure public participation in such an amendment pursuant to RCW 36.70A.035 and 140, and WHEREAS,the following provisions are deemed necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public and the environment, and WHEREAS,the city of Spokane Valley desires to adopt procedures to allow the annual amendment of the comprehensive plan; NOW THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows: Section 1: SVMC 10.30.060 is hereby amended and the following provisions are added to and incorporated as follows: "17.40.160 Type IV Applications—Comprehensive Plan Amendments 1. Initiation. Comprehensive Plan Amendments may be initiated by any of the following: a. Property owner(s)or their representatives; b. Any citizen, agency, neighborhood association or other party; or c. The Community Development Department(hereinafter"department"),planning commission or city council. 2. Applications. Applications shall be made on forms provided by the City. 3. Application Submittal: After submittal of an applicant initiated application,the application shall be subject to a pre- application conference. The date upon fully-complete determination shall be the date of registration with the department. 4. Register of Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Area-wide Rezones.The department shall establish and maintain a register of all applications. 5. Concurrent and Annual Review of Register. a. Sixty(60)days prior to November 1"in each calendar year,the city shall notify the public that the amendment process has begun. Notice shall be distributed as follows: i. Notice published in an appropriate regional or neighborhood newspaper or trade journal; ii. Notice posted on all City official public notice boards; iii. Copy of the notice sent to all agencies,organizations and adjacent jurisdictions with an interest. b. All registered applications shall be reviewed concurrently on an annual basis in a manner consistent with RCW 36.70A.130(2). Applications registered after November 15`of the previous calendar year and before November 1"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. c. 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). 6. Notice of Public Hearing. Comprehensive Plan Amendments require a public hearing before the planning commission. a. Contents of Notice. A notice of public hearing shall include the following: i. The citation, if any, of the provision that would be changed by the proposal along with a brief description of that provision; ii. A statement of how the proposal would change the affected provision; iii. A statement of what areas,comprehensive plan designations,zones, or locations will be directly affected or changed by the proposal; iv. The date,time, and place of the public hearing; v. A statement of the availability of the official file; and vi. 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. b. Distribution of Notice.The department shall distribute as prescribed by law.. 7. Planning Commission Recommendation. a. 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: i. 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 shall conduct a public hearing on the modified proposal. ii. If the planning commission determines that the proposal should not be adopted, it may recommend that the city council not adopt the proposal. iii. If the planning commission is unable to take either of the actions specified in subsections (i)or(ii)above,the proposal will be sent to city council with the notation that the planning commission makes no recommendation. 8. Approval Criteria a. The city may approve comprehensive plan amendments if it finds that: i. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; and ii. 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. iii. 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. iv. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error. v. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. b. The city must also consider the following factors: i. The effect upon the physical environment; ii. The effect on open space, streams,rivers, and lakes; iii. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; iv. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads, public transportation,parks, recreation and schools; v. The benefit to the neighborhood,city and region; vi. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; vii. The current and projected population density in the area; and viii. The effect upon other aspects of the comprehensive plan. 9. City Council Action. Within sixty(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 city clerk shall distribute notice of the council's public hearing as prescribed by law. All annual amendments to the comprehensive plan shall be considered concurrently. By a majority vote of its membership,the city council shall: a. Approve the application; b. Disapprove the application; c. Modify the application. If modification is substantial,the Council must either conduct a public hearing on the modified proposal; or d. Refer the proposal back to the planning commission for further consideration. 10. Transmittal to the State of Washington. At least sixty(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 (sixty) day comment period. No later than ten(10)days after adoption of the proposal,a copy of the final decision shall be forwarded to CTED." Section 2. Provisions in conflict. To the extent that any of the above provisions are in conflict with sections 13.100.102 through 13.900.110 and sections 14.400,14.402 and 14.500 of the Spokane County Code adopted pursuant to SVMC 10.30.060,the above provisions contained in Section 1 above shall apply. Section 3. . Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of ,2006. Mayor,Diana Wilhite ATTEST: City Clerk, Chris Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Last updated 8/4/2006 voluntary compliance agreement as provided for by this article. Verbal warnings shall be logged and followed up with a written warning within five days, and the site shall be re-inspected within 14 days. 3. No warning need be issued in emergencies, repeat violation cases, cases that are already subject to a voluntary compliance agreement, cases where the violation creates or has created a situation or condition that is not likely to be corrected within 72 hours, cases where a stop work order is necessary, or when the person responsible for the code violation knows, or reasonably should have known, that the action was a code violation. 4. Notice and orders should be issued in all cases in which a voluntary compliance agreement has not been entered. 5. The City shall use all reasonable means to determine and proceed against the person(s) actually responsible for the code violation occurring when the property owner has not directly or indirectly caused the violation. 6. If the violation is not corrected, or a voluntary compliance agreement is not entered into within 15 days of notification by the City, a notice and order or stop work order should be issued. Stop work orders should be issued promptly upon discovery of a violation in progress. . - _e—e -•-_- _ e e •_cs a mailing addr- - - '- - -- -- advised of enforcement efforts should be mailed a copy of all written warnings, notices of settlement conferences iccued by the City with regard to the alleged issued by the City. 17.60.070 Service— Notice and order and stop work order 1. Service of a notice and order shall be made on a person responsible for code violation by one or more of the following methods: a. Personal service of a notice and order may be made on the person identified by the City as being responsible for the code violation, or by leaving a copy of the notice and order at the person's house of usual abode with a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there; b. Service directed to the landowner and/or occupant of the property may be made by posting the notice and order in a conspicuous place on the property where the violation occurred and concurrently mailing notice as provided for below, if a mailing address is available; c. Service by mail may be made for a notice and order by mailing two copies, postage prepaid, one by ordinary first class mail and the other by certified mail, to the person responsible for the code violation at his or her last known address, at the address of the violation, or at the Page 30 of 44 P:\Community Development\Development Regulations\Title 17 General Provisions\Title 17 UDC General Provisions PC Draft.doc Pre-Application Meeting SUBDIVISION TYPE III PROCESS (Required) RCW 58.17.070 . 1 , Formal Application Applicant notified Complete Application Fully I Notice of Submittal Counter 28 days--11.- Complete to submit Application mailed Complete Notification Packet e 90 day maximum • RCW 58.17.140 Incomplete Notice of Application sent to I property owners within 300 Applicant notified infeet&site posted writing of an incomplete I RCW 35.70A.035 application. I 14 day comment period 60 days Maximum for re-submittal V T Applicant Re-submits I Staff and Agencies review Incomplete application,SEPA I 14 days checklist and associated I studies Review resubmittal and deem complete. V Technical Review 14 day comment SEPA Decision lw Meeting &appeal deadline (Post and Publish 1 V Notice of Public Hearing sent to property owners within 300 feet,legal notice published 15 days ► Public Hearing in newspaper&site posted RCW 58.17.090 \ v CAppeal to Superior Court 1 Hearing Examiner issues an RCW 3a70C 21 days appealable decision V Final Plat Application i- 5 Year All conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval met Average 30 days I V Staff and Agencies review I FINAL DECISION — application Applicant notified of required fees. Mylar submitted for signatures 4 before recording with Spokane County Auditor's Office. SHORT PLAT TYPE II PROCESS RCW 58.17 Pre-Application Meeting (Required) 30 day maximum • V Formal Application Applicant notified Complete _ Application Fully Notice of Submittal Counter 28 days— Complete to submit Application mailed Complete Notification Packet A 1 Incomplete Notice of Application sent vto property owners within Applicant notified in 300 feet&site posted writing of an incomplete 4 RCW 36.70A.035 application. 14 day comment period 60 days Maximum for re-submittal V • Applicant Re-submits Incomplete Staff and Agencies review I 14 day review application i Review resubmittal —0- Iand deem complete. Appeal to Hearing Examiner/'r-14 days CD-Planning issues decision —' C V Final Plat Application I�-5 Year All conditions of Preliminary Short Plat Approval met Maximum 30 days RCW 58.17.140 V Staff and Agencies review 0— FINAL DECISION — application Applicant notified of required fees. Mylar submitted for signatures 4 before recording with Spokane County Auditor's Office. TYPE III PROCESS Pre Application Meeting (Subdivision, Planned Development, Site-specific (Required) Rezone) • V Formal Application Applicant notified Notice of ; Submittal Counter Complete Application Fully to submit —► Application Complete 28 days Complete Notification Packet mailed i, A 90 day maximum:subdivisions RCW 58.17.140 Incomplete 120 Day Maximum:zoning V Notice of Application sent Applicant notified in to property owners within writing of an incomplete 4 300 feet&site posted application. RCW 36.70A 60 days Maximum for re-submittal 14 day comiment period V Applicant Re-submits Staff and Agencies review Incomplete 14 days application,SEPA checklist and associated studies Review resubmittal and deem complete. v Technical Review 14 day comment SEPA Decision Meeting &appeal deadline (Post and Publish V Notice of Public Hearing sent to property owners within 300 feet,legal notice published 15 days It Public Hearing in newspaper&site posted RCW 58.17.090 V Hearing Examiner issues an ppto City Council �d-14 days appealable decision '1 (Aeal V IS Final Plat Application I45 Year All conditions of Preliminary Plat Approval met • I Maximum 30 days RCW 58.17.140 Applies to plats only Staff and Agencies review p FINAL DECISION — application Applicant notified of required fees. Mylar submitted for signatures before recording with Spokane County Auditor's Office. TYPE III PROCESS Pre-Application Meeting Conditional Use Permit (Required) ♦ Formal Application Applicant notified Notice of Complete , Application Fully ___d to submit 0, A Application Submittal Counter 28 days— Complete PP Complete Notification Packet mailed IA Incomplete 120 Day Maximum V Applicant notified in Notice of Application sent PP to property owners within writing of an incomplete 4 300 feet&site posted application. RCW 36.70A.035 I I 60 days Maximum for re-submittal 14 day comment period 7 • Applicant Re-submits Staff and Agencies review Incomplete application,SEPA I 14 days checklist and associated studies —i Review resubmittal and deem complete. V Technical Review 14 day comment SEPA Decision Meeting &appeal deadline (Post and Publish • Notice of Public Hearing sent to property owners within 300 feet,legal notice published 15 days P l Public Hearing in newspaper&site posted ♦ (Appeal to Superior Court Hearing Examiner issues an RCW 36.70C /a 14 days appealable decision , N STry or Spokane \/a1Yey 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000♦Fax:509.921.1008 0 cityhall@spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Planning Commission and Members of City Council From: Mike Basinger,AICP,Associate Planner Cc: Nina Regor,Deputy City Manager, Cary Driskell,Deputy City Attorney, and Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Date: August 3, 2006 Re: STV-02-06 Proposed Vacation of McMillan Road, located between Euclid Avenue and Buckeye Avenue has been withdrawn. Lots N Land, Linda S. Hanson and Charles W. & Pamela D. Adams, the petitioners have requested that STV-02-06 be withdrawn and the proceedings abandoned. The petitioners thank the City for its consideration of the vacation petition, but it has become apparent to the petitioners that the vacation of McMillan Road may no longer serve their interests.