The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 05/12/2016 *Wane Valle h Y Spokane Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Amended City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. May 12, 2016 6:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 28, 2016 and May 3, 2016 minutes 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-2016-0001 proposed amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.85 Marijuana Uses, 19.120.050 Permitted Use Matrix and Appendix A Definitions b) Study Session: Retail Improvement Strategy X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XI. ADJOURNMENT Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall, April 28,2016 Chair Graham called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Administrative Assistant Deanna Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: Kevin Anderson Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Heather Graham Mike Basinger,Economic Development Coordinator James Johnson Tim Kelley Mike Phillips Suzanne Stathos Joe Stoy Deanna Horton, Secretary of the Commission Commissioner Stoy moved to accept the April 28, 2016 agenda as presented. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed. Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the April 14, 2016 minutes as they were presented. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. Commissioner Johnson clarified the SEPA determination would not need to change due to Planning Commission's recommended changes after the public hearing on CTA-2015-0006 Marijuana regulations. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson reported he attended a Department of Commerce Short Course in Planning. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Senior Planner Lori Barlow reminded the Planning Commission of the joint study session scheduled for May 3, 2016 between the City Council and the Planning Commission to discuss draft goals and polices and land use alternatives which could be included in the City's Comprehensive Plan. PUBLIC COMMENT: There were no public comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS: Study Session: Comprehensive Plan Existing Conditions Report Senior Planner Lori Barlow explained these reports are intended to provide background information for the study session next week with the City Council regarding the Comprehensive Plan Update. As the City began the update, one of the first exercises was to review the Community's vision for the City. Next Ms. Barlow explained the City was required to have a population allocation from Spokane County in order to plan for growth. The City would be using a number which had been developed through an extensive process by the Planning Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC). The PTAC makes a recommended population allocation to the Steering Committee of Elected Officials (SCEO). The SCEO reviews the recommendation and forwards it to the Board of County Commissioners (BoCC). The BoCC ultimately has the authority to determine the allocation to each jurisdiction. The PTAC and the SCEO have recommended the 2037 Office of Financial Management's (OFM)medium population forecast number. This recommendation was forwarded to the BoCC on November 4, 2015. The City is using this forecast number of 14,650 for the next 20 years growth. Commissioner Anderson asked if the numbers were similar to numbers used in 2006. Ms. Barlow said during each update process the numbers are reviewed and a process is undertaken to review the numbers issued by the OFM and determine if this is an adequate number to plan for. The process could come up with a growth number similar to the numbers generated in 2006. Existing Conditions Housing and Economic Trends — Ms. Barlow covered the major points of the Report: Population/Demographic Trends: • Steady population growth, 1%annually 04-14-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 • City has a higher percentage of people over the age of 65. Average age is 39.8 vs the County at 37.2 • Less City residents have higher education levels than those of the County at 21%vs 28% • City's median household income is less than County$48,000 vs $49,200 Housing trends: • Modest housing growth • Characteristics are changing o More multifamily is being built than single family o Number of renters is increasing o Average household size is decreasing o Percentage of households with children is decreasing • 36%of all households pay more than 30%of their income on There was discussion among the Commissioners and staff regarding the changing trends for housing. Why is more multifamily housing being built? Are fewer homes available to buy or is it that people don't want the hassle of owning a home? Can the millennials afford a single family home or do they want to? The changing demographics of the City's population,trending to older empty nesters, some don't want to deal with a large home any longer. Economic Trends • Service based economy providing commercial,providing commercial, professional, and retail services. • City economy has been slower to recover from the recession • Regional Commercial and Corridor Mixed Use zones realized the largest decrease in sale during the recession o In 2007 the Regional Commercial zone produced 43%of the taxable retail sales(TRS) o In 2013 the Regional Commercial zone produced 40%of the TRS o 2004-2014 TRS in the Mixed Use Center zone have doubled Land Use Summary • 50%of all the City's land use is single family housing o 90%of all residential zoned land is single family o 10%of all residential land is zoned multifamily • The City has approximately 3,000 acres of vacant land, which is predominately located in the northeast part of the City Development Trends • Residential Development: There has an increase in multifamily housing construction to meet demand—the City has a vacancy rate of 4% o Most multifamily construction is locating in Mixed Use Center and Corridor Mixed Use zones o Only one project was built in a MF-1 zone o No multifamily projects have been built on Sprague o This generally indicates the demand for housing types is changing • Commercial Development: o Retail sales recently recovered to pre-recession levels o Demand for commercial properties is weak • Office space vacancy rate is over 20% • Retail vacancy rate is improving— 10%in 2012 to 6%presently o Indicates an oversupply of office space • Buildable Residential Land: Almost 70%of buildable residential land is zoned single family, 11%multifamily, 19%Mixed Use. This does not consider land size or distribution for ease of aggregation. 04-14-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 • Buildable Commercial and Industrial Land: Spokane Valley lacks small scale, neighborhood oriented commercial areas within walking distance to many of the residential areas. o Limited new industrial development o Vacancies have decreased from 20%to 10% o Indicates at some point new space many need to be developed The consultants were asked to look at some of the City's current zoning issues and come up with possible solutions for these issues. • Medium Density Residential Zoning o Problem: The MF-1 zone has not had multifamily development since 2012 • One permit in the MF-1 zone since 2012,while almost 300 units built per year in other zones. • City has heard multifamily projects are not feasible in this zone o Conclusions: Density limit is too low to make development feasible at current rent levels and development costs • Multifamily tax exemptions for medium density housing types • Allow other housing types that are less expensive to construct • Adjust setbacks, lot width, development standards,etc. • Mixed Use Development o Problem: Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) has not realized adequate levels of new development along Sprague and Trent • Mixed Use is typically a vertical development with multifamily units on upper story and retail on the ground floor o Conclusions: Lack of redevelopment is due to project economies • Anticipated rents do not support vertical development • Not an issue with zone regulations • Trent more affected than Sprague due to the lower land values, proximity to industrial uses and railroad tracks,and distance from Interstate-90(I-90),can't be as competitive as other locations. • Consider multifamily tax exemptions • Adjust setbacks, lot width, development standards,etc. • Office Zone o Problem: Recent office development is happening outside of the City's two office zones around I-90 and in the Mixed Use Corridor zone. Areas with good visibility and large vacant tracts of land • Office zones have seen little office development since 2004 • Zones are concentrated along Argonne, Pines and Evergreen Corridors • Zones have a mixture of uses, retail and single family • Parcel sizes are less than 0.75 acres, which makes them hard to assemble for sizable new development. o Conclusions: • Typical small office building since 2004 had at least 20,000 square feet and parking • Generally office development requires a minimum site of 35,000 square feet or more for a new project • Office and Garden Office zones have few adequate sized sites which are vacant or can be redeveloped • Mixed Use Center and other areas close to I-90 are better suited to office development • Allow more uses in the Office zone • Medical office uses may see a demand linked to aging population • Vacant areas in the Office and Garden Office are along major corridors and may be suitable for multifamily 04-14-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5 • Consider more opportunity for residential uses • Consider rezones accordingly • Neighborhood Commercial zoning — Can the City develop small scale retail uses in neighborhoods o Problem: City lacks small-scale neighborhood-oriented commercial areas within walking distance of residential neighborhoods • Small local business support a vibrant retail market and creates community character o Conclusions: Limited vacant sites at major intersections to support small scale retail development • Residential areas surrounding sites are low density—not enough population to support retail • Proforma analysis indicated vertical mixed-use not feasible • Consider rezone vacant parcels to neighborhood commercial • Consider rezone intersections as Neighborhood Commercial for redevelopment • Review parking requirements for Neighborhood Commercial uses • Consider rezones accordingly The transportation existing conditions were covered briefly. It compares where the residential land is compared to where people travel to work. The report highlights how people get to work: Approximately 40,000 commute into the City for work, about 23,000 leave the City and 14,000 live and work here. Of the people commuting to work, 80%of them drive alone. • Challenges: o Many residential streets do not have curb, gutter, or sidewalks — could benefit from enhancements o Long blocks and high traffic speeds make it difficult to cross major streets — impedes transit use,walking/biking, etc. o Transit service is minimal in parts of the Valley, requiring that people drive to reach destination o The regions position on major freight rail corridor increase risk of train delays caused by at-grade-crossings o Unattractive streetscape, lack of gateway features, and public spaces on side of streets • Opportunities: o Streets in good repair—allow opportunities to invest in other city priorities o Good Traffic Level of Service o Grid system can support a considerable amount of additional economic development o Good connections to freeway and railway network support economic development opportunities o Strong pedestrian/bicycle plan that is expanding the trail network with regional and federal funding. Ms. Barlow said the next touches on the Comprehensive Plan elements would be the joint meeting with the City Council on May 3, a retail and tourism study update on May 12, water resource inventory on May 26 and an overview on tiny houses on June 16. This schedule is subject to change depending on other matters which may need to come before the Commission. Commissioner Stoy confirmed the second public hearing for the marijuana regulations was scheduled for May 12, 2016. B. Study Session: Comprehensive Plan Focus Areas Economic Development Coordinator Mike Basinger explained this would be a primer for the joint meeting with the City Council. The intent is to have a lean,understandable document. The City would like to incorporate its economic development initiatives into the plan. Staff would like to make sure that the Community's vision is incorporated into the plan as well as the priorities of the Commission 04-14-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 and the City Council. One of the points of the exercise at the joint meeting will be to determine if the focus areas adequately reflect the Council/Commission/Community priorities and determine if anything is missing. The focus areas are not meant to be all encompassing. Mr.Basinger covered each element and touched on the community and economic development priorities. Commissioner Stoy asked if the City had the ability to annex land. Mr. Basinger said the City could annex any land in the City's UGA (Urban Growth Area). He also said there are some areas which are between two jurisdictions which require joint planning,but expansion would likely occur north or south of the City. Each topic is an element of the Comprehensive Plan. There are required elements as well as some which are options. Mr. Basinger explained on each page there are community priorities, economic development priorities and best practices for each element. The community priorities have come from the many outreach efforts to engage the community in the process of developing the direction of the Comprehensive Plan. The economic development priorities have been developed through studies the City has engaged in to guide our economic development efforts. There are state requirements which must be included, and best practice options which the Commissioners and Council can consider. GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the good of the order. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Stoy moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:50 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor,motion passed. Chair Heather Graham Date signed Secretary Deanna Horton MINUTES City of Spokane Valley Special Joint Meeting Spokane Valley City Council and Spokane Valley Planning Commission Tuesday,May 3,2016 Attendance: Councilmembers: Staff: Rod Higgins, Mayor Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Ed Pace, Councilmember Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Sam Wood, Councilmember John Hohman, Comm &Eco. Dev Director Bill Gothmann, Council Pro Tem Mike Basinger, Eco. Development Coordinator Chaz Bates, Eco. Development Specialist Planning Commissioners: Gabe Gallinger, Senior Engineer Heather Graham, Chair Deanna Horton,Administrative Assistant Joe Stoy,Vice-Chair Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Kevin Anderson, Commissioner James Johnson, Commissioner Others in Attendance: Timothy Kelley, Commissioner Doug McIntyre,Van Ness Feldman Michael Phillips, Commissioner Elliot Weiss, Community Attributes, Inc. Suzanne Stathos, Commissioner Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the City Council roll; all Councilmembers were present. Commission Secretary Horton called the Commission roll; all Commissioners were present. Agenda Topic: Comprehensive Plan Review Purpose Statement: The City Council and Planning Commission will participate in an interactive discussion concerning land use alternatives and goals and policies for the Comprehensive Plan Update. The input being sought will help City staff and the consultant team refine the land use alternatives and the goal and policy focus areas. Councilmembers and Commissioners will rotate around three stations, facilitated by staff and consultants, to help determine proposed land use alternatives; they will be asked to consider the options for City growth and record their input on a worksheet. The Councilmembers and Commissioners were seated at three tables. Community and Economic Development Director Hohman welcomed everyone to the meeting; said the purpose of tonight's meeting is to discuss some specifics about goals and policies and land use; said the public is welcome but there will not be any public participation; said we will be focusing on some work to move forward to create a draft document and staff seeks input from the Council and Commissioners; that input will be collected,processed,and built into future steps in this effort;said this project started November 2014 and quite a lot of work was accomplished this year including visioning and public meetings; said we had to take some time out for technical information, but we now have a defensible, but not completely official number for the population allocation and we will be using that to move forward to try to update the plan, which must be completed prior to June 30, 2017. Mr. Hohman said Economic Development Coordinator Basinger will be directing tonight's proceedings and taking the lead on this project, and our consultants will be giving a presentation tonight as well. Mr. Basinger explained that tonight's objective is to get some direction;that we heard from the community during several workshops, and the information in tonight's exercises includes input from the community, Planning Commission 05-03-16 Joint meeting Page 2 of 2 and Council and Commissioners will be asked to rate those issues; said although our Comprehensive Plan must meet the GMA(Growth Management Act)requirements,that is not the purpose of tonight's meeting. Mr. Basinger said that tonight we will work on how we'd like our community to grow, the vision of the community,what are the important things, and are we on the right track. Mr. Doug McIntyre with Van Ness Feldman started the PowerPoint presentation explaining that once completed,this Comp Plan will be the City's official statement of how it wants to grow over the next twenty years; said the Plan is amended annually and there are GMA requirements to consider; said this detailed review of the Plan is required every eight years which allows us to comply with changes in the GMA and to respond to change in land use; said we want to determine what are the trends and how to address that in the official policy document; said we are working to hit that June 30,2017 deadline while making progress in the right manner.As shown in his PowerPoint,Mr. McIntyre mentioned some factors to consider as well as SEPA (Sate Environmental Protection Act) requirements. Mr. Elliot Weiss of Community Attributes, Inc., continued through the PowerPoint explaining the connection to economic development,mentioned the Retail and Tourism Studies; said we have heard from numerous stakeholders about economic development and community priorities, and tonight is a great opportunity to splice in some of the work done for policy, infrastructure, image &identity, assets, centers, and catalysts, as shown on the slide. He explained that he, Mr. Mclntrye and Mr. Basinger will be at one of the three tables to facilitate conversation; said the worksheets are pretty clear; with the object to have Council and Commissioners rate some ideas for focus areas within the Comp Plan,then move on to goals and policies;then come back and determine what was done well and what needs more work; and that one of the objectives for tonight is to help form options of what is most important. Mr. Hohman said that we have been actively working on the Comp Plan and this is the twelfth visit since the first of the year;that we talked about the Retail and Tourism studies,and about water districts;that the Planning Commission is a little behind as they were working on marijuana issues; but the intent is to bring all those presentations forward to them as well. The three facilitators went to each table and the discussions began.After a designated time,members of the tables rotated to a different table and further discussion ensued. Once everyone had been at each table,Mr. Basinger thanked everyone for coming out tonight;and said the next steps include gathering the information and compiling that into something to start the draft moving for the land use map and policies and goals. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Heather Graham, Chair Date Deanna Horton, Secretary,Admin CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: May 12, 2016 Item: Check all that apply: n consent n old business ® new business ® public hearing n information n admin. report n pending legislation FILE NUMBER: CTA-2016-0001 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing— Comprehensive Marijuana Regulations DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated code text amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) chapter 19.85, SVMC 19.120.050, and Appendix A to add definitions regarding marijuana uses, prohibit all new marijuana retail uses, cooperatives, and clubs from any zones within the City,to allow existing retail uses to locate within existing zones and subject to existing buffering requirements, and to provide additional regulations for production and processing of home-grown marijuana by qualified patients and designated providers for personal use in residential zones. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.106; RCW 69.50 (codifying Initiative 502); RCW 69.51A; SVMC 17.80.150 and 19.30.040; SVMC 19.85; SVMC 19.120.050 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: City Council has adopted regulations as set forth in SVMC 19.120.050 and SVMC 19.85 for the zoning and buffering of recreational marijuana. On December 9, 2014, City Council adopted a moratorium on unlicensed marijuana uses (primarily medical marijuana). On October 6, 2015, City Council adopted a moratorium on marijuana uses licensed by the Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board ("WSLCB"). On April 14, 2016, Planning Commission held a public hearing and approved a modified proposal for consideration. BACKGROUND: The City is in the process of developing comprehensive local marijuana regulations, as required pursuant to moratoriums as described in the Staff Report. The Planning Commission conducted background study sessions on October 22, 2015,November 12, 2015, and December 10, 2015. At those study sessions, Planning Commission received information from staff regarding recent changes to State law, ongoing rulemaking by the Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB) and Washington Department of Health, testimony from the public, information from Spokane Valley Police and Spokane Valley Fire, and a range of various types of available options. Planning Commission also visited a marijuana production/processing operation and retail store on March 3, 2016. Planning Commission considered various options and ultimately gave a consensus for staff to draft proposed amendment language that would ban all new marijuana uses, allow home growing, require notice by renters to landlords for home growing, and ban home extraction. Following the recommendation from Planning Commission, staff drafted proposed amendments, which were discussed briefly at the meeting on February 25, 2016 and again during a study session on March 10, 2016. On April 14, 2016, Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments, which generally would prohibit any new marijuana uses. One interested party spoke during the public hearing. As part of deliberations following the public hearing, Planning Commission approved a substantially modified proposal as described below. Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E), the Planning Commission is required to conduct a public hearing on the modified proposal if the modification is substantial. Accordingly, the Planning Commission is holding a public hearing on the modified proposal on May 12, 2016. The modified draft amendment proposal will amend chapter 19.85 SVMC, SVMC 19.120.050, and Appendix A by (1) adding definitions for medical marijuana endorsed retail stores, marijuana cooperatives, and marijuana clubs, (2)prohibiting any new licensed marijuana retail stores from all zones, (3) allowing existing licensed marijuana retail stores to locate within the existing designated zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements, (4) prohibiting marijuana cooperatives from all zones, (5) prohibiting marijuana clubs or lounges from all zones, (6) requiring any home-growing by qualified patients as allowed by state law to be conducted only in single family residential zones in permanent structures that are opaque and not visible by neighbors or from the public rights-of-way, and to clarify that renters may be required, as may be authorized by federal, state, and local laws, to give notice to landlords of their intention to grow marijuana plants in a rental dwelling. The major changes to the original proposal were to (1) allow licensed marijuana production and processing in existing zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements, and(2) allow existing licensed marijuana retail stores to locate within existing allowable zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements. Please note that the staff report has been updated to conform to the modified proposal. Planning Commission is conducting a public hearing on the proposed modified amendments, after which it will deliberate and ultimately vote on a recommendation to forward to City Council. Note that all information taken and received since the beginning of this process is incorporated into the Planning Commission's consideration of these amendments and is part of the record and basis for Planning Commission's recommendation. For informational purposes, all information provided as part of the prior meetings has been included with this RCPA. NOTICE: Notice for the public hearing on the proposed amendments has been provided to the Spokane Valley News Herald in accordance with the requirements of Title 17 SVMC. APPROVAL CRITERIA: SVMC Section 17.80.150(F) provides approval criteria for text amendments to the SVMC. The criterion stipulates that the proposed amendment(s) must be consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and bear a substantial relation to the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: The Planning Division makes no statement of recommendation regarding the proposed amendments other than that the proposal complies with City text amendment requirements pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(F) and complies with Washington State law. STAFF CONTACT: Christina Janssen—Planner Jenny Nickerson— Senior Plans Examiner Erik Lamb—Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: A. Updated Staff Report on modified proposal, including copies of Ordinance Nos. 14-021 and 15- 017 B. Proposed modified amendments to chapter 19.85 SVMC, SVMC 19.120.050, and Appendix A C. Copy of RPCA from October 22, 2015 D. Copy of RPCA from November 12, 2015 meeting E. Copy of RPCA from December 10, 2015 meeting F. Copy of RPCA from February 25, 2016 meeting G. Copy of RPCA from March 10, 2016 meeting H. Copy of RPCA from April 14, 2016 meeting I. Copy of minutes from October 22, 2015, November 12, 2015, December 10, 2015, February 25, 2016, March 10, 2016,meetings and April 14,2016 public hearing and meeting. J. Police crime tracking information requested at December 10, 2015 meeting K. Document regarding "medical" marijuana rules from Commissioner Anderson from March 10, 2016 meeting ATTACHMENT A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 01#\ftrik PLANNING DIVISION Spokane 4000 Valley STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CTA-2016-0001 STAFF REPORT DATE: May 12, 2016 (updated from April 14, 2016 version for public hearing based upon modifications sought by Planning Commission). HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: May 12, 2016, 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: A city initiated text amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) to amend SVMC 19.85 and Appendix A to add definitions and modify the regulations to prohibit any additional state-licensed retail sales of marijuana, including regulations for licensed retail stores with medical marijuana endorsements, to allow existing licensed marijuana retail stores to locate within existing allowable zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements, to prohibit marijuana cooperatives, and to add general requirements for all home-growing by qualified patients in residential zones. 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: The Planning Division makes no statement of recommendation regarding the proposed amendments other than that the proposal complies with City text amendment requirements pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(F). STAFF PLANNER: Christina Janssen, Planner, Community Development Department ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Ordinance No. 14-021, adopting a moratorium on all marijuana uses other than recreational production,processing, and retail uses licensed by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board; Ordinance No. 15-023, adopting an extension on the unlicensed marijuana uses. Exhibit 2: Ordinance No. 15-017, adopting a moratorium on all marijuana uses required to be licensed by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board. Exhibit 3: Proposed text amendments to SVMC 19.85, SVMC 19.120.050, 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 Ordinance 14-002 passed, adopting interim definitions 2/11/14 and regulations for state-licensed recreational marijuana Ordinance 14-004 passed, adopting amendments to the 4/22/14 interim regulations for state-licensed recreational marijuana Ordinance 14-008 passed, adopting definitions and 7/22/14 regulations for state-licensed recreational marijuana and repealing interim development regulations adopted pursuant to ordinances 14-002 and 14-004 Ordinance 14-021 passed, adopting a moratorium on the 12/9/14 establishment of all marijuana uses other than marijuana producers, marijuana processors, and marijuana retail sales as licensed by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (previously the "Liquor and Control Board"). Ordinance No. 15-017 passed, adopting a moratorium on 10/6/15 all marijuana uses required to be licensed or registered with the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board. Ordinance No. 15-023 passed, adopting a six-month 12/1/15 renewal of the moratorium on unlicensed marijuana uses originally adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 14-021. SEPA Determination April 8, 2016, for current proposal,and June 20, 2014, for existing regulations Published Notice of Public Hearing April 22, 2016 and April 29, 2016 Sent Notice of Application for Optional Determination of February 26, 2016 Non-Significance to staff/agencies PROPOSAL BACKGROUND: Through the course of meetings on October 22, 2015, November 12, 2015, and December 10, 2015, Planning Commission heard multiple reports from staff, Spokane Valley Police, and Spokane Valley Fire, as well as receiving extensive public comment on the City's regulation of legal marijuana. Staff reports included discussion of existing City regulations, State law, ongoing rulemaking by the Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board ("WSLCB") related to all licensed marijuana types and the Washington Department of Health related to medical marijuana (although the Department of Health has since categorized medical marijuana as "compliant marijuana" due to ongoing questions about its beneficial medicinal qualities), and a range of options for Planning Commission to consider. Planning Commission also visited a marijuana production/processing operation and retail store on March 3, 2016. The background of these discussions are included as part of the RPCA for the public hearing on this code text amendment. Planning Commission considered various options and ultimately gave a consensus for staff to draft proposed amendment language that would ban all new marijuana uses, allow home growing, require notice by renters to landlords for home growing, and ban home extraction. On April 14, 2016, Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments, which generally would prohibit any new marijuana uses. One interested party spoke during the public hearing. As part of deliberations following the public hearing, Planning Commission approved considering Page 2 of 8 substantial modifications to the proposal as described below. Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E), the Planning Commission is allowed to modify a proposal, but must first conduct a public hearing on the modified proposal if the modification is substantial. Accordingly,the Planning Commission is holding a public hearing on the modified proposal on May 12, 2016. The modified proposal is to amend Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) chapter 19.85, SVMC 19.120.050, and Appendix A by (1) adding definitions for medical marijuana endorsed retail stores, marijuana cooperatives, and marijuana clubs, (2) prohibiting any new licensed marijuana retail stores from all zones, (3) allowing existing licensed marijuana retail stores to locate within the existing designated zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements, (4) prohibiting marijuana cooperatives from all zones, (5) prohibiting marijuana clubs or lounges from all zones, and (6) requiring any home-growing by qualified patients as allowed by state law to be conducted only in single family residential zones in permanent structures that are opaque and not visible by neighbors or from the public rights-of-way, and to clarify that renters may be required, as may be authorized by federal, state, and local laws,to give notice to landlords of their intention to grow marijuana plants in a rental dwelling. The major changes to the original proposal were to (1) allow licensed marijuana production and processing in existing zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements, and (2) allow existing licensed marijuana retail stores to locate within existing allowable zones in compliance with existing buffering requirements. Recreational Marijuana Background: Recreational marijuana was legalized within Washington State with the passage of Initiative 502 (I-502) in November 2012. The State has worked over the last three years to develop extensive regulations for licensing and permitting of production (growing), processing, and retail sales of recreational marijuana. All recreational marijuana facilities must be licensed by the WSLCB. The WSLCB began accepting and processing applications in November 2013, and issued the first production and processing licenses within Spokane Valley in March 2014. As provided by law, the WSLCB developed rules to allocate a limited number of retail licenses within each jurisdiction. The City was allocated three recreational retail licenses and the WSLCB has issued all three licenses and all shops are open and operational. Under state law, there is no restriction on the number of production and processing facilities allowed. State law provides 1,000 foot buffers between licensed marijuana facilities and several sensitive uses, including schools, libraries, and public parks, but excludes trails and undeveloped school or library property. The WSLCB enforces the state buffers through the state licensing process. On January 16, 2014, a Washington Attorney General Opinion was released that provided that the Attorney General's opinion was that local jurisdictions were not preempted by I-502 from adopting local regulations and restrictions on state-licensed recreational marijuana uses. The City's buffers are in addition to the state- mandated buffers and are enforced by the City. All marijuana uses remain illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act. However, the United State Department of Justice has released a policy to not prosecute licensed marijuana providers in states which have legalized marijuana and which have a strong enforcement and regulatory scheme. Medical Marijuana Background: In 1998, voters approved the medical use of marijuana by initiative, though approval was limited in scope. In 2011, the Washington State Legislature adopted amendments to the medical marijuana laws that would have created a state registry for patients and legalized dispensaries and collective gardens. The Governor vetoed all sections related to the state registry and dispensaries, creating a large amount of confusion and leaving collective gardens as the sole means for producing and procuring medical marijuana. The City did not adopt regulations at that time, but issued business registrations for collectives, provided they were located in a zone where retail sales were appropriate. With the passage of I-502 and legalization of recreational marijuana, there developed two very distinct and separate marijuana Page 3 of 8 regulatory regimes — a licensed and regulated recreational market and an unregulated and unlicensed medical market. In 2015,the Washington State Legislature passed major changes to existing medical marijuana laws in an effort to reconcile the medical and recreational marijuana markets. There were two primary bills passed as part of the changes: Second Substitute Senate Bill 5052 (Cannabis Patient Protection Act) and Second Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 2136. The major changes included the following: Reconcile Medical and Recreational Marijuana Markets - Establishes a "medical marijuana endorsement" for licensed marijuana retailers. This endorsement allows a licensed retailer to sell medicinal marijuana to qualifying patients and designated providers. • The medical marijuana endorsement does not prohibit the licensed retailer from also selling recreational marijuana. • Qualifying patients and designated providers may receive an exemption from the State's marijuana tax when purchasing medical marijuana from a licensed retailer with a medical marijuana endorsement. • Anyone over the age of 21 may purchase any of the marijuana sold at a retail store, regardless of whether it is "medical" (now referred to as "compliant" marijuana by the Washington Department of Health) or"recreational"). - Creates a medical marijuana authorization database that qualifying patients and designated providers must be entered in to. • Patients and providers will obtain "recognition cards" that authorize them to purchase medical marijuana. • The database must be operational by July 1, 2016. - Collective gardens must cease operations as of July 1, 2016. Changes to Licensing - WSLCB must reconsider and increase number of retail outlets to accommodate medical marijuana needs. - WSLCB must develop merit based application process for new retail licenses. - WSLCB must increase canopy limits for producers to account for medical marijuana needs. - Restricts the use of butane or other gases for marijuana extraction to validly licensed marijuana processors (no home extraction with these types of gases and solvents). -Retailers may not sell through vending machines or by drive-up windows. -Establishes a transportation license for common carriers delivering between licensed facilities. -Establishes a research license. • Allows licensed researchers to research chemical potency, clinical investigations into marijuana-derived drug products, and efficacy and safety of administering marijuana as medical treatment, and to conduct genomic or agricultural research. - Requires signage at the premises of prospective producers, processors, and retailers providing notice to the public of the intent to license the facilities as a marijuana producer, processor, or retailer. Allow for "Cooperatives" (effective July 1, 2016) - Allows for the creation of medical marijuana "cooperatives"that may be formed by up to four qualifying patients or designated providers. • Cooperatives cannot be located within a mile of marijuana retailers or within 1,000 feet of schools, playgrounds, recreation centers, child care centers, public parks, public transit centers, library, or applicable game arcades. Page 4 of 8 • Cooperative locations must be registered with the WSLCB. • The location of a cooperative must be a domicile of one of the participants and only one cooperative may be located on a single property tax parcel. • Cooperatives may grow up to a maximum of 60 plants. • The WSLCB may adopt rules relating to security and traceability requirements for cooperatives. • Cooperatives are not considered businesses (since they only distribute to the four members), so no business licenses or taxes. • May not locate where prohibited by a city or county zoning provision. Qualified Patients and Designated Providers -Must receive authorization from health care professional. - Authorization and recognition card issued once entered into the database are necessary to receive arrest protection. - May keep amounts of marijuana listed on authorization card. - May grow up to 15 plants in house. • No more than 15 plants per housing unit regardless of how many patients reside in the housing unit(except for cooperatives,which may have 60 plants). - No production or processing if any portion can be seen from unaided vision or smelled from a public place or private property of another housing unit. - State will adopt rules allowing non-combustible extraction by qualified patients and designated providers. -Minors may be patients,with parents serving as designated providers. Local Authority - Repeals RCW 69.51A.140,which granted cities and counties the authority to adopt and enforce requirements related to medical marijuana, including zoning. - Cities are authorized to adopt civil penalties for patients and designated providers growing/keeping plants outside the limits set by SB 5052. - Cities may adopt ordinances reducing the buffers between licensed facilities and recreation centers, child care centers, public parks, public transit centers, libraries, or game arcade which is not restricted to those over 21 from 1,000 feet to not less than 100 feet, provided such distance reduction will not negatively impact the jurisdiction's civil regulatory enforcement, criminal law enforcement interests,public safety, or public health. • Buffers to schools and playgrounds may not be reduced below the state required 1,000 feet. - Subject to any rules adopted by the WSLCB, cities and counties may adopt an ordinance prohibiting a marijuana producer or processor from operating or locating a business within areas zoned primarily for residential use or rural use with a minimum lot size of five acres or smaller. Ongoing Rulemaking: As part of the State law changes, the State must increase the number of retail stores to account for the medical marijuana market. Through emergency rulemaking,the WSLCB has set the increased total retail stores to 556. The WSLCB has left the allocated number of stores in the City at three based upon the ongoing moratorium. In the event the moratorium is lifted and the City allows additional retail stores,the allocated number is likely to double to six total stores. On September 23, 2015, the WSLCB issued, effective immediately, its Emergency Rules #15-18, which among other things, provided for the WSLCB to begin accepting and processing marijuana retail license applications beginning on October 12, 2015. Page 5 of 8 The WSLCB recently released revised proposed rules implementing the changes from the Cannabis Patient Protection Act and Second Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 2136. Those revised rules include,but are not limited to the following provisions: -Expanded definition of"licensed premises". - Removed requirements for "Mr. Yuk" stickers to be on labels for infused edible and liquid products. A different label will be required. -Added mandatory signs at the point of sale on retail licensed premises. - Modified enforcement provisions to clarify that persons operating without a WSLCB license will be discontinued. - Added language regarding authority of WSLCB to deny registration for cooperatives that do not meet the WLSCB rule requirements. - Modified penalties so that failure to address monetary penalties for two or more violation notices in a three year period will result in license cancellation. - Modified penalties for producers and processors so that all penalties are monetary; product will not be destroyed as a penalty. The WSLCB final rulemaking is anticipated to be complete in late spring/early summer of 2016. Further, the Washington Department of Health is in the rulemaking process, but has provided through emergency rulemaking that in lieu of"medical marijuana", certain types of marijuana will be "compliant" marijuana that will be subject to certain testing and which may contain higher CBD ratios or higher THC ratios. Other than one particular variety of high THC marijuana, anyone over the age of 21 may purchase any compliant marijuana. In discussions with the WSLCB,they have indicated they will not consider any differentiation of medical retail stores and recreational retail stores, but will instead simply considered licensed retail stores. The Department of Health has adopted final rules requiring any retail store with a medical marijuana endorsement to have a certified medical marijuana consultant on staff. Final rulemaking on the other aspects of compliant marijuana and the medical marijuana authorization database is anticipated to be complete by June, 2016. City Regulatory Background: In response to I-502, the City adopted permanent regulations on July 22, 2014. The regulations, as they now exist, are set forth in SVMC 19.120.050 (permitted use matrix) and SVMC 19.85 and provide as follows: - State licensed marijuana production is a permitted use in Heavy Industrial and Light Industrial zones, and indoor growing only is permitted in Regional Commercial and Community Commercial zones. - State licensed marijuana processing is a permitted use in the Heavy Industrial and Light Industrial zones, and packaging and labeling of useable marijuana only is permitted in Regional Commercial and Community Commercial zones. - Both production and processing uses may not be located within 1,000 feet of City Hall, CenterPlace, vacant City property (other than stormwater and public rights-of-way), vacant library property, and vacant school property. Production and processing may be located within 1,000 feet of the Appleway Trail, provided that it is in the appropriate zone (there are few Regional Commercial and Community Commercial zones within 1,000 feet of the Appleway Trail). - State licensed marijuana sales are permitted in the Mixed Use Center, Corridor Mixed Use, Regional Commercial, and Community Commercial zones. Page 6 of 8 -Licensed retail sales may not be located within 1,000 feet of City Hall, CenterPlace,vacant City property (other than stormwater and public rights-of-way), vacant library property, vacant school property,the Appleway Trail,and the Centennial Trail. Further, after the passage of I-502, the City saw an increase in the number of collectives (unregulated medical marijuana) seeking business registrations. The City passed a moratorium on unlicensed marijuana uses (e.g., primarily medical marijuana) pursuant to Ordinance No. 14-021 on December 9, 2014 to allow the City to determine what action the State would take to reconcile the medical and recreational marijuana markets and to develop its own regulations. In response to the WSLCB's Emergency Rules on September 23, 2015 (described above), the City adopted Ordinance No. 15-017, which established a moratorium on marijuana uses licensed by the WSLCB in order to allow the City to complete the consideration, development, and adoption of its regulations without allowing additional licenses to vest or create potentially inconsistent or incompatible uses. The moratorium did not impact existing marijuana uses which had already received a license from the WSLCB. However, it will prevent the City from processing any applications from collectives which wish to receive a retail license from the WSLCB. Further, the moratorium did not impact any home use or consumption. This proposal stems from a requirement originally adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 14-021 and subsequently also Ordinance No. 15-017. Pursuant to both ordinances, the City established a work plan to work through and adopt permanent regulations for all marijuana uses. This proposal constitutes the permanent regulations required pursuant to Section 3 of Ordinance No. 14-021 and Section 3 of Ordinance No. 15-017. 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: The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals by protecting residential areas, protecting commercial uses, maintaining a flexible and consistent regulatory environment, and promoting compatibility between adjacent land uses. Further, the proposed amendments maintain the character of residential neighborhoods by prohibiting cooperatives and limiting secondary impacts on surrounding properties for any medical growing within residential zones through compliance with land use and building codes. Relevant Comprehensive Plan goals and policies are shown below: LUP-1.1: Maintain and protect the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. LUP-1.2: Protect residential areas from impacts of adjacent non-residential uses and/or higher intensity uses through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. Land Use Goal LUP-10.2: Encourage a diverse array of industries to locate in Spokane Valley. Page 7 of 8 Economic Goal EDG-7: Maintain a regulatory environment that offers flexibility, consistency,predictability and clear direction. Economic Policy EDP-7.1: Evaluate, monitor and improve development standards to promote compatibility between adjacent land uses; and update permitting processes to ensure that they are equitable,cost-effective, and expeditious. Economic Policy EDP-7.2: Review development regulations periodically to ensure clarity, consistency and predictability. Neighborhood Policy NP-2.1: Maintain and protect the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. (2) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment; Analysis: The proposed amendment will allow compliance with state law and allow existing state-licensed recreational and medical marijuana businesses to continue to operate within the Spokane Valley while separating such uses from identified sensitive uses and the City's existing and future residential uses. Further the amendment will limit additional adverse impacts from new marijuana uses on other existing commercial uses. Finally, the proposed amendment will protect the residential character of residential neighborhoods. 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 on the modified proposal. b. Conclusion(s): Adequate public noticing will be conducted for CTA-2015-0006 in accordance with adopted public noticing procedures 3. Finding and Conclusions Specific to Agency Comments a. Findings: No agency comments have been received to date. b. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. C. OVERALL CONCLUSION The proposed code text amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plans policies and goals. D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division, after review and consideration of the submitted application and applicable approval criteria, makes no recommendation as to the approval of the regulations related to production, processing, and retail sales of state-licensed recreational and medical marijuana, and land use and building code compliance for medical marijuana production and processing within residential zones, except that such proposed amendments are consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies and goals and meet the criteria set forth in SVMC 17.80.150(F). Page 8 of 8 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 14-021 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON,ADOPTING A MORATORIUM ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ALL MARIJUANA USES OTHER THAN MARIJUANA PRODUCERS, MARIJUANA PROCESSORS, AND MARIJUANA RETAIL SALES AS LICENSED BY THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 69.50 RCW AND REGULATED BY CHAPTER 19.85 SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE AND SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 19.120.050,AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, since 1970, federal law has prohibited the manufacture and possession of marijuana as a Schedule I drug, based on the federal government's categorization of marijuana as having a "high potential for abuse, lack of any accepted medical use, and absence of any accepted safety for use in medically supervised treatment." Gonzales v. Raich,545 U.S. 1, 14(2005),Controlled Substance Act, 84 Stat. 1242,2] U.S.C. 801 et seq;and WHEREAS, Initiative Measure No. 692, approved by the voters of Washington State on November 3, 1998, and now codified as chapter 69.51A RCW, created an affirmative defense for "qualifying patients"to the charge of possession of marijuana; and WHEREAS, in 2011,the Washington State Legislature considered and passed ESSSB 5073 that, among other things, (1) authorized the licensing of medical cannabis dispensaries, production facilities, and processing facilities, (2) permitted qualifying patients to receive certain amounts of marijuana for medicinal purposes from designated providers, (3) permitted collective gardens by qualifying patients whereby they may, consistent with state law, collectively grow marijuana for their own use, (4) and clarified that cities were authorized to continue to use their zoning authority to regulate the production, processing, or dispensing of marijuana under ESSSB 5073 and chapter 69.5IA RCW within their respective jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, on April 29, 2011, former governor Christine Gregoire vetoed the portions of ESSSB 5073 that would have provided the legal basis for legalizing and licensing medical cannabis dispensaries,processing facilities,and production facilities,thereby making these activities illegal; and WHEREAS, on November 6, 2012, voters of the State of Washington approved Initiative Measure No. 502 ("I-502"), now codified in chapters 69.50,46.04.46.20,46.21,and 46.61 Revised Code of Washington ("RCW"),which provisions, (l) decriminalized possession and use of certain amounts of marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia; (2) amended state laws pertaining to driving under the influence of intoxicants to include driving under the influence of marijuana;and(3)established a regulatory system licensing producers, processors, and retailers of recreational marijuana for adults 21 years of age and older, and required the Washington State Liquor Control Board (the "LCB") to adopt procedures and criteria by December 1,2013 for issuing licenses to produce,process,and sell marijuana; and WHEREAS, on August 29, 2013, the United States Department of Justice issued a memo providing updated guidance on marijuana enforcement in response to the adoption of I-502. Several ongoing federal enforcement priorities were outlined, including prevention of crime and preventing distribution of marijuana to minors. Further, the memo provided that the Department would not seek ongoing prosecution of marijuana providers, users, and local officials in states that authorized marijuana, provided that those state and local governments "implement strong and effective regulatory and enforcement systems that will address the threat those state laws could pose to public safety, public Ordinance 14-021 Page 1 of 5 health,and other law enforcement interests. A system adequate to that task must not only contain robust controls and procedures on paper; it must also be effective in practice;"and WHEREAS, the LCB has established a comprehensive regulatory scheme for the licensing, operation, and enforcement of recreational marijuana production, processing, and retail sales shops under chapter 314-55 WAC; and WHEREAS, in 2014, the Washington State Legislature considered, but did not adopt E3SSB 5887 that would have reconciled the comprehensive state regulatory scheme for recreational marijuana under I-502 and the lack of regulatory oversight and controls over medical marijuana under chapter 69.51A RCW; and WHEREAS, the possession of medical marijuana, operation of collective gardens, and services provided by designated providers remain illegal under chapter 69.51A RCW and Cannabis Action Coalition v. City of Kent, 180 Wn. App. 455 (2014), cert. granted,with such activities only entitled to an affirmative defense;and WHEREAS, RCW 69.50.445 prohibits the opening of a package containing marijuana, useable marijuana, or a marijuana-infused product, or consumption of marijuana, useable marijuana, or a marijuana-infused product"within view of the general public,"but does not otherwise regulate operation of any "private" marijuana consumption facility, "vaping" of marijuana extracts or oils, or other unlicensed marijuana operations;and WHEREAS, unlike recreational licensed marijuana production, processing,and retail sales under chapter 69.50 RCW, all other marijuana uses, including medical marijuana and businesses offering "private"consumption or"vaping,"remain unlicensed marijuana uses that are largely unregulated and are not subject to review, licensing,or enforcement by the LCB; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature is likely to propose and consider legislation on medical marijuana in the upcoming 2015 Legislative session, but the City cannot determine what that legislation may provide or when or if it will be passed;and WHEREAS,the City of Spokane Valley Police have informally documented 45 marijuana-related crimes since November 13,2013, with at least 30 of those involving persons under the age of 21;and WHEREAS on July 22, 2014, the City adopted Ordinance No. 14-008, which established in chapter 19.85 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code ("SVMC") and SVMC 19.120.050 regulations, zoning,buffers,and other Iimitations on marijuana producers,processors,and retail sellers licensed under chapter 69.50 RCW,but which did not regulate unlicensed marijuana uses;and WHEREAS, as of October 28, the City had at least 18 medical-marijuana related businesses registered within the City, all of which provide marijuana outside of the licensing, regulation, enforcement of the LCB, none of which are licensed marijuana producers, processors, or retail outlets under chapter 69.50 RCW,and none of which are subject to the City's regulations under SVMC 19.85 or SVMC 19.120.050;and WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City of Spokane Valley is authorized to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws," which includes the adoption of regulations governing land uses within the City; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 provides that "A county or city governing body that adopts a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control without holding a Ordinance 14-1121 Page 2 of 5 public hearing on the proposed moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control, shall hold a public hearing on the adopted moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control within at least sixty days of its adoption, whether or not the governing body received a recommendation on the matter from the planning commission or department. If the governing body does not adopt findings of fact justifying its action before this hearing, then the governing body shall do so immediately after this public hearing. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control adopted under this section may be effective for not longer than six months, but may be effective for up to one year if a work plan is developed for related studies providing such a longer period. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance or interim official control may be renewed for one or more six-month periods if a subsequent public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each renewal;"and WHEREAS, a moratorium enacted under RCW 35A.63.220 and/or RCW 36.70A.390 is a method by which local governments may preserve the status quo so that new plans and regulations will not be rendered moot by intervening development;and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390 both authorize the enactment of a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control prior to holding a public hearing; and WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 197-11-880, the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act;and WHEREAS, the lack of regulatory oversight at any level over unlicensed marijuana uses,such as medical marijuana collective gardens, designated providers, and "private" marijuana consumption businesses, (1) creates a market for marijuana that is inconsistent with the highly regulated market established by licensed producers, processors, and retail sales by the LCB, (2) allows increased access to marijuana by minors, and (3) creates a risk to the public health, safety and welfare because of the lack of regulatory oversight and potential for abuse; and WHEREAS, on November 4, 2014, the City Council adopted its 2015-2017 Legislative Agenda, which included an item wherein the City Council stated it would "support the reconciliation of the recreational and medical marijuana statutes," "support development of one system that would regulate medical and recreational marijuana, (including the elimination of medical marijuana), in Washington State,"and would"support State regulations which close gaps within current legislation: Vaping, edibles, oils, and `private' consumption/facilities;and under age possession and consumption;"and WHEREAS, additional time is necessary to allow the City to conduct appropriate research to analyze the allowance, siting, and necessary land-use regulations for unlicensed marijuana uses under existing state law, and to determine what, if any, regulations may be passed by the Washington State Legislature in the upcoming 2015 legislative session regarding unlicensed marijuana uses and the impact of such laws on unlicensed marijuana uses within the City; and WHEREAS, a moratorium will provide the City with additional time to review and amend its public health, safety, and welfare requirements and zoning and land use regulations related to the establishment and operation of unlicensed marijuana uses;and WHEREAS, Washington State law, including RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390, authorizes the City to adopt a moratorium, provided the City conducts a public hearing on the moratorium within 60 days of the date of adoption of the moratorium;and WHEREAS, the City has authority to establish a moratorium concerning the establishment and operation of unlicensed marijuana uses as a necessary stop-gap measure: (1) to provide the City with an Ordinance 14-021 Page 3 of 5 opportunity to study the issues associated with allowing, siting,and regulating unlicensed marijuana uses, including determining what, if any, regulations are passed by the Washington State Legislature in the upcoming 2015 legislative session and the impacts of those laws upon unlicensed marijuana uses; (2) to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley by avoiding and ameliorating negative impacts and unintended consequences of additional unlicensed marijuana; and (3) to avoid applicants possibly establishing vested rights contrary to and inconsistent with any revisions the City may make for its rules and regulations as a result of the City's study of this matter;and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the moratorium imposed and established by this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, public safety, public property and public peace. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows: Section 1. Preliminary Findings. The City Council hereby adopts the above recitals as findings of fact in support of this Ordinance. Section 2. Moratorium Established. A. The City Council hereby declares and imposes a moratorium upon the submission, acceptance, processing, modification or approval of any permit applications or licenses by or for unlicensed marijuana use. B. For purposes of this moratorium, "unlicensed marijuana use" means the production, growing, processing, manufacturing, extraction, infusion into edible solids, liquids or gummies, allowing consumption on the premises of, sale, distribution, or delivery of marijuana, marijuana-infused products, extracts, concentrates, oils, or any other form of product containing or derived from marijuana and intended for human use by any business, association or other for-profit or not-for-profit establishment, including but not limited to collective gardens, designated providers, medical marijuana dispensaries, or private marijuana "vaping," smoking, or consumption clubs;provided, however, "unlicensed marijuana use" shall not include any marijuana producer, marijuana processor, or marijuana retailer that has received and holds a valid marijuana producer, marijuana processor,or marijuana retailer license from the Washington Liquor Control Board pursuant to chapter 69.50 RCW and chapter 314-55 WAC;provided, further, if a building permit for work within a business is necessary in order for a business to obtain a valid marijuana license from the Washington Liquor Control Board under chapter 69.50 RCW, the City may accept and process such permit prior to the applicant receiving its license from the Washington Liquor Control Board. C. "Unlicensed marijuana use"does not and shall not include any personal possession or use of marijuana, marijuana-infused products, marijuana extracts, marijuana concentrates, marijuana oils, or other form of product containing or derived from marijuana and intended for human use by any person pursuant to chapter 69.50 RCW or by any qualifying patient pursuant to RCW 69.51A.040. D. Nothing herein shall affect the processing or consideration of any existing and already- submitted complete land-use or building permit applications that may be subject to vested rights as provided under Washington law. Section 3. Work Plan. The following work plan is adopted to address the issues involving the City's regulation of,and the establishment of unlicensed marijuana uses: A. The City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission is hereby authorized and directed to hold public hearings and public meetings to fully receive and consider statements, testimony, positions, Ordinance l4-021 Pave 4 of 5 and other documentation or evidence related to the public health, safety, and welfare aspects of unlicensed marijuana uses. B. The City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission is hereby authorized and directed to work with City staff and the citizens of the City, as well as all public input received, to develop proposals for regulations pertaining to the establishment of unlicensed marijuana uses, which regulations may provide provisions restricting or limiting unlicensed marijuana use up to and including bans, to be forwarded and recommended to the City Council for its consideration. Section 4. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and 36.70A.390,the City Council shall conduct a public hearing on January 27,2015 at 6:00 p.m.,or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard,at the City of Spokane Valley City Hall, 11707 East Sprague, Spokane Valley,99206,City Council Chambers, to hear and consider the comments and testimony of those wishing to speak at such public hearing regarding the moratorium set forth in this Ordinance. Section 5. Duration. The moratorium set forth in this Ordinance shall be in effect as of the date of this Ordinance and shall continue in effect for a period of 365 days from the date of this. Ordinance, unless repealed,extended, or modified by the City Council after subsequent public hearing(s) and entry of appropriate findings of fact, pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A390. Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority set forth herein and prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 7. 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 S. Declaration of Emergency; Effective Date, This Ordinance is designated as a public emergency necessary for the protection of public health, safety, and welfare and therefore shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the City Council. Passed by the City Council this 9th day of December, 2014. ATTS :/ Dean Grafos .yor 7,44;14A / A4 ity Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as orm: Office he Ci ttorney Date of Publication: December 12,2014 Effective Date: December 9, 2014 Ordinance 14-021 Page 5 of 5 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 15-017 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING A MORATORIUM ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ALL NEW MARIJUANA PRODUCERS, MARIJUANA PROCESSORS, MARIJUANA RETAILERS, MARIJUANA RESEARCHERS, MARIJUANA TRANSPORT AND DELIVERY USES, AND MARIJUANA COOPERATIVES, LICENSED BY OR REGISTERED WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR AND CANNABIS BOARD, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, since 1970, federal law has prohibited the manufacture and possession of marijuana as a Schedule I drug, based on the federal government's categorization of marijuana as having a "high potential for abuse, lack of any accepted medical use, and absence of any accepted safety for use in medically supervised treatment." Gonzales v. Ranch, 545 U.S. 1, 14(2005),Controlled Substance Act, 84 Stat. 1242,21 U.S.C. 801 et seq; and WHEREAS,Initiative Measure No.692,approved by the voters of Washington State on November 3, 1998,and now codified as chapter 69,5 IA RCW,created an affirmative defense fur"qualifying patients" to the charge of possession of marijuana; and WHEREAS, in 2011, the Washington State Legislature considered and passed ESSSB 5073 that, among other things,(I)authorized the licensing of medical cannabis dispensaries,production facilities,and processing facilities,(2)permitted qualifying patients to receive certain amounts of marijuana for medicinal purposes from designated providers, (3) permitted collective gardens by qualifying patients whereby they may, consistent with state law, collectively grow marijuana for their own use, and (4)clarified that cities were authorized to continue to use their zoning authority to regulate the production, processing, or dispensing of medical marijuana under ESSSB 5073 and chapter 69.5IA RCW within their respective jurisdictions;and WHEREAS,on April 29,2011, former governor Christine Gregoire vetoed the portions of ESSSB 5073 that would have provided the legal basis for legalizing and licensing medical cannabis dispensaries, processing facilities,and production facilities,thereby making these activities illegal;and WHEREAS,on November 6,2012,voters of the State of Washington approved Initiative Measure No. 502 ("1-502"), now codified in chapters 69.50, 46.04, 46.20, 46.21, and 46.61 Revised Code of Washington ("RCW"), which provisions, (1) decriminalized possession and use of certain amounts of marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia;(2)amended state laws pertaining to driving under the influence of intoxicants to include driving under the influence of marijuana; and (3) established a regulatory system licensing producers,processors,and retailers of recreational marijuana for adults 21 years of age and older, and required the Washington State Liquor Control Board(now the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board, and referred to herein as the"WSLCB")to adopt procedures and criteria by December 1,2013 for issuing licenses to produce,process,and sell marijuana;and WHEREAS,on August 29,2013,the United States Department of Justice issued a memo providing updated guidance on marijuana enforcement in response to the adoption of 1-502. Several ongoing federal enforcement priorities were outlined, including prevention of crime and preventing distribution of marijuana to minors. Further,the memo provided that the Department would not seek ongoing prosecution of marijuana providers, users, and local officials in states that authorized marijuana, provided that those state and local governments"implement strong and effective regulatory and enforcement systems that will Ordinance 15-017 Page 1 of6 address the threat those state laws could pose to public safety, public health, and other law enforcement interests. A system adequate to that task must not only contain robust controls and procedures on paper; it must also be effective in practice;"and WHEREAS on July 22,2014,the City adopted Ordinance No. 14-008,which established in chapter 19.85 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code ("SVMC") and SVMC 19.120.050 regulations, zoning, buffers, and other limitations on marijuana producers, processors, and retail sellers licensed under chapter 69.50 RCW, but which did not regulate unlicensed marijuana uses, including medical marijuana;and WHEREAS, the City's regulations were premised, in part, upon the laws and regulations then in effect (chapter 69.50 RCW and chapter 314-55 WAC), that allocated a total of three marijuana retail licenses within the City and provided a maximum limit on marijuana production space;and WHEREAS,on December 9,2014,the City adopted Ordinance No. 14-021,adopting a moratorium on the establishment of new unlicensed marijuana uses in order to allow the City to consider any marijuana- related legislation adopted as part of the 2015 Washington State Legislative Session and to develop comprehensive marijuana regulations incorporating such changes;and WHEREAS, the moratorium adopted by the City on December 9, 2014, did not impact existing licensed or unlicensed marijuana facilities and did not prohibit the City from processing applications related to licensed marijuana producers,processors,and retailers because the City had already adopted regulations for such uses that were premised, in part,upon the laws and regulations then in effect(chapter 69.50 RCW and chapter 314-55 WAC), that allocated a total of three retail licenses within the City and provided a maximum limit on marijuana production space;and WHEREAS, to date, the City has 19 licensed marijuana producers, 2I licensed marijuana processors and three licensed marijuana retailers located within its boundaries. All three licensed marijuana retailers are operational and are selling marijuana at their locations within the City. The City processed five business registrations related to medical marijuana in 2013 and 10 business registrations in 2014 prior to the adoption of the moratorium; and WHEREAS, in 2015,the Washington State Legislature adopted the"Cannabis Patient Protection Act," Laws of 2015,ch. 70,and additional comprehensive marijuana-related regulations pursuant to Laws of 2015, ch. 4 and other enacted legislation(collectively,the"2015 Marijuana Legislation"); and WHEREAS, as part of the 2015 Marijuana Legislation, the State (1) reconciled the medical and recreational marijuana markets by establishing a"medical marijuana endorsement"that retail licensees will be able to obtain to sell medical marijuana to qualified patients and designated providers,while also making unlicensed collective gardens illegal by July 1,2016,(2)expanded the amount of marijuana production that may be conducted state-wide to accommodate the needs of marijuana retailers with medical marijuana endorsements, (3) created "cooperatives"which must be registered by the WSLCB, and (4) created a new license for common carriers to deliver and transport marijuana between licensed marijuana producers, processors,and retailers delivery/transportation and created a new marijuana research license for permitees to produce, process, and possess marijuana for certain limited research purposes;and WHEREAS,as part of the 2015 Marijuana Legislation,the State required an increase in the number of marijuana retail licenses to "accommodate the medical needs of qualifying patients and designated providers"and directed the WSLCB to promulgate rules and regulations for setting the number of increased retail licenses, accepting new retail license applications and accepting applications for medical marijuana endorsements;and Ordinance 15-017 Page 2 of 6 WHEREAS, on September 23, 2015, the WSLCB issued, effective immediately, its Emergency Rules #15-18 (the "WSLCB Emergency Rules") to amend chapter 314-55 WAC to provide that (1) the WSLCB will begin accepting marijuana retail license applications on October 12, 2015 and it will not set a limit on the number of marijuana retail licenses until a later date, (2) the WSLCB will begin accepting applications for medical marijuana endorsements,and(3)the state cap on maximum marijuana production space is removed and will be set at a later date;and WHEREAS, on September 23, 2015, the WSLCB also issued its Proposed Rules #15-17, which will be subject to public comment, and pursuant to which the WSLCB has provided that it will not set a limit on the number of marijuana retail licenses or a state cap on marijuana production space until a later date;and WHEREAS,pursuant to Article 11,Section 11 of the Washington Constitution,the City of Spokane Valley is authorized to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws,"which includes the adoption of regulations governing land uses within the City; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 provides that "A county or city governing body that adopts a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control without holding a public hearing on the proposed moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control,shall hold a public hearing our the adopted moratorium, interim zoning map,interim zoning ordinance,or interim official control within at least sixty days of its adoption,whether or not the governing body received a recommendation on the matter from the planning commission or department. If the governing body does not adopt findings of fact justifying its action before this hearing,then the governing body shall do so immediately after this public hearing. A moratorium, interim zoning map,interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control adopted under this section may be effective for not longer than six months, but may be effective for up to one year if a work plan is developed for related studies providing such a longer period. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance or interim official control may be renewed for one or more six-month periods if a subsequent public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each renewal;"and WHEREAS,a moratorium enacted under RCW 35A.63.220 and/or RCW 36.70A.390 is a method by which local governments may preserve the status quo so that new plans and regulations will not be rendered moot by intervening development;and WHEREAS, RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390 both authorize the enactment of a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control prior to holding a public hearing;and WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 197-11-880, the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 14-021, the City is in the process of developing comprehensive medical and recreational marijuana regulations. However, the Planning Commission and City Council will not have an opportunity to fully consider and develop comprehensive marijuana policy decisions that give adequate consideration to 2015 Marijuana Legislation,or to adopt such City regulations, prior to October 12,2015 when the WSLCB will begin accepting and processing additional marijuana retail licenses;and WHEREAS, new proposals for additional marijuana retail licenses that may be submitted beginning October 12, 2015, pose an imminent threat to the public health and safety as they may create incompatible land uses subject to the City's existing regulations which were premised, in part,on a total of Ordinance 15-017 Page 3 of 6 three marijuana retail stores and a state cap on the maximum amount of marijuana production space,without allowing the City to fully consider the impacts of the 2015 Marijuana Legislation or the WSLCB Emergency Rules. Further, allowing an unknown number of marijuana retail licenses to vest or be located within the City prior to completion of the City's review and development of its marijuana zoning and land use regulations impairs the City's ability(1)to give full consideration to the 2015 Marijuana Legislation, WSLCB Emergency Rules, and currently uncapped increase in marijuana retail stores and statewide maximum marijuana production space,(2)to develop a reasoned approach to the public health,safety,and welfare impacts from the 2015 Marijuana Legislation, WSLCB Emergency Rules, and the currently uncapped increase in the number of marijuana retail stores and statewide maximum marijuana production space, and(3)to adopt appropriate comprehensive zoning and land use regulations governing medical and recreational marijuana based upon the impacts from the 2015 Marijuana Legislation and WSLCB Emergency Rules;and WHEREAS, additional time is necessary for Planning Commission and City Council (1) to give full consideration to the 2015 Marijuana Legislation, WSLCB Emergency Rules, and currently uncapped increase in marijuana retail stores and statewide maximum marijuana production space, (2) to develop a reasoned approach to the public health, safety, and welfare impacts from the 2015 Marijuana Legislation, WSLCB Emergency Rules, and the currently uncapped increase in the number of marijuana retail stores and statewide maximum marijuana production space, and (3)to adopt appropriate comprehensive zoning and land use regulations governing medical and recreational marijuana based upon the impacts from the 2015 Marijuana Legislation and WSLCB Emergency Rules;and WHEREAS,Washington State law, including RCW 35A.63.220 and RCW 36.70A.390,authorizes the City to adopt a moratorium, provided the City conducts a public hearing on the moratorium within 60 days of the date of adoption of the moratorium; and WHEREAS, the City has authority to establish a moratorium concerning the establishment and operation of licensed or registered marijuana uses as a necessary stop-gap measure: (1) to give full consideration to the 2015 Marijuana Legislation, WSLCB Emergency Rules, and currently uncapped increase in marijuana retail stores and statewide maximum marijuana production space, (2) to develop a reasoned approach to the public health, safety, and welfare impacts from the 2015 Marijuana Legislation, WSLCB Emergency Rules, and the currently uncapped increase in the number of marijuana retail stores and statewide maximum marijuana production space, (3)to adopt appropriate comprehensive zoning and land use regulations governing medical and recreational marijuana based upon the impacts from the 2015 Marijuana Legislation and WSLCB Emergency Rules, and (4) to avoid applicants possibly establishing vested rights contrary to and inconsistent with any revisions the City may make for its rules and regulations; and WHEREAS,the City Council finds that the moratorium imposed and established by this Ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, public safety, public property and public peace. NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley ordains as follows: Section 1. Preliminary Findings. The City Council hereby adopts the above recitals as findings of fact in support of this Ordinance. Section 2. Moratorium Established. A. The City Council hereby declares and imposes a moratorium upon the submission, acceptance, processing, modification or approval of any permit applications or licenses by or for any new licensed or registered marijuana use. Ordinance 15-0 17 Page 4 of 6 B. For purposes of this moratorium, "licensed or registered marijuana use" means any marijuana producers, marijuana processors, marijuana retailers, including any licensed retailer seeking a medical marijuana endorsement, marijuana researcher, marijuana delivery or transportation by common carrier between licensed facilities,marijuana cooperative, or other use that is required pursuant to chapters 69.50 and 69.51A RCW and chapter 314-55 WAC to be licensed by or registered with the WSLCB. C. This moratorium shall not affect, and "licensed or registered marijuana use" shall not include any personal possession or use of marijuana, marijuana-infused products, marijuana extracts, marijuana concentrates,marijuana oils,or other form of product containing or derived from marijuana and intended for human use by any person pursuant to chapter 69.50 RCW or by any qualifying patient or designated provider pursuant to chapter 69,51A RCW. D. Nothing herein shall affect the processing or consideration of any existing and already- submitted complete land-use or building permit applications that may be subject to vested rights as provided under Washington law, or any processing or consideration of any land-use or building permit for a marijuana producer, marijuana processor,or marijuana retailer that has,as of the date of this moratorium, already received its license from the WSLCB and which permit application is for a modification or renewal at the existing location listed on that license for that marijuana producer,processor,or retailer. Section 3. Work Plan. The following work plan is adopted to address the issues involving the City's regulation of,and the establishment of licensed or registered marijuana uses: A. The City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission is hereby authorized and directed to hold public hearings and public meetings to fully receive and consider statements,testimony,positions,and other documentation or evidence related to the public health, safety, and welfare aspects of licensed or registered marijuana uses. B. The City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission is hereby authorized and directed to work with City staff and the citizens of the City, as well as all public input received,to develop proposals for regulations pertaining to the establishment of licensed or registered marijuana uses, giving full consideration to the 2015 Marijuana Legislation and WSLCB Emergency Rules, and which regulations may provide provisions restricting or limiting unlicensed marijuana use up to and including bans, to be forwarded and recommended to the City Council for its consideration. Section 4. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and 36.70A.390,the City Council shall conduct a public hearing on October 27,2015 at 6:00 p.m.,or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard,at the City of Spokane Valley City Hall, 11707 East Sprague, Spokane Valley, 99206, City Council Chambers, to hear and consider the comments and testimony of those wishing to speak at such public hearing regarding the moratorium set forth in this Ordinance. Section S. Duration. The moratorium set forth in this Ordinance shall be in effect as of the date of this Ordinance and shall continue in effect fora period of 365 days from the date of this Ordinance, unless repealed,extended, or modified by the City Council after subsequent public hearing(s)and entry of appropriate findings of fact,pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220 and.RCW 36.70A.390. Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority set forth herein and prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 7. 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. Ordinance 15-017 page 5 of 6 Supplemental Conditions Commercial and Industrial Zone I-2 I-1 P/OS RC Districts Permitted Use Matrix C NC O GO CMU MUC Residential Zone MF-2 MF-1 R-4 Districts R-3 R-2 R-1 19.120.050 Permitted use matrix. Use Category/Type Food and Beverage Service Agriculture and Animal Supplemental Conditions Commercial and Industrial Zone I-2 I-1 P/OS RC Districts Permitted Use Matrix C NC O GO CMU MUC Residential Zone MF-2 MF-1 R-4 Districts R-3 R-2 R-1 Use Category/Type Industrial, Light Residential Supplemental Conditions Commercial and Industrial Zone I-2 I-1 P/OS RC Districts Permitted Use Matrix C NC O GO CMU MUC Residential Zone MF-2 MF-1 R-4 Districts R-3 R-2 R-1 Use Category/Type Retail Sales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ear Adult 6 Months Minor bh9{ bh 9{ Medical Endorsement allows creation of the Recognition Cards and entry into the Voluntary Data Base Department of Health has identified Compliant Marijuana but has not identified marijuana for medical Special training required for sales personnel if Medical Endorsement is obtained (on recognition cards, Certified medical marijuana Customer Consultant required for sales personnel if Medical Endorsement Compliant Marijuana can be sold by both Retail and Retail with Medical Endorsement to anyone 21 With a Recognition Card and in the Voluntary Data Base are you required to purchase from a Retail Certified medical marijuana Customer Consultant required for sales personnel selling Marijuana to DEPARTMENT of HEALTH CURRENT RULES Recognition Card (entry into Voluntary Data Base) allows Marijuana purchase quantity to increase Medical Endorsement allows for sales to those under 21 (only with proper Authorization Card) Recognition Card required if one wants to be entered into the State's Voluntary Data Base Patients under 21 years of age may only obtain marijuana with proper Authorization Card Kevin Anderson Recognition Card produced by the Marijuana retailer with Medical Endorsement Special training required for sales personnel selling Marijuana to those over 21 Recognition Card (entry into Voluntary Data Base) eliminates sales tax Authorization Card can only be issued by a health care professional outlet with a Medical Endorsement to obtain your tax break Authorization Card necessary to obtain a Recognition Card 59{/wLtLhb tax breaks, marijuana amounts, etc.) years of age or older those over 21 is obtained use IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY City of Spokane Valley RETAIL February, 2016 Katherine Morgan, Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce Skip Sherwood, Cornerstone Property Advisors Wendy Smith, Greater Spokane Incorporated ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Carl Guenzel, Kiemle and Hagood Doug Yost, Centennial PropertiesMark Goodman, Project Manager PROJECT TEAM John Guarisco, MDI Marketing Yolanda Ho, Planning Analyst Bob Boyle, Hansen Industries Justin Folkins, CANTU Jim Koon, NAI Black Sam Morse, CANTU John Miller, Divcon Mike Basinger John Hohman Gloria Mantz Chaz Bates 41 71 13 9 GOALS, STRATEGIES, ACTIONS CONTENTS IMPLEMENTATION RETAIL PROFILE INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION 01: 9 INTRODUCTION Spokane County’s population and employment. With more than 93,000 greater Spokane area, the City appears well positioned to expand upon and mographics, but also a tool that can be leveraged to attract businesses and ration and together with the City of Spokane is home to the majority of residents and a role as a major housing and employment center in the -- their understanding of the City’s retail trade area, retail demand and de The City of Spokane Valley is a relatively new city in terms of incorpo BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE facilitate growth in the City’s retail footprint. el time, population and Analysis of trade capture rates and assessment of gaps in retail -- edgeable in local real estate and retail commerce dynamics Analysis of the City’s retail trade area base to assess: elop a retail strategy based on established retail zones, trav Develop an action-oriented retail strategy: stakeholders to dev tions >>>>>> of Spokane Valley’s assets, opportunities and challenges in the near and long A demonstrated desire to add retail as part of the City’s civic hub but also a baseline of information and analysis to inform an economic understanding a strategic vision to support a series of action steps the City can commit to tool for recruitment, with benchmarks and performance metrics that will help policymakers monitor progress towards the City’s goals. The technical analysis --- Uncertainty surrounding the amount of retail space Spokane Valley res a general preference to expand and improve retail throughout the City tions for their retail needs, particularly in food and beverage Washington Department of Revenue taxable retail sales data for the TECHNICAL APPROACH AND American Community Survey and US Census data RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Spokane County Assessor Data tered on the following factors: METHODOLOGY Hoovers Business Data idents can support >>>>>>>>> 10 11 RETAIL PROFILE 02: for the lights locations where larger clusters of retail currently exist. The City has retail spread out along its major travel corridors with larger clusters anchored by several large big box stores. In addition, the Spokane Valley Mall is a major retail presence in the City. The following is a partial list of key retail anchors - 13 Spokane Valley Mall Walgreens Auto Row Rite Aid Safeway Shopko Kohl’s >>>>>>>> Winco Foods Home Depot Fred Meyer Rosauers Walmart Lowe’s Costco Target within the City. >>>>>>>> uses clustered along Sprague and Appleway, as well as many of the City’s kane Valley Mall. To better understand how these retail areas function, this The concept of a retail trade area has been used by analysts and practitioners tail trade area analysis focuses on locating and describing the target market. This knowledge is critical for both marketing and merchandising purposes, as well as for choosing new retail locations. In site evaluation, trade area analysis is combined with many operational requirements of the retail chain Put simply, a trade area is the geographic region that generates the majority of customers for a given commercial district retail location. It can also be -- in retail site evaluation and other market studies for a very long time. Re north-south corridors like Argonne and Sullivan and the area near the Spo SPOKANE VALLEYS RETAIL TRADE study evaluates the City’s retail trade area. AREA come. For the purposes of evaluating retail in Spokane Valley, retail trade ute drive time can be considered the City’s primary trade area and the 10-minute drive time can be considered the City’s secondary encompasses the City’s boundaries and extends westward into the City of Spokane and its downtown area. The secondary trade area and includes overlaps with several retail destinations in the City of -- Spokane and Liberty Lake. serve. for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY 14 To better understand the existing retail clusters within the City, terms of overall walkability and access. The large majority of retail in the City is auto oriented with limited amounts of retail accessible for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY 16 tegic planning and retail site selection. For example, the population te for many retailers when choosing a location. In addition, understanding and the relative proximity of population centers to Spokane Valley retail. Population density is a key factor for many retailers looking For City policymakers it is also important to consider how retail is concentrated in relation to where its residents live. How do people access retail now and how can they access it in the future? Currently, ther emphasizes that majority of the City’s population does not live ---- stand the purchasing power on the trade area and where opportuni where higher incomes are concentrated allows one to better under The indicators chosen represent attributes important for both stra density and related concentration of households is a key attribu ties for new types of retail may exist. Population Change Housing Burden >>> The following section provides details on the City’s trade area and people and jobs that lie within it. As previously mentioned, the City’s primary and destinations. Below are key considerations when examining a retail trade It’s important to note one cannot match a single business’s trade area to the whole community. Rarely do other businesses match the pacted by its network of streets and highways, as well as major -- for the ically to illustrate various patterns within the City’s trade areas. RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY landforms such as rivers, lakes, and mountains. nity’s population, the bigger your trade area is. pull of a prominent destination business. TRADE AREA PROFILE instead of your community. Median Household Income Population Density businesses. im area. >>>>>>> 18 2010 to 2013. Much of the region’s most rapid population growth enced growth in certain neighborhoods, especially in the southeast lation and household density is an important factor for prospective retailers, it’s important to understand where growth is occurring within the City and where such growth can be leveraged to support existing and new retail. It is also important to consider the impact --- has occurred in the City of Spokane. Spokane Valley also experi of land use policy on housing densities and where growth is en couraged through said policies. for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY 20 the City’s primary retail destinations, there exists a broad range of household incomes. Based on the geographic distribution of the trade area there are pockets of higher incomes, especially on the throughout the primary trade area is similar to the distribution found across the incorporated areas of the county. In comparison to --- the City of Spokane for example, Spokane Valley has a higher me data there is a relatively high concentration of households earn for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY 22 income on housing. This attribute relates directly to household incomes and the amount of disposable income residents have for non-essential items. While the City of Spokane has several areas with high concentrations of burdened households, there exists a ley. This has implications on retail spending and how and where people access both essential and non-essential goods. For example, are lower income or cost burdened households able to cheaply and -- substantial number of such households in the City of Spokane Val are considered burdened by the cost of housing. Burdened is gen for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY 24 for the plete understanding of how retail is performing in the City of Spokane Valley. Below is a summary of the steps taken to assess Spokane Valley retail and 2. Assessment of the population characteristics in the City’s trade areas to 3. Assessment of total taxable retail sales and taxable retail sales per capita The trade capture analysis includes a detailed study of retail spending within ington State Department of Revenue. The data is collected and organized by comparison of distinct retail types and geographic areas. The data allow for General Merchandise stores are also a major spending category within Motor Vehicles and Parts represents the largest retail spending category o-thirds of all retail sales in the -- the City, representing major big box retailers like Target and Fred Meyer the City. The analysis uses taxable retail sales data collected by the Wash An analysis of retail sales within the City was conducted to gain a more com determine potential consumer demand for products and services RETAIL TRADE CAPTURE Combined, these two categories represent tw within the City compared to region in Spokane Valley City. >> for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY 28 for the Income and Housing. Higher-income households tend to the south, though neighborhoods within the City boundaries are ally, the City is largely single family with little retail dispersed Market Indicators. Although retail vacancy rates have declined ber of underutilized and underperforming properties in the regionally but well below rates found in downtown Spokane. -- more populous and host higher population densities. Gener cluster outside the City’s boundaries to the north and within the City’s residential areas. >> The Trade Area Analysis and Retail Trade Capture Assessment articulated a throughout the region, indicated by its high retail sales per capita and trade capture rates. This means many of its retailers are reliant is clustered along the City’s major thoroughfares and is generally auto oriented and relatively spread out. There are few neighborhood serving retail locations throughout the City and most of the City’s Large Format Retailers. General merchandise stores, represented by Impact of the Spokane Valley Mall. The Spokane Valley Mall serves hor for the city, luring customers population. Approximately half of all restaurants in the City are fast - the development of goals and strategies for retail in Spokane Valley. for the STRATEGIC THEMES FROM THE RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY as a major retail draw and anc the retail sales in the City. RETAIL PROFILE in the surrounding area. than Spokane Valley. >>>>> 32 : STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT VETTING INITIAL FINDINGS eas of focus for the retail strategy and potential retail strategies to consider. Several retail “subdistricts” that exist within the City were Answer the question: What do you want us to know about --- CAI facilitated an informal discussion centered on establishing ar Utilize the knowledge and experience of participants to for retail in Spokane Valley and the greater Spokane Area? tions and goals for retail in Spokane Valley mulate strategies on retail the opportunity to: >>> The following is a summary of the retail strategy workshop that took place and expertise of local stakeholders. The workshop provided an opportunity to not only learn more about the retail environment in Spokane Valley but also to align the strategy with the challenges and opportunities cited by ticipated in the workshop representing a mix of real estate professionals, -- property owners and regional economic development specialists. Work for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Justin Folkins – Cantu Commercial Properties Wendy Smith – Greater Spokane Incorporated Katherine Morgan – Spokane Valley Chamber Sam Morse – Cantu Commercial Properties John Guarisco – MDI Marketing shop participants include the following: Jim Koon – NAI Black John Miller – Divcon >>>>>>>> 34 Key challenges for retail are the decentralized nature of the City and the lack of concentrated attractions in any one area. The City It is hard for mom and pop shops/retailers to compete with national Perry District in Spokane is an example of local retailers succeeding There is an opportunity for a regional sports facility in the City that shopping in the City. There is also an opportunity for an indoor There is an opportunity for a recreational activity hub in the City. Potential exists for recreational equipment rental services as well as tary retail and restaurants. Connect to river and trails ---- recreation facility in the City. Look at the impact of basketball tour sary for successful retail. Throughout the City, higher concentra There is existing demand for higher density multifamily develop 35 : n o i t s e needs an anchor attraction for the area around City Hall. u Q potential challenges and opportunities for retail in the City. ? y t i C e h t naments in Spokane and Spokane Valley. f o r e t n in today’s evolving retail market. e c system in the City and beyond. e h t o t e l p small scale retailers. o e p w a r d complemen u o y n a c w o H >>>>>> estate market and other factors as they relate to retail in Spokane Valley. The north-south corridors of the City are good locations for retail Land pricing is a challenge in the City of Spokane Valley. Many and thus are not motivated to sell/lease in current New developments need to achieve $22 to $24 per square foot south, resulting in north-south commuting patterns through the - landowners are willing to wait until the market can support high n a e STRATEGIC THEMES FROM THE r e lease rates in order for new development to be realistic. h t s I : s n o STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP i t s e and Pines are both corridors to consider. u Q concentrated to serve commuters. implications for strategy development. due to commute patterns. er sales prices conditions. >>>>> In some cases, lease rates have to be lowered to keep and/or with somewhat --- Businesses that include a mix of retail and industrial activi In many cases such businesses are priced out of Spokane. Spo ? kane Valley has a relative pricing advantage w o r lower land values and required lease rates. g There is low retail draw to this subarea. y e h t n a c e r e h W ? s n such a mix of uses. o i t a l attract tenants. u g e r e s u d n a l / e d o c >>>>>> Workshop participants focused a portion of their discussion on land use To promote retail development in areas with supportive housing Align permitted housing and commercial densities with market The stakeholder group discussed the Argonne retail subdistrict and its role within the City. This conversation led to a broader discussion of retail in The central hub of the neighborhood consists of food/restaurant - Develop long term strategies addressing retail and housing densi s I : n for the o i t s e u ? Q n o i RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY t a c o The area hosts a number of major employers. l s section is broken into several categories for clarity. i h policy and its relationship to retail development. t n i l i a t e r y r e c ties and their relationship. o r g l a n o the neighborhood. i t i d d a r o f demand. m o retail. o r e r e h t >>>>>>>> 36 that will increase opportunities for new and better types of retail. Focus on the following customer segments: young people, students, - 37 ant factors in creating a better retail environment families, visitors, current residents >>> plement retail, something Spokane Valley lacks. There is a lack of a center of ous opinions on where this can/should be such as near City Hall What role can an athletic facility play in drawing people to the City? A major facility or event would draw lots of regional/state ple that may otherwise spend their money and time in the City Look to Kendall Yards as a transformative project to draw people The following represents areas or topics that the group recommended City has had a great start with branding & identity and needs to continue to establish a clear identity. Market the city’s outdoor --- town where you can conduct multiple activities. There are vari visitors to Spokane Valley. The City should focus on drawing peo Focus on utilizing on-line/social media resources Downtown Spokane has cultural draws to com Retailers associations and special events the strategy focus on and/or include. recreation opportunities or the Mall. of Spokane. to the City America” >>>>>>> 39 STRATEGIES & ACTIONS GOALS, 03: for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY 40 HIGH PRIORITY ACTION GOALS AND STRATEGIES AT A GLANCE for the HOW TO NAVIGATE THIS SECTION for the STRATEGY 1.1 Policy for the STRATEGY 1.2 Policy Policy STRATEGY 1.3 for the STRATEGY 2.1 Infrastructure Infrastructure STRATEGY 2.2 for the Image and Identity STRATEGY 3.1 STRATEGY 3.2 for the STRATEGY 3.3 Image and Identity Image and Identity STRATEGY 3.4 for the STRATEGY 4.1 Assets Assets STRATEGY 4.2 along with something to purchase will be Retailers that provide an experience Urban Land Magazine “Retail Futures” (2010) for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY rewarded. 58 Assets 59 events for spaces like CenterPlace, and expand the Actively seek conferences, conventions and other Promote Spokane Valley retailers and hoteliers at regional events, such as Spokane HoopFest, 4.3.1 Increase Regional Participation connections to the Spokane River and other 4.3.2 Advertise Natural Amenities Bloomsday and the Ironman Triathlon. city’s role in marketing key facilities. 4.3.3 Fill Existing Facilities unique quality-of-life assets. STRATEGY 4.3 for the Retail Centers STRATEGY 5.1 for the STRATEGY 5.2 Retail Centers Retail Centers STRATEGY 5.2 View at: http://uli.org/wp-content/uploads/2005/01/TP_Partnerships.pdf services, building schools, and a wide range growing arena for the use of PPPs is urban and wastewater systems, delivery of social transportation projects but also for water “Today, partnerships are used not only in “Ten Principles for Successful Public-Private Partnerships” (2005) of other applications. By far the fastest- economic development.” Urban Land Institute for the RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY 64 Retail Centers STRATEGY 5.3 for the STRATEGY 6.1 Catalysts for the STRATEGY 6.1 Catalysts Catalysts STRATEGY 6.2 IMPLEMENTATION 71 04: applicable codes to allow retail in industrial zones, as conditional uses Comprehensive Plan update, identify procedures for adding a retail Comprehensive Plan update, to conduct due diligence and initiate Use the current Capital Improvements Plan to categorize needed Coordinate with Public Works to ensure that the CIP treats key Identify retail zoned sites adjacent to trail and coordinate with Coordinate with the Planning Division to evaluate and amend Where to start? and home occupations future trail segments The table on pages 72-74 presents a list of the “high priority” actions from this plan. Each action zone or overlay improvements is mapped to retail centers throughout the city, so that implementers of the plan can target their actions within the community. The table also provides a starting point for immediate brokers rezone XX Neighborhood Centers XXXXXXX Sprague Corridor North/Coyote Rock Mirabeau & S.V. Mall X Argonne for the X City Hall X Western S.V. X Gateways RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY X Citywide PRIORITIZED ACTIONS 1.3.1 Encourage “Local Production” Uses 1.1.3 Rezone Commercial Corridors 2.3.1 Leverage the Appleway Trail 1.2.1 Add an Overlay or New Zone 3.2.3 Promote Retail Segments 72 Negotiate a scope of work with an appropriate consultant to evaluate Reach out individually to key business owners to pitch the “night out” simultaneously coordinate with appropriate departments to amplify 73 Coordinate with brokers to assemble a list of vacancies and work Reach out individually to key restaurateurs to pitch the “taste of Engage with Greater Spokane Inc. and other relevant entities to Discuss suggested mechanisms with relevant departments and a list of tourism investments for potential ROI to the city political authorities to evaluate initial feasibility Where to start? mouth” to recruit participants social media presence update regularly participants XXXXX Neighborhood Centers XXXXX Sprague Corridor North/Coyote Rock Mirabeau & S.V. Mall Argonne City Hall Western S.V. Gateways XXXXX Citywide 5.2.2 Match Businesses with Available Space with sustained, higher than average vacancy rates are candidates for Reach out to local or regional operators of existing farmer’s markets opportunities to market to local brokers and potential developers Reach out to local businesses to establish interest and start an and contract with an operator or consultant to begin business Identify business and land owners in close proximity to the Mirabeau Point plan, or other subarea plans of similar scale Identify complementary retail activities and development Where to start? to formulate next steps See pages 75 - 77 See above, 6.1.5 rezoningplanning Neighborhood Centers XX Sprague Corridor North/Coyote Rock XX Mirabeau & S.V. Mall Argonne for the XXX City Hall X Western S.V. RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY Gateways XX Citywide 6.2.1 Conduct a Market Analysis and Business 5.3.2 Create a Business Improvement District 6.1.6 Support the Development of Mirabeau 6.1.8 Execute the Vision for the City Hall Area 5.2.8 Consider Land Use Alternatives Point Plan 74 75 workshops, interviews and other research to prioritize recruiting targets RETAIL RECRUITMENT TARGETS for Spokane Valley. you’d like to see expand in The City will need to work with and/or hire local real estate professionals that will actual Alternatively, meet with local, regional and statewide developers that have built or - Develop “packages” of restaurants and retailers: businesses that would like to lo a framework for evaluating and pursing retail recruitment activities. These actions are The following actions add granularity to the actions detailed in this plan. They provide Develop a list of desirable retail businesses with a local, regional intended to complement the information provided in the retail recruitment targets The broker should serve as a facilitator for recruitment and be involved in for the support the City’s goals and retail recruitment priorities Create a list of at least a dozen such businesses that RETAIL RECRUITMENT CHECKLIST Focus on locally owned and operated businesses RETAIL IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY repositioned high quality retail developments lease transactions where appropriate and commercial developers or statewide presence cate near each other table on page 75. the City >>>>>> 76 77 Meet with at least a dozen retailers and Meet with at least a dozen property owners and/or developers in the next -- Develop a list of at least a dozen suit roperties suitable for fu PROGRESS MEASURES restaurateurs in the next year ture retail recruitment able spaces/p year >>>> develop and maintain an inventory of land and existing commercial space that Using the list of desired retail businesses, contact businesses owners and provide Setup meetings with potential retailers and learn about their growth plans, space Serve as a resource for businesses that may need assistance with permitting and they better understand -- facilitate further con Prioritize available spaces and match with potential retail types Identify local property and building owners with available land versations with the City’s broker and/or brokers representing said properties Identify locations that may be attractive to them and work to Provide them a copy of the retail recruitment strategy so marketing materials about the City of Spokane Valley could house the next great retail shop or restaurant port the City’s overall economic development goals and spaces in key locations within the City needs and perceptions of Spokane Valley issues that may need to be resolved the City’s intent >>>>>>>>>