PC APPROVED Minutes 09-22-16 APPROVED Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Council Chambers—City Hall
September 22,2016
I. Commissioner Graham called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience
stood for the pledge of allegiance. Secretary Elisha Heath took roll and the following members and
staff were present:
Kevin Anderson Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney
Heather Graham John Holman, Community& Economic Development Director
James Johnson Mike Basinger,Economic Development Coordinator
Tim Kelley Gloria Mantz,Economic Development Engineer
Mike Phillips Chaz Bates, Economic Development Specialist
Michelle Rasmussen
Suzanne Stathos Elisha Heath, Secretary for the Commission
IL Agenda: Commissioner Anderson moved to accept the September 22, 2016 agenda as presented. The
vote was seven in frwor, zero against and the motion passed.
III. Minutes: Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the August 25th,2016 minutes as presented. The
vote to approve the minutes was seven in favor, zero against and the motion passed.
IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson and Commissioner Graham reported that they
attended the Comprehensive Plan Open House on September 8,2016.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Economic Development Coordinator, Mike Basinger reported on
the schedule of future meetings including the Public Hearing scheduled for September 29th with a
continuation on October 6th, if necessary.Followed by a meeting on October 13th for deliberations and
recommendations to City Council on the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Basinger stated that there is a
possibility to separate the deliberations and recommendations into two separate meeting.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment.
VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
a) Study Session: DRAFT Comprehensive Plan Update; Draft Spokane Valley Municipal Code
(SVMC)Proposed Updates; and SEPA Analysis for Draft Comprehensive Plan.
Prior to the beginning of the presentation by Economic Development Coordinator Mike Basinger,
Commissioner Johnson inquired about the mandated date by the state in which the Comprehensive
Plan needed to be completed. Staff stated the date is June 30, 2017. Commission Stathos followed
up with the question of why the schedule is set for the Comprehensive Plan to be completed by
November 2016.Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb replied that it is the expressed desire of the City
Council for the Comprehensive Plan Update to be completed by the end of 2016.
Mr. Basinger introduced Economic Development Engineer Gloria Mantz and Economic
Development Specialist Chaz Bates,who were present and would assist him in answering questions
the Commission might have about the document at the conclusion on his presentation on the draft
Comprehensive Plan Update. He requested that Commissioners submit any housekeeping items
including grammar to staff for correction. While substantial changes to the document be discussed
amongst the Commission in order to form a consensus of future action. Mr. Basinger proposed
discussion points for the Planning Commission in relation to the overall document including the
Goals and Policies must be consistent with the community's vision and that the regulations that
implement the Comprehensive Plan are consistent i.e. SVMC Title 19, Zoning.
The community vision is an important piece to the Comprehensive Plan Update as it aligns closely
to the City Council's vision for the plan. The plan has a strong economic development focus, it is
data driven as well as easy to navigate and understand for the community and staff. The approach
includes a specific section on goals and policies to have them located in one place. The
09-22-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5
implementation matrix is completed. Mr. Basinger presented the following changes related to
zoning:
• Creation of one Multifamily Zone, all new Multifamily designation is located within one
half mile of a bus route.
• Designated new areas for parks and open spaces, Mirabeau and Appleway Trail.
• Changed Office to Corridor Mixed Use, allowed for multifamily, office, retail, and light
manufacturing.
• Designated new areas for Neighborhood Commercial.
• Created Industrial Mixed Use,allowed for contractor's yards and removed Multifamily.
• Consolidated Light and Heavy Industrial into one Industrial.
• Integrated Community Commercial into Corridor Mixed Use.
• Consolidated R-3 and R-4 to R-3.
• New Mixed Use Area, existing mining pit which in the future use could change.
• Created language in the Development Regulations to allow existing mining operations to
mine within their existing permitted rights.
The proposed Land Use Map has 9 Comprehensive Plan designations and 11 zoning designations
and the current Land Use Map has 12 Comprehensive Plan designations and 17 zoning
designations.
Development Regulations were reviewed to ensure they are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan; compliant with current laws; in addition streamline regulations so they are easier to
understand.
Implementing Regulations that were reviewed for changes include SVMC Title 17 General
Provisions; SVMC Title 19 Zoning; SVMC Title 20 Subdivisions; SVMC Title 21 Environmental
Controls;SVMC Title 22 Design and Development Standards and SVMC Appendix A Definitions.
• SVMC Title 17 General Provisions created a stronger interpretation process. Removed
rebuttal period, modified sign requirements for Public Hearing notices, and reviewed
Hearing Examiners' change of conditions. Added vesting provisions.
• SVMC Title 19 Zoning reorganized the entire title, modified the zoning districts to be
consistent with the new Land Use Map. Modified the permitted use matrix to reflect new
zoning districts. Incorporate language for small dwellings i.e.tiny homes and cottage type
housing. Modified the density and dimensional standards, created transitional provisions,
and modified administrative exceptions.
• Reconfigured the Permitted Use Matrix to have the information more accessible.
• Created new section for supplemental uses and uncategorized uses within the broad use
category.
• Transitional provision limited uses allowed in 10 foot set back with landscaping, the upper
level is a one-to-one ratio starting at 15 foot. Provision to assist with zoning within the
right-of-way, it will be at the zone providing protection instead of the middle of the right-
of-way.
• Created a SEPA in-fill exception to promote development.
• Consistent with Shoreline Master Plan
• SVMC Title 22 Design and Development Standards reviewed off-street parking, loading
standards,fencing, screening and landscaping, street standards.
Mr. Holman addressed the question of why the Comprehensive Plan was a brand new document.
He explained the first Comprehensive Plan was put together to be compatible with the Sprague-
Appleway Revitalization Plan which was ultimately removed and the Comprehensive Plan was
modified with the final product being a hollow shell, thus, making it more effective to start from
09-22-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5
scratch on the current Comprehensive Plan Update. Commissioner Anderson commented on the
difficulty analyzing changes when the two documents are not identical. There was additional
concern expressed by many Commissioners that there was a limited amount of time available to
review the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety.
Discussion turned to the 5,000 square foot lot within the R-3 zone with the underlying density
remaining at six lots per acre. The Commissioners opposed to the reduction of the minimum lot
size to 5,000 square feet, sited the desire to preserve the feel of the neighborhood as well as lack of
market in the Spokane Valley for smaller lot sizes.The Commissioners supporting the change,sited
the quick sale of 5,000 square foot lots outside the City limits but within the valley area in Spokane
County and the City's Urban Growth Areas.The City of Spokane's older neighborhoods have these
same sized lots; this also creates an opportunity for in-fill development.
Next item for discussion was the Land Use Map specifically the change of zoning on the corner of
Barker and Sprague to Multifamily on staff's recommended map. The Commission expressed
concern over the change due to previous public opposition to the change of the zoning for this
location due to traffic issues already present on Barker.
Commissioner Anderson inquired why there were areas on the Land Use Map that are currently
developed are presented as a change in zoning to Neighborhood Commercial. Mr. Basinger
explained that many of the properties are located on major intersections throughout the City;if they
wanted to redevelop in the future it would allow more flexibility.
Tiny homes became the next topic for discussion. The opposition stated that it does not encourage
home ownership; does not improve prosperity of the community;
Erik Lamb further explained changes in SVMC Title 17 General Provisions, as it is the general
administrative practices which are applicable to SVMC Title 18 Boards and Commissions through
SVMC Title 24 Building. There is a new section for code interpretation pulled over from SVMC
Title 19. The goal was to strengthen and provide more direction to City staff. Permit processing
procedures in SVMC Section 17.80.110 the notice provision for the distribution of public hearing
notices, the previous requirement to notice homes within 400 feet, added that persons outside of
the 400 feet where there is criteria and circumstances to expand the noticing area. The process for
processing Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Development Code Amendments found in
SVMC Sections 17.80.140 and 17.80.150 added clarifying language. SVMC Section 17.100
Compliance and Enforcement changed dates for consistency. Completely new SVMC Section
17.80.170 relates to project vesting. Currently when a complete application is submitted, that
application will be considered under the development regulations in affect to allow for certainty for
developers.Any application set forth in SVMC Table 17.80-1 there is an option for wavier of vested
rights by developers to have the project considered under the current development standards.
The Commission took a break at 7:56 p.m.returning at 8:03 p.m.
Ms. Mantz further explained the changes and additions made to SVMC Title 19 Zoning. SVMC
Chapter 19.25 Nonconforming Uses and Structures,only minor inconsistencies were made to assist
in implementing the code. SVMC Chapter 19.30 Changes and Amendments: a section was
removed which addressed development agreements when used with Comprehensive Plan
amendments. This process was not being used. Mr. Hohman commented this section had been
used for one project and staff would not want to it used again. SVMC Section 19.30.015 is the
section in the current code if the Commissioners would like to go read that section. SVMC Chapter
19.35 Residential Density Bonus,this section from the old code has been removed. This was taken
out because there is no density requirement in the Multifamily zone so there is no requirement for
it. The Growth Management Act does require for the City to plan for affordable housing but Mr.
Lamb does not know if this would be applicable. SVMC Chapter 19.40 is a new section to address
Alternative Residential Development Options such as tiny houses,cottages,duplexes,townhouses,
industrial accessory dwelling units (ADU). Commissioner Anderson asked what an industrial
accessory dwelling unit was. Mr. Basinger said there has been a new drive for live/work
environments and being able to live where people work. Commissioner Kelley said he has a client
who is currently looking for this type of set up, live/work/office use. The Commissioners are
09-22-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5
concerned about small parcels coining up with ten ADUs but it would be different than ten trailers,
there was considerable discussion regarding concern over allowing these ADUs. Mr. Holtman said
he understands why there would be a desire to try and look at the old and new codes side by side
however trying to compare some sections, like this one, make it very difficult to do. This was one
of the reasons why the old code was so confusing the staff worked to try and make sure the new
one would encompass what was good of the old one but would clearly define what was important
in the new one.
SVMC Chapter 19.50 Planned Residential Developments(PRD),Table 19.40-1 shows which zones
the PRD is allowed. Cottages are allowed in a PRD. Commissioner Phillips said he was in favor
of the cottages in a PRD. Commissioner Johnson asked if there would be smaller access roads for
these types of developments, or parking being hidden. Mr. Basinger said a cottage development
would require a Conditional Use Permit,which requires a hearing in front of the Hearing Examiner.
A PRD would still have to meet the City's Street Standards. Tiny homes as supportive housing is
an issue for some of the Commissioners. Some Commissioners don't feel the tiny homes don't fit
in an R-3 zone. A question came up as to how small it would be sanitary to allow a `home' to be
and if the Health Department had concerns in the size. The Health Department is concerned about
sanitary conditions but the Building Code's smallest allowable space is 300 square feet.
Ms. Mantz continued with SVMC Chapter 19.65 Supplemental Use Regulations,this section
number is new but the contents are not new because it was gathered from three sections in the old
code. This addresses some uses and where they are allowed. SVMC Chapter 19.70 is a new
section with the new residential standards:
■ Adjusted standards in R-3
• Min lot size 5,000 sq. ft.
• Eliminated min lot width and length
• Retained density(6 units/acre)
• Adjusted standards in Multifamily Residential
• Eliminated density
• Eliminated building height
• Eliminated non-residential dimensions except for Neighborhood Commercial
SVMC Chapter 19.75 has the transitional regulations in it and this is new section to the code. The
ground level setback is ten feet, but must be landscaped and has limited uses which are allowed in
the setback. The upper level setback is a ratio of one to one starting at a height of 15 feet at the
property line. The height of the building next to a protected zone may increase one foot for every
foot of horizontal distance from the nearest protected zone (R-1, R-2 or R-3) boundary. If there
were multiple properties in a zone, it would apply to the whole project. There are no height
restrictions in the multifamily/commercial zones. The transitional regulations should control the
height of the project. If there is a single family home in a multifamily zone, this protection would
not apply to that single family home.
Ms. Mantz said if the Commissioners wanted to concentrate on the new information being added
to the code in SVMC Title 19 the Chapters would be 19.40, 19.70 and 19.75. She said SVMC
Chapter 19.50 had some changes to the Permitted Use Matrix and many of the categories have been
condensed. Mr. Lamb stated there had been no changes to the marijuana regulations since they had
been adopted earlier in the year.
Commissioners asked why the line for multifamily became along 4th Avenue, instead of the other
side of Sprague Ave. Mr. Basinger said it was a red line for Spokane Transit Authority (STA)
which means it is served by transit on Sprague. Mr. Hohman said currently there is medium and
high density along 4t1'Avenue and it has access to the Appleway Trail currently or will in the near
future. The intent is to limit amendments moving forward and to concentrate development in the
smartest places, where it has been developing. Development of multifamily housing on or near
Sprague makes sense for new development.
09-22-16 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5
VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the good of the order.
IX. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:09 p.m. The vote on
the motion was unanimous in favor, motion passed.
ID/ ,(3//,Heather Graham, Chair Date signed
/4 / el'AS/
Elisha Heath, Secretary