PC APPROVED Minutes 03-22-18 APPROVED Minutes
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Connell Chambers—City hail
March 22,2018
I. Chair Rasmussen called the meeting to order at 5:58 p,m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for
the pledge of allegiance, Office Assistant Mary Moore took roll and the following members and staff
were present:
Michelle Rasmussen Eric Lamb, Deputy City Attorney
James Johnson Jenny Nickerson, Assistant Building Official
Timothy Kelley Lori Barlow, Senior Planner
Danielle Kaschmitter Micki Harnois, Planner
Suzanne Stathos
Matthew Walton Deanna I lorton, Secretary of-the Commission
Mary Moore, Office Assistant
Commissioner Johnson moved to excuse Commissioner Phillips from the meeting. The vote on this
motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed.
II. Agenda: Commissioner Johnson moved to accept the March 22, 2018 agenda as presented. The vole
on the motion was,cbc in favor, zero against and the 'notion passed
III. Minutes: Commissioner Johnson moved to approve the February 22, 2018 and March 08, 2.018
minutes. The vote on this motion was six in,ftxvor{, zero against, and the motion passed
IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: There were no repor ..
V. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Ms. Lori Barlow, Senior Planner explained [hat the appeal for
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CP.A-2018-0003 was scheduled with the I learirr. Examiner On
March 15, 2018 but has been deferred to March 27, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: 'There were no public comments,
VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS:
it Study Session: Review of Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Open Space
requirements in Mixed Use zones.
Ms.Barlow stated that duringthe March 8,2018 meeting,the commissioners requested some additional
infbrmation pertaining to the following:
• Where did the 210 square feet per unit of open space come from? Ms. Barlow explained that
staff could not find any information why 210 square feet per unit was selected but they did do
an analysis and found that multifamily zones have an area per unit that fluctuates dramatically
but in Mixed Use zonesit is a fixed number per unit. Multifamily residential area is always the
same but the area per unit goes up as the density goes down and in the Mixed Use residential,
the overall area goes up as the numbers go up and there is no density limit and the area goes
down as the number of units go down.
• Multifamily prrejects located in Mixed Use zones and how many were providing open space?
Ms. Barlow looked over the permits for the last five years and was able to find that of the 21
multifamily project's, all had provided some kind of open space. Commissioner Johnson
confirmed there was no requirement for open space when a project was within 1300 feet of a
public park or a trail.
• The Commissionersasked for additional information on impact fees. Mr. Eric Lamb, Deputy
City Attorney, shared that SVMC 19,70.054(1)(3) provides for a fee in lieu of land in the
mixed-use zoning districts.Mr.Lamb said RCW 82.02.020 provides a voluntary agreement for
a payment of a fee in lieu of dedication but it must be reasonably necessary as a direct result of
the proposed development or it must require to mediate the direct impact of the development.
RCW 82.02.050 -82,08,090 allows for a more generalized impact fee. A study must be
conducted,a needs assessment is produced and then a fee is assessed on each new development.
This is an arduous process and fees are adopted by ordinance by the Council. These are the
03-22-18 Planning Commission Mim tea ]'age 2 of 3
basis for SVMC 19,70.O50((i)(3) Commissioner Walton confirmed there currently is no fee.
If a developer wanted to exercise this, they would need to do their own study on the impacts.
Commissioner Rasmussen asked if the regulation was eliminated could it be reinstated. Mr, Lamb
replied it would be more work to bring it hack. It would be a new regulation, which would start at the
Planning Commission if the City Council decided they wanted to do that. Commissioner Rasmussen
confirmed if the Commission recommended to leave it as is, the Council could change it. Mr. Lamb
confirmed the Council has had discussions about impact fees and the direction has been consistently to
not include them.
Commissioner Walton confirmed that if SVMC 19.70.050(G)(3),a fee in lieu,were eliminated the open
space requirement would be required of every development in a Mixed Use zone. 'l'he 210 square feet
would be the requirement for all development with more than 10 dwelling units.The requirement could
be waived if the development was located within 1,300 square feet of a park or trail, but there would
be no other option.
Chair Rasmussen opened the floor for public comment.
Arthur Whitten, Covernmcnt Affairs Director, Spokane Homeowner Builders Association: Mr.
Whitten shared there is a shortage of buildable land and people in the skilled trades encourage the
development of a variety of housing options. Ile said we should be looking at ways to maximize the
number of units and maximize development around major transit corridors, transit centers and
commercial areas. His organization feels open space requirements hinder development in a higher
density, urban styles that today's market seeks. Mr. Whitten observed that the Comprehensive Plan
update incorporates language consistent with the proposal to remove this requirement, adopting
development regulations are supportive of a variety of attainable housing options and the elimination
would bring Spokane Valley, Spokane and Spokane County's development regulations some
consistency. This code would not change onsite parking requirements, would not eliminate existing
public open spaces and would not preclude a developer from providing innovative market driven
amenities in mixed-use developments, Mr, Witten explained the Home Builders support the repeal of
the open space requirement and encourage the support of the Commissioners.
Ms. Barlow commented this regulation is currently in the municipal code and Council requested the
Commission review it and make a recommendation to modify, eliminate or leave it is. Commissioner
Kelley confirmed the City does not currently have impact fees. Commissioner Kelley also confirmed a
developer could make a payment instead of having open space. Commissioner Johnson shared that
prior public comments stated concerns about growth and building in mixed-use zones with offices,
commercial and residential, which the City does not have a lot of. The current code prohibits this.
Commissioner Johnson said he would strike all of SVMC 19.70.050. Commissioner Walton said
although he could agree with Commissioner Johnson, lie was concerned builders would seek projects
in this area to avoid some of these requirements, feeling the open spaces in the residential zones would
shrink. Mr. Walton said eliminating the requirement doesn't further the Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioner Kelly stated he would support taking the fee out and keeping the open space
requirement. Commissioner Stathos wants to keep open space requirement.Commissioner Ka
wants to keep green space requirement so children have places to play, and hesitates taking the fee
away completely because of the process of trying to return it to the municipal code. Commissioner
Rasmussen shared she is pro-greenspace, supports mixed-use buildings that have a different clientele
who want something walkable. She said for the sake of development of different types of affordable
housing she would recommend removing the entire section. Commissioner Johnson said the lifestyle
of the people moving into those residential uses is different Ile said many people graduate from college
and move somewhere else because the City doesn't have enough for the youth to do, for a good place
to live or for jobs. There arc a lot of people out there that have different needs for convenience and
affordability, He believes in people promoting change and a quality of life, not industry and it doesn't
make any sense to keep the regulation. Commissioner Kelley explained when living in Boise they had
impact fees which over time he had seen them pay offand now the area is screaming with development
however, he supports the open spaces. Commissioner Walton feels we have to have a vision for what
our city should look like in the future but in the meantime, we have to look at what the current
population desires.
03-22-18 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 01.3
Ms. Barlow stated there seemed to be differing opinions on mixed-use zones versus the corridor mixed
zones. Ms. Barlow said the Commissioners could separate the uses or the zones. The subject is much
broader than just if it should be required or not and to consider all the options. Ms. Barlow reminded
the members Liberty Lake requires open space and requires private space in the form of balconies and
patios. Commissioner Stathos said she supports keeping green space requirements, Commissioner
Johnson asked if Spokane and Spokane County have this stipulation. Ms. Barlow explained Spokane
does not require open space in their mixed use zone because in mixed use zones there is a design
element which requires layer of activities for a live/work environment. Spokane County does not
require open space for multifamily in their mixed zones. The City of Liberty Lake has a requirement of
open space that is 20% of the lot size and they require a private space requirements. Commissioner
Kelley said developers could decide to develop in another jurisdiction because they will not have the
restrictions there that we are discussing. Ms. Barlow responded we have developments now on the
borders of the City butin order to attract residents there has to be amenities. Ms. Barlow confirmed the
Mixed Use and multifamily requirements could be treated differently in the code.
Commissioner Walton moved to postpose further discussion of this topic to April 12, 2018. The vote
on this motion was six in favor,zero against and the motion passed.
Ms. Barlow asked if there is any more information she could provide the Commissioners to help them
reach a recommendation.Chair Rasmussen asked for options that they could consider and what entities
can be involved in the mixed use and the commercial use zones. Commissioner Stathos asked for
information on separating out multifamily from mixed use and a suggesting compromise. Ms_ Barlow
was requested to research other communities in Washington including,Tri-Cities,Vancouver,Yakima,
and Federal Way regarding their regulations for open space in a mixed use zone,
ii Study Session: CTA-2.01H-01101, Proposed amendments to Spokane Valley Municipal Code
(SVMC)19.65.020 Animal raising and keeping.
Mieki Harnois, Planner, gave a presentation regarding CTA-2018-0001 to revise animal keeping and
minimum lot sizes from one acre to 40,00{} square feet in the SVMC Section 19.65.020. The City
incorporated in 2003 and adopted the Spokane County regulations as its interim zoning code did not
allow animal keeping in residential zones. In 2.004 the UR-1 residential zone was adopted and the
minimum lot size was 40,000 square feet and allowed three large animals per acre_ In 2007, the City
adopted its own development regulations and kept the 40,000 square feet in residential zones still
allowing three large animals per acre.
During 2016 Comprehensive Plan update, the corresponding changes to the development regulations
updated the minimum lot size to 43,560 square feet(one acre)and kept the three large animals per acre.
This code text amendment would return the lot size for keeping large animals to 40,000 square feet,
and keep the same number of animals. It would also strike the words excluding swine and chickens, as
well. Commissioner Johnson asked if there was any possibility for a litigation. Ms. Barlow interjected
this was simply returning the minimum lot size to for keeping animals to what it was historically. This
is the lot size which determines whether or not you can have animals on your lot. . Commissioner
Rasmussen confirmed someone who has a 40,000 square feet lot is allowed 2.6 animals.
VIII. GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was nothing for the Good of the Order.
IX, ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:20 p.m. The vote on
the motion was unanimous in favor and the motion passed,
•
"t(6-- '4-11 -I ti7
Pvlichelle Rasmussen, Chair Date signed
C44-210,3 (4/7-(791711Y-L)
Mary Moore, Si"tary