Loading...
2019, 03-14 Agenda Packet S11 'ane Valle K Y Spokane Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave. March 14, 2019 6:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 28, 2019 VI. COMMISSION REPORTS VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Findings of Fact: Proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XI. ADJOURNMENT PC ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only As of March 7,2019 ***Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative and subject to change*** To: Commission& Staff From: PC Secretary Deanna Horton by direction of Deputy City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Commission Meetings March 14,2019 Findings of Fact: Comprehensive Plan Amendments—Lori Note: Additional meetings scheduled as necessary. March 28,2019 Study Session: CTA-2018-000X -Addressing Standards—Karen (Tentative) April 11,2019 Public Hearing: CTA-2018-000X - Addressing Standards—Karen April 25,2019 Findings of Fact: CTA-2018-000X -Addressing Standards—Karen Study Session: CTA-2018-0006—Affordable Housing—Lori May 9,2019 Public Hearing: CTA-2018-0006—Affordable Housing—Lori May 23,2019 Findings of Fact: CTA-2018-0006—Affordable Housing—Lori June 13,2019 Draft Advance Agenda 3/7/2019 Page 1 of 1 Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers —City Hall February 28,2019 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Office Assistant Robin Hutchins took roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson Eric Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Timothy Kelley Karen Kendall, Planner Robert McKinley Martin Palaniuk, Planner Michael Phillips, absent- excused Colin Quinn-Hurts, Planner Michelle Rasmussen Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Matt Walton Ray Wright, Senior Traffic Engineer Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager Robin Hutchins, Office Assistant Deanna Horton, Secretary to the Commission Hearing no objections, Commissioner Phillips was excused from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the February 28, 2019 agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor,zero against, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the meeting minutes from February 14, 2019 as presented. Commissioner Johnson asked to correct his comment made regarding reducing up to 600 dwelling units. His intent was to state it could impact 600 dwelling units as that was a critical point. The vote on the amended motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson went to the City council meeting and advised Councilmember Haley commented on the important topics the Commission has addressed. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Senior Planner Lori Barlow advised the City has received one additional privately initiated Code Text Amendment and one additional City Initiated Code Text Amendment. VIII. P UBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda. There was no public comment. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Findings of Facts: CTA-2018-0005, a privately initiated amendment of Spokane Valley Municipal Code 19.40.050, 19.40.060 and 19.60.050, proposing changes to the duplex and townhome development standards. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 15 Senior Planner Lori Barlow summarized that CTA-2018-0005 has come before the Commission on several occasions. First being the study sessions, a continued public hearing ending in deliberation where the Commission voted unanimously to deny the request. Ms. Barlow explained that the findings and recommendation will be forwarded to the Council for review and their process will also include public comment for those following the item. Commissioner Walton moved to forward the Findings of Fact recommendation as presented to the City Council. Commissioner Walton stated he recognized the interest and would like to see how the Council continues to look at the item. Commissioner Walton strongly recommended the Commission uphold their Findings of Fact. Commissioner Johnson clarified that his correction to the minutes was extremely important for a number of reasons. He added that if the Commission would have approved this request it would have impacted thousands of opportunities for dwelling units to be constructed and was too far reaching. The vote on the motion was six in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. ii. Public Hearing: Proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Chair Johnson read the rules of the public hearing and opened the public hearing at 6:14 p.m. Ms. Barlow explained that staff conducted environmental reviews for each amendment individually and advised that determinations of non-significance had been issued for all amendments being considered. Should the Commission make it through to deliberations the Findings of Facts will be conducted on March 14, 2019 to package the recommendations and forward to the Council. Ms. Barlow emphasized the notice requirements for the amendments. On January 30, 2019 the general notice was published in the newspaper, a notice was posted on site for those that are site specific and notices were mailed to property owners within 800 feet as opposed to code requirements of only 400 feet. Ms. Barlow added that three additional comments have been received for consideration and will be discusses during the applicable amendment presentation. Ms. Barlow highlighted procedural recommendations advising that tonight's meeting is for the Commission to review the materials and to consider public comment. Ms. Barlow explained that staff will be discussing the more minor City initiated Comprehensive Plan amendments as small collective groups for ease and sake of time. The more significant Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be presented individually. a. CPA-2019-0004: A City Initiated Amendment to update implementation strategies to remove completed strategies, update timelines, and add new strategies consistent with the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. CPA-2019-0006:A City Initiated Amendment to Annexation and policy additions. CPA-2019-0008 A City Initiated Amendment to create a new map appendix of the most recently adopted maps. Ms. Barlow introduced Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0004. Ms. Barlow explained that this will modify some strategies in Chapter 2 to refresh some language and bring it into line with the City's objectives. This will remove strategies that have been completed, update timelines and modify with new information. Ms. Barlow continued with CPA-2019-0006 advising that this would modify one existing Land Use goal and one existing Land Use policy regarding annexation and will add one additional policy. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 15 Lastly,Ms. Barlow explained CPA-2019-0008 introduces a new map appendix to the Comprehensive Plan. The maps are not new to the City but the appendix is new to the Comprehensive Plan. The appendix will capture the maps and attached them to the Comprehensive Plan making them more user friendly for public access. Ms. Barlow concluded that there have been no substantive comments related to any of the amendments she presented. There was no public comment. b. CPA-2019-0005: A City Initiated Amendment to update pedestrian and bicycle component of the Transportation Element and related goals and policies. CPA- 2019-0007: A City Initiated Amendment to update Figures 26,27 and 46 to reflect changes and amendments to pedestrian and bicycle facility recommendations. CPA-2019-0010: A City Initiated Amendment to create a new appendix of transportation project for a 20-year period that is informed by existing studies. Transportation Planner Colin Quinn-Hurst introduced Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0005. Mr. Quinn-Hurst explained that this amendment updates the pedestrian and bicycle components in completing the pathway and trail network. This will add language to support consideration of a Complete Streets ordinance. Mr. Quinn-Hurst explained that the bicycle and pedestrian plan was first established in 2011, and the updates will revise the components to reflect changes in the network based on current conditions and practicalities. The 2011 recommendations included a network of 156 miles of sidewalk, 38 miles of bike lanes and 28 miles of new pathways. Mr. Quinn-Hurts explained that with 156 miles at $600.00 per foot for a new side walk the cost is a substantial amount of money adding up to half a billion and decades of time. Mr. Quinn-Hurst stated the City conducted a public involvement process that included attending community events and an online survey. Through the survey it was determined that the top priority for improvements was a completed sidewalk system the second was good pavement, and third was pathway and bikeway improvements followed by crosswalks. The City administered a technical evaluation looking at crashes and safety, congestion and travel patterns, to find"hot spots" where improvements would have the largest impact and they fit in line with public comment. In conclusion adding text to Chapter 5 would outline these priorities, add language to support the goal of connecting the pathway network by linking the Appleway Trail to the Centennial Trail. Lastly this amendment would add language supporting eventual consideration of a Complete Streets ordinance to leverage existing funding. Mr. Quinn-Hurst continued with CPA-2019-0007 advising this proposal is to update the Sidewalk, Bicycle and School District Maps to reflect completed projects and updated networks. Mr. Quinn-Hurst highlighted CPA-2019-0010 advising this amendment will create an appendix showing a list of 20-year transportation projects. This will be regularly updated as a resource for vetting and developing our transportation projects to make them eligible for grant opportunities. Mr. Quinn-Hurst concluded that there have been no substantive comments related to any amendments he presented. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 15 Commissioner Johnson stated he is somewhat disappointed that the Pines Road grade separation at Trent Ave is going to take seven years. He hopes there will be a way to accelerate the schedule to keep within the $29 million budget. There was no public comment. c. CPA-2019-00001:A Privately Initiated Amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial(I)to Single Family Residential(SFR) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial (I)to Single Family Residential Urban (R-3). Planner Karen Kendall introduced CPA-2019-0001 a privately initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment, located 300 feet south of the intersection of Park Road and Broadway Avenue. This site-specific Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendment is requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial (I) to Single Family Residential (SFR) and to change the Zoning District from Industrial (I)to Single Family. Ms. Kendall went on to explain the potential incompatibility of rezoning the site to R- 3 from Industrial as it would reduce the allowable uses from a broad range of industrial uses to single family, duplex, cottages, townhomes, daycares, school and church uses. The R-3 zone would allow six dwelling units per acre and up to 12 units per acre with cottage development. Changing the land use designation and zoning of the subject parcel will impact adjacent industrial properties as future development will be subject to transitional regulations, limiting ability for full site development. The transitional standards include greater setbacks, screening requirements and various other restrictions. Ms. Kendall explained that if approved, the transitional regulations would apply to any new development on the four parcels adjacent to the subject parcel located to the west and south. Ms. Kendall went on to explain that two of the surrounding parcels have recent activity. One parcel has an active building permit and the other has gone through a pre-application meeting,both for industrial development. Ms. Kendall concluded that staff has received standard agency comments with nothing substantive. Staff has also received three additional public comments and summarized that the concerns were specific to redevelopment of the adjacent parcels, the industrial nature of the area and traffic impacts on Park Road. Ms. Kendall concluded that this amendment is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioners Kelley asked if the property located south east of the parcel will have little to no impact and it was concluded to be true. Commissioner Kelley also questioned green zone compliance with existing parcels should this amendment change and it was determined that once the lots are developed they would have to comply with transitional regulations. Commissioner Johnson discussed the property located at Broadway Ave and Park Road being commercial and the transitional impact to those surrounding it should this amendment be approved or denied. Ms. Kendall explained that it would depend on what zone they proposed to change to in order to determine what types of impacts would be associated if any at all. Danny Davis, 2780 W Iago Street, Post Falls, ID: Mr. Davis gave a presentation to the Commission and audience. Mr. Davis explained that he is the owner of the Circle J mobile home park adjacent to the proposed parcel. Mr. Davis described his argument to be that the current zoning is possibly wrong today. He went on to explain that what exists today is a beautiful mobile home park consisting of sixty-one low income houses, for seniors fifty-five and over surrounded by Industrial. Mr. Davis detailed the current 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 15 uses that are allowable next to these homes to be dog kennels, animal processing, crematorium and heavy truck industrial sales.Mr. Davis explained that they believe the zoning has been incorrect since implementation. Mr. Davis continued that his proposal is in line with the City's Comprehensive Plan such as providing land uses that are essential to residents and to enable development of affordable housing for all income levels. Mr. Davis explained that their plan is to build a fifty-five and over cottage style development for seniors in turn providing innovative and affordable housing types for all income levels.Mr. Davis advised they have reached out to their neighbors to discuss the transitional zoning and understand their concerns. Mr. Davis promised that should their application be approved they will self-implement the transitional buffers onto their property as they do not want the thirty-foot buffer to encroach onto their neighbors. Mr. Davis concluded that a residential rezoning is much more compatible, will remain in line with the City's Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies, and promised their neighborhood friendly development plan would not negatively impact the surrounding properties. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Davis when the Circle J was purchased and what the zoning of the neighboring parcels were at that time. Mr. Davis advised they purchased the property six years prior and the zoning was Industrial at the time it was purchased. Curt Nead, 18582 W Rice Ave, Howser, ID: Mr. Nead stated he is representing the Crow family trust for Mr. Jim Crow at 1201 N Evergreen Road. Mr. Nead advised they share a property line with the subject property and they feel this change would negatively impact their property when it comes to the setback requirements. Mr. Nead asked without a plan in place how would the promise by the development be enforced? Mr. Nead stated their property would be made unattractive to potential buyers and would take away future opportunities. Mr. Nead concluded that developing a senior community were access would merge into active Industrial traffic on Park Road would not be conducive to safety. Mr. Nead stated they agree with staff that this is not in keeping with the City's goals and policies and believe it should be denied. Jim Chavez, 15902 E 15th Ave, Spokane Valley,WA: Mr. Chaves read a statement on behalf of his brother Brian Chaves whom is the property owner at N 630 Park Road adjacent to the proposed amendment. Mr. Brain Chaves is not in favor of the proposal. He respectfully requests that the Commission look at the incompatibility issues and continued that the transitional regulations will be detrimental to his property. Mr. Chaves notes that the self-imposed regulations can't be promised and he is opposed to the proposed zoning changes. Joel Elgee,24327 E Maxwell,Liberty Lake,WA: Mr. Elgee stated he is a proponent and knows the applicant personally and spoke to his good character. He stated that if Mr. Davis promises to do something he will. Mr. Elgee added that this proposed site and the surrounding properties seem to be limited with the current zoning. d. CPA-2019-0002: A Privately Initiated Amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Planner Marty Palaniuk presented CPA-2019-0002, explaining this is a privately initiated amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Neighborhood Commercial(NC) and to change the 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 15 Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Mr. Palaniuk stated that the property is located at 8th Avenue and Sullivan Road. 8th Avenue is a minor arterial, and Sullivan Road is a principal arterial with approximately 20,000 vehicle trips per day. This is directly across the street from Central Valley High School which creates significant traffic. North of the high school there has been substantial multifamily developments creating significant density. Mr. Palaniuk stated that this site consists of two properties, one owned by the Genesis Church and one residence. There is an irrigation district located to the west of the property and a Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) easement along the east. The BPA easement encumbers both of the properties along the east boundary and does create some issues. Mr. Palaniuk explained the Comprehensive Plan land use designation for these properties is to have single family residential units. If approved this would change the land use designation to Neighborhood Commercial, which is intended to provide neighborhood scaled commercial developments to serve the neighborhoods. Mr. Palaniuk explained the current zoning of R-3 limits the uses, changing the zoning would allow several additional uses to include retail, office and convenience stores. He added the development restrictions to the Neighborhood Commercial zone would keep the scale of the development to fit into the neighborhood. For example, height requirements would be the same and setbacks would be designed to be consistent with the adjacent residential lots. Mr. Palaniuk stated there have been no substantive comments from staff or public related to this amendment. Mr. Palaniuk concluded that this proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Walton asked in looking at other Neighborhood Commercial zones has there been any traffic flow or traffic pattern impacts? Mr. Palaniuk explained that the only developed establishment near the site is a Coffee Espresso Stand located at 16th Ave and Sullivan Road and there have been no significant traffic pattern impacts. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Palaniuk about if he was aware of easement which would allow 9th Avenue to be extend through to Progress Road. Mr. Palaniuk stated he was unaware of any at this time. Commissioner Johnson was concerned that if 9th Ave was extended it might impact the homes along 9th Avenue. Commissioner Walton asked about the residential parcel's access points onto 9th Avenue, one being from the Church parking lot and another from the daycare. Commissioner Johnson added there would be nothing to preclude them from adding access to 9th Avenue. It was concluded that the parcel with the single family residence would be allowed access to Sullivan Road and 9th Avenue. Ben Goodmansen-Whipple Consulting Engineers,21 S Pines Rd,Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Goodmansen thanked the staff for their work advised they agree with the Staff Report. Mr. Goodmansen explained they feel this Land Use change is an appropriate one, not only for the immediate neighborhood but for those to the South. Mr. Goodmansen explained that the Coffee Espresso Stand on 16th Ave is a good Neighborhood Commercial development and he pointed out that it is on the "going home" side of the roadway. He added that they are seeing growth to the South and commercial access is becoming necessary especially on the "going home" side of the road. Mr. Goodmansen mentioned the access for the smaller parcel at 910 S Sullivan Road has two access point, one on 9th Avenue and one on Sullivan Road. Lastly, Mr. Goodmansen mention that the property owner Mr. Ford approached members of the neighborhood to include the church and had positive feedback. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 15 Stephen Ford, 320 S Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Ford advised he is an attorney and his current office is located at 320 S Sullivan Road where it has become increasingly commercial which is not needed for the nature of his business. Mr. Ford purchased the proposed property at 902 S Sullivan Road with intent to put a law office there. He advised he spoke to the homeowners on 9th Avenue and the cul-de-sac to discuss the proposal. He stated the response was overwhelmingly supportive.Mr.Ford explained that he would be creating a nice entry into the neighborhood and separate the neighbors from Sullivan Road. Currently the main access to 902 S Sullivan is off Sullivan Road with a secondary access off of 9th Avenue both appropriate for a Law Office. Mr. Ford stated he encourages the Commission to accept the recommendation. e. CPA-2019-0003 A Privately Initiated Amendment Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multi Family Residential (MFR) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3) to Multi Family Residential (MFR) Mr. Palaniuk presented CPA-2019-0003, a privately initiated amendment to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential (SFR) to Multifamily Residential (MFR) and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban (R-3)to Multifamily Residential (MFR). Mr. Palaniuk stated the property is located near the Mullan/Argonne Road corridor. Both roads are principal arterials that are heavily traveled. Mr. Palaniuk added that the corridor is mostly commercial uses, with a large retail center located northeast of the site. Mr. Palaniuk continued that this site is situated on the northwest corner of Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road within an older neighborhood. The site is a single parcel with two duplexes and a single family home constructed on site. Current regulations would not permit the numerous dwellings on one lot. Mr. Palaniuk continued explaining the current uses which are adjacent to the site and are commercial. The intent of this amendment it to change the current land use designation of Single Family Residential to Multifamily Residential. The change would allow multifamily development and low impact commercial development, and would change the zoning regulations significantly, the density would allow additional units. Mr. Palaniuk added currently the Single Family Residential allows a density of up to six units per acre, multifamily would allow up to 22 units per acre. However; on this site the size would be limited to a maximum of 20 units, if the existing buildings were to be raised and multifamily was undertaken 20 units would be the maximum allowed. Mr. Palaniuk continued adding that the most significant change would be increasing the height requirements from 35 feet to 55 feet, and the setback requirements. Mr. Palaniuk stated staff did not receive any agency comments. Mr. Palaniuk stated there has been one public comment received and they are opposed to the change. Mr. Palaniuk concluded that this proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Kelley asked for clarification that a multifamily zone has to be adjacent to a higher right-of-way or like zone? Mr. Palaniuk explained due to this being an area wide amendment and not a site specific rezone it does not have to meet that criteria. Commissioner Walton added that with this being part of the Comprehensive Plan process even though it is applying to a specific parcel that requirement is not necessary even though this does boarder a higher use zone. Walton discussed future opportunity if this were rezoned as multifamily would this allow similar rezoning of surrounding properties or would those properties be required to apply for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and it was determined they would have to apply for a Comprehensive Plan 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 15 amendment. Deputy City Attorney Eric Lamb advised that the staff report identifies the code requirements for Comprehensive Plan approval by looking at consistency with the Comprehensive Plan as well as substantial relation to public safety and welfare. The surrounding area plays into a lot of those points but is not necessarily a check box at this point in time. Commissioner Rasmussen asked if the owner of the parcel is seeking to subdivide the property into four different lots and read the application stating such. Ms. Barlow explained that they may have identified that specific language however if this is approved there is nothing binding them to do exactly what is written, the plan could change to include multiple options. Mr. Palaniuk explained that a pre-application meeting was done and those details were listed but it can change. Mr. Palaniuk stated that in changing this to Multifamily zoning it would be more advantage for them to subdivide the property to have the smaller lot sizes. Mr. Palaniuk added that it could be subdivided now under the Single Family Residential zoning however;the lots would have to be bigger and the duplex lots would have to be 10,00 square feet versus 4,000 square feet under the Multifamily zoning. Commissioner Walton asked what the total size of the lot was and it was advised to be just under an acre. Commissioner Johnson asked for confirmation that they can have parking in the transitional area as long as it has appropriate screening. Mr. Palaniuk stated if this develops as Multifamily that is correct. Joel Elgee, 24327 E Maxwell, Liberty Lake, WA: Mr. Elgee stated he was appreciative of Staff's recommendation and thanked them for their work. Mr. Elgee stated after looking at the current uses his intent would be in keeping with the City's Comprehensive Plan by providing affordable house opportunities. He continued that the intent of the owner is not to tear anything down and build new as that would not make financial sense. He explained they would keep the existing and would possibly build an eight to ten-unit apartment type structure with access off of Sinto Avenue or Marguerite Road. Mr. Elgee added that this would provide public improvements to the streets as well. Commissioner Kelley asked the applicant if he was familiar with the current vacancy rates in the Valley? Mr. Elgee advised that depending on the unit size generally they are around 3 percent. Commissioner Kelley confirmed that 5 percent is considered full occupancy. Mr. Elgee stated that up to four or five years ago the standard analyze was at 10 percent vacancy. With this being a small project this would add to that vacancy rate where it's needed. Michael Porter, 8919 E Boone Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Porter stated he and his family has lived in the area for 20 plus years and traffic is increasing on both Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road. Mr. Ported stated the neighbors will have problems with parking as the streets are narrow and stated he is not in favor of the proposal. Mae Greenwood, 8802 E Boone Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Ms. Greenwood thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak. Ms. Greenwood is concerned with safety, traffic impacts and the on street and off street parking. Ms. Greenwood stated the neither Sinto Avenue or Marguerite Road are arterials and there is no clear access to the businesses. Ms. Greenwood thanked Planner Palaniuk for mentioning her comment adding that the public does not know how to comment as access isn't always apparent. Ms. Greenwood stated she is opposed to this proposal. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 15 John Rohrback, 8722 E Sinto Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Mr. Rohrback stated his property is adjacent to the proposed site and his concern is with the size of the building and the appearance of the neighborhood. He is also concerned with parking, traffic and and safety of those walking the streets. Mr. Rohrback mentioned concerns with a driveway coming from Sinto Avenue. Mr. Rohrback asked that if this is approved the units be kept to a bare minimum to help with parking and traffic issues. Jolene McGuire 8810 E Sinto Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA: Ms. McGuire spoke about the conflicting information as to what is going to be constructed and gave examples of proposed developments. Ms. McGuire is worried about access due to the corner of Sinto Avenue and Marguerite Road being a hazardous corner and is also concerned with parking. She is also concerned for her privacy in her home as being looked in upon with the height requirement changes. Ms. McGuire asked for more clarification as to what is being proposed as there are too many safety issues and she is opposed to the proposal. Daniel Harrington, 8817 E Sinto Avenue, Spokane Valley,WA: Mr. Harrington is opposed to the proposal and is concerned for the safety of the children in the area as there are no sidewalks and kids play in the street. Mr. Harrington stated this would also take away his neighbors model airplane landing strip and the deer would no longer visit. Mr. Harrington stated this would not be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood, he is not in favor and asked the Commission to keep the neighborhood safe. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Palaniuk what kind of improvements would be required if they were to put a 20-unit development? Mr. Palaniuk advised they would have to provide sidewalks, a swale, curb and gutter along Marguerite Road and Sinto Avenue. There was some discussion regarding dimensions for the street and sidewalk improvements. Commissioner Walton asked if under the current R-3 zoning would allow the parcel to be subdivided into eight separate lots at 5,000 square feet minimum? Mr. Palaniuk advise the City would apply the density standard which would allow 6 units per acre, if changed to Multifamily it would allow for 20 units based on the size of the lot if the two duplexes and single family were removed from the property. Commissioner Kaschmitter ask that if sidewalks were required would it encroach onto the properties along Marguerite Road? It was concluded that all of the improvements would be along the frontage of the proposed site and no other properties would lose any frontage. Commissioner Johnson asked for clarification regarding changing the zoning when no other multifamily was contiguous to the subject parcel. Ms. Barlow explained that this can be considered regardless, because it is a Comprehensive Plan amendment, not a rezone,however if the City were looking at it via the rezoning criteria this would have to be adjacent or contiguous to a property zoned of equal or higher intensity. In this case the commercial property across the right-of-way to the east is a higher intensity use. j. CPA-2019-0009: A City Initiated Amendment Proposal to change Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential (MFR) to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). Planner Karen Kendall introduced CPA-2019-0009 a City initiated Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential to Corridor Mixed Use. Ms. Kendall explained the property involved is 18.7 acres and includes 12 parcels of land north of Mission Avenue between 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 of 15 McDonald Road on the west and Mamer Road to the east. Ms. Kendall explained that there is a 150-foot-wide Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) easement crossing the properties and noted that the properties were largely developed as the Whimsical Pig with other various owners and uses. Ms. Kendall went on to explain the surrounding uses of the site include single family residence, multifamily, professional offices, assisted living and retail. The intent of the Comprehensive Plan land use designation is to provide land that will allow light manufacturing, retail, multifamily and offices along transpiration corridors -the uses in the area currently fit the intent. Ms. Kendall explained that should this change occur; the amendment area would be allowed to further develop consistently with the adjacent land uses. Ms. Kendall continued that the zone change would allow uses that align with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan along the major transportation corridor being Mission Avenue. Ms. Kendall concluded that there is limited development opportunity for these properties. This proposal would allow development along the corridor consistent with the corridor and would not create any nonconforming use with the change. The Corridor Mixed Use designation has no height limitations; in comparison the current Multifamily Residential zone is limed to 50 feet in height. However, there are not many buildings that currently push or exceed the 50-foot height limit. Ms. Kendall added the Corridor Mixed use has no density limits and the change may allow an increase in the density from 22 dwelling units per acre to no limit however this is not likely due to building placement,parking and landscaping. Ms. Kendall advised staff has received no public comment. Staff has however received one agency comment from Washington State Department of Transportation asking for additional transportation information. Ms. Kendal stated the City's traffic engineer provided a Trip Generation and Distribution letter concluding there is adequate capacity. Ms. Kendall concluded that the amendment would make the location consistent with the surrounding area and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Johnson asked for an explanation on the voluntary impact fee mentioned in the transportation report. Senior Traffic Engineer Ray Wright explained that in working with developers and consultants the City has created the Mirabeau Subarea Plan. The intent of this plan was to look at existing conditions of the streets, what developments might occur within the zoning of each and expected traffic impacts. Mr. Wright explained the there is a fee associated with the specific amount of trips needed to complete the analysis. Mr. Lamb clarified that impact fees have not been adopted under the Growth Management Act. These fees are technically mitigation fees similar to those identified in the Planned Action Ordinance for the northeast industrial area. As part of environmental review, developers are required to complete the traffic analysis. Similarly, the Mirabeau Subarea Plan there has been an agreement as to what project may be coming and provide some certainly for the cost of those trips. Developers are allowed to enter into this Subarea Plan voluntarily. Mr. Lamb added that Washington State Department of Transportation's wanted to clarify if the parcels were changed to Corridor Mixed Use that the City has sufficient capacity. We reviewed the proposal and concluded that we do. Commissioner Walton asked what the maximum impacts use of this property if developed at its maximum potential would the traffic analysis bear out or would there need to be additional improvements. Mr. Wright stated they did consider that possibility as this is a large piece of property. Mr. Wright stated that if this were 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 of 15 converted to a hospital that it would increase the trips considerable, he stated it would be good use of judgement as to what can be supported. Commissioner Kelley clarified that Mr. Wright reviewed the amount of traffic which he expects new development to generate. Ms. Barlow explained that the initial answer that staff was looking for was whether or not there was capacity and that has been addressed through analysis with Washington State Department of Transportation. Future impacts from development will be under discussion with the City and Washington State Department of Transportation however that would not be provided to the Commission as part of the current process. Sharon Janson-13607 E Mission Ave, Spokane Valley,WA: Ms. Janson explained that there is a lot of uncertainty and she is not sure as to what can be built. She explained that her property includes the irrigation ditch and she isn't sure what would happen to her property. Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 8:13 PM After a detailed discussion it was concluded that all City Initiated Code Text Amendments CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0008, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0007 and CPA-2019-0010 would be combined as a collective motion and vote. Commissioner Walton moved to approve all six City Initiated Code Text Amendments CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019- 0008 and CPA-2019-0010 as presented by the City. Commissioner Walton thanked the Staff for their work on each amendment. Commissioner Johnson concurred. The vote on the motion was six in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. CPA-2019-0001 Commissioner Johnson stated he knows a party involved and recused himself from deliberation. He passed the gavel to Commissioner Walton and left the room. Commissioner Kelley thanked the applicant Danny Davis for his enthusiasm and work he had done. Commissioner Kelley continued that he would be voting against the proposal as he agreed with land owners. Commissioner Rasmussen advised she had driven the location to familiarize herself with the area. Her concern is the Industrial environment along Park Road. Commissioner Rasmussen added that she is a proponent of Cottages and alternative housing types, however she is concerned for the properties adjacent and will be voting against. Commissioner McKinley stated he was torn on the proposal and feels that if it were developed as proposed it would provide needed additional low income housing for seniors. However, the area is Industrial. Commissioner Kaschmitter explained that she sees both sides with the need for senior housing and the need for Industrial. She feels that with the current zoning of Industrial it should be left as such,adding that it is harder to rezone to Industrial. After considering public comment and the difficulty to enforce the promise related to buffers she is opposed to the proposal. Commissioner Walton discussed blending uses and explained that his concern is the impact to the surrounding properties. He applauded the applicant's creativity in self-imposing the setbacks however it would not alleviate all setback requirements to the Industrial lots. Commissioner Walton concluded that there is existing Industrial infrastructure on a large portion of the mobile home park to the south and also mentioned the current application and permits. Commissioner Walton stated he will be voting against the proposal following City recommendations. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 of 15 Commissioner Kelley moved to deny CPA-2019-0001 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. Commissioner Johnson returned at 8:28 PM CPA-2019-0002- Commissioner Johnson commented that this is almost what they wrote the Land Use into the code for adding that with the light there and the traffic, the possibility of neighborhood expiation this is perfect for what the Commission had intended. Commissioner Kelley commented on the"going home" side of the street and how important that was and that the City does need a development here. Commissioner Walton stated he sees this as being in line with the Comprehensive Plan. He added that his only reservation would be to encourage crosswalk and signage should this be developed to prevent vehicle verses pedestrian interactions. Commissioner Walton concluded that he is in favor. Commissioner Rasmussen agreed that this is a good use and thanked the applicant for reaching out to the neighbors. Commissioner Kaschmitter stated she is in support of the proposal and thanked the applicant for speaking with the neighbors. Commissioner McKinley stated he is in support. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2019-0002 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. CPA-2019-0003 Commissioner Kelley stated he is sympathetic to public comments related to safety. He added that should this be developed there will be curbs and sidewalks that will help in regards to safety keeping people and children off of the street. Commissioner Kelley stated he is in favor of the proposal. Commissioner Walton stated he will be opposing the amendment. He stated there will be sidewalk and swales, however, they will end without connections, causing safety concerns. Commissioner Walton continued that if approved he feels it would be creating an island for additional Multifamily residential applications moving forward, creating higher uses in an area that does not have infrastructure that supports this kind of development. Commissioner Walton thanked the applicant for their ideas, is respectful of the idea for additional affordable housing, concluding that he will be voting no on this proposal. Commissioner Kaschmitter agreed with Commissioner Walton and his comments regarding the sidewalks adding that there would be access and parking issues and will not be supporting the proposal. Commissioner McKinley stated he did not believe he would be supporting the proposal. Commissioner Rasmussen stated she was on the fence adding that she drove the site and is familiar with the road. She added that the area has several sections of duplexes and some commercial toward the end of Mission Avenue. Commissioner Rasmussen stated the environment does fit the proposal and will be voting in favor. Commissioner Rasmussen added that she understands the neighbors' concerns adding that the lots are large and there should be ample space for parking. Commissioner Johnson also drove the area several times mentioning that there is a large amount of open space to the back of the properties that does not appear to be well used. Commission Johnson reiterated that his argument for having a medium density zoning and land use as this would be perfect for row houses. Commissioner Johnson stated that this may be starting a slippery slope if this is approved, however he feels that the owners of the properties will find an increase in property value that will allow them to move to an area that provides the type of life they are looking for. He continued that he feels this change is appropriate and will be voting in favor adding that once this is under development there will be infrastructure improvements that will have 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 of 15 to be made. Commissioner Walton stated he considered the existing non-conforming uses trying to divide the lot as it exists under the current zoning and determined it could be done. Commissioner Walton spoke about lot sizes and duplex units and densities in order to conform. Commissioner Walton added if zoned Multifamily he understands the concerns from the homeowners. Commissioner Walton has concerns about access and does not feel like this is the right time for this application and will be voting against. Commissioner Johnson stated that when you look at the area as a whole it lends more to a Multifamily zone. Commission Kelley spoke about the vacancy rates being unheard of at 3%. Adding that this is a great location with access to bus service, restaurants and retail. Commissioner Walton pointed out that he sees there is a flaw in the thought process for the evening. Adding that should this be developed in the future there would be sidewalk improvements providing access to bus routes however at present the sidewalks would go nowhere. Commissioner Walton stated that he feels creating this one small area hoping for more to follow is potentially poor foresight on the part of the Commission. Commissioner Kelley asked for clarification from Commissioner Walton regarding his stance on Multifamily and it was concluded that Commissioner Walton is not opposed to Multifamily but feels this proposal would provide a"base property"that may create additional adjoining properties. Commissioner Walton concluded that right now the commission is looking at creating higher occupancy for a single property that creates a non-conforming usage in this area. Commissioner Kelley spoke about sidewalks stating that currently there are no sidewalks and the addition of them would be a plus. Commissioner Kelley moved to approve CPA-2019-0003 as presented. The vote on the motion by a showing of hands was three in favor and three opposed. Secretary Deanna Horton highlighted procedural voting requirements that a Comprehensive Plan amendment recommendation can only be moved forward with a vote of four. It was concluded that another motion be made with a hope for a fourth or this moves forward with no recommendation. Commissioner Kelley moved to approve CPA-2019-0003 as presented. The vote on the motion by a showing of hands was three in favor and three opposed the motion moves forward with no recommendation. CPA-2019-0009 Commissioner Walton stated he is torn as all uses conform with the existing Multifamily Residential and is unsure as to what this change would do to future intent. He spoke about the maximum potential development for a rezone not just the current zone and spoke about traffic flow and access to the hospital. Commissioner Walton stated he is opposed at this time due to future potential. Commissioner Rasmussen asked for clarification in regards to a property addressed during public comment and if the property is within two zones. Ms. Kendall explained that the property is directly on the corner of Mamer Road and Mission Avenue or is one of the four single family residences. Ms. Kendall provided clarification by using the map and stated that the property does span across the irrigation canal. Commissioner Johnson asked if all property to the north are Corridor Mixed Use and it was determined to be true. Commissioner Kelley moved to extend the meeting to 9:15 PM The vote on the motion was six in favor and zero opposed and the motion passed. Commissioner Kelley agreed with Commissioner Walton's concerns however, is in favor. Commissioner Kelley continued that he sees a lot of potential for development 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 14 of 15 with great access to Pines Road, Evergreen Road and Sullivan Road. Commissioner Kelley added he does not believe traffic would inhibit the hospital. Commissioner Kaschmitter stated she is on the fence, she sees the potential and also sees what is existing and that it's working as is. Commissioner McKinley isn't sure why the change is needed and is not in favor. Commissioner Kaschmitter added something to consider would be changes in taxes should this be approved. Commissioner Rasmussen stated that this ties in with the Comprehensive Plan's goals and mission in bringing development and jobs. Commissioner Rasmussen added that she drove the area and this proposal fits, adding that this being a City initiated amendment this will pave the way for future development. Commissioner Rasmussen spoke on the transportation issue that once a development is proposed it will be reviewed concluding she will be voting for this proposal. Commissioner Johnson stated he also drove this area and spoke about the expandable area for additional parking and access. He saw several units on the ground floor that could be used for medical offices and sees benefit. Commissioner Johnson added that should this be redeveloped it is exactly what the hope was. Commissioner Johnson stated in his opinion this would be a benefit to the City and is in favor. Commissioner Walton is in support of the proposal and sees great potential for mixed use opportunities. Commissioner Walton added that the use does conform with the adjoining uses. He continued he does have concern that access on Mission Avenue is not very good however feels most of the traffic would feed toward Pines Road if redeveloped and is in support. Commissioner Johnson added that should this be developed into medical offices that use would not be during rush hour and would be spread out throughout the day and does not see added traffic being an issue. Commissioner Johnson conclude that he is sympathetic to single family homes and feels that the residents will be in a good situation to sell their property and move to a much more single family type of environment. Commissioner Walton moved to approve CPA-2019-0003 as presented by the City. The vote on the motion was five in favor and one opposed and the motion passed. Commissioner Kaschmitter expressed her concern about the apartments being moved somewhere else in the valley into an R-3 zone. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner McKinley stated he will not be attending the next meeting due to work conflict. Commissioner Walton thanked the public for their comment. Commissioners Johnson apologized to the commission for CPA-2019- 0001 as he did not realize until public testimony that he had a business relationship with one of the neighboring owners, he could have remained impartial however perception was more important and recused himself. Commissioner Kelley stated that if Commissioner Johnson felt he could have been impartial he could have stayed. Ms. Barlow noted that with Commissioners Phillips and McKinley being absent at the next meeting and Commissioner Johnson recusing himself due to voting requirements we may be in a position to move the next meeting. Commissioner Walton asked for procedural clarifications pertaining to the voting requirements with the absentees and Commissioner Johnson recusing himself. Mr. Lamb stated that this is a written recommendation from the Planning Commission and is memorialized as part of the vote. It was concluded that under the rules of order that at least four votes are needed to move a Comprehensive Plan amendment forward. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner McKinley moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:13 p.m. The vote on the motion was unanimous in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. 02-28-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 15 of 15 James Johnson, Chair Date signed Robin Hutchins, Secretary CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Review Meeting Date: March 14, 2019 Item: Check all that apply: ❑consent ®old business ❑new business ❑public hearing ❑information ❑admin.report ❑pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2019 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Findings of Fact PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: On February 14, 2019, the Planning Commission held a study session followed by a public hearing on February 28,2019. At that time the Planning Commission deliberated on each request and voted on a recommendation to Council. BACKGROUND: At the February 28, 2019 Planning Commission meeting the Planning Commission reviewed and deliberated on each of the proposed CPAs. The following recommendations to the City Council were voted on: CPA-2019-0001 The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of denial of CPA-2019-0001. CPA-2019-0002 The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2019-0002. CPA-2019-0003 The Planning Commission voted 3-3 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval. A recommendation requires a majority vote, and therefore the Planning Commission is not able to forward a recommendation to City Council for CPA-2019-0003. CPA-2019-0009 The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2019-0009 CPA-2019-0004-0008 and CPA-2019-0010 The Planning Commission voted 6- 0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2019-0004- 0008 and CPA-2019-0010. City Council may choose to adopt the proposed individual amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission, disapprove the proposed amendments, or modify and adopt the proposal. If the Council chooses to modify a proposal,they must either conduct a public hearing or refer the proposal back to the Planning Commission for further consideration. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Planning Commission Findings and Recommendations to City Council. STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner, Martin Palaniuk, Planner Karen Kendall, Planner Colin Quinn-Hurst Planner 1 of 2 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Findings and Recommendation for CPA-2019-0001 through CPA-2019-0010 Exhibit 2: Findings and Recommendation for CPA-2019-0001 Exhibit 3: Findings and Recommendation for CPA-2019-0002 Exhibit 4: Findings and Recommendation for CPA-2019-0003 Exhibit 5: Findings and Recommendation for CPA-2019-0009 Exhibit 6: Findings and Recommendation for CPA-2019-0004—0008, and CPA-2019-0010 2 of 2 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 2019 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 2019-0001 THROUGH 2019-0010 MARCH 14,2019 A. Background: 1. The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan(Comprehensive Plan)includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from November 2nd to November 1st of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November 1st in late winter/early spring of the following year, with a decision by City Council in late spring/early summer. 2. For the 2019 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment cycle,the City received three privately initiated requests for Comprehensive Plan amendments, designated as CPA-2019-0001, CPA-2019-0002, and CPA-2019-0003. Sites approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. The City initiated one Comprehensive Plan amendment and six text amendments designated as CPA-2019-0004 through CPA-2019-0010. B. Findings: 1. Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.140 provides the framework for the public to participate throughout the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, including notice and public hearing requirements. 2. On February 26, 2019, the Department of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21C (SEPA), and Title 21 SVMC, environmental checklists were required for each proposed Comprehensive Plan map and text amendment. 4. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. Determinations of Non-Significance(DNS)were issued for each of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments on February 8,2019. 5. The Planning Commission finds the procedural requirements of SEPA and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. 6. On February 8 and February 15,2019,notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald and each site subject to an amendment was posted with a "Notice of Public Hearing" sign with a description of the proposal. 7. Individual notice of the map amendment proposals were mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of each affected site. 8. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments concurrently to evaluate the cumulative impacts. The review was consistent with the annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW(Growth Management Act). 9. On February 28, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. After receiving public testimony,the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and deliberated on the Comprehensive Plan amendments and voted to forward to City Council the following recommendations: Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 1 of 3 CPA-2019-0001: The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of denial of CPA-2019-0001. CPA-2019-0002: The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2019-0002. CPA-2019-0003: The Planning Commission voted 3-3 and accordingly no recommendation is forwarded to City Council for CPA-2019-0003. CPA-2019-0009: The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2019-0009. CPA-2019-0004 through CPA-2019-0008 and CPA-2019-0010: The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to forward to City Council a recommendation of approval of CPA-2019-0004 through CPA-2019- 0008 and CPA-2019-0010. The Planning Commission hereby adopts and incorporates specific findings for each Comprehensive Plan Amendment as attached(See Attachments). Conclusions: The Planning Commission finds compliance with SVMC 17.80.140(H) — Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria for CPA-2019-0002,CPA-2019-0004,CPA 2019-0005,CPA-2019-0006,CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008, CPA-2019-0009, and CPA-2019-0010. The proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, and will promote the public health, safety,welfare,and protection of the environment. The Planning Commission does not find compliance with SVMC 17.80.140(H) — Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria for CPA-2019-0001. The proposed amendment is not consistent with the goals and policies of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, and will not promote the public health, safety, welfare,or protection of the environment. The Planning Commission makes no recommendation on the proposed amendment CPA-2019-0003,and therefore makes no conclusion as to whether CPA-2019-0003 complies with SVMC 17.80.140(H),whether it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and whether it promotes the public health, safety,welfare,and protection of the environment. Recommendations: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendments CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0004, CPA 2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008, CPA-2019-0009, and CPA-2019-0010. CPA-2018-0001 is forwarded with a recommendation to deny the request from the Planning Commission. CPA-2018-0003 is forwarded with no recommendation. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 2 of 3 Approved this 14th day of March,2019 Matt Walton,Vice Chairman ATTEST Deanna Horton,Planning Commission Secretary Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Page 3 of 3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA-2019-0001 March 14,2019 A. Background: 1. The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan(Comprehensive Plan)includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from November 2nd to November Pt of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November 1St, typically in late winter/early spring of the following year,with a decision by City Council typically in late spring/early summer. 2. For the 2019 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment cycle,the City received three privately initiated requests for Comprehensive Plan amendments,designated as CPA- 2019-0001, CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0003, and one City initiated amendment CPA- 2019-0009. Sites approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. The City initiated six Comprehensive Plan text amendments. The proposed amendments are considered concurrently and cumulatively regarding potential impacts pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). B. Findings: Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC) 17.80.140(H),the Planning Commission makes the following findings with regard to CPA-2019-0001: 1. A privately initiated request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Industrial(I)to Single Family Residential(SFR)and to change the Zoning District from Industrial(I)to Single Family Residential Urban(R-3). 2. The property is described as parcel number 45183.9059; addressed as 622 North Park Road,located 300 feet south of the intersection of Park Road and Broadway Avenue, further located in the SW 1/4 of Section 18,Township 25 North,Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. 3. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act,chapter 43.21C RCW(SEPA),and Title 21 SVMC, an environmental checklist was required for the proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment. 4. Staff reviewed the environmental checklist, and a threshold determination was made for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)was issued for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment on January 25, 2019. 5. The Planning Commission finds the procedural requirements of SEPA and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. 6. SVMC 17.80.140 provides the requirements for the Comprehensive Plan amendment process,including public participation,notice and public hearing requirements. 7. On February 8,2019 and February 15,2019,notice for the proposed amendment was published in the Spokane Valley News Herald. 8. On February 12,2018 individual notice of the map amendment was mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject site. 9. On February 13,2018 the subject site was posted with a"Notice of Public Hearing" sign and a description of the proposal. 10. On February 26,2019,the Depaitinent of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. 11. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment to evaluate the cumulative impacts consistent with RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). The review was consistent with the Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0001 Page 1 of 3 annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act). 12. On February 28,2019 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on CPA-2019- 0001. After receiving public testimony,the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and began deliberations. 13. The public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment will not be served by the proposed amendment. Transitional regulations will limit the impacts of new development,however they will not address impacts from existing uses. It is possible that conflicts may result by allowing the extension of residential uses into areas surrounded by industrial or other types of higher intensity uses. 14. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is not consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan or the Growth Management Act(GMA)chapter 36.70A RCW. The proposal is not consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies_ a. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties,particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. b. LU-G3 Support the transformation of commercial,industrial, and mixed-use areas into accessible districts that attract economic activity. c. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. d. LU-P12 Maintain a robust supply of productive industrial land. 15. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. 16. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 17. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. C. Factors: 1. The effect upon the physical environment: There are no known physical characteristics that would create difficulties in developing the property under the proposed designation. 2. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes: The site does not contain any streams,rivers or lakes. There will be negligible impact on the open space areas. 3. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods: The current zoning of the property would require transitional regulations on site to mitigate impacts of higher intensity use on a residential use. If the amendment were approved,than transitional regulations would be applied to the four adjacent parcels at the time of development and would limit their area available for redevelopment. Limited measures to mitigate such impacts as noise,traffic,and pollution of dust between incompatible uses exist. Based on issued building permits and pre-application meetings the Commission identified the area is growing as an industrial area and the amendment would allow for incompatible residential encroachment. . 4. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks, recreation, and schools: The proposed amendment will not likely have impact on parks,recreation or schools. 5. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region: The proposed map amendment may affect the surrounding neighborhood by increasing the incompatibility of residential and industrial uses adjacent to each other and disadvantaging industrial zoned properties by limiting buildable area. 6. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land: Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0001 Page 2 of 3 There are adequate lands available to accommodate the projected future demand of residential and industrial lands. 7. The current and projected population density in the area: The increase in density for the area was not contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan for the parcel. The change will have marginal impact on population density. 8. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan: The request is in conflict with the Comprehensive goals and policies as identified in B(13)above. D. Conclusion: The Planning Commission does not find compliance with SVMC 17.80.140(H)—Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria for CPA-2019-0001. Proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0001 is not consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan,and will not promote the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. E. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission recommends the City Council deny proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0001. Approved this 14th day of March,2019. Matt Walton,Vice Chair ATTEST Deanna Horton, Planning Commission Secretary Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0001 Page 3 of 3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA-2019-0002 March 14,2019 A. Background: 1. The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan(Comprehensive Plan)includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from November 2nd to November Pt of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November 1St, typically in late winter/early spring of the following year,with a decision by City Council typically in late spring/early summer. 2. For the 2019 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment cycle,the City received three privately initiated requests for Comprehensive Plan amendments,designated as CPA- 2019-0001, CPA-2019-0002, and CPA-2019-0003. Sites approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. The City initiated one Comprehensive Plan amendment and six text amendments. The proposed amendments are considered concurrently and cumulatively regarding potential impacts pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). B. Findings: Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.140(H),the Planning Commission makes the following findings with regard to CPA-2019-0002: 1. A privately initiated request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Neighborhood Commercial(NC)and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban(R-3)to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) 2. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act,chapter 43.21C RCW(SEPA), and Title 21 SVMC, an environmental checklist was required for the proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment. 3. Staff reviewed the environmental checklist, and a threshold determination was made for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)was issued for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment on February 8, 2019. 4. The Planning Commission finds the procedural requirements of SEPA and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. 5. SVMC 17.80.140 provides the requirements for the Comprehensive Plan amendment process,including public participation,notice and public hearing requirements. 6. On February 6,2019 the subject site was posted with a"Notice of Public Hearing"sign and a description of the proposal. 7. On February 8,2019 and February 15,2019,notice for the proposed amendment was published in the Spokane Valley News Herald. 8. On February 13,2019 individual notice of the map amendment was mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject site. 9. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment to evaluate the cumulative impacts consistent with RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). The review was consistent with the annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act). 10. On February 26,2019,the Department of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. 11. On February 28,2019 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on CPA-2019- 0002. After receiving public testimony,the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and began deliberations. Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0002 Page 1 of 4 12. The public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendment. Designating the property as neighborhood commercial will allow for neighborhood scale services to be developed across from Central Valley High School,an intensely developed school site,within walking distance to serve the residential area and student population. Infrastructure,including streets,water,sewer, and other utilities, are available to support the proposed amendment and will be provided through the course of development. 13. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Growth Management Act(GMA)chapter 36.70A RCW, specifically the goals listed below. The amendment is also consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: a. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner; and b.. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards; and c. ED-GI support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. d. LU-P1 Encourage neighborhood scale commercial uses in residential areas. 14. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. Substantial change has not occurred since the 2016 Legislative Update to the Comprehensive Plan. 15. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 16. The proposed amendment does address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update identified areas for NC zoning and identified the need as a community priority.The amendment location was not identified in the 2016 update,but it does offer an opportunity for smaller scale commercial development in an area that is generally consistent with the criteria for NC. C. Factors: 1. The effect upon the physical environment: The change to NC will allow neighborhood commercial development of the property. The site will likely transition from a residential use with residential driveways,trees,lawn,and buildings to a commercial building with parking structures, commercial landscaping, and stormwater treatment areas. Traffic will likely increase with the commercial development. Both sites have been developed with building,paving and grading activity. 2. The effect on open space, streams,rivers, and lakes: Any stormwater associated with commercial development will be retained and treated on the site. The site does not contain any streams,rivers or lakes. The open space areas associated with the required residential front, rear, flanking, and side yards will likely transition to parking or commercial landscaping areas. 3. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods: NC development is purposefully limited in size to reduce impacts to neighboring residential uses. Development standards will limit the height and location of any new commercial development and together with landscaping and screening standards, will reduce the impacts to adjacent residential uses. The existing church is a permitted use in the NC zone and was developed prior to the NC development standard. Subsequent changes of use would have to be a permitted use in the NC zoning district and comply with the NC development standards. 4. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks, recreation, and schools: A neighborhood commercial use will likely have minimal impact on parks,recreation or schools. Generally a commercial use does not generate a need for those facilities. As noted earlier the Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0002 Page 2 of 4 uses permitted within the NC zone are smaller in scale and suited for neighborhoods. Sullivan Road is a Principal Arterial designed to serve through trips and connect Spokane Valley with the rest of the region. 8th Avenue is an Urban Minor Arterial. Minor arterial streets provide inter- neighborhood connections,transit access,and serve both local and through trips. No impacts on community facilities are anticipated. 5. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region: The 2016 Legislative Update increased opportunities for neighborhood commercial development throughout the City. The community expressed a strong desire to encourage neighborhood scale commercial development. The neighborhood is already served by the larger-scale commercial and retail uses north of site along 4th Avenue and Sprague Avenue. The existing church is consistent with neighborhood commercial development. The redevelopment of the southern property from single family residential to an NC use, such as office, would allow a use that is reasonable and appropriate for the location across from the school and adjacent to a church. 6. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land: The 2016 Legislative Update to the Comprehensive Plan increased the areas that are zoned NC. The NC zoned lands are scattered throughout the City,primarily located on arterial streets within neighborhoods. NC zoned lands are located south of the site at the intersections of 16th and Sullivan, and 24th and Sullivan. A small coffee/espresso stand has developed at 16th and Sullivan. Of the five NC-zoned properties closest to this site,the 16th/Sullivan site is the only site to redevelop from the existing use into a neighborhood commercial use. This site is located within one half mile of major retail centers at Sprague/Sullivan and smaller retail centers at 4th/Sullivan. During school periods the Central Valley High School,with a student population of over 2300 students,adds population density that can support NC development. 7. The current and projected population density in the area; and The NC zone allows single-family dwellings (current use of the south property) and neighborhood scale commercial development. Single family uses are permitted in the NC zone and the proposed change would have no effect on the land use capacity of the property. The proposed change in land use to NC will not impact the overall density of the area. 8. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. The NC designation would support many of the Economic Development, Land Use, Transportation, and Housing goals. The proposed land use change will have little effect on the Capital Facilities and Public Services, Public and Private Utilities, Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources elements of the Comprehensive plan. D. Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds compliance with SVMC 17.80.140(H)—Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria for CPA-2019-0002. Proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0002 is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and will promote the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. E. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0002. Approved this 14th day of March,2019. Matt Walton,Vice Chairman Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0002 Page 3 of 4 ATTEST Deanna Horton,Planning Commission Secretary Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0002 Page 4 of 4 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA-2019-0003 March 14,2019 A. Background: 1. The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan(Comprehensive Plan)includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from November 2nd to November Pt of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November 1St, typically in late winter/early spring of the following year,with a decision by City Council typically in late spring/early summer. 2. For the 2019 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment cycle,the City received three privately initiated requests for Comprehensive Plan amendments,designated as CPA- 2019-0001, CPA-2019-0002, and CPA-2019-0003. Sites approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. The City initiated one Comprehensive Plan amendment and six text amendments. The proposed amendments are considered concurrently and cumulatively regarding potential impacts pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). B. Findings: Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 17.80.140(H),the Planning Commission makes the following findings with regard to CPA-2019-0003: 1. A privately initiated request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation from Single Family Residential(SFR)to Multi Family Residential(MFR)and to change the Zoning District from Single Family Residential Urban(R-3)to Multi Family Residential(MFR). 2. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act,chapter 43.21C RCW(SEPA), and Title 21 SVMC, an environmental checklist was required for the proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment. 3. Staff reviewed the environmental checklist, and a threshold determination was made for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)was issued for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment on February 8, 2019. 4. The Planning Commission finds the procedural requirements of SEPA and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. 5. SVMC 17.80.140 provides the requirements for the Comprehensive Plan amendment process,including public participation,notice and public hearing requirements. 6. On February 8,2019 and February 15,2019,notice for the proposed amendment was published in the Spokane Valley News Herald. 7. On February 13,2019 the subject site was posted with a"Notice of Public Hearing" sign and a description of the proposal. 8. On February 13,2019 individual notice of the map amendment was mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject site. 9. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment to evaluate the cumulative impacts consistent with RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). The review was consistent with the annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act). 10. On February 26,2019,the Depaitnient of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0003 Page 1 of 3 11. On February 28,2019 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on CPA-2018- 0003. After receiving public testimony,the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and began deliberations. 12. The Planning Commission reviewed the staff report,considered public testimony and had extensive deliberations on the topic which included the need for additional MFR lands and if the request would result in further encroachment of MFR lands within a single family residential neighborhood. 13. The Planning Commission voted on a motion to recommend that City Council approve CPA-2019-0003. The Planning Commission vote was a split of three votes for and three votes against. Pursuant to the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, adopted pursuant to Resolution No. 12-006, a Comprehensive Plan amendment must be approved by at least four affirmative votes. Therefore,Planning Commission finds that the split vote results in no recommendation to City Council. Planning Commission further finds that since no recommendation is being provided,no other findings regarding the approval criteria set forth in SVMC 17.80.140 are provided by Planning Commission. However, the staff report,public testimony,minutes of the deliberations of Planning Commission and all other materials in the record are being forwarded to City Council for its review and consideration of CPA-2019-0003. 14. The Planning Commission makes no finding as to whether the public health, safety, welfare,and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendment. 15. The Planning Commission makes no finding as to whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Growth Management Act(GMA)chapter 36.70A RCW. 16. The Planning Commission makes no finding as to whether the proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. 17. The Planning Commission makes no finding as to whether the proposed amendment corrects a mapping error. 18. The Planning Commission makes no finding as to whether the proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. C. Factors: The Planning Commission makes no recommendation on the proposed amendment, and therefore makes no findings as to the factors identified in SVMC 17.80.140(H)(2). D. Conclusion: The Planning Commission makes no recommendation on the proposed amendment, and therefore makes no conclusion as to whether the proposed amendment complies with SVMC 17.80.140(H), whether it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,and whether it promotes the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. E. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission makes no recommendation on the proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0003. Approved this 14th day of March,2019. Matt Walton,Vice Chairman Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0003 Page 2 of 3 ATTEST Deanna Horton,Planning Commission Secretary Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0003 Page 3 of 3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008,and CPA-2019-0010 March 14,2019 A. Background: 1. The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan(Comprehensive Plan)includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from November 2nd to November Pt of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November 1St, typically in late winter/early spring of the following year,with a decision by City Council typically in late spring/early summer. 2. For the 2019 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment cycle,the City received three privately initiated requests for Comprehensive Plan amendments,designated as CPA- 2019-0001,CPA-2019-0002, and CPA-2019-0003 and one City initiated amendment CPA-2019-0009. Sites approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. The City initiated six Comprehensive Plan text amendments. The proposed amendments are considered concurrently and cumulatively regarding potential impacts pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). B. Findings: Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC) 17.80.140(H),the Planning Commission makes the following findings with regard to CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005, CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008, and CPA-2019-0010: 1. The City proposes to amend text in Chapters 2 and 5 of the Comprehensive Plan,update recommended pedestrian and bicycle network maps in Chapter 5,and add two new appendices.Proposed amendments to Chapter 2 include policy and strategy changes to reflect Planned Action Ordinance projects in and around the Northeast Industrial Area,changes to annexation policy and changes to strategic actions in Chapter 2.Updates to Chapter 5 reflect recently-completed projects and minor modifications based on public involvement and technical evaluation.The first proposed appendix provides a printable set of all maps,and the second appendix provides a 20-year transportation improvement plan,or TIP,listing all transportation improvements over a 20-year horizon. 2. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act,chapter 43.21C RCW(SEPA),and Title 21 SVMC,an environmental checklist was required for the proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment. 3. Staff reviewed the environmental checklist, and a threshold determination was made for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)was issued for each of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments on February 15,2019. 4. The Planning Commission finds the procedural requirements of SEPA and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. 5. SVMC 17.80.140 provides the requirements for the Comprehensive Plan amendment process,including public participation,notice and public hearing requirements. 6. On February 8,2019 and February 15,2019,notice for the proposed amendments were published in the Spokane Valley News Herald. 7. The proposed amendments are primarily policy-oriented and did not require individual notice to property owners or"Notice of Public Hearing" signage at specific sites. 8. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments to evaluate the cumulative impacts consistent with RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). The review was consistent Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0004-0008,and CPA-2019-0010 Page 1 of 4 with the annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW(Growth Management Act). 9. On February 26,2019,the Department of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. 10. On February 28,2019 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on CPA-2019- 0004, CPA-2019-0005,CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007,CPA-2019-0008,and CPA- 2019-0010. After receiving public testimony,the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and began deliberations. 11. The public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendments by ensuring that the Comprehensive Plan reflects the changing conditions and preferences of the community,as well as ensuring consistency with regional policy and other adopted plans. 12. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with Growth Management Act(GMA)chapter 36.70A RCW. Specifically the following GMA planning goals would be met as well as specific Comprehensive Plan Goals and policies would be met: Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans. a. CPA-2019-0004: Updating implementation strategies and timelines. i. Economic Development: Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. ii. Land Use: Ensure that land use plans,regulations,review processes,and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality. iii. Transportation: Ensure that the transportation system and investments in transportation infrastructure are designed to improve quality of life or support economic development priorities. iv. Housing: Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. v. Housing: Enable the development of affordable housing for all income levels. vi. Housing: Allow convenient access to daily goods and services in Spokane Valley's neighborhoods. b. CPA-2019-0005: Text updates to pedestrian and bicycle elements. i. Transportation: Maintain and enhance a comprehensive multimodal transportation system that promotes, supports,and improves the safe, efficient, and reliable movement of people,vehicles,and goods. c. CPA-2019-0006: Annexation goal and policy additions. i. Land Use: Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents,employees, and visitors. ii. Land Use: Ensure that land use plans,regulations,review processes, and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality. d. CPA-2019-0007: Recommended network map updates. i. Transportation: Ensure that the transportation system and investments in transportation infrastructure are designed to improve quality of life or support economic development priorities. ii. Transportation: Ensure that transportation planning efforts reflect anticipated land use patterns and support identified growth opportunities. iii. Transportation: Provide for safe and efficient freight mobility. iv. Transportation: Maintain and enhance a comprehensive multimodal transportation system that promotes, supports, and improves the safe, efficient,and reliable movement of people,vehicles,and goods. e. CPA-2019-0008: Appendix of most recently adopted maps. a. Land Use: Ensure that land use plans,regulations,review processes,and infrastructure improvements support economic growth and vitality. Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0004-0008,and CPA-2019-0010 Page 2 of 4 f. CPA-2019-0010: Appendix with 20-year transportation improvement plan. i. Transportation: Ensure that the transportation system and investments in transportation infrastructure are designed to improve quality of life or support economic development priorities. ii. Transportation: Ensure that transportation planning efforts reflect anticipated land use patterns and support identified growth opportunities. iii. Transportation: Provide for safe and efficient freight mobility. iv. Transportation: Maintain and enhance a comprehensive multimodal transportation system that promotes, supports,and improves the safe, efficient, and reliable movement of people,vehicles, and goods. 13. The proposed amendment does not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control. 14. The proposed text amendments do not correct a mapping error. 15. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. However,these text amendments are policy-oriented and address strategies and network-level planning rather than site-specific impacts on the physical environment. Site-specific analysis will be addressed as individual capital facilityie-s projects are brought forward at a future time. C. Factors: 1. The effect upon the physical environment: These text amendments are policy-oriented and address strategies and network-level planning rather than site-specific impacts on the physical environment. Site-specific analysis will be addressed as individual capital facility projects are brought forward at a future time. 2. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes: The proposed amendments are primarily policy oriented and have no direct impact on open space,streams,rivers, and lakes. 3. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods: The City addresses adequacy of community facilities on a City-wide basis through capital facilities planning; annual updates to the Comprehensive Plan ensure that the City is adequately providing for the anticipated growth. These amendments recommend context- sensitive pedestrian and bicycle network improvements.Recommended facility locations and types respond to destination land uses and accommodating travel behaviors based on street and adjacent development characteristics. 4. The benefit to the neighborhood,City, and region: The public benefit is furthered by ensuring the Comprehensive Plan is reflective of regional policy and current with other internal plans. 5. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land: The proposed amendments are policy oriented and do not have a direct impact on the quantity and location of land planned for land uses. 6. The current and projected population density in the area: The proposed amendments do not require population analysis. 7. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan: The proposed amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the Plan. C. Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds compliance with SVMC 17.80.140(H)—Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria for CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005,CPA-2019-0006,CPA- 2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008, and CPA-2019-0010. Proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendments CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005,CPA-2019-0006, CPA-2019-0007,CPA-2019- Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0004-0008,and CPA-2019-0010 Page 3 of 4 0008, and CPA-2019-0010 are consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and will promote the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. D. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendments CPA-2019-0004, CPA-2019-0005,CPA-2019-0006, CPA- 2019-0007, CPA-2019-0008, and CPA-2019-0010. Approved this 14th day of March,2019. Matt Walton,Vice Chairman ATTEST Deanna Horton,Planning Commission Secretary Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0004-0008,and CPA-2019-0010 Page 4 of 4 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA-2019-0009 March 14,2019 A. Background: 1. The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan(Comprehensive Plan)includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from November 2nd to November Pt of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November 1St, typically in late winter/early spring of the following year,with a decision by City Council typically in late spring/early summer. 2. For the 2019 Comprehensive Plan annual amendment cycle,the City received three privately initiated requests for Comprehensive Plan amendments,designated as CPA- 2019-0001, CPA-2019-0002, CPA-2019-0003, and one City initiated amendment CPA- 2019-0009. Sites approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment receive a zoning classification consistent with the new land use designation. The City initiated six Comprehensive Plan text amendments. The proposed amendments are considered concurrently and cumulatively regarding potential impacts pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). B. Findings: Pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC) 17.80.140(H),the Planning Commission makes the following findings with regard to CPA-2019-0009: 1. A City-initiated request to change Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning district from Multifamily Residential(MFR)to Corridor Mixed Use(CMU). 2. The property is described as parcel numbers 45104.9150,45104.9151,45104.0324, 45104.0315,45104.0311,45104.0307,45104.0308,45104.0330,45104.0329, 45104.0323,45104.0327 and,45104.0328,addressed as 13303, 13507, 13515, 13519, 13607 and 13621 East Mission Avenue,located north of Mission Avenue between the intersections of Mission Avenue and McDonald Road and Mission Avenue and Mamer Road,further located in Section 4 of Township 25,Range 44,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. 3. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act,chapter 43.21C RCW (SEPA), and Title 21 SVMC, an environmental checklist was required for the proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment. 4. Staff reviewed the environmental checklist, and a threshold determination was made for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)was issued for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment on January 25, 2019. 5. The Planning Commission finds the procedural requirements of SEPA and Title 21 SVMC have been fulfilled. 6. SVMC 17.80.140 provides the requirements for the Comprehensive Plan amendment process,including public participation,notice and public hearing requirements. 7. On February 8,2019 and February 15,2019,notice for the proposed amendment was published in the Spokane Valley News Herald. 8. On February 12,2018 individual notice of the map amendment was mailed to all property owners within 800 feet of the subject sites. 9. On February 13,2018 the subject sites were posted with a"Notice of Public Hearing" sign and a description of the proposal. 10. On February 26,2019,the Depaitinent of Commerce was provided a notice of intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0009 Page 1 of 3 11. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment to evaluate the cumulative impacts consistent with RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). The review was consistent with the annual amendment process outlined in SVMC 17.80.140 and chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act). 12. On February 28,2019 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on CPA-2019- 0009. After receiving public testimony,the Planning Commission closed the public hearing and began deliberations. 13. The public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment will be served by the proposed amendment. The amendment provides more flexibility of uses and intensity in an area surrounded by similar zoning and uses. The amendment will allow opportunity for increases in uses providing complementary daily goods and services and the subject properties will benefit by being allowed to develop consistent with the adjacent land uses. 14. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with Growth Management Act(GMA)chapter 36.70A RCW. Specifically the following planning goals would be met: a. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. b. Provides for economic development adjacent to similar zoned parcels and utilizes land for infill development within an urban area. c. Provides a suitable land use designation consistent with the City's GMA compliant Comprehensive Plan. 15. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies; a. ED-P6 Promote the development or redevelopment of vacant and underutilized properties, particularly those with potential to serve as a catalyst for economic development. b. LU-P5 Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. c. LU-P16 Maximize the density of development along major transit corridors and near transit centers and commercial areas. d. H-G1 Allow for a broad range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of the community. e. CF-P2 Optimize the use of existing public facilities before investing in new facilities. 16. The proposed amendment does respond to a substantial change in conditions due to the 2016 Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning change of the surrounding properties. The City underwent an extensive legislative Comprehensive Plan update in 2016. At that time,the subject parcels were designated consistent with the existing land uses and maintained the same land use designation. The surrounding properties to the north and west received a new land use designation of CMU. 17. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. 18. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. C. Factors: 1. The effect upon the physical environment: The properties will have the opportunity to transition and add a mix of uses to serve the surrounding single family,duplexes and multifamily,commercial and office services. There is no concern on effect of physical environment. 2. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes: The site does not contain any streams,rivers or lakes. There will be negligible impact on the open space areas. 3. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods: Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0009 Page 2 of 3 The amendment is consistent with the adjacent land use designation,and allows the properties to develop consistent with the existing CMU designation and development along the entire corridor on the north side of Mission Avenue. 4. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks,recreation,and schools: The proposed CMU designation will have minimal impact on parks,recreation or schools. The City prepared a Trip Generation and Distribution Letter concluding there is adequate capacity. No impacts are anticipated. 5. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region: The proposed land use designation provides equal development opportunity to the properties along the corridor which encourages development and implements the vision for corridor. 6. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land: Since the majority of the proposed amendment area is developed the amendment would have marginal impact,but the change would allow for more intensive uses and increased density. 7. The current and projected population density in the area: Since the properties are substantially developed,the change to CMU development is not anticipated to increase or decrease the population or density in the area. Although it is noted that additional units could be developed on site above the current density. The change should not result in significant impacts on the projected population density. 8. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan: The CMU designation will support many of the Economic Development,Land Use, Transportation,and Housing goals. It would have little effect on the Capital Facilities and Public Services,Public and Private Utilities,Parks and Open Space and Natural Resources elements of the Comprehensive plan. C. Conclusion: The Planning Commission finds compliance with SVMC 17.80.140(H)—Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria for CPA-2019-0009. Proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0009 is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, and will promote the public health,safety,welfare,and protection of the environment. D. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve proposed 2019 Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA-2019-0009. Approved this 14th day of March,2019. Matt Walton,Vice Chairman ATTEST Deanna Horton,Planning Commission Secretary Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation CPA-2019-0009 Page 3 of 3