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