Loading...
2019, 06-13 Agenda Packet sookaine Valle Spokane Valley Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda City Hall Council Chambers, 10210 E. Sprague Ave. June 13, 2019 6:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 23, 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: STV-2019-0002, a privately initiated street vacation of a portion of Glenn Road, University Road and Baldwin Avenue. ii. Findings of Fact: CTA-2019-0002, a proposed text amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapter 19.60, Chapter 19.85 and Appendix A to allow and provide regulations on licensed marijuana transportation businesses. iii. Findings of Fact: STV-2019-0001, a proposed street vacations of a portion of Tshirley Road, Long Road, Rich Avenue and Greenacres Road in the Northeast Industrial Area. X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XI. ADJOURNMENT PC ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only As of June 5,2019 ***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 June 13, 2019 Findings of Fact: STV-2019-0001 —NEIA Street Vacations—Mike Basinger Findings of Fact: STV-2019-0002—Baldwin Ave. Street Vacations—Connor Findings of Fact: CTA-2019-0002—Marijuana Transport Regulations—Erik June 27, 2019 July 11, 2019 Study Session: STV-2019-0003—Broadway Ave. Street Vacation-Karen July 25, 2019 Public Hearing: STV-2019-0003—Broadway Ave. Street Vacation -Karen August 8, 2019 Findings of Fact: STV-2019-0003 —Broadway Ave. Street Vacation-Karen Draft Advance Agenda 6/5/2019 Page 1 of 1 Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall May 23, 2019 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Office Assistant Robin Hutchins called roll and the following members and staff were present: James Johnson Jenny Nickerson, Building Official Danielle Kaschmitter Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Timothy Kelley Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager Robert McKinley Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Michael Phillips, absent - excused Connor Lange, Planner Michelle Rasmussen, absent - excused Matt Walton Robin Hutchins, Office Assistant Hearing no objections, Commissioners Phillips and Rasmussen were excused from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Walton moved to approve the May 23, 2019 agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Walton moved to amend the May 9, 2019 minutes to correct the misspelling of his last name on page 8 from Walter to Walton. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Johnson reported on May 14, 2019 he attended the Spokane County Human Rights Task Force executive committee to discuss the confluence of leadership meeting where it was determined that meeting will be a long range plan. He also attended the City Council meeting and expressed his concerns for the lack of accurate representation by the 4th legislative district and requested a more diverse invocation at the City Council meetings. On May 21, 2019 he attended the Spokane County Human Right Task Force regular meeting where they received rapid response training. The training was to prepare for public acts of hate received through a portal developed by the task force to report hate crimes. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Economic Development Manager Mike Basinger advised that after the first reading with the City Council of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments the Council agreed with all of the Planning Commission's recommendations. Mr. Basinger added that Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-2019-0003 that had no recommendation from the Planning Commission was denied by the City Council. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: On any subject which is not on the agenda. Chair Johnson asked the Commission for a consensus on standardizing a three-minute time limit for all public comment excluding proponent comments. A standard three- minute time limit was concluded to be essential in keeping order. 05-23-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 9 There was no public comment. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: i. Findings of Fact: CTA-2018-0006, a proposed text amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapters 19.60.050, 19.65.130, 19.40.035 and Appendix A, regarding affordable housing and multifamily development. Senior Planner Lori Barlow summarized the Findings of Fact for the privately initiated code text amendment (CTA). The intent of the amendment is to allow multifamily (MF) development as a conditional use in the residential R-3 zone subject to specific criteria. This proposal came before the Planning Commission on two prior occasions. A study session was held on April 25, 2019 and a public hearing on May 9, 2019. After hearing considerable public testimony, the Planning Commission deliberated and voted unanimously to forward a recommendation of denial to the City Council. Ms. Barlow explained that the Findings of Fact formalize the pivotal actions and capture the Planning Commission's recommendation and vote. Ms. Barlow concluded that as this item moves forward to the City Council there will be no further opportunity for public comment unless the Council takes specific action to do so. Commissioner Walton stated this CTA was one of the more contentious items reviewed in his time with the Commission. He appreciated the public for their participation and the deliberation from the Commission. He added that despite the struggles the Commission may have had in moving forward he felt this was the correct outcome and is in support of the Findings of Fact. Commissioner Walton moved to approve Findings of Fact CTA-2018-0006 as presented. There was no discussion The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. ii. Public Hearing: STV-2019-0002, a privately initiated street vacation of a portion of Glenn, University Roads and Baldwin Avenue. Planner Connor Lange provided a presentation outlining the privately initiated application to vacate unimproved portions of Baldwin Avenue, University Road and Glenn Road. Mr. Lange explained the right-of-ways (ROW) are located between I-90 to the north, Nora Avenue to the south and further bordered by Overland Avenue to the west. Mr. Lange provided procedural overview advising the application was submitted March 8, 2019, the study session was conducted on May 9, 2019, and tonight the public hearing is being held. Mr. Lange advised the majority of the property surrounding the proposed ROWs to be vacated are owned by Circle M Properties. The applicant feels the request will allow for maximum use of abutting properties and that a right of way connection for an overpass is not feasible at University Road. Mr. Lange highlighted a study done in 2015 reviewed the feasibility for an overpass crossing at University Road, the project was determined to be costly and not viable at the time. However, it is unknown if a project on University Road may provide a greater level of service in the future. Due to future development, staff is recommending an amendment to the proposal by removing University Road from the vacation proposal. Mr. Lange advised that all required notices have been satisfied. Notice was posted at CenterPlace, City Hall and the library. Notice was also posted in the newspaper of record on two separate occasions. Written notice was provided to the owner's adjacent to the 05-23-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 9 unimproved portions of University Road and Baldwin Avenue and signs were posted at the end of each street to be vacated. Mr. Lange advised that in processing a street vacation, staff reviews a number of criteria for approval to determine if the street is still required for public access. Staff does not anticipate that either Baldwin Avenue or Glenn Road would serve any public use and are still part of the recommendation from staff to vacate. Mr. Lange added that there has been a request for both ingress/egress and sewer easements that have been added as a recommended condition of approval. Staff also reviews conditional changes and feels University Road may provide a public benefit in the future should an overpass be proposed. There were no public objections during the comment period. Commissioner Kelley asked for clarification pertaining to University Road and what the City was asking. Mr. Lange advised the City would like to retain University Road and not allow it to be vacated in order to preserve it for future projects. Commissioner Johnson referenced an email from Jen Brunner requesting a 20-foot public sanitary sewer easement and asked where that would be located. Mr. Lange advised that is yet to be determined however; it would most likely be along the proposed access point parallel to Baldwin Road. Chair Johnson opened the public hearing at 6:20 PM Todd Whipple; 212 N Pines Road: Mr. Whipple stated the retention of University Road by the City was a surprise to his client. He advised that when his client had come to him asking about this piece of property, they had done their research before purchasing. He cautioned his client not to purchase the property until they had clarification concerning the crossing at University Road from the City that they had located in the 1985 SR90 Environmental Impact Statement. Mr. Whipple continued that during their Pre- Application meetings they brought the University Road crossing information to the City's attention and were advised by City staff to move forward and vacate University Road, now they have changed their mind. Mr. Whipple advised the customer has done a considerable amount of work,provided plans to the City and had received a grading permit. He added that the grading permit restrictions specified that until the street vacations were approved they were not to do any work on the ROWs. He explained that it became too difficult to maneuver around the property and then the customer had to stop the project. Staff has taken University Road out of the proposal completely. Mr. Whipple stated they received correspondence that the City would entertain a license agreement in order to use the property as if it were vacated to protect the possible future public improvements while the City retains ownership. Mr. Whipple asked the Planning Commission to maintain the University Street Vacation in order to give them time to go before the City Council with a request for a license agreement to use University Road ROW while the City retains ownership. Commissioner Kelley asked Mr. Whipple, if the license agreement is obtained and years down the road the City decided to build a bridge, at whose expense would it be to remove the work they had done? Mr. Whipple advised it would depend on the license agreement and would most likely be the responsibility of Circle M Properties. Mr. Whipple gave some details into what they have done and hope to do. He advised they would grade to highway elevation to create the access road between the two distinct properties on either side and explained their road would be well below University Road. Mr. Whipple gave details into building a crossing structure over I-90 and stated the work they have and will do should not affect future bridge development. He added they would be willing to work with the City in regards to abutment and girder locations at that time. 05-23-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 9 Commissioner Kaschmitter asked that if the access road they would build is lower than University Road and should a bridge be built; would the bridge have to be longer in order to accommodate? Mr. Whipple explained that may be the case adding that currently there isn't enough ROW to widen University Road. He explained that University Road is 50- feet wide and building a 45-foot road to go over I-90 would require walls straight up and down. He explained that would be cost prohibitive and would be cheaper to build girders and a deck. Commissioner Walton asked for clarification that should it be decided to move forward as amended and University Road is retained how would that impact what they are currently doing until they obtain the license. Mr. Whipple advised the work would stop and could potentially kill the project. They will need to enter on one side and exit on the other due to the size of equipment they use in order to move their materials. If they cannot use University Road, then they purchased a piece of property they can't use. He added that they are moving their corporate headquarters to this site, losing University Road was a big deal and losing the license agreement would be detrimental. Patrick J Mitchelli, 4107 E Broadway Avenue; Mr. Mitchelli explained Mr. Whipple covered all of their concerns. He added that before purchasing the property they made sure University Road would be able to be vacated and explained that if that is no longer the case that will put their business in a tough spot. Mr. Mitchelli added that directly across from University Road is the junk yard and stated that isn't going anywhere in the near future. Justin Fabio, 302 N Walnut Road; Mr. Fabio asked if the traffic was going to run north of University Road and where it would exit. It was determined that the street would run north of University Road,through Circle M Properties and would exit onto Raymond Road. Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 6:39 PM Commissioner Johnson asked staff why they concluded to remove University Road from the proposal and creating a license agreement. Mr. Basinger stated staff recognized that there may be a potential use for University Road sometime in the future adding that not knowing when that might happen the license agreement is an appropriate means to move forward. He highlighted that currently Circle M Properties is located on prime retail property on Pines Road and them moving would open that property to better uses. Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb spoke to the license agreement terms stating the City can require that the applicant's improvements are subject to the City putting in a future project. He added that the license agreement would allow Circle M Properties to use the property while the City retains control to build a future project. It was determined the license agreement details do not require Planning Commission action. Commissioner Kelley spoke about his experience driving truck while serving in the United States Army and how difficult they are to turn around in small spaces. He is concerned for the applicant's future as they invest their funds and work for a number of years and then the City builds a bridge. Commissioner Johnson advised that in the early 1990's he was involved in a two-year long process with Spokane County where an overpass was discussed for University Road trying to mitigate the traffic flow on Argonne Road. At the time, the bypass would start near Bigelow Gulch Road, above Hutton settlement, across the river and to University Road, he is unsure if that is still the long range plan. An interchange at University Road is not feasible at this time however, an overpass may be needed in twenty years. Commissioner 05-23-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 9 Johnson is opposed to leaving University Road in the proposal and is in support of the amendment presented by staff. Commissioner McKinley asked staff if the City would have eminent domain rights. Mr. Lamb explained that if in fact University Road was vacated the City would have eminent domain. The City could either purchase or condemn the property and it would be a matter of retaining the right to do so in the future or the City may feel comfortable enough not to develop and willing to pay the cost in the future if necessary. Currently it is City property and should a bridge be developed at a later date the City would have all rights to the property. Commissioner Walton stated the possibilities in cost associated with repurchasing or condemning the property and the legal implication are concerning. He added that looking at the future and how approvals impact the valley as a whole he feels the City needs to leave all possible mechanisms in place. Commissioner Kaschmitter stated she feels the license agreement will help and is in favor of it. She also agrees there may be a need for a bridge in the future. Commissioner Walton moved to approve STV-2019-0002 for Baldwin Road and Glenn Road with the removal of University Road from the street vacation application as amended by staff Commissioner Kelley advised in looking at the map it appears there are four structures that would have to be removed in order build a bridge at a later date. He added that he is opposed to the motion and feels the street vacation for University Road should remain. Commissioner Walton advised he understands where the proponent and applicant stand as it seems the City changed their mind late in the process. He added that in doing so staff was looking to do what's right for the future of the City and feels the City was well within the right to make the change as the vacation had not yet occurred. He strongly urges City Council to consider the license agreement to run concurrent as it continues to move forward. Commissioner Walton added that he can't, in good conscience, support the promise to obtain licensure if the vacation is approved and is in support of the motion as it stands. Commissioner Kaschmitter agreed with Commissioner Walton. Commissioner McKinley supports the motion and also agreed with Commissioner Kelly regarding the structures that would need to be removed. The vote on the motion was four in favor, one opposed with Commissioner Kelley dissenting, and the motion passed. iii. Public Hearing: CTA-2019-0002,a proposed code text amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC) Chapter 19.60,Chapter 19.85 and Appendix A to allow and provide regulations on licensed marijuana transportation businesses. Chair Johnson opened the public hearing at 6:57 PM Mr. Lamb provided a presentation outlining the code text amendment to allow licensed marijuana transport operators to operate within the City of Spokane Valley. Mr. Lamb provided background into Washington Initiative I-502 that passed in 2012 legalizing marijuana in Washington State. The City responded with adopting comprehensive regulations for the allowable state license uses to be production, process and retail stores. As part of the regulations the City Council adopted a provision 19.85.040 that prohibits all other uses within the City of Spokane Valley. In the fall of 2018 the City had a citizen 05-23-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 9 inquiry from a license transporter hoping to do business in the City. Staff presented an administrative report to the City Council and the Council gave consensus to bring a proposal forward to the Planning Commission for consideration. Mr. Lamb continued that transportation is only between the licensed production, process, retail stores and research facilities and is not for home delivery. The Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board(WSLCB) oversees the licensing and licensed transporters are subject to WSLCB requirements. Mr. Lamb continued that license marijuana transporters are required to have a physical location or office to store their fleet and state law prohibits them from storing marijuana in an office or physical location. State requires transportation logs and manifests in keeping with the state mandate that marijuana be suitably tracked from seed to sale. Mr. Lamb explained the product is transported in secured compartments, required to be attached to the vehicle or vehicle body and are locked at all times. Delivery has to be made within 48 hours from the time of pick up as there may be an instance where the marijuana is left in the vehicle overnight. Commissioner Johnson asked about shorter stops such a dinner and lunch breaks. Mr. Lamb advised it is allowed to be in the vehicle in a secured compartment no matter the length of the break. Commissioner Kelley asked if a truck could be stored in a storage facility or garage? Mr. Lamb advised that is an option, adding that under state law the product cannot be stored in an office and there is no mandate that the vehicle has to be stored in a garage or storage facility. Mr. Lamb added that state law prohibits licensed marijuana transporters from being within 1,000 feet of enumerated sensitive uses such as schools, playgrounds, public transit and libraries. Mr. Lamb gave an example that currently under state law a marijuana shop could be built near an empty park like property with no current use. The City's buffers already in place prohibit marijuana shops from being built within 1,000 feet of vacant uses in order to prohibit non-conforming uses. Mr. Lamb addressed the questions posed by the Commission during the study session starting with the transportation of live plants. Transporting live plants is allowed in a secured compartment,those compartments could be metal partitions, cages or shatter proof acrylic to allow the plant to stay alive. Mr. Lamb added that the vehicle transporting the live plants must be windowless to the maximum extent possible. Mr. Lamb addressed advertising concerns advising state law prohibits advertising on or in private vehicles to limit the draw of attention. Mr. Lamb addressed the question regarding being stopped by law enforcement and identifying themselves. Transporters are required to keep a binder with their license details in the vehicle at all times to easily provide to law enforcement. Transport vehicles under the law are considered to be an extension of the licensed premises and can be stopped and inspected at any time. Mr. Lamb concluded that staff identified potential impacts to be traffic; as there are no restriction on fleet size, odor; as marijuana will be kept in vehicles, and crime; also due to marijuana being kept in vehicles. WSLCB is not aware of any complaints regarding odor or any break-ins to transport vehicles. Mr. Lamb concluded that this proposal is to allow licensed transporters in the Regional Commercial(RC), Industrial Mixed Use(IMU) and Industrial(I)zones as this will address traffic issues by placing them near arterials. The proposal includes the City buffers related to vacant school, library and City properties and also requires a lockable enclosure for the fleet if they are in the RC zone. 05-23-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 9 Commissioner Kelley asked what the definition of Regional Commercial zone is. Mr. Basinger explained that RC zones are for commercial regional uses located throughout I- 90 along high traffic exits like the Spokane Valley Mall. Mr. Basinger added the enclosure suggested are due to the fact that there would be a lot of individuals shopping in these zone. The City wants to ensure the vehicles and products are stored properly. Kevin Lynch, 722 W Wedgewood; Mr. Lynch advised there are other transport companies in the state that already stay the night in the City of Spokane Valley during transport. He spoke to the topic of smell advising the product is vacuum sealed for packaging, then placed in sealed totes and then in a compartment in the van preventing odor. Commissioner Johnson asked Mr. Lynch if he currently ships live plants? Mr. Lynch advised he does periodically as it is 1% of his business. He added that per state law the vehicle that ships live plants cannot have any windows as Mr. Lamb had mentioned. Commissioner Walton asked Mr. Lynch to describe what a law enforcement interaction would look like. Mr.Lynch explained that his staff are required to wear ID badges to prove they are an employee. He continued that the binder carried in the vehicles as mentioned before include their common carrier license, business license, insurance card and affidavit. There is a manifest and invoice in the primary tote that can be provided to law enforcement when requested. Mr. Lynch explained that it can range from law enforcement knowing the business being conducted before even making contact with them to being asked to provide all documents in the vehicle and in the totes. Commissioner Kelley asked Mr. Lynch why the information isn't offered to the officer and it was explained that would be breaking the chain of custody due to the seed to sale laws. Mr. Lynch added that by law he does not have to prove to law enforcement what is being transported in the totes unless instructed to do provide documentation. Commissioner Walton asked Mr. Lynch what impacts the City's request to have a secure enclosure would have on his business? Mr. Lynch advised it does add to cost. He stated that he is a proponent of the request as it will make his staff, drivers, product and vehicles more secure. He added that buildings are hard to find and cost ranges from $1,800 to $2,500 dollars a month, it is also difficult to find a landlord that will rent to him. Mr. Lamb addressed the discussion pertaining to law enforcement stops highlighting that there is a preemption prevision in state law that WSLCB provides all operations of the licensed uses. The City would not be able to ask for any additional forms of identification or supplemental documentation. Commissioner Walton asked staff why the City chose to exempt Appleway trail from the 1,000-foot exclusion zone? Mr. Lamb advised that the City Council does provide a prohibition on retail sales within 1,000 feet of Appleway trail to prevent the end users from using the trail. Council felt it appropriate to exempt Appleway trail due to its extent across the City and crossing multiple zones. Mr. Lamb added the limitations in place such as production staying indoors and no chemical processing. This was a compromise for business rights and property rights verses the trail and its beneficial use by citizens. Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 7:23 p.m. 05-23-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 9 Commissioner Walton stated he was intrigued by this proposal due to the attitudes and state adoption of marijuana usage across the country. He feels it's a good idea to stay at the cutting edge of the process within state guidelines and state law, adding that the City wants to promote growth of all kinds. Commissioner Walton likes the proposal and feels there is a good compromise in the adoption of the enclosures and is in support. Commissioner Kelley explained his understanding of the process due to an acquaintance having a similar business and how it operated. Commissioner Kelly explained he feels this will attract criminals that want to steal the trucks and the product. Commissioner Kelly stated he does not appreciate the confrontational attitude toward law enforcement. He added that having been part of this first hand, landlords have the right not to lease to businesses they feel will be a detriment to the community. Commissioner Kelly believes there is a lot of crime attracted to and associated with marijuana businesses and is concerned for people's safety. Commissioner Walton move to approve CTA-2019-0002 as presented. Commissioner Kelley reminded the Commission that when I-502 was first presented, the marijuana grow, production and retail facilities were voted down by the Commission. He added that his belief is that if the legalization of marijuana would have been brought to the vote of the people of Spokane Valley it would not have passed and he is greatly opposed. Commissioner Walton thanked Commissioner Kelley for the background. He added that he is in support as the City allows this type of business and are staying on the cutting edge. Commissioner Walton advised that location and regulations have addressed many concerns. Commissioner Walton continued one of his primary considerations was to understand how this business is being perceived by local law enforcement and appreciated the perspective from the proponent as well as Commissioner Kelley's position. The vote on the motion was four in favor, one opposed with Commissioner Kelley dissenting, and the motion passed. iv. Public Hearing: STV-2019-0001, proposed street vacations of a portion of Tshirley Road, Long Road, Rich Avenue, and Greenacres Road in the Northeast Industrial Area. Chair Johnson opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Mr. Basinger provided a presentation to the Commission outlining the Northeast Industrial Area City Initiated Street Vacation. Mr. Basinger provided background advising on April 29, 2019 City Council initiated the Street Vacation and set a public hearing with the Planning Commission. On April 25, 2019 a study session was conducted and tonight the public hearing is being held. Mr. Basinger explained this area is located in the Northeast Industrial Area were the City has taken action to advance development. The City rezoned the property to allow a broader variety of industrial uses, extended the sewer from Sullivan Road to Barker Road and have adopted a planned action ordinance to streamline development. The proposed street vacations will further prepare the area for development. Mr. Basinger advised Garland Avenue will provide access for future development. He added that the current ROW may be an impediment for a large industrial user to developed in the future. Mr. Basinger continued,the proposed vacations are the unimproved Right of 05-23-2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 9 Ways (ROW) of Tschirley Road, Long Road, Greenacres Road and Rich Avenue. Public notice was posted and mailed on April 25, 2019, posted in the Valley Herald and the Exchange on April 26, 2019 and May 3, 2019 and signs were posted on each end of proposed vacation areas. There have been no public or agency comments to date. Mr. Basinger added that the City has been working with Consolidated Irrigation District as they would like to loop their water system. The City will have an easement in place once Tschirley Road ROW is removed to accommodate for their loop. Staff is requesting the approval to vacate the ROWs subject to the conditions in the staff report. Mr. Basinger provided a list of the conditions. Vacated property will be transferred into the abutting parcels, if approved the area will be surveyed to identify applicable easements. There was some discussion regarding a Pre-Application meeting that determined there would be a land locked parcel once the ROWs are vacated. However,the applicants are proposing to apply for a boundary line elimination to make one parcel mitigating this issue. Mr. Basinger concluded that the zoning will be extended to include the vacated ROWs, a survey will be recorded and all conditions will be fully satisfied prior to transfer of title. Chair Johnson closed the public hearing at 7:49 p.m. Commissioner Walton moved to approve STV-2019-0001 as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Kaschmitter thanked the public for their comments. Commissioner Walton spoke about his reflection on the previous meeting and overall dedication from the Commission and community. He thanked Commissioner Kelley for reminding himself and staff of his passion in allowing the public to have their free speech. Commissioner Walton apologized to the Commission and members of the public if his comments felt as if they were dissuading the public from speaking as that was not his intent. Commissioner Walton concluded with thanking the Commission for their dedication. Mr. Basinger added currently the Planning Commission is the forum where comments will be received, so it is with utmost importance they are heard. It is also important to forward a recommendation that synthesizes the Commission's vote and he appreciated the Commissions service. Commissioner Johnson stated he concurred with Commissioner Walton and also appreciated being a part of this team. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Walton moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m. The vote on the motion was five in favor, zero opposed, and the motion passed. James Johnson, Chairman Date signed Robin Hutchins, Secretary CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: June 13, 2019 Item: Check all that apply ® old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ study session ❑ pending legislation FILE NUMBER: STV-2019-0002 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Findings of Fact - Street vacation of a portion of Baldwin Avenue, University Road and Glenn Road DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Request to vacate unimproved sections of Baldwin Avenue (669 feet in length), University Road (225 feet in length) and Glenn Road (19 feet in length). The right-of-way widths are 60 feet. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 22.140; Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35A.47.020 and RCW 35.79 BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission conducted a study session on the proposed vacation on May 9, 2019 and a public hearing on May 23, 2019. The Planning Commission voted 5-1 to recommend approval of the amended proposal (from staff)to vacate Baldwin Avenue and Glenn Road but retain the right-of-way for University Road. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve the Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation for STV-2019-0002 or provide staff further direction STAFF CONTACT: Connor Lange, Planner ATTACHMENTS: PC Findings and Recommendation STV-2019-0002 RPCA Public Hearing for STV-2019-0002 Page 1 of 1 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION STV-2019-0002 —Street vacation of a portion of Baldwin Avenue, University Road and Glenn Road Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E)the Planning Commission shall consider the proposal and shall prepare and forward a recommendation to the City Council following the public hearing. The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. A. Background: 1. Chapter 22.140 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), governing street vacations,was adopted in September 2007 and became effective on October 28, 2007. 2. The privately-initiated street vacation, STV-2019-0002,proposes to vacate unimproved sections of Baldwin Avenue(669 feet in length),University Road(225 feet in length) and Glenn Road(19 feet in length) 3. The Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on May 23, 2019 and conducted a study session on May 9, 2019. The Commission voted 5-1 to recommend approval of the amended proposal(from staff)to vacate Baldwin Avenue and Glenn Road but retain the right-of-way for University Road. B. Planning Commission Findings: Compliance with SVMC 22.140.030 Planning Commission review and recommendation Finding(s): 1. Whether a change of use or vacation of the street or alley will better serve the public? The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved and no utilities are located within the right-of-way. However, Spokane County Environmental Services requested an easement for sanitary sewer. The applicant stated in the application materials that an ingress/egress easement would be created to provide future access to parcel 45093.2401. The vacation of Baldwin Avenue and Glenn Road is expected to have no impact on the general public as surrounding parcels currently do not use the right-of- way for access. However,the vacation of University Road has potential to impact the general public. Therefore, staff recommends the City retain the University Road right-of-way for projects that are unforeseen at this time. 2. Whether the street or alley is no longer required for public use or public access? The subject right-of-way is unimproved and not being utilized for public access. The site is bordered by Interstate 90 to the north which provides no reasonable means of connection for Baldwin Avenue and Glenn Road. However, as referenced in the Background section University Road right-of-way could provide potential future public benefit if a pedestrian or vehicle access crossing was ever proposed. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2019-0002 Page 1 of 3 3. Whether the substitution of a new and different public way would be more useful to the public? Public access is not needed in this area because no properties currently utilize the right- of-way for access and the majority of ownership along the unimproved right-of-way is owned by Circle M Family Properties. There is no need for a new and different public way. An ingress/egress access easement will be required to ensure access for parcel number 45093.2401. 4. Whether conditions may so change in the future as to provide a greater use or need than presently exists? Based on the comprehensive plan it is not anticipated that changes will occur in the future that would require the use of the Baldwin Avenue or Glenn Road right-of-way for public access. However, as discussed in the background section University Road has potential to serve a greater purpose than currently exists. The right-of-way could provide future public benefit with a pedestrian or vehicle access overpass. 5. Whether objections to the proposed vacation are made by owners of private property(exclusive of petitioners) abutting the street or alley or other governmental agencies or members of the general public? No objections or public comment was received. C. Conclusion: The findings confirm criteria set forth in SVMC 22.140.030 have been met. D. Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends City Council approve the amended proposal to vacate Baldwin Avenue and Glenn Road but retain the right-of-way for University Road subject to the following: 1. Initial work to satisfy conditions of the street vacation(File No. STV-2019-0002), including all conditions below shall be submitted to the City for review within 90 days following the effective date of approval by the City Council. 2. The vacated property shall be transferred into the abutting parcel (45093.1519)as shown on the record of survey created and recorded with Spokane County Auditor's Office pursuant to condition 8. 3. The following easements shall be established. Submit recording number on record of survey and written documentation of easement for City verification. a. All existing lots shall have access to a public street or existing driveway easement prior to finalization. Parcels shall be reconfigured through a boundary line adjustment or an easement shall be created to provide access to parcel 45093.2401. b. An easement acceptable to Spokane County Environmental Services for access to public sewer to serve parcel 45093.2401. If,parcel 45093.2401 is consolidated with an adjacent parcel that has access to the sanitary sewer system,no easement is required. 4. Following the City Council's passage of the Ordinance approving the street vacation, a record of survey of the area to be vacated,prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington, including an exact metes and bounds legal description, and specifying any and all applicable easements for construction,repair and maintenance of existing and future utilities and services, shall be submitted by the proponent to the City Manager,or designee, for review. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2019-0002 Page 2 of 3 5. The surveyor shall locate a monument at the intersection of the centerline of the vacated right-of- way with each street or right-of-way in accordance with the standards established by the SVSS. 6. All direct and indirect costs of title transfer of the vacated street from public to private ownership, including but not limited to,title company charges, copying fees, and recording fees shall be paid by the proponent. The City shall not and does not assume any financial responsibility for any direct or indirect costs for the transfer of title. 7. The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation, and all area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the districts. The adopting Ordinance shall specify this zoning district extension inclusive of the applicable zoning district designations. 8. The record of survey and certified copy of the Ordinance shall be recorded by the City Clerk in the office of the Spokane County Auditor. 9. All conditions of City Council authorization shall be fully satisfied prior to any transfer of title by the City. Approved this 13th day of June, 2019 Planning Commission Chairman ATTEST Deanna Horton,Administrative Assistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2019-0002 Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: June 13, 2019 Item: Check all that apply: n consent ® old business n new business n public hearing n information n admin. report n pending legislation FILE NUMBER: CTA-2019-0002 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation—CTA-2019-0002, Amendment to chapters 19.60 and 19.85 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and Appendix A — Licensed Marijuana Transport Regulations DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated code text amendment to chapters 19.60 and 19.85 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) and Appendix A to allow and provide regulations governing the zoning and limits on licensed marijuana transportation businesses in the RC, IMU, and I zones and to add related definitions. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.106;RCW 69.50 (codifying Initiative 502); WAC 314- 55-310; SVMC 17.80.150 and 19.30.040; Chapter 19.60 SVMC; Chapter 19.85 SVMC; PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: Public hearing on May 23, 2019, and Planning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend City Council approve CTA-2019-0002. Study session by Planning Commission on May 9, 2019; City Council has adopted regulations as set forth in SVMC 19.60.050 and chapter 19.85 SVMC for the zoning and buffering of licensed marijuana production, processing, and retail sales. City Council heard an administrative report on state law requirements for licensed marijuana transporters on November 20, 2018. BACKGROUND: In the fall of 2018, City Council received a citizen inquiry regarding allowing licensed marijuana transport businesses within the City. City Council heard an administrative report on November 20, 2018, and determined to forward the matter to Planning Commission. Currently,the City allows licensed marijuana production,processing, and retail sales pursuant to chapter 19.85 SVMC. The City prohibits all other marijuana uses, except for certain limited home medical marijuana use. Pursuant to RCW 69.50.382 and .385, and rules promulgated by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB)in WAC 314-55-310, applicants may receive a license to operate as a licensed marijuana transport business to transport marijuana and marijuana products between other licensed marijuana producers,processors, and retail stores. Staff has identified proposed regulations to allow licensed marijuana transport uses within the City. The proposed regulations are similar in form to the City's regulations for producers,processors, and retail stores. The proposed regulations allow marijuana transport businesses to be located in the RC,IMU, and I zones. In the RC zones,the transport business must have a lockable enclosure to keep the fleet in, as the WSLCB rules allow transporters to have marijuana in the vehicles for up to 48 hours and staff understand that there are instances where transporters will have marijuana in the vehicles overnight. Further, as with the production and processing uses,the proposed regulations have added buffers to certain sensitive uses in addition to those set forth by the State. These buffers prohibit marijuana transport uses from being within 1,000 feet of undeveloped school, library, and City property(other than stormwater and ROW), and prohibit such uses from being within 1,000 feet of City Hall and CenterPlace. The attached staff report identifies other impacts and applicable state regulations for marijuana transport businesses. On May 9,Planning Commission asked the following questions. •First,Planning Commission requested information regarding transport of live plants. Under the law, live plants are allowed to be transported in a"fully enclosed,windowless locked trailer, or in a secured area within the inside body/compaituient of a van or box truck." The"secured area"is defined as"an area where solid or locking metal partitions, cages, or high strength shatterproof acrylic can be used to create a secure compaitnient." Finally, other than the front windshield and side windows necessary for driving,the secure compaituient must be free of windows. WAC 314-55-310(5)(f). • Planning Commission also asked about what markings might be required or allowed on transport vehicles. Staff spoke with a transporter who indicated they have no markings. Further, WAC 314-55-155 provides"No marijuana licensee shall place or maintain, or cause to placed or maintain, an advertisement of a marijuana business or marijuana product...[o]n or in a private vehicles...." This appears to limit advertising on transport vehicles. •Finally, Planning Commission asked about what is required of drivers to assist law enforcement if they are stopped during transport. Staff spoke with a transporter,who indicated that every vehicle is required to have a copy of the marijuana transport license. Thus, if stopped by law enforcement,that information would be easily available to demonstrate to law enforcement that it is part of a valid transport business. However, law enforcement has broad authority to ensure that such transport occurs lawfully, and WAC 314-55-310 provides that every"vehicle assigned for the purposes of transporting marijuana,useable marijuana,marijuana concentrates, or marijuana-infused products shall be considered an extension of the licensed premises and subject to inspection by enforcement officers of the WSLCB. Vehicles assigned for transportation may be stopped and inspected by a WSLCB enforcement officer at any licensed location, or while en route during transportation." On May 23, 2019, following deliberations, Planning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend that City Council approve CTA-2019-0002. NOTICE: Notice for the proposed amendment to SVMC was sent to the Spokane Valley News Herald for publication on May 3, 2019 and May 10,2019. Notice for the proposed amendment was provided consistent with applicable provisions of Title 17 SVMC. APPROVAL CRITERIA: SVMC Section 17.80.150(F)provides approval criteria for text amendments to the SVMC. The criterion stipulates that the proposed amendment(s)must be consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and bear a substantial relation to the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve the Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation for CTA-2019-0002. STAFF CONTACT: Erik Lamb—Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: A. Proposed Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION CTA-2019-0002—Proposed Amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E) the Planning Commission shall consider the proposal and shall prepare and forward a recommendation to the City Council following the public hearing. The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. Background: 1. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130, Spokane Valley adopted its Comprehensive Plan Update and updated development regulations on December 13, 2016,with December 28,2016 as the effective date. 2. CTA-2019-0002 is a City-initiated text amendment to chapter 19.60 SVMC,chapter 19.85 SVMC and Appendix A.The proposal is to amend chapters 19.60 and 19.85 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) and Appendix A by (1) amending the permitted use matrix to allow licensed marijuana transportation uses in the RC, IMU, and I zones, subject to additional supplemental regulations; (2) adding supplemental regulations to set buffers between marijuana transportation uses and certain sensitive uses, and requiring marijuana transportation uses in the RC zone to provide a lockable enclosure for fleet vehicles, and(3) adding a related definition for"marijuana transporter". 3. The Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing and conducted deliberations on May 23, 2019. The Commissioners voted 4-1 to recommend that the City Council adopt the amendment. Planning Commission Findings: 1. Recommended Modifications The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments presented by staff in CTA-2019-0002. 2. Compliance with SVMC 17.80.150(F)Approval Criteria a. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan: Findings: The proposed text amendment is consistent with the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. ED-G1: Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. ED-G6: Maintain a positive business climate that strives for flexibility,predictability, and stability. ED-P2: Identify and encourage business and employment growth in new and innovative industries and occupations. LU-G1: Maintain and enhance the character and quality of life in Spokane Valley. LU-P5: Ensure compatibility between adjacent residential and commercial or industrial uses. LU-P9: Provide supportive regulations for new and innovative development types on commercial, industrial, and mixed-use land. LU-P 10: Ensure that freight-intensive operations have convenient access to designated truck routes and intermodal terminals. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission CTA-2019-0002 Page 1 of 2 b. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety,welfare and protection of the environment. Findings: The proposed amendment will allow compliance with state law and allow state-licensed marijuana transport businesses to locate within the Spokane Valley while separating such uses from identified sensitive uses and the City's existing and future residential uses. Further the amendment will allow transportation businesses near transportation infrastructure. 3. Conclusion: The proposed text amendment is consistent with Comprehensive Plan and bears a substantial relation to public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment. 4. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends the City Council approve CTA-2019- 0002. Attachments: Exhibit 1—Proposed Amendment CTA-2019-0002 Approved this 13th day of June, 2019 Planning Commission Chairman ATTEST Deanna Horton,Administrative Assistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission CTA-2019-0002 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Action Meeting Date: June 13, 2019 Item: Check all that apply ® old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ study session ❑ pending legislation FILE NUMBER: STV-2019-0001 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation—Northeast Industrial Area Street Vacation DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Request to vacate 1,266 feet of Tschirley Road, 1,565 feet of Long Road, 1,328 feet of Rich Avenue, and 2,615 feet of Greenacres Road. The ROW width is 30 feet on Tschirley Road, 30 feet on Long Road, 30 feet on Rich Avenue, and 30 feet on Greenacres Road. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC)22.140,RCW 35A.47.020 and RCW 35.79 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: The Planning Commission conducted a study session on the proposed vacation on May 9,2019 and a public hearing on May 23, 2019. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the street vacation(STV-2019-0001)to the City Council. BACKGROUND: This request is being initiated as part of the City's Economic Development Program. The ROW, as they currently exist, are not needed and limit the usability of the adjacent parcels. The City of Spokane Valley is constructing a new road(Garland Avenue)between Flora Road and Barker Road that will provide access to future development in the area. On April 9, 2019, the City Council passed Resolution 19-005 initiating the vacation of four unimproved rights-of-way(ROW)and Resolution 19-006 setting the public hearing date with the Planning Commission. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve the Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation for STV-2019-0001. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation RPCA Findings and Recommendation for STV-2019-0001 Page 1 of 1 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(E) the Planning Commission shall consider the proposal and shall prepare and forward a recommendation to the City Council following the public hearing. The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission's decision to recommend approval of File No. STV-2019-0001. A. Background: 1. Chapter 22.140 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), governing street vacations, was adopted in September 2007 and became effective on October 28, 2007. 2. STV-2019-0001 is a City-initiated street vacation proposing to vacate 1,266 feet of Tschirley Road, 1,565 feet of Long Road, 1,328 feet of Rich Avenue, and 2,615 feet of Greenacres Road. The Right of Way (ROW) width is 30 feet on Tschirley Road, 30 feet on Long Road, 30 feet on Rich Avenue, and 30 feet on Greenacres Road. 3. The Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing and conducted deliberations on May 23, 2019. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of STV-2019-0001 to the City Council. B. Planning Commission Findings: Compliance with SVMC 22.140.030 1. Whether a change of use or vacation of the street or alley will better serve the public? The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved. The vacation is expected to have no impact on the general public as surrounding parcels currently do not use the ROW for access. 2. Whether the street or alley is no longer required for public use or public access? The subject ROW is currently vacant land not being utilized for public access and is not required for future public access. 3. Whether the substitution of a new and different public way would be more useful to the public? The City of Spokane Valley is constructing a new road(Garland Avenue) between Flora Road and Barker Road that will provide access to future development in the area. 4. Whether conditions may so change in the future as to provide a greater use or need than presently exists? The construction of Garland Avenue will provide access to future development and the existing ROW as presently configured will not provide a greater use or need. 5. Whether objections to the proposed vacation are made by owners of private property (exclusive of petitioners) abutting the street or alley or other governmental agencies or members of the general public? No objections were received. C. Conclusions: The findings confirm that the criteria set forth in SVMC 22.140.030 have been met. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2019-0001 Page 1 of 2 D. Recommendation: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends the City Council approve STV-2019-0001. 1. The vacated property shall be transferred into the abutting parcels (55065.0107, 55061.9062, 55065.0105, 55065.0190, 55065.0171, 55064.0169, 55064.0170, 55065.0170, 55064.1107, 55064.9030 and 55061.9066) as shown on the record of survey. 2. Following the City Council's passage of the Ordinance approving the street vacation, a Record of Survey (ROS) shall be prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington. The ROS shall include an exact metes and bounds legal description specifying any applicable easements for construction, repair and maintenance of existing and future utilities and services. 3. The surveyor shall locate a monument at the intersection of the centerline of the vacated right-of-way with each street or right-of-way in accordance with the Spokane Valley Street Standards. 4. The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining each side of the street or alley to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation, and all area included in the vacation shall be subject to the regulations of the extended districts. 5. The ROS and certified copy of the Ordinance shall be recorded by the City Clerk in the office of the Spokane County Auditor. 6. All conditions of City Council authorization shall be fully satisfied prior to any transfer of title by the City. Approved this 13th day of June, 2019 James Johnson, Chairman ATTEST Deanna Horton,Administrative Assistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission STV-2019-0001 Page 2 of 2