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