Loading...
2009, 01-06 Study Session MinutesMINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Tuesday, January 6, 2009 Mayor Munson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and welcomed everyone to the meeting. Present: Councilmembers: Rich Munson, Mayor Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember Diana Wilhite, Councilmember Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner Ken Thompson, Finance Director Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Munson brought council attention to the additional information piece, the Amendment to Community Relicensing Interlocal, and said this will be placed on the January 13, 2009 council agenda. Mayor Munson then asked Mr. Mercier for an update on the roads and weather. Roads /weather Mr. Mercier reported that work continues with private contractors and County crews primarily in school zones to facilitate drop off of students; he mentioned that it would be an over- whelming task to remove all berms of 430 miles of roadways and that the concentration point now is the schools; he said that beginning tomorrow, we should have between one hundred and two hundred members of the National Guard to help shovel school roofs; and then if there are additional needs, we have arranged with a contractor to have some front -end loaders available should there be flooding along streets. Mr. Mercier said that the National Weather Bureau is not concerned about the River going over its banks, although there could be flooding from some small streams, and that the temperatures should remain above freezing until late Friday; and that it is estimated the area will receive one -half inch of rain between now and Friday; adding that the current concern is with building structure integrity, particularly the schools; and at last count, there have been approximately 75 building collapses reported in the region. Mayor Munson said he sent an e-mail to the school superintendents to make sure they got the information distributed at the last Emergency Operations Committee meeting today about roof load factors, and that the National Guard will be arriving tomorrow to assist. 1. Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan — Scott Kuhta Senior Planner Kuhta said that tonight's goals are to review progress made at the last meeting, there is some unfinished business; and there is a handout not previously in the council packet; that he would like to continue the discussion of the mixed use avenue district zone, then move to neighborhood centers and on to the residential boulevard district zone if time permits. Mr. Kuhta reviewed what was accomplished last week, including the decision to move the eastern boundary for the Plan to the property line between Plantland and American West Bank; the continued discussion on the gateway commercial zoning districts, mention that the pre- located streets will be discussed later, and that a decision was made to add amusement parks to permitted uses in the Gateway Center. Regarding the decision to add the amusement parks, he said there is some concern about the impacts of amusement parks as they can be large, and rather than have that a permitted use, staff suggests adding that as a conditional use so it can go through the public review process; and depending on the scope and size, a public hearing could be held and special conditions placed if needed; and he said there is language other than amusement park, such as outdoor recreation uses, which would cover amusement parks, or large outdoor amphitheaters, and the idea is to require all those to have a conditional use permit. In further follow -up of last week's meeting, Study Session Meeting Minutes: 1 -06 -2009 Page 1 of 6 Approved by Council: 01 -27 -09 Mr. Kuhta said he would show some pictures tonight of the auto row area for further discussion, and said that staff has a definition for light industrial for council consideration. Mr. Kuhta said on the mixed used avenue districts, there were questions about outdoor storage and items for sale, and that will be discussed tonight as well. Concerning amusement parks, Mr. Kuhta said staff recommends defining that as outdoor recreation use, and recommends requiring a conditional use permit for that. Mr. Kuhta said this would not include parks, but there would be a list of what it would include, such as a water park, or more commercial type uses and not public park uses. Council concurred to make this a conditional use. Mr. Kuhta displayed pictures of the gateway commercial area, including diagrams which show the intended form of the district zone, such as in this zone, buildings can be set back as far as thirty feet, or be up to the lot; that there is a requirement for a minimum of 40% of the property to be covered by buildings within the setback; and Mr. Kuhta said discussion for a future meeting would be if we want to propose a new cross section for Sprague and Appleway; and he mentioned the previous decision on the one - way /two- section; and said he would be proposing a new cross section which would narrow the streets and allow on- street parking. Regarding meeting the minimum frontage requirement of 40 %, Mr. Kuhta explained that the owner could either do a boundary line adjustment or a binding site plan where they create a lot, or if there is a lot of land and the owner doesn't want to build a lot of buildings at once, staff would work with any property owner to have a phasing plan if needed; and he said that we can keep the 40% or it can be changed if Council feels that is too restrictive. Mr. Kuhta said this was brought up due to a letter from Taylor Engineering on behalf of AutoNation, recommending 25 %. This prompted discussion on what that percentage should be, with Councilmember Gothmann mentioning that the number should be between 25 and 40, and he suggested 30% as a compromise. Deputy Mayor Denenny said there is substantially more than that on the Appleway property now; and Councilmember Taylor said their issue is they want to use the double frontage situation, which is a unique situation, and he questioned if we want the Plan to address this unique situation or handle this through a boundary lot adjustment or other manner; and he said he would like the percentage based on more than a mid - point. Councilmember Gothmann said he feels 30% allows flexibility; which he said is the issue. Councilmember Wilhite asked if it could be written that if there are two major arterials on your land, it would be 40% and it could be split 20/20; as if there were no major arterials on the side, it would be back to the 40 %. Mr. Kuhta said there is presently no minimum frontage coverage for any street except Sprague; and he would not recommend requiring a frontage coverage on those other streets at this point; but maintaining flexibility is important; and he said that the original recommendation was to create a two -way Sprague, and with that, we would get the traffic right off the freeway onto Sprague; so this was the gateway to the commercial area; and the idea was that people would want most of their business to front on Sprague because traffic could go either way on or off the freeway and onto Sprague, so requiring all the frontage on Sprague isn't as important if there is the one -way. Councilmember Gothmann further suggested having the 40 %, and said that could either be obtained by 40% of Sprague, or add into that the percentage one would have on Appleway; so if there was 20% on Appleway, they would only need 20% on Sprague; and Mr. Kuhta said that would be difficult to administer and he would prefer to establish a minimum frontage requirement; and if Council wants, can establish such on the other streets as well. After further discussion on Taylor Engineer's letter, and how it might affect the desired overall look; likely resulting in many of the buildings remaining as they are, oriented north /south without much exposure to the street; there was some consensus with Mayor Munson, Deputy Mayor Denenny, and Councilmembers Dempsey and Gothmann agreeing to the 30 %. Mr. Kuhta moved to the handout concerning the outside storage and display, and explained what is and is not allowed, with the front page showing what is allowed in our current code in the community commercial zone, corridor mixed use zone, and the regional commercial zone; he explained that these regulations discuss what can be displayed for sale outside the building; and he explained that there is no provision currently in the community commercial zone for any permanent type of outdoor storage other Study Session Meeting Minutes: 1 -06 -2009 Page 2 of 6 Approved by Council: 01 -27 -09 than during the business hours; but such is allowed in regional commercial which would include Home Depot and Lowe's; and Mr. Kuhta said there are many businesses not meeting the current regulations, such as sheds at Lowe's. Mr. Connelly mentioned that the phrase in the code of "normally displayed for sale outside" is ambiguous, and needs further refinement when we move to the new code, as it could mean such things as storage sheds, or concrete blocks, vehicles, etc. To clarify, Mr. Kuhta said this item was brought up during the discussion of mixed use avenue. Mr. Kuhta said staff recommends for the city center, that outdoor displays are permitted during business hours, and it would be permissible to use the sidewalks for sidewalk sales as long as pedestrian movement is not restricted; and in neighborhood centers, staff suggests this be the same as the city center as it is similar in form; in the mixed use avenue center the recommendation is that outdoor displays are permissible during hours; can have outdoor storage which must be screened and not interfere with pedestrian and auto circulation, and can have sale items normally displayed outside, and he said that staff will work on language to state exactly what that means. Mr. Kuhta said that the Gateway Commercial would be the same as Mixed Use Avenue; and that Residential Boulevard would allow outdoor display during business hours for commercial uses, like bikes could be displayed outside during business hours and brought inside during the evening. Deputy Mayor Denenny asked about such things as keeping lawn tractors outside; and Mr. Kuhta said there are many businesses which are currently keeping such items outside, which is not in accordance with our current code; and he said that once Council determines which regulations to have for the new code, that staff will go back and correct the current provisions. Mr. Kuhta said such things can be displayed provided they do not interfere with pedestrian movement on the sidewalk; and Mr. Connelly suggested defining that more explicitly, such as leaving an eight -foot unrestricted walkway, which is included in the next sentence, but said the language should not include subjective phrases such as "aesthetically pleasing." Discussion continued on how to define what can and cannot be allowed in the zones in the subarea, and Councilmember Gothmann suggested including motor vehicles such as lawn type vehicles and bicycles, and motorized lawn and snow equipment; and to exclude such things as wheelbarrows; with Mr. Connelly reminding everyone that we are trying to define use which will be consistent with the district and the policies in the comprehensive plan, so that regulations will be consistent with each other. Mr. Kuhta mentioned other outdoor displays for Council to consider might include the large concrete or granite slabs used in kitchens; building materials, concrete blocks, or playground equipment; and Council voiced their displeasure in keeping pallets of building materials outdoors, with no objections from Council to include lawn tractors and bicycles. Community Development Director McClung said that something for Council to keep in mind is, what is the goal in each zone, between zones and visually up next to the street; that most retailers will want to display next to the street; and others will want to keep items strictly for storage purposes and there are other cases where it would make no difference to have the materials further back; so the question to consider is, what do you want next to the street. Mr. Connelly said there seems to be two separate issues: storage in general not on the sidewalk, and the three issues concerning display: put it out temporary and take back in at the end of the day; screen it; or leave it 24 -hours unscreened, and in what zones are you going to allow those or where and what will you allow to be displayed outdoors 24- hours a day; and he suggested council look at each zone and say where those issues fit; and that the second issue of temporary sidewalk use is an entirely different issue. There was Council consensus to define those items as items normally displayed outside are permitted in the mixed use avenue, and as well in the gateway zone, and for the residential boulevard staff will further refine the language and bring that back for further council consideration. Mr. Kuhta then explained the amended definition of light industrial, as there was discussion to add light industrial uses to both the mixed use avenue and the gateway commercial avenue zones; that it is already included in the mixed avenue from the Planning Commission recommendation; and staff incorporated some additional language, which Mr. Kuhta read: Study Session Meeting Minutes: 1 -06 -2009 Page 3 of 6 Approved by Council: 01 -27 -09 "Permitted Uses: a. light industrial uses that are generally compatible with one another and with adjoining residential or commercial uses. May include uses such as technology businesses, light manufacturing and assembly, and plastic injection molding (thermoplastic). Industrial uses that cause obnoxious [it was determined that "obnoxious" needs further definition ] noise, vibrations, smoke, gas, fumes, odor, dust, glare, fire hazards or other objectionable environmental conditions are prohibited. b. stand alone warehouse or warehousing as an accessory to retail or light industrial use. The total area of a building to be used for warehousing may not exceed 12,000 square feet or 30% of the floor area (if an accessory), whichever is greater. c. all storage of products and equipment (not including fleet vehicles) shall be indoors or obscured by a type 1 screen." Mr. Kuhta said this is for the gateway commercial avenue, the light blue areas; and the gateway commercial centers are the dark blue areas and he asked since they are a separate category of industry, does council want to keep those provisions out of the dark blue areas, and council concurred to keep those out of the dark blue areas. Discussion turned to the Mixed Use Avenue area; that the last discussion ended after the retail permitted use section; page 6 and 7 of 38; and Mr. Kuhta mentioned that gas stations are permitted in the mixed use avenue areas but not in the neighborhood centers. Mayor Munson asked how we would be dealing with future activities of ground transportation which could include hydrogen re- filing, electricity re- charging, or if this Plan will not address those topics. Community Development Director McClung said that area is something staff will be researching within the next year in the more encompassing program of green building and green practices, which would be something we would want for the whole city and not just this area; and in the meantime, if such business types are not addressed in our code, the director is given authority to place in the appropriate zone, or can refer it to the Planning Commission. Concerning the corner store retail, Mr. Kuhta said that is really created for the residential boulevard district and that can be addressed later or now; and Councilmember Taylor asked about the special conditions concerning drive -ups not being permitted, yet pharmacies, banks, and food sales generally have drive -up or drive - through uses, and said he could envision any of those in a corner store retail. Mr. Kuhta said if there is a corner lot in any district zone that allows other types of retail uses like mixed use avenue retail, you would not be under the corner store regulations, even though it says they are permitted in those areas; the use could be a mixed -use avenue retail; and in mixed -use avenue, drive -ups and drive - throughs are allowed; but corner stores are created for the residential boulevard district zone, which is the frontage of Appleway; and he added that the corner store cannot be a stand alone building but must be incorporated into a larger building; and Mr. Kuhta said this can be addressed further when Council and staff discuss the residential boulevard in greater detail later. Mr. Kuhta said in looking at the spreadsheet/chart, the only type of retail allowed in the mixed use avenue on Sprague, is mixed used avenue retail, yet corner store indicates it is also permitted, and he said that may be a conflict as it indicates corner stores are permitted and drive throughs are not; and perhaps comer store should not be permitted on Sprague, and therefore should be deleted from the 2.1.3 mixed use avenue section; and there was no council objection.; and Mr. Kuhta mentioned that corner stores would be allowed in the mixed use avenue zones on streets other than Sprague. Mayor Munson called for a short recess at 7:20 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. Study Session Meeting Minutes: 1 -06 -2009 Page 4 of 6 Approved by Council: 01 -27 -09 Mr. Kuhta then directed Council's attention to the Neighborhood Centers found in section 2.1, on page 10 of 14, and he read the definition, and explained the use chart for the regulations, and specific retail, as shown in section 2.2, on page 5 of 38 at the bottom of the page. Discussion continued on permitted uses, and City Attorney Connelly asked about the difference between banks and check - cashing stores, and said staff may want to research that further. Other discussion included convenience stores /gas stations in mixed use avenue, and drive - through prohibitions in this zone; and Mr. Kuhta said convenience stores should probably also be included in mixed use avenue and staff would also need to draft a definition for that as well; and that in this zone, gas stations will still not be allowed. Councilmember Gothmann mentioned if the idea is to promote pedestrian friendly areas, drive - throughs wont' be allowed; and Councilmember Taylor said banks, fast food restaurants and other similar businesses would probably not want to be in this area without their drive through; and Councilmember Wilhite added that fast -food restaurants would not want to be in that area without the ability to have drive - through service; and she would prefer doing that under the conditional use, as she sees no difference in service between a fast -food restaurant, and a bank with a drive - through. Mr. Kuhta said that if Council wants more walkable areas in this zone, and drive - through in the neighborhood centers, staff could come up with some ways to do this without making it a conditional use; or take them out of conditional use and regulate another way, perhaps based on access; and it was noted that Council likes the idea of not requiring a conditional use permit, so staff will research that and come back with specifics for council to consider. In the Residential Boulevard Zone, Mr. Kuhta mentioned page 12 of 14, under section 2.1, and he read the definition of a "residential boulevard" and what is allowed under that zone. Councilmember Taylor noted that the term "sensitively" is used under the description; and Attorney Connelly said that is not an enforceable term and is more of a purpose statement; but added that staff might want to consider options for a substitute word. Mr. Kuhta showed several photos of residentially compatible buildings as good examples of a building residential in character but one which could house any kind of office use; and after further brief discussion of buffers for these areas; and of the area in general, there was council consensus not to make any changes in this section. Councilmember Wilhite mentioned that as the plan moves past Pines, she would like to discuss transition lines and how it would impact for residential. Councilmember Taylor mentioned the Dwight Hume letter, and it was determined that letter would be a good starting place for the next deliberation/discussion. 2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Munson City Manager Mercier mentioned the upcoming meetings next Monday and Tuesday, with Monday as the retreat, and Tuesday focused on the SARP; with the possibility of another additional meeting January 27. Councilmember Taylor mentioned the upcoming airport overlay subject and that the Planning Commission appears to be split on any recommendation, and that the Commission recommended forming some kind of study committee, which Mr. Taylor said he feels would represent an additional ninety day delay. Community Development Director McClung said staff would brief Council on that at the January 20 meeting. Mayor Munson mentioned the upcoming discussion about the court and he said he sent an e- mail to the Board of County Commissioners about the process, and said Council will hear a report at the January 13 meeting, at which time Council can decide if they want to place a motion on an upcoming agenda to notify the county we will be reconsidering the contract, adding that due to time constraints, a decision must be made by the end of January, and that he will invite the Board to the January 27 meeting. Mayor Munson also asked staff to give council an assessment at the end of next Monday's meeting, of how we are progressing on our meeting schedule on the SARP. 3. Information Only: The CenterPlace Catering Contract and Universal Playground Updates, Parking Restrictions, Municipal Court, Airport Overlay, and Amendment to Community Relicensing Interlocal Agreement were for information only and were not reported or discussed. Study Session Meeting Minutes: 1 -06 -2009 Page 5 of 6 Approved by Council: 01 -27 -09 4. Council Check -in — Mayor Munson. n/a 5. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier n/a There being no further business, Mayor Munson adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. ATTEST. Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Richard Munson, Mayor Study Session Meeting Minutes: 1 -06 -2009 Page 6 of 6 Approved by Council: 01 -27 -09