Loading...
2020-07-23 PC APPROVED SIgned minutes Regular Meeting Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall July 23rd, 2020 I. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The meeting was held remotely via ZOOM meeting. II. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. III. Administrative Assistant Taylor Dillard took roll and the following members and staff were present: Fred Beaulac, Joined At 6:25 pm Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Walt Haneke Jenny Nickerson,Building Official James Johnson Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager Danielle Kaschmitter Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Tim Kelley Chaz Bates, Senior Planner Bob McKinley Taylor Dillard, Administrative Assistant Sherri Robinson Marianne Lemons, Office Assistant There was a consensus from the Planning Commission to excuse Commissioner Beaulac from the meeting. IV. AGENDA: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the July 23, 2020 agenda as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. V. MINUTES: Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the amended June 11, 2020 minutes as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve the July 9, 2020 minutes as presented. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. VI. COMMISSION REPORTS: Chairman Johnson reported that he has continued to attend the Spokane County Human Rights Task Force meetings. There were no other reports. VII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Building Official Jenny Nickerson reminded the commissioners to drop off their yellow binders to City Hall so they can be used for the City Council packets. Ms. Nickerson also requested that the letter from applicant Jay Rambo regarding CPA-2020-0003 and the agency comments included for CTA-2020-0003 be removed from the Planning Commission Packet. They were included in error. VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT: There was no public comment. 1 07-23-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 4 IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS: a. Findings of Fact: 2020 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments Senior Planner Chaz Bates gave a presentation to the commission. He explained that there were two study sessions held on March 6, 2020 and June 11, 2020 regarding these amendments. The public hearing was held on June 25, 2020 and the Planning Commission deliberated on each amendment individually and came up with recommendations to be submitted to the City Council. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of CPA-2020-0001, CPA-2020-0002,and CPA-2020-0006. The Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of CPA-2020-0003 and CPA-2020-0007. This item is being heard to formalize those findings and the Planning Commission vote on each amendment. Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve and forward to City Council the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission for the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments CPA-2020-0001, CPA-2020-0002, CPA-2020-0003, CPA-2020-0006, and CPA-2020-0007. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. b. Findings Of Fact: CTA-2020-0001,A proposed amendment to Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.180 Annexations Economic Development Manager Mike Basinger explained that the proposed amendment to the SVMC is to clarify the process and criteria to annex areas which are adjacent and contiguous to the City. It also ensures that the fiscal impacts of providing the facilities, utilities, services, and maintenance of the annexation areas are adequately considered prior to annexation. The process included a study session on June 11, 2020 and a public hearing on July 9, 2020. During the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed change. This item is being heard to formalize those findings and the Planning Commission vote. Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve and forward to City Council the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission for the proposed amendment CTA-2020-0001. There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed c. Findings Of Fact: CTA-2020-0002,A proposed amendment to SVMC 19.90 Essential Public Facilities Senior Planner Lori Barlow stated that this proposed amendment is to prohibit locally significant Essential Public Facilities (EPF) in residential zones and allow EPF's in the Mixed-Use zone. The process included a study session on June 11, 2020 and a public hearing on July 9, 2020. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed change. This item is being heard to formalize those findings and the Planning Commission vote. Commissioner Kaschmitter moved to approve and forward the City Council the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission for proposed amendment CTA-2020-0002. 2 07-23-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4 There was no discussion. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed d. Study Session: CTA-2020-0003,Nonconforming Use Code Text Amendment Senior Planner Lori Barlow gave the Commission a presentation explaining that Chapter 19.25 of the SVMC regulates nonconforming uses and structures and defines what is considered a legal nonconforming use or structure. According to the municipal code, nonconforming uses are uses or structures that were legally permitted under the applicable regulations at the time the use or structure came into existence and began lawful operations but subsequent changes or amendments to the zoning regulations occurred and made the use or structure nonconforming. Under this section of the municipal code, these nonconforming uses are allowed to continue and are subject to regulations of this chapter. The chapter also outlines the circumstances that a nonconforming use can be expanded. There are two reasons that the City has been prompted to look at this item. The first reason is regarding single family residential uses in a non-residential zoning district. In the applicability section of SVMC 19.25.010(4) states that existing legally established single- family residential uses located in a nonresidential zoning district are defined as a legal nonconforming use or structure. According to SVMC 19.25.030(E), if a structure is damaged by fire,flood, neglect, or act of nature more than eighty percent of the market value, it may not be rebuilt. This notation in the municipal code is causing problems for residents to get financing to either refinance a current mortgage or get a new mortgage. Banks want to make sure that they can retain their value in the event of a disaster. Staff is proposing to make a change to item four of the applicability regulation that states "existing legally established single-family residential uses located in a nonresidential zoning district shall not be deemed nonconforming and shall be permitted as a legal use." Commissioner Beaulac joined the meeting at 6:25 pm. Ms. Barlow continued that the second reason that has prompted the code text amendment is regarding the ability for property owners to expand nonconforming uses. The current regulations state that nonconforming uses can be expanded within the boundaries of the original lot and any lot adjacent to the original lot if they meet all criteria laid out in the code. Staff is proposing to remove the language from the code allowing expansion onto adjacent lots. Nonconforming uses will continue to be allowed to expand only within the confines of the boundaries of the original lot. Commissioner Haneke asked if a nonconforming use is only allowed to expand one time onto an adjacent lot. Ms. Barlow answered that staff interpretation would be that owners are limited to expand only one time onto an adjacent lot. However,this isn't a situation that has come up for review yet. The proposed amendment would limit expansions to only occur on the confines of the original lot and would prohibit expansion onto any adjacent locations. Commissioners Haneke and McKinley expressed concern over the change because it would limit businesses from growing. It's substantially less expensive to expand than relocate and relocation could be outside of the City limits. Commissioner Haneke asked how many nonconforming residential units there are within the City limits. Ms. Barlow stated that she will try to get that data from the GIS analyst for the next meeting. 3 07-23-2020 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4 Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb mentioned that this will also apply to all mining operations. Currently in the code, all mining within the City limits is considered a nonconforming use because mining really isn't appropriate within an urban setting. However, under the current regulations mining can be expanded onto adjacent properties if the owners purchase the land. This change will eliminate that ability. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER: Commissioner Beaulac apologized for being late to the meeting. Commissioner Haneke and Commissioner Kaschmitter thanked staff for their hard work. XI. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner McKinley moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:54 pm. The vote on the motion was seven in favor, zero against, and the motion passed. /40Ti� James Jo son, Chair Date signed Deanna Horton, Secretary 4