Loading...
Minutes - 08/23/2007 Spokane Valley Planning Commission Approved Minutes Council Chambers–City Hall,11707 E. Sprague Ave. August 23, 2007 I.CALL TO ORDER Vice-ChairmanBlumcalled the meeting to order at 6:00pm. II.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance III.ROLL CALL Commissioners Blum, Beaulac,Carroll, andSands were present.Commissioners Kogle, Crosbyand Robertson were excusedabsent. Staff attending the meeting: Greg McCormick, Acting Director Community Development, Mike Basinger, AssociatePlanner, Inga Note, Senior Traffic Engineer, Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant. IV.AGENDA Commissioner Beaulacmade a motion to accept the August 23rdagenda as presented. V.MINUTES nd Commissioner Carroll made a motion to approve the minutes from February 22, thth March 8and June 14as presented. It was seconded and the motion passed unanimously. VI.PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment offered. VII.COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Carroll stated he forgot to mention to the Commission he was on th vacation during the Aug. 9meeting. Commissioner Sands stated she attended the special Council meeting and the Bob Gibbs presentation. Commissioners Beaulac and Blum had nothing to report. VIII.ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Mr.McCormick reported that the City Council would be having a public comment th session at CenterPlace on Aug. 28to accept comment regarding the UDC. They th , at City Hall. Mr. McCormick would also be holding another public hearing on Sept. 11 announced that the new Director for Community Development had been named, Kathy McClung. Mr. McCormick explained that Ms. McClung would be joining the City after serving in Federal Way as the Community Development Dr. IX.COMMISSION BUSINESS NewBusiness–Public Hearing STV-03-07, Commissioner Blum read the rules for the public hearing. Mr. Blumalso stated that he was working part time for the AutoNation Automotive Group but did not feel that it would keep him from beingobjective regarding this matter. 08/23/2007 Planning Commission MinutesPage 1of 5 Associate Planner Mike Basinger presented the proposal to the Planning Commission of STV-03-07, a street vacation of 265 feet of Sipple Rd. and 765 feet of First Ave. The applicants are Appleway Toyota, AutoNation Automotive Group and Gus Johnson Ford. Mr. Basinger slides showed where the vacations were located in the Auto-Row area. Mr. Basinger explained that the City’s Comprehensive Plan stated that the City should extend the street network, and encourage connecting streets for multimodal transportation. The sub-area plan will support new connections between Sprague and Appleway whenever possible. Staff is recommending utility easements must be retained and the fire department is requesting a fire lane be maintained. Mr. Basinger explained that the Public Works department did aneedassessment and Public works is recommending that the vacation of Sipple Rd. be denied. Public Works has approved the vacation of First Ave. on the condition that Sipple Rd. isextended through to Appleway Ave. Mr. Basinger also stated that he received an updated letter from the fire department stating that information in their report pertained to existing buildings only, that if new construction would take place then it would be treated as new development. The majority of the property needed for the dedication of Sipple would need to come from Gus Johnson Ford. FJ Dullanty,Jr.,440 W. Riverside Ave.–Mr. Dullanty stated that he represented AutoNation and Gus Johnson Ford who were both in favor of the petition. Mr. Dullanty stated thathe had submitted a letter earlier in the day and hoped that the Commissioners would be able to read it. Auto-Row,by nature, is large lots andno one needs thisroad. Sipple is not maintained by the Cityand isused as private access and adrivewayby the dealerships. First Avenueis not used by the public,only as part of the dealership property. Mr. Dullanty explained that there is a through street at Sargent, there is a quarter of a mile between Sargent and Vista Rd. Mr. Dullanty stated that the Sub-area plan was mentioned but it had not been adopted. He felt that Sipple would be a hindrance. AutoNation is going to remodel the Chevrolet and Mitsubishistores. Toyota isgoing to make a $6,000,000investment tore-franchise. Thus,Toyota is driving this issue. Toyota is requiring anupgrade in facility, a 6-10 million dollar investment. IfAutoNation can not accommodatethe upgrade then, they will losethefranchise. AutoNationneeds are unique. Mr. Dullanty stated that Appleway is operating under a temporary franchiseagreement with Toyota at the moment. Mr. Dullanty explained that if AutoNation could not get this vacation, and can not build a new building, they will lose the franchise. It will leave them only one choicethey would need to leave the City. Mr. Dullanty quoted that in Chapter 2, Land Use, Section 2.2.5, page 8 addresses that the Auto-Row area is important, and needs big lots, this isn’t big enough to handle Auto-Row. You need to understand that Auto- Row brings in tax dollars, if they fail to build this building, then you will lose that tax revenue. Benefit to the public, staff report said no benefit to the public. Mr. Dullanty stated that it would implement the Comprehensive Plan, 200-265 feet not sufficient to put a dealership on, violate comp plan it you put small lots on it. Allow site to be developed under new codes, better drainage, better driveways, public safety improvement, no longer have a right-of-way between the properties that you have to maintain. Mr. Dullanty stated thatsubstitution of Sipple would not make any sense and it would not make it better and there is no connection between Sipple and First Ave. He stated he did not understand the trade-off between the two rights-of-way and how they were related, how staff could ask for Sipple Rd. Mr. Dullanty stated he felt it was inappropriate for staff to ask for the extensionof Sipple in exchange for the vacation of First Ave. Mr. Dullanty stated he also felt that the extensionof Sipple would not benefit the public what so ever. 08/23/2007 Planning Commission MinutesPage 2of 5 Mr. Dullanty stated that his clients have indicated to him that if the extension Sipple is a requirement of the First St. vacation it is a deal killer. He also stated that if Appleway group does not have the ability to expand the dealership the way they want to they will go someplace else. It would be a detriment to their plans. Commissioner Kogle asked if any of the Commissioners had any questions of Mr. Dullanty. Commissioner Beaulac asked Mr. Dullanty that if the vacation were granted what guarantee would the City have that Appleway would not leave anyway. Mr. Dullanty stated that there was no guarantee. Commissioner Sands asked that Toyota did not have a problem with part of Toyota dealership was across Sargent Rd. Mr. Dullanty expressed that Appleway did understand that part of the dealership would be across Sargent and did not have a problem with this layout. Commissioner Carroll asked how much land Gus Johnson owned south of First Ave. that would be vacated. Mr. Dullanty statedthat Mr. Johnson did not own land south of First Ave. being vacated and that all of the land that would be required to extend Sipple would all be coming from the Johnson property.Mr. Carroll wondered why the dealers did not feel that the additional traffic from Sipple would not benefit them. Mr. Dullanty tried to explain that the cross traffic would not benefit them, and the only traffic on Sipple and First now is dealership traffic. Mr. Basinger stated that the Appleway group’s whole goal was to vacate First Ave. to develop the property for the Toyota dealership. Mr. Basinger explained that if a person were to miss Sargent as a cross street you would have a ways to go to turn in either direction to go back. Staff felt that to establish more cross streets, as the Comprehensive Plan recommends and to give AutoNation what they wanted, extending Sipple would be a good compromise. Ms. Note stated that one eight of a mile is not too close and that 300 to 600 feet is more ideal in the size of a block. Mr. Dullanty’s response to Mr. Basinger’s argument regarding the turn around process of missing Sargent, he stated it did not make sense. Mr. Dullanty stated that the staff report says it does not get used for traffic and was of no benefit to the public. Mr. Dullanty stated that he would like the Commission to look at the over all picture. Do you want this develop or not? Does the City find a benefit to redevelop this facility or not? This is really what this is all about. There are something we would all like, but something’s are more important and maybe to revitalize this property is more important to the City. Sean Lumsden, 727 W. Garland, representing Quinn Group Advertising, for Auto- Row. -Mr. Lumsden stated Auto Dealerswere a lucrative business. People come here to shop and leave their tax dollars here. He stated that is a big tax base and employment base for under educated people. Mr. Lumsden stated that he would appreciate that the Commission look favorably on this vacation. Mr. Lumsden stated he knew that dealers had high standards and that they wanted to update all of their old dealerships to look good. Mr. Lumsden stated he also did not see any need for the cross street, it would just be one way for teenagers to see how fast they could go. Commissioner Beaulac made a motion to recommend approvalof vacation STV 03-07, in favor the applicant for the vacation of Sipple and First. Commissioner Sandsmade the second. Commissioner Beaulac stated he has seen the growth of Auto Malls and would like to see the vacation approved as the applicant presented it. 08/23/2007 Planning Commission MinutesPage 3of 5 Commissioner Sands stated she too has seen the growth of larger dealerships, appreciates the tax base for the City, however feels resentful hearing that if the vacation isn’t granted Auto-Row will stay an asphalt jungle and be threatened that the dealers will take their business to Liberty Lake or some place else to get what they want. She also stated that she did not have a problem with the vacation of First Ave. but that the dealers have consumed a right-of-way, but does the Commission need to go with the staff recommendation to extend Sipple. Commissioner Blum stated that he felt that it bothered him if he thought the City was being threatened, however it also bothered him if the government wanted to trade one piece of road for another. He felt that if the vacation was ok, then it was ok, but don’t condition it. Mr. Blum stated he understood the need for more cross streets, but was uncertain if there was a need for one here. Commissioner Carroll stated that he supported the vacation of First Ave. but he could not support the vacation of Sipple because the City could need it now or in the future. Commissioner Sands stated that she felt that it would be nice to have time to review some of the additional information and go back and review the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioners took a vote on the motion, the vote was two to two. Motion fails. Commissioner Sands made a motion to continue the public hearing to Sept. 13, 2007 and allow additional public input, second by Commissioner Blum. Vote is two to two, motion fails. Commissioner Carroll made a motion to recommend approval of STV-03-07 as presented by staff, no second. th Commissioner Carroll made a motion to continue the public hearing to Sept. 13, Commissioner Sands second the motion. Vote is threeto one, Commissioner Beaulac beingthe dissenting vote. Commissioner took at break at 7:18, returned at 7:25 and discussed the zoning map Old Business: Zoning Map. Mr. McCormick explained to the Commission that during deliberations, the City Council had tentatively decided to bring back the 10,000 sf lot size to the low density residential zoning districts. He stated that based on that decision, the staff had developed a map showing the lots that had been platted at 10,000 sf, leaving the rest of the lots that are being discussed at 7,500 sf. There was a considerable amount of discussion between the Commissioners and staff regarding where the 10,000 sf lots and the 7,500 sf zoning should go. Commissioners have concern that there are too many lots zoned at 7,500 sf and not enough neighborhood preservation at the 10,000 sf. Commissioner Carroll made a motion that staff return with a map where all lots platted at less than 10,000 sf be zoned at the 7,500 sf zoning district and the rest of the low density residential under discussion be zoned at 10,000 sf. It was seconded and passed unanimously. Commissioner Sands made a motion that was passed unanimously to forward the definitions, Appendix A to the City Council. Commissioner Sands made a motion that as passed unanimously to accept the Office and Garden Office zoning districts as presented on the map dated 8-23-07. Commissioner Beaulac made a motion that was passed unanimously to accept all other zoning districts, except the 10,000 and 7,500 sf low density residential as presented on the 8-23-07 map. 08/23/2007 Planning Commission MinutesPage 4of 5 X.GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Carroll asked if during street vacations if the square footage of the amount of street vacation be added to the statistics provided during the presentation. Also the Commission would like a relationship map be provided so that the Commission could see what is in the area surrounding the vacation. XI.ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjournedat 8:28pm SUBMITTED:APPROVED: ___________________________________________________________ Deanna Griffith, Administrative AssistantGail Kogle, Chairperson 08/23/2007 Planning Commission MinutesPage 5of 5