Loading...
Minutes - 10/23/2008 Spokane Valley Planning Commission Approved Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. October 23, 2008 I. CALL TO ORDER The Chairperson Robertson called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance III. ROLL CALL Commissioners Beaulac, Carroll, Eggleston, Robertson, Sands and Sharpe were present. Commissioners Kogle was absent and excused. Staff attending the meeting: Kathy McClung, Director of Community Development; Greg McCormick, Planning Manager; Lori Barlow, Associate Planner; Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner Carroll, seconded by Commissioner Sands, to move STV-02- 08 to item one on the agenda. It was unanimously agreed to accept the October 23, 2008 agenda as amended. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was decided to approve the minutes at the next meeting. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no Public Comments. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Robertson stated that he attended a pan handling committee meeting and that the Mayor is looking for the committee to make regional presentations. There were no other Commissioner reports. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Director McClung stated that the Council has changed the recommended location of City Hall from the original proposed location. Mr. Kersten, Public Works Director has determined it would be better suited based on street design, for the City Hall to occupy a parcel to the east of the previous location and negotiations would continue on the new site proposal. Council is also going to be discussing the traffic circulation issue relating to the Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan at the next Tuesday meeting, Oct. 28, 2008 The Director also stated that Council reviewed and emergency code amendment regarding surveying issues. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS New Business — Public Hearing, STV-02-08, street vacation of approx. 390 feet of 5 th Ave between Newer and Progress Rd. Commissioner Robertson opened the public hearing at 6:04 p.m. Associate Planner Lori Barlow made a presentation to the Commission regarding the location, vicinity, the conditions on the ground and surrounding areas. There is a house located on the property that would have been 5 th Ave at the end just west of Newer Rd. It was explained that 5 th Ave. will probably never be able to go all the way through, based on the house being located at this intersection. Ms. Barlow stated that a plat, Short-Plat-17-08, which has received preliminary approval to 10/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 6 divide a parcel west of the proposed vacation which will require improvement to one half of 5tn Ave. abutting the new parcel. Ms. Barlow reviewed the criteria for approving the street vacation. Staff's recommendation is that the vacation be denied because the street could be used to serve future development. Public Works has also recommended denial for connectivity issues in the future. Arnie Woodard, 2511 S. Best Rd, Mr. Woodard stated that he has represented Mr. Elliott in the past, Mr. Elliott is the property owner of the western two parcels in the proposed area. Mr. Woodard stated that it would make more sense to put a street through north and south instead of east and west, when there would be no possible way to complete 5 Ave all the way through, with the house that sits right in the way. Mr. Woodard stated that Mr. Elliott is intending to put a street through north and south not east and west. Chair closed the public hearing at 6:18 pm. Ms Barlow stated that Development Engineering and Public Works were aware of Mr. Elliot's proposal for his 4 parcels due to a pre-app meeting he has alread�r had with the City. At that time they recommended that St. Charles be put through from 4 h to 6 Ave., with 5 Ave. still providing a connection from Progress Rd. It is still the opinion of both departments that the right-of-way for 5 Ave. is needed would still be beneficial to provide access to the back of the other two lots to the east of Mr. Elliot's for redevelo�ment. , Although a turn-around for the fire department would still need to be provided even if 5 h Ave were extended. It is still both departments' opinions that the right-of way for 5tn Ave needs to remain in place. Commissioner Beaulac wanted to know if they could make a condition on the street vacation if it was approved they would require St. Charles to be put through as a cross street. Director McClung said the Commission can not place a condition on the street vacation that relates to future development. There was discussion regarding the turn around required for the short plat to the west of the requested street vacation. The short plat has preliminary approval, it is required to make half street improvements, and a fire turn-a-round is being planned on the property however if the street vacation were approved, a full cul-de-sac would likely be a condition of the vacation for a turn around, per Public Works. Commissioner Sands made a motion to recommend denial of the STV-02-08, street vacation of a portion of 5 Ave. Commissioner Eggleston seconded the motion. Discussion began, regarding the following conditions: there was no reason to not vacate, there will be no way to continue 5 Ave. all the way to Newer Rd., if we vacate, there is nothing to hold the developer to building a north/south road, the road extension issue could be handled at the time of plat application and the developer would be held to conditions made at that time, , 5 Ave. is going to dead end one way or another, why not at the intersection of St Charles, and not against Mr. Elliot's properties. There was concern about the impact to other lots, more in favor of half of a vacation, without a vacation they can not develop the lots, the developer gains from the vacation, put a turn around at the intersection of St. Charles with 5 get half the vacation, give up half and get better connectivity all the way around. There would be an out to Progress, 4tn and 6 And there would be a turn-around for the fire department. Vote is three in favor and three opposed. Motion fails. Planning commission will send it forward to City Council with no recommendation. New Business — Public Hearing, Uniform Development Code Amendment, Title 19, 19.110.030, Airport Hazard Overlay Commissioner Robertson opened the public hearing at 6:28 p.m. Planning Manager Greg McCormick gave a presentation regarding the history of the airport overlay zone. Mr. McCormick also discussed issues with the zone overlay, zone 6 is basically suppose to relate to a noise reduction issue, and the basis for the discussion for the evening. Currently the zoning in zone 6 is one dwelling unit per 2.5 acres. The options for changing the density in the overlay zone are: Option 1 No Change and leave the density where it currently is 10/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 6 Option 2 Allow density of current zoning within Zone 6 of the Airport Hazard Overlay (AOZ Airport Overlay Zone) zone. Option 3 Allow density to be limited to the R-2 zoning district regulations within zone 6 Option 4 Allow density of underlying zone within Zone 6, however development must comply with a minimum of one (1) of the following criteria; a. The site had water and sewer stubs installed for future development prior to the adoption of the City of Spokane Valley initial airport hazard overlay regulations on 2-28-06 by Ordinance 06-002; b. Contiguous parcel with a minimum lot size less than or greater to underlying zone. c. More than one residence is located on a property, excluding any residence used at one time for a dependent relative, may develop property consistent with underlining zone to make conforming. Option 5, which was requested by the Planning Commission at the study session to leave the density north of Trent the way that it is and south of Trent at the under lying zoning. Commissioner Sharpe had requested information regarding vacant parcels, he wanted to know how many vacant parcels there were in the AOZ. The planning staff was able to provide the information, there are 80 parcels but staff can not tell what condition those parcels are in. Staff was also able to tell that there were seven dividable lots, once again not being able to tell who owns them or their condition. Staff's recommendation is still option 4, allow the underlying density within zone 6, with the listed criteria. The Commissioners had several questions before they began the public testimony. How did staff come to the criteria listed? It is close to the criteria used for rezoning purposes. Why wasn't this research done previously? Why isn't it water and sewer? Did we hear back from the FAA as requested? Yes, they did respond and staff did meet with them. Did we do any noticing of the area regarding the possibility of changing the density then or now? Commission began the public testimony. Ryan Sheehan, 2303 S Tekoa St.: Mr. Sheehan stated he was representing the airport. Mr. Sheehan requested that the Commission post pone any action or choose Option 1. Mr. Sheehan stated that the Airport Board would like more time to review the impacts of the changes. The director, Mr. Neil Seelock, is asking for more time to consider proposed changes based on more which should be considered more on noise in the community as well as safety. Mr. Sheehan stated that the first the Airport Board heard about the proposed changes was mid last week, after receiving a call from Asst. Planner Karen Kendall. The Airport Director did not feel they had enough time to present what it would like to offer in the way of education regarding activity increases. Commissioner Eggleston asked how much time more time did they think they need? Mr. Sheehan stated they thought 30 days. A Commissioner asked if the airport received notice. A notice of public hearing was sent however there is no administrative staff at felts field and all administrative work gets passed out to Spokane International Airport. Jeff Hamilton, 3305 S High Drive: Mr. Hamilton stated he is the president of the Tenants Association for Felts Field, business or airport. It is the Tenant's Association to protect the airport. Mr. Hamilton stated that they have submitted a letter stating their position. The Tenant's Association is aware of airports closing more around the country. Mr. Hamilton wanted to commend the City for its standards, for the FAA and WADOT for being concerned about increasing density when it is not reasonable. Mr. Hamilton stated he is concerned about putting the airport at risk. Mr. Hamilton would like to ask for a comprehensive analysis, and respectfully ask to postpone this decision. Gary White, 10405 E Ferret Drive: Mr. White stated he was president of the Washington Pilot Association. Mr. White requested that the Commission adopt option 1 to postpone this 10/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 6 discussion in order to get more information regarding this regulation. Mr. White would like to encourage not to increase density around the airport. Mr. White has stated that he as seen other airports shut down because of density. Bill Faith, 7719 E Current Pt.: Mr. Faith stated that he owns a parcel which would be a little less than 3 lots which have sewer stub and water. Mr. Faith stated that he would understand if he wanted to build high rise in the flight path, but if you are concerned about the safety then worry about the houses across the river. Mr. Faith stated that there are trees and everything across the river, he does not see any reason for restrictions in this area. Carter Timmerman, Arlington, WA, WADOT: Mr. Timmerman stated he was an airport sponsor and that he supports Mr. Sheehan's request for more time. Mr. Timmerman also made an offer of assistance in the planning process. Mr. Timmerman said that most accidents occur within 5000 feet of the runway. Density in this zone does offer a risk, but the noise is the larger concern. Commissioners asked if any noise surveys done on that area, none that anyone was aware of. Larry Tobin, 8610 E Red Oak Dr.: Mr. Tobin stated that he felt that the airport very important. Mr. Tobin said he felt the airport carrot for the area and would not like to see the airport go away because people don't like the noise. Mr. Tobin stated that what the Commission was talking about zoning the around the airports, and asked that they give careful consideration to these regulations. Blake McKinnley, 4015 S Sunnerland: Mr. McKinnley stated he is an officer of the Chapter of WA State Pilots Assoc. Mr. McKinnley shared the airport data for Felts Field 70,669 annual flight operations which represents 22% more flight operations than Spokane International Airport. Both runways are used extensively on a daily basis. WADOT has stated that the economic benefit Felts Field provides to the area is 250 jobs resulting in $16.5M dollars in labor and economic value to the community on a annual basis. Mr. McKinnley stated that the Associations understand for the adoption of the AOZ and restricting certain land uses and density was to protect the airport and airport safety. By allowing density increase in the area, is not reasonable land use. The potential adoption would allow increase in noise and liability issues which potentially puts the asset of the airport at risk. The Association requests that the Commission delay its decision for more collaboration and a comprehensive approach for all parties to study this subject further. Mike Klein, Manager Orchard Ave Water District, 917 S Bowdish: Mr. Klein stated that it seems to me like the battle with the Water District and the patrons is with the airport not the City. Mr. Klein said this was new to him. Mr. Klein stated in the past the only restrictions have been height and radio frequency. Noise and density were a recommendations, this ordinance was acted on a recommendation. Mr. Klein stated he was here to inform the Commission that this decision has a big impact on the water district. With out an increase in density there will be no future growth. The density along the airport was UR-3.5 in the county. The safety zone does not want schools, parks, large gatherings of people and yet there are all of these things in the overlay zone already. Mr. Klein stated that on one is trying to destroy the airport, there has never been an incident there, but overkill hurts people. People are being hurt by the restrictions in this ordinance, hope the Commissioners can see this. Jeff Howe, 7101 E. Rudder: Mr. Howe stated that the City of Spokane Valley has been losing revenue by not allowing these lots to be divided. Mr. Howe stated that around the airport in Deer Park you are required to sign off a statement recognizing you are in a an airport zone, you must sound insulate you home and giving certain rights to the airport because you live in and around the airport zone. None of that has been implemented by the City of Spokane airport, the airport has a business to run, but the City of Spokane Valley. Mr. Howe said he bought a property in 2006, he asked if it could divide it before he bought it, asked county if he could get extra sewer stubs, water stubs from Orchard Ave., he even got a building permit for a building on the property, which is much smaller than he would have built otherwise. Mr. Howe said he made several trips down to the City and he was never told he could not divide his property, paid more for the property than he would have, the City is missing the revenue. Mr. Howe stated he 10/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 6 thought that the change had been railroaded through the first time, when even the water district does not know about it six months after, he felt the Commissioners should side with the little people. James Bower: Pilots Association. Mr. Bower stated that he felt the Commission should choose option 1. Mr. Bower said he felt that the Commission should advise Council to protect the people living here. Talking about zone 6 is talking about noise, flying between 1000 - 800 feet is fairly noisy, the noise is less at 1000-1500. Mr. Bower suggested that the Commissioners consider the job is to protect from noise. If you look to the future, some new home buyers may not realize the airport not there, even though airplanes are there 24 hours a day. Mr. Bower said even though we are talking about a housing only, this industry supports the schools, snow plows and other important activity in the City Dwight Hume, 9101 Mt View Lane: Mr. Hume stated he didn't understand agencies coming to ask for more time, this is not about increase density. Mr. Hume stated he belived that Option 4 reasonable, without further analysis. Under regulations, extra insulation can be required for noise suppression, new permit holders should have to sign an easement waving for noise.. Mr. Hume stated he felt that if the airport felt this was going to be damaging to them then they should have to come back with help and prove why the net increase is damaging, and could cause the closure of the airport. Joe Coleia, 8112 E Marietta: Mr. Coleia stated got letter from Marina (Marina Sukup, former Director) stating he would be able to divide the property or he would not have bought it. Mr. Coleia stated he had a lot of money invested in a little house and a lot that he can not split. Mr. Coleia stated he was upset that he had a letter that said he could do something we later said he could not do. The lot has sewer and water. Mr. Coleia stated he did not think if he split his lot, it would be any smaller than any other lot on the street. Sara Orrange, Spokane Realtor Association, 9124 N. Ash: Ms. Orrange stated she was the Government Affairs Director for the Spokane Realtors, which advocates housing options and not restricting housing choices. Ms Orrange stated that option 4, while it allows for housing density with some restrictions, it does not allow for as much as many housing opportunities, as some of the other options do. Ms. Orrange also stated it did not allow for the opportunities as the underlying zoning or what is allowed in the City of Spokane. Jeff Mclntire 3816 N Park Rd.: Mr. Mclntire stated he lives at the end of the runway and has no problems with the airport. Mr. Mclntire purchased his property to divide, it has water and sewer, he is also a board member for Orchard Ave. Water District. Mr. Mclntire stated that he is aware that planes make noise, he has lived in this area for 33 years and never had an issue with the noise. Mr. Mclntire did state he was concerned that there had been no proper notice to concerned parties. Pam Mclntire, 3816 N Park Rd.: Ms. Mclntire stated that the Airport was a great neighbor. She also said that they like the airport, but that some of our properties are dividable, we want to be to do that. Ms. Mclntire wondered why are we trying to change it now, when there have always been people there? John Stipe, 2820 N Center Rd.: Mr. Stipe stated that the airport would never going to make much noise. He said they can't bring in 4 engine jets, there is not enough runway length. Mr. Stipe stated he used to fly fighters but they had practiced to land the fighters Felts Field for a while however the runway is too short and there is no room to expand it, after Northwood was built they never used it again. Mr. Stipe talked about the new gyms at WVHS, and the people using the school. Mr. Stipe stated that the airport does not fly multiple flights out of there after 10 p.m. at night. He stated that the most noise in the neighborhood comes from the railroad. Mr. Stipe stated he had enough land to divide, and believes he should be able to do so if he chooses. Sharon Panther, 8004 E Glass: Ms. Panther stated she had not received any information on this overlay. Ms. Panther stated she has sort of an acre. She stated that the county stated that the property could not be divided until sewer was in the area. Ms. Panther stated now she has 10/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 6 the utilities she was told now she can not divide the property now. Ms. Panther stated she asked the City is the change had been mandated by some other entity but could not get a satisfactory answer and would like the ability to divide her property. . John Dikes, 7323 E Marietta: Mr. Dikes stated he likes the airplanes, but if you stop the growth the water district needs growth to keep the costs down. He also stated he felt that growth spawned improvement in existing development. Mr. Dikes does not feel the noise of the airplanes is bothersome, he finds the trains far noisier than the airport. Mr. Dikes also has a lot he could improve and divide if allowed. Commissioner Beaulac asked Mr. Dikes if he were to develop his extra lot would he be willing to sign a waiver for the airport noise and provide the extra insulation for the noise suppression. Mr. Dikes responded that although he would be willing he was surprised that the airport noise was a problem for anyone, the railroad noise far out weighted the planes. Raymond Gunning 6215 N Thierman: Mr. Gunning stated he has a full packet, got had a letter from Marina Sukup, had the engineering done, sewer, brought in to submit it, can't do it. Mr. Gunning stated that he was in agreement with the land owners, as far as the airport, he has grown up in Millwood, and sells real estate, with the understanding that you have to enjoy the planes, trains and automobiles. Mr. Gunning stated he would never want to harm the airport but he also does not want to harm the water district. Commissioner Beaulac asked Mr. Gunning if he would be willing to sign an agreement, and put in the noise abatement features. Mr. Gunning stated he would sign it and believed that the last 10 houses he has sold, that one of his customers would have a problem signing it either. The Planning Commission took a break and on their return, Director. McClung clarified the surrounding some of the questions and issues of the airport overlay zone. The Director also explained how the amendment would proceed through the City Council process. Commissioner Eggleston made a motion to continue the public hearing to Dec. 11, 2008, with a second by Commissioner Sands. Vote is unanimous in favor. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Robertson stated that the Council would be discussing Water Quality at the next Council meeting. XI. AD70URNMENT The being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m. SUBMITTED: APPROVED: Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant Ian Robertson, Vice-Chairperson 10/23/2008 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 6