PC APPROVED Minutes 01-12-12.pdf Spokane Valley Planning Commission
APPROVED Minutes
Council Chambers — City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave.
January 12, 2012
L CALL TO ORDER
Secretary of the Commission, Deanna Griffith called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
IL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance
IIL ROLL CALL
Commissioners Bates, Carroll, Hall, Higgins, Neill, Sands, Stoy were present. .
Staff attending the meeting: Scott Kuhta, Planner Manager; Kelly Konkright, Deputy Ciry
Attorney; Lori Barlow, Senior Planner; Karen Kendall, Assistant Planner; Inga Note, Senior
traffic Engineer Dean Grafos, Councilmember; Ben Wick, Councilmember; Deanna Griffith,
Secretary of the Commission
A. Election of Officers:
Secretary Deanna Griffith explained nominations would be accepted for the position of
Chair, votes would be taken by ballot. The same would happen for the position of Vice
Chair. Nominations were opened for the office of Chair of the Commission and
Commissioner Higgins nominated Commissioner Bill Bates. Commissioner Sands
nominated Commissioner Hall. Commissioner Hall nominated Commissioner Sands.
Nominations were closed.
Commissioner Vote Commissioner Vote
Stoy Bates Hall Sands
Sands Hall Carroll Hall
Higgins Bates Bates Bates
Neill Bates
Votes were recorded as follows: Bates =four, Hall = 2, Sands = 1: Commissioner Bates
was elected Chairman of the Commission.
Nominations were then opened for the office of Vice-Chair. Commissioner Higgins
nominated Commissioner Stoy. There were no other nominations for Vice-Chairman.
Commissioner Stoy was declared Vice-Chair by consensus.
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Stoy made a motion which was unanimously approved to accept the January 12,
2012 agenda as presented.
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Bates noted that there was an error in the December 08, 2011 minutes noting
the amendment was listed incorrectly. Commissioner Higgins made a motion to approve the
01-12-2012 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 4
October 27, 2011 minutes as presented and the December 08, 2011 minutes as amended. The
vote to approve this motion was unanimous.
VL PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
VIL COMMISSION REPORTS
Commissioners had nothing to report.
VIIL ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
Planning Manager welcomed Mr. Higgins and congratulated Commissioners Bates and Stoy on
their new positions. Mr. Kuhta reminded the Commissioners about the possible joint meeting
with City Council on Feb 21, 2012. Mr. Kuhta also had a brief discussion regarding the
Commission's advanced agenda.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS
A. Unfinished Business: Code Amendment CTA-03-11, Chapter 22.70 Landscaping
Proposed amendments
Asst. Planner Karen Kendall reviewed the questions that Commission had at the previous
meeting.
• Does the clearview triangle apply to residential drive ways.
• An exception for fence heights for utility companies.
• Landscaping points, intent for reducing point requirement
• Tree staking requirements
Ms. Kendall covered the proposed amendments, discussed changes that staff had already
incorporated based on previous discussions with the Commissioners.
• Clarify fence height on Flanking Yards;
• Correction to Clear View Triangle tables and definition;
• Clarify which zones allow barbed wire;
• Streamline landscape point calculations;
• Remove landscaping requirement around signs in developed areas;
• Provide more options to modify landscape requirements; and
• Establish threshold when a Landscape Architect is required
Discussion with the Commissioners covered several items including: would it be
appropriate to broaden the discretion for the barbed wire for more than utility companies,
should an exception be allowed for concertina wire, would existing barbed wire fences be
considered legal non-conforming (Mr Kuhta answered yes they would be). Questions that
were also answered were regarding the reduction of landscaping points below 500 sf of
developed area, what the definition of developed area was, tree staking would now be
optional, but a new graphic would be inserted to show staking below the ground however it
01-12-2012 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 4
would be stated that the staking must be removed within 12 months. Discussion also
covered reducing the requirement for when a landscape architect would be required.
After a page by page review of the proposed text amendments Commissioner Sands made a
motion to approve the proposed text amendments and recommend approval to the City
Council of CTA-03-11. Vote on this motion was unanimous.
Planning Manager Kuhta reminded the Commissioners that staff would be returning at the
next meeting with the prepared findings for approval.
B. New Business: Study Session CTA-06-ll proposed amendments to title 22110, Sign
Regulations
Senior Planner Lori Barlow made a presentation regarding proposed amendments to Title
22.110 sign regulations. Ms. Barlow explained during a presentation to City Council
regarding the sign regulations, the Ciry Council had questions and requested that staff make
some comparisons to surrounding jurisdictions and requested some changes be made to the
current regulations. Ms. Barlow discussed the items in the current code that will be
addressed in the proposed upcoming amendment.
■ allow A-frame signs ��►
■ modify the requirements for temporary signs
■ increase the number of freestanding signs allowed for businesses on large lots
fronting arterials
■ Clarify that churches are allowed signage in any zone
■ allow multi-family complexes to display wall signs; and
■ require electronic signs to be equipped with an automatic dimming capability
A-frame signs.: Currently the code prohibits A-frame signs. Businesses have expressed the desire
to have them back Ms Barlow stated that A-fame signs will be allowed with the amendment, max.
size would be nine s£, no higher than three feet, cannot be located farther than 12 feet from the
business entrance, can only be used during business hours, be well maintained, one sign per
business and real estate signs would be limited to five s£ Ms. Barlow stated that these signs had
been regulated previously to reduce the clutter along the roadways. She also mentioned the current
proposal is for the business not to move the sign more than 12 feet from the business entrance, and
that there could be some concern regarding this point.
Free Standing signs: Currently each business is allowed one free standing sign per street frontage.
Council would like to create standard based on frontage. The proposed amendment would change
to allow one freestanding sign for each 500 feet of lineal frontage, all other requirements stay the
same. Other jurisdictions have similar requirements - the City of Spokane; 300 feet, Spokane
County; 500 feet. Ms Barlow stated that staff felt that Spokane Valley is suburban and more
conservative, therefore felt the 500 foot decision. Commissioner Bates wanted to know if the size
of the sign was regulated. Ms. Barlow responded yes, but the City was not aware of issues based
on the size of the sign. Commissioner Carroll asked if there would be an inequity between shallow
lots and deep lots and did any jurisdictions using total square footage of lot instead of frontage.
Most jurisdictions have standards for spacing of the signs. Commissioner Stoy asked if signs had
setbacks, the response is yes, but not the same as building setbacks. Commissioner Stoy stated he
felt this could lead to clutter.
01-12-2012 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4
Wall signs on multi-family complexes: Currently the City did not have allowance for multi-family
complexes to have a wall sign to state the name of complex on wall. This amendment would allow
such a sign for them.
Dimming requirements of electronic signs: Ms Barlow stated this was common concern for
electronic signs to require dimming capability. The proposed language would require all new
electronic signs to automatically adjust based on ambient light.
Signs for churches in residential zones: Ms. Barlow informed the Commissioners that currently
churches are only allowed an monument or pole sign if on an arteriaL The proposed language
would allow a monument sign in any zone. Ms Barlow said that changing this regulation would
allow monument signs to be allowed in all zones, regardless of the business, not just churches..
Commissioner Stoy asked a question regarding probable reader boards, which Ms. Barlow stated
are still prohibited.
Temporary signs — Currently Ms. Barlow said, temporary signs are allowed with a permit only
twice a year for 30 days. The proposed amendment would allow a single temp sign whenever a
business would like. The sign could not be bigger than 20 sf, and must be well maintained. The
amendment would also allow additional signage twice a year, for up to 30 days, for a fee.
The questions Commissioners posed after Ms. Barlow's presentation why would it be a concern if
A-frame signs were limited to 12-feet from business entrance. Mr. Kuhta gave an example of a
business in strip mall that might need to have the sign farther from the door.. Commissioner
Carroll wondered if the dimensions of signage material should be taken into account when basing
the sign sizes. Commissioner Bates wondered if staff knew how many illegal temporary signs we
in the City and confirmed that the City is complaint driven in regard to enforcement.
X. GOOD OF THE ORDER
There was nothing for the good of the order ► ,.r
XL ADJOURNMENT
The being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.
SUBMITTED: `
Deanna Griffith, Secretary Date
APPROVED:
Bill Bates, Chairperson
01-12-2012 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4