Loading...
PC APPROVED Minutes 06-27-13 Spokane Valley Planning Commission APPROVED Minutes Council Chambers— City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. June 27, 2013 L CALL TO ORDER Chair Bates called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance III. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS Present Absent CITY STAFF Bill Bates-Chair x r Scott Kuhta,Planning Manager Joe Stoy--Vice Chair x Marty Palaniuk, Planner Steven Neill x - Cary Driskell, City Attorney Kevin Anderson x �-- Mike Phillips x t' Robert McCaslin x r` Christina Carlsen x Can Hinshaw, Secretary Planning Commissioners agreed to excuse Commissioner Stoy from the Planning Commission Meeting. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Carlsen moved to approve the agenda as presented, a second was made and the motion passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Neill moved to approve the June 13, 2013 minutes as presented, a second was made and the motion passed unanimously. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Anderson and Commissioner Carlsen attended the Regional Short Course at the City of Spokane. Commissioner Carlsen stated there was a lot of good information and wished there were more that would have attended. She said there were many aspects of City Planning that she had not wrapped her head around yet and the speakers did a good job at presenting the Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 3 information. Commissioner Bates attended the City of Spokane Valley budget session and the Joint Session on the Shoreline. He stated it was good to have a joint meeting and he complimented the staff on what a good job they did. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Planning Manager Kuhta reviewed the advance agenda. He stated that the plan is to focus on the Shoreline Master Plan issues. There is not a lot of detail to the advance agenda due to waiting to see how the SMP issues plays out. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. Old Business: Findings of Fact: CTA-2013-0004, Sign Code Amendments Commissioner Neill moved to approve and forward to City Council CTA-2013-0004 as presented. A second was made. Discussion: None Planning Commission vote was to forward to the City Council as presented, the motion was passed unanimously. B. New Business: Presentation: Spokane Regional Transportation Council. Senior Transportation Planner Ryan Stewart provided an overview of the Horizon 2040 effort. Under Federal regulations, one requirement is to develop a metropolitan transportation plan. This is a twenty-year minimum look into the future. It will be the blue print for the entire county of what they want transportation to look like over the next twenty plus years. He went over the Regional priorities, their vision, forecasting the population and employment. C. Unfinished Business: Commissioner Bates opened the Public Hearing at 7:03 PM Public Hearing and Deliberations: CTA-2013-0005. Planner Marty Palaniuk provided an overview of the materials for the Outdoor Lighting Standards and went over the proposed changes as attached in the draft materials for Chapter 22.60 Outdoor lighting standards. Commissioner Phillips asked if "lights on billboards" was in the sign code ordinance. Planning Manager Kuhta read the regulation as follows: Sign code section of the municipal code 22.110.060 General Provisions: Electronic signs shall be permitted on the same basis as other signs. All electronic message centers are required to have automatic dimming capabilities that adjust the brightness to the ambient light at all times of the day and night. Mr. Kuhta stated there is suppose to be written documentation when people come in for a permit to install their sign. It does not talk about a specific standard, it talks about dimming capabilities. Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 3 Commissioner Bates discussed criteria. His concern was about the maximum pole height. He asked if the Planning Director would determine the height of each individual project based on his knowledge of zoning and could we have different heights of poles in the City? Planner Palaniuk responded with yes. Commissioner Bates discussed treating people fairly by one of them not being able to put up the kind of fixture that he/she wanted verses somebody else. He stated that maybe regulating it based on zoning would be good. Mr. Palaniuk responded that the only purpose of the decision criteria is to decide whether a lighting plan is required. He does not think it is going to limit the height of the pole. The City is going to allow the developer to come in and provide the information. The only requirement the City will have is that the light be shielded off the site. The intent of the changes is to allow more flexibility for the developer. Commissioner Bates closed the Public Hearing at 7:20 PM Commissioner Neill moved to approve and forward to the City Council CTA-2013-0005 as presented, a second was made Discussion: Commissioner Anderson stated he will support the plan, but from a personal standpoint, he said he could understand rules about minimal Iighting for public areas or parking lots that are all safety related. He does riot like the idea that we would restrict private people from how much electricity they use or pay for on their own property. The state of Washington has taken it upon itself to put rules for that, From Commissioner Anderson's standpoint, he stated the cost of electricity would control what people do with their money. He is amazed at the thought process (not created by this City) in that we would restrict people from doing whatever lighting process they wanted as long as it was not a safety hazard. Planning Commission Action: to forward to the City Council as presented, the motion was passed unanimously. X. GOOD OF THE ORDER There was nothing for the good of the order. XL ADJOURNMENT The being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. Bill Bates, Chairperson --//121/9/6--";-(zi- Carl Hinshaw, PC Secretary Date signed 7 /7A- Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT D FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION July 11,2013 The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission's decision to recommend approval. Background: 1. Spokane Valley development regulations were adopted in September 2007 and became effective on October 28,2007. 2. The City-initiated text amendment proposes to amend Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 22.60 to streamline the outdoor Iighting standards by eliminating the watts per square foot lighting limit, eliminating redundant provisions, eliminating the requirement for a photometric plan, adding a requirement for a lighting plan if deemed necessary by the building division, eliminating outdoor recreation facility requirements, and adding two additional exemptions. 3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 27, 2013 and voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the amendment to City Council. Planning Commission Findings: 1. Compliance with SVMC 17.80.150F Approval Criteria a. The proposed City-initiated code text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; Finding(s): i, Land Use Policy LUP-1.2 Protect residential areas from impacts of adjacent non-residential uses and/or higher intensity uses through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. ii. Land Use Policy LUP-13.1 Maximize efficiency of the development review process by continuously evaluating the permitting process and modifying as appropriate. iii. Housing Policy HP-1.1: Consider the economic impact of development regulations on the cost of housing. iv. Housing Policy HP-1.2: Streamline the development review process and strive to eliminate unnecessary time delays and expenses. v. Economic Goal EDG-7: Maintain a regulatory environment that offers flexibility, consistency,predictability and clear direction. vi. Economic Policy EDP-7.1: Evaluate, monitor and improve development standards to promote compatibility between adjacent land uses; and update permitting processes to ensure that they are equitable,cost-effective, and expeditious. vii. Economic Policy EDP-7.2: Review development regulations periodically to ensure clarity, consistency and predictability. viii. Neighborhood Goal NG-2: Preserve and protect the character of Spokane Valley's residential neighborhoods. ix. Neighborhood Policy NP-2.1: Maintain and protect the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. x. Neighborhood Policy NP-2.2: Review and revise as necessary,existing land use regulations to provide for innovation and flexibility in the design of new residential developments, accessory dwelling units, and in-fill development. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Conunission Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT D b. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. Finding(s): i. The proposed amendment will streamline the outdoor lighting development review process and provide flexibility in lighting choices. The requirement to shield lighting trespass will minimize glare and mitigate off-site impacts. ii. The public health,safety, welfare,and protection of the environment are furthered by ensuring that the City's development regulations are consistent with goals and policies in the adopted Comprehensive Plan. 2. Conclusion(s): a. The proposed city initiated code text amendment is consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan and the approval criteria contained in SVMC 17.80.150(F). b. The Growth Management Act stipulates that the comprehensive land use plan and development regulations shall be subject to continuing review and evaluation by the City. Recommendations: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends City Council adopt the proposed City- initiated code text amendments to SVMC 22.60 as attached. A ved this 1 ' day of July,2013 r - ill Bates, hairman ATTEST Ail Cari Hinshaw,Administrative Assistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission Page 2 of 2