Zoning break weighed

The Spokane Valley City Council seems poised to change the city’s nonconforming-use rules to benefit one property owner despite concerns from some council and planning commission members that doing so would allow anyone to take advantage of the new, more lenient rules.

A nonconforming use is created when a business that used to be allowed is no longer allowed after a zoning change. A nonconforming use is allowed to expand to a neighboring parcel if that second parcel was owned by the same owner at the time the use became nonconforming. Dwight Hume, who operates a land-use planning company, filed a proposed text amendment on behalf of Hite Crane to eliminate the ownership requirement. That would allow a nonconforming use to expand to an adjacent parcel no matter when the second parcel was purchased.

The Planning Commission recommended denial of the text amendment over concerns that it would allow unlimited expansion to multiple properties. At the July 20 council meeting the majority of the council rejected the Planning Commission’s decision and told staff to prepare an ordinance to allow the change.

At the July meeting several council members discussed making a conditional use permit required in order to expand a nonconforming use. That would allow the hearing examiner to set requirements designed to mitigate the impact of the expansion. That option did not find favor on Tuesday. Councilman Dean Grafos called it “just another step which would be more costly to the property owner. If I go to the hearing examiner option, I’m becoming more restrictive.”

Councilman Bill Gothmann asked city attorney Mike Connelly about several different property ownership scenarios and whether the expansion would be allowed under the new rules under consideration. “He could expand into parcels adjacent to the original lot,” Connelly said.

The new rules would limit expansion to parcels immediately adjacent to the original lot. But a piece of land may have several adjacent parcels to the north, south, east and/or west and a nonconforming business could expand to any or all of those parcels all at once or one by one over the years.

Councilman Bob McCaslin pointed to the vacancies on Sprague Avenue as a reason to allow the new rules and said that “every effort” should be made to allow business owners more freedom.

An e-mail from Planning Commission chairman John Carroll was read into the record during the meeting about his objections to the possible new rule. He wrote that Hite Crane knew about the expansion rules when he bought property at 17515 E. Appleway. Expanding the rules would “create a situation where the entire city may suffer for Hite Crane’s choices.”

Carroll’s e-mail focused on the fact that the city’s adult entertainment shops, which are nonconforming uses, would be allowed to buy property and expand under the new rules. “This council is about to give them carte blanche to expand on our main street,” he wrote.

Several council members gave little weight to Carroll’s arguments, with Grafos calling it a “scare tactic.” Councilwoman Brenda Grassel agreed. “I think, as Mr. Grafos said, this is a scare tactic,” she said. “He’s zoning in on porno shops and not any other type of business.”

“They’re in business to make money,” McCaslin said of the adult entertainment shops. “To the public, quit going to them and they’ll fold up.”

Gothmann, however, said he shared Carroll’s concerns and had some of his own. He said he recently drove out to take a look at the new Hite Crane location. “I was shocked,” he said. “Right across the street is Greenacres Junior High School. I don’t think that’s a good mix.”

Business owner Gary Hite told the council previously that the fire department said he needed to expand onto the neighboring parcel in order to provide emergency vehicle access. Gothmann said he spoke to the fire chief and was told the opposite. Gothmann also said that he believes Hite wants to move to that location because Spokane Valley doesn’t charge oversize and overweight vehicle fees like other jurisdictions do. He’s also concerned about the homes located close to the site.

“The expansion is just not right for the neighborhood,” he said. “I’ll leave that up to you to decide whether it’s scary or not, but it’s a fact.”

McCaslin dismissed Gothmann’s concerns, saying that if the new rule creates problems it can always be changed later. “For such a positive person you sure are negative,” he said. “The choice is not between Hite (Crane) and kids.”

“It is,” said Gothmann. “The hell it is,” McCaslin replied.

Councilwoman Rose Dempsey said she shared some of Gothmann’s concerns, but wanted to make sure Hite was able to run his business. “I am going to vote for this reluctantly,” she said.

Gothmann was the only one to vote against advancing the ordinance to a second reading.

In other business, the council voted unanimously to approve a new law enforcement contract with the Spokane County Sheriff’s Office. The contract now runs four years instead of having to be renewed every year and includes quarterly meetings to discuss issues. It also has a new billing formula that will clear up an ongoing dispute over what the city was paying for. “It’ll be a lot more beneficial and a lot more communication,” said acting city manager Mike Jackson.

Councilman Gary Schimmels said he liked the longer length of the contract. “It’s taken us six months to clean up problems that have been around since 2007,” he said.

Deputy city attorney Cary Driskell took the opportunity Tuesday to praise outgoing city attorney Mike Connelly, who is now on vacation until his last official day with the city on Aug. 20. “He has put in five good hard years with the city,” he said.

“I think the city has benefited greatly from his experience,” said Mayor Tom Towey. Connelly thanked everyone for their comments and said he was leaving to take a position with a local law firm just as he was getting to know the new council. “Hopefully I’ll be back on occasion,” he said.

Towey launched a debate at the end of the meeting by suggesting that the council create an ad-hoc committee to examine what the city can do to support businesses on Sprague Avenue, specifically in the area between University and Argonne roads. He suggested having the committee include a council member, a planning commission member and four citizens. “I think that we can help the businesses on Sprague now and not wait two or three years,” he said. “Certainly the business community would be a great part of it.”

Dempsey suggested extending the study area west to the freeway and Grafos said such a committee would leave out other areas such as the Industrial Park, Trent and Sprague east of Sullivan. “I don’t know if I’m in favor of that,” he said. “Just to have another committee is just a way of stalling.”

Schimmels agreed that other areas should be included. “We have blinders on,” he said. “Look at the Argonne/Mullen corridor. It’s hard to segregate, if you would, that one area.”

Dempsey cautioned against looking at too wide an area. “By expanding this to the whole city, it would just stop it,” she said. “It would be SARP all over again.”

“One of the faults with SARP is that we bit off too much,” said Gothmann. “I think you’re right.”

Grassel said she doesn’t want to have a committee if they are only going to focus on one possible solution. “I want to hear something other than ‘my business is failing because I’m on a one-way road,’ ” she said. “Quite frankly, I’m about done with that excuse.”

“The bottom line is we have to do something,” said Schimmels. “I would like to see us start somewhere.”

The council will consider the issue further at a future meeting.