Planning Commission won’t OK code changes

The Spokane Valley Planning Commission dug in its heels last week at making changes to the entire city that were designed to benefit only a single business. It recommended denial of one text amendment and held another one back so staff could do more research.

The amendments will now go before the City Council, which can choose to ignore the Planning Commission recommendations.

It was unintended consequences that made several of the seven commissioners wary. The first group of zoning text amendments considered would give the community development director authority to grant administrative exemptions, allow vehicle sales in the Mixed Use Avenue zone under a conditional use permit and add full-service restaurants as a permitted use in Mixed Use Avenue. All the suggested amendments were requested by the City Council.

The commissioners quickly got hung up on adding vehicle sales, which was crafted to allow Elephant Boys to sell boats on its property on East Sprague. The use is currently not allowed and the landowner has filed a lawsuit against the city. “Is that the driver on this, the one boat sales?” said commissioner Marcia Sands. “If it is, isn’t there another way we can do this?”

“We’re not just talking boats here,” said commission Chairman John Carroll. “It’s all vehicle sales.” That would include ATVs and “everything that has wheels.”

During the public comment period, businessman Dick Behm suggested separating vehicles and boats into separate categories. “Boat sales are a different animal,” he said. “They are usually good neighbors.” He cautioned against making such a large change for just one business. “It doesn’t just apply to Sprague/Appleway, it applies to the whole city. Sometimes a hasty decision to solve one problem leads to many others down the road.”

Several commissioners pounced on the idea, asking staff if it was possible to add boat sales only. “If you decide to go that route, we will have to make a couple more changes to our code as far as definitions,” said community development director Kathy McClung.

Vehicle sales were intentionally limited to the Auto Row area on the west end. “Are we doing a disservice to Auto Row by allowing vehicle sales all down Sprague?” asked Carroll.

Commissioner Arne Woodard said he was in favor of opening everything up and not limiting what property owners can do with their land. “We have become extremely restrictive,” he said. “I think we have an opportunity to show we’re more friendly than we have been.”

Commissioner Joe Mann said that it would be better to deal with Elephant Boys as an individual matter rather than doing something that will affect the entire city. Sands pointed out that current used-vehicle businesses along Sprague are legal nonconforming uses. “They can stay there as long as they want,” she said.

In the end, the vehicle sales amendment was withheld for further research and discussion while the other amendments will go to the City Council with a positive recommendation. “Our job is not to look at specific uses,” said Carroll. “Our job is to look at the city as a whole.”

“It has to be justice for everybody,” said commissioner Craig Eggleston.

The final amendment of the evening was filed by Dwight Hume of Land Use Planning Services. Current city code states that the owner of a nonconforming business can only expand onto an adjoining parcel only if he or she owned the adjoining parcel at the time the nonconforming use began. Hume’s proposed amendment would take away the ownership date requirement for expansion to an adjoining parcel.

City staff recommends against approving the amendment because it is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, said planner Scott Kuhta. The proposal isn’t done by other local jurisdictions. “It is an uncommon zoning practice,” he said. “It does start to render zoning somewhat meaningless.”

Kuhta said it’s possible that a landowner could use the new regulations to set up a chain down the road, expanding a nonconforming use to property after property as the land is bought up.

Hume disagrees. “Nonconforming uses, by their nature, are not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,” he said. “That’s only a distinction of who owned it when.” He sees the proposed change as something benefiting everyone. “It’s not going to open Pandora’s box.”

Hume suggested adding some criteria to address Kuhta’s concerns, including limiting expansion to only one adjoining parcel. “What I’m trying to accommodate right now is a business that’s not going to expand but just needs a little more elbow room,” he said.

“So there is a specific issue driving this?” said Carroll.

“Of course,” Hume said. “I don’t come down here just to be here.”

Woodard said sticking to the ownership requirement would “really limit businesses” and the commission should recommend approval in order to “limit the disappointment” of business owners.

Commissioner Rustin Hall said the city’s current rules for nonconforming uses are business friendly. “We’re already very generous,” he said. “I’m afraid I can see someone taking advantage of this rule change.”

“I think we’re again down to affecting 90,000 people for the sake of one,” said Sands, and businesses should request zone changes and follow that process. “I don’t think making nonconforming uses more liberal is going to solve anything.”

Woodard made a motion to approve the code amendment with the suggestions added by Hume. It died when no one seconded it. A motion to recommend denial of the code amendment passed, with Woodard and Art Sharpe voting no.

After the meeting Hume said he submitted the proposed amendment to benefit Hite Crane. The business has plans to move to 17515 E. Appleway, where it would be a nonconforming use. It would be allowed because the previous business on the site, Consolidated Supply, was also a nonconforming use.