City Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thanks, Shane. Welcome all to the planning commission uh meeting of April 22nd, 2026. Um would you Kathy, please give us a roll call? Yes. Tom Sberg here. Phil Foyer here. Joe Man here. Jim Boner. DG Garcia here. Charlie Jensen here. Jean Husel here. Abby Sprag here. And Troy Mullenex.

Troy Mullenex. Uh and Jim Bumper asked to be recused or excused. U motion to excuse them from the meeting. Move to excuse. And all in favor? I. Thank you. I M Mr. Man, would you please Yes, sir. would you please lead us in the pledge of allegiance? Would you please stand and join me?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. U we're not really going to change the agenda, but I'm going to just do a little explanation. We're going to run this meeting just a little bit differently than we have before. The agenda, um review it, and if you have any changes to the agenda, um I'll take a motion on that. What we're going to do is we're going to listen to the presentation of u if you look under workshop um draft and full draft comprehensive plan review we're going to be given a PowerPoint presentation of a a few revisions. And do we have the consultants on online too? Just us.

Just us. Okay. And then I'm going to ask you all since I know that you've all we've gone through all of all of this. There's a court case that's involved in one of these. There's a bunch of other. Write down any questions you have and at the end of the presentation we will discuss those. Okay, good enough. Okay. Uh, I'll accept a motion to approve the agenda as written. Then move to approve. Thank you, Commissioner Jenx. Second,

Commissioner Garcia. Thank you. And approval of the minutes with revisions that are spelling revisions. Um, does anybody have any corrections or changes? And I'll entertain a motion to accept them. Move to approve. Again, Commissioner Jensen. Second. Again, Commissioner Garcia. Second. All in favor? I. I. All opposed. Okay. Approved. Lance, the floor is yours. And we know that you don't just read PowerPoint presentations to us. We appreciate.

Yeah. Um, so yeah. So, so these are a few chapters of the comp plan that we had to make some changes to. These changes are not reflected in the full draft that we put out because we wanted you to approve them before we would incorporate them into that. Um, so we're starting out with the land capacity analysis. And um when Lisa started the length capacity analysis, she was using the most current numbers um we were given at that time for our housing allocation from the county and that number since changed. It's actually been reduced. Is your microphone on?

Yep. Is that a little bit better there? Okay. Yeah. I just wasn't wasn't close enough. Um so anyways, the county um revised this housing allocation number to us. it's less than it was before. And so we went through and we just updated the tables and any calculations that use that number were uh changed. And you can see those um it's that the the first big table there changed. We went from a allocation of 5315 to 5180. Whoever's blowing that up for us. Yeah,

that's still not enough. So this is the new table with the 5180. So that's the correct number that we need to be planning to um this is the the table that is currently in the land capacity analysis that has the wrong number. You'll see it's 5315. And so the correct number is 5180. Yeah. 5180. And we tried to make this as clear as we could in the document, but it's a graph that is put out by the county. So we just tried our best to to make it legible. Um and then you you'll see just a few more tables where that number um changes. Yeah. So

there's a couple places that that number is referenced in the land capacity analysis and so we just had to make those updates to reflect that the actual number that we have to be planning to. Okay. That was really everything for the land capacity analysis that changed. Um, but we did use that same number and some of those same tables in the um the housing and community services element. Wait, before before we move on, I just want to make sure that the land capacity analysis everybody understands what changed and why it changed and everybody's okay with that. So then we'll move on to the housing if everybody's okay with that. Okay, good. We'll go back to the housing one. Yeah,

Joe, be sure to speak up if you've got any questions. Absolutely. Yeah. So, it's this it's essentially the same changes uh to the housing chapter um where that number was used and any tables that used a form of calculation from that uh housing allocation number. Um but we also had one other change. Hold on one second. Oh, yep. No, no worries. My my computer has insufficient data. Oh, but it still shows the change. So, in the previous versions, you'll see that it was just that 5180 number changing. So that's those tables that were changed that I can't quite pull up. But then this piece right here is the new piece. Um correct that that we had to add. Yes.

So I'll let you talk about clarification. Uh yeah. So it's it's the affordable we're on page 11 of the handout. Page 11. Yep.

And it's a a paragraph that we added. Um it's the affordable housing funding gap. uh which is based off of a a essentially Mercer Island uh hearing board growth management hearing board decision where they ruled that um Mercer Island had to change their comp plan to show the cost gap of essentially what it would cost to um create all the affordable housing units that they needed. And so that's what we did here. Um, we use um, excuse me, we um, use the the units and then we had to multiply it by um, the Spokane County average costs for for those kinds of units. Um, that's what the example we were given by which was Milwood, Washington. And so that one was approved through Commerce. Um, so we went ahead and added this section there, ran it through Commerce. Commerce has looked at this change and and approved it via email saying that it looked good. And so that's um the only other change other than the um housing allocation number that we talked about before.

Okay. That you or Charlie might have questions on. I do have a question. Yes, I have a comment. A comment. What is gap in funding? What does that mean? Well, I think they're trying to show what it what kind of um investment needs to be made into the community to provide the the housing that's um not there. That's that's really what it's showing is if if the what what does the private sector have to invest into the community to create this housing?

In in item number one, you talk about total annual affordable housing units needed. earlier in this report um talks about the number of units built between two was it 2004 2000 to 2024 total number of units built in Liberty Lake was about less than 40 units a year and you're you're talking here about building 147 units per year

how are you going to do that and and if there affordable in like in the 0 to 80% range. What are you going to do or what do you think you should do to incentivize the market to build those units or require them like an inclusionary housing ordinance or something? What else are you going to do? Are you think considering to make that happen? Because otherwise based upon the past it's it ain't going to happen. this dog don't hunt.

Yeah. So, um first to answer a first part of your question, we we are not going to build it. Um we have to make sure that we have the proper land and the proper zoning and we've done the proper analysis that it could be built. Um you know, our goals and policies are supportive of those things being built. So when you look through the housing um the housing chapter, we have different goals and policies that are supportive of those things being built and saying that we will be supportive of those things. And um commerce has said that that satisfies what they're calling the adequate provisions of House Bill 1220. And so the piece that they said was missing from Mercer Island was that well there was lots of things missing from theirs that we have in ours but the the main thing that they said was missing that we needed to add was essentially analyzing what the gap is. What is what would it cost for this to be built and we needed to break down that analysis. And so that's what this piece is is just saying um and so I guess part of I should backtrack a little bit. the um the housing allocation that was given to us um is meant to capture um historic underprouction. So saying that these there is already a need that hasn't been met. So it's also looking backwards that and how that was calculated is kind of a mystery. Um it was given to us from it was given to us from commerce. Um the city of Spokane has taken um great umbrage with the process that was used, but they are not willing to share behind the curtain as far as what the calculations were on how they got to those numbers. Um but essentially that the numbers that were given to us account for historic underprouction. And so in order to satisfy the underprouction and also the growth needed moving forward, this is the number of units that need to be built over the 20-year period. And if those those units were to be built over the 20-year period, what would the cost be? And so that is essentially part of what came out of the Mercer Island growth

management hearing board decision. And that is what um Commerce has instructed us that this addition satisfies that requirement. So the likelihood is is this isn't going to happen.

I would say that with it as it is currently written, it is probably not likely. I would suspect we have to do a 5-year check-in and I would suspect that there will be additional legislation that will direct us on how we are to do that in that time period. That would be my suspicion. I don't know that. But I I suspect that there will be more to come on how on how now we are going to incentivize closing that gap. Um but they aren't telling us right now that we have to do certain things in order to close that. We just need to analyze what the gap is. Do you expect other changes from the county driving these revisions before you finalize this document?

That an unknown. Uh I would say that's an unknown. I I would hope not. I know that the county themselves has to um the board of county commissioners has to make some moves to change the table and to make the same changes that we're making. So they do have to make those changes. um if additional changes on top of that are coming, I am not aware. But I know um we've been in consistent talks with the county and other jurisdictions and that process is um underway to rectify the original mistake. Um now, if something else comes out of that, it will be these are these aren't big changes, but

not for us. it it right it but it takes time and money to make the revisions and you have to if you're developing this document it would seem to me there has to be a point in time we have to say okay we're done here with numbers and manipulating the numbers percentages what happened what what have you so now we got we want to finalize our document that time's coming

yes it's also coming for it's also coming for the county the county has to go through similar exercises they have to do a land capacity analysis for their portions of the unincorporated county, they they um are are likely going to be coming from behind worse off than us. They also have to make those changes. But I don't I don't anticipate those changes requiring anything above and beyond what we've already presented. Okay. That that I can't anticipate everything though because sometimes there's things that you never know.

Yeah. That come out of left field. So, this is similar to the I'm going to say gap the funding gap question. It was a good question. The state has mandated that we're um going to have no uh our aspirational goal is to have no traffic fatalities. Mhm. So, it's the same issue with a a gap in funding versus a gap in reality is what it is. So I think that we're not the ones that are setting those rules and again we're trying to comply with their um bureaucracy and we've discussed that before. Yes, we have ramifications in doing that.

Okay, Phil, just a com a you answered my question mostly. Thank you very much. Because my heartburn with the whole thing was the thought that the Department of Commerce could think that they could force any jurisdiction to implement something such as this because the market's going to dictate it,

plain and simple. So how you started off with your explanation to Charlie um w with the understanding of will um ensure that our zoning meets the criteria ensure that our outlook on this portion aligns with current lands available so on and so on. Um, would you not say that at the end of this paragraph that the city's goal is to do what you just said earlier? Because as I read that for the very first time, it makes me think that, oh, maybe the city's going to kick in $31,960,000. They're not. So that's my question or my comment I guess is first of all I I've been doing this long enough to know that stuff that comes from higher state is just shove it down your throat and just roll

and then change it with the next administration. So that's what this is. I understand. However, I think it might be wise and you can decide maybe not is to final put give a summary of what the city's position on that is by we'll support this by what you said earlier, making sure our zoning fits, making sure our available lands fit, making encouraging affordable, how whatever, however you want to word it. Or or maybe that's not important. I I don't know. We may be the only we may be the first and the last ones to read that paragraph. That's true.

So it may not be worth anybody's time. It's just one of those things that gets under my skin when it comes from outside of our jurisdiction. That's fair. Um so I can say that this language specifically came from an example that was sent to us from commerce. I understand. This is how you come. This is how you get over that hurdle. This is how you check that box.

Yeah. And so we and and because we had kind of labored over this so much, we tried to keep the changes as minimal as we could in order to make sure that we were complying. So we tried to keep that really, you know, as again as as small as we could and still meet the intent. So we can certainly add more. My my worry is that adding something additional like what you're saying could be viewed by commerce as complying but not complying. And so and so then it gets kicked back to us and says you need to remove that paragraph because it it it doesn't support how you know HB1220.

However, you know, this is your guys' document. I mean, it's everybody's document, but you know, if you guys would like to direct us to add something additional, we can do that. You rais a great point. Just a roll and explaining it to the because all we're doing is recommending approval to the council is a summary like you gave, I think, is going to be sufficient. And if they have other questions, then Mhm. Yeah. We all know why we're doing this. Yeah. Yes. So, any other questions? Ch. I think I think the summary in a narrative format would be would be sufficient. You know, you could talk through rather than put on a piece of paper. Yeah.

The other the only other question I had was um what is a housing unit? Is that defined by number of people, number of cars? What is what is a housing unit? I would have to look up Commerce's definition. And I guarantee you they have a definition of what they consider a unit. I would have to look up the specific definition and I can do that. Did you say Joe has his hand up? He does. Yes, Joe, please.

I do. I do. Well, I think it's it's very clear the city cannot force the builders to build 147 units a year. It's not possible. So all the city can do is as Phil was saying is provide the land, provide the proper zoning and then the market dictates it from there. We are a market driven society. And so there is I mean it's not a failure on Liberty Lakes's part that 147 units aren't being built every year. We've made the land available. We've made the uh made it as easy as possible to get uh uh uh the into the land in using our um uh laws and that type of thing. So I don't think I don't feel badly about this at all. This is not something we have any control over. So I that's my point. Thank you for keeping it short and sweet and to the point.

Yes, thank there is a definition, but it doesn't it doesn't add anything to what a housing unit is. No, really. I would think it would have to be a bedroom, a kitchen, and a bathroom. Yeah, but that'd be too specific for government to say we're creating space for an unknown, an extraterrestrial average median income is for Liberty Lake. I don't know for for Liberty Lake. I don't I I've looked it up several times for the county because that's the area median income that we have to go by is for the county.

And we have that map that has the demographic of each of the sections of Liberty Lake, but I don't know that we did an average. That's way back in our housing unit. I don't know the specific. We had the discussion because where I live has a whole bunch of the mobile homes and the manufactured homes and so the average income there 78,000 or something. It's going to be down. Yeah, it is. Would we be presumptuous to create our own what a housing unit is from a planning standpoint?

We may have that in our development code already. I would have again I would have to look for the specific definitions but for the for the purpose of this exercise we need to meet commerce's definition because commerce is the one that's giving us the allocation for the housing units. So we would want to make sure that we're sticking with with that with compliance in mind. Okay. Are we good? Um so other than this again we just kind of in the within the housing chapter the only other changes we're just updating the tables to match the land capacity analysis. So then we can move on. If nobody has any more questions or comments or anything like that, we'll move on to the transportation changes. Moving on. All right.

Yep. So the the changes for the transportation uh chapter really focused on um we added two appendices. Um one was the bicycle expansion and waybinding um kind of summary and the other was the transportation resiliency plan. Um the the bicycle expansion way finding appendix was was kind of new, but the transportation resil resiliency plan was always going to be part of the um document. It's just that we now were able to insert it uh and remove the placeholder. So you'll see on page it says page 14 um we added just a little reference here to this um bicycle expansion and wayfinding appendix.

Peter's not working. doesn't have sufficient data that they make. And so this this um appendix was we were asked by the parks um plan working group to to they thought they they created this and they thought it would fit best in our transportation plan as opposed to in the parks plan and so we just incorporated it essentially through an appendix and that's what and we've seen all this. Yeah. Yeah. So the the paragraph you have there in red on page 14, you're going to include that or you just going to say um as part of the parks plan, please reference appendex J regarding bicycle expansion and wayfinding. Yeah.

Or are you going to leave all that other language? Well, yeah. Everything in red was what what we were proposing to add um to the chapter. And then and then at the end here I've included the actual appendix so you can see what the wayfinding um appendix is. Sounds good. Okay. Yeah. To me the list of projects is ever lasting changing. It's always going to be ch I mean so the longterm document. So next month.

Yeah. So to me it just a simple statement just reference the appendix and what it what it the the purpose of the appendix and call it good but I'm good with it like it is too. Okay. I I do agree with uh Commissioner Foyer because that the to be more simplistic just guide them to the attendance. Yep. And leave out the um the did you know part um what we're doing because that just takes them right there or there's no needed explanation prior to saying you're going to be going to get your information from the bicycle expansion and wave finding.

So are we saying essentially to remove the first sentence there in red that's part of the parks plan? Right. Okay. Get rid of that. just remove the verbiage and just say the appendix J for the explanation. Yeah. So it could just be bicycle expansion and wayfinding C appendix J. Yeah. Okay. I says more again. Says no. Absolutely. Okay. We can make that work. And that's just in my opinion. Joe, does that sound good? Yes, I'm in agreement. I totally agree. Okay,

we can we can make that change. And then the only other um items you'll see in red changes were just renaming the appendices because the the letter changed. That's it. That was all of the proposed changes to the complaint this this go around. Okay. So, um, when we get into the draft and as we kind of talk about that and as we move forward, what I'm going to be asking is that whatever motion is made that it includes the changes as discussed, right?

So, unless you guys want us to make the changes and bring it back to you for another look. Um, then just making sure that it's um, you know, recommend XYZ with the changes as discussed and then we'll make them and move that um, they'll be included in the draft that's presented. So I have that written down is that we would we'll entertain a motion to accept the comp plan as proposed with provisions for city council approval. Perfect. Okay. Okay. So I will close out of these actually knowing that we all have already reviewed the full comprehensive draft plan online

per your link. Um, I didn't have one question about it. All 187 pages. I I printed an example just so that everybody can see why I didn't But you did it on on double-sided, too. I did do it doublesided. I just felt like it was an Mine's all single for why I didn't print nine of these. Unless there's something that's was there I mean that I you want to draw that you want to draw attention to I'm good with that document as plus our amended today.

Yes. Okay. If I mean I'm I'm as long as you guys are comfortable with recommending that we present this to council and council reviews it and then once council blesses that off then they will go to commerce for their 60-day review and we'll send it out to um regional agencies and we'll do the sea on it which takes about a month and then um and then you know whatever feedback we get from those outside agencies we'll bring that feedback back to you if it results in material changes um and then and then we'll be good to go. I just want to make sure everybody's comfortable with what's in this document. And if you have any questions or any comments or changes that now's now's the time to do that,

but it sounds like everybody's comfortable. Well, I'll make a motion then to propose. Are you good to you okay with that? I am. Okay, cool. make a motion to approve the full comprehensive draft plan with amendments identified today, April 22nd, uh for consideration to the city council. Second. Second by Joe Man. Any discussion? All in favor?

I posted pass unanimously. Thank you for giving it to us to review and now we're actually reviewing it before we come to meetings. So that shortens the amount of time for you guys too or lengthens the amount of time you have to stay around and fix it.

Just want to get back to where we're cruising through this agenda. You guys just blazed through like five slides more than that. So, stop sharing. I'm going to reshare so we can get back to our agenda. Citizen comments. That where we're at now? That is where we're at. Is anybody online, Lance or Kathy? No, not okay. We We do have a city administrator here. Do you have any comments or anything for us? Yeah, here just take one of ours.

I guess the only thing I would add is uh formal acknowledgement if you watched the council meeting if you wanted me to deliver that. Yes, thank you very much. The council formally confirmed Amy's appointment to the community development director position. Uh, and she was sworn in last night. So, she's officially now the community development director. And so, uh, round of applause would be one more. You don't have to say anything. And then,

okay. And just for uh Phil's benefit, the city council packet last night was 827 pages. Just I know FYI. Oh, I know. I was looking.

So, for my secretary's report, the only thing that I was going to ask was if there would be somebody willing um the chair or otherwise to give a report to council. Um, since we'll be moving this forward, it's probably a good opportunity, somebody to kind of somebody from the commission to kind of let them know, you know, this is what we've been working on and we hope that you um, you know, pass it or move forward with it. But if anybody is willing and able to give a report to city council on May 5th, anybody else want to do it? I mean, I'll do it, but I don't want to misrepresent. You are welcome to do it. All right then.

I'll be heading to Boston pretty soon after that. I think great. As an adjunct to adjunct to that, we should probably I would recommend a team do that. Yeah. Do the presentation fine with me? Back and forth, back and forth, back and forth for three minutes. It's it's you get a little bit more time than three minutes when it comes to those. You're not limited to citizen comment, but they do they do appreciate those being brief. They are. Yeah. There's not a lot of back and forth. Yeah. Oh, we'll chat. Okay. Awesome. Just like they did. We'll just summarize an awful lot. We sort of did that. You heard that the other day anyway. Mhm.

Right. That's all I have. Okay. Any other commissioner reports? Uh just a question. Yes. Uh can we talk about the remainder of the year's uh meeting times schedules? What's on your mind? Well, we've been doing two meetings a a month for a year and a half now. Mhm.

I'd rather just go back to one a month. I'm just speaking for myself. Is the workload Does the workload require two meetings a month? Well, I think that we can get through them. Um the what's remaining is mostly is the development code changes. Um SCJ is going to be helping us with a lot of those and explaining kind of what and and we've paired it down um from kind of an ambitious list to what what is required and what do we need to do to make sure that we're again in compliance. So, um the sign code workshop is kind of the only outlier there, but I think as long as we're um comfortable going for the full time, um on those single meetings, we we can probably get that done in one meeting a month.

Yeah. Or we have the meeting shorter and if we need a second meeting to finish something, we could do that. We could set a meeting time. But I think if we is I don't think anybody in here wants wants to have more meetings. And so if we can go back to the schedule that we had before with our regularly scheduled meeting and then if we need another meeting and we'll have a special meeting. Yeah, we can do that. Sure. I support that. When would we start that? Immediately or give Amy a little bit more time to get How much time do you need after this and after the city council? Aren't you going to be busy trying to make all that happen? Yeah. Do you need more work?

Yeah. I mean I Yes. saying I am busy after this is actually is accurate. Um but like I said SCJ is working on a lot of the development code changes they have and they've already streamlined their presentations which I appreciate

they have and and they have I believe the I I anticipate the first one really being more of an outline of the changes that are going to need to be made and kind of a timeline for that. So I don't anticipate that first presentation being too in the details. Um, but as more red lines become available and as we kind of work through those, then um there'll be more substance to those presentations as far as section numbers and actual red line language that we're proposing to change. Um, but again, I don't I don't know that two meetings a month is necessary for us to get through that because we have paired it down. If it is, it is fine, right? But during the summertime, it it's just reasonable to Yeah.

try to do what we can. But if we need to have us another meeting, then just send us an email and Yeah. and we could do it. Did we vote on this schedule? I don't remember doing it. No. Oh, yes, we did vote on this one. Did we vote on this one? Okay, then I'll entertain a motion to change the um number of meetings back to our regularly scheduled once a month. I move to change our meeting back to our regular Commissioner Garcia. Schedule second.

Second by Commissioner Jens. Any discussion? I think we're premature in doing that. I I think we should take a little bit of time particularly because of the changes within our organization and maybe do this the 1 of June. That would be my only opposition. So, two meetings next month basically. Did you

Well, I appreciate that statement. Um it also is a bit more clear that should we need to we would know that at the meeting and should we need to continue we still always have the option um a meeting at this at the on the fourth Wednesday. That's right. Yeah. We have the option which is always available uh than to cloud the schedule. And I say that only because some of us make our schedules, like right now, we're making it all the way through August.

And should we um hold up something we'd like to do in anticipation of these meetings, then we may have, you know, locked ourselves in. Well, that's that's exactly reflects my point. I'd like to plan as well for the future. That's why. And then all of a sudden, if we're going to plan to maybe have the meeting, that blocks that time out. So the time's blocked out anyhow. Whether we come or not, it doesn't matter. And if that happens, we have a couple of adjunct commissioners that can fill in if somebody can't make it. Okay. Have a motion and a second. All in favor? I

I opposed. I We're not going to say that who it was. We're just going to say it was almost unanimous. I don't see anybody arguing with that. Okay. And Amy and Lance, if you guys see that there's something, all you got to do is email whenever you see that it looks like we don't have enough time and we'll try to make it happen. And the same goes for the design review. I mean, you you have didn't you have to cancel a couple of design reviews, too? Okay. I'll just follow up with this. the the the habit of redlining the changes has been excellent. Yes.

And it makes it so much less burdensome on the volunteers that come here every twice a month for the last however how long um to quickly review it before the meeting comes. So when we get here we're not you know searching what you know you're not going line for line right because some of these changes are are uh just simple word smmithing, right? Yeah. So, so if we can continue to do that, then I think we set ourselves up for success for being, you know, using our time wisely during these meetings. Not saying we haven't. Um just continue with

that theory and I think we can just work our way through it and then we can do some of our housekeeping on our ordinance and Oh, yeah. things too because Okay. Anything else for the good of the order? Joe, anything? No, sir. All right. Entertain a motion to dismiss. Move to adjourn. Second. All in favor? I. Good night. Congratulations, Amy. I think speech. Speech. I think that was her.