Spokane Valley Planning Commission Study Session on Land Use Scenarios - December 11, 2025
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Spokane Valley Planning Commission Study Session on Land Use Scenarios - December 11, 2025
The Spokane Valley Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Thursday, December 11, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall. The agenda stated there would be no public comment opportunity. The meeting featured a round-table study session on draft land use scenarios designed to satisfy state-mandated housing allocations, with discussion of trade-offs, infrastructure concerns, and community character.
Routine Approvals
- Excused absences were granted for Commissioners Robertson and Weatherman by unanimous vote.
- The meeting agenda was approved unanimously.
- Minutes from the November 13, 2025 special meeting and regular meeting were each approved unanimously.
Commission and Administrative Reports
- Commissioner Wilson reported attending the city's Christmas tree lighting ceremony, estimating at least 1,500 attendees and calling it a great community event.
- Staff reminded the commission that there will be no second meeting in December and no first meeting in January; the next meeting will be the second meeting in January 2026.
- Two Planning Commission positions are open; applications are due December 19, 2025.
Study Session: Land Use Scenarios
Steve Roberge presented the scenarios, with context provided by Mike Bessinger, Community and Economic Development Director.
- The city must plan for approximately 16,600 housing units over the next 20 years. The allocation is broken into income brackets based on Area Median Income, roughly $100,000 for a family of four in the Spokane Valley area.
- State law requires at least six of nine defined middle housing types to be allowed in all predominantly residential zones. The state also mandates allowing up to four units per parcel, potentially six near transit.
- No Action Alternative: If the city makes no changes, preemptive state bills would still impose middle housing and ADU mandates. This scenario is non-compliant with state housing requirements, risking loss of grants and other penalties. Chairman McKinley noted that 71% of the city's capital budget comes from grants and awards.
- Scenario A (Limited Rezone/Up Zone): This scenario includes rezone of R4 land north of Sprague Avenue between Valleyway and the corridor mixed-use zone to residential multifamily, plus higher densities in commercial/multifamily zones up to about 32 units per acre (with R4 up to 41 units/acre).
- Scenario B (No Rezone, Stronger Up Zone): This scenario keeps current zoning but increases densities in multifamily and commercial zones to about 40 units per acre.
- Staff stated that expanding the Urban Growth Area would be very difficult to justify under state criteria. Annexing existing UGA areas would add additional housing allocation, and past analysis found most areas would be a net financial drain.
Commissioner Positions and Discussion
- Several commissioners expressed concern that state mandates reduce local control and could degrade quality of life by straining roads, utilities, schools, public safety, and other infrastructure.
- Commissioner Wilson emphasized the importance of homeownership, architecture that blends with neighborhoods, and addressing infrastructure capacity. He also announced he will step down from the commission in January.
- Commissioner Meyer supported embracing change and providing more affordable and diverse housing options within existing neighborhoods, saying the city should attract young families. Several commissioners discussed the potential for mixed-use redevelopment of underutilized commercial corridors like the auto row area along Sprague.
- Mike Bessinger explained that the current land use map reflects years of community input, and staff tried to incorporate state mandates while preserving neighborhood character. He noted that unlimited density in corridor mixed-use zones has not produced high-rises because the market does not support them.
Key Outcomes
- No formal decisions or votes were taken on the land use scenarios; the session was intended for discussion.
- Staff asked commissioners to reflect on the scenarios and on which middle housing typologies best fit Spokane Valley.
- New commissioners will be oriented before the next business meeting.
- The meeting adjourned with farewells to outgoing commissioners, including Commissioner Wilson and Commissioner Kelly, who is moving to the city council.
Meeting Transcript
Are we ready to go? Um I'd like to uh call the meeting for Thursday, December 11th, 2025 of the Spokane Planning Commission uh uh Spokane Valley Planning Commission to order at six o'clock. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God. Chairman McKinley. Here Commissioner Robinson Robertson. Commissioner Weatherman. Commissioner Meyer. Here. Commissioner Kelly. Present. Commissioner Winkler. Here. Commissioner Wilson. Sure. Um we'll take a I think Robertson and also Weatherman said that they were not going to be here at the last meeting. So I take a motion for an excused absence for both of them. Move to excuse absences for Weatherman and Robertson. Second. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Pass. Um approval of the agenda. So move. Second. Um before I call for the vote. We're because it's more of a discussion today, it it's the reason we're down here and um not that we've all been demoted. It's so it once we get into the presentation, it'll be kind of a little bit more. We'll just open it up. So all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Approval of the minutes from November thirteenth, two thousand twenty-five. Um so do we have we have two? Yes. Yeah. Yeah, two minutes. Are we required to uh consider them separately? Yes, we are. Okay. Yes, we are can I ask why we had a I didn't did we have two meetings on that day or no, it's because one was one was a special meeting, and so we have to treat uh treat the open house as a special meeting. I moved to approve the minutes uh from the special meeting on November thirteenth, 2025. I second. Okay, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Um and the approval of the November thirteenth minutes. So I had removed reviewed those minutes um and also went back and watched our um uh commission meeting from that evening and uh I would uh I feel they're accurately represent um the uh proceedings, so I move to approve them. Uh the regular meeting minutes from November thirteenth, twenty twenty-five.
openpublica.com