Spokane Valley Planning Commission Meeting - February 12, 2026

The Spokane Valley Planning Commission held a regular meeting on February 12, 2026, at 6:00 PM in City Hall. The main item was a study session on the Comprehensive Plan update (Valley 2046), reviewing draft chapters for Economic Development, Land Use, and Natural Resources. Commissioners provided extensive feedback on proposed land use scenarios, density increases, and related policies. No formal votes were taken on the plan; further discussion and a preferred land use scenario decision are expected in March.

Commission Reports

• Commissioner Winkler reported meeting with city staff about the Trent and Sullivan Transportation Improvement Project, noting a revised design featuring a roundabout on Trent and one roundabout on Sullivan, which he supports.
• Other commissioners reported nothing of substance.

Administrative Report

• Steve Roberge, Planning Manager, informed the commission that the City Council recently passed interim ordinances on battery energy storage facilities and retail marijuana, which will be rolled into the comp plan update.
• He also noted that scoping is open for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) related to the comp plan, which will help evaluate alternatives and inform final decisions.

Public Comment

• No members of the public spoke during the public comment period. No one was on Zoom.

Discussion Items: Comprehensive Plan Draft Element Review

• Elliot Weiss, Senior Planner at Community Attributes Inc., presented an overview of the comp plan update process (Valley 2046), emphasizing compliance with state mandates (e.g., HB 1220, 1110, 1337) regarding housing density, middle housing, and ADUs.
• The team presented three land use scenarios:
  • No Action Alternative: State requirements for ADUs and middle housing would still take effect, but no proactive city changes.
  • Scenario A (Limited Rezone + Upzone): Increase density in multifamily/mixed-use zones from 22 to 32 dwelling units per acre; rezone a portion of R4 land near Sprague Avenue to multifamily residential; allow multifamily in RC zones.
  • Scenario B (No Rezone, Stronger Upzone): Keep R4 zoning but increase density to 40 dwelling units per acre in multifamily/mixed-use zones to meet capacity requirements.
• Commissioners raised concerns about the impacts of increased density on infrastructure, traffic, schools, parks, the aquifer, and neighborhood character. Specific points:
  • Commissioner Winkler questioned the accuracy of population growth projections and the term "modest" for a 45% density increase (22 to 32 units/acre). He urged inclusion of annexation opportunities and clearer data on commuting patterns.
  • Commissioner McKinley asked about the capacity of industrial land and the strain on services.
  • Commissioner Weatherman noted the existing traffic congestion in areas like Sullivan and Pines, stressing the need for transportation modeling.
  • Commissioner Pockel expressed concern about stormwater drainage and loss of green space.
• Staff clarified that state mandates require these changes; the city is trying to minimize local impacts. Director Mike Basinger explained that land values in Spokane Valley make high-density development unlikely in practice.
• Commissioner Winkler criticized the clarity of real estate market language in the economic development element and requested updated commuting data with more location detail.
• The Natural Resources element was praised for its minimal changes.

Key Outcomes

• No formal motions or votes were taken on the comprehensive plan elements. The commission provided substantive feedback to be considered in revisions.
• The preferred land use scenario will be deliberated further; city council is expected to provide direction in March.
• The planning commission will hold a follow-up roundtable discussion at its next meeting to continue the conversation.
• Written feedback from commissioners is welcome before the next meeting.
• Commissioner Winkler requested a response to a letter from Bo McCann regarding adding property to the urban growth boundary; staff confirmed follow-up.
• A thank-you letter from a resident (Ms. Rogers) was read, expressing gratitude for the commission’s work.
• The meeting adjourned at an unspecified time.