City Planning Commission

PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA WEDNESDAY, April 14, 2021 4 P.M. CITY HALL HELD REMOTELY PURSUANT TO GOVERNOR INSLEE’S ORDER 20‐28 DATED MARCH 24, 2020 – ALL PUBLIC MEETINGS WILL BE HELD REMOTELY. The Planning Commission will participate via ZOOM. The public can participate via the following:  Sign up to provide Public Comment at the meeting via calling in  Submit Written Public Comment Prior to 2 pm on March 24, 2021  Join the Zoom Meeting Questions or Need Assistance? Please contact Planning Commission Clerk Megan Abhold at mabhold@libertylakewa.gov 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. GENERAL BUSINESS:  Review of Agenda  Approval of Minutes from March 24, 2021  Ratify Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations for the Proposed Amendments to the Landscape Code  Ratify Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations for the Proposed Amendments to the Sign Code 4. PRESENTATIONS/WORKSHOP:  Workshop on 2021 Proposed Comprehensive Plan & Code Amendment: Meadowwood Technology Park Comprehensive Plan Land Use & Zone Change Application  Presentation on City of Liberty Lake 2020 Development Statistics 5. REPORTS:  Secretary’s Report  Planning Commissioner Reports 6. Citizens Comments 7. Adjournment Next Meeting: May 12, 2020  PUBLIC COMMENT If you wish to provide oral public comments or testimony during the Planning Commission meeting, please register through this link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89702657428?pwd=dzlsSXZlUDZPVzJ6b0R6Z2MxbWYvZz09  WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS If you wish to provide written public comments for the upcoming council meeting, please email your comments to mabhold@libertylakewa.gov by 2:00 p.m. the day of the Planning Commission meeting and include all of the following information with your comments: 1. The Meeting Date 2. Your First and Last Name 3. If you are a Liberty Lake resident 4. The Agenda Item(s) which you are speaking about  JOIN ZOOM MEETING To view the meeting live via Zoom Meeting, join the Zoom web meeting: Meeting Instructions: To join the Zoom web meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89702657428?pwd=dzlsSXZlUDZPVzJ6b0R6Z2MxbWYvZz09 Meeting ID: 897 0265 7428 Passcode: 912134 Dial In Phone Numbers:  +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)  +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)  PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24TH, 2021 HELD REMOTELY Planning Commission Members Present: Richard Siler, Joe Mann, Tim Olsen, Jamie Baird, Stephen Ramirez & Marc Rubin. Adjunct Member(s) Present: Marilyn Van Degrift Absent: N/A Staff Present: Lisa Key & Megan Abhold Call to Order: Meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. Roll Call: A quorum of members was present. Review of Agenda & Approval of Minutes: Commissioner Baird moved that the February 10th minutes be approved, seconded by Commissioner Rubin. The motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing: Landscape Code Amendments: Director Key presented on the proposed amendments landscape amendments while detailing the existing landscape standards for reference of differences and current issues. Public Testimony was opened to the public. No one from the public was in attendance. Commission Siler asked if any Commissioners had any comments in regard to the proposed landscape code amendments. Commissioners discussed various grammatical errors, suggested changes regarding applicability to multi-family units and developments, as well as discussion of the reasoning that led up to the proposed landscape standard changes. Commissioner Siler suggested to go through the criteria for approval to see if the proposed landscape amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Criteria for Approval: 1. Such amendment IS consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and IS NOT detrimental to the public welfare; Commissioner Van Degrift dissented. 2. Change in economic, technological, or land use conditions HAS NOT occurred to warrant modification; all agreed. 3. It is found that an amendment IS NOT necessary to correct an error; all agreed. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 1|3 March 24, 2021  4. It is found that an amendment IS necessary to clarify meaning or intent Commissioner Van Degrift dissented. 5. It is found that an amendment IS necessary to provide for a use(s) that was not previously addressed; Commissioner Van Degrift dissented. 6. Those amendments ARE deemed necessary as being in the public interest; Commissioner Van Degrift dissented. Commissioner Siler asked for a motion. Commissioner Van Degrift made a motion to approve with modifications; the motion failed for lack of a second. Commissioner Siler asked for a motion to approve as written. Commissioner Mann so moved, seconded by Commissioner Ramirez. The motion passed with 6 in favor, one opposed. Proposed Blade, Awning, Canopy & Marquee Sign Amendments: Director Key presented on the proposed amendments allowing for blade, awning, canopy, and marquee signs in various zones across the City. Public testimony was opened. Kevin Schneidmiller discussed why Greenstone brought forward these suggested changes to the sign code amendment. These changes would benefit the RD neighborhood due to the mixed-use of residential and neighborhood commercial, especially with the introduction of a blade sign. Commissioner Siler appreciated Kevin Schneidmiller pushing forward the proposed changes. Commissioner Olsen also stated his appreciation as a resident of the River District. Commissioners further discussed future changes that could be made to the sign code, including electronic message signs. Commissioner Siler suggested to go through the criteria for approval for the proposed sign code amendments. Criteria for Approval: 1. Such amendment IS consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and IS NOT detrimental to the public welfare; all agreed. 2. Change in economic, technological, or land use conditions has occurred to warrant modification; Commissioner Van Degrift dissented. 3. It is found that an amendment IS NOT necessary to correct an error; all agreed. 4. It is found that an amendment IS necessary to clarify meaning or intent; all agreed. 5. It is found that an amendment IS necessary to provide for a use(s) that was not previously addressed; all agreed. 6. Those amendments ARE deemed necessary as being in the public interest; all agreed. Commissioner Siler asked for a motion to approve as written. Commissioner Baird so moved, seconded by Ramirez. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 2|3 March 24, 2021 Secretary’s Report: Lisa Key reported on the below listed items:  Design Committee reviewed three projects in March: o Cornerstone Tenant Improvement o Carpet One o Auto Dealership  Pre-Application Meeting occurred for a 280,000 square foot distribution center on E Appleway Ave.  Two Commissioners have resigned this year. Two vacant positions open: one full-time member, one adjunct. Currently advertising for applications through March 26th. o Mayor Kaminskas will hold interviews first week in April.  April Workshop with Greenstone in relation to a Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zone Change request  Annual Report on 2020 Development in April. Planning Commissioner Reports:  Commissioner Siler – Planning Commission Report to City Council April 6th. Landscape Workshop April 20th, 2021, Public Hearing – first meeting in May. Sign Code Workshop – first meeting in May. Public Hearing – second meeting in May.  Commissioner Siler requested someone to present the Planning Commission Report to Council on April 6th. Commissioner Mann volunteered to present the report. Citizens Comments:  N/A Adjournment: Commissioner Baird moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Commissioner Mann which carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 5:33 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 3|3 March 24, 2021  PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE MATTER OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE HEARING DATE: March 24, 2021 @ 4:00 p.m. PROPOSAL COORDINATOR: Lisa D. Key, Director of Planning & Engineering Services PROPOSAL SUMMARY: Location Citywide Proposal City Initiated Amendments to Landscape Standards in City of Liberty Lake Information Development Code City Development Code §10‐1C: Definitions (“Native Plants” & “Adaptive Code Section Plants”) City Development Code §10‐3C: Landscaping, Street Trees, Fences & Walls Proposed See Exhibit A. Amendments CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK & PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS: City Code §10‐4B‐5: Type IV Projects: Development Code Amendments are classified as Type IV Projects in the City of Liberty Lake Development Code and are considered legislative decisions. The procedural requirements and decision criteria are detailed in City Development Code §10‐4B‐5. STATE OF WASHINGTON REGULATORY FRAMEWORK, AUTHORITY & REQUIREMENTS: RCW 36.70A: Growth Management Act (GMA): Liberty Lake is mandated to plan under GMA. The City’s Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations were developed in accordance with the requirements of GMA. Development Regulations are required to implement the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and any amendments to City Development Code must be consistent with the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan. The City must provide reasonable public notice of proposed amendments and opportunities for public participation. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations 1 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Landscape Standards  WAC 365‐196: Growth Management ‐‐ Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and Development Regulations Development code amendments must comply with procedures established in WAC 365‐196, including rules regarding internal consistency, interjurisdictional coordination, public participation requirements, and notification to the Department of Commerce of “intent to adopt” proposed code amendments at least 60 days prior to final adoption. WAC 197‐11: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Rules: Development code amendments are subject to SEPA review as a non‐project action, in accordance with procedures established in WAC 197‐11. SEPA REVIEW: SEPA Checklists were completed for the proposed amendments to landscaping standards contained in the City of Liberty Lake Development Code. The City of Liberty Lake Planning & Engineering Services determined that the proposal, as a non‐project review, would have no significant adverse environmental impacts and issued a Determination of Non‐Significance (DNS) and Adoption of Existing Environmental Document on February 19, 2021. The City adopted the Spokane County Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan that was prepared on November 22, 2000 and was previously adopted for the original City of Liberty Lake Comprehensive Plan and Development Code, as well as the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Liberty Lake Urban Growth Area Boundary Alternatives that was prepared on December 13, 2006. The Notice of Availability, SEPA Checklist and Threshold Determination, and Amendment Document were routed to agencies on December 14, 2018 and a Notice of Availability was posted at the Liberty Lake Municipal Library and at City Hall, as well as being published in the February 26, 2021 edition of the Valley News Herald. On February 22, 2021, the Notice of Availability, Notice of Hearing, SEPA Checklist and Threshold Determination, and Amendment Lists were also posted on the City website, and the notice and a link to the City website was emailed to the public notice group, as well as the amendment applicants. Comments on the SEPA Checklist and Threshold Determination were due by 4 p.m., on March 9, 2021. No comments were received. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION: October 9, 2019; Planning Commission Workshops: November 13, 2019; Agenda & packet published on City website & distributed to City’s December 11, 2019; “Notify Me” e‐mail distribution list. January 8, 2020; February 12, 2020; March 11, 2020; December 9, 2020; and, February 10, 2021. February 22, 2021 SEPA Notice of Availability/ Planning Commission Public Hearing Notice: NOA packet with SEPA checklist and DNS e‐mailed to involved agencies, adjacent jurisdictions, “Notify Me” e‐mail distribution list & posted on website. February 26, 2021 SEPA Notice of Availability/Planning Commission Public Hearing Notice: Published in Valley News Herald. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations 2 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Landscape Standards  March 9, 2021 SEPA Comment Period Ends March 24, 2021 Planning Commission Hearing & Recommendation: Agenda & staff report published on City website & distributed to City’s “Notify Me” e‐mail distribution list on March 17, 2021. AGENCY REVIEW: SEPA Distribution List & Adjacent Jurisdictions: Liberty Lake Police Department; Avista; Century Link; Central Valley School District; City of Spokane Valley; CDA Tribe; Comcast; Spokane Clean Air; Spokane Valley Fire District; Spokane Transit Authority; Spokane Regional Health District; Spokane Tribe; WS Department of Ecology; S Department of Fish & Wildlife; WS Department of Natural Resources; WS Department of Transportation; Spokane Regional Transportation Council; Liberty Lake Water & Sewer District; Consolidated Irrigation District Spokane County Utilities; Spokane County Planning; WS Department of Commerce. Agencies Notified Notification Comment Summary SEPA Distribution List & SEPA Notice of Availability; No comments received Adjacent Jurisdictions Proposed Amendment Summary; Determination of Non‐Significance (DNS) Emailed 2/22/2021 PUBLIC COMMENTS (WRITTEN): Name & Address Comment Summary N/A No comments received RELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS & POLICIES: Economic Development Goal 1: Maintain a healthy and sustainable local economy. Natural Environment Goal 3: Maintain air quality in the City of Liberty Lake that protects human health, prevents injury to plant and animal life, and preserves clear visibility. Natural Environment Goal 4: Preserve the unique beauty of the community through the conservation of the native trees. Governance Policy 1: The City shall use the website, email, social media, newsletters, local newspapers, special announcements and other techniques to keep the community well‐informed. Urban Design Policy 5: Require the planting of curbside trees. Identify those species of trees that are most appropriate for curbside plantings, considering safety, soils, aesthetics, and compatibility with infrastructure, and require species diversity to protect from disease and promote neighborhood identity. Urban Design Policy 11: Native landscape materials and site‐sensitive architectural designs shall be incorporated into all public and private building projects to enhance the cohesion between the natural and built environments. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations 3 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Landscape Standards Urban Design Policy 13: Require landscaping in parking areas to avoid large uninterrupted areas of asphalt. Transportation Policy 23: Encourage curbside landscaping consistent with safety requirements. Identify those species of landscaping that are most appropriate for curbside planting. Natural Environment Policy 12: Water‐conserving landscaping and other conservation practices should be encouraged. Incentives should be used to reduce water consumption. Natural Environment Policy 19: Encourage public awareness of the increased property values associated with tree conservation. Natural Environment Policy 21: Encourage tree planting programs that emphasize native species and encourage species diversity. Natural Environment Policy 22: Maintain tree conservation regulations that discourage removal of mature trees, require appropriate tree replanting when removal is necessary to accommodate development, and provide incentive to conserve trees in accordance with the City’s designation as a “Tree City USA”. STAFF ANALYSIS: The Planning Commission established the following goals for the proposed Landscape Code Amendments: 1. Allow for more designer creativity rather than prescriptive methodology. Provide performance‐based guidelines. 2. Maintain the tree canopy in the City, but allow for different configurations. 3. Maintain streetscape aesthetic, views from rights‐of way. 4. Emphasize and enhance safety considerations in landscape design, with specific consideration given to: • Bicycle & pedestrian safety; • Vehicular ingress & egress; and, • CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) Principles 5. Reduce the amount of maintenance for owners (both for snow and plants) and reduce initial costs of construction. 6. Acknowledge adjacencies for required buffering (like zones/uses may not need buffering), maybe add buffers for other‐than vehicular areas. 7. Reduce water usage, incentivize the use of native plants and xeriscaping. 8. Incentivize the use of existing/mature trees rather than replacement. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations 4 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Landscape Standards FINDINGS: 1. The required SEPA review has been completed on the proposed amendment. 2. All public and agency notice requirements were met and accomplished in a timely manner. 3. The public was provided the opportunity for early and continuous participation. 4. The public had the opportunity to submit written comments and testify at a public hearing before the Planning Commission. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL: The criteria for approval of a code amendment are established in City Code §10‐4B‐5(A), which states: A. Criteria for Amendment: The City may amend development regulations when it finds that any of the following applies: 1. Such amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is not detrimental to the public welfare; 2. Change in economic, technological, or land use conditions has occurred to warrant modification; 3. It is found that an amendment is necessary to correct an error; 4. It is found that an amendment is necessary to clarify meaning or intent; 5. It is found that an amendment is necessary to provide for a use(s) that was not previously addressed; or 6. Those amendments as deemed necessary by the City Council as being in the public interest. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed amendment IS consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and IS NOT detrimental to the public welfare. 2. The proposed amendment IS NOT warranted by a change in economic, technological and/or land use conditions. 3. The proposed amendment IS NOT necessary to correct an error. 4. The proposed amendment IS necessary to clarify meaning or intent. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations 5 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Landscape Standards  5. The proposed amendment IS necessary to provide for a proposed use that was not previously addressed. 6. The proposed amendment IS deemed necessary as being in the public interest. RECOMMENDATION: In the matter of proposed amendments to Landscape Standards in the City of Liberty Lake Development Code (as detailed in Exhibit A of this Staff Report), the City of Liberty Lake Planning Commission recommends to City Council that the amendment be APPROVED as written. The Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation as detailed above were ratified by the Liberty Lake Planning Commission on April 14, 2021. ________________________________________ Lisa D. Key, Director City of Liberty Lake Planning & Engineering Services Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations 6 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Landscape Standards  PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE MATTER OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE SIGN CODE ALLOWING BLADE, AWNING, CANOPY & MARQUEE SIGNS HEARING DATE: March 24, 2021 @ 4:00 p.m. PROPOSAL COORDINATOR: Lisa D. Key, Director of Planning & Engineering Services PROPOSAL SUMMARY: Location Citywide Amendments to Sign Regulations in City of Liberty Lake Development Code to Proposal allow for Blade, Awning, Canopy and Marquee Signs, and provide standards Information associated therewith City Development Code §10‐1C: Definitions (“Awning Sign” , “Blade Sign”, Code Section “Canopy Sign”, and “Marquee Sign”) City Development Code §10‐3E: Signage Standards Proposed See Exhibit A. Amendments CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK & PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS: City Code §10‐4B‐5: Type IV Projects: Development Code Amendments are classified as Type IV Projects in the City of Liberty Lake Development Code and are considered legislative decisions. The procedural requirements and decision criteria are detailed in City Development Code §10‐4B‐5. STATE OF WASHINGTON REGULATORY FRAMEWORK, AUTHORITY & REQUIREMENTS: RCW 36.70A: Growth Management Act (GMA): Liberty Lake is mandated to plan under GMA. The City’s Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations were developed in accordance with the requirements of GMA. Development Regulations are required to implement the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and any amendments to City Development Code must be consistent with the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan. The City must provide reasonable public notice of proposed amendments and opportunities for public participation. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation 1 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Signage Standards  WAC 365‐196: Growth Management ‐‐ Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and Development Regulations Development code amendments must comply with procedures established in WAC 365‐196, including rules regarding internal consistency, interjurisdictional coordination, public participation requirements, and notification to the Department of Commerce of “intent to adopt” proposed code amendments at least 60 days prior to final adoption. WAC 197‐11: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Rules: Development code amendments are subject to SEPA review as a non‐project action, in accordance with procedures established in WAC 197‐11. SEPA REVIEW: SEPA Checklists were completed for the proposed amendments to landscaping standards contained in the City of Liberty Lake Development Code. The City of Liberty Lake Planning & Engineering Services determined that the proposal, as a non‐project review, would have no significant adverse environmental impacts and issued a Determination of Non‐Significance (DNS) and Adoption of Existing Environmental Document on February 19, 2021. The City adopted the Spokane County Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan that was prepared on November 22, 2000 and was previously adopted for the original City of Liberty Lake Comprehensive Plan and Development Code, as well as the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Liberty Lake Urban Growth Area Boundary Alternatives that was prepared on December 13, 2006. The Notice of Availability, SEPA Checklist and Threshold Determination, and Amendment Document were routed to agencies on December 14, 2018 and a Notice of Availability was posted at the Liberty Lake Municipal Library and at City Hall, as well as being published in the February 26, 2021 edition of the Valley News Herald. On February 22, 2021, the Notice of Availability, Notice of Hearing, SEPA Checklist and Threshold Determination, and Amendment Lists were also posted on the City website, and the notice and a link to the City website was emailed to the public notice group, as well as the amendment applicants. Comments on the SEPA Checklist and Threshold Determination were due by 4 p.m., on March 9, 2021. No comments were received. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION: December 9, 2020; Planning Commission Workshops: January 13, 2021; and, Agenda & packet published on City website & distributed to City’s February 10, 2021 “Notify Me” e‐mail distribution list. February 22, 2021 SEPA Notice of Availability/ Planning Commission Public Hearing Notice: NOA packet with SEPA checklist and DNS e‐mailed to involved agencies, adjacent jurisdictions, “Notify Me” e‐mail distribution list & posted on website. February 26, 2021 SEPA Notice of Availability/Planning Commission Public Hearing Notice: Published in Valley News Herald. March 9, 2021 SEPA Comment Period Ends March 24, 2021 Planning Commission Hearing & Recommendation: Agenda & staff report published on City website & distributed to City’s “Notify Me” e‐mail distribution list on March 17, 2021. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation 2 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Signage Standards  AGENCY REVIEW: SEPA Distribution List & Adjacent Jurisdictions: Liberty Lake Police Department; Avista; Century Link; Central Valley School District; City of Spokane Valley; CDA Tribe; Comcast; Spokane Clean Air; Spokane Valley Fire District; Spokane Transit Authority; Spokane Regional Health District; Spokane Tribe; WS Department of Ecology; S Department of Fish & Wildlife; WS Department of Natural Resources; WS Department of Transportation; Spokane Regional Transportation Council; Liberty Lake Water & Sewer District; Consolidated Irrigation District Spokane County Utilities; Spokane County Planning; WS Department of Commerce. Agencies Notified Notification Comment Summary SEPA Distribution List & SEPA Notice of Availability; No comments received Adjacent Jurisdictions Proposed Amendment Summary; Determination of Non‐Significance (DNS) Emailed 2/22/2021 PUBLIC COMMENTS (WRITTEN): Name & Address Comment Summary N/A No comments received RELEVANT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS & POLICIES: Governance Goal 1: Actively involve residents, businesses, and property owners in the governance of the City. Land Use Goal 2: Encourage development in the Central Business District that advances the City identity, provides transportation linkages, and supports a pedestrian friendly environment. Urban Design Goal 1: Maintain the urban village character and the scenic resources of the community. Economic Development Goal 1: Maintain a healthy and sustainable local economy. Governance Policy 1: The City shall use the website, email, social media, newsletters, local newspapers, special announcements and other techniques to keep the community well‐informed. Urban Design Policy 8: Continue to implement and strengthen standards for the scale and intensity of commercial signs that protect views and minimize signage clutter while still allowing adequate business identification Urban Design Policy 9: Prohibit construction of new video boards, billboards, and electronically changeable message signs, except under limited circumstances. Work with business owners to transform such existing signs while providing the option of directional signage. Urban Design Policy 19(d): Signs should be regulated to reduce glare and other adverse visual impacts on nearby residents without limiting their potential contribution to the color and character of the center. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation 3 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Signage Standards Urban Design Policy 20(c): Limit sign height and size. Economic Development Policy 5: Provide consistent, fair, and timely regulations that are flexible, responsive, and effective. STAFF ANALYSIS: The proposed amendments were requested by a local developer to provide more options for pedestrian‐ oriented signage, to include blade signs, awning signs, canopy and marquee signs. The standards contained in the proposed amendments were developed through a series of Planning Commission workshops. FINDINGS: 1. The required SEPA review has been completed on the proposed amendment. 2. All public and agency notice requirements were met and accomplished in a timely manner. 3. The public was provided the opportunity for early and continuous participation. 4. The public had the opportunity to submit written comments and testify at a public hearing before the Planning Commission. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL: The criteria for approval of a code amendment are established in City Code §10‐4B‐5(A), which states: A. Criteria for Amendment: The City may amend development regulations when it finds that any of the following applies: 1. Such amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is not detrimental to the public welfare; 2. Change in economic, technological, or land use conditions has occurred to warrant modification; 3. It is found that an amendment is necessary to correct an error; 4. It is found that an amendment is necessary to clarify meaning or intent; 5. It is found that an amendment is necessary to provide for a use(s) that was not previously addressed; or 6. Those amendments as deemed necessary by the City Council as being in the public interest. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed amendment IS consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and IS NOT detrimental to the public welfare. Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation 4 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Signage Standards  2. The proposed amendment IS warranted by a change in economic, technological and/or land use conditions. 3. The proposed amendment IS NOT necessary to correct an error. 4. The proposed amendment IS necessary to clarify meaning or intent. 5. The proposed amendment IS necessary to provide for a proposed use that was not previously addressed. 6. The proposed amendment IS deemed necessary as being in the public interest. RECOMMENDATION: In the matter of proposed amendments to Sign Code Regulations in the City of Liberty Lake Development Code (as detailed in Exhibit A of this Staff Report), the City of Liberty Lake Planning Commission recommends to City Council that the amendment be APPROVED as written. The Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation as detailed above were ratified by the Liberty Lake Planning Commission on April 14, 2021. ________________________________________ Lisa D. Key, Director City of Liberty Lake Planning & Engineering Services Planning Commission Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation 5 Proposed Amendments to the City of Liberty Lake Development Code – Signage Standards