The Spokane Valley Planning Commission held a study session on proposed code text amendment CTA-2025-0002 to consider permanent changes that would allow narrowly defined regional emergency-communications towers to exceed existing height limits.

Lori Barlow, senior planner in the Community and Economic Development Department, told commissioners the proposal responds to a request from the Spokane Regional Emergency Communications provider (SHREK) after staff determined the tower SHREK needs would exceed the city’s current height limits. The City Council previously adopted an emergency interim ordinance (Ordinance No. 25-013, adopted July 29, 2025) that temporarily allowed regional first-responder communications towers to have a support-tower height of up to 100 feet plus up to 20 feet for an antenna array (total 120 feet). The interim regulation expires in 180 days unless the council repeals, extends or modifies it.

Staff proposed folding the interim exception into the permanent code rather than leaving it as a standalone emergency clause. Under existing code language presented by staff, residential and mixed-use zones currently allow support towers up to 60 feet (plus a 20-foot antenna), while regional/commercial/industrial zones allow 80 feet (plus a 20-foot antenna). The interim ordinance expanded the support-tower allowance to 100 feet citywide for qualifying regional first-responder communications uses, with an additional 20-foot antenna allowance.

Commissioners focused their questions on limiting the exception so it would not broadly apply to residential areas, how to define “regional” and “first responder,” and whether the city should require a conditional use permit (CUP) for certain zones instead of creating a blanket height allowance. Several commissioners suggested narrowing the allowance to mixed-use and nonresidential zones or applying a CUP in residential areas so neighboring property owners would have a formal review and mitigation process. Legal counsel and staff noted the CUP process typically takes roughly three to four months, carries an application fee (staff estimated roughly a couple thousand dollars) plus an environmental-review fee (about $400), and could add costs to applicants who would assemble experts and legal support for high-stakes public-safety infrastructure.

City staff and the commission discussed alternative approaches: (1) keep the interim-like allowance as a permanent, narrow code exception limited by zone or use; (2) require a CUP in residential zones only while leaving an administrative allowance in nonresidential zones; or (3) require case-by-case review (CUP) citywide. Staff also raised the variance and administrative-exception processes as existing tools that can address unique situations but noted administrative exceptions have limited criteria and may not allow neighborhood input.

Timing was a repeated subject. Adam Knight and staff outlined the project schedule: SEPA and the ordinance published Oct. 3; public-comment period through Oct. 17; a public hearing and commission recommendation expected Oct. 23; findings of fact on Nov. 13; administrative report Nov. 25; first council ordinance reading Dec. 9; and council final action Dec. 16, 2025. Staff told the commission that if SHREK submits a complete building permit under the interim regulations and it is vested, the applicant may be able to proceed under the interim standards even if the permanent code is modified later.

Commissioners requested additional information for the next meeting, including: comparisons with neighboring jurisdictions’ tower rules (City of Spokane, Liberty Lake), clarification on the meaning and distribution of “neighborhood commercial” zones, confirmation whether SHREK has filed a building permit (vesting status), and suggested language options such as limiting the permanent exception to mixed-use and nonresidential zones or making increased heights subject to a CUP in residential zones.

No formal recommendation or vote on CTA-2025-0002 occurred at the study session; commissioners will consider a staff report, public testimony and any additional information at the next meeting before making a formal recommendation to City Council.