North Greenacres Neighborhood

Sp.Valley Comp Plan Draft - Neighborhood Testimony

Quality of Life and Outline of Issues

North Greenacres Neighborhood Official Comments
Comments on Spokane Valley’s Comprehensive Plan Draft
June 22, 2005 and June 23, 2005

Our neighborhood has been made aware that the Planning Department had misconstrued the comments that were hand delivered in April 2005. This was thought to be either an entire Neighborhood Chapter or even worse a poorly constructive Neighborhood Plan. It is our pleasure to assure the Planning Department, City Council, and Planning Commission that we have done what we were asked. We read the Draft Plan and as directed by staff, noted what was not present in the Comprehensive plan draft and made recommendations and comments on what was in the Comprehensive Plan Draft. We made an attempt to organize the information. Most likely this was simply a human error of skimming through and missing the information in the cover letter that led to this misunderstanding.

We must note that we were assured at GMA community meetings by staff, “We’re going to write what we think you told us, and if we didn’t get it right, tell us and we’ll go back and do it again.” We took them at their word. Another interesting rumor regarded the formation of a Spokane Valley Neighborhood Council. We are not interested in setting up a pseudo-governmental organization that weighs in on everything. Our goal has been to have neighborhood associations, business and other recognized agencies and staff coordinate and work together when it directly benefits or effects an area. With that said, and having clarified any misunderstanding, hopefully now, we are all on the same page.

The City staff has done an extraordinary job of compiling and writing a technical and important tome of work in record time. In light of all their other duties and the enormous workload that is entailed in public meetings as well as the routine work of the city, we would like to extend our sincere thanks for their efforts.

The short period of time between the announcement of the new draft, received on May 25, 2005 via email and the time allotted for public hearings, June 1, June 16, June 22, and June 23, constitutes a cautionary concern for the legitimacy of public participation. Time is not adequate to read the new document, and coordinate our comments.

Despite poor attendance, it should not preclude more opportunities for those who desire to have meaningful participation that provides thoughtful response.

Preserve Quality of Life

The final product of our first comprehensive plan will have far reaching ramifications. Quality of life can easily be lost in the pursuit of what is deemed efficient or useful. Our legislature as well as many other areas of the country, believe quality of life is of prime importance. (…uncoordinated and unplanned growth, together with a lack of common goals expressing the public’s interest in the conservation and wise use of our lands, pose a threat to the environment, sustainable economic development and the health, safety, and high quality of life enjoyed by the residents of this state.) RCW 36.70A.010

Lake Oswego, spent a year studying the impacts of anticipated growth, in order to write a detailed growth policy to protect the community from likely impacts.
Quality-of-life indicators were created to measure quality of life, and are incorporated into development regulations as criteria for determining impacts of future development on the community.

The benefits gained by growth may only enrich a few while the real cost in terms of higher taxes, congestion, and quality of life will be felt across the entire community. The cumulative cost of each action exponentially increases over time. Change does not just alter the environment but has the power to change our quality of life. This poses a challenge and the ability to utilize the many talents across our community to bring the needed wisdom to balance change. The true measure of whether we have achieved “growth” or merely density lies in quality of life.

Our legislature in writing, The Growth Management Act, recognized there was not consensus of what entails wise use of our land. They passed this Act to promote wisdom and quality of life, utilizing a bottom up process so the citizenry would shape this plan. Neighborhoods have become a fundamental building block of wise planning. Once growth in one area is filled, it looks to another area. The quality of what is left determines the future, not growth.

Looking at an individual home without ever looking inside would not make one adept at planning the rooms. You could make general assumptions but choice of colors, furniture, and carpeting without getting this family’s desires would be a recipe for disaster. This is what a comprehensive plan without a detailed Sub-area/Neighborhood section comprises.

Management is the other side of this Act. Practices that ignored the existing land uses by designating them as non-conforming uses would seem to ignore the legislative mandate to preserve our high quality of life. Preserving existing large parcel uses may well provide future needs for parkland as the city becomes more fiscally solvent, while providing green and open space for both aesthetic and environmental protection. The following comprises our recommendations.
Outline of Major Recommendations for Inclusion in SVCP Draft

A. Present SVCP Draft Needs a Dedicated Neighborhood Chapter and integration of these goals through all chapters.

There is a lack of a Dedicated Chapter or even Sub-Section to Guide Sub-Area/Neighborhood Planning.

Neighborhoods and Sub-Areas (Including planning of City Center, Hospital District, etc.) are most effectively planned utilizing a Sub-Area Neighborhood Chapter.

Economic Development is more effectively supported utilizing the expert information of those most acquainted with area trends and needs.

Strengthening communication between development interest, city staff and neighborhoods avoids the cost of hearings and delays in projects.

A more Equitable process - citizens less familiar with legal process and government need an easy to understand guide for participation.

*The following pages (6 – 13) begin our detailed submission of Sub-area/Neighborhood Plan as a dedicated chapter.