La Center planning commission recommends Downtown and Timon Landing subarea plans with outreach, card-room limits

La Center Planning Commission recommended that City Council adopt the Downtown and Timon Landing subarea plans, the planned-action environmental review and related amendments to the La Center Comprehensive Plan and La Center Municipal Code Title 18, following a public hearing on June 11.

The commission voted to forward a recommendation to city council with two stipulations: keep card rooms limited to the existing card-room overlay rather than allowing them broadly in the C‑1 commercial zone, and direct city staff to perform additional outreach to parcel owners affected by the rezones (staff said a certified-mail follow-up would be sent before the council hearing). The commission chair called for broader, clearer notification after residents and business owners said mailed notices and online materials were difficult to parse.

The subarea plans and the planned-action ordinance are intended to implement a community vision developed over roughly 18 months for a new downtown and the Timon Landing waterfront area. Marty Snell of consulting firm WSP told the commission that the project began with visioning and an existing-conditions analysis and has moved through concept plans to the current proposal. "The community came together to vision what they'd like to see in a new downtown and property at Timon Landing," Snell said.

WSP and city staff described three parallel package elements: the subarea plans (land-use and urban-design guidance), amendments to the comprehensive plan and map to match the new land-use designations, and changes to Title 18 (development code) that create new zones and rules for downtown and Timon Landing. Alec (project staff) said the draft EIS opened for a 30‑day comment period in May; the city received six comments and the final EIS was posted the same day as the hearing.

Key regulatory changes summarized by staff include: repealing the existing mixed-use designation in Timon Landing and creating a Downtown Mixed Use (DMX) district focused on pedestrian-scale development; a new high-density residential zone (16–24 units per acre); adjustments to medium-density minimum project-area thresholds; establishment of a Downtown Gateway overlay that would allow limited hospitality and small-scale recreational commercial uses near the bridge; and relocating park/open-space provisions into an urban public zone. Staff said concessionaire (small-scale waterfront vendor) rules, window/roof design standards, and allowances for limited sidewalk/curb adjustments were also part of the code changes.

Staff emphasized the role of the planned-action EIS: if future developments stay within thresholds analyzed in the EIS, they would not need a separate SEPA determination, streamlining later review. "The main purpose of a planned action is to establish those upfront mitigation measures outlined in the EIS and streamline the environmental review process for future developments," project staff said.

Public commenters raised concerns about notification, property impacts, public access, wildlife and stormwater, and the effect of rezoning on private-property rights. Landowner Carolyn Defoe said her roughly 3-acre parcel along the East Fork Lewis River faces increased foot traffic, dogs off leash and past livestock attacks; she asked how trail access, parking and stormwater would be handled. "If a trail comes down the road ... the city is going to do an extensive process to work with you through that trail and work through your concerns," staff replied, adding that site‑specific mitigations beyond the EIS would require follow‑up SEPA review.

Several commissioners pressed staff on outreach. Commissioner Hill said he knew of property owners who had not received helpful or understandable notice and urged the city to deliver an easy-to-read one-to-two page summary of potential upsides and downsides for affected owners. Staff said mailed notices had been sent to property owners within the subarea and a 300‑foot buffer; staff also noted fact sheets and an extensive appendix summarizing engagement activities. Planning staff agreed to send certified follow-up mailings to parcel owners prior to the city-council hearing.

Card rooms and the downtown overlay drew notable attention. The staff presentation said the card-room overlay (C‑3) would be repealed and card rooms permitted in the C‑1 historic downtown zone; commissioners and community members worried that change could allow card rooms beyond the existing, limited area. The commission’s formal recommendation preserves current card-room boundaries pending a separate review of the overlay.

Staff and consultants described draft financing approaches in the action plan appendix, including grant funding for public infrastructure (for example a Highway 99 multimodal pathway, a downtown plaza, water and transportation improvements), and longer-term local financing tools such as tax increment financing (TIF), local improvement districts (LIDs), system-development charges (impact fees), and local-option levies.

Next steps: the commission’s recommendation and the record will go to city council, which has an adoption hearing scheduled for June 25. Staff said they will prepare the certified-mail outreach to parcel owners immediately; consultants noted that holding the planning hearing open would require re-noticing and would add contract cost and schedule impacts to the project.

The commission’s recommendation was recorded as approved by voice vote with no objections at the end of the June 11 meeting. The package before council includes the subarea plans, the planned-action ordinance tied to the final EIS, map and comp‑plan amendments, and code revisions to Title 18.