City staff says Spokane has physical land to meet 2023–2046 growth target but flags data limits

Kevin Picasso, principal engineer in the city’s Integrated Capital Management group, told the Plan Commission on Feb. 26 that the land capacity analysis (LCA) prepared for the comprehensive plan update finds the city has capacity to accommodate the regionally assigned growth for 2023–2046.

"The land capacity analysis itself is part of a comprehensive plan update," Picasso said, and he summarized the work the city followed: classifying roughly 81,000 parcels, subtracting physical constraints and lands reserved for other public uses, and applying a county market-factor to produce a conservative estimate of buildable acreage and likely dwelling units.

Picasso said the regionally assigned population growth for the city is about 23,400 people between 2023 and 2046, and that the Commerce housing allocation tool translates that into roughly 22,300 housing units the city must be able to accommodate. After applying the LCA methodology — which subtracts wetlands, slopes, rights-of-way, public property and an agreed-upon 30% market factor — the staff conclusion was that the city does have enough physical space to meet the allocation.

The report emphasizes conservative choices. Staff flagged that about 10% of the city's acreage is classified as vacant (about 3,500 acres), that partially used land and underutilized parcels together also contribute capacity, and that the methodology intentionally left out certain speculative sources of capacity (for example, assuming every downtown surface parking lot or every eligible parcel will redevelop). Picasso said, "we took the conservative route" in many of the assumptions.

City staff walked commissioners through key methodological steps: (1) classify each parcel as vacant, partially used, underutilized or developed; (2) remove physical impediments and buffers; (3) subtract land needed for other uses (parks, utilities, schools, airport, institutional holdings); (4) reduce large parcels for internal circulation; and (5) apply a 30% market factor to account for uncertain market behavior or parcels that will not develop in the 20-year window. Picasso noted this process follows the regionally adopted methodology used across Spokane County and references Growth Management Act (GMA) guidance, the Revised Code of Washington and Washington Administrative Code where relevant to the statutory LCA requirement.

Picasso described how staff converted buildable acreage into likely dwelling units by using zone- and place‑specific densities derived from recent permit history (for example, lower-density neighborhoods were modeled at lower units-per-acre while higher-density neighborhoods used higher recent averages). The analysis also allocated expected unit types ("middle housing" 1–4 units and multiunit buildings 5+ units) and factored different persons-per-unit assumptions by housing type to convert units into population capacity.

Commissioners and staff discussed assumptions and next steps. Commissioners asked whether state law changes often cited as "11 10" and other recent code changes (referred to repeatedly in the meeting) were incorporated; Picasso said jurisdictions have discretion to include those changes in their LCA but that Spokane took a conservative approach and did not assume widespread, immediate redevelopment from those statutory changes. He also said accessory dwelling units (ADUs) were modeled at a conservative historic pace (about 30 ADUs per year based on recent permit history), not by assuming near-term explosive uptake.

Staff acknowledged important follow-ups: a forthcoming analysis that maps where the most affordable (0–30% AMI) housing could realistically be developed, review of city‑owned parcels for potential surplus or affordable housing opportunities, and coordination with Integrated Capital Management on infrastructure implications (sewer, water, streets). Picasso cautioned that the LCA answers one narrow statutory question — do we have enough physical land — and that it is the starting point for longer policy, infrastructure and affordability discussions.

"From the standpoint of, does the city need to be bigger? We don't think so," Picasso said, summarizing the LCA finding while noting further refinements are planned.

The commission will receive the LCA documentation and staff indicated the report will inform later subcommittee work, targeted analyses on where affordable units can be sited, and capital facilities planning.

Ending: The LCA presentation resolved the narrow statutory question about physical capacity for 2023–2046 but left open a series of follow-up tasks: mapping affordable‑housing capacity by AMI band, reviewing public‑land opportunities for housing, and integrating LCA results into capital‑facilities and subarea planning work.