Spokane County outlines growth alternatives, clarifies TIF/LIFT sign in Otis Orchards

Spokane County planning staff on Oct. 26 presented three alternatives for the countywide comprehensive plan update and environmental impact statement and sought public input on where and how the county should accommodate roughly 100,000 additional residents over the next 20 years.

At a public meeting in Otis Orchards, county staff also addressed concerns about a tax-increment (TIF/LIFT) district sign north of the Spokane River, saying the sign’s language described what the law allows but did not reflect any current planning approval or project north of the river.

County planning staff described three broad approaches the draft EIS will study: take no action (leave current rules and boundaries as they are); increase allowable densities inside the existing urban growth area (UGA); or combine density increases with limited expansion of the UGA. Scott Jassy, with Spokane County Planning, said the study will test whether changes to zoning and development standards can accommodate growth within existing boundaries or whether new land must be added.

"This is a sort of classic case of government where one hand doesn't know what the other is doing. Planning has nothing to do with this tax increment district or its projects," Jassy said, describing the county's lack of prior notice about the sign and stressing that projects funded by the TIF/LIFT district must be located in the current UGA on the south side of the river.

Why it matters: the alternatives will guide decisions affecting housing supply, transportation, sewer and water capacity, and environmental protections — including critical aquifer recharge areas that county staff said are vulnerable to contamination through fast-moving paleochannels. Jassy noted the county must also meet recent state requirements to include climate and resiliency elements in the comprehensive plan.

Density and housing: staff showed examples of how different density limits change development patterns. The county's low-density residential zoning (LDR) was set to a maximum of 8 units per acre in 2020, Jassy said, and the historic "effective density" built in the county has been about 4.5 units per acre. Staff presented visuals of 6-unit, 9-unit and 15–18-unit-per-acre patterns to illustrate how yard sizes, parking and open space change as densities rise. Jassy said higher density can still achieve quality design: "Density is a factor of design more than anything else. If you have really high quality residential design, community design, neighborhood design, you could have 9 and 10 units an acre, and it's a very comfortable place to live."

Affordable housing: the presentation described state guidance that requires jurisdictions to plan by income bands tied to area median income. Staff told the meeting that households at 60% of area median income or below generally require either multifamily rental housing or some form of public or private subsidy to be able to purchase housing.

Critical areas and infrastructure: staff emphasized the role of the critical areas ordinance and shoreline management program in protecting wetlands, steep slopes, frequently flooded areas and aquifer recharge zones. The presentation connected land-choice questions to infrastructure capacity: "If a developer wants to build on that property, a traffic impact study is done ... you need another lane, you need intersection, you need traffic light improvements," Jassy said. He noted that some large corridors, including the I‑90 approaches, have long-standing capacity problems that affect where growth can be supported.

TIF/LIFT sign north of river: multiple residents raised alarms about a sign posted at Harvard and Euclid that mentioned affordable housing and public improvements. Jassy said the sign reflected the legal scope of the Liberty Lake LIFT/TIF district and that the district's projects must be located in the UGA on the south side of the river. "We know of nothing formal for that, Eric. There's nothing in our shop for that," Jassy said when asked whether the county had an approved affordable housing plan north of the river.

Process and timeline: staff said they will meet with the planning commission on the 30th and brief the board on the 3rd. The county intends to publish a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) "on or about Dec. 1," followed by a 45‑day public comment period, a final EIS in February and a draft comprehensive plan around July 2026. Jassy reminded residents that UGA expansion is a regulated, multi-step process tied to statutory criteria and that large boundary additions previously led to appeals; he said the county faced appeals after a 2015 UGA and had worked through litigation and compliance issues.

Public input and next steps: staff encouraged residents to submit parcel-specific comments via the county comp-plan web page and to attend upcoming Planning Commission and board briefings. The draft EIS will be the formal public-review document for commenting on the alternatives and technical analyses.

Ending: County staff said the public comments gathered at meetings and online will inform the EIS and recommendations to the planning commission and county commissioners, and they urged residents to use the posted maps and comment form to register parcel-level preferences and concerns.