Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Comprehensive Plan Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Spokane Valley council reviews comprehensive plan updates, presses for clearer multimodal, water and EV language
Summary
City staff and consultants presented final transportation, capital facilities and parks elements of Spokane Valley’s comprehensive plan and a near-term schedule to submit a draft to the Washington State Department of Commerce. Councilors pressed for clearer data, plain-language environmental-justice and EV-charging wording and more detail about water-district coverage and funding options for sidewalks.
Mayor Patten convened the special meeting at 5:00 p.m. and introduced a work session on the city’s last three comprehensive-plan elements: transportation, capital facilities and parks. Mike Basinger, community and economic development director, said staff integrated the active transportation plan and the parks master plan into the transportation and parks elements and emphasized the tight Commerce deadline.
The consultants framed the update as a Growth Management Act periodic review that must align the plan with recent state law, SRTC data and local changes. Steve (consultant) said the draft will be submitted to Commerce by mid‑June, with a corrected public draft expected by June 18 and a planning‑commission hearing on July 23; adoption is targeted for late fall.
Cole Grisham of Dowell walked the council through the transportation element, describing updated multimodal maps and a 2022 baseline for average‑daily traffic. He said the draft incorporates multimodal level‑of‑service measures from the active transportation plan and that, “the vast majority of the network performs at a corridor level between level service A and C,” while a few isolated segments show lower service and are being investigated as possible data anomalies.
Councilors pressed three recurring points. First, several members said the draft relies on 2022 corridor‑level data that can understate localized intersection congestion; Cole responded that the analysis is accurate for corridor-level comparisons but acknowledged intersection turning-movement data and newer project completions could alter localized results. Second, members debated whether to retain specific long-range strategies (the “bridging the valley” projects) or to move strategic project lists to referenced plans; consultants said many bridging‑the‑valley projects were completed and that staff will reassess which items should remain. Third, members urged simple, non-prescriptive language about mode shift: Councilmember Merkel said the plan’s phrasing about “reducing vehicle trips” risks implying limits on car ownership, and councilors asked staff to emphasize “providing modal options” instead.
The council also questioned how environmental justice considerations were reflected in transportation and active-transportation analysis; consultants said the active transportation plan contains those measures and that they will be carried into the comp‑plan element. Deputy Mayor Hatenberg noted the city’s Complete Streets policy is a council‑adopted standard from 2021 (transcript reference) and urged it be cited clearly in the document.
On capital facilities and parks, Jen Dial of SCJ Alliance described reorganized facility inventory tables, added references to TIP projects and new parks policies that increase shade, tree canopy and maintenance assessments. She noted the cross‑country course and new tourism assets in the city’s inventory. City Manager John Homan flagged that several project entries in the draft are placeholders and will be revised before publication.
Water and utilities drew sustained attention. Councilmembers asked for clearer distinctions between irrigation districts, municipal water districts and any areas not covered by a water provider; consultants agreed to add explanatory text and to consult joint aquifer and water‑district plans. Homan noted the city historically relied on a staff water coordinator role that is currently unfilled and that staff will research water‑right developments and related interlocal coordination.
On implementation and outreach, parks director John Vitale explained the decision to mail postcards to about 2,500 households to boost survey responses and public participation. Staff repeatedly told the council they will incorporate tonight’s comments, pursue updated traffic and project data where feasible, and proceed with the planned Commerce submission while allowing follow‑up revisions through the adoption period.
The meeting ended without votes on policy changes; the council agreed not to take up a scheduled executive session item and adjourned after routine motions. The next formal public steps are the Commerce review period and the planning commission hearing in July.
