TONIGHT: Summit for Neighborhood Fairness, Part II

The South Perry District is frequently cited as one of the “most livable” or “best” or “coolest” neighborhoods in Spokane. Will future development follow the pattern of South Perry or Garland, or degrade into surface parking and big-box stores? (PHOTO: Spokesman-Review)

Tonight, join community leaders, elected officials, and smart growth advocates at Part Two of the Summit for Neighborhood Fairness. Futurewise Spokane will convene a diverse group of representatives and stakeholders for the second of two public fora on empowering our neighborhoods and prioritizing denser infill development in accordance with existing planning documents. As you’ll recall, the dialogue over smart growth and land use reached a fever pitch last month when it was discovered that Scott Chesney and the Planning Department had approved a building permit for a drive-through-only McDonald’s restaurant on north Hamilton, and that Dave Black had violated Centers and Corridors zoning and the 2009 Developers’ Agreement at his Target development on the South Hill.

Part One of this summit focused on possible policy proposals, while Part Two will focus on choosing the best solutions and crafting a plan toward implementation. It’s clear that land use policy and neighborhood development has quickly become the number one issue in Spokane’s political system. It should be interesting to see where this planning and policy proposal process leads.

  • Join us at the Summit for Neighborhood Fairness, tonight from 5:30p – 7:30p at the downtown branch of the Spokane Public Library. Neighborhood representatives, community leaders, activists, legal experts, and other stakeholders will all be represented.

5 thoughts on “TONIGHT: Summit for Neighborhood Fairness, Part II

  1. I do not agree with the developments in Logan or South Hill, but at the same time you are again wrong in your statement “violated Centers and Corridors zoning.” Have you reviewed the zoning code? If so you would see that both developments are permitted uses in the District Centers which is what both of those are. Logan is not a “pedestrian street,” therefore drive-thru eating establishments are permitted. South Hill Center is not a “Neighborhood Center” therefore big box is allowed. The design standards are suggestions, not requirements. None of this is how the planners want it to be, its how the City Councils of the past required it. The planners have always pushed for something more, but rec’d push back from developers and City Council about being to strict and ultimately everything was watered down. So, please, Mr. Spokane Rising, stop stating inaccurate statements.

    • Would “violated the intent of Centers and Corridors zoning” satisfy you? As toward the Southgate District Center, it’s overlaid by CC1 zoning…the same as South Perry. We wouldn’t put big box in South Perry, would we?

  2. I don’t disagree that the intent does not match the zoning. But the zoning is what the planners must use to make decisions. The comp plan is a guideline, it is not code. South Perry is a CC1-NC, Regal is a CC2-DC. Big box is not permitted in a NC/Neighborhood Center. Have you ever looked up the distinction between a NC, DC or EC in the Comp Plan? Please do so.

    Don’t get me wrong here, I appreciate that you care about Spokane. But you continually throw the planners under the bus with broad statements (usually incorrect). Its not that all the planners in the Spokane region are perfect (trust me), However, MANY of them have fought the good fight for a long time and continue to do so today. They get beat up from the inside and by neighborhoods on the outside. Do your research first and stop spreading incorrect information. Or, have coffee with one of them from time to time to get the real info.

    • Throwing the planners under the bus is the last thing I’m doing. It’s important to keep in mind that the planners are working under the Condon administration, and that’s fine and dandy. He won the election fair and square.

      If you read what I’ve written in the past, I am very much sympathetic to the planners. They do some great work, and I think that if they had more tools at their disposal, there might be some progress on design review and planning. There’s just a lot of work to do with the new Comprehensive Plan and with the City Council to bring the “intent” more in line with the text.

  3. They have every tool every other city has at their disposal, including Portland. They are not naive planners, they know what’s up and coming in the planning world. They read blogs too. One, most ideas get shot down by the citizens before they even get to the council (you try explaining to the average citizen why density is important and tell me how that goes). Two, if they get to the Council, they get shot down there. Three, some of the older planners are beaten up and not willing to push the envelope anymore. Its a combination of all three.


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s