Proposal Would Restrict Urban Uses Near Rivers Plan Is Attempt To Comply With State ‘Mandate,’ Planning Director Says

If an ordinance being proposed by the city Planning Department had been in effect decades ago, there would be no steps leading from the Opera House and Ag Trade Center to the Spokane River.

There would be no red brick power substation at Post Street. Riverfront Park and the Creek at Qualchan Golf Course would look radically different.

That’s because the proposed regulations, designed to protect wildlife habitat, would severely restrict all development within 250 feet of the Spokane River and Hangman Creek.

Existing structures could stay. But new development and activity would be prohibited unless a landowner could prove there is no other reasonable use for the property.

Spokane is required to protect its critical areas under the state Growth Management Act, said Planning Director John Mercer. That includes fish and wildlife habitat, he said.

If the city does not comply with the state law - and it currently is not in compliance - it would remain ineligible for state trust fund loans and other funding programs. The city is considering using trust fund loans to help pay for a planned street repair program.

“It’s a mandate from the state,” Mercer said. “We do have to get this done.”

The city also is required to have an ordinance in place to protect geologically sensitive areas, which would limit development in areas prone to landslides. That would affect much less property, however.

The 250-foot buffer along the waterways isn’t required by the state, Mercer said. However, the state does require that the city define its habitat using the best available science, and that science, as provided by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, recommends a 250-foot buffer.

Developers are wondering whether the proposed ordinance isn’t unnecessarily restrictive.

Joel White, a legislative affairs assistant for the Spokane Home Builders Association, noted that the guidelines are very similar to those in place in Spokane County.

“I think there’s a difference between an urban and a rural habitat,” White said. “I think they need to look very closely and get the values of the city residents.”

One large and significant piece of property that could be affected by the restrictions is the Summit site, an 88-acre parcel of land north of the Spokane River and west of Monroe owned by Metropolitan Mortgage and Securities.

Metropolitan is studying the proposed ordinance for its possible effects to its property, which has been approved for a mixed-use development, said Erik Skaggs, director of government relations.

“The worst-case scenario is that the city would significantly impact the scope of the project and impact the marketability,” Skaggs said. “(The proposed ordinance) seems very aggressive. We were not quite clear why the city was proposing this out of the chute without consulting landowners.”

The proposal drew the ire of Mayor John Talbott and Councilman Rob Higgins when it was first presented at Monday’s council briefing session.

“I can’t understand why we’re talking about 250 feet in an urban area,” Higgins said. “That to me is ridiculous.”

Talbott called the proposal “tantamount to a taking” of private property and blasted the state’s mandate.

“I really have a problem when the state tells us what the reasonable use of Spokane property is,” he said.

Higgins and Talbott also expressed concern that property owners along the rivers have no idea of the coming ordinance.

As a result of the council’s concerns, Mercer said before holding a hearing on the ordinance, the Planning Department will attempt to contact all property owners along the rivers, who could number in the thousands. The department will also look for alternative wildlife studies that may not be as restrictive.

“The reality is, we’re somewhat in a box,” said Leroy Eadie, a city planner. “If there’s some other science out there, maybe the box is bigger.”

The state’s mandate to protect wildlife came out of the 1990 Growth Management Act, which set protecting the environment as one of the state’s goals, said Kevin Robinette, the regional planning director for the state Fish and Wildlife Department.

While the city has in place other GMA-mandated ordinances that protect critical areas, such as the aquifer, wetlands and flood plains, it never got around to protecting wildlife habitat or geologically sensitive areas, Mercer said.

That’s because the city was preoccupied with completing the comprehensive plan, the centerpiece of the GMA requirements. Now that the comprehensive plan is nearly done, the Planning Department is turning its attention to the missing elements, in order to be in full compliance with GMA by next year.

Robinette acknowledged that protecting habitat is an uphill battle in an urbanized area. Nonetheless, it’s a worthy goal, he said.

“We’d like to see healthy wildlife habitats in urban areas,” Robinette said. “In heavily developed urban areas, the last areas that have any value for wildlife are riparian corridors (the rivers).”

Rivers and vegetated river banks provide corridors for traveling wildlife, filter sediment and pollution and control temperature, erosion and wind, Robinette said.

“If you have a 250-foot buffer, then you’re able to protect a majority of the habitat functions that this agency is interested in,” he said.