 |
A last-minute attempt to limit the scope of the Sprague-Appleway Revitalization Plan was derailed by the Spokane Valley City Council on Tuesday.
Council Member Rose Dempsey’s motion to keep the plan’s focus between University Road and the Interstate 90 freeway overpass was only supported by colleague Gary Schimmels. The council, in a 5-2 vote, agreed to move the plan, dubbed SARP, forward as-is between the interchange and Sullivan Road.
“I feel the plan is just too much,” Dempsey said, adding that she saw University – where Appleway now terminates – as the logical endpoint. “I’d like to see a slower start.”
The revitalization plan’s core tool – and the aspect that drew some of the heaviest criticism – is zone changes that force certain uses, such as café’s and bistros, toward a proposed renewed city center in the University City area. In order to do that successfully, planners argue, a significantly large portion of the Sprague corridor must be affected.
“That would be extremely disruptive,” said Council Member Steve Taylor. “You can’t cut the plan in half. It defies all the rules of logic in planning.”
Schimmels countered that SARP’s inclusion of properties east of University cannot work as intended because the city still doesn’t own the undeveloped Appleway right-of-way.
“I just don’t think you can justify it,” Schimmels said.
Council Member Bill Gothmann said it would create a hardship on Sprague business owners – most of whom support the plan, as evidenced by SARP’s endorsement by the Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce and Spokane Valley Business Association – if they thought their zoning could change again in the future.
“I don’t think that’s good public policy,” he said. “We’re here to solve problems. The problem is the Sprague/Appleway corridor.”
Council Member Diana Wilhite wondered why Dempsey had not brought up her concerns earlier.
“We’re down to the first reading,” Wilhite said. “I think we need to move this forward.”
Dempsey said she sympathized with the disenfranchisement of the plan’s critics and wondered why those who oppose it are viewed as “troublemakers.”
Taylor said that those who are the loudest opponents don’t necessarily represent the majority.
“That’s the reality of a representational form of government,” he said.
Mayor Richard Munson said that the plan can always be changed.
“This plan isn’t going to be chiseled in stone and sit on a shelf and let the chips fall where they may,” he said.
|
Despite the Dempsey’s criticism (a guest column detailing her concerns appears on page 4), there was surprisingly little outcry against the modified version of the plan, which has drawn dozens to the podium in past meetings.
Only property owner Dean Grafos came forward to ask that his land just to the east of Fred Meyer at 15813 E. Sprague be taken out of the plan. The council agreed to consider it and discuss the request on June 16 at the ordinance’s second reading.
|
|
By
Mike Huffman
