- From:
- Tate Andrie
- Cc:
- Betsy O'Halloran, Betsy O'Halloran,Dave Schaub, Amy L. Sumner,Jacob Taylor,Jade McKeen, Amber Waldref,Mike Petersen,Adam Gebauer, Garrett M (DFW) LaCivita, cseckhart@gmail.com, eric-allen@spokanecd.org, jake.madewell@ecy.wa.gov, mindi.sheer@ecy.wa.gov, meagan.hayes@ecy.wa.gov, emily.atkins@ecy.wa.gov,Matt Covert, Joshua Warwick, Michael Weir,Hilary Hahn,Douglas Yormick
Kerry et al.,
That map is reflective on infill study areas under alternative 1, not proposed UGA expansion study areas which are part of alternative 2. You can see the proposed expansion study areas on this map here:
https://www.spokanecounty.gov/DocumentCenter/View/65939/BothAltsMap_02102026?bidId=
This TAC has only ever sent a letter in support of the comprehensive plan element work to the PC. There has not been a formal submittal of comment from the TAC as a whole on UGA study areas as part of the county's growth alternatives. I can tell you for certain
that the areas that were picked are going to be studied for potential impacts. We plan to have our draft EIS released on May 22nd, in which there will be a 30-day comment period ahead of a PC meeting on June 25th. I would advise that any comments from this
TAC regarding the UGA study areas be provided during the draft EIS comment period. This TAC is made up of multiple individuals, departments and agency representation, so I would urge that any comments summarized from the TAC are representative of the TAC as
a whole, otherwise comments should be made on an individual basis. If there are any questions, please let me know.
Tate Andrie | Planner | O: 509.477.7141
Spokane County Planning | http://www.spokanecounty.org/BP
Included email history
1 messageAttachments
Loading community reactions…