The Clark County council appears poised Tuesday to adopt Councilor David Madore’s controversial proposals on the county’s 20-year growth plan, in spite of the Planning Commission recommending against them.
Madore, whose hands-on approach to the county’s Comprehensive Growth Management Plan update has stirred controversy all year, appears intent on pursuing his new proposed planning assumptions at Tuesday’s 10 a.m. hearing at the Public Service Center at 1300 Franklin St. in Vancouver.
Two documents on The Grid, the county’s hub for meeting material, point to the council’s adopting Madore’s new planning assumptions, as well as Alternative 4. A resolution posted calls for the county to amend its planning assumptions to fit with Madore’s proposals. Madore’s proposals consider fewer lots developable than the draft Environmental Impact Statement of the growth plan and increases the county’s population projections.
A spreadsheet on The Grid of zoning proposals also indicates the council will consider adopting Alternative 4 as part of its preferred alternative.
Councilor Tom Mielke signaled his support for the planning assumptions and Madore’s Alternative 4 at a Nov. 9 work session.
“Our rural property zoning map is broken,” Madore posted on his Facebook page on Friday. “Tuesday marks the day we can take a big step to fix it.”
The Planning Commission voted last week not to recommend Alternative 4 of the growth plan, which would reduce the minimum allowed parcel size of rural, agricultural and forest lots across Clark County, as well as components of Alternative 2 that reduce property sizes. The commission also did not recommend Madore’s new planning assumptions.
Madore says his proposed changes will correct the county’s existing planning assumptions, which he said are “unvetted.” However, the Clark County council unanimously approved those assumptions in April of this year.
According to the draft Environmental Impact Statement analyzing the impacts of the existing proposals, current zoning could lead to the creation of 7,073 new lots. Alternative 4, meanwhile, could create 12,401 new lots. Madore’s proposals state that current zoning could create 3,325 lots, while his Alternative 4 could create 6,638 new lots. Planning staff said at last week’s meeting that they were unable to verify and replicate Madore’s assumptions.
Madore’s proposals have been criticized by those who say it is too late in the planning process to introduce new planning assumptions. The county must have its plan completed in April in order to make the June 30 deadline for the state Department of Commerce to accept it.
Planning Commissioner Karl Johnson said he sympathizes with the desires of rural property owners who have been clamoring for the right to subdivide their property, but the county “can’t get a grasp on the data” prepared by Madore.
“I think Councilor Madore’s positions are, he’s trying to do too much too quickly,” Johnson said.
What adoption of Madore’s proposals could mean for the overall process is unclear.
“We are wrestling with the question of whether the latest proposal is a new alternative … or whether it is another version of Alternative 4 developed with different planning assumptions,” Gordy Euler, deputy director of Clark County Community Planning, said by email Monday. “Either way, it can be argued that a new draft (environmental statement) should be prepared.”
