Updated comp plan goes against the current
October 3, 2008 · Updated 12:45 AM
This letter is being written in reaction to recent action taken by the North Bend City Council in adopting comprehensive plan updates. I choose to comment on a simply mind-boggling point.
Buried within the folds and rhetoric of the SAOD is a policy decision in which this council says it believes it is likely the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River will radically change its course to the South Fork. The council, save one member, has ignored a recommendation from the Planning Commission and ignored citizen comment for the record.
Yes, you read that correctly. Silver Creek will no longer be the quiet (occasionally rapid) cross-flow channel it has been for the period of recorded history. Why, you ask? An extreme interpretation of a transparently flawed report (in my opinion) of a study done by King County, in combination with the efforts of city planning staff.
What changes must ensue? What of the existing homes? How many will become an essentially prohibited use in this low-density residential zone? Thirty, 40 ... ? Do you live in the Silver Creek neighborhood? How readily will you be able to remodel or sell your home?
Given this was an update to the comprehensive plan, what additional elements of consistency need to be addressed? To what extent will the stormwater and six-year transportation capital improvement plans need to be updated? Certainly the current and proposed culverts will not be large enough to let the water through. How many "Mount Si" bridges will be needed for all the road crossings? Three, four ... ? And what of the water and sewer lines, how will they be realigned or protected? Will the water and sewer comprehensive plans need to be updated? How much will these updates in plans and infrastructure cost? How can we afford them?
Or, given review under the harsh light of reality, priority and probability, council could revisit this policy decision and come up with solutions less extreme. Soon they will begin crafting the regulations which will enforce this new policy. We need to let them know we believe this is an unreasonable policy update.