Last week on a drive to Blue Lake and back, I forced my family to listen to a tape of a joint North Bend council and planning commission workshop. I’m sure James can now give you an opinion

on North Bend politics in his column, but it’s likely he will stick to Little

League scores. By the way, I hope the chairs at the Senior Center were padded for

your comfort … long meeting.

Listening to the tape, there seemed to be a lot of good discussion about

the directions that North Bend, the council and planning commission wanted

to take with regards to downtown, signage and several other things.

During the discussion, one underlying plan was mentioned over and

over, almost with the same vigor as the Bible in church, the Vision Plan.

So what is this vision plan? Well, it is a plan that the city created about

five years ago which provides some general guidance the city would like to

take with regard to development, aesthetics, etc.

What makes me nervous is how much the plan was referred to as the

sole reason for determining specific policies. Hold on a sec. Wasn’t the vision

just that, a vision? Doesn’t the comprehensive plan determine requirements

for specific governance? And does a vision, developed five years ago, need

an occasional reality check? I would guess that it should be a dynamic vision

plan with updates at least every 18 months. As new business owners move

into downtown and new developments (after the moratorium) are created, it

would seem prudent to review the vision. Consequently, there may be occasion,

based on a changed vision, to change the comprehensive plan and from that,

drive new regulation. But to tout a vision as the reason to enact legislation seems,

in general, to assume the vision is still viable.

The whole Upper Valley is rapidly changing. Residents and business

owners are constantly having to adapt to growth and a changing business

climate. Questions like, is North Bend to have a pedestrian-oriented downtown or

adequate parking to pull business off of the freeway? Should the

interchange have been developed differently now that there are concerns about a “sea

of cars” in front of Safeway?

These are great questions, all of which lend themselves to a review of

the vision and not the use of this vision as the main driver behind policy.

I do want to commend the city for spending so much time on the

intricacies of paint, signage, frontage, medians, etc. Seems like this moratorium has

given city staff a lot of extra time to determine how to implement this vision

right down to the last detail.

Jim McKiernan