Spokane County planning staff on Wednesday presented a progress update on the countywide Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and the draft EIS (DEIS), laying out three alternatives for accommodating projected population growth and identifying environmental constraints that will shape any preferred course. The briefing focused on natural-environment protections — especially aquifer vulnerability and wetlands — and how those protections affect the urban growth area (UGA) and housing capacity.

"We will also talk about, a little bit of how the critical areas ordinance review is going along, specifically natural environment areas," Scott Chesney, the county planner leading the briefing, told commissioners as he opened the presentation. Chesney framed the DEIS around three bookended alternatives: a no-growth regulatory scenario, an Alternative 1 that relies on regulatory changes to accommodate growth within existing UGAs, and an Alternative 2 that preserves historic planning patterns while allowing limited movement of UGA borders.

Chesney stressed that the DEIS is meant to identify reasonable alternatives and the mitigation measures the county can use to avoid or reduce significant environmental effects. "The affected environment, the impacts, mitigation measures, and significant unavoidable adverse impacts" will be summarized in the DEIS, he said, and the county is performing a gap analysis of the 2017–18 CAO to reflect best-available science.

A central focus of the briefing was groundwater protection. Commissioners asked for and were shown maps of the Spokane Valley–Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer and the distinct West Plains aquifers. Chesney said the county does not have authority to override other jurisdictions but participates on a joint aquifer board and is updating the coordinated water system plan to clarify who serves what areas. "We do participate on the joint aquifer board," he said, adding the county will seek opportunities to coordinate with neighboring jurisdictions.

Public speakers and staff repeatedly warned about contamination and percolation risks in unsewered areas north of Spokane. Chesney recalled a previous county effort to install sewer infrastructure that was curtailed by Growth Management Act (GMA) rules prohibiting sewer extensions outside UGAs, and suggested the EIS process will reexamine whether exceptions or policy changes are warranted to protect drinking water.

Wetlands and mitigation were a second major topic. Tammy Camper of Facet, the presentation's wetland specialist, described mitigation banking — large, monitored restoration projects that generate credits developers can buy — as often more effective than many small on-site mitigations. "A lot of times you're taking out a high quality wetland and replace it with a low quality one," Camper said, arguing that well-designed mitigation banks can provide higher-quality outcomes if properly funded and monitored.

The county team said mitigation sequencing (avoid, minimize, mitigate) will remain the priority and that revised CAO language will tighten reporting and require credentialed wetland scientists and updated mapping to be submitted to the county record.

Chesney also presented land-capacity examples showing the planning trade-offs. In one example, the North Metro subarea showed a roughly 6,000-unit deficit if no regulatory changes are made; applying Alternative 1 density increases would create a 4,000-unit surplus in that subarea. Countywide, staff reported a roughly 6,000-unit deficit under a no-change scenario and said density changes could accommodate roughly 16,000 units. "The question is, can we do it? Yes. Would GMA prefer we do this? I think it's fair to say yes," Chesney said, adding that the policy question remains whether communities accept higher densities.

As possible compromise approaches, staff proposed a "neighborhood residential" and "neighborhood commercial" zoning option to allow targeted higher-density infill while retaining neighborhood character through lot dimensions, setbacks and mixed-use design standards.

The county said it will post CAO code revisions for public comment in coming weeks, pursue technical advisory committee feedback, and return to the commission with revised language. Staff also confirmed a December meeting will be scheduled to align with anticipated DEIS publication and to present the draft to commissioners before final release.

Votes and administrative business: the commission adopted the Oct. 30 minutes (motion by Commissioner Melissa, second by Pete Rainer) and later adjourned (motion by Commissioner Logan, second by Commissioner Melissa). The staff report confirmed a December meeting will coincide with DEIS timing.

Next steps: staff will post the CAO revisions for public review, refine the DEIS based on public and TAC input, and present more detailed maps and land-capacity analyses at future meetings. The county emphasized that choices about density, buffer rules, mitigation banking and sewer policy will determine whether projected growth can be accommodated within current UGAs or will require UGA expansion.