Voters' Pamphlet Information

The following information appears in three parts in the Voters' Pamphlet for the September election.  It has been combined into one article for easier reading.

Jump to:

• part 2
• part 3

The three annexation applications, each for about 24 acres, are essentially identical. The combined acreage is about half that of the previous proposals.

Voters may now choose which area(s), if any, they would like to see developed. This increased choice is a step forward, and we believe it is the result of having the right to vote on annexations. However, important issues remain unaddressed.

The first involves limits on the rate of development. The first annexation proposal contained no limit on the rate of development. The second application included an agreement that would have placed minimal control on the rate. The latest applications contain NO LIMIT on the rate.

You may hear about being given a choice about the “rate of growth.” You may hear statements such as “70 units per year, regardless of how many annexations are approved.” These figures are part of each application’s financial analysis, and do NOT represent a cap on development. There is no mechanism to limit the development rate.

According to the City Manager and the applicants, the development rate will be determined by “market forces” and by the time needed for the City to complete Master Planning of parcels that are approved. In other words, “the bureaucracy” will limit the development rate.

Developers make money by building and selling houses as fast as they can. Without an enforceable limit, development will occur as fast as possible. Fast growth can be used to justify even faster growth in the future. We believe voters should reject any annexation application without a guaranteed rate of development.

In Part 1 we pointed out that there are no assurances regarding the rate of development. Now assume that one or more of the applications are approved and development proceeds at the rate of 70 units per year indicated in the financial analyses.

Seventy new dwelling units would result in approximately 175 new residents each year - which is double North Plains’ total population increase from 2000-2005. In other words, every year, development in the annexed areas would bring twice as many new residents as have moved here in the last five years.

Approximately 140 cars would accompany these 70 new dwelling units, resulting in about 700 additional automobile trips every day.*

Forty-eight new lots were created in 2005, which was the most in 7 years. There is the potential for 84 new building permits this year, which includes 50 lots that are scheduled to be built next year.*

That depends on how many applications are approved, and whether the City and developers stick to the 70 units/year development rate. Assuming they do, then if voters approve only one of the applications, the entire parcel could be built in just two years. If voters approve all three, they could all be built out by 2013, which means that ½ of the 20-year land supply could be built in just 6 ½ years! At that rate, the UGB expansion area would only last about 13 years.

Fast growth brings faster growth. Friends of North Plains believes that a 20-year land supply should last 20 years, not 13.

* Figures are based on the best information available.

In Parts 1 and 2 we discussed the rate of development. In this part we direct our discussion to the type of development being proposed. Contrary to previous applications, the parcels currently proposed for annexation contain only residential developments; no retail or commercial areas are included.

This emphasis on residential development will tend to turn North Plains into a commuter-oriented community. Residents won’t receive any of the benefits that come with new retail and commercial development, and will need to drive to their shopping destinations.

We believe that a well-planned town is one where residents can work, shop, and play within walking or biking distance of where they live. Local retail shops and businesses could create job opportunities for residents. They could reduce dependence on automobiles, which reduces pollution, traffic, and congestion. Walking and biking improve residents’ health.

Residential development is also the most expensive in terms of the cost of providing services. A 1999 American Farmland Trust study showed that residences require $1.15 in services for every $1 in taxes paid. Businesses require only 28 cents for every tax dollar collected. Even though the financial analyses provided show no net cost to existing residents, it seems clear that the type of development being proposed would impose a higher cost to provide services.

Friends of North Plains recognizes that the City has a good overall Master Plan that mixes densities and development types. It is unfortunate that the applicants chose to include only residential development in their proposals. We believe that it would be in the residents’ best interest if the areas to be developed had a mix of residential and commercial development.

Annexation maps showing the types of developments in each area may be viewed at our web site, http://www.fonp.org.

Submitted by Friends of North Plains Steering Committee

Brian Beinlich, James Just, Jim Long, and Pat Wolter

Back to the annexation main page