FINAL BILL REPORT
SHB 2929
PARTIAL VETO
C 17 L 90 E1
BYHouse Committee on Appropriations (originally sponsored by Representatives Cantwell, R. Fisher, Brough, Haugen, Belcher, Ferguson, Nutley, Phillips, Horn, Rust, Wood, Winsley, Nelson, Locke, Appelwick, Leonard, Wineberry, Scott, Bennett, Pruitt, Cole, Crane, Heavey, Spanel, Forner, Holland, O'Brien, Hine, Fraser, Todd and Wang)
Enacting comprehensive growth planning provisions.
House Committe on Appropriations
Senate Committee on Governmental Operations
SYNOPSIS AS ENACTED
BACKGROUND:
Washington state arguably has a dual economy, one in which the central Puget Sound region faces problems associated with rapid growth and much of the rest of the state faces problems associated with too little growth. This has implications both for the state and for local governments.
In Washington state, planning is traditionally done by cities and counties that have statutory authority, and arguably inherent power, to regulate land use and otherwise manage growth in their areas. Counties and cities have extensive power to regulate land use to protect the health and safety of their citizenry.
Land use planning and development regulations such as zoning are generally optional for counties and cities. Some counties and cities do not engage in formal planning or regulation at all. Most counties and cities do some transportation planning to receive state transportation funds, but transportation planning does not have to be coordinated with any land use planning the counties and cities may undertake.
The actions of a county or city regarding growth management and land use can affect areas well beyond the jurisdiction of that government. State-wide requirements are imposed by some state laws such as the state Environmental Protection Act and the Shoreline Management Act. Platting, subdivision, land development, forest management, water, and building code laws also apply state-wide.
With certain exceptions, counties and cities are prohibited from charging impact fees to address the additional public facility and service costs caused by new development.
SUMMARY:
Washington's growth dichotomy is addressed by enacting provisions to manage growth where necessary and to encourage growth in areas not experiencing economic prosperity. Major provisions include: 1) planning goals, 2) mandatory and coordinated comprehensive planning for some counties and cities, 3) regional transportation planning to be coordinated with land use planning, 4) impact fees, 5) additional real estate excise taxes, 6) mandatory review of the impact that divisions of land have on public facilities and services, 7) designation of timber, agriculture, and mineral resource lands and critical areas by all counties and cities, 8) conservation of timber, agricultural, and mineral resource lands and critical areas by some counties and cities, and 9) assistance to rural communities to attract and absorb economic growth.
Planning Goals.
Planning goals are established that apply to counties and cities that plan under this act.
Comprehensive Planning.
Comprehensive planning and development regulations are mandatory for all counties, and the cities within such counties, that meet either of two criteria. These criteria are: 1) a population over 50,000 and a population growth rate of more than 10 percent in the previous 10 years (expected to be King, Pierce, Snohomish, Clark, Kitsap, Thurston, Whatcom, Skagit, and Island counties), or 2) a growth rate of more than 20 percent in the previous 10 years, regardless of population. Any county that has a population of less than 50,000 and meets this 20 percent growth criteria may, by December 31, 1990, choose not to be subject to the planning requirements, (currently San Juan, Mason, and Jefferson counties are expected to have this option).
Any county may choose to follow the planning requirements, but having once done so, may not later remove itself from those requirements.
Counties and cities required to plan under this act must adopt comprehensive plans by July 1, 1993. Zoning ordinances must be consistent with and implement the plan within 12 months from the adoption of these comprehensive plans. All other counties and cities that have a comprehensive plan must adopt zoning ordinances to implement their comprehensive plans by July 1, 1992.
All counties and cities must designate agriculture, timber, and mineral resource lands and critical areas by September 1, 1991. The Department of Community Development, after consultation with interested parties, must provide guidelines to assist counties and cities in making these designations. Counties and cities that plan under this act must also conserve these designated natural resource lands and critical areas through their zoning regulations by September 1, 1991.
Comprehensive plans, for those counties and cities that plan under this act, must include:
1) Designation and conservation of agricultural lands, forest lands, and mineral resource lands;
2) Designation of critical areas, such as wetlands and aquifer recharge areas, and preclusion of land uses or development that is incompatible with such critical areas;
3) Designation of urban growth areas by counties. A mediation process and administrative hearing process is established to resolve conflicts between counties and cities regarding urban growth areas. Each city's comprehensive plan must allow urban densities. A county's comprehensive plan must allow urban densities within urban growth areas, and only allow growth outside of urban growth areas if it is not urban in nature;
4) Mandatory elements as follows: (a) land use, (b) housing, (c) capital facilities plan, (d) transportation, and (e) public utilities. In addition, such counties must include a rural element.
5) Coordination with adjacent counties and cities; and
6) Public participation in development of comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances.
Technical assistance, grants, and mediation are available through the Department of Community Development.
Impact Fees.
The prohibition preventing counties and cities from imposing most impact fees is revised to allow impact fees to be collected by counties and cities that plan under this act. Impact fees may be collected for 1) public streets or roads, 2) publicly owned parks, open space, or recreation facilities, 3) school facilities, or 4) fire protection facilities that are not part of a fire protection district.
Before collecting such impact fees, the county or city must: 1) adopt a capital facilities plan element in its comprehensive plan and address existing deficiencies, 2) establish an advisory committee, 3) establish service areas where appropriate, and 4) adopt a schedule of impact fees based on a formula.
The impact fees: 1) may be imposed only for public facility improvements that are reasonably related to the new development, 2) may not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of public facility improvements that are reasonably related to new development, and 3) may be used only for public facilities that will reasonably benefit the new development.
An appeals process must be established, and provisions must be made for the refund of impact fees under certain conditions.
Real Estate Excise Tax.
Counties and cities that are required or choose to plan under this act must use proceeds from the existing one-fourth of 1 percent real estate excise tax primarily for capital projects specified in the capital facilities plan element of their comprehensive plan and for housing relocation assistance.
An additional one-fourth of 1 percent real estate excise tax may be imposed by counties and cities that are required to plan under this act. Other counties and cities that choose to plan under this act may impose the additional real estate excise tax with voter approval. Proceeds from this additional real estate excise tax must be used to finance capital facilities specified in the capital facilities plan element of the comprehensive plan.
Housing Relocation Assistance.
The prohibition preventing counties and cities from imposing most impact fees is revised to allow the payment of housing relocation assistance.
Counties and cities that are required to plan under this act are authorized to require housing relocation assistance from developers for low income persons who are dislocated as a direct result of the new development. The total relocation assistance may not exceed $2,000 per household with the developer paying not more than one half of the housing relocation. However, in the future the amounts may be adjusted to reflect changes in the consumer price index.
Subdivision Changes.
The standard of review for subdivisions is changed from one that allows counties and cities to deny the subdivision only under certain circumstances to one in which the subdivision may be approved only if written findings are made that adequate provisions have been made for public facilities and that the subdivision is in the public interest. This new standard of review also applies to short subdivisions.
Transportation Planning.
Transportation plans must be coordinated with comprehensive land use plans.
Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPOs) are authorized. These are voluntary associations of local governments within a county, or within geographically contiguous counties. The RTPOs: 1) certify that local comprehensive plans are consistent with regional transportation plans, 2) develop a regional transportation plan, and 3) assist the state Department of Transportation in ensuring that regional transportation plans are consistent state-wide.
Encouraging Growth State-wide.
Building local capacity for rural economic growth is the focus of a grant program in the Department of Community Development. The department is to administer grants to rural communities to increase local economic development resources, establish urban- rural links, and increase the export of products from rural areas.
The delivery of state services to encourage growth is addressed in several ways. Provisions include: 1) formalizing the Associate Development Organization network in statute to help coordinate state economic development services at the local level, 2) creating a Service Delivery Task Force to review the present system and make recommendations to the Legislature and governor, and 3) providing additional staffing to assist rural communities in financing and revitalization.
Improving the processing of permits by state agencies is also addressed.
Other provisions include: 1) an Industrial Competitiveness Program that focuses on business networks, 2) a bid information system, 3) a provision to provide technical assistance to community based organizations through the Local Development Matching Fund, 4) a self-employment loan program for low income persons, and 5) an evaluation of advanced technology and science in Washington State.
The Growth Strategies Commission.
The Growth Strategies Commission that was created by executive order is required to recommend by October 1, 1990: 1) how to ensure that counties and cities planning under this act comply with the planning goals and other requirements in this act, 2) what the state role should be in growth management, 3) how to identify and protect lands and resources of state-wide significance, 4) what state funds could be withheld and what incentives could be used to promote compliance by counties and cities, 5) how to increase affordable housing and link transportation and land use planning, 6) how to address vesting of rights issues and short subdivisions, and 7) how to resolve disputes between cities and counties regarding urban growth areas.
VOTES ON FINAL PASSAGE:
Regular Session
House 72 21
Senate 35 12 (Senate amended)
First Special Session
House 76 20
Senate 36 13 (Senate amended)
(House refused to concur)
Free Conference Committee
Senate 32 16
House 72 21
Partial Veto Summary: The partial veto removes a provision that exempted port districts and municipal airports from the requirement that special districts conform to local comprehensive plans, removes provisions that authorize local governments to contract with developers to provide public facilities related to new development, removes some protections for developers regarding impact fees, and removes several provisions related to economic development, including those that would have established an Industrial Competitiveness Program, a bid information system, a low income self-employment program, a technical assistance program for community based organizations, and an evaluation of technology and science. (See VETO MESSAGE)
EFFECTIVE:July 1, 1990