HOUSE BILL REPORT

                  HB 2785

             As Reported By House Committee on:

                Trade & Economic Development

Title:  An act relating to siting of major industrial developments.

Brief Description:  Regulating siting of major industrial developments.

Sponsor(s):  Representatives Riley, Forner, Cantwell, Betrozoff, Sheldon, Rayburn, P. Johnson, Kremen, Brough, Paris, Wynne, Carlson, Miller, Winsley, Basich, Hochstatter, Wood, Edmondson and Mitchell.

Brief History:

  Reported by House Committee on:

Trade & Economic Development, February 7, 1992, DPS.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON

TRADE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  Signed by 11 members:  Representatives Cantwell, Chair; Sheldon, Vice Chair; Forner, Ranking Minority Member; Betrozoff, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Ferguson; Kremen; Ludwig; Moyer; Rasmussen; Riley; and Roland.

Staff:  Charlie Gavigan (786-7340).

Background:  A majority of counties in Washington State, and all cities in these counties, are planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA).  The comprehensive plans required under this act are intended to enable the local government to accommodate expected growth within the jurisdiction while protecting the environment.  Under the GMA, counties, working with cities, must designate urban growth areas to accommodate a 20 year population projection.  Urban development and industrial activity cannot occur outside urban growth areas, except for new fully-contained communities and master planned resorts.

New fully contained communities and master planned resorts are allowed outside urban growth areas if specified criteria are met.  These include provision for the new community or resort in the comprehensive plan, provision of buffers between these new communities and resorts and existing urban growth areas, provision for protection of critical areas, and provision for fully providing necessary infrastructure.  A new fully contained community becomes an urban growth area.

The 20 year growth management planning population projection, which determines the size of urban growth areas in the county, must be allocated between urban growth areas and proposed new communities.

Summary of Substitute Bill:  Counties planning under the Growth Management Act may establish a process, in conjunction with cities, for reviewing proposals to site major industrial developments outside urban growth areas.  A major industrial development is defined as a manufacturing or commercial use that requires a parcel of land so large that no appropriate parcel is available in an urban growth area, that should be located in rural areas because of the character of the use, or that requires location near national resource lands.

The criteria for siting a major industrial development in rural areas include providing for new infrastructure and impact fees, providing for transportation needs, providing buffers between the development and rural areas, providing for environmental protection, providing mitigation of adverse impacts on designated natural resource lands, and providing for protection of critical areas. 

An approved major industrial development becomes a separate urban growth area.

Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:  Establishing a process to site major industrial developments is made optional, not mandatory.  Clarifications are made to the definition of "major industrial developments."

Fiscal Note:  Not requested.

Effective Date of Substitute Bill:  Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For:  It is appropriate to site some major industrial development outside urban growth areas because of the size of the development, the characteristics of the development, or the economic development it could bring to a rural area.

Testimony Against:  Industrial development should be done primarily in urban areas because that is where the necessary public services, infrastructure, and workforce are located.  Counties and cities will consider the need for industrial development sites in the process of designating urban growth areas.

Witnesses:  Bruce Wishart and Dave Bricklin, Sierra Club (Con); Don Marcy and Ted Knapp, National Association of Industrial and Office Parks (Pro); Dave Williams, Association of Cities (Con); Kris Backes, Association of Washington Business (Pro); and Ryan Petty, Forward Washington (Pro).