HOUSE BILL REPORT

                 SSB 6422

             As Reported By House Committee On:

                       Transportation

Title:  An act relating to protecting general aviation facilities from encroachment of incompatible land uses.

Brief Description:  Requiring additional planning for general aviation facilities.

Sponsors:  Senate Committee on Government Operations (originally sponsored by Senators Haugen, Morton, Hale, Swecker, Prentice and Sutherland).

Brief History:

  Committee Activity:

Transportation:  2/21/96 [DP].

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

Majority Report:  Do pass.  Signed by 22 members:  Representatives K. Schmidt, Chairman; Benton, Vice Chairman; Mitchell, Vice Chairman; Skinner, Vice Chairman; R. Fisher, Ranking Minority Member; Hatfield, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Backlund; Blanton; Brown; Buck; Cairnes; Chopp; Elliot; Hankins; Johnson; Ogden; Patterson; Romero; D. Schmidt; Scott; Sterk and Tokuda.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  Signed by 4 members:  Representatives Horn; McMahan; Quall and Robertson.

Staff:  Jennifer Joly (786-7305).

Background:  Counties and cities planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA) must develop comprehensive plans that include a transportation and land use element.  GMA requires that the transportation and land use elements be consistent with each other, but it does not require planners to protect general aviation airports from incompatible land uses.

Summary of Bill:  Consideration of general aviation airport facilities is required in both the land use and transportation elements of the comprehensive plans of counties and cities planning under the GMA.

Every city, town, code city, charter city and county having a general aviation airport in its jurisdiction is required to discourage the siting of land uses that are incompatible with the airport.  This policy must be implemented in the comprehensive plan and development regulations as they are amended in the normal course of land use proceedings.  Formal consultation with the aviation community is required, and all plans and regulations must be filed with the aviation division of the Department of Transportation.

Appropriation:  None.

Fiscal Note:  Not requested.

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

Testimony For:  General aviation airports are vanishing due to pressure from encroaching incompatible land uses.  Land use planning statutes should express the state policy that these airports should not be subjected to incompatible neighbors.  Therefore, general aviation airports can be preserved to enhance our transportation system and the safety of all air travel.

Testimony Against:  It is not clear what this bill asks local governments to do. 

Testified:  Senator Mary Margaret Haugen, prime sponsor (pro); Mark Tripplet, Washington Pilots Association (pro); Bill Brubaker, Department of Transportation (pro); and Dave Williams, Association of Washington Cities (con).