SENATE BILL REPORT

                   HB 2467

              As Reported By Senate Committee On:

           Government Operations, February 23, 1996

Title:  An act relating to industrial developments.

Brief Description:  Revising the definition of "major industrial development" for the purpose of growth management planning.

Sponsors:  Representatives Pennington, Morris, Carlson, Boldt and Benton.

Brief History:

Committee Activity:  Government Operations:  2/23/96 [DPA].

SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended.

  Signed by Senators Haugen, Chair; Sheldon, Vice Chair; Goings, Hale, Heavey, McCaslin and Winsley.

Staff:  Rod McAulay (786-7754)

Background:  The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires each county planning to designate urban growth areas within the county, inside of which urban growth shall occur and outside of which urban growth shall not occur.  Every city must be included within an urban growth area.  Other areas may be included in urban growth areas if they are already characterized by urban growth or are adjacent to such areas.

A county may authorize major industrial developments outside urban growth areas, if certain conditions are met.  The county must consult with cities consistent with the provisions of the county-wide planning policy in establishing this process.  A "major industrial development" is defined as a master planned location for a specific manufacturing or industrial business, or a specific commercial business other than retail commercial development or multi-tenant office parks, that

$requires a parcel of land so large that no suitable parcels without critical areas are available within any urban growth area; or

$is a natural-resource-based industry requiring location near agricultural land, forest land, or mineral resource land upon which it is dependent.

A variety of factors must be met before such development may be sited outside an urban growth area, including (a) infrastructure is provided and/or applicable impact fees have been paid, (b) buffers and environmental protection are provided, and (c) development regulations discourage urban growth in adjacent non-urban areas.  Priority shall be given to applications for sites adjacent to or in proximity to the urban growth area.

Summary of Amended Bill:  A pilot test is authorized in Clark County for an expanded exception for major industrial  developments outside of the urban growth boundary (UGB).  The county may establish a site bank with no more than two sites outside of the UGB.  These sites must be master planned locations suitable for manufacturing or industrial businesses.  Development of the site may occur only if sites of adequate size are not available within the UGB or the industry must be located in proximity to agricultural, forest or mineral resources.  Sites outside of the UGB may not be used for retail commercial or multitenant office parks.

Amended Bill Compared to Original Bill:  The original bill as passed by the House applied to all counties planning under the GMA; did not limit the number of sites outside an UGB; required each site to exceed 200 acres and required that the industry located on the site be one targeted by the state diversification strategy.

Appropriation:  None.

Fiscal Note:  Not requested.

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

Testimony For:  The striking amendment will permit Clark County to designate lands for industrial projects before the "client" arrives.  Clark County is allowed to compete with Oregon for industrial development.

Testimony Against:  The reporting requirement will unduly delay legislative consideration of issue.

Testified:  Chuck Williams, Clark County (pro); Mike Ryherd, APA, Thousand Friends; Greg Hanon, National Assoc. of Industrial and Office Properties; Dave Williams, Cities.