_____________________________________________

ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5378

           _____________________________________________

State of Washington      57th Legislature     2001 Regular Session

By Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Parks & Shorelines (originally sponsored by Senators Jacobsen, Swecker and Spanel; by request of Governor Locke)

READ FIRST TIME 03/05/01. 

_1      AN ACT Relating to amendments to shoreline master programs and

_2  critical areas; amending RCW 90.58.080 and 36.70A.130; and

_3  creating a new section.

_4  BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

_5      NEW SECTION. Sec. 1.  The legislature finds that many factors

_6  impact the quality and availability of habitat for salmon in their

_7  various life stages.  The legislature also finds that substantial

_8  portions of the shoreline management rules recently adopted by the

_9  department of ecology are intended to improve shoreline practices

10  that impact salmon.  The legislature also finds that many state and

11  federal laws direct counties and cities to take action to protect

12  and improve salmon habitat.

13      The legislature recognizes that there are numerous regulations

14  requiring local governments to protect the environment, and salmon

15  in particular.  The growth management act requires that county and

16  city development regulations include best available science when

17  designating and protecting critical areas, including fish and

18  wildlife areas, wetlands, and frequently flooded areas.  The growth

                               p. 1                     ESSB 5378

_1  management act also requires counties and cities to give special

_2  consideration to conservation and protection measures necessary to

_3  preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries.  In addition, most

_4  counties and cities must comply with the federal clean water

_5  act.  Many counties and cities must develop storm water management

_6  plans and must require those developing property to use best

_7  management practices to prevent storm water runoff.  Counties and

_8  cities must also comply with the state environmental policy

_9  act.  All counties and cities with threatened or endangered salmonid

10  species must avoid take through their development practices and

11  permitting activities, subject to enforcement by the federal

12  government or third-party lawsuits.  Many counties and cities also

13  have in place flood hazard reduction programs, are engaged in

14  watershed planning, and are engaged in salmon recovery limiting

15  factors analysis.

16      It is the intent of this act to coordinate the planning process

17  of the growth management act, chapter 36.70A RCW, the critical

18  areas provision of the growth management act, RCW 36.70A.130, and

19  the shoreline management act, chapter 90.58 RCW.  The planning

20  should be on the same schedule to fully integrate the statutory

21  requirements of each.

22      Sec. 2.  RCW 90.58.080 and 1995 c 347 s 305 are each amended to

23  read as follows:

24      (1) Local governments shall develop or amend, ((within twenty-

25  four months after)) pursuant to the adoption of guidelines as

26  provided in RCW 90.58.060, a master program for regulation of uses

27  of the shorelines of the state consistent with the required

28  elements of the guidelines adopted by the department.

29      (2) The department must consult with counties and cities and

30  develop a master program amendment schedule consistent with the

31  priority salmon recovery regions identified in the statewide

32  strategy to recover salmon and population growth data provided by

33  the office of financial management.  Taking into account the amount

34  of funding provided by the legislature and the ability of the

35  department to timely review and approve the shoreline master

36  program amendments, the schedule may not require a county or city

37  to submit its amended master program to the department sooner than

ESSB 5378                      p. 2

_1  thirty-six months or later than seventy-two months after that

_2  county or city has received the full amount of funding needed to

_3  amend its shoreline master program.

_4      (3) The department, upon the request of a local government,

_5  must grant an extension of no less than twelve months to the

_6  deadlines established by the department under subsection (2) of

_7  this section for amending the shoreline master program element of

_8  comprehensive plans.

_9      (4) Amendments to the guidelines adopted by the department

10  after January 1, 2000, do not apply to any:

11      (a) County or city with a shoreline master program and

12  comprehensive land use plan in place;

13      (b) County, or city within a county, that has seventy-five

14  percent or more of its land base in preservation, natural resource

15  use, or open space.  (i) "Preservation" means land that is set aside

16  for national parks, national wildlife refuges, state parks, local

17  parks, conservation easements, natural resource conservation

18  areas, open space, or any similar status; (ii) "natural resource

19  use" means national forest land, state forest land, and

20  agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands designated under

21  RCW 36.70A.170; and (iii) "open space" has the same definition as

22  in RCW 84.34.020; and

23      (c) Counties that border on another state of the United States.

24      (5) Counties or cities that are not required to amend an

25  existing master program to conform to shoreline master program

26  guidelines adopted by the department after January 1, 2000, must

27  either maintain and enforce a master program subject to the

28  previous guidelines or voluntarily amend their master program

29  subject to the amended guidelines.

30      Sec. 3.  RCW 36.70A.130 and 1997 c 429 s 10 are each amended to

31  read as follows:

32      (1) Except as provided in subsection (5) of this section, each

33  comprehensive land use plan and development regulations shall be

34  subject to continuing review and evaluation by the county or city

35  that adopted them.  Not later than September 1, 2002, and at least

36  every five years thereafter, a county or city shall take action to

37  review and, if needed, revise its comprehensive land use plan and

                               p. 3                     ESSB 5378

_1  development regulations to ensure that the plan and regulations

_2  are complying with the requirements of this chapter.  The review and

_3  evaluation required by this subsection may be combined with the

_4  review required by subsection (3) of this section.

_5      Any amendment or revision to a comprehensive land use plan

_6  shall conform to this chapter, and any change to development

_7  regulations shall be consistent with and implement the

_8  comprehensive plan.

_9      (2)(a) Each county and city shall establish and broadly

10  disseminate to the public a public participation program

11  identifying procedures whereby proposed amendments or revisions of

12  the comprehensive plan are considered by the governing body of the

13  county or city no more frequently than once every year except that

14  amendments may be considered more frequently under the following

15  circumstances:

16      (i) The initial adoption of a subarea plan;

17      (ii) The adoption or amendment of a shoreline master program

18  under the procedures set forth in chapter 90.58 RCW; and

19      (iii) The amendment of the capital facilities element of a

20  comprehensive plan that occurs concurrently with the adoption or

21  amendment of a county or city budget.

22      (b) Except as otherwise provided in (a) of this subsection, all

23  proposals shall be considered by the governing body concurrently

24  so the cumulative effect of the various proposals can be

25  ascertained.  However, after appropriate public participation a

26  county or city may adopt amendments or revisions to its

27  comprehensive plan that conform with this chapter whenever an

28  emergency exists or to resolve an appeal of a comprehensive plan

29  filed with a growth management hearings board or with the court.

30      (3) Each county that designates urban growth areas under RCW

31  36.70A.110 shall review, at least every ten years, its designated

32  urban growth area or areas, and the densities permitted within

33  both the incorporated and unincorporated portions of each urban

34  growth area.  In conjunction with this review by the county, each

35  city located within an urban growth area shall review the

36  densities permitted within its boundaries, and the extent to which

37  the urban growth occurring within the county has located within

38  each city and the unincorporated portions of the urban growth

ESSB 5378                      p. 4

_1  areas.  The county comprehensive plan designating urban growth

_2  areas, and the densities permitted in the urban growth areas by

_3  the comprehensive plans of the county and each city located within

_4  the urban growth areas, shall be revised to accommodate the urban

_5  growth projected to occur in the county for the succeeding twenty-

_6  year period.  The review required by this subsection may be combined

_7  with the review and evaluation required by RCW 36.70A.215.

_8      (4) It is the intent of this section to coordinate the planning

_9  process of the growth management act, chapter 36.70A RCW, the

10  critical areas provision of the growth management act under this

11  section, and the shoreline management act, chapter 90.58 RCW.  The

12  planning should be on the same schedule to fully integrate the

13  statutory requirements of each.

14      (5) Revisions of critical areas must be completed according to

15  the following schedule:

16      (a) Not later than September 1, 2004, and every ten years

17  thereafter, for each county and city that is subject to the

18  requirements of RCW 36.70A.215;

19      (b) Not later than September 1, 2006, and every ten years

20  thereafter, for each county and city that adopted a comprehensive

21  plan between January 1, 1992, and January 1, 1997, unless it is

22  subject to the requirements of RCW 36.70A.215;

23      (c) Not later than September 1, 2008, and every ten years

24  thereafter, for all other counties and cities, except that if a

25  county or city becomes required or chooses to plan under RCW

26  36.70A.040 after July 1, 2001, it must take action to formally

27  review and, if needed, revise its comprehensive plan and

28  development regulations no later than ten years after the due

29  dates required for its initial adoption of a comprehensive plan

30  and development regulations or, if it is subject to the

31  requirements of RCW 36.70A.215, consistent with the schedule in

32  (a) of this subsection.

‑‑‑ END ‑‑‑

                               p. 5                     ESSB 5378