HOUSE BILL REPORT
ESHB 2929
As Amended by the Senate
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
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. (21)
Signed by Representatives Locke, Chair; Grant, Vice Chair; H. Sommers, Vice Chair; Appelwick, Belcher, Braddock, Brekke, Dorn, Ebersole, Ferguson, Hine, Holland, Inslee, Peery, Rust, Sayan, Spanel, Sprenkle, Valle, Wang and Wineberry.
Minority Report: Do not pass. (6)
Signed by Representatives Silver, Ranking Republican Member; Youngsman, Assistant Ranking Republican Member; Doty, May, Nealey and Padden.
House Staff:Charlie Gavigan (786-7340)
Nancy Stevenson (786-7130)
AS PASSED HOUSE MARCH 9, 1990
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 for both the state and for local governments.
In Washington state, planning is traditionally done by local governments. Cities and counties have statutory authority, and arguably inherent power, to regulate land use and otherwise manage growth in their areas. Local governments have extensive power to regulate land use to protect the health and safety of their citizenry.
Land use planning and development regulations (zoning) are optional for local governments, except for the requirements of the Shoreline Management Act. Some local governments do not engage in formal land use planning or development regulation. Most local governments do some transportation planning to receive state transportation funds; this transportation planning does not have to be coordinated with local land use planning.
The actions of a local government regarding growth management and land use can affect the region and the state. Therefore, state- wide requirements do exist in several critical areas, such as the State Environmental Protection Act and the Shoreline Management Act. These statewide regulations are sometimes mandated by the federal government.
The Shoreline Management Act is designed to preserve and protect the state's shorelines and major lakes and streams. Development in these areas must be regulated by local governments in accordance with provisions in the Shoreline Management Act.
The State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) is patterned after federal law and applies to state and local agencies. SEPA applies to most governmental actions, including issuing building permits or approving public or private development projects. SEPA requires that disclosure and consideration be made regarding the impact of the proposed action or development being reviewed by the government on the environment. If it appears that the project will have an adverse environmental impact, the project can be altered to mitigate this perceived impact or an Environmental Impact Statement must be prepared and reviewed.
Platting, subdivision, land development, forest management, water, and building code laws also apply statewide.
Local governments are prohibited from charging impact fees to address the additional public facility and service costs caused by new development.
Current state (and federal) economic development programs focus on improving economic development in general or focus on improving specific areas of economic development, such as rural revitalization. Many of the programs that are not directly related to rural revitalization assist rural communities indirectly. State economic development efforts can be categorized as follows: (1) international and domestic trade promotion; (2) business development, assistance, and investment; (3) tourism promotion; (4) financing programs; (5) tax incentives; (6) local economic assistance programs; and (7) training and education programs.
SUMMARY:
Washington's growth dichotomy, rapid growth in some areas and slow growth in others, is addressed by implementing provisions to manage growth where necessary and to encourage growth in areas not experiencing economic prosperity. Substantive changes that are made include: (1) statewide goals are provided; (2) comprehensive planning is mandatory for many local governments, and must be coordinated when appropriate; (3) transportation planning must be done regionally and coordinated with land use planning; (4) impact fees are authorized and the vesting doctrine is changed; (5) subdivision and platting law changes give local governments greater ability to analyze the impact of divisions of land on public facilities and services; (6) timber, agriculture, and water conservation measures are provided; and (7) rural communities are given greater capacity to build and absorb economic growth.
Goals
Policy goals are established that are applicable throughout the state. These goals guide the planning and zoning actions of local governments, but also guide all other actions. These goals attempt to contain urban sprawl, to protect sensitive areas, and to encourage economic development in rural areas.
Comprehensive Planning
Comprehensive planning and development regulations are mandatory for all counties (and the cities within such counties) with a population of 100,000 or more or with a growth rate in excess of 10 percent in the last 10 years. The plans must be adopted by July 1, 1993. Zoning ordinances must be consistent with, and implement, the plan within one year from the adoption of the comprehensive plan.
Counties and cities that are required to plan must make interim designations by July 1, 1991. These designations apply to: (1) lands with long-term significance for production of agricultural products, timber, or mineral resources; and (2) sensitive areas. Incompatible land uses must be prohibited. The Department of Community Development, after conducting public hearings and consulting with interested parties, must provide necessary definitions by July 1, 1990.
If other counties reach 100,000 in population or the 10 percent growth rate in a 10 year period, then they, and the cities within these counties, must make interim designations within one year and adopt comprehensive plans within three years (of reaching the threshold population or growth rate). Other counties can choose to comply with the planning requirements. If they do, they must designate land uses within one year and plan within three years (of choosing to comply), and the cities in that county must comply also.
Comprehensive plans must include:
1.Designation and protection of agricultural lands, forest lands, and mineral resource lands. If an area is removed from a forest lands designation, at least 10 percent of that area must be retained as a greenbelt;
2.Designation and protection of sensitive areas, such as wetlands and aquifer recharge areas;
3.Designation, by counties, of urban growth areas. Aggrieved cities may object to the Department of Community Development, which may mediate the dispute. Each city's comprehensive plan must allow urban densities. A county's comprehensive plan must allow urban densities within urban growth areas, and must preclude urban growth outside of urban growth areas;
4.Mandatory elements that include: (a) land use, including housing, public facilities, and public utilities sub- elements, and (b) transportation;
5.Coordination with adjacent counties and cities; and
6.Public participation in development of comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances.
7.Counties and cities that are required to adopt comprehensive plans must identify open space areas within urban growth areas, and must identify areas for public purposes, such as landfills, schools, transportation corridors, and utility corridors.
Transportation Planning
Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPO) are authorized. These are voluntary associations of local governments within a county, or within geographically contiguous counties. The RTPO's: (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 statewide.
Impact Fees and Vesting
The prohibition preventing local governments from collecting impact fees to address increased public costs of new development is removed. Local governments are authorized to charge an impact fee or assess an excise tax to offset public costs associated with new development. The impact fees or excise taxes must be based on a formula to avoid double-charging developers, and the fees or taxes must be used within six years.
The vesting-of-rights doctrine is altered from the existing doctrine that allows a right to vest upon the submission of a less- than-complete application to a doctrine that requires both: (1) a permit be issued; and (2) substantial action be taken based on the permit.
Subdivision and Platting Changes
The Platting and Subdivision Act is altered. The minimum lot size of the smallest lot resulting from a division of land that necessitates review and approval is increased from less than five acres to less than 20 acres. Short subdivisions are eliminated, but counties and cities are permitted to adopt local ordinances allowing the administrative approval of certain subdivisions of land as follows: (1) cities may allow up to nine-lot subdivisions; (2) counties may allow two-lot subdivisions anywhere, up to nine-lot subdivisions in urban growth areas, or up to four-lot subdivisions if under current zoning each of the resulting lots is small enough so that it could not be further subdivided.
The standard of local government review for subdivisions is changed from one that allows local governments 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.
The "grandfathering" provision of current law that allows a lot created by a subdivision to remain subject to zoning, septic tank, and other standards that existed on the date of approval of the subdivision is eliminated.
Timber, Agriculture, and Water Conservation
The existing water right exemption that allows users of less than 5,000 gallons per day of well water to use water without obtaining a water right is eliminated. After July 1, 1990, the Department of Ecology must be notified 60 days prior to drilling a well. A permit may be required in areas that have ground water problems.
Water reservations that allow the applicant to reserve a water right to use a quantity of water in the future will be granted only when the applicant participates in comprehensive water supply planning.
An applicant must provide evidence of a water source for the building in order to obtain a building permit or for approval of a subdivision. Proof of a water source for a building permit is not required if the construction or remodel will not create a need for additional water.
Owners of forest land taxed under provisions that allow their property to be assessed at its current use, rather than its highest and best use, will no longer be able to remove the land from the current use tax role simply by paying a penalty of retroactively increased taxes. The landowner must now also wait 10 years before changing the land use.
The 10 year waiting period also applies to lands designated for agricultural or forestry uses in the local comprehensive plan when the landowner requests removal of the land from such designation in the comprehensive plan for an incompatible use. This 10 year waiting period does not apply if the comprehensive plan is certified, or to small counties prior to July 1, 1993.
A city or county may adopt an ordinance waiving the 10 year waiting period when the affected landowner faces an extreme hardship that could not reasonably have been foreseen.
Encouraging Growth Statewide
Urban-rural links between the Puget Sound economy and rural communities are established through: (1) changes to the Marketplace Program, which focus on the demand for products in urban areas that could be met by rural suppliers; and (2) changes to the Export Assistance Center to focus on rural exports and links between Puget Sound exporters and rural businesses and farms.
Delivery of State Services is changed and reviewed by: (1) formalizing the Associate Development Organization (ADO) network in statute to coordinate state economic development services at the local level; (2) creating a Service Delivery Task Force to review the present system and make recommendations for improvement to the legislature and governor; and (3) providing two additional staff persons in the Department of Community Development to help rural communities meet financing needs.
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 Business Assistance Center must assist businesses or local governments in permit processing, and must report to the governor or Legislature on how to improve the process.
Other Provisions
Among other significant provisions:
1.The Growth Strategies Commission is required to recommend a structure or process that: (a) ensures state agencies and local governments comply with the goals and other requirements in this legislation, (b) defines, identifies, and protects lands and resources of statewide significance; and (c) identifies incentives and state funds that can be withheld to promote local government compliance;
2.If the Legislature does not enact legislation regarding compliance and certification by July 1, 1991, the Department of Community Development must establish rules and procedures for certifying compliance;
3.Technical assistance and grants are provided to counties and cities for planning;
4.The Department of Community Development, with the Department of Information Services, is directed to prepare procedures and standards for collecting, storing, and disseminating information useful to local governments and to make policy decisions on statewide issues.
EFFECT OF SENATE AMENDMENTS: The Senate striking amendment: (1) changes substantially the comprehensive planning requirements; (2) removes the provisions dealing with changes to the vesting doctrine; (3) removes provisions authorizing impact fees; (4) removes the changes to subdivision and platting laws; (5) includes the transportation provisions authorizing regional transportation planning organizations and requires that transportation planning and land use planning be consistent; (6) removes conservation measures for agricultural and timber lands and for water; and (7) makes changes to the rural economic development provisions.
Comprehensive planning.
The Senate striking amendment substantially changes the planning provisions. The Department of Community Development (DCD) is required to adopt guidelines for county and city comprehensive plans that are consistent with a list of growth planning goals. This must be done by July 1, 1991.
Comprehensive planning is mandatory for all counties and cities, except that cities with a population less than 7500 (224 exist) can opt out by resolution; the House version makes planning mandatory for large or fast growing counties and cities within those counties. The plans must be adopted within 12 months of the date DCD adopts the planning guidelines. As in the House version, urban growth areas are addressed, zoning must be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, and comprehensive plan should be consistent with adjacent counties and cities.
The Senate striking amendment requires a number of mandatory elements in the comprehensive plan, but the detail is significantly less than the House bill. Provisions requiring for identification and protection of sensitive areas and agriculture and forest lands, particularly interim designations, were removed from the House bill by the Senate striking amendment.
A dispute resolution mechanism is established through the courts to resolve disputes between counties and cities.
The traditional exclusive detached single family residential zone is eliminated by permitting each dwelling to add a "mother-in-law" apartment.
The role of the Growth Strategies Commission is changed by the Senate striking amendment to be more limited. The commission must recommend methods to ensure local government compliance with the act, methods to promote linkages between land use and transportation, and alternatives for funds to mitigate the impact of development on counties and cities.
The Senate striking amendment appropriates $3 million to DCD to provide technical assistance.
Encouraging Growth State-wide.
Several rural economic development provisions were not changed by the Senate striking amendment. These include: (1) provisions dealing with the Export Assistance Center establishing urban-rural links; (2) provisions requiring the Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED) and DCD to encourage growth state- wide; (3) provisions formalizing the Associate Development Organizations in statute; and (4) provisions requiring the Development Loan Fund, CERB, and the Public Works Fund to consider the overall benefits to the community that potential projects will have.
The following provisions were removed by the Senate striking amendment: (1) provisions dealing with formation of urban-rural links through the Marketplace Program; (2) provisions establishing a grant program in DCD to build local capacity in rural areas; (3) provisions providing for a Service Delivery Task Force; and (4) provisions establishing a grant program in DTED to encourage value-added manufacturing and industry modernization. The grant program in DTED was replaced in the Senate amendment by an industrial competitiveness program that focuses on establishing industry associations and conducting an industrial census.
The following provisions were added by the Senate striking amendment: (1) several state agencies are required to expedite permit processing; (2) the Business Assistance Center in DTED must provide information to businesses on bids issued by state agencies and educational institutions; (3) CERB is authorized to provide infrastructure for destination tourism resorts; (4) DCD must set aside $200,000 from the Local Development Matching Fund program to assist community-based organizations in their efforts to assist low-income areas; and (5) a self-employment program for low-income persons is established in DCD.
Fiscal Note: Requested January 23, 1990.
Effective Date:Sections 5 and 17 of the bill contain an emergency clause and take effect immediately; and section 36 of the bill takes effect on July 1, 1990.
House Committee ‑ Testified For: Representative Ruth Fisher, Chair, Transportation; Representative Jennifer Belcher, Chair, Natural Resources and Parks; Representative Busse Nutley, Chair, Housing; Representative Mary Margaret Haugen, Chair, Local Government; Representative Maria Cantwell, Chair, Trade and Economic Development; Jeff Parsons, Citizens for Balanced Growth; Steve Robinson, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission; Randy Scott, Washington Association of Counties; Elizabeth Tabbutt, Washington Environmental Council; and Kurt Danison, Okanogan County, Circuit Rider Consortium.
House Committee - Testified Against: No one.
House Committee - Testimony For: Support for growth management goals and the strengthening of the planning process was expressed. The legislation should be applied statewide. Growth strategies and land use planning are necessary to protect natural resources. The proposal strengthens the critical elements of the planning process. Technical assistance is needed at the local level. Local government costs are more than one time costs; local governments will require financial assistance.
House Committee - Testimony Against: None.
VOTE ON FINAL PASSAGE:
Yeas 72; Nays 21; Excused 5; 2/15/90
Voting Nay: Representatives Ballard, Baugher, Bowman, Brooks, Brough, Brumsickle, Day, Doty, Fuhrman, Hankins, Kirby, McLean, Miller, Moyer, Nealey, Padden, Prince, Smith, D. Sommers, Wolfe and Youngsman.
Excused: Representatives Dorn, Sayan, Schoon, Silver and Valle
VOTE ON FINAL PASSAGE:
Yeas 76; Nays 20; Excused 1; 3/9/90
Voting Nay: Representatives Ballard, Baugher, Bowman, Brooks, Brough, Brumsickle, Day, Doty, Fuhrman, Hankins, Kirby, McLean, Miller, Nealey, Padden, Rayburn, Smith, D. Sommers, Wolfe, Youngsman.
Excused: Representative Vekich