Brief Description: Distinguishing growth management update responsibilities between slower and faster growing cities and counties.

Sponsors: Senate Committee on Land Use & Planning (originally sponsored by Senators Morton, Hargrove, Mulliken, Rasmussen, Swecker, Horn, Haugen, T. Sheldon, McCaslin, Sheahan and Parlette).

Hearing Date: 2/25/04

Staff: Thamas Osborn (786-7129).

Background:

General Policy - GMA Planning Requirements. The Growth Management Act (GMA) establishes a comprehensive land use planning framework for county and city governments in Washington. Counties and cities meeting specific population and growth criteria are required to comply with the major requirements of the GMA. Counties not meeting these criteria may choose to plan under the GMA. Twenty-nine of 39 counties, and the cities within those 29 counties, are required to or have chosen to comply with the major requirements of the GMA (GMA jurisdictions).

Requirements - Comprehensive Land Use Plans. Among numerous planning requirements, GMA jurisdictions must adopt internally consistent comprehensive land use plans (comprehensive plans), which are generalized, coordinated land use policy statements of the governing body. Each comprehensive plan must include planning provisions for each of the following elements: a) land use; b) housing; c) capital facilities plan; d) utilities; e) rural areas;

f) transportation; g) economic development; and h) parks and recreation.

Continuing Review and Evaluation. Comprehensive plans and development regulations are subject to continuing review and evaluation by the adopting county or city. Any amendments or revisions of development regulations must comply with the requirements of the GMA and must be consistent with and implement comprehensive plans.

CTED Review Schedule. The Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development (CTED) must establish a schedule for counties and cities to review and, if needed, revise their comprehensive plans and development regulations so as to ensure their compliance with the Growth Management Act. The schedule must provide for reviews and evaluations by the following dates, and every seven years thereafter:

•    December 1, 2004 for Clallam, Clark, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, Pierce, Snohomish, Thurston, and Whatcom counties, and the cities within those counties;

•    December 1, 2005 for Cowlitz, Island, Lewis, Mason, San Juan, Skagit, and Skamania counties and the cities within those counties;

•    December 1, 2006 for Benton, Chelan, Douglas, Grant, Kittitas, Spokane, and Yakima counties and the cities within those counties; and

•    December 1, 2007 for Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grays Harbor, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pacific, Pend Oreille, Stevens, Wahkiakum, Walla Walla, and Whitman counties and the cities within those counties.

Counties and cities may begin this process early and may be eligible for grants from CTED, subject to available funding.

Summary of Bill:

Introduction. Generally, counties and cities with smaller populations and lower population growth rates are required to review their GMA plans and development regulations with less frequency, and are allowed to limit the scope of such review, as compared to larger and faster growing jurisdictions.

GMA Update Cycles. Jefferson, Clallam, and Whatcom Counties, and the cities within them, may mutually agree to delay completion of their Growth Management Act (GMA) updates by one year, until December 1, 2005. Such agreement must occur by legislative action within 45 days of the effective date of this provision. Subsequent updates must occur every ten years thereafter, unless otherwise required by statute.

The update cycle for all counties with populations of less than 75,000 and population growth rates of less than 17 percent, and the cities located in such counties, is increased from once every seven years to once every ten years. Under specified circumstances, legislative action by a city or county within two years prior to its scheduled update will be considered to have met the required review.

Scope of Review of GMA Plans and Regulations. The statutory requirements for a GMA review are made less stringent for certain counties and cities with smaller populations and lower growth rates. Specifically, counties and cities that meet the following criteria are given the option of conducting a GMA review that is more limited in scope than that required of other jurisdictions: a) counties with populations of less than 75,000 residents and with population growth rates of less than 17% during the requisite ten year period; and b) cities of less than 5,000 residents and with population growth rates of less than 17%, and which are not located in a county west of the crest of Cascade mountain range and having a 1995 population greater than 150,000 residents. For cities and towns meeting these criteria, this limited GMA review process must, at minimum, accomplish the following:

•    Review and update, if necessary, critical areas designations, and the policies and development regulations that protect critical areas, to include best available science;

•    Review and update, if necessary, resource land designations, and the policies and development regulations adopted to protect resource lands; and

•    For local governments fully planning under the GMA, review and update, if necessary, comprehensive plans and development regulations necessary to accommodate projected growth and to incorporate any changes in the GMA statutes since the last required local review and update.

All counties with populations of seventy five thousand or greater and that have experienced population growth rates in excess of 17 percent during the ten years prior to their update deadline, and all cities located within those counties and which have experienced such growth rates, must continue to complete the full, comprehensive updates required under current law.

The schedule established by the must include individual city and county population estimates based on the Office of Financial Management (OFM) information.

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Requested on February 23, 2004.

Effective Date: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.