HOUSE BILL REPORT
SHB 1135
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in
their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a
statement of legislative intent.
As Passed Legislature
Title: An act relating to aquifer conservation zones in qualifying island cities without access to potable water sources outside their jurisdiction.
Brief Description: Allowing certain cities to designate aquifer conservation zones.
Sponsors: By House Committee on Local Government (originally sponsored by Representatives Appleton, Rolfes, Lantz, Seaquist and Clibborn).
Brief History:
Local Government: 2/6/07, 2/9/07 [DPS].
Floor Activity:
Passed House: 2/23/07, 94-0.
Passed Senate: 4/10/07, 49-0.
Passed Legislature.
Brief Summary of Substitute Bill |
|
|
|
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 6 members: Representatives Simpson, Chair; Eddy, Vice Chair; Curtis, Ranking Minority Member; Ross, B. Sullivan and Takko.
Staff: Ethan Moreno (786-7386).
Background:
Growth Management Act
The Growth Management Act (GMA or Act) is the comprehensive land use planning
framework for county and city governments in Washington. Enacted in 1990 and 1991, the
GMA establishes numerous requirements for local governments obligated by mandate or
choice to fully plan under the Act (planning jurisdictions) and a reduced number of directives
for all other counties and cities.
The GMA requires all jurisdictions to satisfy specific designation and protection mandates.
All local governments, for example, must designate and protect critical areas. Critical areas
are defined by statute to include wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat
conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas.
The GMA includes planning requirements relating to the use or development of land in urban
and rural areas. Among other obligations, counties that comply with the major requirements
of the GMA (planning counties) must designate urban growth areas (UGAs) or areas within
which urban growth must be encouraged and outside of which growth can occur only if it is
not urban in nature. "Urban growth" is defined by the GMA, in part, as a reference to growth
that makes intensive use of land for the location of buildings, structures, and impermeable
surfaces to such a degree as to be incompatible with the primary use of land for specified
agricultural, mineral resource, and rural purposes.
The GMA includes many requirements pertaining to UGAs that planning jurisdictions must
satisfy. Using population projections made by the Office of Financial Management, planning
counties and each city within these counties must include within UGAs areas and densities
sufficient to permit the urban growth that is projected to occur in the county or city for the
succeeding 20-year period. The UGAs must permit urban densities and include greenbelts
and open space areas. The UGA determinations may include a reasonable land market supply
factor and must permit a range of urban densities and uses. Additionally, a UGA provision
grants planning jurisdictions comprehensive plan discretion to make many choices about
accommodating growth.
Residential Density
Although the GMA includes provisions pertaining to density and the reduction of sprawling
low-density development, neither "density" nor "residential density" is defined in the Act.
The Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development, defined "residential
density" in its September 2004 guidance paper, Urban Densities - Central Puget Sound
Edition, as, in part, the number of dwelling units over a specified land area.
The GMA does not prescribe a uniform minimum residential density, nor does the Act
require jurisdictions to establish uniform minimum residential densities. Growth
Management Hearings Boards have, however, issued decisions pertaining to residential
densities.
Summary of Substitute Bill:
Any city coterminous with, and comprised only of, an island that relies solely on groundwater
aquifers for its potable water source and that does not have reasonable access to a potable
water source outside its jurisdiction may designate one or more aquifer conservation zones
(conservation zones). Conservation zones may only be designated for the purpose of
conserving and protecting potable water sources.
Conservation zones may not be considered critical areas under the GMA except to the extent
that specific areas located within conservation zones qualify for critical area designation and
have been designated as such under the GMA.
Any city may consider whether an area is within a conservation zone when determining the
residential density of that particular area. The residential densities within conservation zones,
in combination with other densities of the city, must be sufficient to accommodate projected
population growth under the GMA.
Nothing in the provisions authorizing conservation zones may be construed to modify the
population accommodation obligations required of jurisdictions under the GMA.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Not requested.
Effective Date: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony:
(In support) This bill is necessary as there is no known resource of potable water for
Bainbridge Island. The Legislature needs to investigate what would happen if Bainbridge
Island outgrows its water resources. This bill is timely and would be improved with an
amendment proposed by the city attorney. Bainbridge Island is about the size of Manhattan,
but with 22,500 residents. The growth potential for the city is enormous, the entire city is an
urban growth area, and its residents are completely dependent upon an island aquifer for their
water supply. Bainbridge Island is trying to balance urban density and aquifer protection and
this bill will allow the city to accept its required growth and protect its water supply. This
bill is important and will help island cities. The bill would be improved with an amendment
that clarifies provisions pertaining to residential densities.
(Opposed) None.
Persons Testifying: Representative Appleton, prime sponsor; Representative Rolfes; Chris Snow, Libby Hudson, and Paul McMurray, City of Bainbridge Island.