HomeMy WebLinkAbout1413RESOLUTION NO. /4/3 •
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of Kent,
Washington, ratifying the countywide planning
policies adopted by the Metropolitan King
County Council pursuant to the Growth
Management Act.
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act (RCW 36. 70A. 210)
requires the adoption of countywide planning policies by the
legislative authority of King County, and that said policies are to
provide a county-wide framework from which local comprehensive
plans are to be developed; and
WHEREAS, King County, the City of Seattle, and the
incorporated suburban cities and towns in King County established
a process for the development, adoption, and ratification of
countywide planning policies by an interlocal agreement, which was
approved by the City of Kent, and that said interlocal agreement
established the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) , a group
consisting of elected officials from King County, suburban cities,
and the City of Seattle, who were authorized to develop a set of
recommended countywide planning policies for consideration by the
King County Council; and
WHEREAS, the GMPC recommended a set of countywide
planning policies to the King County Council that were adopted
pursuant to Ordinance No. 10450 on July 6, 1992, as required by RCW
36.70A.210; and which furthermore were ratified by the Kent City
Council as outlined in the interlocal agreement pursuant to
Resolution No. 1326 on September 15, 1992; and
WHEREAS, the King County Council and the Kent City
Council expressly conditioned its adoption and ratification of the
of the policies, generally referred to as Phase I, upon completion
of a Phase II Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, fiscal
analysis, and more analysis of affordable housing issues, an urban
growth area boundary, and designation of urban and
manufacturing/industrial centers; and
WHEREAS, since 1992, the GMPC, working with task forces
to address the specific issues outlined for Phase II
developed recommended amendments to the Countywide
Policies adopted in 1992; and
analysis,
Planning
WHEREAS, these recommended amendments to the countywide
planning policies, set forth in a report entitled Recommended
Amendments to the King County 2012 Countywide Planning Policies,
were adopted by the GMPC on May 25, 1994; and
WHEREAS, these countywide planning policies, with minor
amendments, were adopted by the Metropolitan King County Council
pursuant to Ordinance No. 11446, on August 23, 1994; and
WHEREAS, as outlined in the interlocal agreement, the
City of Kent has ninety days to ratify or disapprove the Phase II
policies as adopted in Ordinance No. 11446; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Planning Committee reviewed the
amended countywide planning policies on September 20, October 18,
and November 1, 1994, and approved a motion recommending
ratification of the amended policies; NOW THEREFORE
2
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Kent, acting pursuant to the
Interlocal Agreement among King County, the City of Seattle, and
incorporated suburban cities, hereby ratifies the countywide
planning policies as adopted by the Metropolitan King County
Council pursuant to Ordinance No. 11446 attached hereto as Exhibit
A and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2. The countywide planning policies adopted
herein shall be filed with the City Clerk and in the office of the
Planning Department and made available for public inspection.
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington this /5 of ~, 1994.
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this /0
day of~, 1994.
ATTEST:
3
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
Resolution No. !¥1_1 , passed by the City Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, the 15 day of ?Luvt;tt:h-~,/1994.
GMPC.RES
4
King County
September 9, 1994
The Honorable Jim White
Mayor
City ofKent
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Dear Mayor White:
Re: King County Countywide Planning Policies -Ratification by Cities
We are pleased to forward for your consideration and ratification the amended Countywide
Planning Policies.
The Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) were first adopted in July of 1992. After an
exhaustive review process, amendments to those initial policies were adopted by the
Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) on May 25, 1994. In accordance with our
interlocal agreement that established the GMPC, the Metropolitan King County Council
adopted and ratified the amended CPPs on August 15, 1994.
The King County 2012 Countywide Planning Policies become effective when ratified by at
least thirty percent of the city and county governments, representing seventy percent of the
population of King County. A city will be deemed to have ratified the policies unless by
legislative action it disapproves them by November 21, 1994.
To assist in your review of the CPPs, you will find that amendments proposed and approved
by the GMPC are underlined and subsequent changes added by the Metropolitan King
County Council are shaded.
The proposed amendments represent significant compromises by the representatives of the
County, Seattle, and Suburban Cities to establish a new framework for managing growth in
King County. We hope you will join us and ratify these policies on behalf of our region.
The Honorable Jim White
September 9, 1994
Page Two
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us, Rebecha Cusack, Lead Staff to the
Metropolitan King County Council's Growth Management Committee at 296-0330, or
Craig Larsen, Acting Director of the Parks, Planning and Resources Department at 296-
7503.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Kent Pullen, Chair
King County Council
u~
Chris Vance, Chair
Growth Management, Housing
& Environment Committee
cc: Cynthia Sullivan, Vice Chair
Growth Management, Housing
& Environment Committee
Rebecha Cusack, Legislative Analyst
Robin Appleford, Intergovernmental Relations
Cliff Petersen, Council Coordinator
Jerry Peterson, Council Administrator
. Craig Larsen, Acting Director,
Parks, Planning & Resources Department
e
King County Executive
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
July 19, 1994
orcppllmmc/rc. 719
EXHIBIT ...d. RECEIVED
SE? 2 1 B94
Jane Hague
Introduced By: Chris Vance
Proposed No. : 94-386
ORDINANCE NO. 11446
AN ORDINANCE adopting amendments to the
Countywide Planning Policies pursuant to RCW
36. 70A.21 0; ratifying the amended Countywide Planning
Policies for unincorporated King County; amending
Ordinance 10450, adding new sections to K.C.C. 20.10,
and repealing Ordinance 10450, Section 3 and K.C.C.
20.10.030.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS. The council makes the following findings.
12 A. Beginning in the fall of 1991, King County, the City of Seattle and the
13 Suburban Cities of King County met jointly as the Growth Management
14 Planning Council to develop and recommend Countywide Planning Policies
15 for King County, as mandated by the Growth Management Act, RCW
16 36.70A.210.
17 B. In July of 1992, the King County Council adopted the Countywide Planning
18 Policies recommended to it by the Growth Management Planning Council.
19 The Countywide Planning Policies adopted at that time have generally been
2 0 referred to as Phase I. At that time, the Policies as adopted contemplated
21 completion of a Phase II of countywide policies, to address issues not dealt
2 2 with in sufficient detail in Phase I.
23 C. The particular issues to be addressed in Phase II included designation of urban
2 4 centers for purposes of pursuing a regional transit plan, affordable housing,
2 5 economic development, rural character, the preparation of a detailed fiscal
2 6 analysis of the Countywide Planning Policies, and completion of a draft and a
2 7 final Environmental Impact Statement. ·
2 8 D. Since July 1992, the Growth Management Planning Council, working With
2 9 task forces to address the specific topics identified for further work in Phase
3 o II, has developed recommended amendments to the adopted Countywide
31 Planning Policies.
3 2 E. On May 25, 1994, The Growth Management Planning Council took fmal
3 3 action recommending Phase II amendments to the Phase I Countywide
3 4 Planning Policies. The GMPC recommendations can be found in the
3 5 document entitled Recommended Amendments to Kin~ County 2012
3 6 Countywide Plannin~ Policies. Adopted by the Kim~ County Growth
3 7 Mana~ement Plannine Council May 25. 1994. Urban Growth Area maps
3 a provided in Appendix 1 are int~nded for policy planning purposes. The Urban
3 9 Growth Area contained in these policies is a dynamic policy line which
4 o provides general guidance to the Metropolitan King County Council when it
41 adopts the final Urban Growth Boundary in its 1994 Comprehensive Plan.
M:\gmhe\ordmot\orcppiimmc/rc 3:04 PM 7/29/94
- 1 -
11446
1 F. The Metropolitan King County government finds that any pertinent growth related
2 issues not addressed in these Countywide Planning Policies, such as proposed urban
3 growth areas for newly incorporated cities, shall be handled in a manner pursuant to
4 State law, until or unless they are proposed by the GMPC or its successor as
5 amendments to these Countywide Planning Policies.
6 G. The Metropolitan King County Council finds that the final report of the Fiscal Impact
7 Analysis and Economic Development Task Force. May 4. 1 994 which was
8 transmitted to the GMPC on May 4, 1994 meets the requirements of county
9 Ordinance #10450, and RCW 36.70A.210.
1 o H. The Metropolitan King County Council finds that the existing environmental
11 documents adopted by King County on May 5, 1992, the supporting addendum
12 issued on June 18, 1992, the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for
13 Countywide Plannina Policies issued by King County on January 12, 1994, the
14 Summazy of Public Involvement 1993-1994 for the Supplemental Environmental
15 Impact Statement. and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for
16 the Countywide Plannin~ Policies issued by King County on May 18, 1994, are
1 7 adequate under SEP A for the purposes of the county's adoption of amendments to the
18 Countywide Planning Policies.
19 I. The amendments to the King County 2012 Countywide Planning Policies adopted
20 herein are substantially consistent with the recommendations ofthe GMPC, but make
21 technical corrections to further clarify the Countywide Planning Policies.
22 J. With these amendments, the King County 2012 Countywide Planning
2 3 Policies are further enhanced and refined, and provide clearer direction to all
2 4 the jurisdictions in the county concerning the location and extent of Urban
2 5 Centers, approaches to affordable housing and economic development, and
2 6 the treatment of rural areas. As such they bear a substantial relationship to,
2 7 and are necessary for, the public health, safety, and general welfare of King
2 8 County and its residents.
2 9 SECTION 2. Ordinance 10450, Section 3, and K.C.C. 20.10.030 are each repealed and
3 0 the following is substituted:
31 The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 Countywide Planning Policies
3 2 attached to this ordinance are hereby approved and adopted.
33 SECTION 3. Ordinance 10450, Section 4, and K.C.C. 20.10.040 hereby each amended
3 4 to read as follows:
3 5 A. Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance 10450 for the purposes specified
3 6 are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County.
37 B. The amendments to Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance 10840 are.
3 8 hereby ratified on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County.
3 9 C. The amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordi!laoce 11061
4 o are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County.
M:\gmhe\ordmot\orcppiimmc/rc 3:04 PM 7/29/94
- 2 -
r 11440
1 D. The Phase U Amendments to the Kin2 County 2012 Countywide Plannjn~ Policies
2 adopted by this ordinance are hereby ratified on behalfofthe population of unincorporated
3 Kini: County.
4 SECTION 4. Ordinance 1 0450, Section 5, and K.C.C. 20.I 0.050 are each amended to
5 read as follows:
6 A. The Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance I 0450 shall become
7 effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least thirty percent of the city and
8 county governments representing seventy percent of the population of King County
9 according to the interlocal agreement. A city shall be deemed to have ratified the
10 Countywide Planning Policies unless, within ninety days of adoption by King County, the
11 city by legislative action disapproves the Countywide Planning Policies.
12 B. The Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance I 0840 shall become
13 effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least thirty percent of the city and
14 county governments representing seventy percent of the population of King County
15 according to the interlocal agreement. A city shall be deemed to have ratified the
16 Countywide Planning Policies unless, within ninety days of adoption by King County, the
17 city by legislative action disapproves the Countywide Planning Policies.
18 C. The Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance 11061 shall become
19 effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least thirty percent of the city and
20 county governments representing seventy percent ofthe population of King County
21 ~ccording to the inter local agreement. A city shall be deemed to have ratified the
22 Countywide Planning Policies unless, within ninety days of adoption King County, the city
23 by legislative action disapproves the Countywide Planning Policies.
24 D. The Kin2 County 2012 Countywide Plannim~ Policies adopted by this ordinance sbaJI
25 become effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least thirty percent of the
26 city and county 2ovemments. representin2 seventy percent of the JlQPUlation of Kina
27 County accordina to the interlocal a~ement. A city shaJJ be deemed to have ratified the
28 Kin2 County 2012 Countywide Plannin2 PoJicies unless. within ninety days of adoption by
29 Kin2 County. the city by le2islatjye action disapproves the Kin2 County 20I2 Countywide
30 plannin2 Policies.
M:\gmhe\ordmot\orcppiimmc/rc 3:04 PM 7/29/94
- 3 -
11446,
1 SECTION 5. Ordinance l 0450, Section 6, and K.C.C. 20.1 0.060 are each amended to
2 read as follows:
3 20.10.060 Implementation. ((The eoWity exeeuthce shall eommeaee
4 preparatiea efthe Phase II SeiS aaa fiseal aaalysis, aaa the eelifit:y eompreheMiYe plaa
5 ameaameats aaa regulatioas to implemeat the eooo~nniae polieies, ·subjeet to eompletioa
6 of the ratifieatioa proeess set out ia Seetioa 2Q.IQ.Q5Q. The ColHl~":.z:iae Pla:r ... -Hag Polieies
7 will affeet the eouaty's lana use aeeisioBS Vlaea tfte eoWity eomprefieasive plaa or lan:d use
a regulatioas imJllemeatiag the polieies are adoJltee.)) Land capacity availability and
9 redevelopment assumptions that underlie the recommended Urban Growth Area will be
1 o closely monitored 1zy the Metropolitan Kim~ County iOvemment subseQuent to adoption of
11 the final Urban Growth Area tbrouih annual benchmarkini and monjtorini reports. An
12 affordable housini committee. a land capacity task force and a irowth monjtorini advisory
13 committee have been called for by the Countywide Plannini Policies and the county
M:\gmhe\ordmot\orcppllmmc/rc 3:04 PM 7/29/94
- 4 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
11446
council intends to promptly convene such w-oups. the purpose ofwbich is to review data
on land capacity and housim~ affordability to ensure that the Growth Mana2ement Act
reQuirements re2ardin2 Urban Growth Areas are bein2 met. To further enhance those
efforts a technical committee to facilitate environmental protection shaH be established by
January1995 to serve as a d<Wository ofre~ulations and policies adopted by jurisdictions in
Kin~ County.
INTRODUCED AND READ for the first time this c;)O ;ei day of
~ ,19!f As~y a vote of _jj__ to _Q_ this LS.,rl:_day of (j;,ur-t= , 191f.
ATTEST:
KING COUNTY COUNCIL
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
%~f~
Chair
~~!
APPROVED this day of ~ ~±
2 o Attachments:
21
2 2 A. Recommended Amendments to King County 2012 Countywide Planning Policies
23 Adopted by the King County Growth Management Planning Council May 25, 1994
24 (Revisions by MKCC Staff7.19.94)
25 B. Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Countywide Planning
26 Policies
2 7 C. Summary of Public Involvement 1993-1994 for the Supplemental Environmental
2 8 Impact Statement
2 9 D. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Countywide Planning
3 o Policies Proposed Amendments
31 E. Fiscal Analysis and Economic Development Task Force Final Report, May 4, 1994
32
M:\gmhe\ordmot\orcppiimmc/rc 3:04 PM 7/29/94
- 5 -
l
2
3
4
5
6
INCORPORATES AMENDMENTS ADOPTED 8/15/94 BY MKCC
Recommended Amendments to Kin& County lOU
Countywide Planning Policies
Adopted by the King County Growth Management Planning Council
May 25, 1994
Revisjons·':by)MKCC:,:mff:Zi19i94 ·
7 A. The Problem
s King County has long been known for unsurpassed natural beauty and a dynamic
9 h.uman environment. It has thriving cities and suburbs and healthy rural communities.
10 The county's attractive lifestyle and economy continue to draw people into our region.
11 But unmanaged growth and development endanger some of those very qualities.
12 An additional 325,000 people will live here by the_year 2010 (State of Washington Offic
13 of Financial Management), bringing the total population to 1.8 million. While growth
1 ~ fuels the area's strong economy, the absence of effective management of that growth
1 s threatens the features that are essential to a rich quality of life.
16 The effects of uncoordinated and unplanned growth are obvious. King County h2
1-: the fifth worst traffic mess in the nation. declining air and water quality, flooding
18 aggravated by development. and escalating housing costs. Many of the schools are over-
19 crowded and local governments are struggling to pay for increased demands for services
2 o to control cnme and to provide critical human resources.
21 The need facing the County and State is to provide· the incentives necessary to
2 2 promote a vigorous. sound. and diversified economy, while reducing, controlling and
2 3 managing the potential adverse effects of uncoordinated and unplanned growth.
2 4 The Washmgton State Legislature passed the Growth Management Act (GMA) in
2 5 1990 and strengthened it m 199l.to address these problems.
2 6 8. The Precess
2 7 Growth management involves planning for economic and population growth,
2 8 determining where new jobs and housing should go and then locating and phasing
2 9 population growth in accordance with the ability to provide infrastructure and services.
3 o This should include economic development, a workable tnmsportation system, quality
31 drinking water, affordable housing, good schools, open space and parks and, at the same
3 2 . time, protection of our natural environment.
3 3 King County and the 34 cities within it are addressing growth management
3 4 problems together and in their local jurisdictions. Planning at both levels is called for b~
1
1
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
, ;:
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2~
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
446
the Growth Management Act.
All jurisdictions are working together to develop a vision for the future. This
vision is embodied in this ·series of policies called Countywide Planning Policies.
Realization of this·.vlsion involves ttade-offs and difficult choices .about the appropr:iate
level of growth, its location, the type of growth to be encouraged, public spending,
governance decisions, environmental protection, and the quality of life in King County.
A formal body, the Growth Management Planning Council, with elected officials
from Seattle, the suburban cities, and King County, ((M!i)) considered ((~))draft
policies in May 1992, and based on public input, ((will fftake)) made a recommendation
the King County Council for adoption. Kine County Council adcmted the initial
Countywide Plannine Policies in July 1992 by Ordinance #10450. The Ordinance ado.ptt
the Phase I Policies and initiated a Phase U work pmeram which called for environment
and fiscal analysis and additional work on economic development. rura] character.
transoonation and affordable housine. The Phase I Countywide Plannine Policies were
1 re11 i fted tw Seattle and the suburban cities in October 1992. ((A8ef'tieA ft'H~st ES::ke plaee h
hlh I. !992. KiA~ Ce~flt~· will theA 5tifJfflit the aee"tee J'6lieies te the eities fer
fflli fieR!IOf'l: ))
The Grnwth Mana~ement Planning Council initiated the Phase II Work Pmmm :
Ortoher 199~ and formed three Task Forces comprised of elected officials and citizens tc
de"elflp pohrv recommendations and a Transponation Caucus to devetcm transponation
s1rateg1es. These included the Affordable Housine Task Force. Rural Character Task
Force and Fis/Ed {Fiscal Impact Analysis and Economic Development) Task Force. The
F1s/Ed Task Force was responsible for conductine the fiscal analysis reguired for the
Countywide Plannine Policies as well as developine policy recommendations on econom
development. At the completion of the Phase TJ work. on May 25. ((.~)JJ994 the GMPC
made policy recommendattons to the Metropolitan Kine County Council. Kine County
will adopt ((f.fte)) policies and then submit them for ratification to the cities.
The Countywide Planning Policies, as amended throueh the Phase II work. ((will
serve as the framework for each jurisdiction's own comprehensive plan, which must be
consistent with Countywide Ptannina Policies ((if\ plaee)) by Decenibet·3l;''J995 «o!.!!r:·:
199((3))~)))). These individual comprehensive plans throughout the county, then, will b
-consistent with the overall vision for the future of King County.
C. The Growth Management Act
cppph1. 07119/94
2
1
2
3
. 4.
5
·6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
The GMA ·fundamentally changes the way that comprehensive planning is to be
done and land use decisions are to be made in Washington State. The challenge of GMA
is to establish a countywide vision and devise a strategy to achieve it. This includes
balancing growth, economics, land u5e, ·intt3struc.ture, and finance. If resou~ are
fnadequate to realize the vision, then the strategies and land use must be revised. The
· GMA require((s))~ Countywide Planning Policies to be adopted by July 1, 1992. At a
minimum, the policies ((tftt!M)) were to address:
services;
a. Implementation of RCW 36. 70A.ll0 (Urban Growth Areas);
b. Promotion of contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban
c. Siting of public capital facilities;
d. Transportation facilities and strategies;
e; Affordable housing;
f. Joint county and city planning within Urban Growth Areas;
g. Countywide economic development and employment: and
h. Analysis of fiscal impact.
1 7 Special emphasis is placed on transportation. Future development activity will be
18 constrained by a jurisdiction's ability to provide and finance transportation improvements
19 or strategies. This fact has implications for all jurisdictions who can no longer finance
2 o and build the facilities necessary to retain current service levels.
21 D. Vision for King County 2012
22 Our county has stgniftcantly changed in the 20 years that have elapsed from 1992
2 3 to today. The paramount cause for this change has been the successful public/private
2 4 partnershtp whtch has: supported a diversified. sound regional economy; managed and
2 5 accommodated growth: and maintained the county's quality of life.
2 6 An effecuve stewardship of the environment has preserved and protected the
2 7 critical areas in the county. This stewardship has extended to the conservation of our
2 8 land. air. water and energy resources for future generations.
2 9 The rural areas first formally identified in 1985 and expanded in 1992 remain
3 o permanently preserved with a clear boundary between rural and urban areas.
31 Development has emphasized the use and reuse of the existing urbanized areas.
32 .Much of the new growth after 1992 first occurred in the areas where there was existing
3 3 capacity. Growth then occurred where existing infrastructure could be easily extended or
cppph2. 07119/94
3
1
2
3
4
5
enhanced. Lastly, areas which required significant ~ew investment in infrastructure
accommodated growth. Today, there still is ample room for new development within the
· urban area.
· Much of the growth in employment, .and a significant share of new housing, has
occurred in Urban Centers. These Centers now provide a mixture of employment,
6 residential, commercial, cultural and recreational opportunities. The centers are linked
7 by the high-capacity transit system, and transit stations within the centers are located
8 within walking distance to all parts of the center. Each center has its own unique
9 character, and they are all noted for their livability, pedestrian orientation and superior
10 design.
11 Smaller concentrations of businesses are distributed throughout the urban area, and
12 focus on providing goods and services to surrounding residential areas. They are linked
13 to Urban Centers by an effective local transit system.
1 -4 Manufacturing/industrial areas continue to thrive and be key components in the
15 urban area. They are served by a transportation system which emphasizes the movement
16 of people and goods to and within these areas.
17 Rural cities provide unique environments within the rural area and provide
18 commercial and employment opportunities for their residents. This includes retail,
19 educational and social services for city residents and surrounding rural areas. Businesses
2 o m rural cities provide employment opportunities for local residents.
21 The en11re urban area is increasingly characterized by superior urban design and ar
2 2 open space network which defines and separates, yet links the various urban areas and
2 3 JUrisdicuons. Countywide and regional facilities have been located where needed, sited
2 4 unobtrusively and with appropriate incentives and proper impact mitigation.
2 5 Attractive and workable alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle have been built
2 6 and strategies adopted which assure the mobility of people, goods and information
2 7 throughout the county and beyond.
2 8 Regional funds have been used to further the regional land use ·plan and fund
2 9 needed regional facilities. Local resources have been focused on local facilities. The
3 o sharing of resources to accomplish common goals is done so that the regional plan can
3 1 succeed and so that all can benefit.
3 2 The economy is vibrant and sustainable, and emphasizes diversity in the range of
3 3 goods produced and services provided. Businesses continue to locate in our county
cppp~. 07119/94
4
1 because of the high quality of life. the emphasis on providing a superior education, and
2 the predictability brought about by the management of growth and the effectiveness of the
3 public/private partnership in these areas as well as the mutually beneficial partnership in
4 economic developineni: .
s Housing opponunities for aJI incomes and .lifestyles exist throughout the county.
6 and with the balanced transportation system, access to employment is assured.
7 The needs of residents are attended to by a social service system that emphasizes
a prevention, but which stands ready to respond to direct needs as well.
9 The ·urban area is located within the incorporated cities, which are the primary
1 o urban service providers. Where appropriate, sub-regional consortiums have been created
11 for certain services, and the county government is recognized as a regional service
12 provider.
13 Through a clear understanding of growth management. residents and businesses
14 have recognized that all problems wilJ not be cured quickly, but clear and reasonable
15 timelines and financing commitments demonstrate to them that problems will be solved.
16 Residents and businesses trust in their local governments because the plans and promises
17 .made to_ manage growth in 1992 have been follo~ed. Change is accepted and proceeds in
18 an orderly fash1on based on the growth management plan.
19
2 o E. The Framework Policies
21 The GMA gives local officials new tools for planning and, for the first time,
2 2 mandates that the county and cities work together to establish an overall vision. Through
2 J a collaborative process. the local jurisdictions of King County have prepared the following
2~ ((tffit+f)) Countywide Planning Policies. ((This J'reeess relies)) These policies rely on local
2 5 choice lO determine the density/intensity and character of each area. All jurisdictions
2 6 must recogmze that the sman, long term choices for the region will require compromises
2 7 in local self-determination.
2 a These policies represent a cohesive set and are not individual, stand-alone
2 9 concepts. The ideas represented here balance each other to establish a vision for the
3 o county which builds on existing land use patter,ns. The policies are organized by topics in
31 separate chapters. At the beginning of each chapter is a framework policy which
3 2 esta~lishes the overall direction for the following policies. The Countywide Planning
3 3 Policies can only be reaJized through local plans and regulations. A decision made locally
cppph2. 07119194
s
1
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
446
must become a commitment that the region can rely upon. The following framework
policies outline the countywide planning process. ·
Whenit:t;riitiitYWiae;WliCJi:sgues'lfjji:i~nmsoam~wnw.:,;or*'>.Wt11,.·:1fo:·:·sometbm,
$Ucb·:a =pOlicy regtiires··tbe:!urlsdicljori'':,¢0iDPf#ll~Sbj::pjil.ri+tt?:eOotjj_n:?J;·poUcy ihat:js
wnnen·::to:::aecoinplisbrthe·:i»it3X!ii;m>itie:~d.~liOiijit~~CiJ'-~a::::¢0frriffiri.de•::poJicy
mtes4bafa:juri$dictil?l1::~~shou1d~8!io::jiOil)ethUi'f&&6ijiOJiey::Jiitfiiij"ittbjfljiijSdiCfiOiiS
coamfeberiSiVefPlii]'rtP::#oritiifiWi;]fOI~~pU .. f.\''11.l~:;;pfi(P.§i#\9f.ffli
countYWi.de··i?Olicy:::wie$i'~ttit#iUiiwCfion:::iif1Siiii.tj~fiiiiimtWfjj:l~i'f'ifri!!Fripti(IQij~YW:@~
a ·covntyWide··pOJiey·:·1Rres·1ttat~i:;mri~~iiiYntit£Fi§iiidtiiriiU~~ch2i?P9Ji§Y:::Jiiii$i.Js
the··;urisdiciioriS·:::-comPretJenSiYi'JilirFiiitiiiiFi'WJHi~'3tWaecompli~JPtliCffP.ijljiO~c
the ·countywide ·poliCj·jfit isjn ··'tbeit~mterest;
FW -1. Countywide growth management is a ..m.u.lli ((ltYe))-step process:
STEP 1: The Countywide Planning Policies became ((!hell eeeeme)) effective
October 1992. upon adoption by the King County Council and ratification by at least
thirty percent of the city and county governments representing seventy percent of the
population in King County. (( (SeJ'tel't'leer 1992 te~et sate)))
STEP~: The·Growth Manaeement Plannine Council <GMPC) reconvened to
conduct environmental and fiscal impact analysis of the Countywide Planning Policies anc
to consider poltc\· nmendments developed through implementation of taSks specified in thf
Countywide Plnnnmg Polices. 'When adopted by the Metnmolitan Kin~ Co\JntiCOUriS.il
and ratified {Gfll. these actions are considered the Phase II policy amendments and
mclude:
a. Confmnatton of Urban Centers according to the procedures and criteria
2 4 estahhshed m nollctes Lll-:~9 and LU-40:
25 b. Confirmation of Manufacturing/Industrial Centers based on the procedure
2 6 and cntena estabhshed policies in LU-51 and LU-52:
27 c Adoption of 20 year targets of projected household and employment
2 8 growth countywide and target ranees for each iurisdiction accordine to the proce<iurcs anc
2 9 criteria in policy LU-67 and LU-68:
30 d. Confirmation of the Urban Growth Area based on criteria established in
31 policy LU-26.a.u The Urban Growth Area ·in·'tbC'Cri"Unt)rwi4e·],lannjn~:·pwjceS'.:·:;s .. a
3 2 plannine policy framework tsfbeJJsed·bytheM-etro.PolhifJGri:·countj'=c®ndl .Wberi:it
3 3 adopts the· final Urban Growth ·Area 'in ·jts :1994''''Chriiprtbenm"Pli\n. and
cppp~. 07119/94
6
:
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2J
24
.L~~--
e. Adootion of additional oolicy amendments based on the xecommendations
of the Rural Character Task Force. the Affordable· Housin~: Task Force. the FiscaJ10Wi6
ari~l:Y$is and Economic tieveJo.pment Task Force. and public comments on the
Countywide PJannine Policies. .·
((e. The Grewth Meft&geffteftt Pleftftiftg Cettfteil (GMPC) sfte:tl reeei¥e &y
Oeteeer eAEI eef!tirffi B)' Deeeffieer 1992 ftelftiftetiefts freffi eities fer UfhM Ceftters mul
Mettfaetttriftgllftdttstf!el Ceftter!l as estelishee if'l tfte Cettfttywiee P1Mf'lift:; Pelieie!l.
(Oeteeer Deeeffther 1992 1erget eeleS)
e. The GMPC !hell edeJtt 29 yeM !ltl'get ftttffihers fer J'PejeeteEI fM'J'ttletiet!
gre.,.·th &rte e&J'&eit)· heseEI eft Urea,. Ceftter!l eeei!lieAs, the ef'iterie: esteelishee ift pelieies
LU 51 BREI LU 52. eRe f'Bf'ttlatieR renges reeeffiffiefteeEI B)' aH iRterjttriseietieruH steff
eeffHfliUee. (Deeeffieer 1992 target eete)
e. The GMPC shell adef't 29 year target ftttffthers fer f'Fejeetee ef'ftf'leylfteftt
grewtA BAS eBf'aeity eases eA UreaR CeAters eeei!iefts, the eritel"ia estehli!hed ift peliey
LU 53. aREI effif'le)·PReRt raAg:es reeePRPReA8ee B)' aA iRterjttriseietieAal staff eeffiffiiUee.
(DeeePReer 1992 target sate)))
f.((&;)) Housing and jobs to accommodate King County's ((J'rejeete8
f'BfHtlatiert)) ~wwth tareets shall be planned in the context of carrying capacity of the
land. Housing density and affordability shaJl be considered co-equal objectives.
((e. The GMPC SAall eefthrPR the Ureert Gre.,.·th Ares:s eases eft Cettters
""'ilAifl the UrAftA Grevti(R •o\FeR te PReet prejeetee grewth. (Deeel'fther 1992 target eete).))
STEP 3: The Countywide Plannin~ Policies shall be implemented as follows:
!L All JunsdJctions shall make the decisions required to implement the
2 5 Countywide Plannmg Policies into their respective comprehensive plans. (Jttly ((1993))
2 6 1994 target eate)
27 b. All jurisdictions shaJl make the decjsions reguired to jmplement the
2 8 Countywide Plannin~ Policies and thejr respective comprehensive plans through
2 9 development re~ulations. CCDeeember 1924 tm:et Eleten
30 ((STEP 4: a. The GMPC shall reeerwefte ift Jttly 1993 er !leefter es fteeeee te
31 fe't'iew issttes raises tflret:tgfl lee&l f'lBA iHtf'leHtefttatie" effeRS, aHa te eeHsieer Re·.v er
J 3 CeuRfywiee PlaRRiftg Pelieies. The GMPC shell reeef'ftf'fteRe re•f'i:!Jief'ls B!l ftee8ed te
cppph2. 07119/94
7
11
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
46
1994 tMget datei))
k..(~)) ·The GMPC fffi~ shall establish a process for resolving
conflicts· between loCal plans and ·the Countywide· Planning Policies. ( (!!! PB:ised ey l~
jttrisdietiefts, aftd Pftay reeePAPfteftd aPfteftdPfteftts te either the Cettfttywide PlBflftiftg Pelieic
er leea1 ~1afts. (Jttly 1994 ta~et date~))
-d..._((e-:)) Phase II Amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies shall be
subject to ratification by at least thiny percent of the city· and county governments
representing seventy of the population in King County. All jurisdictions shall amend
comprehensive plans as Deeded by necemwat::t'!l995 <Gily''J92Sll to be consistent witt
adopted and ratified Phase II amendments. (((Jttly 1994 target date)))
((STEPS: All jttrisdietiefts shall PftaiEe the deeisiefts :feE~ttil"eS le iPAfJlePAeftt the
Cet::tAtywise Plaftftiftg Pelieies aftd their resf'eetive ee"'f'Peheftsi¥e J'l&fls threttgh
regttlariefts. (Jttly 1994 taf'get etue)))
STEP 4: Following adoption of comprehensive plans, the GMPC or its successor
shall review adopted household and employment target ranges and estimated capacity for
each jurisdiction to ensure sufficient capacity within the Urban Growth Area.
a. Each jurisdiction shall reoon to the GMPC or its successor the househok
19 and employment targets adopted in its comprehensive plan. and the estimated capacity fo1
2 o household and employment growth for the next 20 years. Jurisdictions containing Urban
2 1 and lor Manufacturing/Industrial Centers sha11 repon household and employment Jarget
2 2 · ranges both for Centers and areas outside Centers. Each jurisdiction shall also evaluate
2 3 the availability of infrastnrcture. as adooted in six-year capital improvement plans. to
2 ~ ensure that capacitv is available to accommodate a six-year estimate of household and
2 5 emplovment growth.
26 b. The QMJ>C or its successor shall review growth Jareets and capacity·for
2 7 each jurisdiction to assure that local tar~ets are within the adopted ranees and countywidt
2 a capacity is sufficient to meet 20 year growth tareets. If a discrepancy exists between
2 9 growth targets and capacity. either within an individual comprehensive plan or for the
3 o Countv as a whole. the GMPC or its successor shall recommend amendments to
31 Countywide Planning Policies or local plans to ensure that growth tauets can be achieve
3 2 by planned zoning and infrastrucn•re capacity.
33 STEP 5. The GMPC or its successor shan establish a Land Capacity Task
cppph2. 07/19/94
8
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
force to accqmplisb the work program prepared jn April J 994 CSee Appendix 4 l.
STEP 6. The GMPC or its successor shall recommend to the Metrqpolitan
J<ing County Council a monitoring and benchmarks program to assess progress in meetin:
,Countywide Planning PolicieS. ·
a. The GMPC or its successor Shall establish a growth management
monitoring advisory committee which sha11 recommend information to be reponed
annually to serve as indicators and benchmarks for growth management policies. The
annual reponing shaJI incorporate the economic develqpment oolicy indicators develcmed
by the Fiscal Jmpact AnalySis and Economic Development Task Force and other indicator
as adopted by the GMPC or jts successor. and shaJJ consjder housing indicators mecjfied
in oolicy AH-5. King County sha11 repon the adOJ)ted growth management benchmarks
annually.
b. The GMPC or its successor should conduct a comprehensive evaluation tc
assess implementation of the Countywide Planning Policjes. The evaluation should be
initiated as indicated by results of the monitoring program. but no earlier than five years
after adoption of the Phase II Amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies. The
evaluation shall include opponunities for public involvement.
c. If the purposes of these planning policies are not being achieved as
19 evidenced by results of benchmarks and monitoring r;pons. the GMPC or its successor
2 o will reconvene at the reguest of a pany to discuss. evaluate and recommend actions to
21 ach1eve the purposes of the oolicies.
2 2 STEP 7. The Countywide Planning Policies are based on an urban centers
2 3 concept. growth phasing strategy. and establishment of an Urban Growth Area. King
2 4 Countv shall ac11vely pursue dedication of ooen space along the Urban Growth Area
2 5 boundan· wuh a goal of creating a contiguous band of open space nonh and south along
2 6 the Urhan Growth Area boundary. When future ro>wth reaujres addjrion31 capaCity
2 7 beyond what exists in the main urban area. jurisdictions should look first to the ·main
2 8 urban area. and then to the rural cities and their expansion ·areas to acComn'lo<fai new
2 9 ~rowtb. This proeram shaJJ·follow the 1994 adoption of the final Urban Growth Arei·b,
3 o the Metropolitan King County Council.
31 a. Rural land. excluding agriculturally zoned land. may be added to the
32 .Urban Growth Area only in exchange for a dedication of permanent open space to the
3 3 King Countv Open Space System. The dedication must consjst of a minimum of four
cppph1. 07119/94
9
l
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
acres of wen mace dcdjgtcd for every one acre of land added to the Urban Grpwth
Area. c;ak:ulated in gross acres. The open space la,nd sha11 be dedicated at the time the
· i!Pplication is ilPJlTOVcd.
b. La.nd added io the Urban GrOwth f.tea adojZted jn the 1994 Countywide
pJannjng Policies must be physicallY contiguous to the existing Urban Growth Area. and
must be itble to be served by sewers and other urban services.
c. The total area increased as a result of this policy shan not exceed 4.000
1cres.
d. Development on the land added to the Urban Growth Area under this
I
policy shall be limited to residential development and shaH be ill a minimum densjty of 4
units to the acre. Prooosals shall meet Kin~ County Comprehensive Plan density and
affordable housin~ goals.
e. Open sooce areas shall remain jn rural designations and should generally
15 he dedicated in such a way that it can connect with open mace on adiacent propenies.
16 Open space areas should generally parallel the urban-rural line. according to criteria jn k.
17 belen ... ·
18 f. The minimum depth of the open space buffer between the proposed
19 addition to the Urban Growth Area and the Rural Area shall be at least one-half of the
2 o property width.
21 £ The mmimum size of propeny to be considered wiJJ be 20 acres. wbjcb
2 2 mcludes both the prooosed addition to the Urban Growth Area and the land proposed for
2 J open space ded1cation. Smaller prooerties may be Combined to meet the 20 acre criterion
24 h. lmual prooosals for open soace dedication and urban development must b
25 received between July I. 1994 and June 30. 1996. Review by King County shall concluc
2 6 by June 30, 1997.
27 1. Where applications are adjacent to city boundaries or ootential annexation
28 areas. Kin~ County shall consult with and solicit recommendations from the city,
29 I I The Kin~ County Executive wm evaluate proposals for guality of open
3 o space and urban development. The highest guality prqpoals wi11 be recommended by tht
31 Executive to the Metrooohtan King Coumy CouncU for ado.ption. This adoption wm
3 2 constitute an amendment to the Urbi!n Growth Area. If the 4.()QQ acre limit on land addt
3 3 to the Urb1n Growth Area is not rcached in the first round of proposals. due to either
cppph1. 117119194
10
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
insufficient number of proposals or proposals of insufficient Qualit~. additional mynds of
applications may be acrotcd I Kjng County wiJI set the APPlication and review periods fg
any additional rounds.
k. Criteria for evaluatin' proposals shall include:
1 1 the quality of wildlife habitat areas:
2. connections to re,jonal open space systems:
3. protection of wetlands. stream corridors and water bodies:
4. unjgue natural features:
5. the amount of dedicated open mace and connections between
1 o dedicated ooen soace lands along the urban rural boundazy: and
11 6. ability to provide efficient urban governmental services to lands to be
12 added to the Urban Growth Area.
13 1. Proposals which add more than 200 acres to the Urban Growth Area shaH
14 include affordible housing consistent with King County policies for urban planned
15 developments. As an incentive for additional affordable housing develwment. the
16 reouired ooen soace dedication shall be 3;5 acres for each acre added to the Urban
17 Growth ':-rea for prooosals smaller than 200 acres that provide 30 percent affordable
18 housin~ units. or for larger developments that exceed 30 percent affordable hoysing units.
19
2 o STEP 8. a. The citizens and jurisdictions of King County are committed to
21 mamtaining a permanent Rural Area. The GMPC or its successor shall review all Urban
2 2 Growth Areas 10 years after the adootion and ratification of Phase II Amendments to the
2 3 Countywide Planning Policies. The review shall be conducted utilizing monitoring rewns
2~ and benchmark evaluatiOn. As a result of this review the GMPC or its successor may
2 5 recommend to the Metropolitan King County Council amendments to the Urban Growth
2 6 Area. Alternatively. Kin~ County may initiate consideration of Urban Growth Area
27 amendments. Amendments shall be based on an evaluation of the following factors:
2 8 the criteria in policies LU-26 and LU.:.27
2 9 the sufficiency of vacant. developable land and redevetqpable land to
3 o meet project needs:
31 the actual and projected rate of development and land consumption by
3 2 .cate~ory of land use including both development on vacant land and redevelopment
3 3 projects:
cppph2. 07119/94
11
l.l4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
the capacity of appropriate jurisdictions to provide infrastructure and
service to the Urban Growth Areas:
the actual and proiectcd promss of jurisdictions jn meerin~ their
. .
adooted 20:year goals an~·tareets of number of ~ousebolds and ·employees per acre:
the actual and projected rate of population and employment m>wth
compared to adooted 20-year eoals and camet ranees. and compared to revised projectiom
from the Washineton State office of financjal mauaeement:
the actual and prpiectec:l trend of economic develo,pment and
affordable housine indicators. as reponed annuaUy throueh the adopted monitorine and
benchmarks proeram.
indicators of environmental conditions. such as air quality. water
quality. wildlife habitat. and others.
b. The Urban Growth Areas of the followin~ cities which are in dispute as of
May '25. J 994 and illustrated on the attached maps. are now acknowled&ed as Joint
Plannin~ Areas <See Apoendix ll. By December 31. 1995. Kine County. the cities .
citizens and orooeny owners wiJI have completed a plannin& process to determine land
uses and the Urban Growth Area for each .city. The King County Executive will
recommend amendments to the Urban Growth Area for each city for adoption by the
l\1erropolltan King Countv Council. The Urban Growth Area for each city will be
amended in a separate Council ordinance. These amendments are not subject to
ratification under this oolicy.
Redmond (map #ll-15 acres
Issaquah <map #:!l -100 acres
Renton fmap #3l -:!38 acres
North Bend <map #4)-480 acres
. Black Diamond <map #5 titled: Black Qiamond Urban Growth Area/Qpen
2 7 Space> -maximum 3.()QQ acres
2 8 Snoqualmie <map #6 area labeled Joint Planning Area: the time frame for
2 9 completion of joint planning sha1! be that identified jn the aereement between City of
3 o Snoqualmie. Kin~ County and Snogualmie Ridee Associates reeardine Snogualmie's future
31 annexation of propeny on the Lake Alice Plateau.>
3 2 c. In the 1994 King County Comprehensive Plan. the Kine County Executive rna'
3 3 prooose for adoption by the Metropolitan Kine County Council minor technical chanees.
cppph.!. 07119/94
12
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
lJ
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2J
2~
25
26
27
28
29
not to exceed 300 ac;res. to the Urban Growth A~ recommended by the GMPC in the
Countywide Plannim~ Policies. These minor technical changes are not subject to
ratification under policy FW-L
·STEP 9. Amendments to the Coumywjde· Planning Policies may be developed by
the GMPC or its successor. or by the Merro.politan King County Co.uncil. as provided in
this policy. Amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies. not includin~ amendment
to the Urban Growth Area pursuant to SteJ) 7 and 8 b iiichr above. shaJJ be subiect to
ratification by at least thirty percent of the city and county governments re_presenting
seventy percent of the population in King County. Adcmtion and ratification of this
policy shall constitute an amendment to the May 27. 1992 interlocal agreement among
King County.the City of Seattle. and the suburban cities and towns in King County for tt
Growth Management Planning Council of King County.
FW-:!. Countywide Planning Policies are effective after King County adoption an
city ratification for the purposes of updating comprehensive plans, and providing a polic)
framework for other governmental actions of all jurisdictions. Significant planning
options will be precluded if interim actions are not taken to assure capacity and direct
growth in the Urban area. and to protect the Rural area from the impacts of growth. 1b1
following intenm actions will be taken by all jurisdictions no later than one month after
ratif1cat1on.
a. King County shall adopt interim rural zoning consistent with the
des1gnauon of rural for the "new" Rural area adopted through the Countywide Planning
Poilc1es to ensure rural character 1s not threatened by additional subdivision activity.
b. All _1unsd1Ctlons in the Urban area will adopt interim minimum density
ordmance) and rev1e\ol. and. where appropriate. remove regulatory barriers to accessory
dwelling unns and manufactured homes on individual lots. to ensure that urban land is
used efficiently.
((e. JttriseietieAs shell Aet e~J'&AEI the e~istiAg JeAEI &fee zeAeEI fer
BliSiAess/effiee f'lll'kS.))
FW-3. The final adoored household and employment target ranges shalJ be
3 o monitored by Metrooolitan Kin~ County annuaUy wjtb adjustments made by the GMPC <
3 1 its successor organization every six Years utilizing the process established by FW-1. Ste.p
32 .Q..
33 I. CRITICAL AREAS
cppph2. 07119/94
13
11
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
46
Most jurisdictions in King Cnunry have sensirive areas ordinances in pltzce or
under development. These regulmions are tailored ro ~~ specific ~eds of each
jurisdiction and are· nor likely 10 be modified based on another jurisdicrion 's regulmions.
Jr is .imporranr .rn promote regional policies rhm 4o not erode existing regularions while
providing guidance for achieving consistency and compmibiliry among them.
A. Overall Environmental Protection
FW-((3)~. All jurisdictions shall protect an~ enhance the natural ecosystems
through comprehensive plans and policies, and develop regulations that reflect natural co
straints and protect sensitive features. Land use and development shall be regulated in a
manner which respects fish and wildlife habitat in conjunction with natural features and
functions. including air and water quality. Natural resources and the built environment
shall be managed to protect, improve and sustain environmental quality while minimizinl
public and private costs.
FW-((4)),5. Puget Sound, floodplains, rivers, streams and other water resources
shall be managed for multiple beneficial uses including flood and erosion hazard reduc-
tion. fish and wildlife habitat. agriculture, open space, water supply, and hydropower.
Use of water resources for one purpose shall. to the fullest extent possible, preserve and
promote opponunities for other uses.
B. Wetlnnds Protection
CA-I. All junsdictions shall use as minimum standards, the 1989 Federal Man\12
for ldenufymg and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands and reference the 1989 manual in
their wetlands protecuon ordinances.
CA-2. In the long term. all jurisdictions shall work to establish a single
countywide classification system for wetlands.
CA-J. Within each basin, jurisdictions shall formulate their regulations and othc
non-regulatory meth?ds to accomplish the following: protection· of wetlands; assure
no-net-loss of wetland functions; and an increase of the quantity and. quality of the
wetlands. The top class wetlands shall be untouched.
CA-4. Implementation of wetland mitigation should be flexible enough to allow
for protection of systems or corridors of connected wetlands. A tradeoff of small, isolat
wetlands in exchange for a larger connected wetland system can achieve greater resource
.protection and reduce isolation and fragmentation of wetland habitat.
C. Aquifers
c:pppb1. 07119/94
14
11446
1 Currenlly, · thert art five Ground Wmer MD1JDgOMnl Plans ((tmtk,.,•""')) i1d.!:l:
2 prepared in King Counry: Redmond, Issaquah, East King CoU11/y, South King Cowuy, cu.
3 Vashon. Mnsr. bur nnr all. imannanr oautfers orr cnmqintd wirhin rheg arras. "I'M sta
4. Depomne~r of Ecology luJs ·designm~ Seairie-Kif!-g CouiUy IHpomnenr of Public Health
s as the lead agency. Eoch plan is prtpored in conjunction with an advisory committee wi
6 r.epresenrOJives from suburban cirie.s, warrr utilities. businesses. privare well owners,
7 environmental groups. and stare agencies. The plans wiU. identify aquifer recharge areas
8 and propose strategies for prmecrion of aquifers ((-grvntnti•wue,.)) through preservation 011
9 protection of groundwater ((ttt'jtui:fas)). Lncql rnvemmenrs ore required m adom or
1 o amend rrrulocinns. nrdinqnqs. and/or programs in order ro implrmrnr fhe plans fnllowir
11 ct'rrificarinn by Ecqlngv jn qccnrdancr with WAC 173-UXc/20.
12 CA-5. All jurisdictions shall adopt policies ((regttletiefts)) to protect the quality
13 and quantity of groundwater where appropriate:
14 a. Jurisdictions that are included in Ground Water Management Plans shall
15 suppon the development. adoption. and implementation of the Plans; and
16 b. The Seattle-King County Depanment of Public Health and affected
17 Jtmsd•ctions shall develop countywide policies outlining best management practices withir
18 aquifer recharge areas to protect public health;_aru!
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
c. Km~ County and ~:round water purveyors includin~: cities. special pumosc
d1stncts, anc1 others should rointly:
I. Prepare ~roundwater recharge area maps using common criteria and
mcorporatm~ mforma11on genercued by Ground Water Management Plans and purveyor
studies;
"' Develop a process by which land use jurisdictions will review. conct
with. and 1mnlement. as anvropriate. purveyor Wellhead Protection Programs reguired b·
the Federal Sate Dnnkin~ Water Act:
3. Determine which ponions of mapped recharge areas and Wellhead
28 Protection Areas should be designated as critical: and
29
30
31
32
33
4. Update critical areas maps as new information about recharge areas
and Wellhead Protection Areas becomes available.
CA-6. L.and use actions should take into account the potential impacts on aQuifer
. determined to serve as water supplies. The depletion and degradation of aQuifers needed
for potable water supplies should be avoided or mitigated: otherwise a proven. feasible
cppph2. 07119/94
15
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
6
replacement source of water supply should be planned and develwed to compensate for
potential Jost supplies.
D. Fash and Wildlife Habitat
. CA-((6))1 .. Adjacent jurisdictions shall identify· and protect habitat networks that
are aligned at jurisdictional boundaries. Networks shall link large protected or significan
blocks of habitat within and between jurisdictions to achieve a continuous countywide
network. These networks shall be mapped and displayed in comprehensive plans.
CA-((!it)lS. All jurisdictions shall identify critical fish and wildlife habitats and
species and develop regulations that:
a. • Promote their protection and proper management; and
b. Integrate native plant communities and wildlife with other land uses wher.
possible.
CA-((~)).2. Natural drainage systems including associated riparian and shoreline
habitat sha11 be maintained and enhanced to protect water quality, reduce public costs,
protect fish and wildlife habitat. and prevent environmental degradation. Jurisdictions
within shared basins shall coordinate regulations to manage basins and natural drainage
systems which include provisions to:
a. Protect the natural hydraulic and ecological functions of drainage systems
mamtain and enhance fish and wildlife habitat. and restore and maintain those natural
funcuons:
b. Control peak runoff rate and quantity of discharges from new developmet
2 2 to approximate pre-development rates; and
23 c. Preserve and protect resources and beneficial functions and values throug
2 4 mamtenance of stable channels. adequate low flows. and reduction of future storm flows,
2 5 erosion. and sedimentation.
2 6 CA-((9)).l.Q . .Jurisdictions shall maintain or enhance water quality through control
2 7 oi runoff and best management practices to maintain natural aquatic communities and
2 8 beneficial uses.
2 9 CA-((W))ll. The Washington State Depanments of Fisheries and Wildlife and th
3 o Indian Tribes both manage fish and wildlife resources. However, local governments havr
31 authority for land use regulation. Jurisdictions shall coordinate land use planning and
3 2 management of fish and wildlife resources with affected state agencies and the federally
3 3 recognized Tribes.
cpppb2. 07119/94
16
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
" 30
31
32
33
11446
E. Frequently Flooded Areas
The Stau adopted comprehensive flood legWtuion in 1991 (Se7Wlt Bill 5411) thai
makes the GMA requiremenr for coordilllllion tmd consistency on flood hazard regulation
much more :explicit. AccQrding to ·rhe new legislation, cowuies are to d~lop flood
hazard conrrol managemen1 plans with the full partidpmion of jurisdicrions within tM
planning areas. Once adopted by the counry, cities within flood hazard planning areas
must comply with the mll1Ulgemenr plan. 1he f(6.:iiftJJ Counrywide Flood Hazard
Reduction Plan ((i:a -~b· 'l¥;li!#JJ !!:m reviewed by affected jurisdictions f(!Jf!£1!:
rhr King=Cnunty :·Council an Nnrr1nhct::J5}~~1993:::10tiljiipni:(/J1112l
CA-((-H))lf. The cities and the County should closely plan and coordinate
implementation of their flood hazard reduction activities wjthin the major river basins Cth
Snoqualmie. Skykomish. Sammamish. Cedar. Green. and White). ((All jttPiseietiefts
shall aeept a As i fflf}lefflefH the relevaAt geAersl aAe h~Ae ttse pelieies ef t.fte FleeEI HH:Itftf
RedttetieA PleA aAEi Eie.,·elep &l'f'"el'riate regt:tletieAs fer iffl]'leffleAtatieA Me eAfereemeftt
ef tAe PleA. Reg~:~letieAs shall:
a. Comprehensive plan policies. reeulations. and proerams of iuriscijctions i
any of the six major river basins should be consistent with the Kin: County Flood Hazar
Reduction Plan <FHRPl Policies.
b. Each jurisdictionS policies. re2ulatjons. and proerams should effectively
prevent new develooment and other actions from causin2 sienificant adverse jmpacts on
major river floodm~. erosion. and natural resources outside their jurisdiction.
8. Reetlee Aoee in~pe:ets eA eKistirtg ee't·elepffteHl ey restteiftg risk &fld
e. Ree~:~ee lertg terffl p~:~elie arts private eests;
e. Preteel AftltiF&I Aeea sterage aAd eeAvey&Ree f.tiAetieAs; e:Ae
e. De'lelep &A eAfefeeffleftt J"fegf&ffi.n
F. Geologic Hazard Areas
CA-{(H))J]. All jurisdictions shall regulate development on certain lands to
protect public health. propeny, important ecological and hydrogeologic functions, and
environmental quality. and to reduce public costs. The natural features of these lands
. include:
a. Slopes with a grade greater than 40";
cppph.:. 07119194
17
6
1
2
3
4
b. Severe landslide hazard areas;
c. Erosion hazard areas;
d. Mine hazard areas.; and
e. Seismic hazards.
5 Regulations shall include, at a minimum, provisions for vegetation retention,
6 seasonal clearing and grading limits, setbacks, and drainage and erosion controls.
7 G. Air and Water Quality
s CA~((~))H. All jurisdictions, in coordination with the Puget Sound Air Pollutio1
9 Control Agency and the Puget Sound Regional Council, shall develop policies,
1 o methodologies and standards that promote regional air quality, consistent with the
11 Countywide Policy Plan.
12 CA-((+4)).(5. All jurisdictions shall implement the Puget Sound Water Quality
13 Management Plan to restore and protect the biological health and diversity of the Puget.
14 Sound Basin. ·
15 H. Implementation
16 CA·((~))J..fi. King County shall establish a technical committee by Janua!)' 1995
17 ·to facilitate environmental protection which is to include representatives of the county, th1
1 B cittes. the federally recognized Tribes. business community, environmental community,
19 public utilities. spec1al districts. and interested citizens. The committee will serve as a
2 o depository of regulations and policies adopted by jurisdictions in King County.
21 ((BRsea en iAfam~arieA f'r-e,..·ieee 8~· eJJ jttfisf:lietieHs, t)) Ihe committee shall
2 2 ( ( f'Fef'&l'e a ref'C:'~ 8~ Deeeft18er J 993 wAieA eeeresses)) evaluate and comment upon new
2 J developmenT regulations propo5ed by jurisdictions pursuant to FW-3. CA-l throu~h 15.
2 4 Lll-~ through " In rev1ewm~ the proposed regulations. the technical committee shall
2 5 consider the consistency and compatibility of regulations and designations, and cumulativ'
2 6 and long-term impacts. ((&fie ef:lueRtiefl f'P6gf8ff15. The re,art shettle ee eesignee le
2 7 ass is! juFistile!ton~ iA fie.,·elef'iAg ,ermefleHt regtt1etieHs witA ef'tifflel eeHsisteHey &ffteHg
2 B tRe j~riseietleAs. ))
2 9 The committee shall also recommend environmental benchmarks.
30 II. LAND USE PAITERN
31 A. Resource Lands: Agricultural, Forestry, and Mineral
3 2 The pmrecrinn and munogemenr of resource lands in King County is a regional
3 3 cnncem and a majnr objective of th~ CountyWide Planning Policies. The vasr majority q,
cppph2. 07119194
18
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1S
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
11446
resource lands are locmed in unincorpormed King County. These areas were idenri.fied
and proteaed under the 1985 King County Comprehensive Plan and .subseq~nr
community plans and regularions.
. FW-((-:§)).6. ·.The land use pattern. for the County shall protect the natural
environment by reducing the consumption of land and concentrating development. Urban
Growth Areas, Rural Areas, and Resource Lands shall be designated and the n~ssary
implementing regulations adopted. This includes Countywide establishment of a pqij"(;5t
p!annine boundary for the Urban Growth Area. Local jurisdictions shall establish these
land use designations, based on the Countywide Planning PolicieSO::WbiCfi.::aij:(:iQ.iiijijfJ.i!.fl
framewofk···for·lhe·Jdoptiort'.:of,the)J:994·'i\WiOpol)Wl:)<.mi410Uri\Yi~~·~.
LU-1. Agricultural and forest lands are protected primarily for their long-term
productive resource value. However. these lands also provide secondary benefits such as
open space. scenic views and wildlife habitat. All jurisdictions should encourage
utilization of natural resources through methods that minimize the impacts on these
secondary benefits. Resource lands also contain an abundance of critical areas that shall
be protected in accordance with adopted State and local regulations.
LU-2. All jurisdictions sha11 protect existing resource lands within their
boundanes that have long-term commercial significance for resource production. Any
des1gnated agricultural and forestry lands shall not be considered for urban development.
Junsdictions are required to enact a program authorizing the transfer or purchase of
development nghts for designated forest or agricultural areas within Urban Growth Areas.
At the request oi any city. King County wi11 work to reinstate the King County Purchase
of Development R1ghts Program and/or establish an interjurisdictional transfer of
development nghts program to protect these resource lands in accordance with the GMA.
LU-J. Ex1stmg mmeral extractive and processing operations or designated sites
may be annexed or Incorporated to a city only if there are policies and regulations in plac
to protect the long term viability for continued operation and ensure adequate reclamation
and enhancement of the site once operation ceases.
LU-4. All jurisdictions shall encourage compatible land uses adjacent to natural
resource areas which suppon utilization of the resource and minimize conflicts among
uses. Each jurisdiction is responsible for implementing the plat and permit notification
.requirements for propenies within 300 feet of the resource land, as specified in RCW
36. 70A as amended. Jurisdictions will consider an increased distance for notification and
cppph2. 07119/94
19
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
46
notification to titles to propeny within or adjacent to the resource lands.
LU-5. All jurisdictions shall require mineral extraCtion and processing operation!
and agricultural practices to implement best management practices to reduce
environmental impacts and mitigate any· unavoidable impacts.
B. Rural Areas
The vast majority of rural areas are locared in unincorporared King Counry. The
areas were identified and regulmed through the 1985 King Counry Comprehensive Plan
and subsequent community plans and regulations. While coUIIlies are the jurisdictions
specified by the GMA as responsible for designating and regulming rural areas through
their comprehensive plans, the protection of King Counry's rural area is a regional issue
and a fimdamenrol objective of the Countywide Planning Policies.
FW-((~))]. Urban Growth Areas, Rural Areas, and Resource Lands shall be
designated and the necessary implementing regulations adopted. This includes ·
Countywide establishment of an Urban Growth Area. Local jurisdictions shall establish
these land use designations. based on the Countywide Planning Policies.
FW-((~))_B. AJI jurisdictions acknowledge that rural areas provide an overall
benefit for all residents of King County. Strategies to fund infrastructure and services in
rural areas may be needed to suppon a defined rural level of service. Towns and cities :
the rural areas play an imponant role as ((-4ee~H)) trade and community centers.
FW-9. A fundamental comoonent of the countywide planning sttategy is the
mamtenance of the traditional character of the Rural Area with its mix of forests. farms.
h1~h-oualuy natural environment. rural cities. unincorporated rural centers. and variety o
lnw-densuv residential uses. The basic elements of this rural character are:
a · NATURAL FEATURES .... such as water bodies and significant
2 5 wetlands. scen1c resources and hahitat areas should be afforded Jon~-term protection.
2 6 mmimizine long-term environmental de~radation. and enhancing environmental gualjty
2 7 where previous de~radation has occurred.
28
29
30
31
32
33
b. RESOURCE-BASED INDUSTRIES .... Commercial and non-commercii
farmin~. forestry. primary forest products manufacturing. mining and fisheries activities
shall be encouraeed to continue and to expand as possible:
c. RURAL TOWNS .... Valued attributes of small towns such as: public
.safety: historical continuity: small. independent business: and local availability of goo<is
and services shall be encouraeed to continue.
cppph2. 07119/94
20
1 d. RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE A~ SERVICES .... Rural residents
2 outside cities should anticipate lower levels of public services and infrastructure than those
3 available in urban areas. maximizin~ self-sufficiency and independence.
4 e. OPEN SPACE SYSTEM , .. Significant components of King County's
5 Open Space System are found in Rural Areas. Trail corridors. habitat networks.
6 recreational areas and scenic resources should be linked wherever possible to complete the
7 system. Active recreational facilities shall be rural in character. Where a traditional
8 landscape of fields cleared for agricultural pm:poses exists. new develo.pment should be
9 clustered at the edges of fields to minimize the consumption of amcultural land and
10 possible conflicts with current or future farming activity.
11 f. RURAL HOUSING .... The Rural Areas shall offer important alternative
12 and qualitative housing choices but shall not be considered a quantitatively significant part
13 of the county's residential growth capacity:
14 g. RURAL ECONOMY .... The Rural Areas make a unique contribution to
15 King County's economy. ln addition to farming. fisheries and forestry. cottage industries
16 shall be recognized as making a significant economic contribution in Rural Areas. and
17 should be encouraged.
18 h. CITIES .... Rural cities shall encourage. where appropriate. business
19 opportunities which support the full range of rural activities occurring in their adjacent
2 o Rural Areas. including support services for agriculture and forestry. Cities should also
21 provide a place for shopping. education. social services and other community functions at
22 a scale consistent with the maintenance of rural character as well as the cities' household
2 3 and employment target ranges.
24 FW-10. To achieve and maintain rural character. King County. and the cities.
25 as appropriate. shall use a range of tools including. at a minimum: land use designations.
26 development regulations. level of service standards (particularly for infrastructure). and
2 7 incentives.
2 8 LU-6. Through the Countywide Planning Policy process, King County, with
2 9 the cooperation of the cities, shall be responsible for designating rural areas consistent
3 o with GMA. In designating long term rural areas, King County shall foster better use of
31 limited public funds by allowing service providers to establish distinctly rural facility and
3 2 service standards.
3 3 LU-7. Designated rural areas are considered to be permanent and shall not be
cppph2. 07/19/94:amend 8115/94
21
11446
1 redesignated ~ an Urban Growth Atea until reviewed pursuant to the Growth
2 Management Act CRCW 36.70A.J30 C3ll and ooliey fW-1. Future growth should be
3 accommodated to the maximum extent feasible by efficient use of existing urban land
. 4 . within the Urban Grriwth.l\rea. Annexation ·~f fl!T21 arCM to cities shall be prohibited.
5 When annexation of rur21 areas is necessary to link two urban areas, that intervening rura
6 area shall be designated as permanent urban separator at low rural densities._
7 LU-8. Retention of resour;e-based uses and con~c;rvation of natural resource lane
8 are jmpon.ant to maintaining the traditional character. environmental functions and values c
9 the Rural Area. Kjng County shaJJ jdentib' awropriate districts wjthjn the Rural Area whe1
10 farming and fqrestr,y are to be encouraged and expanded. These districts shall be designate
11 by December 3 1 . 1 995. Areas to be considered should include:
12 a. L.ame blocks of land. either identified by King County or prqposed t
13 the propeny owners. with resource land characteristics or agriculture or foresttv productic
14 potential:
15 h. Land enrolled in the current use assessment orogram as farm and agr
16 cultural land or timber land under RCW 84.34 or enrolled for tax purposes as timber Jar
17 under RCW 84.33:
18 c. Land in oroximity to designated Agriculture and Forest Production Pi~
19 tncts. offering mutual b\1ffering benefits and low potential for conflicts wjth adjacent use
2 0 and
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
d. Land with valuable environmental features sych as wildlife· habit£
~round water rechar~e. salmonid streams. or high-value wetlands.
LU-Q Permitted land uses within designated Rural Area farming and forestry distric
should be limned to residences at very low densities and farmine or forestry-related use
.Institutional uses or public facilities should not be permitted except for the siting of utili
.lines where no feasible alternative exists and the siting of K-12 public schools and K-
lpublic school facilities in conjunction with K-12 Public Schools. Development of adjace
,lands should be conditioned to minimize land use conflicts and. conversion pressures up
these districts.
LU-10. The Rural Area shall have low densities which can be sustained by minim
infrastructure improvements. such as septic systems and rural roads. King County. cjti
.adjacent to Rural. Areas. and other agencies pmvidin~ services to Rural Areas. shaJJ adc
Standards for facilities and services in Ruiil Areas that protect basic public health and safet
cppph.2. 07119/94
l
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
and enhance the environment. but urban facilities and services should not be provided t
Rural Areas. · Utmtjes. ma,ds. and other infrastruCture improvements rna~ only be extende
through rural areas to serye existing urban areas.
. ({RY-3))W~ 1 1. Comprehensive plans covering nearbY Urban Areas sbaii consider tr
JlOtential impacts of urban development upon the adjacent Rural Area. Develcmment in Urba
Areas sha11 not significantly increase peak flows or pollution jn Rural Area streams. Urbar
generated traffic should not caUse rural roads to be upgraded to Urban Standards. Where
rural arterial must be upgraded to accommodate urban-generated traffic. it should inclyde fe
tures such as screening and limited access within the Rural Area to Jessen the road's jmpa<
on surrounding rural lands. incJuding pressure to convert them to higher-intensity use~
Funding for such improvements should be primarily the reswnsibility of the benefitin
jurisdiction.
LU -12. Plannin~ for Rural Areas should comply with the foHowing density guideline:
a. one home per 20 acres to protect forest lands when designated jn accm
dance with Policv LU-8.
b. one home per 10 acres to protect lands for small-scale farming whe
17 desi~nat~d in accordance with Policy LU-8:
18 c. one home per 10 acres is also appropriate jf the predominant Jot size is 1
19 acres or lar~er and the lands are within one-guarter of a mile of a designated Fore:
2 o Production Distnct or lower-density Agricultural Production Pi strict with livestock-base
21 agnculture or a legally-aporoved long-term mineral resource extraction site or. the lane
22 contain st~nificant environmentally constrained areas as defined by county ordinance c
2 3 federal or state Jaw·
2 4 d. one home oer 5 acres where the land is physically suitable and can t
25 supoorted by rural servtces. and
26 e. development on existin~ sub-Standard lots in the Rural Area shalJ t
2 7 permitted when applicable development Standards. such as Board of. Health regulations fc
2 8 on-site sewa~e disposal. can be mel.
29 LU-13. To maintain rural character. and to minimize the need for additional
3 o infrastructure. very lar~e lots (five acres or morel are the preferred residential
31 development pattern. To further the goals of rural protection. clusterine of develcmment
3 2 !hat will sustain rural land uses. require only rural levels of service and be designed.
3 J scaled and sited to be consistent with Rural Area character may be reguired
cpppl\2. 07/19/94
23
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
4ti
a. where jt would not result jn a ereat~ number of dwelline unjts than woul
be constructed under a conventional lottine nanetn unless either:
1 . a substantial dedication of land to Kjn~ County$ Qpen Space Systen
js provided and the jmp3ft$ ~f the additional dwe11ine units m mirieated:
2. permanent protection. substantially greater than that anainable throu~
~xistin~ re~ulations. js secured for a sienificant natural resource. or
. 3. substantial fannin~ or forestry lands would be permanently protectec
from cOnversion to non-resource based uses.
b. where clusterin~ of development would:
1 . · provide ereater protection for natural resources or environmentally
sensitive features:
2. reduce the consumption of agricultural or forestry lands for residenti
13 purnoses: or
14 3. minimize ootential conflicts between residential and resource-based
15 acti\·ities.
16 LU-14. King County may allow transfer of density from Rural Area proztt
17 to other Rural or Urban Area prooenies in. order 'JO {1) secure a substantial dedication of si
18 nificant land to the Kin~ County Ooen Space System: (2) provide permanent protection whi
19 1s greater than that available through existing regulation to a si~nificant natural resource:
2 o ( 3 l encourage retention of resource-based uses in the Rural Area. The county shaJl devel
21 a mechanism to accomplish these objectives and provide that:
2 2 a. lands dedicated are first determined to be suitable for inclusion within t
2 J King Count\' Open Space System:
2 4 b. the protected natural resource is first determined to be of significance
25 Kmg Count\· c1t1zens and the protection afforded is materialJy superior to that provided
2 6 existing regulations:
2 7 c. the resulting development is located in proximity to the lands to be do
2 8 cated to public ownership or where it can otherwise be shown that the residents of this dev
2 9 opment witl share in an overridine public benefit to be derived from the preservation of t
3 o dedicated lands or the protection of the natural resource:
31 d. the resulting development within the Rural Area maintains rural charaCtf
32 . and
3 3 e. there shall be no net increase in density within the Rural Area as a res
cppph2. 07/19/94
24
1
2
3
4
5
6·
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
16
11446
of this density transfer.
LU-15. Rural Areas should retain a bjgh pro,ponion of undisturbed soils to main¥
_ground water recharge. hjgh water guaUty and river and stream base flows essential
navigatiOn. recreation and the survjval of wildlite·and fish. The long-term integrity _of Ru
Area ecosystems should be a guiding wincjple jn establishing the location and intensity
land uses and public facilities jn Ruijll Areas. the aperating standards for resource-bas
activities. and rural facility standards.
LU-J 6. Rural development standards should be designed to protect the natural en·
ronment. The tools tQ achieve this include: seasonal and maximum clearing limi
imoervigus surface limits: surface water management standards that emphasize preseryati•
of natural drainage systems and water quality. ground water recharge and best managem<
practices for resource-based activities.
LU-17. Rural Areas shaH be recognized as significant for the recharge and stora
of groundwater and as areas necessary for the maintenance of base flows in rivers and natu
levels of Jakes and wetlands. Measures to protect these areas shall include:
a. A rural sectjgn within the King Cgunty Surface Water Design Mam
17 regumn~ runoff be infiltrated exceot where POtential gmundwater contamination canngt
18 pre\'ented hy oollution source controls and stormwater pretreatment. and
19 b. infiltration as the preferred method of volume control. with other methc
2 o allnwahle onlv after infiltration has been ruled out for technical reasons.
21 LU-18. Kin~ County's Comprehensive Plan shaH include policies to preser
2 2 opportuniues for minin~ and to assure extractive industries maintain environmental qual
2 J and mmim1ze imoacts to adjacent land uses. The gaal shaH be to facilitate the effici<
2 4 utillzauon oi valuable mmeraL oil and gas deoosits when consistent with maintaini
2 5 environmental guality and mmimizin~ impacts.
2 6 LU -19. Rural level standards for streets should be refined to minimize clearing a
2 7 ·grading. and avoid conflicts with the natural landscape. pavement width should be no wic
2 s t_han needed to meet safety considerations and accommodate desi~nated bicycle/pedestri
2 9 routes.
3 o LU-20. Standards for rural water service. to be develgoed throu~h the rural desi
3 1 manual. should assure adeguate quality and quantity for domestic supply consistent with lc
3 2 n1ral residential densities and exjstin~ infrastructure cgmmjtments.
3 3 LU-21. Regional public facilities whjch directly serve the public sbaJJ be discoura~
cpppl\1. 07/19194
25
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
6
from locatjn~ in rural areas.
LU-22. Kine County should evaluate additional ways that small-scale farmine a
forestQ'. and land and watershed steWaJ'dshjp can be encouramf throueh landowner jncenti
programs and community-based ·edUcation. This should jnclude:
a. crea,tine QWOOUnifies and jncentiVC$ for VQ}UDtazy COOperative IDanagemE
of woodlots and open space that is currently in separate ownerships:
b. providine technical assistance and information to landowner groups a
community associations seekine to implement stewardship. habitat restoration and mana~
ment plans:
c. providing outreach and assistance to smaJI landowners wjshing to particips
in ooen space taX incentive programs:
d. on~oing evaluation of existing taX incentive programs. including t
13 County's Public Benefit Ratio~ System and the timber and agricultural current use assessme
14 pro~rams. "to ensure they meet the Deeds of rural character preservation:
15 e. implementation of "ri~ht to farm" and "right to forestry" ordinances:
16 f. development of expedited permit review processes and/or permit exemptjo
17 for activities complying with cooperatively developed stewardship. habitat restoration ill
18 resource management plans that include "best management practices".
19 g. cooperation with State and Tribal Agencies in expediting regulatory reyif
2 o and technical assistance to cooperating landowners.
21 ((LU 8. DesigAaleEI Ftlftll areas shall ha·t'e lew eeAsities whieh eM ee SttStflifte
2 J Elegra81Rg 11:\e ef'lv·irof'IFf'lef'lt or ereatif'lg the Aeeessity f.er ttf9aA le·1el ef sePYiees.))_
24 ((LU 9. The GMPC shall estaelish a stteeeftlfftittee to se .. ·elop 8fl ettteeftles
2 5 eased poilc~ ree~f'l'lf'l'lef'lt'IRIIE'lf'l ef'l tl:\e ed1Aitiof'l ef rttPBI ehaf'B:eter BAS iAeerHi,.·es fer
2 6 proteellof'l of rttral e~eas. The stteeefftftliUee shaH ha·,.e I'~J'eftieftsl represefttstioA trem
2 7 KiAg CettAty. Seattle 8AS sttetlfBBA eities BAS shall ftlake its f!J'eft te the GMPC ey
2 8 Oetoeer l. 1992. The eefiAitieA shall eePtsieer rttPBl deft!ities, eJttstenftg aAd ether teels
2 9 to proteet rttral eheraeter. JAeeHtives te ee eeHsieeres iAelttee:))
30 a. Assess laAd iA rttPel arees eft its ettffeftt ttse;
31
3 2 .f.el'est. wetlaAes. l"if!aPiaft te~tes:
33 e. Develop f!regPBffts fer direet "'ar*etiftg ef yneettee iA ttrhan Bf!ti;
cpppl\1, 07119/94
26
l
2
3
4.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
.11446 • '*·
e. Reiftf8ree right te farm BftS f8rest praettees i" ftt~ Mea!!; B:Jtelef
e. Develefl !ePYi.ees threttgh eJtitttitt: e:eneies ¥tif:ft ftlral eJtpefti!e.
LU-((-4Q))23. Rural areas designated by King County shall remain rural.
Additional. rural areas shall he de5igrlated b}r' ~n~ County through adoption of a land usc
map authorized by the Growth Management Planning Council. These additional areas
meet at least one of the following criteria:
a. Opponunities exist for small scale farming .and forestry which do not
qualify fo.r resource land designation;
b. The ·rural designation serves as a buffer for designated resource lands or
sensitive areas;
c. Significant environmental constraints make the area generally unsuitable f1
intensive urban development;
d. Major physical barriers exist to providing urban services at reasonable
cost:
e. The area is contiguous to other designated rural areas, resource areas or
sensitive areas;
f. The area has outstanding ~enic, .historic, and/or aesthetic value that can
hest be protected by rural land uses and densities; and
g. The area has limited public services. extension of full services is not
planned. and mtlll at h1gher densities is not feasible or necessary to meet regional goals.
Cml'rw .\{JC'q/iC'J tn LU-((#J))~(g) permits the redesignation of urban lands in
Ktn).: CnunrY 1n rural. ThC'w arl'cn ha\'e nor received a full range of services, such as
.\('1\'l'r.,. unJ un· dtTrlnpctl ut Jl·n.\ilit•J which arc• roo low 10 suppon cosT-effective
pml·l.'imn of u/1 urhun .\l'rnce.L The inclusion of these new rural areas will carry our
reJ,:wnal po!Jcu·.' hy .focu.'iill).: n('w tiC'velopmem TO urban areas thor are planned to have fi
urhan J('n'l£:e.L
LU-((++))24. Low-density urban areas meeting the criteria of LU-((-4Q)).2,3(g)
((3MH)) .m.a.x: be redesignated rural and zoned for rural residential densities. Legally
created existing lots within the rural area are legal building sites as authorized in the Kin
County Code.
((LU 12. Te RutiAUtiA fttfal eharaeter, BAS te fftiftifllli~ the fteeS fer aEIEiitiena:l
J 2 . iAfrastrttetttPe. while fflaxiffliziH: ttfteeveler:teEI lane availaele fer tPBditienal PH~ ttses,
3 3 elttstenft: ef "e"'· eevelef:'tHeftt shall ee reqttireEI en an eJtisting pareels ef eefttigttetts
cppph2. 07119/94
27
114·
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
ewftenhiJ!' ef teft ep "'ere aePe!, J!'Pet:tideel that elttsteriftg shell ee eesigfteel MS Jealee te
he eeftsisteAt with N!'el Me& eharaeter.))
LU-25. Kir~e County. in coUaboration with affected eovemments. agencies and
citizens shall P!el'are the followine prOducts:
a. A manual on rural infrastructure desien (includine an examination of alternari
sewa2e treatment technolof:iesl. fire/wildfire protection. and service standards:
b. Recommended revisions to Kine County's land develcmment reeulations
address issues such as incentives for reconsolidarion of nonconformine and unbuildable Jo
ap,plication of current regulations if discretionary extensions of preliminary plat ap,provals c
allowed. and $Ubdivision site design to minimize conflict with nearby farming and forest
activities:
c. A stratef:y to persuade the banking industry and its regulators to revise
lending criteria to remove obstacles to affordable housing on large lots. and to invest in
environmentally sound land management practices: and
d. A strategy to oersuade the federal and state governments to devise domes
water ouality standards and monitorin2 requirements that protect the environment and pub
health at a reasonable cost so as to avoid financial pressure to conven Rural Areas to hjgt
denslltes.
((Ll' 1?. KiA~ Co~:~Ary. eiries that are aEfje:eeru to or are StJR'Ot:IASee e~ ntf'B:I
ElestgARteEI areas. BAEI orher ageneies thRt f:'Poviee sel"'t·iees to rt~ft!l erees shell farm e
reehAieal eoMffiil!ee 1e ~re~are a ffiftRttBI eA rttral iAffi!:SfRiet't:lre eesigA, fire/wildfire
f'F6teetiefl. ana se'"' iee staAEiarcls.))
C. Urh:m Areas
Thr fnllmwng pnlicirs rsrahli.'ih an Urban Growth Area (UGA) and methods 10
phase de,·rlopmrnr wirhin rhis area in nrder rn bring cenainry rn lnng-tenn planning and
de\'l'inpmenr wuh111 Jhe cnunry. The Urban Grnwth Area is a pennimenr desig1Ultion.
.Land nw,r;idl' rhl' Urhan Growth Area i.'i de.'iignated for permanent rural and resource
usrs. excepr fnr thr cirie:; in thr rural area. Cnunrywide policies on rural and resource
arras are found in Chaprrr 1/A. Resource Lands, and Chapter JIIB, Rural Areas.
Thr c:apac:tr:dn the Urban Growth Area fnr growth, based on adopted plans and
rrgularinns, merr.'i ((etettttl.v)) the 20-year minimum requirement of the GMA according ,,
the current pnpularinn forecasts. In the future, all urban growth is to be accommodated
within permanent urban area.'i hy increasing densities. Phasing is to occur within t"M
cppph2. 07119/94
28
11446
1 Urban Growth Area to ensure thai services are prov~ded as growth occurs. All cities are
2 to be within the Urban Growth Area. Cities in the-rural area are to be UGA islands.
3 FW-((8))11. The land use pattern for King County shall protect the natural
4 environment by reducing the consumption of land and concentrating development. An
5 Urban Growth Area, Rural Areas, and Resource Lands shall be designated and the
6 necessary implementing regulations adopted. This includes countywide establishment of a
7 boundary for the Urban Growth Area. Local jurisdictions shall make land use decisions
s based on the Countywide Planning Policies.
9 FW-((9))12. The Urban Growth Area shall provide enough land to accommodate
1 o future urban development. Policies to phase the provision of urban services and to ensure
11 efficient use of the growth capacity within the Urban Growth Area shall be instituted.
12 1. Urban Growth Area
13 The GMA requires King County to designate an Urban Growth Area (UGA) in
14 consultation with cities. The Counrywide Planning Policies must establish an Urban
15 Growth Area that contains enough urban land to accommodate at least 20 years of new
16 population and employment growth. The GMA stares: "based upon the population
17 forecast made for the counry b_v the Office of Financial Managemenr, the Urban Growth
18 Areas in the counry shall include areas and densities sufficient to permit urban growth thai
19 is projected ro occur in rhe counry for rhe succeeding twenty-year period. Each Urban
2 o Growth Area shall pem1ir urban densities and shall include greenbelt and open space
21 areas." A UGA map is arrached as Appendix 1. which guides the adomion ofrhe 1994
2 2 Merropoliwn Kim: Cnuntv Comprehensive Plan.
2 3 LU-((~))26. The lands within ((Hte)) Urban Growth Areas_ (UGA) shall be
2 4 characterized by urban development. The UGA shaJI accommodate ((~f~~)) the 20-year
2 5 projection of ((population)) household and employment growth with a full range of phased
2 6 urban governmental services. The (:ountywide Planning Policies shall establish the Urban
2 7 Growth Area based on the following criteria:
2 8 a. Include all lands within existing cities, including cities in the rural area and
2 9 their designated expansion areas;
3 o b. The GMPC recognizes that the Bear Creek Master Plan Developments
31 (MPDs) are subject to an ongoing review process under the adopted Bear Creek
3 2 Community Plan and recognizes these propenies as urban under these Countywide
3 3 Planning Policies. If the applications necessary to implement the MPDs are denied by
cpppl\1. 07119/94:amend 8/15/94
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
King County or. not pursued by the apPlicant(s), then the property subject to the MPD
shall be redesignated rural pursuant to the Bear C~ Community Plan .. Nothing in thest
Planni1_1g .Policies shall limit the continued review and implementation through existing
appUcations, capital improve~_ents appropriati~s or other-approvals of these tv.io MPDs
as new communities under the Growth Management Act.
c. Not include rural land or unincorporated agricultural, or forestry lands
designated through the Countywide Pl.anning Policies plan process;
. d. Include only areas already characterized by urban development which can
be efficiently and cost effectively served by roads, water, sanitary sewer and stonn
drainage. schools and other urban &overnmenta1 services within the next 2& years;
e. Do not extend beyond natural boundaries, such as watersheds, which
impede provision of urban services;
f. Respect topographical features which form a natural edge such as rivers
and ridge lines: and
g. Include only areas which are sufficiently free of environmental consttaints
to be able to suppon urban growth without major environmental impacts unless such area
are designated as an urban separator· by interlocal agreement between jurisdictions.
LU-((~)):!7. Urban separators are low density areas or areas of little developmer
((81H~ ffil:fSI ee)) within the Urban Growth Area. Urban separators shaH be defined as
permanent low density lands which protect adjacent resource lands. rural areas. and
environmentally sensitive areas and create open space corridors within and between urbar.
areas which provtde environmental. visual, recreational and wildlife benefits. ((-Rtese
tftftes)) Destgnated urban separators shall not be redesignated in the future {in the 20 year
olannin~ cycle! w other urban uses or higher densities. The maintenance of these urban
seoarators is a re~mnal as well as a local concern. Therefore. no modifications should b
made to the development re~;tulations eovemine these areas wjthout Kine County review
and concurrence.
2. Phasing Development within the Urban Growth Area
2 9 Dl'vrlnpml'nt in the• urban area will be phased to prnmme efficient use of the lanli
3 o add cl'nainry rn infrastrucrurf planning, and 10 ensure thm urban services can be providt
31 rn urhan de\ttlnpm~nr. The minimum den.fiTies required by LU-((M))M_ help ensuTf! the
3 2 r:tficienr u.tt' t?f rh~ land. Phasing will further ensure coordiiUUinn of infrasTructure and
3 3 dev~lnpment. Urban area.t in jurisdictions which do nor have urban services and an noi
cppph!. 07/19194
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
il.4'±0
scheduled to receive urban services within 10 years shall« subjea to phasing
requironenrs.
LU-((~)).28. Within the Urban Growth Area, growth should be directed as.
follows: a) first, to: centers ~-d urbanized areas with existing infrastructure capacity; b)
second, to areas which are already -urbanized such that infrastructure improvements can t
easily extended; and c) last, to areas requiring major infrastructure improvements.
. LU-((H)),22. All jurisdictions shall develop growth phasing plans consistent with
applicable caPital facilities plans to maintain an urban area served with adeguate public
facilities and services to maintain an urban area to meet at least the six year intermediate
household and employment tar&et mnees consistent wjth LU-67 and LU-68. (~
ieeAtifyiAg ar:e&s ier grre'lft·th fer the ft9l left &Ad the fteJtt tweAl)' years where fteees_,·
ttreeA seP>w·iees eaA ee J!lre,·ieee.)) These growth phasing plans shall be based on locally
adopted definitions, service levels, and financing commitments, consistent with State
GMA requirements. The ((teA eAe t'lft'ertty year grewth)) phasing plans for cities shall no
extend beyond their Potential Annexation Areas. lnterlocal agreements shall be develope
that specify the applicable minimum zoning, development standards, impact mitigation an
future annexation for the Potential Annexation Areas.
LU-((+8)).:!Q. Where urban services cannot be provided within the next 10 years,
Jllnsdictions should develop policies and regulations to:
a. Phase and limit development such that planning, siting, densities and
Infrastructure decisions wiJI support future urban development when urban services
become available: and
b. Establish a process for convening land to urban densities and uses once
services are available.
3. Joint Planning and Urban Growth Areas around Cities
2 6 The GMA rt"lJuire.\ each cnunry rn tlesigr~are Urban. Gmwrh Areas, in consuluuion
2 7 with ciTies. Withm rhe counrywitle Urban Growrh Area, each ciry will identify land need1
28 jnr in ~rmwh fnr rhe ne.n rwenry years. Alrhough rhe GMA does nor explicitly· equate
2 9 Urban Gmwrh Areas wirh m11nicipal annexarion areas. the Urban Growth Areas around
3 o ciTie.\ may be considered porenria/ expansion areas for cities.
31 FW-((~))l.J. Cities are the appropriate provider of local urban services to urban
3 2 . areas either directly or by contract. Counties are the appropriate provider of most
3 3 countywide services. Urban services shall not be extended through the use of special
cppp~. 07119/94
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2~
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
purpose districtS without the approval of the city in_ whose potential annexation area the
extension is proposed. Within the urban area, as· time and conditions warrant, cities
should assume local urban services provided by special purpose districts.
. .
LU .. ((-I-9))J..i. Jn collabotatioil with ·adjacent counties and cities and King C~unty
and in consultation with residential groups in affected areas, each city shall designate a
potential annexation area. Each potential annexation area shall be specific to each city.
Potential annexation areas shall not overlap. Within the potential annexation area the cit
shall adopt criteria for annexation, including conformance with Countywide Planning
Policies, and a schedule for providing urban services and facilities within the potential
annexation area. This process shall ensure that unincorporated urban islands of King
County are not created between cities and strive to eliminate existing islands between
cities.
LU-((~))12. A city may annex territory only within its designated potential
annexation area. All cities shall phase annexations to coincide with the ability for the ci
to coordinate the provision of a full range of urban services to areas to be annexed.
LU-((~))1J. Land within a city's potential annexation area shall be developed
accordtng to that city's and King County's growth phasing plans. Undeveloped lands
ad_1acent to that city should be annexed at the time development is proposed to receive a
full range of urban services. Subsequent to establishing a potential annexation area, infil
lands within the potential annexation area which are not adjacent or which are not
practical to annex shall be developed pursuant to interlocal agreements between the
County and the affected cuy. The inter local agreement shall establish the type of
development allowed in the potential annexation area and standards for that development
so that the area 1s developed in a manner consistent with its future annexation potential.
The mterlocal agreement shall specify at a minimum the applicable zoning, development
standards. impact mi_tigat_ion. and future annexation within. the potential annexation area.
LU-((~))34. Several unincorporated areas are currently considering local
gqvemance options. Unincorporated urban areas that are already urbanized and are witt
a city's potential annexation area are encouraged to annex to that city in order to receive
urban services. Where annexation is inappropriate, incorporation may be considered.
Development within the potential annexation area of one jurisdicrion may have
impacts nn adjacent jurisdictions.
LU-((~))~. A jurisdiction may designate a potential impact area beyond its
cppph2. 07119/94
32
11446
1 potential annexation area in collaboration with adjacent jurisdictions. As pan of the
2 designation process the jurisdiction shall establish· criteria for the review of development
3 proposals under consideration by other jurisdictio~s in the impact area.
4 The ·aMA has a· pr:ovision granting counries the discretion 10 disband the Boundar;
5 Review Boards after comprehensive plans and development regulorions are adopted. The
6 following policy provides direction for considering whether to disband the Boundary
7 Review Board for King Counry.
s LU-((~))~. Upon the adoption and ratification of the Countywide Policies, the
9 King County Council shall convene a meeting with municipal elected officials to
1 o determine a process for disbanding the Washington State Boundary Review Board for
11 King County and establishing criteria to oversee municipal and special district
12 annexations, mergers, and incorporations in King County. Until the Washington State
13 Boundary Review Board for King County is disbanded, it should be governed in its
14 decisions by the interim urban growth area boundary and the adopted and ratified
15 countywide planning policies. The criteria shall include, but not be limited to:
16 a. Conformance with Countywide Planning Policies;
17 b. The ability of the annexing jurisdiction to demonstrate a capability to
18 provide urban services at standards equal to or better than the current service providers;
19 and
20 c. Annexauons in a manner which discourages unincorporated islands of
2 1 development.
2 2 The GMA rt'tJUm'.' 1ht11 cuy unci c:ounry comprehensive plans he coordinated and
2 3 constsfc'/11 1\'iTh mw tmmlwr. Consi.wrncy is required "whc~re there ore common borders o
2 4 rc•lmt'ci rt'gumlll 1.\.\IIC'.' .. rRCW 36. 70A. 100). Jninr planning is fundamenraltn all the
2 5 lrum('Wnrk pnltetc'.'.
2 6 L U-( (~) ).11.. All jurisdictions shall cooperate in developing comprehensive plans
2 7 _which are consistent with those of adjacent jurisdictions and with the countywide planning
2 8 policies.
29 4. Cities in the Rural Area
II
3 o The' cities and unincorporated rnwns in the rural areas are a significant pan of
3 1 Kin~ Counry 's diw!rsiry and heritage. Cities in this cmegory include: Black Diamond,
32 Carnation, Duvall. Enumclaw, Nonh Bend, Snoqualmie and Skykomish. They have an
3 3 impnnunr rolf u." Inca/ Trude anti communiry centers. These cilies and rnwns are the
cppph2. 07119/9-$
33
-
1 appropri01e providers of Inca/ rural services for the community. They also conrribuze to
2 the variety of de~lopmenr p01rems and housing Choices within the counry. As
3 municipalities, the cities ore to p~vide urban services lUid be loc01ed within· design01ed
. 4. Urban Growth Areas~ ·ne urban servict!S, ~ide_mial densities· and mix of la"d uses ma
s differ from those of the large, generillly western Urban Growth Area.
6 LU-((~)).3.8. In recognition that cities-in the rural area are generally not
7 contiguous to the countywide Urban Growth Area, and to _protect and enhance the optior.
a cities in rural areas provide, these cities shall be located within ((e)) Urban Growth
9 Areas. These Urban Growth Areas generalJy will be islands separate from the larger
1 o Urban Growth Area located in the western portion of the county. Each city in the -fRulcl
11 eArea aru!...King County and the GMPC shall work cooperatively to establish an Urban
12 . Growth Area for that city. ((UPB&A Grewlfl ltt'e8:9 l'ftt!St ee llJ'J'f6YeS ey lfle GMPC ey
13 JaAtte~· 1. 199? •. )) The Urban Growth Area for cities in the Rural Area shall:
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
a. Include all lands within existing cities in the rural area;
b. Be sufficiently free of environmental constraints to be able to suppon ru;
city growth without major environmental impacts;
c. Be contiguous to city limits;
d. Have boundaries based on natural boundaries. such as watersheds, topo-
' graph1cal teatures. and the edge of areas already characterized by urban development~
e. Be maintained in laree lots at densities of one home per five acres or Jess
w11h mandaton· clustenn~ provisions until such time as the city annexes the area: ·
f. Be implemented through interlocal agreements among King County. the
cities and special pumose districts. as appropriate. to ensure that annexation is phased.
nearby open space 1s protected and development within the Urban Growth Area is
compatihle with surrounding Rural and Resource areas: and
g. Not include designated Forest or Agricultural. Production District lands
unless the conservation of those lands and continued resource-based use. or other
compatible use. is assured.
(CLtT 27. Cities iH rt.e rtt'l"'ll areas st.ell iflelttde tt.e feHe¥t'iHg eA&l"'letePisties:
a. Shef3f3iAg. e"'f'ley,.eAt, &AS seA·iees fer residern:s, sttpf'li~ fer resettrees
iAdttstries. iAelusiAg ee"'"'ereial, iAdttstri&l. &Ad tettrisft'l develep,.eAt at e seale tt.et
. reiAf.erees tt.e SttPf'ettndiAg PttP&l et.el"'l:etePi:nie;
e. ResideAtiel devele"ft'leAt, iflelttdiftg !ft'I&H let siAgle f&ft'lily, l'ftttltif&mily,
c:pppl\2. 07119/94
34
1
2.
J
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
·33
e .. Desigft MitftSBM!I that ViePk le ~reserve me ft!ftl:l, Sffta:H l6~ft eh8f'lleter ~e
~rerftete ~ede:!JlPiBft rftehiJity.
·n. Urban. and Man~facturing/lndustrial Centers ·
Urban Centers are envisioned as artas of concenrrared employmenr and housing,
with direct service by high capacity transir, and a wide range of other land uses such as
retail, recrearioTUll, public facilities, parks and open space.
Urban Cenrers are designed to 1) strengthen aisting communities. 2) promote
hm1sing opponuniries close 10 employmenr, 3) suppon developmenr of an extensive
transponarion system 10 reduce dependency on DUtomobiles, 4) consume less land with
urban development, and 5) maximize the benefit of public investment in infrastructure and
services, 6) reduce costs of and time required for pennirring, and 7) evaluate and
mitigate environmental impacts.
Mam!facrurin.l(llndustriol Employment Centers ore key components of the rtgional
ecnnnmy. Thc•se urc•as are c.:lwruc:rc•riud by a sign({icant amounr of manufacturing ((M
~)) indu.r;rrial. and aclvanced trchnnlngv employment. They differ from other
emplnynu•nr urea.~. such OJ Busines.r!Office parks (see FW-13 and LU-58-62), in thlu a
land haJC' and thC' J<'rrc•~:minn nf major nnn-munufacruring uses are ((iTtHt)) essenrial
elemenrs_ t?f their operatinn.
FW-(CH))H. Within the Urban Growth Area, a limited number of Urban CentCI
· which meet specific criteria established in the Countywide Planning Policies shall be local!
designated. Urban Centers shall be characterized by all of the following:
a. Clearly defined geographic boundaries~
b. lntenslly/density of land uses sufficient to suppon effective rapid transit;
c. Pedesman emphasis within the Center;
d. Empl:aasis on superior urban design which reflects the local community;
e. Limitations on single occupancy vehicle usage during. peak hours or
commute purposes;
f. A broad array of land uses and choices within those uses for employees ill
residents;
g. Sufficient public open spaces and recreational opponunities; and
h. Uses which provide both daytime and nighttime activities in the Center.
FW-((~))~. Within the Urban Growth Area, the Countywide Planning Policies
c:ppptL!. 07119194
35
ll·
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
shall assure the creation of a number of locally(( a~si:nated)) detennined
Manufacturing/Industrial Centers which meet speCific criteria ((es!ehlisheEI in ~e
Cet~ntywiee Planning Pelieies will ee leeaUy ae!i:nated)). The Manufacturing/Industrial
Centers ((wHJ)) ~ be ((ana are)) characterized by the following:
a. Clearly defined geographic boundaries;
b. Intensity/density of land uses sufficient to support manufacturing,. ((&fMI))
industrial and advanced technology uses; ((aftEI))
c. Reasonable access to the regional highway, rail, air and/or waterway
system for the movement of goods;
d. Provisions to discourage large office and retail development: and
I
e. Fast-track proiect nermining.
FW-((+3)).l.Q. Urban and Manufacturing/Industrial Centers shall be complement.ec
by the land use pattern outside the centers but within the urban area. This area shall
include: urban residential neighborhoods, activity areas. business/office parks, and an
urban open space network. Within these areas. future development shall be limited in
scale and intensity to support the countywide land use and regional transportation plan.
1. Urban Centers Designation Proc~
18 LU-((~)).3_2. The location and number of Urban Centers in King County ((will
19 ee)) were determined through the joint local and countywide adoption process, based on
2 o the following sreps:
21 a. The Countywide Planning Policies include specific criteria for Urban
22 Centers:
2 J b (( B~ Oeteeer l. 1992. leesl jt~riseietieA5 shall eeterfflifte if they will
24 eaAtBtA BA Uri'lRA CetHerl5).)) Jurisdictions electing to contain an Urban Center provided
2 5 ((tflese eeAters ..... ill J3reviae)) the GMPC with a statement of commitment describing the
2 6 city's intent and commitment to meet the Centers' criteria defined in these policies and a
2 7 timetable for the required Centers Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement or
2 8 identification of existing environmental documentation to be used; and
29 c. The GMPC reviewed the Centers nominated ((By Deeeffteer 1, 1992, the
3 o Grewth M&Aft~effleflt PleAAiAg Cet~Aeil shall J"e"'ieYt' aAEI eeAfirm the Centers that ere
31 eleetee)) by local jurisdictions consistent with Policy FW-1, and the following criteria {(t
32 .ffteke sfljt~stfftents hesee eA)):
3 3 1) The Center's location in the region and its potential for promoting a
cppph2. 07119/94
36
1 countywide system of Urban Centers;
2 2) The total number of centers in the county that can be realiu:d over t
3 next twenty years, based on twenty years projected growth;
4 3) ·. ·The type an.d leVel·Of ~mmitmentt that each jurisdiction has
5 identified for achieving Center goals; and ·
6 4) Review of other jurisdictional plans to ensure that growth focused tc
7 Centers is assured.
8 d. The GMPC confirmed the follow1ne Urban Centers:
9 BeJievue CBD
1 o Federal Way CBD
11 K~tCBD
12 Kirkland Totem l.ake
13 Redmond CBD
14 Redmond Qverlake
1 5 Renton CBD
16 Seattle COD
1 7 Seattle Center
18 First Hill/Capital Hill
1 ~ University District
2 o North~ate
21 SeaTac CBD
2 2 Tukwila CBD
23 ., -· urban Centers Criteria
24 llrban Centers vary substantially in the number of households and jobs they
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
con tam today. The intent of the Countywide Plannine Policies is to encouraee the uov.
of each Urban Center as. a unigue. vjbrant community that is an attractive place to Jive
and work. will suppon efficient public services includine transit. and remands to local
needs and markets for jobs and housine.
Two aoproaches are used to set euidelines and track the erowth of Urban Center
First. the Countywide Plannine Policies establish leve)s of households and jobs nee4ed t
achieve the benefits of an Urban Center. Some Urban Centers will reach these levels o·
.the next twenty years. while for others the criteria set a path for erowth over a Jom:er
term and provide capacity to accommodate growth beyond the 20 year horizon.
cppph2. 07119194
37
11
l
2
3
4'
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
, =
--'
16
, -.:_I
46
· Second. iurisdictjons estab1isb 20 year household and employment mwth target
rnnges for each Urban Center. The target rangeS reflect tbe diversity of the Centers.
allowing communities to envision changes over the next 20 years and plan for needed
services. The taUet ranges .set ·a policy for .the level of irowtb envisioned for. each Cer.
that not only considers land capacity but also the rimjng and funding of infrasrrucrure.
Reaching the rarget ranges will reguire Planning I public investment. and incemives for
private investments. Over time the Centers wjll move toward the devel<mment pattern
envisiOned in the Countywide Planning Policies.
Within the County. Urban Centers are expected to account for up to one-half of
employment growth and one-guaner of household growth over the next 20 years.
Additional capacity for household and empJqymem growth js provided in the Urban
Growth Areas outside of designated Urban Centers to ensure that. Countywide. 20-year
growth projections will be accommodated.
LU-((~))40. Each jurisdiction which has designated an Urban Center shall ado}
m Jts comprehensive plan a definition of the urban center which specifies the exact
geographic boundaries of the center. All Centers shall be up to 1-1/2 square miles of
land. Infrastructure ·and services shall be planned and financed consistent with the
1 E exrected rate nf growth. For the purposes of achieving a long-rnnge development patte1
1 Sr tha• will prnv1de a successful mix of uses and densities that will efficiently suppoo high
2 o capaclly trans1t. each ((&eft)) Center shall have planned land uses to ((he ~efteB te))
21 accommodate:
22 a. A minimum of 15.000 jobs within 1/2 mile of a trnnsit center;
2 3 b. At a mtn1mum. an average of 50 employees per gross acre; and
2~ c. At a mimmum. an average 15 households per gross acre.
2 5 Lll-41. In order to be designated as Urban Centers. jurisdictions shall demonstr
2 6 both that an adeauate supply of drinking water is available to serve projected growth
2 7 within the Urban Center and that the jurisdiction is capable of concurrent service to nev.
2 8 development.
2 9 LU-((-3Q))42. Jurisdictions which contain Urban Centers, in conjunction with
3 o METRO. shall identify transit station areas and right-of-way in their comprehensive plar
31 Station areas shall be sited so that all ponions of the Urban Center are within walking
32 . distance (one half mile) of a station.
3 3 LU-((;.t.))~. In order to reserve right-of-way and potential station areas for
cppph.2. 07119194
38
.JL ..L. -:1: ·:a_ v ..
1 high-capacity transit or transit hubs in the Urban Centers, jurisdictions shall:
2 a. Upon adoption of specific high-capacity transit alignments by METRO,
3 adopt policies to avoid development which would restrict establishment of the ·
4. high-capacity transit system;
5 b. Preserve right-of-ways controlled by the jurisdiction which are identified
6 for potential transit use; and
7 c. Provide METRO an option to acquire p~ny owned by the jurisdiction.
s · LU-((~)~. To encourage transit use, jurisdictions ((!MH)) should establish
9 mechanisms to limit the use of SOVs for commuting pumoses: such mechanisms could
1 o include charge for long-term single-occupancy vehicle parking and/or ((e liPAit eH))
11 limiting the number of off-street parking spaces for each Urban Center, and establish
12 minimum and maximum parking requirements that limit the use of the single-occupant
13 vehicle and develop coordinated plans that incorporate Commuter Trip Reduction
14 guidelines. All plans for Urban Centers shall encourage bicycle travel and pedestrian
15 activity.
16 LU-((~)~. Jurisdictions' comprehensive plans for Urban Centers shall
1 7 demonstr:ate compliance with the Urban Centers .criteria. In order to promote urban
18 growth withm centers. the Urban Center plan shall establish strategies which:
19 a. Support pedestrian mobility, bicycle use and transit use;
2 o b. Achieve a target housing density and mix of use;
2 1 c. Provide a wide range of capital improvement projects, such as street
2 2 improvements. Schools. parks and open space, public an and community facilities;
2 J d. Emphas1ze supenor urban design:
2 4 e. Emphas1ze historic preservation and adaptive reuse of historic places;
2 5 t Include other local characteristics necessary to achieve a vital urban cente:
26 and
2 7 g. Include facilities to meet human service needs.
28 LU-((~))~. The system of urban centers shall form the land use foundation for
2 9 regional high capacity transit system. Urban centers should receive very high priority fc
3 o the location of high-capacity transit stations and/or transit centers. (See also LU-((4+))~
31 3. Incentives for Urban Centers
3 2 In order 10 help creaJe Urban Cemers, incenri"Ves 10 jurisdictions 10 establish
3 3 Urban Cenrers, and 10 rhe communiry 10 build in Urban ~nrers, should be establisMd.
cppp~. 07119194
39
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
, ::
... ..-
16
17
18
1St
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
46
The provision of high-capaciTy transit (HCT) is one such incenri~. Others include
funding, and streamlined permitting.
LU-((3§));47. Countywide financing strategies shall be developed by the GMPC t
jts successor. ((By Jttly 1, 1993)) which:
a. Identify regional funding sources; and
b. Set priorities and alJocate funds for urban facilities and services including
social and human services, and subarea planning effons, in Urban Centers.
LU-((~))!8. Each jurisdiction electing to contain an Urban Center ((ttHEief Pelie
LU 28)) shall prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PElS) for each
proposed Center. The PEIS shall be prepared in a comprehensive manner and shall
address probable significant adverse environmental impacts from and reasonable
alternatives to the proposal. These may include, but are not necessarily limited to subjec
of area-wide concern such as cumulative impacts, housing, schools, public utilities, and
transportation. Subsequent project-specific proposals shall not be required to perform
duplicative environmental review of issues which have been adequately reviewed in the
PElS. but shaH provide additional environmental review of other issues. These may
mclude." but are not necessarily limited to the direct impacts of the specific proposal,
substantial changes in the nature of the proposal or information regarding impacts which
md1cate probable significant adverse environmental impacts which were not adequately
analyzed m the PElS. Examples of project-specific direct impacts include local traffic
1mpacts. sue aesthetics. and other issues not addressed by .the PElS.
LU-((~))49. In suppon of Centers. additional local action should include:
a. Strateg1es for land assembly within the center, if applicable;
b. Infrastructure and service financing strategies and economic development
strategies for the centers:
c. Establishing expected permit processing flow commitments consistent wit
. the PElS: and
d. Establishing a streamlined and simplified administrative appeal process
with fixed and certain timelines.
LU-((;8)).5.Q. Jurisdictions should consider additional incentives for development
within Urban Centers such as:
a. Setting goals for maximum permit review time and give priority to perm:
in Urban Centers:
cppph2. 07119/94
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8·
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
b. Policies to reduce or eliminate impact fees;
c. Simplifying and streamlining of the administrative appeal processes;
d. Eliminating project-specific requirements for parking and open space by
providing those facilities. for. the Urban Center as· a whole; and
e. ·Establishing a bonus zoning program for the provision of urban amenitie:
4. Manufacturing/Industrial Center Designation Process
LU-((~))il. The location and number of regional Manufacturing/Industrial
Centers in King County ((v.·iU ee)) ~ determined through the joint local and
countywide adoption process, based on the following steps:
a. Countywide Plan~ing Polices include specific criteria for
Manufacturingllndustrial Centers;
b. ((By Oeteeer 1, 1992, leeal jttfi9Eiietiens shall eeterf'ftine if lfiey v.·iU
eents:in a Manttfaetttfin:llnettstRal Center(s).)) Jurisdictions electjne ((that eleet)) to
contain a Manufacturing/Jndustrial Center provided the GMPC with a Statement specjfyi
((shall s"eeii=)·)) how the Center will meet the intent of the Countywide Policies, includit
plans to adopt criteria, incentives. and other commitment to implement
Manufacturing/Industrial Centers;
c. ((B) Deeefnher 1. 1992, the Gl'ewth Managef'fteftl Planftin: Cettneil shill
19 rn·te"" BREI eent:irffi)) The GMPC reviewed the Manufacturing/Industrial Centers ((-that
2 o &fe)) elected by local jurisdictions consistent with Policy FW-1, ((er f'ftake aejttstf'fteftts
21 easeEI efl:)) and the followine criteria:
2 2 1. The Center's location in the region, especially relative to existing ar
2 3 proposed transportation facilities and its potential for promoting a countywide system of
2 4 Manufacturing/Industrial Centers;
2 5 :::. The total number of Centers in the county that are needed in the
2 6 county o~er the nex~ twenty-years based on twenty years projected need for manufacturi
2 7 land to satisfy regional projections of demand for manufacturing land assuming a 10
2 B percent increase in manufacturing jobs over this period;
2 9 3. The type and level of commitments that each jurisdiction has
3 o identified for achieving Manufacturing/Industrial Center goals;
3 1 4. Review of other jurisdictional plans to ensure that growth focused t(
3 2 . Manufacturing/Industrial Centers is assured; and
3 3 5. The accessibility of the Center to existing or planned transportation
cppph!. 07119194
41
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
facilities.
d. The GMPC confirmed the foJlowirig Manufacruring/lndus~al Centers:
North TukwHa. Duwamjsh and Ballard/lntet'bay in Seattle. and the Kent Industrial Area.
·s. Manufacturing/Industrial Center Criteria :
LU-((49))~. Each jurisdiction which contains a regional Manufacturing/Industria
Center shall adopt in its comprehensive plan a definition of the Center which specifies tht
exact geographic boundaries of the Center. ({&eh Ceftter shall ee :eeftee te:))
Jurisdictions with Manufacturing/Industrial Centers shall have zoning and detailed plans i
place to achieve the following goals by the year 2010.
a .. Preserve and encourage the aggregation of yacant or non-
manufacturin~lindustriat land parcels sized for manufacturing/industrial uses;
b. Discourage land uses ((ether thaft)) which are not compatible with
manufacturin~ ((etta)) industrial and advanced technology uses; ((etta))
c. Accommodate a minimum of 10,000 jobs: and
d. Limit the size of offices and retail unless as an accessory use.
LU-((4+)li3. All jurisdictions support the development of a regional industrial
stu:g policy ((to liRl< the eettAt)·Ytiiee fRBAt:tfaett:tRAgliAdt!!ltRal eeAters iAte the regiefta1
Re!woflc ot)) t('l promme industrial activity.
LU-((~))S4. Jurisdictions shall design access to the regional
Manufacturing/Industrial Centers to facilitate the mobility of employees by transit, and tht
mobility of gQ('Ids by truck. rail or waterway as appropriate. Regional comprehensive
plans shall include strategies to provide capital improvement projects which support acces
for movemen1 of good!~.
Lll-((~)J~). Junsdtcuons which contain regional Manufacturing/Industrial
Centers in C(lnJtmction with ((METRO)) transit agencies, shall identify transit station area
and nght-of-way in each jurisdiction's comprehen-sive plan. ((fraAsit teeder systeMs,
eie~·ele f6ttles E\RS f3e8estriaA systefRs shell ee esteelished te liAIC the. Ceftter te the tfBASit
ststier. &fee(s).)) Where t@nsit stations exist or are planned. jurisdictions in conjunction
with transit uencies shall identify various options such as feeder systems. bicycle routes
and oedestrian systems to link the Center with its transit Stations.
LU-((44 ))if!. In order to reserve right-of-way and potential station areas for
.high-capacity transit or transit hubs in the regional Manufacturing/Industrial Centers,
jurisdictions shall:
cppph2. 07119/IJ.4
42
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2~
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
----
a. Upon adoption of specific high-capacity transit alignments by METRO,
adopt policies to avoid development which would restrict establishment of the
high-capacity transit system;
. . . · b. Preserve right-of·ways cc;»ntiollcd by the jurisdiction which are identified
for potential transit usc; and
c. Provide METRO an option to acquire propeny owned by the jurisdiction.
. LU-((~))~. ((Fe eAeetsrage tfttftsit tsse, jtsnseietieAs shall estehlish lfteehMisms
te ehar~e fer sil'l~le eeetiJ!I&fte,· vehiele JMlfk:!ng er a limit en the fttl!fteer ef J!lafiting spaee
ter siAgle eeetiJ!I&rtey •lehieles withirt eaeh regiertal MMtsfaettsrirtg/lrtetsstPial Certter. AH
pleAs fer regieAel MeAufeettsl"ir:tgiiA8tsstrial CeAters shaH erteetsrttge hieyele emvel 8ftS
~eestri&A eiPetslatien.)) Transit agencjes shall strive to provjde convenient and economi<
mass transit service for the Manufacturin&llndustrial Centers that will result in a decrease
in single-occupancy non-commercial vehicle trips within the Centers.
LU-((46))5..8. Jurisdictions' comprehensive plans for regional
Manufacturing/Industrial Centers shall demonstrate compliance with the criteria. In orde
to promote manufacturing/industrial growth,· the Manufacturing/Industrial Center plan fo1
each jurisdiction shall establish .strategies:
a. To provide capital facility improvement projects which support the
movement of goods and manufacturing/industrial operations;
b To coordmate planning with serving utilities to ensure that utility facilitje5
are available 10 serve such centers:
((fr.))L To provide buffers around the Center to reduce conflicts with adjace
land uses:
(le-:))~ To facilnate land assembly; and
((ti-:-)J~ To attract the type of businesses that will ensure economic growth aJ
stabilny.
LU-((~))5,2. Each Manufacturing Center containing a minimum of 15,000 jobs
and having sufficient employment densities to support HCT should be served by HCT. I
is reco~nized that by their nature. Manufacturin&llndustrial Centers may not achieve
densities necessary to make HCT service viable. Nevertheless. Manufacturing/Industrial
Centers which are located on the regional high capacity transit alignment and which mee
. the transit-friendly criteria in policies LU-((~))~ through LU-((46)).5,B above ((~))
should receive one or more high capacity transit stations and/or transit centers.
cppph1. 07/19194
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
-:a:. v
6. Incentives for Manufacturing/Industrial Centers
LU-{(48)),60. Countywide financing strategies shall be developed by the GMPC!
its successor ((ey lttly 1, 1993)) which:
a. Identify reg.ional.funaing sources; and
b. Set priorities and allocate funds for urban facilities and services including
social and human services in regional Manufacturing/Industrial Centers, and subarea
planning efforts in Manufacturing/Industrial Centers.
·LU·((49))~. Jurisdictions shall consider conducting detailed SEPA review for tt.
regional Manufacturing/Industrial Center at the planning stage so that project-specific
environmental review is minimized.
LU-((.§Q))~. To reduce or prevent conflicts, jurisdictions shall develop policies 1
establish and suppon normal manufacturing/industrial practices such as notices on
development permits for propenies adjacent to a manufacturing/industrial center.
E. ((4;)) Activity Areas
;1C1i l'iA' ;4 rt'tJ.'i tltt · /riCtiliRM.\' ,the! CfllfMifl 8 tfffJtlCi'Bi'e CtJnCCif11't:lr'i81f 8j C81ff"'E1'Cial
• , "' ~·· 1 •.• .,_,. r 1 ... ,,; ;;,/ ••• -i I jli· ,; · · ~· ·-rtJ ~ ttl < ''rlrcnvF tl rrUtla .•fit en~•09 ~r rrvttrn491PJ \W1r1 ZJt:Jr7t'ttyvlfEt•fiRS, %;t'flKNifJrlC St ... es, Bft 1911
Acfl\'"' A rt·u_, urt' ('n\·isinm•d qs arras cnnroining modrrore cnncenrrarinns nf
commrrQal clf•\'C•Innmrnr and hnu.,·in!! rhm funcrinn as a focal vninr fnr rhr local
2 3 cnmm11nm !'tcrn·in· Art'm contain a mix nf/and uses such as reraill rrcrt'afinn areas~
2 ~ T?11hl1c (acilirif•., I narks and onrn .mace. Alrhnueh smaller in scale rhon Urban and
2 5 Manu(acturinr:llndll.'ifria/ Cent('r.'i I Acrivirv A rea.'i contain a sufficient densiry and mix of
2 6 IIS('s rn vm\•idf' similar hrnrfirs. Acrivio• Area.'i are designed tn 1 J pmvide housing and
2 7 emnlnvmt•m nnnnrwnities I 2 J nmvidr retail I service.'i and business nppnnunities~ 3J redu
2 8 amnmnhilr 11se and suppnn rlficient rrgnsir service. and 4) consume less land with urba1
2 9 de\•elnnmenr. Encnurg~ing cnmpoC1 drvrlnpmenr within Acrivirv A reus is an impnrronc
3 o mm nf the Cmmr"widr Planning Pnlicv visinn pmmnting in fill drvelnpmt'nt and prrvenri.
31 sprawl.
32 Activity Areas are d{-.Si~noied in !IggJ_cnmprehensive plans. The size nfche Acrh
3 3 A reo and rhe mix orul drn.fi'Y nf land u.frs qre lncallv detrrminrd en merr cnmmuniry
cppph2. 07119194
44
·1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2J
25
26
27
28
29
30
fnals. Examples of Activity Areas ((lftigitl)) inclutk 1M cenrral busiTU!Ss districts of
Kirkland, Burien, and Des Moines,· East Hill in Kenr,· and a num~r of business district~
in Semrle, such as Loke Ciry, Wallingford, tmd War Stllllle Juncrinn.
.FW~I7. Within the Urban· Growth Area .. jurisdictions may locaHy desi~nate one
more ActivitY Areas characterized by the followjn~:
a. An array of land uses. includine commercja1 develapment. housing. pub1i
faciJities and public open spaces:
b. Intensity/density of land uses sufficient to encourage freQuent ttansit:
c. Pedestrian emphasis within the ActivitY Area:
d. Emphasis on superior urban desjgn whjch reflects the loca} community:
e. Disincentives for sinele occupancy vehicle usaee for commute pumoses
during peak hours.
LU-((~)).QJ. Jurisdictions shall designate the boundaries, ((rtUMtil'ftttl'ft 8eftsities,)
and uses within all activity areas to provide for local employment. a mix of housing typ<
commercial activities~ ((eftEI)) public facilities and open space.
· LU-((~))64. All Activity Areas that achieve sufficient employment and househo
densities should receive frequent peak hour transit service. Activity Areas may contain :
high-capacity transit station or transit hub if the activity area:
a. Is on an HCT corridor, or can serve as a transit hub;
b. Has pedestrian. bicycle. and transit-supponive site planning, building
design and road design regulations; and
c. Has parking regulations to encourage transit use.
Lll-<<~))65. Tn encourage transit use. jurisdictions ((shell)) should establish
mm1mum and max1mum parking requirements that reduce dependence on the single-
occupant veh1cle. ~urisdictions should establish mechanisms to charge for single-
. occupancy vehicle parking and/or a limit on the number of off-street parking spaces for
each activity center. All plans for Activity Areas shall encourage bicycle travel and
pedestrian activity.
((E.}) F. Urban Growth Outside of Centers
3 1 A varicry of loiul uses and cnncenrrorions of growth occur within the Urban Gro'
32 .Area and outside of the Urban Centers and Manufaauringllndusrrial Cenrers. Localla1
3 3 use plans will be responsible for rhe designmion, character, and utilization of urban ore
c:ppph2. 07119/94
45
.LJ.
1
2
3
4·
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
outside of cenrers. However. Counrywide Policies are pre.semed ~low ro provitk
guidaru:e for these areas co ensure thDl they suppan t~ Qmers growth concept. ~e
policies do nor apply co the rural cities whose land use ponem is described by ooUey LU-
~ ((fJBUeJes Ll:J 2'6 81ttl.Lil 27.)) .
Households and rmmavmtmt rorrer mnges by jurisdiqjqn are c/escribet! in this
· secrion jn order co establish che ability. countywide. co qccommndoce the orojecret! 20 yea
population and rmplovmror growth. The counrywjde paDUIDtjon growth has lz«n
e,r;tablishrt/ bv rhr Stare qf Woshingran Qffke ofFiDDncial Mqnogemenr as reauired by th1
Gmwrh Manqgrnzenr Ace. Thr counrywide emplqymem growth has bern drrivet/ from
pmjrcrions prenored by the Pugrr Sal.md Regiqnal Council. For ourposes ofthis secrion.
rargeT ranees ore drlined as: The commirmrm by each jurisdicrion m ensure the ability tc
gccnmmnclmr. at a minimum. growth within rhe next 20 years in housine (expressed jn
hnusehnldsJ and rmplovmem (exnressrd in rmplnvresJ. This cqmmirmenr implies nne only
rhe pnlicy and rrgularon• fromrlmrl: fcomprrhrns;vr plqn and zoningJ. bur the cammimrer
for funded in(rasrrucflm' as well. cnn.r;i.r;rrm wirh rhr iurisdicrinnJ financing capaciry. kvt
nt .\en·ice srondard.r; and concurrenc" rrquirrmrms.
1. Urban Residential Areas
18 · Urhan residential arras form rhe bulk of the Urban Growth Area, and are home t£
19 u lor!.!e {'ornnn nf rhf' cnunry '.\· f'Of'lllarion. They will contain a mix of uses and will have
2 o diffc•rc•nr clwruc:tl'nwics in t.li./fl'rrnt neighborhoods. Generally, the character, form.
21 f'rl'.wn·armn uml ul'\'t•ln{'mrnt nf rhe.'il' area,<; is a /neal jurisdictional responsibility:
2 2 HnH't'\'f'r, r/1(· rc•.\1(/emllll areas nl'et.ltn .mppon the Centers concept and provide sufficienr
2 J op{'ommrrY tor .l.!mwth wiThin rhc• UGA. A subsronriol mojnriry of new residenrial units
2 4 will he· cm1.'itrucu·t.l withtn urhon rc•Jidemiol areas.
2 5 LU-((~))hh. In order to ensure efficient use of the land within the Urban Growtt
2 6 Area. provide for housing opponunities, and to suppon efficient use of infrastructure,
2 7 each jurisdiction shall:
2 8 a. Establish in its comprehensive plan a target minimum number of net new
2 9 ((Elwellil'lg tJAits)) households the jurisdiction wi1l accommodate in the next 20 years ...
3 o ((B:ft6)) Jurisdictions shall adopt regulations to and commit to fund infrastructure sufficient
31 achieve the target number:
3 2 b. Establish a minimum density (not including critical areas) for new
3 3 construction in each residential zone~ and
cppph2. 07119194
46
1
2
3
4'
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
c. Establish in the comprehensive plan a .target mix of housing types for ne"
development and adopt regulations to achieve the target mix.
LU-((~)).67. The targets and regulations in LU-((~)) nQ ((sha:ll ee)) m_based c
the .following steps:
a. ((By Oeteeer 1, 1992 t))Ihe GMPC ((!fl&H)) adopt~ ((e)) ~ target
number of net new ((ewelliftg ttAits)) households to be accommodated countywide over tt
next 20 years as 195 .000;
b. ((By Oereeer 1. 1992 t))Ihe interjurisdictional staff committee ((!fte:H
~)) reponed to the GMPC or its successor taiJel ranges ((reee"'"'eAeee !'Bflges)) for
net new ((ewelliftg ttAits)) households for each ((ttAiftee:rpePBteS ttpt,e ee f\!f&l
eeffiffittftit)', &AS eeeh eity)) iuris<iietion based on the following criteria:
1 ~ The capacity and condition of existing and forecast ((iftffe5U'tietttre,):
capital facilities and utilities.
2. Proximity to major employment centers,
3. Access to existing and projected regional transit.
16 4. Capacity of undeveloped land and potential for redevelopment given
17 the character of existing ·development,
18 5. The need for a range of housing types,
19 6. Each jurisdiction's share of affordable housing as required by
2 o Affordable Housmg policies.
21 7. Consistency with the countywide numbers;
2 2 c. The tareer ranees as shown in Appendix 2 were recommended by the
2 J GMPC. adopted and IC\tified pursuant to oolicy FW-1. Step 4c.
24 (lt>-7))~ The target ran~es in each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan shall~
2 5 consistent with the tar~et ranGeS in Appendix 2 ((fall withift the raAges,)) or shall state tl
2 6 reasons for deviating from the target ranges ((~));
27 ((~))e. Through the process established under FW-1 Step 4b, if the
28 jurisdiction's comprehensive plan differs from the target, the GMPC may recommend
2 9 amendments to either the Countywide Planning Policies or local plans; and
3 o ((e-:-))i The iAterjttrisaietieAel sl:Bff eemffiittee shall reeeffiffiefte a l'reeess te
31 ffieAiter the iffi~leffieAtatiefl ef this ,elie)'. The ,reeess shettla iftelt!ee meffieers ef the
3 2 . J=luelie. Monitorin~ should follow the process described in policy FW-1.
3 3 2. Urban Employment Growth
cppp~. 07119194
47
11
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
A poninn of the urbon employment growth ~11 occur in ocriviry oreas and
neighborhoods in the urbon oreo. This employment growth will support t!Je Urbon
Centers, while boloncing local employmenl opporruniries in the urbon orea.
LU..:((Q)).QB. Target ~s for employment growth outside Urban Centers((~
ee)) ~established for cities and for unincorporated ((ttr9&R eemmttAities)) King Count
through the joint local and countywide adoption process based on the following steps:
a. ((B,· Beeemeer 1992 t))Ihe Growth Management Planning Council((~
adopt~ 20 year target number for employment growth ((efta empleymet\l eepaeity
iAsiee ttl'8ilfl eefttel'! aAe ettt!iee ttf8e eerttel'!)) as 347.400. ((By Oeteeer 1992 t))Ihe
interjurisdictio!lal staff committee ((Mt&ll)) developm preliminary recommendations for
target ranges for ((e{)) employment growth ((ana eepeeity)) inside and outside urban area:
((ffi)) .fQr_each ((eity. iA ttAiAee.,eftltee ttPBBft eemmttflities eRe iA rerel &fees)) juris<iictio
based on the following criteria:
1 . Consistency with the countywide numbers;
., The need to direct growth to urban centers based on consistency witt
16 the multiple centers strategy:
17 3. Access to regional rapid tra~sit and existing highway and arterial
18 capacuy:
19 4. Availabilities of undeveloped land and potential for redevelopment
2 o gl\·en the character of existing development:
21 5. The willingness of local jurisdictions to implement policies which
2 2 encourage transH such as S.O. V. parking charges and/or limits. transit, bicycle and
2 J pedestrian supportive design. and the adoption of policies that encourage clustering of
2 ~ com mereta I and residential areas:
2 5 b. The tareet ranges as shown in Appendix 2 were recommended by the
2 6 GMPC. adopted and ratified pursuant to Policy FW-1. Step 4.
2 7 ((9-:-))£.:. As part of their comprehensive plans. all jurisdictions shall indicate
2 8 planned employment capacity and targeted increases in employment for 20 years inside
2 9 and outside urban centers and shall show how their plans reflect the criteria in this policy
30 and
31 ((e:))~ Through the process established under FW-1 Step 4({6)), if the
3 2 .jurisdiction's comprehensive plan differs from the target IIDG. the GMPC or its successc
3 3 may recommend amendments to either the Countywide Planning Policies or local plans.
cppph1. 07119194
48
1 3. lnfiii'Development
2 Urban growth occurs both in •Mw• ~ighborhoods and· in existing ~ighborhood.
3 Existing ~ighborhoods have o hisrnry of developmenr patterns which have created o sen
4 of idenrir);. At the ·same rime o l!itaJ:neighborhood adapts ro change and develops i~s. owr
s image. New developmenT in these Mighborhood..s should build on the existing panems in
6 manner which respecrs and enriches the neighborhood. For example in single family
7 neighborhoods selective penni"ing of accessory units and carriage houses may be more
8 compatible than new opanmenr buildings.
9 LU-((~))~. All jurisdictions shall develop neighborhood planning and design
1 o processes to encourage in fill development and enhance the existing community character
11 and mix of uses.
12 4.((~)) Business/Office Parks
13 Business/Office Parh are areas where low-density office developmenl is collected
14 m Jnc:mions .'ieparated frnm em iclenr(fied retail commercial core. These parks rend to IUJ
15 In\\' tit'miric•s antl1hus u•ntl nor rn he supponive of rransi1 or pedestrian circulation. The
16 c·mploymrnr opponunities grnrrally do nor require extensive land for their operarions, m
17 cnu/J hl' accnmmodared in Urhan Cenlt>rs. Because the further development of these
18 un·a.1 may cmnpt'll' wirh the c•mpln_vmenr 11rmvrh thai is planned ro suppon Urban Center
19 .llt:niticanr lwurr emplnvmrnr will nm he encouraged in these areas.
20 Lll-((~))70. Office building development is directed primarily to Urban Centen
21 Of1ice buildmg development outside Urban Centers includinf: business/office parks shoul
· 2 2 occur w1thm act1v11y areas. which can be suoooned by and promote transit, pedestrian a
2 J h1cvcle use~
24
2 5 F'lttSIRe·,~~ fll,-lce flrtrb. Junsd1ctions where consistent with their land use plans should
2 6 prov1de mcenuves for the development and redevelopment of an adequate supply of land
2 7 suitable for mixed light industrial/commercial and high technology ..
2 8 LU-((6Q))n. All jurisdictions shall establish mechanisms to encourage transit USI
2 9 Examples of potential mechanisms include a charge for S.O. V. parking and/or a limit or
J o the number of parking spaces for single occupancy vehicles within each existing .
31 business/office park. Bicycle and pedestrian supponive design should be encouraged.
J 2 LU-((e-1-))13. ((Te it'ft~let'ftefn J)81iey LU 53. an))-Jurisdictions ((shaH estelish
3 3 ffiB~iR•Htffi Fleer .Acree Rsties Bf'IEI/er fftEUtifftttfft eft'IIJ!tleyt'fteftt le·tels fer ef.Hee ttse if'l existi
cppph1. 07/19/94
49
11
1
2
3
4"
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
ettsiness/effiee f'BP)ES. These rt\BXirt\tlrt\9 &P intended le eh&ftnel fttlt!Pe empl8)'ffteftt eftS
efitee spaee grewth tPeft'l httsinesslef'itee ~ eiit:1i8e ef UrhB:I'l Gel'lters te UrhB:I'l
GeRter9)) are -encouraged· to site business/office parks where they can be served by
adeguate surface ttansponari~n and mmsit. Wbm transii is available and can result. in
gecreased demand for parking. higher density deye}opment should be considered.
LU-((~))74. All jurisdictions should develop planning mechanisms to assist inti
conversion of business/office parks to mixed use areas. Jurisdictions should ((eneettH~:ge
provide for inclusion of residential and neighborhood commercial land uses and open
space within existing business/office parks.
Ill. TRANSPORTATION
A. Transportation Overview
12 RCW 36. 70A. 070(6) (Growth ManDgemenr Act) fundamemally changes the way ti
13 cnmprehl'nsive planninR will ht' dnne wirhin rhe Stale of Washington. The Act places
1 ~ special rmpha.tis nn rranspnnarion making ir unla"ifill to approve development for which
15 the appml'ing jurisdicTion cannnr demnnsrrare the availability of facilities, strategies and
16 srn·ices which are nl'edl'd tn accommodate thl' growth in traffic at the adopted level-of-
17 .w'n'/Cr H'ilhin six years. Fumre development activity will be constrained by a
18 }ttn.\dwnon \ ahi/if\· 1n finance and pmvide rranspnnarinn improvements or strategies.
1 So Th" rocf hm _,omt' \'l'n· Jignificanr implicminns f(Jr all jurisdictions which are dependem
2 o 11(11111 1he rc·gm11 ·, rromponmirm sysu•ms hecau.te:
21 I. PrnjeCieci !raffle grmv1h on the freeway and anerial system within the
2 2 rl'gmn grl'miv excenls 1hC' forc•.w•c•ahle c:n/Jecrive ability ro finance and construct the
2 J llll.f>m\·c·nwm' nc·ctlt•d 1t1 rcw111 hi.wnrical ll'\'C'Is-nf-service .
., Mcunrainin~ rhc• currem lt've/ nf personal mobility by single occupant
2 5 \'elucll'.\ will ht· o cn.t!l\' puhlic im'l'Simenr rho! will negatively impact the regional quali~
26 o(Jife. crc•au· sc'\'l'rt' impacl.'i rn sensitive areas, degrade e~vimnmenra/ qualiry, and
2 7 incrl'asc enl'rgy usc• and rhe consumption nf land.
28 3. De\'elopment wi1hin any nne jurisdiction can be severely impacted by
2 9 dC'cision.r; and acrinns bc•yond thaT jurisdiction's cnnrml:
3 o • WSDOT may br unable to program improvements concurrent with a
3 l juriJdicrion 's approval n( a development permit.
32 •Merm may nnr be able to respond rn transit levels-of-service adopted by
3 3 Inca/ jurisdictions.
cppph2. 071 19194
so
l
2
3
4.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
. 17
18
•A jurisdiction may adopt kvel-of-service standards for aneriols within irs
jurisdiction and decline to accepr improvements necessary 10 mirigare 1ransponarion
impacts from a proposed devt!lopment in an adjoining jurisdiction.
· · · • Cumulative. growth rhroughout_the. rt!gion -will cause traffic growth on the
exisTing nerwork and may Thert!by exhaust the capacity for local jurisdictions to approve
development.
In light ~f these .financial constraints and potential. dangers, it will be necessary;
undenake a dramaTically di.lferenr approach for both transponarion planning and land u
planning, Than ha.s been done in the pa.st. This is necessary if the region is 10 avoid
haphazard denials of developmenr permits following the July 1994 deadline for imple-
menTing ordinances. In order 10 limiT sprawl, creme the desired urban form, and provit.
snme measure of predicTability for landmvners and developers, the region's scarce
resources fnr rranspnnatinn capacity impmwmenrs musr be used prudently to focus on
areas where zoning and dt"nsiries suppnn a mulri-modal transponmion system. System
cupuciry im·c•.rtnll'nrs Jhnuld he wrgned .first rn rhose areas where rhe exisring land use
and rrunspnrtutinn .n•.wrm prm•iclt"s .mme hope f?f achieving rhe desired mulri-modallevei
n{-Jt'n·iet• within six years .
8. Trnnspor1ation Policies
19 FW-((4-+)).1.£. The land use pattern shall be supponed by a balanced transponatic
2 o system wh1ch provides for a variety of mobility options. This system shall be
21 cooperatively planned. financed. and constructed. Mobility options shall include a High
2 2 Capacity Transn system wh1ch links the urban centers and is supponed by an extensive
2 3 H1gh Occupancy Vehicle system. local community transit system for circulation within t
2 ~ centers and to the non-center urban areas. and non-motorized travel options.
25 FW-((B))l2. All .Jurisdictions in the county, in cooperation with Metro, the
26 Metropoluan Plannmg Organization. and the State, shall develop a balanced transponati1
2 7 system and coord mated fmancing strategies and land use plan which .implement regional
28 mobility and reinforce the countywide vision. Vision 2020 Regional Growth Strategies
2 9 shall be recognized as the framework for creating a regional system of Centers linked b:
3 o High Capacity Transit and an interconnected system of freeway High Occupancy Vehicl
3 1 (HOV) lanes. and supponed by a transit system.
3 2 FW-((*'))lQ. In recognition of the fact that King County is the regional freight
3 3 distribution hub and a major international trade gateway, ·and that freight transponation
cppph1. 07119/94
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
one of the state's most imponant basic sector economic activities, goods mobility by all
modes shall be included as a component of comprehensive plans.
T -1. The ceuntywide transportation systc~ shall promote the mobility of people
and goods and shali be a multi-modal system. based on regional priorities consistent with
adopted land· use plans. The transportation system shall include the following:
a. An aggressive transit system, including High Capacity Transit;
b. High Occupancy Vehicle facilities;
c. Freight railroad networks;
d. Marine transportation facilities and navigable waterways;
e. Airports;
f. Transportation Demand Management actions;
g. Non-motorized facilities; and
h. Freeways. highways. and anerials.
T-2. King County. its cities. adjacent counties, Metro, and the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) shall suppon the continuous, comprehensive an
cooperative transportation planning process conducted by the Puget Sound Regional
Council. (PSRC) pursuant to its Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) designation.
The pnmary forum for the development of regional transportation systems plans and
strategtes shall be the PSRC. as the MPO.
T-3. The annual update and approval of the six-year Transportation lmprovemer
Program (TIP) by the PSRC should be the primary tool for prioritizing regional
transportation improvements and programming regional transportation revenues.
T-4. The GMPC or its successor shall have the ongoing responsibility for the
tollowmg:
a. Developmg and maintaining coordinated level-of-service standards and a
concurrency system. for countywide transit routes and anerial streets, including state
. facilities:
b. Developing regionally consistent policies for implementing countywide
Transportation Demand Management actions and the Commute Trip Reduction Act
including, but not limited to, parking policies, with an examination of price as a
determinant of demand; and
c. Developing and recommending transportation financing strategies,
including recommendations for prioritizing capacity improvements eligible to receive
cppph1. 07119194
5l
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
federal funds available to the region under the Inter-modal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act (ISTEA).
1.. High Capacity Transit/Regional Transit Project (HCT/RTP)
T -5: . Each -Urban Ce~ter will be providing for a minimum of 15.000 jobs and
should be served by High Capacity Transit (HCI'). Each Manufacturing Center
containing a minimum of 15,000 jobs and having sufficient employment densities to
support HCT should be served by Her. All jurisdictions that would be served by HCT
shall plan for needed HCT rights-of-way, stations and station supponive transportation
facilities and land uses in their comprehensive plans. The land use and transportation·
elements of comprehensive plans shaJJ incorporate a component to reflect future
improvement needs for High Capacity Transit. Interim regional transit service should be
provided to centers until the center is served by HCT. If voters do not approve HCT
local option taxes, jurisdictions shaJI address this implication in the reassessment phase.
T -6. WSDOT should assign a high priority to completion of the core HOV lanes
in the central Puget Sound region. King County, its cities, and Metro Council represcnta
tives on the Transportation Policy and Executive Boards of the Puget Sound Regional
Council (PSRC) shall make completion of this system a high priority in programming the
tederal tunds available to the region.
., -· !'\on-motorized Transportation
2 o T -7. The transportation element of Comprehensive Plans shall include pedestrian
21 and b1cycle travel as pan ol the transportation system and be developed on a coordinated,
2 2 reg1onal bas1s. The b1cycle and pedestrian element shall be a part of the funding
2 3 component of the capital improvement program.
24 3. Freeways/Highways/Arterials
25 T-8. In order to maintain regional mobility, a balanced multi-modal transponatior
2 6 system shall be planned that includes freeway. highway and arterial improvements by
2 7 ·making existing roads more efficient. These improvements should help alleviate existing
2 s traffic congestion problems, enhance HOV and transit operations, and provide access to
2 9 new desired growth areas, as identified in adopted land use plans. General capacity
3 o improvements promoting only Single Occupant Vehicle traffic shall be a lower priority.
3 1 Transportation plans should consider the foliowing mobility options/needs:
3 2 a. Arterial HOV treatments.
3 3 b .. Driveway access management for principal ancrials within the Urban
cppph2. 07119194
53
"I
1 Growth Area; and
2 c. Improvements needed for access tO manufacturing and in~ustrial centers,
3 marine and air terminals.
4· .-·FW-((~))11. InfrastrUcture planning and financing shall be coordinated among
5 jurisdictions to direct and prioritize countywide facility improvements to implement the
6 countywide vision and land use plans.
7 FW-{(+8))2Z. Where appropriate, King County and its cities shall adopt a clear
s definition of level-of-service and concurrency requirements and establish a consistent
9 process for implementing cOncurrency. including accOuntability for impacts for adjacent
1 o jurisdictions. .
11 FW-(H9))1J. Each jurisdiction shall identify the facilities needed to ensure that
12 services are provided consistent with the community's adopted service levels. Timelin~
13 for the construction of the needed facilities shall be identified.
14 4. Transportation Level-of-Service (LOS)
15 T -9. Level-of-service standards shall be used as a "tool" to evaluate concurrenc~
16 tor long-range transoortation ((tfl!A9f.M'Ae ·!teA)) planning, development review and
17 programming of transportation investments.
18 T-10. Each local jurisdiction shall establish mode-split goals for non-SOV travel
19 to all s1gnificant employment centers to reflect that center's contribution to the solution (
20 the region's transportation prohlem. Mode-split goals will vary according to developme
2 1 densities. access to transit service and other alternative travel modes and levels of
2 2 congestion. Comprehensive plans shall demonstrate what transponation system
2 J •mprovements. demand management and land use strategies will be implemented to
2 ~ ach1eve these mode-spilt goals. These local goals shall be coordinated to achieve county
2 5 and reg1onal goals.
2 6 T-I I. Elements to be considered ·in the level-of-service standard are mobility
2 7 options that encourage the use of transit, other high occupancy vehicles, demand
2 8 management actions. access to transit. and non-motorized modes of travel. These
2 9 standards shall be consistent with the requirements of the Commute Trip Reduction Act.
3 o T-12. Mode split goals and measures of mobiHty for transit, ridesharing and
31 non-motorized travel shall be established by local jurisdictions and METRO.
3 2 T-13. Level-of-service standards shall vary by differing levels of development
3 3 patterns and growth management objectives. Lower ancrial standards, tolerating more
c:ppphl. 07/19/94
54
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
congestion, shall be established for urban centers. Transit LOS standards may focus on
higher service levels in and between centers and decrease as population and employment
densities decrease.
.. T -14. Metro should develop· lraJ'!Sit level-of-service standards which provide. the
county and cities with realistic service expeCtations to support adopted land uses and
desired growth management objectives. These standards should consider that route
spacing and frequency standards are necessary for differing service conditions including:
a. Service between designated centers served by High Capacity Transit;
b. Service between designated centers not served by High Capacity Transit;
and
c. Service to areas outside centers.
5. Reassessment
13 T-15. Local governments shall work together to reassess regional land use and
14 transportation elements if transportation adequacy and concurrency cannot be met. Shoul.
15 funding fall shon for transportation improvements or strategies needed to accommodate
16 growth. the following actions should be considered:
17 a. Adjust land use and level-of-service standards to better achieve mobility
18 and the regional vision:
19 b. Make full use of all feasible local option transportation revenues authorize~
2 o but not yet Implemented; and
2 1 c. Work with WSDOT. Metro, and the private sector to seek additional state
2 2 transportation revenues and local options to make system improvements necessary to
2 J ( 1 eeeA'~' mm!EHe ll accommodate projected employment and population growth.
2~ 6. Firmncin~
2 5 T-16. T ransponataon elements of Comprehensive Plans shall reflect the
2 6 preservation and maintenance of transportation facilities as _a high priority to avoid costly
2 7 replacements and to meet public safety objectives in a cost-effective .manner.
2 a T -17. Developer impact fees shall be structured to ensure that new development
2 9 contributes its fair share of the resources needed to mitigate the impact on the
3 o transportation system. Adjoining jurisdictions shall execute interlocal agreements for
3 1 impact fees which recognize that traffic generated in one jurisdiction contributes to the
3 2 . need to make transportation improvements across jurisdictional boundaries. Impact fees
3 3 shall not be assessed to cure that ponion of the improvement attributable to correcting
cppph2. 07119/94
55
11
1
2
3
4 ·,
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
46
existing deficiencies.
T -18. Existing local option transportation funding shall be applied within King
County as follows:
. .
a. Employee ux base ...: reserved for city· street uulity ·development; ·
b. Commercial parking taX-defer action, pending development of a regior.
TOM strategy;
c. HOV acceleration financing-defer until after High Capacity Transit vot
and
d. Local option gas tax -consider as potential source to address
transponation "concurrency" needs of county and cities only after vote on High Capacit:
Transit.
T -19. Regional· revenues (such as Inter-modal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act funds) which provide discretion should be used to address regional mobility projects
and strategies. including such strategies as creating centers or enhancing transit/HOV-SC
mode split.
7. State Transportation Role
17 T-20. Consistent with the countywide vision, local governments shall coordinate
16 wtth the State on land use and transportation systems and strategies which affect state
19 facilittes and programs.
2 o T-~ I. State capital improvement decisions and policy actions shall be consistent
21 wtth regional and countywide goals and plans: The State shall ensure its transportation
22 capttal improvement decisions and programs support the adopted land use plans and
2 J transportation actions.
2~ T-~~. The State ;tnd local governments shall use the same capital programming
2 5 and budgeting time frame that all local governments and the county use, a minimum of
.2 6 years. for making capite~:! decisions and for concurrency management.
27 8. Siting Regional and Countywide Transportation Facilities
28 T-23. King County, the cities, the Puget Sound Regional Council, the State,
2 9 Metro. and other transportation providers shall identify significant regional and/or
3 o countywide land acquisition needs for transportation and establish a process for
3 1 prioritizing and siting the location of transportation facilities.
cpppt\2. 071191'U
56
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
J.J.4':1:(j .·
IV. COMMUNITI CHARACTER AND OPEN SPACE
A measure of the success of planning for growth is the aunr to which wt restore
mainrain and creal~ good places to live. work~ play. We must encourage growth wh
impmves our neighborhoods and landscapes. and builds a strong sense ojplace. The
following policies on cultural resources, civic architecture and landmarks, multi-use
roadways, infil/ development, and incentives for urban and rural design, aim ro promott
good community characrer.
FW-((~))24. All jurisdictions shall support the county's existing diversity of
places to live, work and recreate and the ethnic diversity of our communities. The .
countywide development pattern shaH include sufficient supply of quality places for
housing, employment. education. recreation. and open space and the provision of
community and social services.
FW-((~))l5. Each urban area shalJ be characterized by superior urban design a
locally defined.
FW-((~))2§. Significant historic, archaeological, cultural, architectural and
environmental features shall be respected and preserved.
A. Historic Resources
18 HHwric re.\OIIrCC'.\ crc•mc• u :wn.'lt' f?f Inca/ idenriry and hisrnry, enhance the quali.
19 nf Nte. Juprmn commumry l'italiry. ami nrhenvise enrich our lives. Historic resources a
2 o non-rrnc•u•ah/C': rhc•r C'mhndy rhC' unique herira~e and evolurion of panicular places.
2 1 Thoughr{ul mtmagemem of liu•Jr re.wurc:C's cnnrrihures 10 economic developmenT and
2 2 moderutc'.\ Jmnc· of rht• lwrm{ul c~fft'crJ f?f rapid grmvrh. Planning for hisroric resources
2 J mclude.\ pmfc•cfmg arc:lwmlo.~:u:al Jiles und hisroric buildings and landscapes,
2 4 encourugin).: c•xprc·.uion of' dn•ersc· nhnic and folk rraditif!ns, and supponing acrivities fi
2 5 children unt.l \'olllh.
2 6 CC-1. All jurisdictions should work individually and cooperatively to identify,
2 7 . evaluate. and protect historic resources including continued and consistent protection fo1
2 8 historic resources and public an works.
2 9 CC-:2. All jurisdictions shall encourage land use patterns and implement
3 o regulations that protect and enhance historic resources, and sustain historic community
3 1 character .
32 . B. Urban Design
33 Govemmenrs should he leaders in providing structures, public spaces. paries aru.
cppph2. 07119194
57
1
l
2
3
4·
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
15
-16
17
440
streets which supporr th~ qualiry of our region. Civic design should express the region·~
values QIUJ vision, and should provide landmarks· which contribute to our sense of place.
Additionally, individual jurisdictions can -nunure their individual character by developini
a clear set ·of goals· and policies -which ourlin~ th~ publiC interest in the design· ofprivau
development in the urban and rural-communities.
CC-3. All jurisdictions shan promote a high quality of design and site planning i
publicly-funded construction (such as civic buildings, par~. bridges, transit stops), and :
private development.
C. Human and Community Services
Human and communiry services are: social and health services; emergency
shelters; meeting places,· perfnrmin[!, arts and cultural activities; schools; libraries; parlc
and recreation; and.fire and police protection.
CC-4. Human and community service planning activities shall support Countywi
Planning Policies and the countywide land development pattern.
CC-5. All jurisdictions shall identify essential community and human services ar
mclude them in land use. capital improvement, and transportation plans.
D. Open Space
18 Open space lands are e.uenrial rn the community character of King Counry. 1he
19 prm·idf \'i:wal "l'tJriery• and rf'lieffrnm developed areas, protect environmental quality, ar.
2 o pm\•idr wild/if(• hahirm and foster nppnnuniries for outdoor recreation. Open space
2 1 corridors physically and funcriona/ly link open space lands.
2 2 Thl' chaiiC'ngC' for juri.wlicrions is tn establish programs that contribute to the
2 J pmrc>crion. ocet'.'isihillfY and src·wardship f!f open space lands and corridors. The GMA
2 ~ reqtnres fllri.'icltc!lons ro form lmkages bef\veen and within populaTion centers with lands
2 5 tt.H'{ltl tor n·crc•aflon. rrail.\. wildlile habitat and cnnnecrinn nf critical areas. 1hese opt
2 6 space land.~ and corr)dors or xrec•nwa_vs should be selecTed-and preserved to form an
2 7 interconnected sysrem re~innally and within jurisdictions locally and should be stewarde.
2 8 rn ensure• cnnrinuing em•irnnmenra/ and ecological significance. Where appropriate, tht
2 9 re~ional system and irs Inca/ componenTs should provide for multiple benefits and
3 o functions. which will require car~ful planning and management to ensure compatibility'
31 lnng-rerm viahiliry of the benefits and functions.
3 2 Open space lands and corridors have significance aJ both the local and regional
3 3 scale. Jdenrjfication and prorection nf local open spaces will be considered within the
cppph2. 07119194
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
J.. ..l..'±~U ,..
comprehensive plans of each jurisdiction. On on individual basis, jurisdiaions should
srrive 10 idenrify. esroblish and prorecr open spoee IDnds of local signific'!nce tluzt alst?
complimem, adjoin or enhance the regionDl system. 1he regionDl open space sysrem
includes open space lands and corridors .rhar haW! importance beyond jurisdicrionDI
boundaries and will require mulri-jurisdicrionDl coordiiJlllion 10 idenrify, protect and
sTeward.
FW -( ~) )12. All jurisdictions shall cooperatively identify, establish, protect and
steward urban and rural open space corridors of regional significance.
CC-6. A regional open space system shall be established to include lands which:
a. Provide physical and/or visual buffers such as open spaces which help to
separate incompatible uses, distinguish the urban and rural areas, define urban growth
boundaries, or establish the character of a neighborhood, community, city or region;
b. Provide active and passive outdoor recreational opponunities which are
compatible with the environmental and ecological values of the site; and/or
c. Contain natural areas. habitat lands, natural drainage features, and/or othe
environmental. cultural. and scenic resources.
CC-7. All jurisdictions shall work cooperatively to identify and protect .open spac
corridors oi regional significance. This process shall include:
a. ldenti fication of regional open space lands and corridors which form a
functionally and physically connected system with environmental, ecological, recreational
and aesthetic s1gnif1cance and which is readily accessible to our urban populations;
b. ldenti ficatlon of implementation strategies and regulatory and non-
regulatory techn1ques to protect the lands and corridors, including collaboration and
coordtnatlon w1th land trusts and other land preservation organizations; and
c. Development of management plans and strategies to sustain the corridors'
open space benefits-and functions of the .preserved lands and corridors.
CC-8. Water bodies and rivers of the Puget Sound region form an imponant.
element of the open space system. Jurisdictions shall work to protect visual access to
water bodies and rivers, and provide for physical access where appropriate.
CC-9. Countywide funding shall be available for the acquisition, maintenance anc
stewardship of parks and open space, a) advancing the development of the regional open
. space system which has been cooperatively identified by the jurisdictions, and b) ensurin1
the ready access of our citizens residing in Urban Centers to the regional open space
cppph1. 07119194
S9
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2~
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
46
system.
CC-10. The conceptual map of open space systems contained in the 1988 King
County Open Space Plan sha11 be used as the planning basis for regional open space land
and·corriaors. ·All jurisdictions-will worlc cooperatively tri revise and supplement this m~
to direct the protection of these valuable resources throughout the county.
CC-1 1. All jurisdictions shall work cooperatively to ensure paries and open space
are provided as development and redevelopment occur. ·
CC-12. All jurisdictions shall use the full range of regulatory and land
preservation tools available to create, maintain and steward the regional open space syste
which has beep cooperatively identified.
CC-13. All jurisdictions shall develop coordinated level of service standards for
the provision of parks and open spaces.
V. AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Adequate hnusinR. fnr all t'Cnnomic segments ofrhe population, is a basic need oj
King Cnunty's rl'sidenrJ and an is.me t?f counrywidt' concern. Affordable housing needs
mw;! he adclrt'.'i.H'd hy local .~ovt'mmt'nt.'i working in cooperation with the private sector
and nnnprnfiT hnusing agc•ncil'S.
Thl' GMA requires cmmrywide pnlicies rn address parameters for the distriburion,
aftordah/C' housing. including hmt.'iing for all income-groups. This complex issues requir1
adC'quml' inf;,mwrion regarding currc-m housing resources and housing needs, which is
hf'mg df'\'f'lorwd (or cnmprehenxivl' plan housinR elt'ments. as well as in-depth discussion
o( \'Ciillr.'i tmd prioriTil'.'i fnr housing dc•vc•lnpmt'nt.
Prm·iding .m{f7cil'nr land fnr hnusin~ development is an essential step in promorin1
aftnrdah/C' hnu'iin[!. Affnrdahll' hnusinR can be encouraged by zoning additional land for
hight'r rC'sidemial densiric•s. which helps provide needed capacity for growth, reduces lan
dc-w•lnpmt'nT cn.w prr unir((ti}). and a/lnws for lo~r cosr construction types such as
arwcht'd dwellings. Highrr drnsiry housing includes a range of housing types: small-lor
single family. arrachrd singlt' family, mobile home parks, apanmenrs and condominiums.
In addi1inn. mning chan~es rhor pt'rmir additional housing in established areas, such as
ucct's.mry unirs. corria~t' houses, and re.fidences buill above commercial uses, increase
affordable hfJlLfing opponuniries.
FW-((~)).£8. All jurisdictions shall provide fQL.a diversity of housing types to
meet a variety of needs and provide for housine ommnunities for an economic scements
c:pppb2. 07119/94
60
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
, =
--'
16
, -.....
lo
19
20
22
2J
2~
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
------
of the population·. ((ifteeMes)). All jurisdictions shall cooperatively es~lish a process t·
ensure an equitable and rational distribution of low-income and affordable housing
throughout the county in .accordance with land use policies, transponation, and
employment locati.ons.
AH-1. All jurisdictions shall plan fur housjn~ to ms;et the ns;eds of all economic
se~ments of the mmulatjon. Each jurisdiction shaJJ specjfy. based on the proiectec!
number of net new bousin& units antjciwted jn its comprehensive plan. the estimated
number of units which wi1! be affordible for the following jncome segments: 0 to 50
percent of the countywide median household jncome. 50 to 80 percent of median. 80 to
120 percent of me<fjan. and above 120 percent median· The estimates for housine
affordable to households below 80 percent of median income shall be consistent with
countywide objectives for low and moderate income housin~ in Policy AH-2. The
estimated number of units for each income sc~ment shall be re,poned to the GMPC
followin~ adoption of the comprehensive plan. for the purpose of countywide monitorin~
0 f canaci t\' for housing development.
((~)). Within the urban growth area, each jurisdiction shall demonstrate
cc Alfl'tll'f'lize)l its abilitv to accommodate sufficient, affordable housing for all economic . . .
s~!:!m~nts of the population. Local actions may include zoning land for development of
suffictent densmes. revising development standards and permitting procedures as Deeded
10 encourage affordable housin~. ((8) re"'e•·iftg regt:~hue,· eamers,)}-reviewing codes f
redundancies and mconsistenciesa and providing opponunities for a ((+ttll)) range of
housmg. types .. such as accessory dwelling units, manufactured homes ((ert irtEli,.·iet:lfti
~ll gr0ur h0me.., and foster care facilities. apanments, townhouses and attached singlf
tam11\ housmg.
A H-~ ( ( +)) A II Jurisdictions shall share the responsibility for achievi(Jg a rational
and equnable dtstrioutto~ of affordable housing to meet the housing needs of low and
moderate income residents m King County. The distribution of housing affordable to lo·
and moderate mcome households shall ((reAeet)) take into consideration the need for
proxtmny to lower wage employment. ((8ft6)) access to transponation and human
services~((~)) and the adeguacy of infrastructure to SUPJ)OO housing development:
recognize each jurisdiction's past and current effons to provide housing affordable to lo"
. and moderate-income households; avoid over-concentration of assisted housing; and
increase housing opponunities and choices for low and moderate income households in
cppph~. 07/19/'M
61
11
l
2
3
4 .
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
46
communities throughout King County. Each jurisdiction shall give equal consideration tc
local and countywide housing needs.
A. Existing Needs for Affordable Housing
. Each jurisdiction 5hal.l partiCipate jn ·dey~l<min~ cOuntyWide housin~ resOurces anc
programs to assjst the lme number of low and moderate income households who
currently do not have affordable. appropriate bousjng. These counxywide efforts will he·
reverse current trends which concentrate Jow income housing opj)OOUniries jn certain
commUnities. and achieve a more equitable participation by local iuri5dictions in low
income housing development and services. Countywide effom should give priority to
assisting households below 50 percent of median income that are in greatest Deed and
communities with hjgh proportions of low and moderate income residents.
By October. 1994. the GMPC or its successor shaJJ ;umoint elected and communi
representatives to develop recommendations for providing low and moderate income
housing and related services. Within one year the committee shall recommend to the
Gt-.1PC N its successor:
1. new countywide funding sourceCsl for housing production and services. iJ
<~ plt~n to estahlish this funding within three years:
~. Participation by local ~~:ovemments. including appropriate public and privc
fint~ncmg. such that each jurisdiction contributes on fair share basis: and
3 ohjectives for housing and related services. including measurable levels o
housmg proctuc11on t~nd costs to provide necessary related service.
Countvwide programs should provide the following types of housing and related
sen·1ces:
lov. mcome housing development. includin~ new construction. acguisitior
.., housing assistance. such as rental vouchers and supponive services:
2 7 ~-assistance to expand the capacity of nonprofit or~anizations to develop
2 8 housin~ and provide housin~ related services:
2 9 4. programs to assist homeless individuals and families:
3 o 5. programs to prevent homelessness: and
31 6. assistance to low and moderate income home buyers
cppph2. 07119~
62
........ -... ....... --v ..
1 B. Future Needs for Affordable Housjog
2 Each jurisdiction shall specify the Iange arid amount of housing affordable to low c
3 moderate income households to be accommodated in its comprehensive plan. ~
4. jurisdiction shaJJ plan for a· number of housine u~its affordable· to households with jncon
5 between 50 and 80 percent of the County median household income that is egua1 to 17 perc'
6 Qf its projected net househQld emwth. In addition. each jurisdiction sha}l plan for a numl
7 of housing units affordable to households with incomes below 50 percent of me<iian inca·
s that is either 20 percent or 24 percent of jts pmjected net household growth. For t
9 housing. the target percentage shall be determined usine the Affordable Housing Job/Housi
1 o Index developed using Censys-based information. which js contained in Appendix 3.
11 ((All 2.)) Each jurisdiction shaH show in its comprehensive plan how it will use
12 policies. incentives. regulations and programs to provide its share of housing affordable ·
13 low and moderate-income households ((as eetefFRiHee e~· the J!IPeeess et:1tlinee in AU 1.))
1 ~ Each jurisdiction should apoly strategies which it determines to be most appro.priate to tt
15 local housing market. For example. units affordable to low and moderate income
16 households mav be developed through new construction. orojects that·assure lQng-term
17 affordability of existing housing. or accessory hQusing units added to existing structures.
18 Local actions may include:
19 a. lctentifymg the costs to develop and preserve subsidized hQusing and othe:
2 0 lo~ -cost houstn~ 11('1[ provided hy private development in the local housing market. and
21 tdentifymg sources of fundmg:
2 2 b. R~v1smg land use re~ulations as needed to remove any unreasonable
2 J requtrements that ma\· create barriers to siting and operatine housing for soecial neecls
2 ~ groups. Snectal need 'I housin~ serves oersons. who. by vinye ((viAt:lre)) of disability or
2 5 other ctrcumstance~. face difftculty living independently and reguire supponive services '
2 6 a transiuonal or lon~-term basis: and
2 7 c. Adopting land use incentives programs or Qther re~:uiatory measures to
28 encourage private and nonprofit development
2 9 Small. fully built cities and towns that are not planned tQ grQw substantially unde
3 o GMA may work cooperatively with other juri5dictjons and/or subreeional hoysine
3 1 agencies to meet their housin~: rar~:ets.
3 2 In areas identified as city expansion areas. King CQunty and cities should plan
3 3 cooperatively for affordable housing development and preservation.
cppph1. 07119194
63
11
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
46
((The GMPC shall define and f.!tt&Alify affe~dlthle hettsing needs fer lew Me
"'eeerate ineel!te hettsehelds and eettntywide eejeeti,.·es fer distri8tttien ef ltfleM&hl~
hettsing fer )e¥t· a~d "'eeerate ineel'l'le hett!eftel~s. The preeess shan inehtee in·.,elvemet~
ey hett!Jing inett!it~· Pef'Pe!e,tUitftYe!, . hettsing interest grettpS, ll:ftB eefftl!tttftity
epganimtiefts. The Afiereaele Hel!siAg "FeehAie&:J Fel"tll'ft, whieh he pepresen!lttives frer
the· Cettftt)' ana eaeh eity, shall J'PeJ'ePe reeefftffteftd&tiens fer the GMPC ey Attgttst 1,
By Oeteeer 1. 1992 eaeh jHPi!idietieft shall s,eeify the :PBftge ed ameHnt ef hettsit
afferea8le te lew ana t'fteeerate ineeme hettJehelds te 8e aeeemt'fteeatee in its
eei'H)'FeheAsive J'l&n, elt!leEI en eettntywide eBjeetiYes fer 8istri8tttteft. By Deeemeer 1,
1992 the GMPC ¥t'ill re·tiew, &AEI the eetnny &He eities wiJI ratif)·, the ee'tl~tty¥t·iee
eejeetives fer distt"tet:ltieA &fld eaeh jttri!Hlietie~t's J'Pef'6SeEI PBHge and amettftt ef afferea8
The J'FBeess shell eddress:
e. De· .. elef3ffiCFH RAE! f3reseA·etieA ef sttesidized hettsiHg &Rd lew eest fftltfket
e. The eetiAiliBA ef lew iAeen~e BAS I'He6ef8te iHeeffte hettsiRg;
e. G u idel• Ae~ te meet RfferdRele hett!iiRg Heeds iA i~tdividttal jttf'i!idietieRs lt!i
¥t·el1 e~ Aeeel !~rou~~Btll KiR~ CetiAI). iflelt:ldiRg reeegRitieA fer jttrisdietieHs that already
ffieel the g:t~ielei•Aes:
d SmHe~•es. IAelud•Ag leAd t:1se iReeftti•,·es. !lfe&t'ftliRee JM!Ft'ftittiRg J'Feees:tes
2 2 BAEI ft:IRSIRg CBffiffiilffiCAlS. lB Be 8SBf3ted B)' &IJ jttrisdietiBA5 te J'fBYtde &fiefdaBle
2 4 e. Gu•dei•Ae!'l 10 ensure thet affereeele hett!iiRg is J'Fevided iA eeftjttHetieH wi
2 5 regiBR81 treASf36FtRti6A f'lRARiAg. iAelttdiRg fttRdiAg fer 8Cf.!ttisitiBR 8ftd FeflaBili!lttieft te
27 I AeusiAg in il~fill RAa redevelef}ffieflt f}Fejeets; &Rd. st:tejeet te 8 legal eeterfftift&tieR,
28 iAeltlsiefle:ry re~uireffieRts te eRsttre that a J'Pef'6PlieR ef Rew residential eevelepftteftt is
29 e:ffereae1e le lew e:AEi ffteeere:le iReeffte hettsehelds.))
3 o AH-3. Each jurisdiction shall evaluate its existing resources of subsidized and
31 low-cost non-subsidized housing and identify housing that may be lost due to
J 2 . redevelopment. deteriorating housing conditions, or public policies or actions. Where
3 3 feasible. each ((&eft)) jurisdiction shaJI develop strategies to preserve existing low-incor
cppph2. 07/19194
64
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
11446
housing ((where te&sihle)) and provide relocation assistance to low income residents who
may be displaced.
AH-4. The GMPC or its successor shaU identify ways to expand technical
assismnce to locaJ.juriscijctioDs in afforclable bousine techniques. Technical assismnce
should include proiect case studies and model ordinances coverine such topics as
development and financine of nonprofit housine. provision of housine-reJated services.
incentives proerams for affordable housine. reeulations that encourage well-desjgned
higher density housing. jmprovements to deve)ooment permit processing and standardS tc
redUce development costs. and public education and involvement. The Affordable
. Housine Task Force Reoon. dated March 1994 contains a summaQ' of actions that local
governments may use to encourage affordable housing.
AH-~ ((4)). All jurisdictions shall monitor residential development within their
jurisdiction and determine annually the total number of new and recieveloped units
receiving permits and units constructed, housing types, developed densities and rcmainin1
capacity for residential growth. Housing prices and rents also should be remne.d. based
on affordability to four income categories: 0 to 50 oercent of median income. 50 to 80
percent of median. 80 to 120 percent of median. and ab9ve 120 percent of median. Kin1
County shall report annually on housing development, the rate of housing cost and price
mcreases and available residential capacity countywide in its annual growth reponing.
The Affordable Housing and Data Technical Forums. which are comprised of city
and county staff and onvate housin~ industry representatives. shall develop a uniform
aooroach for monitoring housing permit activity. construction. and affordability. Where
ieasihle. the A ftordahle Housing and Data Technical Forums shall consider collectine
statiStiCS such as: housin~ units receiving building permits by income cateeory. total unit:
constructed by mcome category. low and moderate income housing acguired or preservec
households rece1vine rental assistance. and other local housine activities. In addition
·where feasible. planning and monitoring for affordable housing should use the median
household income for King County indexed by household size. published annyalJy by the
U.S. Depanment of Housing and Urban Develonmem. Calculations of affordable house
prices should assume standard Federal Housing Administration lendine criteria and
minimum downpavments.
AH-6. Every five years. beginnine in 1999. the GMPC or its successor
organization resoonsible for monitoring growth management implementation shaJJ evaluat
cpppl\1. 07119/94
65
11
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
46
achievement of countywide and local eoaJs for housine for aU economic gments of the
. WJ>Ulatjon. The GMPC or jts successor shaU corisjder annual repons P~ under
Policy AH-5 as well as market conditions and other factors affectin~ housjne
develwmem. If the GMPC or jts suCcessor determines that housine planned for anY
economic seement falls short of the nc;ed for such bousine. the GMPC or its successor
may recommend additional actjons.
As pan of jts evaluation. the GMPC or its successor shaU review local
performance in meetine low and moderate income housine neecis. The basjs for
determinine local performance shaH be a iurisciictjonS. panjcipation in countywide or
subregional efforts to address existine housine DeedS and actual development of the tane' .
percentage of low and moderate income housing units as adcmted in its comprehensive
plan. Jn establis.hing plannin~ targets to address future affordable housing neecis. it js
recognized that success will be dependent in part upon regional factors beyond the contro
of any sin::le juriscliction. Any one jurisdiction actin& alone. or even in concen wjth oth'
local governments. may or may not be able to achieve its Uthefe)) tareets in these
policies. despite its best effons. Success will regujre cooperation and support for
. .
affordable housing from the state. federal and local iOvemmcnts. as well as the private
sector. The significant role of the market must also be recognized. In determining
performance the GMPC or its successor shall therefore use reasonable judement. and alsc
shall consider these market and other factors. as well as action taken to encourage
development and Preservation of low and moderate income housine. such as local fundim
development code chanees. and creation of new proerams.
\'1. COSTIGUOLTS AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT And PROVISION
24 OF URBAI\ SERVICES TO SUCH DEVELOPMENT
2 5 CJwpwr ll. ·Lund Use Ptmern, • contains policies for phasing development within
2 6 rhl' Urban Grmvrh Area. An inre~ral cnmponenr of the phasing process is ensuring rhat
2 7 devl'!opmenr is ucc:nmpunied by a full range of urban services. Equally imponanr is.
28 ensurin~ rhar it?frasrrucrure imprnW!menrs are nor provided in advance of development
2 9 which cnuld undennine rhe cnunrywide development pmrern. This chapter provides
3 o pnlicic•J which .mppnn phasing wirhin the Urban Growth Area and ensure rhe inregriry OJ
31 rhr cnunrywitle lund de\•elnpmenr puuern.
3 2 FW-((~))29. Planning for and financing of services shall be coordinated among
3 3 jurisdictions to direct and prioritize countywide facility improvements to implement the
cppp~. 07119/t,l4
66
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
,
countyWide policies.
FW-(~)).JQ. Jurisdictions shall identify the services needed to achieve adopted
service levels. Timelines for constrUcting needed services shall be identified.
... FW-(~))ll. Protection· of Public health and safety and tl)e environment shall be
given high priority in decision-making about infrastrUcture improvements. County
residents in both urban and rural areas shall have reasonable access to a high-quality
drinking water source meeting all federal and state drinking water requirements.
Management and operation of existing on-site septic systems shall not result in adverse
impacts to public health or the environment.
A. General Policies
Tn ensure rhar land use is accompanied with the maximum possible use of existing
faciliries and cosr-e.ffecrlve service provisions and extensions, and ro encourage
develnpmenr of srrong, interrelaTed communities, policies are needed which inregrare aful
ranJ:e ~f urban services wirh land-use planning and environmental protection. Urban
.\('tTicc· de(inirinns shnuld hl' guided by "public services," "public facilities," and ·urban
gm'c'rnmenral service's" as defined in RCW 36. 70A (GMA).
Comnumiry anti human :iC'r\'ic:c•s policies are included under Chapter IV,
"CommuntrY CJumtCIC'r ami Open Space," and transponarinn policies are included under
CJwprer Ill. "Tran.'iponcllion. " St'VC'ra/ cnunrywide planning effons provide direction for
aclunm;..: rhc· iniC'grmioll t~( .'irn•iceJ, aqu~fer and natural resource protection, and land
usl' planmng. Thl'se include rlw Coordinared Water System Plans, Seattle Regional
Cnmprl'ht'nJI\"(' Wwer Supply Plan. Groundwater Management Plans, Basin Plans, ~loJ
Agrt•c•mc·m RC'gwnol Wmer Re.murc:es Plannin~ Process, Flood Hazard Reduction Plan,
v.·u.'ilt'wart•r 2020 Plw. Humon St'n·ic:l's Srrarrgies Repnn, and the King Counry Sewerage
GC'neral Pion Furrlwrmorl'. rlwrc art' .ware mandates which ujjecr the provision of
sl'nicr.\. Fnr example'. walt'r rrsource u/Jocurion musr acqommodure all reasoTUJble
ow-~(-srrt'tml nel'd.'i and mainrain sufficient flows for in_-srream uses.. The following
pnlicic's rransct'nd Urhcm and Rural lund use designations and apply counrywide.
1. Urban Services Required as Growth Occurs
3 o CO· I. Jurisdictions shall identify the full range of urban services and how they
31 plan to provide them.
3 2 2. Conservation, Efficiency, Cost Effectiveness and New Technologies
3 3 C0-2. Jurisdictions and other urban service providers shall provide services and
cppph1. 07119194
67
1
l
2
3
4 ·.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
446
manage natural resources efficiently, through regi~nal coordination, conjunctive use of
resources, and sharing of facilities. lnterjurisdictional planning effons shall evaluate
approaches to share and conserve. resources. . .
CQ-3. Service provision shall·be coordinated .to -ensure "the protection and.
preservation of resources in both rural areas and in areas that are developing, while
addressing service needs within areas currently identified for growth.
C0-4. All jurisdictions acknowledge the need to develop a regional surface watt
management .system which crosses jurisdictions boundaries and identifies and prioritizes
program elements and capital improvements necessary to accommodate growth and prott
the natural and build environment. The GMPC shall develop and recommend a financin
and implementation strategy to meet this need.
C0-5. Water supply shall be regionally coordinated to provide a reliable econon
source of water and to provide mutual aid to and between all agencies and purveyors ..
The region should work toward a mechanism to address the long-term regional water
demand needs of all agencies and water purveyors.
C0-6. Aggressive conservation efforts shall be implemented to address the need
for adequate supply for electrical energy and water resources, protect natural resources,
and achieve improved air quality. Effons shall include, but not be limited to, public edt
cat1on. water reuse and reclamation. landscaping which uses native and drought-resistant
plants and other strategies to reduce water consumption, small lot size, low-flow
showerheads. conservation credits. and energy efficiency incentives in new and existing
buildmgs.
C0-7. \\'ater reuse and reclamation shall be encouraged. especially for large
commerc1al and residenllal developments. and for high water users such as parks. schoo
golf courses. and locks.
C0-8. When pl.anning for the future demand on wastewater treatment and
conveyance. alternatives to the expansion of the Metro centralized system such as
decentralized treatment and other treatment technologies, and wastewater reclamation an
reuse shall be identified and incorporated into plans as viable options.
C0-9. The presence of tightline sewers or availability of sewer pipeline capacity
and water supply above what is required to meet local needs shall not be used to justify
·development counter to the countywide policies, and any such land use development
proposal shall be denied by the permitting agency.
c:ppph.!. 07119/'14
68
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
..L .JL. -:a:. ....... v
B. ·urban Areas Jdentirtea for Growth for the Next Ten Years
The di!SigntJlion of the Urban Growth Amz atablishi!S t~ servia aretJ for th~
counry. The detaiied arrangemenJ and timing of_ services and t~ iruttJllDtion of
in.frasrrucrure improveinerrrs-is ltft to be determined through shorrer-term capiral
improvemenJ plans. To suppon the deruitii!S and land usi!S of urban areas idenlified foi
immediate development. urban \VOter and sewer systems are essential to supporr growth
anJicipmed in the Urban A reo over ~he nar ten yean. Urban WDier systems are deft~
as o nenmrk of pipes which are di!Signed to meet all user needs and provide fire
prntecrion. Urban sewer sysr~ms ore defined as a system of pipes providing conveyanct
a .'it'WDR~ rrr.arm~nr fociliry.
1. Urbnn Water and Sewer Systems Required
12 C0-10. In the Urban Area identified for growth within the next ten years, urbal
13 water and sewer systems are preferred for new construction on existing lots and shall be
14 required for new subdivisions. However, existing septic systems, private wells, and/or
15 small water systems may continue to serve the developments so long as densities and
16 physical conditions are appropriate, the systems are allowed by the relevant jurisdiction
17 .and management keeps the systems operating properly and safely.
18 C. Urban Areas Designated for Growth Beyond 2002
19 Jn urhan arraJ drJi)!IWit'dfor Krnwrh beyond 2002. the~ will bt o mix of aistir.
2 o Jt•n·tcr.' whtch may or may nm he• at urhan service lt'w.ls. Tht-oppropriart-infrastructu
2 1 tmpm,·c•nu•m., tor Jt•wc•r and wmc•r .\·y.'ilt-nr.,· will vary according ro ui.sting sire condition
2 2 NC'w dc•,·t•lop11W111.\ Jhoultl occur cmuiguouJ rn rxisring . .fully-drveloped areas .so rhm
2 J c·xu·n.\ion of wr\'let'.' occur., in an orderly and cost-e.ffecrive manner.
24 1. Pha~ed and Cost Effective Extension of Urban Water and Sewer System
2 5 CO-l I. To the extent practicable, all new plats shall be contiguous to the areas
2 6 identified. for grow'h for the next ten years. The phased expansion should respect basir
2 7 . boundaries or other natural landscape features.
2 8 CO-l:!. Preferred sewer and water systems in areas designated for growth beyo
2 9 2002 are community drain fields and water systems which are professionally managed.
3 o These systems shall be designed, sited, and built to facilitate eventual conversion to urb
3 1 sewer and water systems. Jurisdictions shall require an· known and projected costs of
3 2 . infrastructure improvement to urban service levels be funded at the permitting stage.
33 CQ-13. Urban sewer system extensions in unincorporated King County shall be
cppph1. 07119/'U
69
~-------
1 permitted cons~stent with the provisions of the King County Sewerage General Plan,
2 countywide policies, and the policies of the jurisdiction in whose potential annexation area
3 the extension is proposed.
4 D. Rural Areas and Resource Lands
5 Residerus in rural areas and resource lands need to have many of the same types OJ
6 services as urban areas. However, the service standards in rural areas and resource
7 lands are not at Urban levels. Rural warer systems are defined as individual or
a community wells or piped warer systems designed ro meet all user needs but, in most
9 cases, not providing for fire protection.
10 1. Limited Extension of Urban Water and Sewer Systems
11 C0-14. Sewer expansion shall not occur in rural areas and resource lands except
12 where needed to address specific health and safety problems threatening structures
13 permitted before July 1, 1992 or the needs of public facilities such as schools. Sewers
14 may be extended only if they are tightlined and only after a finding is made that no
15 alternative technologies are feasible. Mechanisms to reduce cost and limit the number of
16 individual hookups shall be explored and actions recommended to the GMPC.
17 C0-15. ((UreaR water systeFR exteRsieAs sha:ll Aet ee J3efmiueEI iR mfil'l areas BRC
18 rese1:1ree laRels exeef't w salve iFRFReeliate health er satet)' f'FeeleFRs tfifeateAiRg eKistiRg fesi
19 eleAts. If HreaR water systeFRs are exteAeleEI, the FAB*iFAHFA RHFAeer ef heelaif'S that is eeRsis
2 0 teAt with the eetiR()'Wiele laRel elevelef'FACAt J3aUeffi Sfla:ll Be Sf'CCifieEI at tfte time ef tftf
21 e,.teAsieA.)) Urban water system extensions are not preferred in rural areas. However.
2 2 Group A (WAC 246.290.020) water systems are permissible under the followin~ criteria:
2 3 a«eu. Water guality or guantity problems:,or:enstirii:·systems:::q::~:pr~
24 31. 1994. that threaten public health ((exist which)) can best be solved by Group A service:
25 or ((ftfH!))
2 6 b((a)). Group A service is financially feasible at rural densities and shall not be
2 7 justification for anv increase in residential density: ftfl6 prior to approval. the specific number
2 8 of rural connections shall be specified for the line or system for the UteftJU 16til rura] area
2 9 bein~ served: and <fu;="fUthe area has either been approved for Group A service throu~h 2 ·
3 o Kin~ County-adopted COofdiriated water system plan or has been desi~nated for Group A
31 service through prior establishment of a uti1ity local improvement district or other financial
3 2 mechanisms((tff)).
3 4 C0-16. All ftlr&l water systeFAs etltsiele eKistiRg service areas (13lBRHiRg areas) shall
cppph2. 07119/94:amend 8/15/94
70
1 Be prefessieH~ly ffteH&geS ey the &J'J'lieeele WBlef J'tifYeyer &eeereiHg te tfte 9Blellile l'ft&H&ge
2 mettt preeedttfes ef tfie Ceefditt&led W&.lef Syslefft :PlMs, &Hd desigtted te ntfttl sl&Hd&res.
3 Rural water systems should be provided throu2h private wells or sma}l public systems. Ir
4 the Rural Area. a11 new ((iWMll 9fii£i?!A water systems should be Cuij·a~eeteell ~
5 by a C<J.i9e.ft.iiJl> §f.i.#.fl water system qperator AffiF'iUJ~l'ijWIQiOJm::p·:::Sjstemi''ShQIDd.'be
6 py~ri''''fW·'lfi.¢''P.§9diY:'=fq::'t;i)Siiftf:'tlj~:::~111Wfiltfiiljpi;J).l#.'Jiiltl)'':reiiilitiOiis. If tbe arec
7 w'P.¢.?ijty@ is included in the plannin2 area of an existin2 water purveyor as identified in i
s Coordinated Water System Plan. the water system C(iiji.lil) Sfi.Ogld be o.perated by the
9 purveyor through either satellite management arrangement or by direct service.
10 VTI. SITING PUBLIC CAPITAL FACll..ITIES OF A COUNTYWIDE Or
11 STATEWIDE NATURE
12 Public capital facilities of a countywide or statewide nature generally have
13 characterisiics that make these facilities extremely difficult to sire. Such characteristics
14 include the number of jurisdictions affected or served by rhefaciliry, the size of the
15 faciliry, and the faciliry's potential adverse impacts, such as noise, odor, traffic, and
16 pollution generation. I11e facilities can be either desirable or undesirable to jurisdictions.
17 Some of the facilities are privately owned and regulated by public entities. Facilities also
18 can be owned hy rhe srare and used by residents from throughout the state, such as
19 universities and their hranch campuses.
2 o I11e counry and rhe cities need 10 develop a process for siting public capital
21 facilities with rhese rypes f?{ characTeristics, including but nor limited to, utility and
2 2 transponarion corridors. airports, wastewater treatmenr plants, solid waste landfills,
2 3 higher educa1ional facilities, correctional and in-patient treatment facilities and energy-
2 4 generating facilities.
25 FW-((~))3:2. Public capital facilities of a countywide or statewide nature shall be
2 6 sited to suppon the countywide land use pattern, suppon economic activities, mitigate
2 7 environmental impacts, provide amenities or incentives, and minimize public costs.
2 8 Amenities or incentives shall be provided to neighborhoods/jurisdictions in which facilities
2 9 are sited. Facilities must be prioritized, coordinated, planned, and sited through an
3 o inteijurisdictional process established by the GMPC or its successor.
31 S-1. The Growth Management Planning Council or its successor shall establish a
3 2 process by which all jurisdictions shalJ cooperatively site public capital facilities of a
3 3 countywide or statewide nature. The process shall include:
3 4 a. A definition of these facilities;
3 5 b. An inventory of existing and future facilities;
cppph2. 07/19/94:amend 8/15/94
71
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
and·
c: Economic and other incentives to jurisdictions receiving facilities:
d. A public involvement stmtcgy;
c. Assurance that the environment and public health and safety arc protectcc!
f. A consideration of alternatives to the facility, including decentralization,
demand management, and other strategies.
VDI. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ((AND RH.'.t.'JCE>)
Jurisdiaion.r; should cooperatively creDit on environmeill which suszains zhe
economic \l'itoliry l!f the region and which contributes io monDgeoble economic growth.
Jurisdictions sflall recognize thor King Cnunry is pan of a larger regionDl economy, whi'
is strongly linked by trade to the national and inttrnDtional economies. Infrastructure
im>e.ftment.f shnuld bt' fncust'.d into urban cenrer:s and manufacruringlindustrial cenztr:s
which art' suppnned h.v transit. Cnunrywide policies shall be integrated with economic
dt',·c•lnpmenr.
FW-((~)),l3. All jurisdictions sha11 contribute to the economic sustainability of
the county in a manner which suppons the countywide land use pattern. This is to be
accomplished ~y providing cost-efficient quality_.infrastructure and public services at an
adopted level-of-service specific to the local situation, providing affordable housing,
promoting excellence in education. and protecting the environment.
FW-((~))~. All jurisdictions sha11 act to increase work training and job
opponunities tor all residents and communities.
FW-((~)).,}5. All Junsdictions shall suppon the development of a regional
economic development strategy consistent with the countywide land use pattern.
Ddinirum of Economic Del'rlnnmrnr
Ecnnomic D(•,·rlonmrnr i.t ernwth ond change in thr ecnnnmy whereby the
c•cnnnmic healrh nf the rrr:inn-it!i nrnnlt. jcs business. jt!i gnvrmmencs-is enhanced. A.
impnrrnnr comnonrnr ofqchieving Economic Drve/apmcnr is 1hrnugh the pur:posdill
un(/enakim: nf nuhlic gnd privqcr qqion.'i tksignrd m qchjrve.·
--rhr mainrrnqncr of g .rtrnng rcnnnmjc ba.tc.·
--a divr~ificminn nf thr rcnnnmy.·
--imnrm•c•d jnh crgininf! qnd rducarinnal npnnnunirics.·
-the prnrrcrinn of thr nqmral rnvimnmrnr.·
--thr rmnmvrnnrnr nf rcnnnmicg/ly di.tadyqncqgcd drizrns gnti ncjghbnrlzond.s.
cppph!. 07119194
72
1
3
4 ..
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
--o ponn,rshif? krcwrrn rhr priyqrr gnd puklic gcmrs.·
rhe mainu:noncr gnd rnqrjan ofhirhcr lfamjJvJ wqge jobs.
77zjs c/t:menr qfche Counrywjdc Plqnnjng Policies js inrcntled ro prnvidr o yjsion
ond policy dirrcriqn fnr Kine Cnunry jurisdiccign.s.
fW-36. The Growth Management ·Planning Council or its successor and juri~
dictions shall develoo monitoring and evaluation systems. including benchmarks. by whic
they can evaluate performance jn achjevjng the goals of their Comprehensive Plans.
((A. &enerRie De•JeleprRellt))
ED-1. ((By 9eeefft8eP 1, 1992,)) The GMPC ((sfteH)) hii_adopt~ Economic
Development policies which:
a. Establish the county's role in the regional economy;
b. Maintain a strong economic base within King County;
c. Encourage diversification of the economy;
d. Maintain an adequate supply of land to support future economic
development:
e. Identify geographic areas to target public resources promoting econom:
development:
f. Foster job training opponunities to maintain a highly educated work
torce:
g.. Protect the natural environment as a key economic value in this region
h. Con~1der th~ spec1al needs of economically disadvantaged citizens and neighborhood5
and
1. Include the assistance of private sector.
ED-2. By July I. !99~((~)) regional planning shall produce a regional industrial
Slllng policy based on a regional assessment of the need for industrial zoned land and tht
availability of transpo~tion and other infrastructure to serve it.
ED-3. Jurisdictions· comprehensive plans shall include economic development
policies. These policies shall address the local economic concerns of each jurisdiction
within the context of a regional economic development strategy.
ED-4. Each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan shall include an economic
development element which will include an estimate of the type and number of jobs to b
. accommodated in the jurisdiction during the next 20 years.
ED-5. The county shall work with Snohomish and Pierce Counties to develop a
c:ppph1. 07119194
73
11
1
2
3
4"
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
, = ~--
16 I . .., I
.... ' . !
18
19
20
21
22
2J
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
40
joint 20-year regional economic development stratc~Y·
1. Strengthen, Expand, and Diversify the Economy
. ED-6. I..ocal juDs<iictjons plaus sbaJJ jnclude policies that actively suwon the
retention and expansion Of· the :economic base or the muliicounty n:~ion. Local
jurisdictions and the County shall work cooperatively on a re~jonal basis and invite privE
sector nanjcipation to evaluate the trends. owonunities and weaknesses of the ez;istin2
economy and to analyze the economic nee<fs of key industries.
·Local jurisdictions' comprehensive plans shall include policies intended to foster:
a. the develooment and retention of those businesses· and industries which
exoon their eoocis and services outside the re~ion. These businesses and industries are
critical to the economic srreneth and diversification of the economy:
b. a business climate which is supponive of business formation. ez;pansio
and retention and reco2nizes the imoonance of smaJJ businesses in creatin2 new jobs.
ED-7. Jurisdictions shall cooperate to establish economic diversification and
cie\elopment goals for the multicountv region. Jurisdictions shall. in process of
comprehensive plannin~. identify the contribution they will make to the re2ional diversi-
fle<'ltlon and development goals .
ED-8 Where appropriate. jurisdictions' plans shall include oolicies intended to
amact and retain mdusrnes. firms and jobs. within their locally determined or zoned
manufactunn& and industrial areas.
ED-9. Jurisdictions shall recognize businesses. facilities. and institutions within
the1r boundanes that provide opponunities to maintain economic stability and realize
econom1c growth for the entire region. These include major educational facilities.
research mstnu11on~. health care facilities. high value added manufacturing facilities and
port facillttes among others. The County and local jurisdictions shall encoura2e these
mstttllttons. husmesses and facilities to thrive while maintaining the environmental and
other goals of the local comprehensive plans.
2. Environment
ED-10. Jurisdictions shall adopt economic develonment and other policies wbjch
will recognize and help protect the environment as a key economic value in the region.
Local policies shall seek to achieve an appropriate balance between the nee4s for
. economic growth and the need for protecting the environment. Local governments are
encouraged to look for ways to work cooperatively with businesses to help them compl)
c:pppl\2. 071 J 9194
74
11446
1 with environmental r;:ylations and to develcm policies that resylt in environmental
2 protection throyeh reeulatory processes that are Understandable and efficient.
3 ED-11. ln CQQperarion wjtb water and electricitY providers. local jurisdictions.
4. jncJudjn~ sewer and water districts. sbaJJ en~u~ee prozrams f.qr water and power
s conservation in public faciJitjes and in the private sector.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
, = ~..J
16
17
18
19
20
21
3. Human Resources: Economically Disadvantaged Citizens and
Neighborhoods, Job Training and Education
· ED-12. Jurisdictions' comprehensive plans shall address the historic disparity jn
income and employment opponynities for minorities. women and economicaUy
disadvantaged individuals. Jurisdictions shaU develcm strategies and sywon community-
based actions to involve minorities. women and economicallY disadvantaged individuals i
improving their economic future. The plans shall recognize their special DeedS and each
jurisdiction should commit. based on their plans. resources in human services. commynit
development. housing. economic develooment and the public infrastructure. to address th
megualities referred to aoove.
ED-13. Job training. retraining. and edUcational op_ponunities are critical to
develoo ~nd maintain a highly skilled workforce. Jurisdictions shall coo,perate in effons
tn meet these training and educational needs on a countywide basis by facilitatin~ the
Implementation of programs to meet the edUCational and training needs and to identify
pannersh1ps and rundm~ opportunities where appropriate.
~. Dirl'ct Governmental Actions: Land Supply, Infrastructure, and
2 2 Penn itt ing
2 3 ED-I~ JunsdlctiOns shall cooperate on a countywide basjs to inventozy. plan for
2 ~ and mon11or the land ~upply for commercial. industrial. institutional. resource and
2 5 res1dent1al u~e~ Local 1urisdictions shall. in five year increments. for the next 20 years
2 6 identify the amount. character and uses of land Deeded to achieve the jurisdictions' job
2'i growth goals:
2 a ED-I 5. Local comprehensive plans should include policies which foster a c1imatt
2 9 supoooive of the siting needs of industrial ysers and that reco~njze the jmponant role tht
3 o olay in creating high-wage jobs. Local plans are encoura~ed to include policies desj~nec
31 to ensure that industrial use of industrial-zone land js not unduly encroached ypon or
3 2 limited by non-supoooing or incompatible yses.
3 J Local policies and plans are encouraged to suppon the continued availability of
cppph1. 07119/94
75
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1~
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
446
land for those industrial and supponine or comnatible activities de,pendent on critical
infrasrructure as identified jn Joca.J comprehensive plans. Jurisdictions should consid~
zonint Of Other IDeMS to provide OJmOTWDities for those UseS in areas where infrastruCtUT
facilities can be uriiized to eXplOit the economic benefit of that infrastructure.
ED-16. Jurisdictions are enCouraeed to promote the siring of resource-based and
a~ricultural-based industrial activities close to the location of the natural resource whethe
outside or inside the urban growth boundary. Jurisdictions m encouraged to recomize
forest land as a sustainable economic resource.
ED-17. Where jurisdictions. including water and sewer districts. have
responsibility to provide infrastructure and/or services or to plan for them they shall
include the ~oa!s of economic development as an important part of their decision making
process.
ED-18. Jurisdictions shall cooperatively deve}QQ funding strategies for
eovernmental infrastructure which take into account economic devetwment goals. and
cC'lnsider the costs and benefits for the jurisdictions. and the region.
ED-19. Jurisdictions shall seek state legislative approval of state funding and
re2ulatory strategies to fund environmental clean-up of industrial sites. Jurisdictions shal
work together on a collaborative basis to develop alternative local. county and state
financm~ and regulatory strategies to assist with the funding of environmental clean-up o
mdustrial sue~.
ED-20 Jurisdictions shall identify geographic areas that can be developed or
redeveloped JDtC'l manufacturinglmdustrial areas. and coordinate with utility providers to
build the necessary mfrastructure. Jurisdictions are encoura~:ed to provide public
incentives tQ promote basic employment associated with manufacturing.
ED-:~ I. To maintain the economic vitality of Kin~ County. regulatory reform mu
occur with the implementation -of GMA reguirements. To ·cam out this ~oa}. iurisdictio
. shall adopt perminin~ processes with defined milestones for prompt approval of projects
that conform with the local jurisdiction$ development re~ulations. TO carry out this
· policy the followin~ actions shall be taken:
a. No later than January J996. iurisdictions shall identify to the GMPC o·
its successor current oermit nrocess timeframes and barriers to smc!Y permit approval.
. including discussion of ooerational and cost considerations.
b. Eliminate redundant permit reviews and appeals:
cppph2. 07119194
76
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
--....... --v-
c. Establishine consistent mitigation regujremems conta,inine clear stan-
dards. and tacmtatim: pmicx:ts that meet these established standards:
d. ·.Focusine the scone of public appeal processes for a project to those
issues thar relate :directly_ to ,Specific impacts of the proiect: and ·
e. Adontjne procedures to perform concurrent permit revjew whenever
possible.
ED-22. Jurisdictions may prepare non-proiect environmental impact statements tc
address. in a comprehensive manner. the probable sienjficant adverse impacts of future
development.
ED-23. Jurisdictions are. encoyraged to est3b1ish a master utility permit process ir
conjunction with approval of land use permjts such as short plats. subdivisions and maste
planned developments. Utilities may include both pyblicly and privately owned utilities
for electricity. naturnl ~as. water. sanitary sewer. surface water manaeement and
telecommunications. All utility extensions and reQuired new construction may be
reviewed as pan of the master utility oermit.
5. Private/Public Partnerships
1 7 ED-24. Jurisdictions shall foster the development and use of private/public
18 partnerships to implement economic development policies. programs and projects.
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
IX. REGIONAL FINANCE AND GOVERNANCE
((8-))A. Finance and Governance Plans
A ~fisClll mwlrsi_,. is rc•quiretl by rhe GMA. The pumosr ofrhr fiscal analysis is for
Kim: Cnunn· 1n rc•a/i.wica/1" a.Ut>.'iJ tht> fiscal cnscs and consrroinT.'i of implementing thr
CPPJ and llwrc•h\' 10 comrihmc• lo the• dc,"iign n(an rffecrivr .flrategv tn owrcomr Thog
·~e~·, f:t t."t ··'·' · ,, .. '· ... ; ' G ... , ... -.. •· ~·e·;·""' B tutti B' tnttl ·~ ,,.,~,.;tie tJ.if'eelie" ftr *"~ "'!('''' rs. ..... rrrcsri.4Jftt:Jf 4. v Yl ?.1,.4'1 F.Jr ~v ,, r••Y v,
~lif.ieics.)J
In order to evaluate the Fiscal lmnacts of th~ initial Countywide Plannine Policies
adopted by Kin~ County in 1992 and Phase 2 Amendments pursuam to GMA. and Kine
County Ordinance #10450. the GMPC created the Fiscal Impact Analysis and Economic
. Development CFis/Edl Task Force. The GMPC directed thjs Task Force to perform the
required fiscal analysis and recommend awrwriate policies to the GMPC. The GMA
cppph2. 07119194
77
11 46 .•.
1 reouires an analysis of the fiscal jmpacts to be completed when adoptine countywide
2 plannine poliCies. Kine County Ordinance #10450 requires that an jn-d~pth analysis be
3 conducted to evaluate the fiscal and economic impacts of the CPPs on eovemments.
4. businesses and individuals. The 1992 CPP Policy EW-32·reguires that jurisdictions
5 cooperatively identify reejonaJ fundin& SOUTCe$ and establiSh reejonal financin& Stratceie~
6 Fiscal analysis of the CPPs contains djscussion of anticipated fiscal impact on the couno
7 and cities. The Fist:Ed Task Force completed the work pmeram adooted by the GMPC
s accomplish the leeal reguirements for the fiscal analysis and transmitted their findines tc
9 the GMPC in a Final Reoort on May 4. 1994.
1 o The Fiscal Analysis. Chapters 1 throueh 8. of the Final Rewa of the Fiscal
I
11 Analysis and Economic Development Task Force whjch was ttansmitted to the GMPC o
12 May 4. 1994 is hereby incorporated by reference as the Fiscal Analysis for the
1 J Countywide Plannine Policies.
14 FW-((-36)).3]. To implement the Countywide Planning Policies, jurisdictions shal
15 cooperatively identify regional funding sources and establish regional financing strategic~
16 by July 1. 199((3)).Q. Such strategies shaH consider the infrastructure and service needs
17 Urban Centers, Manufacturing Industrial Centers, Activity Areas, Business/Office Parks
18 other activity concentrations. and rural areas. Such strategies shall also provide incentiv
1 9 t0 ~uppon the Counrywide Planning Policies and should:
2 o a. Make existing and newly identified funding sources respond in the mo:
21 flexible way to meet countywide needs:
2 2 b. Ensure that a balance of services is available countywide to meet,
2 3 among other~. human serv1ce. public safety. open space and recreation, education, and
2 4 transportation needs: and
2 5 c. Evaluate current revenue and service demands and the potential for more
2 6 etfecuve coordination of service delivery.
27 FW-38. In order to implement the Countywide Plannine Policies. key investmer
2 8 need to be identified and implemented. Public resources shall include countywide.
2 9 re~ional. state and federal funds. Kine County and its cities shaJJ develop a Reeional
3 o Financin~ Plan includine sources for the key investments by July. 1996.
31 a. The Reeional Financin~ Plan should establish priorities for reeional
3 2 I infrastructure investments includine transponation. water. sanitaO' sewer, storm water.
3 3 parks and open space.
cppp~. 07/IIJ/94
78
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
2J
11446
b. The Reejonal Financine Plan should emphasize stratcejes to achjeve
environmental clean-up. redevelopment. affordable bousjne and Ie£U)atOQ' reform.
c. The Rc&ional Fjnancin& Plan should consider the recommenciations on
reeional infrastructure investmems which niay be contained jn the Foundations for the
Future: Re&ional P.conomic Sttate&yS ActiOn Plan due out jn late 1994.
. d. Local jurisdictions' eligibility for shared funding through reeional aeencie
and consortia shall be deoendent uoon collaboration jn deyeloument and execution of thj~
work program.
FW-39. In order to implement the Countywide Planning Policies. a Regional
Governance Plan shall be adopted by Kjng County and the cjtjes. This plan shaJl be
developed in a collaborative process with local jurisdictions. special districts. citizens anc
business representine a broad range of stakeholders. This pro.posal shall:
a. Evaluate opportunities for government consolidation.
b. Match service responsibilities of jurisdictions with the fiscal caoacity to
mamtain. services at the level desired by taXpayers: and
c. Pefine appropriate regional and local responsibilities for s~rvjce delivezy.
RF-1. King Counry and its cities shall seek authority from the State Legislature t
facilitate puhllc sector assemhlage of land for the purpose of redevelopment.
RF-~. Krng County and its cities shall seek authority from the State Lc&islature t
~staolrsh soecral "Urban Center Districts .. where increments of new revenues resulting
lrorn redevelopment can be allocated UeH6etedU for infrastructure financing.
RF-;\ All JUrisdrcuons shall adopt policies. to stimulate construction or
ore\erYatrnn nf affnrctahle hnu'\rn:; in centers. infill and redevelopment areas.
, RF--l Each crt\ wrth a potential annexation area shall enter into an interlocal
2 5 agreement wrth the Count\ tor defining service delivery responsibilities. A financing pi£
2 6 for rnvestments in the annexation areas shall be Included in the interlocal agreement for
2 7 capital facilities and service delivery. Level-of-service standards and financial capacity
2 8 should be considered for each area. together with density issues and phasing of
2 9 developments.
3 o RF-5. In order to transition governmental roles so that the cities become the
3 1 provider of local urban services and the county becomes the re&ional eovemment
3 2 .providin~ countywide and rural services. unincorporated urban growth areas are
3 3 encoura~ed to annex or incomorate within the 20-year tjmeframe of these policjes. To
cppph2. 07/IY/94
79
1 achjeve this eoaL aU cities that have identified potential annexation area sbaJJ enter into
2 jntetlocal am;ements with Kine County that inchides a plan for develcmment standards
3 and financinr: of gpjtal and operarinr: expenditures durinr: the period prior to annexation
4 ·.
5 B. ImDiemtntatjon <CJrftalcrrienjij8jnU and Transition
6 Cmmrvwidr Planning Pnlidrs orr inrrntkd m qff(cr direCTly nnly Inca/
7 comprehensive plqns. Hnwrvrr. rhr GMPC recqgnjzes th4c. iruiirecrly. Cnunrywide
s PlonnirH! Policies will ulrimOTelv havr o broad rangjn~ impaCT nn znnin~. e.xistin~ uses.
9 /nrs and srniCTUJ"eS rhrnuWnut rhr odqnrjqn nf drvrlnpment regulations rhar ore cnn.risrer.
10 wirh Inca! cnmprehcm.'iivr plqn.r. lr js rwr nnssible m fashion on a counrywjde basjs rule:
11 nf rronsirinn rhar will accmmr fnr rhrse impaccs. Cicjes and the Cnunry need fle.xjbWry «
12 adnar ntles rhar gm·em· rransirinn issurs qllnwing local imp/emencarinn cn occur in on
13 rmlf'rlv. fair qnd nrrdicrahle manner. Anrjciporing. understanding and providing
14 rf'a.mnahle rules rn t!m•rm the cnnversinn frnm nld rn new GMA plans and tfevelnpmenr
l5 n•;•ulminm· is hC'.\'T addreS.\'Cd in local f'/ttn.'i and deve/npm(nT regu/arinns.
16 TP-1. All jurisdictions shall implement these countywide plannine, policies throU!
17 adopt1on of comprehensive plans. Countywide plannine, policies will affect exjstinr: leea
18 1onm!:! uses. structures.and lots only throu~h locally adopted development regulations th<
19 are consistent with adopted comprehensive plans.
2 o TP-~. Local plans and development ree,ulations may provide rules of transition.
2 1 governing such matters as zoning <~ll and existine, ler:al uses. stn1ctures and Jots.
2 2 mcludmg oending applications for development approval.
cpppl\2, 07/19194
80
l
2
3
APPENDIX 1
Urban Growth Areas Map
11446
4 TijjfUGA map is a ·pJarjriirie policy·recofumeodaUprFto'':Jie'f6JlOWCd by the 'MetTOJ)o1U3n
s Kffi& 'CoimtY ·co1incu ·wherr::u·-'idOJiti:i:he;nru!Jtttrp-.ij~':<ifOW'ffi',Area :in':'it$''1994
6 commhelissv#·:rrwt
cppph2. 07/)9/94
81
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL
PROPOSED URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
!I!
This UGA map is a pl~nning policy
recommendation to be followed by the
Metropolitan King County Council when it
adopts the final Urban Grow Area in its 1994
Comprehensive Plan
t
..., 1 of :J • North ·r1T:if--[~-;--l---:---~~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r'U'-'I:I"'U--o-1tJ ~~-_;--------i;---··--rr.:···--------:\··-------.~-----
bs 1 .... :... _ _.,.._~_. • '"" .... ! -~ 1 I : ! :
c=J URBAN GROWTH ARFA
·-Unincorporated ldlvity Centen 'I'
!"X"'X'7Xl It URAL AfUio\ ~
(» Rlral Town Centen
C"_J Forest Production Districts
o () Apicultural Production Dlstricll
IBII OPEN SPACE
N Propclef Urban Growth
Area Une
~ Joint Plami111
Area
C'J Incorporated Cilia
(I) Nominated Urban Centen
[~~-] Municipal Watenhedl
l/7~~ /~~/; Mucldelhoot Indian Raerv.dlon
C'J Water Bocla
King County PCDD
Geographic Information System
,UJe 0\ 1994
Thi1 mop is int&nded for ;:-laming purpc'les Ol"ly
ond Is m.'t guarmleed to show occurole meOS'.lremenls.
BouPdories may be incomplete and ere the best
uvaibbfe ot the clJ!'renf lime.
I 1 I I 4
wu.
~~0~
/" . -i ---------'1-
I
02 6,. I (I f> :
I
I
6 lt>
' I
os,...
I
;f>
2il
i
"'
60•
-----·---.1 .. -------I·--. -_j_ •• -·
1:>1 t>' ' : 6 6 6
II 12
6
6
I
I
: 6
I
I -. -I
I
I
I
: !:>
I
!)l (·~ (};t
16 ~
!:> r-----15.--~-'f.'
" 17 :6 I•
6
i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-I I I I ~--_ .. -j -A-f -----6 -I----6--_J_ - -6 -
. I I
I
I
: 6 h)
I
I
6l -I--
I
·n
'A ~·J :A
I
6 !:>
-: ------1-
' !:> ;A 20
i I
I
6 6 I .
_, 4----··-6 '6
;2 I i
6 !:>
~I
"'
2t-
,--z;,.-
I ----1 __ .-
JJ
6
~~~~~~~~~~~li~~~~~~~~~~~~"~-6------~-6-------tE------· ~l fif, f> ' ~l; 6 I );...
b.
I
-~!:>
!:> 'A -~·····----I
I I
--1\ ---'1 -6--.. --. I A
I
I
12 6l 07 1\
I
I
I
I 6 -1 ------
1
I
I ~I
13 f>1 /t• f> I
I
I
I
6 I I
----J. I
I
.. 61
" I
!:> 6V
-t· -
l:>t
I
Jt
I
Oi! h. :r
'
A I A
ll
A
!:>
A ' 6
I
--i
!:>
~r.
' A I !:>
Oj\
,f>
t-.
~I
;:.,
:!fi
--•-f> L -/:;
X !:>'!' /'; J~ A :t~
'-' A ' !:> _., ___________________ ...._ ________ _
I
~~ l:i.!': i':J [jf 6 J!
A !:>. "'
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL
PROPOSED URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
llep 2 ol 3 -C.ntnll
_ _] URBAN GROWTH AREA
• Unincorporated lctivity Centen
t ::-.::~~:3 RUIW. AREA
I -_, .... 1
· __ ,_I
') ,_·, -N
~!:m
D
~
Rural Town Centers
Foreot Production Districts
~!ural Production Diolricb
OP£N SPACE
Prop<Jotd Urban Growth
Area une
Joint rlannins
Area
locoq>arated Otift
Nominated Urban Centen
Municipal Watenhedl
[o//8 Muddeol>oot Indian Reoerv.~tion
CJ Water Bodin
\ing Cou:1i{ PC:DD
~eographic !nformati2-n :=ysiem
.1!"£ 02. 19?~
. ·~Js mop is 'rrta-~ded kr pl~ ..... ~;:-.g ;:,"..: .. 1=-')Ses ·=~:!1·
Jr,d l~ net guormte!:d to !:rG..., c:·cu-'-!·e me:::sl.:!·emenfs.
-!:::ound:-..-jes may te k,ccr:q'e!e ·J"~d :::::---o:: H·~ best
Jva~cb~e ~t fre cu• r ePf t;..,...:.'!,
-• ]
• l1:ii
<>--·-~·" .. H•II~' ;s _,r . ~ '"
."'1 0<'~ '"'·, -~ £;_._~·-~~ " ~ • , ""I,, ~~ ~/' ., ------~-~-·:_ ___ _ ~~ ~-----~ --~ ~: ,, . .
lo.l _., ' I '
V ~·,' [ __ i Phat Lab C3 '« ---~ I -., :fV~
I , -. I-• , I ~I' . f' ~ '' \ \ , \:
'"""' ...._:::_ i l'··~~
\ . :T)
.:r~ J ;/~ __ .;"
'li"O:_y,riiY ~~ , ______ ...___ \
';/
!\
This UGA map is a planning policy recommendation to be followed by the
Metropolitan King County Council when it
adopts the final Urban Grow Area in its 1994
'' O:>mprehcnsivc Plan
I r
~ o'f.l':oY:i§:o~\ j r. j t.
oifot-~1-~-~?=-=-----:--1'~-------t.~---------·--------... ----
:,
6
~
' '
{\
-~~ 6 I
1\
., "'
"~
~
[•1:! .6.
7Jger Mo'ungin
6 {
1\ 6
"
1\
"
i'J
6
: co-,->--·: .. ../;,
...... 6
'6 A ·~
A
,.:0~/
6 . ' " 6
'6. ·{\-..... --6
I
~--· -r -~·-·---·-.·
'6 ~:r t.
"
6 3~
;..,
~2
{\
~;
1\,
~
I
I
~ : :
I
·~·
~I I --.!
: "' 12 I
I
!!,. t
I
~ ~
! ~
~
__ ii._ . ., ... "h." -~
,. c~ " 61
-6--,-.A. 1\
6.'
"·· .... /), 6
!~ -~~
:."'i 1::.. :
I : ~
! /\:
l~ I :
ii.
. {\
'"'
6
" 6
''6
"6
"
~
·6
1\
1\
/',
r:.:=
6
6
!,'
6
6·
6
'l!.
"
. 4
A
1\
•;:
6
{\ {\ 'l ~
{\" 6
r:.' {\ /',
6 {),
6 ''· {\ {),
{), {),
1\ 1\
{\
C> •
6
6 : "' "'--::--~-~---~---tj_ ___ ~.:-~--"------.~--------~.-----:z~---L-~-· 6 ------
6,
6 .... A
6' 1\
'("6. " A
A 6
A
I
I
i
~
6 1\ 6 /),.... 6'
6 lfiv• r 1\ 1\ 1\
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL
PROPOSED URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
...,. s of s -South
r ·-.. j URBAN GROWTH ARFA
--" J
·-Unincorporated ktivity Centers
l;~?~l RURAL ARFA
Rural Town Centen
_.] Foret Prodoction Oiotricb
M1
N
~
Cl
(f)
1
~~r1
D
~raJ Production Districts
OPEN SPACE
l'rOpOied Urban Growth
Area une
Joint .. ~ ..
Area
lncorpol'"ilted Citieo
Nominated Urban Cart<n
Municipal Watenhedo
Muddeohoot Indian l~on
w.mr Bodies
City of Black Diamond to provide updated
Joint Planning Area of 3,000 Acres
r:ing Counly PCDD
G-:=;Jgrophic \nf onT';o1ion Sysien1
J,:··e ct G?J
p;;s rr\ap :s ;;t~tTdsd ;vr plCf!,,lrg Pc..ipOs&s: ::":Y ~·1;:1 ~s no! g'JCfC::lt~d tc shew c·:cur\Jfe :-,.~e.::s:LJr~r~~:-~J£.
80lJnd~xies ~"''lO·r b~ :o:::c-r"·~plete end are th~ b€'st
,~-, ci 1 ~!J.ie c~ !~1e curr.:r:! ~:r7"!e
• ----::::J -
,,
This UGA map is a planning policy recommendation to be followed by the
Metropolitan King County Council when it
adopts the final Urban Grow Area in its 1994
Comprehensive Plan
-~-,,
-~
----z-.-----
{ ~ ' 6 6 6 6
·------
6 6 1\
" ,,
6 I'> I'> 6
,.,. 6 [',
''6 '\', 8
I'>
I ~
s
-
1\
·'~
;;,
l~
1\
-----,-
6
I'> I'>
'6 ,,
"
6 6 "
,.;· 'i\
;~ -~ I'> I'> I'>
I'> '6 ··•
I
;.s 6. ;·\'>'·
6 6
,{'
6 ______ ..
I'> t:.
!i~ " ,,
6 t:. '6
This UGA map is a planning policy
recommendation to be followed by the
Metropolitan King County Council when it
adopts the final Urban Grow Area in its 1994
Comprehensive Plan
< < <
~ ~ <I~ i
<I <1 <1: 1-----.--.,-----~----i---:
I
<I
' I " I
I I
;:] <II
·------:-
I <I
' ...
<1: ~~ ' I I ,_ __ '<! ____ ,
: I
I
::J ~
"'
I
' I
' <I ' ..,-------~ I I
::J I
!:t <II
I
I
I <I I
-!.----
:<I I s
I
: <I : I . -..:.----------+---·
<I : <I
:;>;
I
: E
<I :
I
I -------1---· <I I <I I
I
"' I 5>1 ~ <I l ~
I
I
I
-<I ------J-<1--;
I
I
I
;;<l Jd
I
I
I <I 1<1
-------~-------~-
' I
I I I ~~
I
"!.\ <llij <l "' t::l . <l <l' <l <l
I ,.. ~-------~ ... -------l--'":'-~--~--------...!~
<]I <I: <I : <I I
Z!
:::<1
::.c
<]:
.. -L -·-' I · - -· --r - ---- - -i----- - --1 ll:
, I I
<I <I '<I
~ ~ . ·-..
~
<j <II <I <I
' I .... -------r ------·-r-------~ <lg '<I::!-:
'
..
" <I '..:,...·
I
<I
:!: <J ~<J
I
I
-----~<9 __
~ <l
<I
... <l ...
<I I <I
~
<I
<I r:
~
<I
..
~
<I
;;<I
;2<1
~<J
<l
Iii. I :::
<l <l
I
x.x~ -----<:r j---- --<1" -t· ----<I'
""" I 2 i ~<J I <) I <]~
I I I
l I I I
---!::J------4,------A'-- ---_<I_ -!-
; I l '
3 <I ~<I -$ii <l:;j
I
~
I
<I : :;;
f I j I ~" ·. '*1 ~~.:1 i<l < !<I <I <]I <I 1 <I ~ ... ~~~: -:------~----------:-----------+---------~---------~-------·
, • I f I
<I :::
' <I : <I I <j ' <I ; <I
~ ~ ~ I ~ ; ~ : = I<]
I
-----~-------
<1 I <l
I
I
I I I I
~<] • .;J <]: <] I <f ~·~-------'--------~-------L-------~ ~-g;
<I I <I
I
...
'"'
-----<l· ~ -----<] -r-----<i--
<1: <l. <I :<1 r
:!: ! = I ~ I :::
~ <l: <I/~
I . /I
<l
:I
I
I
! ll~lillillll~~~~~~~~~~~~rrrrrr~ ... -------~---~---~--,~~-+ ~ <i----I I I
I !:( ' I~ I <l <J; l <lr
I I I' I
: r ;
;!; <l
r---<l---r-1'-<l----~-~----
1 I
I I
<ll!\ <l :!! .. <I l:a <I! = <l
-1 -u
z >
::::» a:
0 c( u c
~ ..
I
I <I '--~-
~~ ;
0 I
"' 0
0
<II
D : ~ ~
" z ! S : o m -o p o., p q 9 .. o or p, q o 1 o .. o o : o 1 9 o JO <21 o <? <:?;
z m z
c( % ? ~ o ~ ~, o d o .. o o I o ,__ o o : c:12 . o 1o ~ ~ ~ r. ,_., ,::: <'h ,;. r."' r. \ ~ r."' r'>--"" r. -r. r. I ~ 'h r. .lr. 1'\
~ -
= c
<I
0 ~ ~
1--c a: ~ e • z ~ ~ ,.. c. ~._ -W W .J = ci XI ~ oo ~
::& z I!! ~ c ~ e E ~e ~ w ill • .o ... ~ Cl) s ~ £
c( ; 1 > ...... _,_ a.-~ •
" " • Q ~ g ~-~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t I J5 1 j .s ~ ·~ ~: 6
c( :::l :z: ~ i i ::; 0 .J ~ 1 f "'g '0 :2 . ~~ ~ ~
:/E C ] ~ 1 ~ s ~ l "' ~ .'t 0 :I j -II ~ ~ o ~ l! .2 ~= "~ ;
W i.e ~ ~ ; 1 i! ~ ::l ., ~ 1 ~ 'iii 1 .~ .( 8 5 -g "i £ ~ % ""' E 1:: {! a. .a 111 .5 f i1 • Q Cll a.. 1: 1!!!. ~ 3
VI j! 0 z ...a :g = -~ 6 ~ u
1-0 ~= ~ -s ~ '; 1 ] ~ l I "B t 1! .§ ~ ~ ~ ·;; -E-" :5 a ~~
::::.. ft rt :;;) :;;) -= -= ~ , o -t '!.-t _ ~ ~ I ~ _ = :::1 ..r:. __ .. ~
;;:::.o -~ ~ 0 c. ~ --0 0 I -u o ~ a.g ~ ~ ll ___ n_* ~ o ~ ~~i I ~ I n ~ n ~ [] ______ ~~ -~~ ~ t~
Redmond North
Urban Growth Area
• lncorpomed ,.,_ N RMde
~ E] ~ Potent• Anneution AIM
,_...
-
0 0.5 1 1.5 N 1113 lnt•rim Urta.n m Joint Pllnnin
Growth AI• liM
,., ..
MILES r.: •ti
Prop~d Urta.n Growth
AI• Une
1 County PCDD 1114
Issaquah East
Urban Growth Area
• lncorpomed AI-
[] Potent• AnM:ution AIM
__ o.C::s ===1 1.5 2 N 1193 lnt•rim Urta1n
Growth AIM lin• ,., Prop011d Urbln Growth ... AI•Un•
MILES
Jnty PCDD 1114
[/ ~ ._: --
i -----."
N
~ .
m
I
Joint ~ir
AI•
Renton -East
Urban Growth
•
E2J
0.---;;;;0[.5========1
1.5 N
MILES
1 County PCDD 1114
Area
1993 •nt.rim Urt.n
Growth AI• line
N
EE3
-·-
unty PCDD 1H4
1
MILES
North
Urban
2
Bend
Growth Area
.·
.. lncorpormed AI-§ p~
N 1993 Interim Urt.n m Joint f'Wvlin
Growth AI• line AI•
r.: Prop~ UrbM Growth . .., ,.,.. Un•
N Roede
~ .,.
0
County PCDD
Black
Urban
Diamond
Growth
City of Black Diamond to provide npdatcd
Joint PlalllliDI Azea of 3,000 Aaca
1 2
MILES
1114
I Lake
Area
~awyer
Ill lncorpomed ~~~-§
N 1993 Interim Urt.n m Growth AI• line ,.: Prop-d Urt.n Growth ... AI• Un•
N RCMde
~
Joint Pllnning
AI•
nty PCDD 1114
__ .. /
1
MILES
/
/
~noqua1m1e
Urban Growth Area·
• lncorponrted ,.,_ ~ . P-Ie
N 1993 Interim Urt.n m Joint P!Mning
Growth IV• line NM
2 ,., Propa.d UrN\ Growth ·~ ,.,_ Lin•
N RMda
l
2
cppph2. 07/19/'J.a
APPENDIX 2
Household and Employment Ranges
82
Proposed Growth Target Ranges for Households and Employment
HH.t:EMP-i.wlr'l
Net New Net Newllhld R.aazea Net New Net New EIDD. Raa~es I
'
crnES Houeholds Low Hidl EauJlovmeat Low Hi~h ·!
I
I
Algona 404 346 462 350 ·300 .. 400 I
Au bum 8,082 6,553 9,610 11,100 9,0001 13,200 .i
I I'
Beaux Arts 0 0 0 0 0! o~·
I
' . 8,575 7~68(} 9,550 28,250 25,.100: 31.200: ! BelleVJJ-e
I Black Diamond 1,033 947 '1,119 1,200 1,100 i 1,.100 i.
·!Bothell (KC part) ·1,931 1,448 2,413 2,900 2,:, 3,600;.
:Burien 1,796 1,596 1,995 450 5oo!l
!Carnation 404 404 404 0 0 o1:
I 12 0 0\ ,I Clyde Hill 12 12 0
jl Des Moines 1,796 1,437 2,155 2,500 2,000 3.ooo 1
II Duvall 1,886 1,563 1,759 1,700 1,600 I 1,800
!!Enumclaw 2,626 2,182 2,667 1,000 900 1,100
II Federal Way 14,996 13,425 16,566 14,800 13,.100 16,400
!i Hunts Point 4 4 4 0 0 0 . .
2,694 4,300 'Issaquah 1,879 3,508 3,000 5,600
:Kent t> ,735 ~ 6,120 7,500 11,500 10,450 i 12,550
!: Kirkland :~··5,837 5,.128 6,.146 8,600 7,800 9,.100
jiLake Forest Park I 135 101 168 200 150 250
!'Medina 17 17 17 0 0 ·o
::Mercer Island I 1.122 1,056 1,188 1,700 1,600 1,800
'Milton I 18 18 18 0 0 0 I
Normandy Park 135 I 0 ! 135' 135 01 0
I
North Bend 1,527 1,266 1,787 2,050 1,1oo; 2,400
Pacific
: 1,212
I
606 1,818 100 .so 1 1.50
I
Redmond ! 11,458 9,637 12,760 29,509 29,500 j . · 34,75o 1
Renton 8,890 7,730 10,049 23,000 20,000 . 26.ooo I
SeaTac 3,592 3546. 7,.500 15,800 I 1.5,600 i 26,900 I
Seattle 53,877 48,233 59,520 132,700 118,800 146,600
Skykomish 27 27 27 0 0 0
Snoqualmie 2,784 1,942 3,625 4,500 3,100 5,820
·Tukwila I 5,388 4,761 6,014 22,250 19,000 24,000
Woodinville 1,796 1,7.50 1,842 1,950 1,900 2,000
Yarrow Point 18 18 18 0 0 0
I
Cit}: Totals 150,803 131.768 ' 172,.558 322,409 288,700 I 370.620 1
-Uninc. KC 44,897 40.048 50,000 25,000 23300! 28,700 1
I
I
GRAND TOTAL 195,700 171,816 I 222,558 347,409 312,ooo I 399,320 I
rce: GroY.1h Management Planning Council, May 14, 1994.
1
2
"
cppph2. 07119/94
APPENDIX 3
Affordable Housing Index
.•
83
. I
I
I
I
I
AFFORDABLE HOUSING JOBS/HOUSING INDEX
The Jobs/Housing Index was developed by the Affordable Housing Technical Forum as a way to adjust housing
targets based on each jurisdictions existing concentrations of low-cost housing and low-wage employment. A
Low-Wage Jobs Index greater than one indicates that the proportion of lower wage employment is ifCatCr than the
county average; a Low-Cost Housing Index greater than one indicates that the proportion of lower cost housing is
leis than the county average. The Jobs/Housing Index is computed by multiplying the jobs and housing indexes.
together.
Policy AH-2 establishes planning targets for housing affordabl~ to households with incomes between 0 and 50
percent o'f the county median income. Based on the Jobs!H'ousing Index, jurisdictions should. plan for a number of
units that is either 20 or 24 percent ofprojected net new housing units, as follows:
Notes
I.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Jobs/Housing Index greater than one: 24 percent.
Jobs/Housing Index less than one: 20 percent
Jurisdiction for which Index could not be computed (shown as NA): 20 percent.
Algona· 73 0.85 406 0.61
Auburn 5,362 0.83 9,245 0.65
Beaux Arts NA NA 3 20.74
Bellevue 22.297. 1.08 12,801 1.39
Black Diamond 59 1.28 259 0.73
Bothell 1,691 1.19 1,704 1.2
Carnation 64 0.85 248 0.81
Clyde Hill 31 0.52 21 26.07
Des Moines 1,564 1.27 4,473 0.74
Duvall 56 0.87 229 1.74
Enumclaw 1,174 1.17 2,106 0.65
Federal Way 6,384 1.26 14,107 0.89
Hunts Point 0 o· 7 14.14
Issaquah 1,676 1.17 1,594 1.01
Kent 8,067 0.78 11,526 0.69
Kirkland 5,472 1.17 6,955 1.17
Lake Forest Pk. 554 1.28 251 2.98
Medina 25 0.91 54 10.67
Mercer Island 1,697 1.11 1 ,'Z2.7 3.21
Milton NA NA n 1.08
Normandy Park 352 1.23 488 2.68
North Bend 506 1.15 595 0.84
Pacific 147 0.85 1,107 0.67
Redmond 7,296 0.96 5,103 1.34
Renton 9,675 o.n 11,999 0.75
SeaTac 4,497 0.91 6,528 0.69
Seattle 129,451 1.02 134,526 0.87
Skykomish NA NA 72 0.63
Snoqualmie 444. 1.18 426 0.74
Tukwila 10,875 0.85 4,256 0.65
Yarrow
Cities 219,489
Uninc. KC: 32,885 1.03 66.775 1.32
KCTOTAL 374 1.00 299,185 1.00
Source: King County Planning and Community Development Division, 1993.
0.52
0.54
NA
1.50
0.93
1.43
0.69
13.56
0.94
1.51
0.76
1.12
NA
1.18
0.54
1.37
3.81
9.71
3.56
NA
3.30
0.97
0.57
1.29
0.58
0.63
. 0.89
NA
·o.87
0.55
0.91
1.36
1.00
Low-wage jobs are estimated using Puget Sound Regional Council employment data for five sectors,
convert~d to lower income quartile households. King County Planning and Community Development, 1992.
Proportion of low-wage jobs relative to the county average.
Rental housing units with rents less than $700 per month, plus owned housing units valued at less than
$100,000, in 1990 dollars. 1990 Census.
Proponion of )ow-cost housing relative to the county average.
Low-wage jobs index (2) multiplied by the )ow-cost housing index (4).
1
2
cppph1. 07119/94
APPENDIX 4
Land Capacity Work Program
84
4-18-94
DRAFT WORK PROG~~
Improving King County Land Capacity Data
Background
. .
King County jurisdictions ~ave prepared estimates of land capacity to
accommodate future growth to the year 2010 and beyond. Land capacity
refers tn the additional .dwelling units (for resid~ntial uses) or square
feet of. floor space (for ·commercial or· industria·l uses) that can be
built in a particular g~ographic area gtven ·specific assumptions about
zoning, the land base, and development practices.
This work was initiated in the summer of 1991 to meet the requirements
of Countywide planning and comprehensive plan revisions called for in
the state's 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA). King County jurisdictions
came together to form a Data Resources Technical Forum, which developed
common met~ods to guide the work.
After extensive work using King County Assessor parcel data,
supplemented in several cases by local surveys, jurisdictions finished
preliminary est;mates of land capacity in the summer of 1992. In the
fall of 1992, members of the Data Forum began meeting with individuals
from the private sector with extensive knowledge of King County land
development practices. These meetings continued into the summer of 1993
and resulted in the Forum recommending additional refinements to the
land capacity estimates.
lr its initial capacity work, Data Forum members prepared estimates for
oc~n vacar.t land and redevelopment pot~ntial. Jurisdictions started by
est1ma:1n5 the theoretical yield under current zoning and then
c;s:~untec for environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands or steep
s1ooes. r1ght-of-way, and land needed for other public purposes such as
parKs or scnools.
D1s:ussions with. the private sector -led to recommendations that an
a::::1ona~ d1scoun: be ~ade for "market factors" because not all lands
~,:~ oe available for aevelopment during the 20 year horizon specified
for clann1n; by the GMA. The Forum also recommended jurisdictions add a
2S~ :Jsn1on to tne1r revised zoning capacity to allow markets to work
ef~1:1en:ly, w1tnout undue pressure on land prices. A prooram to
mon1tor land caoa:ity was also recommended to ensure a continuing source
of 1nforma:1on ef)-H\e-ca~a:~ty of land to accommooate future growth. · . .
~ne land capac~ty est1mates have been reported in the Draft Supple~ental
tn~:~onmental !mpact Statement on the Countywide Planning Policies
cat lee for Oy tne GM.!-. ihe_v have also been the subject ·of briefings to
t~e Affordable Hous1n~ and F1scal Analysis and Economic Development
(~1s/EO) Task For~~s se: up to advise the Growth Management Planning
Counc1l on poss1b1e ref1nements to the Countywide Policies.
·Continuing discussion surroundi~g the_land capaci~y estimates led t~e
Fis/ED Task. Force to establish a comm1ttee to revaw .the land capac1ty
estimates in March 1994. The Committee expressed concern with both the
data -and methods used.in the land capacity work. undertaken by the
jurisdictions. While both residential and the commercial/industrial
estimates were viewed critically, there was agreement that, of the two,
the commercial/industrial estimates are most in need of additional work..
The work. program outlined_below responds to this need.
Proposed Work Program .
The proposed work will be undertaken·over an 18-month period as part of
the Phase·Itl work program for the Countywide policies. Work will begin
either upon adoption of Phase II policy refinements by the Metropolitan
King County Council in July, 1994 or in January, 1995, depending upon
the availability of budget resources {see below).
All tasks will involv-e cooperative work between the public sector
members of the Data Resources Technical Forum and representatives from
the private sector with expertise in land development issues.
The objective of the work program is to produce an improved, updated set
of land capacity estimates, to establish a baseline from which regular,
ongoing monitdring can proceed. Consensus between public and private
sector participants should be enhanced by cooperatively working through
elements of data.and methodology to produce refined estimates.
Tasks will be undertaken in priority order, commercial and industrial
lanas firs~. then residential lands. The logical steps to follow are:
A.
...
...
LA_ND CAPACITY ESTIMATION
discuss and decide upon methods for estimating capacity .
extract 1994 data from the Assessor's computerized system .
.... field test and fine.tune methods by examining a small liun:ber
of representative parc~ls.
... distribute data to jurisdictions for use in updating their
ca;acity es~imates .
... produce estimates for both six year {CIP) and 20 year {GMA)
hor1zons .
...
est1mates.
assist jurisdictions as needed as they prepare refined
review and evaluate estimates received from jurisdictions.
E. ESTIMATING DEMAND FOR FUTURE LAND USES
* estimate the demand (forecasts) for future uses. for both
the six and 20 year planning horizons.
C. BALANCING SUPPLY AND DEMAND
• compare projected demand to the estimated capacity of lands
to absorb growth.
• recommend zoning and other adjustments as needed to ensure
the adequacy of the capacity planned to accommodate future growth.
Establish parameters to help decide when corrective action is cllled
for.
D. DATABASE -MAitnENANCE AND MONI-T_ORING
The tasks in this section will follow the development of refined
baseline land capacity estimates. They are not, strictly speaking, part
of this work program and are not included in next section on budget.
* monitor and report on key indicators of new development and
land capacity on a continuing basis, as specified in .the refined
Countywide Policies, to ensure accomplishment of policy goals.
* support the development and sharing of Geographic:.
Information System technology to facilitate routine updating of land
capacity estimates.
Financinc the Work Program
Substantial resources and time will be needed to produce new and
improved land capacity estimates.
The general approach we recommend is to use the membership of the Data
Resources Technical Forum, augmented with private sector representation,
to oversee the work program.
King County will provide staffing for the work of the Forum. This will
. include preparation of agendas, scheduling meetings, assisting cities
with data problems, resolving disputes, a~d preparing maps, reports and
other materials as needed. T~is will require an estimated two staff
work1n; half time for the estimated 18 month duration of the project.
Jurisdictions will be responsible for participating in the deliberations
of the Data Forum and for preparing their own revised capacity
est1mates, request1ng assistance from County staff as needed.
Once agreement is reached on the elements of the work to be undertaken,
a detailec t1meline and budget request will be prepared. Approximately
S95,000 will be needed for project staffing plus 01M support.
1 APPENDIX S
2
3
4
5 TRANsP()RTATIQfiti:=:::*eguiteijjen~ip['=ttJ~:=~yi9.W(fi:\f4~\l.t¥,ijl'':}\ct
6 :::-:=countywjde:p(JH9.tes'q;t{e§t!Q·,:::J94$.Pi~?.f.P.w:::~)
7 · ··==·.··= ·==coumjiwu~ertJtaiinf.Hi••nollCJa:;zpigf'VR:•:wilPfE.if.::~lFf.#6i:::r·~··::::zm.:::r.a.riifii.Wq~:·:rt
8 trammnrk••rrnm==::\wizcn:•ciir;.futrili='·cmmoranil•=Ciii:::w1Jiiiiiitf®.Wf•:•pliiii,f'=wtl:=~;f!e:vtlfii?Jl)':·.
9 Policirs fnr rran.fporratidn•must oddrisS.·
1 o . l;· .··==Policir.rff1r:prQmiirinh?a6ciHiiiiijiiiiJ?qifiJ/itfiJ~rlj•iJeytlhfithl#.(·tijfJ
11 pmvision of urhan sen 'ices en sucb drvelopmrni I32;2=(3Frttll:
12 2. PoficiP.s fiJr sitine puhlic cimitallaciliiicJ·dfii CmrnmVidlOf.=ift{(~~lfiflj
13 naruref32.2 {3) (cJI.·
14
15 (t/ )f.·
16 4. Policies tor joinr cmmry and dry plqnnin( lviihinfmwrh=areq.~YJ';;'£lCfJ
17 fill:.
18 5. An anal\'!iiJ o[rfle fiscal impact,(32.2 (3J {hJl.
19 6. Lt"vef ofSen•icr. concurr<•ncy. and oorlrin~ policy euidrlines'[(Lf•fi:(jjiirtd
2 o h'· Cmmrvwid<• Plannint: Policy T-41.
21
2 2 Comprehensh•e Plnns (RCW 36. 70A.070)
2 3 771l' Tran.morrarion <•lrmenr o(comprrht:nsi\lf p/an,'i adnm{'d hy th( countj·(Jr Cifies
2 4 will hl' ml'a.'illrrtl m:qinsr rhr policit•s and srundartl.~ a.anmved and rarified OJ part nfthe
2 5 counrvwidt• framework nlan: Bv Julv I. 1994 the cnunzy qntldria are rrauiri~d m iii:lnrlr:p
2 6 comprehemiw• nlan wir~ a mandamry rrgnsponatinn tlrmtmrthai in¢ludei thf'tdlf{jWflii
2 7 · ,c;uh-rlemems:
28 /. Land use assummion,'i used in r.stimriti1lriifiiyelgemariil.'
29 2. Fadliry and srn'icr nrrds fnr gnginini:oridsri#dinin{l@l-of-SriVice
3 o standard~ tor ont"ria/J qnd rransit rourrs.·
31 J. Sjx-year finondng rilon ho.red f/PMthc'ireeds Qj)he·cnmprehensive·rilari:
3 2 , rroS.'i(.'i.'i lqnd U.'ie rfrmrnr iflcve/-n(-srn1cr stO@artJs cqltlm(hf mc(With fulldinr
3 3 resnurcrs.· ilzis i?lgn -.,vi// hr urxlarrd and odnpctd·qnnuiil{y.·
cppph1. 07/19/IJ4
85
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
······•·-·· .·.<:•··r<nrr:s;/·!:t):rliii.iiiQfiiifJ.iiii tiifffi41iii?M.iiif4iif!JirJii,?#.fiif.iiJi.i.·
-·-·.···-·-····· ::::::•4vtthlri'm1ii~mnsr;rtrilafiQffffi*:tpaifiilfiliiif.ffli)pllfii}.:::t~rra;#nNtiifiiPCitlei+iife
reouiTeilf() mfec.· .
· · · ·-···· · · . ·n··\•::aatifillic¥=i~hfti1rli1lffitrPKl!Oiitiitp(if.iiJ.rilJif£<Tifhif!iWfiffi1iibtfiFIJelijlniifijefrt
armrnval ifthe .• ilevefnpment:-cailirs::fh~··:tlvct4jplf~fjjc#•:•tiPfjeclii}i!l1Jii10iv·in¢_::##ililpfii
adofiilit'iir'tlziPtfii&,fjiifriiif(ftiteteiiienh·
:2.····--::chncummO'•Reauiremmis?it5ld)MifeveliifiiifefftFif~lt##:••t.1iJi.fr(ifilfriiif.i7ik_
srraregies tn accmnmodqte the impaics::ardeWJiijtriiinWf!tli7-'1'bf/i.ri:..:firijqtiiHiHf}'ijifii6~(
df'W!lnmnenr. nr o··finiind«l>cnmmifnieii6J.fNif/ifliiif!J:fiilWJfiiP.lif(j..=·fh.(:::;fiijzfij§.C#ti)pf.
s!raregies wirh;;rsix ''eary.
13 Other L'lws and Regulations
14 Federallow-~rquirr.'i an nn;;~oing crmpefaiiw:::::c;;nniiiibufiffifth1mnf(beifjtf#
15 rransroriarinn rlanning nmc<'.H as a condirinn of federal irimspnn(/iifm ifirnti. :7h
16 cmnrfv wirl7 riJis rrot~irc•menr.· the designated MermvnliTtin Pltinn171~ ·OriQHiiiiiton\~PO)
1 7 is rrsrwnsihlr (nr lnm:-rangc• rran.mnrrarinn rlanning and shnrt-ranu trqnspoiidiion
18 imrmn·t•mf'nr rmr:ramminr: WPJ.
19 777e M PO planninr: and pmgramminr: rrsrmnsibilirie.~ arc srrenerhened ::qJid
2 o c•nhancrd tmda The n•am re-amhnri::.arinn ofthr F(C/rrql Sur(oci-TraniJioniiiioH:HctJtt:M
2 1 lnrt•r-mndol Smfltct• Transrwrrarion Efflcil'ncy Act nf 1991 flSTEA J eliminatr.f .~r\JeHif
22 cm(·r:orical timdin!! nm!!rams and crearcs a nov-fleribleSur(ace Trair..uinnafi()ft Pf.i/fiiliit
2 3 (STPJ and a nf''-'' Cnnr:esrinn MiTir:arirm Program. Funt/,v qvdilahle to the regimi·untler
2 4 rhr.w• rwo highwa\' pmgram.lii may he• uud fnr multi-modal ·.m/urinns.-and the •MP(tnli.'i
2 5 pmje(f sC'[ecrinn amhnrio• fOr These vrngrams. as well gs·rhlfedi:riilirqn.fir iitoerorri1jj1jils
2 6 .fnr thf' r<'ginn. In qddirion. Wqshingmn Store DeparrmenC:iffTrari.mnrtatioii'f:tWSJtf:J:t)
2 7 pmjecr seh•crions unda rhe lnrl'r.ifare Mainrf'nancr. Bri@C. Onif·"NoiinniitHifhway·sys(fip
2 8 fNHSJ nrngrom.'i must he mtuJr· in cooperation ·wjrh the ·MeO iind:in:cfinrormaitce wrif£.:"jfie
2 9 regional Tran.'ipnrtarinn lmprnvemrm Pragrgm ([JPJ.
3 o 17u' Federal Clean Air Act Amendment fCMAJ nfl99Qireauirrs slihstOnrial
3 1 rfducrinn of rmis!iinn.'i from rhe cran.mnrrarion ::Srcror/ Vzl/PU£ec Snund Recinijil!ChUfi?frs
3 2 , tron.mnrrarion plans 0nd pmiecrs mu.rt :cnnfniir('tn ·rroiiJ.riQriwri·:eonirnlMi:i:iiiires
3 3 cnnrained in rhr Srare lmplrmf'ntorinn .· PlanYSIPPl'rifiaiililthj?tmr·ru~dSoufii{Air
cppph2. 07119/94
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
eonuiihn='cnnrrot·=AirriBW'··:nze:·curitru .mmcvF'znr mcmv==catQt :!fhl¢tt:ifhlS#l.mu
rcau;ri:meirt.'i iriciiJdc
..... ei:Ji;QriileiJ:::iiiijifiifaiFiiiitl=mizirii&idiiiiiizfiiiriiifiYYiiiil
. "· .:~ ci reglniiatiiiijzlfflifnrorinit•ntthr:::qnmpiHte?triii~'RedilcfiQir :.I:iofl· dtrd below.
·.····· ·the -$tare ···Cnmmwe:··rr;a···Rrdiiifirmtf.ii#t:df:J99J.;!eiifiirii :.M.fudtons ·~n·•··wi!Jicle
mUc.rt traveled.·.· Emnlnvcrs af 100 ar:UWriimifjliifkifiif(C1tr'(C(ifdfiq···@#¢i{')iijij'(riNtl
dnnand bj · 35 · i?ercenr · nv 1999. ~ : rirttihifiiCtJ:::aiflibirill1ij~=:mrtijdfiiiijf.?ijililftliifi::rniiiiflie
conrt!ina~rd··nfth··-rforiiit·•·oreridr.t.•rltlnnat'ijJi;tiliiltii?ofialii7Jidniifi~Jiriif/frW,ffj~··emjilWiii:
and they muse he cnnsistenf',vith cnmmutiffriii>rr.duEiiQ!FpliJfltdf?fie;ihbon"'
jurisdiction,'i.
State law provides for The del'Clapr11eriliifir<fli"fh:CiiJJdcifj traifrit wc:rr•miifin
wirhin rhe Pucer Sound. Area. The law·rrauirGv·:chaP'trt1n.vW•aifndeSlMeiiri~ ·p;ef#~
Tran.r;;(, Snarran I Commrmjry Trqn.r;if and Eve rea. Triin$UfiQ(ntly man 'ihe •• implriifiiiiiifiqiJ
nf.wch a .rv.<;rrm. For rhtlf pumosr. 1hr Jn;nr Re:ional POlicy Cnmmicrri·wit't'fofflitfd.iiijd
clwr(!l'cf wirh rhe re.mnmihi!irv nf rrcnmmrnding a system· plgn and financial proCfaiiz thor
wnuld imnll'menr the HCT sv.wem. This nlan js being deyclopc:d in !'iWZJ?nrt qfthi:<'Ymon
2020 Regional Grmvrh Srrarrgies.· this yisinn calls for creation ota,rreinnaJ:·usrhifrif
Cf'fl!ral nhwes linkrd hv High Canacirv Transir fqciljties. and qn interconncctrd .iyS(em•nf
ji"f·rwav Hi t:h OcrunanQ' Vi•hirlr (HO VJ lanr.L
17w 1990 Srare Ll'f!islarurr pasJed vqriou.'i le£i.'i/atjon £ranrine local eqverirmenis
amhm?rv rn rswhli.r;h a numhrr ofraxing programs for (undine rronsoorcarinn prQjic{{iitiil
nrn~rams. An inr('rim and infnmraf group callrd rhr Lncgl Qprinn.rSrrateJ:Y DevtflQJirirerit
Su·l•rim: CommiTTee wm· fomwd m rC'cmnmrnd how rlzesc (undine auchqrirics shmild he
c•xcrcised. This inirial work \\'(/.\' conmlerc•tl in Stmtembrr qf 1991 wjrh a cnmprrhrn.'iive
rrcnmmrndarinn aJ ro hnw each funding snurce shnuld be assigned. A.'i lncgl jurisdictions
rake acrion.~ mr rhr.w recomm('ndarion.ro. jr would he u.rdul to reconvene this Steering
Cnmmim•e or a similar t:rmm for coordintlfing rransporrarion timding ded.'iions.
3 o Countvwide Level of Service Framework
31 The followjn~ Countywide Level of Seryi¢e :Framewotk Gt.ridini·rruiCiples were
3 2 . adopted by the GMPC on July 21. 1993 jo response to Count;)"wjcJe•:rlannin&'POJicy·T~4.
3 3 Ihtzy are provided as advisory &uideUnes forloc;ll j\JrisdjCtjoos to COnsider {fintmde<Be
cppph:!. 07/J9/lJ4
87
1 =ld&f"JOMI. itiri:tdieeien3l)•u·~tbey :deyelqp• leyel ,orWM.t?e'=;iili.4.a.rl11·
2 ·. Use a multi•rriodqfLOS ft.upipach
3 .. ,,_ ···=1'. >Jurisaietiom?$fioidd::tizf:atmmnrwcg=:=ifi~:,.fo/.::.J9ne~ran2e
4 mmsPbnitjOri .. :planniri&r''""'Jilstei@'of=Tt;tY.irii=:pn=:;tiili.QJiit?mliit;ID.Fol¥.::fofi@sseriier
5 cars;·inew::LOs:=•mndards==snoutao:e0coufiieiJ.til;:··n.a;?9f.:l5.Jiht::@Ji~tiop qeijiand
6 mana&emenE•aod•nqnm2tOniet1 'njyelf·
7 ,·:::'tBiiiibliili\liiiR¥$OV'iiriiifi?ifilii<iliiOl
a · z>' :=tocar:jurlsdictioris •sh®Jd·'Work·:\yitb%f:!i.c#.titjq$sfa9lish: noij~$pV>ff.t9<.fe
9 split eoaJs. These tOcaJ·'eoaJs shan 'ti·cootdiri;rled·=:ffi.'8¢.hiev~:.9()uptyipd="Jlii<>nitl''':ioaiS.f:"
1 o Local jurisdictions and the County shOUld work:w]d{'tbe 'state; ''transit i~enb\eSS:.::at)ij'':fbe
11 PSRC to develo.p ·re~ona):·mode ·solit eoals. ·
12 ·Develop (suoplv•Pt/e) tmnsit ·per(ormance·.mrasurts
13 3. Metro should develop supply-side transiCLOS:J'neisu~s thifffi.chlde
14 service availahility and service quality. Transit service availability descrjbes·tJte=:t,ypes:=m
15 service availahle (rail. regular bus. and express bus) and its orientation (serviceto
16 designated centers and service to areas outside centers). Service gualitj deScribes ihe
17 miniimim route coverage. frequencies. and headways. Transit traveltillles·:and'·M;;time
18 performance standards are optional. appropriate jurisdiction policies and actions Shall
19 accompany their me.
2 o Develop demand-side transit performance measures
21 4. In order to achieve non-SOY mode mlit goals. jurisdictions should adcipt
2 2 policies and implement actions that suppon transit investments. Transit supportive
2 3 policies create the operating environment to promote increased transit mode share.
2 4 Supportive policies and actions include. but are not limited to. the following: parking
2 s minimums and maximums. provisions for transit facilities. transit-oriented development
2 6 guidelines; provisions for HiGh Occupant Vehicle <HOY) and Transportation System
2 7 . Management <ISM) treatments. Transportation Demand Management ITPM). and
2 8 Commute Trip Reduction CCTR) ordinances.
2 9 Develop regional LOS standards and thresholds
30 5. Local jurjsdictjons. the state; and txansjtgencjes should WOrk wjtb the
3 1 Puget Sound Regional Council fPSRCl to develop LOS standards for regional facilitieS.
3 2 .' Local Jurisdictions and. agencies should provide on-eoint review of the PSRC's:reeional
3 3 LOS studies. and make recommendations "to the Growth'Mana1ement Plannine CouJjcD
cppph~. 07/19/1}4
88
1 ana·;ttiiJimoftitmn:.:=eouCJ·==BQira::=fijiitfiJii.'•'t.P.S.·'::mriif.mt~~~TRf.::~Dil•·:·fijiii9.lJ.8l.l.9D
2 systems: 'iriCludirii ••treeways;··aiefi'(Ci]jeifilJTiiiiijlFAA<f.tf.qffiFiY ·
3 r:••:::=rt:'tt:!uffift.'Iijli'(iiiililJQ.S
4 :•.··················::::\•t:=::..:·n~;oy.i==:Junmicnpni:••w;JJ•=:=oae.n.w.ne'•~-.~·tlti.ili~'\:J.fi..iii?!if.COJjidOij•···so.•··ijievyfe
s Los=;· ::t;ach :Junsncnon••shouta••avemze::tcos'?eHher·:·l&.·1'':•ae.9JfiPlji¢··m.J.l~~···biiid ·.o.q::::ta.na
6 Use ortravel· Sheds/• or •aJOnfi '·tiavel·: cotijdO[):•::=::a,)1@iiQi.'''t.ifiwg9i.····b.WU~')iJ:iijli'£.:Uie
7 eeneml···coneestion ··otanenafs•'iristead .of a·sm'&Je:•inrersecfion••or•lin~Y:
8 ·Vary·' Los nandgrds·'by:·land:pu •OrgiJltf.lh?tirJJijiiijiJJetrt Objectives
9 · ... 7 .. ·. · The Los stindari1 •should wij=·JW:9iff~n#i)rn'*·:Pf..9tiv¢12i6~t::v.,mw;s
1 o and erowth · manaeement.objecti~e$t••.:::=pot eiiijjpli~:lJ.tfii···Ari~l"i,l%i.*#.~S'·#.j•t:··W.fff.+f.~
11 more coneestion should· be established •=for. ufbjriiEi.~iSf:'.:~+Dffi.~t=:pqS{$tiri4iij,fi'?ijjij+.Jjq
12 vary based ·upori pomilation and enjploymerifdensmes;
1 3 Support tile countywide land use vision
14 8. Each jurisdiction should devise ·thei(LO~ ijmroilcb =ill ijys tfii(\$~
15 the countywide land use vision. For example. jurisdictions may use LOS {adtOtitbijt
16 measure relative trip leneths or travel time. jn suwon of the countjwide iarid use?V)siori/
1 7 Develop a nonmotorized LOS comooncn_t
18 9. Local jurisdictions should develo.p a nonmotorized componento(their
19 LOS standard. For example. jurisdictions may use a checklist that indicates Wht:itbefpr
2 o not fundamemal non motorized policies. standards. and faci1ities are in place.
2 1 Include state facilities in LOS evaluations
2 2 10. State facilities are an jnteeral element of the transportation netwotk.
2 3 Therefore. it is imponant to include srate facilities in lone-ran&e plannine LOS
2 4 evaluations.
25
2 6 Detennine LOS thresholds aJ the local level
2 7 11. Each jurisdiction will determine LOS tbresholds and weights BWiQPfiite
2 8 for their jurisdiction that are consistent with the coumywide vision .. For example. Qrie:city
2 9 may set a LOS threshold at LOS D citywide. and an a<ijacentjuriSdjctjon U\ay:Setiri?£0S
3 o E threshold for its urban center and an LOS D threshold focthe remainder of the City . ., ,
3 2 Establish inrerlocal amements
33 12. Applyjn~ LOS standards may use interlocaJ a2feements with adjacent
3 4 , jurisdictions to coordinate LOS. methodolo~:ies and resolVe differences.
35
cppph1. 07/19/94
89
1 cmaetjm:::ror::::tA(aJ/J]iumortotioa=Piiif'Conmtiji(Y'\•oct'·J.>i.Y.et.OJinw.nt'"'Jliiijaiiffiic!
2 in·Km··count!
3 ·.·. ··· \<•':Tfretottowm~·omaeunes··rm-r:ocarTiiffimonan•iiHepDiiifenC.farid
4 DeveJqprDent ;:consiutrency:::ui ='Ki#i: tCObfi{.Y:i:ware 'ad<iteA:~I.if.~\flie.·:ijMfC·on Januai:Y ·'J(J.
s l994'::;n::reswnse·::to (Countywide :.rJannin& ·rotwy·::t#Jfh:tt1)cyi~i.Ji::inte»oea lo;&Pide·:lQ(;aJ
6 jurisdictions as·:they deVC:tqp :franspol"Wjori·plans':an<FeoriCij_fiencyiie&J.JlatipriS.
7 ····· · ConC111iions
a Kin~:county:and''tbecjtiesitfKiri&:t?oJmiY···J.119i]ldiJ.li''=ibae=·&ui4eU.rit$·::Jri+_tije
9 preparation·.:·or··tneirTt@ri'sfiO"rWion·::.elemeoti'''an4::=&.ml~ID'~~ .. ~laoi·'·tQ''·'a¢~1e.YC.':tp.e
1 o directiVes, ofthe=·Gmwtb··Manaeeil'tenf::'AtKaricHt.fi~:::~a.e.·:f.ta.n.nin&:=P()~fiE·si.\Clj
11 consistency ·arid :.'COOidh'!adon ·will ·se,.YeiiS'thC'·'·basis::f:for::<JevCIQj)in&+tb~:C()tfutYi\ti~e
12 transportation sy$tem to serve the exPes;tetfifOWtb~):CbiniCi::-iiriifdeyetopment:'Jij'tfi.tF#fties
1 J and County.
14
15 Introduction
16 The purpose of these guidelines is to provide for the consistency and coordination
1 7 of transportation and land use plans by local planning and tranmonatiori aeeriCieS:'YJilij'iit
18 King County so that the. county will-be served by a ·balance<[ multimodal'trarisPQd:ifiQb
1 9 svstem that functions effectively and efficiently under the ~uidance of the CountyWide
2 o Planning Policies. Autos CSOV and HOV). public ttansponation '{rail. bus. pafatriir)$if3ng
21 ferry services), frei~ht (rail. truck. ship. and air). and non-mOtorized modes Of tfi\!el/'B$
2 2 well as demand management strategies. should be planned 'to meet 'the urban 'arid DJra)
2 J travel needs of King County and to support the land use :Policies of the County and its
2 4 cities. Local transportation elements should balance their land use. level :Of-serVice
2 5 standards. travel needs. and financial expectations so that plans can be implemented arid
2 6 used as the has is to determine the transportation concurrency of individual development
2 7 projects.
2 8 GroH'th Management Act
2 9 The Gro\\1h Management Act !GM A) reg'uires that' the 'cOmpreherisive·plans:or
3 o cities and counties be consistent with and coordinated witn'·'the CO!Dprehensive· p13!lS Of
3 1 other cities and counties with which they have cOm mOll bO\nidilries; . £36 .. 70A;JOOf The
3 2 GM A also reguires that counties prepare countyWide·ptanriin,:poticies fCPPl so that the
3 3 -reguired consistency wiH be achieved. SuChqpolicl¢$f6fCdriritfWjde 'tr3n$.POrtatiOn
3 4 facilities and strategies are reguired by section '36.70A.2100Udl of the GMA.
cppph2. 07/19/94
90
1 .'Colmtywide Planning Policia
2 '::::::::;:-::o=:rollQWili&\ffi#:qi&.H§ri>of:,qf(_":YM!\.'~'·iJil~'::JM.ni:=:5¥9#.Jiij-Qi§Wi.b.''''ftf#iji.i#ffi~i
3 . PJaririirii;'Coijncjt'UGMPCY=3dqpfedtjfii~GJ!I1!ijij':':'J.m?~'~~f.9liwJrf4.:iipf.dije:.eyfl::iiie$.'·:t)iat
4 the :GMPI; :.:has=the':Qn~ornj::~si§jijij:ij9.?9~~19l('WIJ:]ti.iijiipijij':!§ri.MI;l3t(.:d 'J<Wet=9f~
5 service· ctoSl standards and a coi!#iif#.ili6y_'.S.91¢#.i''f.()l}'fE9.l.ip~9.¥.~':~niJi:Joijt#S:Wt~
6 arterial· streetS f\1/ttich indudes·:smt#fi61ifi#s.>
7 · ·.• •. , , :::·::= .. The:cpr:·aJso·':mt#::,,n··'PdJic)w):.W.~l:7=:®•t.:J.ii~i?ilJwmmi.':§rla·:nnii.iPffi&''lb$.
8 coordinaiea·:·amori&JunsaictioOfjd':Jb.~::i:.J:N.P.~i9.;::nv.RwYi.m~~':'mB!':b#:·jiii9.f.ffiZ.rf:F:w
9 order ·to jmj;Hetileot the :oountyWide::YisiOri ::and"liijlp.=#i'';PJ.al)"ii
10 Policy EW-18 enal)les the coiihty·ancf'"Cip~~;:t.t?:':il~wt::A.';f.)Cjl!?fd#fi#jtiqfi?wrfi.Q$?M.9
11 consistency reguirements. and to estabJish:;t:oonSisterifprpcess:fpfjmpleirieriijrii
12 concurrency.
13 Consistency and Coordination Guidelines·for'Loclll·TronmortQtitin·P14#i"''tifid
14 Development Concun-encv
15 1. Definitions
16 The terms consistency. coordination. and concurrency'ishOuld.tiCf\.l##:f:Wi.ffi''·'~ij#
17 meanings described in the Washington Administrative Code {WAC 3~;;'195l':and\tlje
18 RCW. These definitions are as follows:
19 "Concurrency" means that adeguate public facilities are available wbeo:'}licfliripa¢tS
2 o of development occur. This definition includes two concepts of .. adeguate publiC
21 facilities" and of "availahle puhlic facilities" as defined elsewhere in the WAC;'' t\lS&IItlje
2 2 RCW states that "concurrent with the development" as a,m>lied to transportatiOn ri)eans
2 J that "impnwements or strategies are in place at the time of development. or that" a
2 4 financial commitment is m place to complete the improvements or strategies within six
2 5 years ... 06. 70A.070(6)(e))
2 6 .. Consistency .. means that no feature of a plan or tqulation is iocompatible'·Witb
2 7 ·any other feature of a plan or regulation. Consistency is jndkative._of a capacjty'for
2 8 orderlv integration or operation with otherelerpents'in:a_=·systeni
2 9 .. Coordination .. mearis consultation and ciXweratiOn 'arrione ·iurisdjctions;
3 o 2. Land Use and Growth
31 The amounts. timing. and locations·ofemwtb:tb~·~ planned b)' aU
3 2 . jurisdictions should be consistent with the Office·Qf:Firiarici~FManil~errientforecasff'foi
3 3 King County and with the growth targets and \iSj6njdQj)ted''by'·the'GMPC.
cppph2. 07/IIJ/')4
91
1 ·· · ·· · · ,· .. · ••o.:'·s •. · ···Trjvel
2 M''''ft'''''•:::::tr~~···w~~;·tttftieieiP.F.~w9?J.Dve1::1'9;miii4~'!i(tlatm~~r9~;;fNifl~~mff~no.rf~$.,~metits
3 shoulo'fJi'''E(fflsi~FWiftillfi"eaan.a;M~·~r~zrm«l~-imr.@.J·:;•~#i':~mw'j:t.W4J
4 Junsru(;t19nsF''•'iTlieHJse•i•otrcom'pau6te•••anJJm§DJf2.9lJ:P.i~':W1lJ.I.~fi.aJ?l~/f~s···res~ttS'1o
s be':'cO'nma¥eci •••acrosi'JtffisaicHonar.Jmes'i't
6 · 4. ULeveJ orsemce'•stiriaaids
7 ·. ·······~····•?•:::::•:•·(•T1'\E:::oos:.•,staDaaras::::aaQiiwt'lfiW@CiUJ.iffis.tti.i;PQiiJ.f~fi.9.wa:~~?~m.t~~D{;;WltlfWthe
8 LOS 'Fnimewort:::omaelmes'•adoptea•~·6YiiHe::tnt!fPCNiiJidts6cfwaaze•::cooroi·n#ied·'~ijb•.:(}1.tif
9 local jurisdictions I .· The ·:tos oStaridifdS''''SfiQUj(f•pe::ta'sdr-tcf:ideritifih'detiCieriCles'•:,and
10 jmproverrierits ass&iated··witb 'concurrency/:
11 ·. 5. . ··Transpiri\tkm Needs
12 The new and improved transportation· ti¢jljtie$' anp?$tijite~ies•:J#piiiiJ@i#lf.lg::J.p
13 transportation pJaris should 'l!eoonSisterifWit1FlQ&JJFmbbilitY%neeas·':'ana::::eos··=sf1ndafiiS'{Fwi<J
14 should be coordinated. Facilities should in'dudeineiials?''fiiriSlt~:routes'ltiri'cf':'$Wte
15 facilities·. Strate~ies should include transportation de'mana fuanaieirierit find :SyStetn
16 management measures.
17 · ·6. Fundine
18 The sources and funds to pay for the ·transportation jniptovements··nee(ied''to
19 meet LOS standards should be consistent with federal. state. regionaLind 1Qciil 'rundiri'~
2 o policies. Projects needin~ re~ionally administered funds shotild•be coordiriijed throu~h
21 the PSRC planning and funding approval process. ·The funding OftranSpOmltiori•etemiffits
2 2 shpuld include the consideration of the timing and availability ofanticipatecffUhdS\
23 7. Concurrency
2 4 Concurrency applies to the regulation of individualland use •actions· as
25 descrihed in RCW ~6.70A.070<6Hel. It should be derived frointhe coordination·•and
2 6 balancin~ of land use. kOS standards. transpOrtation .rieetisVarid 'firiaridal Te$oiirce;f::'iQ"'t},e
2 7 comprehensive plans of local jurisdictions.
28 8. Monitorine and Evaluation
2 9 The local jurisdictions and transportatiOn .gencies<iridl<ini •countj should.· W.§f~
3 o together to establish performance benchmarks fo(tbe cOuntyWide trans;ponatiOn systefi:E•:•g,
31 that each can monitor its performance and evaluate.•'the ·need io imprOve it; , .. Tbjsactiviij
3 2 , should include the exchange of information: d$L••and':'te¢hniciil'inalyses:
3 3 9. · ::Certification and Reyjew
cppph2. 07119/94
92
1 r==::::::::=::-::::-:::::;?::t::::;g:\1;]ie=resgtf''stiowa:,:c<iji$iij;f"';\litf::iii':':9f~::jijiS@lifi~i:i]jfijf:Si:9@J.fi~i§n.
2 rrnewN3fi1.&aJ:·:mnsmttanon =~su;mm.·::JlfJP.Iiiffi.iii4Wis.di.cmPP.s::::tn:=::JSin·i·=~co.u.nw=:
3 rroo1em s=:orJnoonsisrenc§::with =other JQciif:Can(f)'eiiO.nili?ptj.US.?ifiii':=&VresoTvea<throu&n·:a
4 ri;assessmtmt :or·•=JQcii1··= itarfijKinatiori,.pliQs:=::J.S,:JiwYid&Fiii~t.De:·=t;'f4{S';·:
5
6
1 Gtlidetines:':ror=:::commuter'=:eJ"tkirig=:J!~n;qe.s
8 .··= :·The Iott<>Win~:.ou;deunes·=tort;ommtue.r•'f.lfkil!#fplicjes:twere'i.(]~:·fiy·:pi~
9 GMPC opJ3n\Jazy\'19/:199~·,:jn=reiNn~:,.JO:::ppufflYWiij¥.i'f!Jiqpiqi:':pol]Cj':ft~:~t_:=::~ -
1 o pOlicies :,Wefe:proposea ana:=endoae<F=Jiyft.Ji.';,I<.iDJ:=:=§Pijpf!.:i:J!J.iifiilifii.ft.>lfijpq::::i.t@?~i9!.e.9
11 by the Transportation Callcus on NOvefriJXfr\l:f}t1~4Pl:rftey''irif=P.foVid~d..'ij'i,:~
12 guidelines ror·localjurisdktions to conSistet'fiif\tentJ&I.,.te' iti~tle'l~eJij "itip;s§.ieijeij'sJY':i.$.'lt.l.l~Y
13 develqp parkin& policies.
14 Preamble
15 The purpose of these guidelines is to provjde a framework for Jocaliu[j5Qicnops·'to
16 use as they review and revise their parkin& policies. While it is reco~iied''they?ffiay?i.lid
17 some· tailoring to fit the needs of individual jurisdictions.·they are<strone1y·reci)mmerige.<Ji"fis
18 a .means to achieve consistency among local governments in the drafiin& of theii:Damri~
19 policies.
2 o Revision of parking codes js seen as a process reguirin& evaluation arid tri0djfiq6on 4 • Oo • H 00000000
2 1 on an iterative basis. Local elected officials should reView parkimnxilides and.coo'CS'''#Ye.fi'
2 2 few years and adjust them as transponation alternatives improve and experierice Mth''''(ljeir
2 3 impacts gained. To implement these policy recommendations. jurisdictions wm rieed:'jl)
24 monitor parking demand. perhaps on a biennial basis. The extent to which local &overnmerits
2 5 constrain parking supply wilf ultimately devsnd on the availability of alternative trans;porti~ion
2 6 modes.
2 7 The incremental nature of these policies should increase the wiJJin&ness ofdevelqpers
2 8 and lenders to consider reduced parkin& sup_pJy. ·• The· success of tbese policies :W1]''Wpe
2 9 measured. in pan. by local a~encies' ability to work With the financial· coirhfiuijjij:C:'jo
3 o encourage lender approval of projects with a less than traditiomll·parkin& Hsuwly.:
3 1 Policy Guidelines
32 I. It is recommended that-·cities aod·lh$:Couriiy:a~qpt•pg]jcies'in =their
3 3 comprehensive plans to reduce reliance on SiriiJ¢10Ccypari{'::vetijde§:(SOVsrby
cppph1. 07/19/94
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
consra1nhi&::'·SifPi'tiF<>f·:wm"JJ1uiifileffiPIOl'ee:':~nimii··:#ir.t¥a.?f9.1':::i9:"'w¥.':'tqn&;:c.9.V.n.&
cotiritfWidet:PJanrnrii'"'Policies•:and··we;:sijite:~®ffiiriifteitfi.iP.''~i®.CfiQfr.ttriSR'•JY.J'#.
GmcteUnesJ•'
·····•::r:=:.mackcroiin<E'::i~rwfFhWirldilifiititffi#.?.if.;!IJiif;rfiii2.ififf.fiiiPt~n·i-fiarfii7f~(#iiiii!i'iiii4
priceiire rhe •117nsr rosr -effedi\;iizf"iilltriinsizhfidiioff''(Jifriiijifil}fftifijjli~ifii#li!iifiijijfj?ifiifii#~fi.
Parkin~ ifoliij" fui#r · 1int;'ii4nit iiTniffl· hiiFm'l!.ft'fi)f!ftpiiifijf!fi':cJi~r/ifiifltfiiiiSiiiiJifilJi~Tiifl.flf£
The ·:coiinffivtae····:tNanntnk''':fionae~·f'ttoiiQt:~w¢la.n.e®~J.flrP.rHzfilj,(llCiiQPJ.i:);;e.~:~f.9i84tn
mai;mi'm••.:uaficltig •fiia#i rrmc17ri.'ipfii':'Oifij#ih.~lii.f?Viff§QJ(fl.;!i6:iifi!lif!#'W;pif¢f,fH?iiiji!.:fi¢iffi.itJW}~
a·nmfi.'rin.'ihi('tzfimliFntpirtldnPiifiifC¢l:f:qri'§QY.S::rp:::qfli.iijrfii.if.eij,{':ffiijqUJ1i¢(1iffiji7Jiilfl!#ffiiiJ
centerS I ····Odili;iV::'qrcQ,f;':/giiif·'bt!##ei.flndjEC'"'fiijlf.f}':lttH.efpiJ.'Iffir;;:p;zz;i!j_:~~fi!iavFP.fii§fii?tllffJ
an nrmommirv ·.to· srarr to· •cnl1.itr£iiri·K~iiJidTY :ras::•attemiftjifii'Ui:iirii,iiiiiii@nli'::=ffiiRfli:!}IRCljfM
available ro mrefrhe inreni nfthe.rr·CiniiuyiViik'tPtaririinil'PtJUCieS;:J
A. Encoura~e cities to coordinate on a subie:is21la):-:basls:fo·•ferluce·wfkirii
requirements for office. industrial. institutional. and mixe<HJse:develgpinenf•S()';t1jiij·'•'tlj¢
reguired supply better matches demand. lt js prooosed that sum>Jy outside iiman:·ceroers
be adjusted just to fit existing demand at this rime and dro,P b¢10\~fdeiJland i>rilY''iF'sijcb
.time when ad~uate transportation alternatives are in place.''lt js ICCOl1Jmendegttbif.m!$iij?j)ly
v:ithin urban centers be set below existing demand when· improvements 'that pt:O:vide
19 alternative modes of trans:portation are in place. Reduction of sup,pl}r may be
2 o accomplished by eliminating minimum reguirements ·alto,gether. reducim: minimum
21 reguirements. and/or by establishing maximum regujrements.
2 2 (Back::mund.· Jr is rl'('Ommcndl'd rlzar parkin~ policy chaners be azrred iiiQii (if a
2 3 counrvwidf' lr,·rl and rhar a cnmmon framework for cock chan~r.s be cnnrdinatrd Oro
2 4 suhrec:innal lrw'l. wnrkinf! rhmuf!h already esrahli.'ilzed organizarinnJ Such os ETP on the
2 5 Ea.wsidf and SCATBD in rh<' sourh rnd. lr should he nnred rhar the policy
2 6 recnmmrndminns dn nnr dntl wirh rrrail nr residential land use.'i. nn[y with otfice.
2 7 industrial. insrirurinnnl. and mulri-use drvelnpmrnr.
28 1. Adiust minimum parlcin& regujreme{ttS outSi®·Uttian':cehteil\k):•JW'lbe
29 level of existine demand. Reduce this regujremeri(funberas'trinspOnatiOri QptiOhs
3 0 increase with development of enhanced ttansit mice arid/Or as demand drQps wi"th
3 1 achievement of CTR goals.
3 2 ·(Back~rmmd:. 1he ·CfR' lqw·m(mifqtf.ffdi(if/emjilifji:rS::With.JOO nr·ninfe
3 3 employer.'ircduce the numhrr nfSOV trips·m-tlfdFwntbitit>'f55rtij:J995/.15%1ii.']997.
cppph.2. 07/19/~
94
1 rma···~s!&::::iijH19991??lhidiu;ye'::fi/iiifVfjf/i~ii'fj'~SQ.V}!ff.Q'i:fi#JJFfi!iffiif.€.:•:ik'::p~i1Wfill
2 &iffiziJn'e.::'!i.\ullmijr·,:;iJiii#.r]r:qt.a.u:~~&::;Mf·:'lviii.n~P.Wflai.~:';;mw.i!':~;rr:i/l?Ji;::s.:~t'«:w.lifiR
3 iiUCiifftomw<v.narWffli~}Sflriirwrwnmran..t:;'tif4.tliifltfl:R'I'i.liWl.i6?.?5'rfjfflin·"'mtf="Jir
4 mii.''·inif:::zzm;raea•·:oonafi"i/tfawliii.i+f.tiftnrl'i:::lWffi:;~J.m'il1iilmt4tW.li':~ctlla··m·=·•1fn.f:=ro??a
5 Stihlirhqn ~non~CBTJ (]fea. whura:biY4% :tz)Y4S)9$f#:(;.~:~?lPP.t.-'·•::fmil.:Z1li41':\lb':·•gp..o.p;c::'tf.'i'iJ
6 rrcogrifild::ihele>a1rliifijirinr#·: orrJ£oi¢fl?p!f!Pfi~?fflfillii~lq'iy)[~ij~ll}'!ff··:ma·:r;m.'~f.'f.f.rf.q'f#
7 outarliiiestanarsnfiUtdWe'itifllcWea:::mumJ(wauaUifri.lfitiaif.f•!m;:eaf!ftiiidsiliCijo/.fP•••:w?.t''if!f?t
8 recnmmrnara · iht1r iltrisilictinns · ream re:=te.iJ+tlfiifiVihe::::We;;t(iijii}\:Vfiii'i·e¥ian.m ~e;y;se:•ri"::-'fiiir
9 frequent; J
1 o · · 2. Set·the miriimum ·patlcin&·reQui¢nieiltj4ri/rif6an'9¢1#¢d=and'.'~'·:w.Jm
11 enhanced transit service below the level Of existin~ :pif'kin¢'derijarid~:.:::A·,C,§fFP.#fl~ffl~~~
12 would be to use ·the ·level· of· demand ··based OD·'=the'lcruevetnenPOf'l995 ·comjjj\ite',·tfjp
13 reduction 20als.
14 r&ckgmumJ.· As ·nnr~d·abnve. dema!ldfnrifiiifjniiii.=~ra:rr;TaFiii#'PJ:ifli
15 CTR law is imalrmemrd. Parkinc .wapfv can be tighrtned more in urban· Clnceri'i"iili.?fe
16 puhlic rranspnnqrinn alternatives qrr already availiihli. ti'Jhhuld 'binbieif thdf:'ffii.f"fii}flifi..
17 is nm inrendetl tn apnlv rn park-and-ride lnrs.) .
18 3. Establish a maximum parking ratio for employee parking. with
19 administrative flexibility to allow exceptions to the maximurr!if al)propriate.
2 o (Backr:muncl: Ew•n when minimum parkinc rraujrrments are reducea;=::q
21 .\'iCnificanr VC'fCt'nfOI!l' n(dt'\'t•fnners will STill provide pqrking qhnve the minimum
2 2 rt'Qldrrmrnr ifrJw\' helirw· the markrt demand is there. The Starr CTR Guidrlines·:p(iflcine
2 3 PnliC\' Rr•nnrr rt'commrnds rhm maximum.\' he set m meet acmal demand. includin~ a
2 4 cushion nf 10 rn 15 rwr('('nr for pracrical capaciry rn guard ar:ainsr .rpillnver. J
25 4. Evaluate and revise parking standards on a re~ular basis. startin& ·1n ']997~·
2 6 based on assessed impacts and effectiveness at reducing reliance on sovs:
2 7 fBackcrmmd: Thi,c; wW enable juri:sdicrinm; rn determine howihit'reVt.red.
. . . . . .
2 8 parking .'iTlmdard,c; orr working and fine-runr re(JrHreirfazfi:'ihcrrmenraPy liiz.'ff:if.(;ntfiEtfiiil
2 9 CIPPrirnce. j
3 o B. Make it easier to adjust parking to a mjo less "than =the ieguired minimtlm'{Or
31 office. industrial. institutional and mixed-use land uses.
32 1. Streamline the process {or new develqpment:to·provide Jess than the
3 3 minimum where the demand for employee patkill& 1s:'zlow:nori1lal.
cppph2. 07119/94
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
·=·:::··"':n····--r·:::::•·Hno::•ma6kffiiilftif3·:::···:a···:sliiYtiYTiriif::ra.rtOOiJ:fQl'ifiit!ifi¥iJJJl.c.t:9.1i.¥1if.-2.P::~@ff.ni.Bi9
iiin.fifi.ffflfifi.'iJ.nt{9!f1Fiff9if41ril/if6.fiftiPiffiJJlJ?iJ#.f;i:iJifillltfiii.f*~~f;?iJJi?.ifi,"fm!mZW~l.iil?.ff.i
rrF'iilimarte.awniifirt&Fm1mnfiiiii''wHifiif1Ffdiftif.1/!lif:f!JI!i.f!iflllff.OJl~;:=r·~t:Il'wnir;'n'tti.r::.na;p,--,o
. ~o i1irHiieh''o4wthv·viiija1Icr izmcr.iiWJ.LtmiiJ.az~#iiifiiY+Jlqefiiiii:Fi':fro/#.·iJi:QYid.fri'i ·1.ess
0a rldne 'ffiQn ·•reau;red/J
.. : ........ •·. ··z .· ·.:::establish·: a process ·ana·. actiye)y"·eri00.9.riiP.~rii.:·p\\Jorn.::w.rm~or
7 woiksites·•io reguce<tb-etfpatldii& ••swply5~especliUyNwn;retM.·J~ce$S'ieijstsf::w'?W.P.$9.#.
8 commmetful··r«Jlictimi·•&oaJs;
9 mackgmund.· ·s; ncr' par/dn'g• CQdi.r'!lV,1tiiiiJl1jti)TiljfH:•ifelii E&if.f.ii#i#iiJff.i ·
1 o firvelnrmzrnr; ··they ·\tiill=llni alfcci iii.ftin~ ileV(NiijiiftittiiUiiififictra::fiy(ifilt;[l!,tljpyiWJflfPijf}q
11 provision/ike this;)
12 3: A now parkin~ ·to ·be proVideifl!19~··w.·~:··mihUftY"fri.::w~re•··t6C.iji~J'e
13 incentives to redevelop existin~: sites in 6eritrn··supj)Qrt&Fb)i'tranhlbaod+wn¥.1¥iw@
14 actions do not present a situation where "spillover" :iWkiri& neptivelfjmpicts.:acniC¥flt
15 land uses.
16 fBackg.rmmd: Del'rlopmrnts in grrqs with· fnod tron~i(serVicr shHii1d'Ji(!Fiib1!.
17 ro rrm'ide Irs_,: rhan rhl' minimum C\'rn tforhrr pharaccrristics Qfthr drvelqam?rif?Wifiild
18 nor nomwll" indicarr a lnwf•r than nomwl demand. J
19 C. In addition to the code revisions suggested above. insure the folloWiri~
2 o common elements are included in individual lOcal parkjng co<ies:
21 1. Encourage shared parkin~. CShared parkin~ refers to patldn,:spaci;S:·tpat
2 2 can he used to serve two or more individual land uses without conflict.)
2 3 fBackr:mund: Mmr iurisdicrinn.'i already have provisions for shared iiarTarii'ln
2 4 rheir cndrs.· rhi.'i would mrrrl" insure char all jurisdicrinns encourage reduced oarkine
2 5 rrauirrmrnrs rhmur:h rhi.'i means. J
26 .., ... Require reserved parkin~: for high-occupancy vehicles clo~•to•tbetffQttt
27 ·entrance of a building.
2 8 fBackcrmmd: Rrquirrm~nrs co re.vrrve a crrrain ·ratin ofi!rr tnrglparldiii<iiijiz
2 9 fnr HOV narkinl! ar<' hrcnming more cnmmnn. This may O.f1Pear·qsg rrg,u;remenffnr"ii11
3 0 drvelnnmenr in a cengin land U.fC coregqry nr as qn oprinnfnr developer.r wh(i w;m·•to
31 reduce rhe;r parking .mrmly below rhr juri.vdiclinn.·::siundari:ld
3 2 3. Set standards for bicycle patkiDgf .
3 3 · rBackemumt.· Bicycling"hizS-,he::'fiiiteiitiiilttdY.!Ji&f'reosdntthlt: iifjeitiiitrvl::to
cppph2; 07119/94
96
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
sov ,,rfNtfroorh>in htdr-drns;& airat;: ,wcre-:::r~iefl'-li a!r?if4i':a·mfniU.?f.ifii?Wfi.oWif::W
bicycle cnmmuriitg. alld t!l lhw.;acn.rrt§•oiia£\\Wif:ij ih~ii:'Jil"fi:i.fffiifli.§&fiid::ffii@fi@&
;.r:'·'mtiiimat:-nr·:,Jiiiavm1ahlr!rt·'Biaaa·::pananr:-::y,nulilt/ie}ifi;P~illd::qs:::;pmr;n•artniil!•::iXif6.ni
srall.'i). 'with a niirlimum \rjifCiflfd. : •\<1-':hiihcr~rqda:·mtijflbi./W#.ifiifftiffl•Jn .i!¥_:ufba# p1jiii;·
Bicycle' t;arl..7ng· taatmes::snniila 'fif:wrTFlm>sfcilfi~troJfi/ffiat§?ifiilt:~ifCaieailitiin iifid'i1iiir
i.'i proFecrrd fii?iitrncftim'rTiFiWiirhlr>t:
:·:· ·: ~c ·,: =setdeSiiH:::staridifds':::foFpiifin'&~Jots::=;FqJ.f/OW!i&emp;rgrpeif¥#.f.Mitf•if.9¥ss
between sidewalks: ana ,hun din~ :entrances\ancrw•:·c.m~r~\U:J#f.'Witldrii':,,ots'::Cire'Wn§f:~'-P.iffler
to pedestrians~
. ·· _.,. fliilckgmuiiiiF : tw?tciiJJii=FtfOri.'tii::'iiiJJfiifj.flfiJiifr/'6iif1YrHWfijlli':i.hiijujQ •viift
expan,r;es nfparldng m gee fmm ·rroirsirsrhiii:'i6'bii1tilifiiPfiritaiice.~::,t:QniwQY.:·td/Chiiiii~
this simor;nn is rn Jncate emplnvee porkini iifthe frarilifilfiidi:.t (jiflii'b'ii_flairii)'Yfijthef-;"(~iffi
in (rnnr nfrhe huildinr:.)
5. Allow parking suroly to exceed the majim1lrtrstandard qfpiovtde'a--::jj()g1is
15 such as· increased density for developments that provide a portion ofthejrsitefor'P&R
16 use or other public uses. This would apply primarily to new retail prOjeCts 9itq::eij~ril
17 sites that have an excess parking supply.
18 (Backr:mund: Park-and-Ride capaciry in Kine Cnunry is in shnl'i sii{ijzlj.:=:gfid
19 cnnsrmrrion nf m•w rorkim: cnsr,o; mmmximarely $20.lXJQ per space. PrnVidln"i:ifn
2 0 inct•nrive in nff-.'iiTrt'l'f parkin!! cnde.'i fnr The private JeCTnrti> /rqsr Space TO trgir.fit
21 al!rncil'.'i .... multl ht•lp acrnmmndar<' rhj.'i need. The additional parkjng suanlv CoUld mtt~qe
2 2 u.w•d hv rhr drw•lnpmenr ar nir:Ju and nn wcekrnd.'i. J
23 6. Review on-street short-term parkine supply as a means of accommodariri~
2.; cities' economic develoDment needs.
2 5 fBackr:mund.· ThP rc•cnmmcndarinn.'i contained in rhi.'i paper deal Wirh lnn~-
2 6 1enn cnmmmrr parkinr: .. 'illrmlv. Parking supply fnr rrroil usrs .vhnuld hr addressed
2 7 ·separmrl\' h\' htrisdicrinn.'i. J
28 7. Agree on a regionally consistent set of measures Ior-establishin&:patldri~
2 9 ratios.
3 o fBackcmuntl: lr i.'i nfrrn difjjculrco cqmnqre ·oilrkfn~ standards nf Inca/
31 ;urisdic.1inns because difkrenr meqsurei are usfd:tnserm'lrldfi~ raTios. For most I(]Tld
32 w;es. rhis measure .'ihnuld he snoce.f per J.QQQ;~quqir teeiQ.trrd#]easahlr arei(
3 3 Hnwever. cnn.'ii.'itc•nr mea.mre.'i frr such u.re,f tl.~SChOoli;"'hn.giiral.f~··~:md churCM.riieeifiii be
cppph1. 07/19/94
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
w.icui.frQ/fiiftliiffF(i#.LitiiiifPMnF!jacljah··•
:wnr··:::r?'ttifl~inj:••:w;cvttnltiaflves
::····:·••::::•::::=+wrn:::t~::::;unsairoons••:moultN9wetog·;w~Wi!Jl9Cf.?:9.tf.@.t.t•f.e.Ch"Difioe5·:xo···womP.te
a •cJoser..:woff(irii•ma~onwp•:·:~ittjttbeHifi~n§~·:·:Md.i'9m1.9.iiiP.i:i;sp_ffiffi\U.ifti~:··.
·· ······.··rw:·nJ==-:::=•tOCiJ.::Junsol&Jons···a.na•::Menp::::iff9wif:~wP.r*rt.9i.9.ffii+wr:·we.nutY ... P#rJdn~··mcJD~
tect1nig\les···tha~,.~hoi)td•:fie··im.p1emeiitep'•ijj':t)l?.WelJ§n'::WJ.a.::;Qtffi3.Ht•:•t#l.Jjt~Y.veta,ijt.hQf]ty•·ati$)i ·
sooe:•:tevetHoHritfOOuce••:suctr••strateitesr·:·•
·····t&Jcu'miina:··<··thr····sra;r::rn··:ra.vktt:ofii/'f&iffiiiif#liil.eQ>ilffi.f::rifiiatJii.ifllFi,ili!J
incentive .frrarrvir.'i be pursued before ireiifll!izry'~Vfiiiiejirs::W(rii::Snuehf·t6:(/.<f&ffii!#it:'lf
CTR goals can • /?C izChirved · withm# · rhe· nr,r'Q/fa'•.¥iiiJfitiiPli1i;f/d#i'¢1igr~ls~ :'fil(iiWfVfi{YfQ~
need for ·rrgU/arory srralegjrs will be· rcVicifea• hy·the•:X<iSFFj/ro/")i1tU995~ ··:·1Jii:r¢•g~··p
number ofKing Cmmrj P/anninv Djrrcrors•tha('bi:lieye•jJt;diriW&(;hniiJJ(esiifeTcilifiift(i
annmpriatr in urban crmrr.'i.)
Technigues such as the followine could t>e<coriSjdefe<J:
A. Provide tax incentives and other credits to eiripl()yeis<thafeJirriirijte••eroplOjee
parking subsidies.
(Bac:kermmd: Deciding w wke advqnrqfe.ofraxinerririves-:gnikCrtidit.f.:'fVQJjlif4X
\'0/umar\' rm 1hr parr oflhe rmnlnvrr or d('vclnper. SevEral cities have r.xpii:Silil'Tniereit
in pmvidinr: .'iliCh incrnth'l's.)
B. Charge for parking.
CBackl:mtmd: 111rrr i.\· curremly no rnahlin~ legisWdon allowing 1nCiJ1
jHrisclicTions rn rN111ire a clwrr.:e for rzarkinf ar r.xisring deyelopmem. Bnweyef. thlt"ii'iin
nminn rhar can he rmr.wrd 1hmur:h the SEPA nmces.'i as a miri~atirm measure reqiliredof
nrw dr,·elopnwnrs.
c. lmvose a parkin2 tax on privately provided.dnon-commercial patkiri,.
2 6 rBackrtmuntl: The 1990 Lncal ()cJiion Commercial ::Parking''Tiq i$cu)iinflyJ.'((m(ied
2 7 ro commrrcial norldn r: hu.'iin('.'i.'irs. whjcJz ore rare outjjd(if!Si:dttl(i:::qnd -io :rticllifies
2 8 whjch chgrve fhr oork;ng I Because the LOcal Qjitjmt• Commefciarearlcfitftiii":'IS::uiu:ilile
2 9 rn rarger free parking. if dilmrs rhr dfecrfYrnrs.~ gfrh(rai ii.~>((TDM mdi J
3 o D. Encoura&e employers who ·subsidize empleyee·patkin~ to proVide empleyees
3 1 the option to &ive up their parkine mace ·and receive•a:caSJramotinf:"egtiivaJenfto the
3 2 parkine subsjdy.
3 3 fBackgmund: Vzis -porkinv pricing ·rcChniqut!··tilr¢gdy"':/n:jnrHused in :(Jilifnriria
cppph~. 07/19/94
98
1
2
3
4.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
riixrtJrq':•ii1ij:::f1j7Jgdir~8'iitm'kiiliii~i.tf:iffli.rtai?.!$P.iii.P'i:Vqfi!rro.=::l.w}iJfi.fiJiifii!7iii«
ihriP.Pffii~-rwxriilfliffi1f(Tf#JfJJrrlmtiJf:flii'fifiJfii.ifJil6£.1iiJ!7f§i)f1.iii.¢'<iiJ?iif:marrrea.,:e.~
~t~n.w~tzei/'}2iirldite:'·,,=:::we=rmufi1H!Wiiii¢'k:z;pt1tU·'iuea:'ttJ,'~ifilii;P.wnit1Stcurrrnill :crtax~rree
brirdf"t?unPe'r-:zR$••:fiirutiifi,nns:.Whrtr>riifP1wer:t-:Wfiiild{lfi.~_tii.iif?•tr.fffij•./ii@iea···rh_e.iifgr/cfl
valu~ n=t.,;arld11~;=}
TRA~ESPORTATIO~ff'}!eijt!lreft.eti~·· fif.!~~,;~'~J.i(:~i~:i~~~t···)(et
ce~Atywiee·Pelieies JReESHB 1G2s~·::&eetiet./2) . . .·.·· ... ··· ·.•.. . ·. . ... ·.·.·.·.·.··.·· .. ·.· .... ·.·.·.·.·.-.......... ·.·.·.·.··.·.·.·.·.·.· .. ·: .. ·
CBrtnFy;Vitlif,.·!Jisif,,(,;rg jf81ieies· ·lfifi.Yi '~~-liilii/ff'i!}/i;,;;;ti#.i,.:I;,_::!.~ .ii£!Jr~:~'f4~,,-~
fi·6me"',·flik:fFem vmte~t eandi:ileltl Ct~iett,. e.itJ: ct,Yitffoiifirf!f#l!!~/~l#fi#: Xr!l:C#:#.}#.#J#llif!¥:;; <
n~t;e;e5 ~6" .,"trt9~~~li9 nw5' 6flti"eil. n n• J' •YT' ilt•, .~~a:
nt:JWI"t'{32. 2 (3) (e-)};
4. A'~!icit·s :fnr )•)fm t"W'I"' tot·' c·;-. ~'ti'P'fi~~ ·~j·'ti1 ~~~ •" ,.~ ~ B)
5. i '! '"'lt·'····i·· f1" '1F ft~t"~' i· ·~tie' r~~ ~ f31 ~
CftHtJ'rehensi'Ye PlAits (RCV/ 3(;.'79A.9'79)
t'OI1iprcht·,·rs; l't' pltm wirh tt l'iltHitktiH"' N'6PI.fiJ'OT•'Itldffn ekmt!ltt fo~al inel-i:Hles thefalltnving
:wh eh·mt'•'lfS:
1 Y~
2.
Lttflw:l t~sr e:e;t:t11filittl9s ~set/ ;, esli#fftllifft rNJWI tl~alftl;
Gieifer ttnt1 ve-·iet> "e tJ. ft f · · ~ • · le I ~' · · ·· • 7> .1 • n . • ~.v .,,. tNIItrtutg a. 3ttif6tntttg,.'lf~ fi.J5t!f't'ft!t!
s rn• v • y '' • r •• t:ll81tVIJ f'fllt,.t::.' .. 'i,'
~-
re.wwrees; .this filtJff will he ~ tlfftl at:IBfHellaiH'flllllly;
J,•p,'e. ,YR,Pll, ?
0
'WlWe,",'(J,1 ecn·AJ.,·p~,tj,'"tf ',lo'f'I.,L ... -· -di >>.· . . · .. • · .. • -. •. ,;;J• .. I' 0 en~ rnn• urna"J"· ·g-··m-··-··P'J f:A9J8et!1tl.J6t"rt!5iz;efi8115,'
cppph2. 07119/94
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
f~::::::.:·:.:·t.a~fi!Ui.n.::;e~!!!,,:I!~M.iB:~!i.i.Lt!;
;t!!~!tf:::l!i;::,-iirZ~~""':·.:.i·::.e?ffifi~Jilii~:&::ii.~o:::·i!i;::~f!::t!i
·1~:: ··.· .. ~··~~ii;:;tf~t.f~m#.fii#§.tifi!iit:: .. a::tiiiiiJis~ifii!~ti.:.i!!~fil&:.:.!~~,
6fiP1'8¥.Bl.if the ee~~lflfol~e~t ~fJli5es_ ,t~e-''J.ej~i_"'8f .. #?fi!lf!:::i.~::.'fl#Jfi!~:}fi!ff5r::.f/i£ .. !_~f#
Ot-her Laws aAa R:egttlatioAs
<',OJ"11'J,1V -.tri,.,', z.'z.i..: .aw· ,., ... .i-.• , .... ·r· ~ '7771 ./ T 1 J": J'TJ ~!ij1il~ri Cl t, 1t? cJe··i~·rePiJ ,, l .• J 4 i l
I ., .1) l I .. 1 l { .Y V It i : ii ~ Yi fl. r• I { fi( it r• I V 81ft • J68,ge
ffr •
(" TL 'S I I'J-'J"!{ "(;/'" ~'u 1 ; 1 , • r v .1
•O,ol,ltt'l·,n," 6a••-o' ..t.fiJ.IIIilrt-· ~t r ~rr nnt Yl7t >1£C Cj.
cppph2. 07119/94
· ... ·.·. ·. .· .· .•..... ·.·.·.· ... ·:.-.... :· .. · .. ··.·.·.·.·,•.·.-.·:·:-:o:-:-::-.-
100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
~##~4.?!!.!.rfiil#ii¥!i:.!~.!i!~'#i!f#;#ii!~:p_fjlf!ifj:~.2#.:'-f#
· ·:.;:~:tf#&!:~~t:!.mi'Jli##l#fll#i·:?!:f'ii:~r?iii!i!if!.~:::·:t!!fo·:rtR!~~:::~~~:~?!li!t!i!lftr~
'ffl~f~/1!!#. :'¢~f!!iffiif~·"?tJtif:~ll!i!f!JJi#2!!~Zr:f!::~~ffi:=tfi/i#Iii:7t###~~¥f·:t~:···~~!.#
mileii ii¥iveke. ·'~tiitJ!J&d~s flJ..! ~--~·i:7i~-~f#·::fiffolii!?¥:::!f5:·.!r&:f!?!:fii':r!~~~·j~f~tff#}§l
· tknr8.¥.hj· ·J§:.peN!eitl'aj 1'999. . o1i8Htii~eif5 · #efPf.?i!:~Y. ·r.~~:;::?!i~if!Y.:··:·~ifi!.· #!~is.;:::!i!'i#~ -~~
eaard.f1ia.¥.6 1~iirh :rtii'L!Jit agt¥reit!!i, fe.gfe~ig_fil!:.~f.i!ii:··~fi~&!#i?.l~fi¥'.~"/fi?V~t::?.iffi!!5!!§y
affJ i!u:j lllltSt he eaft.?i.v.teifi lvi.-lf. eamm~.·; fi.ip 'fil~l~ifpliiif.f (f"'f:?lg~-~~-~ifg
&.-tl:t J.e~.,. p1vwitlesfor ,.,t' tlt'l'elflt'1ftelti.'&:i!.!!:tt'J; €.8fi:~?.lii:t!!~~~.-f!!§t£:iriil?fi!
wil-hl11 Hie Puget Sfletrttl A1't'tt. J?u' Iil~v ~tjNI~ Oi!l#l""!.•!tff!f{._"~g~~(;Jq,"'_f!tftj~fi!·;.:_::!J!lfi#.
~t'flh!tl ii'Rf'kl71el'fl«lc:'ICT 9"e•rl'9l ·~ • .,t •'' IL. I •
ppnt-pl .,LitiJ'G link-vi 1.~, rr; 1. r I 1 ,;"". -r.. . I r. ., •.
l.. ~ nll ~rl P' r;-, \ ,T finft:l.u 1'1) } , • .. ~n ct:Jf'6£•ry r•·'6/'f..Vl1 J8Clii1iCS,
T/u~ l9oo Sw!A' LAI,..:~-L~· .... tl "'t'•'l'?' ~:r~~~~~ C'"~-.,talh.IYffi pt.i.htll \'t:riflbls •.;:r. rra/6. tilfg
S:t·;·rin\t; CtJ1'11111i11Ct' \rW.v .fHrJ1lt'cl It> recflnnllclft:i h8~•· tllese}ttltiJ,;Itg 6~:~f't~-ifi~i--fi~~-;tl··6·-v• 1 ; ~ •t . . ···.·-···
h'tts e:JrlffJltt .. "t:l Ht St·,·e,t~er: f( /-!}9' .. ~lf't t1 etHifPJ~~ · : .. -.·--:-
r'%{'( 'fiP11t'1l('}}tk;fftiN tl.'i f ~ 1i ~I I' ?c lt"1i ~; 'l ':" I ~ ~ J ~ , ;, I tJ
••• /. I • I.. . I I I • • 'crn:t t7t tft 11r5 'lr'f frU'SC fC't'a"JHIPIICP/atlfil JU!i, Jt Vl*8Hr'tJ he i'"f!itfu/tfl ~f!t'fllfl't!l'fe tflfS ~ftttg
cppph2. 07119/94
101