Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1900RESOLUTION NO. /<fOQ A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, ratifying the King County Countywide Planning Policies adopted by the Metropolitan King County Council and pursuant to the Growth Management Act. RECITALS A. The adoption of countywide planning policies is required under the State Growth Management Act (GMA), pursuant to RCW 36. 70A.210. The Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) provide a framework for Kent and other cities in King County to conduct planning under the requirements of GMA. This framework ensures that city and county comprehensive plans are consistent. B. On August 18, 2014, the Metropolitan King County Council approved and ratified an amendment to the CPPs approved by Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) Motion Nos. 14-1, 14-2, and 14-3 as follows: 1. GMPC Motion No. 14-1: Approves an amendment of the Potential Annexation Areas map in the 2012 King County Countywide Planning Policies to transfer the area known as Klahanie PAA from Issaquah to Sammamish. 1 Countywide Planning Resolution 2. GMPC Motion No. 14-2: Approves an amendment of the King County Countywide Planning Policy DP-17 so that proposals to expand the Urban Growth Area under the Four-to-One Program are not required to be based on a need for increased capacity. 3. GMPC Motion No. 14-3: Approves an amendment of the 2012 King County Countywide Planning Policies to add the urban portion of the area known as the Rainier Ridge Four-to-One to the Urban Growth Area and amend the Potential Annexation Areas Map to add the same area to the Maple Valley PAA. Now the amendment is presented to jurisdictions in King County for Ratification. C. The King County Council approved and ratified these amendments on behalf of King County pursuant to King County Ordinance No. 17861. The Kent Economic & Community Development Committee reviewed these amendments at its meeting on October 13, 2014. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: RESOLUTION SECTION 1. Amendment. The City of Kent, acting pursuant to the interlocal agreement among King County, the City of Seattle, and incorporated suburban cities, hereby ratifies the proposed amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies as adopted by the Metropolitan King County Council in King County Ordinance No. 17861, attached and incorporated hereto as Exhibit A. 2 Countywide Planning Resolution SECTION 2. -Public Inspection. The amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies adopted herein shall be filed with the City Clerk and placed in the planning services office so they are available for inspection by the public. SECTION 3. -Severabilitv. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. SECTION 4. -Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. SECTION 5. -Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. PASSED at a regular open public meeting by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, this day of Cb1"'cu5er , 2014. CONCURRED in by the Mayor of the City of Kent this --"'--'---day of ___,~fl2_,~:::_ __ , 2014. 3 Countywide Planning Resolution APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY 4 Countywide Planning Resolution EXHIBIT A September 8, 2014 The Honorable Suzette Cooke City of Kent 220-4th Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 Dear Mayor Cooke: We are pleased to foiWard for your consideration and ratification the enclosed amendments to the King County Countywide Planning Policies (CPP). On August 18,2014, the Metropolitan King County Council approved and ratified the amendments on behalf of unincorporated King County. The ordinance will become effective September 8, 2014. Copies of the King County Council staff report, ordinance and Growth Management Planning Council motions are enclosed to assist you in your review of these amendments. In accordance with the Countywide Planning Policies, FW-1, Step 9, amendments become effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least 30 percent of the city and county governments representing 70 percent of the population of King County according to the interlocal agreement. A city will be deemed to have ratified the CPP and amendments unless, within 90 days of adoption by King County, the city takes legislative action to disapprove the amendments. Please note that the 90-day deadline for this amendment is Sunday, December 7, 2014. If you adopt any legislation concerning this action, please send a copy of the legislation by the close of business, Monday, December 8, 2014, to Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council, Room 1200, King County Courthouse, 516 Third Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104. If you have any questions about the amendments or ratification process, please contact Karen Wolf, Senior Strategy and Performance Analyst, l<ing County Executive's Office, at 206 263-9649, or Christine Jensen, Metropolitan l<ing County Council Staff, at 206 477-5702. Than!< you for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, Larry Phillips, Chair Metropolitan King County Council Enclosures cc: King County City Planning Directors Sound Cities Association Dow Constantine King County Executive John Starbard, Director, Department of Permitting and Environmental Heview (DPER) Karen Wolf, Senior Strategy and Performance Analyst Christine Jensen, Council Staff, Transportation, Environment and Economy Committee (TREE) Proposed No. 2014-0275.1 KING COUNTY Signature Report August 18, 2014 Ordinance 17861 1200 Killg Co'mi.t;i' CbtirthtiU'se · 516 ThirdAVcuue Seattle, WA 981 Oil Sponsors Dembowski and Lambert 1 AN ORDINANCE adopting Growth Management Planning 2 Council Motions 14-1, 14-2 and 14-3 and ratifying Motions 3 14-1, 14-2 and 14-3, for unincorporated King County. 4 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY: s SECTION 1. Findings: 6 A. Growth Management Planning Council Motion 14-1 recommends that the 7 Potential Annexation Areas map in the 2012 Kmg County Countywide Planning Policies 8 be amended to transfer the area known as Klahanie PAA from Issaquah·to Samm1unish. 9 B. Growth Management Planning Council Motion 14-2 recommends that King 10 County Countywide Planning Policy DP-17 be amended so that proposals to expand the 11 Urban Growth Area under the Four-to-One Program are not required to be based on a 12 need for increased capacity. 13 C. Growth Management Planning Council Motion 14-3 recommends that the 14 2012 King County Cotmtywide Planning Policies be amended to add the urban portion of 15 the area known as the Rainier Ridge Four-to-One to the Urban Growth Area :md that the 16 Potential Aunexation Areas Map be amended to add the same area to the Maple Valley 17 PAA. 1 Ordinance 17861" 18 D. On May 21,2014, the Growth Management Planning Council unanimously 19 adopted Motions 14-1, 14-2, and 14-3 amending the 7-012 King County Countywide 20 Planning Policies. 21 SECTION 2. The amendments to the 2012 King County Countywide Planning' 22 Policies, as shown in Attaclunents A, B and C to this ordinance, are hereby adopted and 23 ratified on behalf offbe population of unincorporated King County. 24 Ordinance 17861 was introduced on 7/14/2014 and passedby fbe Metropolitan :king County Council on 8/18/2014, by fbe following vote:. ATTEST: · Yes: 8 -Mr. von Reichbauer, Mr. Gossett, Ms. Hague, Ms. Lambert, lv!r. Dunn, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Dembowski mel Mr. Upthegrove No: 0 Excused: 1 -Mr. Phillips KING COUNTY COUNciL KWG COUNTY, WAmTINGmb ~ii0t 'r ,-!= .. ) Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council APPROVED this '11_cl" day of ihA,J'5l( ~ 2014. y Do;~ons Attachments: A. GMPC Motion 14-1, B. GMPC Motion 14-2, C. GMPC Motion 14-3 2 I 2 3 5/21/14 rem Attachment A Sponsored By: Executive Committee GMPC MOUON NO. 14-1 4 A MOTION to amend to the Potential Annexation Areas map in --y------tl1e2UI:n::1n-gToiintyrountyWiilePlannfiigPoliCies to tniilsfer 6 the Klahanie P AA from Issaquah to Sammamish. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 \li!HEREAS, DP-23 calls for urban areas that are within a city's Potential Annexation Area (P AA) to be annexed to cities; and WHEREAS, on April22, 2014, the cities of Sammamish and Issaquah signed an lnterlocal Agreement on the future status of the Klahanie P AA, and WHEREAS, on April25, 2014, the cities of Sammamish and Issaquah submitted the signed Interloca!Agrcement with a request for the GMPC to adopt a motion transferring the P AA from Issaquah to Sammamish. NOW 11IEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Growth Management Planning Conncil of King County hereby recommends that the Potential Annexation Areas map in the 2012 King County Cotmiywide PlanningPolicies be amended to transfer the area known as the Klahanic P AA from Issaquah to Sammamish. ~~eel-- Dow Constantine, Chair, Growth Management Planning Council Attachment A: Amendment to P AA Map [t.g !(n!ilig C©Jm,·~y The trifo:rilofo~ lnclr1dod on lhb map h•s boen compikd by Khg County old !rom a varhty ofonuro"" andb tubj~clt~ change without no~ce_ King County maho no r<t?fesentaHoM or \•~armn!io$, ••nr~ss ~r Implied, as lo aceurooy, e.:>mpld¢M<~S, (rner.,ess, or fights to the use of n>cll lnfnrmaUon. This documonl is no! lnlond~d for uso as a swvay pmdw::t Kbg County shall not I>!> fiable for any ~""etal, spod111, illdiro~~ inoldenlol, or o::On,equentinl do~Mges !ndudlf19, but Ml OmMed 1~, l<>st revenuts or lost proffis rosulfiog fro!ll Uw use or mlsme of the inlorm•tion rnmlainad on thhl map. My ;n!e of £hi; map'" lnfonnation on \his mop h pmhibiled except by wrltlen pum15>'.;lon of King County. Date: May 6, 2014 . l\g!snas1\Projecls\ddes\2014_ CompP!an\pmjecls\Kiahanle _gmpc _paabw;mxd l\gisnas1\Pfojecls\ddes\2014_ CompP!an\projects\f<Jo.han1e _gmpcyaal1.v.pdf MCCOMBSP ].;~~:··:J Redesignated PM fl2};l1 Incorporated Areas .~::j/7 Urban Growth Boundary q~ o Proposed Urban .o-& Growth Boundary 0 650 1,300 1 2 3 4 ------------_s._ ___ _ 6 7 8 9 ]0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 Attachment B 5/21114 Sponsored By: Executive Committee GMlP'C MOHON NO. 14-2 A MOTION to amend King County Countywide Planning Policy .. DP-11-to-clarif~-criteda for expansion-of thdJJ'ban-Gro:wth-Axea. WHEREAS, the 2012 Countywide Planning Policies clarified the procedmes for amending the Urban Growth Area (UGA. ); and WHEREAS, in accordance with Policy DP-16, the UGA can be amended only if one of the three criteria is met: (1) land is needed to expand capacity in order to accommodate projected growth; or (2) land is part of the Four-to-One Program with at least four times the acreage of the land added to the UGA is dedicated as permanent open space; or (3) the area is a King County park being transferred to a city or the park land is less than 30 acres in size and has been owned by the city since 1994; and WHEREAS, The ability to add land emolled in the Four-to-One Program or land serving as a park was meant to serve as exceptions to the capacity requirement; and WHEREAS, as cnrrently written, DP~ 17a sets up a situation hy which·even the proposals under the Four-to-One Program would have to meet the capacity requirement. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Growth Management Planning Council of King County hereby recommends that King County Countywide Planning Policy DP-17 be amended as follows so that proposals to expand the UGA under the Four- to-One Program are not required to be based on a need for increased capacity: lllP-17 If expansion of the Urban Growth Area is warranted based on the criteria in DP-16(a) or DP-16(b ), add land to the Urban Growth Area only if it meets all of the following criteria: a) Is adjacent to the existing Urban Growth Area ((atl.t!;))~ b) For expansions based on DP-16(a) only, is no larger thari necessary to promote compact development that accommodates anticipated growth needs; c) Can be efficiently provided with mban services and does not require supportive facilities located in the Rural Area; d) Follows topographical features that form natural boundaries, such as rivers and ridge lines and docs not extend beyond natural boundaries, such as watersheds, that impede the provision of urban services; 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 4& 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57. e) Is not currently designated as Resource Land; f) Is sufficiently Jl'ce of enviro)1111ental constraints to be able to supp01t urban development without significant adverse environmental impacts, nnless.the area is designated as an Urban Sepal'ator by interlocal agreement between King County and the annexing city; and g) Is subject to an agreement between King County and the city or town adjacentto fhe atea thaNhe area will be added to the city's Potential Annexation Area. Upon ratification of the amendment, the Countywide Planning Policies will reflect both the Urban Growth Area change and Potential Annexation Area change. ~C2Q ~t:: t' . Dow Constantine, Chair, Growth Management Plannillg Council I 2 3 4 5/21114 Attachment C Sponsored By: Executive Committee GMPC MOTION NO. 14-3 A MOTION to amend the Urban Growth Area map in the 2012 ··~ ---------:;---·~~ --:King County CoriiicywfdePianniiig PolicTes-toa(fdtl1e uroan· ·-~~~------... 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 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 portion oftlie area known as the Rainier Ridge Four-to-One to the Urban Growth Area and to amend the Potential Annexation Areas map to add the same area to the Maple Valley P AA. WHEREAS, The King County Four~to-One Program allows limited expansions of the Urban Growth Area (UGA.) For each acre of1and added to the UGA, four acres of riJralland must be dedicated as permanent, dedicated open space; and WHEREAS, the Rainier Ridge Four-to~One would add fourteen acres to the UGA adjacent to the City of Maple ValleY in exchange for 56 acres dedicated as pennanent open space; and WHEREAS, This Rainier Ridge Four-to-One proposal was approved by the King County Council's Transportation, Economy, a:J:~d Enviromhent Committee on Aprill, 2014 and will be considered by the King County Council for final action on May 19,2014. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Growth Management Planning Council of King County hereby recommends thatthe Urban Growth Area map in the 2012 King County Countywide Planning Policies be amended to add the urban portion of the area known as the Rainier Ridge Four-to-One to the Urban Growth Area imd to amend the Potential Annexation Areas map to add the same area to the Maple Valley P AA. ~DoW~-bt-- Dow Constantine, Chair, Growth Management Planning Council Attachments: (1) Map depicting the UGA expansion for urban portion of the Rainier Ridge Four-to-One; (2)map depicting the addition of the UGA expansion area to the Maple Valley PAA; (3) map depicting the dedicated open space; and (4) vicinity map oftbe Rainier Ridge Four-to-One proposal R<ffiinier Ridge UGA Expllinsion altl~j R®d~~:<signe~ooltl Map ltJWj King C©JMli'llll:y The lnf~rrnnl.ion lndoded on U•ls map hao been eompi!ed by King County staff from a vmMy of oouroe; ~nd I• suhjedtu chango \\ilhoul nol.iee. King County mn~os no rtpff!vntn»ons '" wananiJos, C"Jlress or Implied, as to nccura~y. onmp!eleness, ljme!lneS$, or rights to lhn U>e uf $t!cll Information. 11>1• doc-ument Is not Intended l~r u~e as a survey product. King C<Junty •hal! not bo liobb for ur.y gcncfnl, tpMio!, lndirecl, inok!ontal, or consequcn~•l dom1go; lnclurllno, but ool Um~cd tn, f<>;t rever"Jes or lost profits re;umng f!om the use or mislr<e ollhe llllorm3lion contained on this map. !my sale of this mar or !nlormat'ou on thh mop b prohibtt~d e•~epl hy wriflon pcrml>•lon ~I King County. Dale: May 7, 2014 1\gisnas 1\Projectslddes\2:014_ CompPianlprojectS\RalnlerRidge_gmpe_locator.rmd \lgisnasi\Projccl.s\ddes\2014_ CompPian\projects\RainierRidga_gmpc_locntor.pdf MCCOMBSP Recommended PAA Blacl< Diamond ., \ \ \ Urban Growth Boundary N Incorporated Areas ~.L Existing Potential Annexation Are~ ~ b ) l f I i f I ROllinier Ridge UGA ExpansiOJr111 and Redesign<ll:~ima Map ~ !{i~g C©JQnlfil'il:y lha ir!lormaion included 011 !his map has boon complld by King Cou"ty slafflrom a vorio(y of sources and Is ~tlbje¢tlo ohanoe without notioe. Kina CmJnty make~ nn represen!alions m warranlles. eJII)ress or Implied, as to accuracy, <Xlmp!et..n~ss, ~mellness, or t1ghb to !he u•~ of sucll !n(orm•Uan. This Jorumen! h n<>l Intended for use ao a survoy pmducl. King County shall not bo liable for ony gffieral, ape•l•l, indlred, inoldental, or cons~quentbl darrng•s including, but not fmilod t<J, ln~t rrwenrw• or k>ot profit• '"'"lUng !\"om !hs use or mhu;e of lhe foformation contained on thb m~p. Any aa!~ of this map or lflformaijon on this map ls pmhlblte<l u~ept by written p¢rmlss1on oiKlng County, rx ra Rural Cities Urban Growth Area Rural Area um Urban Res., Medium (4-12du/acre) Oate: May6, 2014 \lglsnas1\Projacls\ddas\2014_ CompPI<m\projects\RalnlerRidga _gmpc_luhw.mxd \\gisnas1\Projecls\ddes\2014_ CompPian\projocls\RainicrRidgo _gmpc _lub\v.pdf MCCOMBSP I w ~ I ----1 ----_j ,, -------1 I ·iii-_____ ! J I ra Incorporated Areas Urban Growth Boundary Proposed Urban Growth Boundary 0 150 N + 300 Rainier Ridge UGA Expansion <lmd R®desD9Ji1l<ll~ion Map ~ King C©l!!lrril'li:)' Executive Recommended Comprehensive Plan Land Use The lnfnrmation included on !Pis map ha• befrn oompned by King County staf( /rom a varfety nlsources ~nd I~ subjeGtto chsnge v&lhout notiGe, 1\lno County makH no roprnsentati~ns ar worronlla~. eYp!ess or Implied. as to aeoura~y. compli:MM$S, tim•lln•s•. 01 !1Mhh Ia the use ~~ suet> lnlolmallnn. This documont Is not Intended lor use as a SIJI'Vey product. King Cnunty <ho!l not be !lobi• for ony 11enerol, spe,lol, indirect, inoklenl•l, of Nnsc<jucnl!al danng~s Including, bUI not rrm~~d In, !<IS( f<!VNI\IOS 01 lost profll~ fMIJitiPII from tha U>a Of misuse nf the informalion coolained on U1ls map. My sale of U•ls mop or tnform•Uon on !his map I> p!ehib~ed ""cept by m~lcn pcanlsslon ofWng County. Date· May 22, 2014 llgisnas 1\Projectslddes\20 14_ CompPianlprojects\RainierRidga _ os _tocalor.mxd 1\gisnas 1\Projects\ddes\2014_ CompPbn'{lrojects\Ra!n!arR!dge _ os_!ote!or.pdf MCCOMBSP Remains Rural Area Maple Valley ~ c W1 Black Diamond ' Recommended PAA Recommended Open Space Existing King County Parks -' {) Urban Growlh Boundary Incorporated Areas Existing PAA f f N + R@onoer Ridge UGA Expansioi1l arid R®desogi'lation Map t~ !Ki~rag C4:lli\Jinil:y lhe lnfermaion Included on thb mop ha• !>eon oompllnd by King County staff ffom a VMkl'{ n! ""''~"""and Jr; suhjeol!n chang a v&tlwut no~(e, King County makes nn representntf6ns or warranties, express or Implied, as to aootornq, <:<>mplelaness, fimel:nes5, 01 riuhh I<> ll>e usa of $UCh lnformallcn. Thia documont Is 110! lnlondod for usc as a Mavey product. King County shall not be li•ble lor any gtmtral, special, indlrud, Tncldonlol, or tom;equen~el damages Jneludfng, bill Ml nmHed !<:>, Ins! revMUes 01 lost pmr.ls resultlng fwm U1e use or misuoe of tho infonnati<>n ~ontained on lhb; map, My taln of this map <>r lnformatlcn on !h!s map is J"Ohihlte<:! oxoep! by wraten permlosion of King County, Dale: May6, 2014 \\glsnasi\Projec1slddes\2014_ CompPian\projecls\RalnimRldgo _gmpc_paabw.mxd \lgisnas1\Projectslddes\20 14_ CompPianlprojecls\RaJn!erR!dge_gmpcJ.laabW.pdf MCCOMBSP / / Recommended PAA Incorporated Areas Maple Valley Urban Growth Boundary Proposed Urban Growth Boundary N + 0 75 150 fJ¥i if H?t&*·iiiillil!?!iiiiiiil Feel King County Transportation, Ecc:momy and Emrironment Committee STAFF REPORT . ' Agenda Item: 9 Name: Christine Jensen ~~posed No:: 2014-0275 Date: July 29, 2014 Invited: Karen Wolf, Senior Policy Analyst, Office of Performance, Strategy and Budget ·-- SUBJECT A proposed ordinance adopting Growth Management Planning Council recommended revisions to the King County Countywide Planning Policies, including changes to the Potential Annexation Area map and approval of a Four-to-One proposaL SUMMARY On May 21, 2014, the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) unanimously approved the following motions: • GMPC Motion 14-1 (Attachment A): Approves the transfer of the Klahanie PotentiEJI Annexation .Area from the City of Issaquah to the City of Sammamish. • GMPC Motion 14-2 (Attachment Ei): Approves a technical correction to CPP DP-17 to allow expansions of the Urban Growth Area for Four-to-One projects. o GMPC Motion 14-3 (Attachment C): Approves the Rainier Ridge Four-to-One proposal, which would add fourteen acres to the Urban Growth Area in exchange for the dedication of fifty-six acres as permanent open space, and adds the new urban portion to the Potential Annexation Area for the City of Maple Valley. Consistent with Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) adoption requirements, Proposed Ordinance 2014-0275 forwards these recommendations to the County Council for consideration for approval. The proposed ordinance vyould also ratify the change on . behalf of the population of unincorporated King County, and begin the ratification process by the cities. 1 of 6 KING COUNTY COUNCIL AUGUST 18, 2014 88 BAq$'GROUND The GMPC is a formal body comprised of elected officials from King County, Seattle, Bellevue, othe·r cities and towns in King County, and special purpose districts.· The GMPC was created in 1992 by interlocal agreement in response to a provision in the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) 1 requiring cities and counties to work together to adopt Countywide. Planning Policies CPPs. Under the GMA, the CPPs serve as the framework for each individual jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, and ensure countywide consistency with respect to land use planning efforts. As provided for in the interlocal agreement, the GMPC developed and recommended the CPPs, which were adopted by the King County Council and ratified by the cities. Subsequent amendments to the CPPs follow the same process, which is outlin'ed in CPP G-1: recommendation by the GMPC, adoption by the King County Council, and ratification by the cities. Amendments to the CPPs become effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least 30% of the city and county governments representing at least 70% of the population of King County. A city shall be. deemed to have'ratified an amendment to the CPPs unless, within 90 days of adoption by King County, the city disapproves it by legislative action. ANALYSIS GMPC Motion 14-1 (Kiahanie Potential Annexation Area) This motion amends the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) map located in the CPPs to reflect an agreement between the cities of Issaquah and Sammamish for a boundary rnodi,ficatiof) of the Kla.banie PAA. }his modification vvould transfer the Klahanie PAA ltb\fltheCity of Issaquah to the City of Sammamish.·· Klahanie is an area of unincorporated area of urban King County adjacent to both the cities of issaquah and Sammamish. The land area is approximately 1,240 actes with an estimated population of 10,840 people. It is currently designed· as a PAA for the City of Issaquah. A vote to annex the PAA to Issaquah failed earlier this year. Following a discussion at the Februaty 26, 2014 meeting of the GMPC, an lnterlocal Agreement (I LA) between the cities of Issaquah and Sammamish was signed by both cities on April 22"8 , 2014 to transfer the PAA to !he City of Sammamish so that Sammamish can pursue annexation of the area.2 Consistent with the ILA, in order for the City of Sammamish to propose annexation of the Klahanie PAA, it must first be transferred from the City of Issaquah to the City of Sammamish. This action requires an amendment to the PAA map, which is included in the CPPs. The City of Sammamish has expressed its intention to initiate the annexation 1 RCW 36.70A.21 O: " ... shall adopt a countywide planning policy in cooperation with the cities ... " 2 See Attachment 2 to the staff report for: 1) a letter to the County from the cities of Issaquah and Sammamish regarding the PAA transfer; and 2) a copy of the referenced ILA Page 2 of 6 KING COUNTY COUNCIL AUGUST 18, 2014 89 proceedings as soon as possible, but needs this amendment to the PAA map as a first step. While this legislation does not ensure that annexation of Klahanie actually occurs, it does keep the possibility of annexation moving forward. If the City of Sammamish is successful in annexing Klahanie, King County would no longer be the provider for local government services for this neighborhood. This shift would be consistent with regional and state policy guidance calling for cities to be the providers of urban local services. Additionally, this would allow the county to more appropriately focus its role on being the provider of regional services and local services to the Rural Area. 3 . Moving forward with the annexation of these types of remaining pockets of unincorporated urban areas is supported and encouraged by all levels of planning (the GMA, VISION 2040, the CPPs, and the County's Comprehensive Plan). In that vein, King County's approval of this proposed PAA map change is consistent with the growth and annexation policies that the region and the county have adopted, and would be a reasonable decision. GMPC Motion 14-2 (Four-to-One policy) In 2012, the CPPs underwent a significant update to ensure consistency with the GMA and Vision 2040, as well as to reflect current terminology and relevant references. One of the changes from this update clarified the procedures for amending the Urban Growth Area (UGA) in pollees DP-16 and DP-17: DP-16 Allow expansion of the Urban Growth Area only if at least one of the following criteria is met: a) A countywide analysis determines that the current Urban Growth Area is insufficient in size and additional land is needed to accommodate the housing and employment growth targets, including institutional and other non- residential uses, and there are no other reasonable measures, such as increasing density or rezoning existing urban land, that would avoid the need to expand the Urban Growth Area; or b) A proposed expansion of the Urban Growth Area is accompanied by dedication of permanent open space to the King County Open Space System, where the acreage of the proposed open space: 1) is at least four times the acreage of the land added to the Urban Growth Area; 2) is contiguous with the Urban Growth Area with at least a pot1ion of the dedicated open space surrounding the proposed Urban Growth Area expansion; and 3 King County Comprehensive Plan Policy U-201: "In order to meet the Growth Management Act and the regionally adopted Countywide Planning Policies goal of becoming a regional service provider for all county residents and a local service provider in the Rural' Area, King County shall encourage annexation of the remaining urban unincorporated area .... " Page 3 of 6 KING COUNTY COUNCIL AUGUST 18, 2014 90 3) Presewes high quality habitat, critical areas, or unique· features that contribute to the band of permanent open space along the edge of the Urban Growth Area; or c) The area is currently a King County park being transferred to a city to be maintained as a park in perpetuity or is park land that has been owned by a · city since 1994 and is less than thirty acres in size. DP-17 If expansion of the Urban. Growth Area is warranted based oh the ·criteria in DP-16(a) or DP-16(b), add land to the Urban Growth I\ rea only if it meets all of the following criteria: · a) Is adjaceiJt to the existing Urban Growth Area and is no larger than necessaiy to promote compact development that accommodates anticipated growth needs; · b) Can be efficiently provided with urban services and does not require supportive facilities located in the Rural Area; c) Follows topographical features that form natural boundaries, such as rivers a'nd ridge lines and does not extend beyond natural boundaries, such as watersheds, that impede the provision of urban services; d) Is not currently designated as Resource Land; e) Is sufficiently free of environmental constraints. to be· ·able to support urb'an development without significant adverse environmental impacts, unless the area is designated as an Urban Separator by interlotal agreement between King County arid the annexing city; and f) . Is subject to an . agreement between King County. and the city or town adjacent to the area t!Jat the area will be added to the city's Potential Annexation Area. Upon ratification of the amendment, the Countywide Planning Policies will .ref/eel. both ,fhe Urban Growth A rei! change and Potential Annexation Area change. The purpose· of DP-16 was to provide the ability for land to be added to the UGA through any one of the three methods listed: if needed for housing. and job capacit;y, as part of a Four-to-One proposal, or for certain types of parks. Specifically, DP-16(b) allows for Four-to-One proposals to be separate and exempt from the capacity requirement outlined in DP-16(a). However, language in DP-17(a) would still require all proposals to meet the capacity requirement-including Four-to-One proposals that are exempt from capacity requirements as allowed for in DP-16(b). As a result, in 2013, The King County Hearing Examiner denied a Four-to-One proposal due to the capacity requ·wement in DP-17(a). In light of this contradiction between the two policies, and because the intent of DP-16 was to provide more flexibility, the GMPC adopted Motion 14-2, which recommends a technical amendmen't to DP-17 to clarify that Four-to-One proposals are exempt from the capacity requirement: Page 4 of 6 KING COUNTY COUNCIL AUGUST 18, 2014 91 DP-17 If expansion of the Urban Growth Area is warranted basec/ on the criteria in DP-16(a) or DP-16(b), add land to the Urban Growth Area only if it meets all of the following criteria: a) Is adjacent to the existing Urban Growth Aroa((aA€1)); i2J For expansions based on DP-16(a) onlv. is no larger than necessary to promote compact development that accommodates anticipated growth needs; ((13))9 Can be efficiently provided with urban services and does not require supportive facilities located in the Rural Area; ((e))Q) Follows topographical features that form natural boundaries, such as rivers and ridge lines and does not extend beyond natural boundaries, such as watersheds, that impede the provision of urban services; ((e))§) Is not currently designated as Resource Land; ((e))D Is sufficiently free of environmental constraints to be able to support urban development without significant adverse environmental impacts, unless the area is designated as an Urban Separator by interlocal agreement between King County and the annexing city; and ((f))g) Is subject to an agreement between King County and the city or town adjacent to tl?e area that the area will be added to the city's Potential Annexation Area. Upon ratification of the amendment, the Countywide Planning Policies will reflect both the Urban Growth Area change and Potential Annexation Area change. This proposed minor policy change would be consistent with the original intention in the crafting of DP-16, which was to provide fiexibility for Four-to-One proposals. The benefit the County receives for this flexibility is a higher return of open space preservation in exchange for only minor UGA expansion. This permanent conservation of new Four-to-One open space land also results in limiting the further expansion of the urban growth boundary line in the future. This proposed change to DP-17 would help continue to provide tho ability and incentive for use of the Four-to-One program. GMPC Motion 14-3 (Rainier Ridge Four-to-One) The King County Four-to-One program allows for limited expansions of the UGA, provided that for each acre of urban land added at least four acres of rural !arid must also be dedicated as permanent open space 4 The Rainier Ridge Four-to-One proposal would add fourteen· acres to the UGA adjacent to the City of Maple Valley, while preserving an additional fifty-six acres of permanent open space adjacent to the Black Diamond Natural Area. This GMPC motion arnends the UGA to include these fourteen acres of new urban land, and would also add that same land into the Maple Valley PAA The City of Maple Valley has staled its intent in writing to annex the newly created urban area if the proposal is approved. 4 CPP DP-16(b) Page 5 of 6 KING COUNTY COUNCIL AUGUST 18, 2014 92 The County Council already approved zoning, land use, and PAA map amendments for this Four-to-One proposal in June, 2014 as part of the this year's King County Comprehensive Plan Update. This GMPC motion approves the necessary companion amendments to the UGA and PAA maps that are included in the CPPs. Approval of these proposed map amendments would be consistent with the Council's previous affirmative action on the Rainier Ridge proposal. ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed Ordinance 2014-0275, with attachments a. Attachment A, GMPC Motion 14-1 b. Attachment B, GMPC Motion 14-2 c. Attachment C, GMPC Motion 14-3 2. Letter from the cities of Issaquah and Sammamish and copy of ILA 3. transmittal letter dated June 20, 2014- SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Countywide Planning Policies: http://www.kingcounty.gov/property/permits/codes/qrowth/GMPC/CPPs.aspx King County Comprehensive Pia~: . http://www. kin q co u ntv. q ov /property/perm its/ codes/growth/Com pP I a n/2 0 12Ad opted. as 122!: #complete · · · Page 6 of 6 KING COUNTY COUNCIL AUGUST 18, 2014 93