HomeMy WebLinkAbout1326.' .•
RESOLUTION NO. ~~~
A RESOLUTION of the City
Council of the City of Kent,
Washington, regarding ratification
of the County-Wide planning policies
adopted by the King County Council
pursuant to the Growth Management
Act.
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act (RCW 36. 70A. 210)
requires the adoption of County-Wide Planning Policies by the
legislative authority of King County no later than July 1, 1992,
and that said policies are to provide a County-Wide framework from
which local comprehensive plans are to be development; 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
County-Wide planning policies by an interlocal agreement, which was
approved by the City of Kent, and that said interlocal agreement
states that each city shall by ordinance or resolution ratify or
disapprove the policies within ninety days of adoption by King
County; and
WHEREAS, said interlocal agreement also established the
Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC), a fifteen member group
consisting of six elected officials from King County, six elected
officials from suburban cities, and three elected officials from
Seattle, who were authorized to develop a set of recommended
county-Wide planning policies for consideration by the King County
Council~ and
WHEREAS, after six months of deliberation, which included
public workshops and hearings, the GMPC recommended a set of
County-Wide planning policies to the King county Council on June 3,
1992~ and
WHEREAS, the King County Council adopted these policies
pursuant to Ordinance No. 10450 on July 6, 1992, as required by RCW
36.70A.210~ and
WHEREAS, in adopting Ordinance No. 10450, the King County
Council expressly conditioned its adoption of the policies upon
completion of a Phase II Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement and fiscal analysis, and that subsequent development of
the county comprehensive plan amendments and regulations would
implement the County-Wide planning policies as amended, subject to
completion of the ratification process provided for in Ordinance
No. 10450; and
WHEREAS, after public input was received through a public
hearing, the Kent City Council voted to conditionally approve and
ratify the County-Wide planning policies on September 1, 1992; NOW
THEREFORE,
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
2
incorporated suburban cities, hereby ratifies
planning policies, attached hereto marked as
incorporated herein by this reference.
the County-Wide
Exhibit A and
Section 2. The City hereby ratifies the policies
contingent upon further review of the potential environmental and
fiscal impacts of the policies as outlined in King County Ordinance
No. 10450, which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit B and
incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 3. In the event that any subpolicy within the
County-Wide Planning Policies is found to be inconsistent with the
City of Kent locally adopted Comprehensive Plan policies prepared
pursuant to the Growth Management Act, the City of Kent policy will
prevail.
Section 4. The County-Wide Planning Policies and process
outlined in King County Ordinance No. 10450 attached hereto 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 /~ of 7~ , 1992.
~oncurred in by
day of ~' 1992.
the Mayor of the City of Kent, this /h
3
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOB
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
I hereby certify
Resolution No. l3d..fo
Kent, Washington, the
cpp.res
that this is a true and correct copy of
, passed by the City Council of the City of
/5 day of ~ , 1992.
4
EXHIDIT A
King County Growth Management Planning Council
I
Countywide Planning Policies
Recommendation to the_ King County Council
June 3, 1992
Printed June 10, 1992
Growth Management Planning Council
Chair
Cynthia Sullivan, King County Council
Members
Paul Barden, King County Council
Margot Blacker, Councilmember, Bellevue
Bob Edwards, Councilmember, Renton
Audrey Gruger, Chair, King County Council
Tim Hill, King County Executive
Fred Jarrett, Councilmember, Mercer Island
Bruce Laing, King County Council
Roger Loschen, Mayor, Lake Forest Park
Margaret Pageler, Councilmember, Seattle
Larry Phillips, King County Council
Norm Rice, Mayor, Seattle
·Bob Stead, Mayor, Federal Way
Jim Street, Councilmember, Seattle
Bob Wray, Councilmember, Des Moines
Ex-officio
Pat Davis, Port of Seattle
Altem~te Members
Keith Blackburn, Mayor, Enumclaw
Brian Derdowski, King County Council
Sue Donaldson, Councilmember, Seattle
Sherry Harris, Councilmember, Seattle
Rosemarie lves, Mayor, City of Redmond
Greg Nickels, King County Council
Shirley Thompson, Councilmember, SeaTac
Staff
lnterjurisdictional Liaison Committee of Planning, Public Works and Finance Staff
Table of Contents
King County Growth Management Act
Coun_tywide Policies
King County 2012
I.
II.
Ill.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Vlll.
A. The Problem
B. The Process
C. The Growth Management Act
D. Vision for King County 2012
E. The Framework Policies
Critical Areas
Land Use Pattern
A. Resource Lands: Agricultural, Forestry and Mineral
B. Rural Areas
C~ Urban Areas •
Urban Growth Area Map
D. Urban and Manufacturing/Industrial Centers
E. Urban Growth Outside of Centers
Transportation •
Community Character and Open Space
Affordable Housing •
Contiguous and Orderly Development•
Siting Public Capital Facilities of a Countywide or
Statewide Nature •
Economic Development and Fiscal Impact•
Appendix I Transportation: Requirements of the Growth Management Act
•These elements are required by RCW 36.70A.210.
4
4
5
5
7
9
13
13
14
15
19
25
29
35
38
40
44
45
47
King County 2012
A. The Problem
King County has long been known for unsurpassed natural beauty and a dynamic human
environment. It has thriving cities and suburbs and healthy rural communities. The county's
anractive lifestyle and economy continue to draw people into our region.
But unmanaged growth and development endanger some of those very qualities. An additional
325,000 people will live here by the year 2010 (State of Washington Office of Financial
Management), bringing the total population to 1.8 million. While growth fuels the area's strong
economy, the absence of effective management of that growth threatens the features that are
essential to a rich quality of life.
The effects of uncoordinated and unplanned growth are obvious. King County has the fifth worst
traffic mess in the nation, declining air and water quality, flooding aggravated by development, and
escalating housing costs. Many of the schools are overcrowded and local governments are
struggling to pay for increased demands for services to control crime and to provide critical human
resources.
The need facing the County and State is to provide the incentives necessary to promote a vigorous,
sound, and diversified economy, while reducing, controlling and managing the potential adverse
effects of uncoordinated and unplanned growth.
The Washington State Legislature passed the Growth Management Act (GMAl in 1990 and
strengthened it in 1991 to address these problems.
B. The Process
Growth management involves planning for economic and population growth, determining where
new jobs and housing should go and then locating and phasing population growth in accordance
with the ability to provide infrastructure and services. This should include economic development,
a workable transportation system, quality drinking water, affordable housing, good schools, open
space and parks and, at the same time, protection of our natural environment.
King County and the 31 cities within it are addressing growth management problems together and
in their local jurisdictions. Planning at both levels is called for by 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 vision involves
trade-offs and difficult choices about the appropriate 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 Seanle, the
suburban cities, and King County, has considered these draft policies, and based on public input,
will make a recommendation to the King County Council for adoption. Adoption must take place
by July 1, 1992. King County will then submit the adopted policies .to the cities for ratification.
GMA:pol Page 4 --06/10/1992
,,
The Countywide Planning Policies· will serve as the framework for each jurisdiction's own
comprehensive plan, which must be in place by July 1, 1993. These individual comprehensive
plans throughout the county, then, will be consistent with the overall vision for the future of King
County. ·
C. The Growth Management Act
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 use,
infrastructure, and finance. If resources are inadequate to realize the vision, then the strategies
and land use must be revised. The GMA requires Countywide Planning Policies be adopted by July
1, 1992. At a minimum, the policies must address:
a. Implementation of RCW 36. 70A. 110 (Urban Growth Areas);
b. Promotion of contiguous and orderly development and provision of urban services;
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 arid employment; and
h. Analysis of fiscal impact.
Special emphasis is placed on transportation. Future development activity will be constrained by a
jurisdiction's ability to provide and finance transportation improvements or strategies. This fact has
implications for all jurisdictions who can no longer finance and build the facilities necessary to
retain current service levels. •
D. Vision for King County 2012
Our county has significantly changed in the 20 years that have elapsed from 1992 to today. The
paramount cause for this change has been the successful public/private partnership which has:
supported a diversified, sound regional economy; managed and accommodated growth; and
maintained the county's quality of life.
An effective stewardship of the environment has preserved and protected the critical areas in the
county. This stewardship has extended to the conservation of our land, air, water and energy
resources for future generations.
The rural areas first formally identified in 1985 and expanded in 1992 remain permanently
preserved with a clear boundary between rural and urban areas.
Development has emphasized the use and reuse of the existing urbanized areas. Much of the new
. growth after 1992 first occurred in the areas where there was existing capacity. Growth then
occurred where existing infrastructure could be easily eXtended or enhanced. lastly, areas which
required significant new 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, residential, commercial, cultural
and recreational opportunities. The centers are linked by the high-capacity transit system, and
transit stations within the centers are located within walking distance to all parts of the center.
GMA:pol Page 5 ,\(;. < ;:::;. 06/10/1992
Each center has its own unique character, and they are all noted for their livability, pedestrian
orientation and superior design.
Smaller concentrations of businesses are 'distributed throughout the urban area, and focus on
providing goods and services to surrounding residential areas. They are linked to Urban Centers by
an effective local transit system.
Manufacturing/industrial areas continue to thrive and be key components in the urban area. They
are served by a transportation system which emphasizes the movement of people and goods to and
within these areas.
Rural cities provide unique environments within the rural area and provide commercial and employ-
ment opportunities for their residents. This includes retail, educational and social services for city
residents and surrounding rural areas. Businesses in rural cities provide employment opportunities
for local residents.
The entire urban area is increasingly characterized by superior urban design and an open space
network which defines and separates, yet links the various urban areas and jurisdictions.
Countywide and regional facilities have been located where needed, sited unobtrusively and with
appropriate incentives and proper impact mitigation.
Attractive and workable alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle have been built and strategies
adopted which assure the mobility of people, goods and information throughout the county and
beyond.
Regional funds have been used to further the regional land use plan and fund needed regional
facilities. Local resources have been focused on local facilities.· The sharing of resources to
accomplish common goals is done so that the regional plan can succeed and so that all can benefit.
The economy is vibrant and sustainable, and emphasizes diversity in the range of goods produced
and services provided. Businesses continue to locate in our county because of the high quality of
life, the emphasis on providing a superior education, and the predictability brought about by the
management of growth and the effectiveness of the public/private partnership in these areas as
well as the mutually beneficial partnership in economic development.
Housing opportunities for all incomes and lifestyles exist throughout the county, and with the
balanced transportation system, access to employment is assured.
The needs of residents are attended to by a social service system that emphasizes prevention, but
which stands ready to respond to direct needs as well.
The urban area is located within the incorporated cities, which are the primary urban service
providers. Where appropriate, sub-regional consortiums have been created for certain services, and
the county government is recognized as a regional service provider.
· Through a clear understanding of growth management, residents and businesses have recognized
that all problems will not be cured quickly, but clear and reasonable timelines and financing
commitments demonstrate to them that problems will be solved. Residents and businesses'trust in
their local governments because the plans and promises made to manage growth in 1992 have
been followed. Change is accepted and proceeds in an orderly fashion based on the growth
management plan. ·
GMA:pol· Page 6 06/10/1992
,,
E. The Framework Policies
The GMA gives local officials new tools for plannin.g and, for the first time, mandates that the
county and cities work together to establish an overall vision. Through a collaborative process, the
local jurisdictions of King County have prepared the following draft countywide planning policies.
; This process relies on local choice to determine the density/intensity and character of each area.
All jurisdictions must recognize that the smart, long term choices for the region will require
compromises in local self-determination.
These policies represent a cohesive set and are not individual, stand-alone concepts. The ideas
represented here balance each other to establish a vision for the county which builds on existing
land use patterns. The policies are organized by topics in separate chapters. At the beginning of
each chapter is a framework policy which establishes the overall direction for the following policies.
The Countywide Planning Policies can only be realized through local plans and regulations. A
decision made locally must become a commitment that the region can rely upon. The following
framework policies outline the countywide planning process.
FW-1 Countywide growth management is a five-step process:
STEP 1:
STEP 2:
STEP 3:
GMA:pol
The Countywide P1anning Policies shall become effective 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.
(September 1992 target date)
a. The Growth Management P1anning Council (GMPCI shall receive by October
and confirm by December 1992 nominations from cities for Urban Centers
ancfManufacturing/lnd~strial Centers as established in the Countywide
P1anning Policies. (October-December 1992 target dates)
b. The GMPC shall adopt 20 year target numbers for projected population
growth and capacity based on Urban Centers decisions, the criteria
established in policies LU-51 and LU-52, and population ranges
recommended by an interjurisdictional.staff committee. (December 1992
target date)
c. The GMPC shall adopt 20 year target numbers for projected employment
growth and capacity based on Urban Centers decisions, the criteria
established in policy LU-53, and employment ranges recommended by an
interjurisdictional staff committee. (December 1992 target date)
d. Housing and jobs to accommodate King County's projected population shall
be planned in the context of carrying capacity of the land. Housing density
and affordabRity shall be considered co-equal objectives. ·
e. The GMPC shall confirm the Urban Growth Areas based on Centers
designations and subarea population and employment targets, insuring
sufficient capacity within the Urban Growth Area to meet projected growth.
(December 1992 target date) ·
All jurisdictions shall make the decisions required to implement the Countywide
P1anning Policies into their respective comprehensive plans. (July 1993 target date)
Page 7 06/10/1992
STEP 4:
STEP 5:
a. The GMPC shall reconvene in July 1993 or sooner as needed to review
issues raised through local plan implementation efforts, and to consider new
or revised policies developed through implementation of the GMPC tasks
specified in the Countywide Planning Policies. The GMPC shall recommend
revisions as needed to resolve identified conflicts between policies and
address implementation issues. (July 1994 target date)
b. The GMPC shall establish a process for resolving conflicts between local
plans and the Countywide Planning Policies as raised by local jurisdictions,
and may recommend amendments to either the Countywide Planning
Policies or local plans. (July 1994 target date)
,c. Amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies shall be subject to
ratification by at least thirty percent of the city and county governments
representing seventy of the population in King County. (July 1994 target
date}
All jurisdictions shall make the decisions required to implement the Countywide
Planning Policies and their resp~ctive comprehensive plans through regulations.
(July 1 994 target. date)
FW-2 Countywide Planning Policies are effective after King County adoption and city ratification
for the purposes of updating comprehensive plans, and providing a policy framework for
other governmental actions of all jurisdictions. Significant planning options will be
precluded if interim actions are npt taken to assure capacity and direct growth in the Urban
area, and to protect the Rural area from the impacts of growth. The following interim
actions will be taken by all jurisdictions no later than one month after ratification.
a. King County shall adopt interim rural zoning consistent with the designation of rural
for the "new" Rural area adopted through the Countywide Planning Policies to
ensure rural character is not threatened by additional subdivision activity.
b. All jurisdictions in the Urban area will adopt interim minimum density ordinances and
review and, where appropriate, remove regulatory barriers to accessory dwelling
units and manufactured homes on individual lots, to ensure that urban land is used
efficiently. ·
c. Jurisdictions shall not expand the existing land area zoned for business/office parks.
GMA:pol Page 8 06/10/1992
,, I. Critical Areas
; Most jurisdictions in King County have sensitive areas ordinances in place or under development.
These regulations are tailored to the specific needs of each jurisdiction and are not likely to be
modified based on another jurisdiction's regulations. It is important to promote regional policies that
do not erode existing regulations while providing guidance for achieving consistency and
compatibility among them.
A. Overall Environmental Protection
FW-3 All jurisdictions shall protect and enhance the natural ecosystems through comprehensive
plans and policies, and develop regulations that reflect natural constraints 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 minimizing public and
private costs.
FW-4 Puget Sound, floodplains, rivers, streams and other water resources shall be managed for
multiple beneficial uses including flood and erosion hazard reduction, 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 opportunities for
other uses.
B. Wetlands Protection
CA-1 All jurisdictions shall use as minimum standards, the 1989 Federal Manual for Identifying
and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands and reference the 1989 manual in their wetlands
protection ordinances.
CA-2 In the long term, all jurisdictions shall work to establish a single countywide classification
. system for wetlands.
CA-3 Within each basin, jurisdictions shall formulate their regulations and other non-regulatory
methods 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, isolated wetlands in
exchange for a larger connected wetland system can achieve greater resource protection
and reduce isolation and fragmentation of wetland habitat.
GMA:pol Page 9 ,), . ;:; : 06/1 0/1992
C. Aquifers
Currently, there are five Ground Water Management Plans underway in King County: Redmond,
Issaquah, East King County, South King County, and Vashon. The state Department of Ecology
has designated Seattle-King County Department of Public Health as the lead agency. Each plan is
prepared in conjunction with an advisory committee with representatives from suburban cities,
businesses, private well owners, environmental groups, and state agencies. The plans will identify
aquifer recharge areas and propose strategies for protection of ground water through preservation
and protection of the aquifers.
CA-5 All jurisdictions shall adopt regulations to protect the quality and quantity of groundwater
where appropriate:
a. Jurisdictions .that are included in Ground Water Management Plans shall support the
development, adoption, and implementation of the Plans; and
b. The Seanle-King County Department of Public Health and affected jurisdictions shall
develop countywide policies outlining best management practices within aquifer
recharge areas to protect public health.
D. Fish and Wildlife Habitat
CA-6 Adjacent jurisdictions shall identify and protect habitat networks that are aligned at
jurisdictional boundaries. Networks shall link large protected or significant blocks of habitat
within and between jurisdictions 1o achieve a continuous countywide network. These
networks shall be mapped and displayed in comprehensive plans.·
CA-7 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 where possible.
CA-8 Natural drainage systems including associated riparian and shoreline habitat shall 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, maintain
and enhance fish and wildlife habitat, and restore and maintain those natural
functions;
b. Control peak runoff rate and quantity of discharges from new development to
approximate pre-development rates; and
c. Preserve .and protect resources and beneficial functions and values through mainte-
nance of stable channels, adequate low flows, and reduction of future st9rm flows,
erosion, and sedimentation. ,,
CA-9 Jurisdictions shall maintain or enhance water quality through control of runoff and best
management practices to maintain natural aquatic communities and beneficial uses~
CA-1 0 The Washington State Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife and the Indian Tribes both
manage fish and wildlife resources. However, local governments have authority for land
GMA:pol Page 10 0611011992
,, E.
use regulation. Jurisdictions shall coordinate land use planning and management of fish and
wildlife resources with affected state agencies and the federally recognized Tribes.
Frequently Flooded Areas
The Stl!te adopted comprehensive flood legislation in 1991 (Senate Bill 5411 J that makes the GMA
requirement for coordination and consistency on flood hazard regulations much _more explicit.
Accordinc to the new legislation, counties are to develop flood hazard control management plans
with the full participation of jurisdictions within the planning areas. Once adopted by the county,
cities within flood hazard planning areas must comply with the management plan. The draft
Countywide Flood Hazard Reduction Plan is currently being reviewed by affected jurisdictions
before transmittal to the King County Counct1 for consideration and adoption.
CA-11 All jurisdictions shall adopt and implement the relevant general and land use policies of the
Flood Hazard Reduction Plan and develop appropriate regulations for implementation and
enforcement of the Plan. Regulations shall: ,
a. Reduce flood impacts on existing development by reducing risk and regulating new
development; ·
b. Reduce long term public and private costs;
c. Protect natural flood storage and conveyance functions; and
d. Develop an enforcement program.
F. Geologic Hazard Areas
CA-1 2 All jurisdictions shall regulate development on certain lands to protect public health,
property, 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%;
b. Severe landslide hazard areas;
c. Erosion hazard areas;
d. Mine hazard areas; and
e. Seismic hazards.
Regulations shall include, at a minimum, provisions for vegetation retention, seasonal
clearing and grading limits, setbacks, and drainage and erosion controls.
G. Air and Water Quality
CA-13 All jurisdictions, in coordination with the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency and the
Puget Sound Regipnal Council, shall develop policies, methodologies and standards that
promote regional air quality, consistent with the Countywide Policy Plan.
CA-14 All jurisdictions shall implement the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan to restore
and protect the biological health and diversity of the Puget Sound Basin.
GMA:pol Page 11 06/t0/1992
H. Implementation
CA-1 5 King County shall establish a techn.ical committee to facilitate environmental protection
which is to include representatives of the county, the cities, the federally recognized Tribes,
business community, environmental community, public utilities, special districts, and
interested citizens. The committee will serve as a depository of regulations and policies
adopted by jurisdictions in King County.
Based on information provided by all jurisdictions, the committee shall prepare a report by
December 1993 which addresses consistency and compatibility of regulations and
designations, cumulative impacts, and education programs. The report should be designed
to assist jurisdictions in developing permanent regulations with optimal consistency among
the jurisdictions.
GM.A:pol Page 12 06/10/1992
. ,.1
II. Land Use Pattern
A. Resource Lands: Agricultural, Forestry, and Mineral
The protection and management of resource lands in King County is a regional concern and a major
objective of the countywide planning policies. The vast majority of resource lands are located in
unincorporated King County. These areas were identified and protected under the 1985 King
County Comprehensive Plan and subsequent community plans and regulations.
FW-5 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 necessary implementing regulations
adopted. This includes Countywide establishment of a boundary for the Urban Growth
Area. Local jurisdictions shall establish these land use designations, based on the
Countywide Planning Policies.
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 shall protect existing resource lands within their boundaries that have
long-term commercial significance for resource production. Any designated agricultural and
forestry lands shall not be considered for urban development. Jurisdictions are required to
enact a program authorizing the transfer or purchase of development rights for designated
forest or agricultural areas within Urban Growth Areas. At the request of any city, King
County will work to reinstate the King County Purchase of Development Rights Program
and/or establish an interjurisdictional transfer of development rights program to protect
these resource lands in accordance with the GMA.
LU-3 Existing mineral extractive and processing operations or designated sites may be annexed or
incorporated to a city only if there are policies and regulations in place 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 support utilization of the resource and minimize conflicts among uses. Each
jurisdiction is responsible for implementing the plat and permit notification requirements for
properties within-300 feet of the resource land, as specified in RCW 36. 70A as amended.
Jurisdictions will consider an increased distance for notification and notification to titles to
property within or adjacent to the resource lands.
LU-5 All jurisdictions shall require mineral extraction and processing operations and agricultural
practices to implement best management practices to reduce environmental impacts and
mitigate any unavoidable impacts.
GMA:pol Page 13 06/10/1992
B. Rural Areas
The vast majority of rural areas are located in unincorporated King County. These areas were
identified and regulated through the 1985 King County Comprehensive Plan and subsequent
community plans and regulations. While counties are the jurisdictions specified by the GMA as
responsible for designating and regulating rural areas through their comprehensive plans, the
protection of King County's rural area is a regional issue and a fundamental objective of the
countywide planning policies.
FW-6 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-7 All 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
support a defined rural level of service. Towns and cities in the rural areas play an
important role as local trade and community centers.
LU-6 Through the Countywide Planning Policy process, King County, with the cooperation of the
cities, shall be responsible for designating rural areas consistent with GMA. In designating
long term rural areas, King County shall foster better use of limited public funds by allowing
service providers to establish distinctly rural facility and service standards.
LU-7 Designated rural areas are consiC!Iered to be permanent and shall not be redesignated to an
Urban Growth Area. Future gro.wth should be accommodated by efficient use of existing
urban land within the Urban Growth Area. Annexation of rural areas to cities shall be
prohibited. When annexation of rural areas is necessary to link two urban areas, that
intervening rural area shall be designated as permanent urban separator at low rural
densities.
LU-8 Designated rural areas shall have low densities which can be sustained by minimal
infrastructure improvements, such as septic systems and rural roads, without degrading the
environment or creating the necessity for urban level of services.
LU-9 The GMPC shall establish a subcommi~ee to develop an outcomes-based policy
recommendation on the definition of rural character and incentives for protection of rural
areas. The subcommittee shall have proportional representation from King County, Seattle
and suburban cities and shall make its report to the GMPC by October 1, 1992. The
definition shall consider rural densities, clustering and other tools to protect rural character.
Incentives to be considered include:
a. Assess land in rural areas on its current use;
b. Facilitate small land owners qualifying land for special categories such as forest,
wetlands, riparian zones;
c. Develop Pr-ograms for direct marketing of produce in urban areas;
d. Reinforce right to farm and forest practices in rural areas; and/or
e. Develop services through existing agencies with rural expertise.
LU-1 0 Rural areas designated by King County shall remain rural. Additional rural areas shall be
designated by King County through adoption of a land use map authorized by the Growth
Management Planning Council. These additional areas meet at least one of the following
criteria:
GMA:pol Page 14 06/10/1992
,,
a. Opportunities exist for small scale farming and forestry which do not qualify for
resource land designation;
b. The rural designation serves as a buffer for designated resource lands or sensitive
c.
d.
e.
areas;
Significant environmental constraints make the area generally unsuitable for
intensive urban development;
Major physical barriers exist to providing urban services at reasonable cost;
The area is contiguous to other designated rural areas, resource areas or sensitive
areas;
f. The area has outstanding scenic, historic, and/or . .aesthetic value that can best be
protected by rural land uses and densities; and
g. The area has limited public services, extension of full services is not planned, and
infill at higher densities is not feasible or necessary to meet regional goals.
Criteria specified in LU-1 Of g) permits the redesignation of urban lands in King County to rural.
These areas have not received a full range of services, such as sewers, and are developed at
densities which are too low to support cost-effective provision of all urban services. The inclusion
of these new rural areas will carry out regional policies by focusing new development to urban
areas that are planned to have full urban services.
LU-11 Low-density urban areas meeting the criteria of LU-1 O(g) shall 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 King County Code.
LU-12 To maintain rural character, and to minimize the need for additional infrastructure, while
maximizing undeveloped land available for traditional rural uses, clustering of new
development shall be required on all existing parcels of contiguous ownership of ten or
more acres, provided that clustering shall be designed and scaled to be consistent with
rural area character.
LU-13 King County, cities that are adjacent to or are surrounded by rural designated areas, and
other agencies that provide services to rural areas shall form a technical committee to
prepare a manual on rural infrastructure design, fire/wildfire protection, and service
standards.
C. Urban Areas
The following policies establish an Urban Growth Area fUGA) and methods to phase development
within this 11rell in order to bring certainty to long-term planning and development within the
county. The Urban Growth Are11 is a permanent designation. Land outside the Urban Growth
Area is designated for perm11nent rural and resource uses, except for the cities in the rural area.
Countywide policies on rur11/ and resource areas are found in Chapter 1/A, Resource Lands, and
Chapter 1118, Rural Areas.
The capacity in the Urban Growth Area for growth, based on adopted plans and regulations,
exceeds the 20-year minimum requirement of the GMA according to the current population
forecasts. In the future, all urban growth is to be accommodated within permanent urban areas by
increasing densities. Phasing is to occur within the Urban Growth Area to ensure that services are
provided as growth occurs. All cities are to be within the Urban Growth Area. Cities in the rural
area are to be UGA islands.
.·.· . y GMA:pol Page 15 06/10/1992
~
0
GROWTH MGMNT PLANNING COUNCIL
RECOMMENDED URBAN GROWTH AREA
ling County
Planning and Community Dnelopmenl Di•islon
Geographic lnformalion System
This map is inhnded ·lor planning purposes only
and is no I guoronlud. lo show_ accurole musurmenls.
hundorin mar be incompleh and are lhe bul
a•ailobh ol lhe currenl lime. June 10, 1992 l.l[S
_ GIIPC Recommendation UGA tine
llajor Highways
~ Urban Growth Area
m King Counlr Designated Rural
llllll Hew Rural
m T ethnical Review Area
~ Urban Separator
~ Resource -Agriculture
[I]] Resource -rarest Production
[ILJ Indian Reservation
c===J Open Space
i i I I
~
FW-8 The land use pattem for King County shall protect the natural environment by reducing the
consumption of land and concentrating development. An Urban Growth Area. Rural Areas.
and Resource Lands shall be designated and the necessary implementing regulations
adopted. This includes countywide establi'shment of a boundary for the Urban Growth
Area. Local jurisdictions shall make land use decisions based on the Countywide Planning
Policies.
FW-9 The Urban Growth Area shall provide enough land to accommodate future urban
development. Policies to phase the provision of urban services and to ensure efficient use
of the growth capacity within the Urban Growth Area shall be instituted.
1. Urban Growth Area
The GMA requires King County to designate an Urban Growth Area (UGAJ in consultation with
cities. The Countywide Planning Policies must establish an Urban Growth Area that contains
enough urban land to accommodate at least 20 years of new population and employment growth.
The GMA states: "based upon the population forecast made for the county by the Office of
Financial Management, the Urban Growth Areas in the county shall include areas and densities
sufficient to permit urban growth that is projected to occur in the county for the succeeding
twenty-year period. Each Urban Growth Area shall permit urban densities and shall include
greenbelt and open space areas. ... A UGA map is attached.
LU-14 The lands within the Urban Growth Area (UGA) shall be characterized by urban
development. The UGA shall accommodate at least the 2Q-year projection of population
and employment growth with a full range of urban services. The Countywide Planning
Policies shall establish the Urban Gro~h Area based on the following criteria:
a. Include all lands within existing cities, including cities in the rural area and their
designated expansion areas;
b. The GMPC recognizes that the Bear Creek Master Plan Developments (MPDs) are
subject to an ongoing review process under the adopted Bear Creek Community
Plan and recognizes these properties as urban under these Countywide Planning
Policies. If the applications necessary to impl~ment the MPDs are denied by King
County or not pursued by the applicant(s), then the property subject to the MPD
shall be redesignated rural pursuant to the Bear Creek Community Plan. Nothing in
these Planning Policies shall limit the continued review and implementation through
existing applications, capital improvements appropriations or other approvals of
these two MPDs as new communities under the Growth Management Act.
c. Not include rural land or unincorporated agricultural, or forestry lands designated
through the Countywide Planning 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 storm
drainage, schools and other urban services within the next 20 years;
e. Do not extend beyond natural boundaries, such as watersheds, which impede provi-
sion 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 constraints to be able
to support urban growth without major environmental impacts unless such areas are
designated as an urban separator by interlocal agreement between jurisdictions.
LU-.15 · Urban separators are low density areas or areas of little development and must be within
the Urban Growth Area. Urban separators shall be defined as permanent low density lands
GMA:pol Page 16 06/10/1992
·~· ... '
which protect resource lands and environmentally sensitive areas and create open space ··
corridors within and between urban areas which provide environmental, visual, recreational
and wildlife benefits. These lands shall not be redesignated in the future to other urban
uses or higher densities.
2. Phasing Development within the Urban Growth Area
Development in the urban area will be phased to promote efficient use of the lend, add certainty to
infrastructure planning, end to ensure that urban services can be provided to urban development.
The minimum densities required by LU-51 help ensure the efficient use of the land. Phasing wt'll
further ensure coordination of infrastructure and development. Urban areas in jurisdictions which
do not have urban services and are not scheduled to receive urban services within 10 years shall be
subject to phasing requirements.
LU-16 Within the Urban Growth Area, growth should be directed as follows: a) first, to centers
and urbanized areas with existing infrastructure capacity; b) second, to areas which are
already urbanized such that infrastructure improvements can be easily extended; and c)
last, to areas requiring major infrastructure improvements.
LU-17 All jurisdictions shall develop growth phasing plans by identifying areas for growth for the
next ten and the next twenty years where necessary urban services can be provided. These
growth phasing plans shall be based on locally adopted definitions, service levels, and
financing commitments, consistent with State GMA requirements. The ten and twenty
year growth phasing plans for cities shall not extend beyond their Potential Annexation
Areas. lnterlocal agreements shall be developed that specify the applicable minimum
zoning, development standards, impact mitigation and future annexation for the Potential
Annexation Areas.
LU-1 8 Where urban services cannot be provided within the next 1 0 years, jurisdictions should
develop policies and regulations to: ·
a. Phase and limit development such that planning, siting, densities and infrastructure
decisions will support future urban development when urban services become avail-
able; and
b. Establish a process for converting land to urban densities· and uses once services
are available.
3. Joint Planning and Urban Growth Areas around Cities
The GMA requires each county to designate Urban Growth Areas, in consultation with cities.
Within the countywide Urban Growth Area, each city will identify land needed for its growth for
the next twenty years. Although the GMA does not explicitly equate Urban Growth Areas with
municipal annexation ertMs, the Urban Growth Areas around cities may be considered potential
expansion areas for cities:
FW-10 Cities are the appropriate provider of local urban services to urban areas either directly or by
contract. Counties are the appropriate provider of most countywide services. Urban ser-
vices shall not be extended through the use of special 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.
GMA:pol Page 17 06110/1992
LU-19 In collaboration with adjacent counties and cities and King County, 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 city 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-20 A city may annex territory only within its designated potential annexation area. All cities
shall phase annexations to coincide with the ability for the city to coordinate the provision
of a full range of urban services to areas to be annexed.
LU-21 Land within a city's potential annexation area shall be developed according to that city's
and King County's growth phasing plans. Undeveloped lands adjacent 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, infill 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 city.
The interlocal agreement shall establish the type of development allowed in the potential
annexation area and standards for that development so that the area is developed in a
manner consistent with its future annexation potential. The interlocal agreement shall
. specify at a minimum the applicable zoning, development standards, impact mitigation, and
future annexation within the potential annexation area.
LU-22 Several unincorporated areas are currently considering local governance options.
Unincorporated urban areas that are already urbanized and are within a city's potential
annexation area are encouraged to anc;~ex 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 jurisdiction may have impacts on adjacent
jurisdictions.
LU-23 A jurisdiction may designate a potential impact area beyond its potential annexation area in
collaboration with adjacent jurisdictions. As part of the designation process the jurisdiction
shall establish criteria for the review of development proposals under consideration by other
jurisdictions in the impact area.
The GMA has a provision granting counties the discretion to disband the Boundary Review Boards
after comprehensive plans and development regulations are adopted. The following policy provides
direction for considering whether to disband the Boundary Review Board for King County.
LU-24 Upon the adoption and ratification of the Countywide Policies, the King County Council
shall convene a meeting with municipal elected officials to determine a process for
disbanding the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County and establishing
criteria to oversee municipal and special district annexations, mergers, and incorporations in
King County. Until the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County is
disbanded, it should be governed in its decisions by the interim urban growth area boundary
and the adopted and ratified countywide planning policies. The criteria shall include, but
not be limited to: · ·
a. Conformance with Countywide Planning Policies;
b. .The ability of the annexing jurisdiction to demonstrate a capability to provide urban
services at standards equal to or better than the current service providers; and
GMA:pol Page 18 06110/1992
c. Annexations in a manner which discourages unincorporated islands of
development.
,
The GMA requires that city and county comprehensive plans be coordinated and consistent with
one another. Consistency is required "where there are common borders or related regional issues"
tRCW 36. lOA. 1 OOJ. Joint planning is fundamental to all the framework policies.
LU-25 All jurisdictions shall cooperate in developing comprehensive plans which are consistent
with those of adjacent jurisdictions and with the countywide planning policies.
4. Cities in the Rural Area
The cities and unincorporated towns in the rural areas are a significant part of King County's
diversity and heritage. Cities in this category include: Black Diamond, Carnation, Duvall,
Enumclaw, North Bend, Snoqualmie and Skykomish. They have an important role as local trade
and community centers. These cities and towns are the appropriate providers of local rural
services for the community. They also contribute to the variety of development patterns and
housing choices within the county. As municipalities, the cities are to provide urban services and
be located within designated Urban Growth Areas. The urban services, residential densities and
mix of land uses may differ from those of the large, generally western Urban Growth Area.
LU-26 .In recognition that cities in the rural area are generally not contiguous to the countywide
Urban Growth Area, and to protect and enhance the options cities in rural areas provide,
these cities shall be located within an Urban Growth Areas. These Urban Growth Areas
generally will be islands separate 'from the larger Urban Growth Area located in the western
portion of the county. Each city in the rural area, King County and the GMPC shall work
cooperatively to establish an Urban Growth Area for that city. Urban Growth Areas must
be approved by the GMPC by January 1, 1993. The Urban Growth Area for cities in rural
areas shall:
a. Include all lands within existing cities in the rural area;
b. Be sufficiently free of environmental constraints to be able to support rural city
growth without major environmental impacts;
c. Be contiguous to city limits; and
d. Have boundaries based on natural boundaries, such as watersheds, topographical
features, and the edge of areas already characterized by urban development.
LU-27 Cities in the rural areas shall include the following characteristics:
a. Shopping, employment, and services for residents, supplies for resources industries,
including commercial, industrial, and tourism development at a scale that reinforces
the surrounding rural characteristic;
b. Residential development, including small-lot single-family, multifamily, and
mixed-use developments; and
c. Design standards that work to preserve the rural, small-town character and promote
pedestrian mobility.
D. Urban and Manufacturing/Industrial. Centers
Urban Centers are envisioned as areas of concentrated employment and housing, with direct
service. by high capacity transit, ·and a wide range of other land uses such as retail, recreational,
public facilities, parks and open· space.
GMA:pol Page 19 06/10/1992
,,
Urban Centers are designed to 1) strengthen existing communities, 2) promote housing opportuni-·
ties close to employment, 3) support development of an extensive transportation system to reduce
dependency on automobiles, 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
permitting, and 7) evaluate and mitigate environmental imp/Jets.
Msnufscturing/lndustrial Employment Centers are key components of the regional economy. These
areas are characterized by a significant amount of manufacturing or other industrial employment.
They differ from other employment areas, such as Buslness/Offlce parks (see FW-13 and
LU-58-62), in that IJ land base is an essential element of their operation.
FW-11 Within the Urban Growth Area, a limited number of Urban Centers which meet specific
criteria established in the Countywide Planning Policies shall be locally designated. Urban
Centers shall be characterized by all of the following:
a. Clearty defined geographic boundaries
b. Intensity/density of land uses sufficient to support effective rapid transit;
c. Pedestrian emphasis within the Center;
d. Emphasis 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 ofland uses and choices within those uses for employees, residents;
g. Sufficient public open spaces and recreational opportunities; and
h. Uses which provide both daytime and nighttime activities in the Center.
FW-12 Within the Urban Growth Area, the Countywide Planning Policies shall assure a number of
locally-designated Manufacturing/Industrial Centers which meet specific criteria established
in the Countywide Planning Policies will be locally designated. The Manufacturing/Industrial
Centers will be and are characterized by the following:
a. Clearly defined geographic boundaries;
b. Intensity/density of land uses sufficient to support manufacturing and industrial
uses; and
c. Reasonable access to the regional highway, raU, air and/or waterway system for the
movement of goods.
FW-13 Urban and Manufacturing/Industrial Centers shall be complemented 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 Process
LU-28 The location and number of Urban Centers in King County will be determined through the
joint local and countywide adoption process, based on the following steps:
,I ... :.
a.
b.
GMA:pol
The Countywide Planning Policies include specific criteria for Urban Centers;
By October 1, 1992, local jurisdictions shall determine if they will contain an Urban
Center(s). Jurisdictions electing to contain these centers will provide the GMPC
with a statement of commitment describing the city's intent and commitment to
meet the Centers' criteria defined in these policies and a timetable for the required
Page 20 06/l0/1992
Centers Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement or identification of existing
environmental documentation to be used; and
c. By December 1, 1992, the ,Growth Management Planning Council shall review and
confirm the Centers that ·are elected by local jurisdictions (consistent with Policy
FW-1 ), or make adjustments based on:
1 ) The Center's location in the region and its potential for promoting a
countywide system of Urban Centers;
2) The total number of centers in the county that can be realized over the next
twenty years, based on twenty years projected growth;
3) The type and level of commitments that each jurisdiction has identified for
achieving Center goals; and ·
4) Review of other jurisdictional plans to ensure that growth focused to
Centers is assured.
2. Urban Centers Criteria
LU-29 Each jurisdiction which has designated an Urban Center shall adopt in its 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. Each center shall be zoned to
accommodate:
a. A minimum of 15,000 jobs within 1/2 mile of a transit center;
b. At a minimum, an averag~ of 50 employees per gross acre; and
c. At a minimum, an average 15 households per gross acre.
LU-30 Jurisdictions which contain urban centers, in conjunction with METRO, shall identify transit
station areas and right-of-way in their comprehensive plan. Station areas shall be sited so
that all portions of the Urban Center are within walking distance (one half mile) of a station.
LU-31 In order to reserve right-of-way and potential station areas for high-capacity transit or
transit hubs in the Urban Centers, jurisdictions shall:
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 controlled by the jurisdiction which are identified for
potential transit use; and
c. Provide METRO an option to acquire property owned by the jurisdiction.
LU-32 To encourage transit use, jurisdictions shall establish mechanisms to charge for
single-occupancy vehicle parking and/or a limit on the number of off-street parking spaces
for each Urban Center, and establish minimum and maximum parking requirements that
limit the use of the single-occupant vehicle and develop coordinated plans that incorporate
Commuter Trip Reduction guidelines. All plans for Urban Centers shall encourage bicycle
travel and pedestrian activity. · '
LU-33 Jurisdictions' comprehensive plans for Urban Centers shall demonstrate compliance with
the Urban Centers criteria. In order to promote urban growth within centers, the ~rban
Center plan shall establish strategies which:
a. Support pedestrian mobility, bicycle use and transit use;
b. Achieve a target housing density and mix of use;
GMA:pol Page 21 06/10/1992
. ,.,
c.
d.
e.
f .
g.
Provide a wide range of capital improvement projects, such as street improvements,
Schools, parks and open space, public art and community facilities;
Emphasize superior urban design;
Emphasize historic preservation and adaptive reuse of historic places;
Include other local characteristics necessary to achieve a vital urban center; and
Include facilities to meet human service needs.
LU-34 The system of urban centers shall form the land use foundation for a regional high capacity
transit system. Urban centers should receive very high priority for the location of high-
capacity transit stations and/or transit centers. (See also LU-47)
3. Incentives for Urban Centers
In order to help create Urban Centers, incentives to jurisdictions to establish Urban Centers, and to
the community to bUt'ld in Urban Centers, should be established. The provision of high-capacity
transit (HCTJ is one such incentive. Others include funding, and streamlined permitting.
LU-35 Countywide financing strategies shall be developed by the GMPC by July 1, 1993 which:
a. Identify regional funding sources; and
b. Set priorities and allocate funds for urban facilities and services including social and
human services, and subarea planning efforts, in Urban Centers.
LU-36 Each jurisdiction electing to contain an Urban Center under Policy LU-28 shall prepare a
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PElS) for each proposed center. The PElS
shall be prepared in a comprehensive manner and shan·address probable significant adverse
environmental impacts from and reasonable alternatives to the proposal. These may
include, but are not necessarily limited to subjects 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 shall provide additional environmental
review of other issues. These may include, 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 indicate probable significant adverse environmental
impacts which were not adequately analyzed in the PElS. Examples of project-specific
direct impacts include local traffic impacts, site aesthetics, and other issues not addressed
by the PElS.
LU-37 In support of centers, additional local action should include:
a. Strategies 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 with the
PElS; and,
d. Estatiishing a streamlined and simplified administrative appeal process with fixed
and certain timelines.
LU-38 Jurisdictions should consider additional incentives for development within Urban Centers
such as:
a. Setting goals for maximum permit review time and give priority to permits in Urban
Centers;
GMA:pol Page 22 06/10/1992
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 ·amenities.
4. Manufacturing/Industrial Center Designation Process
LU-39 The location and number of regional Manufacturing/Industrial Centers in King County will be
determined through the joint local and countywide adoption process, based on the following
steps:
a. Countywide Planning Polices include specific criteria for Manufacturing/Industrial
Centers;
b. By October 1, 1992, local jurisdictions shall determine if they will contain a
Manufacturing/Industrial Center(s). Jurisdictions that elect to contain a Manufactur-
ing/Industrial Center shall specify how the Center will meet the intent of the
Countywide Policies, including plans to adopt criteria, incentives, and other commit-
ment to implement Manufacturing/Industrial Centers;
c. By December 1, 1992, the Growth Management Planning Council shall review and
confirm the Manufacturing/Industrial Centers that are elected by local jurisdictions
(consistent with Policy FW-1 ), or make adjustments based on:
1 . The Center's location in the region, especially relative to existing and
proposed transportation facilities and its potential for promoting a
countywide system of Manufacturing/Industrial Centers;
2. The total number of centers in the county that are needed in the county
over the next twenty-years based on twenty years projected need for
manufacturing land to satisfy regional projections of demand for
manufacturing land;
3. The type and level of commitments that each jurisdiction has identified for
achieving Manufacturing/Industrial Center goals;
4. Review of other jurisdictional plans to ensure that growth focused to
Manufacturing/Industrial Centers is assured; and
5. The accessibility of the Center to existing or planned transportation ·
facilities.
5. Manufacturing/Industrial Center Criteria
LU-40 Each jurisdiction which contains a regional Manufacturing/Industrial Center shall adopt in its
comprehensive plan a definition of the Center which specifies the exact geographic
boundaries of the Center. Each Center shall be zoned to:
a. Preserve and encourage the aggregation of land parcels sized for manufactur-
ing/industrial uses;
b. Discourage land uses other than manufacturing and industrial; and
c. Accommodate a minimum of 10,000 jobs.
LU-4 1 All jurisdictions support the development of a regional industrial siting policy to link the
countywide manufacturing/industrial centers into the regional network of industrial activity.
GMA:pol Page 23 06/10/1992
LU-42 Jurisdictions shall design access to the regional Manufacturing/Industrial Centers to
facilitate the mobility of employees by transit, and the mobility of goods by truck, rai! or
waterway as appropriate. Regional comprehensive plans shall include strategies to provide
capital improvement projects which support access for movement of goods.
LU-43 Jurisdictions which contain regional Manufacturing/Industrial Centers in conjunction with
METRO, shall identify transit station areas and right-of-way in each jurisdiction's
comprehensive plan. Transit feeder systems, bicycle routes and pedestrian systems shall
be established to link the Center to the transit station area(s).
LU-44 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:
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 controlled by the jurisdiction which are identified for
potential transit use; and
c. Provide METRO an option to acquire property owned by the jurisdiction.
LU-45 To encourage transit use, jurisdictions shall establish mechanisms to charge for
single-occupancy vehicle parking or a limit on the number of parking spaces for
single-occupancy vehicles within each regional Manufacturing/Industrial Center. All plans
for regional Manufacturing/Industrial Centers shall encourage bicycle travel and pedestrian
circulation.
LU-46 Jurisdictions' comprehensive plans for regional Manufacturing/Industrial Centers shall
demonstrate compliance with the criteria. In order to promote manufacturing/industrial
growth, the Manufacturing/Industrial Center plan for each jurisdiction shall establish
strategies:
a. To provide capital improvement projects which support the movement of goods and
manufacturing/industrial operations;
b. To provide buffers around the Center to reduce conflicts with adjacent land uses;
c. To facilitate land assembly; and
d. To attract the type of businesses that will ensure economic growth and stability.
LU-47 Each Manufacturing Center containing a minimum of 1-5,000 jobs and having sufficient
employment densities to support HCT should be served by HCT. Manufacturing/Industrial
Centers which are located on the regional high capacity transit alignment and which meet
the transit-friendly criteria in policies LU-42 through LU-46 above shall receive one or more
high capacity transit stations and/or transit centers.
6. Incentives for Manufacturing/Industrial Centers
LU-48 Countywide financing strategies shall be developed by the GMPC by July 1, 1993 which:
a. Identify regional funding 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 .
. ',:; . ~ .. L ~·· :: ...
GMA:p~l Page 24 06/10/1992
LU-49 Jurisdictions shall consider conducting detailed SEPA review for the regional
Manufacturing/Industrial Center at the planning stage so that project-specific environmental
review is minimized.
LU-50 To reduce or prevent conflicts, ju.risdictions shall develop policies to establish and support
normal manufacturing/industrial practices such as notices on development permits for
properties adjacent to a manufacturing/industrial center.
E. Urban Growth Outside of Centers
A variety of land uses and concentrations of growth occur within the Urban Growth Area and
outside of the Urban Centers and Manufacturing/Industrial Centers. Local/and use plans will be
responsible for the designation, character, and utilization of urban areas outside of centers.
However, Countywide Policies are presented below to provide guidance for these areas to ensure
that they support the Centers growth concept. These policies do not apply to the rural cities
whose land use pattern is described by policies LU 26 and LU 27.
1 . Urban Residential Areas
Urban residential areas form the bulk of the Urban Growth Area, and are home to a large portion of
the county's population. They wl'll contain a mix of uses and wl'l/ have different characteristics in
different neighborhoods. Generally, the character, form, preservation and development of these
areas is a local jurisdictional responsibility. However, the residential areas need to support the
Centers concept and provide sufficient opportunity for growth .within the UGA. A substantial
majority of new residential units will be constructed within urban residential areas.
LU-51 In order to ensure efficient use of the land within the Urban Growth Area, provide for
housing opportunities, and to support efficient use of infrastructure, each jurisdiction shall:
a. Establish in its comprehensive plan a target minimum number of net new dwelling
units the jurisdiction will accommodate in the next 20 years and adopt, regulations
to achieve the target number;
b. Establish a minimum density (not including critical areas) for new construction in
each residential zone; and
c. Establish in the comprehensive plan a target mix of housing types for new
development and adopt regulations to achieve the target mix.
LU-52 The targets and regulations in LU-51 shall be based on the following steps:
a. By October 1, 1992 the GMPC shall adopt a target number of net new dwelling
units to be accommodated countywide;
b. By October 1, 1992 the interjurisdictional staff committee shall report to the GMPC
recommended ranges for net new dwelling units for each unincorporated urban .and
rural community, and each city based on the following criteria:
GMA:pol
1 . The capacity and condition of existing and forecast infrastructure, , •
2. Proximity to major employment centers,
3. Access to existing and projected regional transit, .
4. Capacity of undeveloped land and potential for redevelopment giv~n the
character of existing development,
5. The need for a range of housing types,
Page 25 06/10/1992
,, c.
d.
e.
6. Each jurisdiction's share of affordable housing as required by Affordable
Housing policies,
7. Consistency with the countywide numbers;
The targets in each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan shall fall within the ranges, or
shall state the reasons for deviating from the range;
Through the process established under FW-1 Step 4b, if the jurisdiction's
comprehensive plan differs from the target, the GMPC may recommend
amendments to either the Countywide Planning Policies or local plans; and
The interjurisdictional staff committee shall recommend a process to monitor the
implementation of this policy. The process should include members of the public.
2. Urban Employment Growth
A portion of the urban employment growth wt11 occur in activity areas end neighborhoods in the
urban area. This employment growth will support the Urban Centers, while balancing local
employment opportunities in the urban area.
LU-53 Targets for employment growth outside Urban Centers shall be established for cities and for
unincorporated urban communities through the joint local and countywide adoption process
based on the following steps:
a. By December 1992 the Growth Management Planning Council shall adopt 20 year
target numbers for employment growth and employment capacity inside urban
centers and outside urban centers. By October 1992 the interjurisdictional staff
committee shall develop preliminary recommendations for ranges of employment
growth and capacity inside and outside urban areas in each city, in unincorporated
urban communities and in rural areas based on the following criteria:
1. Consistency with the countywide numbers;
2. The need to direct growth to urban centers based on consistency with the
multiple centers strategy;
3. Access to regional rapid transit and existing highway and arterial capacity;
4. Availabilities of undeveloped ·rand and potential for redevelopment given the
character of existing development;
5. The willingness of local jurisdictions to implement policies which encourage
transit such as S.O.V. parking charges and/or limits, transit, bicycle and
pedestrian supportive design, and the adoption of policies that encourage
clustering of commercial and residential areas;
b. As part of their comprehensive plans, all jurisdictions shall indicate planned
employment capacity and targeted increases in employment for 20 years inside and
outside urban centers and shall show how their plans reflect the criteria in this
policy; and
c. Through the process established under FW-1 Step 4b, if the jurisdiction's
comprehensive plan differs from the target, the GMPC may recommend
amendments to either the Countywide Planning Policies or local plans.
3. lnfill Development
Urban growth occurs both in •new" neighborhoods end in existing neighborhoods. Existing neigh-
borhoods have e history of development patterns which have created e sense of identity. At the
GMA:pol Page 26 -06/10/1992
same time a vital neighborhood adapts to change and develops its own image. New development in
these neighborhoods should build on the existing patterns in a manner which respects and enriches
the neighborhood. For example in single family neighborhoods selective permitting of accessory
units and carriage houses may be more compatible than new apartment bw7dings.
LU-54 All jurisdictions shall develop neighborhood planning and design processes to encourage
infill development and enhance the existing community character and mix of uses.
4. Activity Areas
Activity Areas are locations that contain a moderate concentration of commercial/and uses and
some adjacent higher density residential areas. Activity Areas are distinguishable from community
or neighborhood commercial areas by their larger size and their function as a significant focal point
for the local community. Activity Areas contain a broad spectrum of locations with varied
functions, geographic sizes, and land uses.
Activity Areas are designated in comprehensive plans. Examples of Activity Areas might include
the central business districts of Kirkland, Burien, and Des Moines; East Hill in Kent; and a number
of business districts in Seattle, such as Lake City, Wallingford, and West Seattle.
LU-55 Jurisdictions shall designate the boundaries, maximum densities, and uses within all activity
areas to provide for local employment, commercial activities and public facilities.
LU-56 All Activity Areas should receive frequent peak hour transit service. Activity Areas may
contain a 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-supportive site planning, building design and
road design regulations; and
c. Has parking regulations to encourage transit use.
~ LU-57 To encourage transit use, jurisdictions shall establish minimum and maximum parking
requirements that reduce dependence on the single-occupant vehicle. Jurisdictions 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.
5. Business/Office Parks
Business/Office Parks are areas where /ow-density office development is collected at locations
separated from an identified retat7 commercial core. These parks tend to have low densities and
thus tend not to be supportive of transit or pedestrian circulation. These employment opportunities
generally do not require extensive land for their operations, and could be accommodated in Urban
Centers. Because the further development of these areas may compete with the employment
growth that is planned to support Urban Centers, significant future employment will not 'be
encouraged in these areas.
LU-58 Office building development is directed primarily to Urban Centers. Office building.
development outside Urban Centers should occur within activity areas and promote transit,
pedestrian and bicycle uses.
LU-59 Jurisdictions shall not expand existing land area zoned for business/office parks.
GMA:pol Page 27 .Jl. ~:; 06/10/1992
LU-60 All jurisdictions shall establish mechanisms to encourage transit use. Examples of potential
mechanisms include a charge for S.C. V. parking and/or a limit on the number of parking
spaces for single occupancy vehicles within each existing business/office park. Bicycle and
pedestrian supportive design should be encouraged.
; LU-61 To implement policy LU-53, all jurisdictions shall establish maximum Floor Area Ratios
and/or maximum employment levels for office use in existing business/office parks. These
maximums are intended to channel future employment and office space growth from
business/office parks outside of Urban Centers to Urban Centers.
LU-62 All jurisdictions should develop planning mechanisms to assist in the conversion of
business/office parks to mixed use areas. Jurisdictions should encourage inclusion of
residential and neighborhood commercial land uses and open space within existing
business/office parks.
GMA:pol Page 28 06/10/1992
Ill. Transportation
A. Transportation Overview
RCW 36. 70A.070(6J (Growth Management Act) fundamentally changes the way that
comprehensive planning will be done within the State of Washington. The Act places special
emphasis on transportation making it unlawful to approve development for which the approving
jurisdiction cannot demonstrate the availability of facilities, strategies and services which are
needed to accommodate the growth in traffic at the adopted level-of-service within six years.
Future development activity yvi/1 be constrained by a jurisdiction's ability to finance end provide
transportation improvements or strategies. This fact has some very significant implications for all
jurisdictions which are dependent upon the region's transportation systems because:
1. Projected traffic growth on the freeway and arterial system within the region greatly
exceeds the foreseeable collective ability to finance and construct the improvements
needed to retain historicellevels·of-service.
2. Maintaining the current level of personal mobility by single occupant vehicles will be
a costly public investment that wt11 negatively impact the regional quality of life,
create severe impacts to sensitive areas, degrade environmental quality, and
increase energy use and !he consumption of land.
3. Development within any one jurisdiction can be severely impacted by decisions and
actions beyond that jurisdiction's control:
o WSDOT may be unable to program improvements concurrent with a
jurisdiction's approval of a development permit.
o Metro may not be able to respond to transit levels-of-service adopted by
local jurisdictions.
o A jurisdiction may adopt level-of-service standards for arterials within its
jurisdiction and decline to accept improvements necessary to mitigate
transportation impacts from a proposed development in an adjoining
jurisdiction.
o Cumulative growth throughout the region will cause traffic growth on the
existing network and may thereby exhaust the capacity for local jurisdictions
to approve development.
In light of these financiai constraints end potential dangers, it will be necessary to undertake a
dramatically different approach for both transportation planning and land use planning, than has
been done in the past. This is necessary if the region is to avoid haphazard denials of development
permits following the July 1994 deadline for implementing ordinances. In order to limit sprawl,
create the desired urban form, and provide some measure of predictability for landowners and
developers, the region's scarce resources for transportation capacity improvements must bfJ used
prudently to focus on areas where zoning and densities support a multi-modal transportation
system. System capacity investments should be targeted first to those areas where the existing
land use end transportation system provides some hope of achieving the desired multi-modal
level-of-service within six years.
GMA:pol Page 29 06/10/1992
,,
. B. Transportation Policies
FW-14 The land use pattern shall be supported by a balanced transportation system which
.provides for a variety of mobility options. This system shall be cooperatively planned.
financed. and constructed. Mobility options shall include a High Capacity Transit system
which links the urban centers and is supported by an extensive High Occupancy Vehicle
system. local community transit system for circulation within the centers and to the
non-center urban areas. and non-motorized travel options.
FW-1 5 All jurisdictions in the county. in cooperation with Metro. the Metropolitan Planning
Organization. and the State. shall develop a balanced transportation system and
coordinated financing strategies and land use plan which implement regional mobility and
reinforce the countywide vision. Vision 2020 Regional Growth Strategies shall be
recognized as the framework for creating a regional system of Centers linked by High
Capacity Transit and an interconnected system of freeway High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)
lanes. and supported by a transit system.
FW-1 6 In recognition of the fact that King County is the regional freight distribution hub and a
major international trade gateway, and that freight transportation is one of the state's most
important basic sector economic activities. goods mobility by all modes shall be included as
a component of comprehensive plans.
T-1 The countywide transportation system shall promote the mobility of people and goods and
shall 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 arterials.
T-2 King County, its cities, adjacent counties, Metro, and the Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) shall support the continuous, comprehensive and cooperative
transportation planning process conducted by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRCl
pursuant to its Metropolitan Planning Organization ·(MPOl designation. The primary forum
for the development of regional transportation systems plans and strategies shall be the
PSRC, as the MPO.
T-3 The annual update and approval of the six-year Transportation Improvement 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 following:
a.
GMA:pol
Developing and maintaining coordinated level-of-service standards and a
concurrency system for countywide transit routes and arterial streets, including
state facilities;
· Page 30 06/10/1992
·.
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; ~nd
c. Developing and recommending transportation financing strategies, including
recommendations for prioritizing capacity improvements eligible to· receive 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 Center will be providing for a minimum of 15,000 jobs and should be served by
High Capacity Transit (HCT). Each Manufacturing Center containing a minimum of 15,000
jobs and having sufficient employment densities to support HCT should be served by HCT.
All jurisdictions that would be served by HCT shall plan for needed HCT rights-of-way,
stations and station supportive transportation facilities and land uses in their comprehensive
plans. The land use and transportation elements of comprehensive plans shall 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 shall 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 representatives on the
Transportation Policy and Executive Boards of the Puget Sound Regional Council IPSRCl
shall make completion of this system a high priority in programming the federal funds
available to the region.
2. Non-motorized Transportation
T-7 The transportation element of Comprehensive Plans shall include pedestrian and bicycle
travel as part of the transportation system and be developed on a coordinated, regional
basis. The bicycle and pedestrian element shall be a part of the funding component of the
capital improvement program. ·
3. Freeways/Highways/ Arterials
T -8 In order to maintain regional mobility, a balanced multi-modal transportation system shall be
planned that includes freeway, highway and arterial improvements by making existing roads
more efficient. These improvements should help alleviate existing traffic congestion
problems, enhance HOV and transit operations, and provide access to new desired growth
areas, as identified in adopted land use plans. General capacity improvements promoting
only Single Occupant Vehicle traffic shall be a lower priority. Transportation plans should
consider the following mobility options/needs:
a. Arterial HOV treatments,
b. Driveway access management for principal arterials within the Urban Growth Area;
and ·
c. Improvements needed for ·access to manufacturing and industrial centers, marine
and air terminals.
GMA:pol Page 31 06/10/1992
FW-17 Infrastructure planning and financing shall be coordinated among jurisdictions to direct and
prioritize countywide facility improvements to implement the countywide vision and land
use plans.
·,. FW-18 Where appropriate, King County and its cities shall adopt a clear definition of level-of·
service and concurrency requirements and establish a consistent process for implementing
concurrency, including accountability for impacts for adjacent jurisdictions.
FW-19 Each jurisdiction shall identify the facilities needed to ensure that services are provided
consistent with the community's adopted service levels. Timelines for the construction of
the needed facilities shall be identified.
4. Transportation Level-of-Service (LOS}
T-9 Level-of-service standards shall be used as a •toot• to evaluate concurrency for long-range
transportation planning, development review and programming of transportation
investments.
T-1 0 Each local jurisdiction shall establish mode-split goals for non-SOV travel to all significant
employment centers to reflect that center's contribution to the solution of the region's
transportation problem. Mode-split goals will vary according to development densities,
access to transit service and other alternative travel modes and levels of congestion.
Comprehensive plans shall demonstrate what transportation system improvements, demand
management and land use strategies will be implemented to achieve these mode-split goals.
These local goals shall be coordinated to achieve county and regional goals .
.
T -11 Elements to be considered in the level-of-service standard are mobility options that
encourage the use of transit, other high occupancy vehicles, demand management actions,
access to transit, and non-motorized modes of travel. These standards shall be consistent
with the requirements of the Commute Trip Reduction Act.
T-12 Mode split goals and measures of mobility for transit, ridesharing and non-motorized travel
shall be established by local jurisdictions and METRO.
T -13 Level-of-service standards shall vary by differing levels of development patterns and growth
management objectives. Lower arterial standards, tolerating more 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 transit 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 i~cluding:
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
T-15 Local governments shall work together to reassess regional land use and transportation
elements if transportation adequacy and concurrency cannot be met. Should funding fall
GMA:pol Page 32 06/10/1992
short for transportation improvements or strategies needed to accommodate growth, the
following actions should be considered:
a. Adjust land use and level-of-service standards to better achieve mobility and the
regional vision;
b. Make full use of all feasible local option transportation revenues authorized but not
yet implemented; and
c. Work with WSDOT, Metro, and the private sector to seek additional state
transportation revenues and local options to make system improvements necessary
to accommodate projected employment and population growth.
6. Financing
T-16 Transportation elements of Comprehensive Plans shall reflect the preservation and
maintenance of transportation facilities as a high priority to avoid costly replacements and
to meet public safety objectives in a cost-effective manner.
T-17 Developer impact fees shall be structured to ensure that new development contributes its
fair share of the resources needed to mitigate the impact on the transportation system.
Adjoining jurisdictions shall execute interlocal agreements for impact fees which recognize
that traffic generated in one jurisdiction contributes to the need to make transportation
improvements across jurisdictional boundaries. Impact fees shall not be assessed to cure
that portion of the improvement attributable to correcting existing deficiencies.
T-18 Existing local option transportatio~ funding shall be applied within King County as follows:
a. Employee tax base --reserved for city street utility development;
b. Commercial parking tax --defer action, pending development of a regional TOM
strategy;
c. HOV acceleration financing --defer until after High Capacity Transit vote; and
d. Local option gas tax --consider as potential source to address transportation
"concurrency" needs of county and cities only after vote on High Capacity 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-SOV mode split.
7. State Transportation Role
T-20 Consistent with the countywide vision, local governments shall coordinate with the State
on land use and transportation systems and strategies which affect state facilities and
programs.
T-21 State capital improvement decisions and policy actions shall be consistent with regional and
countywide ~oals and plans. The State shall ensure its transportation capital improvement
decisions and programs support the adopted land use plans and transportation actions.
T -22 The State and local governments shall use the same capital programming and budgeting
time frame that all local governments and the county use, a minimum of six years; for
making capital decisions and for concurrency management.
GMA:pol Page 33 06/10/1992
8. Siting Regional and Countywide Transportation Facilities
T-23 King County, the cities, the Puget Sound Regional Council, the State, Metro, and other
transportation providers shall identify significant regional and/or countywide land acquisition
', needs for transportation and establish a process for prioritizing and siting the location of
transportation f~cilities.
GMA:pol Page 34 06/10/1992
IV. Community Character and Open Space
A measure of the success of planning for growth is the extent to which we restore, maintain and
create good places to live, work and play. We must encourage growth which improves our
neighborhoods and landscapes, and bw1ds a strong sense of place. The following policies on
cultural resources, civic architecture and landmarks, multi-use roadways, infi/1 development, and
incentives for urban and rural design, aim to promote good community character.
FW-20 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
shall include sufficient supply of quality places for housing, employment, education,
recreation, and open space and the provision of community and social services.
FW-21 Each urban area shall be characterized by superior urban design as locally defined.
FW-22 Significant historic, archaeological, cultural, architectural and environmental features shall
be respected and preserved.
A. Historic Resources
Historic resources create a sense of local identity and history, enhance the quality of life, support
community vitality, and otherwise enrich our lives. Historic resources are non-renewable: they
embody the unique heritage and evolution of particular places. Thoughtful management of these
resources contributes to economic development and moderates some of the harmful effects of
rapid growth. Planning for historic resources includes protecting archaeological sites and historic
but1dings and landscapes, encouraging expression of diverse ethnic and folk traditions, and.
supporting activities for children and youth.
CC-1 All jurisdictions should work individually and cooperatively to identify, evaluate, and protect
historic resources including continued and consistent protection for historic resources and
public art works.
CC-2 All jurisdictions shall encourage land use patterns and implement regulations that protect
and enhance historic resources, and sustain historic community character.
B. Urban Design
Governments should be leaders in providing structures, public spaces, parks and streets which
support the quality of ou1 region. Civic design should express the region's values and vision, and
should provide landmarks which contribute to our sense of place. Additionally, individual.
jurisdictions can nurture their individual character by developing a clear set of goals and policfes
which outlt'ne the public t'nterest t'n the design of private development in the urban and rural
communities.
CC-3 All jurisdictions shall promote a high quality of design and site planning in publicly-funded
construction (such as civic buildings, parks, bridges, transit stops), and in private · -
development.
GMA:pol Page 35 06110/1992
C. Human and Community Services
Human and community services are: social and health services; emergency shelters; meeting
places,· performing arts and cultural activities; schools; libraries; parks and recreation; and fi're and
police protection.
CC-4 Human and community service planning activities shall support Countywide Planning
Policies and the countywide land development pattern.
CC-5 All jurisdictions shall identify essential community and human services and include them in
land use, capital improvement, and transportation plans.
D. Open Space
Open space lands are essential to the community character of King County. They provide visual
variety and relief from developed areas, protect environmental quality, and provide wildlife habitat
and foster opportunities for outdoor recreation. Open space corridors physically and functionally
link open space lands.
The challenge for jurisdictions is to establish programs that contribute to the protection,
accessibt'lity and stewardship of open space lands and corridors. The GMA requires jurisdictions to
form linkages between and within population centers with lands useful for recreation, trails, wildlife
habitat and connection of critical areas. These open space lands and corridors or greenways
should be selected and preserved to form an interconnected system regionally and within
jurisdictions locally and should be stewarded to ensure continuing environmental and ecological
significance. Where appropriate, the regions{ system and its local components should provide for
multiple benefits and functions, which will require careful planning and management to ensure
compstibt7ity and long-term visbt1ity of the benefits and functions.
Open space lands and corrfdors have significance at both the local and regional scale. Jdentification
and protection of local open spaces will be considered within the comprehensive plans of each
jurisdiction. On an individual basis, jurisdictions should strive to identify, establish and protect
open space lands of local significance that also compliment, adjoin or enhance the regional system.
The regional open space system includes open space lands and corridors that have importance
beyond jurisdictional boundaries and will require multi-jurisdictional coordination to identify, protect
and steward.
FW-23 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 opportunities 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 other
environmental, cultural; and scenic resources.
CC-7 All jurisdictions shall work cooperatively to identify and protect open space corridors of
regional significance. This process shall include:
GMA:pol Page 36 06/10/1992
~.;
. ..
a. Identification of regional open space lands and corridors which form a functionally
and physically connected system with environmental, ecological, recreational and
. aesthetic significance and which is readily accessible to our urban populations;
b. Identification of implemen.tation strategies and regulatory and non-regulatory tech-
niques to protect the -lands and corridors, including collaboration and coordination .
with land trusts and other land preservation organizations; and
c. Development of management plans and strategies to sustain the corridors' open
space benefits an? functions of the preserved lands and corridors.
CC-8 Water bodies and rivers of the Puget Sound region form an important 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 and 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) ensuring the ready
access of our citizens residing in Urban Centers to the regional open space system.
CC-1 0 The conceptual map of open space systems contained in the 1988 King County Open
Space Plan shall be used as the planning basis for regional open space lands and corridors.
All jurisdictions will work cooperatively to revise and supplement this map to direct the
protection of these valuable resources throughout the county.
CC-11 All jurisdictions shall work cooperatively to ensure parks and open spaces 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 system which has been cooperatively
identified.
CC-13 All jurisdictions shall develop coordinated level. of service standards for the provision of
parks and open spaces.
,,
GMA:pol Page 37 06/10/1992
,, V. Affordable Housing·
' Adequate housing, for all economic segments of the population, is a basic need of King County's
residents and an issue of countywide concern. Affordable housing needs must be addressed by
local governments working in cooperation with the private sector and nonprofit housing agencies.
The GMA requires countywide policies to address parameters for the distribution of affordable
housing, including housing for all income groups. This complex issues requires adequate infor-
mation regarding current housing resources and housing needs, which is being developed for
comprehensive plan housing elements, as well as in-depth discussion of values and priorities for
housing development. ·
FW-24 All jurisdictions shall cooperatively establish a process to ensure an equitable and rational
distribution of low-income and affordable housing throughout the county in accordance
with land use policies, transportation, and employment locations. All jurisdictions shall
provide a diversity of housing types to meet a variety of needs and incomes.
AH-1 . All jurisdictions shall share the responsibility for achieving a rational· and equitable
distribution of affordable housing to meet the housing needs of low and moderate income
residents in King County. The distribution of housing affordable to low and
moderate-income households shall reflect the need for proximity to lower wage employment
and access to transportation and human services; recognize each jurisdiction's past and
current efforts to provide housing affordable to low and moderate-income households; avoid
over-concentration of assisted housing; and increase housing opportunities and choices for
low and moderate income households in communities throughout King County. Each juris-
diction shall give equal consideration to local and countywide housing needs.
The GMPC shall define and quantify affordable housing needs for low and moderate-income
households and countywide objectives for distribution of affordable housing for low and
moderate-income households. The process shall in!=lude involvement by housing industry
representatives, housing interest groups, and community organizations. The Affordable
Housing Technical Forum, which has representatives from the County and each city, shall
prepare recommendations for the GMPC by August 1, 1992.
By October 1, 1992 each jurisdiction shall specify the range and amount of housing
affordable to low and moderate-income households to be accommodated in its
comprehensive plan, based on countywide objectives for distribution. By December 1,
1992 the GMPC will review, and the county and cities will ratify, the countywide objectives
for distribution and each jurisdiction's proposed range and amount of affordable housing
units.
The process shall address:
a. Development and preservation. of subsidized housing and low-cost market rate
housing;
b. The definition of low-income and moderate-income housing;
c. Guidelines to meet affordable housing needs in individual jurisdictions as well as
need throughout King County, including recognition for jurisdictions that already
meet the guidelines;
'i\l.· .... GMA:pol Page 38 06/10/1992
d. Strategies, including land use incentives. streamlined permitting processes, and
funding commitments, to be adopted by all jurisdictions to provide affordable
housing; and · ·
e. Guidelines to ensure that ·affordable housing is provided in conjunction with regional
transportation planning, including funding for acquisition and rehabilitation to pre·
serve existing affordable housing; funding and incentives for development of new
housing in infill and redevelopment projects; and, subject to a legal determination,
inclusionary requirements to ensure that a proportion of new residential
development is affordable to low and moderate income households.
Providing sufficient land for housing development is an essential step in promoting affordable
housing. Affordable housing can be encouraged by zoning additional/and for higher residential
densities, which helps provide needed capacity for growth, reduces land development cost per
units, and allows for lower C()St construction types such as attached dwellings. Higher density
housing includes a range of housing types: small-lot single family, attached single family, mobile
home parks, apartments and condominiums. In addition, zoning changes that permit additional
housing in established areas, such as accessory units, carriage houses, and residences bu17t above
commercial uses, increase affordable housing opportunities.
AH-2 Each jurisdiction shall show in its comprehensive plan how it will use policies, incentives,
regulations and programs to provide its share of housing affordable to low and
moderate-income households as determined by the process outlined in AH-1 .
AH-3 · Each jurisdiction shall evaluate its existing resources of subsidized and low-cost
non-subsidized housing and identjfy housing that may be lost due to redevelopment, dete-
riorating housing conditions, or public policies or actions. Each jurisdiction shall develop
strategies to preserve existing low-income housing where feasible and provide relocation
assistance to low income residents who may be displaced.
AH-4 All jurisdictions shall monitor residential development within their jurisdiction and determine
annually the total number of new units constructed, housing types, developed densities and
remaining capacity for residential growth. King County shall report annually on housing
development, the rate of housing cost and price increases and available residential capacity
countywide.
AH-5 Within the urban growth area, each jurisdiction shall maximize its ability to accommodate
sufficient, affordable housing by removing regulatory barriers, reviewing codes for
redundancies and inconsistencies and providing opportunities for a full range of housing
types such as accessory dwelling units, manufactured homes on individual lots, apartments,
townhouses and attached single family housing.
GMA:pol Page 39 06/10/1992
,, VI. Contiguous and Orderly Development and
Provision of Urban Services to Such
Development
Chapter 1/, "Land Use Pattern, • contains policies for phasing development within the Urban Growth
Area. An integral component of the phasing process is ensuring that development is accompanied
by a full range of urban services. Equally important is ensuring that infrastructure improvements
are not provided in advance of development which could undermine the countywide development
pattern. This chapter provides policies which support phasing within the Urban Growth Ares and
ensure the integrity of the countywide land development pattern.
FW-25 Planning for and financing of services shall be coordinated among jurisdictions to direct and
prioritize countywide facility improvements to implement the countywide policies.
FW-26 Jurisdictions shall identify the services needed to achieve adopted service levels. Timelines
for constructing needed services shall be identified.
FW-27 Protection of public health and safety and the 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
To ensure that land use is accompanied with the maximum possible use of existing fact'lities and
cost-effective service provisions and extensions, and to encow:age development of strong,
interrelated communities, policies are needed which integrate a full range of urban services with
land-use planning and environmental protection. Urban service definitions should be guided by
"public services, • "public facilities, • and "urban governmental services" as defined in RCW 36. 70A
(GMAJ.
Community and human services policies are included under Chapter IV, "Community Character and
Open Space, • and transportation policies are included under Chapter Ill, "Transportation. • Several
countywide planning efforts provide direction for achieving the integration of services, aquifer and
natural resource protection, and land use planning. These include the Coordinated Water System
Plans, Seattle Regional Comprehensive Water Supply Plan, Groundwater Management Plans, Basin
Plans, Chelan Agreement Regional Water Resources Planning Process, Flood Hazard Reduction Plan,
Wastewater 2020 Plus, Human Services Strategies Report, and the King County Sewerage General
Plan. Furthermore, there are state mandates which affect the provision of services. For example,
water resource allocation must accommodate. all reasonable out-of-stream needs and maintain
sufficient flows for in-stream uses. The following policies transcend Urban and Rural/and use
designations and apply countywide.
GMA:pol Page 40 06/10/1992
1. Urban Services Required as Growth Occurs
C0-1 Jurisdictions shall.identify the full range of urban services and how they plan to provide
them.
2. Conservation, Efficiency, Cost Effectiveness and New Technologies
C0-2 Jurisdictions and other urban service providers shall provide services and manage natural
resources efficiently, through regional coordination, conjunctive use of resources, and
sharing of facilities. lnterjurisdictional planning efforts shall evaluate approaches to share
. and conserve resources.
C0-3 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 water management
system which crosses jurisdictions boundaries and identifies and prioritizes program
elements and capital improvements necessary to accommodate growth and protect the
natural and build environment. The GMPC shall develop and recommend a financing and
implementation strategy to meet this need.
C0-5 Water supply shall be regionally coordinated to provide a reliable economic 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. Efforts shall include, but not be limited to, public education, 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 buildings.
'
C0-7 Water reuse and reclamation shall be encouraged, especially for large commercial arid
residential developments, and for high water users such as parks, schools, golf courses,
and locks.
C0-8 When planning 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 and reuse shall be
identified and incorporated into plans as viable options.
C0-9 The presence of tightline sewers or availability of s.ewer 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. ,,
B. Urban Areas Identified for Growth for the Next Ten Years
The designation of the Urban Growth Area establishes the service area for the county. The
detailed arrangement and timing of services and the installation of infrastructure improvements is
GMA:pol Page 41 06/10/1992
•;.r
left to be determined through shorter-term capital improvement plans. To support the densities and
land uses of urban areas identified for immediate development, urban water and sewer systems are
essential to support growth anticipated in the Urban Area over the next ten years. Urban water
systems are defined as a network of pipes which are designed to meet all user needs and provide
fire protection. Urban sewer systems are defined as a system of pipes providing conveyance to a.
sewage treatment facl'lity.
1. Urban Water and Sewer Systems Required
C0-1 0 In the Urban Area identified for growth within the next ten years, urban water and sewer
systems are preferred for new construction on existing lots and shall be required for new
subdivisions. However, existing septic systems, private wells, and/or small water systems
may continue to serve the developments so long as densities and physical conditions are
appropriate, the systems are allowed by the relevant jurisdictions, and management keeps
the systems operating properly and safely.
C. Urban Areas Designated for Growth Beyond 2002
In urban areas designated for growth beyond 2002, there will be a mix of existing services which
may or may not be at urban service levels. The appropriate infrastructure improvements for sewer
and water systems will vary according to existing site conditions. New developments should occur
contiguous to existing, fully-developed areas so that extension of services occurs in an orderly and
cost-effective manner.
1 . Phased and Cost Effective Extension of Urban Water and Sewer Systems
C0-11 To the extent practicable, all new plats shall be contiguous to the areas identified for
growth for the next ten years. The phased expansion should respect basin boundaries or
other natural landscape features.
C0-1 2 Preferred sewer and water systems in areas designated for growth beyond 2002 are
community drainfields and water systems which are professionally managed. These
systems shall be designed, sited, and built to facilitate eventual conversion to urban sewer
and water systems. Jurisdictions shall require all known and projected costs of
infrastructure improvement to urban service levels be funded at the permitting stage.
C0-13 Urban sewer system extensions in unincorporated King County shall be permitted
consistent with the provisions of the King County Sewerage General Plan, countywide
policies, and the policies of the jurisdiction in whose potential annexation area the extension
is proposed.
D. Rural Areas\ and Resource Lands
Residents in rural areas and resou;ce lands n~ed to have many of the.same types of services as
urban areas. However, the service standards in rural areas and resource lands are not at Urban
levels. Rural water systems are defined as individual or community wells or piped water systems
designed to meet all user ne_eds but, in most cases, not providing for fire protection.
GMA~pol Page 42 06/10/1992
1. Limited Extension of Urban Water and Sewer Systems . '
,-
C0-14 Sewer expansion shall not occur in rural areas and resource lands except where needed to
address specific health and safetY problems threatening structures permitted before July 1,
1992 or the needs of public facilities such as schools. Sewers may be extended only if
they are tightlined and only after a finding is made that no alternative technologies are
feasible. Mechanisms to reduce cost and limit the number of individual hookups shall be
explored and actions recommended to the GMPC.
C0-15 Urban water system extensions shall not be permitted in rural areas and resource lands
except to solve immediate health or safety problems threatening existing residents. If urban
water systems are extended, the maximum number of hookups that is consistent with the
countywide land development pattern shall be specified at the time of the extension.
C0-16 All rural water systems outside existing service areas (planning areas) shall be professionally
managed by the applicable water purveyor according to the satellite management
procedures of the Coordinated Water System Plans, and designed to rural standards.
,,
GMA:pol Page 43 06/10/1992
,, VII. Siting Public Capital Facilities of a
Countywide or Statewide Nature
Public capital facilities of a countywide or statewide nature generally have characteristics that
make these facilities extremely difficult to site. Such characteristics include the number of
jurisdictions affected or served by the facility, the size of the facility, and the facility's potential
adverse impacts, such as noise, odor, traffic, and pollution generation. The facilities can be either
desirable or undesirable to jurisdictions. Some of the facilities are privately owned and regulated by
public entities. Facilities also can be owned by the state and used by residents from throughout
the state, such· as universities and their branch campuses.
The county and the cities need to develop a process for siting public capital facilities with these
types of characteristics, including but not limited to, utl7ity and transportation corridors, airports,
wastewater treatment plants, solid waste landfl'lls, higher educational facilities, correctional and
in-patient treatment facilities and energy-generating facilities.
FW-28 Public capital facilities of a countywide or statewide nature shall be sited to support the
countywide land use pattern, support economic activities, mitigate environmental impacts,
provide amenities or incentives, and minimize public costs. Amenities or incentives shall be
provided to neighborhoods/jurisdictions in which facilities are sited. Facilities must be
prioritized, coordinated, planned, and sited through an interjurisdictional process established
by the GMPC.
S-1 The Growth Management Planning Council shall establish a process by which all
jurisdictions shall cooperatively site public capital facilities of a countywide or statewide
nature. The process shall include:
a. A definition of these facilities;
b. An inventory of existing and future facilities;
c. Economic and other incentives to jurisdictions receiving facilities;
d. A public invqlvement strategy;
e. Assurance that the environment and public health and safety are protected; and
f. A consideration of alternatives to the facility, including decentralization, demand
management, and other strategies.
GMA:pol Page 44 06/10/1992
VIII. Ec.onomic Development and Finance
Jurisdictions should cooperatively create an environment which sustains the economic vitality of
the region and which contributes to manageable economic growth. Jurisdictions shall recognize
that King County is part of a larger regional economy, which is strongly linked by trade to the
national and international economies. Infrastructure investments should be focused into urban
centers and manufacturing/industrial employment centers· which are supported by transit.
Countywide policies shall be integrated with economic development.
FW-29 All jurisdictions shall contribute to the economic sustainability of the county in a manner
which supports the countywide land use pattern. This is to be accomplished by 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-30 All jurisdictions shall act to increase work training and job opportunities for all residents and
communities.
FW-31 All jurisdictions shall support the development of a regional economic development strategy
consistent with the countywide land use pattern.
A. Economic Development Policies
ED-1 By December 1, 1992, the GMPC shall adopt Economic Development policies which:
a. Establish the county's role in the regional economy;
b. Maintain a strong economic base wi_thin 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 economic
development;
f. Foster job training opportunities to maintain a highly educated work force;
g. Protect the natural environment as a key economic value in this region;
h. Consider the special needs of economically disadvantaged citizens and
neighborhoods; and
i. Include the assistance of private sector.
ED-2 By July 1, 1993 regional planning shall produce a regional industrial siting policy based on a
regional assessment of the need for industrial zoned land and the availability of
transportation and other infrastructure to serve it.
ED-3 Jurisdictions' comprehensive plans shall include economic development policies. Th~,se
policies shall address the .local economic concerns of each jurisdiction within the context of
a regional economic development strategy.
GMA:pol Page 45 06/10/1992
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 be accommodated in the
jurisdiction during the next 20 years. ·
ED-5 The county shall work with Snohomish and Pierce Counties to develop a joint 20-year
regional economic development strategy.
B. Finance
A fiscal analysis is r.equired by the GMA. This section of policies is intended to bring together
references to financial matters found in earlier chapters (see Chapter II, "Rural Areas" and "Urban
and Manufacturing/Industrial Centers, " Sections 8 and DJ and to provide direction for the fiscal
analysis of the anticipated results of implementing the countywide planning policies.
FW-32 To implement the Countywide Planning Policies, jurisdictions shall cooperatively identify
regional funding sources and establish regional financing strategies by July 1, 1993. Such
strategies shall consider the infrastructure and service needs of Urban Centers,
Manufacturing/Industrial Centers, Activity Areas, Business/Office Parks, other activity
concentrations, and rural areas. Such strategies shall also provide incentives to support the
Countywide Pfanning Policies and should:·
a. Make existing and newly identified funding sources respond in the most flexible way
to meet countywide needs;
b; Ensure that a balance of services is available countywide to meet, among others,
human service, public safety, open space and recreation, education, and
transportation needs; and
c. Evaluate current revenue and service demands and the potential for more
effective coordination of service delivery.
GMA:pol Page 46 06/10/1992
·.;·-\I
EXHIBITB
July 1, 1992
92-439s8:MMcF/JC:hdm
Introduced by: SullivanfLaing
Gruger/Phillips
Derdowski
· Proposed No . : .:t.9"'2,_--=4'-'3,_9~----
1
2 ORDINANCE N0.1 0450
3 AN ORDINANCE adopting the Countywide
4 Planning Policies pursuant to RCW
5 36.70A.210 and ratifying the Countywide
6 Planning Policies for unincorporated King
7 County.
8 PREAMBLE:
9 For the purpose of meeting the requirements of the State
10 of Washington Growth Management Act to establish a countywide
11 framework from which comprehensive plans are to be developed as
.12 specified in. RCW 36.70A.210~ the King County council makes the
13 following findings: ·
14 1. The Countywide Planning Policies describe the vision
15 for King County and provide the initial strategies to be used
16 by local jurisdictions, acting individually and cooperatively,
17 to achieve that vision.
18 2. RCW 36.70A.210 requires that, through a process agreed
19 to by King County (county), the city of Seattle (Seattle), and
20 incorporated suburban cities and towns (suburban cities), the
21 county, as the legislative authority, adopt Countywide Planning
22 Policies no later than July 1, 1992.
23 3. The county, Seattle, and suburban cities established
24 that process through an interlocal agreement creating the
25 Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) . The GMPC is
26 comprised of the King County Executive, five members of the
27 King County Council, three representatives of Seattle, and six
28 representatives of the suburban cities with three votes, and
29 one ex-officio member representing the Port of Seattle.
30 4. After six months or deliberation which included public
31 workshops and hearings, the GMPC adopted and recommended the
32 Countywide Planning Policies to the King County Council.
33 5. The council finds that the existing environmental
34 documents adopted by King County on May 5, 1992 and the
35 supporting addendum issued on June 18, 1992 are adequate under
36 SEPA for the purposes of the county's adoption of the
37 Countywide Planning Policies.
38 6. The county recognizes that additional work is planned
39 to further refine the Countywide Planning Policies with regard
40 to numerous issues, including but not limited to urban centers,
41 manufacturing and industrial areas and centers, affordable
42 housing, mobility, transportation, economic development, rural
43 character, provision of urban services, including services in
44 potenti~l ann~xation areas, and adjustments to the ufban Growth
45 Area. Based on this work, the GMPC will recommend to the
.46 county amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies. These
47 amendments would be subject to further environmental review,
48 and adoption by the county and ratification by the cities. The
49 results of this work would be a refined set of Countywide ·
50 Planning Policies. A Supplemental Environmental Impact
51 Statement (SEIS) will analyze the impacts of the proposed set
52 of refined policies and will consider reasonable alternatiyes
92 • 439s8 :MMcF :hdn
July 6, 1992 10:02am
10450
·1 to those policies. Attachment A lays out the work program and
.2 timetable for refining the policies.
3 7. With respect to the Urban Growth Area (UGA) Boundary a
4 number of study areas have been identified which require
5 additional consideration by.the GMPC. These study areas are
6 identified on the GMPC Recommended Urban Growth Area map. For
7 the East Sammamish area, the GMPC determined that the area
8 should be further evaluated and possibly revised based on the
9 East Sammamish Community Plan Update process which is now under
10 way and which will be completed in January 1993.
11 Recommendations on the UGA Boundary will be developed in
12 cooperation with the affected cities, neighborhoods, property
13 owners and the general public. Changes to the adopted UGA
14 Boundary may be recommended to the county by the GMPC and
15 subject to adoption and ratification.
16 8. The Countywide Planning Policies apply within King
17 County only and therefore only apply to unincorporated King
18 County and to that portion of a city or town located within the
19 county.
20 9. The Countywide Planning Policies provide for the
21 coordination and regulation of public and private development
22 and bear a substantial relationship to, and are necessary for,
23 the public health, safety, and general welfare of King County
24 and its residents.
25 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY:
26 SECTION 1. The county will implement the major planning
27 requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA) in three
28 phases, each accompanied by the appropriate scope and level of
29 environmental review pursuant to both the GMA and the State
30 Environmental Policy Act. (SEPA) and fiscal review. Phase I is
31 the adoption of the Countywide Planning Policies for the
32 purposes described in Section 2. Phase II is the process for
33 refinement of Countywide Planning Policies through proposed
34 amendments to them, and the preparation of an SEIS and a fiscal
35 analysis. Phase II, whic~ will begin upon adoption of the
36 Countywide Planning Policies, is described in Section 3. Phase
37 III is the review and adoption of amendments to the King County
38 Comprehensive Plan. Phase III will incorporate any changes
39 made to the Countywide Planning Policies in Phase II.
40 SECTION 2. The Countywide Planning Policies attached
41 hereto are hereby approved and adopted for purposes of
42 complying with RCW 36.70A.210; to begin the process of city
43 review and ratification; to provide a policy framework for
44 developing and updating jurisdictions' comprehensive plans; to
92·439sB:MHcF :han
July 6, 1992 10:02am
2
1 provide a policy framework for interim controls to the extent
2 the policies expressly require them; and to establish a program
3 for the additional work necessary to refine, amend and
4 implement.the Countywide Planning Policies, including SEIS
5 review and fiscal'an~lysis.
6 SECTION 3. In Phase II the county will reconvene the
7 GMPC no later than December 1992 to evaluate the following
8 information and recommendations: nominations of urban and
9 manufacturing/industrial centers by affected jurisdictions; the
10 targ~t numbers for population and employment by jurisdiction;
11 recommendations from the Rural Character, Affordable Housing
12 and Economic Development Task Forces; further fiscal analysis;
13 analysis of mobility and transportation; other relevant
14 information and public comment, in preparing amendments. GMPC
15 will consider the results of the additional work and may
16 recommend amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies to the
17 county. Any such recommended amendments shall be subject to
18 adoption by the county and ratification by the cities according
19 to the formula in the interlocal agreement creating the GMPC.
20 Further fiscal analysis of t~e Countywide Planning Policies,
21 any proposed amendments and alternatives will be prepared and
22 circulated for public cornmept. The objectives of the fiscal
23 analysis are to a). provide information on the anticipated
24 financial and economic impacts on the individual, and on the
25 private and public sectors, and b) determine how these impacts
26 affect the fiscal viability of the individual and of the
27 private and public sectors. A SEIS will be prepared for the
28 proposed refined set of Countywide Planning Policies resulting
29 from the work described in this Section. The SEIS will analyze
30 the probable significant environmental impacts, including
31 countywide impacts, of the proposed refined set of policies and
32 reasonable alternatives to those policies. The scope of the
33 environmental impact statement will be based on a public~
34 seeping process pursuant to WAC 197-11-408.
92·439s6:MMcF :han
July 6, 1992 1D:D2am
3
•• •·!
. ,
10450
. . 1 SECTION 4 . Countywide Planning Policies adopted by this
···% ordinance for the purposes specified herein are hereby ratified
•· .. 3 on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County.
4 SECTION 5. The Co~niywide Pla~ning Policies shall become
5 effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least
6 thirty percent of the city and county governments representing
7 seventy percent of the population of King County according to
8 the interlocal agreement. A city shall be deemed to have
9 ratified the Countywide Planning Policies unless, within ninety
10 days of adoption by King County, the city by legislative action
11 disapproves the Countywide Planning Policies.
12 SECTION G. The county executive shall commence
13 preparation of the Phase II SEIS and fiscal analysis, and the
14 county comprehensive plan ~mendments and regulations to
15 implement the countywide policies, subject to completion of the
16 ratification process set out in Section 5. The Countywide
17 Planning Poli6ies will affect the county's land use decisions
18 when the county comprehensive plan or land use regulations
19 implementing the policies are adopted.
20 SECTION 7. The county executive shall develop and
21 propose to the council a process to enter'into interlocal
22 agreements relating to each city's potential annexation area.
23 The process shall include con~ultation with affected special
24 purpose districts.
92 • 439s8: KKcF :han
July. 6, 1992 10:02am
4
1 SECTION 8. Should any section; subsection, paragraph,
2 sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.or its application
3 to any person or circumstance be declared unconstitutional or
4 invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affedt the
5 validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance or it
6 application to other persons or circumstances.
7 INTRODUCED AND READ for the first time this day
8 of ---LL~-=--"-==-----1 19 q~
9 PASSED this day of --""~..:.::.'-+------' 1~
10 KING COUNTY COUNCIL
11 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
14 ATTEST:
15
16
17
18
19
20
Clerk of the Council
APPROVED this
92-439sB:HMcF :han
July 6, 1992 10:02am
c<h of ._]" L-1 7 .
,{L~e_o
day
King county Executive
5
19q '?-
t ~· '
10450
ATTACHMENT A
Work Program to Refine Countrwide Planning Policies
The completion dales are points al which the GlllPC is expected to re.-iew and cunsidcr amcndme1its Lu
the Countywide Plaruung Policies. Jurisdictions have additional t.asks to complete or revise Inca!
comprehensive plans.
PUBLIC REVIEW WILL CONTINUE AS l\IATERIALS ARE PREPARED AND
RECOl\11\lENDATIONS FROl\1 JURJSD1CTIONS ARE DEVELOPED.
1.
2.
3.
4.
s.
6.
Scoping of additionaJ issues requiring supplemental
envir01unenlaJ review.
Urban Growth Boundary
l.nterim actions by cities and County.
Technical review of study areas.
Centers and Capacity
Urban and l\lanufacturing/lndustrial
Centers nomination & confinnalion (LU-28 & 39)
Dwelling units accommodated/distributed;
employment growth distributed (LU-52 & LU-53)
Affordable Housing: needs and distribution (All-1)
(includes n~ummcndations from Task Force of GlllPC
private sector)
Economic Development Policies
(includes recommendations from Task Force of GMPC
private sector)
Rural Areas
Rural character (LU-9)
(includes recommendations from Gl\IPC Task Force)
Cities in rural areas growth areas (LU-26)
jbc:mmc
ccpwk:62592
92· 439s6:MMcF :han
July 6, 1992 10:02om
6
Gl\li'C Cmnpleliun Dale
September 1992
One month after
ratification
October 1992
December 1992
December 1992
December 1992
December 1992
December 1992
January 1993