HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM VIII-B-1,~ * ~
//~~CITYOF -~ ~~~ .mot"
1-l~ ~ _ ~~~~ F RM
WASHINGTON AGENDA BILL APPROVAL O
A enda Sub'ect: Kin Count Count ide Plannin Policies Date: June 18, 2007
Department: Planning, Building, Attachments: Resolution No. 4189; King Budget Impact: N/A
and Community County Signature Report and cover letter,
A ril 10, 2007
Administrative Recommendation: Cit Council to ado t Resolution No. 4189.
Background Summary:
Amendments are initially developed at the staff level. Amendments are then routed through the Growth
Management Planning Council (GMPC).
After adoption of the amendments by the King County Council, they are transmitted to city and town
councils. They are deemed ratified when approved by at least 30% of the government agencies
representing at least 70% of the county's population. Individual actions by the respective city and town
councils on the attached amendments must be taken by July 8, 2007. Failure to act is construed as a
vote to ratify.
Three CPP amendments are currently under consideration. These are:
GMPC Motion No. 06-1. Amends the interim Potential Annexation Area into the Countywide Planning
Policies by including an area known as West Hill within the PAA of the City of Renton.
GMPC Motion No. 06-2. Amends the Countywide Planning Policies by revising existing policy LU-
25b to allow adjustment of household and employment targets if a new municipal incorporation occurs
within a designated Potential Annexation Area (PAA).
GMPC Motion No. 06-3. Amends the Countywide Planning Policies by designating the Overtake area
of the City of Redmond as an Urban Center. Overtake is added to the list of Urban Centers following
Countywide Planning Policy LU-39.
Detailed information regarding the proposed amendments is attached to the resolution.
At its June 11, 2007 meeting, the Planning and Community Development Committee recommended that
the City Council approve the proposed amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies.
L0618-3 03.4.1.1
Reviewed by Council & Committees: Reviewed by Departments 8~ Divisions:
^ Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES: ^ Building ^ M&O
^ Airport ^ Finance ^ Cemetery ^ Mayor
^ Hearing Examiner ^ Municipal Serv. ^ Finance ^ Parks
^ Human Services ®Planning & CD ^ Fire ® Planning
^ Park Board ®Public Works ^ Legal ^ Police
^ Planning Comm. ^ Other ^Public Works ^ Human Resources
Action:
Committee Approval: ^Yes ^No
Council Approval: ^Yes ^No Call for Public Hearing _/_/_
Referred to Until _/_/
Tabled Until _/_/_
Councilmember: Norman Staff: Osaki
Meetin Date: June 18, 2007 Item Number: VI11.6.1
Aj~$j,]~RN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED
RESOLUTION NO. 4189
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RATIFYING AMENDMENTS TO
THE KING COUNTY COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan King County Council adopted and ratified the
original countywide planning policies in July 1992; and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) was
established by interlocal agreement in 1991 to provide for the collaborative policy
development process of Countywide Planning Policies as mandated by the State
Growth Management Act amendments of 1991; and
WHEREAS, the policies are subject to periodic review and amendment;
and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) met on
April 9, 2007, and took action to recommend approval of amendments to the King
County Countywide Planning Policies amending the interim potential annexation
areas map and also designating the Overtake Area of Redmond as an Urban Center;
and
WHEREAS, the King County Council subsequently adopted Ordinance
No. 15709 on April 13, 2007, which ratified the proposed amendments on behalf of
unincorporated King County; and
Resolution No. 4189
June 13, 2007
Page 1
WHEREAS, the City Council of Auburn approved the original Countywide
Planning Policies through Resolution No. 2349 in November 1992 "with specific
clarifications;" and
WHEREAS, the 1991 interlocal agreement remains in effect, requiring
ratification of Countywide Planning Policies and amendments to the Countywide
Planning Policies by 30% of the jurisdictions representing at least 70% of the
population of King County, within 90 days of adoption by the King County Council;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council's Planning and Community Development
Committee met on June 11, 2007 and recommended that the City Council ratify the
amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, IN A REGULAR MEETING DULY ASSEMBLED, HEREWITH
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Auburn hereby ratifies the amendments to the King
County Countywide Planning Policies as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto.
Section 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to transmit a copy of this
resolution and other supporting documentation to the Clerk of the King County
Council.
Section 3. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
and signatures hereon.
Resolution No. 4189
June 13, 2007
Page 2
DATED AND SIGNED THIS day of 2007.
CITY OF AUBURN
PETER B. LEWIS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Danielle E. Daskam
City Clerk
AP VE FO
aniel B. H '
City Attorney
Resolution No. 4189
June 13, 2007
Page 3
April 27, 2007
The Honorable Pete Lewis
City of Aubum
25 West Main Street
Aubum, WA 980U 1-4998
Dear Mayor Lewis:
(~~,
~.i ;~ 1 Pf j,; l~:
t~ t `f '
~ft~~C ~r~
~~ ~-
~~ r~j~
We are pleased to forward for your consideration and ratification the enclosed
amendments to the King County Countywide Planning Policies (CPP).
On April 9, 2007, the Metropolitan King County Council approved and raged
amendments on behalf of unincorporated King. County. Copies of the King
County Council staff feport, ordinance and Growth Management Planning
Council motions are enclosed to assist you in your review of these amendments.
• Ordinance No. 15709, GMPC Motion Nos. 06-1, 06-2 and 06-3 amending
the Countywide Planning. Policies by amending the interim Potential
Annexation Area map in' the Countywide I'~lanning Policies; revising
existing po{icy LU-25b to allow adjustment of household and employment
:targets if a new municipal incorporation occurs within a designated
Potential Annexation Area; and designating the Overtake area of
Redmond as an Urban Center, Overtake is added #o the list of Urban
Centers following Countywide Planning Policy LU-39.
In accordance with the Countywide Planning Policies, FVI/-1, Step 9,
amendments become effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by, at
least 30 percent of the city and county governments representing 70 percent of
the population of King County according to the interlocal agreement. A city will
be deemed to have ratified the amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies
unless,. within 90 days of adoption by King County, the city takes legislative
action to disapprove the amendments. Please note that the 90-day deadline
for this amendment is July 8, 2007.
~~
If you adopt any legislation relative to this action, please send a copy of the
legislation by the close of business, July 9, 2007, to Anne Noris; Clerk of the
Council,. W1039 King County Courthouse, 516 Third Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104.
If you have any questions about the amendments or ratification process, please
contact Paul Reitenbach, Senior Policy Analyst, King County Department of
Development and Environmental Services, at 206-296-6705, or Rick Bautista,
Council Staff, King County Council, at 206-296-0329.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
~~
Larry Gossett, Chair
Metropolitan King County Council
ims
King County Executive
Enclosures
~.,~c:~ing County City Planning Directors
Suburban Cities Association
Stephanie Warden, Director, Department of Development and Environmental
Services (DDES)
Paul Reitenbach, Senior Policy Analyst, DDES
Rick Bautista, Council Staff, Growth Management ~ Natural Resources
Committee (GM&NR)
KING COUNTY
Signature Report
April 10, 2007
Ordinance 15709
1200 King County Courthouse
516 Third Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
Proposed No. 2006-OS78.1 - Sponsors Phillips
1 AN ORDINANCE adopting amendments to the
2 Countywide Planning Policies; amending the. interim
3 potential annexation areas map and ratifying the .amended
4 Countywide Planning Policies for unincorporated King
5 County; and amending Ordinance 10450, Section 3, as
6 amended, and K.C.C. 20.10.030 and Ordinance 10450,
~ Section 4, as amended,. and K_C.C_ 20.10.040_
8
9
10 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY:
11 SECTION 1. Findings. The council makes the following findings:
12 A. The metropolitan King County council adopted and ratified the Growth
13 Management Planning Council recommended King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
14 Policies (Phase I) in July 1992, under Ordinance 10450.
1 S B. The metropolitan King. County council adopted and ratified the Phase II
16 amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies on August 15, 1994, under Ordinance
17 11446.
Ordinance 15709 -
18 C. The Growth Management Planning Council met. on April 26, 2006 and
19 September 20, 2006 and voted to recommend amendments to the King County
20 Countywide Planning Policies, amending the interim potential. annexation areas map as
21 shown in Attachment A to this .ordinance and designating Overlake an Urban Center as
22 shown on Attachment B to this ordinance_ The Growth Management Planning Council.
23 also approved an amendment to Countywide Planning Policy LU-25b to allow
24 adjustments_of growth targets as municipal incorporations are approved.
25 SECTION 2. Ordinance 10450, Section 3, as amended, and K.C.C. 20.10.030 are
26 each hereby amended to read as follows:
27 Phase II.
28 A_ The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 Countywide Planning
29 Policies attached to Ordinance 11446 are hereby approved and adopted.
30 B. The Phase II Amendments to the KingCounty 2012 -Countywide Planning
31 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 12027.
32 C. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 20 i 2 -Countywide Planning
33 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance .12421
34 D. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
35 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 and 2 to Ordinance 13260..
36 E. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
37 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 through 4 to Ordinance 13415.
38 F. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
39 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 through 3 to .Ordinance 13858.
2
Ordinance 15709
40 G The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
41 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14390.
42 H. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
43 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14391.
44 I. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
4S Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14392_
46 J. The Phase II Amendments. to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
47 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance t46S2.
48 K. The Phase II Amendments to the. King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
49 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments 1 through 3 to Ordinance 14653.
SO L. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
S I Policies are amended,. as shown by Attachment l to Ordinance 14654.
S2 M_ The Phase II Amendments to the Icing County 2012 -Countywide Planning
53 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14655_
S4 N. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
SS Policies are amended, as shownby Attachments 1 and 2 to Ordinance 14656.
S6 O. The Phase II amendments to the King County 20i2 -Countywide Planning
S7 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 14844:
S8 P_ The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
S9 Policies are amended as shown. by Attachments A, B and C to Ordinance 1 S I21 _
60 Q. The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
61 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 1 S 122.
3
Ordinance 15709
62 R_ The Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
63 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 15123.
64 S_ Phase II Amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning
65 Policies are amended, as shown by Attachments A and B to Ordinance 15426.
66 T._ Phase II Amendments to the. Kin County 2012 -Countywide Planning
67 Policies are amended as shown by Attachments A B and C to this ordinance
68 SECTION 3. Ordinance 10450, Section 4, as amended, and K.C.C. 20.10.040 are
69 each hereby amended to read as follows:
70 Ratification for unincorporated King County.
71 A. Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance 10450 for the purposes
72 specified are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County_
73 B. The amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance
74 10840 are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County.
75 C. The amendments to the .Countywide Planning Policies adopted by Ordinance
76 11061 are-hereby ratif ed on behalf of the population of unincorporated King County.
77 D. The Phase II amendments. to the King County 2012 Countywide Planning
78 Policies adopted by Ordinance 11446 are hereby ratified on behalf of the population of
79 unincorporated King County.
80 E. The. amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
81 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 12027 are hereby ratified on behalf of the
82 population of unincorporated King County.
4
Ordinance 15709
83 F. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
84 shown by Attachment i to Ordinance 12421, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
85 population of unincorporated King County.
86 G. The amendments to the. King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
87 shown by Attachments 1 and 2 to Ordinance 13260,. are hereby ratified on behalfof the
88 population of unincorporated King County. .
89 H_ The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
90 shown by Attachment 1 through 4 to Ordinance 13415, .are: hereby :ratified on behalf of
91 the population of unincorporated King County.
92 I. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
93 .shown by Attachments 1 through 3 to Ordinance 13858, areherebyratified on behalfof
94 the population of unincorporated King County_
95 J. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
96 shown by Attachment L to Ordinance 14390, are hereby ratified on behalf of he
97 population of unincorporated King County.
98 K. The amendments to the King County 2412 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
99 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance t 4391, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
100 population of unincorporated King County.
101 L. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
102 shown by Attachment 1 to Ordinance 14392, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
103 population of unincorporated King County.
5
Ordinance 95709 -
104 M. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
105 shown by Attachment. l to Ordinance 14652, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
106 population of unincorporated King County. _
107 N. The amendments to the King County 2012. -Countywide Planning Policies, as
108 shown by Attachments 1 through 3 to Ordinance 14653, are hereby ratified on behalf of
109 the population of unincorporated King County.
110 O. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
111 shown by Attachment 1 °to Ordinance 14654, are-hereby ratified on behalfof the
112 population of unincorporated King County.
113 P. The amendments to the- King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
114 shown by Attachment 1 to .Ordinance 14655, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
115 population of unincorporated King County.
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
Q. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
shown by Attachments 1 and 2 to Ordinance 14656, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
population of unincorporated King County.
R. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 14844, are hereby ratified on behalfof the
population ofunincorporated-King County.
S. The amendments to ;the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
shown by Attachments A, B and C to Ordinance 1512I, are hereby ratified on behalf of
the population of unincorporated King County.
6
Ordinance 15709
125 T. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
126 shown by Attachment A to Ordinance i 5122, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
127 - population of unincorporated King County.
128 U. The amendments to the King County 201.2 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
129 shown by Attachment A to Ordinance 15123, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
130 population of unincorporated King County.
131 V. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies, as
132 shown by Attachments A and B to Ordinance 16426, are hereby ratified on behalf of the
133 population of unincorporated King County.
134 W. The amendments to the King County 2012 -Countywide Planning Policies
7
Ordinance 15709
135
136
137
as shown by :Attachments A B and C to this ordinance are hereby ratified on behalf of
the population of unincorporated Icing County
Ordinance 15709 was introduced on 2!5/2007 and passed by the Metropolitan King
County Council' on 4!9/2007, by the following vote:
Yes: 9 - Mr. Gossett, Ms. Patterson, Ms. Lambert, Mr. von Reichbauer, Mr.
Dunn,lVlr. Ferguson, Mr. Phillips, Ms. Hague and Mr. Constantine
No: 0
Excused: 0
KING COUNTY COUNCIL
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ATTEST:
~~~
l
Anne Noris, Clerk of the Council
Larry Gossett, Chair
APPROVED this ~ ~ day of ~Q-t t-^ , 2007
.Y
~'
~.- --
.i~..i T.
X41
-~ .~'
a;1
jT ~ l
-~:
i~';
x.43,
~~. <-J
_,
-
.~
~_~
t -- ~.
t.: w
~:
®
~3--.~ -~
Ron Sims; County Executive
Attachments A_ Motion No. 06-I--Dated Apri126,2006, B. Motion No. 06-2--Dated Apri126, 2006,
C. Motion No_ 06-03--Dated September 20, 2006
S
9
4/26106
~ 0 ~ ~- 5'
Attachment A
Sponsored By: Executive Committee
/pr
1
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
1.1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
MOTION NO. 06-1 -
A MOTION to amend the interim Potential Annexation Area
map in the Countywide Planning Policies. -
WHEREAS, Countywide Planning Policies LU-31.and LU-32 anticipate the collaborative
designation of Potenrial Annexation Areas (PAA) and the eventual annexation of these
areas by cities. -
WHEREAS, the attached PAA map amendment removes one of the largest unincorporated
urban areas not within the PAA of any city and adds this area to ffie City of Renton PAA.
WHEREAS, the attached PAA map amendment is supported by the City of Renton and
King County.
BE TT RESOLVED THAT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL OF
KIlVG COUNTY HEREBY MOVES AS FOLLOWS.:
1. Amend-the Interim Potential. Annexation Area Map by including the area known as
West Hill, shown on attachment A of this motion, within the Potential Annexation
Area of`the City of Renton.
2. This amendment is recommended to the Metropolitan King County Council and the
..Cities of King County for adoption and ratification.
ADOPTED by the Growth Management Planning Council.of King County on
April 26, 2006 in open session anted by the chair of the GMPC.
Ron ims, Chair, Growth M
- 1 -
Planning Council
15'709 ,
N
Ta. tw~.w.. w~ne.e w w a- Ins ww wegllw W
p^O~dM's/M •wi~yMwiras wAYwhNa-dwp~
~1Fwt w~c.. 16~y Cw~iy w~is w, npwwtrF,K ~
~..t....wr . wd.4 w a ww•+~:
uw«.a . a+ ~ «.y .r.wa -an~w.. ar cwa
dd wt M Fl1~ kr wl yww{ qi{ Y~i~e{ Yt1A+l w
uowaiwGl fr.~yw 1Wi.q, M eM inA1 4 bf
rwwYS v 41f pull pa6q M N w t w1w A ~w
ifarofw 4nlind w 1Ns M. Nry MM ~ Fb 1nq ~
YfaTVM w NewOYp~IMtMwwptb/wlr~pwd.d~n I
~~.
cs ~zs o
Mkc
.aY.M.y.rv+r~ w~.w.~rr..+
~r~cvrxnns~oeo++ac.mw~ivr.~! -w~r.~+~.N
_= _ _ ~ ~ = _ =i ' _a ._ _
_- ==T= -_ -'_ '~ ~T ~~
'sr _
==_
i~> a
^~ PAA Boundary
r---.?~
1=::_; Incorporated Areas
::iii
1 Area to be added to
City of Renton's PAA
E ~ ~ -
_ s,,yr+
•
=
~" ~~ ~ j ~ sra~m
s - _
_
-
- _
_
_ - ~' - i'
_ -
-
- - _ s'~
- - -
_- s _ - .
~ - -= sar
.
_ °~' .~
~~ ~ = ssrsr
~ _
-
~ -
^\ ~zj- ~q o
~ _>2
4~ -
: t
_
,
y
-
~ _ ,,
:-.
- ... I _ _ _ 7 - _
..
~ x ~ ~
-: -s ~. _- ~
.
.7
_
-
_ ~
-
'~ _ .~-~ ~ ~wria
a ~frw
a
~~
a
1
'15709
April 26, 200.6
Sponsored By:
/pr
Attachment B
Executive Committee
MOTION NO. 06-2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
A MOTION by the Growth Management Planning Council of King
County recommending the amendment of the Counytywide Planning
Policies by revising existing policyLU-25b to allow adjustment of
household and employment targets if a new municipal incorporation
occurs within a designated Potential Annexation Area (PAA).
"WHEREAS, in accordance with the Growth Management Act (GMA), the Countywide
Planning Policies establish a household and employment target. for each city and
for unincorporated Urban designated King County through 2022; and
WI~REAS, Countywide PIanning Policy LU-25b states that the adopted household and
employment targets shall be adjusted as annexations occur within a Potential Annexation
Area, but no similar provision is made if a municipal incorporation occurs within a PAA.
THE GROWTH MANAGE PLANNING COUNCIL OF KING COUNTY
HEREBY MOVES AS FOLLOWS:
Amend Sections )II. C. of the King County Countywide Planning Policies as follows:
LU25b As annexations or incorporations occur, growth targets steal! be adjusted.
Household and employment targets for each jurisdiction's potential
annexation area, as adopted in Table lU-7, shall be transferred to the
annexing jurisdiction or newly incorporated city as follows:
a. -King County and the respective city will determine new household
and employment targets for areas under consideration for
annexa#ion prior to the submittal of the annexation proposal to the
1Gng County Bourtdary Review Board;
b. A city's household and employment targets shall be increased by a
share of the target for the potential annexation area proportionate #o
the. share of the potential annexation area's development capacity
located within the area annexed. In the case of incorporation, an
equivalent formula shalt be used to establish household and
employment targets for the new city. Each city will determine how
and' where within their corporate boundaries to accommodate the
target increases;
- s -
1 c. 1 he t;ounty's target shall be correspondingly decreased to ensure
2 that overall target levels in the county remain the same;
3 d. The household and employment targets in Table LU-1 will be
- 4 updated periodically to reflect changes due to annexations or
s incorporations. These target updates do not require adoption by the
6 Growth Management Planning Council.
s -
9 ADOPTED by the Growth Management Planning Council of King County on Apri1246
l 0 20026 in o session_
it
12
14 ~~ ~ .
15 ~~ ~----~ Rdn Sims, Chair, Growth Management Planning Council
16
17`,
18
14
20
21
22 _
23
- 2 -
15~zos`
9/20/06
Sponsored By:
/pr
l
2
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
• i3
14
15
16 '
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
MOTION NO. 06-03
Y
Attachment C
Executive Committee
A MOTION to amend the Countywide Planning Policies by
- designating the Overtake area of Redmond as an Urban
Center. Overtake is added to the list of Urban Centers
following Countywide Planning Policy LU 39.
WHEREAS, a goal, of the Growth Management Act is to encourage development in Urban
Areas where adequate public facilities exist or can be provided in an efficient manner;
VVI~REAS, Policy LU 39 of the Countywide Planning Policies of King County descn`bes
_ the criteria for Urban Center designation;
WHEREAS, Policy LU-40 of the Countywide Planning Policies of I{ing County describes
standards for planned land uses within Urban Centers;
WHEREAS, the City of Redmond has demonstrated that Overtake meets the criteria for
designation as an Urban Center, and
WHEREAS, King County Comprehensive PIan Policy U-108 supports the development of
Urban Centers to meet the region's needs forhousing, jobs, services, culture and recreation
and to promote health.
BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLANNING COUNCIL OF
KING COUNTY HEREBY MOVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. The.Overtake area of Redmond is designated as an Urban Center. The list of Urban
Centers following Countywide Planning Policy LU-39 is modified to include Overtake.
2. This amendment is recommended to the. Metropolitan King County Council and the
Cities of Icing County for adoption and ratification.
- 1 -
1
2
3
4
5
7
=} _ ~ .-
ADOPTED by the Growth Management Planning Council of King County on
September 20, 2006 in open session and signed by the chair ofthe GMPC.
on ' ,.Growth Manag ent Planning Council
- 2 -
en w
1' •~O
Center ~ 4 ? Ove rl a ke U r
ban Center
,, o
~~ City Boundary "'~~ Redmond, WA
Parcel Boundaries
j,~ f~'~i~7r_
'~ ~- , ir` ~ ~,
KIIl9 COU~It~/ ?1rt j •'F`•• ~.'~
Ron Sims ~ _J ~~ f ~ ~ ~
King County Executive f 1 ~r ~
r_ t( - ~~ t
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3210 ~ 1' ;, 4'!
`~ `` `' ~ ~ ~ 11NC11 ,
Seattle, wA 98104 _
206-296-4040 Fax 206-296-0194
TfY Relay: 711
www_metrokc.gov
November 20, 2006
~~~ ~
The Honorable Larry Phillips r~ ~ ~^''`
Chair, King County Council 11
Room 1200
COURTHOUSE
Dear Councilmember Phillips:
I am pleased to submit. to you an ordinance that will adopt motions hat have been approved by the
Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC). Under the interlocal agreement that established
.the GMPC, a motion is first approved by GMPC. King County Council must then approve the
motion and ratify it for the unincorporated area_ Firialiy, the motion is sent to all of the cities in
King County for ratification. There are no fiscal impacts to King County government. as a result of
these motions_
The attached three motions are the result of regional cooperation_ Each received unanimous
approval by the Growth Management Planning Council. One of these motions amends the
Countywide Planning Policies interim potential annexation areas (PAA) map to add the area known
as West Hill to the PAA for the city of Renton. The annexation of the West Hill area is one of the
highest priorities of the King County Annexation Initiative. In 2005, King County supported a
community governance study that resulted in a recommendation by area residents to join Renton.
Earlier this month, I transmitted to you an interlocal agreement (ILA) between King County and
Renton that establishes the goal to have the nearly 15,000 residents that Live in the West Hill area
annexed by Renton before January 2009: The fiscal impact of this action was analyzed in a fiscal
note attached to the legislation authorizing the ILA_
The second motion makes a correction to Countywide Planning Policy L.U-25b to allow adjustment
of growth targets as new incorporations occur in King County_ The third motion amends the
Countywide Planning Policies by designating Overlake as an Urban Center, recognizing Redmond's
efforts to plan for future redevelopment under the Growth Management Act_
15~zos
King Guunty is an Equa! Qppurtunity~Affrrmatdve l~t7r7u~i Employer
and complies w.i.(h dhe Amencartr wirh DtyLbtli'ti.es Act
The Honorable Larry Phillips
November 20, 2006
Page 2
My staff is'available to assist the council in its review of these GMPC motions. Please contact
Stephanie Warden, Director, Department of Development and Environmental Services (pDES), at
206-296-6700, for further information regarding this transmittal.
Sincerely,
on Sims
King County Executive,
Enclosures
cc: King County Councilmembers
ATI'N: Ross Baker, Chief of Staff
Shelley Sutton, Policy Staff Director
Anne Noss, Clerk of the Council
Bob Cowan, Director, Office of Management and Budget- .
Stephanie Warden, Director, Department of Development and Environmental Services
Paul Reitenbach, Senior Policy Analyst, Department of Development and Environmental
Services
5'70 c'
0
Metropolitan King County Council
Growth Management and Natural Resources Committee
Staff Report
Agenda Item: 3 Name: Rick Bautista
Proposed Ord: 2006-0578 Date: February 27, 2007
Adopting GMPC Motions 06-1, 06-2 and 06-3
Attending: Paul Reitenbach, DDES
SUBJECT:
Adopting amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies to adjust the potential annexation
area (PAA) for-the city of Renton, adjust growth targets as a result of incorporations within
existing city PAAs, and to designate the Overtake area of Redmond as an Urban Center.
BACKGROUND:
The Growth Management Planning. Council and Countywide Planning Policies
The Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) is a format body comprised of elected
officials from King Counfy, Seattle, Bellevue,-the Suburban Cities, and Special Districts. The
GMPC was created in 1992 by interlocal agreement, in response to a provision in the
Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requiring cities and counties to work
together to adopt Countywide Planning Policies- (CPPs).
Under GMA, countywide planning policies serve as the framework for each individual
jurisdiction's comprehensive plan; and ensure countywide consistency with respect to land use
planning efforts. As provided for in the nterlocal agreement, the GMPC developed and
recommended the CPPs, which were adopted by the King County Council and ratified by the
cities. Subsequent amendments to the CPPs follow the same .process: recommendation by the
GMPC, adoption by the King County Council, and rat cation by the cities.
Amendments to the CPPs become effective when ratified by ordinance or resolution by at least
30% of the city and county governments representing at least 70% of the population of King
County. A city shaft be deemed to have ratified an amendment to the CPPs unless, within 90
days of adoption by King County, the city by legislative action disapproves it.
SUMMARY:
Proposed Ordinance 2006-0578 would adopt the following three motions (06-1, 06-2 and 06-3)
approved by the GMPC in April and September 2006=
• GMPC Motion 06-1 would amend the interim Potential Annexation Area (PAA) for the City of
Renton.
• GMPC Motion 06-2 would make a correction to CPP Policy LU-25b to allow adjustment of
growth targets if new municipal incorporations occur within designated PAAs.
• GMPC Motion 06-3 would amend the CPP Policy LU-39by adding Overtake to the fist of .
Urban Centers. .
The ordinance would also ratify the change on behalf of the population of unincorporated King
County, as required by Countywide Planning Policy FW-1, Step 9.
GMPC MOTION 06-1 (MAP AMENDMENT: Cm~ of R~vronr PAA)
The unincorporated urban .area of "West Hill° is located between the cities of Renton, Seattle
and Tukwila and is currently located outside of the mapped PAA of any of these three cities.
Over the course of the past ten years, the West Hill community has been exploring governance
options, which have included annexation into one or more of the three adjacent cities or
incorporation as a new city.
King County has conducted two governance studies during that period to analyze financial and
service delivery issues for each of the governance options_ Ultimately, both studies concluded
that annexation was the most viable future governance option_ However, until recently none of
the cities had expressed strong interest in moving forward with annexation of the area.
In the past year, the Renton City Council has taken action to include the West Hill area within
their PAA, thus resolving the quandary of what to do with one of the largest unincorpora#ed ,
urban areas remaining outside of a city PAA:
Approval. of Motion 06-1 would recognize the action of the .Renton City Council and is consistent
with the Growth Management Act, applicable Countywide Planning Policies, the King County
Comprehensive Plan, and the City of Renton Comprehensive Ptan.
GMPC MonoN 06-2 TARGET ADJUSTMENTS FOR INCORPORATIONS W/THlN PARS}
The Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) establish household and job growth targets for cities,
Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs), and unclaimed urban unincorporated areas:
Anticipating the eventuality. of changing jurisdictional boundaries in King County, particularly the
shifting of unincorporated urban areas to city jurisdiction, the CPPs contain policies such. as tU-
25b which specifically establishes a formula for adjusting growth targets upon annexation of
urban unincorporated areas by cities. The formula is based on a proportionality of land use
capacity in .annexed areas, and ensures that cities take on additional target levels
commensurate with the capacity to accommodate jobs and housing in the areas. that are
annexed. Given the frequency of annexations and the formula-based target adjustment called
for, LU-25b also .makes the adjustment process an administrative rather than a legislative
action.
The city of Renton had initiated the proposed revision to LU-25b to'makeexplicit .that the policy
applies equally to new incorporations (versus just annexations), in large measure because the
Renton PAA contains the Fairwood area, which had been under study for potential
incorporation_ Since that time, the proposed incorporation failed to be approved by voters of
the proposed city_
Although the incorporation of the Fairwood area ultimately failed, the revision to LU-25b-would
ensure that, in any case where a new city incorporation occurs within the PAA of an existing
.city, the growth targets for the existing. city would be adjusted commensurate with land use
capacity for lands remaining in the PAA of the existing city
GMPC MOTION 06-3 (URBAN CENTER DESIGNATION: C?VERLAKE)
The City of Redmond initiated the request to amend the CPP LU-39 to add its Overtake area to
the list of Urban Centers. The city has followed the process for obtaining such a designation,
starting with amending its own plans, policies and capital improvement programs, and secured
the recommendation of approval for Motion 06-3 on September 20, 2006 by the Growth
Management Planning Council. A complete analysis of the city's proposal as presented to the
GMPC is included as Attachment 2 to this staff report.
The CPPs describe Urban Centers as areas of concentrated employment and. housing, with
direct service by high-capacity transit and a wide range of other land uses. Collectively, -they are
expected to account for up to one half of King County's employment growth and one quarter of
household growth over the next 20 years. The. list of Urban Centers in Countywide Planning
Policy LU-39 currently includes:
• Bellevue CBD
• Downtown Auburn
• Downtown Buries
• Federal Way CBD
• Kent CBD.
• Redmond CBD
• Renton CBD
• Seattle CDD
• Seattle Center
• First Hill/Capitol Hill
• University District
• Northgate
• SeaTac CBD
• Tukwila CBD
• Totem Lake
• South Lake Union
In order to be designated as an Urban Center, jurisdictions must meet specific criteria in the
Countywide Planning Policies, including having planned land uses to accommodate:
• A minimum of 15,000 jobs within one-half mile of a transit center,
• At a minimum, an average of 50 employees-per gross acre; and
• At a minimum, an average of 15 households per acre.
to addition to these.requirements, Policy LU-40 states that fully realized Urban Centers shall be
characterized by the following:
• Clearly defined geographic boundaries;
• An intensity/density of land uses sufficient to support effective and-rapid transit;
• Pedestrian emphasis within the Cenfer,
• Emphasis on superior urban design which reflects the local community;
• Limitations on single-occupancy vehicle usage during peak commute hours;
• Abroad array of land uses and choices within those land uses for employees and
residents;
• Sufficient public open spaces,and recreational opportunities; and
• Uses which provide both daytime and nighttime activities in the Center.
Specific factors leading to the GMPC action are that:
• Overtake is well. positioned within the regional transportation network, adjacent to SR-520
and within 3 miles of I-405 and can support extension of high capacity transit across Lake
Washington on both 1-90 and SR 520 with service to urban centers in Downtown Bellevue,
Overtake and Downtown Redmond, speciftcatly:
• The proposed Overtake Urban Center includes a transit center at SR 520 and NE 40t''
Street and at 152"d Avenue NE and NE 26`" Street_ METRO, Sound Transit and
Community Transit provide service to the area via these transit centers.
• Sound Transit's long range plan identifies affixed-guideway transit system extendingx~'
across take Washington on both 1-90-and SR 520 with connections to Bellevue,
Overtake and Downtown Redmond: -For purposes of the initial Phase 2 financial: '
analysis, Sound Transit is using a representative alignment that includes the 1-90
crossing and then through Betlewe to Overtake and to Downtown Redmond. Within
Overtake, the representative alignment extends along 152"° Avenue NE and SR 520,
with stations at or in the vicinity of the existing Overtake transit centers. These station.
locations would reinforce the vision for mixed-use. development in the area, significantly
improve travel options for people who work or live in the area, and help spur
redevelopment in the Overtake shopping center area.
Redmond has a strong Commute Trip Reduction program. Overtake includes 18
companies that are affected by the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law, and they are
already achieving the City's goal for use of modes other than driving alone. Currently, 25
percent of people who work for these employers use modes other than driving alone, which
is on track to meet the 2012 goal of 30 percent non-single occupant vehicle (SOV).
Employers use a variety of methods to improve the non-SOV mode share including priuate
shuttles, reserved parking for carpools and vanpools, transit and vanpool subsidies, bicycle
parking and flexible work schedules.
• The City's Transportation Master Plan provides clear direction and standards for improving
the environment for pedestrians and bicyclists accessing the Overtake Urban Center_ The
TMP also sets out the strategy for funding these improvements and for monitoring progress.
• Overtake is recognized. regionally as a growth center and when compared to urban centers
in King County, is second for total employment only to three Seattle urban centers
Downtown, 1s1 HilUCapitol Hill, and University District (based on King Count 2005
Benchmarks Report)_ to terms of existing multi-family dwelings, Overtake compares
favorably to a numt~er of the designated urban centers in the central- Puget Sound region.
As of 2004, an estimated 36,600 people worked within the proposed Overtake Urban
.Center, which equates to 72 jobs per gross acre. Under the. Microsoft Development
Agreement, an additional 1.5 million square feet of commercial floor area {net) will be
constructed east of SR 520 within the Overtake Urban Center. With this development, the
number of people working in the Overtake Center is expected to reach. 44,800 by 2022, or
87 jobs per gross acre_ Based on the current rate of employment growth, Redmond
expects to reach this employment Level earlier than 2022.
As of 2005, the Overtake Urban Center contained nearly 770 dwelling units. Redmond has
the capacity under current zoning to accommodate the urban center criteria of 15
households per acre and has based its adopted growth targets on increasing the amount of
housing in this area to nearly 2;300 dwellings by 2022. This future. density is within the
range of long-range densities planned for other designated urban centers in the central
Puget Sound region.
• Redmond's Comprehensive Plan; development standards, and capital improvement plans
address a number of the other strategies listed in CPP LU-45. The City's policies and
standards emphasize the irnportance of designing buildings and sites to not only be
attractive but also to encourage walking and bicycling.
• Redmond's Plan also recognizes that providing open spaces and recreational opportunities
within the Overtake shopping area is a high prionty_ Finally, Redmond has also worked-
- closely with Bellevue through the Bel-Red .Overtake Transportation Study (BROTS) in order
to identify and implement needed transportation improvements to improve mobility in the
Overtake area.
1 Prop ed Ordinance 2006-0074 with attached GMPC Motions
2. GMPG ff reports for Motions 06-1, 06-2 and 06-3