Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes 1165 - 1990 Growth Management Act Grant Funds Ww `ass 1soa CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 1165 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ACCEPTING GRANT FUNDS TO IMPLEMENT THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1990. WHEREAS, the 1990 Washington State Legislature passed an Act dealing with Growth Management (HB 2929) which requires all jurisdictions in King County to prepare comprehensive plans consistent with new guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Act requires that jurisdictions prepare these plans in cooperation with their neighbors and with King County; and WHEREAS, the Act assigns near term deadlines for the completion of 1) an inventory and regulations for the protection of resource lands and critical areas, 2) a process to identify an urban growth area, and 3) an assessment of land use data collection needs; and WHEREAS, the Legislature appropriated $7.4 million dollars for each year of the 1989- 1991 biennium to assist the Department of Community Development and local governments to comply with and implement the Act; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Development will provide approximately $2.1 million dollars to a consortium of general purpose governments in King County provided that 60% of those governments representing 75% of the county's population agree to the grant distribution formula and to jointly develop and cooperatively implement and work program; and WHEREAS, a technical committee of representatives from City of Seattle, King County and Suburban Cities have prepared a draft work program (attachment A), and a grant distribution formula Attachment B); NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. To be eligible for a share of the Growth Management Act grant funds, Tukwila agrees to: a) designate the King County Planning Directors as the group which will manage the completion of the workprogram, receive regular briefings on the activities and progress of the technical forums, and coordinate preparation of the annual reports to the State Department of Community Development (Attachment C). b) send a representative(s) to and actively participate in a technical forum to accomplish the work program (Attachment A), specifically, the inventory and protection of resources and critical areas, the designation of an urban growth area, and creation of a countywide data sharing group. c) the grant distribution formula (Attachment B), which is that every general purpose government in King County will receive a base amount of $35,000 plus a per capita allocation based on the jurisdiction's proportional share of total county population. d) designation of King County as the jurisdiction that will accept the grant funds from the Department of Community Development and disburse and administer those funds consistent with the provisions of this resolution including attachments. e) submit a short written description of a high priority project which is unique to this City and upon which the jurisdiction intends to begin work By July 1, 1991 (Attachment D) f) complete the Growth Management needs Assessment and return it to the State Department of Community Development by January 1, 1991, with a copy to the King County Planning Division. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF CIE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a regular meeting thereof this 17 17 day of ,(�G��rJ .1990. oan Hernandez, Council President' ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: J6 E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: �kad 4f OFFICE OF THE QTY ATTORNEY: Filed with the City Clerk: /--:I Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number /Al 6- 'ATTACHMENT A' WORK PROGRAM Each of the following work items will include a citizen participation /community involvement element. Consistent with Section 14 of the Growth Management Act, the Technical Forums, Planning Directors Association, and the various jurisdictions will establish procedures for disseminating information, involving citizens and interest groups, and considering alternatives. These procedures will be identified in a detailed scope of work developed for each technical forum. RESOURCE AND CRITICAL LANDS TECHNICAL FORUM BACKGROUND: SHB 2929 requires that King County, and each city within King County, designate natural resource lands and critical area within their respective jurisdictions. The County and each city must then adopt development regulations to assure, the conservation of resource lands, and to preclude land uses or development that is incompatible with critical areas. These actions must be completed by September 1, 1991. OBJECTIVE: To facilitate and coordinate the designation and regulation of natural resource lands. and critical areas by King County and each city within King County, as required by Sections 6 and 17. SHB 2929. -ACTIONS: King County and the cities of King County will establish and participate in a Resource and Critical Lands Technical f=orum charged with carrying out this objective. The T echnical Forum will undertake the following activities: 1. Seek consensus on a common or compatible approach to the criteria for designation and regulation of both natural resource lands and critical areas. 2. Coordinate designation, inventory, rnaoping and other issues relating to the political boundaries between jurisdictions. cxc; canoe ideas. experiences and expertise relating= the cesionatio„ an: reauiatlon of natural resource ianas anc craIcal ar==c. xotore the to;....:se e; consu;tar,:s. gala an:: :n= sso _es arr.:. rag .signs. �oordi ;,a :e wan �e oes,cnation ana reau +aUon ello s o 5noncmisn and Fierce 4gtJ1 ltips. 6. periodically brief elected officiais through esiabiisned intergovernmental forums. PRODUCT: Each jurisdiction will adopt regulations which produce a coordinated and compatible system of natural resource lands and critical areas throughout King County by September 1, 1 URBAN GROWTH AREAS DESIGNATIONS BACKGROUND: SHB 2929 requires that by July 1, 1991, King County begin consulting with each city regarding the location of Urban Growth Areas. Urban Growth Areas must include areas and densities sufficient to permit the urban growth that is projected to occur in King County over a twenty year period. Due to the complexity of urban growth issues, ongoing planning effdrts and other considerations, it is imperative that the County and cities begin work on growth areas immediately. A cooperative effort will ensure that the legitimate interests of all jurisdictions are considered in the ultimate designations. OBJECTIVE: To foster inter- jurisdictionai cooperation and provide an accurate information base upon which King County Urban Growth Area decisions will be made. ACTIONS: The urban /rural boundary of the King County Comprehensive Plan, together with the land use. development and urban service policies of the County and cities, will provide the basis upon which Urban Growth Area decisions will be made. The first step toward making these decisions will be to determine the growth capacity of the County and cities, based on existing plans and policies and on cruet is established for Urban Growth Areas. King County and the cities of King County will: t. Establish and participate in an Urban Growth Area Technical Forum, which will seek consensus on criteria, methodologies and format to be used by the County and each city to estimate their population and employment growth capacities. 2. Each city and the County will estimate their own capacities for population and employment growth, a) based upon local plans and policies, and b) consistent with agreed to criteria, methodologies and format_ a 3. The Urban Growth Area Technical Forum will compile the capacity estimates prepared by King County jurisdictions for purposes of evaluating the Countywide Urban Growth Area. 4. As a second priority, the Urban Growth Area Technical Forum will take initial steps toward delineation of Urban Growth Areas. This effort will be undertaken in light of SHB 2929's recocnition that cities are the appropriate providers of urban covemment services and counties are responsible for making the designation. This effort will also recognize and support King County's ongoing efforts to reline the existing urban /rural boundary through the adoption and updating of community plans. Initial steps will include: a. Seeking consensus on criteria to guide decisions on the future boun;;aries c' Kin-, Countv's cities. Decision making c- tteria should include su ^h issues as development densaies. efficient urc.an services orovisions znc ,irnlnc annexation. C. Icent,'vine and ma =zinc agreed -to Urban Growtn Areas and areas weer: mere is not agreemem. Identttvinc kev eiements of a process for achieving agreement on Urban Growth Areas. d. King County will work directly with cities in establishing Urban Growth Areas according to the followir.3 sequence: t Cities in areas of community planning projects in progress and cities near or bordering rural areas /unincorporated areas. 2) Cities in western King County urban area, not near rural designation areas or not bordering unincorporated areas. PRODUCTS; 1. Estimate of Countywide population and employment growth capacity based on existing plans_ and policies by July 1, 1991. 2. Process and cineria for delineating and agreeing to Urban Growth Areas, by July i, 1991. 3. Map(s) Identifying agreed -to Urban Growth Areas and highlighting areas where there is not agreement, by September 1, 1991. 4. Urban Growth Area designations by King County end of 1991. KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGIONAL GOALS CHAPTER BACKGROUND: The current King County Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1985. King County has initiated a major review of that plan, and has taken steps to solicit the active involvement of all local jurisdictions. This involvement is especially important in light of the coordination and consistency requirements of SHB 2929. OBJECTIVE: To promote coordination and consistency between the King County Comprehensive Plan and the planning of other King County local jurisdictions through the King County Comprehensive Plan review process. ACTIONS: The Resolution of the Suburban Cities Association of King County Regarding Priorities of the 1990 review of the King County Comprehensive Plan (adopted May 9, 1990) will provide the starting point for a joint effort to review, maintain and strengthen the regional policies of the 1985 F King County Comprehensive Plan. King County will continue to actively involve cities in the review and refinement of goals and policies having regional import. a minimum, each city will be responsible for identifying any conflict or inconsistency between their own plans and policies, and any proposed regional policies for King County. Cries should also make suggestions for resolving any such conflict or inconsistency. PRODUCTS: Develop updated. strengthened and coordinated regional coals and moliCies for the King County Comprehensive Plan and C:.y Comorehensive Plans oy tr ie ene o; 1991. GROWTH MAN AGEM ENT DATA SHARING GROUP BACKGROUND: Success.'ul imoiemernation of SH3 2929 will oeoend uoon a nigh level of cooperation and coordination among local jurisdictions. Such coordination is currently hampered by a lack of comparaole land use and development data from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. OBJECTIVE: To share lands use and development data and work toward common methods of compiling and reporting information. ACTIVITIES: first year activities will involve consultation between the cities and the County on standardization of references. A •\7Jr1G�t/. D PRf�f7Ut;TS; 1. Identify and compare data collection and tabulation systems used by each .jurisdiction, by July 1, 1991. 2. Identify common data needs by July 1, 1991. 3. Agree to a common format for collecting and tabulating common data needs by September 1, 1991. WORK PROGRAMS FOR INDIVIDUAL KING COUNTY JURISDICTIONS Each adopting jurisdiction is to provide a paragraph describing an individual multi -year work program designed to implement SHB 2929. The focus of the work program should be on activities to be completed July 1, 1990 to July 1, 1991 with highlights for the years 1992, 1993, 1994. Milestones and timelines are the two key words in completing this requirement as they will be used as the basis for measuring progress and disbursing funds during this first year. Projects for 1992 -1993 which will be developed in subsequent regional work programs include: 1. Lands useful for public purposes. 2. Fair share housing. ATTACHMEN 6 GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT FUNDING Funds Available $7,400,000 King County Regional Allocation Doe Wetlands Funding ($373.500) (575,000+ Percent) 52,190,692 County Holdout (5 Counties) (5600.000) 1989 Population 1.482,800 Funds Available To Regions 56,426,500 Percent of Regional Population 39.91% 4,798,100 State Population Cities 31 3,715,600 Population Of The 15 Regions Growth Rate 14.37% BASE: Base amount is for one planner/ consultant for one year. Per Capha OFM Distribution 1980 1990 Population 10 Year Base Based on Jurisdiction Population Population Percent Growth Rate Amount of Region T otai Aloona 1,467 1,720 0.12% 17.25% 35,000 S 1,279 $36.279 Auburn 26,417 34,150 2.30% 29.27 °,0 35,000 25,389 60,389 Beaux Arts 328 294 0.02% 10.37% 35,000 219 35,219 Be:�evue 73,903 88,890 5.99% 20.28% 35,000 66,085 101,085 Black Diamond 1,170 1,510 0.10% 29.06% 35,000 1,123 36,123 Bothell (part) 7.943 11,500 0.78% 44.78% 33,866 8,550 42,416 Carnation 951 1.255 0.08% 31.97% 35,000 933 35,933 Clyde Hill 3,229 3,090 0.21% 4.30% 35.000 2,297 37,297 Des Moines 7,378 15,490 1.04% 109.95% 35.000 11.515 46,516 Duvall 729 2,435 0.16% 234.02% 35.000 1,810 36,810 Enumclaw 5,427 6,390 0.43% 17.74% 35,000 4,751 39,751 Federal Way 63.980 4.31% 14.37% 35,000 47,565 82,565 Hunts Point 483 504 0.03% 4.35% 35,000 375 35,375 Issaquah :,.536 7,390 0.50% 33.49% 35.000 5,494 40,494 Kent =.,_S1 37,440 2.52% 63.06% 35,000 27,835 62.8,5 King County 503.363 514.834 34.72% 2.28% 35.000 382,750 417,750 Kirkland 18,779 37,700 2.54% 100.76 35.000 28,028 63.026 Lake Forest Park 2,4°,5 2.600 0.19° 12.58% 35.000 2.082 37.082 Medina 322'0 2.960 0.20 c.07,0 35.000 2.201 37.201 Mercer Island 21.522 20,630 1.39° 4.14% 35.000 '.5.237 50.337 Milton (part) 218 5=A 0.04% 159.17% 4.449 428 4.859 Normandy Park 4.262 5.520 0.45 r 2_.11 ti 2.000 4.3= _.C-^2 North Bend" 2.42^ C.1c 42.27°0 35.000 i.79 35.70- L.5.5: �.3a °�'.45 „_.00G nsDmO n= 2: =BSc J i '0 rc -J.00� 2E-` i nenton ,._.34C 5 2E.51% 25.000 2_.247 1 7 184.2 Sec i ac 24.000 i .5 14.37% ,5.000 7 52.843 Seattle 493.846 501.800 33.84 °,0 1.61% 35.000 313.066 408,060 Skvkomish 209 243 0.02% 16.27% 35.000 181 X35,181 Snoguatmie 1,370 1,545 0.10% 12.77°.0 35.000 1,149 36,149 aI kWila .3;578 10;8201 A:73% 202.40°- 35 :0001 8.04'4' '43 ;044f Yarrow Point 1,077 925 0.07°, 8.54% 35.000 732 35,732 32 1,482.800 51,088,315 S1,102,377 S2,190,692 Bothell and Milton will receive a proportionate share of the base amount. Bothell's share is 96.76 Milton's share is 12.71 1990 population does not incline Cascade View. Fimdisg fornula for 1992 will include entire City. LCHT4 Q to the 1991 allocations are not practical at this date. The addition of Cascade Via mould yield only a marginal change in the allocation to the City. ATTACHMENT "C" GOVERNMENTAL FRAMEWORK For approximately the past five years, the general purpose governments in King County have been working more cooperatively to resolve land use and service delivery issues. The Solid Waste Interlocal Forum and the Eastside Transportation Forum are two examples of effective regional problem solving groups in this area. Building on the success of these and other groups, the county's general purpose governments have been discussing the creation of a more formal COUNTYWIDE PLANNING COUNCIL "to assure coordination, consensus, consistency and compliance" among local governments as they Implement the Growth Management Act and adopt comprehensive planning policies to be applied countywide. Decisions on the formation of a countywide planning council and other strategies for local coordination and cooperation are anticipated during Fall 1990 and Winter 1991. In the interim, the general purpose governments in this county have agreed' to designate the King County Planning Directors Association as an appropriate forum for discussing issues, exchanging information, promoting standardization and consistency, encouraging cooperation and providing technical assistance. The directors have been functioning in this capacity for several years with considerable success. The group meets regularly each month, attracts planning directions from City of Seattle, King County, and from most of the suburban cities and small towns in the county. Attachment D CITY OF TUKWILA GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT GRANT 1990 1991 WORK PLAN The City of Tukwila proposes to use its share of the appropriated state grant funds to do the following: 1. Complete adoption of a Sensitive Areas Ordinance. 2. Update the land use date inventory. 3. Negotiate growth boundaries with adjacent jurisdictions. 4. Revise the financial planning model for use in analysis of alternative growth scenarios. 5. Consolidate and update existing inventories of capital facilities of the City and other service providers.