page 10
www.navigatekingcounty.com
NAVIGATE THE FUTURE
Who gets credit (and blame) for transportation planning? A panoply of government agencies work under the auspices of the Puget Sound Regional Council and the state’s Growth Management Act.
plan which represents the region’s growth strategy; Destination 2030, the region’s current comprehensive long-range transn the Puget Sound region, the paramportation plan; and Prosperity Partnereters for land use decisions and, by ship, which develops and advances the extension, transportation networks, region’s economic strategy. are set by the Puget Sound Regional VISION 2040 details a strategy to acCouncil and the state of Washington’s commodate the additional 1.7 million Growth Management Act. people and 1.2 million new jobs expected The dozens of cities, counties and other jurisdictions within the four-county Puget to be in the region by the year 2040. The Sound region are well acquainted with the work, which looked at several different alternatives, was drafted with three main workings of these laws. Following these concepts in mind: policies also determines if public projects • A plan or preferred alternative must which accompany that growth are eligible deal with congestion and increase mobilfor grants or subsidies. ity for all kinds of freight and personal travel despite population and employment growth. • Improve the environment and greenhouse gas emissions. The Puget Sound Regional Council • Sustainable funding for the plan. works across the counties, cities and other Within the metropolitan and core cities, agencies in the Puget Sound region to VISION 2040 supports concentrating manage, accommodate and even shape population and employment growth in regrowth under the authority of both state gionally designated growth centers. These and federal laws. centers are to serve as hubs The 67-member agency for regional transportaconducts planning and fore“The Legislature finds tion, public services and casting to set the parameters that uncoordinated amenities. The new “urban for planning transportation villages” such as Kent Stanetworks, optimizing land and unplanned and Talus, in Issaquah, use patterns and encouraggrowth, together tion reflect these concepts. ing. Money for the agency with a lack of VISION 2040 is ultimatecomes from a variety of sources, including grants common goals ... ly to help leaders accomcommon objectives from state and federal entipose a threat to the plish that transcend jurisdicties and monies from the environment (and) tional borders. member agencies. sustainable economic Along with the role The PSRC is responsible for setting out a published development...” that the report plays in directing decisions by local comprehensive strategy for governments, the analysis managing growth in the contained within these region through a public efforts provides the basis for distributing process. Counties, cities and other jurisabout $160 million in federal transportadictions are to use this plan to form their own policies regarding transportation and tion funds each year. new population growth while encouraging economic growth and quality of life. The PSRC has the authority given to it by state law to ensure that cities, counties During the boom years of the late 1970s and other jurisdictions follow the policies and 1980s, Puget Sound residents found outlined in its plans. that the region, which they had once The PSRC periodically revises its three known as bucolic, had begun to change. sets of policy directives for the region. Commuters in King County and around They are: VISION 2040, the most recent By MARY L. GRADY Reporter Newspapers
I
Puget Sound Regional Council
The Growth Management Act
The 1990 Growth Management Act stipulates that new development be clustered near transportation networks and amenities to lessen traffic. CHAD COLEMAN Puget Sound were stymied by traffic. Farmland continued to disappear, open space and wildlife habitat was lost, and surface water runoff and pollution threatened salmon streams. Residents began demanding that politicians take action to protect their environment and quality of life.
A
s a result, the Legislature passed the Washington State Growth Management Act, the key piece of legislation that determines where and how local agencies will manage growth and land use. The bill says in part: “The Legislature finds that uncoordinated and unplanned growth, together with a lack of common goals ... pose a threat to the environment, sustainable economic development, and the health, safety and high quality of life enjoyed by residents of this state. It is in the public interest that citizens, communities, local governments and the private sector cooperate and coordinate with one another in comprehensive land use planning.” The GMA requires that counties above a stated population level or rate of increase (and cities within those counties) adopt growth-management comprehensive plans and implement them through “development regulations.” It established 13 “planning goals” to guide the preparation of local plans and regulations. Local governments were to direct most growth into urban areas,
require adequate transportation facilities for new development, protect natural resource lands and environmentally critical areas, encourage economic development and protect property rights. It was a long time coming. As Walt Crowley of History Link.orgdescribes the urgency to control development. “With environmentalism a significant political force in the early 1970s, Republican Governor Dan Evans won passage of landmark laws like the State Environmental Policy Act — modeled on the National Environmental Policy Act, sponsored by Washington Senator Henry Jackson — and the Shoreline Management Act. After a mid-1970s economic spurt quickened transformation of open space and farms into subdivisions and shopping centers, county voters passed a 1979 bond issue to buy development rights and preserve farmland.” In 1985, King County planners completed a Comprehensive Plan to guide land use decisions, foreshadowing several aspects of the GMA. It reasoned that certain areas be protected. The GMA has been amended or revised by almost every legislative session since its adoption. Like our region and the land it protects, it is a “living” document.
Mary Grady is editor of the Mercer Island Reporter. She can be reached at 206-232-1215.