The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutR-1993-119 Growth Management ActRESOLUTION NO. 119 A RESOLUTION approving the 1994 Regional Strategy for implementing the Growth Management Act in Yakima County. WHEREAS, growth management in Yakima County requires the concerted and coordinated efforts of all governmental entities; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest that local government cooperate and coordinate with one another in comprehensive land use planning; and WHEREAS, the continuation of a Regional Growth Management Strategy, supported by the fourteen cities and towns located in Yakima County and by Yakima County, will facilitate the commonality and coordination of Growth Management Plans; and WHEREAS, funding support for the planning efforts required by the Growth Management Act will be provided by the Washington State Department of Community Development (DCD) and the proceeds therefrom will be prorated among the cities, towns and Yakima County based on equitable need; provided that 60% of those governments representing 75% of the County's population agree to funding distribution formula and to the general concepts contained in the Regional Growth Management Strategy as shown in the attached Exhibit "A"; now, therefore, Bid IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA that the framework, approach, and funding distribution, as set forth in the Regional Growth Management Strategy, attached hereto in Exhibit "A", are approved. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 16th day of November , 1993. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK 1994 FISCAL YEAR REGIONAL STRATEGY FOR IMPLEMENTING THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT IN YAKIMA COUNTY A. DESCRIPTION OF THE GOVERNMENTAL FRAMEWORK Yakima County is the lead agency in coordinating growth management planning in Yakima County region. The Yakima County Planning Department has served as the lead agency contact during the GMA planning process. Comprehensive planning duties for Yakima County and the various cities and towns within the County will be carried out by planning staffs from Yakima County, the City of Yakima, the various communities or their agents. B. REGIONAL APPROACH AND TIME FRAME TO ACCOMPLISH THE WORK Figure 1 depicts the regional approach that continues to be used to accomplish comprehensive planning requirements under the Growth Management Act. The chart shows seven general work elements that make up the overall planning program for the County and all its cities and towns. The chart outlines the level of responsibility and general time frames among the various entities in carrying out each of the general work elements. Responsibility levels are shown as primary, lead and shared. Primary role means the indicated local entity (County or cities) has full responsibility for the duties and tasks associated with the particular work element. For example, each of the cities will have primary responsibility for development of their individual comprehensive plans as it applies within the city limits and the County will have primary responsibility for its comprehensive plan as it applies outside urban area boundaries. Planning for unincorporated lands within the urban growth boundaries will be shared by the County and each of the cities. IFIGURE 1, REGIONAL APPROACH AND GENERAL TIME FRAME RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLETION OF TASKS OUTLINED BELOW City/YVCOG Yakima County GEOGRAPHIC Urban AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY Rural Primary 5\\N:..:..::.\;;::, ifoi /;:ziii//,/....;,4 City Shared 1 Yakima County Shared :4•:•:•1::o z.•t '....v :.x.:..xc••::+.t..•,.;.;;r .. ._. '•'•.:,A:%- •.'' %////////////////////// .. Leadil./�� City Limits "Urban Growth Boundary TASK YEAR 1990 1991 1991 1993 1991 4995 Goal Setting/ Citizen Involvement Area Dreouresesignations Lands/Critical A Regional Policy Plan Urban Growth Boundary Designation Plan Development Implementation Measures Regional Data Base ___ %. '1,,, 'IN, ' ,;..,..::::;.:.X::.:: a \'It\\r4 N\\\\\ �\\\\• N\\\\• r\no �\\\ 7�%'//j4 71ri/i iiia., VY//1) �i////. 1,74,7 7///!Y, OM 0/a//i " .: *::::?:;.:::>:71::: •;:s ti::sr«:%:::A;ra::: �, Interim Final ��%��/�`��.�� ........:: 4::::$ : A..c>>oP.::::>:.s v: •::mn::::.,,;:,;,,c:s::.7. 1707M ®<::::t $>:>•>; ..... ?:s...... //A%///!//U//WM N\\\1\h\\\\\\\\,. V///////////l//!i/////////////i7 //////////////////L/ \ \\\\\ \ / VX\\\\\\14.uv\\\\\\\\\\\\a\\\\\\\\\\\\\vii\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ /"Mr./////////////!////47., \\\\\\\\v,\\\\\\�c\na\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\•t\ ')7/7/11301071,7 !/////m//////m//!/�O.t7/l///////////U//l// ... \0aa\\\\\vya\\y\\y\\y�\y\\\\y\\y�\\y\\y\\ ,,il/�/ a\\\\\\\\�\\\\\\\\\\\\\. /.%%//.%/////.%/i %///rSv Z%//.%/4 /\//\/\\/\/\//\\/_\\\\\\\\\\\\\y\\\\\\\\\\\\��\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ %////.%/// % /. '//�iil Revised 08/93 Yakima County Regional Strategy 1994 Fiscal Year A shared role is one in which both the County and its various cities assume mutual responsibility in accomplishing the work element. For example, designation of urban growth boundaries will require a coordinated effort by the County and cities based on the projected twenty-year population, existing land base, present and future growth patterns and resource designations of fringe area lands. A cooperative, shared working relationship is essential in setting the growth boundary and to properly represent jurisdictional interests in the planning for the urban growth area. Lead role means either the County or the respective cities has the principal responsibility for carrying out the task with the support and assistance of the other entity. In the case of designating resource lands for example, the County assumed the lead role because these resource lands lie almost exclusively in the unincorporated County, and it has the greatest need for this information. The cities also played a part in this work but it was secondary to the County's because of the relatively small amount of resource lands within their boundaries. C. YEARLY WORK PRIORITIES Yearly priorities for carrying out the planning requirements of the Growth Management Act will be determined largely by the work element deadlines mandated in the Act. The following outlines annual priorities to complete remaining tasks for this comprehensive planning program. 1990/91 (Completed) - Regional priorities were goal setting which included setting up a citizen involvement program, visioning, resource land inventories and classification and compiling a regional data base. In conjunction with the resource land designations, the County reviewed existing ordinances and adopted interim development regulations for the Yakima County Regional Strategy 1994 Fiscal Year protection of resource lands. Preliminary discussions to define urban growth boundaries commenced in mid-1991. 1992 - With completion of the initial goal setting (visioning) and resource inventory work in 1991, priorities during 1992 shifted to critical areas, county -wide planning policies and setting the stage for development of comprehensive plans and urban growth area boundaries. A regional data base continued to be expanded as background to the plan elements. 1993 - The priority for the region in 1993 was completion and adoption of county -wide planning policies and critical area designations and protective measures. County -wide planning policies were adopted in June 1993 and by the fall of 1993 each city and the county had adopted interim designations and protective measures for critical areas. Also during 1993, extensive public involvement was given to a review of various growth alternatives for the county. Selection. of a preferred growth alternative will serve as the basis for designating urban growth areas. In the final quarter of 1993, preparation of comprehensive plan elements will begin in earnest and .interim urban growth areas will be adopted. 1994 - Completion and adoption of comprehensive plans will dominate work activities throughout the region during 1994. Goal setting and citizen involvement will also have an important role in conjunction with the adoption process. 1995 - Upon completion of comprehensive plans, the priority task will become preparation and adoption of implementation measures consistent with the plans. Citizen involvement will continue to be a key element of ordinance preparation and adoption. 4 Yakima County Regional Strategy 1994 Fiscal Year D. DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS Figure 2 depicts the conceptual framework for the planning process to implement this regional strategy. Under a regional strategy, the planning process must foster a close working relationship and careful coordination among the different entities within the County. The figure shows the relationship of the different players in the planning process. In general terms, the players are categorized as administrative/professional staff, technical support, and legislative bodies/planning boards and citizen participants. The figure lists the range of final products expected from this regional planning process. The job of carrying out the work program will rest with the planning staffs from the Yakima County Planning Department, the communities (some through the Yakima Valley Conference of Governments), the City of Yakima Environmental Planning Division and the City's consultant. Except for the City of Yakima, Union Gap and Selah, the communities of Yakima County do not have their own planning staffs. The Yakima Valley Conference of Governments provides planning assistance to those communities requesting such service. However, the YVCOG is only able to provide services commensurate with the communities' funding capabilities. A planning management team is responsible for directing the activities necessary to implement the regional strategy. Its principal duties have been to oversee the day-to-day operations of the respective planning staffs, to handle the administrative aspects of the program, to share information and coordinate activities, and to maintain smooth working relationships between the different jurisdictions. From time to time, technical resource committees are formed in order to provide technical expertise on specific tasks and plan 5 ADMINISTRATIVE/ PROFESSIONAL STAFF FIGURE 2: CONCEPTUAL PLANNING PROCESS TECHNICAL I SUPPORT LEGISLATIVE BODIES/ PLANNING BOARDS/ CITIZEN PARTICIPANTS I ADOPTED PRODUCT Planning Management Team Comprehensive planning managers from participat- I ing agencies Yakima County Communities/ l rn Yakima Valley COG City of Yakima I Technical Resource Committees YMATS, resource lands/ critical areas, utilities, and others as needed. Countywide Planning Policy Committee City and County elected offi- cials as specified in the County -wide Planning Policy Framework AK,reement. Regional Planning Policy Yakima County Comprehensive Plan Focus 2010 Planning Advisory Committees Representatives from city councils, planning commis- sions, interest groups, and general citizenry. !rte m.:*.t Ulnnn;nn 411111111111.5 11 Committees Residents within the commu- nity's urban growth boundary - Y,akiima Visioning 201n - Individual City Public Participation Efforts Regional Transportation Plan Specialized Regional Plans - Water Quality Plan - Solid Waste Plan Community Comprehensive Plans - Grandview - Granger - Harrah - Mabton - Moxee - Naches - Selah - Sunnyside - Tieton - a oppenish - Union Gap - Wapato - Zillah - Yakima Yakima County Regional Strategy 1994 Fiscal Year elements. For example, the identification of resource lands and critical areas has been assisted by persons knowledgeable in those areas. Technical resource committees are available to assist each jurisdiction with specific work tasks relevant to the technical expertise of the committee. This arrangement will provide consistency among each local jurisdiction in their effort to comply with various growth management requirements. The regional context to carry out the Growth Management Act's planning requirements will be enhanced with the appointment and use of various legislative and citizen committees comprised of both incorporated and unincorporated representatives. A County -Wide Planning Policy Committee made up of elected officials from the County and the cities was formed to review and monitor the work programs and progress of the respective comprehensive planning efforts. The committee has been primarily responsible for developing county -wide planning policies and discussing issues relevant to regional coordination and cooperation. With completion of the county -wide planning policies, the committee will continue to meet throughout the comprehensive planning process in order to build consensus on issues of regional concern with the hope that the various municipalities will incorporate these consensus items within their planning documents. For example, the County -Wide Planning Policy Committee will assume the task of formulating general principles related to growth and development within urban growth areas. The various municipalities will be encouraged to use these principles as they develop specific policies for their own urban growth areas. The composition and duties of this committee is designed to build intergovernmental cooperation and coordination among the different municipalities within Yakima County. Yakima County Regional Strategy 1994 Fiscal Year Planning advisory committees for both the Upper Valley and Lower Valley are giving residents and interest groups an active role in the planning process. The committees are participating in the various aspects of the planning process such as visioning, resource lands/critical areas designation and comprehensive plan development. These citizen committees include bothcity and non - city residents from the respective planning areas to ensure that the products emerging from these citizen groups reflect a regional context. Because the cities will prepare their own community plans, which include unincorporated fringe lands within their urban growth boundaries, the cities will establish community planning committees to guide development of their comprehensive plans. Along with the city residents and representatives, these committees will also consist of representatives from unincorporated areas within the urban boundary. The formation and use of ongoing citizen committees such as those described here will ensure early and continuous public participation at each stage of the comprehensive planning process. This participation will be carried through the development and adoption of comprehensive plans and implementing regulations. E. DISBURSEMENT OF GRANT FUNDS As the lead agency, Yakima County will contract with DCD for growth management grant funds to carry out this regional planning strategy. The County has set up a special growth management account for depositing and disbursing the funds to the various planning agencies. Figure 3 presents a general schematic of how grant funds will flow from DCD to the local planning agencies. Table 1 shows the Yakima County Regional Strategy 1994 Fiscal Year distribution of 1994 growth management funds using the same distribution formula as with 1993 fiscal year funds. Tem\GMASTRAT.93 9 FIGURE 3. GRANT FUND DISBURSEMENT WAY-d'NGTON STATE YAIKIM_\ COUNTY GROWTI-I MANAGEMENT ACC0.JN'1' GROWTH MANAGENI AC ( ()tINI YAK1MA COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT COMMUNITIES CI I -Y O1' l`_\I‹.INIA ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING 1)1\'1S10N TABLE 1 GROWTH MANAGEMENT (GMA) FUNDING DISTRIBUTION 1994 Fiscal Year Allocation $393,964.00 1992-3 34.30% 1993-4 ALLOCATION + INCREASE = ALLOCATION GRANDVIEW $12,634.73 $4,333.73 $16,968.46 GRANGER $7,353.15 $2,522.14 $9,875.29 HARRAH $5,643.55 $1,935.74 $7,579.29- MABTON $6,750.12 $2,315.30 $9,065.41 MOXEE $6,106.88 $2,094.67 $8,201.55 NACHES $5,885.77 $2,018.83 $7,904.60 SELAH $10,413.56 $3,571.86 $13,985.42 SUNNYSIDE $16,604.71 $5,695.43 $22,300.14 TIETON $5,976.23 $2,049.85 $8,026.08 TOPPENISH $12,775.44 $4,381.99 $17,157.43 UNION GAP $8,393.39 $2,878.94 $11,272.33 WAPATO $9,056.73 $3,106.47 $12,163.20 ZILLAH $7,207.43 $2,472.16 $9,679.59 SMALL CITIES $114,801.68 $39,377.10 $154,178.78 YAKIMA $59,380.18 $20,367.47 $79,747.65 YAKIMA COUNTY $119,164.14 $40,873.43 $160,037.57 TOTAL $293,346.00 $100,618.00 $393,964.00