County blocks passage of urban growth bill

County heavyweights blocked legislation that would have given cities more control over Urban Growth Areas for the second year in a row.

House Bill 1727, which originated as HB 2045 in 2007, received little more than a mention at the beginning of this year’s legislative session.

The bill aims to give city leaders some power over building standards in areas they will one day annex, but strong opposition from counties has twice prevented the legislation’s progression through the House and Senate.

“It stands to reason that if we, the cities, are expected to incorporate these areas into our boundaries, that development should be consistent with our standards,” Mill Creek Mayor Terry Ryan said. “I can only guess — seeing as they’ve lobbied very hard to kill this legislation — that the counties want to milk these areas for all they’re worth and eventually dump them in the cities’ laps.”

HB 1727 was a top priority this year for the Association of Washington Cities, as well as the South Snohomish County Cities Alliance. Statewide, city leaders have complained for years that county managed development in Urban Growth Areas is inconsistent with municipal standards and a threat to residents’ quality of life.

A hodgepodge of tightly packed residential developments, converted condominium complexes and strip malls south of Mill Creek illustrate the frustration city leaders have with the county’s building standards. Some residents along the Bothell-Everett Highway have little more than a sidewalk between the road and their front doors. Other residents have no sidewalks at all.

Strip malls also butt the roadway.

One in particular — the Crossroads shopping center — is positioned in such a way that motorists and pedestrians have a curbside view of utility meters and backdoor entrances.

“It’s a mess,” Mill Creek Coucnilwoman Mary Kay Voss complained. “It bears no resemblance to the surrounding developments. It’s got all kinds of wild colors going on and the rear of the complex is backed right up against the roadway. Who thought of that?”

These are the same types of issues Rep. Larry Springer faced on the Kirkland City Council, before he was elected to the state Legislature four years ago. He proposed HB 2045 in 2007 and later HB 1727 to resolve disputes over landuse between city and county leaders.

“I spent 11 years on a city council in constant discussions over landuse in our annexation area,” the 45th District Democrat said. “It’s important that cities are able to negotiate building standards for land within their Urban Growth Areas, but the counties view that as a loss of control and have pushed very hard against it.”

Leaders from King and Snohomish counties claim such legislation would cost thousands of dollars, forcing counties to increase staff numbers in order to negotiate building standards with the cities, many of which have shared Urban Growth Areas.

“Snohomish County opposed 1727 for a number of reasons,” Snohomish County Councilman Dave Gossett said. “First of all, it’s not an easy task to coordinate building codes with 19 cities. Secondly — my biggest problem with the legislation — is a representation issue. You guys can decide all of the landuse standards for a bunch of people in unincorporated areas who don’t get to vote for you.”

Gossett suggested that interlocal agreements between the county and cities would be more attractive than a state mandate and easier to manage.

Though some city leaders say such proposals from the county are disingenuous.

“We on the Snohomish County Tomorrow Task Force worked for 16 months on a principles of annexation agreement that in essence says the same thing as 1727 — if the county wants the cities to annex these areas in the UGAs, they should resemble the cities they will be a part of,” Ryan said. “The county council adopted it, and turns around and fights against this legislation. That to me underminds the hours and hours of work city folks poured into this.”

Acknowledging the opposition from county leaders, lawmakers say there were still other hangups that got in the way of the bill’s passage.

“We had 4,000 pieces of legislation in a very short session,” Sen. Steve Hobbs, D-Lake Stevens, said. “We just ran out of time. It’s an important issue and one I hope to discuss further in the future.” While the population in Snohomish County alone is projected to jump by more than 300,000 people by 2025, development standards in municipal Urban Growth Areas is not an issue that will disappear anytime soon.

Lawmakers say they’re committed to helping end disputes between counties and cities and intend to introduce the legislation again next year.

“Cities are incredibly supportive of this legislation,” Springer said. “I think it will take some compromised language and cooperation from both city and county leaders, but I am cautiously optimistic that we’ll get it through eventually.”