Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would align UGA swap rules to protect critical aquifer recharge areas while easing housing development reviews
Summary
Senate Bill 6,016 would make urban growth area (UGA) swap procedures consistent across annual and 10‑year updates for critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs), a technical fix sponsors say will facilitate housing while maintaining environmental safeguards; opponents warned it revives weaker 2022 language and could invite litigation.
Senate Bill 6,016 would amend UGA swap provisions in the Growth Management Act to treat critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) consistently in annual plan updates and 10‑year plan updates, and would require that swaps not result in a net increase of CARA acreage within a revised UGA.
Karen Epps, committee staff, outlined the GMA background and said the bill narrows the swap standard so that CARA protections are maintained under county development regulations when areas are moved into an urban growth area. Sponsor Senator Bateman said the change is a technical alignment intended to use the UGA swap tool more effectively and pointed to prior work on land swaps.
Dave Anderson of the Washington State Department of Commerce testified the UGA swap process allows counties to reconfigure growth boundaries to add areas more suitable for development while removing less buildable areas; he said CARAs differ from other critical areas because they can allow development with appropriate protections.
Opponents and concerned stakeholders raised legal and groundwater‑protection issues. Rhonda Larson Kramer, with a background in planning and land‑use law, argued the bill revives an obsolete 2022 statute and relies on CARA acreage instead of sensitivity, potentially weakening protections in counties where most land is designated CARA. FutureWise took a neutral position after outreach; the Building Industry Association, Thurston EDC and developers supporting Salish Landing said the bill would enable responsible development and preserve environmental standards under county regulations.
Proponents highlighted an example project, Salish Landing, where a proposed swap would trade 65 acres for 46 acres and reduce CARA acreage within the Tumwater UGA, and said the bill retains guardrails and environmental maintenance requirements. Testimony closed with mixed views and calls for clarifying sensitivity‑based protections and statutory coherence.
