Economic Development and Public Transit: Making the Most of the Washington Growth Management Act

Economic Development and Public Transit: Making the Most of the Washington Growth Management Act Robert H. Freilich* Elizabeth A. Garvin** S. Mark White*** INTRODUCTION: THE NEED FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES I. Rapid and unplanned urban growth in the urbanizing and rural fringe areas of the United States has led to numerous problems for state, local, and regional governments.1 In particular, six crises are readily identifiable, each of which threatens to undermine quality of life and local competitive economic advantage. These crises include the following: (1) deterioration of central cities, first-ring suburbs, and closer-in neighborhoods, resulting in depopulation and abandonment of housing and the employment base;2 * Robert H. Freilich is a partner at Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle in Kansas City, Missouri, and Los Angeles, California. Mr. Freilich is a Professor of Law at University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law and Editor of the URBAN LAWYER, the national journal on State and Local Government of the American Bar Association. A.B. 1954, University of Chicago; LL.B. 1957, Yale Law School; M.I.A. 1958, Columbia School of International Affairs; LL.M. 1969, Columbia University School of Law; J.S.D. 1975, Columbia University School of Law. ** Elizabeth A. Garvin is an associate at Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle in Kansas City, Missouri, and Los Angeles, California. B.A. 1988, J.D. 1991, University of Kansas; Master of Urban Planning candidate 1994, University of Kansas. *** S. Mark White is an associate at Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle in Kansas City, Missouri, and Los Angeles, California; B.A. 1985, Bethany College; J.D. 1988, M.R.P. 1989, University of North Carolina. 1. "Growth or development control is one of the most significant and controversial subjects in the political, legal and academic area today." JAMES A. KUSHNER, SUBDIVISION LAW AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT § 1.01 (1991) (citing GRACE DAWSON, No LrTTLE PLANS (1977)). See also M. GLEESON & ROBERT H. FREILICH, URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (1975); MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF GROWTH (R. Scott ed., 1975); James F. Blumstein, A Prolegomon to Growth Management and Exclusionary Zoning Issues, 43:2 LAW & CONTEMP. PROBS. 5 (1979); Robert C. Ellickson, Suburban Growth Controls: An Economic and Legal Analysis, 86 YALE L.J. 385 (1977). 2. See ROBERT FREILICH & ERIC 0. STUHLER, THE LAND USE AWAKENING, ZONING LAW IN THE 70'S 32-33 (1981). See also Robert H. Freilich et al., The New FederalismAmerican Urban Policy in the 80s: Trends and Directions in Urban, State and Local 950 University of PugetSound Law Review [Vol. 16:949 (2) spiraling suburban sprawl, creating massive infrastruc3 ture as well as energy costs; 4 (3) loss of prime agricultural lands; (4) environmental crises and threats to open space, air and water quality, environmentally sensitive lands, and natural 5 resources; (5) transportation congestion and resultant loss of quality of life;6 and (6) inflating cost of housing and its effect on affordable housing.7 These problems do not lend themselves to facile solutions or quick fixes; they must be addressed through the development and application of comprehensive state and regional growth management plans." This Article explores the history and development of growth management and delineates how growth management planning for the Washington Puget Sound region can be effectively implemented to provide a comprehensive system for attaining environmental and transit objectives. Government Law, 15 URB. LAW. 159 (1983); James A. Kushner, The Reagan Urban Policy Centrifugal Force in the Empire, 2 UCLA J. ENVTL. L. & POL'Y 206 (1982). 3. See FREILICH & STUHLER, supra note 2, at 32; Julie Biggs, No Drip, No Flush, No Growth. How Cities Can Control Growth Beyond Their BoundariesBy Refusing to Extend Utility Services, 22 URB. LAW. 285 (1990); Carol R. Stone, The Prevention of Urban Sprawl Through Utility Extension Controls, 14 URB. LAW. 357 (1982); Gilbert P. Verbit, The Urban Transportation Problem, 124 U. PA. L. REV. 368 (1975). See also ADVISORY COMMISSION ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, URBAN AND RURAL AMERICA: POLICIES FOR FUTURE GROWTH 100-101 (Apr. 1968). 4. See Robert H. Freilich & Linda K. Davis, Saving the Land: The Utilization of Modern Techniques of Growth Management to Preserve Rural and Agricultural America, 13 URB. LAW. 27 (1981); Julian C. Jurgensmeyer, FarmlandPreservation: A Vital Agricultural Law Issue For the 1980's, 21 WASHBURN L.J. 443 (1982); Farmland Policy Protection Act, 7 U.S.C.A. § 4201 et seq. (West 1988 & Supp. 1993). 5. See MICHAEL A. MANTELL ET AL., CREATING SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITIES: GUIDEBOOK TO GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES (1990). A 6. See Robert H. Freilich & Terry D. Morgan, Municipal Strategiesfor Imposing Valid Development Exactions: Responding to Nollan, 10 ZONING & PLAN. L. REP. 169 (1987); Robert H. Freilich & S. Mark White, TransportationCongestion and Growth Management: Comprehensive Approaches to Resolving America's Major Quality of Life Crisis, 24 Loy. L.A. L. REV. 915 (1991). 7. See Robert H. Freilich & Martin L. Leitner, Bureau of Urban and Regional Planning Research, University of Illinois, Comprehensive Growth Management and Planning Framework, COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT REGULATION 13-14 (Clyde W. Forrest ed., 1979); Richard A. Newman & Phil T. Feola, Housing Incentives, A National Perspective, 21 URB. LAw. 307 (1989). 8. Individual growth management techniques, without a plan, are ineffective. "There exists little evidence in America that growth has been well managed despite long use of management techniques." KUSHNER, supra note 1, at § 2.02. 1993] II. Guidancefor Growth GRowTH MANAGEMENT BACKGROUND: 951 FROM RAMAPO TO THE TIERS Growth management systems involve the control of one or more familiar components of land use planning: the rate, location, type, density, amount, and quality of development. 9 Unlike traditional subdivision regulations, growth management adds and emphasizes a third dimension-timing.1 0 The timing and sequencing of development were first approved in the landmark decision" of Golden v. Planning Board of Ramapo, 2 where the New York high court upheld 9. See, e.g., Village of Euclid v. Amber Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365 (1926) (regulating land use by geographical zones); Pardee Constr. Co. v. Camarillo, 690 P.2d 701 (Cal. 1984) (regulating amount of growth); Associated Homebuilders, Inc. v. Livermore, 557 P.2d 473 (Cal. 1976) (regulating rate and density of growth); Sturges v. Chilmark, 402 N.E.2d 1346 (Mass. 1980) (controlling rate of development). See also Richard T. LeGates, The Emergence of Flexible Growth Management Systems in the Bay Area, 24 Loy. L.A. L. REv. 1035, 1036 (1991). 10. DAVID L. CALLUES & ROBERT H. FREILICH, CASES AND MATERIALS ON LAND USE 834 (West 1988 & Supp. 1991). Henry Fagin explained the two-part role of timing and sequencing in urban growth as the tempo or rate of urban development and the sequencin (...truncated)