The Good, the Bad, and the UGA-ly as WA Growth Management Act Turns 35
For 35 years, Washington State’s Growth Management Act (GMA) has been a success at reducing sprawl and preserving rural character. It has experienced less sprawl than similarly fast-growing Colorado over those 35 years.
But 35 years later, state development patterns are changing as development shifts away from cities towards unincorporated Urban Growth Areas (UGA). Lower density growth of UGAs isn’t inherently bad, but does increase negative externalities like traffic congestion, longer routes for school buses and first responders, and long-term infrastructure liabilities that can eventually devastate the budgets of local governments. Washington must defend the gains of the GMA’s first 35 years.
Good GMA
Original supporters of the GMA sought to prevent the ‘Californication’ of Washington via unchecked suburban sprawl as well as saving ‘rural character,’ protecting the environment and creating a predictable set of development rules.
The core of the GMA is land use. The GMA requires counties to create UGA borders around cities, with intensive development permitted within and restricted outside the UGA boundaries.
https://www.theurbanist.org/the-good-the-bad-and-the-uga-ly-as-wa-growth-management-act-turns-35/