In evaluating the elements of a Consolidated Washington State Land Use Code the Commission will review the elements set forth in RCW 90.61.040(3)ⁱ and the following criteria:

1. The Growth Management Act provides a framework for comprehensive plans, development regulations which implement those plans, and appeal procedures to implement this decision making process. Is the proposal consistent with this framework? Does it provide a framework for integrating other land-use and environmental regulations? (RCW 90.61.040(3)(a))
2. Does the proposal allow for measurable results?
3. Will the proposal result in qualitative and sustainable improvements in the state's quality of life? (RCW 90.61.040(3)(d))
4. Does the proposal ensure that public resources are spent efficiently?
5. Does the proposal provide adequate means to finance and pay for the requirements of planning, mitigation and infrastructure?
6. How does the proposal affect the monetary or financial burdens on local governments? State agencies? Project applicants? The public? Others?
7. Is the proposal consistent with a procedural framework that assures prompt, open decision-making and creates clear lines of accountability from public policy goals through to enforcement? (RCW 90.61.040(3)(b))
8. Does the proposal allow for matters that have regional impact to be addressed effectively?
9. Does the proposal provide for a balance of local and regional flexibility with consistent interpretation and implementation of state statutes?
10. Does the proposal maintain the state's focus on issues and problems that have inter-jurisdictional, regional or statewide significance? Does it minimize duplication and conflicts and achieve consistency between local, state, and federal laws and regulations?
11. Does the proposal provide for broad public involvement and an education process about the substance and process of a state land use code? (RCW 90.61.040(3)(b))
12. Does the proposal respect private property rights and avoid regulatory takings by providing for regulations which limit the impacts on private land use to those necessary to achieve the goals and objectives of the community?
13. Is the proposal consistent with a predictable and timely permitting process? (RCW 90.61.040(3(f),(g),(h),(i),(j))
14. Does the proposal provide for protection of the environment? (RCW 90.61.040(3)(d))
15. Does the proposal allow for expeditious and equitable means to resolve conflicts and land-use appeals?

ⁱ RCW 90.61.040(3) "Draft a consolidated land use procedure, following these guidelines:

(a) Conduct land use planning through the comprehensive planning process under chapter 36.70A RCW rather than through review of individual projects;

(b) Involve diverse sectors of the public in the planning process. Early and informal environmental analysis should be incorporated into planning and decision making;

(c) Recognize that different questions need to be answered and different levels of detail applied at each planning phase, from the initial development of plan concepts or plan elements to implementation programs;

(d) Integrate and combine to the fullest extent possible the processes, analysis, and documents currently required under chapters 36.70A and 43.21C RCW, so that subsequent plan decisions and subsequent implementation will incorporate measures to promote the environmental, economic, and other goals and to mitigate undesirable or unintended adverse impacts on a community's quality of life;

(e) Focus environmental review and the level of detail needed for different stages of plan and project decisions on the environmental considerations most relevant to that stage of the process;

(f) Avoid duplicating review that has occurred for plan decisions when specific projects are proposed;

(g) Use environmental review on projects to:

(i) Review and document consistency with comprehensive plans and development regulations;

(ii) provide prompt and coordinated review by agencies, tribes, and the public on compliance with applicable environmental laws and plans, including mitigation for site specific project impacts that have not been considered and addressed at the plan or development regulation level; and

(iii) ensure accountability by local government to applicants and the public for requiring and implementing mitigation measures;

(h) Maintain or improve the quality of environmental analysis both for plan and for project decisions, while integrating these analyses with improved state and local planning and permitting processes;

(i) Examine existing land use and environmental permits for necessity and utility. To the extent possible, existing permits should be combined into fewer permits, assuring that the values and principles intended to be protected by those permits remain protected; and

(j) Consolidate local government appeal processes to allow a single appeal of permits at local government levels, a single state level administrative appeal, and a final judicial appeal."