Legal Opinion

New Castle Investments v. City of LaCenter

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 10, 1999No. 23954-0-IIPublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBridgewater, C. J.

The City of LaCenter appeals the decision of the Clark County Superior Court, which affirmed the hearings examiner’s determination that LaCenter’s transportation impact fee ordinance is subject to the vesting statute for land use ordinances, RCW 58.17.033. We hold that the vesting statute does not apply to transportation impact fees (TIFs) because they do not fall within the definition of “land use control ordinances.” We therefore hold that LaCenter’s impact fee could be applied to New Castle Investments’ proposed development even though New Castle’s application for preliminary plat approval…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Nollan v. California Coastal CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Dolan v. City of TigardSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. BosleyWashington Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Waste Management of Seattle, Inc. v. Utilities & Transportation CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Franklin County Sheriff's Office v. SellersWashington Supreme Court · 1982

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. City of Olympia v. DrebickWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  2. City of Olympia v. DrebickWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Joy v. Department of Labor & IndustriesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
  4. Pacific Industries, Inc. v. SinghCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
  5. Pavlina v. City of VancouverCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004

32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API