Legal Opinion

Futurewise v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided October 16, 2007No. 35569-8-IIPublished

1Opinion of the CourtQuinn-Brintnall, J.

¶1 Futurewise and Friends of Pierce County (Futurewise) appeal the decision of the *206Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board (Board) upholding Pierce County Code (PCC) 19A.30-.070(B) (3)(a). In 2004, the Pierce County Council enacted that ordinance, which declares that parcels of land smaller than five acres are not significant agricultural lands of long-term significance that must be conserved under the Washington Growth Management Act (GMA), chapter 36.70A RCW.

¶2 Futurewise challenged the ordinance, claiming that the five-acre minimum parcel size is premised on a factual error…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. City of Redmond v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  2. King County v. Central Puget SoundWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  3. King County v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Pud No. 1 of Jefferson County v. Washington Department of EcologySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Robel v. Roundup Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 2002

10 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