Legal Opinion

Suquamish Tribe v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided July 7, 2010No. 39017-5-IIPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Deren, J.

¶1 The Suquamish Tribe, Kitsap Citizens for Rural Preservation, and Jerry Harless1 appeal the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board (Board) decisions validating Kitsap County’s (County) comprehensive plan under Washington’s Growth Management Act (GMA), chapter 36.70A RCW. The Citizens argue that the Board erred because (1) it applied bright-line rules to approve minimum urban density and maximum rural density; (2) substantial evidence did not support its findings that the County’s reduced urban density plan, the County’s adoption of the minimum density in the land capacity…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Franklin County Sheriff's Office v. SellersWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  2. City of Redmond v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. King County v. Central Puget SoundWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  4. King County v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Quadrant Corp. v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2005

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Brinnon Group v. Jefferson CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
  2. Brinnon Group v. Jefferson CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
  3. BRINNON GROUP v. Jefferson CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
  4. Rachelle Honeycutt & Gabriel Westergreen v. Phillips 66 CompanyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
  5. Burbank Irrigation District 4 v. Dep't Of EcologyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2023

2 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