Legal Opinion

Futurewise v. Snohomish County

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided July 15, 2019No. 79663-1Published

1Opinion of the Court

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FUTUREWISE and PILCHUCK AUDUBON SOCIETY, DIVISION ONE Appellants, No. 79663-1-I v. OPINION PUBLISHED IN PART SNOHOMISH COUNTY and THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS FILED: July 15, 2019 BOARD, Respondents. DWYER, J. — Following the 2014 Oso landslide, Snohomish County updated its regulations designating and protecting critical areas, including geologically hazardous areas (GHA5) such as landslide hazard areas. Futurewise and the Pilchuck Audubon Society (collectively Futurewise) believe that the County’s regulations fail to meet the requirements…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. King County v. Central Puget SoundWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  2. King County v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Pud No. 1 of Jefferson County v. Washington Department of EcologySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Port of Seattle v. Pollution Control Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Skagit Surveyors v. FRIENDS OF SKAGITWashington Supreme Court · 1998

21 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