reglab/statecodes huggingface dataset:
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.020 - Definitions.

RCW 36.70B.020
Definitions.
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter.
(1) "Closed record appeal" means an administrative appeal on the record to a local government body or officer, including the legislative body, following an open record hearing on a project permit application when the appeal is on the record with no or limited new evidence or information allowed to be submitted and only appeal argument allowed.
(2) "Local government" means a county, city, or town.
(3) "Open record hearing" means a hearing, conducted by a single hearing body or officer authorized by the local government to conduct such hearings, that creates the local government's record through testimony and submission of evidence and information, under procedures prescribed by the local government by ordinance or resolution. An open record hearing may be held prior to a local government's decision on a project permit to be known as an "open record predecision hearing." An open record hearing may be held on an appeal, to be known as an "open record appeal hearing," if no open record predecision hearing has been held on the project permit.
(4) "Project permit" or "project permit application" means any land use or environmental permit or license required from a local government for a project action, including but not limited to subdivisions, binding site plans, planned unit developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, site plan review, permits or approvals required by critical area ordinances, site-specific rezones which do not require a comprehensive plan amendment, but excluding the adoption or amendment of a comprehensive plan, subarea plan, or development regulations except as otherwise specifically included in this subsection.
(5) "Public meeting" means an informal meeting, hearing, workshop, or other public gathering of people to obtain comments from the public or other agencies on a proposed project permit prior to the local government's decision. A public meeting may include, but is not limited to, a design review or architectural control board meeting, a special review district or community council meeting, or a scoping meeting on a draft environmental impact statement. A public meeting does not include an open record hearing. The proceedings at a public meeting may be recorded and a report or recommendation may be included in the local government's project permit application file.
[ 2023 c 338 § 5; 1995 c 347 § 402.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.040 - Determination of consistency.

RCW 36.70B.040
Determination of consistency.
(1) A proposed project's consistency with a local government's development regulations adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, or, in the absence of applicable development regulations, the appropriate elements of the comprehensive plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW shall be decided by the local government during project review by consideration of:
(a) The type of land use;
(b) The level of development, such as units per acre or other measures of density;
(c) Infrastructure, including public facilities and services needed to serve the development; and
(d) The characteristics of the development, such as development standards.
(2) In deciding whether a project is consistent, the determinations made pursuant to RCW 36.70B.030(2) shall be controlling.
(3) For purposes of this section, the term "consistency" shall include all terms used in this chapter and chapter 36.70A RCW to refer to performance in accordance with this chapter and chapter 36.70A RCW, including but not limited to compliance, conformity, and consistency.
(4) Nothing in this section requires documentation, dictates an agency's procedures for considering consistency, or limits a city or county from asking more specific or related questions with respect to any of the four main categories listed in subsection (1)(a) through (d) of this section.
(5) The department of commerce is authorized to develop and adopt by rule criteria to assist local governments planning under RCW 36.70A.040 to analyze the consistency of project actions. These criteria shall be jointly developed with the department of ecology.
[ 2023 c 470 § 2020; 1997 c 429 § 46; 1995 c 347 § 405.]
NOTES:
Explanatory statement—2023 c 470: See note following RCW 10.99.030.
Severability—1997 c 429: See note following RCW 36.70A.3201.
Intent—Findings—1995 c 347 §§ 404 and 405: See note following RCW 36.70B.030.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.050 - Local government review of project permit applications required—Objectives.

RCW 36.70B.050
Local government review of project permit applications required—Objectives.
Not later than March 31, 1996, each local government shall provide by ordinance or resolution for review of project permit applications to achieve the following objectives:
(1) Combine the environmental review process, both procedural and substantive, with the procedure for review of project permits; and
(2) Except for the appeal of a determination of significance as provided in RCW 43.21C.075, provide for no more than one open record hearing and one closed record appeal.
[ 1995 c 347 § 406.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.100 - Designation of person or entity to receive determinations and notices.

RCW 36.70B.100
Designation of person or entity to receive determinations and notices.
A local government may require the applicant for a project permit to designate a single person or entity to receive determinations and notices required by this chapter.
[ 1995 c 347 § 414.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.120 - Permit review process.

RCW 36.70B.120
Permit review process.
(1) Each local government planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall establish a permit review process that provides for the integrated and consolidated review and decision on two or more project permits relating to a proposed project action, including a single application review and approval process covering all project permits requested by an applicant for all or part of a project action and a designated permit coordinator. If an applicant elects the consolidated permit review process, the determination of completeness, notice of application, and notice of final decision must include all project permits being reviewed through the consolidated permit review process.
(2) Consolidated permit review may provide different procedures for different categories of project permits, but if a project action requires project permits from more than one category, the local government shall provide for consolidated permit review with a single open record hearing and no more than one closed record appeal as provided in RCW 36.70B.060. Each local government shall determine which project permits are subject to an open record hearing and a closed record appeal. Examples of categories of project permits include but are not limited to:
(a) Proposals that are categorically exempt from chapter 43.21C RCW, such as construction permits, that do not require environmental review or public notice;
(b) Permits that require environmental review, but no open record predecision hearing; and
(c) Permits that require a threshold determination and an open record predecision hearing and may provide for a closed record appeal to a hearing body or officer or to the local government legislative body.
(3) A local government may provide by ordinance or resolution for the same or a different decision maker or hearing body or officer for different categories of project permits. In the case of consolidated project permit review, the local government shall specify which decision makers shall make the decision or recommendation, conduct the hearing, or decide the appeal to ensure that consolidated permit review occurs as provided in this section. The consolidated permit review may combine an open record predecision hearing on one or more permits with an open record appeal hearing on other permits. In such cases, the local government by ordinance or resolution shall specify which project permits, if any, shall be subject to a closed record appeal.
[ 1995 c 347 § 416.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.130 - Notice of decision—Distribution.

RCW 36.70B.130
Notice of decision—Distribution.
A local government planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall provide a notice of decision that also includes a statement of any threshold determination made under chapter 43.21C RCW and the procedures for administrative appeal, if any. The notice of decision may be a copy of the report or decision on the project permit application. The notice shall be provided to the applicant and to any person who, prior to the rendering of the decision, requested notice of the decision or submitted substantive comments on the application. The local government shall provide for notice of its decision as provided in RCW 36.70B.110(4), which shall also state that affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. The local government shall provide notice of decision to the county assessor's office of the county or counties in which the property is situated.
[ 1996 c 254 § 1; 1995 c 347 § 417.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.140 - Project permits that may be excluded from review.

RCW 36.70B.140
Project permits that may be excluded from review.
(1) A local government by ordinance or resolution may exclude the following project permits from the provisions of RCW 36.70B.060 through * 36.70B.090 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130: Landmark designations, street vacations, or other approvals relating to the use of public areas or facilities, or other project permits, whether administrative or quasi-judicial, that the local government by ordinance or resolution has determined present special circumstances that warrant a review process or time periods for approval which are different from that provided in RCW 36.70B.060 through * 36.70B.090 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130.
(2) A local government by ordinance or resolution also may exclude the following project permits from the provisions of RCW 36.70B.060 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130: Lot line or boundary adjustments and building and other construction permits, or similar administrative approvals, categorically exempt from environmental review under chapter 43.21C RCW, or for which environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits.
(3) A local government must exclude project permits for interior alterations from site plan review, provided that the interior alterations do not result in the following:
(a) Additional sleeping quarters or bedrooms;
(b) Nonconformity with federal emergency management agency substantial improvement thresholds; or
(c) Increase the total square footage or valuation of the structure thereby requiring upgraded fire access or fire suppression systems.
(4) Nothing in this section exempts interior alterations from otherwise applicable building, plumbing, mechanical, or electrical codes.
(5) For purposes of this section, "interior alterations" include construction activities that do not modify the existing site layout or its current use and involve no exterior work adding to the building footprint.
[ 2023 c 338 § 1; 1995 c 347 § 418.]
NOTES:
*Reviser's note: RCW 36.70B.090 expired June 30, 2000, pursuant to 1998 c 286 § 8.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.150 - Local governments not planning under the growth management act may use provisions.

RCW 36.70B.150
Local governments not planning under the growth management act may use provisions.
A local government not planning under RCW 36.70A.040 may incorporate some or all of the provisions of RCW 36.70B.060 through * 36.70B.090 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130 into its procedures for review of project permits or other project actions.
[ 1995 c 347 § 419.]
NOTES:
*Reviser's note: RCW 36.70B.090 expired June 30, 2000, pursuant to 1998 c 286 § 8.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.180 - Development agreements—Effect.

RCW 36.70B.180
Development agreements—Effect.
Unless amended or terminated, a development agreement is enforceable during its term by a party to the agreement. A development agreement and the development standards in the agreement govern during the term of the agreement, or for all or that part of the build-out period specified in the agreement, and may not be subject to an amendment to a zoning ordinance or development standard or regulation or a new zoning ordinance or development standard or regulation adopted after the effective date of the agreement. A permit or approval issued by the county or city after the execution of the development agreement must be consistent with the development agreement.
[ 1995 c 347 § 503.]
NOTES:
Findings—Intent—1995 c 347 §§ 502-506: See note following RCW 36.70B.170.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.190 - Development agreements—Recording—Parties and successors bound.

RCW 36.70B.190
Development agreements—Recording—Parties and successors bound.
A development agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of the county in which the property is located. During the term of the development agreement, the agreement is binding on the parties and their successors, including a city that assumes jurisdiction through incorporation or annexation of the area covering the property covered by the development agreement.
[ 1995 c 347 § 504.]
NOTES:
Findings—Intent—1995 c 347 §§ 502-506: See note following RCW 36.70B.170.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.200 - Development agreements—Public hearing.

RCW 36.70B.200
Development agreements—Public hearing.
A county or city shall only approve a development agreement by ordinance or resolution after a public hearing. The county or city legislative body or a planning commission, hearing examiner, or other body designated by the legislative body to conduct the public hearing may conduct the hearing. If the development agreement relates to a project permit application, the provisions of chapter 36.70C RCW shall apply to the appeal of the decision on the development agreement.
[ 1995 c 347 § 505.]
NOTES:
Findings—Intent—1995 c 347 §§ 502-506: See note following RCW 36.70B.170.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.210 - Development agreements—Authority to impose fees not extended.

RCW 36.70B.210
Development agreements—Authority to impose fees not extended.
Nothing in RCW 36.70B.170 through 36.70B.200 and section 501, chapter 347, Laws of 1995 is intended to authorize local governments to impose impact fees, inspection fees, or dedications or to require any other financial contributions or mitigation measures except as expressly authorized by other applicable provisions of state law.
[ 1995 c 347 § 506.]
NOTES:
Findings—Intent—1995 c 347 §§ 502-506: See note following RCW 36.70B.170.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.220 - Permit assistance staff.

RCW 36.70B.220
Permit assistance staff.
(1) Each county and city having populations of ten thousand or more that plan under RCW 36.70A.040 shall designate permit assistance staff whose function it is to assist permit applicants. An existing employee may be designated as the permit assistance staff.
(2) Permit assistance staff designated under this section shall:
(a) Make available to permit applicants all current local government regulations and adopted policies that apply to the subject application. The local government shall provide counter copies thereof and, upon request, provide copies according to chapter 42.56 RCW. The staff shall also publish and keep current one or more handouts containing lists and explanations of all local government regulations and adopted policies;
(b) Establish and make known to the public the means of obtaining the handouts and related information; and
(c) Provide assistance regarding the application of the local government's regulations in particular cases.
(3) Permit assistance staff designated under this section may obtain technical assistance and support in the compilation and production of the handouts under subsection (2) of this section from the department of commerce.
[ 2010 c 271 § 707; 2005 c 274 § 272; 1996 c 206 § 9.]
NOTES:
Purpose—Effective date—2010 c 271: See notes following RCW 43.330.005.
Findings—1996 c 206: See note following RCW 43.05.030.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.230 - Planning regulations—Copies provided to county assessor.

RCW 36.70B.230
Planning regulations—Copies provided to county assessor.
By July 31, 1997, a local government planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall provide to the county assessor a copy of the local government's comprehensive plan and development regulations in effect on July 1st of that year and shall thereafter provide any amendments to the plan and regulations that were adopted before July 31st of each following year.
[ 1996 c 254 § 6.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.240 - Consolidated permit review grant program.

RCW 36.70B.240
Consolidated permit review grant program.
(1) Subject to the availability of funds appropriated for this specific purpose, the department of commerce must establish a consolidated permit review grant program. The department may award grants to any local government that provides, by ordinance, resolution, or other action, a commitment to the following building permit review consolidation requirements:
(a) Issuing final decisions on residential permit applications within 45 business days or 90 calendar days.
(i) To achieve permit review within the stated time periods, a local government must provide consolidated review for building permit applications. This may include an initial technical peer review of the application for conformity with the requirements of RCW 36.70B.070 by all departments, divisions, and sections of the local government with jurisdiction over the project.
(ii) A local government may contract with a third-party business to conduct the consolidated permit review or as additional inspection staff. Any funds expended for such a contract may be eligible for reimbursement under chapter 338, Laws of 2023.
(iii) Local governments are authorized to use grant funds to contract outside assistance to audit their development regulations to identify and correct barriers to housing development.
(b) Establishing an application fee structure that would allow the jurisdiction to continue providing consolidated permit review within 45 business days or 90 calendar days.
(i) A local government may consult with local building associations to develop a reasonable fee system.
(ii) A local government must determine, no later than July 1, 2024, the specific fee structure needed to provide permit review within the time periods specified in this subsection (1)(b).
(2) A jurisdiction that is awarded a grant under this section must provide a quarterly report to the department of commerce. The report must include the average and maximum time for permit review during the jurisdiction's participation in the grant program.
(3) If a jurisdiction is unable to successfully meet the terms and conditions of the grant, the jurisdiction must enter a 90-day probationary period. If the jurisdiction is not able to meet the requirements of this section by the end of the probationary period, the jurisdiction is no longer eligible to receive grants under this section.
(4) For the purposes of this section, "residential permit" means a permit issued by a city or county that satisfies the conditions of RCW 19.27.015(5) and is within the scope of the international residential code, as adopted in accordance with chapter 19.27 RCW.
[ 2023 c 338 § 2.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.241 - Permit review process update grant program.

RCW 36.70B.241
Permit review process update grant program.
(1) Subject to the availability of funds appropriated for this specific purpose, the department of commerce must establish a grant program for local governments to update their permit review process from paper filing systems to software systems capable of processing digital permit applications, virtual inspections, electronic review, and with capacity for video storage.
(2) The department of commerce may only provide a grant under this section to a city if the city allows for the development of at least two units per lot on all lots zoned predominantly for residential use within its jurisdiction.
[ 2023 c 338 § 3.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.245 - Technical assistance to local governments.

RCW 36.70B.245
Technical assistance to local governments.
(1) The department of commerce shall develop and provide technical assistance and guidance to counties and cities in setting fee structures under RCW 36.70B.160(1) to ensure that the fees are reasonable and sufficient to recover true costs. The guidance must include information on how to utilize growth factors or other measures to reflect cost increases over time.
(2) When providing technical assistance under subsection (1) of this section, the department of commerce must prioritize local governments that have implemented at least three of the options in RCW 36.70B.160(1).
[ 2023 c 338 § 9.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.250 - Data reporting template.

RCW 36.70B.250
Data reporting template.
The department of commerce shall develop a template for counties and cities subject to the requirements in RCW 36.70B.080, which will be utilized for reporting data.
[ 2023 c 338 § 11.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.260 - Electricity projects—Prohibition on demonstration of need.

RCW 36.70B.260
Electricity projects—Prohibition on demonstration of need.
During project review of a project to construct or improve facilities for the generation, transmission, or distribution of electricity, a local government may not require a project applicant to demonstrate the necessity or utility of the project other than to require, as part of a completed application under RCW 36.70B.070(2), submission of any publicly available documentation required by the federal energy regulatory commission or its delegees or the utilities and transportation commission or its delegees, or from any other federal agency with regulatory authority over the assessment of electric power transmission and distribution needs as applicable.
[ 2023 c 230 § 304.]
NOTES:
Findings—Intent—2023 c 230: See note following RCW 43.394.010.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70B - Local Project Review. › 36.70B.900 - Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347.

RCW 36.70B.900
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347.
See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.010 - Purpose.

RCW 36.70C.010
Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to reform the process for judicial review of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions, by establishing uniform, expedited appeal procedures and uniform criteria for reviewing such decisions, in order to provide consistent, predictable, and timely judicial review.
[ 1995 c 347 § 702.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.020 - Definitions.

RCW 36.70C.020
Definitions.
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter.
(1) "Energy overlay zone" means a formal plan enacted by the county legislative authority that establishes suitable areas for siting renewable resource projects based on currently available resources and existing infrastructure with sensitivity to adverse environmental impact.
(2) "Land use decision" means a final determination by a local jurisdiction's body or officer with the highest level of authority to make the determination, including those with authority to hear appeals, on:
(a) An application for a project permit or other governmental approval required by law before real property may be improved, developed, modified, sold, transferred, or used, but excluding applications for permits or approvals to use, vacate, or transfer streets, parks, and similar types of public property; excluding applications for legislative approvals such as area-wide rezones and annexations; and excluding applications for business licenses;
(b) An interpretative or declaratory decision regarding the application to a specific property of zoning or other ordinances or rules regulating the improvement, development, modification, maintenance, or use of real property; and
(c) The enforcement by a local jurisdiction of ordinances regulating the improvement, development, modification, maintenance, or use of real property. However, when a local jurisdiction is required by law to enforce the ordinances in a court of limited jurisdiction, a petition may not be brought under this chapter.
Where a local jurisdiction allows or requires a motion for reconsideration to the highest level of authority making the determination, and a timely motion for reconsideration has been filed, the land use decision occurs on the date a decision is entered on the motion for reconsideration, and not the date of the original decision for which the motion for reconsideration was filed.
(3) "Local jurisdiction" means a county, city, or incorporated town.
(4) "Person" means an individual, partnership, corporation, association, public or private organization, or governmental entity or agency.
(5) "Renewable resources" has the same meaning provided in RCW 19.280.020.
[ 2010 c 59 § 1; 2009 c 419 § 1; 1995 c 347 § 703.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.030 - Chapter exclusive means of judicial review of land use decisions—Exceptions.

RCW 36.70C.030
Chapter exclusive means of judicial review of land use decisions—Exceptions.
(1) This chapter replaces the writ of certiorari for appeal of land use decisions and shall be the exclusive means of judicial review of land use decisions, except that this chapter does not apply to:
(a) Judicial review of:
(i) Land use decisions made by bodies that are not part of a local jurisdiction;
(ii) Land use decisions of a local jurisdiction that are subject to review by a quasi-judicial body created by state law, such as the shorelines hearings board or the growth management hearings board;
(b) Judicial review of applications for a writ of mandamus or prohibition; or
(c) Claims provided by any law for monetary damages or compensation. If one or more claims for damages or compensation are set forth in the same complaint with a land use petition brought under this chapter, the claims are not subject to the procedures and standards, including deadlines, provided in this chapter for review of the petition. The judge who hears the land use petition may, if appropriate, preside at a trial for damages or compensation.
(2) The superior court civil rules govern procedural matters under this chapter to the extent that the rules are consistent with this chapter.
[ 2010 1st sp.s. c 7 § 38; 2003 c 393 § 17; 1995 c 347 § 704.]
NOTES:
Effective date—2010 1st sp.s. c 26; 2010 1st sp.s. c 7: See note following RCW 43.03.027.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.050 - Joinder of parties.

RCW 36.70C.050
Joinder of parties.
If the applicant for the land use approval is not the owner of the real property at issue, and if the owner is not accurately identified in the records referred to in RCW 36.70C.040(2) (b) and (c), the applicant shall be responsible for promptly securing the joinder of the owners. In addition, within fourteen days after service each party initially named by the petitioner shall disclose to the other parties the name and address of any person whom such party knows may be needed for just adjudication of the petition, and the petitioner shall promptly name and serve any such person whom the petitioner agrees may be needed for just adjudication. If such a person is named and served before the initial hearing, leave of court for the joinder is not required, and the petitioner shall provide the newly joined party with copies of the pleadings filed before the party's joinder. Failure by the petitioner to name or serve, within the time required by RCW 36.70C.040(3), persons who are needed for just adjudication but who are not identified in the records referred to in RCW 36.70C.040(2)(b), or in RCW 36.70C.040(2)(c) if applicable, shall not deprive the court of jurisdiction to hear the land use petition.
[ 1995 c 347 § 706.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.060 - Standing.

RCW 36.70C.060
Standing.
Standing to bring a land use petition under this chapter is limited to the following persons:
(1) The applicant and the owner of property to which the land use decision is directed;
(2) Another person aggrieved or adversely affected by the land use decision, or who would be aggrieved or adversely affected by a reversal or modification of the land use decision. A person is aggrieved or adversely affected within the meaning of this section only when all of the following conditions are present:
(a) The land use decision has prejudiced or is likely to prejudice that person;
(b) That person's asserted interests are among those that the local jurisdiction was required to consider when it made the land use decision;
(c) A judgment in favor of that person would substantially eliminate or redress the prejudice to that person caused or likely to be caused by the land use decision; and
(d) The petitioner has exhausted his or her administrative remedies to the extent required by law.
[ 1995 c 347 § 707.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.070 - Land use petition—Required elements.

RCW 36.70C.070
Land use petition—Required elements.
A land use petition must set forth:
(1) The name and mailing address of the petitioner;
(2) The name and mailing address of the petitioner's attorney, if any;
(3) The name and mailing address of the local jurisdiction whose land use decision is at issue;
(4) Identification of the decision-making body or officer, together with a duplicate copy of the decision, or, if not a written decision, a summary or brief description of it;
(5) Identification of each person to be made a party under RCW 36.70C.040(2) (b) through (d);
(6) Facts demonstrating that the petitioner has standing to seek judicial review under RCW 36.70C.060;
(7) A separate and concise statement of each error alleged to have been committed;
(8) A concise statement of facts upon which the petitioner relies to sustain the statement of error; and
(9) A request for relief, specifying the type and extent of relief requested.
[ 1995 c 347 § 708.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.080 - Initial hearing.

RCW 36.70C.080
Initial hearing.
(1) Within seven days after the petition is served on the parties identified in RCW 36.70C.040(2), the petitioner shall note, according to the local rules of superior court, an initial hearing on jurisdictional and preliminary matters. This initial hearing shall be set no sooner than thirty-five days and no later than fifty days after the petition is served on the parties identified in RCW 36.70C.040(2).
(2) The parties shall note all motions on jurisdictional and procedural issues for resolution at the initial hearing, except that a motion to allow discovery may be brought sooner. Where confirmation of motions is required, each party shall be responsible for confirming its own motions.
(3) The defenses of lack of standing, untimely filing or service of the petition, and failure to join persons needed for just adjudication are waived if not raised by timely motion noted to be heard at the initial hearing, unless the court allows discovery on such issues.
(4) The petitioner shall move the court for an order at the initial hearing that sets the date on which the record must be submitted, sets a briefing schedule, sets a discovery schedule if discovery is to be allowed, and sets a date for the hearing or trial on the merits.
(5) The parties may waive the initial hearing by scheduling with the court a date for the hearing or trial on the merits and filing a stipulated order that resolves the jurisdictional and procedural issues raised by the petition, including the issues identified in subsections (3) and (4) of this section.
(6) A party need not file an answer to the petition.
[ 1995 c 347 § 709.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.090 - Expedited review.

RCW 36.70C.090
Expedited review.
The court shall provide expedited review of petitions filed under this chapter. The matter must be set for hearing within sixty days of the date set for submitting the local jurisdiction's record, absent a showing of good cause for a different date or a stipulation of the parties.
[ 1995 c 347 § 710.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.100 - Stay of action pending review.

RCW 36.70C.100
Stay of action pending review.
(1) A petitioner or other party may request the court to stay or suspend an action by the local jurisdiction or another party to implement the decision under review. The request must set forth a statement of grounds for the stay and the factual basis for the request.
(2) A court may grant a stay only if the court finds that:
(a) The party requesting the stay is likely to prevail on the merits;
(b) Without the stay the party requesting it will suffer irreparable harm;
(c) The grant of a stay will not substantially harm other parties to the proceedings; and
(d) The request for the stay is timely in light of the circumstances of the case.
(3) The court may grant the request for a stay upon such terms and conditions, including the filing of security, as are necessary to prevent harm to other parties by the stay.
[ 1995 c 347 § 711.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.110 - Record for judicial review—Costs.

RCW 36.70C.110
Record for judicial review—Costs.
(1) Within forty-five days after entry of an order to submit the record, or within such a further time as the court allows or as the parties agree, the local jurisdiction shall submit to the court a certified copy of the record for judicial review of the land use decision, except that the petitioner shall prepare at the petitioner's expense and submit a verbatim transcript of any hearings held on the matter.
(2) If the parties agree, or upon order of the court, the record shall be shortened or summarized to avoid reproduction and transcription of portions of the record that are duplicative or not relevant to the issues to be reviewed by the court.
(3) The petitioner shall pay the local jurisdiction the cost of preparing the record before the local jurisdiction submits the record to the court. Failure by the petitioner to timely pay the local jurisdiction relieves the local jurisdiction of responsibility to submit the record and is grounds for dismissal of the petition.
(4) If the relief sought by the petitioner is granted in whole or in part the court shall equitably assess the cost of preparing the record among the parties. In assessing costs the court shall take into account the extent to which each party prevailed and the reasonableness of the parties' conduct in agreeing or not agreeing to shorten or summarize the record under subsection (2) of this section.
[ 1995 c 347 § 712.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.120 - Scope of review—Discovery.

RCW 36.70C.120
Scope of review—Discovery.
(1) When the land use decision being reviewed was made by a quasi-judicial body or officer who made factual determinations in support of the decision and the parties to the quasi-judicial proceeding had an opportunity consistent with due process to make a record on the factual issues, judicial review of factual issues and the conclusions drawn from the factual issues shall be confined to the record created by the quasi-judicial body or officer, except as provided in subsections (2) through (4) of this section.
(2) For decisions described in subsection (1) of this section, the record may be supplemented by additional evidence only if the additional evidence relates to:
(a) Grounds for disqualification of a member of the body or of the officer that made the land use decision, when such grounds were unknown by the petitioner at the time the record was created;
(b) Matters that were improperly excluded from the record after being offered by a party to the quasi-judicial proceeding; or
(c) Matters that were outside the jurisdiction of the body or officer that made the land use decision.
(3) For land use decisions other than those described in subsection (1) of this section, the record for judicial review may be supplemented by evidence of material facts that were not made part of the local jurisdiction's record.
(4) The court may require or permit corrections of ministerial errors or inadvertent omissions in the preparation of the record.
(5) The parties may not conduct pretrial discovery except with the prior permission of the court, which may be sought by motion at any time after service of the petition. The court shall not grant permission unless the party requesting it makes a prima facie showing of need. The court shall strictly limit discovery to what is necessary for equitable and timely review of the issues that are raised under subsections (2) and (3) of this section. If the court allows the record to be supplemented, the court shall require the parties to disclose before the hearing or trial on the merits the specific evidence they intend to offer. If any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, requests records under chapter 42.56 RCW relating to the matters at issue, a copy of the request shall simultaneously be given to all other parties and the court shall take such request into account in fashioning an equitable discovery order under this section.
[ 2005 c 274 § 273; 1995 c 347 § 713.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.130 - Standards for granting relief—Renewable resource projects within energy overlay zones.

RCW 36.70C.130
Standards for granting relief—Renewable resource projects within energy overlay zones.
(1) The superior court, acting without a jury, shall review the record and such supplemental evidence as is permitted under RCW 36.70C.120. The court may grant relief only if the party seeking relief has carried the burden of establishing that one of the standards set forth in (a) through (f) of this subsection has been met. The standards are:
(a) The body or officer that made the land use decision engaged in unlawful procedure or failed to follow a prescribed process, unless the error was harmless;
(b) The land use decision is an erroneous interpretation of the law, after allowing for such deference as is due the construction of a law by a local jurisdiction with expertise;
(c) The land use decision is not supported by evidence that is substantial when viewed in light of the whole record before the court;
(d) The land use decision is a clearly erroneous application of the law to the facts;
(e) The land use decision is outside the authority or jurisdiction of the body or officer making the decision; or
(f) The land use decision violates the constitutional rights of the party seeking relief.
(2) In order to grant relief under this chapter, it is not necessary for the court to find that the local jurisdiction engaged in arbitrary and capricious conduct. A grant of relief by itself may not be deemed to establish liability for monetary damages or compensation.
(3) Land use decisions made by a local jurisdiction concerning renewable resource projects within a county energy overlay zone are presumed to be reasonable if they are in compliance with the requirements and standards established by local ordinance for that zone. However, for land use decisions concerning wind power generation projects, either:
(a) The local ordinance for that zone is consistent with the department of fish and wildlife's wind power guidelines; or
(b) The local jurisdiction prepared an environmental impact statement under chapter 43.21C RCW on the energy overlay zone; and
(i) The local ordinance for that zone requires project mitigation, as addressed in the environmental impact statement and consistent with local, state, and federal law;
(ii) The local ordinance for that zone requires site specific fish and wildlife and cultural resources analysis; and
(iii) The local jurisdiction has adopted an ordinance that addresses critical areas under chapter 36.70A RCW.
(4) If a local jurisdiction has taken action and adopted local ordinances consistent with subsection (3)(b) of this section, then wind power generation projects permitted consistently with the energy overlay zone are deemed to have adequately addressed their environmental impacts as required under chapter 43.21C RCW.
[ 2009 c 419 § 2; 1995 c 347 § 714.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.140 - Decision of the court.

RCW 36.70C.140
Decision of the court.
The court may affirm or reverse the land use decision under review or remand it for modification or further proceedings. If the decision is remanded for modification or further proceedings, the court may make such an order as it finds necessary to preserve the interests of the parties and the public, pending further proceedings or action by the local jurisdiction.
[ 1995 c 347 § 715.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.150 - Transferring judicial review to court of appeals.

RCW 36.70C.150
Transferring judicial review to court of appeals. (Expires June 30, 2026.)
(1) The superior court may transfer the judicial review of a land use decision to the court of appeals upon finding that all parties have consented to the transfer to the court of appeals and agreed that the judicial review can occur based upon an existing record. Transfer of cases pursuant to this section does not require the filing of a motion for discretionary review with the court of appeals.
(2) Upon stipulation and consent to transfer, the parties waive the right to seek an award of attorneys' fees and costs under RCW 4.84.370, except as may be awarded following an appeal to the supreme court.
(3) RCW 36.70C.090 does not apply to a matter transferred to the court of appeals pursuant to this section.
(4) This section expires June 30, 2026.
[ 2021 c 305 § 1.]
NOTES:
Effective date—2021 c 305: "Except for sections 5 and 6 of this act, this act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect 30 days after signed into law [June 13, 2021]." [ 2021 c 305 § 7.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.70C - Judicial Review of Land Use Decisions. › 36.70C.900 - Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347.

RCW 36.70C.900
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347.
See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.71 - Peddlers' and Hawkers' Licenses. › 36.71.010 - Peddler's license—"Peddler" defined.

RCW 36.71.010
Peddler's license—"Peddler" defined.
The term "peddler" for the purpose of this chapter includes all persons, both principals and agents, who go from place to place and house to house, carrying for sale and offering for sale or exposal for sale, goods, wares, or merchandise except agricultural, horticultural, or farm products, which they may grow or raise, and except vendors of books, periodicals, or newspapers: PROVIDED, That nothing in this chapter shall apply to peddlers within the limits of any city or town which by ordinance regulates the sale of goods, wares, or merchandise by peddlers.
[ 1963 c 4 § 36.71.010. Prior: 1929 c 110 § 1; 1909 c 214 § 1; RRS § 8353.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.71 - Peddlers' and Hawkers' Licenses. › 36.71.020 - Peddler's license—Application for and issuance of license.

RCW 36.71.020
Peddler's license—Application for and issuance of license.
Every peddler, before commencing business in any county of the state, shall apply in writing and under oath to the appropriate county official of the county in which he or she proposes to operate for a county license. The application must state the names and residences of the owners or parties in whose interest the business is to be conducted. The applicant at the same time shall file a true statement under oath of the quantity and value of the stock of goods, wares, and merchandise that is in the county for sale or to be kept or exposed for sale in the county, make a special deposit of five hundred dollars, and pay the county license fee as may be fixed under the authority of RCW 36.32.120(3).
The appropriate county official shall thereupon issue to the applicant a peddler's license, authorizing him or her to do business in the county for the term of one year from the date thereof. Every county license shall contain a copy of the application therefor, shall not be transferable, and shall not authorize more than one person to sell goods as a peddler, either by agent or clerk, or in any other way than his or her own proper person.
[ 2009 c 549 § 4121; 1985 c 91 § 3; 1963 c 4 § 36.71.020. Prior: 1927 c 89 § 1; 1909 c 214 § 3; RRS § 8355.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.71 - Peddlers' and Hawkers' Licenses. › 36.71.030 - Peddler's license—Record of applications.

RCW 36.71.030
Peddler's license—Record of applications.
The appropriate county official of each county shall keep on file all applications for peddlers' licenses that are issued. All files and records shall be in convenient form and open to public inspection.
[ 1985 c 91 § 4; 1963 c 4 § 36.71.030. Prior: 1909 c 214 § 4; RRS § 8356.]
2023 Revised Code of Washington › Title 36 - Counties › Chapter 36.71 - Peddlers' and Hawkers' Licenses. › 36.71.040 - Peddler's license—Cancellation of license.

RCW 36.71.040
Peddler's license—Cancellation of license.
Upon the expiration and return of a county license, the appropriate county official shall cancel it, indorse thereon the cancellation, and place it on file. After holding the special deposit of the licensee for a period of ninety days from the date of cancellation, he or she shall return the deposit or such portion as may remain in his or her hands after satisfying the claims made against it.
[ 2009 c 549 § 4122; 1985 c 91 § 5; 1963 c 4 § 36.71.040. Prior: 1909 c 214 § 5; RRS § 8357.]