Laserfiche WebLink
1 RCW 36.70A.110 governs the identification of urban growth areas; in that regard, <br /> 2 WAC 365-196-310(3) establishes procedures for establishing urban growth areas requires <br /> 3 consultation with each city located within a county's boundaries, and WAC 365-196-310(4) <br /> 4 (c)(v) concerning establishment of urban growth areas, requires that UGAs should not be <br /> 5 expanded into agricultural lands unless no other option is available. <br /> 6 <br /> 7 RCW 36.70A.130 sets out the review procedures and schedules for comprehensive <br /> 8 plan amendments. <br /> 9 RCW 36.70A.170 requires counties and cities to designate agricultural lands <br /> 10 consistent with the guidelines promulgated under RCW 36.70A.050, above. <br /> 11 RCW 36.70A.177 identifies innovative zoning techniques and accessory uses for <br /> 12 agricultural lands. <br /> 13 <br /> 14 V. LEGAL ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION <br /> 15 Issue 1. Petitioners assert that in enacting Ordinance 468, the County did not comply <br /> 16 with GMA in the application of criteria for designating and de-designating agricultural <br /> 17 lands.13 <br /> 18 <br /> Designating and de-designating agricultural lands <br /> 19 <br /> 20 Petitioners argue the application for the comprehensive plan change approved here <br /> 21 "does not meet the test for de-designating farmland set forth by appellate courts in Lewis <br /> 22 County v. Hearings Board, 157 Wash. 2d 488 (2006) or Clark County v. W. Wash. Growth <br /> 23 Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 161 Wash. App. 204 (2011).14 <br /> 24 <br /> 25 <br /> 26 <br /> 27 13 Issue 1. Does Ordinance No. 468 meet the GMA criteria for de-designating agricultural lands set forth in <br /> 28 RCW 36.70A.030(2), RCW 36.70A.030 (11); RCW 36.70A.050, RCW 36.70A.060, RCW 36.70A.110, RCW <br /> 29 36.70A.170, RCW 36.70A.177and RCW 36.70A.190 and Lewis County v. W. Wash. Hearings Bd., 157 Wn.2d <br /> 488 (2006) (County must apply factors enumerated in WAC 365-190-050 in determining which lands have <br /> 30 long-term commercial significance), Clark County v. W. Wash. Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 161 Wn. App. 204 <br /> 31 (2011), <br /> vacated in part, 177 Wn.2d 136 (2013) (Absent a showing that the original designation was erroneous and <br /> 32 improperly confirmed by the hearings board or that a substantial change in the land area has occurred since <br /> the original designation, the original designation should remain) and WAC 365-190-050? <br /> 14 Petitioners Prehearing Brief at 4. <br /> FINAL DECISION AND ORDER Growth Management Hearings Board <br /> Case No. 18-1-0001 1111 Israel Road SW,Suite 301 <br /> July 2,2018 P.O. Box 40953 <br /> Page 5 of 17 Olympia,WA 98504-0953 <br /> Phone:360-664-9170 <br /> Fax: 360-586-2253 <br />