Wash. Rev. Code § 35A.63.100
Municipal authority
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
After approval of the comprehensive plan in accordance with provisions of this chapter, the legislative body, in developing the municipality and in regulating the use of land, may implement or give effect to the comprehensive plan or parts thereof by ordinance or other action to such extent as the legislative body deems necessary or appropriate. Such ordinances or other action may provide for:
(1) Adoption of an official map and regulations relating thereto designating locations and requirements for one or more of the following: Streets, parks, public buildings, and other public facilities, and protecting such sites against encroachment by buildings and other physical structures.
(2)(a)(i) Dividing the municipality, or portions thereof, into appropriate zones within which specific standards, requirements, and conditions may be provided for regulating: The use of public and private land, buildings, and structures; the location, height, bulk, number of stories, and size of buildings and structures; size of yards, courts, and open spaces; density of population; ratio of land area to the area of buildings and structures; setbacks; area required for off-street parking; protection of access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems; and such other standards, requirements, regulations, and procedures as are appropriately related thereto.
(ii) Eliminating the minimum gross floor area requirements for single-family detached dwellings or reducing the requirements below the minimum performance standards and objectives contained in the state building code.
(b) The ordinance encompassing the matters of this subsection (2) is hereinafter called the "zoning ordinance." No zoning ordinance, or amendment thereto, shall be enacted by the legislative body without at least one public hearing, notice of which shall be given as set forth in RCW 35A.63.070. Such hearing may be held before the planning agency or the board of adjustment or such other body as the legislative body shall designate.
(3) Adoption of design standards, requirements, regulations, and procedures for the subdivision of land into two or more parcels, including, but not limited to, the approval of plats, dedications, acquisitions, improvements, and reservation of sites for public use.
(4) Scheduling public improvements on the basis of recommended priorities over a period of years, subject to periodic review.
(5) Such other matters as may be otherwise authorized by law or as the legislative body deems necessary or appropriate to effectuate the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan or parts thereof and the purposes of this chapter.
Notes:
Severability—1979 ex.s. c 170: See note following RCW 64.04.140.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1974–2008 · leading case: Isla Verde International Holdings, Inc. v. City of Camas
Isla Verde International Holdings, Inc. v. City of Camas (2002)
“The City also relies on RCW 35A.63.100 as authority for its 30 percent open space condition.”
Southwick, Inc. v. City of Lacey (1990)
“110; 6 to impose restrictions on the use of land, and, inter alia, the type, height and bulk of buildings, RCW 35A.63.100, 7 and to condition any governmental action on the basis of appropriate environmental policies.”
Sammamish Community Council v. City of Bellevue (2001)
“” RCW 35A.63.100(2). The councils argue that Ordinance 5081 is a zoning ordinance under the above definition because it divides the City into geographic “zones” and regulates land within each area.”
Responsible Urban Growth Group v. City of Kent (1994)
“*385 RCW 35A.63.100(2). RCW 35A.63.070 requires that the: time, place, and purpose of such public hearing shall be given as provided by ordinance and including at least one publication in a newspáper of general circulation delivered in the code city and in the official gazette,…”
Zehring v. City of Bellevue (1985)
“2d 1374 (1974) (construing RCW 35A.63.100 which sets forth zoning powers of the city).”
Citizens' Alliance for Property Rights v. Sims (2008)
“110 or RCW 35A.63.100 authorize the city’s open space set aside requirement and concluding they do not).”
Lutz v. City of Longview (1974)
“RCW 35A.63.100. Obviously the state has vested the authority to zone and rezone solely in the city council.”
SAMMAMISH COUNCIL v. City of Bellevue (2001)
“RCW 35A.63.100(2). The councils argue that Ordinance 5081 is a zoning ordinance under the above definition because it divides the City into geographic "zones" and regulates land within each area.”
Hispanic Taco Vendors of Washington v. City of Pasco (1991)
“020; RCW 35A.63.100; and RCW 35A.21.160. The Vendors do not question the Council’s police powers.”
Isla Verde Intern. Holdings v. CAMAS (2002)
“The City also relies on RCW 35A.63.100 as authority for its 30 percent open space condition.”
CAPR v. Sims (2008)
“110 or RCW 35A.63.100 authorize the city's open space set aside requirement, and concluding they do not).”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 35A.63.100(2) — 5 cases
Isla Verde International Holdings, Inc. v. City of Camas (2002)
“The City also relies on RCW 35A.63.100 as authority for its 30 percent open space condition.”
Sammamish Community Council v. City of Bellevue (2001)
“” RCW 35A.63.100(2). The councils argue that Ordinance 5081 is a zoning ordinance under the above definition because it divides the City into geographic “zones” and regulates land within each area.”
Responsible Urban Growth Group v. City of Kent (1994)
“*385 RCW 35A.63.100(2). RCW 35A.63.070 requires that the: time, place, and purpose of such public hearing shall be given as provided by ordinance and including at least one publication in a newspáper of general circulation delivered in the code city and in the official gazette,…”
SAMMAMISH COUNCIL v. City of Bellevue (2001)
“RCW 35A.63.100(2). The councils argue that Ordinance 5081 is a zoning ordinance under the above definition because it divides the City into geographic "zones" and regulates land within each area.”
Isla Verde Intern. Holdings v. CAMAS (2002)
“The City also relies on RCW 35A.63.100 as authority for its 30 percent open space condition.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.