Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.050
Guidelines to classify agriculture, forest, and mineral lands and critical areas
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Subject to the definitions provided in RCW 36.70A.030, the department shall adopt guidelines, under chapter 34.05 RCW, no later than September 1, 1990, to guide the classification of: (a) Agricultural lands; (b) forestlands; (c) mineral resource lands; and (d) critical areas. The department shall consult with the department of agriculture regarding guidelines for agricultural lands, the department of natural resources regarding forestlands and mineral resource lands, and the department of ecology regarding critical areas.
(2) In carrying out its duties under this section, the department shall consult with interested parties, including but not limited to: (a) Representatives of cities; (b) representatives of counties; (c) representatives of developers; (d) representatives of builders; (e) representatives of owners of agricultural lands, forestlands, and mining lands; (f) representatives of local economic development officials; (g) representatives of environmental organizations; (h) representatives of special districts; (i) representatives of the governor's office and federal and state agencies; and (j) representatives of Indian tribes. In addition to the consultation required under this subsection, the department shall conduct public hearings in the various regions of the state. The department shall consider the public input obtained at such public hearings when adopting the guidelines.
(3) The guidelines under subsection (1) of this section shall be minimum guidelines that apply to all jurisdictions, but also shall allow for regional differences that exist in Washington state. The intent of these guidelines is to assist counties and cities in designating the classification of agricultural lands, forestlands, mineral resource lands, and critical areas under RCW 36.70A.170.
(4) The guidelines established by the department under this section regarding classification of forestlands shall not be inconsistent with guidelines adopted by the department of natural resources.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2023 · leading case: Quadrant Corp. v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board
Quadrant Corp. v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board (2005)
“See RCW 36.70A.050, .190. ¶13 Relevant here, the GMA, at its inception, was “riddled with politically necessary omissions, internal inconsistencies, and vague language.”
Quadrant Corp. v. STATE, GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BD. (2005)
“See RCW 36.70A.050, .190. ¶ 13 Relevant here, the GMA, at its inception, was "riddled with politically necessary omissions, internal inconsistencies, and vague language.”
Honesty in Environmental Analysis & Legislation (HEAL) v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board (1999)
“170 directs that cities and counties making designations of critical areas consider guidelines adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.050. The latter section designates who shall be consulted, but not what the substantive content of their testimony must address or include.”
Whidbey Environmental Action Network v. Island County (2004)
“” 26 And RCW 36.70A.050 allows for consideration of local conditions and the use of unspecified “innovative techniques” to achieve rural densities and uses.”
Manke Lumber Co., Inc. v. Diehl (1998)
“” RCW 36.70A.050 (emphasis added). The WAC guidelines for designating forest lands provide: In classifying forest land, counties and cities should use the private forest land grades of the department of revenue (WAC 458-40-530).”
Ferry County v. Growth Management Hearings Board (2014)
“(2) In making the designations required by this section, counties and cities shall consider the guidelines established pursuant to RCW 36.70A.050. RCW 36.70A.030 defines “critical areas”: (5) “Critical areas” include the following areas and ecosystems: (a) Wetlands; (b) areas…”
Thurston County v. WESTERN WASH. BD. (2007)
“RCW 36.70A.050, .170(1)(a). In making this designation, counties must consider guidelines established by the Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development.”
Thurston County v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2007)
“RCW 36.70A.050, .170(l)(a). In making this designation, counties must consider guidelines established by the Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development (Department).”
Yakima County v. Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2008)
“The question for this court is whether the Board erred by concluding that the actions of the County were clearly erroneous.”
Ferry County v. Concerned Friends of Ferry County (2004)
“RCW 36.70A.050; RCW 36.70A.060. The critical area at issue here comprises fish and wildlife conservation habitat.”
Ferry County v. Concerned Friends (2004)
“RCW 36.70A.050, .060. The critical area at issue here comprises fish and wildlife conservation habitat.”
Yakima County v. Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2008)
“RCW 36.70A.050, .060, .170. “Resource lands” are also referred to as “natural resource lands” and include agricultural lands, forest lands, mineral resource lands, and critical areas.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.050(1) — 3 cases
Yakima County v. Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2008)
“The question for this court is whether the Board erred by concluding that the actions of the County were clearly erroneous.”
Yakima County v. Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2008)
“RCW 36.70A.050, .060, .170. “Resource lands” are also referred to as “natural resource lands” and include agricultural lands, forest lands, mineral resource lands, and critical areas.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.050(3) — 1 case
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.