Wash. Rev. Code » Title 36 · Chapter 36.70A

Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.390

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A county or city governing body that adopts a moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control without holding a public hearing on the proposed moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control, shall hold a public hearing on the adopted moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control within at least sixty days of its adoption, whether or not the governing body received a recommendation on the matter from the planning commission or department. If the governing body does not adopt findings of fact justifying its action before this hearing, then the governing body shall do so immediately after this public hearing. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control adopted under this section may be effective for not longer than six months, but may be effective for up to one year if a work plan is developed for related studies providing for such a longer period. A moratorium, interim zoning map, interim zoning ordinance, or interim official control may be renewed for one or more six-month periods if a subsequent public hearing is held and findings of fact are made prior to each renewal.
This section does not apply to the designation of critical areas, agricultural lands, forestlands, and mineral resource lands, under RCW 36.70A.170, and the conservation of these lands and protection of these areas under RCW 36.70A.060, prior to such actions being taken in a comprehensive plan adopted under RCW 36.70A.070 and implementing development regulations adopted under RCW 36.70A.120, if a public hearing is held on such proposed actions. This section does not apply to ordinances or development regulations adopted by a city that prohibit building permit applications for or the construction of transitional housing or permanent supportive housing in any zones in which residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed or prohibit building permit applications for or the construction of indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in any zones in which hotels are allowed.
[ 2021 c 254 s 5; 1992 c 207 s 6.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1995–2017 · leading case: Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2007) wash · cites it 12× “220 and RCW 36.70A.390 and stated that the City would hold a public hearing within 60 days and prepare findings of fact in accordance with those procedures.”
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2004) washctapp · cites it 6× “220 and RCW 36.70A.390, the City enacted Ordinance No.”
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2004) washctapp · cites it 5× “220 and RCW 36.70A.390 grant it broad authority to impose the moratorium.”
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2007) wash · cites it 14× “220 and RCW 36.70A.390 and stated that the City would hold a public hearing within 60 days and prepare findings of fact in accordance with those procedures.”
Matson v. Clark County Board of Commissioners (1995) washctapp · cites it 6× “RCW 36.70A.390 specifically authorizes interim zoning controls and moratoriums under the GMA.”
Skagit Surveyors v. FRIENDS OF SKAGIT (1998) wash “Although Ordinance 15372 purported to keep 14925 in effect until adoption of the comprehensive plan, RCW 36.70A.390 provides a six-month sunset provision for interim zoning ordinances.”
Skagit Surveyors & Engineers, LLC v. Friends of Skagit County (1998) wash “Although Ordinance 15372 purported to keep 14925 in effect until adoption of the comprehensive plan, RCW 36.70A.390 provides a six-month sunset provision for interim zoning ordinances.”
Kitsap Alliance v. Central Puget Bd. (2009) washctapp “The City relied on a GMA provision, RCW 36.70A.390, as its authority to issue each development moratorium.”
Kitsap Alliance of Property Owners v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board (2009) washctapp “The City relied on a GMA provision, RCW 36.70A.390, as its authority to issue each development moratorium.”
Wells v. WESTERN WASHINGTON GROWTH MGMT. (2000) washctapp “Kitsap County, supra, Order on Dispositive Motions, at 8. [31] Alpine v. Kitsap County, supra, Order on Dispositive Motions, at 9.”
Wells v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2000) washctapp “295(4)(b)(iii); RCW 36.70A.390. Black’s Law Dictionary 546 (7th ed.”
Holbrook, Inc. v. Clark County (2002) washctapp “alternatives considered in the environmental impact statement; (ii) The proposed change is within the scope of the alternatives available for public comment; (iii) The proposed change only corrects typographical errors, corrects cross-references, makes address or name changes,…”
Show all 14 citing cases →
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.