Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 47.52.133 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Except as provided in RCW 47.52.134, the department and the highway authorities of the counties and incorporated cities and towns, with regard to facilities under their respective jurisdictions, prior to the establishment of any limited access facility, shall hold a public hearing within the county, city, or town wherein the limited access facility is to be established to determine the desirability of the plan proposed by such authority. Notice of such hearing shall be given to the owners of property abutting the section of any existing highway, road, or street being established as a limited access facility, as indicated in the tax rolls of the county, and in the case of a state limited access facility, to the county and/or city or town. Such notice shall be by United States mail in writing, setting forth a time for the hearing, which time shall be not less than fifteen days after mailing of such notice. Notice of such hearing also shall be given by publication not less than fifteen days prior to such hearing in one or more newspapers of general circulation within the county, city, or town. Such notice by publication shall be deemed sufficient as to any owner or reputed owner or any unknown owner or owner who cannot be located. Such notice shall indicate a suitable location where plans for such proposal may be inspected.
Notes:
Effective date—2006 c 334: See note following RCW 47.01.051.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1967–1999 · leading case: Leschi Improvement Council v. Washington State High. Comm'n, 525 P.2d 774 (Wash. 1974).
Leschi Improvement Council v. Washington State High. Comm'n, 525 P.2d 774 (Wash. 1974). “Nowhere in our cases, in the federal cases, in the constitution of this state or the United States, or in any statute can I find authority for the courts of this state to entertain an action to review a limited access hearing at the instance of persons in the plaintiffs'…”
Union Elevator & Warehouse Co. v. State, 980 P.2d 779 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “080 provides: No existing public highway, road, or street shall be constructed as a limited access facility except upon the waiver, purchase, or condemnation of the abutting owner’s right of access thereto as herein provided. In cases involving existing highways, if the abutting…”
State v. Brannan, 530 P.2d 322 (Wash. 1975). “The petitioners, as abutting owners, were given notice of this hearing, pursuant to RCW 47.52.133. They attended and voiced their objections to the proposed route but did not propose a specific alternate route.”
State Ex Rel. Gunstone v. State High. Comm'n, 434 P.2d 734 (Wash. 1967). “Certain property owners who object to the location of an access road as proposed by the State, and insist that an alternate route is preferable, presented their views at a hearing before the State Highway Commission as provided by RCW 47.52.133. The Commission’s decision being…”
State v. Lauman, 490 P.2d 450 (Wash. Ct. App. 1971). “” RCW 47.52.133. Notice by publication is also required.”
In Re Puget Sound Power & Light Co., 625 P.2d 723 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). “See RCW 47.52.133. When a city desires to condemn property, it must do so by ordinance, thus involving hearings.”
State Ex Rel. Duvall v. City Council of City of Seattle, 429 P.2d 235 (Wash. 1967). “072 (now revised as RCW 47.52.133) and RCW 47.52.073 (now revised as RCW 47.”
Cont'l Sports Corp. v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 889 P.2d 506 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). “126; RCW 47.52.133; RCW 83.100.050. An intent to restrict the term "mail” to items carried by the United States Postal Service is more easily inferred from the latter statutes than from RCW 51.”
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.