Passed by the Senate April 22, 2009 YEAS 48   BRAD OWEN ________________________________________ President of the Senate Passed by the House April 7, 2009 YEAS 98   FRANK CHOPP ________________________________________ Speaker of the House of Representatives | I, Thomas Hoemann, Secretary of the Senate of the State of Washington, do hereby certify that the attached is SENATE BILL 5107 as passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on the dates hereon set forth. THOMAS HOEMANN ________________________________________ Secretary | |
Approved May 8, 2009, 10:58 a.m. CHRISTINE GREGOIRE ________________________________________ Governor of the State of Washington | May 11, 2009 Secretary of State State of Washington |
State of Washington | 61st Legislature | 2009 Regular Session |
Read first time 01/14/09. Referred to Committee on Environment, Water & Energy.
AN ACT Relating to energy overlay zones; and amending RCW 36.70C.020 and 36.70C.130.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
Sec. 1 RCW 36.70C.020 and 1995 c 347 s 703 are each amended to
read as follows:
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in
this section apply throughout this chapter.
(1) "Energy overlay zone" means a formal plan enacted by the county
legislative authority that establishes suitable areas for siting
renewable resource projects based on currently available resources and
existing infrastructure with sensitivity to adverse environmental
impact.
(2) "Land use decision" means a final determination by a local
jurisdiction's body or officer with the highest level of authority to
make the determination, including those with authority to hear appeals,
on:
(a) An application for a project permit or other governmental
approval required by law before real property may be improved,
developed, modified, sold, transferred, or used, but excluding
applications for permits or approvals to use, vacate, or transfer
streets, parks, and similar types of public property; excluding
applications for legislative approvals such as area-wide rezones and
annexations; and excluding applications for business licenses;
(b) An interpretative or declaratory decision regarding the
application to a specific property of zoning or other ordinances or
rules regulating the improvement, development, modification,
maintenance, or use of real property; and
(c) The enforcement by a local jurisdiction of ordinances
regulating the improvement, development, modification, maintenance, or
use of real property. However, when a local jurisdiction is required
by law to enforce the ordinances in a court of limited jurisdiction, a
petition may not be brought under this chapter.
(((2))) (3) "Local jurisdiction" means a county, city, or
incorporated town.
(((3))) (4) "Person" means an individual, partnership, corporation,
association, public or private organization, or governmental entity or
agency.
(5) "Renewable resources" has the same meaning provided in RCW
19.280.020.
Sec. 2 RCW 36.70C.130 and 1995 c 347 s 714 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) The superior court, acting without a jury, shall review the
record and such supplemental evidence as is permitted under RCW
36.70C.120. The court may grant relief only if the party seeking
relief has carried the burden of establishing that one of the standards
set forth in (a) through (f) of this subsection has been met. The
standards are:
(a) The body or officer that made the land use decision engaged in
unlawful procedure or failed to follow a prescribed process, unless the
error was harmless;
(b) The land use decision is an erroneous interpretation of the
law, after allowing for such deference as is due the construction of a
law by a local jurisdiction with expertise;
(c) The land use decision is not supported by evidence that is
substantial when viewed in light of the whole record before the court;
(d) The land use decision is a clearly erroneous application of the
law to the facts;
(e) The land use decision is outside the authority or jurisdiction
of the body or officer making the decision; or
(f) The land use decision violates the constitutional rights of the
party seeking relief.
(2) In order to grant relief under this chapter, it is not
necessary for the court to find that the local jurisdiction engaged in
arbitrary and capricious conduct. A grant of relief by itself may not
be deemed to establish liability for monetary damages or compensation.
(3) Land use decisions made by a local jurisdiction concerning
renewable resource projects within a county energy overlay zone are
presumed to be reasonable if they are in compliance with the
requirements and standards established by local ordinance for that
zone. However, for land use decisions concerning wind power generation
projects, either:
(a) The local ordinance for that zone is consistent with the
department of fish and wildlife's wind power guidelines; or
(b) The local jurisdiction prepared an environmental impact
statement under chapter 43.21C RCW on the energy overlay zone; and
(i) The local ordinance for that zone requires project mitigation,
as addressed in the environmental impact statement and consistent with
local, state, and federal law;
(ii) The local ordinance for that zone requires site specific fish
and wildlife and cultural resources analysis; and
(iii) The local jurisdiction has adopted an ordinance that
addresses critical areas under chapter 36.70A RCW.
(4) If a local jurisdiction has taken action and adopted local
ordinances consistent with subsection (3)(b) of this section, then wind
power generation projects permitted consistently with the energy
overlay zone are deemed to have adequately addressed their
environmental impacts as required under chapter 43.21C RCW.