The City of Redmond v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that neither the current use of land nor the owner's intended use is conclusive in deciding whether land is 'agricultural land' under RCW 36.70A.030(2), overruling the Growth Management Hearings Board's contrary interpretation; land is 'devoted to' agricultural use if it is in an area where land is actually used or capable of being used for agricultural production. Nevertheless, the court upheld the Board's invalidation of Redmond's agricultural designations because RCW 36.70A.060(4) bars designation of land within an urban growth area as agricultural unless the city has enacted a transfer or purchase of development rights (TDR) program, and Redmond had none. The case was remanded to the Board for further proceedings, including the dependent housing density issue. Justice Madsen concurred in the result, and Justice Sanders, concurring, agreed the designation failed for lack of a TDR program but argued the majority's 'devoted to' definition contradicts the statute's plain meaning and is nonbinding dicta.