What was the basis of the Courts decision?
Because it determined that the requirements to maintain forest cover were similar to a tax or fee, the Court of Appeals decided that state law requires a more individualized evaluation based on the impacts that a particular development will have. Exactly how “individualized” the evaluation must be – and whether a site-by-site review is required – was not clear from the opinion. King County’s regulation established a standard requirement based on lot size. This approach provided predictability for applicants, because they know what will be required when they apply for their permits.
