Community group appealed, under Land Use Petition Act (LUPA), decisions by hearing examiner for county department of planning and public works approving applicant’s planned development district and conditional use permit to build shared housing village to serve county’s chronically unhoused population and denying group’s motion for reconsideration.
The Superior Court affirmed examiner’s decisions. Group appealed.
The Court of Appeals held that:
- Applicant did not have to obtain purported easement owner’s consent prior to its application vesting;
- Group did not lack standing to challenge approval of application;
- Application did not fail to vest due to being inconsistent with maximum density allowed by county’s comprehensive plan; and
- County and applicant were entitled to award of attorney fees, as prevailing parties.