Operator of drop-in center filed petitions for review of two orders of growth management hearings board, which found that city’s regulations restricting the siting of day use centers and overnight shelters serving people experiencing homelessness complied with city’s comprehensive growth management plan, and the Growth Management Act (GMA).
The Superior Court consolidated the two petitions and affirmed both the initial order and compliance order. Operator appealed.
The Court of Appeals held that:
- Determination of whether centers and shelters serving people experiencing homelessness were essential public facilities was a matter of local discretion;
- Prior to requesting that board declare center and shelters as essential public facilities under GMA, operator was required to request that city designate centers and shelters as essential public facilities under its local discretion;
- City’s regulation violate GMA provision prohibiting the preclusion of siting of essential public facilities;
- Substantial evidence supported board’s decision that city’s regulation complied with its comprehensive plan, as required under GMA;
- Substantial evidence supported board’s decision that regulation complied with policy in comprehensive plan that encouraged range of housing types and densities to meet needs of all economic sectors;
- City’s regulation complied with city’s policies addressing access to transit and pedestrian safety; and
- Centers and shelters were not “commercial uses,” and thus policy in city’s comprehensive plan regarding commercial uses in industrial areas did not apply to centers and shelters.