King County will seek Washington Supreme Court review of the recent Court of Appeals decision striking down a portion of King County's Clearing and Grading Code. Executive Ron Sims says the Appeals Court decision is not consistent with long-standing standards for how local governments regulate land use and zoning.

"If this ruling stands, it will have far reaching and negative impacts on local governments' ability to regulate land use to protect people, their property and their quality of life," said Sims. "The clearing and grading ordinance is based on scientific data that clearly shows negative impacts on people's well water, rivers and streams and neighboring properties from excessive clearing."

Executive Sims noted that the clearing requirements do not prevent anyone from building a home or other development consistent with local zoning, but rather prevented the wholesale clear-cutting of land absent another legitimate purpose such as farming or forestry. Sims and Councilman Dow Constantine worked with the Department of Development of Environmental Services to add flexibility to the regulations after feedback from property owners.

King County adopted the clearing and grading provisions as part of its 2004 Critical Areas regulations in response to mandates of the State's Growth Management Act. The Court of Appeals recognized that King County had documented the potentially significant harm that could be caused by excessive clearing. However, the Court concluded that state law required that these requirements must be implemented on a site-by-site basis.

Councilmember Dow Constantine, who chaired the King County Council's Growth Management Committee when this provision was adopted in 2004, supported Executive Sims' decision. He said "The science is clear: Excessive forest destruction harms our lakes, streams, and drinking water," and added "King County has both a legal and a moral obligation to our citizens to protect our environment, economy, and quality of life. The appellate court's ruling undermines our ability to meet that obligation, and threatens essential land use protections across the state."

In Citizens Alliance for Property Rights v. King County, the Court of Appeals found requirements that rural area property owners retain a certain amount of trees and other native vegetation on their property violated a state statute that governs the imposition of taxes, fees, and charges on development

After conferring with the Prosecutor, Executive Sims made the decision to appeal the ruling.

The uniform rules provide developers and the public with certainty and predictability while some flexibility is allowed. The Department of Development and Environmental Services is concerned that requiring more site-specific review of each development proposal would lead to slower review and increase the cost of development.