Skip to content
DWT logo
People Services Insights
About Offices Careers
Search
People
Services
Insights
About
Offices
Careers
Search
Insights

New Parks Impact Fee Not Offset by Prior Land Dedication

05.27.09
Share
Print this page
In a recent impact fees case, Belleau Woods v. City of Bellingham, the Division I Court of Appeals upheld the City of Bellingham’s application of a new park impact fee ordinance to a development that was already conditioned on a land dedication and payment under a separate parks-related development requirement. The Court reaffirmed its prior holdings that new impact fees can be applied to some developments that have already been approved, and that the doctrine of vesting did not protect the developer from the newly-created park impact fee. Based on its extensive analysis of the provisions of a development agreement and the municipal code, the court reversed the Superior Court on the impact fees issue. The Court reinstated the City Hearing Examiner’s decision that the City could apply the new impact fee and the prior park-related mitigation measures concurrently to the development. The Belleau Woods case highlights the importance of assessing all local code provisions that might require or authorize mitigation, even where separate code provisions seem to target similar development impacts.

Related Articles

2025
Feature
Financial Services
New Administration Outlook: Helping You Navigate Post-Election Uncertainty in 2025 and Beyond Read More External Link
06.06.25
Insights
Food + Beverage
Food Venture Financing News - Weekly Issue No. 239 Read More
06.05.25
Insights
Brand Protection & Advertising
Stay ADvised: 2025, Issue 11 Read More
DWT logo
©1996-2025 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Attorney Advertising. Not intended as legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Media Kit Affiliations Legal notices
Privacy policy Employees DWT Collaborate EEO
SUBSCRIBE
©1996-2025 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Attorney Advertising. Not intended as legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.