Washington § 14.12.200 - Judicial review.

(1) Any person aggrieved, or taxpayer affected, by any decision of the board of adjustment, or any governing body of a political subdivision or any joint airport zoning board which is of the opinion that a decision of a board of adjustment is illegal, may present to the superior court of the county in which the airport is located a verified petition setting forth that the decision is illegal, in whole or in part, and specifying the grounds of the illegality. Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty days after the decision is filed in the office of the board.

(2) Upon presentation of such petition the court may allow a writ of review directed to the board of adjustment to review such decision of the board. The allowance of the writ shall not stay proceedings upon the decision appealed from, but the court may, on application, on notice to the board and on due cause shown, grant a supersedeas.

(3) The board of adjustment shall not be required to return the original papers acted upon by it, but it shall be sufficient to return certified or sworn copies thereof or of such portions thereof as may be called for by the writ. The return shall concisely set forth such other facts as may be pertinent and material to show the grounds of the decision appealed from and shall be verified.

(4) The court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to affirm, modify, or set aside the decision brought up for review, in whole or in part, and if need be, to order further proceedings by the board of adjustment. The findings of fact by the board, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be accepted by the court as conclusive, and no objection to a decision of the board shall be considered by the court unless such objection shall have been urged before the board, or, if it was not so urged, unless there were reasonable grounds for failure to do so.

(5) Costs shall not be allowed against the board of adjustment unless it appears to the court that it acted with gross negligence, in bad faith, or with malice, in making the decision appealed from.

(6) In any case in which airport zoning regulations adopted under this chapter, although generally reasonable, are held by a court to interfere with the use or enjoyment of a particular structure or parcel of land to such extent, or to be so onerous in their application to such a structure or parcel of land, as to constitute a taking or deprivation of that property in violation of the Constitution of this state or the Constitution of the United States, such holding shall not affect the application of such regulations to other structures and parcels of land.