Oral Argument October 22, 2014
Reconsideration denied January 15, 2015.
Appeal from Chelan Superior Court. Docket No: 13-2-00793-7. Judge signing: Honorable Lesley a Allan. Judgment or order under review. Date filed: 12/17/2013.
Michelle A. Green, for appellant.
Kenneth W. Harper (of Menke Jackson Beyer LLP ); and Quentin D. Batjer (of Davis Arneil Law Firm LLP ), for respondent.
Concurring: Robert E. Lawrence-Berrey, Kevin M. Korsmo.
[184 Wn.App. 928] Stephen M. Brown,
[¶1] In this land use case, developer Naumes Inc. appeals a second trial court's decision denying its motion to compel arbitration under a development agreement between it and the city of Chelan (City) concerning an industrial and commercial development. In 2003, the City approved a planned development rezone and general binding site plan (GBSP) for Naumes' property. In 2012, Naumes submitted a specific binding site plan (SBSP) for a particular lot showing a road plan deviating from the GBSP. The City rejected what it considered a nonconforming SBSP. Naumes initially filed an administrative appeal and a first lawsuit to compel arbitration. The first trial court denied Naumes' arbitration request and deferred to the hearing examiner, who affirmed the City's determination. This second lawsuit followed. Naumes contends the second trial court (the same court, Judge Lesley A. Allan) erred in [184 Wn.App. 929] denying its arbitration request because, it argues, the parties' development agreement, in essence, supplants the City's land use ordinance process that would otherwise be required to modify or alter a GBSP. We disagree with Naumes and affirm.
[¶2] Naumes is a developer and owner of a 198-acre property located in Chelan known as the Apple Blossom Center (the Property). In March 2003, the parties entered into a development agreement. The agreement included an arbitration provision:
16. Review Procedures and Standards for Implementing Decisions. Review and resolution of disputes by the Parties, their successors and assigns, shall be resolved by arbitration as follows: In the event the Parties cannot agree on any matter set out in this Agreement, they shall promptly consult together and attempt to resolve the dispute. In the event they cannot agree upon a resolution of the dispute, the same shall be settled by arbitration pursuant to Chapter 7.04 RCW et. seq. except as herein modified.
Clerk's Papers (CP) at 295. The agreement stated, " Naumes and the City desire that the future development of the Property be consistent with land use and development regulations of the City now existing or hereafter adopted." CP at 280. Thus, property development was required to be consistent with the City's GBSP process. The development GBSP includes a placement of streets, roads, improvements, utilities, open spaces, and other features of the ...