Mega warehouse project near Puyallup leads to two new lawsuits against the city
A lengthy legal battle over a proposed mega-warehouse project near Puyallup just got more complicated.
The Puyallup Tribe and the developer of the project, Running Bear Development Partners and Knutson Farm, are both appealing the city of Puyallup’s final environmental impact statement. The city released the statement on May 30.
The tribe filed a lawsuit against the city and the developer on June 12 and the developer filed its lawsuit against the city on June 13, both in Pierce County Superior Court.
This is the latest development in a lengthy legal battle over the project that stretches back to 2014.
The lawsuits challenge the city’s environmental impact statement and ask the court to review it for compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act and other laws.
“[We want] this Court [to] determine that the EIS is erroneous, inaccurate and defective,” the developer’s lawsuit says.
The tribe’s lawsuit asks the court to order the city to fix the errors in the environmental impact statement before any permits involving the project are issued.
Asked about the lawsuits, the city of Puyallup told The News Tribune in a statement that it “stands firmly behind the integrity and thoroughness of its environmental review process.”
It’s not clear when construction could start, but court documents estimate that building all seven warehouses that are proposed would take 7-10 years after permits are approved.
What is the project?
The seven-warehouse project would sit on Knutson Farm land between Shaw Road East and the Puyallup River. The seven warehouses would be 2.6 million square feet in total across 164 acres, with 38 acres of that land being set aside for “open space, critical area, and floodplain preservation,” according to city documents.
The project is in unincorporated Pierce County, which means the county is the primary agency in charge of permitting. However, it does sit in the city of Puyallup’s urban growth area, which identifies areas in and around Puyallup that are expecting growth in the next few decades.
The News Tribune previously reported that Pierce County first got the application for the project in 2014. Pierce County said an environmental impact study wasn’t necessary as long as the developer implemented certain measures to prevent environmental harm – but the city of Puyallup insisted on an environmental impact statement.
In 2019, the courts sided with the city of Puyallup, saying the city had the right to conduct an environmental impact statement. The State Environmental Policy Act generally requires cities and counties to review the impacts a project would have on the environment before it can move forward with permitting.
Court documents say the city started its environmental review in February 2020, released its draft environmental impact statement in December 2023 and released the final statement in May 2025.
Why is the developer appealing the city’s environmental statement?
In separate lawsuits, the developer of the project and the Puyallup Tribe are both appealing the city’s final environmental impact statement. Margaret Archer, attorney for the developer, told The News Tribune in an email that the lawsuits will be consolidated into one appeal. An initial hearing in the developer’s case is scheduled for Aug. 8, according to court records.
“Puyallup has opposed the project for years despite the fact the site has been zoned to permit the warehouse use,” Archer wrote. “Puyallup was required to expeditiously prepare an impartial environmental impact analysis. Instead, they took five years, and at our expense of over $1.5 million, produced a document that focuses attention on Puyallup codes and wishes, even though [the] project is in Pierce County and the county is the primary permitting agency.”
In court documents, the developer said the public comment period for the city’s draft environmental impact statement ended on March 15, 2024. After that, state law required the city to release its final environmental impact statement within 60 days – but instead, the city didn’t release its final statement until 14 months later, the lawsuit alleges.
The developer also said the city of Puyallup shut them out of the environmental review process, as well as Pierce County.
“On multiple occasions, petitioners expressed to Puyallup, in writing, their concerns about their exclusions from the process,” the lawsuit alleges. “Puyallup’s persistent exclusion was surprising, since it is commonplace and expected for a lead agency to collaborate with the applicant and, at the very least, afford the applicant significant and meaningful opportunity to participate in the review process beyond the requisite public comment period.”
Finally, the developer said the city required mitigation measures that aren’t possible for them to do.
“For example, the city identifies traffic improvement projects which require obtaining right-of-way which petitioners do not have the legal authority to accomplish,” the lawsuit says.
Why is the tribe appealing the city’s environmental impact statement?
The Medicine Creek Treaty gives the Puyallup Tribe the right to fish in the Puyallup River. In court documents, the tribe says the project impacts this right.
“[The project] is located within the Tribe’s Usual and Accustomed area and impacts the Puyallup River upstream from the Tribe’s jurisdiction, specifically jurisdiction to regulate water quality within the Puyallup River,” court documents say. “The proposed project will impact its right to take fish and shellfish.”
In its environmental impact statement, the city of Puyallup proposed an alternative that would reduce the project’s footprint by 35%. The tribe said that option would still have “significant unavoidable impacts.”
The Puyallup Tribe also said there was a second alternative to reduce the footprint by 70%, but the city rejected it because there was no land use policy to support it.
“The Rejected Alternative should have been included in the FEIS to analyze any further reduction in Significant Unavoidable Impacts,” the lawsuit says.
Later in the complaint, the tribe also expressed concerns about the project placing buildings and parking lots in erosion zones. Finally, the tribe alleges the city did not follow the Endangered Species Act by getting permits under that law or by looking into how the project will impact fish in the Puyallup River.
“[The environmental impact statement] fails to adequately analyze, or provide adequate mitigation for, the impacts from improperly maintained stormwater structures or from ongoing erosion issues on the Puyallup River or species listed under the ESA,” the lawsuit says.
In her email to The News Tribune, Archer said the developer has been working with the tribe to come to an agreement.
“Earlier in the process (in 2018) the tribe filed an appeal and the developer settled that by agreeing to water quality measures above and beyond what the codes required,” Archer wrote. “We are optimistic we can satisfy tribal concerns. We have worked cooperatively with tribal biologists in the past. In fact, the storm outfall for the project is already constructed and the tribe played an important role in the planning for that.”
The News Tribune reached out to an attorney with the tribe for comment, but did not receive a response.
‘An appropriate middle ground’
In a statement sent to The News Tribune, the city of Puyallup said it stands by its report because it believes it did what it could to protect Puyallup’s environment.
“[The project] is directly adjacent to the environmentally sensitive Puyallup River — a critical habitat for protected fish species. The project’s scope includes significant wetland impacts and would introduce substantial commercial truck traffic to an already congested road network,” the statement said. “The [environmental impact statement] identified, among other areas of the environment studied under the [statement], probable Significant Adverse Impacts related to wetlands, water quality, aquatic habitats, erosion, noise, visual/aesthetics, and transportation.”
The city also addressed concerns from the tribe and developer over the delay in compiling the report.
“Both appeals also raise a procedural timing issue that stems from the unique circumstance of the city preparing an EIS for a project where the county holds initial permitting authority. The city is actively working with all parties to address these procedural matters,” the statement said.
The city called its environmental impact statement “an appropriate middle ground,” since the developer thinks it’s too restrictive and the tribe thinks it doesn’t go far enough in protecting the environment.
“We are confident the [statement] represents a reasonable and comprehensive, evidence-based analysis that appropriately balances development considerations with our responsibility to protect critical natural resources and community interests,” the statement said.
The News Tribune archives contributed to this report.
