Oakleigh-McClure Neighbors v. City of Eugene

Notice of intent to appeal is effectively filed, for purposes of determining the timeliness of a motion to intervene under ORS 197.830(7) by a person required under OAR 661-010-0015(2) to be served with the notice, on the date of that service.

Petitioners Paul Conte and Simon Trautman sought judicial review of a final order by the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), which granted approval to Oakleigh Meadows Co-Housing, LLC (Applicant) for a tentative planned unit development. Applicant applied for approval of a multi-unit residential development. Trautman did not appear at the hearing but wrote a letter opposing the development. The application was approved, but Trautman did not receive notice of the decision. The City subsequently realized they failed to send notice and notified all those who were entitled, including Trautman. Truatman, within 21 days of getting his notice, moved to intervene. Applicant opposed as being untimely. LUBA ultimately denied the motion to intervene and Trautman sought judicial review. Trautman argues that the denial of the motion to intervene was in error. The Court found that LUBA erred in denying the motion to intervene because Trautman timely filed his motion within 21 days of receiving his notice.