M & T Partners, Inc. v. Miller

Under ORS 197.829, LUBA "'shall affirm a local government interpretation of its comprehensive plan and land use regulations,' unless LUBA finds that specified conditions are satisfied."

Petitioners sought judicial review of a Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) final order.  Petitioners assigned error to LUBA's refusal to defer to the City's interpretation of prior comprehensive plan and zone change approval.  Petitioners argued that LUBA was required to affirm the City's decision to deny the plan based on the City's 2007 rezoning decision in the site review process.  Respondents argued that no deference was required because "the [C]ity was not interpreting its comprehensive plan or land use regulations; rather, the [C]ity was applying the plain text of the 2007 rezone decision as it considered the site plan proposed by them in 2018."  Under ORS 197.829, LUBA "'shall affirm a local government interpretation of its comprehensive plan and land use regulations,' unless LUBA finds that specified conditions are satisfied."  The Court held that "LUBA did not err in concluding that condition 14 constituted the 'totality of the limits that the city placed on future development on the property' and that the proposed development was in compliance with that condition."  Affirmed.