Dept. of Land Conservation v. Clackamas Co.

“After October 4, 2000, a local government’s requirements for minimum lot or parcel sizes in rural residential areas shall not be amended to allow a smaller minimum for any individual lot or parcel without taking an exception to Goal 14 pursuant to OAR chapter 660, division 14, and applicable requirements of this division.” OAR 660-004-0040(7).

Petitioners request judicial review of LUBA’s order to remand case for evaluation of the zone change under Goal 14. Petitioners assign error to LUBA, arguing that LUBA erred in their construction of OAR 660-004-0040(7) and misinterpreted the requirement of Goal 14. Petitioners further argue that LUBA lacked authority to remand the decision. Defendant’s respond that LUBA did have authority and correctly determined that the zone change needed to be evaluated under Goal 14. “After October 4, 2000, a local government’s requirements for minimum lot or parcel sizes in rural residential areas shall not be amended to allow a smaller minimum for any individual lot or parcel without taking an exception to Goal 14 pursuant to OAR chapter 660, division 14, and applicable requirements of this division.” OAR 660-004-0040(7). The Court reasoned that because Goal 14 applies to issues of density an amendment of an ordinance to upzone is the same as amending the ‘requirements for minimum lot or parcel size’. Therefore, LUBA’s order to remand case for evaluation the zone change under Goal 14 is affirmed.