Richardi v. City of Eugene

A final legal determination on a land use matter shall stand in later proceedings if not successfully challenged in prior proceedings.

Petitioners appeal a hearings officer’s decision approving an application to develop an outdoor athletic field and neighborhood center on property zoned Public Lands (PL). The subject property is comprised of approximately 9.3 acres designated medium density residential (R-2) in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. In 2009, the previous owner sold the property to intervenor. In 2015, intervenor applied for a zone verification, which explained that both of its intended uses were outright permitted uses in the PL zone. In 2017, intervenor applied for site review, adjustment review, and traffic impact analysis review for the construction of its facilities. The city approved the application with conditions. This appeal followed.

In its first assignment of error, petitioners argue the city erred in finding that the proposed uses are allowed in the PL zone. Petitioners argue the city misclassified intervenor’s intended uses which, in petitioner’s view, are more appropriately classified together as an “Athletic Facility and Sports Club,” which is permitted in the employment and commercial zones, but not in the PL zone. The city concluded, and LUBA agrees, that this argument constitutes an impermissible collateral attack on the 2015 zone verification. Because a final legal determination on a land use matter shall stand in later proceedings if not successfully challenged in prior proceedings, the 2015 zone verification cannot be collaterally attacked in the present appeal. However, even if petitioners were not precluded from raising issues regarding the permissibility of the proposed uses, LUBA agrees with the city’s classification of the proposed uses. The first assignment of error is therefore denied and the city’s decision is AFFIRMED.