Nicita v. City of Oregon City
Under ORS 227.180(1)(c), nothing prohibits a city from adopting local appeal fee enabling legislation by ordinance and setting its fee schedule by resolution, the fact that a city’s appeal fee is based on an estimate of average costs instead of an arithmetic average of prior costs provides no basis for reversal or remand, and local governments are afforded broad discretion in calculating and assessing local appeal fees.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Home Builders Association v. City of Eugene
Under ORS 197.312(5), when a city applies existing ADU standards for the first time to zones in which ADUs were not previously allowed, those existing standards are subject to review for compliance with the statute.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Kamps-Hughes v. City of Eugene
ORS 197.312(5) is not limited to only applications for statutory permits. Zone verification decisions must also comply with the statute’s requirement that limitations on accessory dwelling units be “reasonable local regulations relating to siting and design.”
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Watts v. Metro
For purposes of ORS 197.015(10)(a), important considerations for determining the finality of a decision include whether it is an exercise of the local government’s land use planning authority and the extent to which it is binding on the local government and others.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Fairmount Neighborhood Association v. City of Eugene
EC 9.8325(5) prohibits “grading” on portions of development sites that meet or exceed 20% slope, but it does not prohibit all development, site improvements, or soil disturbance, such as “excavation.”
Area(s) of Law:- Municipal Law
Warren v. Washington County
ORS 197.307(4) prohibits local governments from applying standards, conditions, and procedures that are not clear and objective to proposals for housing development, without regard to whether the property is “buildable land.”
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
MJAI Oregon 5 LLC v. Linn County
ORS 197.835(10)(a) requires reversal of a denial decision when LUBA determines that the local government lacks the discretion to deny the development application.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
A Walk on the Wild Side v. Washington County
The fact that an owner of property, zoned exclusive farm use, uses the property for permitted farm uses does not shield concurrent unpermitted uses from code enforcement action.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use