CAF Partners Properties, LLC, v. City of Jacksonville
Incorporating historic standards is inconsistent with the text and purpose of of JUDC 16.32.20(2), and therefore implausible.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Save Stafford Road v. Clackamas County
Under ORS 197.015, a Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) that is issued by a local government is not considered a “land use decision” subject to LUBA review if the project is deemed compatible with local regulations and will require further land use review.
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Kipp v. City of Astoria
"Petitioner has not established that the hearings officer's vested rights decision "violates a provision of applicable law and is prohibited as a matter of law." For reasons explained above, we remand the vested rights determination."
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use
Sane Orderly Development v. City of Roseburg
"Because the decisions have been submitted to DLCD for 8 acknowledgement under ORS 197.626(l)(b), LUBA ceases to have jurisdiction 9 over those submitted decisions or over matters arising out of those submitted 10 decisions unless the director of DLCD transfers matters to LUBA pursuant to OAR 661-025-0250(2)."
Area(s) of Law:- Land Use