The doctrine of unconstitutional conditions redux
At a time when infill development appears to be the only area experiencing growth in an otherwise flat building environment, the Oregon Court of Appeals last month issued an important reminder to local...
View ArticleOregon (finally) begins to integrate water and land-use planning
The famous quote “Whiskey is for drinking; water is for fighting over,” attributed to Mark Twain, continues to resonate today. In the American West, water regimes have prompted lawsuits, mayhem and...
View ArticleFurther muddling of wine-related uses on farmland
In our May 2011 column we summarized existing legislation allowing wineries on land zoned for exclusive farm use (EFU), along with rather ambiguous limitations on “agri-tainment” events such as wine...
View ArticleArkansas vs. the federal government
On Oct. 3, the United States Supreme Court heard an unusual takings case, one brought by one public entity against another. Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States involves the state’s claim...
View ArticleJudge affirms $6.5M jury verdict against the city of Forest Grove
In fall 2011, a jury awarded David Hill Development $6.5 million against the city of Forest Grove for constitutional violations stemming from its delayed issuance of final approval for a subdivision....
View ArticleU.S. Supreme Court finds corps could be liable for government-induced flooding
In November, we noted a pending U.S. Supreme Court case, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States, which involved continual but temporary flooding of the Dave Donaldson Black River Wildlife...
View ArticleSupreme Court ponders off-site improvement obligations and takings
The U.S. Supreme Court case of Koontz v. St. Johns River Management District will require justices to decide whether government has the right to impose off-site conditions in return for permit approval.
View ArticleA Portland puzzle: residential parking and transit
In this month's Oregon Land Use column, attorneys Edward Sullivan and Carrie Richter take a close look at the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals' decision that brought to a halt construction on a...
View ArticleU.S. Supreme Court affirms EPA’s interpretation of Clean Water Act
Attorneys Ed Sullivan and Carrie Richter analyze the Supreme Courts' recent ruling in Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center, a decision that could indicate a change is on the horizon when it...
View ArticleOregon planning program approaching 40
The current Oregon land use program is nearly 40 years old. The fact that the program has survived is important. The programs of other states have not fared as well.
View ArticleCourt decision paves way for greater federal involvement in land use
On May 20, the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision affirming a sweeping declaratory ruling by the Federal Communications Commission that established a “shot clock” (or time limits) on...
View ArticleU.S. Supreme Court expands its take on Takings Clause
In a 5-4 decision last month, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a local government must make “rough proportionality” findings whether it approves or denies a development in those cases in...
View ArticleLegislature modifies Oregon land use program
While much of the attention on land use legislation in the 2013 Legislature focused upon wineries, employment lands in Hillsboro and budgets, significant changes also were made to the structure of...
View ArticleThe trouble with inadequate findings
Although not identified within the statutorily-prescribed scope of review of Oregon’s Land Use Board of Appeals, all decisions approving proposed development against particular criteria must include...
View ArticleThe importance of ‘raise it or waive it’
The 2013 Oregon Legislature had before it a proposal to apply “raise it or waive it” to legislative matters, plan amendments or land use ordinance revisions. The Legislature rejected this proposal,...
View ArticleExactions now include impact fees, but what else?
In Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, the U.S. Supreme Court held that monetary exactions, like requirements to dedicate real property, are subject to the nexus and rough...
View ArticleAnother win for Oregon regional problem-solving process
Many people in the Portland-metro area (particularly during elections) like to throw stones at Metro and bridle regional planning efforts. Given that undercurrent of resentment here, it is interesting...
View ArticleOregon Court of Appeals: Close doesn’t cut it
In our November 2010 column for the DJC we wrote about the agonizing 15-year odyssey endured by the city of Woodburn to amend its urban growth boundary (UGB) to include 409 additional acres,...
View ArticleOP-ED: Bring transportation options together
Oregon has a reputation for effective planning. However, when it comes to transportation planning, efforts often appear to be moving in different directions and at speeds slower than melting...
View ArticleOP-ED: Back to the future: the Metro reserves decision
Reserve designations for the Portland-metro region may soon be decided – for the moment at least.
View Article
More Pages to Explore .....