Appeal Materials (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Eugene Planning Commission May 7, 2018 Page 7 The HO just picked one of the range of theories offered by the City and opponents. It has no better legal legs than any of the others. More importantly, the HO offered no explanation for why her theory is legally correct; she just said it was so. The theory put forward by the City Attorney and adopted by the HO is that any land in the South Hills is automatically subject to the SHS at the time that it is annexed to the city. HO at 13 para 1, quoting City Attorney: "Consequently, as properties located south of 18th Avenue and above 500 feet annex into the City, they become subject to the SHS. The property that is the subject of this application is located within the City, south of 18th Avenue and above 500 feet; therefore, the property is now subject to the SHS, even if it would not have been subject to the SHS when the SHS was originally adopted." Why is that so? No one has offered an explanation, including the HO. There is no legal authority for that position offered or apparent.' The SHS does not say that property becomes subject to the SHS when it is annexed. Neither does the Metro Plan or the zoning code say that. Not only is this theory unsupported by any city law, this position is also contrary to state law. State law says that county plans and codes continue to apply to land even after the land is annexed to a city and until such time as the city changes those designations. ORS 215.130(2), The HO position conflicts with this statute. If the statute says that county plan and zone designations stay in place after annexation until the City changes then, then there can't be any automatic plan changes upon annexation. See April 6 Final Argument at 11. In summary, the HO decision reflects the following errors: a. There is no basis in law for the HO's conclusion that the SHS applies to properties automatically when they are annexed to the City no basis in the Metro Plan, the SHS, the code, or any other law. No basis is offered by the HO; none exists. b. The HO's theory that the.SHS sticks to South Hills properties automatically when they are annexed conflicts with state law that says county plan and zone designations remain in place after annexation until the City changes them. ORS 215.130(2). c. The HO erred in failing to find that changes to the plan designation require an affirmative act by a governing body with authority to take that action. Prior to 1987, the City only had planning authority to do this inside the city limits; the County did everything else. After 1987 the City had authority to plan and zone in the UGB. The HO references no decisions by the County or the City to apply the SHS to this site when either had planning authority for this site. ' If this theory is accurate, then it is also true that prior to annexation the SHS does not apply to a piece of property. Is the City OK with that position?