My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Appeal Final Order
>
OnTrack
>
ARB
>
2021
>
ARB 21-2
>
Appeal Final Order
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/19/2022 3:14:53 PM
Creation date
5/19/2022 3:14:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
ARB
File Year
21
File Sequence Number
2
Application Name
THE HARRY AND ETTA CHASE HOUSE
Document Type
Appeal Findings
Document_Date
5/19/2022
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Final Order: The Harry and Etta Chase House | HDM 21-1/ HA 21-3/ ARB 21-2 <br /> <br />2. Incorrect review process for Adjustment Review <br /> <br />Appellant’s Argument <br />Baker argues that the Historic Review Board has only four responsibilities, all of which are related to <br />historic and archaeological resources, historic properties, historic preservation, and National Register <br />nominations. Baker asserts that review of a Major Adjustment Review is not one of the allowed roles or <br />responsibilities of the Historic Review Board, making it necessary for the Final Order of the Board on the <br />Adjustment Review (ARB 21-2) to be rescinded and denied. <br /> <br />Planning Commission’s Determination <br />The Planning Commission finds that the Historic Review Board had the authority to, and an obligation to <br />reach a decision on the major adjustment review application as further described below. <br /> <br />The Historic Review Board is a standing committee of the Eugene Planning Commission and has powers <br />and duties that are specifically defined by EC 2.355(5). One of the listed powers and duties is to act on <br />applications concerning the demolition of historic properties. For reference, the code section is provided <br />below: <br /> <br />EC 2.355(5)(c): Act upon applications concerning moving or demolition of historic properties. <br /> <br />Additionally, Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code specifically lists the Historic Review Board as an appeal <br />review authority for Historic Demolition, Moving and Alteration requests (see EC Table 9.7055). While <br />the Board typically acts within this role, there is nothing in the Eugene Code that precludes the Board’s <br />ability to hold a public hearing and make an initial decision on a land use application. <br /> <br />As discussed above, OAR 660-023-0200(8) requires a local government to hold a public hearing for <br />requests to demolish National Register structures. Because the Historic Review Board can review land <br />use applications, is tasked with making decisions on demolition of historic properties, and is listed as the <br />appeal review authority for Type II decisions on historic demolitions, the Board was an appropriate body <br />to hold an initial hearing to satisfy the requirements of OAR 660-023-0200(8). <br /> <br />In addition to meeting the requirements of OAR 660-023-0200(8), the applicant also needed approval of <br />a Historic Demolition, Historic Alteration, and as will be further discussed, an Adjustment Review for <br />their application. EC 9.7055 states: “To accommodate a request for concurrent review, the city may <br />instead review multiple applications according to the highest applicable type.” Because the applicant <br />requested that their applications be reviewed concurrently, all applications went to a hearing before the <br />Historic Review Board. <br /> <br />To the point about whether review of the Adjustment Review is within the scope of the review of the <br />Board, it is important to understand why the adjustment was required in the first place. The approval <br />criteria for a Historic Alteration include a specific criterion that requires compliance with all applicable <br />standards. For ease of reference, this criterion is provided below: <br /> <br />EC 9.8175(9): The proposed alteration complies with all applicable standards or adjustments <br />thereto made pursuant to provisions beginning at EC 9.8015 of this land use code.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.