2017 ORS 197.365¹
Application for expedited land division
  • notice requirements
  • procedure

Unless the applicant requests to use the procedure set forth in a comprehensive plan and land use regulations, a local government shall use the following procedure for an expedited land division, as described in ORS 197.360 (“Expedited land division” defined):

(1)(a) If the application for expedited land division is incomplete, the local government shall notify the applicant of exactly what information is missing within 21 days of receipt of the application and allow the applicant to submit the missing information. For purposes of computation of time under this section, the application shall be deemed complete on the date the applicant submits the requested information or refuses in writing to submit it.

(b) If the application was complete when first submitted or the applicant submits the requested additional information within 180 days of the date the application was first submitted, approval or denial of the application shall be based upon the standards and criteria that were applicable at the time the application was first submitted.

(2) The local government shall provide written notice of the receipt of the completed application for an expedited land division to any state agency, local government or special district responsible for providing public facilities or services to the development and to owners of property within 100 feet of the entire contiguous site for which the application is made. The notification list shall be compiled from the most recent property tax assessment roll. For purposes of appeal to the referee under ORS 197.375 (Appeal of decision on application for expedited land division), this requirement shall be deemed met when the local government can provide an affidavit or other certification that such notice was given. Notice shall also be provided to any neighborhood or community planning organization recognized by the governing body and whose boundaries include the site.

(3) The notice required under subsection (2) of this section shall:

(a) State:

(A) The deadline for submitting written comments;

(B) That issues that may provide the basis for an appeal to the referee must be raised in writing prior to the expiration of the comment period; and

(C) That issues must be raised with sufficient specificity to enable the local government to respond to the issue.

(b) Set forth, by commonly used citation, the applicable criteria for the decision.

(c) Set forth the street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject property.

(d) State the place, date and time that comments are due.

(e) State a time and place where copies of all evidence submitted by the applicant will be available for review.

(f) Include the name and telephone number of a local government contact person.

(g) Briefly summarize the local decision-making process for the expedited land division decision being made.

(4) After notice under subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the local government shall:

(a) Provide a 14-day period for submission of written comments prior to the decision.

(b) Make a decision to approve or deny the application within 63 days of receiving a completed application, based on whether it satisfies the substantive requirements of the local government’s land use regulations. An approval may include conditions to ensure that the application meets the applicable land use regulations. For applications subject to this section, the local government:

(A) Shall not hold a hearing on the application; and

(B) Shall issue a written determination of compliance or noncompliance with applicable land use regulations that includes a summary statement explaining the determination. The summary statement may be in any form reasonably intended to communicate the local government’s basis for the determination.

(c) Provide notice of the decision to the applicant and to those who received notice under subsection (2) of this section within 63 days of the date of a completed application. The notice of decision shall include:

(A) The summary statement described in paragraph (b)(B) of this subsection; and

(B) An explanation of appeal rights under ORS 197.375 (Appeal of decision on application for expedited land division). [1995 c.595 §8; 2015 c.260 §3]

Law Review Cita­tions

10 WLJ 414-421, 474, 475 (1974); 56 OLR 270 (1977)

Chapter 197

Notes of Decisions

A comprehensive plan, although denominated a “resolu­tion,” is the controlling land use planning instru­ment for a city; upon its passage, the city assumes responsibility to effectuate the plan and conform zoning ordinances, including prior existing zoning ordinances, to it. Baker v. City of Milwaukie, 271 Or 500, 533 P2d 772 (1975)

Procedural require­ments of the state-wide planning goals adopted by the Land Conserva­tion and Develop­ment Commission are not applicable to ordinances adopted before the effective date of the goals. Schmidt v. Land Conserva­tion and Develop­ment Comm., 29 Or App 665, 564 P2d 1090 (1977)

This chapter, es­tab­lishing LCDC and granting it authority to es­tab­lish state-wide land use planning goals, does not unconstitu­tionally delegate legislative power where both standards (ORS chapter 215) and safeguards ([former] ORS 197.310) exist. Meyer v. Lord, 37 Or App 59, 586 P2d 367 (1978)

Where county’s comprehensive plan and land use regula­tions had not been acknowledged by LCDC, it was proper for county to apply state-wide planning standards directly to individual request for parti­tion. Alexanderson v. Polk County Commissioners, 289 Or 427, 616 P2d 459 (1980)

Issuance of a building permit was a “land conserva­tion and develop­ment ac­tion” where county had no acknowledged comprehensive plan, land was not zoned and no pre­vi­ous land use decision had been made re­gard­ing the land. Columbia Hills v. LCDC, 50 Or App 483, 624 P2d 157 (1981), Sup Ct review denied

Nothing in this chapter grants the Land Conserva­tion and Develop­ment Depart­ment authority to challenge local land use decisions made after comprehensive plan acknowledg­ment. Ochoco Const. v. LCDC, 295 Or 422, 667 P2d 499 (1983)

LCDC has authority in periodic review process to require local govern­ment to add specific language or pro­vi­sions to its land use legisla­tion to assure compliance with statewide goals and LCDC rules. Oregonians in Ac­tion v. LCDC, 121 Or App 497, 854 P2d 1010 (1993), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Authority of a land conserva­tion and develop­ment com­mis­sion to bind the state in an interstate compact or agree­ment, (1973) Vol 36, p 361; applica­tion of Fasano v. Bd. of County Commrs., (1974) Vol 36, p 960; state-wide planning goal in conjunc­tion with interim Willamette River Greenway boundaries, (1975) Vol 37, p 894; binding effect on govern­mental agencies of the adop­tion of interim Willamette River Greenway boundaries, (1975) Vol 37, p 894; applica­tion to state agencies, (1976) Vol 37, p 1129; preexisting ordinances during the interim imple­menting stage, (1976) Vol 37, p 1329; constitu­tionality of delega­tion to LCDC of authority to prescribe and enforce statewide planning goals, (1977) Vol 38, p 1130; effect of situa­tion where similar peti­tion is filed before both com­mis­sion and a court, (1977) Vol 38, p 1268; considera­tion of availability of public school facilities in determina­tion of whether to approve subdivision, (1978) Vol 38, p 1956

Law Review Cita­tions

10 WLJ 99 (1973); 53 OLR 129 (1974); 5 EL 673 (1975); 54 OLR 203-223 (1975); 56 OLR 444 (1977); 18 WLR 49 (1982); 61 OLR 351 (1982); 20 WLR 764 (1984); 14 EL 661, 693, 713, 779, 843 (1984); 25 WLR 259 (1989); 31 WLR 147, 449, 817 (1995); 36 EL 25 (2006); 49 WLR 411 (2013)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 197—Comprehensive Land Use Planning, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors197.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 197, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano197.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.