2015 ORS 92.046¹
Adoption of regulations governing approval of partitioning of land
  • delegation
  • fees

(1) The governing body of a county or a city may, as provided in ORS 92.048 (Procedure for adoption of regulations under ORS 92.044 and 92.046), when reasonably necessary to accomplish the orderly development of the land within the jurisdiction of such county or city under ORS 92.042 (Governing body having jurisdiction to approve plans, maps or plats) and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the county or city, adopt regulations or ordinances governing approval, by the county or city of proposed partitions. Such regulations or ordinances shall be applicable throughout the area over which the county or city has jurisdiction under ORS 92.042 (Governing body having jurisdiction to approve plans, maps or plats), or over any portion thereof. Such ordinances or regulations may specify the classifications of such partitions which require approval under this section and may establish standards and procedures governing the approval of tentative plans for such partitions. The standards may include all, or less than all, of the same requirements as are provided or authorized for subdivisions under ORS 92.010 (Definitions for ORS 92.010 to 92.192) to 92.192 (Property line adjustment) and may provide for different standards and procedures for different classifications of such partitions so long as the standards are no more stringent than are imposed by the city or county in connection with subdivisions.

(2) Such ordinances or regulations may establish the form and contents of the tentative plans of partitions submitted for approval.

(3)(a) The governing body of a city or county may provide for the delegation of any of its lawful functions with respect to partitions to the planning commission of the city or county or to an official of the city or county appointed by the governing body for such purpose.

(b) If an ordinance or regulation adopted under this section includes the delegation to a planning commission or appointed official of the power to take final action approving or disapproving a tentative plan for a partition, such ordinance or regulation may also provide for appeal to the governing body from such approval or disapproval and require initiation of any such appeal within 10 days after the date of the approval or disapproval from which the appeal is taken.

(c) The governing body may establish, by ordinance or regulation, a fee to be charged for an appeal under ORS chapter 197, 215 or 227, except for an appeal under ORS 197.805 (Policy on review of land use decisions) to 197.855 (Deadline for final court order).

(4) The governing body may, by ordinance or regulation, prescribe fees sufficient to defray the costs incurred in the review and investigation of and action upon applications for approval of proposed partitions.

(5) No tentative plan of a proposed partition may be approved unless the tentative plan complies with the applicable zoning ordinances and regulations and the ordinances or regulations adopted under this section that are then in effect for the city or county within which the land described in the tentative plan is situated.

(6) Any ordinance or regulation adopted under this section shall comply with the comprehensive plan for the city or county adopting the ordinance or regulation. [1955 c.756 §22; 1973 c.696 §10; 1983 c.827 §19f; 1989 c.772 §7; 1993 c.792 §47; 1999 c.348 §13]

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Effect of county zoning ordinances on approved subdivision plat, (1973) Vol 36, p 702

Notes of Decisions

Due process standards applicable to land use decisions apply to ad­min­is­tra­­tion of subdivision ordinance. Bienz v. City of Dayton, 29 Or App 761, 566 P2d 904 (1977), Sup Ct review denied

Due process require­ments for granting of variances are identical regardless of whether variance is area variance or use variance. Bienz v. City of Dayton, 29 Or App 761, 566 P2d 904 (1977), Sup Ct review denied

Approval of tentative plan under subdivision ordinance is final order reviewable in writ of review pro­ceed­ing. Bienz v. City of Dayton, 29 Or App 761, 566 P2d 904 (1977), Sup Ct review denied

Modifica­tion of sought-after approval of tentative plan must be treated same procedurally as initial applica­tion. Bienz v. City of Dayton, 29 Or App 761, 566 P2d 904 (1977), Sup Ct review denied

Owner of parcel unlawfully conveyed without having been parti­tioned could not unilaterally seek to parti­tion parcel from remainder of original prop­erty remaining in separate ownership. Kilian v. City of West Linn, 88 Or App 242, 744 P2d 1314 (1987)

Under statutes in effect in 1981, parti­tioning of land parcel had effect of vacating pre­vi­ous lot lines unless parti­tion map indicates continued existence of parti­tioned lots. Weyerhaeuser Real Estate Develop­ment Co. v. Polk County, 246 Or App 548, 267 P3d 855 (2011)

Law Review Cita­tions

10 WLJ 398, 399 (1974)

Chapter 92

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Standards county may impose for approval of private roads created in parti­tioning land, (1972) Vol 35, p 1230; effect of county zoning ordinances on approved subdivision plat, (1973) Vol 36, p 702; applica­tion of Fasano v. Bd. of County Commrs., decision, (1974) Vol 36, p 960

Law Review Cita­tions

10 WLJ 394-403 (1974)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 92—Subdivisions and Partitions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors092.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 92, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano092.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
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.