Home/Oregon Supreme Court/South of Sunnyside Neighborhood League v. Board of Commissioners

South of Sunnyside Neighborhood League v. Board of Commissioners

569 P.2d 1063, 280 Or. 3, 1977 Ore. LEXIS 644
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 4, 1977
Docket91837, SC 25232
StatusPublished
Cited by71 cases

This text of 569 P.2d 1063 (South of Sunnyside Neighborhood League v. Board of Commissioners) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
South of Sunnyside Neighborhood League v. Board of Commissioners, 569 P.2d 1063, 280 Or. 3, 1977 Ore. LEXIS 644 (Or. 1977).

Opinion

*5 DENECKE, C. J.

This is a writ of review proceeding in which petitioners have contended that the Clackamas County Board of Commissioners acted improperly in approving a proposed amendment to the county’s comprehensive plan. The amendment in question changes the designation of a 65-acre parcel on the plan map from "medium density planned residential” to "planned commercial.” The proponent of the change wants to develop an extensive shopping center and hotel complex on the tract in question together with an adjacent 50 acres which is already designated "planned commercial” on the map. The proposed development is referred to as the Clackamas Town Center and is shown on the map on the following page.

The trial court affirmed the Board’s order of amendment and the Court of Appeals affirmed. 27 Or App 647, 557 P2d 1375 (1976), reconsideration denied 28 Or App 281, 559 P2d 512 (1977). We granted review, primarily to consider the question of the standards applicable to single-tract comprehensive plan amendments.

Before proceeding to that question, however, we will decide some secondary issues raised by the petition for review.

Petitioners contend that the county Board of Commissioners did not have jurisdiction to consider the proposed amendment. This contention is based on the requirement, found in the amendment procedures contained in the plan itself, that planning commission recommendations on proposed plan amendments be concurred in by five members of the commission. Petitioners argue that one of the five votes cast in favor of this amendment by planning commission members could not be counted because one of the commissioners had not heard or had an opportunity to review a substantial portion of the evidence.

*6

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Central Oregon Landwatch v. Jefferson County
Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2024
Renaissance Project Development, LLC v. Twin Falls
Idaho Supreme Court, 2024
Nicita v. City of Oregon City
399 P.3d 1087 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2017)
Jenkins v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision
335 P.3d 828 (Oregon Supreme Court, 2014)
Jenkins v. Board of Parole
Oregon Supreme Court, 2014
Jenkins v. Board of Parole
309 P.3d 1115 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2013)
Albuquerque Commons Partnership v. City Council of Albuquerque
2008 NMSC 025 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 2008)
Cowan v. Board of Com'rs of Fremont County
148 P.3d 1247 (Idaho Supreme Court, 2006)
Salosha, Inc. v. Lane County
117 P.3d 1047 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2005)
Sisters Forest Planning Committee v. Deschutes County
108 P.3d 1175 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2005)
Just v. City of Lebanon
88 P.3d 307 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2004)
Monogios & Co. v. City of Pendleton
56 P.3d 960 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2002)
Dimone v. City of Hillsboro
47 P.3d 529 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2002)
1000 Friends of Oregon v. Metro
26 P.3d 151 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2001)
Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc. v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District
12 P.3d 62 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2000)
Tugwell v. Kittitas County
951 P.2d 272 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1997)
Fourth Avenue Corp. v. L.P. Busch, Inc.
912 P.2d 416 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1996)
Hutchinson v. City of Corvallis
895 P.2d 797 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1995)
Lincoln Loan Co. v. City of Portland
855 P.2d 151 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1993)
Dan Gile & Associates, Inc. v. McIver
831 P.2d 1024 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
569 P.2d 1063, 280 Or. 3, 1977 Ore. LEXIS 644, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/south-of-sunnyside-neighborhood-league-v-board-of-commissioners-or-1977.