LandWatch Appeals

Click on the links to the right to review appeals by LandWatch Lane County.

LUBA No. 2016-124
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and Alison & Charles Farver)

Petitioner appeals a county board of commissioners’ order affirming and adopting a hearings official decision that verified four parcels as legal lots. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-129
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and Swanson Bros. Lumber Co. Inc.)

Petitioner requests that this appeal be dismissed. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-106
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and Jeannie Marr)

Petitioner appeals a county governing body’s decision approving a zone change from F-1 (Non-Impacted Forestland) to F-2 (Impacted Forestland). (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-115
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and Julius & Justine Benedick)

Petitioner appeals a board of county commissioners’ decision amending the comprehensive plan designation of a 110.5-acre property from Agricultural to Marginal Land, and rezoning the property from Exclusive Farm Use (E-40) to Marginal Land. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-109
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and Weyerhaeuser NR Company)

Petitioner requests that this appeal be dismissed. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-082
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and Terry & Linda Sayre)

Petitioner appeals a decision by the county approving a forest template dwelling. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-067
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and David J. Smejkal)

Petitioner requests that this appeal be dismissed. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-038
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and McDougal Foundation Inc.)

Petitioner appeals a board of county commissioners’ decision concluding that a 2005 permit approving three buildings for a school has not expired. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-003/004
LandWatch Lane County and Lee D. Kersten v. Lane County and City of Coburg (and Interstate Properties Inc.)

Petitioners appeal two county ordinances that amend a county rural comprehensive plan and co-adopt city comprehensive plan amendments to the city’s transportation system plan and urban growth boundary. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2016-019
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County (and Jordan Iverson and Margaret Iverson)

Petitioner appeals a county decision that approves a comprehensive plan map amendment to redesignate land from Agricultural to Marginal Land, and rezone that land from Exclusive Farm Use (E-40) to Marginal Land with Site Review (ML/SR). (read more…)

LUBA No. 2015-007
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County

The parties request that the decision challenged in this appeal be remanded. Accordingly, the decision is remanded. The parties further stipulate that the petitioner is the prevailing party in this appeal. Petitioner is awarded the cost of the filing fee, in the amount of $200, to be paid by respondent. The Board shall return petitioner’s $200 deposit for costs. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2014-070
LandWatch Lane County and Robert Emmons v. Lane County (and Travis Bamford)

Petitioners appeal a county decision approving intervenor’s application for special use permit approval for a nonfarm dwelling on land zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU). (read more…)

LUBA No. 2013-060
LandWatch Lane County, Jim Weaver, Jim Evonuk and Bob Emmons v. Lane County

Petitioners request that this appeal be dismissed. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (read more…)

LUBA No. 2013-058
LandWatch Lane County v. Lane County

Petitioner appeals a county ordinance taking a reasons exception to Statewide Planning Goal 14 (Urbanization) to allow urban levels of industrial development on existing rural industrials lands in the unincorporated community of Goshen. (read more…)

LCDC
Lane County Citizen-Initiated Request for Enforcement

The commission will consider a request by LandWatch Lane County for an enforcement order under ORS 197.319 to 197.335 requiring Lane County to comply with statutory and zoning ordinance deadlines for making land use decisions. Testimony will be limited to the petitioner and the county. (read more…)