CU24-028 BOC Order - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Applicant argues that the Subiect Property is no longer in violation of land use regulations because the Staff Decision dated November 8, 2024, granted an approval. The Stipulated Judgment, for its part, does acknowledge the Staff Decision and agrees to withhold any future citations until May 12, 2025. Applicant suggests that the analysis of possible ongoing violations is not part of the standards and criteria upon which the decision can be based. However, as stated in 1i.,Unoi,,, standards and criteria can go beyond what the local government labels -approval criteria" for a specific permit. See,, e.g., Davenport v. TigcIrcl, 121 Or. App. 135, 141 (199' )) (stating that relevant standards and criteria to base decisions on are "not limited to the provisions that may be characterized as approval criteria" (internal quotation marks omitted)); Jianov at I I - 14. Opponents also argue that there are documented concerns that the right-of-way has been improperly used for parking, has been improperly widened, unauthorized parking has occurred in the neighbor's field, and the stop sign at 57th Ave NE has been knocked over on several occasions resulting in local code violations under MCC Chapter 10.10. The Hearings Officer finds that Marion County Code Enforcement Officer Chad Goffin was entitled to present testimony and will not strike his testimony from the record. Mr. Goffin also provided comments to the Planning Division on August 23, 2024, which are included in the record. Any testimony provided by Mr. Goffin that purports to attack Applicant's character is not consiclered by the Hearings Officer and has no basis with respect to applicable criteria. No determination is made whether the Applicant is in violation of Marion County Code because the issue of compliance is not imperative based on the prior findings that the proposed use is not primarily a supplier of farm uses and that farm impacts test is not satisfied. However, if the Applicant were in violation of the Code, Marion County has discretionary authority to approve the issuance of the permit or land use approval because with compliance with conditions of approval, the approval would correct the violation. MCC 17.110.680. VIL Order It is hereby found that Applicant has not met the burden of proving applicable standards and criteria for approval of a conditional use. Therefore, the conditional use application is DENIED. IX. Effective Date The application approved herein shall become effective on the 15th day of April, 2025, unless the Marion County Board of Commissioners, on their own motion or by appeal timely filed, is asked to review this Order. In the event of Board review, this Order shall be stayed and shall be subject to Such final action as is taken by the Board. CLJ224-028 - ORDER Klopfenstein Page 18 Page 23 of 26