Viewpoint:
Hearings Official REJECTS 2006 application for lot partition
for 933 W. 13th Ave.
Hearings Official REJECTS 2006 application for lot partition
for 933 W. 13th Ave.
Back to 2007 application, Back to page 1 of 2006 application
The decision and supporting statements by the Planning Director are another clear
example of the Land Use Permits staff's lack of any understanding or concern for
neighborhood residents. (The Land Use Permits section is part of the Planning Division,
and is headed by Steve Nystrom, who was Interim Planning Director when this decision
was made. This same group, under Nystrom's direction, tried unsuccessfully in 2004 to
allow upzonings to R-2/14 in the Jefferson area based on another "trick" mis-interpretation
of the code. In that case, the Hearings Official adamantly rejected the staff's interpretation
as an usurption of City Council's legislative authority.)
The decision also shows a blatant disregard for Council's intent to protect neighborhoods
and for the extensive public process that went into developing neighborhood refinement
plans.
The JWN voted to appeal the decision at our September 12 general meeting. (See
Motions D and E.)
Read the appeal that was filed September 25.
An appeal hearing was held on October 25 and was well attended by JWN residents,
several of whom testified.
Read the appeal testimony that was filed October 25.
Listen to the appeal hearing on October 25 [Windows Media Audio file].
Read the appeal testimony supplement that was filed November 1.
A decision was issued on November 27. Read the Hearing's Official decision.
The Hearings Official REVERSED the Planning Director's approval of the lot partition at
933 W. 13th Ave.
The JWN appeal had cited 15 errors, the Hearings Official ruled as follows on these items:
Sustained our point:
3 (partial) and 4 -- Proposed four-plex must be considered in decision
6 -- Burden of proof on applicants
10 -- Direct connectivity to street
11 -- Alley width and paving
12 -- Storm water standards
14 (partial) -- Fire separation
15 -- Conflicts with Westside Neighborhood Plan
Denied our point:
1, 2, and 3 (partial) -- Inadequate opportunity for public review and comment
5 -- Increase in potential alley use
7 -- Conflicts with Metro Plan (did not evaluate for this process)
8 -- Parcel is prohibited alley access lot/frontage definition
9 -- Fails to meet frontage and/or min width standards
13 -- Creates non-conforming condition
On the major issues, we won on impacts of the four-plex and complying with the
refinement plan; we lost on public process, and alley access/frontage.
The applicant may appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), so the fight to defend
our homes and neighborhood isn't necessarily over.
On December 4, the JWN board voted unanimously to appeal to LUBA on some of the
items we lost on, because of the precedent that leaving these unchallenged would set for
future applications and as a defensive tactic against an appeal by the applicant.
Read JWN Executive Board meeting minutes.
After researching the legal situation; however, the co-chairs determined it would be better
to wait for another similar lot partition application, in particular, the potential resubmission
of a revised version of the application that was denied. The foundation for a LUBA appeal
can be established even stronger because of what was learned in defeating the current
application.
We will also be working for land use code amendments to correct the deficiencies (for
example, the definition of "alley access lot") that the Planning Director misconstrued in his
decision.
Staff's disregard for process and professional integrity
As part of our efforts, we filed a Public Records request for e-mails related to the
application. These e-mails revealed that during the public comment period, staff was
providing alerts and advice to applicants about opponents' concerns while withholding
information from opponents about applicants submission of additional evidence just two
days before the end of the comment period -- something the law doesn't allow. (For
details, see page 5 of the October 25 appeal testimony.)
We also learned that the planner in charge of this application was e-mailing residents
who had submitted opposing testimony and telling them that the proposed partition and
four-plex development "will not enable the construction of more dwellings. No buildings
are proposed as part of this part of this partition. ..." These statements are blatantly false.
Some of the residents who received this misinformation subsequently filed testimony
advising the Hearings Official of their concern that staff responsible for keeping the public
adequately informed about land use actions, would provide this sort
of misinformation as a way to quash opposition.
At the public hearing, staff continued to provide erroneous information to the Hearings
Official (e.g., the flag lots aren't allowed in R-2 zones), and staff would not respond to
repeated follow-up e-mails from the JWN co-chairs asking staff to clarify their statements
for the Hearings Official.
This process demonstrates an utter disregard for the law, City Council's intent, and the
well-being of neighborhood families. It also shows a disturbing lack of professional
integrity that should not be tolerated by the City Manager.
Contact the JWN Chair if you have questions.
Back to 2007 application, Back to page 1 of 2006 application
The decision and supporting statements by the Planning Director are another clear
example of the Land Use Permits staff's lack of any understanding or concern for
neighborhood residents. (The Land Use Permits section is part of the Planning Division,
and is headed by Steve Nystrom, who was Interim Planning Director when this decision
was made. This same group, under Nystrom's direction, tried unsuccessfully in 2004 to
allow upzonings to R-2/14 in the Jefferson area based on another "trick" mis-interpretation
of the code. In that case, the Hearings Official adamantly rejected the staff's interpretation
as an usurption of City Council's legislative authority.)
The decision also shows a blatant disregard for Council's intent to protect neighborhoods
and for the extensive public process that went into developing neighborhood refinement
plans.
The JWN voted to appeal the decision at our September 12 general meeting. (See
Motions D and E.)
Read the appeal that was filed September 25.
An appeal hearing was held on October 25 and was well attended by JWN residents,
several of whom testified.
Read the appeal testimony that was filed October 25.
Listen to the appeal hearing on October 25 [Windows Media Audio file].
Read the appeal testimony supplement that was filed November 1.
A decision was issued on November 27. Read the Hearing's Official decision.
The Hearings Official REVERSED the Planning Director's approval of the lot partition at
933 W. 13th Ave.
The JWN appeal had cited 15 errors, the Hearings Official ruled as follows on these items:
Sustained our point:
3 (partial) and 4 -- Proposed four-plex must be considered in decision
6 -- Burden of proof on applicants
10 -- Direct connectivity to street
11 -- Alley width and paving
12 -- Storm water standards
14 (partial) -- Fire separation
15 -- Conflicts with Westside Neighborhood Plan
Denied our point:
1, 2, and 3 (partial) -- Inadequate opportunity for public review and comment
5 -- Increase in potential alley use
7 -- Conflicts with Metro Plan (did not evaluate for this process)
8 -- Parcel is prohibited alley access lot/frontage definition
9 -- Fails to meet frontage and/or min width standards
13 -- Creates non-conforming condition
On the major issues, we won on impacts of the four-plex and complying with the
refinement plan; we lost on public process, and alley access/frontage.
The applicant may appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), so the fight to defend
our homes and neighborhood isn't necessarily over.
On December 4, the JWN board voted unanimously to appeal to LUBA on some of the
items we lost on, because of the precedent that leaving these unchallenged would set for
future applications and as a defensive tactic against an appeal by the applicant.
Read JWN Executive Board meeting minutes.
After researching the legal situation; however, the co-chairs determined it would be better
to wait for another similar lot partition application, in particular, the potential resubmission
of a revised version of the application that was denied. The foundation for a LUBA appeal
can be established even stronger because of what was learned in defeating the current
application.
We will also be working for land use code amendments to correct the deficiencies (for
example, the definition of "alley access lot") that the Planning Director misconstrued in his
decision.
Staff's disregard for process and professional integrity
As part of our efforts, we filed a Public Records request for e-mails related to the
application. These e-mails revealed that during the public comment period, staff was
providing alerts and advice to applicants about opponents' concerns while withholding
information from opponents about applicants submission of additional evidence just two
days before the end of the comment period -- something the law doesn't allow. (For
details, see page 5 of the October 25 appeal testimony.)
We also learned that the planner in charge of this application was e-mailing residents
who had submitted opposing testimony and telling them that the proposed partition and
four-plex development "will not enable the construction of more dwellings. No buildings
are proposed as part of this part of this partition. ..." These statements are blatantly false.
Some of the residents who received this misinformation subsequently filed testimony
advising the Hearings Official of their concern that staff responsible for keeping the public
adequately informed about land use actions, would provide this sort
of misinformation as a way to quash opposition.
At the public hearing, staff continued to provide erroneous information to the Hearings
Official (e.g., the flag lots aren't allowed in R-2 zones), and staff would not respond to
repeated follow-up e-mails from the JWN co-chairs asking staff to clarify their statements
for the Hearings Official.
This process demonstrates an utter disregard for the law, City Council's intent, and the
well-being of neighborhood families. It also shows a disturbing lack of professional
integrity that should not be tolerated by the City Manager.
Contact the JWN Chair if you have questions.
Back to 2007 application, Back to page 1 of 2006 application
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
Jefferson Westside Neighbors
