Item 6: Lane Plywood Measure 37 Claim

Home Browse Search

8. On April 13, 2005, King transferred lots 1, 2, 3, 5, 11 and (a portion of) 12 to LPI. 9. On October 19, 2005, LPI filed this Measure 37 claim. 10. King and Demers have been working together since at least 1997 to develop the property that is the subject of this Measure 37 claim. 11. LPI has asserted that as a result of new land use regulations, its property has diminished in value in the range of $5 million. DECISION Measure 37 generally grants a property owner the right to compensation (or waiver at the option of the government) for a regulation that existed as of the effective date of Measure 37 (December 2, 2004) if five substantive requirements are met. First, the regulation must constitute a “land use regulation” as that term is defined by Measure 37. Second, the public entity must have enforced the regulation in some manner. Third, the regulation must “restrict the use” of private property. Fourth, the effect of the regulation must cause a reduction in the fair market value of the property. And fifth, the regulation must not fall within one of Measure 37’s five exemptions. As noted previously, LPI’s claim includes virtually all provisions of chapter 9 of the Eugene Code, as well as other parts of the Eugene Code that are incorporated by reference into chapter 9. In addition, LPI’s claim includes the Metro Plan and related documents. LPI did not identify which of those hundreds of pages of code or plan provisions meet any of the tests noted in the preceding paragraph. Nor did LPI offer any comparison of the provisions that govern today versus the comparable provisions that were in effect when LPI acquired its various lots. However, the actual zoning that is in place today (I-3) is more restrictive than the zoning that was in place at the time that LPI acquired many of the lots (M-3). The Council concludes that LPI’s property likely would be more valuable if LPI could use the property for a greater variety of uses than is permitted under the I-3 zoning (or under the CC&Rs that are attached to the property). In light of the findings and conclusions noted above, the absence of funds to pay compensation, and the location and characteristics of the property (for example, an absence of significant natural resources worth preserving), the City Council orders as follows: The City shall not apply those provisions of (a) chapter 9 of the Eugene Code, (b) other chapters of the Eugene Code that are incorporated by reference into chapter 9, or (c) the Metro Plan, to the extent that the provisions were adopted after LPI acquired the lot at issue, and: (1)the provision is a “land use regulation” as defined by Measure 37; (2)the provision “restricts the use” of the lot as that phrase is used in Measure 37; Page 3 of 4