Agenda Packet 9-10-18 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 4 – REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER D. Reduction in Value A “land use regulation” gives rise to a Measure 49 claim only if, in addition to restricting the residential use of private real property, it also reduces the fair market value of the property. Claimant submitted appraisals of the fair market value of the property one year before the adoption of EC 9.2751(18)(a)3. (July 28, 2013) and one year after the adoption of EC 9.2751(18)(a)3. (July 28, 2015).1 The July 28, 2013 appraisal provides a property value of $65,000. The July 28, 2015 appraisal provides a property value of $40,000. As of the date of this Recommendation, nothing in the record contradicts the accuracy of the appraisals submitted by the Claimant. Accordingly, the appraisals confirm that EC 9.2751(18)(a)3.reduces the fair market value of the Claimant’s property. E. Exemptions Finally, a Measure 49 claim is not valid if the challenged regulation was enacted before the Claimant acquired the property or if it falls within one of the six exemptions under the Measure. Regulations adopted to 1) protect the public health and safety; 2) prevent nuisances; or 3) comply with federal law are exempt under Measure 49, even if they otherwise constitute “land use regulations” that “restrict the residential use” and “reduce the fair market value” of property. In addition, regulations that (4) restrict or prohibit the use of the property for selling pornography or performing nude dancing, (5) plan and rezone land for industrial zoning to be included in the UGB, or (6) plan and rezone land already within a UGB to industrial zoning, are also exempt under Measure 49. The regulation at issue in this claim does not fall within any of these exemptions. IV. Conclusion and Recommendation Based on the analysis set forth above, the City Manager recommends that the City Council conclude that Claimant Elise Moore’s Measure 49 claim is valid. In lieu of compensation, the City Manager recommends that the City Council waive EC 9.2751(18)(a)3. to the extent such waiver is necessary to allow Claimant to construct a 1,200 square foot dwelling on the subject property that complies with all other residential lot standards. The recommended waiver does not address the applicability of any other provision that might preclude such construction. A City Council public hearing on this Measure 49 claim was held on July 16, 2018. The claimant’s attorney, Bill Kloos, testified in favor of granting the claim. No other testimony was received at the public hearing. Following the hearing, the Council left the record open one week, until 5:00 p.m. on July 24, 2018, for submission of written testimony and provided the claimant an additional week, until 5:00 p.m. on July 31, 2018, to rebut evidence and arguments submitted. At the Council meeting on July 23, 2018, the Council voted to extend the open record period until 5p.m. on July 27, 2018 and to extend the claimant’s rebuttal period until 5p.m. on August 3, 2018. Testimony submitted did not change the analysis of this report and recommendation. 1 Measure 49 requires the reduction in fair market value of the property be demonstrated through an appraisal that meets certain requirements. ORS 194.310(2). The appraisal submitted by Claimants satisfies those requirements. September 10, 2018, Meeting – Item 4