Legal Opinion

Jebousek v. City of Newport

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 29, 1999No. LUBA No. 97-182; CA A106178PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtDeits, C. J.

Petitioner seeks review of LUBA’s decision affirming an application for a lot line adjustment.1 Petitioner makes four assignments of error, each of which we have considered and only one of which requires specific discussion.

Goal 1, Policy 3, of the relevant part of the city’s comprehensive plan provides:

“Where hazardous areas have not been specifically identified but there is a reason to believe that a potential does exist, a site specific investigation by a registered geologist or engineer shall be required prior to development.”

The city governing body made an interpretive finding,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Clark v. Jackson CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Jebousek v. City of NewportCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  3. Jebousek v. City of NewportCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mountain West Investment Corp. v. City of SilvertonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API