Document text
The Oregon Court of Appeals has rejected an attempt by a developer to bypass much of the usual state land-use process with an “expedited land division” request that sought to develop 26 acres on a hillside in the southern part of Talent. Developer Tony Nieto wanted to put 49 residences on a site west of the CORP railroad tracks. The project was denied by both the city of Talent and its hearings officer. The appeals court rejected Nieto’s appeal in January. In a recent letter to the city, Nieto’s representatives said they would pursue approval for the project through the regular land-use process, City Manager Sandy Spelliscy said Tuesday. “This legislation has been in the books since the early 1990s, but nobody has ever used it that I know of,” said Ashland land-use lawyer Chris Hearn, who represented residents near the proposed development. Oregon Homebuilders Association had promoted adoption of the legislation. Strict limits on grounds for appeal were included in the legislation, and the court used those in rejecting the case, he said. Other lawyers he contacted were unaware of its use and said they were interested in the outcome, said Hearn. “Some think it sort of upsets the public interest because you are bypassing the Oregon process.” Several attempts have been made to develop the Talent site dating back to the last century. Lack of a second emergency access for the development over the tracks has been cited by both neighbors and in rulings as one reason for denying the project. Approvals would be needed from the Oregon Department of Transportation due to a rail crossing and the Army Corps of Engineers for access over a Talent Irrigation District canal at the site. Jackson County Fire District 5 said the development would not meet Oregon Fire Code for access. Nieto filed for the expedited approval in May 2018, but the city rejected his application in June, saying that access issues related to Belmont Road needed to be resolved and a secondary access needed to be provided. Nieto subsequently appealed the city’s ruling to Hearings Officer Roger Pearce, who denied the application in September, arguing it did not qualify as an expedited land division. He ordered the application remanded to the city for consideration as a land-use decision or limited land-use decision. Under the expedited procedure, denial by a government entity can be appealed directly to the Oregon Court of Appeals. The expedited process is allowed if a developer can demonstrate a project will meet affordable housing criteria or that it exceeds city density requirements. The proposal met the last criteria. The court’s January ruling noted that “the grounds for obtaining the vacation of an (arbitration) award are extremely narrow.” Courts can only act on an arbitrator’s award under very limited circumstances, including when an arbitrator exceeded his powers, the ruing stated. Nothing demonstrated that Pearce “exceeded his powers and resulted in error” or were outside his statutory powers. Justice Joel DeVore, writing for the court, also said that any constitutional issues were moot because they remain to be considered if or when the matter is processed as a land-use decision rather than through the expedited process. “Frankly, it was a waste of money for the city, the developer and us. I can understand they wanted to see the process go through,” said Vern Davis, one of the neighbors who was an intervenor-respondent in the case. “Kudos to the city for defending their positions. It was not a cheap thing to do.”