Chapter 92
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Standards county
may impose for approval of private roads created in partitioning land, (1972) Vol 35, p 1230; effect of county zoning ordinances on
approved subdivision plat, (1973) Vol 36, p 702;
application of Fasano v. Bd. of County Commrs., decision, (1974) Vol 36,
p 960
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 10 WLJ 394-403
(1974)
92.010 to 92.190
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Due
process standards applicable to land use decisions apply to administration of
subdivision ordinance. Bienz v. City of Dayton, 29 Or
App 761, 566 P2d 904 (1977), Sup Ct review denied
Due
process requirements for granting of variances are identical regardless of
whether variance is area variance or use variance. Bienz
v. City of Dayton, 29 Or App 761, 566 P2d 904 (1977), Sup Ct review denied
Approval
of tentative plan under subdivision ordinance is final order reviewable in writ
of review proceeding. Bienz v. City of Dayton, 29 Or
App 761, 566 P2d 904 (1977), Sup Ct review denied
Modification
of sought-after approval of tentative plan must be treated same procedurally as
initial application. Bienz v. City of Dayton, 29 Or
App 761, 566 P2d 904 (1977), Sup Ct review denied
Owner
of parcel unlawfully conveyed without having been partitioned could not
unilaterally seek to partition parcel from remainder of original property
remaining in separate ownership. Kilian v. City of
West Linn, 88 Or App 242, 744 P2d 1314 (1987)
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 10 WLJ 398, 399
(1974)
92.010
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Definition
of “subdivide land” contained in former version of this section referred to
approval of plans, plats, and land partitions by cities and counties and had no
application to prosecution under Subdivision Control Law. State v. Baker, 48 Or
App 999, 618 P2d 997 (1980)
Transfer
of title to roadway property prior to 1991 amendment of this section results in
partition of tract bisected by roadway property. Lovinger
v. Lane County, 206 Or App 557, 138 P3d 51 (2006), Sup Ct review denied
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Obtaining local planning
authority approval before ordering division of land, (1978) Vol
38, p 1814; impairment of mortgagee’s remedy of foreclosure where local
planning authorities under local partition ordinance deny permission to
foreclose mortgage, (1978) Vol 38, p 2148
92.014
NOTES OF DECISIONS
The
words “street or way” apply to all roadways constructed for the purpose of
partitioning a parcel of land. Columbia County v. O’Black,
16 Or App 147, 517 P2d 688 (1974), Sup Ct review denied
92.016
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Contractual
promise to convey land which violates this section is unenforceable by seller
against purchaser of property, but enforceable by purchaser against seller if
purchaser can otherwise prove breach of contract, to wit, that land sold was unpartitioned property and damages were caused by breach of
implied promise of lawful partitioning. Ogan v.
Ellison, 297 Or 25, 682 P2d 760 (1984)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Effect of county
zoning ordinances on approved subdivision plat, (1973) Vol
36, p 702
92.017
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Lot
included in unrecorded survey filed with county surveyor in 1963 was not legal
lot of record entitled to protection under this section. Atkins v. Deschutes
County, 102 Or App 208, 793 P2d 345 (1990)
92.018
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Inclusion
in instrument conveying fee title of notice required under ORS 93.040
recommending buyer check with planning department does not limit seller
liability to buyer for improperly created lot or parcel. DK Investment Co. v.
Inter-Pacific Development Co., 195 Or App 256, 97 P3d 675 (2004)
92.025
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Effect of county
zoning ordinances on approved subdivision plat, (1973) Vol
36, p 702
92.040
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Board
of county commissioners’ denial of tentative approval of proposed subdivision
plat failed to meet requirements of ORS 215.416 where denial was couched in
general language and failed to specify what criteria were used to determine
that proposed plat did not comply with county comprehensive plan. Commonwealth
Properties v. Washington County, 35 Or App 387, 582 P2d 1384 (1978)
Where
development of subdivision property depends on approval of construction on
rights-of-way and roadways located adjacent to subdivision lots, applicable
local government laws are those that are in effect at time of application to
construct subdivision. Athletic Club of Bend, Inc. v. City of Bend, 239 Or App
89, 243 P3d 824 (2010)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Effect of county
zoning ordinances on approved subdivision plat, (1973) Vol
36, p 702
92.044 to 92.048
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Effect of county
zoning ordinances on approved subdivision plat, (1973) Vol
36, p 702
92.044
NOTES OF DECISIONS
This
section, read together with ORS 92.090, required that proposed subdivision
comply with county comprehensive framework plan. Commonwealth Properties v.
Washington County, 35 Or App 387, 582 P2d 1384 (1978)
Where
county ordinance was amended so Department of Fish and Wildlife had right to
appeal, petition filed by department with LCDC seeking review of board of commissioners’
decision approving subdivision plat was not barred on ground that department
failed to exhaust its available remedies by failing to initially challenge
approval of plat before board of commissioners. Fish and Wildlife Department v.
LCDC, 37 Or App 607, 588 P2d 80 (1978), aff’d
288 Or 203, 603 P2d 1371 (1979)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Requirement that
developer not discriminate between builders and non-builders in lot sale as
condition of approval of subdivision plat, (1979) Vol
39, p 593
92.090
NOTES OF DECISIONS
This
section, read together with ORS 92.044, required that proposed subdivision
comply with county comprehensive framework plan. Commonwealth Properties v.
Washington County, 35 Or App 387, 582 P2d 1384 (1978)
City
council must make findings that proposed subdivision complied with applicable
land use regulations, but court would not reverse plat approval where no
assertion was made that any specific provision was violated. Golf Holding Co.
v. McEachron, 39 Or App 675, 593 P2d 1202 (1979), Sup
Ct review denied
Where
owner of townsite platted in 1907 reserved to
himself, his “associates and assigns” exclusive right to construct and operate
in streets telephone, telegraph and electric poles and wires, and gas and water
pipes and mains, this section did not invalidate pre-1909 reservation. Sunset
Lake v. Remington, 45 Or App 973, 609 P2d 896 (1980)
92.100
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Surveyor’s
checking of subdivision or partition plat for
compliance with state laws and local ordinances or resolutions is limited land
use decision under ORS 197.015. Hammer v. Clackamas County, 190 Or App 473, 79
P3d 394 (2003), Sup Ct review denied
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Nonapplicability
of fee provision to city engineers and city surveyors, (1972) Vol 36, p 89; effect of county zoning ordinances on
approved subdivision plat, (1973) Vol 36, p 702;
compensating county surveyor from fees collected, (1979) Vol
40, p 48
92.105
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 18 WLR 83 (1982)
92.210 to 92.390
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Status of subdivisions
approved or in process of application pursuant to ORS 92.210 to 92.390 under
1973, c. 421, (1973) Vol 36, p 595
92.305 to 92.495
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Parcel
of land is subject to this law even though intersected by road. State v. Emmich, 34 Or App 945, 580 P2d 570 (1978)
Imposition
of greater sentence for violation of Subdivision Control Law than those imposed
for violations of ORS 92.010 to 92.090 and ORS 92.100 to 92.160 did not violate
equal protection. State v. Baker, 48 Or App 999, 618 P2d 997 (1980)
Seller
of real property could not seek to void transaction as it was not within class
of persons these provisions seek to protect. Seal v. Polehn,
52 Or App 389, 628 P2d 746 (1981), Sup Ct review denied
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 16 WLR 293 (1979)
92.305
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Under former similar statute (ORS
92.210)
Mere
transfer of ownership by person is insufficient to establish that person
undertook development of subdivision so as to become subdivider.
Anderson v. Jack, 39 Or App 813, 593 P2d 1259 (1979)
In general
Under
definition of “subdivider” in former version of this
section it was immaterial whether interests in subdivision were created by
defendant or through a corporation which defendant controlled. State v. Baker,
48 Or App 999, 618 P2d 997 (1980)
LAW REVIEW CITATIONS
In general
57
OLR 43 (1977)
92.325
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Defendant
may be convicted of violation without proof of culpable mental state. State v. Emmich, 39 Or App 769, 593 P2d 1281 (1979)
Conviction
for failure to follow requirements for subdividing land requires culpable
mental state. State v. Baker, 48 Or App 999, 618 P2d 997 (1980)
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Effect of LCDC’s
granting partial acknowledgment of comprehensive plan, (1980) Vol 40, p 274
92.337
ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Application to
condominiums, (1976) Vol 37, p 1045