Residents of Rosemont v. Metro
Oregon Court of Appeals
173 Or. App. 321, 21 P.3d 1108 (2001)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
In 1997, the Metropolitan Service District (Metro) (defendant) designated thousands of acres of land as urban reserves, including five urban reserve study areas (URSAs). In 1998, Metro began proceedings to expand its urban growth boundary (UGB) to comply with a state mandate to provide a 20-year supply of residential land within the UGB. Metro determined that there was a need for affordable housing within three to six miles of the Stafford-Rosemont area. The Metro Council considered proposals to expand the UGB to include four of the five URSAs designated the year prior. The Metro Council approved an expansion of the UGB to include several hundred acres of land in three of the URSAs in an area known as the Rosemont area. The Metro Council adopted an ordinance approving the expansion, and the City of Lake Oswego and the City of West Linn (the cities) (plaintiffs) appealed the decision to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). The cities argued that it was inconsistent with Statewide Planning Goal 14 (Goal 14) for a planning body to expand its UGB based on a need for housing in only part of its territory without considering whether the need could be accommodated outside of the specific subregion. Goal 14 provided for the orderly conversion of rural land to urban based on the consideration of several factors, including the need to accommodate population growth through the provision of housing. The LUBA found that Metro did not err in basing the UGB expansion on a subregional need for affordable housing in the Stafford-Rosemont area rather than determining the need by reference to the entire metro region. The cities appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Deits, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.