New Search
' 3/18/97 WED 16:40 FAX 541 686 6564 HARRANG LONG fj ooa <br /> Linda Norris <br /> June 18, 1997 <br /> Page 2 <br /> Manager's decision. Section 7.735(9) provides that, in the event of an appeal, "the <br /> implementation of any change in methodology. ..shall be suspended..." until after the appeal <br /> is decided. <br /> Similarly, Sections 9/04 (Historic Landmarks), 9.690 (Site Review), and 9.706 <br /> (Conditional Use Permits) all provide that the permit shall not be effective, in the event of an <br /> appeal, until after the appeal is decided. In each case, the code specifically provides: "unless <br /> appealed, the [City's] decision is effective on the eleventh day after notice of the decision is <br /> mailed. tt In each of those cases, individuals are given ten days from the date of the notice to <br /> file the appeal. If no appeal is filed within the ten day timeline, <br /> then the decision becomes <br /> effective. If an appeal is filed within that ten days, then the decision does not take effect until <br /> after the appeal is decided. <br /> These provisions demonstrate that where the City intends that a permit or decision be <br /> stayed pending appeal, the Code specifically and expressly provides for the stay. Unlike the <br /> provisions mentioned above related to systems development charges, historic landmarks, <br /> conditional use permits and site reviews (among others), the tree preservation code lacks any <br /> statement to the effect that an appeal renders a permit ineffective during the pendency of the <br /> appeal. Therefore, we advise that the permit remains effective until and unless a hearings <br /> official reverses the City's decision to grant the permit. <br /> If you have any questions about this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me_ <br /> HARRANG LONG GARY RUDNICK P.C. - <br /> C1TY ATTORNEYS <br /> • <br /> Glenn <br /> GK/gb <br /> cc: Chris Andersen <br /> Scott Plamondon <br /> Richie Weinman <br /> glAgkcrtyltteepp fm.cm <br />