HomeMy WebLinkAboutLoyal Land Decision Matrix1
LO
Y
A
L
L
A
N
D
D
E
C
I
S
I
O
N
M
A
T
R
I
X
Th
e
c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
r
e
v
i
e
w
in
g
t
h
e
L
o
y
a
l
L
a
n
d
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
e
:
“
H
a
v
e
t
h
e
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
t
h
e
p
e
r
m
i
t
o
r
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
o
n
ce
p
t
u
a
l
M
a
s
t
e
r
P
l
a
n
(
C
M
P
)
f
o
r
T
h
o
r
n
b
u
r
gh Destination Resort been substantia lly exercised and is any failure to
fu
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
e
f
a
u
lt
o
f
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
.
”
(
D
C
C
2
2
.
3
6
.
0
2
0
(
A
)
(
3
)
)
.
I
f
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
e
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
,
th
e
n
t
h
e
C
M
P
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
“
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
e
d
”
a
n
d
there is no expiration date for that approval. If the CMP has not been
in
i
t
i
a
t
e
d
,
t
h
e
n
t
h
e
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
h
a
s
e
x
p
i
r
e
d
a
nd
t
h
e
r
e
s
o
r
t
h
a
s
n
o
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
e
n
t
i
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
Is
s
u
e
Bo
a
r
d
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
R
e
c
o
r
d
Staff Comment
1.
De
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
e
a
c
h
o
f
t
h
e
3
8
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
of
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
m
u
s
t
b
e
“
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
”
or
m
u
s
t
t
h
e
3
8
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
,
w
h
e
n
vi
e
w
e
d
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
,
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
“
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
ex
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
”
?
Th
e
B
o
a
r
d
m
u
s
t
c
h
o
o
s
e
t
h
e
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
me
t
h
o
d
o
f
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
.
In
L
U
B
A
N
o
.
2
0
1
2
-
0
4
2
,
L
U
B
A
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
C
ou
n
t
y
h
a
d
t
h
e
o
p
t
i
o
n
t
o
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
t
h
e
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
ap
p
r
o
a
c
h
.
T
h
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
m
a
d
e
fi
n
d
i
n
g
s
o
n
D
C
C
2
2
.
3
6
.
0
2
0
(
A
)
(
3
)
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
v
i
e
w
e
d
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
.
T
h
e
pa
r
t
i
e
s
d
i
d
n
o
t
c
o
n
t
e
s
t
t
h
a
t
p
o
i
n
t
.
Sample motion for BOCC: “Move that the BOCC finds that the appropriate analysis is whether the conditions of approval contained in the CMP, when viewed as a whole, have been substantially exercised.”
2.
De
f
i
n
e
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
“
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
.
”
a.
A
d
o
p
t
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
’
s
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
.
b.
A
d
o
p
t
o
t
h
e
r
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
“
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
ci
s
e
d
”
t
o
m
e
a
n
“
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
i
n
g
o
r
c
a
r
r
y
i
n
g
o
u
t
a
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
t
o
a
s
i
g
n
i
fi
c
a
n
t
d
e
g
r
e
e
b
u
t
n
o
t
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
ly.” This definition was not
ch
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
d
b
y
a
n
y
p
a
r
t
y
a
n
d
w
a
s
n
o
t
d
i
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
b
y
L
U
B
A
.
Sample motion for BOCC: “Move that the BOCC adopt the Hearings Officer’s definition of ‘substantially exercised.’”
3.
Re
c
o
n
c
i
l
e
d
i
s
p
u
t
e
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
m
e
a
n
i
n
g
o
f
th
e
w
o
r
d
s
“
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
”
a
n
d
“
c
o
m
p
l
y
”
i
n
D
C
C
22
.
3
6
.
0
2
0
(
A
)
(
3
)
:
‘W
h
e
r
e
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
s
n
o
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
,
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
e
r
m
i
t
o
r
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
an
d
a
n
y
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
i
s
n
o
t
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
o
f
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
.
’
a.
Ad
o
p
t
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
’
s
de
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
.
b.
Ad
o
p
t
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
.
In
L
U
B
A
N
o
.
2
0
1
2
-
0
4
2
,
L
U
B
A
g
a
v
e
t
h
e
Co
u
n
t
y
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
:
“O
n
r
e
m
a
n
d
…
t
h
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
m
u
s
t
b
e
ab
l
e
t
o
f
i
n
d
b
o
t
h
t
h
a
t
the 38 conditions of
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
,
v
i
e
w
e
d
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
,
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
s
u
b
s
ta
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
a
n
d
t
h
a
t
f
o
r
a
n
y
o
f
t
h
e
3
8
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
w
h
e
r
e
t
h
e
r
e
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
a
fa
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
f
u
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
cise the condition, the
ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
i
s
n
o
t
a
t
f
a
u
l
t
.
”
(
L
U
B
A
N
o
.
2
-
1
2
-
0
4
2
;
p
.
2
0
)
In
o
t
h
e
r
w
o
r
d
s
,
L
U
B
A
v
i
e
w
e
d
“
e
x
er
c
i
s
e
”
a
n
d
“
c
o
m
p
l
y
”
i
n
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
ext of the code to mean the
sa
m
e
t
h
i
n
g
.
T
h
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
f
o
l
l
o
w
e
d
t
h
o
s
e
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
.
(
H
O
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
;
p
.
1
4
)
Th
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
a
r
g
u
e
s
t
h
a
t
“
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
”
a
n
d
“
c
o
m
p
l
y
”
have different meanings in the context of
th
e
c
o
d
e
.
E
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
a
n
a
c
t
;
c
o
m
p
l
y
m
e
an
s
t
o
o
b
e
y
.
T
h
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
,
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
c
a
n
b
e
i
n
fu
l
l
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
e
v
e
n
i
f
n
o
a
c
t
i
o
n
h
a
s
t
a
k
e
n
p
l
ac
e
w
i
t
h
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
t
o
a condition. (Applicant’s
Ju
n
e
1
8
,
2
0
1
4
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
;
p
a
g
e
s
4
-
5
)
Th
e
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
a
r
g
u
e
s
t
h
a
t
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t’
s
a
s
s
e
r
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
c
o
n
s
i
s
tent with the LUBA decision
an
d
,
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
y
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
d
u
r
i
ng
t
h
e
L
U
B
A
a
p
p
e
a
l
,
a
r
e
b
a
r
r
e
d
f
r
o
m
t
h
i
s
pr
o
c
e
e
d
i
n
g
.
(
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
J
u
n
e
1
1
,
2
0
1
4
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
;
p
a
g
e
s
6
-
7
)
Sample motion for BOCC: “Move that the BOCC adopt the Hearings Officer’s/Applicant’s usage of the terms “exercise” and “comply” in DCC 22.36.020(A)(3).”
2
Is
s
u
e
Bo
a
r
d
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
R
e
c
o
r
d
Staff Comment
4.
De
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
t
h
e
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
t
w
o
-
y
e
a
r
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
pe
r
i
o
d
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
M
P
.
a.
U
s
e
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
d
a
t
e
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
b
y
LU
B
A
(
1
1
/
1
8
/
1
1
)
.
b.
U
s
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
d
a
t
e
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
b
y
He
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
(
1
2
/
7
/
1
1
)
.
In
L
U
B
A
N
o
.
2
0
1
2
-
0
4
2
,
L
U
B
A
r
e
c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
t
h
e
e
xpiration date for the CMP as November
18
,
2
0
1
1
.
T
h
a
t
d
a
t
e
w
a
s
n
o
t
a
p
p
e
a
l
e
d
,
a
n
d
h
a
s
n
o
t
been challenged in subsequent proceedings.As a practical matter, the two-year period is not really at issue because the evidence relative to whether the 38 conditions of approval were substantially exercised falls within the effective two-year period identified by the Hearings Officer or LUBA. Sample motion for BOCC: “Move that the BOCC find that all of the evidence presented in this matter, relative to the conditions of approval, fall within the effective two-year period.”
3
Is
s
u
e
Bo
a
r
d
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
R
e
c
o
r
d
Staff Comment
5.
De
f
i
n
e
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
“
f
a
u
l
t
.
”
a.
A
d
o
p
t
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
’
s
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
.
b.
A
d
o
p
t
o
t
h
e
r
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
“
f
a
u
l
t
”
t
o
m
e
an
“
r
e
a
s
o
n
s
f
o
r
w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
w
a
s
n
o
t
re
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
b
u
t
n
o
t
l
i
mi
t
e
d
t
o
,
d
e
l
a
y
b
y
a
s
t
a
t
e
o
r
federal agency in issuing a
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
p
e
r
m
i
t
.
”
N
e
i
t
h
e
r
p
a
r
t
y
o
f
f
e
r
e
d
a
n
a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n
.
Sample motion for BOCC: “Move that the BOCC adopt the Hearings Officer’s definition of ‘fault.’”
6.
Re
v
i
e
w
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
’
s
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s
a
s
t
o
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
1
,
1
4
E
,
2
3
,
3
2
a
n
d
3
8
.
a.
A
d
o
p
t
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
’
s
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s
,
wi
t
h
o
r
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
m
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
b.
A
d
o
p
t
o
t
h
e
r
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
i
e
d
w
i
t
h
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
1
,
1
4
E
,
2
3
a
n
d
32
,
a
n
d
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
3
8
.
T
h
e
p
a
r
t
i
e
s
d
i
d
n
o
t
c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
t
h
o
s
e
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s
,
ex
c
e
p
t
w
i
t
h
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
t
o
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
on
3
8
.
I
n
s
u
m
m
a
r
y
,
t
h
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
gs Officer found that the
ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
d
i
d
n
o
t
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
38
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
i
t
d
i
d
n
o
t
o
b
t
a
i
n
f
i
n
a
l
F
M
P
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
du
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
i
o
d
;
i
t
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
ex
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
b
y
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
d
e
f
e
n
d
i
n
g
i
t
s
ad
e
q
u
a
c
y
o
n
a
p
p
e
a
l
(
H
O
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
;
p
.
4
3
)
.
Th
e
o
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
s
t
h
i
s
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
w
i
l
d
l
i
f
e
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
w
a
s
u
l
t
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
re
j
e
c
t
e
d
b
y
L
U
B
A
a
n
d
t
h
e
C
o
u
r
t
o
f
A
p
p
e
al
s
(
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
J
u
n
e
1
8
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
;
p
.
6
)
.
Sample motion for BOCC: “Move that the BOCC adopt the Hearings Officer’s findings as to conditions 1, 14E, 23, 32[and 38].”
4
Is
s
u
e
Bo
a
r
d
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
R
e
c
o
r
d
Staff Comment
7.
T
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
ov
e
r
t
u
r
n
t
h
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
’
s
de
c
i
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
i
t
w
i
t
h
h
e
r
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
de
c
i
s
i
o
n
,
a
r
g
u
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
i
t
i
s
t
h
e
b
e
t
t
e
r
in
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
c
o
d
e
,
a
s
i
t
p
e
r
t
a
i
n
s
t
o
t
h
e
de
s
t
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
r
e
s
o
r
t
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
Th
e
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
b
j
e
c
t
s
,
a
s
s
e
r
t
i
n
g
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
LU
B
A
a
n
d
C
o
u
r
t
o
f
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
s
ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
c
i
r
c
u
m
s
c
r
i
b
e
t
h
e
i
s
s
u
e
s
o
n
r
e
m
a
n
d
an
d
t
h
e
s
c
o
p
e
o
f
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
’
s
r
e
v
i
e
w
.
Th
e
i
s
s
u
e
b
e
f
o
r
e
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
i
s
t
o
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
t
h
e
ef
f
e
c
t
o
f
t
h
e
L
U
B
A
a
n
d
C
o
u
r
t
o
f
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
de
c
i
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
’
s
s
c
o
p
e
o
f
re
v
i
e
w
/
a
d
m
i
s
s
i
b
l
e
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
.
L
U
B
A
’
s
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
,
af
f
i
r
m
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
C
o
u
r
t
o
f
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
,
w
a
s
t
h
a
t
,
fo
r
a
n
y
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
h
a
v
e
n
o
t
b
e
e
n
f
u
l
l
y
co
m
p
l
i
e
d
w
i
t
h
d
u
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
t
w
o
-
y
e
a
r
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
pe
r
i
o
d
,
t
h
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
c
a
n
c
o
n
c
l
u
d
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
CM
P
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
w
a
s
i
n
i
t
i
a
te
d
o
n
l
y
i
f
i
t
f
i
n
d
s
,
ba
s
e
d
o
n
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
,
t
h
a
t
f
o
r
s
u
c
h
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
t
h
e
“
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
i
s
n
o
t
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
o
f
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
.
”
a.
Fo
l
l
o
w
r
e
a
s
o
n
i
n
g
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
b
y
Op
p
o
n
e
n
t
(
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
d
a
t
e
d
Ju
n
e
1
1
,
2
0
1
4
)
.
S
o
m
e
i
s
s
u
e
s
h
a
v
e
al
r
e
a
d
y
b
e
e
n
d
e
c
i
d
e
d
b
y
L
U
B
A
:
W
h
e
t
h
e
r
i
t
i
s
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
t
o
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
3
8
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
r
j
u
s
t
t
h
o
s
e
th
a
t
i
t
c
o
n
t
e
n
d
s
d
o
n
o
t
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
su
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
l
i
k
e
th
e
F
M
P
a
n
d
f
i
n
a
l
p
l
a
t
s
.
Wh
e
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
“
a
n
y
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
to
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
mu
s
t
n
o
t
b
e
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
o
f
t
h
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
”
a
p
p
l
i
e
s
t
o
a
l
l
o
f
t
h
e
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
r
o
n
l
y
th
o
s
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
i
n
he
r
f
i
r
s
t
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
f
o
u
n
d
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
.
So
m
e
i
s
s
u
e
s
a
r
e
b
a
r
r
e
d
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
y
we
r
e
n
o
t
r
a
i
s
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
p
r
i
o
r
c
a
s
e
:
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
a
r
g
u
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
“e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
”
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
m
e
a
n
“c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
”
w
a
s
n
o
t
r
a
i
s
e
d
b
e
f
o
r
e
th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
,
o
r
i
n
su
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
a
p
p
e
a
l
s
t
o
L
U
B
A
o
r
Co
u
r
t
o
f
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
.
Th
e
B
o
a
r
d
’
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
i
t
s
c
o
d
e
is
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
b
y
L
U
B
A
a
n
d
C
o
u
r
t
o
f
Ap
p
e
a
l
s
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
s
,
a
n
d
O
R
S
1
9
7
.
8
2
9
do
e
s
n
o
t
a
p
p
l
y
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
u
r
t
o
f
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
.
In
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
o
d
e
a
l
s
o
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
he
r
e
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
L
U
B
A
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
th
a
t
t
h
e
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
v
e
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
t
o
b
e
ap
p
l
i
e
d
i
s
t
h
a
t
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
f
o
u
n
d
i
n
t
h
e
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
f
o
r
t
h
e
CM
P
.
b.
Fo
l
l
o
w
r
e
a
s
o
n
i
n
g
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
b
y
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
(
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
d
a
t
e
d
Ju
n
e
1
8
,
2
0
1
4
)
.
T
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
i
s
t
h
e
f
i
n
a
l
ar
b
i
t
e
r
o
f
w
h
a
t
i
t
s
o
w
n
c
o
d
e
m
e
a
n
s
:
OR
S
1
9
7
.
8
2
9
(
1
)
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
t
h
a
t
LU
B
A
s
h
a
l
l
a
f
f
i
r
m
a
l
o
c
a
l
go
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t
’
s
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
i
t
s
ow
n
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
w
i
t
h
so
m
e
e
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
s
.
T
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
h
a
s
no
t
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
w
h
a
t
D
C
C
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
s
c
o
p
e
o
f
t
h
e
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
o
n
r
e
m
a
n
d
i
s
l
i
m
i
t
e
d
b
y
L
U
B
A
’
s
de
c
i
s
i
o
n
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
i
n
g
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
T
h
o
r
n
b
u
r
g
h
D
e
s
ti
n
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
s
o
r
t
w
a
s
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
e
d
u
n
d
e
r
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
22
.
3
6
.
0
2
0
(
A
)
(
3
)
.
Op
p
o
n
e
n
t
o
b
j
e
c
t
s
t
o
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
Applicant in its presentation to the Board
on
J
u
n
e
4
o
n
t
h
e
g
r
o
u
n
d
s
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
i
s
s
u
e
s
h
a
v
e
e
it
h
e
r
b
e
e
n
r
e
s
o
l
v
e
d
b
y
LUBA and the Court of
Ap
p
e
a
l
s
o
r
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
r
a
i
s
e
d
b
e
l
o
w
a
nd
,
t
h
u
s
,
n
o
t
r
e
m
a
n
d
e
d
.
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
c
i
t
e
s
Beck v. City of
Ti
l
l
a
m
o
o
k
a
n
d
Ha
t
l
e
y
v
.
U
m
a
t
i
l
l
a
C
o
u
n
t
y
(
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
d
a
t
e
d
J
u
n
e
1
1
,
2
0
1
4
;
p
a
g
e
s
3-
8
)
.
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
:
Wh
e
t
h
e
r
i
t
i
s
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
c
o
m
p
liance with all 38 conditions of approval or
ju
s
t
t
h
o
s
e
t
h
a
t
d
o
n
o
t
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
s
u
b
s
e
q
u
e
n
t
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
Wh
e
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
p
r
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
“
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
ly with the conditions must not be the
fa
u
l
t
o
f
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
”
a
p
p
l
i
e
s
t
o
a
l
l
o
f
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
approval or only those that
th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
i
n
h
e
r
f
i
r
s
t
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
f
o
u
n
d
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
a
r
g
u
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
“
e
x
e
r
ci
s
e
”
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
m
e
a
n
“
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
”
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
a
r
g
u
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
a
n
e
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
Beck rule prohibiting raising new issues
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
r
e
b
u
t
s
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
’
a
r
g
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
n
i
t
s
J
u
n
e
1
8
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
,
c
i
t
i
n
g
Gage v. City of
Po
r
t
l
a
n
d
,
S
i
p
o
r
e
n
v
.
C
i
t
y
o
f
M
e
d
f
o
r
d
an
d
Ca
n
f
i
e
l
d
v
.
U
m
a
t
i
l
l
a
C
o
u
n
t
y
(Applicant’s submittal
da
t
e
d
J
u
n
e
1
8
,
2
0
1
4
;
p
a
g
e
s
1-
4
)
.
A
r
g
u
m
e
n
t
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
:
Th
e
B
o
a
r
d
i
s
t
h
e
f
i
n
a
l
a
r
b
i
t
e
r
o
f
i
t
s
o
w
n
c
o
d
e
(
O
R
S
1
9
7
.
8
2
9
(
1
)
LU
B
A
g
i
v
e
s
d
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
B
o
a
r
d
’
s
i
n
t
e
rpretation of it code as long as that
in
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
i
s
p
l
a
u
s
i
b
l
e
Th
e
C
o
u
r
t
o
f
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
s
h
a
l
l
a
f
f
i
r
m
L
U
B
A
u
n
l
ess it found the order to be unlawful in
su
b
s
t
a
n
c
e
o
r
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
(
O
R
S
1
9
7
.
8
5
0
(
9
)
(
a
)
)
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
o
b
j
e
c
t
s
t
o
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
t
e
s
t
i
m
o
n
y
r
e
ga
r
d
i
n
g
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
m
a
d
e
b
y
f
o
r
m
e
r
C
o
u
n
t
y
Co
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
e
r
s
o
n
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
C
M
P
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
o
n
th
e
b
a
s
i
s
o
f
i
m
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
b
l
e
a
t
t
e
m
p
t
t
o
r
e
-
li
t
i
g
a
t
e
t
h
a
t
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
.
T
h
o
s
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
w
e
r
e
cr
i
t
i
c
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
a
p
p
lication materials and
qu
e
s
t
i
o
n
e
d
t
h
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
t
h
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
c
i
t
e
s
t
o
Lord v. City of Oregon City
(A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
d
a
t
e
d
J
u
n
e
1
8
,
2
0
1
4
;
p
.
7
)
.
5
Is
s
u
e
Bo
a
r
d
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
R
e
c
o
r
d
Staff Comment
22
.
3
6
.
0
2
0
(
A
)
(
3
)
m
e
a
n
s
.
Th
e
C
o
u
r
t
o
f
A
p
p
e
a
l
s
w
a
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
to
a
f
f
i
r
m
L
U
B
A
u
n
l
e
s
s
i
t
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
e
or
d
e
r
t
o
b
e
u
n
l
a
w
f
u
l
i
n
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
c
e
or
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
(
O
R
S
1
9
7
.
8
5
0
(
9
)
(
a
)
)
.
Th
e
B
o
a
r
d
i
s
f
r
e
e
t
o
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
D
C
C
22
.
3
6
.
0
2
0
(
A
)
(
3
)
a
s
l
o
n
g
a
s
i
t
s
in
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
i
s
p
l
a
u
s
i
b
l
e
.
c.
O
t
h
e
r
.
8.
De
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
,
a
s
t
o
e
a
c
h
r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
,
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
i
t
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
:
Ex
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
Su
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
E
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
If
n
o
t
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
o
r
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
ex
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
,
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
i
s
a
t
fa
u
l
t
.
In
L
U
B
A
N
o
.
2
0
1
2
-
0
4
2
,
L
U
B
A
g
a
v
e
t
h
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
:
Co
u
n
t
y
m
u
s
t
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
a
l
l
of
t
h
e
3
8
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
ha
v
e
b
e
e
n
‘
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
.
’
Fo
r
t
h
o
s
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
h
a
v
e
n
o
t
be
e
n
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
,
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
to
d
o
s
o
i
s
n
o
t
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
o
f
t
h
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
.
Wi
t
h
r
e
s
p
e
c
t
t
o
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
t
h
a
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
‘
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
o
r
co
n
t
i
n
u
i
n
g
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
’
,
t
h
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
ma
y
f
i
n
d
t
h
a
t
a
n
y
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
o
n
t
h
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
p
a
r
t
t
o
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
su
c
h
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
i
s
n
o
t
t
h
e
f
a
u
l
t
o
f
th
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
co
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
c
y
t
h
a
t
w
o
u
l
d
t
r
i
g
g
e
r
ob
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
do
e
s
n
o
t
a
n
d
m
a
y
n
e
v
e
r
e
x
i
s
t
or
t
h
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
o
b
t
a
i
n
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
s
i
t
e
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
i
s
n
o
t
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
fa
u
l
t
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
m
o
s
t
o
f
t
h
e
C
M
P
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
oval under consideration
im
p
o
s
e
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
th
a
t
d
i
d
n
o
t
o
c
c
u
r
b
e
f
o
r
e
t
h
e
C
M
P
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
be
c
a
m
e
v
o
i
d
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
f
u
l
l
y
comply with contingent obligations was the
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
u
l
t
.
S
h
e
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
s
h
e
l
a
c
k
e
d
au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
t
o
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
whether the Applicant
su
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
m
o
s
t
o
f
th
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
w
i
t
h
w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e
A
pplicant failed to fully comply
be
c
a
u
s
e
n
o
n
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
a
s
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
u
l
t
(
H
O
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
;
p
a
g
e
s
2
7
-
3
1
)
.
Th
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
a
s
s
e
r
t
s
t
h
a
t
a
l
l
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
h
a
v
e
b
e
en fully complied with but if the
Bo
a
r
d
f
i
n
d
s
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
t
h
e
n
a
n
y
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
e
c
ontingent conditions of
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
w
a
s
n
o
t
t
h
e
A
p
p
li
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
u
l
t
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
:
De
l
a
y
i
n
t
h
e
B
L
M
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
e
w
i
l
d
l
i
f
e
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
.
TR
C
’
s
b
a
n
k
r
u
p
t
c
y
p
r
o
c
e
e
d
i
n
g
s
a
n
d
ot
h
e
r
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
Op
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
a
p
p
e
a
l
s
.
Fu
t
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
n
g
F
M
P
r
e
m
a
n
d
.
(
A
p
p
l
i
c
ant’s Power Point presentation, June 4,
20
1
4
)
Th
e
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
a
s
s
e
r
t
s
t
h
a
t
2
2
c
o
n
d
i
ti
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
h
a
v
e
n
o
t
b
e
e
n
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
o
r
fu
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
i
e
d
w
i
t
h
a
n
d
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
e
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
t
conditions of approval
wa
s
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
u
l
t
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
:
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
o
n
B
L
M
l
a
n
d
c
o
u
l
d
h
a
v
e
been resolved prior to submitting the
CM
P
a
n
d
/
o
r
r
e
s
o
l
v
e
d
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
F
e
b
r
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
1
a
n
d
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
1
2
(
O
p
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
su
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
d
a
t
e
d
J
u
n
e
1
1
,
2
0
1
4
;
p
a
g
e
s
9
-
1
0
)
.
Th
e
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
d
i
f
f
i
c
u
l
t
i
e
s
e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e
d
b
y
T
RC predate the bankruptcy proceedings and
th
e
e
f
f
e
c
t
s
o
f
t
h
e
r
e
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
.
Op
p
o
n
e
n
t
’
s
a
p
p
e
a
l
s
t
o
l
l
e
d
t
h
e
e
x
p
i
r
a
t
i
o
n
d
a
te of the approval and Opponent cannot be
bl
a
m
e
d
f
o
r
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
d
e
l
a
y
in
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
F
M
P
r
e
m
a
n
d
.
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
h
a
d
o
n
e
y
e
a
r
a
n
d
n
i
n
e
m
o
n
t
h
s
t
o
initiate FMP remand and failure to do so Refer to attachment showing all 38 conditions of approval, color coded pursuant to Hearings Officer’s decision.
6
Is
s
u
e
Bo
a
r
d
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
R
e
c
o
r
d
Staff Comment
wa
s
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
u
l
t
.
9.
De
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
,
w
h
e
n
v
i
e
w
e
d
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
,
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
su
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
.
a.
Th
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
,
w
h
e
n
vi
e
w
e
d
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
,
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
su
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
.
b.
Th
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
,
w
h
e
n
vi
e
w
e
d
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
,
h
a
v
e
n
o
t
b
e
e
n
su
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
2
2
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
an
d
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
e
r
e
o
f
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
i
e
d
wi
t
h
a
n
d
t
h
a
t
s
u
c
h
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
w
a
s
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
u
l
t
.
T
h
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
“
v
i
e
w
e
d
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
”
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
r
e
quires the County to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
d
e
s
t
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
r
e
s
o
r
t
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
to
a
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
d
e
g
r
e
e
,
a
n
d
t
h
a
t
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
a
ti
o
n
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
i
l
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
a
n
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
o
f
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
t
o
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
7
o
f
t
h
e
1
5
c
on
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
t
h
a
t
w
e
r
e
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
i
e
d
wi
t
h
(
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
9
,
1
3
,
1
4
A
,
1
4
B
,
2
2
,
3
6
a
n
d
37
)
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
o
n
l
y
n
o
t
a
t
ions on the FMP,
re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
t
o
a
n
d
f
i
l
i
n
g
o
f
C
C
&
R
s
,
m
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
c
h
art and coordination with the
Sh
e
r
i
f
f
.
I
n
c
o
n
t
r
a
s
t
,
s
h
e
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
e
o
t
h
e
r
8
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
(
3
,
8
,
1
0
,
1
1
,
1
5
,
1
9
,
2
4
a
n
d
3
0
)
a
r
e
re
l
a
t
i
v
e
l
y
m
o
r
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
mo
r
e
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
v
e
a
c
t
i
o
n
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
t
h
e
r
e
s
o
r
t
(o
b
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
,
w
a
t
e
r
r
i
gh
t
s
,
s
t
a
t
e
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
a
n
d
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
,
w
e
l
l
a
g
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
s
,
f
i
r
e
di
s
t
r
i
c
t
a
n
n
e
x
a
t
i
o
n
,
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
o
b
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
c
o
u
n
t
y approval of detailed and complex plans
fo
r
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
c
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
f
i
r
e
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
)
.
Ul
t
i
m
a
t
e
l
y
,
t
h
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
Officer found that she
ca
n
n
o
t
c
o
n
c
l
u
d
e
t
h
e
C
M
P
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
have been substantially exercised because
on
l
y
8
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
1
5
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
i
e
d
w
i
t
h
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
action by the applicant
re
l
a
t
i
v
e
t
o
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
d
e
s
t
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
r
e
s
o
r
t
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
a
l
s
o
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
a
t
4
a
d
d
i
ti
o
n
a
l
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
h
a
d
b
e
e
n
f
u
l
l
y
co
m
p
l
i
e
d
w
i
t
h
(
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
1
,
1
4
E
,
2
3
a
n
d
3
2
)
.
T
h
e Hearings Officer found these conditions
di
d
n
o
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
a
c
t
i
on
b
y
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
.
T
w
o
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
new land use approvals if the
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
C
M
P
o
r
o
p
e
n
s
p
a
c
e
a
r
e
c
h
a
n
g
e
d
.
T
h
e
o
t
her two simply put the Applicant on notice
of
w
h
a
t
w
a
s
n
o
t
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
C
M
P
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
f
o
u
n
d
t
h
e
r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
2
2
c
o
n
d
itions of approval and portions thereof with
wh
i
c
h
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
e
i
t
h
e
r
f
a
i
l
e
d
t
o
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
y
or did not substantially exercise required the
ma
j
o
r
i
t
y
o
f
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
a
c
t
i
o
n
s
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
t
o
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
t
h
e
r
e
s
o
r
t
- i.e., securing subdivision plat
an
d
s
i
t
e
p
l
a
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
re
s
o
r
t
e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
a
m
e
n
i
t
i
e
s
(
H
O
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
;
pa
g
e
s
4
4
-
4
7
)
.
Th
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
a
r
g
u
e
s
:
On
l
y
t
h
o
s
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
e
x
e
r
c
i
sed before FMP approval or concurrently
wi
t
h
a
n
F
M
P
a
r
e
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
.
H
e
r
e
,
e
v
e
r
y
on
e
o
f
t
h
o
s
e
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
f
u
l
l
y
ex
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
.
I
f
f
u
l
l
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
e
x
i
s
t
s
,
t
h
e
n
s
u
b
s
tantial exercise also necessarily exists.
Fo
r
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
4
1
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
f
u
l
l
y
exercised or are fully complied with, and
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
4
1
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
ci
s
e
d
.
T
h
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
w
h
i
c
h
su
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
w
a
s
p
e
r
m
i
ss
i
b
l
e
,
b
u
t
h
a
s
n
o
t
y
e
t
o
c
c
u
r
r
e
d. When the applicant has
ei
t
h
e
r
f
u
l
l
y
o
r
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
ev
e
r
y
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
,
a
n
d
i
s
i
n
f
u
l
l
co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
r
e
s
t
,
s
u
b
s
ta
n
t
i
a
l
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
o
f
t
h
e
c
o
n
d
i
tions as a whole must exist.The Board can give more or less weight to any part icular condition; the Board needs to make this determination by considering all approval conditions relative to each other and their importance to the project. Sample motion for BOCC: “Move that the BOCC find that when viewed as a whole the approval conditions in the CMP have/have not been substantially exercised.”
7
Is
s
u
e
Bo
a
r
d
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
R
e
c
o
r
d
Staff Comment
Su
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
e
x
i
s
t
s
if
e
v
e
r
y
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
c
o
u
l
d
have been exercised by this
po
i
n
t
i
n
t
h
e
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
e
x
e
r
c
i
s
e
d
.
T
h
i
s
i
s
2
0
o
f
4
1
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
,
a
l
m
o
s
t
5
0
%
.
Th
e
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
O
f
f
i
c
e
r
e
r
r
e
d
i
n
g
i
v
i
n
g
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
w
e
i
g
h
t
t
o
s
o
me conditions over others.
Fi
n
a
l
l
y
,
an
y
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
t
o
f
u
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
o
s
e 22 remaining conditions of approval is
no
t
t
h
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
f
a
u
l
t
,
a
s
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
d
u
n
d
e
r
Issue #7, above. (See Applicant’s final
ar
g
u
m
e
n
t
d
a
t
e
d
J
u
n
e
2
5
,
2
0
1
4
)