Chapter 17.130
PROCEDURES

Sections:

17.130.010    Review required.

17.130.020    Pre-application review.

17.130.030    Application types and classification.

17.130.040    Application contents.

17.130.050    Review for technically complete status.

17.130.060    Reserved.

17.130.070    Approval criteria.

17.130.080    Type I procedure.

17.130.090    Type II procedure.

17.130.100    Type III procedure.

17.130.110    Type IV procedure.

17.130.120    Notices.

17.130.130    Appeal.

17.130.140    Expiration and extension of decisions.

17.130.150    Post-decision review.

17.130.010 Review required.

Land use project review and approval is required prior to issuance of building permits for the following:

(1) The division of land or alteration of existing lot (parcel) lines;

(2) All conditional uses and new uses in any district;

(3) All changes in the use of a structure that increase the intensity of use, such as by increasing the gross floor area, height or bulk of the structure, number of access points or parking spaces, number or size of signs, or other measures of intensity or the structure location or significant elements of the design; and

(4) Building and demolition permits or any change, except painting and minor repair, to the exterior of properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.020 Pre-application review.

(1) Applicability.

(a) Unless otherwise expressly provided in this title, all applications subject to Type III or Type IV review are subject to pre-application review unless the director waives the requirement in writing.

(b) The applicant shall submit the pre-application materials to the city.

(2) Waiver. The city discourages waiver of the pre-application process. In the event that the director waives the pre-application review, the pre-application waiver shall state that waiver of pre-application review may increase the maximum time for review for technically complete status and may increase the risk that the application will be rejected or processing will be delayed.

(3) Application Contents.

(a) At a minimum, a pre-application submittal shall include the following:

(i) The requisite fee and three paper copies and one electronic copy of the following information;

(ii) A completed form provided by the city for that purpose;

(iii) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the owner(s), engineer, surveyor, planner, and/or attorney and the person with whom official contact should be made regarding the application;

(iv) A preliminary site plan which should include, where applicable, a north arrow, date, graphic scale, existing and proposed lots, tracts, easements, rights-of-way, development, access, parking, maneuvering, structures and landscaping on the site; existing and proposed natural features on the site, including vegetation, topography and grades; existing and proposed utilities (water, sewer, drainage, fire hydrants); and existing lots, tracts, easements, rights-of-way and structures abutting the site; provided, information about off-site structures and other features may be approximate if such information is not in the public record. The applicant shall provide three copies of the plan reduced to fit on an eight-and-one-half-inch by 11-inch page. Principal features of the plan shall be dimensioned. The applicant is encouraged to submit drawings showing the elevation(s) of a proposed primary structure;

(v) Proposed dedications to the city or other agency, if applicable;

(vi) A written description of the proposed use or development. The description shall identify any variances, adjustments or exceptions needed for approval of the plan.

(4) Scheduling, Notice and Attendees.

(a) Within seven calendar days after receipt of an application for pre-application review, the city shall mail or otherwise convey written notice of the pending pre-application conference to the applicant and other interested agencies. The notice shall state the date, time and location of the pre-application conference, the purposes of pre-application review, and the nature of the conference.

(b) The pre-application conference shall be scheduled not more than 21 calendar days after the notice is mailed or otherwise conveyed.

(c) The director shall determine who shall be invited to the meeting. In addition to the applicant and representatives, possible attendees include the design assistance team (DAT), public works and community development director, or their designee, the consulting city engineer, a representative from affected service districts, and representatives from interested state agencies and neighborhood associations recognized by the city council or by Coos County.

(5) Meeting Summary. Within 14 calendar days after a pre-application conference, the director will provide a written summary of the conference to the applicant and to other persons who request it. The written summary shall, to the extent possible:

(a) Summarize the proposed application(s);

(b) Provide the relevant approval criteria and development standards in the city code or other applicable law; and exceptions, adjustments or other variations from applicable criteria or standards that may be necessary;

(c) Evaluate the information offered by the applicant to comply with the relevant criteria and standards, and identify specific additional information that is needed to respond to the relevant criteria and standards or is recommended to respond to other issues;

(d) Identify applicable application fees in effect at the time, with a disclaimer that fees may change;

(e) Identify information relevant to the application that may be in the possession of the city or other agencies of which the city is aware, such as:

(i) Comprehensive plan map designation and zoning on and in the vicinity of the property subject to the application;

(ii) Physical development limitations, such as steep or unstable slopes, wetlands, or water bodies, that exist on and in the vicinity of the property subject to the application;

(iii) Other applications that have been approved or are being considered for land in the vicinity of the property subject to the proposed application that may affect or be affected by the proposed application.

(6) Time Limit. The written summary of a pre-application conference is valid for up to one year. If more than one year has elapsed between the date of the last pre-application conference and the date an application is submitted, a new pre-application conference may be required. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.030 Application types and classification.

(1) Applicability. Applications for land use review are subject to procedures in this chapter unless otherwise expressly provided in other chapters of the CBDC.

(2) Concurrent Application. If the applicant requests more than one type of review for a given development, an applicant may submit all applications required for the development at one time, unless otherwise prohibited from doing so by law. Concurrent applications for a given development are subject to the highest type procedure that applies to any of the applications.

(3) Procedure Types. There are four types of land use review procedures. This chapter or the chapter that authorizes an application generally identifies the type of procedure that applies to the application. If the appropriate procedure is not clearly defined, the director shall decide which of the four procedures will apply, based on the following considerations:

(a) A Type I process involves nondiscretionary standards or standards that require the exercise of professional judgment about technical issues.

(b) A Type II process involves a mix of discretionary and nondiscretionary standards that require the exercise of limited discretion about nontechnical issues and about which there may be a limited public interest.

(c) A Type III process involves standards that require the exercise of substantial discretion and about which there may be a broad public interest.

(d) A Type IV process involves the creation, implementation or amendment of policy or law by ordinance. In contrast to the other three procedure types, the subject of a Type IV process applies to a relatively large geographic area containing many property owners.

(4) Undefined Review. If this title is silent as to the type of review procedure required, the director shall, using a Type I review process, determine the appropriate level of review. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.040 Application contents.

An applicant for development review shall submit the requisite fee and three paper copies and one electronic copy of the information required by CBDC 17.130.050, except as otherwise provided therein, and drawings showing the elevations of all sides of proposed structure(s). Additional copies may be required, depending upon who the review authority is for the application type. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.050 Review for technically complete status.

(1) Applicability and Schedule. Before accepting an application subject to a Type I, II, III or IV review, the director shall determine within 30 calendar days after the application is submitted whether the application is technically complete.

(2) Standards for Technical Completeness. An application is technically complete if it includes the information required by the CBDC section(s) that apply to the application in question. If the CBDC does not list the information a given application is required to contain, then such an application is technically complete if it includes three copies of the following information:

(a) A completed form provided by the city for that purpose;

(b) The name, mailing address, and telephone number of the owner(s), engineer, surveyor, planner, and/or attorney and the person with whom official contact should be made regarding the application;

(c) A preliminary plan at a scale of no more than one inch equals 200 feet, with north arrow, date, graphic scale, existing and proposed lots, tracts, easements, rights-of-way and structures on the site, and existing lots, tracts, easements, rights-of-way and structures abutting the site; provided, information about off-site structures and other features may be approximate if such information is not in the public record. The applicant shall provide three copies of the plan reduced to fit on an eight-and-one-half-inch by 11-inch page. Principal features of the plan shall be dimensioned;

(d) Proposed easements or dedications to the city or other agency, if applicable;

(e) Written authorization to file the application signed by the owner of the property that is the subject of the application, if the applicant is not the same as the owner as listed by the Coos County assessor;

(f) Proof of ownership document, such as copies of deeds and/or a policy or satisfactory commitment for title insurance;

(g) A legal description of the site;

(h) A copy of the pre-application conference summary, if the application was subject to pre-application review, which shall include all information required to address issues, comments and concerns in the summary;

(i) A written description of how the application does or can comply with each applicable approval criterion, and basic facts and other substantial evidence that supports the description;

(j) Applications necessarily associated with the proposal, such as applications for variances to dimensional requirements of the base zone or for modifications to the road standards that are required to approve the proposal;

(k) Preliminary grading, erosion control and drainage plans may be required depending upon the application and if required shall be consistent with applicable provisions of this or other applicable city documents;

(l) Information about proposed utilities, including water and sanitary waste;

(m) Other information the director identified during the pre-application conference as being necessary to issuing a decision on the merits.

(3) Excluded Information. The director may accept as technically complete an application without information listed as being required if such information is not necessary to make a finding required by the law.

(4) Missing Information. If the director determines an application is not technically complete, within 30 calendar days after the city receives the application the director shall send the applicant a written statement rejecting the application. Incompleteness shall be based solely on failure to pay required fees, failure to address the relevant criteria or development regulations, or failure to supply required information and shall not be based on differences of opinion as to quality or accuracy. The statement shall:

(a) List what is required to make the application technically complete;

(b) Specify a date by which the required missing information must be provided;

(c) State that the applicant can apply to extend the deadline for filing the required information, and explain how to do so; and

(d) Include recommendations for additional information that, although not necessary to make the application technically complete, are recommended to address other issues that are or may be relevant to the review.

(5) Final Actions for a Technically Incomplete Application. If the director decides that all of the required information is not submitted by the date specified, or as extended, he or she shall:

(a) Provide a letter rejecting the application for lack of completeness and stating the reasons for the return; or

(b) Issue a decision denying the application based on a lack of information.

(6) The application will be deemed complete by the director for the purpose of this section upon receipt of:

(a) All the missing information;

(b) Some of the missing information and written notice from the applicant that no other information will be provided; or

(c) Written notice from the applicant that none of the missing information will be provided.

(7) Pursuant to ORS 227.178, the city will reach a final decision on an application within 120 calendar days from the date that the application was determined to be complete or deemed complete, including the appeal period, unless the applicant agrees to extend the 120-calendar-day timeline or unless state law provides otherwise.

(8) The 120-calendar-day timeline may be extended at the written request of the applicant.

(9) The applicant may amend the application up to and including 14 calendar days after the application has been deemed complete.

(10) Amendments to an application submitted more than 14 calendar days after the application is deemed complete may be determined by the director to be so substantial that the application should be treated as having been refiled. In such a case, the director shall provide the applicant with the following options: provide the city with a waiver of the 120-day time frame set forth in ORS 227.178 of a minimum of 14 calendar days from the date the amendment was submitted; treat the application as having been refiled as of the date the amendment was submitted; or, decide the application on the basis of the applicant’s materials without the amendment.

(11) For any application which has been on file with the city for more than 180 calendar days and the applicant has not met the obligations of this section, the application will be deemed withdrawn. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.060 Reserved.

[Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.070 Approval criteria.

The director shall approve an application for review if he or she finds the applicant has sustained the burden of proving that:

(1) The application complies with the applicable regulations of the Coos Bay Development Code; or that the application can comply with all applicable regulations by complying with adopted conditions of approval; or that necessary variances have been approved and shall be subject to approval prior to final plat approval.

(2) The development makes adequate provision for public services consistent with the level of service provided in adopted city policies, plans and regulations. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.080 Type I procedure.

(1) Decision. Within 21 calendar days after the date an application subject to a Type I process is accepted as technically complete, the review authority shall issue a decision that approves, approves with conditions, or denies the application; provided, an applicant may agree in writing to extend that time and may provide additional information within that time at the request of the city. The decision shall include a brief summary of the relevant facts and applicable standards for the application and of how the application complies with those standards based on the facts and evidence, including any conditions of approval.

(2) Notice of the Decision. Within seven calendar days after issuing a decision regarding an application subject to a Type I process, the city shall mail a copy of the decision to the applicant and applicant’s representative(s).

(3) Appeal and Post-Decision Review. The notice of decision shall state the date by which the appeal must be filed pursuant to CBDC 17.130.130 or state that the applicant may apply for post-decision changes pursuant to CBDC 17.130.150. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.090 Type II procedure.

(1) Notice of Application. Twenty days prior to a Type II review, the city shall mail a written notice of the application as provided in CBDC 17.130.120.

(2) Comments. The city shall mail to the applicant a copy of comments timely received in response to the notice.

(3) Decision.

(a) Pursuant to CBDC 17.130.050(7), within 120 calendar days after the date an application subject to a Type II process is accepted as technically complete, the review authority shall issue a decision that approves, approves with conditions, or denies the application; including time for any possible appeal up to an appeal by the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA); provided, an applicant may agree in writing to extend that time and may provide additional information within that time at the request of the city.

(b) The decision shall include a brief summary of the relevant facts and applicable standards for the application and a summary of how the application complies with those standards based on the facts and evidence, including any conditions of approval.

(4) Notice of Final Order. Within seven calendar days after issuing a decision, the city shall mail notice of the decision as provided in CBDC 17.130.120.

(5) Appeal and Post-Decision Review. The notice of decision shall state the date by which the appeal must be filed pursuant to CBDC 17.130.130 or state that the applicant may apply for post-decision changes pursuant to CBDC 17.130.150. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.100 Type III procedure.

(1) Hearing. An application subject to a Type III process will be considered at one or more public hearings before the city’s planning commission. Pursuant to CBDC 17.130.050(7), within 120 calendar days after the date an application subject to a Type III process is accepted as technically complete, the review authority shall issue a decision that approves, approves with conditions, or denies the application; including time for any possible appeal up to an appeal by the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA); provided, an applicant may agree in writing to extend that time and may provide additional information within that time at the request of the city.

(2) Notice of Hearing. At least 20 calendar days before the date of the hearing, the city shall mail public notice of the hearing as provided in CBDC 17.130.120. At least 10 days before the date of the hearing, the city shall cause notice of the hearing to be published and posted as provided in CBDC 17.130.120.

(3) Staff Report. At least seven calendar days before the date of the hearing, the director shall issue a written staff report regarding the application(s). The staff report shall set out the relevant facts and applicable standards for the application and a summary of how the application complies with those standards based on the facts and evidence, including any conditions of approval. The city shall mail a copy of the staff report to the planning commission, the applicant, and the applicant’s representative(s) and other parties who request it. Copies of the staff report also shall be available at City Hall seven days prior to the hearing and at the public hearing.

(4) Public Hearings. Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedure adopted by the planning commission. A public hearing shall be recorded on audio or audiovisual tape.

(a) At the beginning of a hearing an announcement shall be made to those in attendance that:

(i) Lists the applicable approval criteria by development code section number.

(ii) Testimony, arguments and evidence must be directed toward the applicable criteria or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or development code which the person believes to apply to the application.

(iii) Failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence with sufficient specificity to afford the decision-making authority and the parties an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals based on that issue.

(iv) Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to the proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow the city to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.

(v) The decision-making authority must be impartial and that members of the decision- making authority shall not have any bias or personal or business interest in the outcome of the application. Prior to the receipt of any testimony, members of the decision-making authority must announce any ex-parte contacts. The decision-making authority shall afford parties an opportunity to challenge any member thereof based on bias, conflicts of interest, or ex-parte contacts.

(vi) State that if any member of the decision-making authority has visited the site, they should describe generally what was observed.

(vii) Summarizes the procedure of the hearing.

(b) After the announcements, the chair shall call for presentation of the staff report. Staff shall describe the proposal and provide a recommendation.

(c) After the presentation of the staff report, the chair shall call for the applicant’s testimony, opposition testimony and neutral testimony, in that order.

(d) At the conclusion of the hearing on each application, the planning commission shall announce one of the following actions:

(i) That the hearing is continued. If the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, then additional notice of the continued hearing is not required to be mailed, published or posted. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, then notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial hearing.

(ii) That the public record is held open to a date and time certain. The planning commission shall state where additional evidence and testimony can be sent, and shall announce any limits on the nature of the evidence that will be received after the hearing.

(iii) That the application(s) is/are taken under advisement, denied, approved, or approved with conditions, together with a brief summary of the basis for the decision, and that a final order will be issued as provided in this section.

(5) Decision. Within 14 calendar days after the date the record closes regarding a given application(s), the planning commission, or staff, shall submit to the city a written decision regarding the application(s). The decision shall set out the relevant facts and applicable standards for the application(s) and a summary of how the application(s) complies with those standards based on the facts and evidence, including any conditions of approval.

(6) Notice of Decision. Within seven calendar days of the date of the decision, the city shall mail a notice of decision as provided in CBDC 17.130.120.

(7) Appeal and Post-Decision Review. The notice of decision shall state the date by which the appeal must be filed pursuant to CBDC 17.130.130 or state that the applicant may apply for post-decision changes pursuant to CBDC 17.130.150. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.110 Type IV procedure.

(1) Hearing. An application subject to a Type IV process will be considered at one or more public hearings before the planning commission and one or more public hearings before the city council. The planning commission and city council may combine their meetings into one public meeting.

(2) Notice of the Initial Planning Commission Hearing. At least 20 calendar days before the date of the first planning commission hearing regarding an application subject to a Type IV process, the city recorder shall mail public notice of the hearing to parties who have requested such notice and to other individuals, firms or agencies as deemed appropriate. At least 10 days before the date of the hearing, the city shall cause notice of the hearing to be published as provided in CBDC 17.130.120.

(3) Staff Report. At least seven calendar days before the date of the first planning commission hearing, the city shall issue a written staff report regarding the application. The staff report shall set out the relevant facts and applicable standards for the application and a summary of how the application complies with those standards. The city shall mail a copy of the staff report to the review authority and to other parties who request it. Copies of the staff report also shall be available at the public hearing.

(4) Public Hearings. Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedure adopted by the review authority, except to the extent waived by the review authority. A public hearing shall be recorded on audio or audiovisual tape.

(a) At the conclusion of a planning commission hearing on an application subject to a Type IV process, the planning commission shall announce one of the following actions, which may not be appealed:

(i) That the hearing is continued. If the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, then additional notice of the continued hearing is not required to be mailed or published. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, then notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial hearing; or

(ii) That the planning commission recommends against or in favor of approval of the application(s) with or without certain changes, or that the planning commission makes no recommendation regarding the application(s), together with a brief summary of the basis for the recommendation.

(b) At least 14 calendar days before the date of the first hearing before the city council, the city shall mail public notice of the hearing to parties who have requested such notice and to other individuals, firms or agencies as deemed appropriate. At least 10 days before the date of the hearing, the city shall cause notice of the hearing to be published as provided in CBDC 17.130.120.

(c) At the conclusion of its initial hearing, the city council may continue the hearing, take an action forwarding the application for further review consistent with the Coos Bay Development Code, or take an action to terminate or postpone further consideration of the application. If the hearing is continued to a place, date and time certain, then additional notice of the continued hearing is not required to be mailed or published. If the hearing is not continued to a place, date and time certain, then notice of the continued hearing shall be given as though it was the initial hearing.

(5) Appeal and Post-Decision Review. An application subject to a Type IV process is not subject to appeal or post-decision review before the city. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.120 Notices.

Notice shall be mailed to owners within a radius of 150 feet of the site for an application subject to Type II review and within a radius of 300 feet of the site for an application subject to Type III or IV review.

(1) Contents of a Notice of Application Subject to Type II Review. The notice of Type II application shall contain at least the following information:

(a) The file number;

(b) The name(s) and address(es) of the applicant and owner;

(c) The legal description of the site;

(d) The street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject property;

(e) A description of the proposal and a listing of the approval criteria by applicable code section number;

(f) A statement that the application can be reviewed at City Hall during working hours, and that copies can be obtained for a fee equal to the city’s cost for providing the copies;

(g) The name and contact information of the city representative to contact regarding the application;

(h) An invitation to comment, in writing, on the proposal and the place, date and time that comments are due;

(i) A statement outlining the appeals process.

(2) Contents of a Notice of a Public Hearing for an Application Subject to a Type III Process. Mailed notice of a public hearing shall contain the following information:

(a) The information required by subsection (1) of this section;

(b) The date, time and place of the hearing;

(c) A statement that the planning commission will conduct the hearing in accordance with the rules of procedure adopted by the planning commission;

(d) A statement that the staff report will be available at least seven days prior to the hearing and how the report may be viewed; and

(e) A statement that interested parties may testify orally or in writing at the public hearing.

(3) Contents of a Notice of a Decision. Notice of a decision subject to a Type I, Type II or Type III process shall contain at least the following information:

(a) A copy or summary of the written decision;

(b) The appeal closing date;

(c) A description of how to file an appeal of the decision; including applicable fees;

(d) A statement that the public record in the case is available for review and the place, days and times for review; and

(e) The name and telephone number of the city staff person to contact for information about the case or to review the case file.

(4) Distribution of Notices by Mail.

(a) The city shall mail notice of application subject to Type II review to:

(i) The applicant and the applicant’s representative;

(A) The property owner of record; shall be the person(s) listed in the records of the Coos County assessor; and

(B) Failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not affect the decision if the notice was sent. A sworn certificate of mailing executed by the person who did the mailing shall be conclusive evidence that notice was mailed to parties listed or referenced in the certificate;

(ii) Agencies with jurisdiction; and

(iii) Other persons with standing who request such notice in writing.

(b) The city shall mail notice of a hearing regarding an application subject to a Type III process to:

(i) The applicant and the applicant’s representative;

(A) The property owner of record; shall be the person(s) listed in the records of the Coos County assessor; and

(B) Failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not affect the decision if the notice was sent. A sworn certificate of mailing executed by the person who did the mailing shall be conclusive evidence that notice was mailed to parties listed or referenced in the certificate.

(ii) Agencies with jurisdiction.

(iii) Other persons with standing who request such notice in writing. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.130 Appeal.

(1) Deadline for Appeal. An appeal together with the requisite fee and information must be received by the city within 15 calendar days of the date of the final order being issued. Any appeal heard by the city’s planning commission or city council must be heard within the 120-day appeal period.

(2) Standing.

(a) A final decision regarding an application subject to a Type I process may be appealed only by the applicant or applicant’s representative.

(b) A final decision regarding an application subject to a Type II process may be appealed by the applicant or applicant’s representative or by any person, agency or firm with an interest in the matter.

(c) A final decision regarding an application subject to a Type III process may be appealed by the applicant or applicant’s representative or by any person, agency or firm who offered oral or written testimony before the planning commission closed the public record in the case.

(d) Appeal of a Type IV Decision. For an appeal regarding a decision subject to a Type IV process, the applicant, the applicant’s representative, any person, agency or firm on either side who offered oral or written testimony may appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). The party must file a notice of intent to appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals, with the required fees, within 21 days after the land use decision becomes final as described by OAR 661-010-0010(3) and 661-010-0015(1)(b). The scope of the review (the record) consists of the materials submitted to, and not rejected by, the decision makers in the course of the local proceedings.

(3) Appeal Contents. An appeal shall include the appropriate fee and the following information:

(a) A form provided for that purpose by the city;

(b) The case number as designated by the city;

(c) The name of the applicant;

(d) The name, address and signature of each appellant;

(e) The reasons why each aspect is in error as a matter of fact or law; and

(f) The evidence relied on to prove the error.

(4) Scope of Review.

(a) An appeal of a Type I or Type II decision shall be conducted de novo.

(b) Type III Decision. The reviewing body shall issue an order stating the scope of review on appeal to be one of the following:

(i) Restricted to the record made on the decision being appealed.

(ii) Limited to such issues as the reviewing body determines necessary for a proper resolution of the matter.

(iii) A de novo hearing on the merits.

(5) Appeal Authority.

(a) Appeal of a Type I Decision. Within seven calendar days after a timely, complete appeal is filed regarding a decision subject to a Type I process, the city shall send to the planning commission a copy of the appeal and the case file together with any new evidence submitted with the appeal. Within 21 calendar days after a timely, complete appeal is filed, the planning commission shall send to the city a final decision for distribution to the applicant and applicant’s representative.

(b) Appeal of a Type II Decision. For an appeal regarding a decision subject to a Type II process, the city shall schedule a public hearing to be held by the planning commission not more than 35 days from the date a complete appeal was timely filed. Notice and a staff report shall be provided, a public hearing shall be conducted, and a decision shall be made and noticed regarding the appeal as for application subject to a Type III process in CBDC 17.130.100.

(c) Appeal of a Type III Decision. For an appeal regarding a decision subject to a Type III process, the city shall schedule a public hearing to be held by the city council not more than 35 days from the date a complete appeal was timely filed. Notice and a staff report shall be provided, a public hearing shall be conducted, and a decision shall be made and noticed regarding the appeal as for application subject to a Type III process in CBDC 17.130.100.

(6) Review on the Record.

(a) The record on appeal of a Type III decision shall be limited to:

(i) A factual report prepared by the director.

(ii) All exhibits, materials, pleadings, memoranda, stipulations and motions submitted by any party and received or considered in reaching the decision under review.

(iii) The written transcript or electronic recording of the hearing and a detailed summary of the evidence.

(b) The appeal authority shall make its decision based upon the record after first granting the right of argument on the record, but not the introduction of additional evidence to any party who has filed a notice of appeal. The appeal authority shall decide if the correct procedure was followed and, if so, was the correct or appropriate decision made based on the applicable policies.

(7) Review Consisting of Additional Evidence or De Novo Review.

(a) Except as otherwise specified in this code, or required by state law, the appeal authority may hear the entire matter de novo; or it may admit additional testimony and other evidence without holding a de novo hearing if it is satisfied that that additional testimony or other evidence could not reasonably have been presented at the prior hearing. The appeal authority shall consider all of the following in making such a decision:

(i) Prejudice to the parties.

(ii) Convenience or availability of evidence at the time of the initial hearing.

(iii) Surprise to opposing parties.

(iv) The competency, relevancy and materiality of the proposed testimony or other evidence.

(v) Such other factors as may be determined by the reviewing body to be appropriate.

(b) “De novo hearing” shall mean a hearing by the appeal authority as if the action had not been previously heard and as if no decision had been rendered, except that all testimony, evidence and other material from the record of the previous consideration shall be included in the record of the review.

(8) Review Body Decision.

(a) Upon review, the appeal authority shall by final order affirm, reverse or modify in whole or part a determination or requirement of the decision that is under review.

(i) When the appeal authority modifies or renders a decision that reverses a decision, the final order shall set forth its findings and state the reasons for taking the action.

(ii) When the appeal authority modifies or renders a decision, the final order shall set forth its findings and state the reasons for taking the action.

(iii) When the appeal authority remands the matter back to the lower review body for further consideration as it deems necessary, it shall include a statement explaining the error to have materially affected the outcome of the original decision and the action necessary to rectify such.

(b) Action by the appeal authority shall be decided by a majority vote of its members present at the meeting at which review was made and shall be taken either at that or any subsequent meeting. Pursuant to ORS 227.178, the city shall issue the final decision within 120 calendar days from the date the application was deemed technically complete unless the applicant agrees to extend the 120-calendar-day timeline or unless state law provides otherwise. In no case shall the review body render its decision later than 60 calendar days after the filing of the request for review. The city shall file the final decision within five working days after it is rendered. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.140 Expiration and extension of decisions.

(1) Except as otherwise expressly provided by the Coos Bay Development Code or the decision in question, decisions made pursuant to this chapter expire two years after the effective date of the decision unless, within that time, the applicant or a successor in interest files an application for an extension of the decision or submits an application for project review or a building permit, or undertakes substantial development of the use authorized by the decision. Approval of a preliminary subdivision or partition shall expire within five years from the date of approval.

(2) An application for extension of a decision is subject to a Type I process. An applicant for an extension shall submit the requisite fee, a completed application review form provided for that purpose by the city, and text describing how the application complies with the approval criteria for an extension, and basic facts and other substantial evidence to support the text.

(3) The director may approve a single one-year extension of a decision if he or she finds that the relevant facts and the law have not changed substantially since the original approval, or that the application can comply with the law in effect on the date the application for the extension was filed by complying with applicable additional and/or modified conditions of approval, and those additional conditions and/or modifications are adopted. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].

17.130.150 Post-decision review.

(1) Generally. Post-decision review may change decisions and conditions of approval without necessarily subjecting the change to the same procedures as the original decision. Changes may be warranted by ambiguities or conflicts in a decision and by new or more detailed information, permits or laws. Post-decision review cannot substantially change the nature of the development approved pursuant to a given decision and can only be conducted regarding a decision that approves or conditionally approves an application. An application that is denied is not eligible for post-decision review.

(2) Eligibility and Contents. An applicant or successor in interest may, at any time, file an application for post-decision review of a Type I, II or III decision, describing the nature of and the basis for the proposed change to the decision, including the applicable facts and law, together with the fee prescribed for that application by the city council.

(3) Relationship to an Appeal. An application for post-decision review does not extend the deadline for filing an appeal of the decision being reviewed and does not stay appeal proceedings.

(4) Preliminary Processes.

(a) Pre-application review is optional.

(b) An application for post-decision review is subject to technical completeness review, CBDC 17.130.050; provided, the review authority shall not require an application for post-decision review to contain information that is not relevant and necessary to address the requested change or the facts and law on which it is based. As part of the technical completeness review, the director shall:

(i) Determine whether the proposed change can be reviewed as a post-decision review or should be subject to a new application on the merits of the request;

(ii) Classify an application for post-decision review as a Type I, II or III process based on the circumstances of the original decision and the guidelines in subsection (5) of this section.

(c) Notify the applicant in writing of the determination and classification.

(i) The classification of the application is subject to appeal as part of the decision on the merits of the post-decision review.

(ii) A decision denying post-decision review and requiring a new application may be appealed to the planning commission.

(5) Post-Decision Review Guidelines.

(a) An application for post-decision review of a Type I decision shall be subject to a Type I process.

(b) An application for post-decision review of a Type II decision shall be subject to a Type I process if the director finds the requested change:

(i) Is consistent with the applicable law or variations permitted by law, including permits to which the development is subject; and

(ii) Does not involve an issue of broad public interest, based on the record of the decision.

(c) An application for post-decision review of a Type II decision shall be subject to a Type II process if it does not qualify for a Type I process.

(d) An application for post-decision review of a Type III decision shall be subject to a Type I review process if the director finds the requested change:

(i) Unambiguously reduces the adverse impacts of the development authorized by the decision;

(ii) Is consistent with the applicable law or variations permitted by law, including permits to which the development is subject; and

(iii) Does not involve an issue of broad public interest, based on the record of the decision.

(e) An application for post-decision review of a Type III decision shall be subject to a Type II review process if director finds the requested change:

(i) Is needed to address a minor change in the facts or the law, including permits to which the development is subject;

(ii) Involves limited discretion; and

(iii) Does not involve an issue of broad public interest, based on the record of the decision.

(f) An application for post-decision review of a Type III decision shall be subject to a Type III review process if it is not subject to Type I or II review.

(g) Modifications to a decision other than by a timely appeal or post-decision review shall be by new application. [Ord. 503 § 1 (Exh. B), 2018; Ord. 473 § 3 (Exh. A), 2016].