Boutard v. Yamhill Cnty., LUBA No. 2020-105

• Decision Date: 27 April 2021
• Docket Number: LUBA No. 2020-105
• Parties: ANTHONY BOUTARD, Petitioner, v. YAMHILL COUNTY, Respondent.
• Court: Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals

ANTHONY BOUTARD, Petitioner, v. YAMHILL COUNTY, Respondent.

LUBA No. 2020-105

LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

April 27, 2021

FINAL OPINION AND ORDER

Appeal from Yamhill County.

Doug Hageman represented petitioner.

Todd Sadlo represented respondent.

ZAMUDIO, Board Member; RUDD, Board Chair; RYAN, Board Member, participated in the decision.

You are entitled to judicial review of this Order. Judicial review is governed by the provisions of ORS 197.850.

Page 2

Zamudio, Board Member.

On November 19, 2020, respondent withdrew the decision challenged in this appeal for reconsideration pursuant to ORS 197.830(13)(b) and OAR 661-010-0021. On March 29, 2021, the Board received respondent's decision on reconsideration. Petitioner had until April 19, 2021 to either refile the original notice of intent to appeal in this matter or file an amended notice of intent to appeal. OAR 661-010-0021(5)(a). The Board has not received a refiled original notice of intent to appeal or an amended notice of intent to appeal. OAR 661-010-0021(5)(e) provides that, "[i]f no amended notice of intent to appeal is filed or no original notice of intent to appeal is refiled, as provided in [OAR 661-010-0021(5)(a)], the appeal will be dismissed."

This appeal is dismissed. Matrix Development v. City of Tigard, 25 Or LUBA557 (1993).¹

1. On April 5, 2021, the county filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. Petitioner did not respond in opposition to that motion.