Pre-hearing Exhibits - Laserfiche WebLink

PH-1 Pre-Hearing Exhibit #1 All of the testimony provided to date has been forwarded to the Hearings Official under separate cover. Any additional testimony received following this staff report, prior to the public hearing, will be presented to the Hearings Official at the hearing. ReferralsThe Planning Division provided information concerning the applications to other appropriate City and County departments, public agencies, service providers, and the affected neighborhood group. All referral comments received by the Planning Division on this application are included in the application file for reference, and addressed in the context of applicable approval criteria and standards in the following evaluation. Tentative Planned Unit Development Evaluation As required by the Type III land use application procedures beginning at EC 9.7300, the Hearings Official must review any PUD application and consider pertinent evidence and testimony as to whether the proposed use is consistent with the criteria required for approval at EC 9.8320 (shown below in bold typeface). According to EC 9.7330 and EC 9.8320, the Hearings Official shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a tentative PUD application with findings and conclusions provided. In this case, based on the available evidence and findings provided below, staff recommends conditional approval of EC 9.8320(1): The PUD is consistent with applicable adopted policies of the Metro Plan. Metro Plan policies primarily guide local governments in legislative decision-making matters and other long-range planning efforts, and are not intended to be used as mandatory approval criteria for specific development proposals as a part of individual land use applications. In some cases, policies may apply as approval criteria, or at least must be considered as relevant. Text and other provisions of the Metro Plan may also be used in some circumstances to provide context to the meaning or application of the policies. In this case, while staff finds that there are several relevant policies and text that help to inform the decision-making process for this PUD application, none of the policies serve as mandatory approval criteria for the application. The applicant has addressed several Metro Plan June 14, 2013 written statement), and to the extent that those additional findings and policies of the Metro Plan are also relevant here, staff generally concurs with the a statements. Staff also notes that the proposal for clustered dwellings, which will be divided into condominiums, is consistent with Metro Plan Residential Policies A.17 and A.20, which encourage a range of housing types and home ownership. With regard to Environmental Policies, the subject property is within the floodplain and Willamette Greenway. Policy C.31 calls for development regulations within the floodway fringe to minimize damage to life and property; accordingly, the City has adopted special flood hazard development standards, beginning at EC 9.6706, which will apply at the time of development and are further discussed at approval criterion EC 9.8030(10)(c). With regard to the Willamette Greenway, Policies D.2 and D.3 require land use regulations and limit new development to uses that are compatible with the natural, scenic, and environmental qualities. The applicant has applied for concurrent WG permit approval, which is evaluated below, following the PUD evaluation. Staff Report: Oakleigh Meadows Cohousing September 2013 Page 5