LaurelRidge Page 6 of 11 <br />Zone Change Application – Written Statement <br />May 15, 2015 <br />Area near Hendrick’s Hill PUD Area near east end of Tax Lot 701 <br />Showing referenced utility connections Showing referenced utility connections <br />Conclusion: The site can be served by the extension of key urban facilities and services. <br />III. ZONE CHANGE – APPROVAL CRITERIA AND SUPPORTIVE FINDINGS <br />The subject property consists of 121.68 acres at the south end of the Laurel Valley, near the city <br />limits and the UGB. The property has a history of one failed application for a zone change and <br />tentative PUD approval. The application was denied by the Hearing Official, and that decision was <br />5 <br />affirmed by the Planning Commission, LUBA, and the Court of Appeals. A compilation of those <br />decisions appears as Exhibit B. <br />This application seeks Low Density Residential (R-1) zoning for that portion of the property that is <br />designated Low Density Residential (LDR) in the Metro Plan and Parks, Recreation and Open Space <br />(PRO) zoning for that portion of the property which is designated Parks and Open Space (POS). <br />The denial of the first application was based on the fact that the rezoning request and the <br />development proposal were premised on the assumption that all of the site is plan designated LDR. <br />The ultimate conclusion of the City was that some portion of the site is plan designated Parks and <br />Open Space (POS). <br />EC 9.7330 and 9.8865 require the Hearing Official to review an application for a zone change and <br />bold <br />determine whether the criteria for approval, as shown in below, are met. To facilitate review, <br />this narrative is formatted as closely as possible to the Staff Report supporting rezoning in the matter <br />of the Lathen Trust rezoning decision (Z 14-4, ST 14-6, ARA 14-15)(Nov. 26, 2014). <br />9.8865 Zone Change Approval Criteria. Approval of a zone change application, including the <br />designation of an overlay zone, shall not be approved unless it meets all of the <br />following criteria: <br />(1) The proposed change is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan. <br />The written text of the Metro Plan shall take precedence over the Metro Plan <br />diagram where apparent conflicts or inconsistencies exist. <br />Finding: The following Metro Plan Diagram and Text elements apply: <br />METRO PLAN DIAGRAM <br />The most recently adopted Metro Plan Diagram was adopted as part of Ordinance No. <br />201319 (April 21, 2004). That ordinance adopted wholesale amendments to the plan <br />5 <br /> See Hearing Official Decision, Z 12-2, PDT 12-2, TIA 12-6, SDR 12-15 (Sept. 17, 2013), Eugene Planning Commission (Oct. <br />aff’d <br />th <br />14, 2013), , __ Or LUBA __ (LUBA No. 2013-098, Jan. 29, 2014) <br />aff’d Environ-Metal Properties, LLC v. City of Eugene,aff’d <br /> 263 Or App 714 (A156190, June 11, 2014). <br />without opinion <br />Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4 th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 <br />