Hearings Official Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

2 boundary. PT 18. Although the proposed wall is not the type of screening that the neighbors would prefer, it will have the quality of completely obscuring the adjacent parking area, and to some extent the buildings beyond. The example site plan shows that the development as proposed can accommodate a 5 foot setback for the wall even if the adjacent property owners do not grant an easement. Northern Boundary - The Hearings Official screening along the northern boundary and adopts those findings by this reference. Based on the arguments, it does not appear that they were aware of the applicant's landscape plan and intention to preserve the cedar trees along the northern boundary. Even with the reduced setbacks, those plans certainly meet the standard of screening adjacent properties to a reasonable extent. Eastern Boundary Both the Staff findings and the applicant rely on trees and intervening vegetation that already exists between the subject property and the Willamette River bike path to meet the requirements of EC 9.8320(3) for the eastern boundary. The Hearings Official record is clear that the open space immediately adjacent to the eastern boundary is owned by the City and open for public access and use. Although the proposed development will be very unlikely to be visible from users of the bike path, the development will be completely unscreened from view from the perspective of users of the immediately adjacent public open space. Thus, the application does not comply with EC 9.8320(3) for the eastern boundary. However, based on the submitted site plans, there appears to be sufficient space to accommodate landscaping or other screening elements near the eastern boundary of the proposal without causing the PUD to fall out of compliance with other applicable provisions. Therefore, the application can be approved with a condition requiring sufficient screening, or landscaping consistent with city standards for the eastern boundary. The Hearings Official has added a condition with such a requirement below. Southern Boundary - Part of the southern boundary is screened by the adjacent filbert orchard, and the balance of the boundary is proposed to be screened by a 30 inch fence. Although the Hearings Officer generally agrees with the Staff findings for the southern boundary, in this instance a 30 inch high fence is unlikely to screen the development from property owners to the south to a reasonable extent. As part of the condition noted above, the Hearings Official will require the applicant to revise the landscape plan or provide a taller fence along the southern boundary. 2 The Hearings Official considers the example site plan in PT-18 to directly respond to comments made in PT-1 and PT-2 (submitted on October 9, 2013) and, therefore, it does not constitute new evidence being entered into the record. Hearings Official Decision (PDT 13-1, WG 13-1) 14