My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (06)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2013
>
PDT 13-1
>
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (06)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/27/2017 4:32:34 PM
Creation date
7/28/2015 2:42:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
13
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
OAKLEIGH COHOUSING
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
7/28/2015
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
300
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
5 <br />provided a second mailed notice of the decision to the remaining <br />persons entitled to notice of the decision. The city then <br />presumably provided an updated list of "[a]ny * * * person to <br />whom written notice of the land use decision or limited land use <br />decision was mailed as shown on the governing body's records" to <br />Neighbors. Thereafter, on February 20, 2014, Neighbors provided <br />a certificate of service to LUBA certifying that Neighbors served a <br />copy of their NITA on additional persons whom the city identified <br />as being mailed written notice of the decision on February 4, 2014, <br />and who were thus entitled to be served with a copy of the NITA <br />under OAR 661-010-0015(2) and (3)(f)(D). One of those <br />additional persons was Trautman. On March 11, 2014, 68 days <br />after the notice of intent to appeal was filed, and 20 days after <br />being served with a copy of the NITA, Trautman moved to <br />intervene on the side of Neighbors in the appeal." ER pp 3-4. <br />The facts underlying the substantive errors can be found at pages 7 - 9 of <br />LUBA's Opinion: <br />"[The applicant, Oakleigh Meadows Co-Housing [the "Applicant" <br />or "Meadows")] applied for tentative planned unit development <br />(PUD) approval for a 29-unit residential development on 2.3 acres <br />of land zoned low density residential (R-1). The only access to the <br />subject property is via Oakleigh Lane, an east/west street that runs <br />from its western intersection with River Road approximately 850 <br />feet to the subject property. The subject property is located <br />adjacent and to the south of Oakleigh Lane, and is adjacent to a <br />city park on the east, and single family dwellings and vacant land <br />zoned residential on its north, west, and south. Oakleigh Lane <br />terminates at approximately the mid-point of the northern <br />boundary of the subject property. Existing Oakleigh Lane has a 19- <br />foot wide unstriped, paved surface and lacks curbs and gutters, <br />storm drainage, and sidewalks. <br />44***** <br />"As we discuss in more detail later in this opinion, the city <br />required Meadows to dedicate a 22.5 foot strip of land for right of <br />way purposes along Oakleigh Lane, and a 13 foot strip of land <br />OCTOBER 2014 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.