My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (07)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2013
>
PDT 13-1
>
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (07)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/27/2017 4:32:34 PM
Creation date
7/28/2015 2:50:52 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
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
199
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
41 <br />not approve the application with an inadequate sewage treatment system that <br />would allow the impacts of the new development to create to unsafe conditions <br />on either the applicant's property or the neighbors. <br />While transportation is different than sewage, facilities for both must be <br />adequate and safe, and the proper interpretation of the City's code in EC <br />9.8320(5) and (6) serves exactly that purpose. While constitutional limitations <br />constrain how much of the burden an applicant can be required to assume, they <br />do not in any way negate or diminish the safety standards that must be met to <br />protect neighbors of future residents. <br />The City must reconcile the two conclusions it reached; first, that a 45- <br />foot right-of-way was required to protect public safety, and, second, that it can <br />exact no more than 22.5 feet from this Applicant. The result of the two <br />combined conclusions inevitably leads to a right-of-width that is not consistent <br />with City standards and not consistent with the City's findings regarding the <br />safety of Oakleigh Lane. LUBA's decision must be remanded and the City <br />must be required to reconcile the two conclusions. <br />C. CONCLUSION <br />For all of the above reasons, LUBA's decision must be overturned. <br />OCTOBER 2014 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.