My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Hearings Official Public Hearing Exhibit HE #6
>
OnTrack
>
Z
>
2015
>
Z 15-5
>
Hearings Official Public Hearing Exhibit HE #6
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/31/2015 4:04:45 PM
Creation date
8/28/2015 2:48:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
Z
File Year
15
File Sequence Number
5
Application Name
LAUREL RIDGE
Document Type
Hearings Official Public Hearing
Document_Date
8/26/2015
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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).
View images
View plain text
EC 9.8865(3) requires that the uses and densities allowed by the proposed zoning can be <br />served through the orderly extension of key urban facilities and services. Key urban facilities <br />and services are defined in the Metro Plan as: wastewater service, stormwater service, <br />transportation, water service, fire and emergency medical services, police protection, city-wide <br />parks and recreation programs, electric service, land use controls, communication facilities, and <br />public schools. When the subject property was annexed into the city earlier this year, the <br />applicant was required to demonstrate that key urban facilities and services could be provided. <br />The Supporting Narrative submitted for the annexation explains that all key urban facilities and <br />services are available for the property. The Supporting Narrative was submitted as Exhibit C to <br />the zone change application at pages 8-9. No evidence was submitted or testimony provided <br />that persuades me that the applicant is incorrect that the proposed zone change can be served <br />by the orderly extension of key urban facilities and services. Therefore, I find that EC 9.8665(3) <br />is satisfied. <br />EC 9.8865(4) <br />EC 9.8865(4) requires that the proposed zone change is consistent with certain <br />applicable siting requirements, in this case EC 9.2735, which provides: <br />"Residential Zone Siting Requirements. In addition to the approval criteria of EC 9.8865 <br />Zone Change Approval Criteria, a property proposed for the R-1.5 zone shall not exceed <br />the area needed to accommodate up to 8 rowhouse lots and shall be located at least <br />500 feet, as measured along existing street public right-of-way, from any other property <br />zoned R-1.5" <br />The proposed zone change is primarily to R-1 Low-Density Residential and to one area of <br />R-2 Medium-Density Residential, but not R-1.5. Thus, EC 9.2735 is not applicable to the current <br />application. Therefore, I find that EC 9.8865(4) is satisfied. <br />EC 9.8865(5) <br />EC 9.8865(5) requires that certain arrangements must be made with the City when an <br />NR zone is applied based on EC 9.2510(3). The proposed zone change does not include any NR <br />zoning, so this criterion does not affect the application. Therefore, I find that EC 9.8865(5) is <br />satisfied. <br />Transportation Planning Rule <br />Oregon Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), OAR 660-012-0060(1) provides: <br />"(1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive <br />plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly <br />affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local <br />government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this <br />_ 0 <br />Hearings Official Decision (Z 13-5) Page 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.