My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Applicants Final Argument 7-23-18
>
OnTrack
>
WG
>
2018
>
WG 18-3
>
Applicants Final Argument 7-23-18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/25/2018 4:00:42 PM
Creation date
7/24/2018 8:23:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
WG
File Year
18
File Sequence Number
3
Application Name
Lombard Apartments
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
7/23/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
Applicant's Final Written Argument <br />Lombard Apartments <br />July 23, 2018 <br />Page 5 of 12 <br />(c) Protection and enhancement of the natural vegetative fringe along the Willamette <br />River to the maximum extent practicable. <br />The phrase "along the Willamette River" is not defined, thus making this standard not <br />applicable. The term "maximum extent practicable" is extremely subjective. <br />This site is not along the river, being separated by the City park. <br />(d) Preservation of scenic qualities and viewpoints as identified in the Metropolitan <br />Plan NaturalAssets and Constraints Working Paper. <br />Not applicable, as this area is not inventoried in the Working Paper as having scenic <br />qualities or being a viewpoint. In addition, determining what constitutes "preservation" of <br />views requires a subjective judgment. <br />(e) Maintenance of public safety and protection of public and private property, <br />especially from vandalism and trespass in both rural and urban areas to the maximum <br />extent practicable. <br />This standard is not applicable because the operative phrases "maintenance of public <br />safety" and "protection of public and private property" do not come with a clear and objective <br />test for how good is good enough. It requests a value judgment. <br />(f) Compatibility of aggregate extraction with the purposes of the Willamette River <br />Greenway and when economically feasible, applicable sections of state law pertaining <br />to Reclamation of Mining Lands (ORS Chapter 517) and Removal of Material; Filling <br />(ORS Chapter 541) designed to minimize adverse effects to water quality, fish and <br />wildlife, vegetation, bank stabilization, stream flow, visual quality, noise, safety, and <br />to guarantee necessary reclamation. <br />Not applicable, as no aggregate extraction is involved. In addition, the "compatibility" <br />determination requires subjective judgment. <br />(g) Compatibility with recreational lands currently devoted to metropolitan <br />recreational needs, used for parks or open space and owned and controlled by a general <br />purpose government and regulation of such lands so that their use will not interfere <br />with adjacent uses. As used in this section, the words "the greatest possible degree" <br />are drawn from Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 15 (F.3.b.) and are intended to require <br />a balancing of factors so that each of the identified Willamette Greenway criteria is <br />met to the greatest extent possible without precluding the requested use. <br />This standard is not applicable due to the operative word "compatibility." See Group <br />B, LLC P. City of Corvallis, 72 Or LUBA 74 (2105), aff'd 275 Or App 577, rev den 359 Or 667 <br />(2016) (requiring "compatibility" with surrounding development is not "clear and objective" <br />r.e :a;n N -i a :,i F• r, n.. ;F-i G r-f r 9 %.1i71 <br />- i:rr`.ecnl~r.dusr.?.ror~i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.