My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Application Materials
>
OnTrack
>
Z
>
2022
>
Z 22-8
>
Application Materials
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/11/2022 3:03:44 PM
Creation date
6/23/2022 5:36:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
Z
File Year
22
File Sequence Number
8
Application Name
MICHAEL SCNEAR
Document Type
Application Materials
Document_Date
6/15/2022
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
(9) Notwithstanding section (1) of this rule, a local government may find that an amendment to a zoning map does not <br />significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility if all of the following requirements are met. <br />(a) The proposed zoning is consistent with the existing comprehensive plan map designation and the amendment does <br />not change the plan map: <br />(b) The local government has an acknowledged TSP and the proposed zoning is consistent with the TSP; and <br />(c) The area subject to the amendment was not exempted from this rule at the time of an urban growth boundary <br />amendment as permitted in OAR 660- 024-220(1)(d), or the area was exempted from this rule but the local <br />government has a subsequently acknowledged TSP amendment that accounted for urbanization of the area. <br />Response: The proposed R-1 zoning for the property is consistent with the existing comprehensive plan designation as Low- <br />Density Residential, and that this designation was in effect at the time the acknowledged TSP was adopted (TransPlan 2002). <br />When TransPlan was adopted in 2001, the subject property was designated Low-Density Residential and has remained <br />unchanged. The subject property was not exempted from the TPR at the time of an urban growth boundary agreement. Thus, OAR <br />660-012-0060(9) is satisfied. Based on these findings, the proposed zone change does not significantly affect a transportation <br />facility for purposes of the TPR and therefore complies with the TPR. <br />The Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan: <br />Unincorporated Subarea Policies and Proposed Actions: <br />2. The City shall require future developments on parcels abutting the UGB to provide an effective transition <br />between urban and rural land uses. This transition is intended to minimize potential conflicts with adjacent <br />agricultural and sand and gravel operations. (page 57) <br />Response: The subject property does not abut the UGB. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable. <br />CONCLUSION <br />The requested zone change from AG, Agriculture to R1 Low Density Residential, satisfies all applicable criteria. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.