Ord 1312 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(d) That an appropriate level of public facilities and services are likely to be provided in a timely and efficient manner. The Board finds that the applicant has established that any necessary public services are available and that water and waste treatment systems will be provided through private systems. The Board finds that it is feasible for the applicant to provide an appropriate level of water and sewer service to the proposed resort, and relies on the letter from Steven Shropshire, dated July 23, 2008, which demonstrates that the applicant has already received a basin program exception under the Willamette Basin Program. The applicant worked with the Oregon Water Resources Department ("OWRD") to develop a mitigation approach to offset the projected pumping impacts, which was endorsed by OWRD staff and the Commission. Since the mitigation plan required in the review of the groundwater permit is the same plan that was endorsed as part of the basin program exception approval, the Board finds that it is feasible and likely that the applicant will receive an approved groundwater permit. Additionally, the Board relies on the letters from Tracy Cork, dated December 10, 2007 and June 12, 2008, which demonstrate that the wastewater collection and treatment methodology for the proposed resort will meet or exceed Oregon Department of Environmental Quality("DEQ") requirements and will utilize state of the art technology. The Board also finds that compliance with the agencies' regulations is assured through appropriate conditions of approval. Therefore, the Board finds that testimony from the applicant and its consultants supports a finding that it is feasible to provide appropriate levels of public facilities for the proposed use in a timely and efficient manner. The Board finds that any other necessary public facilities and services, including fire protection, can also be readily provided. The Board finds that OAR 660-014-0040(3)(e) is not applicable,because no urban growth boundary or establishment of a new city is proposed. B. Goal 11 Exception—OAR 660-004-0020(4) Goal 11 generally prohibits the extension of sewer lines outside of UGBs and the establishment of new sewer systems outside of UGBs. Regarding the requested exception to Goal 11, OAR 660-004-0020(4) and Goal 2,Part II(c) establish four factors to be addressed when taking a "reasons" exception. Those factors and related responses are set out below. The Board also adopts and incorporates by reference the reasons set forth in its findings in Section IX.A above regarding the Division 14 rules as part of its findings addressing the Division 4 rules. (a) Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply. The exception shall set forth the facts and assumptions used as the basis for determining that a state policy embodied in a goal should not apply to specific properties or situations including the amount of land for the use being planned and why the use requires a location on resource land. The state policy contained in Goals 11 and 14 provide that urban development remain in urban areas and the provision of an urban level of public services remain within an urban growth boundary. Nevertheless, the Board finds that the findings adopted in 1982 for the Goal 4 exception are equally applicable to a Goal 11 exception, and that the same reasons that justified the original exception also justify the construction of a sewer system to serve the development that was previously approved by the county. In fact, an exception to Goal 11 is required by the prior approvals, which include a condition that a community sewer system must be provided for the development. Because the residential and commercial components of the subdivision require a location adjacent to the existing -13-