BOC DECISION (644) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

specifically addressed. (MCC 16.26, Article II) separately from chapter 16.27 access standards. B(4), standing on its own allows an exception for the other chapters that have no specific exceptions,. and addresses modern development.• This interpretation allows MCC. 16.27.510 to mirror. its sister rural zoning code provision from whence.it sprang. MCC 17.110.600'reads: Every dwelling shall be -situated on -a lot having direct. access by abutting upon a public street or a preexisting private driveway of a width not less ,than 20 feet. A private drive shall not serve more than four dwelling units. unless the parcelsr on which those units are prpposed.to be placed, were established with the approval of Marion County in accordance with state law and Marion County ordinances prior to May 1, 1977, or were approved under Chapter 17.121 MCC, Planned Development. MCC 17.110..800 allows access by private roadway as long as it serves no more than four dwelling units. This ensures safe and adequate access developed to public street standards, or it keeps traffic to a minimum for roadways that are developed under lesser private roadway standards to help prevent over use.and damage of easements. This appears.to be the intent of the BOC in enacting MCC 16,27.510 as demonstrated by county practice over many years. If the BOC agrees its intent was to allow access by roadway in other than planned developments, it may formally interpret the code in that way. Under such an interpretation, only two new dwelling units would be allowed on the subject property because the two dwelling units to the.west are already served solely by Blueberry Lane. With.this restriction, Blueberry bane would be adequate to serve the transportation needs of the development,,... adequate services would be present, and MCC 16.39.050(B) would be met. However, applicants ask to adjust this provision to allow two additional. dwelling units on .the subject property. The adjustment is addressed below. The hearings officer recommends denial of the adjustments and recommends development of the subject property in accordance with regular development standards.. With development under regular. standards, MCC 16.39.050(B) would be .met. 6.purpose statement. 'MCC 16.04.000 contains- the RM zone purpose statement The RM (multiple -family residential)' zone is primarily intended to provide for multiple --family dwellings on,a lot,, or attached dwellings on separate lots, at ' residential densities greater than, permitted in the RI, zone. Other uses compatible with residential development are also appropriate..' RM .zones are located in areas designated.. as' multiple -family residential -or an equivalent designation_ in the applicable urban. area comprehensive plan and are provided with urban services.