My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Staff Decision (4552)
Images9
>
Public Works - Planning
>
FOR PUBLIC VIEW ON INTERNET
>
Old Cases
>
Staff Decision (4552)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/22/2024 8:22:26 AM
Creation date
10/30/2024 4:19:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Land Use
Case_Number
24-023
Document_Date
10/22/2024
Land Use Type
Administrative Review
Tax_Lot_Number
061W15A000100
Document_Type
Decision
Site_Address
8692 HUMPERT LN NE
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Findings and conclusions on which the decision was based are noted below. <br /> <br />1. The subject property is designated Primary Agriculture in the Marion County Comprehensive Plan and zoned <br />Exclusive Farm Use (EFU). Utility facilities necessary for public service are a use permitted subject to standards <br />in the EFU zone. <br /> <br />2. The subject property is located on the eastern side of Humpert Ln NE in the 8600 block. The property is <br />developed with a dwelling built in 1995 and associated accessory and farm buildings. The property has a <br />canal/ditch running through it and was the subject of multiple land use cases: AR94-093 and CU95-077 and is <br />therefore considered legal for land use purposes. <br /> <br />3. Surrounding uses are farm uses in all directions. All adjacent parcels are zone EFU and are in active farm <br />production, with the exception of the Mt. Angel Abbey which sits atop the hill to the east. <br /> <br />4. The applicants are proposing to place a telemetry communications tower as a utility necessary for public service. <br />This 20 foot tall pole will be used by NW Natural to communicate with its existing gas systems. <br /> <br />5. The subject property is comprised of approximately 100% high value soils. <br /> <br />6. Marion County Land Development Engineering & Permits (LDEP) commented regarding requirements for the <br />proposal: <br /> <br /> ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS <br /> <br />A. An Access Permit is required to install a new driveway approach, and is already in applied status under <br />record #555-24-001056-PW. <br /> <br />B. Transportation System Development Charges (TSDCs) will be assessed at the time of application for <br />building permits. The proposed use best approximates the county’s Agricultural category for “Cell <br />Tower” that is assigned a flat amount of roughly $20 for 2024. <br /> <br />C. Utility service extensions such as electric power and gas originating from within the public right-of-way <br />to the property require permits from MCPW Engineering. <br /> <br />Marion County Building Department commented: <br /> <br /> “No Building Inspection concerns. Permit(s) would be required to be obtained prior to the construction or <br />installation of electrical systems. A permit would also be required for a communication tower if within the urban <br />growth boundary, according to Marion County Code 15.05.250(A). The proposed 7 foot fence would not require <br />a permit according to this same Marion County Code.” <br /> <br />All other commenting agencies stated no objection to the proposal. <br /> <br />7. Communications towers are a “Utility Facility Necessary for Public Use” as found in MCC 17.136.040. the <br />approval criteria are found below: <br /> <br /> I. Utility facilities necessary for public service, including wetland waste treatment systems, but not including <br />commercial facilities for the purpose of generating electrical power for public use by sale or transmission towers <br />over 200 feet in height. A facility is “necessary” if it must be situated in the EFU zone in order for the service to <br />be provided. An applicant must demonstrate that reasonable alternatives have been considered and that the <br />facility must be sited in an EFU zone due to one or more of the following factors as found in OAR 660-033- <br />0130(16): <br /> <br />1. Technical and engineering feasibility;
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.