AR25-024 Staff Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The property consists of two legal parcels. Combination of these parcels or the required covenants, conditions and restrictions will be required as a condition of approval. (3) The lot or parcel is: (c) Predominantly composed of soils that are capable of producing more than 85 cubic feet per acre per year of wood fiber, and there are within a 160-acre square centered on the center of the subject tract all or part of at least 11 other lots or parcels that existed on January 1, 1993, and all or part of at least three dwellings that existed on January 1, 1993 and continue to exist; and (e) If the tract abuts a road that existed on January 1, 1993 and subsection (D) of this section does not apply, the measurements may be made using a 160-acre rectangle that is one mile long and one-fourth mile wide centered on the center of the subject tract and is to the maximum extent possible aligned with the road. (f) Lots or parcels within an urban growth boundary cannot be used to satisfy the requirements in this subsection. (g) Any property line adjustment to the lot or parcel after January 1, 2019, did not have the effect of qualifying the lot or parcel for a dwelling under this section; and (h) As used in this section, “centered on the subject tract” means the mathematical centroid of the tract. Soil analysis (see finding #4) found that the parcel can produce up to 171 cubic feet per acre of wood fiber and therefore qualifies under 17.139.030(B)(3)(c) above. No parcels within an Urban Growth Boundary were included in the template test. No property line adjustment on or after January 1, 2019 has had the effect of qualifying the subject property under this section. A 160-acre square was used to run the template test in accordance with the requirements above (e & h). Using this test, staff found that the rectangle contained 11 other parcels, and at least 3 of those parcels were developed with a dwelling that was established before January 1, 1993, and continue to exist. None of these parcels are located within an urban growth boundary. The criteria are satisfied. (4) The proposed dwelling is not prohibited by and will comply with land use regulations and other provisions of law including Sections 17.110.830 through 17.110.836. There is no evidence indicating that there will be a significant negative impact on water resources which complies with 17.110.830. There are no identified aggregate sites in the area around the property so 17.110.831 does not apply. Development of a home site on the property should not create significant stormwater issues and LDEP has had the opportunity to review this application, as they will have opportunity to review any future building permit and therefore the proposal is complies with 17.110.833 . A dwelling is a residential use and is not likely to create excessive noise in the area , consistent with 17.110.834. The property does not contain any structures that are designated as historic in the County’s Comprehensive Plan consistent with 17.110.836. These criteria are satisfied. MCC 17.110.835 “Fish and wildlife habitats” requires specific attention due to the proposal exceeding the density limitation in the comprehensive plan, as discussed in more detail under the following criterion. 17.110.835 states: “The impact of land use actions regulated by this title on fish and wildlife habitat identified in the Marion County Comprehensive Plan shall be evaluated and the proposal modified or conditioned as necessary to minimize potential adverse impacts and to preserve the existing resource.” The applicant provided additional and extensive review of potential impacts on wildlife on request from staff after the initial application was received. Oregon Fish and Wildlife reviewed those submissions and commented that the proposal is unlikely to have a negative impact on the elk herds or deer population in the area. The applicant submitted a revised site plan that moved the proposed dwelling location further southwest so that it was clustered within 200-feet of another dwelling on an adjacent property. Staff has applied conditions to limit the buildable area. Therefore, as referenced in this policy, the proposal has been modified and conditioned as necessary to minimize potential adverse impacts. This criterion is met. (5) The dwelling will be consistent with the density policy if located in the big game habitat area identified in the Comprehensive Plan.