My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AR25-044 Staff Decision
Images9
>
Public Works - Planning
>
FOR PUBLIC VIEW ON INTERNET
>
2025
>
Administrative Review
>
AR25-044 Staff Decision
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/26/2025 9:55:38 AM
Creation date
11/26/2025 9:55:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Land Use
Case_Number
25-044
Document_Date
11/26/2025
Land Use Type
Administrative Review
Tax_Lot_Number
083W30CB00400
Document_Type
Decision
Site_Address
3850 COLE RD S
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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 Special Agriculture in the Marion County Comprehensive Plan and zoned <br />Special Agriculture (SA). Wireless communication facilities are utility facilities necessary for public service, <br />which are a use permitted subject to standards in the SA zone. <br /> <br />2. The subject property is located on the southern side of Cole Rd S and contains an existing communications tower. <br />The existing tower was approved by AR99-075. Having been subject to a previous land use case, the parcel is <br />considered legal for land use purposes. <br /> <br />3. The subject property is clustered next to two other parcels with similar communications towers. Surrounding uses <br />include a mix of rural residential, farm, and timer uses. <br /> <br />4. The applicants are proposing to place a wireless communications facility as a utility necessary for public service. <br /> <br />5. The subject property is comprised of approximately 100% high value soils. <br /> <br />6. Various agencies were contacted with a request for comment. <br /> <br />Marion County Building Department commented: Permit(s) are required to be obtained prior to the development <br /> of a communication tower used for emergency purposes only (M.C.C.15.05.250(A)(2)(c)), equipment shelter <br /> and/or generator shelter over 250 sq. ft. in area or designated as a Risk Category III or IV structure according to <br /> OSSC Table 1604.5, and utilities associated with this project such as a propane line from the first stage propane <br /> tank regulator to the generator and electrical systems. <br /> <br />All other commenting agencies either did not respond or stated no objection to the proposal. <br /> <br />7. Wireless communications facilities are a “Utility Facility Necessary for Public Use” in the SA zone as found in <br />MCC 17.137.040. the 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; <br /> <br />2. The proposed facility is locationally dependent. A utility facility is locationally dependent if it must cross land <br />in one or more areas zoned for exclusive farm use in order to achieve a reasonably direct route or to meet <br />unique geographical needs that cannot be satisfied on other lands; <br /> <br />3. Lack of available urban and nonresource lands; <br /> <br />4. Availability of existing right-of-way; <br /> <br />5. Public health and safety; and <br /> <br /> 6. Other requirements of state and federal agencies. <br /> <br />a. Costs associated with any of the factors listed above may be considered, but cost alone may not be the only <br />consideration in determining that a utility facility is necessary for public service. Land costs shall not be <br />included when considering alternative locations for substantially similar utility facilities and the siting of <br />utility facilities that are not substantially similar.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.