Item 1: Ordinance on Oregon West Management

Home Browse Search

community. The suggestions are as follows: · Incorporating a publicly owned plaza/green space. This could function as part of the necessary stormwater infiltration solution while providing the public with a necessary social, cultural nexus in the heart of our commercial area and making best public use of land zoned for that purpose. · Increasing the amount of pervious surface throughout the site to accommodate stonnv,later runolT in an appropriate manner. · An R2 transition area at the East side of the proposed C2 area which had dwellings fronting Eastward on a pedestrian thoroughfare, lower levels projecting farther eastward and upper levels stepped back from the eastem boundary to provide adequate privacy to adjacent Rl development to the East. Such an area should have pedestrian access at a few points westward through the N/S axis of the area. · Smaller scale commercial spaces in the commercially zoned area to provide the community with neighborhood commercial scaled businesses. · Increase the percentage of residential usage on the site. Several of these comments correspond to staff findings tor RRSC policies above. Staff notes that the applicant has not proposed a specitJc site plan, as is generally the practice to not include a specific site plan at this policy level of planning actions. (2) The refinement plan amendment addresses one or more of the following: (a) An error in the publication of the refinement plan. (b) New inventory material which relates to a statewide planning goal. (e) New or amentled community policies. (d) New or amended provisions in afederal law or regulation, state statute, state regulation, statewide planning goal, or state age/Icy land use plan. (e) A change of circumstances in a .'iubstantial manner that was not anticipated III the time the refinement plan was adopted. The proposed amendments are not based on an error in the publication of the RRSC, new inventory material relating to a statewide planning goal or new or amended state or federal laws, regulations, or policies; therefore Be 9.8424(2)(a), (b) and (d), above, are not applicable to this request. Regarding EC 9.8424(2)(c), staff does not tind that the proposed amendments are consistent with Metro Plan and relJnement plan policies and therefore no new or amended community policy would be relevant. However, in the event that the Planning Commission is able to recommend approval of the amendments, the proposed refinement plan amendments are consistent with the related Metro Plan amendments to re-designate 7.3 acres from Low Density Residential to Commercial and to re- designate 1.3 acres from Commercial to Medium Density Residential. If the proposed amendments are found to comply with the applicable approval criteria, the Metro Plan amendments would constitute a new community policy in the context of this criterion. The applicant provided detailed tJndings addressing how the amendments are consistent with EC 9.8424(2)(c) and (e), as they address amended RRSC policies and a substantial change in circumstances not anticipated at the time the refinement plan was adopted. Staff Findings - October 8, 2007 Page 27