Agenda Packet 9-24-18 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

{00286855;1 } 3 of the document, under the “development standards for existing alley access only lots” heading, it states that building size for existing alley access lots should be changed to be the same as for detached SDUs. On page 2 of the document, under the “lot and development standards for SDUs” heading, it states that building size should be “a maximum total square footage of 10% of lot area, not to exceed 800 s.f., for both attached and detached SDUs.” In the legislative history reviewed by staff, including the draft ordinance and related Council packet materials leading up to adoption (see Attachment C), staff did not find any indication that the code drafters intended to limit building size for alley access lots to 10% of lot size or 800 square feet, whichever is greater. The legislative history appears to indicate that EC 9.2751(18)(a)3. is correct and free from error. Public testimony was made that the appraisal provided with the M49 claim overstates the reduction in the fair market value of the property. According to the claim, the regulation diminishes potential building size on the property from 50% of lot coverage (2,310 square feet) to 462 square feet. The appraisal that was submitted by the claimant to place a value on this reduction conforms with Measure 49’s statutory requirements. For an appraisal to be valid under Measure 49, ORS 195.310(2)(a-c) requires: 1) a person certified under ORS Chapter 674 or a person registered under ORS Chapter 308 to prepare the appraisal; 2) the appraisal to comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal practice, as authorized by the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989; and 3) the appraisal to determine the highest and best use of the property at the time the land use regulation was enacted. (See Attachment A) Both appraisers, Zoe York and Richard Duncan, are certified general appraisers licensed by the State of Oregon (see Attachment D), as required by ORS 195.310(2)(a). The first page of the appraisal certifies that it conforms to the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice as required by ORS 195.310(2)(b). No testimony has been provided to indicate that the appraisal does not comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. Finally, the Moore appraisal identifies “allowable residential use in the R-1 zone, subject to general development standards” as the highest and best use of the property at the time the restricting regulation was enacted, as required by ORS 195.310(2)(c) (see page 6 of Attachment D). Attachments Attachment A – Selected Provisions of Oregon Revised Statutes Attachment B – Email from Carolyn Jacobs, dated February 16, 2014 with Draft R-1 Code Amendment Recommendations Attached Attachment C – June 16, 2014 City Council AIS and Meeting Materials including Draft Ordinance Attachment D – Appraisal for Moore M49 (M49 18-1) Claim September 24, 2018, Meeting - Item 3