Laserfiche WebLink
REVIEW COM~ITTEE REPORT <br />Marion County P-!aDning Commission <br />Se._D~ember ~5. 1973 <br /> <br />EXHIBIT <br />Agmnd~ Item No. 3.1.5 <br />SPECIAL EXCE~ION CASE NO. 73-31 <br />Filed: August 15, .~973 <br /> <br />1. APPLICA~TSr Cyril & Marian <br /> <br />FILED BY~ <br />REQUF, N T: <br /> <br />LOCATION: <br /> <br /> Cyril Zubef <br /> <br />To olace a second ~o~-farm oriented dwelling on a 9 acre <br />parcel where an existing dwe%ling already exists in <br />an. F-~0 (Farm Z0) zone (Section 137.~30 of the ~arion <br />County UnifolTa Zoue Code). <br /> <br /> Route 1, B~x 1~3, Aum~ville, oD the South side of MR 3~ <br /> approximately 800 feet northeast of the intersection of <br /> M~ 3~ and MR 87 - Section 18, T9, RlW). <br /> <br />LEGAL DESCRIPTIC~: AS set forth in application <br /> <br />~E,poRT O~ ~CTG: The subject property is ~mntly ~lling with the <br />Salem-gtayton Ditch extending along the north property line and a <br />drainage way to the south. <br /> <br />The soils o~ the property are of the sifton and McBee series which <br />are considered moderate fO:- agricultural crop production. <br /> <br />The land use pattern Of the general area is predo~inant!y agri- <br />eultura1 with several smaller acreage homesites existing a~ong the <br />Ma ri on-,~ tayt on Road. <br /> <br />It is the desire of the appl-icant to locate a mobile h~e near the <br />existing dwelling to provide a home for their daunt%ret and her <br />chi ldren. <br /> <br />Neither the Stayton Area Advisory Cc~mittee nor the County Public <br />works Department has any objections to the proposal. <br /> <br />The county Sanitarian is requesting that a soil pit be ~ug in <br />the area o~ the proposed homesite for soil analysis. <br /> <br />~EVIEW COMMITTEE CON~LUSIOb~: The Committee feels that since the <br />property is marg'inal ~er ~a~ming, due to both ~ize and sci1 <br />an additional ho~esite for family care would not alter the land <br />use pattern nor materially alter the farming activities in this area. <br /> <br />The Committee do~s feel, however; that t, he existence of the mo~ile <br />h~ne on this property should not eXtend beyond the family use inten- <br />ded. <br /> <br />REVIEW C~TTEE RECOMM~.A~IC~: The Committee recou~aends that the <br />special exceptio~ be GRARTED £o~ the specific use of the applicants <br />daughter and children and that any deviation fr~m this intended use <br />would make th~ permit void. <br /> <br /> <br />