Attachment B <br />purposes, absent the right-of-way, the required solar setback would be 20 feet from the north <br />property line. Both buildings are setback at least 20 feet from the north property line. As such, <br />it does not appear that a formal modification through the PUD process is required; however, <br />one could be supported for the same reasons a modified front line setback, as discussed <br />previously, would be granted. <br />Opponent Arguments <br />The neighbors dispute the applicant's setback calculation submitted on September 17, 2013 <br />and provide alternative calculations attempting to show that the setback for buildings 1 and 2 <br />cannot be met. PT-1. <br />Hearings Official Conclusions <br />The Hearings Official generally concurs with Staff's findings for EC 9.2795 and adopts those <br />findings by this reference. <br />It does not appear that the neighbors were aware of the exemption identified by Staff. The <br />Hearings Officer is not directed to any evidence that indicates the exemption at EC <br />9.2795(3)(c)(1) does not apply in this instance. A large portion of the northern property line will <br />subject to dedication for widening of the right-of-way and Oakleigh Lane and will not be <br />developable with structures. In addition, the applicant provided testimony at the October 2, <br />2013 hearing and presents a schematic showing how the shade point from the relevant <br />buildings would avoid casting shade on each other or adjacent areas. The Hearings Official <br />finds this evidence sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the city's solar setback standards. <br />Staff Findings <br />With regard to EC 9.5500 Multiple-Family Standards, the development complies with all of the <br />applicable standards, as follows: <br />o Street Frontage: 60 percent of the street frontage, which is 82 linear feet, is <br />occupied by a building; <br />o Building Orientation and Entrance: only applies to Building 1, abutting the street, <br />which has primary entrances facing the street; <br />o Building Mass and Fa4ade: only applies to Building 1, abutting the street, which is <br />less than 100 feet in length <br />o Articulation: the buildings have porches, windows, and offsets; <br />o Landscaping: the development exceeds the minimum requirement of 4,007 <br />square feet; <br />o Open Space: the development has more than double the required open space, <br />with 54,727 square feet instead of 20,037 square feet; <br />o Site Access and Internal Circulation: the proposed driveway is 22 feet wide, <br />which is within the 20-foot minimum and 28-foot maximum; <br />o Vehicle Parking: is not abutting street frontage; <br />Hearings Official Decision (PDT 13-1, WG 13-1) 47 <br />