My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (05)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2013
>
PDT 13-1
>
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (05)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/27/2017 4:32:34 PM
Creation date
7/28/2015 2:35:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
13
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
OAKLEIGH COHOUSING
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
7/28/2015
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
300
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).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
PH-2 <br />September 24, 2013 <br />City of Eugene <br />Planning and Development Department <br />attn: Becky Taylor, Associate Planner <br />99 West 10th Avenue <br />Eugene, OR 97401 <br />Re: Solar Setback Calculation for the Proposed Land Use Change for the Oakleigh Meadow Cohousing <br />Project - Application PDT 13-0001. <br />Dear Ms. Taylor: . <br />The following letter presents information regarding the solar setback calculation provided to you on <br />about September 17, 2013 by the applicant of PDT 13-0001. The calculation was done Improperly. The <br />horizontal setback was presented as the distance from the current north property line to a point at <br />grade directly beneath the ridge of Building 1. There are two problems with that calculation. <br />• The roof pitch is less than 5/12 (per elevations sheet A3.1 of application), thus according to <br />Eugene City Code (EC) Solar Setback Definition (EC 9.05) for shade point, the eave or more <br />accurately, the north facing dormer-style ridge located on the north wall of Unit 5 of Building 1 <br />is the proper shadepoint. The effective pitch from the dormer ridge to the ridge of Building 1 <br />ridge is still less than 5/12. Also the dormer ridge would cast the longest shadow at the azimuth <br />on the winter solstice and the dormer is greater than 3 feet wide (shade point definition). The <br />applicant stated that the ridge of Building 1 is the Shadepoint, which is inaccurate. Shade point <br />definition is presented below., Ridgelines and eaves of Buildings land 2 are oriented almost <br />directly east-west. <br />• The property line used in the setback measurement is the existing north property line, yet with <br />the approval of the Planned Unit Development, the right-of-way (ROW) of Oakleigh Lane will be <br />widened to 45 feet (22.5 feet each side of the centerline). The centerline will be the current <br />north property line of tax lot 400 (map 17 04 2413) because the full 20 foot ROW of Oakleigh <br />Lane was partitioned out of the original Oakleigh plat. Additional information regarding street <br />connectivity and diminished value of TL 200 due to anything less than a 45 foot ROW extending <br />to end of the existing Oakleigh street ROW, will be presented In follow-up public testimony. <br />Attached Is the applicant's email with redline revisions indicating the above mistakes. <br />The shade point [SPH) (dormer on north wall) is 22.5 feet above existing grade according to A3.1 (see <br />attached excerpt). N>90 feet so N=90, thus: <br />Page 1 of 3 <br />1207, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.