The proposed development does not meet any of the thresholds established in EC 9.8650 through <br />9.8680. The creation of 29 dwelling 4inits is estimated to generate an additional 29 peak hour <br />trips, which is well below the 100-trip threshold for requiring a Traffic Impact Analysis. Referral <br />comments from Public Works staff indicate no concerns related to traffic safety issues or poor <br />service levels which will result from this development. Based on these findings, the above criterion <br />does not apply. <br />EC 9.8320(6): The PUD will not be a significant risk to public health and safety, including but not <br />limited to soil erosion, slope failure, storrnwater or flood hazard, or an impediment to <br />emergency response. <br />Regarding soil erosion and slope failure,-the applicant's geotechnical analysis confirms that the site <br />is geologically stable and adequate for development. The analysis provides construction <br />techniques consistent with industry standards, none of which indicate the existence of unsafe sub- <br />surface conditions. Public Works staff confirms that the analysis indicates no soil conditions that <br />would otherwise require extensive construction to mitigate any significant geological hazards or <br />soil drainage issues. Due to the size of the development, an erosion prevention permit will be <br />required prior to any ground-disturbing activities. <br />With regard to flood hazard, the subject property is within a special flood hazard area; as such!; <br />development of the subject property is subject to the special flood hazard area development <br />standards at EC 9.6706 through EC 9.6709, which is addressed in greater detail at EC 9.8320(11) <br />and is incorporated here by reference. The development itself will not result in unreasonable risk <br />of flood, per the stormwater management evaluation at EC 9.8320(11)(j). <br />With respect to the provision of emergency vehicle response, the applicant states the proposed <br />access on Oakleigh Lane and the hammerhead turnaround within the development site is <br />sufficient for the proposed development. Referral comments from Public Works staff indicate that <br />this on-site turnaround must provide for emergency vehicle access by being within a temporary <br />emergency access easement. The proposed turnaround area meets the dimension requirements <br />for a hammerhead. Referral comments from the Fire Marshal state no concern with the <br />turnaround. The permanent turnaround is anticipated at the end of Oakleigh Lane, when <br />properties to the north further develop. As recommended previously at EC 9.8320(5)(a), the <br />applicant is required to dedicate right-of-way for the portion of the future turnaround that would <br />overlap the subject property. Based on these findings, the following condition of approval is <br />necessary: <br />Prior to final PUD approval, the applicant shall dedicate a temporary emergency vehicle <br />access easement over the on-site hammerhead and the access drive from Oakleigh <br />Lane, and.show this easement on the final PUD plans. <br />Other public health concerns and necessary infrastructure improvements are otherwise addressed <br />with respect to approval criteria at EC 9.8320(5)(b) and (11)(b). Given the available information, <br />-and based on the findings as set forth above, it is concluded that.the proposed development will <br />comply with this criterion. <br />Staff Report: Oakleigh Meadows Cohousing September 2013 Page 18 <br />HO Agenda - Page 25 1005 <br />