My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05 Public Record Pages 824-1020
>
OnTrack
>
Z
>
2015
>
Z 15-5
>
05 Public Record Pages 824-1020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/26/2015 4:35:39 PM
Creation date
10/23/2015 1:31:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
Z
File Year
15
File Sequence Number
5
Application Name
LAUREL RIDGE
Document Type
Misc.
Document_Date
10/23/2015
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
197
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).
View images
View plain text
PDF Page 62 <br />the UGB, and on the north property line, except for the Hendricks Hill PUD (which fronts 700 <br />feet of the 3898' long north property line).of tightly clustered single family homes the north <br />property line largely fronts vacant private land and park land. <br />While the proposed development will necessarily have an impact and change the look and feel <br />of the development site it does not mean that it won't eventually blend in with the natural <br />characteristics of the south hills area. <br />Buildings are designed to flow with the topography; streets are aligned with existing logging <br />roads where possible, large single family lots have been created to preserve large stands of <br />existing trees/vegetation. Large amounts of open space have been preserved to ensure <br />protection of sensitive natural resources. The ridgeline has an additional buffer along the south <br />property line and a trail system as been dedicated to the city of Eugene to connect existing park <br />land. <br />The preserved vegetation, the applicants proposed tree replanting plan, the specific design and <br />the conceptual elevations will help reduce the bulk, height and scale and help blend the <br />development with the natural characteristics of the south hills area. As such, the proposal is <br />consistent with the policy language. <br />That all proposed road locations be reviewed to ensure minimum grade disturbance <br />and minimum cut-and-fill activity, particularly in those areas most visible due to slope, <br />topographic or other conditions. <br />As noted, site design in areas of topography such as the LaurelRidge site is driven largely by <br />vehicular access. Practical, least-costly.streets are a development pro forma requirement. <br />Meeting city street standards is also a requirement. Given this, the proposed roads have been <br />sited to minimize cut/fill impacts, while complying with street gradient, intersection alignment <br />and gradient, street radius, vision clearance and emergency vehicle access requirements. <br />Staff asserts that the Applicant's desire to develop the allowed number of units on the site <br />directly impacts the corresponding number and alignment of streets. While this could be true, <br />what is also true is that on properties with topography like this, in order to minimize cut and fill <br />impacts, and in order to reach those areas where development of structures may occur, one has <br />to build the same road whether there is one unit or 100 units, especially as it relates to multi- <br />family units. If you couple that with fire access, fire turnaround and road length limits, the result <br />is more roads to reach the areas. Put differently, it is easy for the staff to opine that there are <br />too many roads, but they have not suggested how to do it differently. The Applicant has taken <br />six runs at it. <br />The key descriptor here is the word minimize. This is a difficult word to measure. If there were <br />no existing logging roads could the applicant have been found to minimize cut and fill. Minimize <br />might imply designing with zero cut and fill. That might lead to the conclusion that there should <br />be only one dwelling approved. <br />LaurelRidge Applicant Final Argument - Page 28 <br />ill <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 866 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.