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 101 <br />It is easy to conclude that revising the la out based on deficiencies in the PUD stated in the <br />Staff Report, which might result in a different looking site plan, would not have any effect on <br />the traffic count. Only changing the balance of the uses would make a difference and even that <br />would only serve to reduce the number of trips and lessen the impact stated in the TIA. <br />The TIA as submitted identifies that standards streets and sidewalks and traffic control devices <br />are proposed to be constructed. <br />Public Works referral comments state "The applicant has proposed Eugene Specific public <br />improvement in accordance with the City Standards and Specifications. Therefore this criterion <br />is satisfied. <br />The Staff Report embellishes on this and recommends that this criterion can not be evaluated <br />and refers back to the "drastic" changes required based on the review of the PUD. <br />This criterion refers to standards to which the facilities are built; in this case City of Eugene <br />standards. Public Works got it right. A more detailed review will occur at the time of PEPI <br />(Privately Engineered Pubic Improvements) review. This criterion is met. <br />EC 9.8680(3): In addition to the above criteria, if the Traffic Impact Analysis Review <br />was required based on EC 9.8670(4), the improvements shall also address the <br />structural capacity of the street in the County's jurisdiction and address identified <br />structural deficiencies, or reduction in the useful life of existing street structures <br />related to the proposed development. Improvements may be needed to eliminate the <br />identified structural deficiencies and to accommodate vehicle impacts to structures. <br />The TIA was not required based on EC 9.8670(4) in this case. <br />EC 9.8680(4): In addition to the above criteria, if the development is located within <br />the S-WS Walnut Station Special Area Zone, and increased traffic the development <br />would generate on streets within the Fairmount neighborhood to the south of the <br />Walnut Station Special Area Zone shall be mitigated through the use of traffic calming <br />strategies or other mechanisms designed to discourage such traffic. <br />The proposed development is not located within the S-WS zone. <br />The Tentative PUD should be approved. Based on that approval, the criterion under the TIA, as <br />listed in the Staff Report quoted above, are also approved. <br />CONSOLIDATED LIST OF ALL RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS <br />(Note: As we have done in previous applications recommended for denial by staff, the <br />applicant's team is open to working with staff over the next two weeks to tune up a set of <br />conditions that could be jointly recommended in the event the HO wants to approve.) <br />LaurelRidge Applicant Final Argument- Page 67. <br />150 <br />Laurel Ridge Record (Z 15-5) Page 905 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.