Hearings Official Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

sufficient to show that the PUD access way cannot be punched through to the southern portion of Fox Hollow Road. Vivian Way is similarly situated and appears to qualify for the exception as well. EC 9.6820 Cul-de-Sacs and Turnarounds These standards do not apply because no new public cul-de-sacs or streets are proposed or required. EC 9.6830 Intersections of Streets and Alleys These standards are not applicable because no new intersections are proposed or required. EC 9.6835 Public Accessways The applicant is requesting to adjust EC 9.6835(1), which requires accessways connecting to adjacent undeveloped or publicly owned sites, citing that access to the adjacent publicly owned Tax Lot 4500 can be accessed directly from Fox Hollow Road. Public Works staff also note that a connection to this adjacent publicly owned property would be in conflict with EC 9.8325(5) which prohibits grading on portions of the development site that meet or exceed 20% slope. The standards of EC 9.6835(2) do not apply, as there are no existing or potential accessways on adjacent sites that dictate the dedication or construction of a public access way. EC 9.6840 Reserve Strips These standards do not apply because no new public streets are proposed or required and none of these criteria specifically result in the need for a reserve strip. EC 9.6845 Special Safety Requirements These standards do not apply because no new public streets or alleys are proposed or required. EC 9.6850 Street Classification Map The proposal complies with this standard as discussed in EC9.6870 Street Width, which is incorporated herein by reference. EC 9.6855 Street Names These standards to not apply because no new streets are proposed or required. EC 9.6860 Street Right-of-Way Map The proposal does not amend the right-of-way map. This criterion is not applicable. EC 9.6870 Street Width Pursuant to EC 9.6870, the right-of-way and paving widths of streets shall conform to those widths designated on the adopted Street Right-of-Way map. When a street segment right-of-way width is not designated on the adopted Street Right-of-Way map, the required street width shall be the minimum width shown for its type in Table 9.6870 Right-of-Way and Paving Widths, although a greater width can be required based on adopted plans and policies, adopted Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways, or other factors which in the judgment of the planning and public works director necessitate a greater street width. As noted previously, the site is abutted by two public rights-of-way, West Amazon Drive and Vivian Drive, neither of which are identified on the adopted Street Classification Map or adopted Right-of- Hearings Official Decision (PDT 15-1/ ARA 15-13) 11