My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Public Comment (8)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2015
>
PDT 15-1
>
Public Comment (8)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/7/2015 4:07:00 PM
Creation date
12/4/2015 1:52:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
15
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
CHAMOTEE
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
11/3/2015
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
142
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
APP-22 <br />Lots 2 through 25: This cluster of lots is located southwest of the West <br />Amazon Drive right-of-way, west of the westerly waterway. Lots 4, 5, 13, 19, <br />20, 23, and 24 comply by having a 75-foot north-south dimension and a front <br />lot line within 30 degrees of the true east-west axis. The other lots do not <br />comply; however these lots are eligible for an exception per EC 9.2790(3)(b) <br />because of the existing alignment of West Amazon Drive and the planned <br />alignment of Senger Lane. Consistency with the street connectivity <br />standards prevents the lots from being in a north-south alignment. <br />Lots 26 through 36: This cluster of lots is located on the north side of the <br />existing West Amazon. Drive right-of-way, between the west and middle <br />waterways. Of these, Lots 29 through 32 comply, whereas the others do not. <br />The north-south alignment of the waterways coupled with areas of 20% <br />slope makes these lots eligible for an exception, pursuant to EC 9.2790(3)(b), <br />which states that exceptions can be granted if natural features prevent the <br />lots from being oriented for solar access. As such, as exception is granted. <br />Lots 37 through 47: This cluster of lots is located on the east side of the <br />middle waterway, between West Morning Drive and Canyon Drive (i.e. Lots <br />37 through 47). Only one lot (Lot 43) meets the solar standards outright <br />because it has a front line on an east-west street (West Morning Drive) and <br />has a lot depth that exceeds 75 feet. This portion of the site has about 200 <br />feet of width between the middle waterway and the west property <br />boundary, preventing additional east-west streets that would otherwise <br />provide the balance of those lots with front lot line orientation within 30 <br />degrees of the true east-west axis. EC 9.2790(3)(b) allows an exception from <br />lots being oriented for solar access in these situations; as such, an exception <br />is granted. <br />Twelve of the 47 lots (25 percent) shown on the Applicant's illustrative 47-lot plan <br />comply outright with the solar standards. Although.this.does not meet the 70 <br />percent minimum of EC 9.2790(2), EC 9.2790(3)(b) allows an exception if compliance <br />with street standards or natural features prevent the lot configuration from being <br />oriented for solar access. The HO found compliance with the solar access standards <br />for these lots based on the exception provisions; however, he then ruled that he <br />could not ensure compliance following a reconfiguration of the lots as a result of <br />relying on the Matthews Map, <br />The HO did not err in finding compliance with the solar standards with the exception <br />provision for the lots shown on the Applicant's illustrative 47-lot plan; however, he <br />did err in presuming those lots needed to be reconfigured. As confirmed in the <br />appeal issues above, the PC has reversed the HO's decision on EC 9.8325(5), <br />regarding slope, and has confirmed that the Matthews Map is not the correct map <br />to use in the evaluation of this PUD application. As such, there is no ambiguity <br />about solar lot compliance for the western portion of the site. <br />Final Order- Deerbrook PUD (PDT 12-1) December 17, 2012 Page 21 <br />24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.