Appeal Materials - Laserfiche WebLink

1 1. Straight segments of Local Connector and Local Streets 2 should be less than .25 mile in length, and include design 3 features such as curves and T intersections. 4 "2. Cul-de-sacs should not exceed 600 ft. nor serve more than 5 18 dwelling units. 6 "1 Street designs that include traffic calming, where 7 appropriate, are encouraged." (Emphasis added.) 8 The city council interpreted LDC 4.0.60.c.2 as a mandatory applicable approval 9 criterion for the proposed housing, and concluded: 10 "[T]he Council finds that the proposal does not comply with LDC 11 Section 4.0.60.c as it would result in as many as 27 dwellings 12 taking access from the NW Mirador Place cul-de-sac. Therefore, 13 the Council concludes that the proposal is inconsistent with and 14 fails to satisfy the criteria relating to traffic and off-site facilities." 15 Record 17. 16 Petitioner argues under the third assignment of error that the city erred in 17 applying LDC 4.0.60.c.2 to deny the proposed needed housing, because LDC 18 4.0.60.c.2 is not clear and objective. According to petitioner, LDC 4.0.60.c.2 is 19 a highly discretionary standard that by its terms applies to the design of local 20 streets, not to approval of development that is served by already designed, 21 approved and constructed streets. Further, petitioner argues that LDC 4.0.60.c.2 22 is framed in inherently discretionary terms: it requires that the city "consider[]" 23 street designs in at least three particulars. Street designs that include traffic 24 calming are "encouraged." Straight streets "should" be no more than .25 mile in 25 length, and "should" include curves and T intersections. Cul-de-sacs "should" 26 not exceed 600 feet nor serve more than 18 dwelling units. Petitioner notes 27 that LDC 1.6.30 defines the term "should" to mean "[e]xpressing what is 28 desired, but not mandatory." When the code intends to express a mandatory Page 16