But the Concept Plan states that "Higher density development will be clustered toward the road, and <br />gardens, orchards, and lower density development will be located along the river edge of development <br />zones" (pp. 7-8). Here, the OMC PUD inverts the priorities of the Concept Plan. <br />Second, the OMC PUD plans to develop multi-family units in 7 separate buildings, while the Concept <br />Plan states that for the residential areas outside of the commercial zones (including Oakleigh meadow), <br />i.e. "R-1 Zoned Areas along River Road... The development goal for these areas is to preserve and <br />reinforce the single family character of existing R-1 zoned properties" (p. 28). Here again, the OMC <br />PUD does not follow the priorities and goals of the Concept Plan. <br />Oakleigh Lane is an prime example of the single-family character of the Lower River Road area; as <br />described elsewhere in this document, nearly all the homes on Oakleigh Lane are single-family homes. A <br />single building (130-132 Oakleigh) is a rental property with just 2 apartments. The OMC project, with its <br />many multi-family properties, is out of character with the street in a manner particularly discouraged by <br />the Concept Plan. <br />Street Connectivity Exemption <br />The applicant presented a flag lot type of development for TL 200, which is the vacant property directly <br />abutting the north property boundary of TL 400 of the OMC project. The applicant is asking for an <br />exception to the street connectivity standards. Per EC 9.6815, the applicant shall present a street <br />connectivity study which is supposed to show that the development will not hinder adequate access/street <br />service to undeveloped land within a quarter mile of the development site. See below. <br />9.6815 Connectivity for Streets. <br />(2) Street Connectivity Standards. <br />(g) In the context of a Type II or Type I I I land use decision, the city shall <br />grant an exception to the standards in subsections (2)(b), (c) or (d) if the <br />applicant demonstrates that any proposed exceptions are consistent <br />with either subsection 1. or 2. below: <br />1. The applicant has provided to the city, at his or her expense, a <br />local street connection study that demonstrates: <br />a. That the proposed street system meets the intent of street <br />connectivity provisions of this land use code as expressed in <br />EC 9.6815(1); and <br />b. How undeveloped or partially developed properties within a <br />quarter mile can be adequately served by alternative street <br />layouts. <br />The applicant's street connectivity study prepared by Access Engineering, dated August 6, 2013 presents <br />flag lots in a shadow plat of TL 200, with access to the property coming in from the southwest corner of <br />TL 200 off of Oakleigh lane. The attempt of the shadow plat was to show that the development and <br />access is not hindered by the existing Oakleigh ROW width of 20 feet. Thus allowing for the OMC <br />project to increase the number of units and push the northern property setbacks. Essentially the applicant <br />is proposing to put Building 1, 22 feet south of the existing north property line or the south edge of the <br />Page 14 of 20 <br />