EC 9.8320(12), in which Public Works staff confirmed that the development will have minimal off-site <br />traffic impacts. Public comments about the accident at the intersection of Oakleigh Lane and River <br />Road are not on the City's inventory of intersections with high crash ratings that would otherwise <br />warrant analysis to determine patterns that could be mitigated by infrastructure improvements. (HO <br />Decision, Page 50). The HO findings on pages 50-53 are hereby incorporated by reference as further <br />evidence of compliance with the applicable criteria appealed under this assignment of error. <br />With regard to the design of the development, however, the PC finds that the allowance for reduced <br />setbacks along the north and west property lines does not have a "minimal off-site impact". The PC <br />addresses these concerns in the sixth assignment of error, below, which is incorporated by reference. <br />With those findings and conditions that modify the HO's decision, the PUD will comply with EC <br />9.8320(12). <br />Sixth Assignment of Error: The Decision erred by finding the application met EC 9.8320(13) <br />"The proposed development shall be reasonably compatible and harmonious with adjacent <br />and nearby land uses." <br />The PC generally agrees with the HO's findings of compliance under EC 9.8320(13), as addressed on <br />pages 54-55 of his decision. The PC finds that the HO did not ignore or misinterpret the evidence <br />regarding an accident on River Road at the intersection of Oakleigh Lane, and did not misinterpret the <br />requirements of EC 9.8320(12) regarding "minimal off-site impacts" related to traffic. As also discussed <br />under the second and third assignments of error, the PC concludes that the HO did not err, based on <br />the available evidence that the traffic generated by the proposed PUD is acceptable under the approval <br />criteria and does not warrant additional right-of-way beyond what has already been required. <br />However, as discussed under the Third Assignment of Error above, the PC does add a condition of <br />approval to require improvement of Oakleigh Lane to a minimum paving width of 14' within the <br />existing right-of-way, based on the additional testimony and evidence allowed on remand. The <br />Hearings Official was otherwise correct in adopting the related findings under EC 9.8320(12), with <br />regard to arguments about traffic impact also made under EC 9.8320(13). As such, the PC concludes <br />that traffic generated from the PUD will be reasonably compatible and harmonious with adjacent and <br />nearby land uses as required by EC 9.8320(13). The HO findings on pages 53-55 are hereby <br />incorporated by reference as further evidence of compliance with the applicable criteria appealed <br />under this assignment of error. <br />The PC finds, however, that the allowance for a substandard setback along the north property line <br />should be modified in order to ensure the development will be reasonably compatible and harmonious <br />with adjacent and nearby land uses. The PC also finds that additional screening is necessary between <br />the development and surrounding properties. To address these concerns, the PC modifies the HO's <br />approval to add the following condition: <br />The final PUD plans shall show a building setback of 5 feet from the front property line along <br />the newly dedicated right-of-way boundary for Oakleigh Lane. A 10 foot setback shall be shown <br />along the remainder of the north property line, along the newly dedicated right-of-way for a <br />bike/pedestrian path. (See related Condition #3.) <br />The PC finds that the applicant's proposed landscape plan (Sheet L2 of Exhibit PH-69) cannot be <br />2017 Final Order: Oakleigh Meadows Co-Housing PUD (PDT 13-1) Page 12 <br />