I Again, the city's findings state that development of the flatter portions of the property would <br />2 not be possible without the variance for longer cul-de-sacs because of topographical circumstances. <br />3 Those circumstances are "constraints associated with the property" that make "development of a <br />4 permitted use impractical[.]" Petitioners repeat their argument that 75 lots could be developed <br />5 without a variance, and argue that "development of the permitted use" is thus not impractical. <br />6 However, the city council obviously views CDC 10.1510(C) as allowing a variance where the <br />7 variance is necessary to develop a "significant portion" of the property. Petitioners have not <br />8 established that that view of CDC 10.1510(C) is inconsistent with the language, purpose or <br />9 underlying policy of that code provision. <br />10 This subassignment of error is denied. <br />11 E. CDC 10.1510(D) <br />12 CDC 10.1510(D) requires a showing that: <br />13 "the purposes of the [CDC] and the applicable policies of the Community <br />14 Development Plan would be equally met or advanced by a variation from the <br />15 development requirement." <br />16 The city's findings state: <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />"[CDC] 2.002 sets forth broad purpose statements addressing issues such as the <br />general public welfare, the character and stability of the City, adequate public <br />facilities, orderly future growth and development, etc. There is also policy language <br />advocating the compatibility of new development with existing patterns of <br />development. Purpose statement (G) is the most pertinent to the standard in <br />question: <br />"`To provide the most beneficial relationship between the uses of land and <br />buildings and the circulation of traffic throughout the City by promoting a <br />variety of transportation choices including walking, bicycling, transit and <br />automobile and be reducing parking space requirements, with particular <br />regard to the avoidance of congestion in the streets and highways as well as <br />pedestrian traffic movements appropriate to the various uses of land and <br />buildings, and to provide for the proper location and width of streets and <br />building lines.' <br />"This provides some of the background for the maximum permanent dead-end <br />street standard of 200 feet. However, the standard did not expressly take into <br />Page 7 <br />