My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Public Comments submitted at hearings official hearing (NRC 1)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
Public Comments submitted at hearings official hearing (NRC 1)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/12/2018 10:39:26 AM
Creation date
3/12/2018 10:38:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
CAPITAL HILL PUD
Document Type
Public Comments submitted at hearings official hearing
Document_Date
3/7/2018
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
334
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
ResponseCommitteeestimatesthattheproposedprojectwillcontainapproximately1,360SFof <br />parkingspaceareaforLots20,33and34. <br />Basedontheaboveargumentsandeventhoughthe8/22/17Applicationtoutsthebenefitsofthe <br />so-calledCommonPreservationAreasandIndividualPreservationAreas,theyposeasevere <br />safetythreatandareneitherreadilyphysicallynorvisuallyaccessibletotheresidentsofthe <br />proposedPUD.Theproposedprojectisneithersafenorsuitableforsmallchildrenorseniorsin <br />thatallso-called“preservation”areasarenot“preserved”for(all)residents,especiallythevery <br />youngandtheelderlywhocouldhavephysicalorage-relatedlimitations.TheApplication <br />proposesnosafeguardsfortheseareas. <br />THEREFORE,THERESPONSECOMMITTEEPROPOSESAMOREACCURATE <br />ALTERNATIVECALCULATIONOFNETDENSITYASSHOWNBELOW: <br />FromtheApplication’s13.10projectacres(570,636SF),aftertheeliminationoftheCupola <br />Drivearea,thefollowingadjustmentsshouldbemadebeforecalculatingnetdensity: <br />Subtractthe2.08acres(90,619SF)ofso-calledIndividualPreservationAreas; <br />Subtractthe2.46acres(107,331SF)ofso-calledCommonPreservationAreas; <br />Subtractthe6,450estimatedSFofaccesslanes; <br />Subtractthe10,000estimatedSFofsidewalks;and <br />Subtractthe1,360estimatedSFforparkingforLots20,33and34. <br />Afterthesesubtractions,anadjusted,moreaccurate354,876SF(8.15acres)isderivedto <br />utilizeinthenetdensitycalculation. <br />Giventheproposed34to38projectunits,netdensityincreasesfromtheApplication’sstated <br />2.6to2.9units/acretoamoreprecisedensityof4.17to4.66units/acre. <br />TheApplicantstatesthattheproject’sdensity“iswellwithinthemaximumof5unitsper <br />acre…”However,toanyonewhowillliveinorwalk/drivethroughtheproposedproject, <br />densitytotheeverydayuserwillappeartobeclosertothemaximumof5unitsperacre.Inan <br />efforttocamouflagetheincontrovertiblemassiveneighborhoodimpactoftheproposedPUD,the <br />Applicanthasgrosslyunderstatedactualdensitybyapproximately59%. <br />Additionally,theResponseCommitteequestionswhyLots18(18,400SF)and19(21,023SF) <br />areincludedinthenetdensitycalculation.EventhoughbothLots18and19areownedbythe <br />ApplicantandareincludedintheproposedPUD’slotcount,theyneitherphysicallyabutthe <br />developmentsitesoftheother32lotsnoraretheyphysicallyvisiblefromtheother32lots.The <br />mid-lineofLot19isapproximately300feet(afootballfield)fromthesouthernedgeofLot17. <br />Werethesetwolottobedeductedfromthemainproperty,theCommittee’sabovenetdensity <br />calculation4.17to4.66unitsperacrewouldincreaseto4.70unitsperacre(usinga34unittotal) <br />to5.25unitsperacre(usinga38unittotal).Theproposedprojectwouldbeatorabovethe <br />maximum5unitsperacreallowedbytheEugeneCodeforpropertyzonedR-1. <br />102 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.