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
SouthHillsthatcontainalargequantityofsignificanttrees,largerlotsarethebestwayto <br />preservenaturalvegetation.” <br />TheApplicationcontinues: <br />“Dispersedaccessthroughamixtureofeasements,CapitalDrive,andCupolaDriveisa <br />farsaferandefficient(sic)waytoprovideaccesstolots,whileensuringthedevelopment <br />iscompatiblewiththesurroundingneighborhood.” <br />TheApplicationindicatesthatthe“dispersal”ofaccessisadirectresponsetoneighborhood <br />concernsaboutlotfrontage.Onceagain,howdosmallerlotfrontages“ensurecompatibility <br />withthesurroundingneighborhood”? <br />TheCommitteehaspreviouslyexpressedaconcernthatthethreeaccesseasementsareunsafe. <br />Thesethreeaccesseasementsaretoonarrowfortwo-waytrafficanddonothavesidewalks, <br />whichisadangeroussituation,especiallygiventhesteepterraintheytraverse,whicheliminates <br />anescaperouteofftheeasementifrequiredinanemergency. <br />Sincethereisnoguestparkingon-site,accesseasementswillalsolikelyfillwithparkedcars, <br />evenifaparkingprohibitionisposted.Thiswillfurtherimpedepedestriansand,especially, <br />emergencyvehicles. <br />TheApplicationcontinues: <br />“Consideringtheuniquequalitiesofthisneighborhood,atraditionallot-by-lotapproach <br />todevelopment,whichmanyoftheR-1standardssupport,isnotalwaysaneffectiveway <br />toensureeithercompatibilityorwell-designedinfill.” <br />“Therefore,werequestthatthedevelopmentbegivenflexibilitythroughthePUD <br />processwithrespecttothethreecriteriaabove.” <br />TheResponseCommitteehasexpressed,ingreatdetailabove,thattheApplication’srequestfor <br />“flexibility”under EC9.2750LotCoverage toallowa65%coverageratioifoneorbothof <br />Lots16and17areimprovedwiththreeunitsisnonsensicalandpoorlyresearched.Sixty-five <br />percentlotcoverageforLot16wouldbe111%ofLot16’sbuildablespace;sixty-fivepercentlot <br />coverageforLot17wouldbe151%ofLot17’sbuildablespace.TheResponseCommittee <br />urgesdenialofthisrequest. <br />Throughanextremelydetailedanalysis(above),theResponseCommitteehasresearchedthe <br />Application’srequestfor“flexibility”under EC9.2760LotFrontage toalloweightlotswithno <br />streetfrontageandonelotwithminimalstreetfrontage.TheCommitteehasdeterminedthatthis <br />requestispredicatedonadesiretomaximizelotcountand,therefore,tomaximizeprofits.Were <br />theApplicantwillingtogiveupafewlotsalongCupolaDrive,morecode-compliantlotscould <br />beachieved.TheResponseCommitteeurgesdenialofthisrequest. <br />161 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.