My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1st Open Record Period: Applicant Comments submitted 3-21-18
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
1st Open Record Period: Applicant Comments submitted 3-21-18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2018 2:09:36 PM
Creation date
3/22/2018 12:18:10 PM
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 after hearings official hearing
Document_Date
3/21/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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
Technical Memo to Hearings Official - Capital Hill PUD (PDT 17-1) <br /> March 21, 2018 <br /> <br />time. One might assume this is a moonlighting condition, but that is an extremely unlikely and <br />unrealistic commute for that to be the case. Attached for information is a print from the City of Santa <br />Rosa webpage. <br />Mr. Saberian did not submit any engineering calculations and was unable to demonstrate that the <br />relevant criteria. As the supervising engineer for the City of Santa Rosa, it <br />is questionable that he is familiar with the local approval criteria in the first place. The applicant has <br />worked diligently to meet their burden of proof, including providing a traffic study when one was not <br />required. The <br />analysis to ensure the application conformed to approval criteria. Their unbiased review finds the <br />ia. <br />It should be noted that in the second paragraph of Existing C <br />e <br />standard was met, there were a number of erroneous claims that the roadway width is somehow <br />responsible for cars parked on sidewalks, delivery trucks and service vehicles making the roadway <br />width feel narrow, neighbors piling landscaping equipment on the sidewalk, a car turning around at a <br />garage sale, snow collecting on a high-elevation roadway, and neighbors that constructed steep <br />driveways. <br />I am unsure about the conditions or standards in Santa Rosa, California, but these conditions are not <br />unusual in Eugene, Oregon and they are certainly not an example of a criterion not being met. The <br />off-site roadway exceeds the City standard for clear lane width of 14-feet on a local street or access <br />lane, provided the one area identified in my traffic safety study and recommended for a safety <br />improvement is followed. This is the area where approximately four cars park on the downhill side of <br />the street at approximately 2625 Capital Drive. This was recommended with or without the subject <br />development application. As you witnessed in the hearing, the neighbors agree that the on-street <br />parking is not an ideal condition. While there is still no recent known accident history on this off-site <br />roadway, the traffic study recommends a safety improvement for that area. <br />As stated above, Capital Drive is not a unique condition. There are narrow streets with no sidewalks <br />all over Hendricks Park Hill, Laurel Valley, and the Fairmont neighborhood. It is the character of the <br />neighborhood. One of the most recent reconstruction projects of a roadway in Eugene was Crest Drive. <br />It was built to 18-feet in width. The C <br />involvement because the neighbors wanted to slow traffic on their street. It worked. <br /> confirmed that width, and the <br /> based on the approval criteria and the standards. <br /> Page | 2 <br />Branch Engineering, Inc. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.