In the middle of Page 45 of 62, the Staff Report claims that the pedestrian circulation standards <br />at EC 9.6730 are not applicable. However, if either or both of Lots 16 and 17 are developed with <br />3 unit apartments, this standard will apply. See C113 through <br />115 <br /> <br />10 (f) The PUD complies with EC 9.6735 Public Access Required <br />nd <br />Note that an error exists in the Staff report in the 2 paragraph from the bottom of Page 45 of 62. <br />Access to Lot 5-10 and 16-19 will be provided via 20 foot wide <br />shared access easements <br /> <br />In actuality, access to Lots 5-10 is proposed to be via a shared access easement that is 28 feet <br />wide, with a pavement width of 20 feet. Access to Lots 16 & 17 and to Lots 18 & 19 is proposed <br />to be via a 20 feet easement with 12 feet of paving for each access lane to these two sets of lots. <br /> <br />The Response Committee continues to assert that these access lanes are too narrow and should <br />be required to have sidewalks adjacent. <br /> <br /> <br />Further, the Response Committee also holds that the slope of Capital Drive is in excess of 15% at <br />the point that the proposed access easement exits Capital Drive leading to Lots 18 & 19. This is <br />EC 7.420 Access Connections Location (1) (b). <br />in violation of <br /> <br />City Staff addresses compliance with EC 7.420 Access Connections Location (1) (b) on Page <br />there is no mention of this potential code violation. <br />46 of 62 of the Staff Report; however, <br /> <br />#### <br /> <br />10 (k) The PUD complies with All other applicable development standards for features <br />explicitly included in the application except where the applicant has shown that a proposed <br />noncompliance is consistent with the purposes set out in EC 9.8300 Purpose of Planned <br />Unit Development. <br />An approved adjustment to a standard pursuant to the provisions beginning at EC 9.8015 of this <br />land use code constitutes compliance with the standard. <br /> <br />On Page 53 of 62 of the 2/28/18 Staff Report, Staff discusses current code violations regarding <br />an existing 3 unit apartment now located on proposed Lots 33 and 34. Staff proposes the <br />following: <br /> <br /> <br />50 Residential Zone Development <br />Standards including Table 9.2750 and EC 9.2751 Special Development Standards for Table <br />9.2750, shall be met <br /> <br />Additionally, Staff uses similar language in its proposed Recommendation 18 under <br />Recommended Conditions of Approval <br /> <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />