Hearings Official Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

roads are designed to parallel existing topographical contours to the extent possible and the existing topography of the subject property and surrounding natural vegetation will generally limit visibility of the proposed roads, consistent with this standard. The Staff Report also notes that, as originally proposed, the site plan did not satisfy this standard. The staff explains that the original, March 3, 2017 site plan included additional lots along the north boundary of the site abutting Hendricks Park. The site plan depicted a private accessway at the end of Capital Drive to private access to those lots. Fire Department comments at that time indicated that an emergency turnaround would be required near the end of Capital Drive. The revised (June 19, 2017) site plan depicted a hammerhead style turnaround between proposed lots 1 and 2, and the elimination of the private drive and several lots along the north boundary of the site. However, that emergency turnaround would have required extensive grading into the hillside and retaining walls due to the site's topography. After further consultation, the Fire Department determined that the elimination of the additional lots and private driveway along the north boundary also eliminated the need for the emergency turnaround. With the resubmitted site plans (August 22, 2017) the emergency turnaround was eliminated. At least one neighbor argued that this revision was based on the applicant's desire to save money and cut corners at the expense of neighborhood safety. To the contrary, elimination of the emergency turnaround and the accessway and the additional lots along the north property boundary results in a plan that, in addition to reducing density, eliminates the need for extensive grade disturbance and cut-and-fill activity at the end of Capital Drive, thereby complying with this development standard. That planned unit development review shall he based upon a recognition of both public and private interest. In areas ofsignificant conflict (e.g., locating development in a highly visible area as opposed to a less visible area or in an area of significant vegetation as opposed to a relatively open area) which could be resolved through the use q f an alternative development plan, primacy shall be given to the public interest in any determinations. Finding: As the Staff Report explains, because of the location of the subject property, review of the proposed PUD must recognize both the public and private interest; and where there is a conflict between public and private interests, and where a modification to the site plan could benefit the public, (e.g., locating development in a highly visible area as opposed to a less visible area or in an area of significant vegetation as opposed to a relatively open area), "primacy shall be given to the public interest." In accordance with this South Hills Study standard, and to minimize the visibility and impact of the proposed development, the proposed site plan clusters the developable areas of the lots in less vegetated areas, through the use of common open space preservation area (Tract A) and individual preservation areas on the eastern lots to provide for a larger overall preserved area on the steepest slopes and most densely vegetated portion of the site. The applicant has attempted to work with the constraints and opportunities of the property, which have dictated the development pattern of the proposal. Based on the site's topography, the proposed sited plan Hearings Official Decision (PDT 17-1) 25