My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Hearings Official Decision
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
Hearings Official Decision
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/16/2018 4:02:00 PM
Creation date
5/15/2018 12:02:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
CAPITAL HILL PUD
Document Type
Decision Document
Document_Date
5/15/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
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
`queuing' streets because they are not constructed to current standards. However, the review <br />does not provide engineering evidence that the street system is not functioning adequately. The <br />reality that the streets do not conform to city standards does not render the street system <br />inadequate. <br />Based on all of the evidence in the record, including the low reported accident rates, the <br />neighbor's testimony, and the Response Committee's traffic engineer's analysis, it appears that, <br />while the streets are narrow and not constructed to current city standards, the street system does <br />function adequately. <br />Based on the above analysis, public facilities and services are either presently available, or can <br />be available, and can be extended to serve the proposed development, in compliance with EC <br />9.8320(7). <br />EC 9.8320(8) Residents of the PUD will have sufficient usable recreation area and <br />open space that is convenient and safely accessible. <br />Finding: The common open space established by Tracts B, C, and D on the flatter portion of the <br />site will provide the opportunity for relatively easy access for passive recreational activity on the <br />development site. Tract A is located in the steepest area of the site and not easily accessible. <br />At least one neighbor challenged the sufficiency of the open space, given the steepness of Tract <br />A, which limits its availability for active use and is not `safely accessible. She argued that usable <br />recreation space must be `flat.' The usability of some open space on the property, including that <br />on Tract A, may focus on its visual and aesthetic open space values. However, given the amount <br />of open space, relatively large lots sizes within this PUD and this site's proximity to Hendrick's <br />park, like their neighbors surrounding them, the residents of this PUD will have sufficient usable <br />recreation areas and open space available to them that is convenient and safely accessible. <br />EC 9.8320(9): Lots proposed for development with one-family detached dwellings <br />shall comply with EC 9.2790 Solar Lot Standards or as modified according to <br />subsection (10) below. <br />Finding: The proposed PUD includes single-family detached dwellings and is therefore subject <br />to compliance with the applicable solar lot standards at EC 9.2790, as follows: <br />EC 9.2790 Solar Lot Standards. <br />(2) Solar Lot Requirements. In R-1 and R-2, at least 70% percent of the <br />lots in a subdivision shall be designed as "solar lots" and shall have a <br />minimum north-south dimension of 75 feet and a front lot line <br />orientation that is within 30 degrees of the true east-west axis. For <br />purposes of this subsection, a lot proposed for more than one dwelling <br />unit shall count as more than one lot, according to the number of <br />units proposed (e.g. a lot proposed for a fourplex shall be considered <br />4 lots). <br />Hearings Official Decision (PDT 17-1) 59 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.