My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Petitioners Opening Brief
>
OnTrack
>
WG
>
2018
>
WG 18-3
>
Petitioners Opening Brief
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2019 4:05:00 PM
Creation date
12/26/2019 2:38:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
WG
File Year
18
File Sequence Number
3
Application Name
Lombard Apartments
Document Type
Appeal Docs
Document_Date
4/17/2019
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
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
20 <br />1 thus protecting existing residences. A "street," however, is defined to allow <br />2 through movement: "An improved or unimproved public or private way, other than <br />3 an alley, that is created to provide ingress or egress fog vehicular traffic to one or <br />4 more lots or parcels, The applicant sought an adjustment to allow "through <br />5 motor vehicle movement" for the 94-unit apartment complex to pass through a <br />6 small-scale, existing neighborhood, and, in doing so, the applicant has transformed <br />7 the alleged "parking drive" into a "street" because through motor vehicle <br />s movement to other lots and parcels will now occur, consistent with the plain <br />9 meaning of the term. Instead of addressing the plain meaning of the terms <br />1o "parking drives" and "street," the City conclusorily found that "[e]ven though the <br />11 Applicant requests an adjustment to parking drive standards, the adjustment does <br />12 not change the features' designation from a `parking drives' to `streets."' The <br />13 City's decision does not address the plain meaning of the terms at issue. As with <br />14 the issue above, the City ignored the plain meaning of phrase, and created yet <br />15 another superfluous code provision. <br />16 LUBA's decision was just as conclusory as the City's, finding that: <br />17 "[t]he parking drives are not `created to provide ingress and egress for <br />18 vehicular traffic to one or more lots or parcels' within the meaning [sic] <br />19 `street' as defined at EC 9.0500. The parking drives are designed primarily <br />20 to provide vehicular circulation to parking spaces in the apartment complex <br />21 for parking for resident and visitor access to the apartments. We agree with <br />22 the city that the adjustment to the parking area that allows internal traffic <br />23 circulation from access points on both River Road and Lombard Lane does <br />24 not transform the parking drives into streets." <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.