Staff Report on Appeal - Laserfiche WebLink

Staff Report on Appeal MAJ Eugene Polk Street (TIA 21-2 and ARA 21-14) Page 6 of 18 providing articulation or pedestrian amenities required by the land use code. Planning Director’s Decision The Planning Director commented on page 4, that staff will ensure compliance with applicable Street Facades standards at EC 9.3065(4)(a) during building permit review. Additional Comments on Appeal The applicant states in the general response letter on page 1 and 2, that none of the TIA approval criteria (EC 9.8680) require demonstrating compliance with building façade standards (see Attachment G). Per Administrative Order No. 58-02-02-F, section R-9.8650-F Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) - Report Requirements, building façade information is not required (see Attachment H). Additionally, the TIA application form requirements list includes only site plan, street and utility, street and public access way, and parking area requirements. Such requirements shall be met at the time of building permit review. Appeal Issue 3: No citing of specific evidence that all TIA requirements were met Summary of Appellant’s Argument The third appeal issue raised is related to the City’s Administrative Order No. 58-02-02-F which establishes Administrative Rule R-9.8650 (see Attachment H). The appellant asserts that the Planning Director only provided a broad statement that TIA reporting requirements at R-9.8650-F are met but did not provide any evidence or address Mr. Conte’s testimony enumerating specific missing or incomplete items. Planning Director’s Decision The Planning Director addressed the TIA requirements required by EC 9.8675 on page 7 of the decision. Regarding EC 9.8675, General Application Requirements, the applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis in conformance with the TIA standards and the supplemental scoping memorandum. Traffic counts, trip generation, pass-by reductions, distribution and assignment were all performed in accordance with project scoping and standard engineering practice. The applicant’s engineer adequately described the existing transportation system and proposed development impact on traffic. Projected trips were distributed and assigned to the transportation network based upon existing patterns and professional judgement. A safety and crash summary have also been provided. Queuing and level of service information is provided for the 2021 existing condition, 2023 pre- and post- development and 2028 post-development. The applicant has not proposed any exceptions to the report content requirements for development that generates fewer than 100 trips in any peak hour. Therefore, the general application requirements are met. Additional Comments on Appeal Public works staff reviewed the application in detail to confirm that all requirements were met (see Attachment I). For additional documentation, the applicant’s traffic engineer has provided an 8-page detailed analysis pointing to the location and page number where each requirement was addressed in the TIA report (see Attachment J). All requirements have been met.