<br /> <br /> 20 <br /> <br />street or alley is not necessary for compliance with this land use code or the street <br />connectivity standards of subparagraphs (b) through (f) of this subsection. <br /> <br />On page 18 of the Hearings Official’s decision, she notes that in the July 31, 2024, Revised Referral <br />Comments, Public Works staff determined that while the existing grades preclude compliance with <br />the current street design standards for connections in the direction to the north and northeast, the <br />applicant had not established a valid basis for an exception to the connectivity requirement for <br />Randy Lane and also that, in accordance with EC 9.6815(2)(a), Randy Lane should be required to be <br />a public street. <br /> <br />Summary of Applicant’s Argument <br />The applicant argues that the Hearings Official erred by excluding the applicant’s testimony dated <br />August 14, 2024, as new evidence. The applicant maintains that the excluded engineer’s rebuttal <br />evidence showed there was no need for the street to be public and meet public standards because <br />the excluded evidence showed that an exception to street connectivity is justified, due to the steep <br />topography that does not meet the City’s limit of a 20% grade for roads. The applicant argues that <br />the Hearings Official should have admitted this rebuttal evidence, found the connectivity exception <br />justified, and agreed that the applicant demonstrated that the Randy Lane extension did not need to <br />be a public street and could remain as a private street. <br /> <br />Staff Response <br />The July 31, 2024, Staff Memorandum included new findings and three new conditions of approval <br />requiring the construction and dedication of Randy Lane as a public street within a 40-foot-wide <br />public right-of-way. First, the Staff Memorandum asserted that the applicant needed to <br />demonstrate an exception was warranted under the Housing/Clear and Objective track standards <br />and proposed a condition requiring the submission of updated application materials demonstrating <br />that an exception is warranted for Randy Lane under EC 9.6815(2)(h). As an alternative, the <br />applicant could apply for an Adjustment Review under EC 9.6815(2)(i). <br /> <br />Additionally, the July 31, 2024, Staff Memorandum recommended a condition of approval requiring <br />a revised site plan depicting the extension of Randy Lane as a public street and a condition of <br />approval dedicating a 40-foot-wide right-of-way extending the public right-of-way for Randy Lane <br />from its existing intersection with Blacktail Drive to the proposed terminus of Randy Lane. These <br />conditions included the following constitutional findings: <br /> <br />[I]t is in the public’s interest to have an interconnected public street system in order to <br />reduce travel distance, and have the right-of-way adjacent to residential developments be <br />improved with the full range of City street improvements i.e., paving, curbs and gutters, <br />sidewalks, street trees and street lights, so that all public amenities are available for <br />motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians. Additionally, requiring Randy Land as a public street <br />will also ensure that all residents of the subdivision will have access to Videra Park, which <br />abuts the proposed extension of Randy Lane to the south. <br /> <br />These findings were incorporated into the Hearings Official’s decision by reference. Of particular <br />note, the findings were based on the assumption that Randy Lane would not connect to the existing <br />Planning Commission Agenda Page 22 of 159