HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Comment (2)JANISCH Amy C
From: Ross Williamson < ross@speerhoyt.com >
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 4:41 PM
To: BERG-JOHANSEN Erik
Subject: ARA-15-013
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi, Erik.
I noticed an adjustment application related to the Chamotee Trails PUD (PDT 15-001).
Although I am sure you have it handled, I thought I would offer my two cents.
It appears to me that the applicants do not understand the difference between the pavement width standards under EC
9.6505(3)(b) and the connectivity standards under EC 9.6815(2)(b). They are seeking an adjustment to the paving requirement,
which could allow an applicant to pave a street to a different width (or adjust curb/cutter requirements). But the actual request
appears to be an adjustment to the connectivity standard that requires the development to connect to Vivian Drive. In other
words, they want to do away with the requirement that they connect their development to an adjacent street, Vivian Drive. As
you know, the connectively standards are not subject to adjustment - it is also a standard that the original PUD application
clearly fails to address or meet.
It seems the applicant is trying to do away with the connectivity standard through an adjustment to the paving standard.
My quick thoughts anyway. Happy to discuss if you care to.
Thanks for your consideration.
Ross Williamson
875 Foxboro Ln.