Laserfiche WebLink
7.6 <br />7.5.1. Pretiminary development ptan: The Hearing Examiner shall evaluate a planned unlt <br />devetopment apptication and other evidence and testimony submitted into the record <br />and shalt issue a recommendation based on the fottowing considerations and criteria: <br />7.5.1.1 , Criteria appticabte to all PUDs: <br />7.S.1.1.1- pUD complies with alt amendment criteria in KCC Chapter 17.98; <br />7.5.1.1.2. puD makes economic and efficient use of [and, streets, and <br />Pubtlc services; <br />7.5.1.1.3'PUDpreservesusabteopenspace,importantnaturalfeatures' <br />and other amenities; <br />7 .5.1.1.4. pUD provides site design features that reasonabty mitigate off-site <br />impacts; and <br />7.5.1.1.s. pubtic benefits of PUD outweigh the effect of the modification of <br />underlying zoning standards. <br />7.5.1.2. Additionat criteria appticabte to PUDS on Rural Lands: <br />7.5.1.2.1. pUD iS developed in a mannerthat maintains rural character; <br />7,5,1.2.2. Non-residentiat Uses within PUD are designed at a scale <br />appropriato for ruraI area and intended to serve ontythe residents <br />ofthe PUD; and <br />7.5.1.2.g. pUD prOvides appropriate transitions to surrounding properties <br />and land uses. <br />7.5.1.2,4. Att new struCtures shatt compty with the appticabte standards <br />contained in: (1) "Fire safety considerations for Developments in <br />Forested Areas: Fire Hazard severity Rating and Recommended <br />Standards" (Northwest lnteragency Fire Prevention Group) <br />Washington Department of Naturat Resources Severity Type <br />Ratingsystem;(2)standardsadoptedbyKittitasCountyFire <br />Protgctioncooperative-'.RecommendationsForFireSafetyand <br />Prevention of Forest and Range Land in Kittitas county lnctuding <br />Rurat, Commerciat and Private Developments.'; and/or (3) Urban <br />witdtand lnterfscB code for structures outsido a fire district. <br />7.5.2. Finat devetopment ptan: The Director shat[ evatuate and the Board sha]l approve finat <br />devetopment ptans for the PUD, provided the conditions imposed on the pretiminary PUD <br />approvat, if any, have been satisfied. (Ord' 2013-001' 2013) <br />7.5.g. Hearing Examiner Finding: As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with att of <br />17.g6.045. Afinat devetopment ptan shatt be submitted in accordance with KCC 17'36' <br />KCC 16.32,050 Short ptat review: The ptanning officiat shatl be vested with the responsibltity of <br />processing short ptat apptications- The county Shatt review and consider the proposed short <br />subdivision regarding: <br />7.6.1- lts conformance with att county subdivision, zoning, heatth and sanitation, roads and <br />bridges, and fire and tife safety regutations and with laws adopted by the state of <br />Washington. <br />Its conformsnce to att standards and improvements required under this titte' <br />Potentiat hazards created by ftood potentia[, tandstides' etc' <br />provisions for a1 improvements and easements (roads, ditches, Btc.) required by this <br />titte. <br />7.6.5. Access for atl proposed tots or parcets by way of a dedicated road right-of-way or <br />easement' <br />7.6,6. All other retevant facts which may determine whether the pubtic interest will be served by <br />approval of the proposed subdivision. <br />7.6.2. <br />7.6.3. <br />7-6.4.