Street Variance - Performance Criteria

For the Planning Commission review of a variance application for street sections, the intent is to make a determination if the proposed street section is a “good” or acceptable street design. That determination will be based on specific performance criteria. 

Applicants would not be permitted to eliminate required elements without demonstrating how they are providing an equal or better level of design as a substitute. The review criteria may be similar to the following discussion examples:

1) Provision for alternative modes on both sides of the street. A development that abuts an open space with a trail on one side of the street may be able to provide the trail in place of the required sidewalk. 

Similarly, an applicant may wish to provide a bike path instead of a sidewalk on the side of street where no houses front. Both of the above are examples of “good” design because the applicant is substituting for required elements, not eliminating them altogether, and still providing non-vehicular transportation and pedestrian access facilities.

2) Landscape element provided or wider sidewalk in lieu. There are many ways landscaping can be provided along streets, either in traditional planters, in center landscape islands, or in LID bio-retention facilities. 

Eliminating the landscaping element without providing something in lieu would not be acceptable, as there is no element to replace the characteristics and purpose of the landscaping.

New Street Section Variance Process

The existing code has a two tiered approach for review of proposed street widths within plats:

1) Design streets to meet adopted standards (curb, gutter, 5-foot sidewalks on two sides, and a 36 - 44-foot pavement section contained within a 50-60 foot right-of-way); 

2) Propose street sections which do not meet the standard, and go through a “waiver” process with Planning Commission review, or be granted flexibility through the PRD process (also reviewed by Planning Commission).

This second tier is costly in terms of time and staff resources for application review, even with minor variations being applied for.  

Most of the requests to deviate from standards that have been processed recently (past 5 years at least) are for narrower street sections.  This suggests that Oak Harbor’s standard street sections are out dated.

Staff are proposing a new three-tiered process meant to reward creativity in “good” street design and reduce staff, applicant and Planning Commission time spent reviewing alternative street sections in standard plat applications:

1) Standard designs. Offer two options for standard street designs. 

2) Administrative variance. An administrative deviation from prescribed street section dimensions only; if an applicant demonstrates that they cannot provide one of the standard two street sections for unusual site or design reasons.

3) PC Review. If an applicant demonstrates they cannot provide one of the essential elements in the street section (sidewalks, landscape strips, curbs, or 10-foot travel lanes), then they can request Planning Commission review an alternate street design as part of the overall plat review (similar to PRD).