SUBASSIGNMENT OF ERROR 2.A <br />The Decision erred by finding the application met the following criterion: <br />(a) EC 9.6800 through EC 9.6875 Standards for Streets, Alleys, and <br />Other Public Ways (not subject to modifications set forth in <br />subsection (11) below). <br />The Decision erroneously found that Oakleigh Lane would meet, or was <br />exempt from, the applicable standards established for a safe and adequate <br />transportation system. <br />EC 9.6815(2) <br />The Decision erroneously found that Oakleigh Lane was exempt from the <br />applicable standards established for a safe and adequate transportation <br />system. <br />"The applicant's August 6, 2013 connectivity study provides analysis <br />required to comply with EC 9.6815(2)(g)(1)(b) which allows for alternative <br />street designs if it can be shown that "undeveloped or partially developed <br />properties within a quarter mile can be adequately served by alternative <br />street layouts." (Decision at 25) <br />The Hearings Official erroneously found that the applicant's proposed street <br />design would adequately serve Tax Lot 200, despite severely limiting future <br />development of that lot, which is under ownership of opponents of the PUD. <br />The Hearings Official's decision is a clear exaction from the owner of Tax <br />Lot 200 to the benefit of the applicant. This decision fails to meet the <br />constitutional standards for such exactions. <br />Further, in considering the requirements if EC 9.6815(2)(g)(1)(b), the Hearings <br />Official failed to consider and properly apply the substantial evidence <br />provide by the Public Works Department (PWD) analysis. (See the discussion <br />under Subassignment of Error 10.A, which is incorporated here by reference.) <br />Further, the Decision cites to the purpose in EC 9.6800, which states: <br />"Sections 9.6800 through 9.6875 establish standards for the dedication, <br />design and location of public ways to address the purpose of this land use <br />code contained in EC 9.0020 Purpose" <br />However, the Hearings Official failed entirely to actually evaluate EC 9.0020 <br />Purpose, which states: <br />"The purpose of the land use code is to protect and promote the health, <br />safety, and general welfare of the public..." <br />Appeal Statement PDT 13-1 5 November 22, 2013 <br />