Attachment B <br />well as for streets and alleys * * EC 9.6870 sets forth the "width" of the right-of-way and paved <br />service to be "dedicated" in order to conform to the standards set forth in Table 9.6870. <br />The opponents arguments fundamentally misconstrue the requirement of EC 9.8320(5)(a) which is <br />to ensure that a proposed development is capable of dedicating sufficient land along the property <br />frontage to meet the right-of-way width requirements for that street designation. A "dedication" is <br />a form of legal "taking" of property for public use that is intended to provide for public safety and <br />offset impacts imposed by development. Because EC 9.8320(5)(a) is concerned with the dedication <br />of land for a street, neither that provision nor EC 9.6800-9.6875 set forth standards that an existing <br />street must meet in order to serve a proposed development. By its nature, a dedication only <br />applies to the land that is subject to the given land-use application. Therefore, Staff have properly <br />applied EC 9.8320(5)(a) by considering and requiring sufficient dedication of land to meet the right- <br />of-way requirements for either an access lane or a low volume residential street - along the <br />frontage of the subject property. Whether or not Staff have miscategorized Oakleigh Lane as a low <br />volume residential street, and the Hearings Official does not agree that a mistake was made, is of <br />no consequence because Table 9.6870 shows right-of-ways in the range of 40' to 55' for both <br />access lanes and low volume residential streets. The Hearings Official considers Staff's <br />categorization to be more accurate given the increase in ADT moves the lane into the 250-750 ADT <br />range. But, in any case, the record amply demonstrates that the applicant is both willing and able <br />to dedicate land along the northwest corner of the subject property and adjacent to Oakleigh Lane <br />for the purpose of providing sufficient right away and a public accessway. Nothing more is required <br />by EC 9.8320(5)(a). <br />Based on the above interpretation of EC 9.8320(5)(a), the opponents arguments as set forth above <br />are not relevant to whether the applicant has met the requirement to dedicate sufficient land to <br />create a 45 foot right-of-way along Oakleigh Lane. Although eloquently argued, Mr. Conte's <br />substantial analysis of the Staff findings are well outside the scope of EC 9.8320(5)(a), EC 9.6805 <br />and EC 9.6870. Oakleigh Lane need not have a dedicated 45 foot right-of-way and associated paved <br />surface from River Road to the subject property in order to meet EC 9.8320(5(a) because that <br />provision is 'a standard for the "dedication" of land, not a "service" standard akin to level of service <br />- LOS. Neither does EC 9.8320(5)(a) require the neighbors to now dedicate a portion of their <br />property to the widening of the right-of-way or paved surface of Oakleigh Lane. <br />As to the applicant's street connectivity study, the Hearings Official agrees with Staff's analysis. The <br />applicant's August 6, 2013 connectivity study provides analysis required to comply with EC <br />9.6815(2)(g)(1)(b) which allows for alternative street designs if it can be shown that "undeveloped <br />or partially developed properties within a quarter mile can be adequately served by alternative <br />street layouts." The opponents are incorrect that the standard for allowing the exemption is a <br />showing that nearby properties can be developed to their maximum potential. The applicant's <br />study identifies only one property in the vicinity that remains undeveloped and adequately shows <br />that it can be served by the alternative street lay out proposed. That is enough to qualify for the <br />exemption. <br />Hearings Official Decision (PDT 13-1, WG 13-1) 25 <br />