Hearings Official Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

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