The Hearings Official himself documented this fact with respect to the development site: <br />As can be seen on the Oregon Map, the edge of the paving continues in nearly a straight line <br />across the subject property and continues straight across the three properties on the west. It's <br />therefore incontestable that at least six feet, more-or-less, of the paved surface is outside the <br />public right-of-way. There is no evidence in the record to the contrary. <br />As a consequence, the paving on the public right-of-way along this long stretch can only <br />be assumed to be, at best, about thirteen feet wide - not the 19 feet assumed by the Public Works <br />analysis. <br />There is no evidence in the record that the unpaved portion of the 20-foot right-of-way <br />will be paved to provide a paving width of 19' or greater wholly within the public right-of-way. <br />There is no evidence in the record that, as a matter of law, vehicles can and will be ensured <br />permanent, unobstructed use of the paving that's on private property and not in the right-of- <br />way. And there is no evidence in the record that the City can, and will, prevent cars from <br />parking on the paving that's on private property and not in the right-of-way, and thereby <br />obstruct the pavement. <br />The Hearings Official neglected to include in any finding the critical fact that along this <br />250-foot long segment of Oakleigh Lane, there is only a 13-foot wide strip of pavement that is in <br />the public right-of-way and of which the public's use can be ensured. <br />The Public Works Report didn't document this deficiency. The report didn't analyze the <br />adequacy and safety of a 13-foot wide pavement (or any width less than 19 feet); and the report <br />does not include any finding that a 13 foot wide "paved surface [would] provide[] safe passage <br />for two-way vehicular traffic, bicycles, pedestrians and emergency vehicles." The report also <br />didn't address at all any remedies that would ensure at least a 19-foot wide, unobstructed <br />pavement within the right-of-way for the entirety of Oakleigh Lane. <br />With the true condition of the pavement on Oakleigh Lane now brought to the <br />commissioners' attention, the Planning Commission has no choice but to adopt a finding <br />documenting the 250-foot segment of Oakleigh Lane that has no more than an approximately <br />13-foot wide paved strip within the public right-of-way. <br />Based on that finding, the Planning Commission must also find that the Public Works <br />Report's conclusions regarding the safety of Oakleigh Lane are based on the erroneous <br />assumption of a legal and unobstructed 19-foot paving width. Consequently, all of the Hearings <br />Trautman Appeal Testimony PDT 13-1 Page 10 July 27, 2015 <br />