21 <br />1 adequate transportation systems" can therefore be satisfied by <br />2 indefinitely deferring any action to bring the only street serving the PUD <br />3 up to City street standards. <br />4 Such an interpretation would eviscerate the meaning from EC 9.8320(5) and <br />5 subsection (a) and cannot have been the intent of the City Council. <br />6 There's also explicit context in Eugene Code that supports the plain <br />7 language interpretation of EC 9.8320(5) and subsection (a). The purpose of <br />8 EC 9.6870 is set forth in EC 9.6800 and states: <br />9 "[s]ections 9.6800 through 9.6875 establish standards for the dedication, <br />10 design and location of public ways to address the purpose of this land use <br />11 code contained in EC 9.0020 Purpose." <br />12 As mentioned earlier, EC 9.0020 Purpose states: <br />13 "The purpose of the land use code is to protect and promote the health, <br />14 safety, and general welfare of the public * * (Emphasis added) <br />15 The correct interpretation is that the purpose of EC 9.6800 through 9.6875 is to <br />16 "establish standards for the dedication, design and location of public ways to" <br />17 "protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the public." <br />18 The language of EC 9.8320(5) echoes this purpose and is precisely why <br />19 it relies on the standards in EC 9.6800 through 9.6875 being applied to, in this <br />20 case, the only street that provides access to the PUD. <br />21 The Decision must be remanded for the City to properly apply <br />