My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (01)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2013
>
PDT 13-1
>
7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (01)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/27/2017 4:32:34 PM
Creation date
7/28/2015 2:03:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
13
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
OAKLEIGH COHOUSING
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
7/28/2015
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
300
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
16 <br />Commission determined that the safety concerns voiced by the neighbors were <br />simply not supported by the record. Local Rec. 488; Local Rec. 49. <br />LUBA understood this issue as presented to it as a substantial evidence <br />challenge and analyzed it as such. LUBA considered Petitioners' arguments <br />and the evidence in the record regarding safety issues, and concluded that the <br />City got it right: <br />"In a portion of his first assignment of error, we also understand <br />Conte to argue that the planning commission's conclusion that <br />Oakleigh Lane is presently safe and will be safe after the PUD is <br />built is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. ORS <br />197.835(9)(a)(C). * * * The planning commission understood the <br />public works staff comments regarding the need for a 45-foot right <br />of way for Oakleigh Lane to be limited to the portion of Oakleigh <br />Lane within the proposed PUD and to address constitutional <br />requirements for exacting a portion of Meadows' property for <br />widening of Oakleigh Lane on the subject property, and found that <br />the comments do not provide evidence that Oakleigh Lane in its <br />entirety is unsafe. Record 9-10, 15. <br /> <br />"We have reviewed the public works staff comments on the <br />proposed PUD at Record 1255-76 and 1268-69 and we think the <br />8 The Hearings Official found: <br />"Although the Hearings Official understands the neighbors' <br />concerns about increased numbers of vehicles using Oakleigh <br />Lane, the strong assertion that an increase in ADT will result in <br />traffic accidents or actual danger to pedestrians and bicyclists is <br />not supported by evidence in the record. Assertion is not evidence, <br />and neither is an explanation of inductive reasoning. Therefore, <br />the Hearings Official cannot substitute the neighbors' very strongly <br />held opinions that more cars will necessarily decrease traffic safety <br />for actual evidence." Local Rec. 48 (emphasis in original). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.