12 <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />Public Works staff confirm that, until such time that property owners <br />elect to improve Oakleigh Lane to full City standards (including <br />sidewalks), the existing paved surface of Oakleigh Lane will continue <br />to adequately provide for vehicle and pedestrian traffic, as well as for <br />emergency vehicles and delivery services, provided that the paved <br />surface is not blocked by parked vehicles. With regard to public <br />comments received about vehicle parking occurring on the shoulders <br />of the roadway, Public Works staff notes that, technically, such <br />parking is not allowed. The street can be signed for no parking as part <br />of improving the street, but not before, because the City does not <br />maintain unimproved streets. <br />Public Works staff states that the existing paved surface provides <br />safe passage for two-way vehicular traffic, bicycles, pedestrians <br />and emergency vehicles. As such, Public Works staff indicates <br />that there is nothing to suggest that impacts of the proposed <br />development will result in unsafe conditions in Oakleigh Lane." <br />Rec. 3 72. ER 3 8. (Emphasis added). <br />The intervenor ignores the City's findings that the existing Oakleigh <br />Lane will provide safe passage for pedestrians, cyclists and others. Instead, he <br />argues that staff findings in support of the right-of-way dedication state "what's <br />necessary for the last fifty feet of Oakleigh Lane to be adequate and safe; and <br />therefore that longer part of Oakleigh Lane leading to and from the final fifty <br />feet must be as wide." Brief, p. 25. This is nothing more than a surmise <br />derived from a misreading of staff's dedication findings. <br />Public works staff did not find that the existing Oakleigh Lane was <br />unsafe without a 45-foot right-of-way. Staff found, instead, that a half-street <br />dedication was necessary to extend Oakleigh Lane onto the property and for <br />future development consistent with City standards. It is this dedication area that <br />City staff found to be necessary to "assur[e] safe access for cyclists and <br />