ER-39 <br />1 access standard if the applicant provides a street connection study that <br />2 demonstrates <br />3 "a. [t]hat the proposed street system meets the intent of street <br />4 connectivity provisions of this land use code as expressed in <br />5 EC 9.6815(1) * * * and <br />6 "b. How undeveloped or partially developed properties within a <br />7 quarter mile can be adequately served by alternative street <br />8 layouts." <br />9 Meadows provided a street connection study that demonstrated how <br />10 undeveloped properties on the east end of Oakleigh Lane, to the north, can be <br />11 adequately served without a secondary access for fire and emergency vehicles, <br />12 by constructing a hammerhead turnround at the east end of Oakleigh Lane that <br />13 could provide access to the property to the north. The city concluded that the <br />14 possibility of a hammerhead turnaround would satisfy the intent of EC <br />15 9.6815(1) and demonstrated how the properties to the north could be <br />16 adequately served, and granted the exception. <br />17 In their fourth assignment of error, Neighbors assert that the street <br />18 connection study that shows a portion of the possible hammerhead turnaround <br />19 on the property to the north is inconsistent with the city's condition requiring a <br />20 dedication of only 13 feet of right of way, and not 20 feet, in the area of the <br />21 possible hammerhead turnaround, because the street connection study assumed <br />22 a total 40-foot right of way. We understand Neighbors' argument to take the <br />23 position that the street connection study does not provide substantial evidence <br />24 that an exception to the street connectivity standards is justified. ORS <br />25 197.835(9)(a)(C). Neighbors also argue that the street connection study that <br />26 reflects a portion of the possible hammerhead turnaround on the property to the <br />Page 39 <br />000088 <br />