2) On local residential streets with traffic volumes less than 750 vehicles per day, a single <br />14' traffic lane may be permitted for both directions of vehicular travel The single traffic <br />lane is intended to create a "queuing street", such that when opposing vehicles meet, <br />one of the vehicles must yield by pulling into a vacant portion of the adjacent parking <br />lane. This queuing effect has been found to be an effective and safe method to reduce <br />speeds and non-local traffic. <br />Note in particular, that a "queuing street" must have a clearly-defined, separate parking lane to <br />function safely. <br />24 Ft. Streets <br />Parking on one side only <br />The ODOT/DLCD <br />Neighborhood Street <br />Design Guidelines <br />(provided as Attachment <br />K with my August 31, <br />2015 testimony, see page <br />18) shows how a <br />minimal queuing street <br />would be configured. <br />s <br />Queuing Required <br />m <br />s <br />18 <br />Pavement <br />47-52' <br />Right-of-way' <br />Note the 16'-17' Travel lane, with an additional 7' <br />parking/pull-in area of pavement on one side. The required <br />pavement for a queuing street is thus 23'-24' wide, much <br />greater than Oakleigh Lane's pavement, particularly along the <br />250-foot "choke point." <br />A "queuing street" also does not force pedestrians to share the <br />pavement with vehicular traffic; and, as the diagram above <br />shows, the 47'-52' right-of-way provides room for separating <br />pedestrian sidewalks from the roadway. <br />On the left is how a genuine queuing street would be <br />configured and function (again, from page 18). <br />The reference cited by Mr. Weishar makes no explicit or <br />implied claim whatsoever that a "queuing street" doesn't <br />require sidewalks and can safely force pedestrians to walk in <br />the street, as Oakleigh Lane does. <br />Oakleigh Lane clearly does not meet the standards for a safe <br />"queuing street," and thus the "queuing effect" is wholly <br />irrelevant to this case unless the Planning Commission would <br />choose to impose adequate conditions of approval for the <br />Trautman Appeal Testimony PDT 13-1 Page 5 <br />September 4, 2015 <br />268 <br />r M ' <br />42"; Travel Lane <br />5-6i' 'Planting Planting; 5-6' <br />Sidewalk Strip 24' Strip 5idcwalk <br />