JANISCH Amv C <br />r.om: Bryn Thorns <brynthoms@msn.com> <br />;nt: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 10:16 AM <br />To: Eugene Planning Commission; DAVIES Anne C; FLOCK Gabriel <br />Subject: `Request to submit new evidence <br />Attachments: Request to Submit Testimony in Re-opened Record PDT 13-l.pdf <br />Please submit the attached into the record. <br />P <br />BTW - I apologize for getting frustrated with the process at the deliberations meeting on Monday the 17th. Its just <br />really hard watching City staff try so hard to keep Trautman's testimony out of the record. 'Annotations such as <br />highlighting and arrows are the same as some one standing up in a Hearing and pointing at something on a map that <br />is already in the record. We don't ignore that in the quasi-judicial process, why should the highlighting and an arrow <br />be ignored, or even a black spot from copying? <br />In addition,-seeing City staff blatantly ignore the fact that the issue of 13 ft of pavement in the Oakleigh ROW west of . <br />OMC's property was already in the record. Becky Taylor's RLID/QRMAP figure, along with Poage's ROW presentation, <br />along with Dixons' north prop line detail, along with the HO's information in the HO Decision Document that explicitly <br />states that there is only 13 ft of pavement in the ROW north of OMC's property,...all support the issue. Based on <br />information already in the record it is essentially impossible for the current pavement width within the ROW to be <br />more than 13 ft. west of OMC property. I find it very hard to believe that City staff didn't know this before the <br />deliberations meeting on the 17th. <br />i a separate note, the applicant knew this even before submitting the application 2 years ago: Like they really want, <br />to support the neighborhood's safety. They're just high and mighty narcissistic developers. <br />Thanks <br />24 <br />144 <br />