Opponent Arguments <br />Attachment B <br />The Hearings Official views most of the arguments identified above in the findings for EC <br />9.8320(5)(a) to be equally directed at EC 9.8320(5)(b). Again, the strenuous assertion made by <br />neighbors is that the increase in ADT will necessarily decrease the safety of pedestrians, <br />children, and bicyclists traveling along Oakleigh Lane. <br />Hearings Official Conclusions <br />The Hearings Official generally concurs with Staff's findings for EC 9.8320(5)(b) and adopts <br />those findings by this reference, <br />The Hearings Official also concurs with the applicant's October 23, 2013 final argument that the <br />queuing effect of having a single travel lane along Oakleigh Lane is likely to result in lower . <br />speeds and acceptably safe conditions for pedestrians. The applicant provided evidence in(- <br />support of this position from the city's Arterial and Collector Street Plan. The neighbors <br />submitted this very same information in Exhibit PT-1. The queuing effect is deemed effective <br />for streets that have. less than 750 ADT, Even with the added trips attributable to the co- <br />housing proposal, the ADT for Oakleigh will be closer to 400 ADT at most. It is reasonable to <br />expect that the queuing effect identified in the ACSP will work to calm speeds and provide <br />reasonably safe passage pedestrians if the co-housing is approved. Once again, the Hearings <br />Official has not been directed to evidence that shows that pedestrian safety will necessarily be <br />decreased to unacceptable levels simply because 164 ADT are added to Oakleigh Lane. <br />As to Mr. Conte's assertion that the Staff's own findings concede that pedestrian and bicycle <br />traffic will not be assured safe use of Oakleigh Lane, the Hearings Official disagrees. PT-4. The <br />statement Mr. Conte alights on is a finding related to-explaining the justification for the <br />dedication required under EC 9.8320(5)(a). Staffs conclusions are properly understood to <br />require the proposed PUD to dedicate sufficient right=of-way along the subject property's <br />frontage to allow Oakleigh Lane to be brought up to the low volume residential street standard <br />along that frontage. That is consistent with requiring the proposed PUD to meet current street <br />design standards rather than allowing the development to access Oakleigh Lane in its current <br />form. The Hearings Official agrees with the applicant's conclusion that there is no inconsistency <br />in the Staff's findings. - - <br />(c) The provisions of the Traffic Impact Analysis Review of EC 9.8650 through 9.8680 <br />where applicable. <br />Staff Findings <br />The proposed development does not meet any of the thresholds established in EC 9.8650 <br />through 9.8680. The creation of 29 dwelling units is estimated to generate an additional 29 <br />peak hour trips, which is well below the 100-trip threshold for requiring a Traffic Impact <br />Analysis. Referral comments from Public Works staff indicate no concerns related to traffic <br />Hearings Official Decision (PDT 13-1, WG 13-1) 27 <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />• <br />56 <br />