LUBA 076/077 VOL 2 of 2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Eugene Planning Commission September 11, 2015 Page 7 ORS197.835(9)(a)(C)." The hearings officer and planning commission relied on the evidence in the record, including evidence from Meadows and from the city's public works staff, that Oakleigh Lane will provide safe and adequate transportation with the additional trips generated by the PUD. Record 9, 372,1255-76. * * * . i Conte reads the evidence supplied by the city's public works staff differently than the planning commission did. Conte argues that the, city's public works staff took the position that the entirety of Oakleigh Lane must have a 45-foot wide right of way in order to be safe. Conte Petition for Review 29, 37-39. Respondents respond that the public works comments that Conte relies on in support of his argument do not say what he argues they say." We have reviewed the public works staff comments on the proposed PUD at Record 1255-76 and 1268-69 and we think that the planning commission and respondents' description and understanding of the comments and the evidence provided in them regarding whether the PUD satisfies the applicable criteria is the accurate. one. It is also evidence that a reasonable person would rely on in reaching a decision. City of Portland v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 298 Or 104, 119, 690 P2d 475 (1984). Conte concedes '[a]lthough the [public works staff] findings do not state explicitly that Oakleigh Lane would be unsafe after the PUD ' is developed unless all or most of Oakleigh Lane is also widened from the development site to River Road, such a statement is unnecessary for Conte's argument since no other reasonable. conclusion can be drawn from the [public works staff findings. * Conte Petition for Review 39." LUBA Opinion, p. 33-35. While the opponents advance, again, the same arguments before the Planning Commission, they fail to explain what error the Hearings Official, the Planning Commission, and the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals made in reviewing Public Works findings. The Eugene Public Works findings concerning the exaction are limited to providing justificati on for a half-street dedication on the property frontage, and provide no evidence of a traffic safety issue. 2. The Eugene Code Does Not Require that Oakleigh Lane Meet Current Standards For A City Street. The opponents misconstrue applicable law when they argue that EC 9.6870 requires Oakleigh Lane's right-of-way to be expanded along its entire length to 45 feet, and that the street be paved to 20-feet to meet City standards for a local street. July 27, 2015 Appeal Testimony, p. 12, 25. In fact, opponents goes so far as to argue that, the City (1 310 430