Eugene Planning Commission <br />September 11, 2015 <br />Page 16 <br />plans, the PUD provides a 22' 6" emergency vehicle access throughout the PUD. <br />Moreover, in accordance with the Planning Commission's condition of approval, OMC <br />is providing an on-site hammerhead "Fire Turnaround" for emergency vehicles to <br />turnaround on-site. Accordingly, the PUD will not be an impediment to emergency <br />response, and the Planning Commission should affirm its prior decision. <br />The opponents point to a few videos of Oakleigh Lane, to urge that there own <br />on-street parking is such a severe impediment to emergency response that the PUD <br />must be denied. However, there are significant problems with this position. <br />First, the intentional impediment of the street by neighbors is not evidence that <br />"the PUD" is an impediment to emergency response. OMC has provided adequate off- <br />street parking for the PUD, in excess of the City's standards, which ensures that <br />parking by members or visitors will not impede emergency response. <br />Second, the videos at issue are very clearly staged by the opponents to overstate <br />the parking impacts on the street. As noted by Professional Traffic Engineer Michael <br />Weishar all the homes along Oakleigh Lane have private driveways or garages that <br />allow off-street parking on the adjoining property. This is borne out by photographs <br />and videos taken on Oakleigh Lane on the.afternoon of August 17, 2015, which clearly <br />depict parking of most vehicles in driveways, with a few vehicles parked on the <br />shoulders of Oakleigh Lane. In fact, Will Dixon reviewed the videos and confirmed <br />• that most vehicles park in driveways on the street and that in his 15 years in the <br />neighborhood "I have never encountered this much on-street parking." <br />Finally, there is no evidence that parking on the shoulders of the road is an <br />impediment to emergency response on Oakleigh Lane. As Mr. Weishar :observes: <br />"Parking on the shoulder which incidentally obstructs a portion of the improved <br />surface would not pose a safety risk as drivers would simply drive around the <br />obstruction." The opponents, again, point to inapplicable City street standards to urge <br />that the existing street width must be increased to accommodate both parking and <br />emergency vehicles. However, their own survey reflects that there is more than <br />adequate paved width and parking area even at their purported "choke point." <br />As the opponents acknowledge, fire trucks need about 10-feet of travel space <br />mirror-to-mirror. September 4, 2015 Appeal Testimony, p. 9. The paved width of <br />Oakleigh Lane varies from about 21 to 19.8 feet, and residents have provided parking <br />areas along the uncurbed shoulders of the street. See Map of Oakleigh Lane for Bryn, <br />Thoms. While these parking areas vary in width, the opponents survey reflects a <br />continuous "Gravel Parking Area" of approximately 6 to 8 feet located to the north of <br />the improved surface. In fact, as depicted in photographs in the record, these gravel <br />parking areas can accommodate vehicles entirely off of the paved surface of the street. <br />The opponents' speculation notwithstanding, there is simply 'no evidence that the <br />existing parking would obstruct or impede emergency response. <br />319 <br />439 <br />