settled that, as a matter of law, the city or county could prohibit people from parking on the ~ <br />pavement that's on private property. <br />Section D102.1 (page 461) requires that fire access apparatus roads be able to bear a load of at <br />least 60,000 pounds, but the Eugene Fire Code has increased this to 80,000 pounds. According to <br />the Access Engineering Letter, August 6, 2013 submitted by the applicant (LUBA Rec 1439), <br />Oakleigh Lane has an "oil mat" surface, rather than a full "asphalt cement" pavement, and there <br />is no evidence as to its load-bearing capacity. <br />A road's load-bearing capacity is a result of both the subsurface (e.g., rock or native soil, etc.) <br />and the pavement. As Commissioner Randall should be able to explain, even when an oil mat <br />surface can provide an effective armor against water and wear, if the subsurface hasp t been <br />adequately built-up and compacted, a vehicle as heavy as a fire truck can crush the pavement <br />surface into the subsurface and cause serious impediment to the rapid movement of the fire <br />truck. <br />Oakleigh Lane's oil mat surface cannot be assumed outright to be able to support 80,000 <br />pounds, and no tests or analysis are in the record upon which the City can conclude that the <br />pavement bearing capacity is sufficient to meet this requirement. <br />EXPERT OPINIONS <br />As my previous testimony pointed out, the first and largest elephant in the room was the <br />contradiction between the two conclusions about Oakleigh Lane safety presented in the Public <br />Works report. <br />Perhaps an easy way to decide which of these a reasonable person should rely on is to see what <br />actual experts have to say. <br />As noted above, Section 55 of the Administrative Order adopting the Eugene Fire Code states: <br />"The fire code official may be guided by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and <br />Development's Neighborhood Street Design Guidelines, June 2001." That's a clear indication <br />that the City places some confidence in these guidelines, which were produced as part of the <br />state's Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) program through a collaborative effort <br />among DLCD, ODOT and many other "heavy lifters" in the field of land use and <br />transportation. The City of Eugene was represented by planner Allen Lowe, now retired. <br />Attachment K provides the full 2001 version, incorporated herein. <br />Rather than repeat all the salient points in this publication, I suggest that you flip through the <br />introduction and note the highlighted text on pages 2, 3, 5, 9-12, most especially the statement <br />on page 16 that: <br />"Two-way streets under 20 feet are NOT recommended. If, in a special circumstance, a <br />community allows a street less than 20 feet, safety measures such as residential <br />sprinklers, one-way street designation, and block lengths less than 300 feet may be <br />needed." (All emphasis in original.) <br />Read their lips Two-way streets under 20 feet are NOT recommended. <br />r <br />Ise <br />Trautman Appeal Testimony PDT 13-1 Page 14 August 31, 2015 <br />39 <br />