Obviously, none of the three possible mitigations are feasible on Oakleigh Lane, which is a <br />1,000-foot long dead-end with twenty existing single-family homes almost certainly without <br />sprinkler systems. <br />But even that isn't the full "take-away." Look at the "20 ft. Streets" diagrams and notes on pages <br />19 and 20. They state "No on-street parking allowed" and depict a 42- to 48-foot right-of-way. <br />This is not a scenario that would fit Oakleigh Lane in its current configuration, with narrower <br />pavement and parking on both sides. <br />And, if this isn't enough to convince you that Oakleigh Lane is grossly unsuitable for more than <br />doubling the traffic, look at what the OSHA has to say in their publication "Fire Service <br />Features if Buildings and Fire Protection Systems. (See Attachment L, incorporated herein.) In <br />particular read pages 11 to 15 and the summary sidebar on page 16. Here are a few excerpts: <br />"The basic clear width requirement for [fire] apparatus in the IFC and [National Fire <br />Protection Association] NFPA 1 [the Uniform Fire Code] is 20 feet NFPA 1141 calls for <br />one-way fire lanes that are 16 feet wide (page 13) <br />"NFPA 1141 contains a 24-foot clear width requirement for two-way fire lanes. <br />Appendix D of the IBC [International Building Code] calls for a 26-foot clear width for <br />fire hydrant locations, extending for a distance of 20 feet in both directions (page 13) <br />"The IFC Appendix D has a load design requirement of 75,000 pounds." (page 14) <br />• "Fire lane signage is important, both for the public and enforcement officials. Examples <br />include signs, curb painting, or curb stenciling. A jurisdiction's requirements must be <br />followed exactly to ensure that no-parking provisions are legally enforceable. (page 15, <br />emphasis added <br />The standard in NFPA 1141 is particularly relevant because it's for "planned building groups," <br />such as a PUD. (NFPA 1141 defines "planned building group" as: "Multiple structures <br />constructed on a parcel of land, excluding farmland, under the ownership, control, or <br />development by an individual, a corporation, or a firm." This is exactly what OMC proposes.) <br />Oakleigh Lane doesn't even meet OSHA's recommended standard for a safe one-way street. So, <br />Oakley Lane in its current condition would pose greater risks to our community's fire fighters, <br />as well as current residents and future PUD residents, if 29 additional dwellings were to be <br />added at the end of this 1,000-foot dead-end. <br />Enough, already! <br />Every standard that can be consulted from Eugene's adopted street standards, Eugene's Fire <br />Code, Oregon Fire Code, the International Fire Code, DLCD and ODOT street guidelines, the <br />National Fire Protection Association, OSHA and the International Building Code requires that <br />Oakleigh Lane have at the very minimum an adequately paved, unobstructed clear width of at <br />least 20 feet, with 26 feet of clear width around the fire hydrant. <br />• <br />Trautman Appeal Testimony PDT 13-1 Page 15 August 31, 2015 <br />40 <br />