I ATTACHMENT A <br />• Transcript of Eugene Planning Commission meeting - August 17, 2015 <br />Commissioners Baker, Barofsky, Mills, Randall and Taylor Present <br />1:28:17 <br />Barofsky: In regards to the new evidence or whether the width of the pavement is new evidence or not, <br />the aerial photos give me enough pause to want to consider that. And, whether or not and that's why <br />I'm asking that possibly the record be re-opened to give more clarity to that. And that's what I-would be <br />requesting is to substantiate Mr.... I would like to open it to Mr. Trautman and for the other person to <br />have rebuttal to it. <br />And the aerial photo gives me enough pause that I think there may be a question of whether or not <br />there is substantial pavement available for safety. <br />At this point though, however, if that is if the commission deems that this aerial photo isn't enough to <br />bring that in and we don't open the record for more clarity on that issue, I'm leaning with Commissioner <br />Taylor and Commissioner Randall. It gives me pause, but it doesn't sway me enough to allow it in as new <br />evidence. <br />That's why, in order for me to try and get it right, the course to go is to re-open the record. <br />1:30:05 <br />[Discussion and vote on Commissioner Randall's motion, which failed.] <br />1:33:15 <br />• Baker: So we're voting on whether this is new evidence and we would exclude it? <br />Randall: That was my motion. <br />Mills: And exclude? <br />Taylor: Yes. <br />Randall: Exclude this. <br />Taylor: Just the six feet. <br />Vote: Randall and Taylor in favor, and Mills and Baker opposed. (Barofsky abstained). Motion fails 2-2. <br />Randall: So the motion fails. <br />[Chatter] <br />1:34:17 <br />Baker: I move that we re-open the record as suggested by Commissioner Barofsky to Mr. Trautman and <br />to the applicant for a limited period of time related to traffic safety issues. <br />Barofsky: Second. <br />Randall: I guess I have a question how broad traffic safety issues is that all-inclusive <br />Baker: If you would allow me to amend it, I would say: "Traffic safety issues that would include related <br />to right-of-way, paving width by the various jurisdictions. <br />Davies: Is the limited to, or is that including? I mean if you're saying "that includes," you're still pretty <br />broad. <br />• <br />44 <br />