street that provides access to a proposed PUD, that street must provide a safe and adequate <br />transportation system by conforming to adopted city street standards. This is fully explained on <br />pages 21-25 of my July 27, 2015 testimony. <br />But even if that were not the case, there is no question that from both a legal and a practical <br />perspective, the one and only access road to the proposed new development must meet the <br />Eugene Fire Code (EFC) criteria for a fire apparatus access road. <br />If for some reason, the EFC standards were trumped by the city street standards adopted by the <br />local government, then we're right back to Oakleigh Lane having to meet the adopted city <br />standards at EC Table 9.6870. <br />From a practical perspective, Oakleigh Lane must allow the unobstructed passage of a fire truck <br />from River Road to the development site. As the evidence submitted in the August 31, 2015 <br />testimony by Paul Conte shows, this requires at a minimum, clear passage for a 10-foot wide <br />fire truck. That reference point of 10 feet is confirmed in the ODOT/DLCD Neighborhood Street <br />Design Guidelines, included in my August 31, 2015 testimony: <br />"Emergency Response. The movement to reduce street standard widths raised concerns <br />with emergency service providers. Thus, the most controversial issue facing Oregon's <br />fire departments in the past decade has been street width. Fire departments must move <br />large trucks, on average, 10 feet wide mirror-to-mirror." (page 5, emphasis added) <br />"The size of fire apparatus is driven, in part, by federal Occupational Health and Safety <br />Administration (OSHA) requirements and local service needs. The regulations require <br />that fire trucks carry considerable equipment and that firefighters ride completely <br />enclosed in the vehicle. In addition, to save money, fire departments buy multi-purpose <br />vehicles that can respond to an emergency like a heart attack or a traffic accident, as well <br />as a fire. These vehicles typically provide the first response to an emergency. An <br />ambulance will then provide transport to a hospital, if needed. To accommodate the <br />need to move the vehicles and access equipment on them quickly, the Uniform Fire <br />Code calls for a 20-foot wide clear passage." (pages 2-3, emphasis added) <br />When a 10-foot wide fire truck meets an oncoming car, at least six feet wide, there has to be a <br />clear passage way of at least 16 feet plus allowance for space between the two vehicles and <br />obstacles (such as parked cars) one either side. The very bare minimum would be about 18 feet <br />of clear width. If the oncoming vehicle were a truck or larger car, even greater clear width <br />would be required. <br />The 2015August30TruckLeavingOakleighLaneResidence.mp4 video file, included in my August <br />31, 2015 testimony, provides additional, visual evidence that a fire truck would be impeded by <br />parked cars and moving vehicles encountered in the roadway. <br />Nothing in Mr. Weishar's letter, or any other evidence in the record, supports a conclusion that <br />Oakleigh Lane in its current condition can be ensured to have an 18-foot clear width along the <br />entirety of the 250-foot segment where the right-of-way is only 20 feet; the pavement in the <br />right-of-way is no more than 16 feet wide and legally-parked cars on both sides of the road may <br />40 obstruct both the right-of-way and the pavement. <br />Trautman Appeal Testimony PDT 13-1 Page 9 September 4, 2015 <br />281 272 <br />