t <br />1 Opinion liyBassham.. <br />2 NATURE OF THE DECISION : <br />3 Petitioners. appeal a planning commission 'deci'sion on remand, :from <br />4 LUBA that approves the Oakleigh Meadows planned. unit development.(PUD). <br />5 FACTS- <br />.6 : This is the third time the city has approved the Oakleigh Meadows PLTfl-,. <br />7 and the third appeal to. LUBA involving this, application. In December 2013, <br />8 the city planning commission tentatively approved a 29-unit PUD on the 2.3- <br />9 acre subject parcel, with conditions of approval. The only access to the subject <br />10 parcel is via Oaleigh Lane, an_ east/west street that runs west from River, Road' <br />11 approximately 850 feet to dead-end near the subject property. Oakleigh Lane <br />12 was dedicated to. Lane County in 1927 and constructed to county local access <br />13 road standards, with a 20-foot paved width. Oakleigh Lane has a dedicated <br />14 right-of-way that is 45. feet wide at its western end and varies between 30 and <br />15 40 feet for most of its length. However, at its eastern end there is a 250-foot- <br />16 long section where the dedicated right-of-way is only 20 feet wide.- <br />17 As its exists today, Oakleigh Lane has an oil mat paving surface that for <br />18 most of the road's length averages a paved width of approximately 19 feet` <br />19 within the right "of--way. However, along the 250-foot eastern stretch. where the . <br />20 right-of-way is only 20 feet wide there is only approximately 1.4 feet of. paved <br />21 width within the right-of-.way,. with an additional approximately six feet of <br />22 pavement located outside the right-of-way to the south. Thus within that 25.0- <br />Page 3 <br />