My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
LUBA Final Order: PDT 13-1 Affirmed
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2013
>
PDT 13-1
>
LUBA Final Order: PDT 13-1 Affirmed
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2018 4:02:36 PM
Creation date
1/29/2018 10:17:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
13
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
OAKLEIGH COHOUSING
Document Type
Supplemental Materials
Document_Date
1/29/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
l ° <br />case, EC' 9.$320{6) would be.„difficult to reconcile with- city street design <br />2 <br />standards, which as note perm t a "gUeii~ng street" with a l-4 foot travel lane <br />3: <br />and• a.parlang aisle, wluch under petitioners' argument would not;.be sufficient <br />f <br />q <br />to 'allow, two emergency response vehic[es'to pass each other without one of <br />them pulling, over into the'parking aisle We agree with OMC that avoiding. an <br />"impediment" as used in EC 9.$320(b) does not require, as petitioners argue; a <br />= 3 <br />travel cane ;wide enough for wo em'ergency'resporise vehicles,,_fo pass each <br />8: <br />oilier without one pulling over, as otherwise any `.`queuing street"` aflo 'd <br />9. <br />under the city, street. design standards would necessarily be. inconsistent with <br />10 . EC 9:8320(6): : <br />f <br />11:. <br />As to,, the possibility that vehicles` parking on the shoulders of Oakleigh <br />T2: <br />Lane may make ' it difficult to find a spacefor an opposing vehicle'to pull over <br />. <br />13 " <br />to. allow an emergenc resP onder to as or the. ossbility: that, parking on both <br />Y . p p <br />14: <br />shoulderssand.within. the nght-of way could narrO'v'the travel lane.to preclude <br />" <br />15 : <br />:passage by'even a single emergency response vehicle, OMC' argues. substantial,' <br />.16- <br /> <br />evidence in the record indicates that: parking along- Oaklegh Lane is <br />. <br />an; that there..is no basis -in the record:ao <br />1 T ,"-intermittent,",::in Weishar's..word`s, d <br />_ 18 <br />"conclude that parking along both sides of Oakleigh Lane i's likely to occur in a <br />19 <br />way that narrows the travel. Lane to .effectively block passage-of an emergency . <br />20: <br />. response vehicle; as.petitioners speculate <br />21-` <br />Vile agree .with OIVIC As Weishar stated;. all dwellings along Oakleigh <br />22 <br />Lane have private driveways, and the PUD itself will provide off.-site parking <br />Page 36 <br />r <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.