Attachment C <br />GIOELLO Nick R Attachment B <br />From: Paul Conte <paul.t.conte@gmail.com> <br />Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 L56 PM <br />To: GILLESPIE Scott N; GIOELLO Nick R; *Eugene Mayor, City Council, and City Manager <br />Subject: Response to Scott Gillespie'a comments regarding street safety <br />Attachments: NemariamRepo rtWithCV.pdf; Resolution No 5143 Zero Vision.pdf <br />Nick, <br />Please enter this message in its entirety and attachments into the record for the Capital Hill PUD <br />Tentative application. <br />Scott Gillespie's response below is both erroneous and non-responsive. <br />Regarding "queuing streets." Here are the facts, based on CoE standards, ODOT recommendations <br />and the expert testimony from a qualified, licensed traffic engineer. <br />A "queuing street" does not in anyway support or permit a street in which pedestrians are forced to <br />use the travel lane. CoE standards for a "queuing street" require a 21-foot, paved width to provide <br />a 14-foot travel lane for motorized vehicles and a 7-foot, adjacent parking and pullover lane, <br />which must be configured, marked and signed to provide open (i.e., no parking) areas of adequate <br />length and frequency to allow one of two vehicles meeting head-on to pull-over and pause to allow <br />the other vehicle to pass. Parking on the side opposite the "pullover lane" must be prohibited unless <br />there is another 7 foot designated parking lane on that side. <br />CoE standards require at least a sidewalk on one side so that pedestrians, including wheelchair <br />users, visual- and hearing-impaired individuals, are not forced to walk or roll in the same lane that <br />vehicles use. The "pullover" lane is not intended or allowed to provide some sort of "escape" zone <br />for pedestrians to move out of the path of an oncoming vehicle. Sidewalks are required to provide <br />separation of pedestrians. <br />See the attached Nemarian Report which provides a comprehensive review of "queuing streets" and <br />related standards, including Exhibit J (specifically J.6), which is excerpted from ODOT's <br />recommended standards. <br />There is absolutely no credible evidence that forcing an increased number of pedestrians and cars <br />to share the same travel Lane "has a positive effect on traffic calming, safety, livability and <br />reducing fatality injuries." <br />This statement alone provides sufficient evidence that Mr. Gillespie is either unqualified or biased <br />(or both), and his testimony cannot be relied upon by the Hearings Official with respect to ensuring <br />the PUD and its occupancy do not create a significant risk to pedestrians. (EC 9.8320(5)(b) and (6)) <br />For further proof, here is what Mark Schoening, the City Engineer of the Public Works Department, <br />provided as knowledgeable opinion on this issue: <br />"The second issue is: The implications of outward growth decisions as they effect on <br />unimproved roads.... The increased development reliant on unimproved roads increases the <br />Page 266 <br />