I Petitioners argue that the city's determination is not supported by <br />2 substantial evidence, in part, because the is no professional pavement evaluation <br />3 in the record. Nothing in EC 9.6815(2)(f) requires a professional pavement <br />4 evaluation. The undisputed evidence in the record indicates that Lombard Street <br />5 is paved and passable. Accordingly, petitioners' substantial evidence challenge <br />6 provides no basis for remand. <br />7 The fifth assignment of error is denied. <br />8 The city's decision is affirmed. <br />Page 26 <br />