Laserfiche WebLink
In a nutshell, Respondent found that the usual requirements would be overkill for <br />this private street accessing a few homes, and granting the exception would provide a <br />roadway design that is safer and preserves more natural resources than the typical larger, <br />two -way street. <br />As findings were made, the burden is upon Petitioners to show an abuse of <br />discretion for lack of substantial evidence to support the findings. Petitioners have failed <br />to do so, but rather argue that a different conclusion should have been reached. <br />For example, Petitioners quibble with the sub - finding that the width will be <br />sufficient for use of emergency vehicles. The findings set forth in the Resolution <br />approving the Vesting Tentative Map include the following: <br />The proposed private roadway meets emergency vehicle (public <br />safety) access and general circulation needs of the Project. The City <br />Traffic Engineer has also reviewed the RKH Engineers and Fehr & Peers <br />traffic reports and memos (Finger Draft EIR Appendix G) and agrees that <br />the proposed 22 foot wide private roadway will meet necessary access and <br />circulation needs of the Project. (2AR 98.) <br />The granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the public <br />welfare or injurious to property in the vicinity of the subject property. .. . <br />The Plan Review Committee has also determined that the roadway meets <br />emergency vehicle (public safety) and general circulation access needs...." <br />2AR 100.) <br />Whether or not there was evidence of a "Plan Review Committee" meeting (although see <br />2AR 1899, 1924 - 1925), the Administrative Record reflects factual evidentiary support for <br />the finding of the safe width of the proposed street for access by emergency vehicles. <br />27 <br />8.B. - Page 86