Public Comment (8) - Laserfiche WebLink

right-of-way to the specifications requested by the City" (page 20); and "The applicant proposes to meet city design standards and paving widths for all streets. The applicant's plans provide street typical designs on Sheet L8. There are discrepancies between some of the dimensions provided (e.g. 21 feet of paving with only two travel lanes of 20 feet.) The cross sections also show 2:1 side slopes transitioning with existing grades as happening outside the right-of-way; such constructed slopes are typically necessary to ensure the long-term stability of the roadway, which are normally required to be within public slope easements. These issues and the improvement specifications required above are addressed in the findings and conditions provided at EC 9.8325(6)(a). (c) EC 9.6706 Development in Flood Plains through EC 9.6709 Special Flood Hazard Areas - Standards. These standards do not apply because the property is not located within either of these designations. (d) EC 9.6710(6) Geological and Geotechnical Analysis. EC 9.6710(6) states, "Needed Housing. Unless exempt under 9.6710(3)(a)-(f), in lieu of compliance with subsections (2), (4), and (5) of this section, applications proposing needed housing shall include a certification from an Oregon licensed Engineering Geologist or an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer with geological experience stating " (emphasis supplied). EC 9.6710(3) states, "The following activities are exempt from the requirements of this section: (f) activities on land included on the city's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory. The Goal 5 Inventory includes the areas shown on Figure H-2 of the Scenic Sites Working Paper. See LCDC Acknowledgment of Compliance Goal 5 Addendum report at 4, para. 1 (attached as Exhibit M to applicant's May 11, 2012 PUD Narrative). Staff submitted Figure H-2 as Attachment 5 to its August 22, 2012 Memorandum. Figure H-2 is not particularly clear. It is a map of the Metro Area shown on an 11 x 17 sheet, and none of the street names are included for the streets in the vicinity of the subject property. The hearings official compared Figure H-2 to the city's current zoning map and identified the streets (or the most likely candidates). The hearings official includes an excerpt of Figure H-2 below with the streets labeled and with two short arrows labeled "1" and "2." The tip of the arrow at point 1 appears to be the location where the southern section of West Amazon connects to Fox Hollow Rd on the city's zoning map. The tip of point 2 points to the northern terminus of West Amazon. The problem is that these points are in different positions relative to each other than they appear to be on the zoning map. If Figure H-2 accurately depicts West Amazon in the vicinity of point 2, then the subject property would seem to be included in the Goal 5 resource mapped area. If, however, it is was erroneously drawn too far south relative to Hearing Official Decision (PDT 10-2, CU 11-1) 26