My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Applicant Final Argument (3-17-17)
>
OnTrack
>
TIA
>
2016
>
TIA 16-7
>
Applicant Final Argument (3-17-17)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2017 12:27:28 PM
Creation date
3/21/2017 9:47:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
TIA
File Year
16
File Sequence Number
7
Application Name
Amazon Corner
Document Type
Public Comments
Document_Date
7/1/2016
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
Mr. Fred Wilson <br />March 17, 2017 <br />Page 2 <br />Sandow Engineering Technical Memorandum, 2.28, 2017 (responding to the <br />information items included in Administrative Rule R-9.8650 (TIA Rule) and also <br />attaching the Scope of Work agreement reached with the City of Eugene, Public <br />Works Engineering) <br />Lttr from Bill Kloos 2.27.2017 (regarding the pedigree of the TIA Rule) <br />Seven day documents: <br />Sandow Engineering Response to Transportation Issues 3.8.2017 (Record PDF <br />page 2) <br />Sandow Engineering Response to Lttr from Access Engineering 3.8.2017 (Record <br />PDF page 9) <br />Sandow Engineering Response to Items/Issues Raised at Hearing 3.8.2017 <br />(Record PDF page 14) <br />Lttr from Bill Kloos 3.8.2017 (relationship of TIA to "permitted use") (Record <br />PDF page 22) <br />14 day documents: <br />Jon Lauch Lttr responding to March 8 Staff Report, 3.10.2017 (Record PDF page <br />2) <br />Jon Lauch email on bus "Bump-out" issue, 3.15.2017 (Record PDF page 15) <br />Sandow Engineering Response to March 8 Attorney Mittge Lttr 3.15.2017 <br />(Record PDF page 21) <br />Sandow Engineering Response to March 7 Collinge Letter 3.15.2017 (Record <br />PDF page 41) <br />A. Procedural Issues <br />The applicant requests that some of the opposing testimony submitted during the 14-day open <br />record period should be stricken because it is outside the scope of what is allowed at that time. <br />The scope of the post-hearing submission at the 14-day mark is limited by statute. The statute is <br />ORS 197.763(6)(c), which says: <br />"If the hearings authority leaves the record open for additional written evidence, <br />arguments or testimony, the record shall be left open for at least seven days. Any <br />participant may file a written request with the local government for an opportunity <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.