My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1st Open Record Period: Public Testimony (3-7-18 to 3-19-18)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
1st Open Record Period: Public Testimony (3-7-18 to 3-19-18)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/20/2018 4:01:42 PM
Creation date
3/19/2018 4:05:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
CAPITAL HILL PUD
Document Type
Public Comments submitted after hearings official hearing
Document_Date
3/19/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
Questions and Responses regarding Scott Gillespie Testimony - Submitted by Paul Conte <br />What were the values of those estimates? <br />Comment: Gillespie provided no explanation; accordingly, his conclusory statement is neither <br />reliable nor probative. <br />14. RE: "The engineer analyzed intersections for safety and operations." <br />What were the probative results that the applicant's engineer claimed? <br />Comment: Gillespie provided no description of the results; accordingly, his statement isn't <br />probative. <br />15. RE: "The applicant's engineer demonstrated that no crash reducing measures are necessary, <br />recorded traffic speeds are within acceptable percentages for the posted and statutory speed, <br />Capital Drive & Spring Blvd have adequate capacity to serve the development site and no <br />measureable congestion from an engineering standpoint will result from the proposed <br />development." <br />What were the specific data and analysis submitted by the applicant's engineer that you are relying <br />upon for the following conclusions: <br />a) no crash reducing measures are necessary <br />b) recorded traffic speeds are within acceptable percentages for the posted and statutory speed <br />c) Capital Drive & Spring Blvd have adequate capacity to serve the development site <br />d) no measureable congestion from an engineering standpoint will result from the proposed <br />development." <br />Comment: Gillespie provided no explanations; accordingly, his conclusory statements are neither <br />reliable nor probative. <br />16. RE: "City Engineering staff has confirmed the new pavements have the capacity to serve the existing <br />neighborhood and the proposed development site" <br />What measure of "capacity" are you referring to e.g., volume, Gross Vehicle Weight, other? <br />Comment: Gillespie provided no explanation; accordingly, his conclusory statement is neither <br />reliable nor probative. <br />17. RE: "The City of Eugene would not have knowingly reconstructed an unsafe condition." <br />Are you claiming that this is reliable and probative evidence upon which the Hearings Official should <br />base his conclusions, or is this just speculation? On what concrete evidence do you base this <br />statement? <br />Comment: Gillespie provided no explanation; accordingly, his conclusory statements are neither <br />reliable nor probative. <br />18. RE: "The narrow roadway and topography create a self-regulating condition and appropriate for the <br />topography, speeds and volumes in the surround neighborhoods." <br />What is the meaning of "self-regulating" in standard, professional lexicon? <br />Comment: Gillespie provided no explanation; accordingly, his conclusory statement is neither <br />reliable nor probative. <br />March 8, 2018 Page 16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.