My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1st Open Record Period: Public Testimony (3-19-18 to 3-21-18)
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
1st Open Record Period: Public Testimony (3-19-18 to 3-21-18)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/25/2018 9:12:50 AM
Creation date
3/22/2018 1:53:33 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
3/21/2018
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
218
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
look at, and then when the work is done, they can look and say that the road condition went from this <br />level to this level. <br />(28:44) Nick - Yes, the code actually does have provisions that require that there not be significant <br />negative impacts offsite. Could be insub (12), I think, (We think he means sub 11) so it’s not a public <br />works thing. This would fall under that (i.e., EC 9.8320 (11)) and the Hearings Official does have <br />a legal basis to do what Massoud has suggested. Whether or not he’ll choose to do it is a different <br />matter. <br />Eric – As a side note, I don’t think that we’re anticipating a lot of extremely heavy trucks for this <br />project compared to other construction sites. The access to the site doesn’t dictate that. Usually <br />you have a truck and pumper or a truck and transfer to bring up your asphalt and everything, which <br />are extremely heavy and also require a lot of street to maneuver through. I imagine that if this <br />project gets constructed, it’s not going to be with the biggest construction vehicles. <br />Massoud - I’m talking about a typical concrete truck going back and forth. <br />Eric - Yes, concrete trucks, but also asphalt trucks that weigh many tons. <br />(29:51) Nick - I think it’s a valid concern and it’s something that you should just throw out there. <br />It’s something that could be a condition (of approval). We did that where I used to work in Arizona. <br />I don’t know if we can do that here, but I’ll bring it up and I’ll discuss doing an assessment of the <br />roads leading up to it (the PUD). <br />Paul - Look at sub (12). <br />Nick - Prior to having them do the assessment… <br />Faris - Having who do the assessment? The developer? <br />Nick - Yeah. Or Public Works. We’ll have to talk internally as to whether or not that’s something <br />that could be done, but you could bring it up as a condition (of approval). Put it in there. I don’t see <br />why not, I think there’s something valid behind it. <br />Nate - It’s a brand new road. If you want to know what the condition is right now, anybody can tell <br />you, it’s been repaved within 11 months. <br />Nick - If it’s found that any of their activity caused some kind of degradation, then they’re responsible <br />to bring it back to prior condition. Ask for that condition. We’ll deal with it from the planning side <br />and it’ll be up to the Hearing Official. <br />Nick - I think what I’m hearing is that they (Public Works) don’t normally do that. <br />Faris - Is that the only way that you think we’ll be able to prove use? We need to know a way to <br />prove degradation of a road and so a condition survey is one way. Do you have any other way? <br />Eric - No, because degradation of a road happens all of the time, so it is hard to prove. Every vehicle <br />that drives on a road degrades it. <br />CW - Take the difference between the road 1 year ago and now. <br />Faris - It sounds a little bit argumentative to suggest that a road is always degrading as opposed to <br />degrading from a lot of heavy construction. <br />Paul - I can tell you where it is in the code. <br />(32:59) Massoud - With regards to the numbers, a pavement or civil engineer can come up with a <br />level of impact. You know how many trips up there you have now, and then based on the weight of <br />the trucks and typical construction traffic that may be going on for so long a period of time. That’s <br />why they do a survey before and after and that gives them a pretty good idea of conditions. If your <br />road has a 20-year life and it lasts 18 years, you know that it’s time for resurfacing. If it’s a brand <br />new road, newly paved and you have to come back and repave in 2 to 5 years, then you know that <br />there was an impact due to construction traffic. It’s fair (to ask) that the developer know this. <br />(33:51) Nick - It’s knowable. <br />Paul - You said that you don’t use a load standard; you use a construction standard that says “this <br />is how you build the road.” That’s the standard that you refer to, so does that standard ensure that <br />you meet Eugene Fire Code load standards for fire access roads? <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.