Testimony Received 5-21-18 to 5-22-18

“2. The areas indicated as having offset pavement are at a mailbox location and in an area of transverse pavement cracks that indicate failure in the soil material providing the lateral support for the roadway, which in this case appears to be anthropogenic placed fill material.” supporting their opinion, instead presenting a couple of unannotated photographs showing a couple of mailboxes along Floral Hill Drive. By contrast, the Addendum presented by GeoScience on March 21, 2018 (first open record period), contains photographs which have been annotated to show straight lines and the deflection of the pavement, and on page 1, second paragraph states: )³ ¨² °´¨³¤ ¤µ¨£¤³ «²® ¶§¤ ²³ £¨¦ ® ³§¤ ±® £ Ȩ²¤¤ ³³ ¢§¤£ ¯§®³®² £¤¬®²³± ³¨¦ ³§¤ “ ®¥¥²¤³ȩȁ 4§¤ ±® £ ¯¯¤ ±² ³® § µ¤ ¡¤¤ ®¥¥²¤³ ³ «¤ ²³ Ε ³® Ζ ¥¤¤³ ¨ ¤ ²³¤±«¸ £¨±¤¢³¨®ȁȐ new. It is in the record, in both . Kloos states: -hearted study of the site designed to find as Beginning on page 4 of my initial review document it states: The applicant did perform some subsurface exploration using shallow backhoe or trackhoe test pits. In all, Branch Engineering excavated 10 test pits, the locations of which are shown on the figure on the following page. All test pits were located in the more gently sloping area at the top of the ridge. None of them were excavated on the steeper slopes or in the immediate vicinity of the landslide mapped by the applicant’s Engineering Geologist. The easternmost test pit (TP-5) was located on Lot 13 directly in the area between the two apparent slope movements affecting the PUD. Even TP-8, which easily could have been placed at the mapped scarp on Lot 16, was placed around 100 feet from there at the far (northern) boundary of Lot 15. No test pits at all were installed on the southernmost two lots despite significant geomorphic evidence of slope movement being present. No test pits at all were installed in the area later slated for installation of the storm-water discharge for much of the eastern half of the PUD. The 10 test pits describe an area that is on the order of 2.7 acres, which represents around 20% of the entire PUD’s area. Had these test pits all been located in the much steeper eastern portion of the site, they might have provided valuable information to address EC 9.6710 and EC 9.8320. However, as it is, the test pits were installed in the most gently sloping portion of the PUD and provide no information whatever regarding the issue of stability of the east-facing slope.”