Hearings Official's Decision: <br />The Hearings Official accepted the applicant's geotechnical analysis by Branch Engineering <br />which provided an in-depth, detailed analysis, with adequate review of both on-site and off-site <br />impacts, and that no significant geologic hazards were found that would impede or restrict <br />construction on the site (Hearings Official Decision, page 21). <br />Summary of Appellant's Argument: <br />The appellant asserts that the Hearings Official failed to consider that the geotechnical study <br />conducted by Branch Engineering was a preliminary study and not an in-depth and detailed <br />analysis, and the Hearings Official failed to consider evidence that the preliminary study cannot <br />adequately consider both on-site and off-site impacts consistent with the South Hills Study. <br />Planning Commission's Determination: <br />Staff's analysis, including input from the City's Public Works Department, found that the <br />applicant's geotechnical analysis was adequate to show compliance with the approval criteria <br />subject to Condition of Approval #10 in the Hearings Official's decision. The Planning <br />Commission generally agrees with that analysis and the Hearings Official's decision. The <br />geotechnical/geologic investigation found no significant geologic hazards that would impede or <br />restrict the construction on the site (Staff Report, page 11). The applicant's study conducted <br />site investigation and analysis, and did acknowledge expected areas of slide debris in the <br />steeper lots with some areas of the site having a high likelihood of surface land-sliding. <br />However, the applicant's analysis also found that the site is geologically and geotechnically <br />suitable for the proposed development, provided that specific recommendations described in <br />the investigation are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. <br />The Planning Commission determined that the Hearings Official correctly imposed a condition <br />of approval requiring a geotechnical analysis from a certified engineer for any Privately <br />Engineered Public Improvement (PEPI) permits, building permits, and site development permits <br />for the initial construction of infrastructure and residences on individual lots during future <br />development of the site. Each of these permits is required to adhere to the recommended <br />standards for design and construction described in the geotechnical analysis (Staff Report, page <br />32). This condition is necessary to ensure that compliance with the South Hills Study <br />Development Standards regarding adequate review of both on-site and off-site impact by a <br />qualified engineering geologist and in accordance with the Tentative PUD approval criteria at EC <br />9.8320(2) and (6), regardless of the status of the property being on the City's Goal 5 inventory <br />or the exemption to the standards for geotechnical analysis at EC 9.6710(3)(f). However, the <br />Planning Commission finds that in order to comply with the policy related to geotechnical <br />evaluation in the Development Standards of the South Hills Study under EC 9.8320(2), as well as <br />EC 9.8320(6), it is necessary to modify condition of approval # 10 to include more explicit <br />language requiring compliance with both the recommendations in the preliminary geotechnical <br />report submitted and approved as part of the PUD and subsequent geotechnical analyses <br />required with each specified permit for development, including the need to address off-site <br />impacts. Accordingly, the Planning Commission modifies Condition of Approval #10 as follows: <br />Final Order: Capital Hill PUD (PDT 17-1) Page 9 <br />