1 development code. Those restrictions are ambiguous, as stated <br />2 above. On remand, the council should explain (1) specifically <br />3 what, improvements and uses Permawood proposes within the <br />4 floodway and (2) with respect to each of the above, whether and <br />S why the plan and development code permit the improvements and <br />6 uses, given the highly restrictive policy they both reflect. <br />7 3. The "L_ ghtOO Industrial" Designation <br />8 Petitioner's final contention under this assignment of <br />9 error is that approval of Permawood's facility conflicts with <br />!tr the designation of the site as "light industrial" on the city's <br />11 comprehensive plan,9 The city council. rejected petitioner's <br />12 argument the facility should be classified as a "heavy <br />industrial." use. on appeal., petitioner reiterates that <br />14 contention, while the respondents jointly urge us to defer to <br />15 the city's interpretation. <br />1€7 `.i`he city's comprehensive plan defines "light industry" as <br />17 follows: <br />18 "Areas suitable for a wide range of light <br />manufacturing, warehousing, wholesaling and other <br />N accessory and compatible: uses which have minimal <br />environmental. effects and can conform to the <br />20 development node performance standards for the Light <br />Industrial Zone." Albany Comprehensive Plan at 1.23. <br />21 <br />The term "heavy industry" is defined by the plan as follows: <br />22 11most types of manufacturing and processing, storage <br />23 and distribution, and other teypes of industrial uses <br />which are potentially incompatible with most other <br />24 uses but which can comply with the industrial. <br />performance standards of the Heavy Industry /one." Id. <br />2 <br />Under these comprehensive plan definitions the difference <br />26 <br />Page 14 <br />