report includes: all of the requirements of Levels 1 and 2 above; <br />design recommendations for structures, foundations, compacted fill, <br />cut/fill lines, earthwork, and streets; mitigation measures for seismic <br />hazards, landslides, and constraints that cannot be removed; <br />construction measures for backfill, compaction, drainage, weather <br />limitations, access across slope easements; inspection requirements <br />during and following construction; and graphical representation of <br />slope easements and design details for foundations and structures. <br />26. Needed Housing (Clear and Objective) In lieu of compliance with <br />Level 1, 2 or 3 above, applications proposing Needed Housing shall <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />® <br />include a certification by an Oregon Licensed Geologist or and <br />Oregon licensed Civil Engineer stating the criteria in EC <br />9.6710(6)(a)-(b) <br />Comments: <br />23- A level 1 Geotech Report has been submitted and been signed and stamped by Benjamin L. Cook, C.E.G. and <br />James D. Imbrie, P.E. The only comment I have for this Geotech report is that this Geotech report is intended to <br />address the vacation of the 45-foot Slope Easement. At no point in the Geotech report does it address the <br />construction of the proposed extension of the public wastewater mainline. <br />The original Geotech report submitted be Geopacific notes that there is a portion of this site that possible has <br />expansive soils. The new Geotech report does not address this concern but instead relies on previous Geotech <br />reports. Please submit reference 1 with the next completeness review or update the Geotech report to address these <br />concerns. <br />Hazardous Materials Review <br />Yes No <br />❑ ® 27. Is a Hazardous Materials Review application required? <br />Comments: <br />Street and Public Access Way Requirements <br />Submitted <br />Missing <br />Incomplete <br />N/A <br />❑ <br />® <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />28. Identify the street classification of all streets. <br />29. Demonstrate that intersection offsets have been met: <br />Local street, the minimum intersection offset is shown on the plans to be <br />at least 100 feet, <br />Collector street, the minimum intersection offset is shown on the plans to <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />® <br />be at least 200 feet, <br />Arterial street, the minimum intersection offset is shown on the plans to <br />be at least 400 feet, <br />Or an Adjustment Review application has been submitted to adjust the <br />standards of EC 9.8030(12). <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />® <br />30. Indicate potential slope easements. <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />® <br />31. Delineate any street segments where grade exceeds 15% percent, where <br />driveways are prohibited. <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />® <br />32. Provide a street center profile using ground elevations of proposed streets <br />at or exceeding 15% grade. <br />33. Show location and widths (right-of-way and paving width) of all existing <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />® <br />❑ <br />and proposed streets, intersections, and bike and pedestrian access ways, <br />both within the plat and adjacent to the plat. <br />® <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />34. Show existing and proposed curbs and sidewalks on site and adjacent to <br />roper involved. <br />® <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />35. Address EC 9.6815 Street Connectivity and provide supporting narrative <br />j <br />or if requesting an exception, provide <br />ustifications. <br />® <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />36. Show that the proposal is consistent with Eugene Code Section 9.6780, <br />Vision Clearance Area. <br />❑ <br />® <br />❑ <br />❑ <br />37. Show street names for all existing and proposed streets (public and <br />private). <br />Public Works Subdivision Tentative Completeness Review Form Revised June 2016 Page 3 of 4 <br />