Laserfiche WebLink
typesofcaseslater.However, I thinkthatthesetwocases are significant.Howmany <br />otherstherehavebeenishardtodetermine.They are toowell“covered”andeasyto <br />overlook. <br />Case 1 <br />OnOctober21,2015,thePlanningstaffmadetheirreporttotheCityCouncilontheSouth <br />WillametteSpecialAreaZone.SeniorPlannersHardingandHostickweretheplanners <br />involved. <br />A statementofSeniorPlannerHostickisnotable. I havetranscribeditasaccuratelyas <br />possible from thestreamingvideo;thatcanbereferredtoasverification. It is <br />approximately22:08(22minutes8seconds)intothevideo. <br />Hostick:Sounfortunately,whatcanhappenwouldbethatnewdevelopmentwould <br />actuallyberequiredtocomeuptothat 9-footsidewalk.So,thismayseem a little <br />draconian,butthatisinfactwhatisallowedunderthecurrentcode.Andinfact ifyou <br />weretobuild a higherbuildingthatiswhatwouldberequired. <br />NotethatHosticksaysthatthishappen,andthatitisundercurrentcode,but <br />canallowed <br />ineachcasehethenignoresthat.Hestatesunequivocallythat“newdevelopmentwould <br />tocomeuptothat 9-footsidewalk”,andthat"ifyou weretobuild a <br />actuallyberequired <br />higherbuilding"itwouldbetocomeupto thesidewalk \[mine\].The <br />requiredemphasis <br />argumentcouldhavebeen madejustaswellbyusing"allowed",buthehimselfwantsthe <br />argumenttobeas"draconian"aspossibleinordertosellhisnewsolution. <br />Thetwicemadeclaimthatbuildinguptothesidewalkisrequiredisclearlyfalse,anditis <br />clearlydoneintentionally.Thatisthestandarddefinitionof a lie. <br />Whydoesheputinthe"allow"atall?Maybehedoesn’tfeelfullycomfortabletelling a <br />lie.Maybehewants a little“wiggleroom”.Maybethatis a consequenceofthefactthat <br />hemadethatsameargument a coupleofyearsbefore,to a groupofmostlybusiness <br />people,andthepersonwhohadrecentlydevelopedtheapartmentcomplexattheSE <br />cornerofWillametteand24th Placesaidthathehadn'tbeenrequiredtobuilduptothe <br />sidewalk.Hostickthenchangedhisstatementandsaidthatitwasallowedbutnot <br />required.Nevertheless, 2 yearslater,hereheismakingthesamebogusclaim before the <br />CityCouncil.HecanprobablybecertainthattheCouncildoesn'tknowtheCodeaswell <br />asthedeveloper,butperhapstheearlierexperienceleadshimtoaddthat"wiggleroom" <br />byputtingin'allow’beforecontradictingitbyemphasizing‘require’. <br />\[Thepicturebelowaccompaniedthisportionofthepresentation.\] <br /> <br />