02/27/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e by human beings, he said, and there is every possibility that it might be exceeded under extreme weather conditions. However, he noted the Corps is in process of evaluating the capacity of the Amazon drainage. In response to a question regarding cracked foundations, Mr. Saul said the Building Department has done no surveys. However, there had been indications in the past of problems as shown in the South Hills Study. However, he had no knowledge of the design considera- tions of the houses referred to in tonight's testimony. Mr. Obie questioned Mr. Pierce's request for the returning of a portion of a street dedication. Mr. Saul said this had involved a dedication of that street, was contiguous with but not a part of this property. He said the process available for Mr. Pierce would be to petition for vacation. In response to a question from Mr. Bradley, Mr. Saul said the Williamson Study was an earlier report by an engineering geologist for a portion of this site considered under another PUD application. No geology report had been submitted to the Hearings Official as that was a requirement as a condition for approval. Mr. Spickerman noted he had read the Williamson Study. ' e Ms. Smith expressed major concern regarding the testimony surrounding the geological conditions of the site. She wondered if Council could withhold its decision until it received a revised geological report. Mr. Saul replied Council had a number of options: It could affirm, reverse, or modify the Hearings Officical's findings, or modify conditions established by the Hearings Official. He said this request amounted to more than modification as it would be voiding two preliminary approvals by saying those should not have been granted until a geological report is received. Mr. Obie expressed concern regarding the testimony of the geolo- gical conditions. He felt if Council had to make a decision at this meeting it had no other choice than to accept the appeal. He felt the decision for this PUD required special consideration and to what extent this PUD request creates a dangerous situation. He felt, based on the testimony presented tonight, the Council should reverse the Hearings Official approval. Mr. Delay concurred with Mr. Obie. He noted four points for Council: 1) Danger signals exist that require serious consideration; 2) this is an on-site impact and geological conditions seem to be the primary concern; (3) without a geological report, the Hearings Official decision would be hard to accept; and 4) if Council is not considering off-site considerations then it should not be getting staff presen- tations of such. e 2/27/78--9 133