Ordinance No. 19971 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Code. The toe of .the fill slope would extend approxirnately 5D feet beyond the edge of the road far a dis#ance of approximately 15~.feet. To provide optimum service to all lots: Our proposed realignment of South Shasta Loop would connect to East 43rd Avenue and would provide service to all the lots noted above. An evaluation of this realignment by Branch Engineering shows a better grading plan with street grades not exceeding 7 5°/o as well as a better overall development plan for the entire project. To achieve goals of the South Hills Study: We feel the~proposed vacation and realignment of South Shasta Loop provides the best development plan that conforms.to the recommendations ofthe South Hills Study, .specifically set forth on page 5 of Exhibit A "That afl proposed road locations be reviewed to insure minimum grade disturbance and minimum of cut-and-fill activity, particularly in those areas most visible due to slope, topographic or other cond~t~ons". This proposed realignment has the support and concurrence of our Geotechnical Engineers, Foundation Engineering of Corvallis, Oregon. They indicate on the attached ma and letter that P the proposed section of South Shasta Loop to be vacated partially lies on unstable soil that is not recommended for road .construction. They feel the proposed realignment minimizes geologic disturbance. The,proposed realignment also has the support and concurrence from our wetland consultant Phil Stoles of Stoles Associates, Portland, Oregon in his report of January ~ 994. Further ~a royal anal PP concurrence .was obtained from the Division of State Lands who issued a fill permit in May of 1994 for placement of ~ 115 foot section of the realigned South Shasta Loop. Subsequent to these approvals, on April 19, ~ 994 we received tentative a royal from pp the public hearings official on Phase 1 of the Sp~ingcrest PUD which is~cvnditioned on the vacation and realignment of the subject section of South Shasta Loop. We feel.we have done our homework and there are no better alteratives to the one ro osed. PP Therefore we respectfully request your approval of the proposed vacation of South Shasta Loop. Sincerely yours; ~ . ~ ~ Stephen VIZ?endell Thomas Wilson cc; Ms. Jean Hahn, Planning & Development