New Search
, <br /> advisors. The Rule is not being tabled and no change is being made to the <br /> i Rule as a result of this comment. <br /> E. City staff has worked with the development community for several months in <br /> developing the Standards for Geological and Geotechnical Analysis contained herein. After <br /> reviewing the comments received, and making some revisions in response to the comments, staff <br /> recommended that the public be provided an additional opportunity to comment on the rules and <br /> proposed revisions. I concurred with the staff's recommendation, and caused a notice to be <br /> published on January 12,13,14,15, and 16, 2003 advising that comments would be received thereon <br /> for a period of 15 days from the first publication date, or at a public hearing to be held on January <br /> 22, 2003. <br /> F. No written comments were received in response to the notice or at the public hearing <br /> except the following comments from the Law Office of Bill Kloos, PC, which were submitted on <br /> behalf of their client Tom Poage of Poage Engineering & Surveying, Inc., at the public hearing held <br /> on January 22, 2003, to which I make the following specific findings: <br /> <br /> ~ ~ Comment 1: The Standards for Geological and Geotechnical Analysis should be adopted <br /> with pre- and post-adoption notice provided to DLCD. <br /> <br /> I <br /> Finding: The City has provided pre-adoption notice to DLCD, and will provide DLCD, <br /> <br /> ~ within five-days of adopting the Rule, post-adoption notice. <br /> <br /> I <br /> Comment 2: The Standards for Geological and Geotechnical Analysis should be adopted <br /> by ordinance, not administrative rule. <br /> Finding: This administrative rule implementing the policy set forth in EC 9.6710 is not <br /> a legislative act; rather, it is, by definition, an administrative act. The rule <br /> does not contain criteria beyond those required in Chapter 9. Thus, the City's <br /> enactment of this Rule is consistent with ORS 227.186(2) and need not be <br /> <br /> ! adopted by ordinance. Also, EC Section 9.6710 is an acknowledged land use <br /> regulation (Chapter 9) establishing the requirement for a geological and <br /> <br /> i geotechnical analysis and directs the City Manager to adopt administrative <br /> <br /> j rules setting forth the "standards, procedures and content" of the required <br /> analysis. No change is being made as a result of this comment. <br /> Comment 3: The City should consider waiting until the Oregon State Board of Examiners <br /> <br /> ~ for Engineering and Land Surveying (OSBEELS) issues its new rules <br /> governing geotechnical analysis and engineer certification before enacting <br /> this Rule so that they are consistent with the state rules. <br /> ' <br /> <br /> j Finding: A group of professional engineers who believe that Certified Engineering <br /> Geologists do not have sufficient training and understanding in engineering <br /> principles to design facilities encouraged OSBEELS to recognize <br /> Geotechnical Engineers and address geotechnical engineering standards. In <br /> <br /> ~ contrast, the Oregon State Board of Geologist Examiners (OSBGE) has set <br /> the standards for Geologists and they have adopted guidelines for preparing <br /> engineering geologic reports in Oregon. There is a belief in the geological <br /> field that engineers lack sufficient training in Geology. This difference of <br /> opinions has been an issue put before both Boards for more than three years <br /> and it is uncertain as to when decisions will be made. This rule was sent to <br /> Administrative Order - 7 <br /> R:\~ADMINORD\RULES\03geotech2ao.wpd(03/26/03) <br /> <br />