AgdaPkt 2015-09-21 Joint Special SAF PAF

Browse Search

grading or slope of the land. It certainly is not based upon the existence or placement of riparian vegetation", as the Real Party in Interest's expert determined that there was none. 1 AR 1785.) It does not appear to be based upon the "adjacent slope" on the other side of the Creek, as the MacLeod drawings show "top of bank" at different elevations comparing one side to the other. (1 AR 1791.) The MacLeod document submitted as part of the Administrative Record has been augmented, in that it shows the "top of bank" lines drawn by MacLeod for Real Parties in Interest, and comparatively shows the "top of bank" as determined by Respondent's City Engineer, Jon Lynch. The comparison shows that the basically agree on the "top of bank" line for Lots #1 and #2, but widely disagreed on the "top of bank" line along Lots #3 and 4. (1 AR 1791; see 2 AR 672 ( "I marked my locations in the field and the applicant's surveyor showed them on the plans. "); 2AR 616 ("Jon Lynch, City Engineer of Redwood City, has taken exception to the location of certain portions of the delineated top of bank line and has declared that the top of bank is further away from the creek by varying amounts. ")) Charles Jany of the Planning Services Division of the Respondent's Community Development Services Department sent a letter to Real Parties in Interest dated June 6, 2007, indicating that Planning was disinclined to grant a PDP; and specifically indicating among other things) that as to the "top of bank" drawings, "[t]he City Engineer's position still is that, absent a clear point of reference to the actual top of bank, the `theoretical' top of bank be set at the elevation of the 100 -year flow in the creek, plus a 12" minimum freeboard." (lAR 1794 - 1795.) This issue was submitted by Real Party in Interest for another expert opinion by Peter Bohley of Bohley Consulting, who concluded in his letter dated July 18, 2007 that he 20 8.B. - Page 79