The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApplication Applicant 6/5/20241 Revised 08.12.2022 dl City of Springfield Development & Public Works 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 Minimum Development Standards Project Information (Applicant: Complete This Section) Applicant Name: Phone: Company: Email: Mailing Address: Applicant’s Rep: Phone: Company: Email: Mailing Address: Property Owner: Phone: Company: Email: Mailing Address: Assessor's Map No: Tax Lot No(s) Property Address: □ City □ UGB Size of Property □ Acres □ Square Feet If you are filling in this form by hand, please attach your proposal description to this application. Description of Proposal: Existing Use: Required Project Information (City: Complete This Section) Associated Cases: Signs: Case No.: Date: Reviewed By: Application Fee: $ Technical Fee: $ Notice Fee: $0.00 Total Fees: $ Project No.: 2 Revised 08.12.2022 dl Signatures The undersigned acknowledges that the information in this application is correct and accurate. Applicant: Signature Date Print The undersigned acknowledges that the information in this application is correct and accurate. Owner: Signature Date Print 3 Revised 08.12.2022 dl Minimum Development Standards Application Process As stated in SDC 5.15.100, the Minimum Development Standards (MDS) process is intended to minimize development review for minor additions, expansions, or changes in use; ensure compliance with applicable development standards; and protect the public health, safety, and welfare. 1. Applicant Submits Minimum Development Standards Application to the Development & Public Works Department • The application must conform to the Minimum Development Standards Submittal Standards as specified in SDC 5.15.115, as summarized on the Submittal Standards Checklist on pages 5-6 of this application packet as well as the general provisions of SDC 5.1.200. • Planning Division staff screen the submittal at the front counter to determine whether the appropriate materials Submittal Standards are provided; a thorough Completeness Check will be completed as detailed below. • Applications missing required items will not be accepted for processing (see SDC 5.1.225). 2. City Staff Conduct Detailed Completeness Check • Complete Application: Once an application has been received a completeness evaluation will be conducted in conformance with SDC 5.1.405. An application will be deemed complete if the application submittal standards have been fully satisfied upon initial filing or through the procedures set forth in SDC 5.1.405 (E)(1)-(3). When the application is deemed complete, the applicant will be notified in writing. If the Director has not issued in writing a completeness determination within 30 days from the date the application is received by the Director, the application is automatically deemed complete on the 31st day after it was received. • Incomplete Application: If the application is incomplete, the City must notify the applicant in writing of exactly what information is missing within 30 days of receipt of the application and allow the applicant to submit the missing information. The application will be deemed complete for the purpose of SDC 5.1.410(1) upon receipt by the Director of. 1. All of the missing information; 2. Some of the missing information and written notice from the applicant that no other information will be provided; or 3. Written notice from the applicant that none of the missing information will be provided. 3. City Staff Review the Application and Issue a Decision • This Type 1 MDS application involves the ministerial review based on clear and objective standards. In general, potential impacts of development allowed through a Type 1 application have been recognized through the adoption of standards. The Type 1 procedure does not require interpretation or exercise of policy or legal judgement when evaluating development standards. A Type 1 determination is made by the Director without public notice or a hearing. • The Director’s decision must address all the applicable approval criteria and/or development standards. The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. • The Director's decision for a Type 1 application is the final decision of the City. The Director’s decision is effective on the day it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant. 4 Revised 08.12.2022 dl • A Type 1 determination is not appealed at the City level except as otherwise provided in the Springfield Development Code or if found to constitute a permit and authorized by the Director. 4. Development in Accordance with Permit Approval • In accordance with SDC 5.15.130, final approvals and/or occupancy is contingent upon the completion of all required site improvements. Development must not commence until the applicant has received all the appropriate land use and development approvals including but not limited to: Final Minimum Development Standards review approval, grading permits, and building permits. Construction of any public improvements must not commence until the City has approved all required public improvement plans (e.g., utilities, streets, public land dedication, etc.). The City may require the applicant to enter into an agreement (e.g., for phased developments and developments with required public improvements), and may require bonding or other assurances for improvements, in accordance with SDC 5.15.135, Bonding and Assurances for Development. 5 Revised 08.12.2022 dl Minimum Development Standards Submittal Requirements Checklist NOTE: If you feel an item does not apply, please state the reason why and attach the explanation to this form. ❑ Application Fee - Refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate fee calculation formula. A copy of the fee schedule is available at the Development & Public Works Department. The applicable application, technology, and notice fees are collected at the time of complete application submittal. ❑ Minimum Development Standards Application Form ❑ State of Federal Permits Required – The applicant must demonstrate that an application has been submitted for any required federal or state permit and provide a copy of the application upon request. ❑ Narrative A separate written response describing how the Minimum Development Standards proposal meets the Approval Standards of SDC 5.15.125. ❑ One (1) paper copy and one (1) digital copy of the following Plan Sheets (See SDC 5.1.215 for details and exceptions): General Requirements: All plans submitted under this section must: 1. Be prepared by a design professional, licensed in the state of Oregon, when required by state law, such as an engineer, architect, landscape architect, land surveyor, or other qualified professional as determined by the Director. ❑ MDS Existing Conditions Plan: □ The plan must provide the name, location, and dimensions of all existing site features including, but not limited to, significant stands of trees, watercourses shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map and their riparian areas, wetlands, flood designations and slopes. □ The plan must be drawn to scale. Scale must be indicated and provided on the plan. □ The plan must show all the existing improvements. □ The plan must show the entire property, including property lines, gross area, and dimensions. □ Include labels of all elements on the plan. Include a legend or key. □ Show setbacks of all existing structures and dimensions. □ Show existing landscaping including irrigation and street trees. □ Show existing fencing. □ Show the waste storage location and enclosure, including dimensions and connections to sanitary sewer as applicable. □ Show the bicycle parking spaces including the number and location with dimensions and indicate the type of bicycle parking rack. □ Show the parking and vehicle circulation areas including the location, dimensions, number of spaces, typical striping, compact and disabled spaces, and aisles. □ Show the access to the public right of way including dimensions of the existing curb cuts and any curb cuts to be closed. □ Show pedestrian facilities including any existing sidewalks. 6 Revised 08.12.2022 dl □ Show any existing and proposed streetlight locations and type. □ Show any existing on-site lighting. □ Show connections to utilities including any existing easements, location and size of connection points. ❑ MDS Site Plan: □ The plan must be drawn to scale. Scale must be indicated and provided on the plan. □ The plan must show all the proposed improvements. □ Show the entire property, including property lines, gross area, and dimensions. □ Include labels of all elements on the plan. Include a legend or key. □ Show setbacks of all proposed structures and dimensions. □ Show proposed landscaped areas and dimensions, and a table listing the types and quantities of plant species. □ Show proposed landscaping including irrigation and street trees. □ Show proposed fencing. □ Show the waste storage location and enclosure, including dimensions and connection to sanitary sewer as applicable. □ Show the bicycle parking spaces including the number and location with dimensions and indicate the type of bicycle parking rack. □ Show the parking and vehicle circulation areas including the location, dimensions, number of spaces, typical striping, compact and disabled spaces, and aisles. □ Show the access to the public right of way including the dimensions of the existing and proposed curb cuts and any curb cuts to be closed. □ Show pedestrian facilities including any proposed sidewalks. □ Show any existing and proposed streetlight locations and type. □ Show any existing and proposed on-site lighting, including manufacturer’s cut sheets for lighting fixtures to be used on the site. □ Show connections to utilities including any existing and proposed easements, location, and size of connection points. ❑ Utilities Improvement Plan: □ Show the location and width of all existing and proposed easements. □ Show the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed rights-of-way. □ Show the location of existing or proposed utilities and infrastructure on or within 150 feet of the subject site, including the following as applicable: stormwater management systems, sanitary sewer mains, power, water mains, gas, and communications connections including cable, internet, and television cable, etc. □ Show all stormwater drainage patterns and connection points, together with supporting documentation indicating how the proposed stormwater system will function. 7 Revised 08.12.2022 dl Approval Standards: In Order to grant MDS approval, the Director must verify compliance with all applicable standards specified in SDC 5.15.125 and listed below. 1. The proposed land use is a permitted use or is allowed as a discretionary use in the land use district. 2. If a use is allowed as a discretionary use, in addition to meeting the standards below, a Discretionary Use application must be approved in conformance with the standards in SDC 5.9.100. 3. A 5-foot wide landscaped planter strip, including street trees, with approved irrigation or approved drought resistant plants in conformance with SDC 4.4.100 and 4.2.140 must be installed between the sidewalk and parking areas or buildings with the following exceptions: a. Where there is an unimproved street, a 4-foot-wide landscaped area, in conformance with the applicable standards of SDC 4.4.105, Landscaping, must be provided along the frontage of the property. This landscape area is required to be set back 1 foot from the property line; b. Where there is not a 4-foot wide area between existing improvements and the front property line for a landscaped area as required in subsection (A)(3)(a) above, due to existing buildings, street width, paved parking, changes of elevation, or location of utilities including catch basins, 1 of the following must be provided: i. Fencing along the front property line located immediately behind the property line in conformance with SDC 4.4.115, Fences. The fencing must be either wrought iron or masonry and is subject to the fence height standards of the applicable zoning district and the vision clearance setbacks of SDC 4.2.130; or ii. Provide a landscaped area, in conformance with the applicable standards of SDC 4.4.105, Landscaping, that is equivalent in square foot area to the amount required in subsection (A)(3)(a) above. This equivalent area must be placed at the property corners or other areas of the property that are visible from the street. 4. Waste storage must be screened with a fence or wall. The fence or wall must be: a. Between 5 and 6 feet in height. b. Made of wood, metal, masonry, or other permanent materials that are 100 percent sight obscuring on all sides except for a gate access area. c. A gate access to the waste storage must have at least 50 percent site-obscuring screening such as cyclone fencing with slats. d. On all sides of the screening structure, up to 12 inches measured from grade may be visually unobscured provided that the unobscured area is covered with a material that contains the debris within the structure, such as cyclone fencing. 5. The area under the waste storage, the “catchment area,” must be hydraulically isolated and connected to the sanitary system. 6. The waste storage area must be covered. The cover must be: a. A permanent canopy, roof, or awning that completely covers the waste storage area. b. Constructed to cover the waste storage area so rainfall cannot come in contact with the waste materials being stored. 8 Revised 08.12.2022 dl c. Sized relative to the perimeter of the hydraulically isolated activity area. Runoff from the cover must be directed to a stormwater destination that meets all applicable code requirements for stormwater discharge. 7. Any new outdoor storage areas must be screened. The screening must meet the standards of SDC 4.4.110. 8. Bicycle parking must be provided or upgraded to meet the standards specified in SDC 4.6.40, 4.6.145, 4.6.150, and 4.6.155. 9. Any new or modified motor vehicle parking, loading, and vehicle circulation areas must be provided, including paving, striping, and wheel stops as specified in SDC 4.6.110, 4.6.115, 4.6.120, 4.6.130, and 4.6.135. 10. The submitted storm water plan and supporting documentation, as part of the Utility Improvement Plan, must demonstrate that for any new paving and other new impervious surface area a stormwater facility will function in conformance with the stormwater management standards specified in SDC 4.3.110 and 4.3.115. 11. Access to the public right-of-way must comply with SDC 4.2.120. 12. Sidewalks must be installed or upgraded where the proposed development area abuts a curb and gutter street as specified in SDC 4.2.135. 13. Streetlights must be installed as specified in SDC 4.2.145. 14. Any proposed on-site lighting must be in conformance with SDC 4.5.100. 15. The development area must connect to public utilities as specified in SDC 4.3.105, 4.3.110, 4.3.120, 4.3.125 and 4.3.130 and comply with the Springfield Building Safety Codes, where applicable. MDS Exhibit PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT NAME LTD - Operations Command Center DATE OF ISSUE May 29, 2024 PROJECT OWNER Lane Transit District Todd Smith : Todd.smith@LTD.org BUILDING NAME Glenwood Administration Building PROJECT ADDRESS 3500 E 17th Ave, Eugene, OR 97401 ARCHITECT PIVOT Architecture, 44 West Broadway, Suite 300, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: (541) 342-7291 Principal in Charge: Kelley E. Howell, AIA - khowell@pivotarchitecture.com Project Contact: Jacky Grey, AIA - jgrey@pivotarchitecture.com 5 Revised 08.12.2022 dl Minimum Development Standards Submittal Requirements Checklist NOTE: If you feel an item does not apply, please state the reason why and attach the explanation to this form. ❑ Application Fee - Refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate fee calculation formula. A copy of the fee schedule is available at the Development & Public Works Department. The applicable application, technology, and notice fees are collected at the time of complete application submittal. ❑ Minimum Development Standards Application Form ❑ State of Federal Permits Required – The applicant must demonstrate that an application has been submitted for any required federal or state permit and provide a copy of the application upon request. ❑ Narrative A separate written response describing how the Minimum Development Standards proposal meets the Approval Standards of SDC 5.15.125. ❑ One (1) paper copy and one (1) digital copy of the following Plan Sheets (See SDC 5.1.215 for details and exceptions): General Requirements: All plans submitted under this section must: 1. Be prepared by a design professional, licensed in the state of Oregon, when required by state law, such as an engineer, architect, landscape architect, land surveyor, or other qualified professional as determined by the Director. ❑ MDS Existing Conditions Plan: □ The plan must provide the name, location, and dimensions of all existing site features including, but not limited to, significant stands of trees, watercourses shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map and their riparian areas, wetlands, flood designations and slopes. □ The plan must be drawn to scale. Scale must be indicated and provided on the plan. □ The plan must show all the existing improvements. □ The plan must show the entire property, including property lines, gross area, and dimensions. □ Include labels of all elements on the plan. Include a legend or key. □ Show setbacks of all existing structures and dimensions. □ Show existing landscaping including irrigation and street trees. □ Show existing fencing. □ Show the waste storage location and enclosure, including dimensions and connections to sanitary sewer as applicable. □ Show the bicycle parking spaces including the number and location with dimensions and indicate the type of bicycle parking rack. □ Show the parking and vehicle circulation areas including the location, dimensions, number of spaces, typical striping, compact and disabled spaces, and aisles. □ Show the access to the public right of way including dimensions of the existing curb cuts and any curb cuts to be closed. □ Show pedestrian facilities including any existing sidewalks. MDS EXHIBIT1 06/05/2024 6 Revised 08.12.2022 dl □ Show any existing and proposed streetlight locations and type. □ Show any existing on-site lighting. □ Show connections to utilities including any existing easements, location and size of connection points. ❑ MDS Site Plan: □ The plan must be drawn to scale. Scale must be indicated and provided on the plan. □ The plan must show all the proposed improvements. □ Show the entire property, including property lines, gross area, and dimensions. □ Include labels of all elements on the plan. Include a legend or key. □ Show setbacks of all proposed structures and dimensions. □ Show proposed landscaped areas and dimensions, and a table listing the types and quantities of plant species. □ Show proposed landscaping including irrigation and street trees. □ Show proposed fencing. □ Show the waste storage location and enclosure, including dimensions and connection to sanitary sewer as applicable. □ Show the bicycle parking spaces including the number and location with dimensions and indicate the type of bicycle parking rack. □ Show the parking and vehicle circulation areas including the location, dimensions, number of spaces, typical striping, compact and disabled spaces, and aisles. □ Show the access to the public right of way including the dimensions of the existing and proposed curb cuts and any curb cuts to be closed. □ Show pedestrian facilities including any proposed sidewalks. □ Show any existing and proposed streetlight locations and type. □ Show any existing and proposed on-site lighting, including manufacturer’s cut sheets for lighting fixtures to be used on the site. □ Show connections to utilities including any existing and proposed easements, location, and size of connection points. ❑ Utilities Improvement Plan: □ Show the location and width of all existing and proposed easements. □ Show the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed rights-of-way. □ Show the location of existing or proposed utilities and infrastructure on or within 150 feet of the subject site, including the following as applicable: stormwater management systems, sanitary sewer mains, power, water mains, gas, and communications connections including cable, internet, and television cable, etc. □ Show all stormwater drainage patterns and connection points, together with supporting documentation indicating how the proposed stormwater system will function. MDS EXHIBIT2 06/05/2024 REVISIONS: PRINTED ON:2024 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT #:5/29/2024 1:32:47 PMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvtG01105.29.2024CODE REVIEWINFORMATIONLANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00TOTAL SITE AREA: 204,447 SFSITE DATA SUMMARYLAND USE CODE INFORMATIONSEISMIC DESIGN: SEISMIC OCCUPANCY CATEGORY (TABLE 1604.5): IISEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY (SECTION 1613): DSEE STRUCTURAL FOR ADDITIONAL DESIGN CRITERIACONSTRUCTION TYPE: V-BAUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM (903):PROVIDED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 13 AND SECTION 903.1.BUILDING CODE INFORMATIONOCCUPANCIES (CHAPTER 3):B – OFFICEA3 – ASSEMBLY (E) NOT IN SCOPE OF PROJECTALLOWABLE AREA, BASE (506.2):V-B: B OCCUPANCY 36,000 SQ (SPRINKLED, SINGLE STORY) V-B: A3 OCCUPANCY 24,000 SQ (SPRINKLED, SINGLE STORY)EXISTING GROSS (FLOOR) AREA: PROPOSED OCCUPANT LOAD PER OCCUPANCYB OCCUPANCY: 20,541 SQFT B OCCUPANCY = 185 OCCUPANTSA3 OCCUPANCY: 1,968 SQFT A3 OCCUPANCY = 132 OCCUPANTS PROPOSED GROSS (FLOOR) AREA PER LIFE SAFETY PLAN PROPOSED OCCUPANT LOAD PER OCCUPANCYB OCCUPANCY: 25,439 SQFT B OCCUPANCY = 305 OCCUPANTSA3 OCCUPANCY: 1,885 SQFT A3 OCCUPANCY = 126 OCCUPANTSALLOWABLE AREA - SINGLE OCCUPANCY, ONE - STORY (506.2.1)B OCCUPANCY:Aa = [36,000 + (9,000 x .75)Aa = 42,750 SF A3 OCCUPANCY: Aa = [24,000 + (6,000 x .75)Aa = 28,500 SFBUILDING HEIGHT (504.3)ALLOWABLE: 3 STORIESB OCCUPANCY: 3 STORY, 60'-0" A3 OCCUPANCY: 2 STORY, 60'-0" OCCUPANCY SEPARATIONS (508.4):1 - HOUR BETWEEN A AND B OCCUPANCIESMIXED OCCUPANCY (SECTION 508):ACCESSORY OCCUPANCIES (508.2): NOT TO EXCEED 10% OF FLOOR AREAINCIDENTAL USES (509): AS NOTED ON CODE PLAN 2022 OREGON STRUCTURAL SPECIALTY CODE2023 OREGON ELECTRICAL SPECIALTY CODE2022 OREGON MECHANICAL SPECIALTY CODE2023 OREGON PLUMBING SPECIALTY CODE2022 OREGON FIRE CODE2021 OREGON ENERGY EFFICIENCY SPECIALTY CODEICC 117.1- 2017 ACCESSIBILITY CODESDC INFORMATION - PLUMBING FIXTURE COUNTFIXTURE REMOVED ADDED NET CHANGESHOWER 6 4 -2LAVATORY (RESTROOM) 9 9 0COMMERCIAL WASHER 0 0 0WATER CLOSET 7 8 1SINK 2 3 1DRINKING FOUNTAIN 1 2 1URINAL 2 4 2FLOOR SINK 1 3 2FLOOR DRAIN 3 11 8TOTAL 31 FIXTURES 44 FIXTURES 13 FIXTURESVEHICULAR PARKING SPACE CALCULATIONS*OFFICE SF / 300SFTOTAL SPACES REQUIRED ACCESSIBLE SPACES WHEELCHAIR ONLY SPACEOPERATIONS AND ADMIN BUILDING 28,753 / 300 SF = 95.84 95.84TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING96* POSSIBLE 20% PARKING REDUCTION 77TOTAL SPACES PROVIDED225 7 1ADDRESS: 3500 EAST 17TH AVENUE, EUGENE, ORMAP & TAX LOT #: 17 03 34 34 ZONE: LIGHT- MEDIUM INDUSTRIALSETBACKS:MINIMUM FRONT & INTERIOR YARD: 10'-0"MAXIMUM FRONT YARD: 10'-0"LANDSCAPING:MINIMUM LANDSCAPE AREA PER 3.2450B OF LAND USE: A. MINIMUM OF 35% OF DEVELOPMENT AREAB. MINIMUM OF 10% OF THE INTERIOR OF A PARKING LOT HAVING 20 OR MORE PARKING SPACESBIKE PARKING CALCULATIONS*GSF @ SHORT TERM LONG TERMOPERATIONS AND ADMIN BUILDING 28,753 @ 1/5000 GSF *.75 1.08 3.23TOTAL BIKE SPACES REQUIRED:24TOTAL EXISTING BIKE SPACES12 (SHELTERED) +4 (UNSHELTERED)24 (SHELTERED)TOTAL BIKE SPACES PROVIDED:16 (SHELTERED) +4 (UNSHELTERED)20 (SHELTERED)* 20 % REDUCTION PER 4.6.110 = 96 X .80 = 77 MINIMUM 77 SPACES REQUIREDORS 447.233 ADA SPACES REQUIRED FOR LOT 201-300 SPACES 7 REQUIRED ADA SPACESREQUIRED NUMBER OF VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES = 0 SPACESREQUIRED NUMBER OF WHEELCHAIR ONLY SPACES = 1 SPACE TOTAL STANDARD PARKING SPACES PROVIDED:217 PARKING SPACESEXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREALOCATION GSFROOF: 29,121 GSFPAVING: 100,362 GSFTOTAL: 129,483 GSFPROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREALOCATION: GSFROOF, BUILDING: 33,135 GSFROOF, BIKE SHELTER: INCLUDED W/ BUILDINGROOFPAVING: 97,190 GSFTOTAL: 130,325 GSFDEFERRED SUBMITTALSSPECIAL INSPECTIONSACCESSIBILITY FOR EXISTING BUILDINGS (3411)PRIORITY OF IMPROVEMENTS PER ORS 447.241:PARKING: PART OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSENTRANCE:PART OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSROUTE TO ALTERED AREA:PART OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSRESTROOMS: PART OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSTELEPHONES: N/ADRINKING FOUNTAINS: PART OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSSTORAGE:PART OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTSAPPLICABLE CODE: PLUMBING FIXTURE CALCULATIONS:OCCUPANCY PLUMBING FIXTURE CALCULATION - TABLE - 2902.1SPACE WATER CLOSETS URINALS LAVATORIES DRINKING FOUNTAIN SHOWERSUSE OCC. LOAD RATIO MALE RATIO FEMALE RATIO URINALS RATIO MALE RATIO FEMALE RATIO FOUNTAINS RATIO SHOWERSBUSINESS305 1 PER 25FOR THEFIRST 50AND 1 PER50 FOR THEREMAINDEREXCEEDING504.04 1 PER 25FOR THEFIRST 50AND 1 PER50 FOR THEREMAINDEREXCEEDING504.04 MAYREPLACEWATERCLOSETS ATA RATIO OF1 URINALPER 2/3WATERCLOSET1 PER 40FOR THEFIRSDT 80AND 1 PER80 FOR THEREMAINDEREXCEEDING802.9 1 PER 40FOR THEFIRSDT 80AND 1 PER80 FOR THEREMAINDEREXCEEDING802.9 -- N/A -- -- N/A -- -- N/A -- -- N/A --ASSEMBLY -W/OPERMANENTSEATING126 1 PER 125 .504 1 PER 65 .97 --SAME ASABOVE --1 PER 200 .315 1 PER 200 .315 1 PER FLOOR 1 -- N/A -- -- N/A --SUBTOTALS431 4.55 5.01 3.22 3.22 1 -- N/A -- -- N/A --PROVIDED68 8 8 2 410% OF LONG-TERM PARKING IS REQUIRED TO BE OVERSIZED. OVERSIZED PARKING PER 4.6.110 = 20 x .10 = 2 REQUIRED: 2 SPACES PROVIDED: 2 SPACESPROJECT CLIMATE ZONE: 4C MIXED MARITIMECOMPLIANCE PATHWAY: PRESCRIPTIVE PATH5.4.1 INSULATION REQUIREMENTS: COMPLIANCE PER TABLE 5.5-4 AND SECTION 5.8.1 ROOF, ATTIC AND OTHER R-49. SHOWN IN PROJECT R-49ROOF, SEMI-HEATED ATTIC AND OTHER R-30. SHOW IN PROJECT R-30WALLS, ABOVE GRADE: WOOD-FRAME R-20. SHOWN IN PROJECT: R-20SLAB-ON-GRADE FLOORS: UNHEATED R-15 FOR 24". SHOWN IN PROJECT R-155.4.2 FENESTRATION AND DOORS: COMPLIANCE PER TABLE 5.5-4OPAQUE DOORS: ASSEMBLY MAX U-0.37. SHOWN IN PROJECT U-0.37 OR BETTERFIXED FENESTRATION: MAX U-0.36, MAX SHGC 0.36. SHOWN IN PROJECT U-.036 OR BETTEROPERABLE FENESTRATION: MAX U-0.45, MAX SHGC 0.33. SHOWN IN PROJECT U-0.45 OR BETTERENTRANCE DOORS; MAX U-0.63, SHGC 0.33 SHOWN IN PROJECT U-0.63 OR BETTER5.4.3.1.3 WHOLE BUILDING AIR LEAKAGE - IN ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONSBUILDING ENVELOPE PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION PROGRAM IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 5.9.1.2 THROUGH 5.9.1.3 AND 4.2.3.1.5.4.3.2 CONTINUOUS AIR BARRIER DESIGN AND INSTALLATIONENVELOPE ASSEMBLIES WILL HAVE A CONTINUOUS AIR BARRIER PLACED PER SECTION 5.4.3.2. 5.4.3.4 VESTIBULES AND REVOLVING DOORSMAIN ENTRANCE VESTIBULES WILL COMPLY WITH SECTION 5.4.3.4, BE EQUIPPED WITH ELECTRONICALLY DRIVEN, SELF-CLOSING DEVICES, AND INCORPORATE HEATING SYSTEMS PER SECTION 6.4.3.9 5.5.4.2.2 MAXIMUM SKYLIGHT FENESTRATION AREALESS THAN 3% OF GROSS ROOF AREA5.9.1.2 VERIFICATION OF THE DESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF THE CONTINUOUS AIR BARRIERDESIGN REVIEWPERIODIC FIELD INSPECTIONREPORTING5.9.2 COMMISSIONINGENVELOPE COMMISSIONING PER 4.2.5.2. REPORTING SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION 4.2.5.2.2ASHRAE 90.1 2022 COMPLIANCE INFORMATIONINTERIOR ENVIRONMENT (CHAPTER 12):1202.3: UNVENTED ATTIC AND UNVENTED ENCLOSED RAFTER ASSEMBLIESSEE CIVIL FOR REFERENCESEE LANDSCAPE FOR REFERENCESEE STRUCTURAL FOR REFERENCESEE PLUMBING FOR REFERENCESEE MECHANICAL FOR REFERENCESEE ELECTRICAL FOR REFERENCESEE FIRE ALARM FOR REFERENCESEE FIRE PROTECTION FOR REFERENCER-19ACOUSTICAL CEILING SUSPENSION SYSTEMANCHORAGE AND SEISMIC BRACING OF MEP EQUIPMENT AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMSEXTERIOR METAL CLADDING SYSTEMSEMERGENCY CALL SYSTEMFALL PROTECTION ANCHORS AND ANCHORAGEFIRE ALARM AND DETECTION SYSTEMSFIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMSGLAZING SYSTEMS: STOREFRONT SYSTEMSMECHANICAL UNIT ANCHORAGEPREFABRICATED STRUCTURAL ROOF TRUSSESPRIVATE FIRE SERVICE MAINSROOFTOP FALL PROTECTIONROOFTOP AND GROUND MECHANICAL SCREENSKYLIGHTSSOLAR PHOTOVOLTAIC PANEL SYSTEM# DESCRP. DATEMDS EXHIBIT306/05/2024 (E)E(E)E36" EVERGREEN50" EVERGREEN40" EVERGREEN50" EVERGREENIRRIRRIRRIRRIVEIRRSDSDIRRIRRIRRSDSDIRRIRRUWWIRRWWSDSDJEEMAILWWSDMAILMAILMAILSDWWMAILMAILSDUJJIRRUEEEEELECVLTJJTSDIRREIRRIRRGCRJCRCRCRCRCRCRE 17TH AVEGLENWOOD BLVDBUS YARD(E) SITE ENTRY STAFF PARKING32 1313-BOPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION BUILDINGSETBACK5' - 0" PARKINGSETBACK10' - 0" BUILDING 01 1100-PADDITION01 1100-Q______A021132 1313-C28 0000-F28 0000-F08 7100-F08 7100-G26 0000-M26 0000-M26 0000-M32 3113-B171415152312 9313-F12 9313-H33 4801-ACOURTYARD1830'-0" SCHEDULESEE DOOR12 9313-G12 9313-G8"OF WALL4' - 4" FROM EDGE 1' - 8"OF BRICK6' - 1" FROM EDGE 28 0000-F28 0000-F8202323LEGENDPROPERTY LINEWORK LIMIT(E) POLE LIGHT -CHAINLINK FENCING SEE ELECTRICAL (E) TREES WW (E) SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE (P) MANHOLE(E) CATCH BASINSETBACK LINE(P) CATCH BASINADDITIONKEYPLANREVISIONS: PRINTED ON:2024 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT #:5/29/2024 1:23:18 PMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvtA00105.29.2024SITE PLANLANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00KEYNOTES8 REGRADE AREA OF BERM, SEE CIVIL FOR NEW GRADING14 (E) KNOX BOX TO REMAIN15 (E) BIKE RACK TO REMAIN17 (E) VISITOR SIGNAGE TO REMAIN18 (E) LOCATION OF ROUGH-IN FOR EV CHARGING STATION20 NEW GAS METER LOCATION, SEE CIVIL AND PLUMBING23 RELOCATED LIGHT POST, SEE ELECTRICALKEYNOTES - SPECIFICATION01 1100-P RELOCATED LOST AND FOUND PARKING, OFCI01 1100-Q TOOL SHED, OFOI08 7100-F STANDALONE PEDESTAL WITH INTEGRATED ADA PUSHBUTTON, CARD READER, AND VIDEO INTERCOMM SYSTEM,SEE TECHNOLOGY AND SECURITY08 7100-G STANDALONE PEDESTAL WITH INTEGRATED ADA PUSHBUTTON AND CARD READER, SEE TECHNOLOGY ANDSECURITY12 9313-F BIKE STAPLE, SEE LANDSCAPE FOR DETAILS AND EXACTHOOP LOCATIONS12 9313-G SITE FURNISHINGS, OFCI12 9313-H BIKE REPAIR STATION, OFOI26 0000-M ALTERNATE #2: ROUGH IN FOR FUTURE ELECTRIC VEHICLECHARGING STATION, SEE ELECTRICAL AND CIVIL28 0000-F SECURITY CAMERA, SEE TELECOMMUNICATION32 1313-B MECHANICAL CONCRETE PAD, SEE CIVIL32 1313-C CONCRETE PAVING, SEE CIVIL AND LANDSCAPE32 3113-B CHAIN LINK FENCE, SEE CIVIL33 4801-A STORMWATER PLANTER, SEE CIVILGENERAL NOTES - SITE PLANA. SEE ELECTRICAL FOR SITE LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTSB. SEE CIVIL FOR PARKING IMPROVEMENTS, CONCRETE PAVING,GRADING, EROSION CONTROL, STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS, ANDUTILITIESC. SEE PLUMBING FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION AND PLUMBINGIMPROVEMENTSD. SEE LANDSCAPE FOR PLANTING, IRRIGATION, AND EXTERIORCONCRETE JOINTINGE. SEE MECHANICAL FOR CHILLER AND SURGE TANK1/32" = 1'-0"1SITE PLANN0'32'64'16'1/32" -1'-0"# DESCRP. DATEMDS EXHIBIT406/05/2024 A02142A021______3A021______SEE CIVIL FOR PAD LENGTH32 3113-A32 3113-B23 0000-H23 0000-K32 3500-ASEE STRUCTURALSEE STRUCTURALCLR3' - 3 3/8"CLR3' - 11 1/4"CLR3' - 3 3/8"CLR3' - 3 3/8"22 0000-TSEE CIVIL FOR PAD WIDTH4' - 0"2' - 6"23 0000-I4332 3500-B1' - 3 3/4"2' - 9"32 3500-C08 7100-GFINISH FLOOR0"8' - 0"-2' - 0"03 3000-B03 3000-A04 2000-N______A0221FINISH FLOOR0"SWING GATE, TYP.6' - 3"MECHANICAL SCREEN HEIGHT8' - 0"EQEQEQEQ35' - 5"FINISH FLOOR0"______A0221CMU WALL HEIGHT8' - 8"TYP______A022104 2000-O04 2000-OREVISIONS: PRINTED ON:2024 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT #:5/29/2024 1:23:24 PMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvtA02105.29.2024SITE DETAILSLANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.001/4" = 1'-0"1ENLARGED PLAN - CHILLER1/4" = 1'-0"2SECTION - CHILLER CMU WALLS1/4" = 1'-0"4ELEVATION - CHILLER MECHANICAL SCREENKEYNOTESKEYNOTES - SPECIFICATION03 3000-A CONCRETE SLAB, SEE STRUCTURAL03 3000-B CONCRETE FOOTING, SEE STRUCTURAL04 2000-N CMU WALL FULLY GROUTED, SEE STRUCTURAL04 2000-O CONTROL JOINT AT UNIT MASONRY, FILLED WITH SANDEDGROUT22 0000-T HOSE BIB, SEE PLUMBING23 0000-H RELOCATED CHILLER, SEE MECHANICAL23 0000-I CHILLER ACCESS PANEL, SEE MECHANICAL23 0000-K PURGE TANK, SEE MECHANICAL32 3113-A PEDESTRIAN MANUAL SWING GATE, SEE CIVIL AND DOORSCHEDULE32 3113-B CHAIN LINK FENCE, SEE CIVIL32 3500-A CHILLER LOCKING ACCESS GATE32 3500-B SURFACE MOUNTED POST AND BASTE PLATE HARDWAREPER MFR32 3500-C CHILLER SCREEN PANELSGENERAL NOTES - SITE PLANA. SEE ELECTRICAL FOR SITE LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTSB. SEE CIVIL FOR PARKING IMPROVEMENTS, CONCRETE PAVING,GRADING, EROSION CONTROL, STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS, ANDUTILITIESC. SEE PLUMBING FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION AND PLUMBINGIMPROVEMENTSD. SEE LANDSCAPE FOR PLANTING, IRRIGATION, AND EXTERIORCONCRETE JOINTINGE. SEE MECHANICAL FOR CHILLER AND SURGE TANK1/4" = 1'-0"3W-E SECTION - CHILLER PAD & PEDESTRIAN GATE# DESCRP. DATEMDS EXHIBIT506/05/2024 REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comSITE MAP NVICINITY MAP BENCHMARK INFORMATION ENGINEER'S NOTE TO CONTRACTOR Dig Safely. Call the Oregon One-Call Center DIAL 811 or 1-800-332-2344 Dig Safely. Call the Oregon One-Call Center DIAL 811 or 1-800-332-2344 PROJECT CONTACTS LTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER BUILDING ADDITION - SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS 3500 E 17TH AVENUE EUGENE, OR 97401 TAXLOT 170343400301 DRAWING INDEX LEGEND SITE DATA SITE C001 COVER SHEET AND INDEX OF DRAWINGS MDS EXHIBIT6 06/05/2024 REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.com— ——— —— —— ’ ’ ’ — ’ — ’ — — — — — — — — “ — ———— — ’ — —— — — — — ’ — — ’ — — ’ — ’ — ’ — — ’ — — — — — ”— — — — — — — ’ — — —— — — — — —— — — — — — — — — — — — — GENERAL NOTES TRAFFIC CONTROL TESTING AND INSPECTION EXISTING UTILITIES & FACILITIES GRADING, PAVING, & DRAINAGE CURBS & SIDEWALKS PIPED UTILITIES WATER SYSTEM C002 CONSTRUCTION NOTES MDS EXHIBIT7 06/05/2024 REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC003 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DEMOLITION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DEMOLITION PLAN MDS EXHIBIT8 06/05/2024 4'' SS 4'' SS REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC004 SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 2 2 25 2 2 3 4 4 4 5 5 2 8 9 10 11 12 6 7 13 14 15 16 17 16 18 1 19 5 20 21 22 SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN 23 23 23 23 24 2 26 26 MDS EXHIBIT9 06/05/2024 4'' SS 4'' SS REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC005 SITE UTILITY PLAN SITE UTILITY PLAN CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 MDS EXHIBIT10 06/05/2024 4'' SS 4'' SS REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC006 SITE GRADING PLAN SITE GRADING PLAN MDS EXHIBIT11 06/05/2024 4'' SS4'' SSREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comSTORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SD-01 AND FILTRATION PLANTER C007 STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SD-01 AND 1 C007 SD-01 AND FILTRATION PLANTER - PROFILE CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 FILTRATION PLANTER - NORTH SOUTH SECTION 1" = 2' 1 C007 STORMWATER FILTRATION PLANTER 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 6 7 88 9 10 11 12 12 MDS EXHIBIT12 06/05/2024 4'' SS REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comSTORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SD-02 AND SD-03 C008 STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SD-02 AND CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SD-03 1 SD-03 - PROFILE SD-02 - PROFILE 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 6 7 7 7 8 9 5 7 10 MDS EXHIBIT13 06/05/2024 4'' SSE E E E EREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC009 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 6 6 LEGEND 7 8 9 102 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP IMPLEMENTATION: SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURES PLAN: 5 3 1111 11 11 MDS EXHIBIT14 06/05/2024 REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC010 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS FLUSH CONCRETE CURB NTS 3 C010 CLEANOUT NTS 8 C010 FILTRATION PLANTER WALL NTS 11 C010 CONCRETE CURB NTS 2 C010 ACCESSIBLE PARKING NTS 5 C010 CONCRETE WHEEL STOP NTS 7 C010 SECONDARY COLUMN CONC. POUR NTS 10 C010 AC PAVEMENT SECTION NTS 1 C010 CONCRETE PAVING NTS 4 C010 ACCESSIBLE SIGNAGE NTS 6 C010 DEEPENED CONCRETE CURB NTS 9 C010 RESERVED PARKING VAN ACCESSIBLE NO PARKING MDS EXHIBIT15 06/05/2024 REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC011 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS OVERFLOW NTS 1 C011 PERIMETER FOUNDATION DRAIN NTS 2 C011 MDS EXHIBIT16 06/05/2024 REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC012 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS MDS EXHIBIT17 06/05/2024 BRBRBRIRRIRRIRRIRRBUS YARDbenchseatingstaffmain entrystormwater652137891111410benchpicnicseating333RE-SEED DISTURBED LAWN AREASFROM CONSTRUCTION OR TRENCHINGLEGENDTREESORNAMENTAL SHRUBS, GRASSES& GROUNDCOVERSSTORMWATER PLANTINGSEE PLANT SCHEDULESHEET L101SEE PLANTING PLANSHEET L102ROCK MULCH, SEE SPECSHARVEST TABLESEE DETAIL4/L103LINK BENCH 1SEE DETAIL 5/L103LINK BENCH 2SEE DETAILS 6/L103 AND 7/L103EXISTING TREES2'-0"3'-0"2'-2"2'-6"3'-0"3'-6"2'-0"10'-0"5'-0" (MIN.)3'-0"3'-0"CLCLCL4'-0"NOTE:BIKE RACK SHOWN ISLANDSCAPE FORMSEMERSON BIKE RACK:3 1/2" W X 20" L X 30 1/4"HAISLECLEARANCE (DASHED)2'-0"3'-0"3'-0"3'-0"3'-0"3'-0"3'-0"4'-0"5'-0"CL4'-0"4'-0"3'-9"13'-0"1'-8"TYP.CLCL3'-0"3'-0"6'-1"5'-0" (MIN.)2'-0"CL2'-0"CL2'-8"AISLE1'-6"GENERAL NOTES1.METAL EDGING TO BE INSTALLEDWHERE PLANTING BEDS MEET ROCKMULCH. SEE DETAIL 1/L103 AND SPECS.2.CONCRETE MOW EDGE TO BEINSTALLED WHERE PLANTING BEDSMEET LAWN. RE-SEED DISTURBED LAWNAREAS. SEE DETAIL 2/L103 AND SPECS.3.2 FT DEEP ROOT BARRIER TO BEINSTALLED WHERE TREES AREINSTALLED 5 FT OR CLOSER TOPAVEMENT. SEE DETAIL 5/L104.KEYNOTES1METAL EDGINGSEE DETAIL 1/L103 AND SPECS2CONCRETE MOW EDGESEE DETAIL 2/L103 AND SPECS3ROCK MULCH BANDSEE DETAIL 1 AND 2/L103 AND SPECS4CONCRETE PAVINGSEE CIVIL54 FT TALL SCREEN PLANTINGSEE PLANTING PLAN, SHEET L1026LOST AND FOUND BIKE PARKING SEE ARCH PLANS7NEW CHAIN LINK FENCE W/ SLATSSEE SPECS8PEDESTRIAN GATE TO YARD9PEDESTRIAN PATH TO YARD10CHILLER AREASEE ARCH AND CIVIL11FUTURE EV CHARGING STATIONSEE CIVILMarianne H. Zarkin5/8/98OREGON396LANDSCAPEARCH ITECT R E GISTERED1326 NE 63rd AVE.Portland, OR 97213503.802.0031www.mz-la.commzlaREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATED ISSUE DATE:SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #: 11/22/2023 11:15:40 AM C:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt 05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER 3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 97401 2226.00 EXPIRES 5-31-2025L100LANDSCAPEPLAN1" - 20'-0"1LANDSCAPE PLANN0'20'40'10'GRAPHIC SCALEenlarged bike racklayout plan,see 2/L1001/4" = 1'-0"2ENLARGED BIKE RACK LAYOUT PLANBIKE REPAIRSTATIONSEE SPECSBIKE RACK, TYP.N0'4'8'2'GRAPHIC SCALE1'MDS EXHIBIT1806/05/2024 SYMBOLCODEBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZESPACINGQTYREMARKSSYMBOLCODEBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEQTYREMARKSTREESACE CIRACER CIRCINATUMVINE MAPLE1-1/2" CAL2MULTI-TRUNKCOR LGUCORNUS KOUSA X NUTTALLII 'KN4-43'STARLIGHT® KOUSA DOGWOOD2" CAL1LIMBED TO 4' MIN.PAR VANPARROTIA PERSICA `VANESSA`VANESSA PERSIAN PARROTIA1-1/2" CAL5PIN ARNPINUS NIGRA 'ARNOLD SENTINEL'ARNOLD SENTINEL AUSTRIAN PINE5-6` HT16QUE SC3QUERCUS FRAINETTO 'SCHMIDT'FOREST GREEN OAK2" CAL2LIMBED TO 4' MIN.SYMBOLCODEBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZESPACINGQTYREMARKSSHRUBSDEU NIKDEUTZIA GRACILIS 'NIKKO'NIKKO DEUTZIA2 GAL42" o.c.22HYD IALHYDRANGEA QUERCIFOLIA 'PEE WEE'PEE WEE OAKLEAF HYDRANGEA2 GAL36" o.c.12JUN SK2JUNIPERUS SCOPULORUM 'SKYROCKET'SKYROCKET JUNIPER7 GAL30" o.c.8LON MOSLONICERA PILEATA 'MOSS GREEN'MOSS GREEN HONEYSUCKLE2 GAL54" o.c.35MAH COMMAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 'COMPACTA'COMPACT OREGON GRAPE2 GAL36" o.c.33MYR CALMYRICA CALIFORNICAPACIFIC WAX MYRTLE5 GAL72" o.c.6NAN GULNANDINA DOMESTICA 'GULF STREAM'GULF STREAM HEAVENLY BAMBOO2 GAL36" o.c.29PEN HAMPENNISETUM ALOPECUROIDES 'HAMELN'HAMELN FOUNTAIN GRASS1 GAL24" o.c.29POL MUNPOLYSTICHUM MUNITUMWESTERN SWORD FERN1 GAL36" o.c.10PRU LAUPRUNUS LAUROCERASUS 'MOUNT VERNON'MOUNT VERNON ENGLISH LAUREL2 GAL30" o.c.65RIB SANRIBES SANGUINEUMRED FLOWERING CURRANT5 GAL72" o.c.3ROS KKUROSA X 'RADCOR'RAINBOW KNOCK OUT® ROSE1 GAL42" o.c.26SAR RUSSARCOCOCCA RUSCIFOLIAFRAGRANT SWEETBOX5 GAL48" o.c.5SPI NIPSPIRAEA NIPPONICA 'SNOWMOUND'SNOWMOUND SPIREA2 GAL48" o.c.9SPI CARSPIRAEA X BUMALDA 'WALBUMA'MAGIC CARPET SPIREA1 GAL30" o.c.73GROUND COVERSLIR MONLIRIOPE MUSCARI 'MONROE'S WHITE'MONROE'S WHITE LILYTURF4" POT18" o.c.132MAH NERMAHONIA NERVOSALOW OREGON GRAPE1 GAL.24" o.c.13MAH REPMAHONIA REPENSCREEPING MAHONIA1 GAL.24" o.c.128STORMWATER SHRUBSCOR ISACORNUS SERICEA 'ISANTI'ISANTI RED TWIG DOGWOOD2 GAL60" o.c.6NAN GU2NANDINA DOMESTICA 'GULF STREAM'GULF STREAM HEAVENLY BAMBOO2 GAL36" o.c.10PHY CAPPHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUSPACIFIC NINEBARK3 GAL60" o.c.2SAL PURSALIX PURPUREA 'NANA'DWARF PURPLE OSIER WILLOW2 GAL48" o.c.5STORMWATER GROUND COVERSCAR OBNCAREX OBNUPTASLOUGH SEDGE1 GAL.24" o.c.16JUN ELKJUNCUS PATENS 'ELK BLUE'SPREADING RUSH1 GAL.24" o.c.10Marianne H. Zarkin5/8/98OREGON396LANDSCAPEARCH ITECT R E GISTERED1326 NE 63rd AVE.Portland, OR 97213503.802.0031www.mz-la.commzlaREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATED ISSUE DATE:SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #: 11/22/2023 11:15:40 AM C:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt 05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER 3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 97401 2226.00 EXPIRES 5-31-2025L101PLANTSCHEDULEPLANT SCHEDULESTORMWATER PLANTERMDS EXHIBIT1906/05/2024 ACER CIRCINATUMVINE MAPLECAREX OBNUPTASLOUGH SEDGECORNUS KOUSA X NUTTALLII 'KN4-43'STARLIGHT® KOUSA DOGWOODCORNUS SERICEA 'ISANTI'ISANTI RED TWIG DOGWOODDEUTZIA GRACILIS 'NIKKO'NIKKO DEUTZIAHYDRANGEA QUERCIFOLIA 'PEE WEE'PEE WEE OAKLEAF HYDRANGEAJUNCUS PATENS 'ELK BLUE'SPREADING RUSHJUNIPERUS SCOPULORUM 'SKYROCKET'SKYROCKET JUNIPERLIRIOPE MUSCARI 'MONROE'S WHITE'MONROE'S WHITE LILYTURFLONICERA PILEATA 'MOSS GREEN'MOSS GREEN HONEYSUCKLE23456789101MOSS GREEN HONEYSUCKLEMAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM 'COMPACTA'COMPACT OREGON GRAPEMAHONIA NERVOSALOW OREGON GRAPEMAHONIA REPENSCREEPING MAHONIAMYRICA CALIFORNICAPACIFIC WAX MYRTLENANDINA DOMESTICA 'GULF STREAM'GULF STREAM HEAVENLY BAMBOOPARROTIA PERSICA 'VANESSA'VANESSA PERSIAN PARROTIAPENNISETUM ALOPECUROIDES 'HAMELN'HAMELN FOUNTAIN GRASSPHSYOCARPUS CAPITATUSPACIFIC NINEBARKPINUS NIGRA 'ARNOLD SENTINEL'ARNOLD SENTINEL AUSTRIAN PINEPOLYSTICHUM MUNITUMWESTERN SWORD FERN11121314151617181920WESTERN SWORD FERNPRUNUS LAUROCERASUS 'MOUNT VERNON'MOUNT VERNON ENGLISH LAURELQUERCUS FRAINETTO 'SCHMIDT'FOREST GREEN OAKRIBES SANGUINEUMRED FLOWERING CURRANTROSA X 'RADCOR'RAINBOW KNOCK OUT® ROSESARCOCOCCA RUSCIFOLIAFRAGRANT SWEETBOXSALIX PURPUREA 'NANA'DWARF PURPLE OSIER WILLOWSPIRAEA NIPPONICA 'SNOWMOUND'SNOWMOUND SPIREASPIRAEA X BUMALDA 'WALBUMA'MAGIC CARPET SPIREAFOR QUANTITIES & SIZESSEE PLANT SCHEDULE SHEET L1012122232425262728BRBR12589142417281510161312520627151911MULCH DISTURBEDAREAS ON BERMRE-SEED DISTURBED LAWN AREAS FROMCONSTRUCTION OR TRENCHING2479111427281016181526352221241323Marianne H. Zarkin5/8/98OREGON396LANDSCAPEARCH ITECT R E GISTERED1326 NE 63rd AVE.Portland, OR 97213503.802.0031www.mz-la.commzlaREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATED ISSUE DATE:SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #: 11/22/2023 11:15:40 AM C:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt 05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER 3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 97401 2226.00 EXPIRES 5-31-2025L102PLANTINGPLAN1" - 10'-0"1PLANTING PLANN0'10'20'5'GRAPHIC SCALEMATCH LINE 1/L102MATCH LINE 2/L102MATCH LINE 1/L102MATCH LINE 2/L1021" - 10'-0"2PLANTING PLANN0'10'20'5'GRAPHIC SCALEPLANTING KEYMDS EXHIBIT2006/05/2024 61 2"STEEL CONTAINMENT EDGING.INSTALL ANCHORING STAKES ATINTERVALS PER MANUFACTURER'SRECOMMENDATION. SEE SPECS.TOP OF EDGING NOT TO EXCEED1/2" ABOVE FINISHED GRADEFINISH GRADEAT PLANTING AREAROCK MULCH AT BUILDING EDGE.SEE SPECS.GEOTEXTILE FABRIC3"SUBGRADE8"CONCRETE MOW EDGE WITHLIGHT BROOM FINISH. SEE SPECS.TOP OF MOW EDGE NOT TO EXCEED1/2" ABOVE FINISHED GRADEROCK MULCH AT BUILDING EDGE.SEE SPECS.GEOTEXTILE FABRIC3"SUBGRADE6"FINISH GRADEAT PLANTING AREA12" RCOMPACTED BASE ROCK#4 REBARMarianne H. Zarkin5/8/98OREGON396LANDSCAPEARCH ITECT R E GISTERED1326 NE 63rd AVE.Portland, OR 97213503.802.0031www.mz-la.commzlaREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATED ISSUE DATE:SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #: 11/22/2023 11:15:40 AM C:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt 05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER 3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 97401 2226.00 EXPIRES 5-31-2025L103SITEDETAILSNOT TO SCALEMETAL EDGING1NOT TO SCALECONCRETE MOW EDGE2NOT TO SCALEBICYCLE RACK3NOT TO SCALELINK BENCH 15NOT TO SCALELINK BENCH 2 - SEGMENT 27NOT TO SCALEPICNIC TABLE W/ BENCH SEATS4NOT TO SCALELINK BENCH 2 - SEGMENT 16MDS EXHIBIT2106/05/2024 1" MIN.6"6"NOTES:ROOTBALL CROWN TO BEFLUSH WITH FINISHGRADEPLANTING PITS SHALL BE2X DIAMETER AND 1-1/2XDEPTH OF ROOTBALL2.1.CUT AND REMOVE ALLBINDING FROM THE TOPAND SIDES OF THEROOTBALL BEFOREBACKFILLING3.NATIVE SOILCOMPACTED BACKFILL MIX,SEE SPECIFICATIONSBACKFILL MIX, SEESPECIFICATIONSPLANT TABS, SEE SPECIFICATIONS3" MULCH LAYER; KEEP AWAYFROM WOODY STEMSBERM TO FORM DEPRESSEDWATERING BASIN; TO BEREMOVED PRIOR TO END OFMAINTENANCE PERIODFINSH GRADETREE GUY WIRE W/ PVCSLEEVES OVER GUY WIREFOR VISIBILITY3 TIMES ROOTBALL DIAMETER,MINIMUM 4 12' WIDTH1" WIDTH PLASTIC TREE TIE ORCHAINLOCK #4, OR APPROVED EQUALBACKFILL WITH TOP SOIL PERSPECIFICATIONSSCARIFY 4" DEEP AND RECOMPACTTOP DRESS WITH 2" MULCH,SEE SPECIFICATIONSFINISH GRADEFORM BARK MULCH IN A 3"HT. CIRCULAR SAUCER.SAUCER TO BE SOAKEDWITH WATER AFTERPLANTING(2) 6' x 2" x 2" WOODEN STAKE POSTSDRIVEN 18" INTO UNDISTURBED SOILOUTSIDE OF ROOTBALLNOTE:LOCATE TOP OF ROOTBALL AMINIMUM OF 1" ABOVE ADJACENTFINISH GRADE.DO NOT CUT MAIN LEADERPULL TOP OF BURLAP AWAYFROM TRUNK AND TOP OFROOTBALL. LEAVE BURLAP ONSIDES AND BOTTOM OFROOTBALL.3 TIMES ROOTBALL DIAMETER,MINIMUM 4 12' WIDTH1" WIDTH PLASTIC TREE TIE ORCHAINLOCK #4, OR APPROVED EQUALBACKFILL WITH TOP SOIL PERSPECIFICATIONSSCARIFY 4" DEEP AND RECOMPACTPULL TOP OF BURLAP AWAYFROM TRUNK AND TOP OFROOTBALL. LEAVE BURLAP ONSIDES AND BOTTOM OFROOTBALL.TOP DRESS WITH 2" MULCH,SEE SPECIFICATIONSFINISH GRADEFORM BARK MULCH IN A 3"HT. CIRCULAR SAUCER.SAUCER TO BE SOAKEDWITH WATER AFTERPLANTING(2) 6' x 2" x 2" WOODEN STAKE POSTSDRIVEN 18" INTO UNDISTURBED SOILOUTSIDE OF ROOTBALLNOTE:LOCATE TOP OF ROOTBALL AMINIMUM OF 1" ABOVE ADJACENTFINISH GRADE.DO NOT CUT MAIN LEADER24" DEEP ROOT BARRIER.INSTALL AT BACK OF SIDEWALK OR CURB.INSTALL ROOT BARRIER AT EVERY TREEWITHIN 5 FT OF SIDEWALK OR CURB.EXTEND ROOT BARRIER 10'-0" IN EACHDIRECTION. SEE SPECIFICATIONS. 6" 6"BACKFILL WITH TOP SOILPER SPECIFICATIONS.SCARIFY 4" DEEP ANDAND RECOMPACTNOTE:LOCATE TOP OF ROOTBALL AMINIMUM OF 1" ABOVE ADJACENTFINISH GRADE.FORM BARK MULCH IN A 2"HT. CIRCULAR SAUCER.SAUCER TO BE SOAKEDWITH WATER AFTERPLANTINGTOP DRESS WITH 2" OFMULCH, SEESPECIFICATIONSFINISH GRADE'S''S'1/2 'S' UNLESSOTHERWISESPECIFIEDNOTE:'S' = SPACING ON CENTER ASSHOWN ON PLANSEQUILATERALTRIANGULAR SPACINGPLANTEDGE OF PLANT BED, CURB,WALK, FENCE OR WALL 12" 12"PULL TOP OF BURLAP AWAYFROM TRUNK AND TOP OFROOTBALL. LEAVE BURLAP ONSIDES AND BOTTOM OFROOTBALL.SCARIFY 4" DEEP ANDRECOMPACTTOP DRESS WITH 2" MULCH,SEE SPECIFICATIONSFINISH GRADEFORM BARK MULCH IN A 3"HT. CIRCULAR SAUCER.SAUCER TO BE SOAKEDWITH WATER AFTERPLANTINGDO NOT CUT MAIN LEADER1" WIDTH PLASTIC TREETIE OR CHAINLOCK #4,OR APPROVED EQUALBACKFILL WITH TOP SOILPER SPECIFICATIONS(2) 6' x 2" x 2" WOODENSTAKE POSTS DRIVEN 18"INTO UNDISTURBED SOILOUTSIDE OF ROOTBALLNOTE:LOCATE TOP OF ROOTBALL AMINIMUM OF 1" ABOVE ADJACENTFINISH GRADE.Marianne H. Zarkin5/8/98OREGON396LANDSCAPEARCH ITECT R E GISTERED1326 NE 63rd AVE.Portland, OR 97213503.802.0031www.mz-la.commzlaREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATED ISSUE DATE:SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #: 11/22/2023 11:15:40 AM C:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt 05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER 3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 97401 2226.00 EXPIRES 5-31-2025L104PLANTINGDETAILSNOT TO SCALE1SHRUB PLANTINGNOT TO SCALETREE PLANTING W/ ROOT BARRIERNOT TO SCALE2TRIANGULAR GROUNDCOVER SPACINGNOT TO SCALE3MULT-STEM TREE PLANTING5NOT TO SCALETREE PLANTING4NOT TO SCALEEVERGREEN TREE PLANTING6MDS EXHIBIT2206/05/2024 BRBRBRIRRIRRIRRIRR4'' SS POCAAFF19.141"122.71"313.01"33332222111234"34"1"34"34"1"34"34"1"34"34"1"34"1"IRRIGATION NOTES1.SEE SHEET L201 FOR IRRIGATION DETAILS2.ALL DRIP IRRIGATION ZONES SHALL BE COVERED WITH 3" DEPTH MULCH LAYER3.QUANTITIES IN LEGEND ARE SCHEMATIC. PROVIDE ALL PIPING AND EQUIPMENT REQUIRED INEXISTING IRRIGATION AREAS TO CREATE A COMPLETE OPERATIONAL IRRIGATION SYSTEM.4.PROTECT ALL EXISTING IRRIGATION SYSTEMS ADJACENT TO CONSTRUCTION AREA AND REPAIRAS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A COMPLETE WORKING SYSTEM.5.THE INSTALLER SHALL INSPECT THE SITE AND VERIFY CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION. NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DISCREPANCIESAFFECTING SYSTEM PERFORMANCE PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK.6.INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES.7.IRRIGATION LINES SHOWN WITHIN PAVED AREAS ARE FOR GRAPHIC CLARITY ONLY. IRRIGATIONHEADS AND PIPES ARE TO BE PLACED WITHIN LANDSCAPED AREAS WITH THEIR LOCATIONSMODIFIED AS REQUIRED TO AVOID PLANT MATERIALS, UTILITIES AND OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS.PLACE LINES IN COMMON TRENCHES WHERE POSSIBLE.8.ALL COMPONENTS OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED AND ADJUSTED TO PROVIDEADEQUATE COVERAGE AS SHOWN.9.INSTALLER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING A COMPLETE WORKING SYSTEM INTEGRATED WITHEXISTING.10.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY STATIC PRESSURE AT APPROXIMATELY 40 P.S.I. AT THE LOCATIONOF NEW VALVES. NOTIFY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE IMMEDIATELY IF ACTUAL FIELD DATADIFFERS FROM THIS INFORMATION.11.INSTALL ALL IRRIGATION PIPES IN PVC SLEEVES BELOW ALL PAVED SURFACES. COORDINATEPLACEMENT OF SLEEVES WITH APPLICABLE TRADES.12.INSPECT EXISTING BACKFLOW PROTECTION AND REPAIR AS REQUIRED BY LOCAL ORDINANCE.SYMBOLMANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTIONQTYHunter PCZ-101-25Drip Control Valve Kit. 1" PGV globe valve with 1" HY100 filtersystem. Pressure Regulation: . Flow range: 0.5 GPM to 15 GPM.150 mesh stainless steel screen.3Hunter PLD-BVManual flush/shut off valve, barbed insert. Typically installed in10in. box, with adequate blank tubing to extend valve out of valvebox. Use with HDL or other 3/4in. dripline.2Hunter PLD-AVR1/2in. MPT connection with 80 PSI maximum rating.2Hunter HDL-09-12-PC Drip Ring10Area to Receive DriplineHunter HDL-06-18-CVHDL-06-18-CV: Hunter Dripline w/ 0.6 GPH emitters at 18" O.C.Check valve, dark brown tubing with gray striping. Driplinelaterals spaced at 18" apart, with emitters offset for triangularpattern. Install with Hunter PLD barbed or PLD-LOC fittings.3,360 l.f.SYMBOLMANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTIONQTYPoint of Connection 1"1Irrigation Lateral Line: PVC Schedule 401,019 l.f.Irrigation Mainline: PVC Schedule 4010.6 l.f.Pipe Sleeve: PVC Class 200 SDR 2145.4 l.f.FAPOCIRRIGATION SCHEDULEMarianne H. Zarkin5/8/98OREGON396LANDSCAPEARCH ITECT R E GISTERED1326 NE 63rd AVE.Portland, OR 97213503.802.0031www.mz-la.commzlaREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATED ISSUE DATE:SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #: 11/22/2023 11:15:40 AM C:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt 05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER 3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 97401 2226.00 EXPIRES 5-31-2025L200IRRIGATIONPLAN &SCHEDULE1" - 20'-0"1IRRIGATION PLANN0'20'40'10'GRAPHIC SCALECONNECT TO EXISTINGMAINLINE. VERIFYCONTROL WIRES FORNEW VALVES. REMOVEAND REPLACE EXISTINGVALVES TO CONTROLNEW DRIP IRRIGATIONZONES AS SHOWN.ROUTE LATERAL PIPESOUTSIDE OF STORMWATERPLANTER. PROVIDE SLEEVEAT STORMWATER PLANTERWALL.MDS EXHIBIT2306/05/2024 NOTESAIR RELIEF VALVE (PLD-AVR) INSTALLED INVALVE BOX AT OPTIMAL HIGHEST POINT FROMCONTROL ZONE KIT. MULTIPLE AIR RELIEFVALVESMAY BE NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATEDIFFERENCES IN GRADE.FLUSH POINT TO BE INSTALLED AT OPTIMALFURTHESTPOINT FROM CONTROL ZONE KIT TO ALLOW FORMAXIMUMDEBRIS FLUSH IN SYSTEM.PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE DRIPLINE PERPLANPLD OR PLD-LOC FITTING TYP.PVC TO DRIP LINE TUBING CONNECTION(PLD OR PLD-LOC FITTINGS) TYP.PVC LATERAL LINETREE (SEE PLANTING PLAN)PVC EXHAUST HEADERPVC SCH 40 TEE OR EL (TYPICAL)BARB X MALE FITTING:FLUSH POINTPERIMETER OF AREAPERIMETER DRIPLINE PIPE TO BE INSTALLED 2"-4"FROM PERIMETER OF AREASUB-SURFACE DRIPLINE: BLANK TUBINGBARB X BARB INSERT TEE OR CROSS:12" AIR RELIEF VALVEPVC SUPPLY HEADERPVC DRIP MANIFOLDPVC SCH 40 RISER PIPENOTES:1. AIR RELIEF VALVE TO BE INSTALLED AT HIGH POINT OF AREA.2. WHEN USING 17MM INSERT FITTINGS WITH DESIGN PRESSURE OVER50PSI, INSTALL STAINLESS STEEL CLAMPS ON EACH FITTING.4-6"DRIP MANIFOLDBURIAL DEPTHEASY FIT COMPRESSION TEE:RAIN BIRD MDCFTEEON-SURFACE DRIPLINE: RAINBIRD XF SERIES DRIPLINEPOTABLE: XFCV DRIPLINEINLINE DRIP EMITTER OUTLETTIE DOWN STAKE: RAIN BIRDTDS-050 WITH BEND (TYPICAL)MULCHFINISH GRADE3" TYPICALNOTES:1. PLACE TIE DOWN STAKES EVERY FOUR FEET.2. AT FITTINGS WHERE THERE IS A CHANGE OFDIRECTION SUCH AS TEES OR ELBOWS, USETIE-DOWN STAKES ON EACH LEG OF THE CHANGEOF DIRECTION.PLANTINGSUBTERRANEAN EMITTER BOX:FINISH GRADE12" AIR RELIEF VALVE:TO BE INSTALLED AT HIGH POINTSIN DRIP ZONE12" X 34" PVC REDUCER BUSHINGBARB X FEMALE THREADCONNECTOR:12" BLANK DRIPLINE TUBING:BARB X MALE THREADCONNECTOR:PVC TEE CONNECTED TO PVCHEADER PIPE3" MINIMUM DEPTH OF34" WASHED GRAVELBRICK (1 OF 2)FINISH GRADEFLUSH CAP FOR EASY FIT COMPRESSION FITTINGS:EASY FIT COUPLING:SUBTERRANEAN EMITTER BOX:SUB-SURFACE DRIPLINE:3-INCH MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3/4-INCH WASHED GRAVELBRICK (1 OF 2)NOTE:1. ALLOW A MINIMUM OF 6-INCHES OF DRIPLINE TUBING IN VALVE BOX INORDER TO DIRECT FLUSHED WATER OUTSIDE VALVE BOX.TRACE WIRESPECIFIED BACKFILLSLEEVE (6" MIN.)IRRIGATION MAIN ORLATERALCONTROL WIRE(WHEN PRESENT)FINISH GRADE ORBOTTOM OFPAVEMENTNOTE:EXTEND SLEEVE 12"BEYOND PAVEMENT EDGE.2'-0" Min.3"SAND BACKFILLFINISH GRADE/TOP OF MULCHVALVE BOX WITH COVER:30-INCH LINEAR LENGTH OF WIRE, COILEDWATERPROOF CONNECTION:1-INCH BALL VALVE (INCLUDED IN VALVE KIT)ID TAGREMOTE CONTROL VALVE: (INCLUDED IN VALVE KIT)PRESSURE REGULATING QUICK CHECK BASKETFILTERPVC SCH 40 FEMALE ADAPTORLATERAL PIPEPVC SCH 80 NIPPLE (LENGTH AS REQUIRED)PVC SCH 40 ELLPVC SCH 80 NIPPLE (2-INCH LENGTH, HIDDEN)AND PVC SCH 40 ELLPVC SCH 40 TEE OR ELLMAINLINE PIPE3-INCH MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3/4-INCH WASHEDGRAVELPVC SCH 80 NIPPLE, CLOSE (INCLUDED IN VALVEKIT)Marianne H. Zarkin5/8/98OREGON396LANDSCAPEARCH ITECT R E GISTERED1326 NE 63rd AVE.Portland, OR 97213503.802.0031www.mz-la.commzlaREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATED ISSUE DATE:SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #: 11/22/2023 11:15:40 AM C:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt 05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT 100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER 3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 97401 2226.00 EXPIRES 5-31-2025L201IRRIGATIONDETAILS6DRIP IRRIGATION DRIPLINE INSTALLATIONNOT TO SCALE7DRIP IRRIGATION DRIPLINE INSTALLATIONNOT TO SCALE5DRIP IRRIGATION DRIPLINE INSTALLATIONNOT TO SCALE2DRIP IRRIGATION AIR RELIEF VALVENOT TO SCALE3DRIP IRRIGATION FLUSH VALVENOT TO SCALE1DRIP IRRIGATIONTRENCHING AND SLEEVINGNOT TO SCALE4REMOTE CONTROL VALVENOT TO SCALEMDS EXHIBIT2406/05/2024 MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL (E) TB (E) ETB (RR) (RR) (E) (RR) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E) (E)(E)(E)(E) (E) (E)(E) (E)(E) (E) (E)(E) (E)(E) (E)(E)(E)(E)(E) (RR) ACC 1 1 1 2 TYP (E) 1. DEMOLITION DRAWINGS PRESENT LAYOUT OF EXISTING CONDITIONS AND MAJOR MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL ITEMS. THEY ARE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS COMPLETE IN REPRESENTATION OF ACCESSORIES AND INCIDENTALS TO BE REMOVED, REPLACED, OR REWORKED. NOR SHOULD ACCESSIBILITY BE INFERRED. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH THE BUILDING AND EXISTING CONDITIONS, PRIOR TO THE SUBMITTING A BID FOR THIS PROJECT. 2. THIS ELECTRICAL DEMOLITION DRAWING SHOWING EXISTING CONDITIONS HAS BEEN PREPARED BASED ON FIELD OBSERVATION AND ORIGINAL DRAWINGS. ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS MAY EXIST WHICH DO NOT SHOW, AND SUCH ITEMS SHALL BE DEALT WITH IN A MANNER SIMILAR TO THOSE ITEMS WHICH DO SHOW. CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS. 3. CONDUITS, BOXES, ETC., SHALL BE REMOVED AS REQUIRED BY WALL AND CEILING DEMOLITION AND REMOVALS. WIRING SHALL BE REMOVED. ALL WIRING FOR THE REMODELED AREAS SHALL BE NEW UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED OTHERWISE. ALL BRANCH CIRCUITS TO BE DISCONNECTED SHALL BE IDENTIFIED AS TO LOCATION OR ITEM SERVED BEFORE DISCONNECTING. CIRCUITS SERVING AREAS BEYOND THE IMMEDIATE DEMOLITION AREA SHALL BE MAINTAINED. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL THOROUGHLY FAMILIARIZE THEMSELVES WITH EXISTING ELECTRICAL SYSTEM WHICH WILL BE AFFECTED BY THE DEMOLITION WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN PERMISSION FROM OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE TO SHUT OFF SERVICES OR SYSTEMS WHICH MAY AFFECT OTHER AREAS BEYOND THE LIMITS OF THE IMMEDIATE DEMOLITION AREA. SUCH PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED ONLY AFTER OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE IS INFORMED OF THE REASON FOR AND DURATION OF THE SHUTDOWN AND IS SATISFIED THAT THE SHUTDOWN CAN BE MADE WITH AS LITTLE INCONVENIENCE TO OTHER AREAS AS POSSIBLE. 5. PANELBOARDS, DISCONNECTS, FIXTURES, WIRING DEVICES, SIGNAL DEVICES, ETC., SHOWN ON PLANS SHALL BE REMOVED UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. REMOVAL SHALL BE DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GENERAL DEMOLITION WORK. COORDINATE WITH THE OWNER AND OTHER CONTRACTORS. ELECTRICAL DEMOLITION NOTES KEYPLAN REVISIONS: PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT #:309 W 4th Ave Suite 201 Eugene, OR 97401 503-212-4612 5/29/2024 12:27:15 PMAutodesk Docs://22128 - LTD Operations Command Center/22128-LTDOCC-MEPT-R22.rvtED001 05/29/2024 DEMOLITION SITE PLAN LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.001/32" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 1 - DEMO - SITE PLAN - ELECTRICAL KEYNOTES 1 INTERCEPT AND EXTEND LIGHTING BRANCH CIRCUITING TO NEW LOCATION OF EXISTING LUMINAIRE AND POLE BASE. SEE 1/E001. 2 SITE LIGHTING AND SITE SECURITY CAMERAS OUTSIDE OF DEMO SCOPE AREA TO REMAIN OPERATIONAL DURING CONSTRUCTION. PROVIDE WIRING, CONNECTIONS, AND RACEWAY AS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN EXISTING CIRCUITING AFFECTED BY DEMO SCOPE. 0'32'64'16' 1/32" = 1'-0" N # DESCRP. DATE MDS EXHIBIT25 06/05/2024 MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL G (E) TB (E) ETB E131 1 (ER) ACC (ER) (E) ELECTRICAL UTILITY XFMR (F) (F) (F) 1 (ER) (ER) T ELECTRICAL ROOM 402 E001 2 TYP 1'-6" DIAMETER BASE W/ (5) #4 VERTICAL REINFORCING BARS EQUALLY SPACED AROUND PERIMETER W/ #4 SPIRALS @ 8" O.C. MAX SPACING LIGHT POLE (4) 3/4" DIA. X24" HEADED ANCHOR BOLTS ASTM F1554 GR. 36 W/ ASTM F436 TYPE 1 WASHER AND ASTM A563 HEAVY HEX NUT (HOT DIP GALVANIZED) REF. NOTES. 5'-0" 2'-6"1'-6"VERTICAL REINFORCING BARS SPIRALS 1 1/4" CONDUIT 6" MAX3" CLR COVER TYP. NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE ANCHOR BOLT ARRANGEMENT WITH EXISTING POLE BASE PLATE AND MANUFACTURER REQUIREMENTS. 2. GROUND PER NEC/SPECIFICATIONS. 3. ALL CONCRETE 4000 P.S.I.18'-0" GRADE 2'-0" 3/4"C KEYPLAN REVISIONS: PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT #:309 W 4th Ave Suite 201 Eugene, OR 97401 503-212-4612 5/29/2024 12:26:36 PMAutodesk Docs://22128 - LTD Operations Command Center/22128-LTDOCC-MEPT-R22.rvtE001 05/08/2024 SITE PLAN LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.001/32" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 1 - SITE PLAN - ELECTRICAL KEYNOTES 1 ALTERNATE #2: PREPARE FOR FUTURE INSTALLATION OF 208V LEVEL 2 DUAL HEAD EV CHARGING STATION. PROVIDE CONDUIT WITH PULL STRING BACK PANEL 2N. STUB UP CONDUIT, CAP, AND MARK IN LANDSCAPE IN APPROXIMATE LOCATION SHOWN. VERIFY LOCATION OF FUTURE CHARGING STATION LOCATION PRIOR TO ROUGH-IN. SEE E301 FOR CONDUIT SIZE AND QUANTITY. 0'32'64'16' 1/32" = 1'-0" N NOT TO SCALE2LIGHTING POLE MOUNTING DETAIL # DESCRP. DATE MDS EXHIBIT26 06/05/2024 MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL MAIL G CR CR CR CR CR CRCR CR CR 1 1 1 1 1 IRR CR GATE-103* GATE-102* CAM-01* CAM-02*CAM-03* CAM-04* GATE-101* GATE-100* NEDAP UHF READER "HUB A" (MDF) HH-01 HH-02 TWO (2) 2" C. ONE (1) 2" C. NEW "HUB B" (IDF) EXISTING TOP OF FENCELINE CONDUIT TO BE RESTORED/RECONNECTED. ONE (1) 1-1/4" C. TT001 2 EXISTING TOP OF FENCE LINE CONDUIT TO REMAIN. 2 3 4 5 6 6 6 6 7 8 SYSTEMS GENERAL NOTES A. COORDINATE LOCATION/INSTALLATION OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL WORK WITH ALL OTHER TRADES. NO ASPECT OF A SYSTEM INSTALLATION OR ITS ROUGH-IN SHALL COMMENCE UNTIL PROPER AND TIMELY COORDINATION WITH ALL TRADES ASSOCIATED WITH THE INSTALLATION HAS TRANSPIRED. ITEMS TO BE COORDINATED SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO: BUILDING STRUCTURE, SHEET METAL, PIPING SYSTEMS, LIGHT FIXTURES, CONDUITS, CABLE TRAYS, ETC. REFER TO ALL GENERAL, MECHANICAL, AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT. B. PROVIDE PENETRATIONS REQUIRED FOR ROUTING CABLING AND RACEWAYS THROUGH THE BUILDING. COORDINATE FIRE RATED WALL PENETRATIONS AND PROVIDE CONDUIT SLEEVES AND FIRE STOPPING TO MAINTAIN RATING. C. PROVIDE J-HOOKS, BRIDLE RINGS AND OTHER ACCESSORIES REQUIRED TO SUPPORT SYSTEM CABLING. D. ABBREVIATIONS: E - EXISTING ITEM TO REMAIN ER - NEW LOCATION OF EXISTING ITEM N - NEW ITEM IN EXISTING LOCATION R - EXISTING ITEM TO BE REMOVED, PATCH AND/OR COVER RN - REPLACE EXISTING WITH NEW RR - EXISTING ITEM TO BE REMOVED AND RELOCATED 900 HH-02 REMOTE CARD READER PEDESTAL TS301 B 1 1" C. STUB UP FENCE POST TO SUPPORT ELECTRIC STRIKE 3/4" C. STUB UP REMOTE PEDESTAL TO SUPPORT CARD READER 3/4" C. TO POLENEW LIGHTING POLE (SEE ELECTRICAL) REVISIONS: PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT #:309 W 4th Ave Suite 201 Eugene, OR 97401 503-212-4612 5/29/2024 12:32:15 PMAutodesk Docs://22128 - LTD Operations Command Center/22128-LTDOCC-MEPT-R22.rvtTT001 05/29/2024 TECHNOLOGY SITE PLAN LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.001/32" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 1 - SITE PLAN - TECHNOLOGY 0'32'64'16' 1/32" = 1'-0" N 1/8" = 1'-0" 2 ENLARGED PLAN - NORTHEAST GATE KEYNOTES 1 ACCESS CONTROL OPENING. REFER TO THE DETAILS SHEETS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 2 NEW OFOI CAMERA. PROVIDE PATHWAY UP POLE AND CATEGORY 6 CABLING ORIGINATING FROM THE NEW TELECOMMUNICATIONS ROOM TO SUPPORT THIS INSTALLATION. COORDINATE THIS WORK CLOSELY WITH THE OWNER'S PREFERRED VENDOR. 3 PROVIDE ONE (1) 1" CONDUIT ROUTED UNDERGROUND TO LIGHTING POLE TO SUPPORT NEW OFOI CAMERA. 4 EXISTING PATHWAY TO REMAIN. LINES ARE FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY. 5 PROVIDE TWO (2) BELOW GRADE LINK-SEAL SLEEVES AND PENETRATIONS THROUGH FOUNDATIONAL WALL TO ACCOMMODATE TWO (2) 2" CONDUITS. 6 PROVIDE CATEGORY 6 CABLING TO RESTORE EXISTING FENCELINE CAMERA CONNECTIVITY. OWNER'S PREFERRED VENDOR IS UTILIZING POWER-OVER-ETHERNET EXTENDERS TO ACCOMMODATE ALL CABLING RUNS THAT EXCEED 90 METERS. COORDINATE WITH THAT VENDOR ON PREFERRED PLACEMENT OF TERMINATIONS TO ACCOMMODATE THIS METHOD. 7 NEW TELECOMMUNICATIONS BONDING BACKBONE (TBB). FOR BID PURPOSES PROVIDE AN INSULATED COPPER #3/0 WIRE ROUTED FROM THE EXISTING PRIMARY BONDING BUSBAR IN "HUB A" TO THE NEW SECONDARY BONDING BUSBAR IN "HUB B". REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTION 27 05 26 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 8 PROVIDE ONE (1) 12-STRAND SINGLEMODE FIBER OPTIC CABLE AS A BACKBONE CONNECTION TO THE NEW IDF. REFER TO THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS RISER DIAGRAM AND PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. # DESCRP. DATE MDS EXHIBIT27 06/05/2024 Site-based Incentive - Option 1: base LED retro on photo sensors LTD Space Type:12 Location Address This represents a "best estimate" of energy savings and incentive payment. Account #Acct #Space Heat Type:7 These values are dependent on verification of: Meter #Mtr #Air Conditioned?No hours of operation Service GS-2,3 Square Footage:100,000 sf approx quantity and type of fixtures installed Existing Watts/SF:0.24 w/sf Proposed Watts/SF:0.08 w/sf cost of upgrade Avg energy rate:0.037667$ / kWh Highest Demand 350 kW Annual kWh 2,160,000 kWh other changes in the project scope.Demand rate:6.24$ / kW Average Demand 300 kW Average kWh / mo 180,000 kWh Actual incentive may change based on these variables. Watt Reduction 16,082 watts Project %5% Baseline Proposed Fixture Lamp Watts/# of Total Annual Annual Lamp Watts/Ballast # of Total Annual Annual Cost,Cost,Incentive Sitebase kWh HVAC Location Description Type &fixture fixtures Wattage hours usage,Type &Fixture Type fixtures wattage hours usage,each total Rate Incentive savings Adjusted Qty per kWh Qty per kWh kWh Fixture Estimate Fixture Estimate 0.15$ savings EXTERIOR FIXTURES Fleet Bldg wall 70 HPS 93 4 372 4,100 1,525 Lithonia OLW14M2 26 LED 4 105 4,100 431 187$ 748$ 0.15$ 164$ 1,094 1,094 " "wall 150 HPS 190 26 4,940 4,100 20,254 Lithonia OLW23M2 35 LED 26 910 4,100 3,731 247$ 6,422$ 0.15$ 2,478$ 16,523 16,523 Bus Wash & Fuel wall 150 HPS 190 4 760 4,100 3,116 Lithonia OLW23M2 35 LED 4 140 4,100 574 247$ 988$ 0.15$ 381$ 2,542 2,542 " " " "wall 70 MH 95 2 190 4,100 779 Lithonia OLW14M2 26 LED 2 53 4,100 216 187$ 374$ 0.15$ 85$ 563 563 Employee Entry wall 70 HPS 93 1 93 4,100 381 Lithonia OLW14M2 26 LED 1 26 4,100 108 187$ 187$ 0.15$ 41$ 273 273 Bus Lot, East Row 25' pole 150 HPS 190 5 950 4,100 3,895 ATB2 40B LED R4 91 LED 5 457 4,100 1,874 590$ 2,950$ 0.15$ 303$ 2,021 2,021 Bus Lot 40' pole 400 HPS 465 9 4,185 4,100 17,159 ATB2 60B LED R4 213 LED 9 1,914 4,100 7,849 787$ 7,079$ 0.15$ 1,396$ 9,310 9,310 Bus Lot, Perimeter 25' pole 250 HPS 295 21 6,195 4,100 25,400 ATB2 40B LED R4 91 LED 21 1,919 4,100 7,870 590$ 12,391$ 0.15$ 2,629$ 17,530 17,530 Admin Lot 18' pole 150 HPS 190 17 3,230 4,100 13,243 ATB0 20B LED R4 67 LED 17 1,146 4,100 4,700 350$ 5,943$ 0.15$ 1,281$ 8,543 8,543 " "18' pole 150 HPS 190 15 2,850 4,100 11,685 ATB0 20B LED R4 67 LED 15 1,011 4,100 4,147 350$ 5,244$ 0.15$ 1,131$ 7,538 7,538 Horz Arm - sngl 54 86.25$ 4,658$ Horz Arm - 2@180 4 172.50$ 690$ insert additional rows above here as needed Labor - remove & replace 34 69.85$ 2,375$ Materials 1 105.50$ 106$ Mark-up 1 366.79$ 367$ Labor - remove & replace 68 69.85$ 4,750$ Labor - remove & replace 20 64.95$ 1,299$ for ballasts & lamps info see:Materials 1 1,137$ 1,137$ Mark-up 1 1,021$ 1,021$ for recycling info see:Ballast Recycling 104 -$ -$ Lamp Recycling 104 -$ -$ Totals 104 23,765 97,437 104 7,683 31,498 58,727$ 9,891$ 65,938 65,938 23.765 kW 7.683 kW Annual energy savings, kWh:65,938 Total estimated project cost:58,727$ 71,909 kWh busbar Demand reduction, kW:16.082 Savings Based Incentive 9,891$ <==<<<Estimated incentive 9,891$ Avoided annual energy cost:2,484$ Incentive @ 60%35,236$ Net project cost (gross - rebate):48,836$ 0.1375$ /kWh rate Avoided annual demand charge:1,204$ 1 Yr. Payback 55,039$ Payback after incentive:13.2 years 15.0 year meas life 3,688$ Return on Investment:8%91.9 life factor 12.64 millage * Oregon's Tax Credit program has changed. For details of Oregon Dept. of Energy's Energy Incentive Program see www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/BUSINESS/Incentives/ ATB2 60B LED R4 11 873$ 9,601$ ATB2 40B LED R4 21 676$ 14,202$ ATB0 20B LED R4 30 436$ 13,075$ 62 36,878$ 38,954$ Measure kWh life INCENTIVE CALCULATIONSLtg Lgr #May 1, 2013 www.lanecounty.org/Departments/PW/WMD/HazWaste/Pages/business.aspx www.cee1.org/com/com-lt/com-lt-main.php3 Exterior Mixed MDS EXHIBIT28 06/05/2024 ROADWAY Lighting Autobahn Series | ATB0 & ATB2 | LED Roadway MDS EXHIBIT29 06/05/2024 ROADWAY Lighting Quality performance with quick payback. The Autobahn LED uses breakthrough LEDs and precision-engineered optics to provide exceptional illumination while also saving energy. Plus, it works seamlessly with the Acuity Brands ROAM® system to maximize energy and maintenance savings through enhanced monitoring and control functions The Autobahn LED – ATB0 & ATB2 MDS EXHIBIT30 06/05/2024 • Replaces 70 - 400 watt cobraheads • Latest LED technology and optimized lenses provide 40-60% energy savings over HPS • Acuity surge protection device (SPD) provides ANSI/IEEE C62.41 Class C protection • Diecast trigger latch on door and tool-less PEC receptacle make installation easy. • Standard correlated color temperatures (CCT) are 4000K and 5000K Key Features • Municipal Streets and Public Roadways • Residential Areas • Campuses • Military Bases • Industrial Parks • Hotels and Resorts • Municipal Parks • Recreation Centers Applications MDS EXHIBIT31 06/05/2024 • 40B, 60B, 80B LED Packages • 0% Uplight • Types II, III, IV & V • IP66 Rated Light Engines • Precision Engineered UV Stabilized Acrylic O ptics Using breakthrough LEDs and highly engineered precision optics, the Autobahn series provides highly efficient superior optical distributions, which drive 40-60% energy savings over HID. Optical Performance ATB2 Visualization of Applied Lumens @ 180’ Pole Spacing (25' Mounting Height) ATB2 LED 60LED@1000mA 400W HPS Cobrahead LED Competitor Luminaire Performance 400W HPS Cobrahead Autobahn LED 80LED@700mA LED Competitor Pole Spacing 440 440 440 Average Footcandles 1.1 0.7 0.6 Avg/Min 5.5 2.3 3 Power (Watts)465 182 198 Energy Savings Baseline 61%57% MDS EXHIBIT32 06/05/2024 Optical Performance • 20A, 20B, 30B LED Packages • 0% Uplight • Types II, III, IV & V • IP66 Rated Light Engines • Precision Engineered UV Stabilized Acrylic O ptics ATB0 Visualization of Applied Lumens @ 180’ Pole Spacing (25' Mounting Height) ATB0 LED 20LED@700mA 100W HPS Cobrahead LED Competitor Luminaire Performance 100W HPS Cobrahead Autobahn LED 20LED@700mA LED Competitor Pole Spacing 180 180 180 Average Footcandles 0.7 0.4 0.4 Avg/Min 7 4 4 Power (Watts)115 48 71 Energy Savings Baseline 58%38% MDS EXHIBIT33 06/05/2024 Sloped Housing and Weep Holes for Effective Drainage The rugged die cast aluminum housing provides superior thermal management to effectively cool internal electronics and LED’s. This coupled with the durable polyester powder coat paint insures corrosion resistance and product longevity. Light weight and lineman-friendly features make the Autobahn easy to install, and its long reliable operating life significantly reduces lighting maintenance. Mechanical Design NEMA Photocontrol Receptacle Removable power door facilitates installation and maintenance Internal Bubble Level facilitates installation Four Bolt Mounting provides 3G vibration rating and +/- 5 degree tilt Terminal Block can be wired using only a flat blade screwdriver NEMA Photocontrol Receptacle Longitudal Heat Sink Fins ATB2 Diecast Aluminum Housing Tool – Less Entry Trigger Latch 21 lb. unit MDS EXHIBIT34 06/05/2024 Diecast Aluminum Housing Sloped Housing and Weep Holes for Effective Drainage Internal Bubble Level facilitates installation Leveling steps and two bolt mounting provide 3G vibration rating and +/- 5 degree tilt Terminal Block can be wired using only a flat blade screwdriver NEMA Photocontrol Receptacle Longitudal Heat Sink Fins Tool – Less Entry Trigger Latch NEMA Photocontrol Receptacle Mechanical Design ATB0 14 lb. unit MDS EXHIBIT35 06/05/2024 ORDERING INFORMATION Example: ATB2 40BLEDE70 MVOLT R2 Autobahn Series ATB2 Effective Projected Area (EPA) The EPA for the ATB2 is 0.78 sq. ft., Approx. Wt. = 21 lbs. (9.53 kg) 787.4 mm (31”) 25.4 mm (1”) 38.1 mm (1.5”) 355.6 mm (14”) 101.6 mm (4”) 787.4 mm (31”) 25.4 mm (1”) 38.1 mm (1.5”) 355.6 mm (14”) 101.6 mm (4”) ATB2 Autobahn LED Roadway, Large 120 120VMVOLT Multi-volt, 120-277V 347 347V 480 480V 40BLEDE53 40B Chips, 525 mA Driver40BLEDE70 40B Chips, 700 mA Driver40BLEDE10 40B Chips, 1000 mA Driver60BLEDE53 60B Chips, 525 mA Driver60BLEDE70 60B Chips, 700 mA Driver60BLEDE10 60B Chips, 1000 mA Driver 80BLEDE53 80B Chips, 525 mA Driver80BLEDE70 80B Chips, 700 mA Driver80BLEDE10 80B Chips, 1000 mA Driver Color Temperature (CCT) (blank) 4000K (standard) 5K 5000K Mounting (blank) 4-bolt Internal (standard) Paint (blank) Gray (standard) GI Graphite BK Black BZ Bronze DDB Dark Bronze WH White UP Unpainted Options Terminal Block (blank) Terminal Block (standard) T2 Wired to L1 and L2 Position Misc. HS House-Side Shield BF Fitted to Withstand 3G Vibration BL External Bubble Level Controls (blank) NEMA Photocontrol Receptacle (standard) NR No Photocontrol Receptacle PCSS Solid State Lighting Photocontrol (120-277V) SH Shorting Cap DE Dimming Enabled (0-10V) 1 Notes: 1 DE option not available 347 or 480V Dimming controlled via ROAM system (sold separately) Contact factory for details R2 Roadway Type IIR3 Roadway Type IIIR4 Roadway Type IVR5 Roadway Type V OpticsVoltagePerformance Packages Series U.S. Patent No. D663,462 MDS EXHIBIT36 06/05/2024 ORDERING INFORMATION Example: ATB0 20ALEDE70 MVOLT R2 Autobahn Series ATB0 Effective Projected Area (EPA) The EPA for the ATB0 is 0.76 sq. ft., Approx. Wt. = 14 lbs. (6.35 kg) ATB0 Autobahn LED Roadway, Small 120 120VMVOLT Multi-volt, 120-277V 347 347V 480 480V 20ALEDE35 20A Chips, 350 mA Driver 20ALEDE53 20A Chips, 525 mA Driver 20ALEDE70 20A Chips, 700 mA Driver 20BLEDE53 20B Chips, 525 mA Driver 20BLEDE70 20B Chips, 700 mA Driver 20BLEDE10 20B Chips, 1000 mA Driver 30BLEDE53 30B Chips, 525 mA Driver 30BLEDE70 30B Chips, 700 mA Driver Color Temperature (CCT) (blank) 4000K (standard) 5K 5000K Mounting (blank) 2-bolt Internal (standard) Paint (blank) Gray (standard) GI Graphite BK Black BZ Bronze DDB Dark Bronze WH White UP Unpainted Options Terminal Block (blank) Terminal Block (standard) T2 Wired to L1 and L2 Position Misc. HS House-Side Shield BL External Bubble Level Controls (blank) NEMA Photocontrol Receptacle (standard) NR No Photocontrol Receptacle PCSS Solid State Lighting Photocontrol (120-277V) SH Shorting Cap DE Dimming Enabled (0-10V)1 Misc. BF Bridge Fitter, for 3G Vibration Notes: 1 Dimming controlled via ROAM system (sold separately) Contact factory for details R2 Roadway Type IIR3 Roadway Type IIIR4 Roadway Type IIIIR5 Roadway Type V OpticsVoltagePerformance Packages Series U.S. Patent No. D663,462 MDS EXHIBIT37 06/05/2024 Product Overview Optical Performance is comparable to 70-400W HPS roadway luminaires Average correlated color temperature (CCT) is 4000K, 70 CRI minimum or 5000K, 65CRI. Unique IP66 rated LED light engines provide 0% uplight and restrict backlight to within sidewalk depth, providing optimal application coverage and optimal pole spacing. Available in Type II, Type III, TypeIV or Type V roadway distributions. DesignLights™ Consortium approved Electrical Long Life: LED light engines are rated >100,000 hours at 40°C, L70. Electronic driver has a rated life of 100,000 hours at a 20°C ambient Acuity’s proprietary surge protection device provides IEEE/ ANSI C62.41 Category C (10kV/5kA) level of protection Mechanical Easy to Maintain: Includes standard AEL lineman- friendly features such as tool-less entry, tool-less NEMA photocontrol receptacle, terminal block and quick disconnects. Bubble level located inside the electrical compartment for easy leveling at installation. The electrical platform and durable housing materials provide superior longevity and reduce the need for maintenance Rugged diecast aluminum housing is polyester powder-coated for durability and corrosion resistance. Rigorous five-stage pre-treating and painting process yields a finish that achieves a scribe creepage rating of 8 (per ASTM D1654) after over 1000 hours’ exposure to salt fog chamber (operated per ASTM B117) Mast arm mount provides easy, secure installation and is adjustable for arms from 1-1/4” to 2” (1-5/8” to 2-3/8” O.D.) diameter. Wildlife shield is cast into the housing (not a separate piece) Diecast trigger latch on door frame allows for tool-less entry and enables easy and secure opening with one hand Controls NEMA photocontrol receptacle is standard; tool-less “lift and turn” receptacle makes photocontrol orientation easy Dimming version (available with DE option) uses proprietary Acuity Brands components to enable continuous 0-10V dimming down to 10% output via the ROAM® smart controls system (sold separately) Photocontrol for solid-state lighting (available with PCSS option) meets ANSI C136.10 criteria Warranty & Standards Rated for -40°C to 40°C ambient CSA Certified to U.S. and Canadian standards Complies with ANSI: C136.2, C136.10, C136.14, C136.31, C136.15, C136.37 Full warranty terms located at www.acuitybrands.com/ CustomerResources/Terms_and_conditions.aspx MDS EXHIBIT38 06/05/2024 Providing quality performance with quick payback, Autobahn, the next generation LED cobrahead from AEL, will drive you to significant energy savings, lower maintenance costs, and peace of mind. The Autobahn is designed to upgrade existing HID cobraheads with progressive styling and advanced solid-state lighting performance, enhancing the landscape and improving nighttime safety. AEL provides you the assurance and confidence of a dependable solution from the industry leader. With 60 years of roadway experience, we “know the road” and our expertise manifests itself in the Autobahn’s optical design, tool-less features, and component reliability. Move forward with Autobahn. The Autobahn LED Lighting for the Future MDS EXHIBIT39 06/05/2024 AEL Headquarters, 3825 Columbus Road, Granville, OH 43023 Warranty Five-year limited warranty. Full warranty terms located at www.acuitybrands.com/CustomerResources/ Terms_and_conditions.aspx Visit our web site at www.americanelectriclighting.com Product specifications may change without notice. Please contact your sales representative for the latest product information. AEL-1007 7/12 ©2012 Acuity Brands Lighting, inc. All Rights Reserved. MDS EXHIBIT40 06/05/2024 Stormwater Management Report LTD Operations Command Center 3500 E 17th Avenue Eugene, OR 97401 Emerio Design Project Number: 1022-002 City of Springfield Permit Numbers: TBD Date: 05/29/2024 I hereby certify that this Stormwater Management Report for this parcel has been prepared by me or under my supervision and meets the minimum standards of the City of Springfield and normal standards of engineering practice. I hereby acknowledge and agree that the jurisdiction does not and will not assume liability for the sufficiency, suitability, or performance of the drainage facilities designed by me. Prepared For: Prepared By: Todd Smith Ian Feltis, PE Lane Transit District Emerio Design, LLC 3500 E 17th Avenue 1500 Valley River Drive, Ste 100 Eugene, OR 97403 Eugene, OR 97401 Todd.smith@ltd.org ian@emeriodesign.com (541) 682-6130 (503) 746-8812 MDS EXHIBIT41 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 2 of 20 List of Appendices - Appendix A – Site Vicinity Map - Appendix B – Geotechnical Report - Appendix C – FM Building Stormwater Study - Appendix D – Pre-developed and Post-developed Drainage Basin Maps - Appendix E – Stormwater Plans - Appendix F – City of Eugene Presumptive Method Calculations - Appendix G – SBUH Conveyance Calculations - Appendix H – Manning’s Equation Capacity Calculation - Appendix I – Operations and Maintenance Log - Appendix J – City of Springfield Stormwater Management Scope of Work Form MDS EXHIBIT42 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 3 of 20 Project Overview and Description The existing property, located at 3500 E 17th Avenue in Eugene, is bordered by E 17th Avenue to the south and Glenwood Boulevard to the west. This property is currently in use as the Operations Command Center for Lane Transit District. The project scope includes a renovation and addition to the existing operations command center. Work will include alterations and additions to the existing building, building systems, and minor site work. The project currently drains to the west to Glenwood boulevard, through a series of on site catch basins, manholes, and storm pipes. With the renovation to the existing building and parking lot, the new stormwater infrastructure shall tie into the existing infrastructure. A geotechnical investigation was conducted by PBS on October 11th, 2023, and included five borings. The subsurface conditions as described in the geotechnical investigation are as follows: - Asphalt/Base Rock o Approximately 2 inches of asphalt concrete (AC) pavement overlaying approximately 12 inches of base rock was encountered at the ground surface in all five borings. - Silt (ML) o Brown silt with varying amounts of fine- to coarse-grained sand was encountered in all five borings below the gravel base rock, continuing to the termination depth in B-3 through B-5. The silt was generally soft to stiff, with low to high plasticity and was moist. - Sand (SP), Sand with Silt (SW-SM) o Well graded to poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel was encountered in borings B-1 and B-2 below the silt at approximately 7.5 feet bgs. The sand generally increased in relative density with increasing depth, from medium dense to very dense and was wet, with colors ranging from brown/gray to orange. The sand ranged from fine to coarse grained and the gravel was fine to coarse and generally subangular to subrounded. - Gravel with Silt (GW-GM) o Brown to gray to black, subrounded gravel with silt and fine- to coarse- grained sand was encountered in borings B-1 and B-2 at approximately 16 feet bgs, below the sand layer. The gravel was generally fine to coarse, wet, and dense to very dense. - Sandstone Bedrock (RX) o Below the gravel layer in borings B-1 and B-2, very dense, moderately to severely weathered blue sandstone bedrock was encountered at 18 to 19 feet bgs, where both borings were terminated due to auger refusal. Infiltration testing was conducted by PBS on site, which revealed field measured infiltration rates of 0 inches per hour. Therefore, infiltration stormwater measures are not feasible for this project. Please refer to the attached Geotechnical Report for additional details. MDS EXHIBIT43 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 4 of 20 Methodology The following documents are applicable to stormwater design for development within the City of Springfield: - City of Springfield’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, Chapter 3: Stormwater Quality, and Chapter 4, Stormwater Capacity - The current edition of the Oregon Plumbing Specialty Code - City of Eugene’s 2014 Stormwater Management Manual (SWMM) The following table summarizes the areas and curve numbers for the proposed improvements in the pre-developed and post-developed conditions associated with this project: Pre-developed Areas and Curve Numbers Surface Type Area (SF) CN Impervious Area 14,044 98 Pervious Area 6,516 79 Total 20,560 92 Post-developed Areas and Curve Numbers Surface Type Area (SF) CN Impervious Area 15,075 98 Pervious Area 5,485 79 Total 20,560 93 There is an increase of 1,031 sf of impervious area in the post-developed condition. Time of Concentration for the post-developed condition was assumed to be 5 minutes. Per the applicable stormwater design standards listed above, the following is a list of significant stormwater requirements: - Treatment of runoff is required from all parking lots and paved areas, at least 50% of which should be through vegetative methods. - Project conditions require a mid-level site stormwater study since the area is less than 25 acres, drains to a public system within City limits, and is not located adjacent to a floodplain, stream, wetland, natural resource area, or wellhead protection zone. - Hydraulic calculations shall be based on the Unit Hydrograph Method for intervals as noted in the City of Springfield Design standards. In 2016, another building was constructed on this property, in the bus yard directly to the north of the operations command center. During the design phase for that building (noted as the FM Building), it was deemed that on-site detention was not required since the receiving water body is not a small stream (the Willamette River), and there are no downstream deficiencies in the conveyance system as indicated by the City of Springfield. Therefore, since the ultimate stormwater conveyance system and receiving water body is the same as the previous building project, on-site detention should not be required for this project, which has a significantly smaller area of disturbance than the FM building project. The area of disturbance for the FM building was 57,100 sf, while the operations command MDS EXHIBIT44 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 5 of 20 center project is only 20,560 sf, with only an increase of 1,031 sf of impervious area between the pre-developed and post-developed conditions. Please refer to the attachment FM Building Stormwater Study for additional information, and supporting evidence that on-site detention is not required. Water Quality To address water quality requirements as outlined by the City of Springfield, and considering the subsurface conditions discovered with the geotechnical investigation, a filtration stormwater planter was selected as the stormwater facility for this project. The filtration stormwater planter will collect roof runoff and most of the new site runoff through a series of pipes and inlets. Roof runoff will be directed from building downspouts to an exterior collection system and discharge into the planter. Runoff from other sources within the improvement area will be collected and discharged into the planter by area drains and one large trench drain. This filtration stormwater planter is designed per City of Springfield and City of Eugene standards and has the following characteristics: - Planter Length = 44.9 feet - Planter Width = 8.4 feet - Planter Area = 377.16 feet - Planter Depth = 12 inches min. to 30 inches max. o Bottom of Open Storage Elevation = 437.00 - Growing Medium Depth = 12 inches o Assumed Infiltration Rate Through Growing Medium = 2 in/hr - Separation Layer Depth = 3 inches - Drain Rock Layer Depth = 6 inches An overflow is proposed within the planter at an elevation 438.00, which is 1 -foot above the bottom of the open storage area. The filtration stormwater planter collects and treats runoff through the 12” growing medium, where it will by collected by a perforated underdrain, and discharged into the existing stormwater system on site. In this case, the planter underdrain will connect to an existing catch basin indicated to be preserved. Please refer to the attached Stormwater Plans for additional details. The sizing of this filtration stormwater planter was based on the City of Eugene’s Presumptive Method calculator, which uses the NRCS Type 1A rainfall distribution for a 24- hour storm. Per the City of Eugene Stormwater Management Manual section 2.4.2, projects that use the Presumptive Approach are presumed to be in compliance with the City’s Stormwater Quality requirements. The City of Eugene uses a water quality design storm depth of 1.4 inches. Please refer to the attached City of Eugene Presumptive Method Calculations for additional details. Flow Control As indicated above, flow control standards should not apply to this project, as it has been determined that there are no downstream capacity issues, and the offsite conveyance system does not discharge into a small stream. Please refer to the attached FM Building Stormwater Study for supporting evidence. Conveyance Approximately 1/3 of roof runoff (5,025 sf) in the post-developed condition will discharge into the filtration stormwater planter directly via downspouts. The remaining 2/3 of roof runoff in the post-developed condition will be conveyed to the filtration stormwater planter MDS EXHIBIT45 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 6 of 20 via downspouts that connect to a 6” ductile iron perimeter drain surrounding the building addition. Other sources of runoff will be collected in area drains that connec t to the 6” ductile iron perimeter drain. From the filtration stormwater planter, runoff will connect to an existing stormwater inlet and be conveyed to the existing onsite storm system. Please see the attached Stormwater Plans for additional details. Per the City of Springfield’s Engineering Design Standards, conveyance design must accommodate the 25-year, 24-hour storm event of 5.18 inches. The peak runoff rates for the 25-year event for the two conditions analyzed for conveyance are summarized in the following table: 25-Year, 24-Hour Storm Event (5.18 inches) – Conveyance Calculations Conveyance ‘Basin’ Peak Runoff Rate (cfs) Peak Runoff Volume (cf) 1/3 Roof Area 0.144 2,070 Remaining Site Post-developed 0.390 5,382 Total 0.534 7,452 The conveyance figures listed above were calculated using the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph method. Please see the attached SBUH Conveyance Calculations for additional details. Since 2/3 of the proposed roof runoff and the remainder of the site runoff will utilize the 6” ductile iron storm pipe to convey stormwater to the treatment facility, the capacity of the 6 ” ductile iron storm pipe must be analyzed. The capacity was calculated using Manning’s Equation, with the following parameters: - Pipe diameter = 6” - Pipe material – Ductile Iron o Manning’s n = 0.013 - Pipe slope = 0.76% Due to the low gradient of the site, and the depth restriction at the connection point to the existing onsite storm system, the 6” ductile iron storm pipe is required to be laid at a grade of 0.76%. Per Manning’s Equation for gravity pipe flow, the proposed 6” ductile iron pipe has the following capacity characteristics: - Wetted perimeter = 1.57’ - Hydraulic Radius = 0.13’ - Pipe area = 0.20 sf - Flow velocity (flowing full) = 2.50 fps - Capacity (flowing full) = 0.49 cfs The calculated peak post-developed runoff rate for the 25-year storm event for runoff that is conveyed via the 6” ductile iron storm pipe is 0.390 cfs. The proposed 6” ductile iron storm pipe has a capacity of 0.49 cfs. Therefore, the critical conveyance system has enough capacity to convey runoff from the 25-year storm event. Please see the attached Manning’s Equation Conveyance Calculation for additional details. Operations and Maintenance Stormwater Planters are infiltration and filtration stormwater facilities that can provide flood control, flow control, and stormwater quality benefits. Stormwater Planters are walled vegetated surfaces reservoirs used to collect and treat stormwater ru noff from impervious surfaces by allowing pollutants to settle and filter out as the water percolates through the MDS EXHIBIT46 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 7 of 20 vegetation and soil mediums before infiltrating into the ground below or being piped to its downstream destination. Stormwater Planters can be used to help fulfill a site’s required landscaping area requirement and should be integrated into the overall site design. Numerous design variations of shape and planting scheme can be used to fit the character. All facility components and vegetation shall be inspected for proper operations and structural stability. These inspections shall occur, at a minimum , quarterly for the first 2 years from the date of installation, 2 times per year thereafter, and within 48 hours after each major storm event. Training and/or Written Guidance information for operating and maintaining Stormwater Planters shall be provided to all property owners and tenants. A copy of the O & M Plan shall be provided to all property owners and tenants. Inspection Logs shall be kept by the facility owner demonstrating the following items have been inspected and are being maintained properly: - Access to Stormwater Planters shall be safe and efficient. Obsta cles preventing maintenance personnel and/or equipment access to the components of the facility shall be removed. - Debris and Litter shall be removed to prevent channelization, clogging, and interference with the plant growth. Fallen leaves and debris from deciduous plant foliage shall be raked and removed. - Erosion Damage shall be identified and controlled when native soil is exposed, or erosion channels are forming. - Filter Media consisting of sand and/or topsoil shall be tested to ensure stormwater percolates through the planter. Remove and replace sand and/or topsoil to correct percolation deficiencies. - Infiltrating Stormwater Planters shall be excavated and cleaned, and gravel or soil shall be replaced to correct low infiltration rates. Water should drain through the planter within 3-4 hours after a storm event. - Inlets shall be cleared when conveyance capacity is plugged to ensure unrestricted stormwater flow to the planter. - Mulch shall be replenished as needed to ensure health y plant growth. - Nuisance and Prohibited Vegetation from the Eugene Plant List (such as blackberries and English Ivy) shall be removed when discovered. Invasive vegetation contributing up to 25% of vegetation of all species shall be removed and replaced. - Outlets shall be cleared when 50% of the conveyance capacity is plugged. - Piping shall be cleared of sediment and debris to maintain conveyance capacity. - Planter Walls shall be examined for deficiencies, such as rot, cracks, and failure, and repaired as needed. Holes that are not consistent with the design and allow water to flow directly through the planter to the ground shall be plugged. - Sedimentation build-up near or exceeding 2” in depth shall be hand-removed with minimum damage to vegetation using proper erosion control m easures. Sediment shall be removed if it is more than 4 inches thick or so thick as to damage or kill vegetation. - Vegetation shall be healthy and dense enough to provide filtering while protecting underlying soils from erosion. Dead vegeta tion shall be removed to maintain less than 10% of area coverage or when vegetative filter function is MDS EXHIBIT47 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 8 of 20 impaired. Vegetation shall be replaced immediately to control erosion where soils are exposed and within 3 months to maintain cover density. Spill Prevention Measures shall be exercised on site when handling substances that contaminate stormwater. Releases of pollutants shall be corrected as soon as identifi ed. Non-Chemical Pest Control measures shall be taken to prevent development of insects, mosquitoes, and rodents. Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Filtration Stormwater Planter Sediment accumulation on vegetation Sediment Depth exceeds 2 inches Remove sediment deposits on treatment area of the basin. When finished, basin should be level from side to side and drain freely toward outlet. There should be no areas of standing water once inflow has ceased. Standing Water Water stands in the basin between storms and does not drain freely. Any of the following may apply: remove sediment or trash blockages; improve grade form head to foot of basin; remove clogged check dams; add underdrains. Constant baseflow Small quantities of water continually flow through the basin, even when it has been dry for weeks, and an eroded, muddy channel has formed in the basin bottom. Add a low-flow pea gravel drain the length of the basin, or bypass the base flow around the basin. Poor vegetation coverage Vegetation is sparse or bare, or eroded patches occur in more than 10% of the basin bottom. Determine why vegetative growth is poor and correct that condition. Replant with plugs from the upper slope; plant in the basin bottom at 8-inch interval; or reseed into loosened, fertile soil. Vegetation Vegetation become excessively tall (greater than 18 inches); nuisance weeds and other vegetation start to take over. Remove nuisance vegetation so that flow is not impeded. Mowing is not required for wet biofiltration basins. However, fall harvesting of very dense vegetation after plant die-back is recommended. Excessive shading Vegetative growth is poor because sunlight does not reach basin. If possible, trim back overhanging limbs and MDS EXHIBIT48 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 9 of 20 remove brushy vegetation on adjacent slopes. Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Filtration Stormwater Planter Inlet/outlet Inlet/outlet areas are clogged with sediment /debris. Remove material so there is no clogging or blockage in the inlet and outlet area. Trash and debris Trash and debris have accumulated in the basin. Remove trash and debris from basin. Erosion/scouring Basin bottom has eroded or scoured due to flow channelization or high flows. For ruts or bare areas less than 12 inches wide, repair the damaged area by filling with crushed gravel. If bare areas are large (generally greater than 12 inches wide), the basin should be regraded and reseeded/replanted. For smaller bare areas, overseed when bare spots are evident, or take plugs of plants from the upper slope and plant in the basin bottom at 8-inch intervals. Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Catch Basins Broken or cracked pipe or concrete chamber Fill or replace when cracks are greater than 1 inch. Prevent leaking of pipes or structure. Large shrubs and trees Roots are intruding into the drainage structure or pipes. Remove to prevent large root systems from damaging subsurface structural components. Regular Maintenance Summer: Make necessary structural repairs, vactor out sumped structures when sump is ½ full or annually at a minimum. Fall: Clean sediment/leaves from pavement and inlets to prevent clogging. Properly dispose of removed sediments. Maintenance Log Record date, description, and contractor (if applicable) for all structural repairs and facility cleanout activities. Tracking sediment collection will help optimize future cleaning efforts. MDS EXHIBIT49 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 10 of 20 Please see the attached Operations and Maintenance log. Engineering Conclusions The design the proposed stormwater system satisfies the water quality and conveyance standards set forth by the City of Springfield and/or the City of Eugene. MDS EXHIBIT50 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 11 of 20 Appendix A – Site Vicinity Map SUBJECT PROPERTY MDS EXHIBIT51 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 12 of 20 Appendix B – Geotechnical Report MDS EXHIBIT52 06/05/2024 441 2 S COR B E T T A V EN UE POR T LAN D , OR 972 39 503. 248. 19 3 9 MA IN 866. 727. 01 4 0 FA X PB S USA .COM Geotechnical Engineering Report Operations Command Center 3500 E 17th Avenue Eugene, Oregon Prepared for: Lane Transit District PO Box 7070 Springfield, Oregon 97475 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 MDS EXHIBIT53 06/05/2024 ©2023 PBS Engineering and Environmental Inc. 4412 S CORBETT AVENUE, PORTLAND, OR 97239 ▪ 5 0 3 . 2 4 8 . 1 9 3 9 M A I N ▪ 8 6 6 . 7 2 7 . 0 1 4 0 F A X ▪ P B S U S A . C O M Geotechnical Engineering Report Operations Command Center 3500 E 17th Avenue Eugene, Oregon Prepared for: Lane Transit District PO Box 7070 Springfield, Oregon 97475 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Prepared by: Frank Jarman, EIT Geotechnical Engineering Staff Ryan White, PE, GE Principal Geotechnical Engineer Reviewed by: Saiid Behboodi, PE, GE Principal/Geotechnical Engineer 6/30/2024 MDS EXHIBIT54 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon i October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1 General ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2.1 Literature and Records Review ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2.2 Subsurface Explorations ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2.3 Geophysical Testing ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2.4 Field Infiltration Testing .............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2.5 Soils Testing .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2.6 Geotechnical Engineering Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2.7 Report Preparation ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Understanding ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 2 SITE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Surface Description ................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Regional Geology ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Local Geology .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Subsurface Conditions ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Groundwater ................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Infiltration Testing ..................................................................................................................................................................... 5 3.1.2.1 Crustal Earthquakes and Faults ............................................................................................................... 5 3.1.2.2 Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) – Interface Earthquakes .......................................................... 5 3.1.2.3 Intraslab Earthquakes .................................................................................................................................. 6 3.1.2.4 Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading ...................................................................................................... 6 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 7 Geotechnical Design Considerations ................................................................................................................................. 7 Shallow Foundations ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 4.4.1 Minimum Footing Widths and Design Bearing Pressure .............................................................................. 7 4.4.2 Footing Embedment Depths .................................................................................................................................... 7 4.4.3 Footing Preparation ..................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.4.4 Lateral Resistance .......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Floor Slabs .................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Retaining Walls ........................................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.6.1 Drainage ........................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Seismic Design Considerations ............................................................................................................................................ 9 4.7.1 Code-Based Seismic Design Parameters ............................................................................................................. 9 Temporary and Permanent Slopes ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Ground Moisture ...................................................................................................................................................................... 10 4.9.1 General ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10 4.9.2 Perimeter Footing Drains ......................................................................................................................................... 10 4.9.3 Vapor Flow Retarder .................................................................................................................................................. 10 Pavement Design ..................................................................................................................................................................... 10 5 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................... 11 Site Preparation ........................................................................................................................................................................ 11 MDS EXHIBIT55 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon ii October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 5.1.1 Proofrolling/Subgrade Verification ...................................................................................................................... 11 5.1.2 Wet/Freezing Weather and Wet Soil Conditions ........................................................................................... 11 5.1.3 Dry Weather Conditions ........................................................................................................................................... 12 Excavation ................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Structural Fill .............................................................................................................................................................................. 12 5.3.1 On-Site Soil .................................................................................................................................................................... 12 5.3.2 Borrow Material ........................................................................................................................................................... 13 5.3.3 Select Granular Fill ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 5.3.4 Crushed Aggregate Base .......................................................................................................................................... 13 5.3.5 Utility Trench Backfill ................................................................................................................................................. 13 5.3.6 Retaining Wall Backfill ............................................................................................................................................... 13 5.3.7 Stabilization Material ................................................................................................................................................. 14 6 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ............................................................ 14 7 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 14 8 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 16 Supporting Data TABLES Table 1. Infiltration Test Results Table 2. 2022 OSSC Seismic Design Parameters Table 3. Minimum AC Pavement Sections FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Plan Figure 3. Regional Fault Map Figure 4. Historical Seismicity Figure 5. Tectonic Setting of the Pacific Northwest APPENDICES Appendix A: Field Explorations Table A-1. Terminology Used to Describe Soil Table A-2. Key to Test Pit and Boring Log Symbols Figures A1–A5. Logs for Borings B-1 through B-5 Appendix B: Laboratory Testing Figure B1. Atterberg Limits Test Results Figure B2. Summary of Laboratory Data Appendix C: Geophysical Testing (ReMi) MDS EXHIBIT56 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 1 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 1 INTRODUCTION General This report presents results of PBS Engineering and Environmental Inc. (PBS) geotechnical engineering services for the proposed building improvements located at 3500 E 17th Avenue in Eugene, Oregon (site). The general site location is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The locations of PBS’ explorations in relation to existing site features are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. Purpose and Scope The purpose of PBS’ services was to develop geotechnical design and construction recommendations in support of the planned building improvements. This was accomplished by performing the following scope of services. 1.2.1 Literature and Records Review PBS reviewed various published geologic maps of the area for information regarding geologic conditions and hazards at or near the site. 1.2.2 Subsurface Explorations Five borings were completed at the site. Three borings were advanced in the parking area to depths of approximately 6.5 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs) and two borings were advanced adjacent to the proposed addition to depths of up to 19.5 feet bgs. The borings were logged and representative soil samples collected by a member of the PBS geotechnical engineering staff. The approximate boring locations are shown on the Site Plan, Figure 2. The interpreted boring logs are presented as Figures A1 through A5 in Appendix A, Field Explorations. 1.2.3 Geophysical Testing A subcontractor hired by PBS collected and processed refraction microtremor (ReMi) data to produce a 2-D shear wave velocity profile using a 350-foot-long line on the southern portion of the site. 1.2.4 Field Infiltration Testing Two cased-hole, falling-head field infiltration tests were completed in borings B-4 and B-5 within the proposed development at depths of 5 feet bgs. Infiltration testing was monitored by PBS geotechnical engineering staff. 1.2.5 Soils Testing Soil samples were returned to our laboratory and classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2487) and/or the Visual-Manual Procedure (ASTM D2488). Laboratory tests included natural moisture contents, grain-size analyses, and Atterberg limits. Laboratory test results are included in the exploration logs in Appendix A, Field Explorations; and in Appendix B, Laboratory Testing. 1.2.6 Geotechnical Engineering Analysis Data collected during the subsurface exploration, literature research, and testing were used to develop site- specific geotechnical design parameters and construction recommendations. 1.2.7 Report Preparation This Geotechnical Engineering Report summarizes the results of our explorations, testing, and analyses, including information relating to the following: • Field exploration logs and site plan showing approximate exploration locations and depths to native soils MDS EXHIBIT57 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 2 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 • Laboratory test results • Infiltration test results • Groundwater levels and considerations • ReMi seismic survey results • Surface conditions • Regional and local geology • Evidence of expansive soils • Seismic and geologic hazards study in accordance with Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) section 1803.7: o Tectonic and seismic setting o Historical seismicity o Geologic and seismic hazards impacting the site, including: ▪ Potential for surface rupture from mapped faults ▪ Liquefaction and lateral spreading ▪ Estimated duration of seismic shaking o The location of nearby faults o Evaluation of liquefaction and lateral spreading potential o Recommendations for hazard mitigation • Shallow foundation recommendations: o Minimum embedment o Minimum footing widths o Allowable bearing pressure o Estimated settlement (total and differential) o Sliding coefficient o Passive resistance o Over excavation beneath foundations and placement of structural fill foundation drainage • Lateral earth pressures for retaining wall design, including: o Active, passive, and at-rest earth pressures o Allowable bearing pressure o Sliding coefficient o Groundwater and drainage considerations • Earthwork and grading, cut, and fill recommendations: o Stripping and grubbing (where applicable) o Subgrade preparation, compaction, and stabilization recommendations o Structural fill materials and preparation, mitigation of unsuitable soil, and reuse of on-site soils o Utility trench excavation and backfill requirements o Construction access and wet weather considerations o Temporary and permanent slope inclinations • Seismic design criteria in accordance with the 2022 Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) • Building slab rock thickness and modulus of subgrade reaction • Recommended asphalt concrete (AC) pavement sections and pavement subgrade preparation MDS EXHIBIT58 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 3 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Project Understanding PBS understands that the client is planning improvements to the existing Operations Command Center, which are expected to include an addition on the east side of the existing administration building, additional paving for parking stalls on the south side of the existing parking lot, and a new employee entrance. 2 SITE CONDITIONS Surface Description The site is roughly rectangular and is bordered to the west by Glenwood Boulevard, to the north by the Lane Transit District bus yard, to the east by undeveloped land adjacent to Henderson Avenue, and to the south by East 17th Avenue. The site is currently in use as the Operations Command Center for Lane Transit District. The main building occupies the northwestern quadrant of the site, while the remainder of the site consists of parking areas and drive lanes with associated trees and landscaping. Based on review of available Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) topographic and lidar data, the site is generally flat, with ground surface elevations ranging from a maximum of about 442 feet near the southeast corner of the site to approximately 437 feet near the northwest corner of the site (NAVD88; DOGAMI, 2023). Outside of the site, the ground surface remains relatively flat with gentle slopes to the north toward the Willamette River, approximately 1200 feet from the site. Regional Geology The site is located within the southern extent of the Willamette Valley, a broad alluvial basin within the physiographic province of the Puget-Willamette Lowland, which separates the Cascade Range to the east from the Coast Range to the west and extends from the Puget Sound, Washington, to Eugene, Oregon (Yeats et al., 1996). The Willamette Valley is situated along the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) where oceanic rocks of the Juan de Fuca Plate are subducting beneath the North American Plate, resulting in deformation and uplift of sedimentary and mafic volcanic bedrock in the Coast Range and volcanism in the Cascade Range (DOGAMI, 2023). Northwest-trending faults accommodating clockwise rotation of the North American Plate are found throughout the Puget-Willamette lowland (Brocher et al., 2017; USGS, 2023). The Willamette Valley forms a broad alluvial basin, with the Willamette River draining northward along the axis of the valley. Extensive valley infilling and catastrophic flooding related to the Missoula Floods during the Quaternary has subsequently buried older Oligocene and Eocene sedimentary and volcanic basement rocks and concealed many of the structural features throughout the valley (Wiley, 2006). Willamette River tributaries exiting the Coast Range and Cascade Range have contributed to terrace formations and broad alluvial fans protruding from range fronts into the valley. The Willamette and McKenzie Rivers enter the Willamette Valley east of Eugene and form a confluence just north of the city. These rivers continue to deposit sediments and reworked older sediments throughout much of Eugene. Both rivers are positioned within prominent meander belts readily distinguishable within DOGAMI LiDAR data and meandered freely prior to urban development. The southern Willamette Valley terminates south of Eugene where the Cascade and coastal mountains converge (McClaughry et al., 2010). Along the eastern margin of the valley, Oligocene volcanic rocks of the Cascade mountains begin to emerge from younger valley sediments that are interfingered with alluvial fans and debris fans formed from Cascade detritus. West of the Willamette Valley, accreted Eocene to Oligocene deep marine sedimentary sequences and subaerial volcanism are encountered. MDS EXHIBIT59 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 4 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Structural features of the southern Willamette Valley include the north-northeast oriented Eocene age Harrisburg anticline, numerous northwest- and northeast-trending normal faults, as well as northwest- trending strike slip faults (McClaughry et al., 2010). Similar structures exist outside of the valley and in the surrounding Coast Range and Cascade Range. These structures are responsible for deforming and offsetting basement rocks and are perceived as inactive tectonic features. Local Geology Geologic mapping (McClaughry, et al., 2010) indicates site is underlain by Holocene age alluvium associated with the nearby active channel of the Willamette River, consisting of unconsolidated gravel, sand, silt, and clay, with an estimated thickness extending up to 50 feet bgs. Based on the geologic mapping, older Oligocene to Eocene marine sedimentary rocks underlie the younger Holocene and Quaternary basin fill. These rocks are described as micaceous and arkosic sandstone and siltstone with minor volcaniclastic conglomerates, consisting of the Tyee and Eugene Formations. Subsurface Conditions The site was explored by drilling five borings, designated B-1 through B-5, to depths of 6.5 to 19.5 feet bgs. The drilling was performed by Western States Soil Conservation, Inc., of Hubbard, Oregon, using a truck- mounted CME-75 drill rig and hollow-stem auger drilling techniques. PBS has summarized the subsurface units as follows: ASPHALT/BASE ROCK: Approximately 2 inches of asphalt concrete (AC) pavement overlying approximately 12 inches of base rock was encountered at the ground surface in all five borings. SILT (ML): Brown silt with varying amounts of fine- to coarse-grained sand was encountered in all five borings below the gravel base rock, continuing to the termination depth in B-3 through B-5. The silt was generally soft to stiff, with low to high plasticity and was moist. SAND (SP), SAND with silt (SW-SM): Well-graded to poorly graded sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel was encountered in borings B-1 and B-2 below the silt at approximately 7.5 feet bgs. The sand generally increased in relative density with increasing depth, from medium dense to very dense, and was wet, with colors ranging from brown/gray to orange. The sand ranged from fine to coarse grained and the gravel was fine to coarse and generally subangular to subrounded. GRAVEL with silt (GW-GM): Brown to gray to black, subrounded gravel with silt and fine- to coarse-grained sand was encountered in borings B-1 and B-2 at approximately 16 feet bgs, below the sand layer. The gravel was generally fine to coarse, wet, and dense to very dense. Sandstone BEDROCK (RX): Below the gravel layer in borings B-1 and B-2, very dense, moderately to severely weathered blue sandstone bedrock was encountered at 18 to 19 feet bgs, where both borings were terminated due to auger refusal. Groundwater Static groundwater was encountered at a depth of approximately 7 feet bgs. Based on the site’s proximity to the Willamette River, groundwater is likely hydraulically connected and should be assumed to correlate with water levels in the river, including its seasonal fluctuations. Please note that groundwater levels can fluctuate MDS EXHIBIT60 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 5 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 during the year depending on climate, irrigation season, extended periods of precipitation, drought, and other factors. Infiltration Testing PBS completed cased-hole, falling-head infiltration tests in borings B-4 and B-5 at depths of 5 feet bgs within the 4.25-inch inside diameter, hollow-stem auger used to drill the borings. The auger was filled with water to achieve a minimum 1-foot-high column of water. After a period of saturation, the height of the water column in the auger was then measured initially and at regular, timed intervals. Results of our field infiltration testing are presented in Table 1. Table 1. Infiltration Test Results Test Location Depth (feet bgs) Field Measured Infiltration Rate (in/hr) Soil Classification B-4 5 0 SILT (ML) B-5 5 0 SILT (ML) Soil types can vary significantly over relatively short distances. The infiltration rates noted above are representative of one discrete location and depth. Installation of infiltration systems within the layer the field rate was measured is considered critical to proper performance of the systems. 3 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Geologic and seismic hazards are defined as conditions associated with the geologic and seismic environment that could influence existing and/or proposed improvements. Geologic and seismic hazards that could affect the site’s development are identified below and should be considered during the planning process. Seismicity and Faulting 3.1.1 Historical Seismicity Regional historical seismicity information was acquired from the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) Comprehensive Catalog, hosted by the Northern California Earthquake Data Center (NCEDC), and is presented on Figure 4. These data include earthquakes with magnitudes exceeding M 2.5, within a 150-km radius of the city of Eugene, Oregon, and recorded between 1963 and 2017 (NCEDC, 2017). Magnitudes within the ANSS dataset are recorded as local magnitude, surface-wave magnitude, body-wave magnitude, moment magnitude, and magnitude of completeness. 3.1.2 Seismic Sources Several types of seismic sources exist in the Pacific Northwest, which are outlined below. Volcanic sources beneath the Cascade Range are not considered further in this study. Cascade Range earthquakes rarely exceed about M 5.0 in size and are believed to be far enough removed to not pose a threat to the site (NCEDC, 2017). 3.1.2.1 Crustal Earthquakes and Faults Review of the USGS Quaternary Fault Database indicates the site is not located within close proximity (less than 25 km) to any Quaternary faults or tectonic features (Figure 3; USGS, 2023). 3.1.2.2 Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) – Interface Earthquakes The CSZ represents the boundary between the subducting Juan de Fuca tectonic plate and the overriding North American tectonic plate (Figure 5). Recurrence intervals for subduction zone earthquakes are based on MDS EXHIBIT61 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 6 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 studies of the geologic record, with studies estimating a recurrence interval between 500 to 530 years for a full rupture event, and on the order of 300 years for smaller events exceeding Mw 8.0+ (Goldfinger et al., 2012). Geologic evidence and written records from Japan suggest the most recent earthquake occurred in January 1700. The 1700 earthquake probably ruptured much of the approximate 620-mile (1,000 km) length of the CSZ and was estimated at moment magnitudes of MW 9.0. The horizontal distance from the edge of the CSZ megathrust is located approximately 115 miles (180 km) from Eugene, Oregon. The current US Geological Survey risk-based maximum credible earthquake for CSZ megathrust is MW 9.0±0.2 (USGS, 2008). 3.1.2.3 Intraslab Earthquakes Intraslab earthquakes occur within the subducting slab. They are problematic in the sense that they do not have a surface expression or rupture the ground surface and their seismicity generates deformation along many faults within the slab (Kirby et al., 2002). The CSZ has generated significant intraslab destructive earthquakes including the 2001 MW 6.8 Nisqually earthquake in the Puget lowland. The estimated depth to the subducting Juan de Fuca plate under Eugene is less than 50 km (Blair et al., 2011). Therefore, intraslab earthquakes are a seismic hazard that must be considered. 3.1.2.4 Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading Liquefaction is defined as a decrease in the shear resistance of loose, saturated, cohesionless soil (e.g., sand) or low plasticity silt soils, due to the buildup of excess pore pressures generated during an earthquake. This could result in a temporary transformation of the soil deposit into a viscous fluid. Liquefaction can result in ground settlement, foundation bearing capacity failure, and lateral spreading of ground. Based on a review of the Oregon Statewide Geohazard Viewer (HazVu), the site is shown as having a moderate liquefaction hazard; however, based on the depth of groundwater, soil types, and relative density of site soils encountered below groundwater elevations in our explorations, our current opinion is that the risk of structurally damaging liquefaction settlement and lateral spreading at the site is low. 3.1.3 Seismic Hazards Other site-specific seismic hazards considered include earthquake-induced landslides, fault rupture, seiche and tsunami inundation, and earthquake shaking. Based on the flat surface topography and geology at the site, the risk from landslides and earthquake-induced landslides is absent. Due to the absence of mapped faults within 25 km of the site, the risk of fault rupture at the site is low. Due to the location of the site, the risk of seiche and tsunami inundation are absent. Strong earthquake ground shaking will occur during a code-based seismic event on the CSZ as well as from local faults. Based on our current project understanding, our opinion is that effects of earthquake ground motions can be accounted for by using code-based design procedures and the code-based design response spectrum. Flooding Flooding occurs when local creeks, streams, rivers, and bays are not able to transfer water away from a local area faster than the rate of accumulating water. This can occur on a local or regional scale and is highly variable based upon the configuration of individual watersheds. In the context of the Willamette River, distant upland precipitation or rapid snowmelt can have significant impact far downstream where the weather may be different. Regardless, destruction of land, infrastructure, and personal property can occur when banks, levees, and flood plains are inundated with stormwater or rapid snowmelt. While the site is outside of the 100-year mapped flood zone due to elevation, the entire site is mapped within the 500-year floodplain and will become submerged during such a flood event (FEMA, 1999). MDS EXHIBIT62 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 7 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Geotechnical Design Considerations The subsurface conditions at the site consist of silt, fine- to coarse-grained sand, gravel, and mixtures of those materials. Based on our observations and analyses, conventional foundation support on shallow spread footings is feasible for the proposed new building addition. Excavation with conventional equipment is feasible at the site. The grading and final development plans for the project had not been completed when this report was prepared. Once completed, PBS should be engaged to review the project plans and update our recommendations as necessary. Expansive Soils The soil types encountered in our explorations are not generally susceptible to significant expansion. However, given soils near the ground surface have medium to high plasticity, care should be taken during construction to avoid allowing site soils to dry, which could result in shrinkage and subsequent swelling when rewetted. Specific recommendations for addressing this are included in section 5.1.3 – Dry Weather Conditions in this report. Groundwater Control Due to the rapid response of groundwater to water levels in the adjacent Willamette River, we recommend design groundwater levels be assumed as near the river flood elevations for the 100- and 500-year events. Therefore, we recommend the below-grade portions of the structures be designed as water-tight. Consideration should be given to resisting buoyant uplift and hydrostatic pressure. Cold joints between basement walls (if any) or between walls and footings should include water stops. The perimeter ground surface and hardscaping should be sloped to drain away from all structures. Shallow Foundations Shallow spread footings bearing on native medium stiff or better silt or medium dense or better sand may be used to support loads associated with the proposed development, provided the recommendations in this report are followed. Footings should not be supported on undocumented fill. 4.4.1 Minimum Footing Widths and Design Bearing Pressure Continuous wall and isolated spread footings should be at least 18 and 24 inches wide, respectively. Footings should be sized using a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). This is a net bearing pressure and the weight of the footing and overlying backfill can be disregarded in calculating footing sizes. The recommended allowable bearing pressure applies to the total of dead plus long-term live loads. Allowable bearing pressures may be increased by one-third for seismic and wind loads. Footings will settle in response to column and wall loads. Based on our evaluation of the subsurface conditions and our analysis, we estimate post-construction settlement will be less than 1 inch for the column and perimeter foundation loads. Differential settlement will be on the order of one-half of the total settlement. 4.4.2 Footing Embedment Depths PBS recommends that all footings be founded a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. The footings should be founded below an imaginary line projecting upward at a 1H:1V (horizontal to vertical) slope from the base of any adjacent, parallel utility trenches or deeper excavations. MDS EXHIBIT63 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 8 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 4.4.3 Footing Preparation Excavations for footings should be carefully prepared to a neat and undisturbed state. A representative from PBS should confirm suitable bearing conditions and evaluate all exposed footing subgrades. Observations should also confirm that loose or soft materials have been removed from new footing excavations and concrete slab-on-grade areas. Localized deepening of footing excavations may be required to penetrate loose, wet, or deleterious materials. PBS recommends placing a 4-inch-thick layer of compacted, crushed rock over the footing subgrades to help protect them from disturbance due to foot traffic and the elements. 4.4.4 Lateral Resistance Lateral loads can be resisted by passive earth pressure on the sides of footings and grade beams, and by friction at the base of the footings. A passive earth pressure of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used for footings confined by native soils and new structural fills. The allowable passive pressure has been reduced by a factor of two to account for the large amount of deformation required to mobilize full passive resistance. Adjacent floor slabs, pavements, or the upper 12-inch depth of adjacent unpaved areas should not be considered when calculating passive resistance. For footings supported on native soils or new structural fills, use a coefficient of friction equal to 0.35 when calculating resistance to sliding. These values do not include a factor of safety (FS). Floor Slabs Satisfactory subgrade support for building floor slabs can be obtained from the native silt and sand subgrade prepared in accordance with our recommendations presented in the Site Preparation, Wet/Freezing Weather and Wet Soil Conditions, and Select Granular Fill sections of this report. A minimum 6-inch-thick layer of imported granular material should be placed and compacted over the prepared subgrade. Thicker aggregate sections may be necessary where undocumented fill is present, soft/loose soils are present at subgrade elevation, and/or during wet conditions. Imported granular material should be composed of crushed rock or crushed gravel that is relatively well graded between coarse and fine, contains no deleterious materials, has a maximum particle size of 1 inch, and has less than 5% by dry weight passing the US Standard No. 200 Sieve. Floor slabs supported on a subgrade and base course prepared in accordance with the preceding recommendations may be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 120 pounds per cubic inch (pci). Retaining Walls The proposed new addition and site improvements may include retaining walls of less than 5 feet. The following recommendations are based on the assumption of flat conditions in front of and behind the wall and fully drained backfill. For unrestrained walls allowed to rotate at least 0.005H about the base, where H is the height of the wall, we recommend using an active earth pressure of 34 psf. Where walls are constrained against rotation, we recommend using an at-rest earth pressure equal to 58 psf. We recommend any retaining walls founded on native soil or compacted structural fill be provided with adequate drainage and backfilled with clean, angular, crushed rock fill, in accordance with the recommendations provided in section 5.3.6. Lateral loads can also be resisted by a passive resistance of 250 psf acting against retaining walls and foundations, and by friction acting on the base of spread footings or mats using a friction coefficient of 0.35. Per section 1803.5.12 of the 2018 IBC, the determination of dynamic seismic lateral earth pressures on site retaining walls less than 6 feet tall is not required. MDS EXHIBIT64 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 9 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 4.6.1 Drainage Recommended lateral earth pressures assume that walls are fully drained and no hydrostatic pressures develop. For any cantilevered concrete walls, a minimum 2-foot-wide zone of free-draining material meeting the requirements of ODOT SS 00430.11 – Granular Drain Backfill Material should be installed immediately behind the wall. A 4-inch diameter, perforated drain pipe should be installed at the base of the drain rock and routed to a suitable discharge point approved by the civil engineer. Seismic Design Considerations 4.7.1 Code-Based Seismic Design Parameters The current seismic design criteria for this project are based on the 2022 Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC). ReMi testing indicated the measured shear wave velocity profile is representative of Site Class B. However, Site Class B should only be used for foundations supported on rock or soil within 10 feet of the rock interface. Given the bedrock at the site is located at depths of 18 to 19 feet bgs, and based on standard penetration test (SPT) N-values (standard penetration resistance) in the overlying soils, Site Class C is appropriate for use in design. The seismic design criteria, in accordance with the 2022 OSSC, are summarized in Table 2. Table 2. 2022 OSSC Seismic Design Parameters Parameter Short Period 1 Second Maximum Credible Earthquake Spectral Acceleration Ss = 0.68 g S1 = 0.39 g Site Class C Site Coefficient Fa = 1.23 Fv = 1.5 Adjusted Spectral Acceleration SMS = 0.84 g SM1 = 0.59 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters SDS = 0.56 g SD1 = 0.39 g MCEG Peak Ground Acceleration PGA = 0.32 g Site Amplification Factor at PGA FPGA = 1.2 Site Modified Peak Ground Acceleration PGAM = 0.39 g g= Acceleration due to gravity Temporary and Permanent Slopes All temporary cut slopes should be excavated with a smooth-bucket excavator, with the slope surface repaired if disturbed. In addition, upslope surface runoff should be rerouted to not run down the face of the slopes. Equipment should not be allowed to induce vibration or infiltrate water above the slopes, and no surcharges are allowed within 25 feet of the slope crest. Permanent cut and fill slopes up to 10 feet high can be inclined at 2H:1V in medium dense or better silty sand and sand or compacted structural fill. If slow seepage is present, use of a rock blanket or a suitably revegetated, reinforced erosion control blanket may be required. PBS should be consulted if seepage is present; additional erosion control measures, such as additional drainage elements, and/or flatter slopes, may also be required. Exposed soils that are soft or loose may also require these measures. Fill slopes should be over-built and cut back into compacted structural fill at the design inclination using a smooth-bucket excavator. Erosion control is critical to maintaining slopes. MDS EXHIBIT65 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 10 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Ground Moisture 4.9.1 General The perimeter ground surface and hard-scape should be sloped to drain away from all structures and away from adjacent slopes. Gutters should be tight-lined to a suitable discharge and maintained as free-flowing. All crawl spaces should be adequately ventilated and sloped to drain to a suitable, exterior discharge. 4.9.2 Perimeter Footing Drains Due to the relatively low permeability of site soils and the potential for perched groundwater at the site, we recommend perimeter foundation drains be installed around the proposed addition. The foundation subdrainage system should include a minimum 4-inch diameter perforated pipe in a drain rock envelope. A non-woven geotextile filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent, should be used to completely wrap the drain rock envelope, separating it from the native soil and footing backfill materials. The invert of the perimeter drain lines should be placed approximately at the bottom of footing elevation. Also, the subdrainage system should be sealed at the ground surface. The perforated subdrainage pipe should be laid to drain by gravity into a non-perforated solid pipe and finally connected to the site drainage stem at a suitable location. Water from downspouts and surface water should be independently collected and routed to a storm sewer or other positive outlet. This water must not be allowed to enter the bearing soils. 4.9.3 Vapor Flow Retarder A continuous, impervious barrier must be installed over the ground surface in the crawl space and under slabs of all structures. Barriers should be installed per the manufacturer’s recommendations. Pavement Design The provided pavement recommendations were developed using our experience for similar types of parking, as well as the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) design methods, and references the associated Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) specifications for construction. Our evaluation considered a maximum of two trucks per day for a 20-year design life. The minimum recommended pavement section thicknesses are provided in Table 3. Depending on weather conditions at the time of construction, a thicker aggregate base course section could be required to support construction traffic during preparation and placement of the pavement section. Table 3. Minimum AC Pavement Sections Traffic Loading AC (inches) Base Course (inches) Subgrade Pull-in Car Parking Only 2.5 9 Firm subgrade as verified by PBS personnel* Drive Lanes and Access Roads for Passenger Cars 3 9 * Subgrade must pass proofroll The asphalt cement binder should be selected following ODOT SS 00744.11 – Asphalt Cement and Additives. The AC should consist of ½-inch hot mix asphalt concrete (HMAC) with a maximum lift thickness of 3 inches. The AC should conform to ODOT SS 00744.13 and 00744.14 and be compacted to 91% of the maximum theoretical density (Rice value) of the mix, as determined in accordance with ASTM D2041. MDS EXHIBIT66 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 11 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Heavy construction traffic on new pavements or partial pavement sections (such as base course over the prepared subgrade) will likely exceed the design loads and could potentially damage or shorten the pavement life; therefore, we recommend construction traffic not be allowed on new pavements, or that the contractor take appropriate precautions to protect the subgrade and pavement during construction. If construction traffic is to be allowed on newly constructed road sections, an allowance for this additional traffic will need to be made in the design pavement section. 5 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS Site Preparation Construction of the proposed additions will involve clearing and grubbing of the existing vegetation or demolition of possible existing structures and old pavements. In vegetated areas, site stripping should include removing topsoil, roots, and other deleterious materials to a minimum depth of 12 inches bgs. Demolition should include removing existing pavement, utilities, etc., throughout the proposed new development. Underground utility lines or other abandoned structural elements should also be removed. The voids resulting from removal of any foundations or loose soil in utility lines should be backfilled with compacted structural fill. The base of these excavations should be excavated to firm native subgrade before filling, with sides sloped at a minimum of 1H:1V to allow for uniform compaction. Materials generated during demolition should be transported off site or stockpiled in areas designated by the owner’s representative. 5.1.1 Proofrolling/Subgrade Verification Following site preparation and prior to placing aggregate base over shallow foundation, floor slab, and pavement subgrades, the exposed subgrade should be evaluated either by proofrolling or another method of subgrade verification. The subgrade should be proofrolled with a fully loaded dump truck or similar heavy, rubber-tire construction equipment to identify unsuitable areas. If evaluation of the subgrades occurs during wet conditions, or if proofrolling the subgrades will result in disturbance, they should be evaluated by PBS using a steel foundation probe. We recommend that PBS be retained to observe the proofrolling and perform the subgrade verifications. Unsuitable areas identified during the field evaluation should be compacted to a firm condition or be excavated and replaced with structural fill. 5.1.2 Wet/Freezing Weather and Wet Soil Conditions Due to the presence of fine-grained silt and sands in the near-surface materials at the site, construction equipment may have difficulty operating on the near-surface soils when the moisture content of the surface soil is more than a few percentage points above the optimum moisture required for compaction. Soils disturbed during site preparation activities, or unsuitable areas identified during proofrolling or probing, should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. Site earthwork and subgrade preparation should not be completed during freezing conditions, except for mass excavation to the subgrade design elevations. Protection of the subgrade is the responsibility of the contractor. Construction of granular haul roads to the project site entrance may help reduce further damage to the pavement and disturbance of site soils. The actual thickness of haul roads and staging areas should be based on the contractors’ approach to site development, and the amount and type of construction traffic. The imported granular material should be placed in one lift over the prepared undisturbed subgrade and compacted using a smooth-drum, non-vibratory roller. A geotextile fabric should be used to separate the subgrade from the imported granular material in areas of repeated construction traffic. The geotextile should meet the specifications of ODOT SS Section 02320.10 and MDS EXHIBIT67 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 12 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 SS 02320.20, Table 02320-4 for soil separation. The geotextile should be installed in conformance with ODOT SS Section 00350 – Geosynthetic Installation. 5.1.3 Dry Weather Conditions Exposed clay and silt soils should be covered within 4 hours of exposure by a minimum of 4 inches of crushed rock or plastic sheeting during the dry season. Exposure of these materials should be coordinated with the geotechnical engineer so that the subgrade suitability can be evaluated prior to being covered. Excavation The near-surface soils at the site can be excavated with conventional earthwork equipment. Sloughing and caving should be anticipated. All excavations should be made in accordance with applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and state regulations. The contractor is solely responsible for adherence to the OSHA requirements. Trench cuts should stand relatively vertical to a depth of approximately 4 feet bgs, provided no groundwater seepage is present in the trench walls. Open excavation techniques may be used provided the excavation is configured in accordance with the OSHA requirements, groundwater seepage is not present, and with the understanding that some sloughing may occur. Trenches/excavations should be flattened if sloughing occurs or seepage is present. Use of a trench shield or other approved temporary shoring is recommended if vertical walls are desired for cuts deeper than 4 feet bgs. If dewatering is used, we recommend that the type and design of the dewatering system be the responsibility of the contractor, who is in the best position to choose systems that fit the overall plan of operation. Structural Fill The extent of site grading is currently unknown; however, PBS estimates that cuts and fills will be on the order of up to 2 feet to raise or lower the grades within the proposed site. Structural fill should be placed over subgrade that has been prepared in conformance with the Site Preparation and Wet/Freezing Weather and Wet Soil Conditions sections of this report. Structural fill material should consist of relatively well-graded soil, or an approved rock product that is free of organic material and debris, and contains particles not greater than 3 inches nominal dimension. The suitability of soil for use as compacted structural fill will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil when it is placed. As the amount of fines (material finer than the US Standard No. 200 Sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and compaction becomes more difficult to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5% fines cannot consistently be compacted to a dense, non-yielding condition when the water content is significantly greater (or significantly less) than optimum. If fill and excavated material will be placed on slopes steeper than 5H:1V, these must be keyed/benched into the existing slopes and installed in horizontal lifts. Vertical steps between benches should be approximately 2 feet. 5.3.1 On-Site Soil The on-site silt is not likely suitable for reuse as structural fill due to its high moisture and plasticity. On-site sand and gravel soils encountered in our explorations are generally suitable for placement as structural fill for mass grading to raise the site during dry weather when moisture contents can be maintained by air drying and/or addition of water. The fine-grained fraction of the site soils are moisture sensitive, and during wet weather, may become unworkable because of excess moisture content. In order to reduce moisture content, some aerating and drying of fine-grained soils may be required. The material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of approximately 8 inches and compacted to at least 92% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557 (modified proctor). MDS EXHIBIT68 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 13 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 5.3.2 Borrow Material Borrow material for general structural fill construction should meet the requirements set forth in ODOT SS 00330.12 – Borrow Material. When used as structural fill, borrow material should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of approximately 8 inches and compacted to not less than 92% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. 5.3.3 Select Granular Fill Selected granular backfill used during periods of wet weather for structural fill construction should meet the specifications provided in ODOT SS 00330.14 – Selected Granular Backfill. The imported granular material should be uniformly moisture conditioned to within about 2% of the optimum moisture content and compacted in relatively thin lifts using suitable mechanical compaction equipment. Selected granular backfill should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 8 to 12 inches and be compacted to not less than 95% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. 5.3.4 Crushed Aggregate Base Crushed aggregate base course below floor slabs, spread footings, and asphalt concrete pavements should be clean crushed rock or crushed gravel that contains no deleterious materials and meets the specifications provided in ODOT SS 02630.10 – Dense-Graded Aggregate, and has less than 5% by dry weight passing the US Standard No. 200 Sieve. The crushed aggregate base course should be placed in lifts with a maximum uncompacted thickness of 8 to 12 inches and be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. 5.3.5 Utility Trench Backfill Pipe bedding placed to uniformly support the barrel of pipe should meet specifications provided in ODOT SS 00405.12 – Bedding. The pipe zone that extends from the top of the bedding to at least 8 inches above utility lines should consist of material prescribed by ODOT SS 00405.13 – Pipe Zone Material. The pipe zone material should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557, or as required by the pipe manufacturer. Under pavements, paths, slabs, or beneath building pads, the remainder of the trench backfill should consist of well-graded granular material with less than 10% by dry weight passing the US Standard No. 200 Sieve, and should meet standards prescribed by ODOT SS 00405.14 – Trench Backfill, Class B or D. This material should be compacted to at least 92% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557 or as required by the pipe manufacturer. The upper 2 feet of the trench backfill should be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Controlled low-strength material (CLSM), ODOT SS 00405.14 – Trench Backfill, Class E, can be used as an alternative. Outside of structural improvement areas (e.g., pavements, sidewalks, or building pads), trench material placed above the pipe zone may consist of general structural fill materials that are free of organics and meet ODOT SS 00405.14 – Trench Backfill, Class A. This general trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557, or as required by the pipe manufacturer or local jurisdictions. 5.3.6 Retaining Wall Backfill Backfill material placed behind retaining walls and extending a horizontal distance of 0.5H should consist of granular material meeting ODOT SS 00510.12 – Granular Wall Backfill, which recommends ODOT SS 02630.11 – Open-Graded Aggregate. We recommend the granular wall backfill be separated from general fill, native soil, MDS EXHIBIT69 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 14 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 and/or topsoil using a geotextile fabric that meets the requirements provided in ODOT SS 02320.10 – Geosynthetics, Acceptance, and ODOT SS 02320.20 – Geotextile Property Values, Table 02320-4 for separation geotextile. The geotextile should be installed in conformance with ODOT SS Section 00350 – Geosynthetic Installation. The wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 92% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. However, backfill located within a horizontal distance of 3 feet from the retaining walls should only be compacted to approximately 90% of the maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM D1557. Backfill placed within 3 feet of the wall should be compacted in lifts less than 6 inches thick using hand-operated tamping equipment (such as jumping jack or vibratory plate compactors). 5.3.7 Stabilization Material Stabilization rock should consist of pit or quarry run rock that is well-graded, angular, crushed rock consisting of 4-inch-minus material with less than 5% passing the US Standard No. 4 Sieve. The material should be free of organic matter and other deleterious material. ODOT SS 00330.16 – Stone Embankment Material can be used as a general specification for this material with the stipulation of limiting the maximum size to 4 inches. 6 ADDITIONAL SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS In most cases, other services beyond completion of a final geotechnical engineering report are necessary or desirable to complete the project. Occasionally, conditions or circumstances arise that require additional work that was not anticipated when the geotechnical report was written. PBS offers a range of environmental, geological, geotechnical, and construction services to suit the varying needs of our clients. PBS should be retained to review the plans and specifications for this project before they are finalized. Such a review allows us to verify that our recommendations and concerns have been adequately addressed in the design. Satisfactory earthwork performance depends on the quality of construction. Sufficient observation of the contractor's activities is a key part of determining that the work is completed in accordance with the construction drawings and specifications. We recommend that PBS be retained to observe general excavation, stripping, fill placement, footing subgrades, and/or pile installation. Subsurface conditions observed during construction should be compared with those encountered during the subsurface explorations. Recognition of changed conditions requires experience; therefore, qualified personnel should visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect whether subsurface conditions change significantly from those anticipated. 7 LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the addressee, and their architects and engineers, for aiding in the design and construction of the proposed development and is not to be relied upon by other parties. It is not to be photographed, photocopied, or similarly reproduced, in total or in part, without express written consent of the client and PBS. It is the addressee's responsibility to provide this report to the appropriate design professionals, building officials, and contractors to ensure correct implementation of the recommendations. The opinions, comments, and conclusions presented in this report are based upon information derived from our literature review, field explorations, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses. It is possible that soil, rock, or groundwater conditions could vary between or beyond the points explored. If soil, rock, or groundwater conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those described herein, the client MDS EXHIBIT70 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 15 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 is responsible for ensuring that PBS is notified immediately so that we may reevaluate the recommendations of this report. Unanticipated fill, soil and rock conditions, and seasonal soil moisture and groundwater variations are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by merely taking soil samples or completing explorations such as soil borings. Such variations may result in changes to our recommendations and may require additional funds for expenses to attain a properly constructed project; therefore, we recommend a contingency fund to accommodate such potential extra costs. The scope of work for this subsurface exploration and geotechnical report did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous substances in the soil, surface water, or groundwater at this site. If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and the start of work at the site, if conditions have changed due to natural causes or construction operations at or adjacent to the site, or if the basic project scheme is significantly modified from that assumed, this report should be reviewed to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations presented herein. Land use, site conditions (both on and off site), or other factors may change over time and could materially affect our findings; therefore, this report should not be relied upon after three years from its issue, or in the event that the site conditions change. MDS EXHIBIT71 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 16 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 8 REFERENCES ASCE. (2016). Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7-16). American Society of Civil Engineers. Blair, J. L., McCrory, P. A., Oppenheimer, D. H., and Waldhauser, F. (2011, revised 2013). A Geo-referenced 3D model of the Juan de Fuca Slab and associated seismicity: US Geological Survey Data Series 633, v.1.2, https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/633/. Brocher, T. M., Wells, R. E., Lamb, A. P., and Weaver, C. S. (2017). Evidence for distributed clockwise rotation of the crust in the northwestern United States from fault geometries and focal mechanisms. Tectonics, Vol. 36, No.5, pp. 787-818. City of Eugene. (2014). Stormwater Management Manual. Accessed from City of Eugene website: https://www.eugene-or.gov/477/Stormwater-Management-Manual. DOGAMI. (2023). [Interactive Map]. DOGAMI Lidar Viewer. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Oregon Lidar Consortium. https://gis.dogami.oregon.gov/maps/lidarviewer/. Accessed May 2023. DOGAMI. (2023). [Interactive Map]. Oregon HazVu: Statewide Geohazards Viewer. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Earthquake Liquefaction. https://gis.dogami.oregon.gov/maps/hazvu/. Accessed May 2023. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (1999). Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Lane County, Oregon and Incorporated Areas. Panel 1137 of 2972. Map Number 41039C1137 F. Goldfinger, C., Nelson, C. H., Morey, A. E. Johnson, J. E., Patton, J. R., Karabanov, E., Gutiérrez-Pastor, J., Eriksson, A. T., Gràcia, E., Dunhill, G., Enkin, R. J., Dallimore, A. and Vallier, T. (2012). Turbidite Event History—Methods and Implications for Holocene Paleoseismicity of the Cascadia Subduction Zone. US Geological Survey. Professional Paper 1661-F. IBC. (2018). International Building Code. Country Club Hills, IL: International Code Council, Inc. Kirby, S., Wang, K., and Dunlop, S. (2002). The Cascadia Subduction Zone and Related Subduction Systems – Seismic Structure, Intraslab Earthquakes and Processes, and Earthquake Hazards. US Geological Survey Open File Report 02-328 and Geological Survey of Canada Open File 4350. McClaughry, J. D., Wiley, T. J., Ferns, M. L., and Madin, I. P. (2010). Digital Geologic Map of the Southern Willamette Valley, Benton, Lane, Linn, Marion, and Polk Counties, Oregon. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOMAGI), open-file report O-10-03. NCEDC. (2017). Northern California Earthquake Data Center. UC Berkeley Seismological Laboratory. Dataset. doi:10.7932/NCEDC. ODOT SS. (2021). Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction. Salem, Oregon. Oregon Department of Transportation. MDS EXHIBIT72 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon 17 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD). (2023). Well Log Records, accessed May 2023, from OWRD website: http://apps.wrd.state.or.us/apps/gw/well_log/. OSSC. (2022). Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC). Based on IBC. (2021 International Building Code). Country Club Hills, IL International Code Council, Inc. US Geological Survey (USGS). (2008). Earthquake hazards program: Conterminous states probabilistic maps and data. https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/sim3325. US Geological Survey (USGS). (2023). Quaternary fault and fold database for the United States, accessed May 2023 from website: http//earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/. Wiley, T. J. (2006). Preliminary Geologic Map of the Albany Quadrangle, Linn, Marion, and Benton Counties, Oregon. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOMAGI), open -file report O-06-26. Yeats, R. S., Graven, E. P., Werner, K. S., Goldfinger, Chris, and Popowski, T. A. (1996). Tectonics of the Willamette Valley, Oregon, in Rogers, A. M., Walsh, T. J., Kockelman, W. J., and Priest, G. R., eds., Assessing earthquake hazards and reducing risk in the Pacific Northwest: US Geological Survey Professional Paper 1650, v. 1, p. 183–222. MDS EXHIBIT73 06/05/2024 Geotechnical-Engineering Report Important Information about This Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them. The following information is provided to help. The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) has prepared this advisory to help you – assumedly a client representative – interpret and apply this geotechnical-engineering report as effectively as possible. In that way, you can benefit from a lowered exposure to problems associated with subsurface conditions at project sites and development of them that, for decades, have been a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. If you have questions or want more information about any of the issues discussed herein, contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer. Active engagement in GBA exposes geotechnical engineers to a wide array of risk-confrontation techniques that can be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Understand the Geotechnical-Engineering Services Provided for this Report Geotechnical-engineering services typically include the planning, collection, interpretation, and analysis of exploratory data from widely spaced borings and/or test pits. Field data are combined with results from laboratory tests of soil and rock samples obtained from field exploration (if applicable), observations made during site reconnaissance, and historical information to form one or more models of the expected subsurface conditions beneath the site. Local geology and alterations of the site surface and subsurface by previous and proposed construction are also important considerations. Geotechnical engineers apply their engineering training, experience, and judgment to adapt the requirements of the prospective project to the subsurface model(s). Estimates are made of the subsurface conditions that will likely be exposed during construction as well as the expected performance of foundations and other structures being planned and/or affected by construction activities. The culmination of these geotechnical-engineering services is typically a geotechnical-engineering report providing the data obtained, a discussion of the subsurface model(s), the engineering and geologic engineering assessments and analyses made, and the recommendations developed to satisfy the given requirements of the project. These reports may be titled investigations, explorations, studies, assessments, or evaluations. Regardless of the title used, the geotechnical-engineering report is an engineering interpretation of the subsurface conditions within the context of the project and does not represent a close examination, systematic inquiry, or thorough investigation of all site and subsurface conditions. Geotechnical-Engineering Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects, and At Specific Times Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs, goals, and risk management preferences of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil-works constructor or even a different civil engineer. Because each geotechnical-engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. Likewise, geotechnical-engineering services are performed for a specific project and purpose. For example, it is unlikely that a geotechnical- engineering study for a refrigerated warehouse will be the same as one prepared for a parking garage; and a few borings drilled during a preliminary study to evaluate site feasibility will not be adequate to develop geotechnical design recommendations for the project. Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it: • for a different client; • for a different project or purpose; • for a different site (that may or may not include all or a portion of the original site); or • before important events occurred at the site or adjacent to it; e.g., man-made events like construction or environmental remediation, or natural events like floods, droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations. Note, too, the reliability of a geotechnical-engineering report can be affected by the passage of time, because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified codes, standards, or regulations; or new techniques or tools. If you are the least bit uncertain about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical engineer before applying the recommendations in it. A minor amount of additional testing or analysis after the passage of time – if any is required at all – could prevent major problems. Read this Report in Full Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical- engineering report did not read the report in its entirety. Do not rely on an executive summary. Do not read selective elements only. Read and refer to the report in full. You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer About Change Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project-specific factors when developing the scope of study behind this report and developing the confirmation-dependent recommendations the report conveys. Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include those that affect: • the site’s size or shape; • the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, function or weight of the proposed structure and the desired performance criteria; • the composition of the design team; or • project ownership. As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project or site changes – even minor ones – and request an assessment of their impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept MDS EXHIBIT74 06/05/2024 responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise would have considered. Most of the “Findings” Related in This Report Are Professional Opinions Before construction begins, geotechnical engineers explore a site’s subsurface using various sampling and testing procedures. Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at those specific locations where sampling and testing is performed. The data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgement to form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ – maybe significantly – from those indicated in this report. Confront that risk by retaining your geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team through project completion to obtain informed guidance quickly, whenever needed. This Report’s Recommendations Are Confirmation-Dependent The recommendations included in this report – including any options or alternatives – are confirmation-dependent. In other words, they are not final, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied heavily on judgement and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface conditions exposed during construction. If through observation your geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist actually do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming no other changes have occurred. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation-dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform construction observation. This Report Could Be Misinterpreted Other design professionals’ misinterpretation of geotechnical- engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a continuing member of the design team, to: • confer with other design-team members; • help develop specifications; • review pertinent elements of other design professionals’ plans and specifications; and • be available whenever geotechnical-engineering guidance is needed. You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this report. Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction- phase observations. Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift unanticipated-subsurface-conditions liability to constructors by limiting the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent the costly, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note conspicuously that you’ve included the material for information purposes only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note that “informational purposes” means constructors have no right to rely on the interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in the report. Be certain that constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements, including options selected from the report, only from the design drawings and specifications. Remind constructors that they may perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction conferences can also be valuable in this respect. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. This happens in part because soil and rock on project sites are typically heterogeneous and not manufactured materials with well-defined engineering properties like steel and concrete. That lack of understanding has nurtured unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk, geotechnical engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled “limitations,” many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers’ responsibilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The personnel, equipment, and techniques used to perform an environmental study – e.g., a “phase-one” or “phase-two” environmental site assessment – differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical-engineering study. For that reason, a geotechnical-engineering report does not usually provide environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project failures. If you have not obtained your own environmental information about the project site, ask your geotechnical consultant for a recommendation on how to find environmental risk-management guidance. Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture Infiltration and Mold While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater, water infiltration, or similar issues in this report, the engineer’s services were not designed, conducted, or intended to prevent migration of moisture – including water vapor – from the soil through building slabs and walls and into the building interior, where it can cause mold growth and material-performance deficiencies. Accordingly, proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer’s recommendations will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration. Confront the risk of moisture infiltration by including building-envelope or mold specialists on the design team. Geotechnical engineers are not building-envelope or mold specialists. Copyright 2019 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with GBA’s specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report of any kind. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation. Telephone: 301/565-2733 e-mail: info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org MDS EXHIBIT75 06/05/2024 Figures MDS EXHIBIT76 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT77 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT78 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT79 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT80 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT81 06/05/2024 Appendix A Field Explorations MDS EXHIBIT82 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon A-1 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Appendix A: Field Explorations A1 GENERAL PBS explored subsurface conditions at the project site by advancing five borings to depths of up to approximately 19.5 feet bgs on May 24, 2023. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on Figure 2, Site Plan. The procedures used to advance the borings, collect samples, and other field techniques are described in detail in the following paragraphs. Unless otherwise noted, all soil sampling and classification procedures followed engineering practices in general accordance with relevant ASTM procedures. “General accordance” means that certain local drilling/excavation and descriptive practices and methodologies have been followed. A2 BORINGS A2.1 Drilling Borings were advanced using a truck-mounted CME-75 drill rig provided and operated by Western States Soil Conservation, Inc., of Hubbard, Oregon, using hollow-stem auger drilling techniques. The borings were observed by a member of the PBS geotechnical staff, who maintained a detailed log of the subsurface conditions and materials encountered during the course of the work. A2.2 Sampling Disturbed soil samples were taken in the borings at selected depth intervals. The samples were obtained using a standard 2-inch outside diameter, split-spoon sampler following procedures prescribed for the standard penetration test (SPT). Using the SPT, the sampler is driven 18 inches into the soil using a 140-pound hammer dropped 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches is defined as the standard penetration resistance (N-value). The N-value provides a measure of the relative density of granular soils such as sands and gravels, and the consistency of cohesive soils such as clays and plastic silts. The disturbed soil samples were examined by a member of the PBS geotechnical staff and then sealed in plastic bags for further examination and physical testing in our laboratory. A2.3 Boring Logs The boring logs show the various types of materials that were encountered in the borings and the depths where the materials and/or characteristics of these materials changed, although the changes may be gradual. Where material types and descriptions changed between samples, the contacts were interpreted. The types of samples taken during drilling, along with their sample identification number, are shown to the right of the classification of materials. The N-values and natural water (moisture) contents are shown farther to the right. A3 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Initially, samples were classified visually in the field. Consistency, color, relative moisture, degree of plasticity, and other distinguishing characteristics of the soil samples were noted. Afterward, the samples were reexamined in the PBS laboratory, various standard classification tests were conducted, and the field classifications were modified where necessary. The terminology used in the soil classifications and other modifiers are defined in Table A-1, Terminology Used to Describe Soil. MDS EXHIBIT83 06/05/2024 Table A-1 Terminology Used to Describe Soil 1 of 2 Soil Descriptions Soils exist in mixtures with varying proportions of components. The predominant soil, i.e., greater than 50 percent based on total dry weight, is the primary soil type and is capitalized in our log descriptions (SAND, GRAVEL, SILT, or CLAY). Smaller percentages of other constituents in the soil mixture are indicated by use of modifier words in general accordance with the ASTM D2488-06 Visual-Manual Procedure. “General Accordance” means that certain local and common descriptive practices may have been followed. In accordance with ASTM D2488-06, group symbols (such as GP or CH) are applied on the portion of soil passing the 3-inch (75mm) sieve based on visual examination. The following describes the use of soil names and modifying terms used to describe fine- and coarse-grained soils. Fine-Grained Soils (50% or greater fines passing 0.075 mm, No. 200 sieve) The primary soil type, i.e., SILT or CLAY is designated through visual-manual procedures to evaluate soil toughness, dilatency, dry strength, and plasticity. The following outlines the terminology used to describe fine-grained soils, and varies from ASTM D2488 terminology in the use of some common terms. Primary soil NAME, Symbols, and Adjectives Plasticity Description Plasticity Index (PI) SILT (ML & MH) CLAY (CL & CH) ORGANIC SOIL (OL & OH) SILT Organic SILT Non-plastic 0 – 3 SILT Organic SILT Low plasticity 4 – 10 SILT/Elastic SILT Lean CLAY Organic SILT/ Organic CLAY Medium Plasticity 10 – 20 Elastic SILT Lean/Fat CLAY Organic CLAY High Plasticity 20 – 40 Elastic SILT Fat CLAY Organic CLAY Very Plastic >40 Modifying terms describing secondary constituents, estimated to 5 percent increments, are applied as follows: Description % Composition With Sand % Sand ≥ % Gravel 15% to 25% plus No. 200 With Gravel % Sand < % Gravel Sandy % Sand ≥ % Gravel ≤30% to 50% plus No. 200 Gravelly % Sand < % Gravel Borderline Symbols, for example CH/MH, are used when soils are not distinctly in one category or when variable soil units contain more than one soil type. Dual Symbols, for example CL-ML, are used when two symbols are required in accordance with ASTM D2488. Soil Consistency terms are applied to fine-grained, plastic soils (i.e., PI > 7). Descriptive terms are based on direct measure or correlation to the Standard Penetration Test N-value as determined by ASTM D1586-84, as follows. SILT soils with low to non-plastic behavior (i.e., PI < 7) may be classified using relative density. Consistency Term SPT N-value Unconfined Compressive Strength tsf kPa Very soft Less than 2 Less than 0.25 Less than 24 Soft 2 – 4 0.25 – 0.5 24 – 48 Medium stiff 5 – 8 0.5 – 1.0 48 – 96 Stiff 9 – 15 1.0 – 2.0 96 – 192 Very stiff 16 – 30 2.0 – 4.0 192 – 383 Hard Over 30 Over 4.0 Over 383 MDS EXHIBIT84 06/05/2024 Table A-1 Terminology Used to Describe Soil 2 of 2 Soil Descriptions Coarse - Grained Soils (less than 50% fines) Coarse-grained soil descriptions, i.e., SAND or GRAVEL, are based on the portion of materials passing a 3-inch (75mm) sieve. Coarse-grained soil group symbols are applied in accordance with ASTM D2488-06 based on the degree of grading, or distribution of grain sizes of the soil. For example, well-graded sand containing a wide range of grain sizes is designated SW; poorly graded gravel, GP, contains high percentages of only certain grain sizes. Terms applied to grain sizes follow. Material NAME Particle Diameter Inches Millimeters SAND (SW or SP) 0.003 – 0.19 0.075 – 4.8 GRAVEL (GW or GP) 0.19 – 3 4.8 – 75 Additional Constituents : Cobble 3 – 12 75 – 300 Boulder 12 – 120 300 – 3050 The primary soil type is capitalized, and the fines content in the soil are described as indicated by the following examples. Percentages are based on estimating amounts of fines, sand, and gravel to the nearest 5 percent. Other soil mixtures will have similar descriptive names. Example: Coarse-Grained Soil Descriptions with Fines >5% to < 15% fines (Dual Symbols) ≥15% to < 50% fines Well graded GRAVEL with silt: GW-GM Silty GRAVEL: GM Poorly graded SAND with clay: SP-SC Silty SAND: SM Additional descriptive terminology applied to coarse-grained soils follow. Example: Coarse-Grained Soil Descriptions with Other Coarse-Grained Constituents Coarse-Grained Soil Containing Secondary Constituents With sand or with gravel ≥ 15% sand or gravel With cobbles; with boulders Any amount of cobbles or boulders. Cobble and boulder deposits may include a description of the matrix soils, as defined above. Relative Density terms are applied to granular, non-plastic soils based on direct measure or correlation to the Standard Penetration Test N-value as determined by ASTM D1586-84. Relative Density Term SPT N-value Very loose 0 – 4 Loose 5 – 10 Medium dense 11 – 30 Dense 31 – 50 Very dense > 50 MDS EXHIBIT85 06/05/2024 SAMPLING DESCRIPTIONS Table A-2 Key To Test Pit and Boring Log Symbols SPT Drive Sampler Standard Penetration Test ASTM D 1586Shelby Tube Push Sampler ASTM D 1587Specialized Drive Samplers(Details Noted on Logs)Specialized Drill or Push Sampler (Details Noted on Logs)Grab SampleRock Coring IntervalScreen (Water or Air Sampling) Water Level During Drilling/ExcavationWater Level After Drilling/ExcavationLOG GRAPHICS PP Pocket Penetrometer HYD Hydrometer Gradation TOR Torvane SIEV Sieve Gradation DCP DS Direct Shear ATT Atterberg Limits DD Dry Density PL Plasticity Limit CBR California Bearing Ratio LL Liquid Limit RES Resilient Modulus PI Plasticity Index VS Vane Shear P200 Percent Passing US Standard No. 200 Sieve bgs Below ground surface OC Organic Content MSL Mean Sea Level CON Consolidation HCL Hydrochloric Acid UC Unconfined Compressive Strength Details of soil and rock classification systems are available on request.Rev. 02/2017 Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Geotechnical Testing Acronym Explanations Lithology Boundary: separates distinct units (i.e., Fill, Alluvium, Bedrock) at approximate depths inciated Sampler Type Sample Recovery Sample Interval Instrumentation Detail Sampling Symbols Soil and Rock Well Pipe Piezometer Piezometer Ground Surface Well Cap Bottom of Hole Soil or Rock Types Well Seal Well Screen Soil-type or Material-type Change Boundary: separates soil and material changes within the same lithographic unit at approximate depth indicated MDS EXHIBIT86 06/05/2024 0.0 0.2 1.2 7.5 10.0 14.5 15.5 18.0 19.0 05/24/23 P200 = 7% Rig chatter; hard drilling ASPHALT (2 inches) BASE ROCK (12 inches) Medium stiff, brown SILT (ML) with sand; low plasticity; fine to coarse sand; moist increased sand Medium dense, brown, well-graded SAND (SW-SM) with silt and gravel; non-plastic; fine to coarse sand; fine to coarse, subrounded gravel; wet Dense, brown with orange-gray mottling, well-graded GRAVEL (GW-GM) with silt and sand; non-plastic; fine to coarse sand; fine to coarse, subrounded gravel; wet Dense, gray-brown, poorly graded SAND (SP); fine to medium sand; wet Dense, gray-brown, well-graded GRAVEL (GW-GM) with silt and sand; non-plastic; fine to coarse sand; fine to coarse, subrounded gravel; wet Very dense, blue SANDSTONE; fine to medium sand; wet Final depth 19.0 feet bgs due to refusal in sandstone; boring backfilled with bentonite, gravel, and surfaced patched with AC cold patch. P200DEPTH INSTALLATION AND COMMENTS 0 50 100 CORE REC%RQD% MOISTURE CONTENT % DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER UNCORRECTED N-VALUE __BORING LOG 73624.000_B1-5_20230601.GPJ PBS_DATATMPL_GEO.GDT PRINT DATE: 6/16/23:RPGGRAPHICLOGDRILLED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY: J. Powell DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE IDBORING B-1 TESTINGDEPTH FEET (See Site Plan) APPROX. BORING B-1 LOCATION: Page 1 of 1 FIGURE A1HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT: 78.7 BIT DIAMETER: 8 inches LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER EUGENE, OREGON PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 73624.000 NOTE: Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description are approximate only, inferred where between samples, and may indicate gradual transition. Surface Conditions: Asphalt LOGGING COMPLETED: 5/24/2023 Long: -123.04078Lat: 44.04273 40-50/3S-1S-2S-3S-4S-5S-60.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 0 50 100 8 6 14 43 46 MDS EXHIBIT87 06/05/2024 0.0 0.2 1.2 5.0 7.5 10.0 14.5 15.5 19.0 19.5 05/24/23 P200 = 6% Rig chatter; hard drilling; cobbles in cuttings ASPHALT (2 inches) BASE ROCK (12 inches) Medium stiff, brown SILT (ML) with sand; low to medium plasticity; fine to coarse sand; moist Medium stiff, brown SILT (ML); medium plasticity; moist Dense, brown, well-graded SAND (SW-SM) with silt and gravel; non-plastic; fine to coarse sand; fine to coarse, subrounded to subangular gravel; wet Very dense, gray-brown, well-graded GRAVEL (GW-GM) with silt and sand; non-plastic; fine to coarse sand; fine to coarse, subrounded gravel; wet Very dense, gray-brown, poorly graded SAND (SP); fine to medium sand; wet Very dense, gray-brown, well-graded GRAVEL (GW-GM) with silt and sand; non-plastic; fine to coarse sand; fine to coarse, subrounded gravel; wet Very dense, blue SANDSTONE; fine to coarse sand; wet Final depth 19.5 feet bgs due to refusal in sandstone; boring backfilled with bentonite, gravel, and surfaced patched with AC cold patch. P200DEPTH INSTALLATION AND COMMENTS 0 50 100 CORE REC%RQD% MOISTURE CONTENT % DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER UNCORRECTED N-VALUE __BORING LOG 73624.000_B1-5_20230601.GPJ PBS_DATATMPL_GEO.GDT PRINT DATE: 6/16/23:RPGGRAPHICLOGDRILLED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY: J. Powell DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE IDBORING B-2 TESTINGDEPTH FEET (See Site Plan) APPROX. BORING B-2 LOCATION: Page 1 of 1 FIGURE A2HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT: 78.7 BIT DIAMETER: 8 inches LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER EUGENE, OREGON PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 73624.000 NOTE: Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description are approximate only, inferred where between samples, and may indicate gradual transition. Surface Conditions: Asphalt LOGGING COMPLETED: 5/24/2023 Long: -123.04073Lat: 44.04240 50/5S-1S-2S-3S-4S-5S-60.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 0 50 100 7 6 40 55 89 MDS EXHIBIT88 06/05/2024 0.0 0.2 1.2 6.5 LL = 49 PL = 28 PI = 21 ASPHALT (2 inches) BASE ROCK (12 inches) Medium stiff, brown SILT (ML) with sand; high plasticity; fine to coarse sand; moist grades with trace, fine sand Final depth 6.5 feet bgs; boring backfilled with bentonite, gravel, and surfaced patched with AC cold patch. Groundwater not encountered at time of exploration. ATTDEPTH INSTALLATION AND COMMENTS 0 50 100 CORE REC%RQD% MOISTURE CONTENT % DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER UNCORRECTED N-VALUE __BORING LOG 73624.000_B1-5_20230601.GPJ PBS_DATATMPL_GEO.GDT PRINT DATE: 6/16/23:RPGGRAPHICLOGDRILLED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY: J. Powell DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE IDBORING B-3 TESTINGDEPTH FEET (See Site Plan) APPROX. BORING B-3 LOCATION: Page 1 of 1 FIGURE A3HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT: 78.7 BIT DIAMETER: 8 inches LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER EUGENE, OREGON PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 73624.000 NOTE: Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description are approximate only, inferred where between samples, and may indicate gradual transition. Surface Conditions: Asphalt LOGGING COMPLETED: 5/24/2023 Long: -123.04085Lat: 44.04236 S-1S-20.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 0 50 100 6 5 MDS EXHIBIT89 06/05/2024 0.0 0.2 1.2 6.5 LL = 48 PL = 28 PI = 20 P200 = 85% Infiltration testing completed at 5 feet bgs; wet soils from infiltration test ASPHALT (2 inches) BASE ROCK (12 inches) Soft, brown SILT (ML) with sand; medium plasticity; fine sand; moist becomes medium stiff; wet Final depth 6.5 feet bgs; boring backfilled with bentonite, gravel, and surfaced patched with AC cold patch. Groundwater not encountered at time of exploration. ATT P200DEPTH INSTALLATION AND COMMENTS 0 50 100 CORE REC%RQD% MOISTURE CONTENT % DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER UNCORRECTED N-VALUE __BORING LOG 73624.000_B1-5_20230601.GPJ PBS_DATATMPL_GEO.GDT PRINT DATE: 6/16/23:RPGGRAPHICLOGDRILLED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY: J. Powell DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE IDBORING B-4 TESTINGDEPTH FEET (See Site Plan) APPROX. BORING B-4 LOCATION: Page 1 of 1 FIGURE A4HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT: 78.7 BIT DIAMETER: 8 inches LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER EUGENE, OREGON PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 73624.000 NOTE: Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description are approximate only, inferred where between samples, and may indicate gradual transition. Surface Conditions: Asphalt LOGGING COMPLETED: 5/24/2023 Long: -123.04156Lat: 44.04210 S-1S-20.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 0 50 100 4 6 MDS EXHIBIT90 06/05/2024 0.0 0.2 1.2 6.5 P200 = 56% Infiltration testing completed at 5 feet bgs; wet soils from infiltration test ASPHALT (2 inches) BASE ROCK (12 inches) Medium stiff, brown, sandy SILT (ML); low plasticity; fine to medium sand; moist becomes soft; wet Final depth 6.5 feet bgs; boring backfilled with bentonite, gravel, and surfaced patched with AC cold patch. Groundwater not encountered at time of exploration. P200DEPTH INSTALLATION AND COMMENTS 0 50 100 CORE REC%RQD% MOISTURE CONTENT % DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER UNCORRECTED N-VALUE __BORING LOG 73624.000_B1-5_20230601.GPJ PBS_DATATMPL_GEO.GDT PRINT DATE: 6/16/23:RPGGRAPHICLOGDRILLED BY: Western States Soil Conservation, Inc. LOGGED BY: J. Powell DRILLING METHOD: Hollow-Stem Auger MATERIAL DESCRIPTION SAMPLE TYPE SAMPLE IDBORING B-5 TESTINGDEPTH FEET (See Site Plan) APPROX. BORING B-5 LOCATION: Page 1 of 1 FIGURE A5HAMMER EFFICIENCY PERCENT: 78.7 BIT DIAMETER: 8 inches LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER EUGENE, OREGON PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 73624.000 NOTE: Lines representing the interface between soil/rock units of differing description are approximate only, inferred where between samples, and may indicate gradual transition. Surface Conditions: Asphalt LOGGING COMPLETED: 5/24/2023 Long: -123.04017Lat: 44.04211 S-1S-20.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0 0 50 100 10 4 MDS EXHIBIT91 06/05/2024 Appendix B Laboratory Testing MDS EXHIBIT92 06/05/2024 Geotechnical Engineering Report Lane Transit District Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon B-1 October 11, 2023 PBS Project 73624.000 Appendix B: Laboratory Testing B1 GENERAL Samples obtained during the field explorations were examined in the PBS laboratory. The physical characteristics of the samples were noted and field classifications were modified where necessary. During the course of examination, representative samples were selected for further testing. The testing program for the soil samples included standard classification tests, which yield certain index properties of the soils important to an evaluation of soil behavior. The testing procedures are described in the following paragraphs. Unless noted otherwise, all test procedures are in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. “General accordance” means that certain local and common descriptive practices and methodologies have been followed. B2 CLASSIFICATION TESTS B2.1 Visual Classification The soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System with certain other terminology, such as the relative density or consistency of the soil deposits, in general accordance with engineering practice. In determining the soil type (that is, gravel, sand, silt, or clay) the term that best described the major portion of the sample is used. Modifying terminology to further describe the samples is defined in Table A-1, Terminology Used to Describe Soil, in Appendix A. B2.2 Moisture (Water) Contents Natural moisture content determinations were made on samples of the fine-grained soils (that is, silts, clays, and silty sands). The natural moisture content is defined as the ratio of the weight of water to dry weight of soil, expressed as a percentage. The results of the moisture content determinations are presented on the exploration logs in Appendix A and on Figure B2, Summary of Laboratory Data, in Appendix B. B2.3 Atterberg Limits Atterberg limits were determined on select samples for the purpose of classifying soils into various groups for correlation. The results of the Atterberg limits test, which included liquid and plastic limits, are plotted on Figure B1, Atterberg Limits Test Results, and on the exploration logs in Appendix A, where applicable. B2.4 Grain-Size Analyses (P200 Wash) Washed sieve analyses (P200) were completed on samples to determine the portion of soil samples passing the No. 200 Sieve (i.e., silt and clay). The results of the P200 test results are presented on the exploration logs in Appendix A and on Figure B2, Summary of Laboratory Data, in Appendix B. MDS EXHIBIT93 06/05/2024 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 CL or OL ATTERBERG LIMITS TEST RESULTS CH or OH CL-ML MH or OH TEST METHOD: ASTM D4318 "A" LINE FIGURE B1 ML or OL Page 1 of 1PLASTICITY INDEXLIQUID LIMIT 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 73624.000 LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER EUGENE, OREGON KEY SAMPLE DEPTH (FEET) EXPLORATION NUMBER NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT (PERCENT) PERCENT PASSING NO. 40 SIEVE (PERCENT) SAMPLE NUMBER S-2 S-1 B-3 B-4 5.0 2.5 49 48 21 20 NA NA LIQUID LIMIT 28 28 PLASTIC LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX 33.4 34.7 __ATTERBERG LIMITS 73624.000_B1-5_20230601.GPJ PBS_DATATMPL_GEO.GDT PRINT DATE: 6/8/23:RPGMDS EXHIBIT94 06/05/2024 B-1 S-1 2.5 29.1 B-1 S-2 5 28.0 B-1 S-3 7.5 28.3 B-1 S-4 10 10.7 7 B-2 S-1 2.5 30.5 B-2 S-2 5 32.5 B-2 S-3 7.5 13.0 6 B-3 S-1 2.5 32.1 B-3 S-2 5 33.4 49 28 21 B-4 S-1 2.5 34.7 48 28 20 B-4 S-2 5 41.8 85 B-5 S-1 2.5 30.6 B-5 S-2 5 30.4 56 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DATA Page 1 of 1 FIGURE B2 LIQUID LIMIT (PERCENT) GRAVEL (PERCENT) DRY DENSITY (PCF) PLASTIC LIMIT (PERCENT) PLASTICITY INDEX (PERCENT) SAND (PERCENT) P200 (PERCENT) SIEVE ATTERBERG LIMITSSAMPLE INFORMATION SAMPLE DEPTH (FEET) SAMPLE NUMBER EXPLORATION NUMBER ELEVATION (FEET) MOISTURE CONTENT (PERCENT) LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER EUGENE, OREGON PBS PROJECT NUMBER: 73624.000 __LAB SUMMARY 73624.000_B1-5_20230601.GPJ PBS_DATATMPL_GEO.GDT PRINT DATE: 6/8/23:RPGMDS EXHIBIT95 06/05/2024 Appendix C Geophysical Testing (ReMi) MDS EXHIBIT96 06/05/2024 Report on Shear Wave Refraction Microtremor Analysis (ReMi) LTD – Operations Command Center Eugene, Oregon Data Acquisition Date: May 24, 2023 Report Date: June 7, 2023 Prepared for: PBS Portland 4412 S Corbett Ave. Portland, OR 979239 Prepared by: EARTH DYNAMICS LLC 2284 N.W. Thurman St. Portland, OR 97210 (503) 227-7659 Project No. 23214 MDS EXHIBIT97 06/05/2024 EARTH DYNAMICS LLC ReMi Analysis LTD Operations, Eugene, OR May, 2023 Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION PBS Portland engaged Earth Dynamics LLC to conduct a geophysical exploration at LTD Operations Command Center in Eugene, Oregon. This study was requested and authorized by Mr. Ryan White of PBS Portland. The geophysical field work was completed by Mr. Daniel Lauer of Earth Dynamics LLC on May 24, 2023. This report describes the methodology and results of the geophysical investigation. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK The purpose of this study is to characterize the subsurface shear wave velocity at the site. These data are needed to help determine the seismic response of the site to earthquake loading. The exploration consisted of one twenty-four channel refraction microtremor (ReMi) array. 3.0 METHOD The ReMi technique provides a simplified characterization of relatively large volumes of the subsurface. The method can be used to estimate one-dimensional shear wave velocity profiles and provide site-specific soil classification data as described in ASCE/SEI 7-16 (2017). In a ReMi survey, geophones are deployed at designated intervals along a linear array. The resolution and depth of investigation depends upon the geophone cut-off frequency, spacing of the geophones, the total array length, and the frequency characteristics of the Rayleigh waves at the site. For “rule of thumb” survey planning, the nominal depth of investigation is assumed to be approximately one-third of the geophone array length. The theoretical basis of the ReMi method is the same as Spectral Analysis of Surface Waves (SASW) and Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) as first described to the earthquake engineering community by Nazarian and Stokoe (1984). However, ReMi does not require a frequency-controlled source and the field equipment is much more compact and economical. A complete description of the theoretical basis for ReMi is described by Louie (2001). In ReMi analysis all interpretation is done in the frequency domain, and the method assumes that the most energetic arrivals recorded are Rayleigh waves. By applying a time-domain velocity analysis, Rayleigh waves can be separated from body waves, air waves, and other coherent noise. Transforming the time-domain velocity results into the frequency domain allows combination of many arrivals over a long time period and yields recognition of dispersive surface waves. MDS EXHIBIT98 06/05/2024 EARTH DYNAMICS LLC ReMi Analysis LTD Operations, Eugene, OR May, 2023 Page 2 Data reduction is completed in two steps. First, the time versus amplitude seismic records are transformed into spectral energy shear wave frequency versus shear wave velocity (or slowness). The data are graphically presented in what is commonly termed a p-f plot. The interpreter determines a dispersion curve from the p-f plot by selecting the lower bound of the spectral energy shear wave velocity versus frequency trend. The second phase of the analysis consists of fitting the measured dispersion curve with a theoretical dispersion curve that is based upon a model of multiple layers with various shear wave velocities. The model velocities and layer thicknesses are adjusted until a ‘best fit’ to the measured data is obtained. This type of interpretation does not provide a unique model. Interpreter experience and knowledge of the existing geology is important to provide a realistic solution. The data are presented as one-dimensional velocity profiles that represent the average shear wave velocities of the subsurface layers over the length of the geophone array. For this project, data were acquired along one ReMi array consisting of twenty-four 4.5 Hz vertical geophones mounted on an asphalt surface with a geophone spacing of fifteen feet and a total array length of 345 feet. More than thirty 30-second-long seismic records of ambient seismic noise were recorded for each array. Data were also acquired when vehicles, and people were moving on and near the site. 4.0 RESULTS The approximate location of the ReMi array is shown on the Google Earth image in Figure 4-1. The ReMi analysis and results for ReMi Array 1 are contained in Figure 4-2. Figure 4-2 includes the p-f plot, the dispersion curve, the derived velocity versus depth model that best fits the geology of the site and a table containing the shear wave velocity with depth for the array. The data quality of the dispersion curve is moderate. The upper and lower frequency portions of the curve are not well defined. The RMS error of the model fit to the data is less than 60 ft/s. The dispersion curve picks suggest that the depth of investigation for this project is at least 100 feet bgs. MDS EXHIBIT99 06/05/2024 EARTH DYNAMICS LLC ReMi Analysis LTD Operations, Eugene, OR May, 2023 Page 3 Figure 4-1. Site layout showing location of ReMi array. MDS EXHIBIT100 06/05/2024 EARTH DYNAMICS LLC ReMi Analysis LTD Operations, Eugene, OR May, 2023 Page 4 Depth Interval (ft)Shear-wave velocity (ft/s) 0 – 18 1,258 18 – 48 3,993 48 – 100 3,459 Figure 4-2. ReMi Array 1 Results MDS EXHIBIT101 06/05/2024 EARTH DYNAMICS LLC ReMi Analysis LTD Operations, Eugene, OR May, 2023 Page 5 5.0 DISCUSSION 5.1 Exploratory Borings PBS Portland supplied field logs from geotechnical borings completed at the site. The boring logs indicate that the site is underlain by silt, sand and gravel to a depth of approximately 18 feet. At a depth of approximately 18 feet the borings encountered very dense cemented sandstone. The model fit for the ReMi data appears to correlate well with the information contained in the boring logs. 5.2 ASCE Classifications ASCE/SEI 7-16 (2017) defines five site classes based upon the average shear-wave velocity of the soil to a depth of 30 Meters (100 feet). The ASCE classification is summarized in Table 5-1. The classifications in Table 1 are incorporated into the International Building Code (IBC 2018). Earthquake shaking is expected to be stronger where shear-wave velocity is lower. Average shear wave velocity to a depth of 100 ft (Vs100) is calculated using Equation 5-1. 𝑉𝑠ሺ100ሻ ൌ ଵ଴଴ ∑൬ ೏೔ ೇೞ೔൰೔స೙೔సభ Equation 5-1 Where: n = the number of intervals i = the interval number di = the thickness of the ith interval in feet Vsi = the velocity of the ith interval Using Equation 5-1 and the data in Figure 4-2, the average shear wave velocity to a depth of 100 ft is calculated to be 2,714 ft/s for this ReMi Array. The RMS model fit error is approximately 60 ft/s. Since the lower frequency of the dispersion curve is not very well defined the confidence of the accuracy of the deeper portion of the model is not very good. The modelled velocity corresponds to IBC seismic design classification of “B”. Table 5-1. Summary of ASCE soil classification. Class Average S-wave Velocity (ft/sec) Description A > 5,000 Hard rock B 2,500 – 5,000 Rock C 1,200 – 2,500 Very dense soil and soft rock D 600 – 1,200 Stiff soil E <600 Soil MDS EXHIBIT102 06/05/2024 EARTH DYNAMICS LLC ReMi Analysis LTD Operations, Eugene, OR May, 2023 Page 6 6.0 LIMITATIONS The geophysical methods used in this study involve the inversion of measured data. Theoretically, the inversion process yields an infinite number of models which will fit the data. Further, many geologic materials have the same seismic velocity. We have presented models and interpretations which we believe to be the best fit given the geology and known conditions at the site. However, no warranty is made or intended by this report or by oral or written presentation of this work. Earth Dynamics accepts no responsibility for damages because of decisions made or actions taken based upon this report. 7.0 REFERENCES ASCE/SEI 7-16 (2017), Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, Structural Engineering Institute, Reston, VA. Louie, J.N. (2001). “Faster, better: shear-wave velocity to 100 meters depth from refraction microtremor arrays”, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., 91, 347-364. Nazarian, S., and Stokoe II, K.H., (1984), “In situ shear-wave velocities from spectral analysis of surface waves”, Proceedings for the World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vol. 8, San Francisco, Calif., July 21-28, v.3, 31-38. IBC (2018) 2018 International Building Code , International Code Council, Washington D.C. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED EARTH DYNAMICS LLC Daniel Lauer Partner - Senior Geophysicist MDS EXHIBIT103 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 13 of 20 Appendix C – FM Building Stormwater Study MDS EXHIBIT104 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT105 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT106 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT107 06/05/2024 MDS EXHIBIT108 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT i March 2016 DRAFT Report Table of Contents Sections I - Project Overview ......................................................................................................... 3 A -Project Location ................................................................................................ 3 B -Existing Hydrologic Features ............................................................................ 4 C -Floodplains ....................................................................................................... 5 D -Groundwater/Soils ............................................................................................ 5 E -Proposed Improvements .................................................................................. 7 II - Stormwater Design Requirements .............................................................................. 8 A -Summary of Project Impacts ............................................................................. 8 B -Summary of applicable requirements ............................................................... 8 III - Pollutants of Concern ................................................................................................ 9 IV - Existing Soils ............................................................................................................ 9 V - Existing Stormwater Facilities .................................................................................... 9 VI - Stormwater Facility Design ..................................................................................... 10 A -Water Quality Treatment ................................................................................. 10 B -Conveyance Design and Flow Control Evaluation ........................................... 10 VII - Stormwater Facility O&M Plan ............................................................................... 11 Figures Figure 1: Vicinity Map ...................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2: Adjacent Wetlands ........................................................................................... 4 Figure 3: Floodplain Map ................................................................................................ 5 Figure 4: Wellhead Protection Zones .............................................................................. 6 Figure 1: Vicinity Map ...................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2: Adjacent Wetlands ........................................................................................... 4 Figure 3: Floodplain Map ................................................................................................ 5 Figure 4: Wellhead Protection Zones .............................................................................. 6 Tables Table 1: Project Impacts.................................................................................................. 8 Appendices Appendix A – Hydrologic Study Map .............................................................................A1 Appendix B – Geotechnical Report ................................................................................B1 Appendix C – Hydraulic and Hydrologic Design Calculations ....................................... C1 MDS EXHIBIT109 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT ii March 2016 DRAFT Report THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK MDS EXHIBIT110 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 3 Stormwater Study I - Project Overview The purpose of this report is to address the stormwater management regulations for a new single-story building and fleet vehicle parking lot expansion in Springfield, Oregon. This section provides a brief description of the project and proposed improvements. The following sections provide detailed design requirements, methodology and design results. A -Project Location The project is located at 3500 E. 17th Ave. in Springfield, Oregon, although the actual fleet maintenance lot is located on the north side of this large lot, with an entrance on Glenwood Blvd. Lane Transit District’s (LTD) administrative headquarters is located on the southern portion of the lot, with the northern side used for bus parking and maintenance. This area is within Glenwood, a portion of the City to the west of the Willamette River. The project is located within the city limits, although most of the surrounding lots are unincorporated. Figure 1: Vicinity Map MDS EXHIBIT111 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 4 Stormwater Study B -Existing Hydrologic Features The project site drains to the west, to private storm drains on LTD’s lot, which discharge to City of Springfield (COS) maintenance holes connected to 12-inch and 16-inch public stormwater gravity mains. These run along Glenwood Blvd. to the south approximately 1,000 feet to an outfall in an unnamed wetland or water body. This wetland is approximately 2,000 feet from the Willamette River, and is likely hydraulically connected via groundwater, but does not appear to have a surface connection. There are no wetlands immediately adjacent to the site as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2: Adjacent Wetlands MDS EXHIBIT112 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 5 Stormwater Study C - Floodplains The project is located in a 500-year floodplain zone as delineated by FEMA. This is a Zone X (shaded), moderate flood hazard area within the limits of the 0.2 percent annual chance flood, but is not within a regulated special flood hazard area. D - Groundwater/Soils A geotechnical investigation was conducted on February 12, 2016, with four test pits being excavated. The test pits generally had a similar soil stratigraphy consisting of the following layers (from top to bottom): 1. Topsoil (1” thick) 2. Clayey gravel fill (1 to 1.5 feet thick) 3. Soft to stiff, gray, clayey silt to silty clay (0.5 feet thick) Figure 3: Floodplain Map MDS EXHIBIT113 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 6 Stormwater Study 4. Stiff, brown, silt (1 to 2 feet thick) 5. Gravel (>3 feet thick) The site topography is very flat except for a constructed screening berm on the east edge of the property. There are no steep slopes in the area. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 7 feet, at which point excavation was halted because the sides of the gravel layer were caving in at a faster rate than the material could be removed. High infiltration rates were recorded, using the EPA falling head percolation test procedure at depths of 2.5 to 3.5 feet. Based on the test results, and the City of Springfield’s stormwater design standards, a design infiltration rate of 10 inches per hour should be used for the gravel layer and 3.25 inches per hour for the silt layer. The draft geotechnical memo is included in Appendix B. The project is not located in a protected wellhead zone, as shown in Figure 4 below. Figure 4: Wellhead Protection Zones MDS EXHIBIT114 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 7 Stormwater Study E -Proposed Improvements A new 3,700 square foot building for use by LTD’s fleet maintenance crew is being constructed in the northeast corner of the parcel, and the parking lot is also being expanded by approximately 25,800 SF for busses and employee vehicles. There is a screening berm on the east side of the lot, which will be partially relocated to accommodate the expansion. The parking lot expansion will be graded to drain to the east, and collected in a lined ditch which conveys the runoff to a vegetated infiltration swale. Overflow from this swale will drain to the site stormwater system. A new raingarden is also being constructed to treat and infiltrate building roof runoff and runoff from the employee parking area. II - Stormwater Design Requirements Applicable stormwater design requirements for development within the City of Springfield include the following documents: The City of Springfield’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual Specifically: Chapter 3: Stormwater Quality and Chapter 4: Stormwater Capacity 2014 Oregon Plumbing Specialty Code (Based on the 2009 Uniform Plumbing Code) Additionally, Springfield’s standards reference the City of Eugene’s 2014 Stormwater Management Manual (SWMM) A -Summary of Project Impacts Table 1: Project Impacts Square Feet Acres New Impervious Surfaces 31,270 0.72 New Pollution-Generating Impervious Surfaces 26,000 0.60 Total Site Area (including admin building to south) 756,780 17.4 Disturbed Area 57,100 1.3 B -Summary of applicable requirements Based on the above noted design requirements, and the project impacts in Table 1, the following is a list of significant applicable stormwater requirements. -Treatment of runoff is required from all parking lots and paved areas, at least 50% of which should be through vegetative methods. MDS EXHIBIT115 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 8 Stormwater Study -On-site detention will not be required since the receiving body is not a small stream, and there are no identified downstream deficiencies in the conveyance system as documented in a conversation with Clayton McEachern, at the COS on 6/19/15. -A mid-level site stormwater study is required since the study area is less than 25 acres, drains to a public system in the city limits, and is not adjacent to a floodplain, stream, wetland, natural resource area, or wellhead protection zone. -Hydrologic calculations shall be based on the Unit Hydrograph Method for intervals as noted in the COS Design Standards. III - Pollutants of Concern The federal Clean Water Act requires states to maintain a list of water bodies that do not meet water quality standards. This list is called the 303(d) list based on the section of the Clean Water Act that mandates this requirement. Each receiving body of water on this list has its own list of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for pollutants depending on the likelihood for those pollutants to be present in any given system. The Upper Willamette Subbasin has Total Maximum Daily Limits (TMDLs) for temperature, bacteria, and mercury, with listed pollutants as follows: · Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) · DDT · Dieldrin · Escheriichia Coli (E. Coli) · Mercury · Temerature · Turbidity Although not specifically listed, other pollutants found in an urbanized area will affect all receiving waters. Generally these pollutants are litter, sediment, cadmium from tires, antifreeze, engine oil and zinc. Treatment for these types of pollutants can be achieved by implementing BMPs to control the quantities and types of stormwater pollutants released to receiving waters. Although vehicle maintenance, fueling and washing occur at this site, these activities are contained within covered buildings, with drains directed to oil/water separators, and discharging to the sanitary sewer system. IV - Existing Soils A geotechnical investigation was conducted and a draft report was prepared to support the design of the building, pavement, and infiltration facilities. Infiltration tests were conducted and determined high infiltration rates in a gravel layer below the top layers of fill and clayey/silty soils. The gravel was located 2.5 feet to 4.5 feet below the existing grade. The draft geotechnical report is included in Appendix B MDS EXHIBIT116 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 9 Stormwater Study V - Existing Stormwater Facilities According to the City’s GIS mapping, the site stormwater connects to a 12” concrete storm main on Glenwood Blvd, to the west of the existing maintenance building. This 12” main becomes a 16” line at a maintenance hole on the southwest corner of the site. The main continues south to a 36” outfall approximately 1,000’ to the south of the site. According to correspondence with Clayton McEachern, the downstream conveyance infrastructure is adequate and there are no downstream flooding issues. The existing site is fairly flat with low points graded between parking areas. Catch basins direct stormwater to 10” or 12” drain lines flowing to the west. Nearly the entire lot is impervious except for landscape buffers along the edges of the site and the screening berm on the eastern boundary. There is no known flow control or water quality facilities located on site. VI - Stormwater Facility Design A - Water Quality Treatment Since the site grades are so low, and the point of connection to the public storm main is on the other side of the property, it is most efficient to handle the runoff at the source. Additionally, the requirement that half of the runoff be treated with vegetative methods and high native infiltration rates meant that using raingardens and infiltration swales was an optimal choice. Treatment/infiltration of the building roof runoff was not required, however it was considered beneficial to reduce the runoff volumes taxing the existing system. Infiltration facility sizing was based on the City of Eugene’s SWMM, and their infiltration facility sizing spreadsheet. The sizing calculator uses NRCS Type 1A rainfall distribution for a 24-hour storm which is compatible with the City of Springfield’s requirements. Eugene uses 1.4 inches for their design water quality storm, while Springfield uses only 0.83 inches. The higher 1.4 inch storm was used for sizing the infiltration facilities. A maximum infiltration rate of 2.5 inches per hour was used, since that is the typical rate for a bioretention soil mix. Infiltration through the native soils will be much higher once runoff passes through the treatment layer. Both the infiltration swale treating the bus parking expansion and the raingardens treating the employee parking and building runoff provide adequate treatment for the water quality event, and meet the 18 hour drawdown time. The design of these facilities (side slopes, minimum widths, soil depth, etc.) is based on Eugene’s SWMM. See Appendix C for treatment calculations. B - Conveyance Design and Flow Control Evaluation Conveyance design was intended to meet the City of Springfield’s Engineering Design Standards, as well as local and state plumbing codes. Springfield’s standards (Section 4.03.3) require the design to accommodate a 2-year event for flows up to 5 cfs. WinTR- 55 was used to determine the peak runoff rates, using SCS Type 1A unit hydrograph methodology. However, the 25-year event is used for closed pipe conveyance sizing, with 10-year used for the open channel conveyance swale. Peak flows from the bus parking area and building area were 0.78 cfs and 0.39 cfs respectively. (See Appendix A for subbasin figure and Appendix C for calculations) An 8-inch pipe was used to convey flows MDS EXHIBIT117 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 10 Stormwater Study from the raingarden and a 10-inch pipe was used for the swale. Due to the low gradient, the pipes were set at a 0.3% slope. These pipes will have adequate capacity to handle the full peak flow of runoff even without factoring in infiltration and storage in the facilities. A rock-lined conveyance ditch was designed along the eastern edge of the parking lot to collect and convey runoff to the infiltration swale. This ditch is lined with an impermeable liner, and 3” of river rock. The ditch is V-shaped with 2:1 (H:V) side slopes, widening to convey the 10-year flow with 4” of freeboard provided. Limited invert information was available for the existing system, however an analysis was conducted comparing the total parking lot contributing area to the capacity of a 12” pipe set at a minimal slope of 0.5%. The peak runoff for the full site was 9.4 cfs for a 25 year event, with a pipe capacity of 2.7 cfs. This indicated that there would be existing capacity issues within the private system. Ponding is likely to occur during larger rain events, however it would be concentrated in the low spots around catch basins in the parking lots, and directed away from the buildings. None of the buildings on the site have basements or crawlspaces, and it appears that if flooding were to occur, it would drain to the street before inundating the buildings, which appear to be built slightly above the surrounding lot. No downstream deficiencies were noted by the City engineer, and there is not a known need to mitigate flows on the unnamed water body at the outfall. This water body discharges into the Willamette River approximately 2,600’ to the west. The infiltration facilities are likely to reduce the volume discharged from the new impervious areas, but they are not intended to provide flow control due to a requirement. VII - Stormwater Facility O&M Plan Rain Gardens are vegetated surface reservoirs used to collect and treat stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces by allowing the pollutants to settle and filter out as the water percolates through vegetation and soil mediums before infiltrating into the ground below or being piped to its downstream destination. The reservoir basin shall infiltrate stormwater within 24 hours. All facility components andvegetation shall be inspected for proper operations and structural stability, at a minimum, quarterly for the first 2 years from the date of installation, 2 times per year thereafter, and within 48 hours after each major storm event. Training and/or Written Guidance information for operating and maintaining vegetated infiltration basins shall be provided to all property owners and tenants. A copy of the O & M Plan shall be provided to all property owners and tenants. Inspection Logs shall be kept by the facility owner demonstrating the following items have been inspected and are being maintained properly: •Access to Rain Gardens shall be safe and efficient. Obstacles preventing maintenance personnel and/or equipment access to the components of the facility shall be removed. MDS EXHIBIT118 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 11 Stormwater Study •Debris and Litter shall be removed to prevent channelization, clogging, and interference with plant growth. Fallen leaves and debris from deciduous plant foliage shall be raked and removed. • Erosion Damage shall be identified and controlled when native soil is exposed or erosion channels are forming. •Grassed Rain Gardens shall be mowed to 4”-9” high and grass clippings shall be removed no less than 2 times per year. • Infiltrating Rain Gardens shall be excavated and cleaned, and gravel or soil shall be replaced to correct low infiltration rates. • Inlets shall be cleared when conveyance capacity is plugged to ensure unrestricted stormwater flow to the rain garden. • Mulch shall be replenished as needed to ensure healthy plant growth. •Nuisance and Prohibited Vegetation from the Eugene Plant List (such as blackberries and English Ivy) shall be removed when discovered. Invasive vegetation contributing up to 25% of vegetation of all species shall be removed and replaced. • Outlets shall be cleared when 50% of the conveyance capacity is plugged. •Overflows shall be cleared when 25% of the conveyance capacity is plugged. • Rocks or Other Armoring shall be replaced when only one layer of rock exists above native soil. • Sedimentation build-up near or exceeding 2” in depth shall be hand-removed with minimum damage to vegetation using proper erosion control measures. Sediment shall be removed if it is more than 4 inches thick or so thick as to damage or kill vegetation. • Slopes shall be stabilized using appropriate measures when native soil is exposed. •Vegetation shall be healthy and dense enough to provide filtering while protecting underlying soils from erosion. Dead vegetation shall be removed to maintain less than 10% of area coverage or when vegetative filter function is impaired. Vegetation shall be replaced immediately to control erosion where soils are exposed and within 3 months to maintain cover density. •Spill Prevention Measures shall be exercised on site when handling substances that contaminate stormwater. Releases of pollutants shall be corrected as soon as identified. Non-Chemical Pest Control measures shall be taken to prevent development of insects, mosquitoes, and rodents. MDS EXHIBIT119 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 12 Stormwater Study Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Infiltration Raingardens/ Infiltration Swale Sediment accumulation on vegetation Sediment depth exceeds 2 inches. Remove sediment deposits on treatment area of the basin. When finished, basin should be level from side to side and drain freely toward outlet. There should be no areas of standing water once inflow has ceased. Standing water Water stands in the basin between storms and does not drain freely. Any of the following may apply: remove sediment or trash blockages; improve grade from head to foot of basin; remove clogged check dams; add underdrains. Constant baseflow Small quantities of water continually flow through the basin, even when it has been dry for weeks, and an eroded, muddy channel has formed in the basin bottom. Add a low-flow pea gravel drain the length of the basin, or bypass the base flow around the basin. Poor vegetation coverage Vegetation is sparse or bare, or eroded patches occur in more than 10% of the basin bottom. Determine why vegetative growth is poor and correct that condition. Replant with plugs from the upper slope: plant in the basin bottom at 8- inch intervals; or reseed into loosened, fertile soil. Vegetation Vegetation becomes excessively tall (greater than 18 inches); nuisance weeds and other vegetation start to take over. Remove nuisance vegetation so that flow is not impeded. Mowing is not required for wet biofiltration basins. However, fall harvesting of very dense vegetation after plant die-back is recommended. Excessive shading Vegetative growth is poor because sunlight does not reach basin. If possible, trim back overhanging limbs and remove brushy vegetation on adjacent slopes. Inlet/outlet Inlet/outlet areas are clogged with sediment/debris. Remove material so there is no clogging or blockage in the inlet and outlet area. Trash and debris Trash and debris have accumulated in the basin. Remove trash and debris from basin. Erosion/ scouring Basin bottom has eroded or scoured due to flow channelization or high flows. For ruts or bare areas less than 12 inches wide, repair the damaged area by filling with crushed gravel. If bare areas are large (generally greater than 12 inches wide), the basin should be regraded and reseeded/replanted. For smaller bare areas, overseed when bare spots are evident, or take plugs of plants from the upper slope and plant in the basin bottom at 8-inch intervals. MDS EXHIBIT120 06/05/2024 FM Crew Space Building and Bus Lot Expansion March 2016 DRAFT 13 Stormwater Study Maintenance Component Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Maintenance is Performed Catch Basins/ Curb Inlets/ Manholes Broken or cracked pipe or concrete chamber Fill or replace when cracks are greater than 1” Prevent leaking of pipes or structure Large shrubs and trees Roots are intruding into the drainage structure or pipes Remove to prevent large root systems from damaging subsurface structural components. Regular Maintenance Summer: Make necessary structural repairs, vactor out sumped structures when sump is ½ full or annually at a minimum. Fall: Clean sediment/leaves from pavement and inlets to prevent clogging. Properly dispose of removed sediments. Maintenance Log Record date, description, and contractor (if applicable) for all structural repairs and facility cleanout activities. Tracking sediment collection will help optimize future cleaning efforts. MDS EXHIBIT121 06/05/2024 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE LOG Property Address: Inspection Date: Inspection Time: Inspected By: Type of Stormwater Management Facility: Location of Facility on Site (In relation to buildings or other permanent structures): Water levels and observations (ponded water, Oil sheen, smell, etc.): (Approximate Date/Time of Last Significant Rainfall): Sediment accumulation & areas of erosion. Record sediment removal/erosion repair: What is the current condition of vegetation? Record survival rates, invasive species present, number of dead plants, etc.) Record any replacement plants and type of vegetation management (mowing, weeding, etc.) What is the condition of physical properties such as inlets, outlets, piping, fences, and irrigation facilities? Record maintenance performed and replacement activities: Presence of insects or damage from animals. Record control activities: Identify safety hazards present. Record resolution activities: For assistance please call Public Works Maintenance at 541-682-4800. MDS EXHIBIT122 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 14 of 20 Appendix D – Pre-developed and Post-developed Drainage Basin Maps MDS EXHIBIT123 06/05/2024 PRE DEVELOPEDDRAINAGE BASIN MAPEX1 26445 SW FALLBROOK PLACE, SUITE 100BEAVERTON, OREGON 97008TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.com1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comLANE TRANSIT DISTRICTOPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVEEUGENE, OR 97401LANE COUNTY, OREGONPRELI MI N A RY-NOT FORCONSTRUCTIONONSITE PRE-DEVELOPED AREAS AND CURVE NUMBERS MDS EXHIBIT124 06/05/2024 4'' SSEE E E E E E EEEEEPOST DEVELOPEDDRAINAGE BASIN MAPEX2 21500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comLANE TRANSIT DISTRICTOPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVEEUGENE, OR 97401LANE COUNTY, OREGONPRELI MI N A RY-NOT FORCONSTRUCTIONONSITE POST-DEVELOPED AREAS AND CURVE NUMBERS MDS EXHIBIT125 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 15 of 20 Appendix E – Stormwater Plans MDS EXHIBIT126 06/05/2024 4'' SS 4'' SS REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comC006 SITE GRADING PLAN SITE GRADING PLAN MDS EXHIBIT127 06/05/2024 4'' SS4'' SSREVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comSTORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SD-01 AND FILTRATION PLANTER C007 STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SD-01 AND 1 C007 SD-01 AND FILTRATION PLANTER - PROFILE CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 FILTRATION PLANTER - NORTH SOUTH SECTION 1" = 2' 1 C007 STORMWATER FILTRATION PLANTER 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 6 7 88 9 10 11 12 12 MDS EXHIBIT128 06/05/2024 4'' SS REVISIONS:PRINTED ON:2018 PIVOT ARCHITECTUREFROM FILE:CSCALE OF 11 x 17 SHEETS IS HALF OF SCALE INDICATEDISSUE DATE: SHEET TITLE:PROJECT #:11/22/2023 11:15:40 AMC:\Users\ftoledo\Documents\2226_LTD OCC_Arch Building_R22_ftoledoASJ74.rvt05.29.2024LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT100% CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGSLTD OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER3500 E 17TH AVE, EUGENE, OR 974012226.00#DESCRP.DATE1500 VALLEY RIVER DRIVE, STE 100EUGENE, OREGON 97401TEL: (503) 746-8812FAX: (503) 639-9592www.emeriodesign.comSTORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SD-02 AND SD-03 C008 STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SD-02 AND CONSTRUCTION NOTES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SD-03 1 SD-03 - PROFILE SD-02 - PROFILE 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 6 7 7 7 8 9 5 7 10 MDS EXHIBIT129 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 16 of 20 Appendix F – City of Eugene Presumptive Method Calculation MDS EXHIBIT130 06/05/2024 Stormwater Surface Filtration/Infiltration Facility Sizing Spreadsheet 24 Hour Storm, NRCS Type 1A Rainfall Distribution City of Eugene Version 2.1 Project Information Instructions: Design Requirements: Choose "Yes" from the dropdown boxes below next to the design standards requirements for this facility. Pollution Reduction (PR)Yes Flow Control (FC)No Destination (DT)No *An infiltration facility must be chosen as the facility type to meet destination requirements Site Data-Post Development Total Square Footage Impervious Area=15075 sqft Total Square Footage Pervious Area=5485 sqft Impervious Area CN=98 Pervious Area CN=79 Total Square Footage of Drainage Area=20560 sft Time of Concentration Post Development=5 min Weighted Average CN=93 Site Data-Pre Development (Data in this section is only used if Flow Control is required) Pre-Development CN=85 Time of Concentration Pre-Development=10 min Soil Data Tested Soil Infiltration Rate=2 in/hr (See Note 4)N/A in/hr Design Soil Infiltration Rate=2 in/hr Design Storms Used For Calculations Design Storm 1.4 inches Water Quality 3.6 inches Flood Control 3.6 inches Flood Control Facility Data Facility Type=Facility Surface Area=377.16 sqft Surface Width=8.4 ft Facility Surface Perimeter=106.6 ft Surface Length=44.9 ft Facility Bottom Area=377 sqft Facility Side Slopes=0 to 1 Facility Bottom Perimeter=107 ft 12 in Basin Volume=377.2 cf 12 in Ratio of Facility Area to Impervious Area=0.018 Permit Number: Catchment ID: Destination Design= Soil Infiltration Rate 24-hour Rainfall DepthRequirement Pollution Reduction Flow Control 5/22/2024 [Permit #] Depth of Growing Medium (Soil)= N/A Date: 1. Complete this form for each drainage catchment in the project site that is to be sized per the Presumptive Approach. Ian Feltis, PE Emerio Design, LLC Eugene, OR 97401 Project Address: Designer: Company: LTD Operations Command Center Filtration Stormwater Planter Project Name: 3500 E 17th Avenue Destination 2. Provide a distinctive Catchment ID for each facility coordinated with the site basin map to correlate the appropriate calculations with the facility. 3. The maximum drainage catchment to be modeled per the Presumptive Approach is 1 acre (43,560 SF) 4.For infiltration facilities in Class A or B soils where no infiltration testing has been perfromed use an infiltration rate of 0.5 in/hr. For all facilities use a maximum soil infiltration rate of 2.5 in/hr for topsoil/growing medium. Max. Ponding Depth in Stormwater Facility= 5/22/2024-1:51 PM 1 MDS EXHIBIT131 06/05/2024 Pollution Reduction-Calculation Results Peak Flow Rate to Stormwater Facility =0.096 cfs Peak Facility Overflow Rate=0.000 cfs 1324 cf Total Overflow Volume=0 cf Max. Depth of Stormwater in Facility=8.9 in Drawdown Time=2.7 hours Yes Facility Sizing Meets Pollution Reduction Standards? YES Meets Requirement of No Facility Flooding? YES Meets Requirement for Maximum of 18 Hour Drawdown Time? Flow Control-Calculation Results Peak Flow Rate to Stormwater Facility =0.383 cfs Peak Facility Overflow Rate=0.366 cfs 4828 cf Total Overflow Volume=3097 cf Max. Depth of Stormwater in Facility=12.0 in 0.017 cfs Drawdown Time=6.0 hours Pre-Development Runoff Data Peak Flow Rate =0.246 cfs Total Runoff Volume =3604 cf N\A Facility Sizing Meets Flow Control Standards? N\A Meets Requirement for Post Development offsite flow less or equal to Pre-Development Flow? N\A Meets Requirement for Maximum of 18 Hour Drawdown Time? Destination-Calculation Results Peak Flow Rate to Stormwater Facility =N/A cfs Peak Facility Overflow Rate=N/A cfs N/A cf Total Overflow Volume=N/A cf Max. Depth of Stormwater in Facility=N/A in Drawdown Time=N/A hours N/A Facility Sizing Meets Destination Standards? N/A Meets Requirement of No Facility Flooding? N/A Meets Requirement for Maximum of 30 hour Drawdown Time? Total Runoff Volume to Stormwater Facility = Total Runoff Volume to Stormwater Facility = Total Runoff Volume to Stormwater Facility = Peak Off-Site Flow Rate Filtration Facility Underdrain= 5/22/2024-1:51 PM 2 MDS EXHIBIT132 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 17 of 20 Appendix G – SBUH Conveyance Calculations MDS EXHIBIT133 06/05/2024 1S Remaining Site Post-developed 2S 1/3 of Roof Area Routing Diagram for 1022-002 - LTD OCC - Conveyance HydroCAD Prepared by Emerio Design, LLC, Printed 5/29/2024 HydroCAD® 10.00-24 s/n 04804 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link MDS EXHIBIT134 06/05/2024 1022-002 - LTD OCC - Conveyance HydroCAD Printed 5/29/2024Prepared by Emerio Design, LLC Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-24 s/n 04804 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (all nodes) Area (sq-ft) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 15,075 98 Impervious Area (1S, 2S) 5,485 79 Pervious Area (1S) 20,560 93 TOTAL AREA MDS EXHIBIT135 06/05/2024 Type IA 24-hr Springfiled 25-Year Rainfall=5.18"1022-002 - LTD OCC - Conveyance HydroCA Printed 5/29/2024Prepared by Emerio Design, LLC Page 3HydroCAD® 10.00-24 s/n 04804 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Remaining Site Post-developed Runoff = 0.390 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 5,382 cf, Depth= 4.16" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr Springfiled 25-Year Rainfall=5.18" Area (sf) CN Description * 10,050 98 Impervious Area * 5,485 79 Pervious Area 15,535 91 Weighted Average 5,485 35.31% Pervious Area 10,050 64.69% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1S: Remaining Site Post-developed Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)0.42 0.4 0.38 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.3 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.22 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 Type IA 24-hr Springfiled 25-Year Rainfall=5.18" Runoff Area=15,535 sf Runoff Volume=5,382 cf Runoff Depth=4.16" Tc=5.0 min CN=91 0.390 cfs MDS EXHIBIT136 06/05/2024 Type IA 24-hr Springfiled 25-Year Rainfall=5.18"1022-002 - LTD OCC - Conveyance HydroCA Printed 5/29/2024Prepared by Emerio Design, LLC Page 4HydroCAD® 10.00-24 s/n 04804 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 2S: 1/3 of Roof Area Runoff = 0.144 cfs @ 7.85 hrs, Volume= 2,070 cf, Depth= 4.94" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr Springfiled 25-Year Rainfall=5.18" Area (sf) CN Description * 5,025 98 Impervious Area 5,025 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2S: 1/3 of Roof Area Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 727068666462605856545250484644424038363432302826242220181614121086420Flow (cfs)0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 Type IA 24-hr Springfiled 25-Year Rainfall=5.18" Runoff Area=5,025 sf Runoff Volume=2,070 cf Runoff Depth=4.94" Tc=5.0 min CN=98 0.144 cfs MDS EXHIBIT137 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 18 of 20 Appendix H – Manning’s Equation Capacity Calculation MDS EXHIBIT138 06/05/2024 -- Ian Feltis Project 1022-002 LTD Operations Command Center GRAVITY PIPE FLOW (Chezy-Manning) 6 Inch DI Storm Pipe Capacity 2" diameter = 6.0" slope = 0.76% material: DI Manning's n = 0.013 depth of flow = 100.00% of diameter (full) wetted perimeter = 1.57' area = 0.20 s.f. hydraulic radius = 0.13' velocity = 2.50 fps flow = 0.49 cfs Peak flow rate for 25-year event per SBUH = 0.390 cfs - Capacity OK MDS EXHIBIT139 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 19 of 20 Appendix I – Operations and Maintenance Log MDS EXHIBIT140 06/05/2024 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE LOG Property Address: Inspection Date: Inspection Time: Inspected By: Type of Stormwater Management Facility: Location of Facility on Site (In relation to buildings or other permanent structures): Water levels and observations (ponded water, Oil sheen, smell, etc.): (Approximate Date/Time of Last Significant Rainfall): Sediment accumulation & areas of erosion. Record sediment removal/erosion repair: What is the current condition of vegetation? Record survival rates, invasive species present, number of dead plants, etc.) Record any replacement plants and type of vegetation management (mowing, weeding, etc.) What is the condition of physical properties such as inlets, outlets, piping, fences, and irrigation facilities? Record maintenance performed and replacement activities: Presence of insects or damage from animals. Record control activities: Identify safety hazards present. Record resolution activities: For assistance please call Public Works Maintenance at 541-682-4800. MDS EXHIBIT141 06/05/2024 LTD Operations Command Center – Stormwater Management Report 05/29/2024 Page | 20 of 20 Appendix J – City of Springfield Stormwater Management Scope of Work Form MDS EXHIBIT142 06/05/2024 Return to Clayton McEachern @ City of Springfield, email: cmceachern@springfield-or,gov, FAX: (541) 736-1021 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 225 FIFTH STREET SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 PHONE: 541.726.3753 FAX: 541.726.1021 www.springfield-or.gov STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SCOPE OF WORK Project Name: LTD Operations Command Center Applicant: Lane Transit District Assessors Parcel #: 1703343400301 Date: 5/29/2024 Land Use(s): Light-Medium Industrial Phone #: Project Size (Acres): 17.4 Ac. Lot, 0.85 Ac Disturbed Fax #: Approx. Impervious Area: 0.26 Ac. New Impervious Email: Project Description (Include a copy of Assessor’s map): Proposed improvements to the existing LTD Operations Command Center include demolition of a portion of the existing building and construction of a new addition. Additional improvements include reconstruction of a small area of the parking lot, and the construction of a new hardscape patio area. Drainage Proposal (Public connection(s), discharge location(s), etc. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary: The majority of new impervious areas will receive treatment via an onsite stormwater filtration planter. The existing parking lot reconfig uration will be conveyed to the existing stormwater system via an existing catch basin, as is the case in the pre-developed condition. However, the stormwater filtration planter is oversized to treat extra runoff to account for the parking lot area that cannot be conveyed to the planter due to shallow existing grades and conveyance issues. From the stormwater planter, runoff will be conveyed to the existing st orm system on site and be routed to the public system within Glenwood Boulevard. No downstream capacity issues are present. Proposed Stormwater Best Management Practices: Filtration Stormwater Planter per City of Springfield standards to meet water quality requirements. Filtration stormwater planter will treat and collect runoff in a perforated underdrain and convey it to the existing storm system onsite. An overflow is proposed for runoff volumes that exceed the water quality event of 1.4 inches. Drainage Study Type (EDSPM Section 4.03.2): (Note, UH may be substituted for Rational Method) Small Site Study – (use Rational Method for calculations) Mid-Level Development Study – (use Unit Hydrograph Method for calculations) Full Drainage Development Study – (use Unit Hydrograph Method for calculations) Environmental Considerations: Wellhead Zone: Hillside Development: Wetland/Riparian: Floodway/Floodplain: Soil Type: Other Jurisdictions Downstream Analysis: N/A Flow line for starting water surface elevation: Design HGL to use for starting water surface elevation: Manhole/Junction to take analysis to: --------------------------------- (Area below this line filled out by the City and Returned to the Applicant) ---------------------------- (At a minimum, all boxes checked by the City on the front and back of this sheet shall be submitted for an application to be complete for submittal, although other requirements may be necessary.) ------------------------------------------------- (Area below this line filled out by Applicant) -------------------------------------------------- (Please return to Clayton McEachern @ City of Springfield Development and Public Works; Fax # 736-1021, Phone # 736-1036), email:cmceachern@springfield-or.gov MDS EXHIBIT143 06/05/2024 Form Version 5: June 2015 COMPLETE STUDY ITEMS * Based upon the information provided on the front of this sheet, the following represents a minimum of what is needed for an application to be complete for submittal with respect to drainage; however, this list should not be used in lieu of the Sprin gfield Development Code (SDC) or the City’s Engineering Design Manual. Compliance with these requirements does not constitute site approval; Additional site specific information may be required. Note: Upon scoping sheet submittal, ensure completed form ha s been signed in the space provided below: Interim Design Standards/Water Quality (EDSPM Chapter 3) Req’d N/A All non-building rooftop (NBR) impervious surfaces shall be pre-treated (e.g. multi-chambered catchbasin w/oil filtration media) for stormwater quality. Additionally, a minimum of 50% of the NBR impervious surface shall be treated by vegetated methods. Where required, vegetative stormwater design shall be consistent with design standards (EDSPM Section 3.02), set forth in Chapter 2 of the Eugene Stormwater Management Manual. For new NBR impervious area less than 15,000 square feet, a simplified design approach may be followed as specified by the Eugene Stormwater Management Manual (Sec2.4.1). If a stormwater treatment swale is proposed, submit calculations/specifications for sizing, velocity, flow, side slopes, bottom slope, and seed mix consistent with City of Springfield or Eugene’s Stormwater Management Manual. Water Quality calculations as required in Section 3.03.1 of the EDSPM. All building rooftop mounted equipment, or other fluid containing equipment located outside of the building, shall be provided with secondary containment or weather resistant enclosure. General Study Requirements (EDSPM Section 4.03) Drainage study prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer licensed in the state of Oregon. A complete drainage study, as required in EDSPM Section 4.03.1, including a hydrological study map. Calculations showing system capacity for a 2-year storm event and overflow effects of a 25 -year storm event. The time of concentration (Tc) shall be determined using a 10 minute start time for developed basins . Review of Downstream System (EDSPM Section 4.03.4.C) A downstream drainage analysis as described in EDSPM Section 4.03.4.C. On-site drainage shall be governed by the Oregon Plumbing Specialty Code (OPSC). Elevations of the HGL and flow lines for both city and private systems where applicable. Design of Storm Systems (EDSPM Section 4.04). Flow lines, slopes, rim elevations, pipe type and sizes clearly indicated on the plan set. Minimum pipe cover shall be 18 inches for reinforced pipe and 36 inches for plain concrete and plastic pipe materials, or proper engineering calculations shall be provided when less. The cover shall be sufficient to support an 80,000 lb load without failure of the pipe structure. Manning’s “n” values for pipes shall be consistent with Table 4-1 of the EDSP. All storm pipes shall be designed to achieve a minimum velocity of three (3) feet per second at 0.5 pipe full based on Table 4 -1 as well. Other/Miscellaneous Existing and proposed contours, located at one foot interval. Include spot elevations and site grades showing how site drains. Private stormwater easements shall be clearly depicted on plans when private stormwater flows from one property to another. Drywells shall not receive runoff from any surface w/o being treated by one or more BMPs, with the exception of residential building roofs (EDSP Section 3.03.4.A). Additional provisions apply to this as required by the DEQ. Refer to the website: http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/uic/uic.htm for more information. Detention ponds shall be designed to limit runoff to pre -development rates for the 2 through 25-year storm events. *This form shall be included as an attachment, inside the front cover, of the stormwater study. For Official Use Only: As the engineer of record, I hereby certify the above required items are complete and included with the submitted stormwater study and plan set. Signature _______________ Date _______ . * IMPORTANT: ENGINEER PLEASE READ BELOW AND SIGN! MDS EXHIBIT144 06/05/2024