Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments PLANNER 11/17/2008 (2) ~ Message ,- ":" Page 1 of5 L1MBIRD Andrew From: DONOVAN James Sent: Monday;, November 17, 2008.11:40 AM To: Michael.Kaiser; LANGE Jeffrey R Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; L1MBIRD Andrew Subject: RE: My friends, . I have to ask that we all consider the needs of the surrounding uses and continue to look for some creative, incremental change .as we implement both State and local access programs. . Please keep your minds open and consider a couple of options on this: 1) A "NO PARKING' LOADING ZONE" arrangement that would allow customers of the adjacent use to park and load for'the occasional large purchase and mai~tain the turning area for the majority of the time (low likelihood of conflict); 2) An intermittent restriction for the regularly scheduled deliveries at Enterprise. Example: "NO PARKING ON MON &WED FROM 1-5 PM". (Requires scheduled delivery times but reduces conflicts significantly?) , I know we can get to yes on this, Jim Donovan City of Springfield .' Urban Planning Supervisor 726-3660 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 11:05 AM . To: LANGE Jeffrey R . Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; UMBIRD Andrew Subject: Re: ., Jeffrey, ., I am a little frustrated with this process. I understand you are trying to manage the State Highway system and make it as safe as possible. However, why are you trying to manage the 44th Street access? An ODOT requirement to elimi~ate parking on the east side of 44th will impact adjacent property owners and not just this applicant. I appreciate the suggestion that maybe the access on 44th won't work and I am working with JRH Transportation Engineering to verify what is needed to allow a WB-67 vehicle to access the site from 44th. However, this is no(the same approach design that was shown on the original application. In the original application we were using the existing approach that was about 23.4 feet wide (bottom) with 6' wings. Now it is 34.0 feetwide (bottom) with 9' wings. I sent the current design to JRH prior to submitting to ODOT and they did not suggest anything about parking elimination on 44th. But whether it can or can't should not be ODOTS problem. 44th i~ a City street that ODOT does not have control over, or at least shouldn't. If a truck were to go down 44th and not be able to get into the site, what concern is that of ODOT? I am confused with ODOTs priorities. In our August 6,2008 meeting with ODOT and City staff (at Springfield Development office), ODOT staff suggested we use 44th Street for a truck loading/unloading zone. Now ODOT seems concerned we can't get into the site from 44th. This is after considerable cost to the applicant spent proving that once on the site we couldn't get out of the site. ODOT did not seem concerned with the inadequacy of the 44th access when requiring us to close the Main Street access, so.why the concern now? I will let you know what I discover from JRH. Sincerely, Date Received: /';/J-I;;ooa Planner: AL / /. 12/2/2008 Message Page 2 of5 Mike. --- Original Messkge --- From: LANGE Jeffrev R To: Michael Kaiser Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; L1MBIRD Andrew Sent: Monday, Nqvember 17, 2008 9:18 AM Mike, Ed Cantrell with our Roadway Unit commented under the prior application review that a WB-67 could not make the movements necessary to access the site via 44th Street unless the on street parking on the east side was eliminated. The on street parking will need to be eiiminated as a condition of approval or you will need to provide turning templates showing how the WB-67 is able to access the site.. Please work with Ed if you feel you are able to show how a WB-fJ7 can access the site with the on-street parking. Per your other e-mail questions, a lowered sidewalk/dustpan type design can be used to construct the right-out approach. If you can submit completed plans as soon as possible we will be able to process your application more quickly. ODOT will need to receive and approve plans incorporating all of the requested design elements prior to issuing a construction permit. Thanks, Jeffrey Lange, ODOT Access Coordinator 644 A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 phone: (541) 744-8080 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 4:28 PM TiI: LANGE Jeffrey R Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; UMBIRD Andrew Subject: Re: Spri~gfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access Design <new Kaiser app 8988) Jeff, , , I will check with the owner and Enterprise but I think all of the items are okay, with the exception of the parking elimination on 44th Street. I am not sure if the City can do that nor do I think that they should. That is essentially parking!that would be associated with the adjacent property owner on the other side of the street. I will check with JRhl to see if we can do a simple modification with the 44th street approach and/or the site layout (for vehicle storage) that would enable the WB-fJ7 vehicle to enter the site without elimination of the 44th street parking. .1 al,~o sent an e-mail to the City to see what their thoughts were on being able to eliminate parking on the east side. I will let you know what I find out. . Also, for the record, Andrew Umbird is the City planner on this project now and not Molly Markarian. He is included in the CC, Thanks, Mike 'Michael J. Kaiser, PE 56363 POAGE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING. INC. PH 541/485-4505 FAX 541/485-5624 E-MAIL mkaiser@poage.net Date ~eceived' 1~j;./).d(7r Planner: AL 12/2/2008 Message Page 3 of5 P.O. BOX 2527 EUGENE, OR 97402-0152 990 aBlE ST --- Original Message - From: LANGE Jeffrev R To: Michael Kaiser Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; mmarkarianlalci.sDrinafield.or.us Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 12:09 PM Subject: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access Design <new Kaiser app 8988) Hi Mike,' I discussed your concerns with the Traffic Manager and Roadway Designer and they.have agreed to modify ODOT's prior design requirements to facilitate your design vehicle. . Please incorporate the following design elements into your plans and submit the completed plans to ODOT for ou~ review an~ approval. . Construct a directional approach for right-out only with sufficient width to accommodate the exiting design vehicle. . . The approach can be a lowered sidewalk design and must meet all ADAstandards. . Install "Do Not Enter" signs facing Main Street traffic. . Install "Truck Exit Only" & "Right Turn Only" signs for exiting trucks. . Install a lockable gate on the private property that will remain closed except to allow trucks to exit. The design must incorporate a gate, a chain or.bollards will not be sufficient. . ODOT's priorreview concluded that to make the movement needed to get a WB-67 onto the site the parking on the easterly side of 44th Street would need to be eliminated. ODOT approval of the right-out approach will be conditioned upon the City approval of removing the 44th Street eastside parking. . On site striping will not be required Please contact me if you have questions. Thanks, Jeffrey Lange, ODOT Access Coordinator 644 A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 phone: (541) 744-8080 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 12:26 PM To: LANGE Jeffrey R Subject: Re: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access <new Kaiser app 8988) Jeff, Thanks for your response. I think the only thing we have a problem with doing is the mountable curb on Main Street. I had intended to make th~plan address all the other items, more or less. I believe traffic flow on Main Street would be better served without the mountable curb for two reasons. First it presents a problem for trucks leaving our site and entering Main Street. The mountable curb wili cause trucks to enter Main at a much slower speed than without a mountable curb. As you can see in the attached pdf images, the transport truck only has a clearance of about 5 inches. Even if it were a regular semi truck with more clearance, I would wonder about the ~afety of proposing to enter a fairly busy road while dropping from a mountable curb and trying to keep in the right lane. The mountable curb will rock the transport vehicle and will likely scrape the curb or cause it to high center on the curb. The slow entering truck would present unsafe barriers to traffic flow while trying to manuever into the right (westbound) lane of Main Street. Without the mountable curb, trucks could enter the right lane sooner and with less interference of normal traffic flow. I wonder if there are other similar situations where mountable curbs were used (on busy highways/Main Streets) and found to be safe or unsafe. Does the mountable curb really help the overall situation or are we making a worse problem by trying to use it? It may deter some cars from trying to use it, mainly detering left Date Received: 1:/;-/.).4"1" Planner: AL 1212/2008 Message Page 4 of 5 turns into the site from eastbound traffic, but is that worth making it unsafe for trucks trying to enter Main Street from this site. I think the signs will deter most people. So for a very small percentage of people who will blatantly break the rules, we are .making it unsafe for the actual intended user. Second, the mountable curb will present problems for people who, although they see.the signs (Do Not Enter, Exit Only), may not see the mountable curb until too late and stop in traffic to maneuver over the curb. The signs alone will keep most people from trying to use the access as an entrance. Also, most others would be detered by its narrow width and design (angle to Main) not seeing adequate room for two way traffic. Instead the mountable curb only seems to add safety concerns for when it is used by those for whom it is intended and by those who are breaking the rules to use it. I did not include ''Truck'' in the exit only sign because it didn't seem that critical to me for the relatively small number of vehicles that will be using it on a daily basis. The same number of vehicles will be entering Main Street from 44th Street just 157 feet to the east, should they not use this exit. I am not sure if that is better for traffic or worse, just looking at where other accesses to Main Street are located, including flow from S. 44th Street and the businesses across Main Street. South 44th Street <on south side 'of Main) is located between our- alternate access, 44th Street (on the north side of Main), and the proposed access to Main. Therefore the auto traffic we introduce to Main Street will either enter to the east of or to the west of S. 44th Street. I am not sure that will make any difference one way of the other. For entrance onto Main in general I would agree that it is easier to do from 44th street, but with the relatively small amount of traffic exiting the site, it just doesn't seem like something to make an issue over. So that said, we will add "Truck" to the "Exit Only" sign even though I am not convinced that it will have any positive or negative impact to traffic on the state highway. If it doesn't matter to ODOT either, we would prefer leaving the "Truck" part off from the sign but will do it if ODOT feels it necessary after reconsidering my argument to leave off. There is an right arrow shown on the plan. Did you need something more for on site striping? Please let me know what you think about my position regarding the proposed access and ODOT requirements. I did try to look at this from an objective point of view and identify any possible concerns there may be with the proposed access. I certainly do not pretend to have all the answers or know what is best for the State Highway system and would welcome any insight you have on these matters in regards to this specific application. Sincerely, Mike Michael 1. Kaiser, PE 5_6363 POAGE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING. INC. PH 541/485-4505 FAX 541/485-5624 E-MAIL mkaiser@poage.net P.O. BOX 2527 EUGENE, OR 97402-0152 990 aBlE ST. - Original Message - From: LANGE Jeffrev R To': mkaiser@lQoaae.net Cc: WARREN David; LINER Duane J ; SANTOS Dennis N ; bETERING Lvnn Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:49 AM Subject: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access (new Kaiserapp 8988) Mike, ODOT has received your new approach application for the proposed Enterprise Rent-A-Car site at 4396 Main Street. Per our phone conversation this morning ODOT is requesting that you design the right-out only approach to incorporate the following: 12/2/2008 Message Page 5 of5 . A directional approach for right-out only with sufficient width to accommodate the trucks exiting . "Do Not Enter" sign facing traffic that may try to enter from the highway . "Truck Exit Only" sign for exiting vehicles. . On site striping reflecting a right-out only. Please contact me if you have questions. Thanks, . Jeffrey Lange, ODOr Access Coordinator 644 A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 phone: (541) 744-8080 o Ri! he Data t:{eceived: /" ~ kef Planner: AL 12/2/2008 : Message Page 1 of5 L1MBIRD Andrew From: Michael Kaiser [mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 12:49 PM To: CANTRELL Edward W; LANGE Jeffrey R; LINER Duane J Cc: . WARREN David; L1MBIRD Andrew; DONOVAN James; GRILE Bill Subject: Re: Have you already done a turn analysis of the proposed design? If you haven't seen tracking for the WB~7 vehicle for the proposed design yet, then why not ask for it before requiring the elimination of parking on 44th street? Please let me know if you have already done the analysis on the latest design, otherwise I will wait for JRH to let me know what they find. . . This is not a perfect situation here but we are trying to work with what we have. This is an area that the City would like to see redeveloped and ODOTs restrictions are making it much more difficult than it should be. These kind of road blocks make it difficult to operate in the real world of property leases and CitY site reviews. These are the kind of things that drive measures like Measure 37 because development becomes so restrictive that nobody knows what they can do, if anything, with the property they have. And the subjective rules and interpretations of them are continually moving and changing. In this case, what happens!at the end of the lease for Enterprise if the need for access to Main is not proven for the next leasee because they do not need access for a WB~7 truck? I assume ODOT would require closing the entrance to Main and add',the parking back on 44th street, etc. So every 5 or 10 years we go through this painful process again. What a mess. I don't think this is very helpful for the State Highway system or our State resources. It is certainly not worth the bad publicity ODOT has, is, and will continue getting from it. ODOT is not treating the citizens and taxpayers "very well. Instead of representing the peoples interests, ODOT is fighting them every step of the way. ODOT is the only one in this situation questioning the need for access to the State Highway. . We did show a reasonable need for both right in and out on Main but apparently ODOTs opinions are the only opinions that count. '. Thanks. Mike ---- Original Message ---- From: CANTRELL Edward W To: Michael Kaiser; LANGE Jeffrev R ; LINER Duane J Cc: WARREN David; L1MBIRD Andrew; DONOVAN James Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 11 :53 AM Subject: RE: . Michael, The premise for needing access to the state highway was that the WB-67'trucks wouWneed to access the development from 44th and exit to the highway.' . This dev~lopment site is not large' enough to handle trucks without the right-out onto the highway. Without removing parking along 44th Street, it does not appear that trucks can even enter the site. If trucks can not enter the site, the need for access to the state highway would be quesiionable. If you can provide truck off-tracking that shows that the WB~7 can enter the site with parking occupied along 44th St., then there should not be any need to remove the parking. Any questions, give me a call. Thanks, Date ~eceived: I ~,hocJ' Planner: AL 12/2/2008 Message Page 2 of5 Edward W. Cantrell, P.E. ODOT, Region 2 Lead Roadway Designer Ph. (503) 986-5829 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 11:05 AM To: LANGE Jeffrey R Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; UMBIRD Andrew Subject: Re: . Jeffrey, I am a little fru'strated with this process. I understand you are trying to manage the State Highway system and make it as safe as possible. However, why are you trying to manage the 44th Street aCcess? An ODOT requirement to eliminate parking on the east side of 44th will impact adjacent property owners and not just this applicant. I appreciate the suggestion that maybe the access on 44th won't work and I,am working with JRH Transportation Engineering to verify what is needed to allow a WB-67 vehicle to access the site from 44th. However, this is not the same approach design that was shown on the original application. In the original application we were using the existing approach that was about 23.4 feet wide (bottom): with 6' wings. Now it is 34.0 feet wide (bottom) with 9' wings. I sent the current design to JRH prior to submitting to.ODOT and they did not suggest anything about parking elimination on 44th. But whether it can or can't should not be ODOTS problem. 44th is a ,City street that ODOT does not have control over, or at least should~'t. If a truck were to go down 44th and not be able to get into the site, what concern is that of ODOT? I am confused with ODOTs priorities. In our August 6,2008 meeting with ODOT and City staff (at Springfield Development office), OD'OT staff suggested we use 44th Street for a truck loading/unloading zone. Now ODOT seems concerned we can't get into the site from 44th. This is after considerable cost to the applicant spent proving that once on the site we couldn't get out of the site. ODOr did not seem concerned with the inadequacy of the 44th access when requiring us to close the Main Street access, so why the concern now? I will let you know what I discover from JRH. Sincerely, Mike ---- Original Message ~- From: LANGE Jeffrev R To: Michael Kaiser Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; L1MBJRD Andrew Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 9: 18 AM Mike, Ed Cantrell with our Roadway Unit commented under the prior application review that,a WB-67 could not make the movements necessary to access the site via 44th Street unless the on street parking on the east side was eliminated. The on street parking will need to be eliminated as a condition of approval or you will need to provide turning templates showing how the WB-67 is able to access the site. Please work with Ed if you feel you are able to show how a WB-67 Can access the site with the on-street parking. , . Per your other e"mail questions, a lowered sidewalk/dustpan type design can be usedao construct the right- out approach. If you can submit completed plans as soon as possible we will be able to process your application more quickly. ODOT will need to receive and approve plans incorporating all of the requested design elements prior to issuing a construction permit. . Thanks, Jeffrey Lange, ODor Access Coordinator Date Received: I). ;;~t7r Planner: AI:. i/' 12/2/2008 Message Page 3 of5 644 A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 phone: (541) 744-8080 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 4:28 PM To: LANGE Jeffrey R Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; UMBIRD Andrew, Subject: Re: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access Design <new Kaiser app 8988) Jeff, I will check with the owner and Enterprise but I think all of the items are okay, with the exception of the parking elimination. on 44th Street. I am not.sure if the City can do that nor do I think that they should. That is essentially parking that would be associated with the adjacent property owner on the other side of the street. I. will check with JRH to see if we can do a simple modification with the 44th street approach andlor the site layout (for vehicle storage) that would enable the WB.u7 vehicle to enter the site without elimination of the 44th street parking. I also sent an e-mail to the City to see what their thoughts were on being able to eliminate parking on the east side. I will let you know what I find out. . Also, for the record, Andrew Umbird is the City planner on this project now and not Molly Markarian. He is included in the CC. Thanks, Mike Michael J. Kaiser, PE 56363 POAGE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING. INC. PH 541/485-4505 FAX 541/485-5624 E-MAIL mkaiser@poage.net P.O. BOX 2S27 EUGENE, OR 97402-0152 990 OBIE ST. ---- Original Message -.. From: LANGE Jeffrev R To: Michael Kaiser Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; mmarkarian@cLsDringfield.or.us Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 12:09 PM . . Subject: Sprin9field Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access Design (new Kaiser app 8988) Hi Mike, I discussed your concerns with the Traffic Manager and Roadway Designer and they have agreed to modify ODOT's prior design requirements to facilitate your design vehicle. Please. incorporate the following design elements into your plans and submit the completed plans to ODOT for our review and approval. . Construct a directional approach for right-out only with sufficient width to accommodate the exiting design vehicle. . . The approach can be a lowered sidewalk design and must meet all ADA standards. . Install "Do Not Enter" signs facing Main Street traffic. . Install "Truck Exit Only" & "Right Turn Only" signs for exiting trucks. " . Install a lockable gate on the private property that will remain closed except to allow trucks to exit. The design must incorporate a gate, a chain or bollards will not be sufficient. .' . /,0 Date Received' IJ/~.ut?! Planneri AL 12/2/2008 Message Page 4 of 5 I . ODOT's prior review concluded that to make the movement needed to get a WB-:67 onto the site the parking on the easterly side of 44th Street would need to be eliminated. ODOT approval of the right-out approach will be conditioned upon the City approval of removing the 44th Street east side parking. " . Onsite striping will not be required Please contact me if you have questions. Thanks, Jeffrey Lange, OOOT Access Coordinator 644 A' Street Springfield, OR, 97477 phone: (541) 744-8080 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Tuesday;, November 04, 2008 12:26 PM To: LANGE Jeffrey R' Subject: Re: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access <new Kaiser app 8988) Jeff, Thanks for your response. I think the only thing we have a problem with doing is the', mountable curb on Main Street. .1 had intended to make the plan address all the other items, more or less. " I believe traffic flow on Main Street would be better served without the mountable curb for two reasons.. First it presents a problem for trucks leaving our site and entering Main Street. The mountable curb will cause trucks to enter Main at a much slower speed than without a mountable curb. As you can see in the attached pdf images, the transport truck only has a clearance of about 5 inches. Even if it were a regular semi truck with more clearance, I would wonder about the safety of proposing to enter a fairly busy road while . dropping from a mountable curb and trying to keep in the right lane. The mountable curb will rock the transport vehicle and will likely scrape the curb or cause it to high center on the curb:' The slow entering truck would present unsafe barriers to traffic flow while trying to manuever into the right (westbound) lane of Main Street. Without the mountable curb, trucks could enter the right lane sooner arid with less interference of normal traffic flow. I wonder if there are other similar situations where mountable curbs were used (on busy highways/Main Streets) and found to be safe or unsafe. Does the mountable curb really help the overall situation or are we making a worse problem by trying to use it? It may deter some cars from trying to use it, mainly detering left turns into the site from eastbound traffic, but is that worth making it unsafe for trucks trying to enter Main Street from this site. I think the signs will deter most people. So "for a very small . percentage of people who will blatantly break the rules, we are making it unsafe for the actual intended user. Second, the mountable curb will present problems for' people who, although they see the signs (Do Not Enter, Exit Only), may not see the mountable curb until too late and stop in traffic to maneuver over the curb. The signs alone will keep most people from trying to use the access as an entrance., Also, most others would be detered by its narrow width and design (angle to Main) not seeing adequate room for two way traffic. Instead the mountable curb only seems to add safety concerns for when it is used by those for whom it is intended and by.those who are breaking the rules to use it. ,: I did not include "Truck" in the exit only sign because it didn't seem that critical to me'lfor the relatively small number of vehicles that will be using it on a daily basis. The same number of vehicles will be entering Main Street from 44th Street just 157 feet to the east, should they not use this exit. I am not sure if that is better for traffic or worse, just looking at where other accesses to Main Street are located, including flow from S. 44th Street and the businesses across Main Street. South 44th Street (on south side of Main) is located between our alternate access, 44th Street (on the north side of Main), and the proposed access to Main. Therefore the auto traffic we introduce to Main Street will either enter to the east of. or to the west of S. 44th Street. I am not sure that will make any difference one way of the other. For entrance onto Main in general) would agree that it is easier to do from 44th street, but with the relatively small amount of traffic exiting the site, it just doesn't seem like something to make'an issue over. So that said, we will add "Truck" to the "Exit Only" sign even though I am not convinced that it will have any positive or negative impact to traffic on the state highway. If it doesn't matter to ODOT either, we would prefer leaving the "Truck" part off from the sign Date Received: /J.. f /:MOr Planner: AL 121212008 Message Page 5 of5 Jut will do it if ODOT feels it necessary after reconsidering my argument to leave off. fhere is an right arrow shown on the plan. Did you need something more for on site striping? 'lease let me know what you think about my position regarding the proposed access and ODOT 'equirements. I did try to look at this from an objective point of view and identify any possible concerns there nay be with the proposed. access. I certainly do not pretend to have all the answers or know what is best for he State Highway system and would welcome any insight you have on these matters in regards to this ;pecific application. Sincerely, \i1ike \1ichae1 J. Kaiser, PE 56363 POAGE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING. INC. 'H 541/4854505 FAX 541/485-5624 E-MAIL mkaiser@poage.nct '.0. BOX 2527 EUGENE. OR 97402-0152 990 OBIE ST. - Original Message - =rom: LANGE Jeffrev R ro: mkaiser@poaqe.net . ::c: WARREN David; LINER Duane J ; SANTOS Dennis N ; DETERING Lvnn Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:49 AM Subject: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access <new Kaiser app 8988) \i1ike, JDOT has received your new approach application for the proposed Enterprise Rent-A-Car site at 4396 \i1ain Street. Per our phone conversation this morning ODOT is requesting that you design the right-out )nly approach to incorporate the following: . A mountable curb design with a full height sidewalk at the approach. . A directional approach for right-out only with sufficient width to accommodate the trucks exiting . "Do Not Enter" sign facing traffic that may try to enter from the highway . "Truck Exit Only" sign for exiting vehicles. . On site striping reflecting a right-out only. Please contact me if you have questions. Thanks, Jeffrey Lange, ODOT Access Coordinator 544 A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 Jhone: (541) 744-8080 Date Received: IJ;{. ~t?tI r Planner: AL I/'-' 12/2/2008 Message Page 1 of5 L1MBIRD Andrew From: Michael Kaiser [mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 1:23 PM To: CANTRELL Edward W; LANGE Jeffrey R; LINER Duane J Cc: WARREN David; L1MBIRD Andrew; DONOVAN James; GRILE Bill Subject: Re: TO(lIl, I hope I did not sound angry with my last e-mail.ltis.hard with e-mail to communicate effectively but it is a useful tool. Ido not want to attack anyone personally or otherwise. I am just frustrated with the development process in Oregon. With all the regulation I find I am fighting with somebody in government who has an interpretation of . some vague code language that does not agree with my interpretation. Whether it be a Ipcal, state, or federal rule, it seems to be a constant barrage of the individual losing their rights, all in the nam~ of the rights of everybody else. That is not how our country was founded. The individual is important and if something is good for the whole, then the expense to the individual should be compensated. However, that':is not what is happening. Whether its the US Army Corp and the (Oregon) Department of State Lands,regarding wetlands, or ODOT and peoples access to highways, or local ordinances concerning waterways or other land use restrictions, individual rights are continually being taken away with no compensation. It gets old trying to represent the individual against the government, often spending thousands of dollars to no avail. That is all. So please do not take my last few e-mailspersonally.ltis just a sign of the times. I hope to':continue to work to represent the individual, while keeping in mind that I am working with government staff who are also individuals. I know you are just trying to do your jobs and I will continue to do my best to respect that. "So I do apologize if I have been or sounded too critical. " Si ncerely, Mike -- Original Message --- From: CANTRELL Edward W To: Michael Kaiser; LANGE Jeffrev R ; LINER Duane J Cc: WARREN David; L1MBIRD Andrew; DONOVAN James Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 11 :53 AM Subject: RE: Michael, The premise for needing access to the state highway was that the WB-67 trucks wouldi,need to access the development from 44th and exit to the highway. This development.site is not large enough to handle trucks without the right-out onto the highway. Without removing parking along 44th Street, . it does not appear that trucks can even enter the site. If trucks can not enter the site, the need for access to the state highway would be questionable. If you can provide truck off-tracking that shows that the WB-67 can enter the site with parking occupied along 44th St., then there should not be any need to remove the parking. 'I Any questions, give me a call. Thanks, Edward W. Cantrell, P.E. Date. Received: I J-j; /J<10r Planner: AL "" I " 12/2/2008 Message Page 2 of5 ODOT, Region 2 Lead Roadway Designer Ph. (503) 986-5829 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 11:05 AM To: LANGE Jeffrey R Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; UMBIRD Andrew Subject: Re: Jeffrey, I am;a little frustrated with this process. I understand you are trying to manage the State Highway system and make it as safe as possible. However, why are you trying to manage the 44th Street access? An ODOT requirement to eliminate parking on the east side of 44th will impact adjacent property owners and not just this applicant. I appreciate the suggestion that maybe the access on 44th won't work and I, am working with JRH Transportation Engineering to verify what is needed to allow a WB-67 vehicle to access the site from 44th. However, this is not the same approach design that was shown on the original application. In Hie original application we were using the existing approach that was about 23.4 feet wide (bottom) with 6' wings. Now it is 34.0 feet wide (bottom) with 9' wings. I sent the current design to JRH prior to submitting to ODOT and they did not suggest anything about'parking elimination on 44th. But whether it can or can't should not be ODOTS problem. 44th is a City street that ODOT does not have control over, or at least shouldn't. If a truck were to go down 44th and not be able to get into the site, what concern is that of ODOT? I am confused with ODOTs priorities. In our August 6,2008 meeting with ODOT and City staff (at Springfield Development office), ODOT staff suggested we use 44th Street for a truck loading/unloading zone. Now ODOT. seems concerned we can't get into the site from 44th. This is after considerable cost to the applicant spent proving that once on the site we couldn't get out of the site. ODOT did not seem concerned with the inadequacy of the 44th access when requiring us to close the Main Street access, so why the concern now? I will let you know what I discover from JRH. Sincerely, Mike ---- Original Message--- From: LANGE Jeffrev R To: Michael Kaiser . Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; L1MBIRD Andrew Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 9:18 AM Mike, Ed Cantrell with our Roadway Unit commented under the prior application review that a WB-67 could not make the movements necessary to access the site via 44th Street unless the on street parking on the east side was eliminated. The on street parking will need to be eliminated as a condition of approval or you will need to provide turning templates showing how the WB-67 is able to access the site. "Please work with Ed if you feel. you are able to show how a WB-67 can access the site with the on-street parking. Per your other e-mail questions, a lowered sidewalk/dustpan type design can be used to construct the right- out approach. If you can submit completed plans as soon as possible we will be able:to process your . application more quickly. ODOT will need to receive and approve plans incorporating' all of the requested design eiementsprior to issuing a construction pemnit. ' Thanks, Jeffrey Lange, ODOT Access Coordinator 644 A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 Date Received: /~Ah~f Planner: AL 1212/2008 Message Page 3 of 5 phone: (541) 744-8080 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Friday, November 14, 20084:28 PM To: LANGE Jeffrey R Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W; UMBIRD Andrew SUbject: Re: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access Design <new Kaiser app 8988) Jeff, I will check with the owner and Enterprise but I think all of the items are okay, with the exception of the parking elimination on 44th Street. I am not sure if the City can do that nor do I think that they should. That is essentially parking that would be associated with the adjacent property owner on the other side of the street. I will check with JRH to see if we can do a simple modification with the 44th street approach and/or the site layout (for vehicle storage) that would enable the WB-67 vehicle to enter the site without elimination of the 44th street parking. I also sent an e-mail to the City to see what their thoughts were on being able to eliminate parking on the east side. I will let you know what I find out. Also, for the record, Andrew Umbird is the City planner on this project now and not M611y Markarian. He is included in the CC. Thanks, Mike Michael J. Kaiser, PE 56363 POAGE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING. INC. PH 541/485-4505 FAX 541/485-5624 E-MAIL mkaiser@poage.net P.O. BOX 2527 EUGENE, OR 97402-0152 990 OBIE ST. -- Original Message -- From: LANGE Jeffrev R To: Michael Kaiser Cc: WARREN David; CANTRELL Edward W ; mmarkarian@cLsQringfield.or.us Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 12:09 PM Subject: Sprin9field Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access Design <new Kaiser app 8988) Hi Mike; I discussed your concerns with the Traffic Manager and Roadway Designer and they,have agreed to modify ODOT's prior design requirements to facilitate your design vehicle. Please incorporate the following design elements into your plans and submit the completed plans to ODOT for our review and approval. . Construct a directional approach for right-out only with sufficient width to a=mmodate the exiting design vehicle. . The approach can be a lowered sidewalk design and must meet all ADA standards. . Install "Do Not Enter" signs facing Main Street traffic. . Install "Truck Exit Only" & "Right Turn Only" signs for exiting trucks. . Install a lockable gate on the private property that will remain closed except to allow trucks to exit. The design must incorporate a gate, a chain or bollards will not be sufficient. . ODOT's prior review concluded that to make the movement needed to get a WB-67 onto the site the parking on the easterly side of 44th Street would need to be eliminated. ODOT approval of the right-out Date Received: ,~tfocf' 12/2/2008 Planner: AL Message Page 4 of 5 approach will be conditioned upon the City approval of removing the 44th Street east side parking. . Onsite. striping will not be required Please contact me if you have questions. Thanks, Jeffrey Lange, OOOT Access Coordinator 644 A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 phone: (541) 744-8080 From: Michael Kaiser [mailto:mkaiser@poage.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 12:26 PM To: LANGE Jeffrey R Subject: Re: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access <new Kaiser app 8988) Jeff, Thanks for you~ response. I think the only thing we have a problem with doing is the mountable curb on Main Street. I had intended to make the plan address all the other items, more or less. I believe traffic flow on Main Street would be better served without the mountable curb for two reasons. First it presents a problem for trucks leaving our site and entering Main Street. The mountable curb will cause trucks to enter Main at a much slower speed than without a mountable curb. As you can see in the attached pdf images, the transport truck only has a clearance of about 5 inches. Even if it were a regular semi truck with more clearance, I would wonder about the safety of proposing to enter a fairly busy road while dropping from a mountable curb and trying to keep in the right lane. The mountable curb will rock the transport vehicle and will likely scrape the curb or cause it to high center on the curb. The slow entering truck would present unsafe barriers to traffic flow while trying to manuever into the right (westbound) lane of Main Street. Without the mountable curb, trucks could enter the right lane sooner and with less interference of normal traffic flow. I wonder if there are other similar situations where mountable curbs were used (on busy highways/Main Streets) and found to be safe or unsafe. Does the mountable curb really help the overall situation or are we making a worse problem by trying to use it? It may deter some cars from trying to use it, mainly detering left turns into the site from eastbound traffic, but is that worth making it unsafe for trucks trying to enter Main Street from this site. I think the signs will deter most people. .So for a very small percentage of people who will blatantly break the rules, we are making it unsafe for the actual intended user. Second, the mountable curb will present problems for people who, although they see the signs (Do Not Enter, Exit Only), may not see the mountable curb until too late and stop in traffic to maneuver over the curb. . The signs alone will keep most people from tryin9 to use the access as an entrance!; Also, most others would be detered by its narrow width and design (angle to Main) not seeing adequate room for two way traffic. Instead the mountable curb only seems to add safety concerns for when it is used by those for whom it is intended and by those who are breaking the rules to use it. I did not include "Truck" in the exit only sign because it didn't seem that critical to me for the relatively small number of vehicles that will be using it on a daily basis. The same number of vehicles will be entering Main Street from 44th Street just 157 feet to the east, should they nofuse this exit. I am riot sure if that is better for traffic or worse, just looking at where other accesses to Main Street are located, including flow from S. 44th Street and the businesses across Main Street. South 44th Street (on south side of Main) is located between our alternate access, 44th Street (on the north side of Main), and the proposed access to Main. Therefore the auto traffic we introduce to Main Street will either enter to the east of or to the west of S. 44th Street. I am not sure that will make any difference one way of the other. For entrance onto Main in general I would agree that it is easier to do from 44th street, but with the relatively small amoynt of traffic exiting the site, it just doesn't seem like something to make an issue over. So that said, we will add "Truck" to the "Exit Only" sign even though I am not convinced that it will have any positive or negative impact to traffic on the state highway. If it doesn't matter to ODOT either, we would prefer leaving the "Truck" part off from the sign but will do it if ODOT feels it necessary after reconsidering my argument to leave off, Date Received: I;;pcct Planner: AL 12/2/2008 Message Page 5 of5 fhere .is an right arrow shown on the plan. Did you need something more for on site. striping? "lease let me know what you think about my position regarding the proposed access and ODOT 'equirements. I.did try to look at this from an objective point of view and identify any' possible.concerns there llay be with the proposed access. I certainly do not pretend to have all the answers or know what is best for :he State Highway system and would welcome any insight you have on these matters in regards to this ;pecific application. Sincerely, iIIike Michael 1. Kaiser, PE 56363 POAGE ENGINEERING & SURVEYING. INC. 'H 541/4854505 FAX 541/485-5624 E-MAIL mkaiser@poage.net '.0. BOX 2527 EUGENE, OR 97402-0152 990 aBlE ST. ---- Original Message -"- =rom: LANGE Jeffrev.R fo: mkaiserl?ilRoage.net :c: WARREN David; LINER Duane J ; SANTOS Dennis N ; DETERING Lvnn Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 10:49 AM Subject: Springfield Enterprise Rent-A-Car Access (new Kaiser app 8988) . , iIIike, JDOT has received your new approach application for the proposed Enterprise Rent-A-Car site at 4396 iIIain Street. Per our phone conversation this morning ODOT is requesting that you design the right-out Jnly approach to incorporate the following: . A mountable curb design with a full height sidewalk at the approach. I, . A directional approach for right-out only with sufficient width to accommodate the trucks exiting . "Do Not Enter" sign facing traffic that may try to enter from the highway . "Truck Exit Only" sign for exiting vehicles. . On site striping refiecting a right-out only. Please contact me if you have questions. Thanks, Jeffrey Lange, ODOr Access Coordinator 544 A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 Jhone: (541) 744-8080 Data Receive~: IJ.f-/:;CCd Planner: AL, 12/2/2008