Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments SUB 5/22/2008 ~.;. SUB Development Review Cwents For DRC2008-00025 ~ L1MBIRD Andrew . Page 1 of2 From: MATYSZAK Guenter [guenterm@subutil.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22,20089:05 AM To: L1MBIRD Andrew Subject: RE: SUB Development Review Comments For DRC2008-00025 Hi Andy, I have looked at the plan for the anchor you described in the email and it appears to be pole #77034. There are two poles on that corner with anchors. Pole 77034 is along the west property line and has the conductors crossing over 42nd street (east/west orientation). I believe this is the pole you are referring to. The other pole is #79072 and it is along the north property line (south side of Smith Way). Concerning moving the pole anchor from the east-west orientation to the north-south orientation would not work due to the orientation of the span going across 42nd street. An ~nchor is designed to counter the force of the conductor pulling on the pole. If the conductors run to the west (as they do in this instance) the anchor counters the force to the east so the pole does not lean f~om the weight and tension of the conductors. We could remove the anchor and move it to the east edge of the bioswale approximately 3 feet. The current anchor appears to be in the middle ofthe proposed bioswale (4' from the west edge of the 7' P.U.E.). If we go to the edge of the bioswale it looks like we will be on . the east edge of the 7' P.U.E. We may need to extend the P.U.E. slightly to accommodate the anchor. We can also place the anchor further east into the planting strip, but that would increase the siz<:, of the easement required. The cost of moving the anchor would be the developer's responsibility. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Guenter From: LIMBIRD Andrew [mailto:alimbird@ci.springfield.or.us] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 3:42 PM To: MATYSZAK Guenter Subject: RE: SUB Development Review Comments For DRC2008-00025 Thanks Guenter Of interest to SUB Electric: Although the applicant is proposing a 7-foot wide PUE along the property frontage, I have made provisions in the decision for modifying the 7-foot PUE (if necessary) to accommodate the existing overhead line crossing the NW corner of the site, and the anchor wire for the pole on 42nd Street. At the very least, the pole anchor will need to be relocated out of the proposed bioswale, but I'm not sure if the anchor wire can be re-oriented along the north-south axis (parallel with 42nd Street). Andy From: MATYSZAK Guenter [mailto:guenterm@subutil.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 3:35 PM To: LIMBIRD Andrew Subject: SUB Development Review Comments For DRC2008-0002S Hi Andy, 5/22/2008 Date l'<eceived: Planner: AL ( S !zZ/1OO1 / / ". SUB Development Review cwents For DRC2008-00025 . "-.. Page 2 of2 I was out on May 13th for ,the tentative site review of East & West Coast Auto. The paperwork was buried until I found it this week (sorry!). Please see the enclosed word document for comments from SUB electric, I see no issues as long as they are only requiring single phase service, The feed would come from a riser and run south for approximately 10 feet to the new building, Feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns, Regards, Guenter Matyszak <<Development Review - 42nd & Smith Way - East & West Coast Auto.docx>> Date r'<6ceived: Planner: AL 5/22/2008 '?-2./'200/' ,