The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPacket, DRC PLANNER 3/17/2011 . CllY OF SPRINGFIELD - .LOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE DISTRIBUTION DATE March 15, 2011 TO: .,/ ,/' /' /' 4- /' ~ 7 ----:7 ,/ L L /' ./ L .-IL. ..L ~ ~ v ..L ~ -.L ..L --lL' ..L L ..L ~ .L v v 7 V ,7 *Current Planning Staff: G. Karp, J. Donovan, Liz MillerlM. Metzg.mLissa Davi~, L. Pauly, Tara Jones, Andy Limbird, Dave Reesor, Steve Hopkins, Moily Markarian *Matt Stouder, Engineering - Public Works Department I Brian Barnett, Traffic Engineer/PE, Public Works, Department (agenda only 2/02) *Michael Liebler, Transportation Planning Engineer, Public Works Department *Gilbert Gordon, Deputy Fire Marshail, Fire & Life Safety Department Melissa Fechtei, Fire Agenda only / *Ronni Price, Planner, Wiilamalane Park and Recreation District *Ed Head, Springfield Utility Board (Electric) *Tamara Johnson, Springfield Utility Board (Water) *Bart McKee, Water Engineering Supervisor - Springfield Utility Board (Water) Jack Foster, Springfield Utility Board (Energy Conservation) Amy Chinitz, Springfield Utility Board (Drinking Water) * Jim Henry, Central Lane Communications 911 Leo Lambert, US Postal Service *Biily Elder, Northwest Natural Gas (John Radosevich, alternate reviewer) *Phil Fields, Lane County Transportation (Celia Barry & Steve Smrth) Thomas Jeffreys, Emerald People's Utility District (EPUD) George Ehlers, La,,\, County Sanitarian [Urban Transition Zone] (if applicable) Jamie Porter, Rainbow Water District (Dean Hill alternate reviewer) (* only if in' the North SpfJd area) Ralph Johnston, Lane Regional Air Poilution Authority (if applicable) Tom Henerty, Comcast Cable (if applicable) Mark Oberle, EWEB (electric) (property) Dick Helgeson/Mel Damewood, EWEB (water) (*If in Glenwood) Biil Grile - Development Services Director (agenda) John Tamulonis, Economic & Community Development Manager *Dave Puent, Building Official *Lisa Hopper, Building Services Representative * Greg Ferschweiler, Keith Miyata, Brian Conlon, PW Dept. *Craig Fitzgerald, Maintenance PW Dept George Walker, Environmental Works Dept., (agenda only) Deanna Buckem, Engineering Assistant, Public Works Dept. Pollee Chief, Jerry Smith, Police Department (agenda) *Wiil Mueiler, L TD Norm Palmer, Quest Corporation (agenda *Scott Nelson, Planning & Development Manager, ODOT, State Highway Division Jeff DeFranco, Springfield School District (agenda) Wiiliam Lewis III, Financial Services, Springfield School District (agenda) Joe Leahy, City Attorney Chris Moorhead, City Surveyor (agenda) (agenda) '~ RE/i~i-~~\JED ,', '~,' ",' " ~ t }] r,-'"' ;;! ~.i . .j! ~'"".: ~ MAR 1 7 2011 By:J2FLP~ I O~ 37~ A request for land ,use action, as described on the attached agenda, has been receiv~d by the Development Services,." Office. Specific concerns of your division/departmenVagency should be addressed. If you have comments or'- requirements of this proposal, please send them in writing to the assigned planner @ Development Services Department, 225 Fifth Street, Springfi~ld, OR 97477. Your , comments may also be sent via e-mail or if you are a ORe internal user attach as document within the Accela Automation. If your written comments are not received by Friday, March 25, 2011 specific concems of your division/departmenVagency wiil not be addressed unless you attend the meeting on March 29, 2011. The Development Review Commiltee holds staff review meetings on Tuesday@ 8:00 -10:00 a.m. You shOuld also plan to attend the staff meeting on Tuesday if you have specific concerns so that the Planning representative can discuss them prior to meeting with the applicant. If the Planner feels it is necessary for you to participate in the public meetings he/she will let you know on Tuesday. * full packet ., P~one: I Robertson/Sherwood/Architects c Fax: 132 East Broadwa ,Suite 540, Eu ene, OR 974011 .. , :. . '. ,,'-.,_ , ,.. - - -; ~ ". . I ;, . P~one: Fa~: I . . iCity of Springfield Development Services Department 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 Site Plan Review . .. '. . -. . . ~ A licant Name: Glenwood op LLC, c/o Frank Gibson w/ Hutchinson, Cox, Coons Du rlest & Sherlock P.c. Com an : Address: Glenwood 0 , LLC 777 Hi h Street, Eu ene, OR 97401 ,-<: , .'~ A licant's Re . Scott Stolarcz k Com an : Address: Owner: Com an Glenwood 0 , LLC Address: 00 I Phone: I Fax: I . - - 541-686-9160 541-343-8693 541-342-8077 541-345-4302 ~" .. u', ;"', ... 17-03-'!i,-31 and 17-03- I ASSESSOR'S MAP NO: 34-34 6b - r TAX LOT NO S : Lot 900 and Lot 201 I Address: 3500 Block of Franklin Boulevard between Glenwood Blvd and Henderson Ave. I 75,666 s uare feet 1.73 acres Acres II] S uare Feet 0 Pro osed Name of Pro"ect: Glenwood 0 Medical Office Buildin I "', "., ,.;.-,:;....... ='-1 S. I Ins: Date: Revilwed b Date: '7 /1 I{ Revilwed b -~ I Technical Fee:Qat~lYe~: Posta e Fee: $ rw. I . PROJllWtN1.J~~R: fJR) .0- <:JtJQo'Z. ,'~'-'~_,;i!!;!,"~_:<::::,'2;,;<t,'pl!!i;~"@iLF(:";;i:}~~$;}.:~~,:~;;-;-:-:t:~:;:";;~..;,~~:'~4~~!t'tr"':>;f')',''''; V'c.",,':!:: ;,,;;"~Ki~>W:;~;~'j::,,-::;::::-::~<_'l'~,,;f_~"_~.,;,,',;:.iC' I I Description of Pro osal: Existin Use: Undevelo ed site Associated A lications: Fye/\:)- Q&:'D"2.. (~( (t.A Pre-Sub Case No.: P '- . - 0 COO t'o titl<:) Case No.: A Iication Fee: $ OC) .70 TOTAL FEES: $ & "f'j2:;.%:;~<,::jiM-ih'x'::;*;,,;.>-';-!":::;:::"'-o:;"'!$,~;'~ '" "'Y"';;;'''::~:;::~:f8'','?':>i',,~,''''itt.&''>t\> Revised 11/19/09 c.'lt / I t;'CJ '~......' .,' O(iginalSubmittal . jJ> .<7) Y 'ii\.P ctv L)( 3"1...&"\0 sf 10fiO,. ~pr_map - . I . Page 1 of 1 TVP211-00005 Site Plan Tentative 17 -03-34!, TL 900 & 17-03-34-34 TL 201 Glenwood OP, LLC "~....'_ '.fft " :: ~ ,~ . . ...;.., .- ..- ~::'T '" ) I ,I ':1 Q I " 'I > ...l j al Q ii 0 II 0 I 3: z I w I ...l ~ i I I , ~"" -,,' ,"'"," ,'" . " ' "' ,.' N A Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal http://spifs020/mapguide2009/mapviewerphp/printablepage. php?SESSI ON=d00466ec-ffif- ffif-80... 3/15/2011 I " Cl2OII_....I__I"'...tK". (f) - -; m ""U r )> Z 0 ::I, ce :5' ~ (J) ~ C )> 0' ::tI 3 - ~ r r-..> c ~ - - ~ . . ~~ .., ~ -. r ....>. - llIfYJl2tm - ~ ~ \ ~ 'j. m \~ :fi i ~itr- ~ H~ ~ ~!~ '''' <;> H~ ! l! ~\ \ m \ 1 __~L__;______ _ _,,\ \ \ ..~ \ ID \ 51 \ ~~ 't ~~i~ \ ~~~~ \\ -~ ij... ~, ~' ~ \ m, ", 0\ \ \ \ II: .1 1~~ . ~ I, I; i j. .~ ~, ~i. l!''::: j!::>-",...., .. .'o>i~ iio ~ ~ " i ..ei ! o , l i , " / fll Hl I I," '\ 12~ ~ H ! ' o Ql - CD ::;0 CD (') CD <' CD a. ,. ".". ~ !" Z o I if J~ )ifli iil! IIIJ1< I!!;~l~!! rn i .. j! 'j'[' d' >fl oJf ,I, I II (I tlftf 'JIHhil U,niH '. [f 1"11 rl t"!! t '1 , , I I'; ". t I " [ j I I I,J 'il .[ . ~ · , ..1 Ii' ![ Ilfi ~ IH flf' H ",I J ! If !~~! II Jlil t:;;:.. -c::..... llill tIl H Hil II B h J.. ~~ m fi 1 liB IP .! If f f m . -I~i! H ~ ~.! ~ .! 11 ~ "-'; "Il!l Ie g f55 1! it ~ i ~ I!; ~ , II ~ .! fiff Ii '~~II 0 [] 100 ~ m I '" ~ n j m . I H. ( ! \ ~ R Z .. . B a \ !....) ~ ; ! ' . ~ I' ~. f~ fi ~~ " ~ i ~ I I ., ~;~ , i i · ! \.ljiP~ n g '~ , ~ , " , . ; ; t if" . I , p ~ " ~ , i ~ II . f , , ~ i I ~ i ! . i ~ I, ! , ! L i . ~ ~ . Ii ~ ! 2 ! SITE PLAN Slt. Review Submission: NottorCollStntctlon CAMERON McCARTHY RobertsonjSherwoodJArchit~cts pc Q 02...._...SOO._ ...;..~ _"'-'ll'" I GCen.ood Op Medical Otflc. Bulldlnq I I .-..0_."- --~ __ot_ ~ .' . . I erype II Site Plan Approval Narra for: .) Glenwood Op Medical Office Building 3500 block of Franklin Boulevard Eugene (Glenwood), Oregon 10 March 2011 Applicant/Propertv Owner Glenwood Op LLC c/o Frank Gibson Hutchinson, Cox, Coons, Dupriest & Sherlock P.C. 777 High Street, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541-686-9160 Fax: 541-343-8693 Architect/Applicant's Representative RobertsonlSherwoodjArchilects pc 132 East Broadway, Suite 540 Eugene, OR 97401 I Phone: 541-342-8077 Fax: 541-345-4302 I Alln: Scoll Stolarczyk, AlA, LEED AP . I Landscape Architect Cameron McCarthy Uandscape Architects 150 East Broadway '1' Eugene, OR 97401 . Phone: 541-485-7385 Fax: 541-746-0389 Alln: Justin Lanphear, ASLA Civil EnQineer KPFF Consulting Engineers 1201 Oak Street, Suite 100 Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541-684-4902 F~: 541-684-4909 Alln: Anna Backus Project Description: This application is for site plan approval of a new 2-story medical clinic and office building of approximately 19,900 square feet, to be located in on a vacant lot on the south side of Franklin Boulevard, between Glenwood Boulevard and Henderson Avenue. View at Buildinq from the North (Franklin Boulevard) Glenwood Op Medical Office Building Site Plan Review Narrative Date Recei1ved: . MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal I' Page 1 March 2011 Project Location:. .. . The project site is located on the south side of the 3500 block of Franklin Boulevard in the Glenwood area. The site is currently vacant and undeveloped. , , ~ Approvals Requested: Type II, Site Plan Approval Attached Information (included in this package): Type II Site Review Application (1 copy) Check for Site Plan Review Application Fee Fire Department Vehicle Circulation Diagram Revised Stormwater Scoping Sheet and Report (3 copies) Geotechnical Report Exterior Light Fixture Cut Sheets (1 copy each) Preliminary Title Report and Deed Letter from Hutchinson, Cox, Coons, Dupriest, Orr & Sherlock P.C. regarding JUAA's. 8-1/2x11 version of revised Site Plan (Sheet L 1) Revised Drawings (18 copies) GO Project Information Topographic Survey LO Site Assessment of Existing Conditions L 1 Site Plan L2 Vertical Control Plan L3 Landscape Plan C1 Civil notes, Legend and Abbreviations C2 Storm Drainage and Utility Plan E 1 Site Plan- Electrical A 1 Building Plans/Exterior Elevations Site Ownership: Glenwood Op, LLC is the owner of the two lots, totaling 1.73 acres, shown for development in this site plan review application. Project Use: Combined medical clinic and offices. Employment projections are approximately 60 at the time the building will be occupied. The clinic and offices are part of one business. Hours of Operation: Normal operating hours will range from 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM, Monday through Friday, except holidays. Saturday operation may occur as the client base grows. Phasing: . The project will be constructed in one phase. Zoning: The site is within the City of Springfield's Urban Growth boundary and within City limits and is zoned CC, Community Commercial. A medical office building use is a permitted primary use in this zone. The Eugene/Springfield Metro Area General Plan Diagram (per the 2004 Metro Plan with December 2009 updates) indicates the site is designated as "Rural Commercial". However, the Metro Plan states that this rural designation applies to land outside of the current Urban Growth Boundary. Adjacent Uses: The property to the west is an automotive repair/car sales business. The properties to the east are a photocopy supply business and radiator repair business. The property to the south is L TD's fleet maintenance facility. . Date Received: . MAR 1 1 2011 Glenwood Op Medical Office Building Site Plan Review Narrative Original Submittal Page 2 March 2011 .. . Refinement Plan: The applicable refinement plan for the subject site is the Glenwood Refinement Plan. The site is part of Subarea 7 and is designated as a Commerciallndustrial/Mixed Use zone. Fo~ development fronting Franklin Boulevard, the Refinement Plan specifically addresses the following criteria (as noted in Section U~ I (1) Landscaping, including street trees, shall be provided where possible along Franklin Boulevard. The project proposes adding trees along the Franklin Boulevard frontage, her current City standards. (2) Placement of parking areas in side yards and rear yards shall be encoJaged. All vehicle parking is located in the side and rear yards. There is no parkin1g between the proposed building and Franklin Boulevard. I (3) Placement of chain-link fencing within 20 feet of the right-of-way shall be discouraged. Iffencing is needed within this 20-foot setback area, ornamental iron fencing or it's eqJiva/ent shall be provided. Ornamental fencing is\proposed adjacent to Franklin Boulevard. The ornJmental fencing will return back along the west and east property lines for a minimum of 20' from the horth property line. (4) Signs shall be set back ten feet from the right-of-way. Signage is proposed to be mounted on the building and thus is setback from the right-of-way as required . I (5) Where development abuts a public street that intersects with Franklin Boulevard, the site design shall reinforce recognition of the street (as opposed to just another driveway). This criteria is not applicable. (6) Where commercial or industrial development is adjacent to residential development, illumination shall be oriented away from the residential development This criteria is not applicable. (7) Safe and efficient ingress and egress Ingress and egress from Franklin Boulevard is designed in accordance wit~ Oregon Department of Transportation guidelines. The proposed driveway is spaced away from existing adjacent driveways. to the fullest extent possible. Ingress and egress from East 14th Street will be designed in accordance with City of Springfield Standards. Site Access I Transportation: Primary site access will be provided via a driveway off Franklin Boulevard at the north side of the site. Secondary vehicle access is provided via a driveway off East 14th Street at the 'south side of the side. Primary pedestrian access will be provided via a sidewalk off of Franklin BouleVard. Based upon the square footage and use of the building, and using Institute of Tiansportation Engineers standards, the development would generate over 500 daily trips, the threshold for requiring a Transportation Impact Study (TIS) per City of Springfield requirements: Howev~r, conversations with City of Springfield staff and Oregon Department ofTransportation (ODOT) representatives have indicated that a TIS will not be required for this development, given the current capacity of Fra:nklin Boulevard and that there are proposed changes in use, density, and infrastructure for the Glenwood area. ODOT representatives had initially iridicated they did not have record of any apdroved approach permit for the site from Franklih Boulevard. The survey and title report for the property does indicate a shared . Date Receivred: Glenwood Op Medical Office Building Site Plan Review Narrative MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal I I Page 3 March 2011 i I access easement with the prope. the west. across the property at the north. corner.. The easement makes reference to an approved ODOT approach permit, however does not reference a file number for this permit. There is an existing driveway at this location that is used by the adjacent property. The driveway encroaches into the project property but is not configured to provide proper access to the project site at this p.oint. Due to security and functional reasons, Glenwood Op cannot share access points with adjacent properties. Also, there are concerns of impacting the adjacent site or doing improvements on property out of Glenwocid Op's control in order to create a driveway configuration usable to the project. There have also been disagreements between the previous property owner (prior to Glenwood Op purchasing the property) and the neighbor to the west, making any reasonable negotiations for shared access and improvements difficult. While ODOT has indicated their preference would be for this property to create a shared driveway with an adjacent property they have said they will approve a new driveway approach for the development as long as it is located as far away from existing driveways as possible. " L Lane Transit District (L TO) currently owns a 10' wide piece of property that sits between the project site and Franklin Boulevard for most of the project frontage length. This property was purchased by L TO during development of their EmX bus line several years ago. L TO's intention was to transfer ownership of this property to ODOT so it would become part of the public right-of-way. During our research of the property it was discovered that L TO had not yet started this transfer process. L TO has submitted paperwork to ODOT to complete this transfer. Per conversations with City of Springfield staff and ODOT representatives, it was agr'eed that since L TO is still in the process of transferring the property, we may submit this application for Site Plan Review even though we have not yet submitted an application for an ODOT approach permit. It is understood that the ODOT approach permit will need to be approved prior to final construction inspections and issuance of a certificate of occupancy. View at Buildinll from the Northeast During the Pre-Submittal completeness review, it was noted in staff comments that a Joint Use Access Agreement (JUAA) would be required, that would allow access across the project site from the neighboring parcel to the southwest. Please refer to the letter.from Hutchinson, Cox, Coons, Dupriest, Orr & Sherlock P.C. laying out reasons why this JUAA is impermissible as a matter of constitutional and state law. Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Glenwood Op Medical Office Building Site Plan Review Narrative Original submittai Page 4 March 2011 .' Off-Street Parking Fa.s: . . . . All off-street vehicle parking will conform to the standards listed in SDC Sections 4.6-110 through 4.6-120. The minimum number of parking spaces is calculated as follows: Vehicle Parking: Code Required: 19,900 SF / 300 SF per parking space = 67 parking spaces Total vehicle parking spaces provided: 85 spaces Compact Parking: Maximum 30% of spaces 85 x 0.30= 25 compact spaces allowed 25 compact spaces provided Bicycle Parking: Covered long term bicycle parking will be provided at the southwest corner of the building. Short term parking will be provided adjacent to the primary building entrance at the southdast corner. All bicycle parking spaces will conform to the standards listed in SDC Sections 4.6-140 thtough 4.6-150. Bicycle Parking Code Required'" 19,900 SF / 3,000 SF per space = 7 spaces 25% long term: 2 spaces 75% short term: 5 spaces Total bicycle parking spaces provided: 7 spaces 2 long term 5 short term Loading Areas: Loading requirements are minimal and primarily for office/building supply deliveries. A dedicated loading area is provided at the southwest corner of the building. I SDC Article 3.2-440(C) requires screening for truck parking for vehicles necessary for the operation of the facility. Since there is no manufacturing or sales occurring on site, this screening requirement is not applicable. Transit Facilities: There is currently a Lane Transit District (L TD) transit stop for the east bound I~g of the EmX line located immediately in front of the site along Franklin Boulevard. The west bound leg of the EmX line is located on the other side of the street and west approximately one block at the Glenwood Boulevard intersection. Utility Infrastructure: I.. ".C The project site is served by adequate public utilities for sanitary sewer, water, ~Iectricity, and natural gas. The project proposes to extend these utilities onto the project site, to provide adequate fire protection and utility services for the proposed office building development. There is no public 'stormwater infrastructure and so all on-site runoff will be held on site via a series of rain gardens. . All ne~ utilities will be placed underground. Refer to the drawings included with this application for description and location of the proposed utility extensions, 'and for stormwater management strategies. Fire Protection: The proposed building will be fully sprinklered. A new fire hydrant and fire department connection will be provided at the southeast corner. Fire department access will be from the driveWay along Franklin Boulevard. Gates at this driveway will have a Knox box installed to allow for em~rgency access. The parking lot is designed with a 26 foot wide drive aisle to allow fire department vehicles to navigate through and exit back onto Franklin Boulevard. Refer to the vehicle turning diagram prepared by Cameron McCarthy included with this narrative. Date Received: Glenwood Op Medical Office Building Site Plan Review Narrative MAR 1 1 2011 Page 5 March 2011 I I I ! Original Submittal Easements: . . . . Refer to the survey included in the drawing set for description of easements associated with the project. .. L Stormwater Management: The site is not served by any public stormwater infrastructure and so all stormwater runoff will be held and maintained on site. A series of "rain gardens", or swaies, are incorporated into the site design to capture and hold all runoff. Percolation testing has been performed and the data used to properly size the rain gardens. Refer to the Landscape and Civil drawings for detailed information on the design of stormwater facilities. View at Southeast Corner of BuildinQ Floodplain: The property is not located within a fiood plain or floodway. Wetlands: The property is not in areas identified in the Springfieid Local and National Wetland Inventory Map. Drinking Water Overlay District The site outside the Zone of Contribution (Time of Travel Zone) as shown on the City of Springfield's Wellhead Protection Area Map. Natural Features: There are no existing trees or other significant natural features on the site. Signs: Per SDC 8.248, at total of 3 wall signs totaling 350 square feet are allowed, and 1 freestanding sign with 100 per face Dr 200 square feet total is allowed. The signage currently proposed for the project will consist of two wall mounted signs on the north side of the building, totaling approximately 204 square feet in size, located. on the north facade of the building. Other signs on site may include directional signs and are exempt per SDC 8.234. . Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Glenwood Op Medical Office Building Site Plan Review Narrative Original Submittal Page 6 March 2011 ,\ j Attorneys and Counselors at Law Established 1970 Ceft:hrOliJl!{ -10 \'i'ur.\" . 1If'/!rcdkl/ccf 200 FORUM BUILDING 777 High Street MAIL: PO Box 10886 Eugene, Oregon 97440 ~HONE 541686-9160 FAX 541 343-8693 www.eugene~law.com Paul R. Allen James K. Coons Frank-C. Gibson Stephen A. Hutchinson E. Bradley Litchfield Janice L. Mackey Zack P. Mittge Thomas M. Orr William H. Sherlock Patrick L. Stevens Of Counsel John G. Cox Retired. Douglas M. DuPriest . . March 9, 2011 Dear Mr, Liebler: Our firm represents Glenwood Op, LLC. As you know, our client recently purchased the real property located on Franklin Blvd. in Springfield identified as Tax Lot 17-03-34-31-00900. I undetstand that during the site review meeting with our client's representatives, :you indicated that the City of Springfield would not grant site plan approval. unless our client entered into a joint use access agreement aUAA) witH. the owner of the parcel adjacent to the southwest portion of our cliend property (SW Lot). This letter explains why that condition of approval is ilnpermissible as a matter of constitutional and state law.. First, conditioning permit approval on a JUAA constitutes an unconstitutional exaction under the Nollan1 and IDolan2 standards. The US Supreme Court holdings in Nollan and Dolan require that to avoid being deemed an Article V taking, a proposed exactionl must contain an "essential nexus" with the harm to be prevented and mustlbe roughly proportional to the impact of the proposed development. As shown below, the proposed JUAA fails to meet both the Nollan and Dolan tests. Second, because a mandatory JUAA under these facts. constitutes a taking under Nollan/Dolan, the prohibition on taking private property for private use established by Measure 39 applies. Third, in light of the existence of the 14th Street right of way that provides legal access to the adjacent property, the condition violates the requirement under ORS 35.235 that the lcondemnation action "be compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury." . I Date Received: . , 1 Nollan v. California Coastal Comm., 483 US 825 (1987). 2 Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 US 374 (1994). MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal , . Michael Liebler 3/9/11 Page 2 . I. Essential Nexus As established in Nollan, the proposed exaction must contain an essential nexus with the impact of the proposed development. In Nollan, the proposed exaction was a lateral easement across a proposed beachfront property development. The alleged impact of the development was the obstruction of beach views from the street. The Supreme Court found that the proposed exactionlacked an essential nexus with the alleged harm, as the lateral easement would not ameliorate view obstruction. Iri the present matter, prohibiting or limiting development on our client's property until the adjacent landowner is granted access across it would not serve a valid public purpose. Denying our client the ability to develop its property would not solve the access problem for the adjacent lot in the event the City implements its Franklin Blvd. expansion project. Glenwood Op, LLC's development of its property has no bearing on the adjacent landowner's ability to access his property, either now or in the future. Rather, the potential harm to that landowner results solely from the City's decision to reconfigure Glenwood and Franklin Boulevards in a manner that may restrict that property's access. If our client decides not to develop its property, the City cannot demand that our client nevertheless allow access across its property to serve the adjacent lot if the City blocks that property's access from Glenwood Blvd. in the future. Consequently, it cannot do so now. II. Rough Proportionality In addition to failing the essential nexus test, the proposed exaction will likely fail the "rough proportionality" analysis under Dolan. In Dolan'the Court noted the importance of the right to exclude others from property, stating: "[a]s we have noted, this right to exclude others is 'one of the most essential sticks in the bundle of rights that are commonly characterized as property."" The test formulated by the Court places the burden upon the City to demonstrate "rough proportionality" between the proposed exaction and the impacts of the proposed development. The Supreme Court in Dolan held that "[n]o precise mathematical calculation is required, but the city must make some sort of individualized determination that the required dedication is related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development."4 Here, the City's attempt to =e the access problem that it will create by requiring our client to grant the adjacent landowner a private easement, despite the fact that the landowner still retains alternative legal access via 14th Date Received: 3 rd, at 393, quoting Kaiser Aetna v, US, 444 US 164, 176 (1979), 4 Dolan, 512 US at 391. MAR 1 1 2011 . Original Submittal .~ ) . Michael Liebler 3/9/11 Page 3 . Street, demonstrates that the proposed exaction fails the Supreme Court's rough proportionality test as well. Glenwood Opl LLC's development of its property has nothing to do with the adjacent owher's loss of an entry onto Glenwood Blvd. Thus, there is no proportionalitX and the Gty cannot force our client to shoulder the burden of fixing that property owner's access issues. III, Measure 39 ,\s explained above, if the Gty insists that our client execute a JUAA, it will be characterized as an Article V taJ<!ing under Nollan/Dolan, Consequently, the condition will violate the prohibition on taking private property for private use established by Measur~ 39,5 Specifically, Oregon Ballot Measure 39, enacted in response to the US Supreme Court decision in Kelo,6 prohibits government condemnation of priv~te property for private use, Codified at ORS 35.015, the prohibitory language r~ads: . "(1) Except as otherwise provided in this Isection,' a public body as defined in ORS 174.109 may not tondemn private real property used as a residence, busine~s establishment, farm or forest operation if at the time of tThe condemnation the public body intends to convey fee title ~o all or a portion of the real property, or a lesser interest than fee title, to another private party." The proposed JUAA is a taking of a lesser interest than fee title of our client's private property (an easement) for the be~efit of a private party (the adjacent SW Lot). Therefore, Measure 39 prohibits the condemnation. A careful analysis reveals that none of the exception~ to the statute apply to the facts in this case. The only conceivable statutcbry exception under ORS 35.015(2)(c) for condemnation of property for con'struction of transportation facilities does not implicate joint use access agreements or easements and presumes that the land sought for the transpprtation facility has been condemned. Even in the event this exception applied (which it does not), the JUAA and easement would be a taking requiring compensation under the eminent domain procedures. IV, ORS 35,235 In addition to the prohibition under M;easure 39, ORS 35.235(2) requires that the condemnation action be "compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury." The alternativefaccess route to the adjacent SW lot along E. 14th Street, which is recognized in the Gty's transportation 5 Codified at ORS 35.015-018. 6 Ke/o v. City of New London, 545 US 469 (2005). Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal . Michael Liebler 3/9/11 Page 4 . plan and provides a legal right of way, would clearly result in less private harm while maintaining the greatest public good. Accordingly, it is the only legally viable option open to the City. V. Reservation of Rights Under ORS 197.796 Finally, if the City fails to withdraw its indefensible condition of approval to require the taking of property for private use in violation of the Fifth Amendment and Measure 39, then Glenwood Op, LLC agrees to the conditiq,n for purposes of obtaining approval of its site review plan but reserves its right to challenge the contested condition pursuant to ORS 197.796. Glenwood Op, LLC will seek to have the condition removed through the land use appeal.process. Please note that under ORS 197.796(4), "[i]n any challenge to a condition of approval that is subject to the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the local government shall have the burden of demonstrating compliance with the constitutional requirements for imposing the condition." Moreover, our client will look to its remedies in the Lane County Circuit Court for diminution in property value in the event the' condemnation is allowed, or, in the alternative, for damages resulting from engineering and design alterations necessitated by the condition if, as we anticipate, it is deemed illegal under Measure 39. Glenwood Op, LLC would also seek to recoup its costs and attorney fees incurred in defending its property rights as provided under ORS 197.796(5). In sum, and for the reasons set forth above, Glenwood Op, LLC respectfully asks the City to withdraw the condition of approval requiring a JUAA and easement with the adjacent property owner. Sincerely, HUTCHINSON, Cox, COONS, DUPRIEST,ORR & SHERLOCK, P.c. WHS / erl cc: Client Joe Leahy Carole Knapel Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal____ .. Job: Type: Notes: . " . I ~ Gullwing™ Page I of 3 , , I G 18 Area Luminaires The GardeD Gullwing Th1 is an area luminaire defined by its sleek profile and rugged construction. The housing is one-piece, die cast aluminum and mounts directly to a pole or wall without the need of a separate suppo'rt . I arm. The multifaceted arc~image duplicating optical systems provide IES Types I, II, 111, IV and V distributions. T7e door frame is single-piece diecast aluminum and retains an optically clear tempered flat glass lens. The luminaire is completely sealed and gasketed preventing intrusion from moisture, dust and ins~cts. Gullwing 11.1 luminairfs are finished with a fade and abrasion resistant TGIC powdercoat. Flat glass lens luminaires provide full cutoff performance. Sag Lens luminaires provide cutoff performance. I PREFIX MOUNTING DISTRIBUTION . WATTAGE VOLTAGE FINISH I H H H H HI Enter the order code into the appropriate box above. Note: Gardco reserves the right to refuse a configuration. Not all combinations an& configurations ore valid. Refer to notes below for exclusions and limitations. For questions or concerns, pleose consult the foaory. I . ~ PREFIX MOUNTING DISTRIBUTION , d! Date Receive : MAR 1 1 2011 I G 18 18" Gullwing'" Luminaire I Single Pole Mount 2 . Twin Pole Mount at 1800 2@90 Twin Pole Mount at 900 3 J-way Pole Mount at 900 3@120o, 3-way Pole Mount at 1200 4 4-way Pole Mount W Wall Mount, Recessed J-Box WS Wall Mount, Surface Conduit I. Not available with PTFaption. WATTAGE 10OMH' 250PSMH lIJ 350PSMH' <D 875PSMH' Pulse Start MH 150MH' 250PS90.... CD 400PSMH' <!l IOOOPSMHU Magnetic Ballast 175PSMH '" 320PSMH< ~ 750PSMH" Standard MH 175MH' 250MH' 400MH'.l I OOOMW~ Magnetic Bal/ost CosmoPolis TM m Electronic System -= 60CMPE 90CMPE 140CMPE CosmoPalisTM and (See Notes 6,7,9) MasterColo,@ MosterC~/or@ EJite ~ 210MCE.3KlD 315MCE.3K(I) Note:347Vand EJiteSystemsare 4BOV MCE 5)'St~ms supplied with ElectronIC System ..::;. jndud~ and rtquire an lamp. (See Notes 6,7,9,10) 21 OMCE-4K CD 315MCE-4K <D auxiJliarytn:lnsfonner. Pulse Start MH ElectroniC Bollast 150PSE' $ 175PSE (tl 250PSE \tl 320PSE'. \tl (See Notes 6,7.9) High Pressure Sodium 70HPS ISOHPS 400HPS 750HPS' Magnetic Bot/ast 100HPS 250HPS 600HPS Low Pressure Sodium 35LPS Magnetic .Ballast . 1 75MH, 250MH and 400MH not available for sale in the United States. ** 250PS90 includes a 90% efficient magnetic PSMH baliast, meeting the requirements of California Title 20, effective If 1/20 I O. (I) Wattages marked with Circle "E" meet federal energy efficiency standards applicable to 150 watt through 500 watt metal halide luminaires only. OPTIONS H I I' 2XL 3XL 4XL BLCl Q' Type I. Horizontal Lamp Type II, Horizontal Lamp Type III. Horizontal Lamp Type IV, Horizontal La~p Backlight Control Type V, Horizontal Lamp 2, NOl '''';T' ob"e 400 wOlU, VOLTAGE 120 240 347 208 '277 480 200.277 CMPE, MCE and PSE types only. 3. Requires E.28/BT28 lamp. 4. Furnished~sagglasslensonly. 5. Mogul bas~ lamp required. 6. UL usted at 40.( ambient 7. CMPE type~ available 120V or 20o..277V only. PSE types p...ailable 200 - 277Vonly. MCE types available ~00-277V, as well as 347V and 480V, 8. See 1000 l'VCtl: lamp tables below. 9. See QS / Q914 Table on page 2. 10. "-3K" su~ specifies 0 30000K lamp and "-4K"suffrx specifies 0 40000K lamp. I Note 9:11 000 Watt lamp tables. For 1000 Watt Metal Halide use: Brand Product Code Catalog Number VennJre 53702 MSI000W/HORlBT37/3K G.E. 18205 MVR r OOO/UfBT37 Venture 15332 MHIOOOW/UfBT37 For 1000 Watt Pulse Start Metal Halide. use: Brand IprodUct Code Catalop Number G.~ 10389 MVR 1 OOO/U/BT37/PA Venture 49111 MS IOOOW/HORfT25/PS 1 WARNING: Use of other lamps voids warranty. 'I 1611 Clovis Barker Road, San Marcos, TX 78666 (800) 127-0758 (512) 753-1000 FAX:(512) 753-7855 sitelighting.com @20IOKonink/ljke Philips Electronics N.V. All Rights Reserved. Phillps Gardco reserves the right to change materials or modify the desi gnO(itsproduqw~thOJJt'S b 'tt '-t6' . notification as part of the company's continuing product improvement program. Onglnal u mi a 79115-8511210 . PHIUPS GARDea 9. See QSIQ924 Table. II. Not available above 400 watt 12. Not available in 480V. Provide speciPc input voltage. 13. 250W maximum. Pa/ycarbanak lenses corry a 1 year wa"onty only. . ~ . 14. In lieu a(f/at glass. Supplied standard and required with 750 watt and higher wattages. 15. Required for 3" 0.0. round or topererl round poles where top 0.0. i! less than 4". 16. Required for 4". 5" 0.0. round poles. 17. Mounts to 0 2-3/8" 0.0. mast arm. IB.Mounts to (I 2-3/B"T(lpTenon.Spedfy a polt: with a 4.50" 0.0. (or a smooth tronsition. 19. Not availablt: in 1200 mounting configurations. . 20. Requires (I 2-3/B"0.0.x 4" tenon or (I 2.4" round pole top 0.0. Specify Drilling (I, 2, 2@90.3 or 4 only.) 21.Avoilable only with 1 75PSMH through 400PSMH ond 150HPS through 400HPS wattages.lndudes dual-level capacitor and wiring to connect to Gardea Motion Response System. 22.Avai/able with CosmoPo/is'" system only. See submittal sheet GElOo.o05 for complete information on LumiStep'" ballasts. Page 2 aD FINISH BRP BLP WP NP OC Bronze Paint Black Paint White Paint Natural Aluminum Paint Optional Color Paint Specify Optional Color or RAL ex; OC-LGP or OC-RAL7024. Special ,Paint Spedfy. Must supply c%r chiP. SC DIMENSIONS AND EPA . II Gullwing™ G 18 Area Luminaires OPTIONS F" Fusing In Head In.Linelln.Pole Fusing Photocontrol and Receptacle Photocontro\ Receptacle only Polycarbonate Sag Lens Sag Glass Lens Internal Houseside Shield Quartz Standby Quartz Standby. Timed Delay Quartz Emergency Quartz Emergency - Timed Delay 3" Round Pole Adapter 4" and S" Round Pole Adapter Mast Arm Fitter TR liB Single Transition TR21B Twin Transition PTF2" Pole Top Fitter .23(8".3" Dia. Tenon PTF3" Pole Top Fitter. 3" - 3 112" Dia.Tenon PTF4" Pole Top Fitter ~ 3 1/2". 4" Dia. Tenon SQPTF20 Square Pole Top Fitter GMR21 Provision for Gardea Motion Response L6D ,LumiStep'" Ballast 6 hour LSD LumiStep'" Ballast B hour' L I On LumiStep'" Ballast I 0 hour LF pell PCR POLY I] SGI~ HS QS' QST' Q924' QT924' RPAI15 RPA216 MFI7 175 wattS or less 100Watts Above 175 watts up to 400 watts I 50 Watts QS,QST,Q924.QT924 are not availablt: with CMPE,MCE or PSE wattages or in luminaires above 400 watts HID. ~ J ~ ) ::1 ":::::-- \ ::1 31 1/2" BO.OI em . IB" 45.72 em i 6 1/2" 16.66 em t II 1/2" 29.21 em ~ With Sap" Glass Lens t B" 20.32 cm t .....................---... EPA Data 1 1.2 ft' .11 m1 3-4 Date Received: 3.2 ft' .30ml 1 2.4ft' .22mi MAR 11 2011 PH I LftlIiiSSI Submitiai____ 1611 Clovis Barker Road, San Marcos, TX 78666 (800) 227.0758 (511) 751-'0~ FAX:(5J2) 753-7855 sitelighting.com @2010KoninklijkePhilips Electronics N.V. All Rights Reserved. Philips Gardco reserves the right to change materials or modify the design of its product without notification as part of the company's continuing product improvement program. 79115-8511210 G GARDeO . .' Page 3 of 3 SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The Gardco Gullwing'" is an area luminaire defined by its ~Ieek profile and rugged construction. The housing is one-piece, diecast aluminum and mounts directly to a pole or wall without the need of a separate support arm. The multifaceted arc-image duplicating optical systems provide IES Types I,ll, III, IV_and V distributions. The door frame is single-piece diecast aluminum and retains an optically clear tempered fIat glass lens. The luminaire is completely sealed and gasketed preventing intrusion from moisture, dust and. insects. The Gullwing ™ luminaires are finished with a fade and abrasion resistant TGIC powdercoat. HOUSING: A one-piece die cast aluminum housing mounts directly to a pole or wall without the need for a support arm. The low profile rounded form reduces the effective projected area of the luminaire to only 1.2ft'1.11 m'. " LENS ASSEMBLY: A single-piece diecast aluminum-lens frame hinges down from the housing and is secured by a stainless steel lanyard and h.inge pin. An optically dear, heat and impact resistant tempered flat glass lens is mechanically secured with eight retainers. The electrical and optical chambers are thoroughly sealed with a one-piece memory retentive hollow-core EPDM gasket to prevent intrusion by moisture, dust, and insects. OPTICAL SYSTEMS: The segmented optical systems are manufactured from homogenous sheet aluminum which has been electrochemically brightened, anodized and sealed. The multifaceted arc image duplicating systems are designed to produce IES Types I (I), II (2XL). III (3XL). IV (4XL and BLC). and V (Q). With the 2XL.3XL and 4XL luminaries, the reflector facets form a conical fan around the arc tube with each facet positioned to be precisely tangent to the top of the arc tube. . ~GullwingTM G 18 Area Luminaires I The lampholder is glazed porcelain with a nickel plated screw shell. Position-oriented mogul ~ase sockets to accept high output horizontal metal halide lamps are supplied standard. ELECTRICAL: All ellctricat components are UL recognized , and factory tested. Electronic and magnetic HID ballasts are high , power factor and moun~ed on a unitized tray with quick elec~rical disconnects. Magnetic Hip ballasts are the separate component type. Electronic and magnetic ~ID ballasts are capable of providing reliable lamp starting down to _20oF I _290C. Standard fluorescent ballasts are solid state. . I Luminaires provided with the CosmoPolis ™ or MasterC0/or@ Elite high performance cerarriic metal halide electronic systems include high power factor elect~onic ballasts, designed specifically for the system selected. I FINISH: Each standard color luminaire receives a fade and abrasion resistant, electrostatic~lIy applied, thermally cured, triglycidal , isocyanurate (TGIC) textured polyester powdercoat finish. Standard colors include bronze (BRP). black (BLP). white (WP). and natural aluminum (NP). Consult factory for specs on optional or custom colors. . I LABELS: All luminaires bear UL or CUL (where applicable) Wet Location labels. I WARRANTY: Gardco luminaires feature a 5 year limited warranty. See Warranty /nformatihn on www.sitelighting.com for complete details and exclusions. P61ycarbonate lenses carry a I year warranty only. Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal I FUll CUTOFF PERFORMANCE: Full cutoff performance means a luminaire distribution where zero candela int~nsity occurs at an angle at or above 90. above nadir. Additionally, the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not numerically exceed 100 (10 percent) at a vertical angle of 80. above nadir. This applies to all lateral angles around the luminaire. I CUTOFF PERFORMANCE: Cutoff performance means a luminaire distribution where the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not numerically exceed 25 (2.5 percent) at an angle at or above 90. above nadir, and 100 (10 percent) at a vertical angle of 80. above nadir. This applies to all lateral angles ~round the luminaire. 1611 Clovis Barker Road; SaniMarcos,TX 78666 (800) 227-0758 (512) 753.1000 FAX: (512) 753-7855 sitelighting.com @2010 Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. All Rights Reserved. Philips Gardco reserves the right to change materials or modify the design of its product without notification as part of the company's con~inuing product improvement program. 79115-8511210 PHILIPS G GARDeO . . " .. Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal li~~[I~~T~~ ' Intended Use for walkways, plazas or pedestrian areas. Construction HOLlsing: KB_6: Bottom housing is O.125M extruded aluminum. Top cover is O.156"cilsta!uminum.KB_8: Botlom housing is 0.156" extruded afuminum. 42" overall height standard on KBDandKBA6.43"overall heighlstandardonKBA8. Flush-fitting lens is 1/4 ", clear, 100% virgin acrylic. All exposed hardware is tamper- resistantstainlesssleel.Four 1/2"x11"anchorboltswith double nuts/washers and4- 1!1" diameter bolt circle tem- 'ORDERING INFOR~T10N . , plate provided for mounting (shippedseparatelyl. Finish: Dark bronze (DDB) corrosion-reslstantpolyester powder finish standard. Additionalarchitl.'ctural colors available, see www.lithonia.com/archcolors. Optics Reflector system incorporates an anodized,spun aluminum, flared cone and an anodized, hydroformed,flutedupper reflector providing a Type V (symmetric}cutoffdistribll- tion. Optional cylindrical lowerreflectororcastalumi. numlouversavailable. . Electrical Electricalcornponentsare unitized on removable power module and accessible through bottom of bollard. Positive-Iocklng, quick- disconnect on secondary circuit. Ballast All ballasts are 100% factory tested. High reaclance, high power factor for 150W and below. Compact fluorescent uses an electronic high-frequencyballasl. Socket Medium-base porce- lain socket, 4KV pulse rated. Compact fluorescent has four-pin,whitethermoplastic body with quick-connect push-in wiring terminals. lPI is standard 35K forCFl. " . listings Ul listed (standard). CSA Certilied {see Options). UL listed for wet locations. "D Specification KBA KBD KBA For shortest lead times, (onli lire prodllctsusin bolded options. Example: KBA8 70M R5 TB LPI ~i!~s~![,~~p.!Y~~l~~:,~}:-~]~f:8~I~:~,~:s~2:;:::~'r=!illJiHTh~i;~"~.1t'I:~~t '.rVM~~9~3!;~'~'JastT:~{/~,,::i\ ~~::Qp'!io-;. t "~:'rr:S:t~";rr:;;~~..~<riZ~~17:Jr_:'" ':, [.z;~. }ii KBA6 ; Hiahnressure Metalhalidel ~ Incandescent2.U 5tandardtlarl'dcone 120 (blank) Magneticballast: Shiosinstalled . (SA Meets Canadian KBA8 : ~ 50M RS TypeVdistribution ! 2081 : SF Si~grefuse, 120V,2nV,347V standards KBD6 ' 3552 70M CornDact ODtionalcvlindricalreflector ~ 2401 OF O?ublefuse,208v,240V ShiDsseoarate!v KBD8 f 50S 100M ~ CVA 5pecularalzak 277 H24 2f overall height R6S Hatf-shield(6"round) 70S 26TRT CVB Blackalzak 347 H30 39" overall height R8S Half-shield(8"round) 1005 32TRT CVG Gold alzak TB- H36 36" overall height KBAB Anchor bolts 1505 louvers (8" onlvl MVOlP FO fJstoon outlet I , LV louvers FG Festoon outlet with duplex groundfaultreceplade' f'i1ilii'h1'. '. :F'?J~i~' ",7,~t!8ff.i1!,~o,;;:~""",~;T\f2\!:c;;;:6"N::r:t":I,,', ,,~~~;J:}~JW:J.': i:J":~::I,I;J:i';:;':F L~';'~::.: "iJ~ii;:,;..;,:1:;:;j (blank) DWH DRL DMB , DNA : OSS : DGC Oarkbronze(std.) White Black Medium bronze Natural aluminum Sand5tone Charcoal gray AOOITIONALlNFORMATlON . DTG , DBR DSB I CR : SODB . SOWH SDBL Tennis green Bright red Steel blue Enhanced corrosion resistance Dark bronze stripe White stripe Black stripe For additional product information, visit www.lithonia.com. r"",,, ...~"" ,~. -" l,?/; ~ " CONFIGURATIONS _'i;{,,:ft',';. w, 's",>:;'1 Y'V>t ;p I Drawingsarefordimensionaldetailonlyandmaynotrepresentanual mechanical configuration. Dimensions are shown in inches (tentimeters) unle:u otherwise noted. ~l6!E5R!il'_LAMP.TYP ISTRIRUnON' r KBA6;KB06"!;"CJ55:10S'SO '7DS A'CYR'CYG'CYf!;\il "KBA8iKBD8 UDS;7DS,7DM. l00S;JDOMilSDSildrRS. CYA. CYR:CYG.CYf. LVi, LKBA8,'KBD8~IF?:~'f~~26TRT;'32TRT~1f';:':~\-:"2~~lV~~~ Standard flared cone PSG10 Optional cylindricalretlector www.lithonia.com I 1-800-279-8041 SDNA SDTG SDBR SOBUA . SDYlB Natural aluminum stripe Tennis green stripe Brightredstripe. Dark blue stripe Yellow stripe T T ,,- ,,- 1106}1 IHI6}J 1 1 111:2;1 h~3d 111:211 fl~31~ KBA6 louver original Submittal Notes 1 Spedfylamptypeanddistribulion.SeeContiguraUonstable. "2120Vonly. 3 Requirescoatedlamp. 4 KB-ii:116WfTS,lampnollnduded. 5 KB-8:150Wmax.,lampnolinduded. 6 LollYtrmustbeused.Multi-volteleoronicb.Jllast(formmpao fluormem lamps only) capable of operating on anyline voltage lroml2lJV-mV. . ConsultfaooryforuseinCanada. Opfional mulli-t1p ballast (120V,2OSv' 240V, 277V1. In Canada 120V, 277V,347V; ships as 12OVI347V. 9 Ccvershipsseparately. 10 Choose primaryfixtul't'finish and stripe mlorifdes!red. KBAB-LV KBD6 KBOS-LV Max. weight 34.9Ibs 115.9 kgl + Also available in 24" (H24l,30" (H30l and 36"(H36). LPI lamp included L/LP less lamp Dae e MAR 1 1 2011 ~ .L~THON~A .L~GHT~NG' . . '" .. '., ~ Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original submittal Job: Type: Notes: . '. . I ~ G II . ,TM ~ U wing G 13 Area Luminaires :g:ar:c~:~IWing' is an area luminaire defined by its sleek profile and rugged construction, The hOUSinJs one-piece. die cast aluminum and mounts directly to a pole or wall without the need of a separate support arm. The rotatable, multifaceted arc-image duplicating optical systems provide IESTypes II, Ill,and IV distributions.The dOOf. frame is single-piece die cast aluminum and retains an optically clear tempered flat glass lens. The luminaj're is completely sealed and gasketed preventing intrusion from moisture, dust and insects. Gullwing'" 'luminai~s are finished with a fade and abrasion resistant TGIC powdercoat. Flat glass lens luminaires provide full cut6ff performance. Sag Lens luminaires provi~e cutoff performance.' I PREFIX MOUNTING DISTRIBUTION WATTAGE VOLTAGE FINISH I H H H H HI Enter the order code into the appropriate box above. Note: Gardea reserves the right to refuse a conpguration. Not al/ cambinations arid canpgurations are valid. Refer to notes below for exclusions On~/imitatiOns. For questions or concerns, please cansuh the faaory. ' I . PREFIX MOUNTING DISTRIBUTION G 13 13" Gullwing'" Luminaire G IJEMC 13" Gullwing'" Luminaire Emergency Cold Temperature I 2 2@90 3 3@120o, 4 W WS Single Pole Mount Twin Pole Mount at 1800 Twin Pole Mount at 900 3.way Pole Mount at 900 3-way Pole Mount at 1200 4--way Pole Mount Wall Mou.nt, Recessed J-Box Wall Mount, Surfa~e Conduit I. Available with (2) 32TRF lamps and MIS optics only. (I) 32TRF operates in emergency made. WATTAGE ANDVOLTAGE LAMP IVOLTAGE CHART - GI3 HID Voltage HID ill CtlsmaPalisTM Electronic System ~l GIll 60CMPE 90CMPE 140CMPE CosmoPolis'" systems ore supplied with lamp induded. 50MH 70MH 100MH 150MH . 175MH* . . * I 75MH not available for sale in the United States. 70CMHE' UNIV' 100CMHE' UN IV' 150CMHE' <D UNIV' 50HPS ~;;; Gk~ 70HPS IOOHPS 150HPS IBLPS Pulse Start Metal Halide Magnetic Ballast Standard Metal Ha/ide*' Pulse Start Ceramic Metal Halide Electronic Ba/last High Pressure Sodium Magnetic Ballast Low Pressure Sodium CD Wattages marked with Circle "E" meet federal energy effidency standards appliClJble ta 150 watt through 500 watt metal halide luminaires only. Combinatians marked with a dot, with "UN/V" or with "20()"277V" areavai/able far ordering. 1611 Clovis Barker Road, San Marcos, TX 78666 (800) 227-0758 (512) 753-1000 FAX: (5 12) 753.7855 sitelighting.com @2010KoninklijkePhilipsElectronicsN.V. AU Rights Reserved. Philips Gardco reserves the right to change materials or modify the design of its product without notification as part of the company's continuing pr?duct improvement program, 79115-130/1210 Fluorescent fMTSOotiaOnlvl (3)32TRF'U (3)42TRF'u OPTIONS H I 2XL 3XL 4XL MTSI Type II, Horizontal Lamp Type III, Horizontal Lamp Type IV, Horizontal Lamp Medium Throw with Solite~ Lens 2. Not available with PTF option. 3.Avoilable~ithfluorescentsaurcesonly. I LAMP IVOLTAGE CHART - G 13 Fluorescent I Voltal!"e 120 480 277 347 I I I LAMP I VOLTAGE CHART - GI3EMC<.7 Voltacre Fluorescent fMTS Obua Onlv) ill (2)32TRF....' CF Compact Fluorescent TRF Triple Tube Fluorescent 4. Fluorescent and CMHE ballasts accept I 20V through 277V, 50hz [0 60hz, input. Specify "UNIV"far 120V hro~gh 277V. 5. Lamp starting temperature is O. F /.18" C.' 6. For emergency mode lumen hutput see submittal data sheet 79115-155. "Gardea Emergency Light OJtput Infarmation." 7. (I) lamp operates in emerge~cy made. Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal PHILIPS G GARDeO Page 2 of 3 FINISH BRP BLP WP NP OC Bronz.e Paint Black Paint White Paint Natural Aluminum Paint Optional Color Paint Specify Optional Color or RAL ex: OC-LGP or OC-RAL7024. Special Paint Spedfy. Mu~ supply c%r chiP. . OPTIONS F Fusing In Head LF In~Line/ln-Pole Fusing PCs Photocontrol and Receptacle peR Photocontrol Receptacle only POLY' Polycarbonate Sag Lens HS Internal Houseside Shield QSIO QSTID Q92410 QT92410 SPA" TRI12 TR212 PTF2 PT~3 PTF4 MFIJ L61~ L811 L1011 22 1/2" '57.25 em :1 :1 Quartz Standby' Quartz Standby ~ Timed Delay Quartz Emergency Quartz Emergency M Timed Delay Square Pole Adapter Single Transition Twin Transition Pole Top Fitter - 2 3/8" - 3" Dia. Tenon Pole Top Fitter - 3" - 3 112" Dia. Tenon Pole Top Fitter - 3 112" - 4" Dia. Tenon Mast Arm Fitter LumiStep'" Ballast 6 hour LumiStep'" Ballast 8 hour LumiStep" Ballast 10 hour . I 81/2" 21.54 em ~ 79115-13011210 :1 1611 Clovis Barker Road, San Marcos, TX 78666 (800) 227-0758 (512) 75)-1000 FAX: (5 11) 153-7855 sitelighting.com @2010 Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. All Rights Reserved. Philips Gardea reserves the right to change materials or modify the design of its product without notification as part of the company's continuing product improvement program. sc DIMENSIONS AND EPA . Gullwing™ G 13 Area Luminaires 8. Not available in 480V. Provide sped(ic input voltage. 9. 100 Wan HID maximum. PolyCflrbonate lenses carry I year warranty only. 10. IOOw Quartz lamp max, Not ovoi/oble with Fluorescent, EMC, CMHE or CMPE types. II. Required for mounting to straight square poles. 12. Mounts to a 2-3/8" top tenon.Spedfy 0 pole with 3.00" top 00 for a smooth tronsition. 13. Mounts to a 2-318" 0.0. mast arm. 14.Availoble with CosmoPolis'" s)'ttem only. See.submittal sheet GE10()..()05 for complete information on LumiStep'" ballasts. 4 3/4" 12,14 em t 1 .8 ft' .07 m2 13 1/2" 34.16 em EPA 1 1.6 It' .15 m2 3-4 2.2 ft' .20 ml Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original submittal PHILIPS G GARDea . ., , Page 3 of 3 SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The Gardco Gullwing' is an area luminaire defined by its sleek profile and rugged construction. The housing is one-piece, die cast aluminum and mounts directly to a pole or wall Without the need of a separate support arm. The rotatable, multifaceted arc-image duplicating optical systems provide IES Types II, fll, and IV distributions. The door (rame is single-piece diecast aluminum and retains an optically clear tempered flat glass lens. The luminaire is completely sealed and gasketed preventing intrusion from moisture, dust and insects. Gullwing'"" luminaires are finished with a fade and abrasion resistant TGIC powdercoat. HOUSING: A one-piece die cast aluminum housing mountS directly to a pole or wall without the need for a support arm. The low profile rounded form reduces the effective projected area of the luminaire to only.8 ft2/.07m2. " lENS ASSEMBLY: A single-piece die cast aluminum lens frame hinges down from the housing and is secured by a stainless steel lanyard and hinge pin. An optically clear, heat and impact-resistant tempered flat glass lens is mechanically secured with six retail)ers. The electrical and optical chambers are thoroughly sealed with a one-piece memory retentive hollo~-core EPDM gasket to prevent intrusion by moisture, dust, and insects. OPTICAL SYSTEMS: The segmented optical systems are manufactured' from homogenous sheet aluminum which has been electrochemically brightened, anodized and sealed. The multifaceted arc image duplicating systems are designed to produce IES Types II (2XL), 11/ (3XL), and IV (4XL). The refiector facets form a conical fan around the arc tube with each facet positioned to be precisely tangent to the top of the arc tube. The lampholder is glazed porcelain with a nickel plated screw shell. HID luminaires feature porcelain medium base lampholders. . fjGullwing™ G 13 Area Luminaires Fluorescent luminaires uJe a Medium Throw reflector with a Solite@ glass lens (MTS). I . EMC Luminaires: In the event of power interruption, integral battery pack will pow~r (I) 32W compact fluorescent lamp at reduced light levels fo~ a minimum of 90 minutes. Maintenance free battery is rated for ambient temperatures down -4"F/-20"C. Indicator light is visible through the lens. A test SWitch is accessible through the door assembly. EMC units do not bear CUL label. ELECTRICAL: All elLtrical components are UL recognized, factory tested, and mbunted on a unitized plate with quick electrical disconnects. F~r luminaires. provided with Cosmopolis TM. each high power fattor ballast is electronic, designed specifically for the C6smoPolis TM high performance ceramic metal halide electroni1c sytem. Each HID high power factor ballast is capable of p~oviding reliable lamp starting down to ~20"Fr-29c-C. Standard fI~orescent ballasts are solid state. FINISH: Each standard 1olor luminaire receives a fade and abrasion resistant, electrostaticklly applied, thermally cured, triglycidal I isocyanurate (TGIC) texFured polyester powdercoat finish. Standard colors include bronze (BRP), black (BLP), white (WP), and natural aluminum (NP). Consultl factory for specs on optional or custom colors. . I . LABELS: All luminaires bear UL or CUL (where applicable) Wet Location labels. I WARRANTY: Gardco luminaires feature a 5 year limited warranty. See Warranty Inf~rmatibn on www.sitelighting.com for complete details and exclusions. P61ycarbonate lenses carry a I year warranty only. Date Received: MAR 1 I 2011 Original Submittal FULL CUTOFF PERFORMANCE: Full cutoff performance means a luminaire distribution where zero candela int~nsity occurs at an angle at or above 90~ abov~ nadir, Additionally, the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not numerically exceed 100 (10 percent) at a vertical angle of 80. above nadir. This applies to all latera! angles around the luminaire. I CUTOFF PERFORMANCE: Cutoff performance means a luminalrt> distribution where the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not numerically exceed 25 (2.5 percent) at an angle at or above 90. above nadir, and 100 (10 percent) at a vertical angle of 80. above nadir. This applies to all lateral angles around the luminaire. . , 16 r 1 Clovis Barker Road, SaIl Marcos, TX 78666 (800) 227-0758 (512) 75).1000 FAX: (512) 753.7855 sitelighting.com @2010KoninklijkePhilipsElectronics N.V. All Rights Reserved. Philips Gardco reserves the right to change materials or modify the design of its product without notification as pan of the company's continuing prOGua: improvement program. 79115-130/1210 PHILIPS 0, GARDeO . . ''C. ~.... ~ ~tt~ 11~"llmt:4III~~~:IIIIII.m. Geotechnical & Conslruction Servioes Glenwood Op, LLC Ms. Carole Knapel 1201 Oak Street Eugene, Oregon 97401 January 17, 2011 . .'1. Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Franklin Boulevard Eugene, Oregon Project #2107170 Dear Ms. Knapel: We are providing geotechnical engineering services for the above referenced site as outlined in our proposal. This letter provides a summary of ou~ findings and provides .geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed. foundations as well as a discussion of seismic considerations. BACKGROUND <''',0 A new building and associated parking is being designed for a currently vacant parcel' on Franklin Boulevard in Eugene, Oregon. The site location is ~hown on the attached Vicinity Map (Figure 1). The proposed improvements at the site include construction of a new two story building and associated concrete slab, parking ~nd access pavements and landscaped areas. The proposed structure has a :t80 foot [by :t130 'foot footprint The proposed development area is relatively level and currently includes gravel surfacing with some grass and brush over much of the parcel.l Minor site grading is anticipated for the improvements. The building is expected tOI have a finished floor elevation slightly above existing ground elevations with pavement grades closely matching existing site grades. The conceptual site layout ~nd proposed building location is shown on the attached site plan (Figure 2). We und~rstand that portions of the site will be landscaped and used for stormwater detention and treatment I . . . '1 Date Received: This report and/or enclosed test data is the confidential property of the client to whom it is address~d and pertains to the spe'liiCf. process and/or material evaluated. As such, information contained herein shall not be reproduce~ in part or full and/or any ~R 1 t 2011 thereof be disclosed without FEI Testing & Inspection, Inco's written authorization. . I . 750 ~ Cornell Avenue' Corvallis. Oregon 97330. phone (541) 757-4698, f~ (541) 757,Qffl;linal Submittal 29540 B Airport Road, Eugene. Oregon 97402 . phone (541) 684-3849 . fax,(541) 684-3851 63050 Corporate Place, Sutte 2. Bend, Oregon 97701 . phone (541) 382-4844. fax (541) 382-4846 . , . I . . .'. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions: The proposed development location is a relatively flat, gravel covered parcel. It appears that the site was previously developed with much 'of the parcel including gravel surfacing. Grass, blackberries and brush are present over much of the parcel. The Willamette River is located a short distance. to the east of the site. The site is surrounded by existing development with Franklin Boulevard to the north of the site and an existing bike path located along the south property boundary. Subsurface Conditions: Subsurface conditions were explored at six locations on December 16 using a rubber tired backhoe. The approximate test pit locations are shown on the Site Plan (Figure 2). The test pits were extended to depths of :t4 to 6 feet below existing site grades. We observed wet soil honditions and ground water seepage in the gravel stratum in some of the test pits at the time of our exploration. Ground water seepage as shallow as 3.8 feet below grade was observed at the time of our exploration in December. Therefore, we anticipate that a relatively shallow ground water level is present at the site throughout the year. A narrative summary of soil conditions at individual test pit locations are attached. A brief summary of the various soil strata encountered is provided below. FILL: Fill materials were observed in the upper portion of the soil profile across the site. The upper 0104 to 6 inches of ttie fill material typically consists of 'I.-inch minus crushed rock surfacing. The fill thickness varies from 0101 to 3 feet in the area of the proposed building. The fill in this portion of the site includes concrete slabs and foundations associated with a previous structure at the property. The fill also includes concrete: asphalt and metal debris that has been placed on the site. The fill profile encountered in explorations in the proposed pavement areas . typically was less than 1 foot thick. The fill at these locations generally consists of sandy gravel to silty or clayey gravel. . Sandy Silt Alluvium: Generally, the upper fill transitions .to medium stiff sandy silt to silty sand alluvium. The silt stratum was absent at TP-4. The silt stratum varies in thickness and consistency across the parcel. The silty soils were observed to be 0101 to 3 feet thick, where encountered. The silt generally became sandier with increased depth. and was relatively sandy at the transition from the fill at some locations. The silt is brown, moist to very moist, and non-plastic to low plastic. The sand is generally fine grained, with some coarse sand noted with increased depth. Date Received: Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Eugene, Oregon 2. i I I I I ()~iQip.al gl:letliifuol I' January 17, 10ff ---.__._ . i Project No. 2107170 i I ! MAR I I 2011 . . Sandy Gravel Alluvium: The silt and sand alluvium transitions to sandy gravel with depth. The gravel is typically :t3-inch minus, rounded and well-graded. Thel sandy gravel contains some to trace silt and is very moist to wet. The sandy gravel extends to the limit of our exploration at the site (:t6 feet). ' INFILTRATION TESTING Infiltration testing was conducted at two locations (P-1 and P-2). The approximate'test locations are shown on Figure 2. The testing was conducted to lassist in estimating the hydraulic conductivity of the soil beneath the site for use in disposal of ston-il water. The falling head infiltration method was used for the testing, ir;J11 general conformance with the Eugene Stormwater Management Manual - July 2006. The water levels were monitored over a five hour period with variable infiltration rates observed. Based on our observations, it appears that the subgrade soils are expected td have low to moderate permeability. The ihfiltration rates are expected to increase Iwith depth in the soil profile. A summary of test depths, subgrade soils and infiltration measurements are provided in Table 1 for individual test locations. We recomm~nd using an infiltration rate no greater than % inches/hour fOr average infiltration rates in the upper :t18 to 24 inches of the soil profile at the site. The design infiltration rate may be increased to 4 inches/hour if the infiltration areas are excavated to the sandy soil subgrade and , ' relatively free draining material is used to backfill the excavation to the design subgrade level. Table 1. Infiltration Testing Summary Test Test Depth Measured , Subgrade Soil Infiltration Location (in.) rate lan.lhr.) I P-1 24" Sandy Silt :t12in./hr. I I P-2 18" Silt :t1.5 in./hr. I OF GEOTECHNICAL ISSUES Ori itions: .' Date Received: DISCUSSION . MAR 1 j 2011 Weather Cond The site work should be conducted during dry weather, to the extent practical. The site grading is expected to. be minimal and will primarily be excav~tion of the existing fill material for the building pad and footings. The subgrade soils 0i11 typically include silt, which is expected to be moisture sensitive. The excavation depth for the footings and pavements will have to be increased and a thickened rock Isection used for site preparation during wet weather conditions. Therefore, wet weather construction is expected to have higher site preparation costs. gillal Submittal Buildinq Site Preparation: We understand that the new structure will include slab on grade construction that will be elevated above existing site grades. All fill materials and dbbris will need to be excavated from the building. area and hauled from the site las the excavation is Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Eugene, Oregon 3. January 17, 1011 Project No. 2107170 . . conducted. The building site preparation should include compaction of imported aggregate base over the approved subgrade soil. Que to the variability of the fill across the site, we anticipate that site observation will be required throughout the building excavation to verify suitable subgrade soils. Based on the observed depth of fill, we expect that the building pad will include a minimum of 12 inches of aggregate base with some areas requiring :1:3 feet of imported aggregate base. Foundations and Drainaqe: We anticipate that foundation excavations will extend :1:2 feet below existing grades at the site to provide adequate footing embedment and bypass existing fill material. The upper silt alluvium is expected to be adequate to support relatively light foundation loads without excessive settlement. We have provided recommendations for . constructing the footings over :!:12 inches of compacted aggregate base to provide a.' working surface during construction. If footing excavation work is completed during wet weather, we expect that the required excavation depth and rock thickness will increase. " We have assumed that site grading will be conducted to elevate the slab above existing grades' and provide positive drainage away from the structure. The site includes a seasonally shallow ground water surface. Therefore, we have assumed saturated conditions in our bearing capacity evaluation and foundation drains should not be required. However, we recommend that the building slab include a vapor barrier due to the anticipated shallow ground water levels. We have assumed that rain drains from the building will be transmitted to the storm system at the site. SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Our observations of the foundation soils underlying the proposed site and knowledge of the area suggest that the seismic risks at the site are relatively low. A summary of several considerations are outlined below. Fault Rupture: Fault rupture is not believed to be a concern at the site, since there are no known faults in the immediate vicinity. Relative Amplification Hazard: The deeper soil profile at the site is expected to include dense gravel alluvium overlying weathered rock. The upper soils include a stratum of medium stiff silt and medium dense sand. Based on the limited thickness of the upper medium stiff/dense soil, we believe that there is a low amplification hazard at this site, and that the typical correlations provided by the Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OS~teS~ . . d' classifications are appropriate for design. ecelve : Relative Liquefaction Hazard: . MAR 1 1 2011 The foundation soils include medium stiff sandy silt to silty sand in the uPJ2~r portion o~ the soil profile transitioning to dense sandy gravel. Shallow ground waterl.j!fl5)~~~m-e;ttaf at the site that may impact the upper sandy soils. The sandy alluvial soils are expected to have a moderate risk of liquefaction .or strength reduction during a design earthquake. However, due to the limited thickness of the sand stratum and density of the underlying sandy gravel, we anticipate that the hazard would result in only modest settlements to the structure. The liquefaction risk could be mitigated at the site by Geotechnical Investigation January 17, 1011 Glenwood Op Project Project No. 2107170 Eugene, Oregon 4. , i I I I ! I i I I I I I I . . extending the footing excavations through the upper sandy soils to the sandy gravel and backfilling with compacted aggregate base. SEISMIC DESIGN The average soil conditions in the upper :t100 feet beneath the proposed structure is expected to consist predominately of medium dense to dehse alluvium overlying bedrock. Therefore, we believe that use of a site class D is ~ppropriate for seismic , design. In our opinion, the spectral accelerations and attenuation relationships provided in the 2007 OSSC are appropriate for seismic desigh of the new structure. We recommend using the General Procedure of OSSC; Sebtion 1613 to develop' parameters for seismic design of the structure. Peak ground accelerations and spectral accelerations (on roc~) were determined for design using 2% probability of exceedence in 50 years (i.e., :t2,4?5 year return interval). We have used the 2002 USGS modeling for the site. This modeling considers a variety of seismic sources including crustal and subduction zone eartHquakes. However, the principal source of the design ground motion is due to a large m~gnitude (Mw 8.3 to 9.0) earthquake along the CSZ with a source distance :t35 miles Ifrom the site. Crustal earthquakes were also considered, but do not contribute sig~jfjcantly to the design ground motion. The peak ground acceleration (PGA) on rock fO~ the site is 0.27g with a short. period acceleration (Ss) of 0.66 at 0.2 second period and long period speCtral accelerations (Sl) of 0.32 at 1.0 second period. The paramet~rs for establishing the General Procedure Response Spectrum using OSSC Section 1~13 are summarized in . Table. 2. The values for Sos and SOl include a two-thirds reduction as discussed in Section 1613.5.4. Site Ss 51 Fa Fv SIAS SMl 50s 501 Class D 0.66 0.32 1.28 1.77 0.84 0.561 0.56 0.37 Table 2. OSSC 2007 Seismic Design Parameters . . I I GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Bearinq Capacity: We conducted bearing capacity analysis for modest foundation loads which are anticipated for the new structure. Foundation loads are expected to include continuous footings with loads as great as 4 kips/linear foot and spread footihgs with loads as great ~~O~~. . Moderately loaded footings may be constructed over the upper silt and sand alluvium' using an allowabie bearing pressure of 2,500 psf. All continu~us perimeter footings should have a minimum width of 18 inches. Isolated spread footing foundations should have. a minimum dimension of 24 inches. Our analysis assu1med that the footings would be underlain by a nominal :t12 inches of compactecLcrush1ed rock that extends a Date Received: . I uAR 1 I 201 January 17. 1011 PI !project No. 2107170 Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Eugene, Oregon 5. Oriainal Submittfll . . minimum of 6 inches beyond the limits of the footing. The base of all perimeter footings should be embedded a minimum of 18 inches below finished grades. The footings should be designed using an ultimate subgrade friction coefficient of 0.4 for foundations constructed on compacted crushed rock. A factor of safety of 1.5 is appropriate for this coefficient to minimize relative movements when considering long- term loads. Soil parameters used in the bearing capacity evaluation were also used to estimate the modulus of subgrade reaction beneath the proposed slab. Our calculations suggest that slab design using a ks value of 80 kips/feis appropriate for the site assuming a minimum aggregate base thickness of12 inches over the silt subgrade. Settlement: Considering, the relatively light foundation loads and stiffness of the underlying alluvial soil; we do not believe that structure loads will result in significant settlement. However, subsurface conditions vary across the site. We recommend that all footing and building slab excavations extend through the upper fill materials and expose medium stiff, native silt and sand alluvium. Proper subgrade preparation and fill placement and compaction will be necessary to adequately support the. structure. Proposed foundations are expected to result in minor long-term consolidation of the alluvial soils. Therefore, we recommend that the structures be designed to accommodate maximum total and differential movements of y:, inch. Pavements: We have conducted pavement thickness analysis using assumed traffic, based on our experience with similar facilities. Our assumed traffic includes a daily volume of 200 cars and pickups and 2 light tWo-axle delivery trucks (28k gross vehicle weight) and one three-axle truck (50k gross vehicle weight). The light traffic applied over a 20 year design life results in an Equivalent Single Axle Loading (ESAL's) of :t30,000. A Mr value of 4,000 psi was selected for our analysis based on available correlations and our experience with similar compacted silt subgrade soils~ We assumed a 20 year design life for our analysis, a reliability of 90% and terminal serviceability of 2.0. Our calculations suggest that a pavement section consisting of 3 inches of asphalt over 12 inches of aggregate base should be used for pavements at the site. CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS Materials: Unsuitable soils at the site should include fill materials containing debris, organics or plastic clay and any organic soils. Stumps, large roots (over:t1 inch in diameter) or deeper concentrations of soft soil conditions or organic material should also be considered unsuitable. Unsuitable soils should be hauled from the site. Required excavations are expected to include an existing building slab and associated footings that previously occupied the site. Aggregate base as defined in this report should consist of % to 1-inch minus, well graded crushed rock. The rock should be relativelY.l<lefln with less th~n 5% (by weight) passing the #200 sieve. Uate KeCelVea. Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood op Project Eugene, Oregon MAR 1 1 2011 January 17, 1011 Project No. 2107170 I , I i 6. Original Submittal . . All imported aggregate base should be moisture conditioned and compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. The maximum dry density of ASTM D 698 should be used as the standard for evaluation of relative compaction. Site Preparation (Dry Weather): The existing fill material should be excavated from beneath all proposed slab and foundation areas. We recommend that the underlying subgrade surface be evaluated during dry weather by proof rolling the relatively undisturbed ~lIuvium to identify any. areas of soft or yielding subgrade' that may require additional excavation and replacement. The engineer should identify the extent and dkpth of the existing fill material that needs to be excavated and replaced with imported brushed rock. Footing areas should be excavated as' required to allow Place~ent and compaction of :1:12 inches of aggregate base. All softened or disturbed sUbgrdde materials should be excavated to firm subgrade. The subgrade soils beneath the !foundations should be observed and apprcNed' by the engineer at the time of excayation. The approved foundation soil should be covered with a leveling course of :1:12 inches of compacted aggregate base. . I. . All structural fill should be documented to confirm adequate compaction. Field density testing should be conducted where 8'inches ormorE;l of compa~ted aggregate base is . required to attain either bottom of footing or slab elevations. Fill material should be' placed in loose lifts no greater than 12 inches thick. Final coni paction of the building pad in slab areas should be conducted after all plumbing and ~Iectrical trenching has been completed. Field density testing should' be conducted on 'the completed building , pad fill to confirm adequate compaction of the aggregate base. Site Preparation (Wet Weather): Additional excavation and placement of aggregate base will be required to support construction operations if the site preparation. work is delayed until wet weather conditions. Dewatering of required excavations at the. site is anticipated for work conducted during wet weather months. The aggregate ba~e thickness beneath foundations and slabs should be increased to at least 18 iriches for wet weather. _, construction. The excavation work should. be completed uSingl a smooth bucket and' conducted in small sections to allow fill placement as the '^(ork progresses. The excavation should be inspected throughout the work to delineate any unsuitable subgrade soils exposed in the excavation. Wet weather cbnstruction should be conducted to minimize disturbance to the subgrade to the exten1t practical. Placement and compaction of aggregate base will not be practical durind periods of extremely heavy rainfall. Therefore, the sitework should be delayed during' periods of heavy rain. In addition, use of a higher quality granular fill and placement of a thickened initial lift may be required. Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Eugene, Oregon Foundation Construction: Footing excavations should extend into the relatively undisturbed native alluvium. The base of all perimeter footings should be at least 18 inches beloW the finished grade or paved surface. Place and compact a minimum of 12 inches of aggregate base beneath all footings. I . Date Received: I . MAR I I 2011 7. Original Submittal I I January 17. 1011 Pr0ectNo.2107170 . . Pavements: Pavements should be constructed during dry weather to the extent practical. Construction of the pavement sections will require a thicker aggregate base section during wet weather to support construction operations. In addition, paving may not be practical during wet weather. Excavate as needed in the pavement areas to attain the design subgrade elevation. The subgrade should be evaluated at the time of pavement section construction to identify any areas of soft or unsuitable material. We anticipate that some areas may encounter unsuitable fill material at the design pavement subgrade level. Therefore, the pavement subgrade should be evaluated by the engineer at the time of excavation to determine the limits of additional excavation required. The finished subgrade should be evaluated by proof-rolling the surface using a loaded 12 cubic yard dump truck and conducting field density testing at regular intervals. Any areas of excessive deflection, rutting or pumping or failing density test results should be identified and either processed and compacted or excavated and replaced with compacted granular fill. " Place and compact the required base section over the approved subgrade as soon as practical. We recommend a minimum base section of :t12 inches for the section constructed over fine-grained soils. We anticipate that the base section will support limited construction traffic during dry weather conditions. Field density testing should be completed on the aggregate base prior to paving to confirm adequate compaction. . Compact the asphalt cement pavement to a minimum of 91 % relative compaction . according to the theoretical maximum density calculated from the Rice specific gravity. Conduct field density testing on the asphalt pavement at the time of compaction to confirm the required density is being achieved. . . LIMITATIONS AND USE OF THIS REPORT This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Glenwood Op, LLC and their . design consultants for the' proposed' Glehwood Op project located on Franklin Boulevard in Eugene, Oregon. Information contained herein should not be construed as a warranty or guaranty of site or subsurface conditions. Our explorations. indicate soil conditions only at specific locations and only to the depths penetrated. They do not. necessarily reflect soil strata or water level variations that exist between or beyond exploration locations or limits. Soil and ground water conditions at other locations or times may differ. Our work should not be assumed to represent any environmental services; we have assumed that those services are being provided by others. Our work, at the time this letter was prepared, has been conducted in accordance with' generally accepted principals and practices. No warranty or other conditions, expressed or implied is made. Date Received: MAR I I 2011 Original Sl.lbmhtat.______ Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Eugene, Oregon 8. January 17, 1011 Project No. 2107170 i i I I I I I I I , i I i i I ! I I . . We trust this information meets your current needs. Please feel free to contact us with any questions. Sincerely, FEI Testing and Inspection, Inc. 1JJ.~#r-- Michael L. Meyer Vice President Attachments: Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Eugene, Oregon VV1f. V1\L Mel McCracken, P.E. Project Engineer '" "' ~ --..,......,-, lEXPIRES': 12r~~./ \ '7-- ~ '. --,.,.,...~.- " NarrativeTest Pit Logs (pages 10 through 12) Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Plan 9. . r Date Received: MAR t t 2011 riginal Submittal January 17. 1011 Project No. 2107170 TP-1 Depth (ft.) 0-2.9 29 - 5.0 5.0-6.0 TP-2 Depth (ft.) 0-1.9 1.9 - 5.0 5.0- 5,5 Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Eugene, Oregon . . is s, ilt, r, i " y, h to i Ived: 011 11 70 NARRATIVE TEST PIT SUMMARIES Glenwood Op Project Franklin Boulevard Eugene, Oregon Project No, 2107170 Excavated on December 16, 2010 Elevation N/A Soil Profile Oeseri tion Crusf\ed rock surfacing Medium dense silty GRAVEL with some debris and clay: brown, moist, debr includes wood, concrete and asphalt, rounded to subangular gravel to 003 inche (Fill), ' Medium dense silty SAND; brown, moist, fine sand, rounded non-plastic 5 (alluvium), Medium dense gravelly SAND; grey, very moist, rounded gravel to :!:3 inch diamete (alluvium), Minor caving of test pit sidewalls . No groundwater infiltration encountered, / Elevation N/A Soil Profile Oeseri lion Crushed rock surfacing Two concrete slabs below 006 inches, Medium dense sandy GRAVEL with some silt to CLAY with some gravel: gre . slightly moist, crushed :!:%-inch minus base aggregate and open-graded :!:3 inc gravel, (Fill), . Medium dense silty SAND; brown, moist, fine to medium sand, (alluvium), Medium dense to dense sandy GRAVEL; grey and brown, moist, rounded gravel :!:3 inch diameter, (alluvium), No groundwater infiltration encountered, ece MAR 1 1 2 Original Submittal 10, January 17,10 Project No, 21071 . . TP-3 Elevation N/A Depth (ft.) Soil Profile Description I 0-1.1 Crushed rock surfacing I Medium dense silty GRAVEL to gravelly CLAY: grey to brown, moist, rounded to angular gravel to 003 inches, (FILL). I . I 1.1 -2.0 Medium stiff sandy SILT; brown, moist, fine sand, (alluvium). I 2.0-4.5 Medium dense to dense sandy GRAVEL; grey, very mbist to wet, rounded gravel to :1:4 inch diameter, (alluvium): '. . I No groundwater infiltration encountered. ". TP-4 Elevation N/A Depth (ft.) Soil Profile Description I 0-2.6 Crushed rock surfacing I' . Medium dense clayey GRAVEL with abundant debris; grey to brown, moist, debris includes several concrete posts and footings, metal fencing, rounded to angular gravel to 003 iriches, (FILL).' .., . . I 2.6 -5.0 Medium dense to dense sandy GRAVEL; grey, moist to wet, rounded gravel to :1:6 inch diameter, fine to coarse sand, (alluvium). I . Minor cavinq of test pit sidewalls. . No groundwater infiltration encountered. TP-5. Elevation N/A Depth (ft.) Soil Profile Description I 0- 0.5 Crushed rock surfacing '.' I . Medium dense silty GRAVEL to gravelly CLAY: grey to brown, moist, rounded to angular gravel to 003 inches, (FILL). I 0.5 ~ 3.2 Medium stiff sandy SILT grading to silty SAND; brown, moist to very moist, fine to coarse sand, (alluvium). I 3.2-4.0 Medium dense to dense sandy GRAVEL; grey, very moist to wet; rounded gravel to :1:3 inch diameter, (alluvium). . I Moderate ground water infiltration noted below :1:3.8 feet. .. Date Receive MAR 11 2011 Original Submittai Geotechnical Investigation January 17, 1011 Glenwood Op Project 11. Project No. 2107170 Eugene, Oregon d: . TP-6 . Elevation N/A Depth (ft.) Soil Profile DescriDtion 0-0.9 Crushed rock surfacing Medium dense silty GRAVEL with some sand and ciay: grey to brown, moist, rounded to angular gravel to 003 inches, (Fill). 0.9 - 4.0 Medium stiff sandy SilT grading to SAND with some silt; brown, moist to very moist, fine sand, some coarse below 003 fe'et, (alluvium). . 4.0 - 4.2 Medium dense to dense sandy GRAVEL; grey, very moist, rounded gravel to :1:4 inch diameter, (alluvium). No ground water infiltration noted. " Date Received: MAR 1 1 2011 Original Submittal January 17:1011 Project No. 2107170 I ! , I I i Geotechnical Investigation Glenwood Op Project Eugene, Oregon 12. ......:-..j;..... ....c--.. -.. . ''''C'!'''''' ,y,., tlr....; . .. '. ': '".;6r';~ eut;t~;~'inQT :~~: Ji i~; ~: .::. {" : . /.'it: l,?}',: ......., ;1...... ".;,. .r~' .....: "7, ";."l~"~-~'~.fl~'~-~~0:~::"' 0::_1< .ii." "., ".. ~!'-''''''O ... II ~ It-''':l' ~'" .. - , ~'...'!.-!I'-!.... - t"l!' ~'. ~1f:: :.:" " rf1,.I:..-;: :!= :'-;;-:::',-- .Joof;'~', ~"C '~.~r.'/J:~ ',.', . ~ I ..: . . I I.;:. . ____, ___~~.' f...... -":'1'.. . '(,~"_.' I .." .~".."ro'\... .!~, i 'O~:;s~~; .:.: l~;"-; . : . .,; '.,; " ....F",.''1 " ; '. ~,.' , 'Ef; G . l J' ~,;',.,oL~-,,~-:~~~!,.: '.~-..<,:,.~.'.' ~, .' - I' 11) t~. t~ .. "_"'-_~_----"':--_". r:.__.--... ,.i.~-.. (; i \t. L '. ~~~~...---j.-: - -R' ....._:.\;;.~-::'~. ....:."':~ ':.;'.' ..~.~_... ~ ,'/RlY.$'"--' .-. ~<:fii' <;". ",~,. /'~;=f':..-:----'J'<; '-<'.,: A-,QL.~ ,'~'--'-,:", '''I~flr~~~:',.II.~JI...t ", u..-.-~_l., /"'~.I~"""-. .~~_.I.I ';~:';::;~I . {/& ./" ." t '-, _:.~ -"'I . '1-' 8rt 4 , ,"~ ....- lira... II. j ',-j I"'.. r .. .., ,." ~ . "11' '. 1 ..:.II..... ':~".- ....' -" -r." 1 ~J_I!. j " , . .'. '1/ ':1" E--l-'l,r-"li':'-'~:':~~':':'......:~, I~..!:,-I- ~,0 -~., ' ~'f if... _ '. I J}. ~b_.j~J..!:'.~. I..;\~ "-' ';-)'.0 ,."-' ,. '.. _ II . ~'I I' ',00.., -:., ~" ~..'~t~I::'J!l" "*",," ":e.~ udkinlis ItClen\v P.O.'" 'i6f.:i:.J' :1:iQzi f l ~'~....~~..~ '1! '~I. '... ' 1'., .~ ~..:_JI - I" 'J'- ..,.. II II , . "1"~.!'\1 Ii! I I ~'. +1____..:;_...~...~..AI; 1: I'.......... .' ,. .'~,.'I, .'.,. ,:i'. {. I ' ,~..!., .......~.. .' '-"'-':l:""'<~'''' IL . ,.~ . :;~--= ~~\~";"I':?"tfli\~.,.\....~> ~:~. I "1~:....JJJIIl.a.~~...'Ii~."". '":)~,., ,,,,~:"r."I,.Tl ~'I"\~ ../1: :1' I~K.\.. '. 1/4.. -,t",r'o";l!."J'" :d ::'\\- "'("." :~~1~;~":~ .-, I"~.J.I. - - /t:::.~ - - -" .-.-...: u...J!:a~~~': ~"1~"'~':. '!';,,~' 'ti'~'" ":'" ,":j" i ~\ !. : ,: /.... ,l;:.;.';~ " ~ "11 f'''rk' " . """'1'1'"; "~i#' ". III "")1" · "~ "1'",,,,,,.. I . -'.' .". , M'~;'~.~.'.f,:.'h"..~I::~ll~;"i~" /' ilf"'~'~.. ...--'- \, , f l~"~' i' 'i :r(:~"":/~..;tA~t~ ;.~:TII"'.~<,-f ,/:: i':~I~"~~ 4"iI'8~J ':~ J' !~fe:Jd" ~(,," . ~;"\\;"~c.,._'I,""",\ '\0'. ;'I~"'~ 1'1;'1)" .I" ,.,. . , '. l,o.J,VJ1n Ii e.. ~,.:.. '" ,,~}I:l'I' ':......"...... - ' ".~' '.' < ~, " "j' \~ i . !l ._,~ ' 'il/' ---I. . .. -,...., 'J .. "',~...:~'"'\.I. ."""':tJ"'f.I.t ;,t, 1.. \:" )Ii ";1'"'' L=_!. "'0~" un' et ;.I;~.-- (,... .........4.;..&1' lic.'.. - ',," '!J I, <<l 'II' I~ .~ ..)";; ~~'I>'/ .r., "t::---,,-:-~\ . .'j .1' .i.!f-r .;';. :;:~..:. .~" "~.'ff -I' i (,I .a.:.. .. -"..' I ,<, ..t. '..'.'.. .., '. ..'.-.... '.t~. 1', .,,;'(t..~:.......~~.-cl . ":";. " '. 'I .. ~, . .r---,Si., '",. 'j6'/f;;~"':!B:u:r\\{/.'J~' \~.',~,. . ..... 1'\ 'hiir::~i~""~~~~ ..,; r;j....l....~ ;.,~i.":ij.'..:JP .i~. :;., .'.'ij.... ,~. "'':-./' ~1"olf!ii~'5 ,.1ri'~\v... ~ t')/:t:r:... '\'..../ '. ./" "";;::" "'~' '" 'I . ":~T l 'I', ~'" T . ~//rft::l!!f;;....f.1 .... I' · ;;-.: .,>,' t...., :fl., . t= .-,' )\, "~ ,;.: '-f!"';a.'l-/~l/ 1,1i.'.//; ,. i ...; --,,~. I" ;>-;~..J.;t - ",__',t> '''') 'j './.. ..JVi.4""t.../' .' lrJ'. ".'.... )..... ..-....~. _....:..r;, -~:' - '.'-' '-'. . ".,.,/, ' '0 l;.t....\.. ,,:,' ....., ',I 'f"" "",-"",'..- '~' . -~...' .'. '1"1\\ ....:--:'~:.;',>/)..n.t:- j-... .,w-:- ,"~I..-.'.-~. ,<. -_-.,~ 1:"'_ : .'~~ "::"'i. ~~,-~:.::~~;.'...1..~~;.I-.!./J#..=. . ~ i: ..;". 4 i ,:I> 1< , :'-, . ",' ,", 1.- , 'J,.,:'t\" .j..;t' ~" .",',fm'.';.I~,.,(,~~~'"''''.-'---''' ''''';': .~.', - .'1' . I '~'i~ ._-, . ::-'.'" '., ."~~~:..i:.;}i;-;-..... ',' /;;....... .-~'\'~\--" ":.::'1 ...-" 1,lIu ;.,10,. ,:I,. ~I J ), I ),:\'1' ;-... P'" \ #"":' . ',', < \ /.;;.:,~.. ........ ':, ~.IiJ.~ Uhf.' )"il: :;~ trl'~...'I.. i \kJ./i' :...:" i,~ /"::.' _,~ ,\'\ I . . .-':~~' 6*. ,"~_~:'i-~l: ,* ~!: ! "1" . '~. .'" ir,!" . , ........ .,,, ----, ... .--,,'. , .."~.~-':":,-~--.!....!...!..!.,..lL... Iii." :n,.' S-:~!Cr,'c:~::;;,l.~~l:,' ~: "-r~~.. .\ . i ! ,.J 33 'I. ...:1:....., . ~ \'~.! ! ~ .~... I" ;.j_~ <":,=", 81>11475 ; ~.t>~'~ \<. ~:;.;;.:.2"-'.~.;.'.. ',- . "'-", .. *'kl. .""""'~"" " '.. ,'j Pllr1C'::-~-'",~"'-7-'" ... ..... ,----' ~ ~~~.-~~~~-~, FEr Testing & Inspection, Inc. GeotectTlical & ConstructIon Services ' 29540 B AIrpMt Rood Eugeno, Oregon 97402 phone (5411 684-3849 fax (5411 684-3851 . ~ , VICINITY MAl Fi GURE NO. 1 GLEN WOOD OP PROJiC~ . EUGENE, OREGO I a e Receiv MAR 1 1 2011 . . -. Ongmal SubrrmlCll I . . I 225':1: ) \ -- FEI Testing & Inspection, Inc. Geotednicol & Construction Services 29540 B Airport Road Eugene, Oregon 97402 phone (541) 684-3849 lex (5411 684-3851 SITE PLAN EXPLORATION LOCATIONS GLENWOOD OP PROJ@ate Recei EUGENE, OREGON Original Submittal E [ '. ~ Fi GURE NO. i . I i , I I I I 2 Iii ~ \ \ ~9 i i \ ' il ,,~~ I 1 \ \ __--.---..-- ! I I!~ : I I \ \ tE'~..4._._._.- _' ._b._._.,......_._.__._._~-~- . J I , . ""'"""'''''''-"' -r." . .-.-. .-.- ._.---~-~_. - Ii \\ ~~ II _ ~I +,r-V . ~"1' -:A: ,,~~, ="h. n' n' _-a-_ n~_n~ r- -'[ -- ~ II ~ \ \ \ .~ I I i ~rl .1' \ I \ - : - ~~, J<"" \,.~ \, \ I . ,I I -... --..... ' '-..:ce.( ,!1 i \\\~ \ :.1 \) + L.L ~\I' rr-. I ~ \\ (.. "'~. + \ ,. I \ "- \ /1;..2' ~I" f ~ \: \ ~~1' \ \ () IN": \ \ \ \ \ " ',' . " - = I I \ I I -;;- \' i Ii - 1l-\...:' \ ) 1\ \ ~ : I \ \ ~! \ " \\.~ ~_t.~~-~t. ~r 'E:+ ..' ~I ---+->1 \ j$ ,; fi o! oIl' i: '; \'" ~ _\_ _~ =i>' 0 ()~h! Bid b /' \ " Il \. + ' "I \ \ '! o"9T t. _5 .. ~-c _ ' L' · ""''" . \ I ' ". .. '~. \7~'j . ~'J;.-' 1\ - -,--'~: J .. \,1 : 1 i ~ II @] ~ [/1 t~ '" + .. tJ +tJ " 'IT hi UC ..'C. l I ()~ '\ b \\ ~.t~ \ \\ /" l \. ' \ I < ~ \ I :L.l;~ ._ -, " ,: "'''' ! .-:t I . ';*1 ! is \, \ \ II ~, . -4' .~. .'. .... ... + I 1=0,:12 0,0 0 olli 0 0 0 0 D !:J , . I \ .\ ",_...-... ..;'-... ~-... - .. ~..,.. ' \ ~ 1 II I- \ \ \ \ r'-'-'-'--'-'-'\'-'-'-'-'-'-'-'-' _....:..:_:i,-:~.....:..._:....:.....::!;....:..;..:.._....J'i-.' (.f) .\,1\ V,) \. : IIi. il I I Z tfl LJ.J ~ o Z "0 <ll ClJ ~ ~~ ..0 <ll ... V'I <ll .~ "0 c"O Oi:: <lJ ClJ E . > :J ~ :J V'I U ClJ V'I :J C <ll ~ <ll >-~ E = ~ <ll .- ClJ .- u... u t: ClJ ._ <ll U ..c Cl. ~ ClJ C ClJ >00: ...... o E =..c eo~C045 ...... ... ::: 1>0'- "0 ~ ~.:: ::: ~'~~u>- :J +--' '.;3 t"O '"0 Vl-C..:t:::bO @ .~ ClJ ..0 ..0 E~-:J- ..............U'l"'Ct1 --cc:>.L.. ..coo..oClJ +-' L.. L.. >. "0"""""""0 0 ClJ .- '+- '-+- C]) u ::: 0 0 ... ClJ.- L..L..ro..c..c 'D.i!:!.i!:!u:J"'Eg: <ll C C r=ClJClJ~O~ uuu...t:....... "0 C <ll _ ClJ ~ .:: '"0 t't1ceu..Qj ..0 >.t;:: - .2 .... 00 QJ V'l :J C ClJ C Cl.'- ...c Q) aJ "- ::: EO J} ...~ QJ'+- 1>0 ..c 0 c..c...c ~ to >-.- ~c..oU ClJ ClJ >_"0 - 0- ClJ~ +J(ij:-Q..c c L.. > (J) o ClJ 0 ~ ~ > ~ """ u... 0 Cl....:: c::: <C ::E 1>0 C C ~ :J ... - - = ...., ..J co ::: 'E .Cl :J (/) ro c: '5 'C o u z z>-~ OI~ c:::1-~ WC:::E :I:<~ <<G: " u:I:~ z :s ..c ... :20 ::: 8 . V'I ClJ..c ClJ u Cl. ~ ~ E ClJ C .- o.D o Cl... ... ';:; rtI t"O <ll ~ ~ 3~U E V'I 2 C ... V'I 0 ClJ 100"'- L... I.UJ V'l'- C c...... 'c ClJ ~ ~ E '- :J ._ OJ ~"O<ll "0 <I> > '(j) U <D a::: <I> .... co o ..0 ~ :J U -' ClJO "OM V'I'" C <ll ... E ~ :J V'I E V'I .- :J C .- .- "0 ~ ~ - - N '<t M Lfl ~ , \ . \ , \ \ ; \ \ , CDO'l ><;t- +-' ~><;t-O . ..:::s:. Q) . . . CO Q) CX:Jr-- CD n U ...... .. .. .. ::J L r-- I- Q) CD E . ><;t- O (]) i-= ><;t- O L ~Q) . ~ LL U 01 N o c ...J<( (]) U 0 01 +-' C L .c ~ 'c (]) +-'U~Q) 0 .- 'DOUQ) 0.. 3LO+-, 0 I-...J(f) CD b <Xl o '<t II = -~ ClJ <ll U tflb N b ~,. ~~,. ~ ~ ...... o ~~ ~ ClJ -"00 .::!: <ll MCl... ~ ::) I- o I- ::) <( ~ u.J. > ::) u.J Z <( ~ ~U UZ -' ::)U ~o 1-8 u.J:5: ~z LU -' LJ..lJ