My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE - Batch B
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE - Batch B
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/8/2018 4:02:01 PM
Creation date
3/7/2018 10:18:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
CAPITAL HILL PUD
Document Type
Misc.
Document_Date
3/6/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
74
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<Eric.J.Favreau ,ci.eugene.or.us> <br />Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 2:14 P <br />Subject: RE: -Road Load on Capital and Spring <br />Hi Brent, <br />Please see responses to your questions below. <br />® The 24 hour count is the 24 hour volume of the day counted. The growth factors account for impacts over <br />the 365 day year throughout the design life of the pavement. <br />® ESAL growth factors. include heavy vehicles. Growth factors are based. upon highway data in <br />Oregon. They tend to overestimate heavy vehicles when applied to a local street. We use this as a built in <br />factor of safety for pavement design. We have no evidence suggesting the structural section of Capital Drive is <br />inadequate for the proposed development, construction activity included. Our engineers have verified the <br />structural section is greater than the minimum pavements required to serve the existing neighborhood and the <br />proposed development. <br />® You are correct. Eugene Code does not preclude the consideration of construction in the PUD approval <br />criteria. Eugene Code also does not identify or address construction activity in the approval criteria. <br />Thanks, <br />Scott Gillespie, PE <br />Public Works Engineering <br />99 East Broadway, Suite 400 <br />Eugene, OR 97401 <br />541-682-2706 <br />From: Brent Lorscheider rmailto:lorsch2728 cDPacbell.net] <br />Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 10:40 PM <br />To: GIOELLO Nick R <Nick.R.Gioello(c ci.eugene.or.us>; GILLESPIE Scott N <br /><Scott. N.Gillespie0_ci.eugene.or. us> <br />Cc: Cathy Johnson <cdiohnson617@msn.com> <br />Subject: Re: Road Load on Capital and Spring <br />Scott and Nick, Thx for your patience with my questions. May I please just get clarification on a couple of your <br />responses? <br />In Scott' response no. 2 he states "Class counts are typically an average 24 volume". <br />I assume we are talking about 24 hour volume and this applies to each day of the year, 365 days in all? <br />In Scott's response no. 3 he states: "ESAL growth factors are empirical and anticipate construction activity, <br />seasonal fluctuations and anticipated heavy vehicles. The growth factors include averages of all activity that <br />can be expected on Oregon's roadways. This includes construction traffic." <br />Does this statement not imply your current ESAL growth factor should include all future, or anticipated, <br />construction activity, including the construction activity from the PUD? and from the resulting approximately 35 <br />dwelling units? Does your ESAL growth factor include the anticipated construction activity related to the PUD, <br />which will result in numerous trips by Class 7 and 8 vehicles? <br />In closing Scott states "...staff has already spent a significant amount of time responding to technical requests <br />that do not have applicable approval criteria as it relates to this land use application. <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.