My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1st Open Record Period: Applicant Comments submitted 3-21-18
>
OnTrack
>
PDT
>
2017
>
PDT 17-1
>
1st Open Record Period: Applicant Comments submitted 3-21-18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2018 2:09:36 PM
Creation date
3/22/2018 12:18:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
PDT
File Year
17
File Sequence Number
1
Application Name
CAPITAL HILL PUD
Document Type
Public Comments submitted after hearings official hearing
Document_Date
3/21/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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
Geotechnical/Geologic Investigation Rebuttal <br /> Capital Hill PUD <br />Eugene, Oregon <br /> <br />although no test pits were conducted in that area. The ridge line of the site is a linear extension of the same <br />volcanic rock intrusion that is visible in the road cut along Franklin Blvd north of the site. The intrusion of <br />this volcanic rock through the sedimentary rock deposits is suspect to be a primary cause of the slope dip in <br />the sedimentary rock that Mr. Schlieder discussed. Bedding strikes in OFR 0-10-03 show an 11° dip to the <br />northeast in the area of the subject site. <br /> <br />Biased Assessment <br />The location selection of our test pits was based on the proposed roadway alignments and accessibility to <br />equipment without extensive vegetation removal or earthwork. The entire site was walked by Gary <br />Sandstrom CEG. <br /> <br />It seems contradictory to me that Mr. Schlieder would accuse us of being bias when he brought up a landslide <br />on 30 Avenue about ½-mile south of the site; which according to the June 4, 1985 report for Lane County <br />th <br />prepared by L.R. Squire Assoicates Inc. indicating that the landslide that occurred in 1984 was categorized <br />as an earthflow resulting seepage pressures due to fill placement by the County in 1982 over fill placed in <br />1964. <br /> <br />Placement of Level Spreaders <br />Little I can say on this topic, it is not the best idea in my opinion. Three claims I would like to be able to <br />make are: 1) we are not removing the resisting force at the toe of any slide area by removing soil, 2) we are <br />not increasing the driving force at the top of any slide area by placing soil, and 3) we are not adding water <br />into the slide area but actually reducing the water by conveyance to a more suitable point of disposal. <br /> <br />I am not sure where that more suitable point of disposal is but it would be nice to find one. <br /> <br />Soil Creep <br />Soil creep is the downhill movement of near surface soil (usually the upper 2- to 3-feet) due to gravity, <br />freeze/thaw, and shrink/swell effects. The slow creep may cause a pistol-butting of tree trunks during their <br />early growth phase until substantial root mass and trunk strength is developed. Creep is common on most <br />hillsides and does not indicate gross landslide movement. Creep movement is generally mitigated by modern <br />foundation systems and control of soil moisture and temperature under and around the residence to where <br />the slow movement is unnoticeable over the typical lifespan of a residence. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br />Branch Engineering Inc., <br /> <br />Ronald J. Derrick, P.E., G.E. <br />Principal Geotechnical Engineer <br />HEARINGEXHIBITJ <br />2 <br />Branch Engineering, Inc. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.