Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS (8-22-17)August 22, 2017 Nicholas Gioello City of Eugene Planning and Development 99 W 10th Avenue Eugene, OR 97401 RE: Capital Hill PUD PDT 17-3 Nick: Thank you again for your thorough review of the project. The following are the responses to the Completeness Review items. The City items are in regular typeface and our responses are in italics. PLANNING Comments • Two (and possibly three) lots identified as potential lots for attached single-family homes appear to be located with the Fairmount Neighbors boundary (see attached Map). Attached housing in the R-1 zone on the same lot is defined as either duplex or triplex. Please refer to EC 9.2741 Special Use Limitations for Table 9.2740, which clearly prohibits duplexes and triplexes within the City defined boundary of the Fairmount Neighbors. After reviewing the boundary map with respect to the Site Plan we obtained the GIS data layer that locates that boundary line on our Site Plan. It is clear that Lots 6 and Lots 19 are almost fully contained within that boundary. As such these lots have been revised. Lot 6 has been divided into 2 single family lots. Lot 33 will contain the existing 3 unit apartment building. A portion of Lot 17 is contained within the Fairmount Neighbors boundary and as such the eastern portion of the lot (contained in the Laurel Hill Valley neighborhood) will be the only part of the lot designated for development of single family attached homes. The GIS layer was inserted into the ACAD base file and lined up with as many property lines as possible. We did not attempt to line the neighborhood boundary line up with tax lots but rather line up surveyed property lines with GIS tax lot lines. It goes without saying that these did not line up well. We decided to match up the eastern most boundary of our site with corresponding tax lot line on the GIS data base. This gave us the longest contiguous piece of data that matched. • Page 9 of the written narrative indicates bike parking for Lots 7, 18 and 24. Is this in reference to the old plan set? There is not lot 34 in the new plan set. Is the reference to the bike parking related to the attached housing? Thanks for catching this. Apparently the second time through a few details were missed in terms of lot numbers. This has been revised in the written statement. The only bike parking reference is now for the only lot that could potentially be built with a multi-family unit. Since there are no plans currently for that lot the statement simply serves to assure staff that this item can be reviewed at time of building permit should the developer of the lot choose to develop with a multi-family unit. This is currently Lot 17 in the revised Site Plan submitted with this response. • There seems to be some confusion and discrepancy regarding several boundaries referenced in the narrative. Please review the following, the first 3 maps were generated from our GIS data, the fourth map is codified in the Eugene Code: ➢ South Hills Plan boundary ➢ Laurel Hill Plan boundary + LANDSCAPE 59 ARCHITECTS t 375 West 4th, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 SCHIRMER PLANNERS + LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS + ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS Phone: 541.686.4540 Fax: 541.686.4577 www.schirmersatre.com = Capital Hill PUD: PDT 17-01 Page 2 of 5 Completeness Review Response ➢ Fairmount Neighbors boundary ➢ EC 9.8010 Adopted Plans Map and legend; In summary, a portion of the site is within the South Hills Study and is codified in EC 9.8010 Adopted Plans (see attached South Hills Plan map and EC 9.8010 Adopted Plans Map and Legend). The narrative indicates that only tax lots 100 and 201 are within the Laurel Hill Plan boundary, however the entire site, except tax lot 300, is located within the boundary. Tax lots 200 and 400, which are located within the Laurel Hill Plan boundary are also located within the Fairmount Neighbors neighborhood. As well, all of tax lot 300 and small portions of tax lots 100 and 201 are located within the Fairmount Neighbors neighborhood. Please revise the narrative accordingly. The narrative has been corrected to simply indicate that all of the property is in the South Hills Study area and that there is a boundary line on the proposed Site Plan that indicates which property is in each of the 2 neighborhoods. • Staff has concerns that several lots show larger trees within the conservation area that would be potential technical fellings. Staff believes it is feasible to slightly adjust the conservation areas and buildable lot areas in order to preserve for example the 30 inch maple south of lot 15 (tree no. 2169) while still yielding a sizable building area for lots 15 and 14. Other examples include lots. Please review all lots have conservation areas and assess the possibility of further adjustments in order to preserve additional trees. In general this statement above will always be true. The team moved all lots lines around in an effort to ensure some of the more healthy trees were preserved. In doing so we found with the move of one lot line and then another, other trees that were originally preserved were at risk of technical felling. In a forested environment the healthy trees and less than healthy trees are intermingled. It is impossible to move lot lines to preserve healthy trees without affecting other healthy trees. This becomes a guessing game as well. Which trees should remain? Which ones should require adjusting of lot lines? In fact over 33% of the site has been preserved and preserved in a large contiguous area. A valid question might be: If we had preserved 25% of the site and then in response to this request to look at preserving more trees added 10% more would that then have been satisfactory? It is our experience that there is no end for requests to preserve more trees, no matter how many have been preserved. In this case this large group of trees is contiguous with the trees on the Ribbon Trail and meet many if not all of the tree preservation criteria for preserving large stands, not creating individual trees subject to wind throw, etc. It also creates a large contiguous visual buffer on the east side of the property, not an insignificant concern expressed by neighbors through this process. As a not so minor detail many of the deciduous trees (i. e. maples, oaks, cherries, ash) found in this forest are in fair to poor condition regardless of the caliper size. They are being shaded by the healthier more vigorous Douglas firs as indicated in the written statement and in the tree assessment chart provided with the drawing package. Substantial damage has occurred as well as a result of the 2016 ice storm that was followed by a wind storm that damaged or uprooted even more trees. Many of the trees that are shown on the plan in fair or poor condition were damaged as a result of these storms. Healthy trees were damaged as well. • Regarding elevation drawings to show how the site will be viewed from off site and to ensure how the development will be viewed in terms of scale, bulk and height to ensure that the development blends with the South Hills area. Even though your response indicates the site cannot be seen, except by existing residence across Capital Drive, photographic or other evidence is needed to show this is correct. Staff points out that during our past sight visit, from the existing points on Capital Drive, part Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD: PDT 17-01 Completeness Review Response Page 3 of 5 of the downtown and other parts of the city were visible, which presumes that those parts of the city may be able to see portions of the development. Whether portions of the site are visible or not visible from off site, staff is requesting (either elevation drawings or photographic) evidence to support your claim. The narrative has been corrected and does not imply that this can't be seen, just that it is difficult to see. A photo taken from a known location downtown has been included in the written statement and the existing 100 year old pink house has been located in the photo. This photo was taken without benefit of zoom lens as that is how the eye would see it naturally. The views staff is referencing are views through the trees off site to views downtown. It is important to understand the context from which these views are seen. One can stand on the Capital Hill property, in an environment that is screened by the mature trees to the west of Capital Drive. The places off site that can be seen are not screened by trees and are in full sun. It is easy to stand in the less well lit places on Capital Hill and see well lit places downtown. The reverse can be said as well. Standing downtown when one is looking up at Capital Hill there are mature trees in the view. Even with the sun to the west, shining directly at the hill the trees obscure the view of existing buildings whether it is the existing pink house on the development site or the other homes located on the west side of that hill. An additional factor is that from up on Capital Hill one is looking down on the city and looking through a small break in the trees. There is a vacant lot due west of the property which affords this view. If a house were built on this lot it would obscure this view to downtown. When looking up at Capital Hill from downtown one is standing at an elevation approximately 480 to 500 feet lower and looking up through mature coniferous trees and existing one and two story homes. See attached evidence: • Video looking to the west from the development site. Video was taken by walking along a known path (see attached plan for location of path) and looking to the west. • Image looking east towards the development site From the top of the Downtown Athletic Club parking garage. Included in body of written statement. • Video walking along Ribbon Trail looking west see attached plan for location of path PUBLIC WORKS • The narrative references that slope easements have been added to the site plans, but staff cannot locate any reference for such easements on the plan. See Sheet L2.0. In the legend, 8th from the bottom, is a slope easement and it is in color. Look on the Site Plan for this colored dashed line as shown in the legend. Close to the pink house and a little to the right you will see the words "Proposed Slope Easement" with an arrow pointing at the colored dashed line. • The Traffic Safety and Street Connectivity Study will need to be updated to reflect the currently proposed lots for the PUD. See attached and revised Traffic Safety and Street Connectivity Study. • The stormwater criteria was not adequately addressed as follows: • Pervious asphalt is not allowed for public streets, especially in heavily sloped areas. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD: PDT 17-01 Page 4 of 5 Completeness Review Response August 22, 2017 All pervious pavement has been removed from the project. See attached Storm water Plan Sheet C2. • How are flood control standards being addressed for the individual lots? Specifically the lots that are east of the private street and drain away from the street (Lots 5, 7-18). Where will the run off go in large events. The PUD application is an application for approval of lots, not structures. There is no practical way to address stormwater management requirements in any specific manner. More than likely these lots will employ level spreaders that release water into the forested area at pre-development flows. See note on Stormwater Plan that "All individual lots will need to address water quality and flow control requirements when applying for building permits" • Flood and flow control standards require consideration for ALL impervious area, including future buildings, driveways, and other impervious areas. According to Table 2 in the Stormwater Management Plan, they aren't including the runoff from the buildings when determining peak discharge rates. What happens in a large event? Will the proposed mechanical System have adequate capacity to handle runoff from the additional impervious surfaces on the individual lots? This question has been posed quite often by public works staff at time of land use application submittal. Many times, but not consistently staff has agreed that this point in the process is not an appropriate time to be proposing specific stormwater solutions as there are no proposed impervious surfaces on site. The appropriate time to ask this question and to provide site specific solutions is at the time of building permit. Otherwise we are making up solutions for conditions that don't exist or don't exist in the manner in which we are imagining them. It becomes a guessing game and an unnecessary addition to client and development costs. Individual Lot Runoff The individual lots will need to meet water quality and flow control requirements when submitting for building permits and are not addressed by the improvements proposed above. Possible water quality mechanisms for the private lots would be the use of mechanical treatment or perhaps lined planters, rain gardens, sand filters, or swales. For flow control, some of the mechanisms above might work, but the use of underground storage tanks or oversized pipes may serve better. For the lots bound by the new roadway improvements, upon treatment and flow control, drainage disposal will discharge onto the new roadways. For the lots draining away from the roadway to the east, disposal (after treatment and detention) would be into level spreaders directed toward the existing park land to the east or north. • The applicant has not adequately addressed the destination requirements, particularly with respect to Capital Drive. As of now, it appears as though they will be collecting surface runoff, concentrating it, and directing it away from their property, which isn't acceptable. Where will this water go once it leaves the site? Are their ditches or a public system in the area? They must display that the downstream system has capacity to handle concentrated flow. Bubbler systems are no longer accepted in the City. Flows will not exceed predevelopment flows. See revised Stormwater Report and Storm water Analysis Report. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD: PDT 17-01 Completeness Review Response Page 5 of 5 • Applicant does not include any discussion about the portion of Capital Drive on the south side of the site, where lots 17 and 18 take access from. Please address. In the Site Plan these are now Lots 18 and 19. That portion of the right of way in front of those 2 lots will remain as is. No changes are proposed. In this location there is an existing 50 foot right of way with existing 20 feet of pavements. This paved area meets the minimum requirement for 2 way traffic and is contained within a concrete curb and gutter. No sidewalks are proposed for this small portion of the street as it makes no practical sense to install a sidewalk that doesn't connect to any other sidewalk. Also, given the steep nature of the property on either side of the road in this location and the close proximity of improvements to the paved road surface that are part of the property directly across the street, installing a small section of sidewalk would only serve to create unnecessary erosion, destruction of neighboring property and potential removal of existing trees. Information Items by Public Works • There will likely need to be an additional inlets of some sort between the two proposed intersections. Spacing between inlets is too far. This comment will be taken into consideration. • Capital Drive will need to be fully reconstructed to meet City standards. Simply adding additional asphalt to widen will not be accepted as Capital Drive is in poor condition and likely does not meet the City's standards for AC or base thickness. This means that a full 21' wide street reconstruct will be necessary. Acknowledged and agreed. Please call if you have any questions, comments or are in need of any additional information. I believe this responds to all incomplete items and issues. Sincerely, Schirmer Satre Group Carol Schirmer cc: Tom and Cynthia Dreyer (client) Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 TENTATIVE PUD APPLICATION Capital Hill PUD Eugene, OR 97401 Assessor's Map 18030431 Tax Lots 00100 00200 00201 00300 00400 March 3, 2017 Revised: June 19, 2017 Revised: August 22, 2017 375 West 4th, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 PLANNERS I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS + ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS Phone: 541.686.4540 Fax: 541.686.4577 www.schirmersatre.com t LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS t SCHIRMER I I - Capital Hill PUD Page 2 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Table of Contents Page Numbers PUD Application .............................................................................................................3-6 PUD Site Plan Requirements .......................................................................................7-11 PUD Written Statement ..............................................................................................12 - 66 Conclusion 67 Attachments (all submitted prior) Except: Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study resubmitted Except: Traffic Safety Study resubmitted Except: Disk with video submitted for first time this written statement Attachment A Air Photo Greater Context Attachment B Air Photo Attachment C Tax Lot Map RLID Attachment D Tax Lot Map Attachment E Zoning: City of Eugene Attachment F Metropolitan Area General Plan Attachment G Legal Description Attachment H Goal 5 Map Attachment I Ribbon Trail Map Attachment J Street Connectivity North Attachment K Street Connectivity East Attachment L Neighborhood Meeting Documents Meeting Invite (Exhibit A) Mailing List (Exhibit B) Affidavit of Posting Photo of Posted Sign Affidavit of Mailing Meeting Notes Notes from Flip Chart (used at meeting) Sign In Sheet Meeting Guidelines Site Plan Presented at Meeting Power Point Shown at Meeting Attachment M Land Use Decisions Prior AZ 81-3 Ordinance No. 18900 AZ 82-3 Ordinance 19060 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 3 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) PD 82-2 PD 83-1 A 14-06 Council Resolution 5122 Title Report Traffic Safety and Street Connectivity Study (3 copies submitted separately) (3 copies submitted with this Revised Written Statement August 22, 2017) Geotechnical/Geologic Report (3 copies submitted separately) Plus Addendum Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study (3 copies submitted with this Need Housing Statement and Plan Revised Written Statement August 22, 2017) (3 copies submitted separately) Disk with 3-D animation of Site Disk with video Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 4 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) March 3, 2017 Revised: June 19, 2017 Revised: August 22, 2017 TENTATIVE PUD APPLICATION General Housing Criteria CAPITAL HILL PUD PROJECT DIRECTORY PROPERTY OWNER / APPLICANT Cynthia and Thomas Dreyer 2995 Capital Drive Eugene, OR 97403 Contact: Tom Dreyer Phone : 541.953.7547 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE LAND USE PLANNER, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Suite 201 Eugene, OR 97401 Contact: Carol Schirmer Email: carol@schirmersatre.com Phone: 541.686.4540 x1 CIVIL ENGINEER Branch Engineering, Inc. 310 5th Street Springfield, OR 97477 Contact: Lane Branch Email: Lane@branchengineering.com Phone: 541.746.0637 SURVEYOR Roberts Surveying, Inc. PO Box 7155 Springfield, OR 97475 Contact: Kent Baker Email: kent@robertssurvey.com Phone: 541.345.1112 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER Branch Engineering, Inc. 310 5th Street Springfield, OR 97477 Contact: Ron Derrick, P.E., G.E. Email: RonD@branchengineering.com Phone: 541.746.0637 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 5 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) The following is specific proposal information from the Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage. MAP and TAX LOT Assessor's Map Tax Lot Current Zoning 18 03 04 31 00100 R-1 18 03 04 31 00200 R-1 18 03 04 31 00201 R-1/PD 18 03 04 31 00300 R-1/PD 18 03 04 31 00400 R-1/PD AREA OF REQUEST 593,694 sf or 13.63 acres (approximately) 570,485 sf or 13.10 acres (net after removal of proposed private street from calculations) EXISTING USE OF THE PROPERTY The property contains 4 separate residential structures and a carriage house associated with 2955 Capital Drive that had been used as a residence at one time. 18 03 04 31 00300 2995 Capital Drive single family house 18 03 04 31 00400 2955 Capital Drive single family house 18 03 04 31 00200 2855 Capital Drive single family house + 3 unit apartment PROPOSED USE OF THE PROPERTY The client proposes to develop a residential PUD that includes a variety of housing types to accommodate opportunities for a range of economic abilities. The project includes the existing structures, as well as proposed lots for single family detached and single family attached units. The client is not proposing to build the units, but to instead provide the opportunity for individuals to purchase a lot and build their own homes. In other words, the client seeks to establish "shovel-ready" lots for residential development. SITE CONTEXT The property is located in both the Laurel Hill Valley neighborhood and the Fairmount neighborhood. The surrounding neighborhoods are primarily comprised of single family homes. The majority of the homes are located to the west and south of the property. To the north, directly abutting the north property line of the development site, is 80+ acres of parkland known as Hendricks Park. To the east is the Ribbon Trail, which is an urban recreational trail constructed and maintained by the City of Eugene Parks and Open Space Department. The existing homes range in height, but are predominantly either single story or 2-story. The properties and access to and from them are often steep. As an example, many parking areas (garages, carports, etc.) are built like platforms to accommodate the steep topography. The style of architecture throughout the area varies greatly, with homes that are built in the styles of ranch, contemporary, bungalows, craftsmen and more. PRIOR LAND USE DECISIONS AZ 78-8 Owner applied to annex Tax Lots 100 and 300. Annexation was denied. Pumping waste water to the public system was not an option back in 1978 and the eastern portion of Tax Lot 100 sloped away from the existing public wastewater system. AZ 81-3 Owner applied to annex Tax Lot 300 and the western portion of Tax Lot 100. Annexation was approved. See Attachment M (Ordinance No. 18900) Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 6 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) AZ 82-3 Owner applied to annex Tax Lots 200 and 400. Annexation was approved. See Attached Ordinance No. 19060 annexing tax lots 200 and 400. A portion of Tax Lot 201. See Attachment M (Ordinance 19060) PD 82-2 Owner applied for a PUD to include 5 new units plus the existing home on Tax Lots 300 and a portion of Tax Lot 100. The PUD was approved and never implemented. See Attachment M PD 83-1 Owner applied for a PUD on Tax Lot 400 to include 9 lots (8 new homes plus 1 existing home). The PUD was approved and never implemented. See Attachment M A 14-06 Annexation of Tax lots 201 and a portion of Tax Lot 100 See Attachment M (Council Resolution 5122) Planned Unit Development Approval Criteria This application will be reviewed under the General Criteria (EC 9.8320) Statewide Goal 5 Inventory The site is not included on the City acknowledged Statewide Goal 5 Inventory Does adjustment request include stormwater drainage facilities? No Pre-application conference January 14, 2014 Written Statement The written statement follows the Site Plan Requirements list below Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 7 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS This is based on the checklist provided for the PUD application. It is included in the written package for clarity. Site Plan Requirements Date, North arrow, and standard engineers scale on site plan. Shown on Site Plan Show the Assessor's Map and Tax Lot number Vicinity Map (not to scale) Dimensions of the plan boundary Dimensions of proposed lots Approximate square footage calculations Proposed parcel lines Location of parcel lines / parcels greater than 13,500 sf Location of existing and proposed structures Indicate remain or remove Existing Structures Proposed Structures Provide elevation drawings that portray the scale and appearance of the proposed buildings. Tabulation of Site Coverage Shown on Site Plan Shown on Site Plan Shown on Site Plan and Survey Shown on Site Plan Shown on Site Plan Shown on Site Plan Shown on Site Plan Shown on Site Plan Shown on Site Plan None proposed None proposed Shown on Open Space and Impervious Surface Plan Indicate on the map and provide a supporting See Site Plan written statement addressing the solar criteria This applies only to land zoned R-1 and R-2. Provide a cover sheet with the certification Shown on Cover Sheet and signatures of the professional coordinator and all design team members for the project Show the width and location of all existing and proposed public and private easements Show all contiguous property under the the same ownership. Shown on Site Plan Shown on Ownership Plan on Site Plan Show all proposed grading for streets, building areas and other prop. development Show the type and size of existing or proposed fencing and/or landscape buffering. Shown on Public Roadway Plan and Private Roadway Plan Shown on Site Plan Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 8 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Show phasing boundaries Include a phasing plan Wastewater Requirements Location and flow line of existing public waste water at connection points Existing and proposed wastewater sewer layout including service to each lot. Water Supply Requirements Existing and proposed water main Existing and proposed fire hydrant No phasing No phasing See Wastewater and Water plan See Wastewater and Water plan See Wastewater and Water plan See Site Plan Storm Drainage Requirements Show location and flow line elevation of existing piped public system at proposed connection point(s). Tops of banks of all open waterways on and adjacent to the property. Special Flood Hazard Area Base Flood Elevation Watercourse alteration Existing and proposed storm drainage Stormwater analysis Indicate whether Stormwater system or portions thereof are proposed for public or private maintenance. See Stormwater Plan No waterways either on site or adjacent to the site Not in a special flood hazard zone None necessary. Not in a flood plain No watercourses on site See Stormwater Plan See attached Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study Privately maintained on site. Publicly maintained in the right of way. Submit a draft Operations and Maintenance See attached. Plan (private facility) and/or Operations and Maintenance Agreement (public facility) Tree Preservation Requirements Tree Preservation Plan and Report include narrative description and Show location, size and species of existing trees on site that are 8 inches or more DBH See Tree Preservation Plans and written statement in following pages Shown on Site Plan and Survey Show "critical root zones" for trees to be preserved. See Tree Preservation Plan Natural Features Assessment and Delineation of Applicable Boundaries on Site Plan Significant on-site vegetation, including None on site Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 9 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) rare plants and native plant communities. All documented habitat for all rare animals species. No documented habitat or rare animal species Prominent topographic features, such as ridgelines and rock outcrops shown. Wetlands, intermittent and perennial stream corridors, and riparian areas shown. None None Natural resource areas designated in the Metro None Plan diagram as `Natural Resource'. Mitigation Plan Landscaping Requirements Existing Landscaping Proposed Landscaping Means of irrigation Open Space Contour Intervals Benchmark Used Contour Interval See Written Statement See Survey See Landscape Plan and Written Statement See note on Landscape Plan None required Elevations for this survey are based on City of Eugene benchmark datum, station name SE1012, a 3 inch brass cap in the top of curb located on the south side of East 28th Avenue on the centerline of extension of Onyx Street. Elevation = 569.78 feet (NGVD 1929) Two foot contours. Parking Area Requirements Location, number and dimensions of existing Parking in garages and driveways. and proposed parking spaces. Include aisle Shown on Site Plan widths, disabled parking spaces. Bicycle parking Lot 17 will show code compliant bike parking at time of building permit submittal if a multi-family unit is proposed. No buildings are currently planned. Traffic circulation pattern, width of travel lanes Landscaping and screening for parking areas. Means of protection for landscaped areas. Existing lighting Proposed lighting Car Pool and Van Pool Shown on Site Plan No parking areas proposed None proposed None None proposed. There are no employees. This is a residential development Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 10 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Street and Access Way Requirements Traffic Impact Analysis None required See attached Traffic Safety and Street Connectivity Study. Identify street classification of all streets Slope easements Proposed streets : 15% grade Distance from centerline to centerline of all street intersections. Location and widths (ROW and paving) of all existing and proposed streets, intersections, bike and pedestrian access ways, both within and adjacent to property Show existing and proposed curbs and sidewalks Street connectivity Show street names Indicate radii of all curves Existing transit facility Proposed transit facility Street grade over 12% Existing private access ways to property Alternative Traffic Study Demonstrate access to development site is located in accordance with EC 7.420 Shown on Site Plan See Site Plan. See Private Roadway Plan and Profile Sheet C4 Curve but no intersection See Site Plan Shown on Site Plan See written statement in following pages. See attached Traffic Safety and Street Connectivity Study. Shown on Site Plan Shown on Site Plan None nearby None proposed See Private Roadway Plan and Profile C4 Shown on Site Plan No adjustment proposed Shown on Site Plan Street and Utility Improvement Requirements Existing and proposed public and See Civil Engineering Sheets C1 - C4 private improvements Constructed publicly or privately Existing and proposed street trees Constructed privately. Existing street trees are within the Capital Drive ROW No street trees proposed. Existing or proposed street lights See Survey for existing. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 11 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) None proposed Architectural Features of Proposed Buildings Indicate general building location Per the base zone or 30 feet Building bulk and height Indicate key architectural features South Hills Study Supporting Documents Geotechnical analysis Preliminary title report Wetland determination Legal description See written statement. No buildings are proposed. See written statement. No buildings are proposed. Project is in the South Hills See attached Geotechnical/Geological Investigation 3 copies previously submitted No wetlands present See attached (Attachment G) Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 12 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3. 2017 (Revised:June 19. 2017. Auaust 22. 2017) Written Statement The following are the Tentative Planned Unit Development criteria as set forth in EC 9.8300 and our responses. This information addresses the development known as the Capital Hill PUD and will specifically be reviewed under the General Housing criteria. Code criterion is in plain text and responses are in italics. EC 9.8300 Purpose of Planned Unit Development. The planned unit development (PUD) provisions are designed to provide a high degree of flexibility in the design of the site, the mix of land uses, and potential environmental impacts. In other words, they are intended to: (1) Create a sustainable environment that includes: (a) Shared use of services and facilities. (b) A compatible mix of land uses that encourage alternatives to the use of the automobile. (c) A variety of dwelling types that help meet the needs of all income groups in the community. (d) Preservation of existing natural resources and the opportunity to enhance habitat areas. (e) Clustering of residential dwellings to achieve energy and resource conservation while also achieving the planned density for the site. As the development site is above the 700 foot elevation and is located in the South Hills, the Eugene Code requires that Planned Unit Development criteria be used. Moreover, three of the tax lots are zoned with the Planned Unit Development overlay (1PD), which also requires the Planned Unit Development criteria. Through the flexibility of the PUD process, any particular design element or conflicts with code can be adjusted to reach mutually agreed upon solutions or an understanding that adheres to the spirit of the code. The PUD purpose statements and our responses to it throughout this written statement provides the flexibility that allows the project to be approved as designed. NOTE: A comment was made by city staff during the initial design phases of this project that the PUD looked like a "traditional subdivision". Experience tells us that when designing on steep properties in the South Hills that contain a large quantity of significant trees, larger lots are the best way to preserve natural vegetation with respect to the land use code. Time and time again, when city staff considers PUD applications, existing trees are given greater weight than proposed housing and greater consideration is provided to the following Envision Eugene Pillars. • Protect, repair and enhance neighborhood livability • Protect, restore and enhance natural resources Without clear and objective measures against which to evaluate the level of tree removal as it relates to the pillars, the decision making path becomes one of subjectivity. Other pillars that are to be considered are: • Provide housing affordable to all income levels • Provide compact urban development and efficient transportation options. The pillars are considered aspirational. They are not criteria "for approving or denying an individual land use application" (Eugene Comprehensive Plan, Pg. 1-1. Unadopted). While the Envision Eugene pillars are an important framework for guiding legislative efforts, they are not intended to evaluate land use applications. This is a proposal for housing. More housing means more options for all income levels. Currently there is a housing shortage in the City of Eugene, as well as a subsequent rise in the cost of both housing and rent. This proposal clearly provides compact urban development, increasing the current use of the property from 6 units on approximately 13 acres to 35 - 37 units (combined existing and Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 13 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) proposed). The land use code does allow for 65 units on this number of acres, but limiting the density speaks to the preservation of natural resources and neighborhood livability, while still providing compatible infill development on existing streets. Designing a plan with larger lots, so as to elicit a comment from staff of "looks like a traditional subdivision" ; means that greater consideration is given to reducing the impacts of grading individual sites and unnecessarily removing existing trees. Experience tells us that smaller lots means more site disturbance, while larger lots allows for greater tree preservation, increasing the amount of undisturbed existing ground, limiting erosion, and preserving positive qualities of the existing site. a. Shared use of services and facilities: The clustering of residential structures near required streets, where the existing dwellings are located, is an excellent example of the sharing of services and facilities. By locating multiple units along the same connections, existing as well as proposed services can be shared, which eliminates the need for redundant or multiple systems. Existing services, such as utilities and existing roads, will be able to serve more people as opposed to creating living areas further away from existing services and requiring an extension of those services. This development is created in direct response to the need for density and infill within the existing Urban Growth Boundary. In this manner, energy conservation goals are achieved as well. b. A compatible mix of land uses that encourage alternatives to the use of the automobile: The design of this development site proposes a modest mix of land uses. It combines residential uses (i.e. single family attached and single family detached) with abundant access to recreation. In addition, the site exists within a greater mix of uses in the surrounding neighborhood context. While the site is designed primarily as a residential property, the development site abuts Hendricks Park to the north and provides connections to the Ribbon Trail (local hiking trail with connections to Hendricks Park and the Laurelwood Golf Course). The walking and biking opportunities are abundant, as is the opportunity to be in a natural environment in an urban setting. It is highly likely that alternatives such as walking, passive recreation, and biking will provide some alternative to utilizing the automobile, as opportunities are literally right outside the residents' front doors. The location of the site in close proximity to: Commercial Centers /Employment Center • Just over 1 % miles from the intersection of Hilyard Street and East 24th Avenue, a commercial center that contains Sundance Natural Grocers, Paul's Bicycle Way of Life, Sundance Wine Cellars, Black Sun Book store, and many more eating and retail establishments. • 1 mile from the intersection of East 19th Avenue and Agate Street, a commercial node that features McMenamins East 19th Street Cafe, Beppe and Gianni's Restaurant, Prince Pucklers Ice Cream, Sweet Life Bakery, Tom's Market and other small retail shops. • 1 mile from the University of Oregon: one of the top employers in the Eugene/Springfield area • 3 miles from Downtown Eugene • 3 miles from Woodfield Station, a significant commercial/retail center and Willamette Street, a commercial/retail corridor. Education/Recreation • 1 mile from the University of Oregon • Recreation right outside residents' front doors: Hendricks Park directly abuts the north property line of the development site • Less than 1 mile from a public golf course (Laurelwood Golf course) Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 14 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) • 1 % miles to Roosevelt Middle School • 2 miles from South Eugene High School • 1 mile from Edison Elementary School c. A variety of dwelling types that help meet the needs of all income groups in the community: Capital Hill PUD will offer a range of housing types/building sizes. The proposed living opportunities are as follows: • Single family attached townhouses with garage • Single family detached (both one story and multiple story) The wide variety of building and unit types will provide a range of options and prices creating opportunities for residents across a range of income groups to live here and enjoy the development site. It is the client's intent to create opportunities for a variety of income levels, thereby creating a diverse neighborhood that encourages a sense of community for families and individuals. The goal is to provide a quality living environment and to be all-inclusive. d. Preservation of existing natural resources and the opportunity to enhance habitat areas: This is an urban lot that is zoned for residential use. The lots and associated circulation are sited and designed to preserve as many natural resources, habitat areas, and trees as practical. In particular, there are existing trees on the site that are healthy, likely to survive, and are not in the construction path. The existing road will be improved and widened to current standards, but will be built in a way that creates only minor disturbance of existing natural resources. The proposed private street is: • Located where existing on-site vehicular circulation currently exists • Located to minimize disturbance to the site (i.e. cut and till) • Created as a private street to minimize impact to site; and • Provided as access to homes and emergency vehicles This property is one of the last remaining larger pieces of under-developed property in this area. As such, it has a collection of existing unmaintained trees that range from fair to poor condition, as the Douglas Firs present on the site have grown to shade out deciduous trees. That being said, many of those trees are low-value species, such as wild cherries, cottonwoods, ash trees, and Big Leaf Maple trees, which are primarily comprised of multiple trunks. Moreover, many of the oaks have been shaded as well, which is typical of an environment where Douglas Firs dominate. The lots are clustered around the transportation system, which allows larger stands of trees to be preserved as a unit and to preserve the forested look of the site. The addition of street trees, private trees, and landscaping on the site will create a habitat that is appropriate and typical of an urban infill project. The trees to remain, proposed trees, and landscaping will be routinely maintained and thrive and mature into a healthy environment. The selective removal of existing trees and other vegetation is appropriate given the context and the zoning of the site. e. Clustering of residential dwellings to achieve energy and resource conservation while also achieving the planned density for the site. The clustering of residential lots (and eventually structures) on this development site, where several homes have existed for quite some time, is an excellent example of the sharing of services and facilities. By locating multiple units in the same approximate location, existing and proposed services are shared, eliminating the need for redundant or multiple systems. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 15 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) The lots are clustered around the transportation system to preserve the existing natural environment to the greatest degree practical. Larger lots are proposed and as aforementioned in this written statement, minimizes disturbance to the site. In comparison, developing smaller lots, particularly when grading to build a house with an associated driveway, requires the removal of all trees in that area. Moreover, when located close to the neighboring lot, the grading of each lot connects, which essentially removes all vegetation. In response to this issue, the PUD creates larger lots and over 30% of the property is protected in the form of large forested areas. Above is an image of a typical lot-by-lot single family home development that is directly east of the Piper Lane PUD project site just north of Cal Young Road. It is clear to observe that the homes have only 10 feet between each of them and that the only open space is a private patio for each home, minimal front yard and minimal back yard. As a result of this development, there is little if any opportunity to grow significant trees or replace trees that were removed. On the other hand, examine the site plan above for Piper Lane, an approved PUD in the Cal Young neighborhood. A figure/ground image is a great way to differentiate buildings/paving from green open space. You will see the generous areas of open space, as opposed to the minimal 5' side yards. In this open space, we preserved stands of trees and had open space in which to plant new trees and provide areas of passive recreation for the occupants of the units. This assists in developing a new, healthy, and context-appropriate tree canopy. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 16 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) This is the same approach we are taking in the design of the Capital Hill PUD. We are preserving existing stands of trees where practical, removing trees in areas where development is most appropriate, and then planting new trees once new homes are constructed. Existing services such as existing roads, utilities, and parks will serve more people through clustering residential uses adjacent to those services, instead of creating living areas further away from existing services and requiring an extension of those services. This development is created in direct response to the need for density and infill within the existing Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The clustering of residential units is not just a close-up look at how they are clustered with respect to each other on the site, but also how a clustered development is planned and proposed within the greater context of the city and the UGB. Resources are not just trees. The sentence uses the word "resources" without the qualifier, "natural" Resources can also be: • The energy required to implement the project close-in rather than farther away; • Developing near existing utilities rather than bringing in utilities from a distance; • Infilling vacant lots so that resource land (e.g. agricultural land) is not utilized for housing and development; • Providing housing near urban services to reduce vehicle miles traveled, • Locating housing adjacent to recreation opportunities; and, • Locating housing near other housing so neighbors can share resources (i. e. sharing rides, sharing tools, etc.) The planned density for the site is indicated by a maximum rather than a minimum. The proposed density falls somewhere between the existing density of.44 units per acre and the allowed maximum of 5 units per acre. The site design is created with consideration for the multifaceted nature of any development which has to take into consideration the objectives of the Metro Plan and the City of Eugene Land Use Code, as well as the goals of the developer (e.g. marketability, feasibility, finance-ability, and livability). The development is in close proximity to services, employment, and transportation. In this manner, energy conservation goals are acknowledged through the site design and opportunities are provided for the occupants to contribute to energy conservation. (2) Create comprehensive site plans for geographic areas of sufficient size to provide developments at least equal in quality to those that are achieved through the traditional lot by lot development and that are reasonably compatible with the surrounding area. As discussed above, every effort is being made through thoughtful site design - which is balanced alongside consideration of economic viability, marketability and finance-ability - to create a development site that is an attractive and varied neighborhood that is reasonably compatible with the surrounding residential environment. Some components that were considered were the clustering of buildings around the transportation system and away from steep downhill slopes, inclusion of a stormwater management system, and preservation of a large portion of the forested environment. All of this was done in concert with accommodating on-site circulation and parking, utilities, fire access, and other infrastructure in a compact manner as necessary to serve a reasonable level of low-density residential development. It is interesting to note that the land use code requires an argument that assumes that traditional single family lot-by-lot development is the highest-quality development type, while any other proposal has to argue it is either equal to or superior in quality to that type of development. An examination of many traditional lot-by-lot, single family neighborhoods throughout Eugene reveals quality that ranges from very poor to outstanding development. The higher quality single family Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 17 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) neighborhoods typically have larger, higher quality homes on them and are situated on less than traditional lots (i. e. larger than 4500 to 6000 so. Many neighborhoods developed through traditional lot- by-lot development have substandard homes that are located only 10 feet from each other, with traditional 10 - 20' front yards. Is this the standard to which we hold a PUD? Here is an image of a traditional lot-by-lot development that contains high quality homes. This is a tax lot map for that project. 94 6 5' 6 800- - - - - - 501 502y " s 032A c, :0 15 AC 0.13 AG 6000 5900 sr c2 ~•,j1')...°J.> PCL.1 PGL.2 L01A14Y'0.16 AC ~c LCT 13 _ 5.42471, snr 4'89 14Df7 1a e;<[ 13 1500 0.74 AC 4rPTPER,_Uq 6100 541491 - 2011a 411191, 15500 5300 ,5800 -f1~ 5 AC - 15 AC ~~46 r X :fl.13 AG w 97~~ LOT 1C L•,OT9 ~110T~ `I Q.13AG ` V LOT 12 LOT s 12 Q I 11 10 g 8' 7 4800 12 AG 4900 5000 :5100 5200 1401 uea re r? ?"~-A~~ 0.13 AC 0.13AC a LOT 3 LOT 4 ;.iG AC ~t 1501 - i LOT Ste, LOTo - 3 4 0 0.15AC - r - - LOT 1 J . ,.______--_-_'_--_-___e_ --4 The project is dominated by 10 feet of separation between homes, small front yards, and small back yards. There is no significant open space or tree preservation on the site. Yet, the homes themselves are of exceptionally high-quality. This is considered traditional single-family lot-by-lot development. Is this better than the proposed PUD? Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 18 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Different than a traditional lot-by-lot development, the Capital Hill PUD design provides the following amenities not typically found in a traditional neighborhood. • Large common open spaces • Clusters of preserved trees • Separation between buildings • Privacy • Protection of views into the site • Access to nature • Diversity in lot size and potential for building type. In this manner, the proposed Capital Hill PUD exceeds the quality of any traditional lot-by-lot development, which do not typically conserve the positive qualities of the existing site or create open space within the development. The Capital Hill PUD site, as it is proposed, meets the purpose of the PUD criterion as stated above. EC 9.8305 Applicability. PUD provisions shall be applied when any of the following conditions exist: (1) The proposal is subject to review and approval through the PUD process according to adopted refinement plan, including but not limited to, property within the boundary pf the South Hills Study where all or a portion of the development site is: (b) On property above 701 feet in elevation The entire property is above the 701 foot elevation, therefore the PUD criteria apply. EC 9.8310 Tentative Planned Unit Development General Application Requirements. (1) Ownership. The area included in a proposed PUD shall either be under single ownership or common development control. The application shall include all contiguous property under the same ownership or development control, shall be signed by the owner of the property, and include such related information as prescribed by the planning director... . The area included in the PUD is under common development control by the client. The application is signed by the owner of the property. (2) Project Coordinator and Professional Design Team. The tentative PUD application shall identify the PUD project coordinator and the professional design team and certify compliance with the following: (a) Project Coordinator. The project coordinator shall: 1. Be the liaison between the applicant and the city. 2. Ensure that the required plans are prepared and executed according to any required conditions. 3. Either be a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners or licensed in the state of Oregon to practice architecture, civil engineering, or landscape architecture. The project coordinator, Schirmer Satre Group, is licensed to practice landscape architecture in the State of Oregon. (b) Professional Design Team Designation. Unless waived by the planning director, the professional design team shall consist of at least the following professionals: 1. Oregon licensed arborist. 2. Oregon licensed architect. 3. Oregon licensed civil engineer. 4. Oregon licensed landscape architect. 5. Oregon licensed land surveyor. See project team on Cover Sheet to plan set and at beginning of this written statement. (c) Plan Certification. Certification of the services of the professionals responsible for particular drawings shall appear on those drawings. To ensure comprehensive review of all plans for compliance with the PUD provisions by the professional design team, the cover sheet shall Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 19 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) contain a statement of review endorsed with the signatures of all designated members of the professional design team stating that the portion of the project in which he or she was involved complies with the following: 1. Meets the standards of his or her profession. 2. Complies with the tentative PUD criteria. See plan sheets for Plan Certification. (3) Phasing. The tentative PUD application shall include a phasing plan that indicates any proposed phases for development, including the boundaries and sequencing of each phase. Phasing shall progress in a sequence that promotes street connectivity between the various phases of the development and accommodates other required public improvements. This project is not phased. (4) Density. Dwelling unit densities for PUDs shall be consistent with Table 9.2750 Residential Zone Development Standards. The calculation of the number of dwelling units allowed shall be determined based on the following: (a) Easement Calculations. If it is demonstrated that easements will benefit residents of the proposed PUD, residential density calculations may include areas in easements, with the exception of private streets or ingress/egress easements. The project contains a private street. The area contained in the private street is excluded when calculating the proposed density. (b) Dedications. If it is demonstrated that lands dedicated to the city will benefit residents of the proposed PUD, residential density calculations may include areas dedicated to the public for recreation or open space. No land is proposed to be dedicated to the city. (c) Cumulative Density. When final plans are to be approved in phases, at no time shall the cumulative residential density exceed the overall density per acre established at the time of tentative plan approval. Acknowledged. (5) Needed Housing. If the proposal includes needed housing, as defined by State statutes, the written statement submitted with the PUD application shall clearly state whether the applicant is electing to use the general approval criteria in EC 9.8320 Tentative Planned Unit Development Approval Criteria- General instead of the approval criteria found in EC 9.8325 Tentative Planned Unit Development Approval Criteria- Needed Housing. The project is being submitted under the General Criteria however see attached discussion with respect to the inability to utilize the Need Housing Approval Criteria. EC 9.8320 Tentative Planned Unit Development Approval Criteria- General. The hearings official shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a tentative PUD application with findings and conclusions. Decisions approving an application, or approving with conditions shall be based on compliance with the following criteria: (1) The PUD is consistent with applicable adopted policies of the Metro Plan. Metro Plan Diagram Residential Land use designations shown on the Metro Plan diagram are depicted at a metropolitan scale. The site is designated as Low Density Residential. The standards contained in the Plan provide minimum guidelines in determining appropriate new and expanded sites and locations for such uses in urban site uses. As of January 1, 1977, density of all existing residential development within the 1990 Metro Plan projected urban service area was about 3.64 dwelling units per gross acre. For new dwelling units constructed during 1986 to 1994, the net density was 7.05 dwelling units per acre in the UGB based on the RLID data. The estimated overall residential net density for all residential development has climbed Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 20 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) from 5.69 dwelling units per acre in 1986 to 5.81 dwelling units per acre in 1994 This Metro Plan, including the Metro Plan Diagram, calls for an overall average of about six dwelling units per gross acre for new construction through 2015 (the end of the planning period). By realizing this goal, the community will benefit from more efficient energy use; preservation of the maximum amount of productive agricultural land; use of vacant leftover parcels where utilities are already in place; and more efficient, less costly provision of utilities and services to new areas. The Capital Hill PUD project is a development that proposes infilling residentially zoned property within the UGB with single family lots that can accommodate primarily single family homes and some single family attached homes. The development achieves a maximum density of approximately 3.13 units per net acre. In this manner the development is achieves several important objectives: 1) infill and density within the UGB; 2) more efficient use of resources /energy; 3) use of vacant leftover parcels and 4) more efficient, less costly provision of utilities and services to the area. This PUD is an appropriate infill development within the UGB. Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy A.10 Promote higher residential density inside the UGB that utilizes existing infrastructure, improves the efficiency of public services and facilities, and conserves rural resource lands outside the UGB. There are 6 existing units on the development site currently. The addition of 29 - 31 more units in the Capital Hill PUD project area would increase the net density from .46 units per acre to 2.67 - 2.82 units per acre (where 5 units per acre are allowed). In this manner, existing infrastructure will be utilized by a higher number of residents and greater efficiency will be created by virtue of a greater number of people living in relative proximity to existing facilities. Additionally, rural resource lands will be conserved as more units are provided within the UGB. Policies A.11 Generally locate higher density residential development near employment or commercial services, in proximity to major transportation systems or with transportation efficient nodes. The Capital Hill PUD development is creating a higher density on this R-1 zoned property than currently exists but in keeping with local land uses regulations concerning density in this zone. This addition of residential buildings will locate a greater number of people closer to the commercial services, employment services, and major transportation systems. Commercial Centers/ Employment Center • Just over 1 % miles from the intersection of Hilyard Street and East 24th Avenue, a commercial center that contains Sundance Natural Grocers, Paul's Bicycle Way of Life, Sundance Wine Cellars, Black Sun Book store, and many more eating and retail establishments. • 1 mile from the intersection of East 19th Avenue and Agate Street, a commercial node that features McMenamins East 19th Street Cafe, Beppe and Giannis Restaurant, Prince Pucklers Ice Cream, Sweet Life Bakery, Tom's Market and other small retail shops. • 1 mile from the University of Oregon: one of the top employers in the Eugene/Springfield area • 3 miles from Downtown Eugene • 3 miles from Woodfield Station, a significant commercial/retail center and Willamette Street, a commercial/retail corridor. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 21 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Education/Recreation • 1 mile from the University of Oregon • Recreation right out your front door: Hendricks Park directly abuts the north property line of the development site • Less than 1 mile from a public golf course (Laurelwood Golf course) • 1 % miles to Roosevelt Middle School • 2 miles from South Eugene High School • 1 mile from Edison Elementary School Transportation Systems • Interstate 5 is 2 % miles from the development site and is a major north-south transportation corridor for the Eugene/Springfield area. • 30th Avenue and Amazon Parkway, major connectors through the city of Eugene, are 2 % miles from the development site. This development site is ideally located to provide access and opportunities to commercial services, employment centers, and major transportation systems. Policy A.13 Increase overall residential density in the metropolitan area by creating more opportunities for effectively designed in-fill, redevelopment, and mixed use while considering impacts of increased residential density on historic, existing and future neighborhoods. See answer to Policy A.11 above. Any proposed change to a neighborhood that hasn't seen change in a very long time will have impacts. The development is designed in such a way that the units are clustered around the transportation system, while preserving large expanses of contiguous open space and trees. The density proposed is similar to the existing density in the developed neighborhoods to the west and south and lower than what is allowed by the land use code. This development proposes appropriate inlill, considering the underlying zoning, while also minimizing impacts to existing neighborhoods. In this manner, the project effectively creates in-fill development in property already within the UGB. Policy A.17 Provide opportunities for a full range of choice in housing type, density, size, cost, and location. By approving this PUD, the City of Eugene provides further opportunities for housing to be developed that is single family attached or single family detached. Some of these choices will cost less than others to both develop and purchase. This development will add to the broad range of housing type, density, size cost and location found throughout the City of Eugene. Policy A.20 Encourage home ownership of all housing types, particularly for low income households. See response to EC 9.8300 (1)(c)above. Economic Element Policy 13.2 Encourage economic development, which utilizes local and imported capital, entrepreneurial skills, and the resident labor force. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 22 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) While this policy is more likely to be referring to larger industrial / commercial developments, this project does utilize local capital and labor to design, process, construct, and eventually maintain the finished product. In this manner, the goal of this economic policy is met. Environmental Design Element Policy E.2 Natural vegetation, natural water features, and drainage-ways shall be protected and retained to the maximum extent practical. Landscaping shall be utilized to enhance those natural features. The policy does not preclude increasing their conveyance capacity in an environmentally responsible manner. Natural vegetation is preserved on the development site through large and uninterrupted areas, as well as individual significant trees. Approximately 33% (one third) of the development site is protected from the direct impacts of development, while accommodating compact urban growth directly adjacent to existing services within the UGB. Policy E.9 Refinement plans shall be developed to address compatibility of land uses, safety, crime prevention, and visual impact along arterial and collector streets, within mixed-use areas. During the interim period before adoption of a refinement plan, these considerations shall be addressed by cities in approving land use applications in mixed use areas by requiring conditions of approval where necessary. The development site is located within the boundaries of the South Hills Study area, the Fairmount Neighborhood, and the Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood. Any relevant polices with respect to relevant refinement plans are addressed below. Energy Element Policy J.8 Commercial, residential, and recreational land uses shall be integrated to the greatest extent possible, balanced with all planning policies to reduce travel distances, optimize reuse of waste heat, and optimize potential on-site energy generation. The proposed development is on an infill lot, which reduces travel distances when compared to a development of the same type proposed further outside the urban core. The development site is directly adjacent to the Ribbon Trail and Hendricks Park. Recreation opportunities are feet away from residents' front doors. This integrates residential and recreation land to the greatest degree possible. As demonstrated above, this PUD is consistent with the adopted policies of the Metro Plan. (2) The PUD is consistent with applicable adopted refinement plan policies. The South Hills Study does not appear to contain standards for this application because the entirety of this site was outside the City limits at the time the SHS was adopted by the City in 1974. The applicant has the burden of demonstrating compliance with the applicable standards for the decision, but it is the city's obligation to show what the standards are, as the City adopted the standards. The City needs to explain why the SHS contains standards that apply to this property. In order for the SHS to be applicable to the subject property, the City must show that the subject property is within the regulatory footprint of the SHS. There are three ways in which this could happen. First, at the time the SHS was adopted by the City, by Resolution No. 2295 (June 10, 1974), the subject property was inside the footprint of the land over which the City had planning Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 23 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) jurisdiction. That would be land inside the City limits at that time. Second, at some later date, between adoption of the urban growth boundary in 1980 and the City acquiring jurisdiction over the UGB land in 1987, the SHS was affirmatively extended to include the subject property. Third, after May 8, 1987, when Lane County transferred land use responsibilities to the City for the area within the urbanizable portion of the urban growth boundary, the County acted at the request of the City to adopt the SHS and make it applicable to the subject property. As best the applicant can determine, none of these three situations applies to the subject property, as discussed further below. If the City believes that the SHS applies to the subject property, the applicant requests that the City provide for the record the documentation described above, or some other basis establishing the SHS as law that applies to the subject property. In the sections below we elaborate on the three points made above. 1. The subject property was not in the City at the time the SHS was effective on June 10, 1974. City records show that Tax Lot 300 was annexed in 1981. Tax Lots 200 and 400 were annexed in 1982. Tax Lots 100 and 201 were annexed in 2014. The SHS was effective on June 10, 1974, via Resolution No. 2295. At the time the SHS was adopted in 1974, there was no urban growth boundary. The City at that time had no lawful basis to regulate land that was outside the City limits. The applicant is unaware of any independent contemporaneous County adoption of the SHS as being applicable to any land that was outside the City limits. Thus, at the time the City adopted the SHS in 1974, it applied only to the land inside the then city limits, and thus it did not apply to the subject property. In the two parts below we examine whether the footprint of the SHS was extended to include the subject property at any later date. 2. The SHS was not extended to the UGB between the time the first UBG was established in 1980 and the time that the City acquired jurisdiction over the UGB land in 1987. The Preface to the Metro Plan explains the history of the adoption and acknowledgment of the plan. The Metro Plan was initially adopted by the three local governments in 1980 and submitted for acknowledgment. The initial plan included an Urban Growth Boundary that encompassed the subject property. Some changes to the plan were required by the State, and those changes were made in 1982. The final version of the plan that applied to all lands inside the UGB was acknowledged on August 23, 1982. The Metro Plan as initially acknowledged ratified the continued existence of area refinement plans, including the SHS, but the plan did not extend the footprint of the plan to land that was outside the City but inside the UGB. See Metro Plan (August 1980) at 1-5 ("Refinement plans and policies adopted subsequent to the 1990 General Plan remain in effect where they do not conflict with the updated Metropolitan General Plan.') The Metro Plan did not extent the footprint of the SHS to land that was outside the City in 1980 but inside the initial UGB. The 1980 Metro Plan maintained the jurisdictional bright line between the City and the County at the city limits. The 1980 Metro Plan explained at page IV-3. "The Cities of Eugene and Springfield have responsibility for all areas within their city limits. " Thus, from 1980 to 1987 the land in the UGB was subject to county land use jurisdiction. The County itself could have applied SHS inventories and maps and policies to the UGB area during this period. However, the applicant is not aware of any County ordinance that did that. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 24 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) 3. The SHS has not been extended to the UGB area in the three decades since the County delegated land use regulation inside the UGB to the City in 1987. Beginning in 1987, Lane County delegated to the City the right to adopt land use regulations for the area in the UGB, which included much of the subject property. See Agreement Regarding the Transfer of Building and Land Use Responsibilities within the Urbanizable Portion of the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary (May 7, 1987). Under this arrangement the City drafted land use regulations for the County to adopt, and then the City administered them. That relationship continues. Under this arrangement, the County adopted zoning regulations in 1987 and it has amended them periodically at the request of the City. However, as best the applicant can determine, the City has never requested, and the County has never adopted an extension of the SHS policies or maps to the UGB area. In summary, it appears that the footprint of the SHS does not extend to the subject property for the reason that. The property was not in the City when the SHS was adopted in 1974; the City did not extend the SHS plan to the subject property by a Post Acknowledgment Plan Amendment following annexation of parts of the property to the City in the early 1980s; and, finally, since the transfer of jurisdiction for the UGB area to the City in 1987, the City has never asked the County to apply the SHS to the UGB area. In the event that staff finds the applicant is in error with regards to the applicability of the SHS and has supporting documentation that the subject property is in the SHS area the following is offered to respond to the South Hills Study. The South Hills Study serves as the adopted refinement plan for the area included in this planned unit development proposal. The applicability of the South Hills Study is based on whether or not a development site is located at an elevation greater than 701 feet. As expressed in the adopting resolution (Resolution #2295), the South Hills Study Purpose Statements and Recommendations are adopted as policy statements and as a refinement of the Metropolitan Area General Plan. In other words, they are intended as criteria for making land use decisions in that area. In addition, the property is located in the Fairmount neighborhood and Laurel Hill Valley neighborhood. Accordingly, this PUD application will respond to any applicable policies with respect to those two neighborhoods. The following policies are directly applicable to the proposed development. South Hills Study Policies. Ridgeline Park Section - Specific Recommendations 1. That all vacant property above an elevation of 901' be preserved from an intensive level of development, subject to the following exceptions: a. Development of individual residences on existing lots: and Capital Hill PUD proposes individual residences on existing lots that are to be subdivided into smaller lots to accommodate multiple units. b. Development under planned unit development procedures when it can be demonstrated that a proposed development is consistent with the adopted South Hills Study Ridgeline Park purpose statement which provides any areas recommended for preservation or park usage should serve at least one of the following purposes: a. To insure preservation of those areas most visibly a part of the entire community. b. To protect areas of high biological value in order to provide for the continued health of native wildlife and vegetation. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 25 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) c. To insure provision of recreational areas in close proximity to major concentrations of population. d. To provide connective trails between major recreational areas e. To provide connective passageways for wildlife between important biological preserves. f. To contribute to Eugene's evergreen forest edge. g. To provide an open space area as a buffer between the intensive level of urban development occurring within the urban service area and the rural level of development occurring outside the urban service area. The Capital Hill PUD proposal includes the subdivision and development of single family or single family attached residential lots, which, according to the above policy language, requires that the proposed development be consistent with the purposes of the Ridgeline Park section of the South Hills Study (SHS). While the SHS focuses on the highest areas (above 900), in this case, the highest areas are the least visible for the entire community. 3rd story of the existing house barely visible through the trees. (painted light pink} Ex sting home on Gresta de Ruta (painted white) This picture was taken from the top (4th floor) of the Downtown Athletic Club parking garage. It was taken without using any zoom function on the camera so that it best represents what can be seen by someone looking up to that area. The existing home that resides at the highest elevation of 924' has been there for roughly 100 years. In addition to the home, there is an existing carriage house that has been used to both store vehicles and as a residence. There is a bright white house that is visible. That is a house one street below the house on the development site. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 26 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) This property, while at the highest elevation, is also on a fairly flat section of the property. The steepest slopes are in the lower elevations of the property. As such, the property was cultivated much like a typical residential property, with cleared open spaces that are currently in use as a vineyard and open expanses of lawn and ornamental plantings around the house. This house is not sited in a wooded forested environment. A large area (Tract A) is preserved as part of this proposal. See Site Plan. This approximately 2.33 acre piece provides an area that preserves existing vegetation and ensures a continuous visual buffer between the Ribbon Trail and the subject property. Moreover, there will be portions of each individual tax lot that are also required to be preserved with respect to healthy trees and vegetation. This preservation area directly abutting the Ribbon Trail amounts to 2.08 acres. In addition to other small preservation areas scattered throughout the site, this brings the total preservation area to approximately 4.54 acres. Individual property owners will not be allowed to build in those areas, further increasing the buffer between the development and the Ribbon Trail. In this manner, the Capital Hill PUD ensures preservation of those areas most visibly part of the entire community. With respect to a link to the Ribbon Trail, the project explored the possibility of providing a connecting trail and dedicating it to the City of Eugene Parks and Open Space Department. As it turns out there are standards with respect to maximum steepness of the trail. The property necessary to accommodate this limitation would have required donating 2 additional lots as well. Needless to say this is not an option for the development of the property so the plan for this trail in partnership with the City of Eugene Parks Dept has been abandoned. Instead, the area that could have been a potential connection is now a buffer proposed on the south property line between existing development and proposed development. One large areas of preserved property extends east-west from the east boundary of the property. This area will serve to provide connective passageways for wildlife. In addition, the CCRs for the project will prohibit the construction of fences between individual lots. So for all intents and purposes, the site remains open to all wildlife and acts as a large wildlife corridor. In this manner, the proposed PUD will comply with four of the relevant purposes of the stated Ridgeline Park section of the South Hill Study. (b) That all proposed developments in the south hills area be reviewed to determine if connecting linkages are possible between various park sites, particularly north of Skyline Park to Hendricks Park and between Blanton Heights and Hawkins Heights. The development site abuts Hendricks Park to the north and the Ribbon Trail (owned by City of Eugene) to the east. The Ribbon Trail is the connection from Hendricks Park to other parts of the park system. No connection through the development site is necessary and as it turns out it wasn't possible without a dedication of a couple of single family lots. 2. That the area specified for preservation be protected through a variety of techniques including but not limited to acquisition, scenic easements, density transfers and dedication. The area specified for preservation (Conservation Area) will be dedicated as such and managed by the HOA. 3. That the Joint Parks Committee be instructed to prepare refined cost estimates and an analysis of funding sources for submission to the City Council. This standard does not apply. 4. That the City pursue acquisition of major active-use park facilities to serve existing and potential population in the following areas: a. Adjacent to the EWEB reservoir off North Shasta Loop. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 27 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) b. Property south of the present Amazon linkage system, south of Center Way and east of Fox Hollow Elementary School. c. Property adjacent to the Crest Drive Elementary School. d. Property adjacent to the EWEB reservoir located south of 25th Avenue and west of Hawkins Heights. The development site is not in any of these areas therefor these do not apply. 5. That the city insure the potential for further active-use parks to serve anticipated population in the areas south of Warren Avenue, east of the present Spencer Butte Park and adjacent to Blanton Heights Road. This area does not include the Capital Hill PUD property therefor the standard does not apply. 6. That all proposed developments in the south hills area be reviewed to determine if connecting linkages are possible between various park sites, particularly north of Skyline Park to Hendricks Park and between Blanton Heights and Hawkins Heights. The development site abuts Hendricks Park at its north property line. Capital Hill Drive connects directly to the park for pedestrians and cyclists at the terminus of the right of way. Density Section - Purpose 1. That in the area east of Friendly Street the maximum level of new development per gross acre be limited to 5 units per acre (the maximum figure of 5 dwelling units per gross acre being subject to positive findings under the planned unit development criteria). There are 13.61 gross acres (13.10 net acres) within this development site. There are 35 to 37 units (existing and proposed) or a density of 2.67 to 2.82 units per net acre. This density is well below the 5 units per acre or 65 units that could potentially be allowed on this development site. 2. That in the area east of Friendly Street the maximum level of new development per gross acre be limited to 5 units per acre (the maximum figure of 5 dwelling units per gross acre being subject to positive findings under the planned unit development criteria). The property is west of Friendly Street. See 1. above. 3. That low-moderate income housing developed under the Controlled Income and Rent provisions of the City Code be exempt from the density standards set forth above, but subject to normal specific site analysis standards. This proposal does not include Controlled Income and Rent Housing. 4. That if a significant volume of low-moderate income housing should develop, the effect on total density should be evaluated and allowable densities of future developments adjusted. This standard does not apply. Urban Service Area - Specific Recommendations 1. That the ridgeline identified in the South Hills Study defines the potential extension of the urban service area. This proposal does not include extension of the urban service area (now referred to as the Urban Growth Boundary). The 2007 annexation of the subject property codified the location of the UGB for the subject property. 2. That future annexation requests within the potential urban service area be evaluated upon the following bases: a. That the ability of the community to provide public services for the potential development in an economic and efficient manner (and other factors normally considered in evaluation of annexations). b. The previous maintenance of the property as a desirable residential environment (Note: if the city adopts an ordinance governing vegetation removal, the standards set forth in that ordinance could provide the basis for evaluating previous maintenance of the property.) This proposal does not include an annexation request. The 1981 (AZ 81-3), 1982 (AZ 82-3 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 28 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) and 2014 (A 14-06) annexation of the subject property included a finding that public services (now referred to as key urban services and facilities) can be provided to the site in an orderly and efficient manner. 3. That property which can only be provided sewer service by contouring not be included in the definition of the potential urban service area. Sanitary sewer service is available to the subject property. Contouring is not required. Development Standards - Specific Recommendations That all major developments (developments in excess of minor partitions) occurring on property above an elevation of 701' shall be reviewed by the Planning Director to determine if standard subdivision procedures, or planned unit development procedures shall be required. A planned unit development procedure is already required. See 2. Below. That planned unit development procedures be required for development of any parcel over 4 acres in size, characterized by a slope in excess of 20% in the area between 500 feet and 701 feet elevation. This project is applying under the planned unit development procedures. That planned unit development procedures shall be utilized for the following purposes: 1. To encourage clustering of development in areas characterized by: a. Shallowest slopes b. Lowest elevations c. Least amount of vegetation d. Least amount of visual impact. To begin this discussion, we will point out that these are recommendations only and will continue that emphasis throughout this discussion. While well-intended, the South Hills Study presumes that hills are steepest at the top and shallower at the bottom. In fact, the geomorphology in this area is one of rolling hills - not mountain peaks. Elevated areas are more likely to be rounded at the top and steeper on the lower elevations. Of course that depends on where the property boundary is located, which is also arbitrary with respect to these recommendations. In the case of this development site, the highest elevations contain the shallowest slopes and the lowest to middle elevations contain the steepest slopes. The existing development is already at the highest and shallowest areas for very practical reasons. This is the area that was the easiest and least expensive place to build 100 years ago. It more than likely had the best view looking west, as the trees currently west of the development site were not there either. Consequently, the highest elevations on this property have the least amount of vegetation and are dominated by 6 dwelling units, a cultivated vineyard, open areas, and lawn. The existing housing to the south and west has been in existence for long enough that the existing trees on those properties screen much of the view from the development site to the west. By extension, the views from the west onto the development site will be very limited as well. There will be minimal tree removal on the highest elevations and what will be removed for construction of proposed homes will not create additional visibility into the site from the valley floor. See attached video of view out from the site. There are significant trees on neighboring properties. One can conclude from the video that if you can't see out from the site then one can't see in from the site, especially from the valley floor. In this manner, the proposed development clusters the homes around the existing and proposed transportation system and occupies the shallowest slopes as is practical, disturbs the least amount of vegetation, and has the least visual impact. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 29 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) 2. To encourage preservation as open space those areas characterized by: a. Intermediate and steep slopes b. Higher elevations c. Significant amounts of vegetation d. Significant visual impact. Open space preservation is proposed for the steepest slopes with significant trees and other vegetation and provides a continual buffer where the highest visual impact would occur. The higher (yet minimal) visual impact will be into the site from the east and only by users of the Ribbon Trail looking straight up the hill looking for houses. Seeing houses in an urban environment is not an unexpected occurrence. The land that the Ribbon Trail borders was zoned as low density residential long before the Ribbon Trail existed (opened March 2010). See attached video of view walking along the Ribbon Trail. The video depicts a view walking from the south end of the trail adjacent to the development site to the north end adjacent to the development site. The camera is held facing up the slope perpendicular to the Ribbon Trail. This is not a natural way someone would view the site if walking along but the video takes a closer look to highlight the existing screening. As previously stated, the higher elevations west of the development site have the advantage of having a significant forest of existing trees that have matured over time and screen the view into the highest elevations almost completely. To the north is the 80+ acres of Hendricks Park, which also provides significant screening with its mature trees. Therefore the topography of the area, coupled with the preservation area, provides an excellent visual buffer between the proposed development and off site users. This is a still shot from the animation that was submitted with this application. This is a view walking north on the Ribbon Trail. Off to the left and high up on the slope is a small white sign that marks the eastern property boundary of the development site. Some of the proposed houses are barely visible through the trees. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 30 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) That adequate review of both on-site and off-site impact of any development by a qualified engineering geologist occur under any of the following conditions: See attached Geotechnical/Geologic Investigation. That developments be reviewed to encourage clustering of open space elements of different development in order to preserve the maximum amount of continuous open space. Along the east boundary of the development site, there are 2 proposed preservation areas. One will be managed by the Home Owners Association and is not incorporated into the individual tax lots. This is labeled as Tract A on the Site Plan and includes approximately 2.33 acres. The other preservation area is contiguous with Tract A, the difference being that it will be owned by the individual property owners. It will also be regulated through the CCRs, which will require the preservation of healthy trees. It is made up of approximately 2.08 acres. At its very narrowest, it provides a 150-foot open space area between the development site and the Ribbon Trail. In this manner, open space elements are clustered to preserve the maximum amount of continuous open space. That developments be reviewed in terms of scale, bulk and height to insure development blends with rather than dominates the natural characteristics of the south hills area. This is a proposal for a Planned Unit Development/ Subdivision. Those developments are the most challenging to review using this criterion as no buildings are proposed. However, it is not unusual to refer to both the CCRs and the land use code itself for compliance with these aspirations. Moreover, the CCRs will refer to the character of the individual homes. It is premature to be preparing covenants and restrictions and this point in the process. These should also implement final conditions imposed on the approval, if any. This criterion is in reference to the development as a whole, not the individual homes. The development as a whole will blend in with the natural characteristics of the South Hills area. To better evaluate this, it is best to understand the current natural characteristics of the South Hills. When viewed from the valley floor, one can see that the hills are dominated by fairly mature trees, including many that are evergreen in nature, with a few stands of Oregon Oak. Houses are also visibly scattered throughout the South Hills view shed. The current natural characteristics of the South Hills includes elements of the forest, as well as elements of human occupancy as much of it is zoned residential. (i.e. homes, cell towers, utilities, etc.) This development will have little impact on the view into the site from the valley floor and will have very little impact to the continuity of the tree cover that is currently visible when looking into the site. As stated previously, the existing properties to the west of this development site have extensive mature vegetation that will continue to screen the future homes from view. The buildings will not be seen beyond the property, except by immediate neighbors directly across Capital Drive. The existing trees on the developed lots directly west of the property on both Capital Drive and Cresta De Ruta are very mature and serve to screen the development site from views into the site. The existing homes provide screening from off-site view into the site as well. Very few of the existing trees on portion of the site facing west (towards the valley floor), near the existing house (shown in pink on the Site Plan) and Lots 1,2 and 3 make up the existing view into the site as a result of the mature vegetation to the west. We have not been able to visually locate (with the naked eye) the existing 2 story and in some places 3 story pink house on Lot 23 (it is painted pink) from the valley floor until we took compass measurements and stood on a parking garage roof downtown. Without that effort the house isn't noticeable. This house sits at the highest point on the development site (elevation 924). Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 31 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Looking towards the site from the valley floor mean you are standing at an elevation approximately 500 feet lower than the proposed development. The site has the advantage of being located at a steep viewing angle and is literally screened by built and natural elements between your view and the site (i. e. existing homes already built nearby, large mature trees, buildings downtown and in existing neighborhoods, etc.) Practically speaking the only proposed and vacant lots that orient to the valley floor are Lots 1,2,3, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26. Lot 22 contains very few trees and has a large portion of the property that requires no tree removal for development. Lots 1 and 2 contain a few of the healthy Douglas firs and yet existing trees across the street and existing homes will prevent views into the site (from off site) to see these homes. Lot 3 contains very few significant trees and is also screened from view by existing mature trees to the west and existing homes. Lot 21 configuration "forces" the buildable area around to the eastern portion of the lot away from Capital Drive. It too is screened by mature off-site vegetation and existing homes. Lot 24 contains the carriage house (garage) for the house on Lot 23. It is already a 2 story structure and cannot be viewed from off-site. It is the perfect place to construct a new home. We have not been able to locate this structure from off-site either as a result of existing mature off-site trees and homes that screen the view. The existing mature trees on the site could very well be preserved depending on the proposed unit for that property. Lot 25 and 26 have generous buildable areas and preservation of some of the tree could be possible. Not all trees are in good condition. Of the 33 lots only 8 have the potential to be viewed from beyond the property to the west and it is highly unlikely they will be as a result of the mature trees off-site and directly west. The proposed Cupola Drive (private drive) has been located as closely as is practical in the existing footprint of the vehicular circulation that was previously created on site in the past for the owner to get around the property and maintain it. In this manner cut and fill has been minimized to the greatest extent practical. The private drive could not be viewed from off-site and the removal of those trees required to install the drive is minimal. There is a thick border of preservation area on the eastern portion of the site. This area is in addition to the existing vegetation on city owner property to the east. The topography on the eastern boundary of the property is quite steep and the city owner property contains various topographic outcroppings which makes views into the site form the Ribbon Trail challenging. One must look up hill, through vegetation to a point a minimum of 160 feet away to see any proposed buildings. This property is well screened from views into the site and has taken advantage of existing mature growth and clustered the lots around the existing roads and a proposed road that literally resides where existing vehicular circulation existed. Some of the trees on the west side of the development are proposed to be removed. This removal will not be visible from the valley floor nor will it affect the natural characteristics of the South Hills area. Extensive preservation of trees is proposed for the east side of the property which will provide a visual buffer for individuals utilizing the Ribbon Trail. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 32 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) There is also the reality that it takes time to build a home as well as a complete PUD. The property will not be developed all at once and trees required to be removed to construct infrastructure and buildings will be removed over time. New trees will take their place as required by the Tree Preservation Plan. That all proposed road locations be reviewed to insure minimum grade disturbance and minimum cut and fill activity, particularly in those areas most visible due to slope, topographic or other conditions. Capital Drive is an existing road and is proposed to be paved and widened to current city standards. In addition, there is a proposed private drive that follows an existing driving area on the property as closely as is practical. This area is currently used as access within the property and is located on a part of the property that is fairly level. The decision to place the proposed Cupola Drive in approximately the same place as the existing access drive is grounded in common sense. This location would require the least amount of cut and fill and disturbance to natural resources, while providing required access to the proposed lots. That planned unit development shall be based upon a recognition of both public and private interest. In areas of significant conflict (e.g. locating development in a highly visible area as opposed to a less visible area or in an area of significant vegetation as opposed to a relatively open area) which could be resolved through use of an alternative development plan, primacy shall be given to the public interest in any determinations. This Planned Unit Development proposal is required to meet the public policy direction contained in the South Hills Study for development in areas having significant vegetation and other sensitive characteristics such as steep slopes, wetlands, and drainage ways. This development proposal attempts to balance the private interest to develop the property for low density residential use, along with the public interest for minimizing the impact to the natural character of the site. In this instance the public interest is served by • Minimizing impacts to the site existing trees and vegetation; • Minimizing disturbance of some of the steepest slopes; • Minimizing the impact to the site but proposing density that is well under the 5 units per acre allowed, • Preserving large contiguous areas of open space, forest canopy and wildlife habitat; • Providing wildlife corridors; and • Providing housing at a time when housing is in short supply. This proposal is consistent with the applicable South Hills Study policy direction. That all developments shall be reviewed for potential linkage with or to the ridgeline trail system While the original intent was likely to have the Ridgeline Trail on the ridge, there are some places within the city that acquiring and building the trail on the highest elevations is not possible. This is one of those cases. Exactly 100 years ago, the existing house shown on Lot 23 was constructed at the very highest point on the development site (elevation 924). As you can see from the map below, the Ridgeline Trail (in black running through the green area) was not proposed through private property nor was that property acquired. The development site borders Hendricks Park and a connection to the park system is made at the terminus of the Capital Drive right of way. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 33 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) PROJECT SITE That all developments (planned unit developments or subdivision) shall be reviewed to insure maximum preservation of existing vegetation. See Tree Preservation Plan and discussion under the relevant code sections within this Written Statement. Over 33% of the existing vegetation is preserved and 100% of the living trees removed on the buildable portions of the lots will be replaced. EC 9.9570 Fairmount / U of O Special Area Plan Policies Property is not within the University of Oregon study area. EC 9.9590 Laurel Hill Plan Policies Only a portion of the property is in the Laurel Hill Valley and as such, the policies only apply to that portion of the property. (1) Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood Land Use and Future Urban Design (Section I, Subsection C). (a) Approval of Valley Development will take into consideration: 1. Density. The appropriate density for the residential development shall be determined based on 1) the provision of the Metropolitan Area General Plan calling for an overall density range of one to ten units per acre; and 2) provisions of the South Hills Study, including those limiting density to five units per acre for sites above 500 feet in elevation. All tax lots are located in the South Hills Study area. A line has been show on the Site Plan indicating which portion of the site resides in the Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood and which portion resides in the Fairmount Neighborhood. This total net acreage for the site is 13.10 acres with 35-37 units total (including existing units). This is an existing density of 2.67 - 2.82 units per acre which is well within the densities proposed by both the Metropolitan Area General Plan (one to ten units per acre) and the 5 units per acre allowed by the South Hills Study. 2. Size. Large apartment complexes . . Large apartment complexes are not proposed for this development site. 3. Dispersal. Planned Unit Developments composed primarily of multiple dwelling units shall be separated and dispersed and not abutting. (Policy 1). Capital Hill PUD is composed primarily of single family detached housing. Only 1 of the 33 lots allows for proposed multiple dwelling units. This one lot will be a maximum of 3 units and will be built as single family attached townhouses. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 34 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (b) New land divisions shall be planned to respect the existing topography and ensure solar potential to the extent possible. Developer shall be encouraged to investigate techniques other than grid-type division of land when planning for development. (Policy 5) The Capital Hill PUD has divided the land so the home sites are clustered around the transportation system which reduces the overall impact to existing features. The majority of the lots are oriented to the street system and meet the solar lot standards. (c) The Laurel Hill Plan supports the South Hills Study standards. In general, alteration of land contours shall be minimized to retain views of natural features and retains as much of the forested atmosphere as possible. Aside from purely aesthetic considerations, these hillside demand care in development because the topsoil is thin and the water runoff is rapid. Proposed developments shall respect the above considerations. The Valley hillside policy applies to all land with an average slope, from toe to crest of 15 percent or greater. (A 15- percent slope is one in which the land rises 15 feet per 100 horizontal feet.) 1. If, in the opinion of the responsible City official, an adverse conservation or geological condition exists upon a parcel of land proposed for a subdivision, or before any major hillside clearing, excavation, filling or construction is contemplated, the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, Excavation and Grading, and those sections of the code relative to foundation design may be invoked. See attached Geotechnical/Geologic Report. All building recommendations will be adhered to during the building permit and construction phases of this project. 2. Considerable latitude shall be allowed the developer in the shaping, depth, and required street frontages of lots where it is necessary to preserve the terrain. (Policy 6) The streets and lots are designed to minimize impacts to existing topography and to preserve large expanses of property in its natural state. Much of the conservation area is on the steepest slopes and contains a large quantity of trees. The project is also designed to minimize views into the site of the proposed development, while at the same time preserving as much as possible of the existing forested area of the development site. This conservation area (as identified on the Site Plan) is contiguous with the forested area of the City of Eugene property. By preserving this area the untouched forested area is in a larger contiguous mass. New land divisions shall be planned to respect the existing topography and ensure solar potential to the extent possible. Developer shall be encouraged to investigate techniques other than grid-type division of land when planning for development. (Policy 5) Capital Hill PUD has divided the land in such a way that the home sites are clustered around the transportation system, which reduces the overall impact to existing features. Thee lots are considered solar lots, ensuring solar potential for future homes. (3) The PUD will provide adequate screening from surrounding properties including, but not limited to, anticipated building locations, bulk, and height. The surrounding area is predominantly vacant land (i.e. Hendricks Park to the north and the Ribbon Trail to the east) and low density residential to the south and west. As previously discussed under EC 9.8320(2), the South Hills Study policy requires developments to be reviewed in terms of scale, bulk, and height. Building Locations Building sites will be located closest to the street relative to the majority of the properties, especially the properties on the east boundary of the development site. In this manner, the maximum amount of contiguous open space is preserved and by extension, the existing trees in those areas are also preserved. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 35 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Bulk and Height There are no proposed buildings for this project as shown. These will be lots available for sale to individual builders and potential homeowners. The Capital Hill CCRs will provide guidelines for the bulk, height, and scale of the buildings. In addition, there will be a design review team that will review and approve proposed plans ensuring that the intent of the CCRs is met. It is premature to be preparing CCRs. These should implement final conditions imposed on the approval, if any. The proposed buildings will adhere to the limits of the land use code as it regulates the height of single family homes. No flexibility in the standards is requested. Homes proposed for this rea will be no different than any other single family attached or detached home allowed in the city of Eugene. There are no clear and objective standards that regulate bulk or scale of a building found anywhere in the land use code or the building code. The limit to building size is found in the height restrictions placed on the zone and the lot coverage standards. No building elevations have been shown as this is an exercise in guessing with no criterion upon which to objectively evaluate the submitted images. A cursory examination of Lane County public records shows that the majority of the houses within closest proximity to the development site range from 1500 sf to 5000 sf, with the majority of them falling within the range of 2000 - 4000 sf. This proposed development will be constructed similarly. Screening The eastern boundary of the development site is more than adequately screened from the abutting Ribbon Trail. A preservation area of substantial size and width abuts directly to forested areas of the Ribbon Trail, creating a large and contiguous open space. To the north is Hendricks Park, which borders the north property line in its entirety. There are 2 existing structures along that boundary, with only 2 more proposed. This portion of Hendricks Park does not contain trails that abut the north property line, so the combination of modest development and the existing vegetation in Hendricks Park provides effective screening for the development. Different than abutting private property, that is subject to private development, the screening that Hendricks Park provides is likely to be there for a very long time. To the west and south are existing single family homes. The south property line contains Tract E, which is a 25-foot wide piece of property that will be dedicated to the City of Eugene for development of a connection to the Ribbon Trail. This dedication effectively separates the development site from the abutting properties. The west boundary of the development site is only adjacent to 7 single family homes. The nature of the topography and the steepness of the western portion of the existing hillside development puts the other homes downhill from these 7 existing homes. These homes and the existing trees screen the downhill homes from this development site. Preservation of existing trees and the addition of new trees on the project site will ultimately come with development of the properties, which will integrate new development with existing development and context. (4) The PUD is designed and sited to minimize impacts to the natural environment by addressing the following: (a) Protection of Natural Features. 2. For areas included on the City's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory: a. The proposed development's general design and character, bulk and height, location and distribution of recreation space, parking, roads, access, and other uses, will: Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 36 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (1) Avoid unnecessary disruption or removal of attractive natural features and vegetation, and (2) Avoid conversion of natural resource areas designated on the Metropolitan Area General Plan to urban uses when alternative locations on the property are suitable for development as otherwise permitted, the preservation of significant natural features to the greatest degree attainable or feasible, including: See answer to b. below. This property is not designated on the Metropolitan Area General Plan as a natural resource area. Proposed building, road, and other uses are designed and site to assure preservation of significant on-site vegetation, topographic features, and other unique and worthwhile natural features, and to prevent soil erosion and flood hazard. Buildings are clustered on the existing road and proposed road, minimizing impacts to the remaining site and allowing a large portion of the site to be preserved in its natural state. This preservation area is primarily on the steepest portions of the site and borders the existing vegetated area that is part of the city of Eugene property to the east. The preserved area combined with the Parks area creates a thick buffer between the urban hiking trail through the city property and the development site. Proposed Cupola Drive is located where and existing circulation drive was located so as to minimize tree removal and cut and till (erosion). In short, the proposed housing has been proposed along the existing road where there is already existing housing. Additional circulation and housing has been proposed in proximity to existing development. (b) Tree Preservation. The proposed project shall be designed and sited to preserve significant trees to the greatest degree attainable or feasible, with trees having the following characteristics given the highest priority for preservation: Healthy trees that have a reasonable chance of survival considering the base zone or special area zone designation and other applicable approval criteria; A Tree Preservation Plan is submitted as part of this application to indicate the location of the existing trees. The most significant vegetation on-site are the existing trees, of which are not of high quality or value. They have not been maintained for decades. Many have been damaged by ice storms, wind, and general decline. The existing conifers have outpaced and hindered the growth of the existing deciduous trees. Many of the existing ash trees and oak trees are struggling and are not in good condition. Also, the portion of this code criterion that needs due consideration is the phrase "considering the base zone" The base zone is R-1 and the property is located in a well-established developed neighborhood. The land use code and the base zone allow for residential development on this property. As is typical when trying to navigate between conflicting land use standards (i.e. encourage development on lowest elevations and shallowest slopes) and development that proposes the least impact to the site (i.e. development on shallowest slopes and some of the highest elevations), trees are in the construction path for required roads and proposed buildings. It is near impossible to design in the South Hills in a way that guarantees that the only trees removed are the least healthy. Typically, in any aging and unmaintained vegetated area, trees that are in either healthy or poorer condition are intermixed. Due consideration is given to preserving healthy trees as is practical. The conservation zones included on the site plan result in a greater positive impact through preserving large areas of vegetation. In this manner, almost 113 of the entire site has been preserved through these zones. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 37 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Throughout the remainder of the site, individual trees have been selected for preservation as well. The reality of any kind of development effort is that roads and circulation have limited places they can be located. The residential housing component is also required to meet certain setback requirements, including setbacks from roads and properties lines, and cannot be co- located where there is circulation. Therefore, regardless of their condition, there are trees that need to be removed for purposes of development. Trees located within vegetated corridors and stands rather than individual isolated trees subject to wind throw; Efforts have been made to preserve large stands of trees, as opposed to individual trees. The stands of trees exist primarily on the eastern slopes of the development site. Towards the top of the development site and in the flatter areas, the trees are arranged more individually. However, these individual trees have also been standing there for a long time and subjected to various wind and weather conditions. See Site Plan for location of the Tree Preservation Area as well as preservation of individual trees. Design and layout of the roads and the lots were considered with respect to preserving the maximum amount of trees as possible, while keeping the private interests of the property owner in mind. 3. Trees that fulfill a screening function, provide relief from glare, or shade expansive areas of pavement; The trees on the east boundary provide the most effective screening of the site. A large area of contiguous forest that connects to the adjoining treed area adjacent to the Ribbon Trail is to be preserved. There are no existing trees that will shade expansive areas of pavement. 4. Trees that provide a buffer between potentially incompatible land uses; This development is a residential development. This residential land use is not considered incompatible with the existing neighboring residential uses or recreation use. In fact, the Metropolitan Plan Policies address this and encourage co-location of residential and recreational uses. The predominantly single family nature of the design fits well with the existing single family nature of the existing neighborhood. Put simply, this development provides more of what is already there, making it particularly compatible. The plans for the PUD delineate conservation areas, both private and public, that will preserve the vegetated character of that portion of the property. 5. Trees located along the perimeter of the lot(s) and within building setback areas; To the extent that it is practical, trees have been preserved. Some large areas of vegetation are on the perimeter of the development site (east boundary) and are part of the tree preservation area. The preservation area constitutes at least 113 of the entire development site. Trees will also be preserved in Tract B between lots 29 and 30, as well as in Tract C and D. Tracts C and D also provide a common area that serves as the entry to the development. It makes more sense to preserve a large area of vegetation along the perimeter of the development site. By extension, all of the trees on the perimeter of the lots in the conservation zone are preserved. Some trees in the developable area that are along the perimeters of the lots will be preserved as well, where it is practical. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 38 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) This project proposes to remove trees for purposes of developing the road, utilities, and ultimately the homes that will occupy the lots. To the greatest degree practical, existing trees will be preserved and when trees are removed for the construction of the homes and driveways, new trees will be planted. The new trees will be healthy and site appropriate trees that will thrive in a residential environment and provide all of the advantages that trees provide to a neighborhood. 6. Trees and stands of trees located along ridgelines and within view corridors; The site contains no ridgelines nor is it within a view corridor. To the extent that the highest point on the property could have been considered part of a ridgeline it is already developed with a home, garage and a vineyard. If the Ribbon Trail is considered a view corridor, then there is a significant area of existing vegetation that has been preserved between the development and the Ribbon Trail. 7. Trees with significant habitat value; Significant habitat value is not a term that is defined in the land use code, so it is unclear how this criterion is construed. A typical way to define this term would be the presence of endangered or threatened tree species, which would require the preservation of those trees. However, without this definition or clarity, we are forced to assume the meaning of this criterion. One could posit that since a large contiguous area of existing vegetation is preserved, that the entire area provides habitat for whatever is currently living there - significant species or not. This preservation area is contiguous with the abutting vegetated area that contains the Ribbon Trail, so the 2 properties preserve a large area. Considering this development is within the Urban Growth Boundary and an existing residential neighborhood, the proposed landscaping will include new, healthy, context-appropriate trees that will thrive in this residential environment, as well as provide habitat for birds and other living things. 8. Trees adjacent to public parks, open space and streets; There are relatively few trees adjacent to Hendricks Park to the north. Different than a traditional park, Hendricks Park itself is heavily treed. Removing a few trees close to the north property line of the development site will cause little if any change to the experience of being in the park, which is over 80 acres in size. There is no public open space on the development site, as it is all private property. That being said, the proposed preservation area can technically be considered open space when the development is completed. In this manner, many of the existing trees along this open space are being preserved. Trees along the existing Capital Drive will be preserved as is practical. The trees proposed for removal are as a result of the requirement to improve the street. 9. Trees located along a water feature; There are no water features on the site. Therefore, none of the existing trees are located on a water feature. 10. Heritage trees. There are no heritage trees on-site. See Tree Preservation Plan. All of the trees were evaluated for their relative health. Each tree is numbered on the plan and there is a corresponding comment on the chart provided in the report. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 39 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Tree preservation is accomplished through the establishment of conservation zones, which offer protection to trees, as well as other types of vegetation, natural resources and habitat areas. The preservation zones take 2 forms; 1) Preservation areas held in common ownership and regulated by the HOA and 2) Preservation areas that are privately held. The conservation areas are intended to remain as open space, in which the natural character and vegetation of the land are protected from any type of development. These conservation areas are preserved for the following reasons, including but not limited to: • Preservation of existing vegetation including trees and understory; • Preservation of existing habitat; • Protection of property for unnecessary erosion (between Lots 17 and 18) ; and • Preservation of the existing vegetation which will serve as a visual buffer between the housing and the recreation activities on the adjacent Ribbon Trail The conservation areas held in both private and common ownership will be regulated by the CCRs for the Planned Unit Development. (c) Restoration or Replacement. 2. For areas included on the city's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory, any loss of significant natural features described in criteria (a) and (b) above shall be consistent with the acknowledged level of protection for the features. The development site is in the Goal 5 Inventory. To the extent that trees are removed, additional trees will be planted. It is the client's desire to add trees to enhance the residential character of the property, re-vegetate where existing vegetation has been lost, and to provide an attractive and high-quality living environment for the existing and developing neighborhood. See Tree Preservation Plans for conditions pertaining to tree removal and replacement. (d) Street Trees. If the proposal includes removal of any street tree(s), removal of those street tree(s) has been approved, or approved with conditions according to the process at EC 6.305. Existing street trees are proposed to be removed as part of the required improvements to Capital Drive. The removal of these trees will be reviewed through this PUD application process. Other than those trees, there are no other street trees adjacent to the property. (5) The PUD provides safe and adequate transportation systems through compliance with the following: (a) EC 9.6800 through EC 9.6870 Standards for Streets, Alleys, and Other Public Ways (not subject to modifications set forth in subsection (11) below). EC 9.6805 Dedication of Public Ways As a condition for development, the city may require dedication of public ways for bicycle and pedestrian use as well as for streets and alleys The right of way for Capital Drive is already dedicated. Sidewalks are proposed on the development side of the street. EC 9.6810 Block Length Block length for local streets shall not exceed 600 feet unless an exception is granted based on one or more of the following: (1) Physical conditions preclude a block length 600 feet or less. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography or the existence of natural resource areas such as wetlands, ponds, streams, channels, rivers, lakes or upland wildlife habitat area, or a resource on the National Wetland Inventory or under protection by state or federal law. Capital Drive is already dedicated as a public street and terminates at the north property line that abuts Hendricks Park. By definition, there are no blocks in this area as the land is not surrounded on all sides by public street right-of-way, either existing or proposed. Moreover, physical conditions preclude the connection of the existing right-of-way to any other existing right-of-way. To the west is existing and fully improved lots, to the north is Hendricks Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 40 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Park (public land), to the south are fully improved lots, and to the east are slopes greater than or equal to 30% and the Ribbon Trail property (public land). Therefore an exception is requested. (2) Buildings or other existing development on adjacent lands, including previously subdivided but vacant lots or parcels, physically preclude a block length of 600 feet or less considering the potential for development. See response to (1) above. (4) As part of a Type II or Type III process, the developer demonstrates that a strict application of the 600 foot requirement would result in a street network that is no more beneficial to vehicular, pedestrian or bicycle traffic than the proposed street network and that the proposed street network will accommodate necessary emergency access. See answer to (1) above. EC 9.6815 Connectivity for Streets (2) Street Connectivity Standards (a) All streets and alleys shall be public unless the developer demonstrates that a public street or alley is not necessary for compliance with this land use code or the street connectivity standards of subparagraphs (b) to (e) of this subsection. Capital Drive is already a public street. Cupola Drive is proposed as a private drive. Numerous discussions with Public Works staff has supported designating and building Cupola Drive as a private drive. The smaller footprint of a private drive versus a public street will reduce the impact of the street construction on the development site. (b) The proposed development shall include street connections in the direction of all existing or planned streets within mile of the development site. The proposed development shall also include street connections to any streets that abut, are adjacent to, or terminate at the development site. Capital Drive terminates at the north boundary of the property, which is the south boundary of Hendricks Park. No right-of-way exists in Hendricks Park, but Capital Drive creates a connection in that direction as required by the connectivity standards. A street connection is not proposed to abut the east property line (west property line of the Ribbon Trail), as the topography is too steep to propose a road. In all practicality, there will likely never be a connection from Capital Drive through the Ribbon Trail property. (c) The proposed development shall include streets that extend to undeveloped or partially developed land that is adjacent to the development site or that is separated from the development site by a drainage channel, transmission easement, survey gap or similar property condition. The streets shall be in locations that will enable adjoining properties to connect to the proposed development's street system. Capital Drive currently exists as a 50' wide dedicated public right-of-way that extends north to the place where it abuts into the south property line of Hendricks Park. Although it might appear in map view that a connection could be made at the terminus of Capital Drive at Hendricks Park to the terminus of Highland Drive, it would require installing a road across park property and on a slope of over 30%. (see attached Traffic Safety Study) The only proposed street is Cupola Drive that loops through the property, connecting in 2 places with Capital Drive. To the north is Hendricks Park. Capital Drive already abuts that property. To the south and west are fully developed properties and a network of roads. To the east is undeveloped and/or partially developed property. The Ribbon Trail abuts the east property line (see Attachment 1) of the development. There are also developed/partially developed/unannexed lots east of the Ribbon Trail. The east portion of the subject Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 41 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) property, the entire Ribbon Trail lot, and the properties east of the Ribbon Trail contain steeps slopes that are unsuitable to provide a connection between the private drive on the subject property and Floral Hill Drive. The road would exceed the Fire Code standards for allowable slopes. In addition, it is unlikely that a connecting road would be allowed through the Ribbon Trail property. Therefore, no connection to Floral Hill Drive from the subject property is proposed. This is not a proposal for, there are no plans for and no code requirement to connect Capital Drive further to the north. (d) Secondary access for fire and emergency medical vehicles consistent with EC 9.6870 1 believe this is supposed to refer to EC 9.6820 Cul-de-Sacs or Emergency Vehicle Turnarounds. Capital Drive is at the top of a hill and abuts City of Eugene Parks and Open Space Department property. This leaves no possible or practical reason for connecting streets to go through these properties. Access to the development is provided from Capital Drive and from Cresta de Ruta Street. Originally a secondary access connection was proposed from Cupola Drive across Lots 16,17,18 and 19, providing a connection further south on Capital Drive. Geotechnical studies revealed a slide area between Lots 18 and 19 and civil engineer recommendations suggested the area was too steep to properly accommodate a road. A road across this area would require excessive grading, retaining walls, and create a potential slide hazard. Based on the civil engineer's recommendations that secondary road was abandoned, a decision that was discussed with both Public Works staff and Fire Department staff. All new units developed on the subject property will be sprinklered, which is an option typically supported by Fire Department staff when secondary access is not available. This aspect can be reviewed at time of building permit. (e) Except for applications proposing needed housing, all applicants shall show that the proposed street alignment shall minimize excavation and embankment and avoid impacts to natural resources, including water related features. The proposed improvements to Capital Drive are to be constructed within the existing dedicated public right-of-way. The majority of the improvements are proposed either to the east or uphill side of the street. Along the east boundary of Capital Drive, the topography is fairly even and somewhat flat in places. Cupola Drive is proposed as a private drive, which minimizes impacts to the site. The plan view footprint of the proposed drive is 25 feet (21' of pavement and 4' of sidewalk on one side). This is a context-appropriate road that is located approximately in the footprint of an unofficial drive that was created by prior owners of the property. This portion of the site was used for vehicular access to the site and was logically created on relatively flat ground. This is the appropriate place to install the proposed road as cut and till (ground disturbance) is minimized. Placing this private drive further to the east would place the road on the 30% slopes, requiring extensive cut and fill to create a stable road bed. It would also create unnecessary erosion and tree removal. For the reasons discussed above and elsewhere throughout this written statement, common sense dictates placing a proposed road on an already existing, unofficial road. (f) In cases where a required street connection would result in the extension of an existing street that is not improved to city standards The required street connection will not result in the extension of an existing street that is not improved to city standards. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 42 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (g) In the context of a Type II or Type III land use decision, the city shall grant an exception to the standards in subsections (2)(b), (c) or (d) if the applicant demonstrates that any proposed exception are consistent with either subsection 1. or 2. below: An exception is being requested to (2)(c) and (d). 2. The applicant demonstrates that a connection cannot be made because of the existence of one or more of the following conditions: a. Physical conditions preclude development of the connecting street. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography or likely impact to natural resource areas such as wetlands, ponds, streams, channels, rivers, lakes, or upland wildlife habitat area, or a resource on the National Wetland Inventory or under protection by state or federal law. We are requesting an exception to the connectivity standards to the east of the development site. Such a connection would require connecting from the development site to Floral Hill Drive through the Ribbon Trail property, a well- established walking and biking trail. The property containing the Ribbon trail is 200 feet wide from east to west. Moreover, between Cupola Drive and Floral Hill Drive is considerable topography, existing vegetation, significant trees, and wildlife habitat. A connection across either of these properties is unlikely as well. Furthermore, any proposed connection would be required to traverse terrain of 30% slopes or greater, which makes any potential connection to Floral Hill Drive impractical from the viewpoint of Public Works and Fire Department staff. Any connection would also create considerable disruption of existing forest and would result in the removal of existing trees and create extensive cut and fill. There is a reason Floral Hill Drive is located where it is within the boundaries of Hendricks Park. The topography is gentler there and there is enough room to for the road to head north before going south. The design of Floral Hill Drive minimized impacts to the existing slope. EC 9.6820 Cul-de-Sacs or Emergency Vehicle Turnarounds. (1) Except for streets that are less than 150 feet long and streets that will be extended in the future, all streets that terminate shall be designed as a cul-de- sac bulb or an emergency vehicle turnaround. Cupola Drive is designed to accommodate both the proposed lots and fire access. The design of the street and the proposed radii allow emergency vehicles to maneuver through the entire site. The only street that terminates with no likely extension in the future is Capital Drive, which terminates at the boundary of Hendricks Park. Considering this is a hilltop development with lots fully developed on the west side of Capital Drive, there is no practical place to put either a cul-de-sac or a hammerhead turnaround at the terminus of Capital Drive. A fire turn around has been proposed between lots 1 and 2. All proposed new dwellings will be required to have sprinkler and can be evaluated at time of building permit submittal for compliance with this requirement. (2) If a street will be extended in the future, a temporary easement shall be provided and an emergency vehicle turnaround shall be constructed. There are no plans to extend Capital Drive in the future. See answer to (1) above. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 43 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (3) There shall be no cul-de-sacs more than 400 feet long from the centerline of the intersecting street to the radius point of the cul-de-sac bulb. There are no cul-de-sacs proposed. (4) Pubic accessways to provide safe circulation for pedestrians, bicyclists and emergency vehicles shall be required from a cul-de-sac or emergency vehicle turnaround longer than 150' in length when measured from the centerline of the intersecting street to the radius point of the cul-de-sac or to the center point of the emergency vehicle turnaround. There are no cul-de-sacs proposed. An emergency vehicle turnarounds is proposed between lots 1 and 2. (5) As a part of a Type II of Type III process, an exception may be granted to the requirements of (1), (3) and (4) of this section because of the existence of one or more of the following conditions: (a) Physical conditions preclude development of the connecting street. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography or likely impact to natural resources areas such as wetlands, ponds, streams, channels, rivers, lakes or upland wildlife habitat areas, or a resource on a National Wetland Inventory or under protection by state or federal law. An exception is being requested to sections (1), (3) and (4). Physical conditions preclude development of the connecting streets. Connecting the terminus of Capital Drive with the terminus of Highland Drive would require constructing a road on slopes that are a minimum of 30%, too steep for fire access. A connection deep into the park to Fairmount Boulevard would also require traversing slopes too steep for fire access, as well as likely to be extremely unpopular with the community. EC 9.6830 Intersections of Streets and Alleys (1) Angles (a) Streets and alleys shall intersect one another at an angle as near to a right angle as practicable considering topography of the area and previous adjacent layout. Cupola Drive is proposed as shown on the Site Plan. Intersections are wide enough to accommodate appropriate fire radii (30' inside and 50' outside). The private street has been located where a private access drive already exists and is located where an existing driveway is currently constructed. These locations were considered the least impactful to the site and provide visibility and a safe intersection. See attached Traffic Analysis. The southernmost intersection of Capital Drive and Cupola Drive allows a car traveling north from Capital onto Cupola Drive to make an easy right hand turn. A car traveling south from Cupola Drive can orient themselves 90 degrees to the street as a result of the large radius at that intersection, which addresses existing and potential safety concerns. The northernmost intersection of these 2 streets provides a smoother right turn for those going north on Capital to Cupola Drive, as well as clear visibility if continuing to the terminus of Capital Drive. Cars exiting Cupola Drive at that intersection and traveling south have clear visibility for any cars coming from the terminus of Capital Drive. (2) Offsets The minimum intersection offset shall be 100 feet on a local street, 200 feet on a collector street. And 400 feet from and arterial street unless adjusted through the process for adjustments to standards EC 9.8030 (12)(c) Offsets shall be measured from the center lines of the two intersecting streets. Capital Drive and Cresta de Ruta are both local streets. The intersection of Capital and Cupola Drive is well over 100 feet apart. The northern most and southern most intersections of Capital Drive and Cupola Drive are well over 500 feet from each other. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 44 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) EC 9.6835 Public Accessways (1) The city shall require within the development site the dedication to the public and improvement of accessways for pedestrians and bicyclist use to connect the development site to adjacent cul-de-sacs or to an adjacent site that is undeveloped, publicly owned, or developed with an accessway that connects to the subject site, provided the city makes findings to demonstrate consistency with constitutional requirements. None of these conditions exist on this site. Therefore, there is no need for public dedication of accessways for pedestrian and bicyclist use. EC 9.6840 Reserve Strips. The city manager may require the developer to dedicate a reserve strip controlling the access to a street or alley when a reserve strip is necessary to address one or more of the following: (1) To prevent access to abutting land at the end of the street in order to assure the proper extension of the street pattern and the orderly development of land lying beyond the street. This condition does not exist. (2) To prevent access to the side of a street on the side where additional width is required to meet right-of-way standards provided in Table 9.6870 Right-of-Way and Paving Widths. This condition does not exist. (3) To prevent access to land abutting a street of the development, but not within the development itself. There may or may not need to be a reserve strip dedicated at the terminus of Capital Drive. One was not found when researching the records, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. (4) To prevent access to land unsuitable for development. This condition does not exist. (5) To prevent access prior to payment of street improvement assessments or connection charges. No known street improvement assessment or connection charges will be required as a result of this development. (6) To prevent access to an arterial or collector street when such access would be inconsistent with EC 7.420. Capital Drive is a local street. EC 9.6845 Special Safety Requirements. Except for applications proposing needed housing, where necessary to insure safety, reduce traffic hazards and promote the welfare of the general public, pedestrians, bicyclists and residents of the subject area, the planning director or public works director may require that local streets and alleys be designed to discourage their use by non-local motor vehicle traffic and encourage their use by local motor vehicle traffic, pedestrians, bicyclists, and residents of the area. Capital Drive is proposed to be improved in the existing right of way. Cupola Drive is a looped street that connects to Capital Drive at 2 intersections. This development does not create, encourage, or provide through traffic, as it abuts Hendricks Park to the north where there is no street connection. No connections have been provided to the east for reasons discussed earlier. When it comes to motor vehicle traffic, the Capital Hill PUD is essentially a dead-end. Local motor vehicle traffic will be the primary users of these streets. Cyclists and pedestrians currently use Capital Drive to connect to the trails in Hendricks Park. EC 9.6850 Street Classification Map The November 1999 Street Classification Map adopted by Ordinance No. 20181 and as amended by Ordinance thereafter, shall be the basis for determining the correct classification of a street Capital Drive is classified as a local street. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 45 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) EC 9.6855 Street Names. Wherever practical, streets that are in alignment with existing named streets shall bear the names of such existing streets. Names for streets that are not in alignment with existing streets are subject to approval by the planning director and shall not necessarily duplicate or resemble the name of any existing or platted street in Lane County. The proposed public street improvement is an extension of the existing Capital Drive and therefore will continue to use that name. Cupola Drive is the name given to the proposed private street. EC 9.6860 Street Right-of-Way Map. The November 1999 Street Right-of-Way Map is an official map adopted by the city council by ordinance No. 20181 designating the widths of street right-of-way and street paving for specific street segments. Capital Drive is an existing 50 foot right of way. EC 9.6865 Transit Facilities. Except for applications proposing needed housing, the city manager may require provisions, including easements, for transit facilities where future transit routes are required on streets extending through or adjacent to the area of the development . . Capital Drive cannot accommodate transit due to the context appropriate-design of the streets. The existing corners are too sharp and the existing paved surfaces are not wide enough to accommodate the city buses. No future transit is expected or can be accommodated. EC 9.6870 Street Width Unless an alternative width is approved through use of other procedures in this code, the right-of- way width and paving width of streets and alleys dedicated shall conform to those designated on the adopted Street Right-of- Way map. Capital Drive is a low volume residential street. Table 9.6870 Right of Way and Paving Widths, indicates that a low volume street will have a right-of-way width of 45'- 55' and a paving width of 20'- 28'. Capital Drive is a dedicated 50' right-of-way and currently has a paving width that varies from 19 feet to 14 feet. This design of this project proposes to improve Capital Drive to a 21' paving width, meeting the Right-of-Way and Paving Widths standards. EC 9.6873 Slope Easements Because of terrain, slope easements may be required . . See Site Plan for location of slope easements. EC 9.6875 Private Street Design Standards Private streets, when permitted under EC 9.6815 (2), shall be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable requirements for private streets contained in the adopted "Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways." Cupola Drive is designed as a private drive and will be designed and constructed to city standards. The pavement will be 21 feet wide with a 4 foot sidewalk on one side. Several meetings with Public Works staff indicated that the design is acceptable as proposed. Considering the context of the site, with its steep slopes and existing trees, the smaller the footprint of the proposed private drive - the better. (b) Pedestrian, bicycle and transit circulation, including related facilities, as needed among buildings and related uses on the development site, as well as to adjacent and nearby residential areas, transit stops, neighborhood activity centers, office parks, and industrial parks, provided the city makes findings to demonstrate consistency with constitutional requirements. "Nearby" means uses within 1/4 mile that can reasonably be expected to be used by pedestrians, and uses within 2 miles that can reasonably be expected to be used by bicyclists. The existing road, proposed private drive, and proposed sidewalks will more than adequately connect the development site to all proposed buildings, related uses on-site, and adjacent and nearby residential neighborhoods. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 46 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (c) The provisions of the Traffic Impact Analysis Review of EC 9.8650 through 9.8680 where applicable. EC 9.8650 Purpose of Traffic Impact Analysis Review. The purpose of the Traffic Impact Analysis Review is to ensure that developments which will generate a significant amount of traffic, cause an increase in traffic that will contribute to traffic problems in the area or result in levels of service of the roadway system in the vicinity of the development that do not meet adopted levels of service standards provide the facilities necessary to accommodate the traffic impact of the proposed development.... EC 9.8670 Applicability. Traffic Impact Analysis is required when one of the conditions of subsections (1) - (4) of this section exist unless the development is within an area (a) shown on Map 9.8670 Downtown Traffic Impact Analysis Exempt Area, or (b) subject to prior approved Traffic Impact Analysis and is consistent with the impacts analyzed. (1) The development will generate 100 or more vehicle trips during any peak hour as determined by using the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip generation. The development does not generate 100 or more vehicle trips during any peak hour. The majority of proposals for new development generates concerns about additional traffic. Therefore, as an added measure, we have included a traffic analysis to address concerns we heard during the neighborhood meetings and in some of the additional informal (not required) meetings that were held with neighbors and city staff. See attached Traffic Safety Study. (2) The increased traffic resulting from the development will contribute to traffic problems in the area based on current accident rates, traffic volumes or speeds that warrant action under the city's traffic calming program . . See attached Traffic Safety Study. There are no documented accidents in this area. A site visit to Capital Drive would show that there are already traffic calming measures in place. The relative steepness of the street, coupled with narrow corners, would suggest to any reasonable driver that they should proceed slowly. While there will always be drivers that test the limits of safety, it is the driver that makes the road unsafe - not the road itself. (3) The city has performed or reviewed traffic engineering analyses that indicate approval of the development will result in levels of service of the roadway system in the vicinity of the development that do not meet adopted level of service standards. See attached Traffic Safety Study. (4) For development sites that abut a street in the jurisdiction of Lane County, a Traffic Impact Analysis Review is required if the proposed development will generate or receive traffic by vehicles of heavy weight in their operations. The development site will not generate or receive traffic by vehicles of heavy weight in their operations. The development is a residential project. No Traffic Impact Analysis is required as a result of this development proposal. (6) The PUD will not be a significant risk to public health and safety, including but not limited to soil erosion, slope failure, stormwater or flood hazard, or an impediment to emergency response. The geotechnical analysis confirms that the site is geologically stable and adequate for development. The analysis provides construction techniques consistent with industry standards, none of which indicates the existence of unsafe, sub-surface conditions, except in one area of the site. This area has been placed in Tract A, the conservation portion of the site, and is off limits to development of any kind. Any development in that area would have required extensive retaining walls to mitigate for any potential geological hazard issues. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 47 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) See attached Geotechnical/Geologic Investigation report. This report is specifically in response to concerns raised during the neighborhood meetings and informal meetings held with neighbors, as well as concerns expressed by the applicant themselves regarding soil erosion or slope failure. Due to the size of the development, an erosion prevention permit will be required prior to any ground disturbance activities. The development site is at the top of a hill and is not near any water bodies or water courses. There is no opportunity at this site to create any sort of flood hazard. The property is outside any flood hazard areas. There is no known limit to emergency vehicle access currently. Emergency response is facilitated with improvements to the width of the existing paving on Capital Drive and the addition of a 21' wide paved private drive. There is currently no adequate or easy place for emergency vehicles to turn around on Capital Drive. The addition of the looped Cupola Drive, emergency vehicle turn around between lots 1 and 2, and appropriate radii on the curves allows emergency vehicles to easily turn around. All proposed dwellings will be required to have sprinklers, thereby reducing the risk of the spread of fire further. Removing existing trees and underbrush to accommodate the construction of new homes, will also add to relatively safer conditions on Capital Hill by removing some of the fuels on the forest floor. Stormwater has been addressed in the attached Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study. Essentially, the storm water analysis and the utility plan that depicts the proposed storm water system shows that the anticipated amount of storm water generated by the development can be adequately treated and discharged in compliance with EC 9.8320(6). This PUD will not be a risk to public health or safety. (7) Adequate public facilities and services are available to the site, or if public services and facilities are not presently available, the applicant demonstrates that the services and facilities will be available prior to need. Demonstration of future availability requires evidence of at least one of the following: (a) Prior written commitment of public funds by the appropriate public agencies. (b) Prior acceptance by the appropriate public agency of a written commitment by the applicant or other party to provide private services and facilities. (c) A written commitment by the applicant or other party to provide for offsetting all added public costs or early commitment of public funds made necessary by development, submitted on a form acceptable to the city manager. All public facilities and services are available to the site. See attached Survey. Electric is provide by EWEB. Water is provided by EWEB. Stormwater and sanitary sewer are provided by City of Eugene. (8) Residents of the PUD will have sufficient usable recreation area and open space that is convenient and safely accessible. Over 80 acres of Hendricks Park, which connects into the Ribbon Trail, abuts the proposed PUD. Residents couldn't get any closer to this superb recreation experience. A short walk to the end of Capital Drive and residents will be in the park, which is accessible to bicyclists and pedestrians only. A large, open space area that is visually accessible is proposed for the eastern portion of the development site in order to preserve some of the tree canopy, as well as continue to provide a buffer between development and the Ribbon Trail. (9) Lots proposed for development with one-family detached dwellings shall comply with EC 9.2790 Solar Lot Standards or as modified according to subsection (10) below. EC 9.2790 Solar Lot Standards (1) Applicability. Solar lot standards apply to the creation of lots within subdivisions in R-1 and R-2. This is a proposal for lots within a subdivision on property zoned R-1. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 48 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (2) Solar Lot Requirements. In R-1 and R-2, at least 70% of the lots in a subdivision shall be designed as "solar lots" and shall have a minimum north-south dimension of 75 feet and a front lot line orientation that is within 30 degrees of the true east-west axis. For purposes of this subsection, a lot proposed for more than one dwelling unit shall count as more than one lot, according to the number of units proposed. Technically, 7 of the proposed 33 lots do not have front lot lines. Of the 26 remaining lots, 8 are solar lots (or 319,o). Out of all the 33 lots, only 3 do not achieve the minimum 75 foot north-south dimension, despite their orientation to the front lot line or lack of front lot line. (3) Exceptions to the Solar Lot Requirements. A proposed subdivision shall be exempt from EC 9.2790(2) if either of the following exists: (b) Site Constraints. One of the following circumstances is present: 1. Compliance with applicable street standards of public street plans requires a street configuration that prevents the lots from being oriented for solar access. Capital Drive is an existing dedicated right-of-way. The street runs primarily north-south for a couple of segments and one segment is oriented within 30 degrees of true east-west, allowing one lot on the street to meet the solar requirements. Cupola Drive connects to Capital Drive and resides within an existing area that was used for vehicular circulation by prior owners to access the property. They naturally located it on the flattest portion of the site and travelled parallel with the existing contours to reduce impact to the site. That means that Cupola Drive also runs in a primarily north-south direction, prohibiting proposed lots from meeting the requirement for the front lot line to be within 30 degrees of true east west. The streets are oriented in such a way as to prevent the majority of the lots from meeting solar lot standards. Therefore, the subdivision is exempt. (4) Exemptions to the Solar Lot Requirements. A proposed lot shall not be identified as a "solar lot" but shall be counted as a lot that satisfies EC 9.2790(2) Solar Lot Requirements when the lot satisfies (a)(b)(c) or (d) of this subsection. (a) Slopes. The lot is sloped 20 percent or more in the direction greater than 45 degrees east or west of true south. The lots that slope 20 percent or more in a direction greater than 45 degrees east or west of true south are as follows: In summary, 27 of the 33 lots can be counted as solar lots (or 82%). Therefore, this criterion is met. (10)The PUD complies with all of the following: (a) EC 9.2000 through 9.3915 regarding lot dimensions and density requirements for the subject zone. Within the MR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone . . The development site is not within the /WR zone. The subject zone is R-1, beginning with EC 9.2700, Table 9.2750 Residential Zone Development Standards. Minimum Net Density: No minimum Maximum Net Density: 5 units per acre per South Hills Study EC 9.2751 Special Development Standards for Table 9.2750 (1) Density (b) For purposes of this section, "net density" is the number of dwelling units per acre of land in actual residential use and reserved for the exclusive use of the residents in the development, such as common open space or recreation facilities. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 49 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) The entire site is reserved for the exclusive use of the residents in the development. The total site (net) is 13.10 acres or 570,485 sf. (c) For purposes for calculating net density: 1. The acreage of land considered part of the residential use shall exclude public and private streets and alleys, public parks, and other public facilities. 2. In calculating the minimum net density required for a specific lot or development site, the planning director shall round down to the previous whole number. 3. In calculating the maximum net density allowed for specific lot or development site, the planning director shall round up to the next whole number only for: a. A lot or development site that is 13, 500 square feet or more in area; b. A lot or development site that is not abutting the boundary of, or directly across an alley from land zoned R-1; and c. Fractions of.75 or above. 4. At the request of the developer, the acreage described in 1. above, also may include natural or historic resources.... . Density is calculated by using the acreage for the entire development site and excluding the area dedicated for public right-of-way. The total development site is 13.63 acres. The net acreage is 13.10 acres, excluding the proposed private drive. The proposed unit count is 35 - 37 units making the net density 2.67 - 2.82 units per acre, well within the maximum of 5 units per acre allowed in property zoned R-1 and located in the South Hills Study area east of Friendly Street. Lot Area Minimum: 4500 SF All lots meet minimum lot area (see Site Plan for lot area) Lot Area Maximum: 13,500 SF See exceptions listed below. EC 9.2762 Special Standards for Table 9.2760. (1) Lot Standards (c) Lot area, frontage, and width minimums may be modified with an approved cluster subdivision in R-1 or Planned Unit Development (PUD) in any zone. Lot area maximum and lot frontage is being modified and is discussed in the Purpose Statement of the PUD. (5) Exceptions to the maximum lot size shall be granted if any of the following is met: (a) Existing physical circumstances such as topographically constrained lands, conservation easements, existing buildings, or utility easements prevent the ability to further divide the lot. (d) The exception will enable the protection of natural resources. In this case both of these exceptions apply. Lots 4, 20, 22, and 23 and contain existing buildings and other physical features associated with those buildings (i.e. driveways, garden spaces, etc.) that preclude reducing these lots below the maximum 13,500 sf. Lot 22 contains an existing vineyard and fruit tree orchard as well as some existing large trees that the developer wishes to retain in its entirety with the existing house on Lot 23. The proposed boundaries of Lot 22 encompass those elements. Lots 5, and 14 - 19 are larger than the maximum allowable size as a result of topographic constraints and natural resource protection (the smaller the lots, the more trees that need to be removed for development of those lots). Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 50 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) The preservation zones for the lots exceeding the maximum lot size containing preservation zones are as follows: Lot 5 Lot size 17,735 sf Preservation Area 1,117 sf Existing buildable pad site located at top of steep portion of site Usable Area 16,618 sf Lot 14 Lot size 17,793 sf Preservation Area 6,715 sf Usable Area 11, 078 sf Lot 15 Lot size 20,724 sf Preservation Area 8,075 sf Usable Area 12,649 sf Lot 16 Lot size 27,598 sf Preservation Area 11,430 sf Usable Area 16,168 sf Lot 17 Lot size 31,131 sf Preservation Area 17,742 Usable Area 13,389 sf Lot 18 Lot size 18,400 sf Preservation Area 9,095 sf Usable Area 9,305 sf Lot 19 Lot size 21,023 sf Preservation Area 10, 795 sf Usable Area 10,228 sf Lot Frontage Mi nimum: Interior Lot 50 feet Corner Lot 50 feet Curved Lot 35 feet Lot Frontage proposed Lot 1 95+ feet on Capital Drive Lot 2 85+ feet on Capital Drive Lot 3 70+ feet on Capital Drive Lot 4 75+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 5 No frontage (requesting flexibility through PUD purpose statement) Lot 6 No frontage (requesting flexibility through PUD purpose statement) Lot 7 90+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 8 No frontage (requesting flexibility through PUD purpose statement) Lot 9 No frontage (requesting flexibility through PUD purpose statement) Lot 10 55+ feet on Cupola Drive) Lot 11 85+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 12 85+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 13 75+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 14 80+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 15 65+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 16 32+ feet on Cupola Drive (requesting flexibility through PUD purpose statement) Lot 17 No frontage (requesting flexibility through PUD purpose statement) Lot 18 No frontage (requesting flexibility through PUD purpose statement) Lot 19 No frontage (requesting flexibility through PUD purpose statement) Lot 20 200+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 21 120+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 22 200+ feet on Capital Drive Lot 23 150+ feet on Capital Drive Lot 24 80+ feet on Capital Drive Lot 25 55+ feet on Capital Drive Lot 26 120+ Feet on Cupola Drive Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 51 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Lot 27 180+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 28 90+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 29 95+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 30 80+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 31 130+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 32 90+ feet on Cupola Drive Lot 33 115+ fee on Cupola (b) EC 9.6500 through EC 9.6505 Public Improvement Standards. EC 9.6500 Easements. (1) The city may require the dedication of easements for wastewater sewers and other public utilities, and for access thereto for maintenance, of a sufficient width to meet the intended use, provided the city makes findings to demonstrate consistency with constitutional requirements. See Site Plan for location of proposed utility easements. (2) Easements may be required along lot or parcel rear lines or side lines, or elsewhere as necessary to provide needed facilities for present or future development of the area. See Site Plan for location of proposed utility easements. (3) No building, structure, tree, or other obstruction shall be placed or located on or in a public utility easement. Prior to approval of a final PUD, final site review plans, or final plats, there shall appear thereon a restriction showing compliance with this subsection. Acknowledged and agreed. EC 9.6505 Improvements - Specifications. All public improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with adopted plans and policies, the procedures specified in Chapter 7 of this code, and standards and specifications adopted pursuant to Chapter 7 of this code. Additionally, all developments shall make and be served by the following infrastructure improvements: (1) Water Supply. All developments shall be served by the water system of the Eugene Water & Electric Board. See Sheet C1: Wastewater and Water Plan. (2) Sewage. All developments shall be served by the wastewater sewage system of the city, complying with provisions in Chapter 6 of this code. Public improvements will be constructed privately. See Sheet C1: Wastewater and Water Plan. (3) Streets and Alleys. (a) The developer shall grade and pave all streets and alleys in the development site. All paving shall be to the width specified in EC 9.6870 Street Width and provide for drainage of all such streets and alleys There is one street proposed as a private drive and is currently called Cupola Drive. It is paved to 21' wide, but it is not considered a public improvement. (b) The developer shall pave streets and alleys adjacent to the development site to the width specified in EC 9.6870 Street Width, unless such streets and alleys are already paved to that width, provided the City makes findings to demonstrate consistency with constitutional requirements. Capital Drive is adjacent to the development site. It is considered a low volume local street. Table 9.6870 requires a 45'- 55' right of way with 20'- 28' of paving. The right of way is already dedicated at 50'. The existing street is undersized, narrowing to just 14 feet in some places. There are currently no sidewalks. This street will be improved so the paving is a full 21' and a 4' sidewalk will be constructed on the development side of the street. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 52 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (c) The standard at (3)(b) may be adjusted if consistent with the criteria of EC 9.8030(19). No adjustment requested. (4) Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be located, designed and constructed according to the provisions of this land use code, the Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways, construction and design standards adopted pursuant to Chapter 7 of this code, and other adopted plans and policies. The section of Capital Drive that is proposed for improvement with additional paving will also be constructed with a 4' sidewalk on the development side of the right of way. See Site Plan for sidewalk location. (5) Bicycle Paths and Accessways. Bicycle Paths and Accessways shall be designed and constructed according to provisions of this land use code, the Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways, construction and design standards adopted pursuant to Chapter 7 of this code, and other adopted plans and policies. No new bicycle paths or accessways are proposed as a result of this development. (c) EC 9.6706 Development in Flood Plains through EC 9.6709 Special Flood Hazard Areas - Standards. The project is in neither a flood plain nor a special flood hazard area. FEMA Map # 41039C1143F indicates the development site is outside the 500-year flood zone. No version of this FEMA map seems to be available, but it is safe to say that this area is safely out of the special flood hazard area, considering its higher elevation. (d) EC 9.6710 Geological and Geotechnical Analysis. (2) Geological and Geotechnical Analysis Required....a geological and geotechnical analysis, prepared by an Oregon licensed Engineering Geologist is required for any of the following: (a) All proposed tentative planned unit development, site review, or subdivision applications on properties with slopes equal to or greater than 5%. See attached Geotechnical/Geologic Investigation report and Geotechnical Investigation Addendum. (b) All proposed development that includes dedication or construction of a public street or alley or the construction of public drainage systems of public wastewater systems. This development site includes dedication of a public street. See attached Geotechnical/Geologic Investigation report and Geotechnical Investigation Addendum. (e) EC 9.6730 Pedestrian Circulation On-Site. (1) Purpose of Pedestrian Circulation On-Site. These standards are intended to provide safe and efficient circulation for pedestrians within all developments. (2) Applicability of Standards. As more specifically provided in this section, the standards in this section apply to any development that creates a new building entrance, but not to a building alteration or change in use. (a) In any zone, except 1-2 and 1-3, on-site pedestrian paths shall be constructed in the following cases for institutional, office, commercial and industrial development: The property is zoned R-1. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. (b) In employment and industrial developments on E-1 zoned property, on-site pedestrian paths shall be constructed in the following cases: The property is zoned R-1. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. (c) In all zones, on-site pedestrian paths shall be constructed within new multiple-family residential developments with 3 or more units to insure that access is provided: 1. From every unit to all other units within the residential development. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 53 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Lot 33 has an existing 3-unit apartment complex on it and is considered existing non- conforming. Lot 17 is proposed for 1 to 3 additional units. Should an owner of this lot propose the maximum of 3 units, then the multi-family development standards and pedestrian connection standards would apply. This will need to be evaluated at time of building permit submittal, as no units are proposed as a part of this application for a Planned Unit Development. 2. From every unit to all laundry, recreational and other community facilities in the residential development. See answer to 1 above. It is likely that these units will have self-contained laundry facilities in each of the units, There will more than likely be a common walkway that connects the units to the proposed sidewalk on the private drive, which will then connect these units to all other units in the development. This will be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. 3. From every building located within 40 feet of a public or private street to the street right-of-way line. See answer to 1 and 2 above. (3) Design of On-Site Pedestrian Facilities. All on-site pedestrian paths provided for the purposes of complying with this land use code shall conform with the following standards: (a) On-site pedestrian paths shall provide direct access from public ways to building entrances. Compliance with this criterion will be evaluated at time of building permit submittal if Lot 17, is developed with 3 units. A development of that nature would need to meet the multiple family development standards or apply for an Adjustment Review with respect to these standards.. (b) On-site pedestrian paths shall be constructed of concrete, a comparable hard surface material, or any properly designed pervious surface that complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Compliance with this criterion will be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. (c) On-site pedestrian paths shall be raised to standard curb height when adjacent to public and private streets or driveways. Compliance with this criterion will be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. (d) On-site pedestrian paths intersected by driving aisles shall be marked with striping or constructed with a contrasting paving material to indicate a pedestrian crossing area. To be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. (e) Pedestrian scale lighting in conformance with the standards in EC 9.6725 Outdoor Lighting Standards shall be provided along pedestrian facilities. See Site Plan note regarding the pedestrian scale lighting. Specific lighting plans can be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. (f) EC 9.6735 Public Access Required. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this land use code, no building or structure shall be erected or altered except on a lot fronting or abutting on a public street or having access to a public street over a private street or easement of record approved in accordance with provisions contained in this land use code. The development site abuts a public street and a private drive. Where the lots do not directly abut either one of these, there is an access easement in place. (2) Access from a public street to a development site shall be located in accordance with EC 7.420 Access Connections - Location. If a development will increase the development site's peak Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 54 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) hour trip generation by less than 50% and will generate less than 20 additional peak hour trips, the development site's existing access connections are exempt from the standard. EC 7.420 Access Connection - Location. (1) Access Connections to all Street Classifications. Access connections to all street classifications shall be located in accordance with the following standards: (a) No access connection shall be located to encompass a municipal utility. The 2 proposed access connections do not encompass a municipal utility. (b) .....no access connection shall be located in areas where the street grade is over fifteen percent (15%) The development site is relatively flat, as is the street the development site fronts. There are no streets that are over 15%. (c) If a parcel has frontage on two or more streets of different street classifications Both the public street and the private drive have the same street classification. (d) Access connections located within five feet of an existing alley . . The development site does not abut an existing alley. (2) Access Connections Arterial and Major Collector Streets. In addition to the standards set forth in this EC 7.420(1), access connections to arterial and major collector streets shall be located in accordance with the following standards. Capital Drive is a local street. (3) Access Connections to Local and Neighborhood Collector Streets. In addition to the location standards set forth in EC 7.420(1), access connections to local and neighborhood collector streets shall be located in accordance with the following standards: (a) Lots and parcels at intersections shall have the access connection begin no less than 20 feet from the end of the radius of the curb, or 20 feet from the property corner if there is no curb. This criterion will be evaluated at time of building permit, as no buildings or access points to those buildings are proposed as part of the Planned Unit Development submittal. (b) A safety island of not less than 22 feet of full height curb shall in all cases be provided between access connections under one ownership. There is only one access connection. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. See answer to (a) above. (g) EC 9.6750 Special Setback Standards. (2) Special Setback for Streets. (a) A lot or parcel of land in any zone adjoining an arterial or collector street that is not improved with curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights and street trees shall have a special setback line.... Capital Drive is classified as a local street. The site does not adjoin an arterial or collector street. (3) Special Setback for Utility Easements. A lot or parcel of land in any zone for which there is a planned utility easement, or where extension of public infrastructure has been identified through long-range infrastructure plans or the design of existing infrastructure, shall have a special building setback line to allow for the future easement. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 55 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) There is no planned utility easement on this development site nor has extension of public infrastructure been identified through long-range infrastructure plans. No special setback is required to allow for a future easement. (h) EC 9.6775 Underground Utilities. All new on-site utilities shall be placed underground if there is a utility-owned structure immediately adjacent.... All new on-site utilities will be placed underground. (i) EC 9.6780 Vision Clearance Area. Development sites shall have triangular vision clearance areas on all street corners to provide for unobstructed vision consistent with American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards. Vision clearance triangle areas will be provided on all street corners to provide for unobstructed vision, consistent with AASHTO standards. See Site Plan for location of Vision Clearance areas.. Q) EC 9.6791 through 9.6797 regarding stormwater flood control, quality, flow control for headwaters area, oil control, source control, easements, and operation and maintenance. EC 9.6791 Stormwater Destination. Stormwater from the site will match pre-developed drainage patterns by incorporating various techniques due to insufficient stormwater infrastructure for connection within a reasonable distance to the site. Some areas will use underground detention tanks for flow control, while others will use level spreaders and bubblers. EC 9.6792 Stormwater Quality. Stormwater quality will be met by incorporating mechanical treatment devices to the new impervious areas created by both the public and private roadway. There is insufficient space for vegetated filtration facilities due to the nature of the slopes on-site. The mechanical treatment devices in combination with the underground detention tanks will provide sufficient treatment to meet the City's stormwater quality requirements. See Stormwater Management report. EC 9.6793 Stormwater Flow Control (Headwaters). The site is located above elevation 500 triggering the need to meet flow control requirements for a headwaters area. As noted earlier, Stormwater from the site will match pre-developed drainage patterns by incorporating various techniques due to insufficient storm water infrastructure for connection within a reasonable distance to the site. Some areas will utilize underground detention tanks for flow control to level spreaders and bubblers. For additional information on existing and post-developed runoff rates, please see the Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study. EC 9.6794 Stormwater Oil Control Our proposed development does not meet any of the criteria listed in the "Applicability" portion of this code section and therefore does not include design features that specifically address this issue. EC 9.6795 Stormwater Source Controls The solid waste storage will be in traditional rolling carts much like a single family house. There will be no separate solid waste storage areas. This development will not have any other source control pollutants to address. EC 9.6796 Dedication of Stormwater Easements The storm water from the public street will be treated in storm water treatment facilities in the right of way. These facilities will be maintained by the city. They are in the right of way so no easements will be necessary. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 56 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) EC 9.6797 Stormwater Operations and Maintenance All stormwater management measures proposed on the development site are private improvements. When the project is submitted for Building Permit, the City's "Form O & M: Operations & Maintenance Plan" and "Notice of Operation and Maintenance Plan" documents will be completed and the "Notice of Operation and Maintenance Plan" will be recorded with Lane County. See attached draft Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan for public stormwater. (k) All other applicable development standards for features explicitly included in the application except where the applicant has shown that a proposed noncompliance is consistent with the purposes set out in EC 9.8300 Purpose of Planned Unit Development. Property is zoned R-1 Maximum Building Height Main Building Proposed Building Height Minimum Building Setback Front Yard Setback Interior Yard Setback Proposed Front Yard setback Proposed interior yard setback Maximum Lot Coverage All lots Proposed lot coverage 30 feet No buildings are proposed as a part of this PUD. Buildings will not exceed maximum height allowed in the zone. To be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. 10 feet 5 feet minimum or 10 feet between buildings 10 feet (evaluated at time of building permit submittal). 5 feet (evaluated at time of building permit submittal). All existing structures meet these setback requirements. 50% of lot. 50% of lot to be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. Note: Lot 17 is proposed for development of 1 to 3 units, which will be the lot owner's choice. Should the lot owner choose to develop more than a single family house, this proposal is requesting flexibility to the lot coverage standards (which states coverage must not exceed 65% of the lot). Outdoor Living Area These standards will be applied to Lot 17 at time of building permit submittal if the lot owner chooses to build the maximum allowed 3 units on each of the lots. If the lot owner chooses to build a single family home or a duplex, these standards will not apply. Fences Max Height within Interior Yard Setbacks 6 feet Max Height within Front Yard Setbacks 42 inches Proposed Height Interior Yard None proposed at this time. Proposed Height Front Yard None proposed at this time. EC 9.2795 Solar Setback Standards (1) Applicability. These standards apply to all structures on R-1 and R-2 zoned lots, 4000 square feet or greater, with a minimum north-south dimension of 75 feet. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 57 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (3) Exemptions to Solar Setback Requirements. A building is exempt from the solar setback standards when any of the following conditions exist: (e) PUD Exemption. The lot is identified as being exempt from solar setback provisions through an approved PUD application where one or more of the following exists: 1. The lot has been identified as being exempt from solar setback standards. The subdivision is exempt from complying with the solar lot standards. Therefore, all lots are exempt from meeting solar setback requirements. EC 9.3000 Special Area Zones The development site is not located within a Special Area Zone. EC 9.4300 Purpose of /PD Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone. The /PD Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone is intended to achieve the following: (1) Provide flexibility in architectural design, placement and clustering of buildings, use of open space and outdoor living areas, and provision of facilities for the circulation of automobiles, pedestrians, bicycles, and mass transit, parking, storage, and other considerations related to site design. (2) Promote an attractive, safe, efficient, and stable environment that incorporates a compatible variety and mix of uses and dwelling types. (3) Provide for economy of shared services and facilities. (4) Encourage the construction of a variety of housing types at price ranges necessary to meet the needs of all income groups in the city. (5) Enhance the opportunity to achieve higher densities. (6) Preserve natural resource areas. This development meets the purpose of the /PD overlay zone through its thoughtful and sensitive design with respect to surrounding context and uses, as well as its focus on providing infill that meets overall city values and goals. The development clusters buildings to best preserve natural resources and to ensure efficacy in the provision of shared facilities and services. A third of the site is dedicated to open space and the preservation of significant trees and vegetation. Moreover, the site provides safe and adequate transportation facilities that promote effective circulation of automobiles through improving Capital Drive and providing a private drive, Cupola Drive, that ensures circulation throughout the site. There site is designed to promote an attractive, safe, efficient, and stable environment, which is further bolstered through the compatible mix of dwelling types on the site. In addition to the site containing a variety of residential types, including single family attached and detached units, the development is bordered by other residential development and recreational uses. As previously mentioned in this section and throughout the written statement, lots are clustered to provide access to shared facilities, which reduces the cost of new development (as opposed to extending facilities to accommodate development on the urban fringe). Again, the range of housing types provides a compatible mix of dwelling units that provide an opportunity for residents of varying economic abilities to access a neighborhood that may have previously been inaccessible. The development is at a density range that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and provides more dwelling units to the City's overall housing supply, while still preserving natural resource areas. If the development was to build at the maximum allowable density, it would come at the detriment of preserving trees, wildlife corridors, and vegetation. For the reasons above, the PUD meets the purpose of the Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone and exceeds the standards in the above criterion. EC 9.4310 Applicability. The /PD overlay zone applies to all property where /PD is indicated on the Eugene overlay zone map, or when the PUD process is required by an adopted refinement Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 58 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) plan. The PUD process may also be used at the request of the property owner. The provision of the /PD overlay zone supplement those of the applicable base zone or special area zone. Wherever the overlay zone and base zone or special area zone provisions conflict, the more restrictive requirement applies. Within the /PD overlay zone, applications for development permits shall not be accepted by the city for development until the development is approved according to the PUD procedures beginning at EC 9.8300 Purpose of Planned Unit Development. The site is zoned /PD. Therefore, the /PD overlay zone applies and the development must comply with the Planned Unit Development criteria contained in EC 9.8300 - EC 9.8335. EC 9.8300 Purpose of Planned Unit Development. The planned unit development (PUD) provisions are designed to provide a high degree of flexibility in the design of the site and the mix of land uses, potential environmental impacts, and are intended to: (1) Create a sustainable environment that includes: (a) Shared uses of services and facilities. (b) A compatible mix of land uses that encourage alternatives to the use of the automobile. (c) A variety of dwelling types that help meet the needs of all income groups in the community. (d) Preservation of existing natural resources and the opportunity to enhance habitat areas. (e) Clustering of residential dwellings to achieve energy and resource conservation while also achieving the planned density for the site. (2) Create a comprehensive site plans for `geographic areas of sufficient size to provide developments at least equal in quality to those that are achieved by traditional lot by lot development and that are reasonably compatible with the surrounding area. We are requesting flexibility through the PUD purpose statement for the following code criteria: EC 9.2750 Lot Coverage. The building for Lot 17(or for any other lot) has not yet been designed. The future owners of the lot will have the flexibility of building 1, 2, or 3 units on this lot. The lot coverage standards for property zoned R-1 is 50%. We are requesting that if the owner chooses to build more than 1 unit on the lot, the lot coverage standards be increased to 65%. In the Eugene Code, flexibility is provided to promote infill development when the land use code proposes requirements, such as lot coverage restrictions, that inhibit a developer's ability to maximize space effectively. As an example, row house lots are permitted a 25% increase in lot coverage within residential zones. While one could argue that this reduces other important amenities such as open space, this PUD supplies an abundance of open space - a third of the site is dedicated to open space and preservation of trees and significant resources. Allowing flexibility with respect to lot coverage will permit the Capital Hill PUD to provide opportunities for modest infill in a way that effectively uses space, while still promoting a livable and unique neighborhood with a plethora of amenities for all residents. As stated in the PUD purpose statement above, a PUD is intended to provide a "high degree of flexibility in the design of the site. " Providing the applicant flexibility with respect to the lot coverage criterion permits the applicant to better achieve the intent of the land use code. Through allowing for greater coverage, the applicant is able to provide a greater diversity of housing units that maximizes infill opportunities, while promoting resource conservation. Natural resources are preserved through clustering units together and not placing them in other areas of the site, which would require further grading and removal of both trees and vegetation. There is also an equity component to this request, as encouraging multiple units on Lots 7, 18, and 35 permits an opportunity for residents of varying economic abilities to access the neighborhood in a way that traditional lot-by-lot development does not encourage. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 59 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) EC 9.2760 Lot Frontage. We are asking for flexibility for lot frontage for Lots 5, 6, 8, 9, 16, 17, 18 and 19, as they do not meet the minimum frontage requirements. Similarly to our request for flexibility for lot coverage above, flexibility is provided through both the PUD process and the Eugene Code to promote design that meets community values. The lot frontage requirements are based on a traditional lot- by-lot approach to development, which is not a one-size-fits-all approach to development. R- I lots are required to have 50 feet of frontage, while other residential zones (excluding R-1.5) are permitted 35 feet. Moreover, row house lots are only required to have 15 feet of frontage. The PUD process permits the applicant to request flexibility regarding land use criteria to design a development that is unique, livable, and sustainable. Through not requiring every lot to have frontage, the PUD is able to provide a thoughtful design that provides access to public and private streets, while still preserving trees and vegetation through reducing the use of extraneous grading and cut and fill. Lots 5, 6, 8, and 9 front a 20' foot access easement (12-foot paving width) that also connects to Capital Drive. Lots 16 and 17 connect to Cupola Drive via a 20' access easement and 12 feet of paving width. Finally, lots 18 and 19 connect to Capital Drive via a 20' access easement with 12 feet of paving width. A more elegant solution than a flag lot, providing access via easements ensures land is used more efficiently, which promotes compatible infill and clustering of units, while also protecting existing natural resources. If each lot had to have 50 feet of frontage on Cupola Drive, the applicant would be forced to either extend or widen the street in a way that is detrimental to significant trees and vegetation or lose a significant number of lots, which is counter to Eugene's efforts to increase housing supply and provide a diverse housing mix. Maintaining Cupola Drive and Capital Hill as designed, as opposed to widening or extending them to ensure frontage, also ensures that a walkable environment that feels safe for users of all ages is present for current and future residents of the area. Rather than simply have frontage for frontage's sake, the design of this PUD seeks to meet the intent of the residential zone and PUD criteria through creatively preserving natural resources, while also providing suitable and compatible infill. EC 9.2760 Lot Area. Lots 4-5, 14-19 and 20, 22 and 23 exceed the lot area maximum of 13,500 sf. In this case, the lot area maximum is exceeded to preserve existing natural features and homes. As previously mentioned in this written statement, certain lots within the PUD are greater than the lot area maximum primarily to create and maintain conservation zones. These zones will be regulated and maintained by the HOA to ensure the natural area is appropriately preserved. The conservation area component of the lot will be protected from development and will preserve trees and vegetation, as well as provide a forested buffer between the PUD and Ribbon Trail. Some lots exceed the maximum as they contain an existing home and existing elements around the home that are desirable to preserve with that lot. The preservation zones for the lots exceeding the maximum lot size containing preservation zones are as follows: Lot 5 Lot size 17,734 sf Preservation Area 1,117 sf Existing buildable pad site located at top of steep portion of site Usable Area 16,617 sf Lot 14 Lot size 17,793 sf Lot 15 Lot size 20,724 sf Lot 16 Lot size 27,598 sf Preservation Area 6,715 sf Usable Area 11, 078 sf Preservation Area 8,075 sf Usable Area 12,649 sf Preservation Area 11,430 sf Usable Area 16,168 sf Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 60 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Lot 17 Lot size 31,131 sf Lot 18 Lot size 18,400 sf Lot 19 Lot size 21,023 sf Preservation Area 17,742 Usable Area 13,389 sf Preservation Area 9,095 sf Usable Area 9,305 sf Preservation Area 10, 795 sf Usable Area 10,228 sf This meets the PUD purpose in a variety of ways, particularly as inclusion of the conversation areas within the individual lots preserves natural areas and provides a multitude of opportunities to enhance habitat areas. While there are no protected species present on the site, the conservation areas will also provide wildlife corridors for species such as deer, birds, grey squirrels, and more. li also ensures that resources are conserved, while still reaching appropriate density on-site. In summary, flexibility for the lot coverage, frontage, and area criteria is specifically requested to ensure the site is designed as a livable and compatible addition to the surrounding residential and recreational uses. Moreover, this design was developed over a number of years in consultation with surrounding neighbors and city staff. It is a direct response to concerns regarding preservation of natural resources, vegetation, and trees, as well as concerns over potential impacts to the Ribbon Trail. Even though the subject property line is fairly close to the Ribbon Trail, the applicant has chosen to rely on the flexibility of the PUD process and to arrange and design lots in such a way that this important community resource is visually protected and buffered from as much development as feasible. Moreover, the development requests flexibility regarding lot coverage standards to ensure the City's housing and infill strategies are appropriately integrated into the site design. This decision is also based on feedback from neighbors and city staff. Finally, the requested flexibility for lot frontage is based on a number of concerns from neighbors and City staff. If each lot was arranged in such a way as to have frontage on Capital Drive and Cupola Drive, many units and valuable natural area would be lost. Dispersed access through a mixture of easements, Capital Drive, and Cupola Drive is a far safer and efficient way to provide access to lots, while also ensuring the development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Considering the unique qualities of this neighborhood, a traditional lot-by-lot approach to development, which many of the R-1 standards support, is not always an effective way to ensure either compatibility or well-designed infill. Therefore, we request that the development be given flexibility though the PUD process with respect to the three criteria above. EC 9.5500 Multiple-Family Standards. (2) Applicability of Multiple-Family Standards (a) Except for building alterations and building additions that increase the square footage of livable floor area by less than 50%, multiple family standards shall apply to all multiple family developments in all zones except commercial... The property is zoned R-1. Only lot 17, when a development is proposed, could potentially be required to respond to these development standards. The lot is proposed for development of 1 to 3 units, each of which are single family attached. If the owner of this lot proposes 3 single family attached units, then this section will apply. If they propose less than the maximum number of units allowed on this lot, then this section will not apply. Compliance with this section can be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. No units are proposed as a part of this PUD submittal. Table EC 9.6105(4) Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces There are no bike parking requirements for single family lots. Lot 17 may or may not be developed with multiple units. This criterion will be evaluated for compliance at time of building permit submittal. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 61 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Lot 33 contains a 3-unit apartment and would be considered existing non-conforming. No bike parking spaces are required. EC 9.6205 Landscape Standards There are no landscaping standards for proposed single family lots. Lot 33 includes a 3-unit apartment on one tax lot and is an existing non-conforming use. Therefore, it is exempt from these standards. Lot 17 may or may not be developed with multiple units. This criterion will be evaluated for compliance at time of building permit submittal. Table EC 9.6410 Required Off-Street Motor Vehicle Parking The off-street motor vehicle parking requirement for single family and multiple-family housing is 1 parking space per dwelling unit. See Site Plan for parking for existing buildings. All vacant lots, except lot 17 will contain single family homes and will likely have driveways and garages where the vehicles will park. Maneuvering will be through backing onto the street. Lot 17 may contain 1 to 3 units. The requirements for parking will be evaluated at time of building permit submittal. If these lots are proposed with the maximum of 3 units, then they will be designed to provide parking that prevents backing onto the private drive or public street. (11)The proposed development shall have minimal off-site impacts, including such impacts as traffic, noise, stormwater runoff and environmental quality. This criterion has consistently been interpreted and is here interpreted to address off-site impacts of the proposed use. The standard of reasonable compatibility is construed to contemplate that a use will have some level of impact on abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood, but the level of impacts must be minimal relative to the reasonable expectation of occupiers of nearby properties given the zoning and character of the area. The term "minimal impact" recognizes that there will be some impact of uses, but the impact shall be as small as possible if such use is to be allowed with the practicable level of operation as a functional use. For all intents and purposes, the Capital Hill PUD is a residential development. The residential use is allowed outright in the underlying zoning and this development is likely the most compatible neighbor abutting property owners could reasonably expect. This is not a proposal for a commercial or industrial development next to residential homes or another more intrusive use. The level of impact would be as anticipated by the redevelopment of vacant property with the proposed dwelling units. This project proposes to enhance the development site and to create the type of neighborhood that many people will find attractive from both an environmental and aesthetic standpoint. The proposal is for a mix of dwelling types and densities, which creates a visually aesthetic property (i.e. all the buildings are not identical in bulk, height and scale). The variety of lot sizes, lot location, and unit potential (1- 3 units on some lots) will allow a wider range of opportunities for people of varying economic capabilities. The buildings will very likely be similar to the neighboring single family homes. By clustering the units around a limited street system and lallowing multiple units in one building, open space is preserved, as are views into and out of the site. Capital Drive is being improved to a 21' width and the Private Street (Cupola Drive) is being designed to a 21' width. This will allow for parking on one side of the street in a neighborhood where parking for guests is limited and more parking is desired. Single family homes will likely be designed with 2-car garages and an associated driveway. That configuration accommodates 4 parking spaces and also ensures that cars will not spillover into the neighboring streets. The additional parking providing within the development helps mitigate any potential off-site impacts. In addition, this development terminates at Hendricks Park, where there is no through connection. In other words, this development is a dead end. There will be no cut- through motor vehicle traffic and all Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 62 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) motor vehicle traffic will be local. Potential impacts that may arise as a result of this development are mitigated through the dead-end street. A traditional subdivision design for this property would have resulted in approximately 65 single family lots and 65 peak hour trips. By preserving over 33% of the site in open space and designing with only 33 lots (6 existing units), this development proposes less peak hour trips than would be generated by a development that maximizes the density. (See attached Traffic Safety Study). These additional peak hour trips on a local street doesn't make the development incompatible nor lead to the creation of excessive traffic impacts. The expectation is that the proposed lots will attract a variety of potential property owners that will build homes that meet the current land use code for development in R-1 properties. Building height is limited and no flexibility has been requested through this PUD process. The CCRs (not yet developed) may provide some control over building size, color, and other such details to ensure proposed development tits neatly into the existing residential and forested context. This property is expected to generate no more noise than any other residential development. Stormwater runoff and environmental quality have been addressed previously in this written statement. (12)The proposed development shall be reasonably compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby land uses. Adjacent and nearby land uses to the west and south are primarily residential in use and character. Uses to the east and north are recreational and include both Hendricks Park and the Ribbon Trail.. Many individuals walk and bike along Capital Drive to get to and from Hendricks Park. Providing residential dwellings in a residential neighborhood with directly abutting recreational uses makes the proposed development compatible with surrounding uses. See (11) above. Architectural Elements The words "compatible" and "harmonious" have no definition in the land use code, which means a discussion of these qualities is purely subjective and open to much interpretation. There is nothing clear or objective about this criterion. It is difficult for both the applicant and the city staff to evaluate objectively, so we provide the following as support for the proposed development. This neighborhood is a mix, with respect to architectural styles and materials, of a low quality apartment building (3 unit), traditional single family detached homes, and high quality and large single family homes. These dwellings vary in their construction quality and maintenance. Given the varied nature of the existing neighborhood, one could construe that "reasonable and harmonious" could mean that the proposed development will have units that are: • Residential • Single family detached • Single family attached • One and 2 story homes • Eclectic in style • Varied in parking options (i.e. garages, no garages, carports) In other words, much like the character of many neighborhoods in Eugene. Below are some examples of the structures that are typical to this neighborhood: Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 63 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) Above is a single family home on Capital Drive, with a front dominated by a garage and cars, minimal landscaping, and typical residential quality building materials. This is another typical single family home on Capital Drive, designed as a ranch style with traditional materials. The above image is of another typical single family home in the neighborhood, with the same materials used on the entire structure. It's front is dominated by a 2-car garage, a blank wall on the side of the home, no articulation, and minimal windows. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 64 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) - xM*rfi~ t . ail. a ifti' g. M .~M1 /4x w. This ranch 9 A N R ~n ~,ry tin This fairly new contemporary home uses quality materials and left the landscaping as is. and uses traditional materials. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 65 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) This 100-year old house is at the very top of the hill and is designed as a Craftsman/Mission home. It is a three-story structure located at the highest point on the hill (elevation 924'). Environmental quality When it comes to evaluating a project with respect to environmental quality (also not defined in the code), the conversation is often about existing vegetation and in particular, significant trees. In this context, the word "significant" is a misnomer. While "significant" is defined as any tree with an 8" DBH or more, the definition does not take into account the health and value of the existing trees. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 This ranch style home uses traditional materials and is dominated by cars out of necessity, as parking is from the uphill side. Capital Hill PUD Page 66 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) The expectation with respect to trees is to save healthy trees by designing around them and to place site elements (like roads, utilities, home sites) where trees are of a lesser quality. That just isn't how nature is arranged, with respect to development that is appropriate considering the base zone. The deference in site design is with respect to stress (access), connectivity, and emergency vehicle access. If significant, healthy trees can be preserved, then they will be. In this case, we chose to preserve large areas of vegetation, regardless of the health of the trees. As a result of both common sense and a desire for minimal disturbance to the site, the private road is placed higher up on the site. This ensures the road remains within the footprint of existing circulation on-site and in an area that would cause the least amount of cut and fill and erosion. Placing this road further east would simply result in more cut and fill and vegetation removal with no added benefit. Preserving approximately 30% of the site along the east boundary allowed us to combine this area with the existing forested area on the Ribbon Trail property (200 feet wide) to create one larger preserved area. This benefits the proposed development by preserving one of the existing amenities on the site (vegetation), provides some privacy for the proposed lots, and also visually protects the Ribbon Trail visually from the proposed development. It also benefits the existing vegetation by preserving existing soil conditions and root systems, eliminating erosion, and diminishing potential windthrow for trees that are used to being in a protected group. Fire Safety Removing some of the existing vegetation (i.e. trees and understory) for the construction of homes also serves the purpose of stronger fire safety. This hill has been accumulating fire fuel on the ground floor for decades and as such, the owner received (pre-recession) a letter from the county suggesting that tree thinning and understory clearing would help with fire safety for the existing residential dwellings on the hill. They also offered to assist with the removal of some of the vegetation. Constructing new homes and roads on the hill will require removal of some of the existing trees and the understory. Thoughtful planning by the owner of each of the lots, along with the CCRs that will guide the re-vegetating of the properties, will reduce the fire hazard that currently exists on this hill for existing residents and future residents. All of the homes will be required to have sprinkler systems, further adding to the fire safety of this area. • Storm drainage The handling of the storm drainage is regulated by the land use code and will meet the storm water criteria found in relevant sections of the land use code. In that context, there are no issues with this development. All storm water is treated for quality and then conveyed to an approved system. Post development flows will not exceed pre-development flows. There are no additional impacts created by this development with respect to stormwater. See attached Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study report. The land use code provides for compatibility when a development meets the criterion. (13)lf the tentative PUD application proposes a land division, nothing in the approval of the tentative application exempts future land divisions from compliance with state or local surveying requirements. The tentative PUD application proposes a land division and the approval of the tentative PUD will not exempt future land divisions from compliance with state or local surveying requirements. Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Capital Hill PUD Page 67 of 67 Planned Unit Development Application - Tentative Stage - Written Statement March 3, 2017 (Revised:June 19, 2017, August 22, 2017) (14)lf the proposed PUD is located within a special area zone, the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposal is consistent with the purpose(s) of the special area zone. The proposed PUD is not in a Special Area Zone. (15)For property with the /SR Site Review Overlay Zone . . The property does not have /SR overlay. In Conclusion The Capital Hill PUD is a residential project that meets the implicit intent of the City of Eugene land use code to develop land on vacant or partially vacant property to increase density within the UGB and to its full potential. This project is the appropriate type of residential project to infill the R-1 site located within a neighborhood that is comprised of residential homes. The goal of this project is to create a livable community within the larger context of the city, add housing in an existing residential neighborhood, and to preserve the qualities of the property that make it unique, while accommodating the use allowed by the base zone. We believe that the quality of development that will be attracted to this unique location will only serve to enhance the value of the existing neighborhood. The scale of the buildings, the presence of other residents (`eyes on the street'), the preservation of large areas of existing vegetation (over 30%), connection to abutting recreational resources, and its proximity to open space and various modes of transportation, combine to make this project a positive addition to the existing neighborhood. The development of this property will enhance the aesthetic quality of this neighborhood, as well as add a presence that precludes the use of this property for unlawful activities or otherwise unwelcome activities in this neighborhood. This development will increase the opportunity for others to enjoy this already special and unique neighborhood, as well as allow for an opportunity to add more units at a time when housing is in short supply. We look forward to your review and comments, and trust that the design of this site meets the intent of the code and serves to enhance to quality of life in Eugene. If you have any questions or need additional clarification, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Schirmer Satre Group Carol E. Schirmer Principal cc: Tom and Cynthia Dreyer Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4 m Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study CAPITAL HILL - TENTATIVE PU D For Dr. Thomas Dryer 2995 Capital Drive Eugene, Oregon 97405 p PROFFss C31 N l #7923 PE OREGON OFQ 21, N qN PqT( EXPIRES: 12/31/18 E "G` INEERING.= Since 1977 civil • transportation structural • geotechnical S U R V E Y I N G March 3, 2017 Updated August 22nd www.BranchEngineering.com Contents Page No. 1.0 Introduction .....................................................................................................................1 2.0 Existing conditions ......................................................................................................1 2.1 Topography 1 2.2 Soils 1 2.3 Existing Drainage 1 3.0 Proposed Development & Stormwater Management ..................................2 3.1 Stormwater Summary 2 3.2 Stormwater Analysis 5 3.3 Water Quality Treatment 7 3.4 Flow Control and Destination 7 4.0 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................9 Appendices Description Appendix A Storm Plan (Sheet C2) & Basin Maps Appendix B NRCS Soils Data Appendix C HydroCAD Analysis Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) has been prepared for the Capital Hill PUD located east of Capital Drive in Eugene, Oregon. The new development will create over 30 new single family and multi-family lots by widening and extending Capital Drive, and installing a private road to access a handful of the eastern lots. The new improvements will also include extending all necessary utilities to serve the residential hillside development. This report will display conformance to the updated City of Eugene requirements for stormwater management by examining existing site conditions and analyzing the stormwater management methods for treating and meeting flow control requirements before discharging runoff off site. 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 TOPOGRAPHY The existing site is located in the south hills of Eugene which consist of ground vegetation and trees, and has elevations varying between 720' and 920'. Most of the new construction and development will be above elevation 800'. The site has several residential structures that are to remain as property lines will be adjusted to produce 33 total lots, leaving the existing buildings on the new lot layout. Slopes on site are generally greater than 8-10% for a majority of the site with many locations exceeding 20% and a fair amount exceeding 1:2 (V:H). 2.2 SOILS According to the Natural Conservation Service Website mapping services, the existing soils at the site are Panther silty clay loam, 2 to 12 percent slopes (NRCS Soil #102C), Philomath cobly silty clay, 3 to 12 percent slopes (NRCS Soil 108C), Philomath-Urban land complex 12 to 45 percent slopes (NRCS Soil #109F), and Steiwer loam, 20 to 50 percent slopes (NRCS Soil #125F). These soils are primarily in the Hydrologic Soil Group D with the eastern edge falling into the Hydrologic Soil Group C. The site soils were determined using the NRCS Web Soil Survey 2.0. A map of the soils at the site can be found in Appendix B. A Geotechnical Assessment was conducted by Branch Engineering, Inc. for the site and can be available upon request. 2.3 EXISTING DRAINAGE As mentioned previously, the existing site is underdeveloped with only a few existing structures on-site and no stormwater infrastructure within a reasonable distance for connection. Runoff currently sheet flows from peak of the hill located just east of Capital Drive to the east and west offsite. The drainage runoff to the west drains onto and across Capital Drive and onto neighboring properties. The runoff to the east sheet flows into the forested Ribbon Trail Property owned and maintained by the City of Eugene. Because there is a lack of sufficient storm infrastructure adjacent to the site and the development falls into a designated headwaters area, all new/additional runoff will need to be detained on site and released at flow rates matching the peak discharge rate during the flow control storm event. Branch Engineering, Inc. Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 Though the existing site has many `discharge' locations since it is at the top of a hill and there is no storm infrastructure or system nearby, for our purposes in simplifying the design, we will assume five main points of connection/discharge for designing the post developed condition. 1. A portion of the site drains into the eastern gutter line on Capital Drive. 2. A portion of the site sheet flows to the east into Hendrick's Park. 3. A portion of the site drains into a shallow ditch/channel east of a gravel path north of the Capital Drive existing pavement. 4. A portion of the site drains into the western gutter line on Capital Drive. 5. A portion of the site sheet drains onto and across Capital Drive and onto the adjacent neighboring properties to the west. The City of Eugene's Stormwater Management Manual defines the flow control storm as the 10- year design storm for a basin area less than 40 acres. For that reason, the post developed condition will need to match pre-development discharge rates up through the 10-year design storm into the destinations described above. 3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 3.1 STORMWATER SUMMARY This report is for the storm treatment and management resulting from the new Capital Hill PUD development. The development includes 33 total residential lots as well as a private road. Stormwater management for the Capital Hill PUD can be separated into three initial components; (1) Capital Drive Public Improvements, (2) Private Roadway Runoff, and (3) the individual lots. Due to the development's elevation (greater than 500 feet) the site is in a headwater designated area, which triggers the need for stormwater management to address flow control requirements in addition to water quality standards. Due to the sensitivity of development on a hillside, infiltration facilities are not typically recommended and that is why a combination of catch basins, underground detention tanks, and mechanical treatment devices will be used to treat and filter out sediment and oils in the stormwater collected from the private road. Other reasons infiltration and filtration devices are not recommended for this development are the nature of the steep slopes, the lack of space, and the areas nearby to the southeast that are prone to landslides. There are a few basins where the new impervious areas are smaller and do not justify the cost of installing mechanical treatment, though flow control is still applied. Those smaller basins will require higher SDC's as necessary and coordinated with the City of Eugene. 3.1.1 Capital Drive Public Improvements Runoff Capital Drive is an existing roadway that sheet flows to the west with intermittent curb along the west side of the roadway. The roadway has a high point toward the middle of the project essentially splitting the roadway into roughly two larger basins; one that drains north and one that drains south. Considering the various aspects of the existing drainage patterns, stormwater management for Capital Drive will be split into several components that discharge to locations 1, 3, 4, & 5 as described in section 2.3 previously. Branch Engineering, Inc. 2 Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 The primary goal for stormwater management on Capital Drive is to match existing drainage patterns and peak discharge rates through the design storm. The new pavement and widening improvements needed to construct a 21' wide roadway will have an offset crown matching the existing pavement width that sheet drains to the west. The new additional pavement width will sheet flow to the eastern gutter line where it will be collected in catch basins for detention. Additional detail for these systems will be described shortly. Due to the existing intermittent curb, a flush curb is proposed along a majority of the western side of the new improvements with a 1-2' gravel shoulder. The gravel shoulder is proposed to aid in absorbing and dissipating the sheet flow draining to the west. The flush curb will be placed in areas where an existing curb either (1) doesn't exist, (2) is a top set curb in poor shape and not functioning as a curb, or (3) isn't a curb at all but rather logs along the side of the road. Again, the intent is to match the existing drainage pattern which is for a majority of the roadway to sheet flow toward the neighbors to the west (Destination #5), without increasing peak runoff rates toward the neighbors or downstream systems. These improvements will end up reducing the runoff sheet flowing to the west by directing upland areas toward the north as will be described in the following sections. To summarize the curb locations: • A new curb & gutter will start at the southern limits of the new construction and end at the second driveway which appears to be 2910 Capital Drive. • The remaining curb to the north up to the existing end of pavement will be flush with a 1-2-foot gravel shoulder. • The remaining portion of the roadway that extends pavement further north halfway through lot 2 will have standard curb and gutter on both sides of the road. The runoff from the eastern portion of the widened roadway south of the high point will be collected in catch basin(s) and directed to a mechanical treatment device near the southern intersection with the private roadway. The existing basin drains across Capital Drive to the western gutter line. It is for that reason that after directing this runoff through detention and flow control, runoff will be directed to re-enter the gutter line via a bubbler. A bubbler is proposed in order to match the existing drainage patterns of runoff into the gutter while also applying a way to disperse the water with minimal disturbance. The post-developed flows into this gutter line (Destination #4) will match the pre-developed flow into the gutter line so there is no increase in the gutter line drainage anticipated. One last note for this basin east of the crown and south of the roadway high point, is that there is a small area south of the catch basin that is draining to the existing eastern curb line (Destination #1) under the post-developed condition. The private roadway runoff will be designed to over detain in order to match the pre- developed flows into the eastern gutter line. The runoff from the eastern portion of the widened roadway north of the high point, as well as the new pavement to extend the roadway will be collected in catch basins, and directed into a series of underground storage tanks to meet flow control requirements. There is an existing basin that drains into a ditch along the eastern side of a gravel path north of the new pavement improvements (Destination #3). This discharge location was suggested by and coordinated with Fred Lockhart, the City of Eugene's Stormwater Branch Engineering, Inc. 3 Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 Services Program Manager with the Parks and Open Space Division. The new pavement widening and extension runoff will release into this ditch matching the pre-developed discharge rates. This ditch continues on to the north where it is released into Hendrick's Park. In other words, the development will be re-directing much of the new pavement improvements and existing upland areas previously draining toward the residents to the west, and instead directing that runoff into Hendrick's park, i.e. these improvements will reduce the runoff draining toward the residents to the west. 3.1.2 Private Roadway Runoff Runoff created from the impervious pavement of the private roadway will be treated by mechanical treatment devices in 1 of the 3 separate outfall locations. A majority of the runoff will be detained in underground storage tanks in order to meet the existing discharge rates offsite, thereby meeting flow control requirements. The runoff discharged to the existing forested area to the east will be released into level spreaders in order to disperse the flow across a wider path. (a) The first basin will be the southern portion that drains down from the first (southern) high point of the roadway. This basin will be collected by catch basins or a trench drain and will enter an underground detention tank. From there the tank will include a flow control device that will direct runoff to a bubbler on the east side of Capital Drive (Destination 1), and it will be released into the gutter line of the roadway matching the existing drainage pattern. No additional filtration can be applied to this basin area due to the steep slopes and lack of space available. The system is designed to match pre- developed rates into the gutter line, so there should be no concern for capacity issues. (b) The second discharge location from the private road will be at the bottom of the greenway between lots 13 and 14 (Destination #2). There will be various underground storage tanks reducing the peak discharge rate and then releasing the runoff into level spreaders or a series of level spreaders in the eastern greenway west of the Ribbon Trail. With all the underground facilities (catch basins, storage tanks and mechanical treatment devices), this system could almost be considered a treatment train. The runoff downstream of these mechanical devices is then released to level spreaders where the drainage will be filtered through the landscape as it runs across the ground before reaching the eastern property line and the Greenway. No additional filtration or infiltration can be applied to this basin area due to the lack of space available, the steep slopes and the areas nearby to the south prone to landslides. (c) The third and last discharge location from the private roadway will be the northern basin that collects runoff west of the second (northern) high point. The drainage will be collected in a catch basin and connect to the series of storage tanks, the first being a privately maintained tank, and the remaining storage in the public right of way as part of Capital Drive Improvements. The runoff from this basin will be directed into the ditch east of the gravel road north of the Capital Drive Improvements (Destination #3). No additional infiltration or filtration can be applied to this basin area due to the steep slopes and lack of space available. 3.1.3 Individual Lot Runoff The individual lots will need to meet water quality and flow control requirements when submitting for building permits and are not addressed by the improvements proposed above. Possible water quality mechanisms for the private lots would be the use of Branch Engineering, Inc. 4 Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 mechanical treatment or perhaps lined planters, rain gardens, sand filters, or swales. For flow control, some of the mechanisms above might work, but the use of underground storage tanks or oversized pipes may serve better. For the lots bound by the new roadway improvements, upon treatment and flow control, drainage disposal will discharge onto the new roadways. For the lots draining away from the roadway to the east, disposal (after treatment and detention) would be into level spreaders directed toward the existing park land to the east or north. 3.2 STORMWATER ANALYSIS All stormwater calculations were determined using HydroCAD 10.0 modeling software. This program utilizes the Santa Barbara Unit Hydrograph hydraulic modeling method. All results of the analysis are included in Appendix C. 24-Hour Rainfall depths are based on City of Eugene Stormwater Management Manual, Appendix C. In order to calculate the pre-developed rates that need to be met in the post developed condition, the existing basin areas to those discharge locations needed to be determined. Using the existing surface in the software program AutoCAD-Civil3d and the new road and lot layout, the basin areas were determined and the following summarizes the areas and peak discharge rates for the existing conditions. Table 1: Existing Basin Data: Discharge Discharge Discharge Discharge Discharge Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5* Greenway North Sheet flow Discharge South between Lot Capital South west off Location Capital Drive 14 & 15, and Drive ditch Capital Drive Capital Drive Summary (East Gutter greenway east of (West onto adjacent Line) east of lot Gutter Line) neighboring 15. gravelroad. properties Existing 38' wide Existing Existing Existing Basin Driveway & section up Driveway & Pavement Pavement Summary Landscape to top of Hill Landscape and upland and upland (SW) (^'380') (NW) areas areas Impervious 6050 0 2095 0 N/A Area (SF) Pervious 13510 14750 10625 30,885 N/A Area (SF) Total Area 19560 14750 12720 30,885 N/A (SF) Peak 10-YR Discharge 0.30 0.16 0.19 0.38 N/A Rate (cfs) Branch Engineering, Inc. 5 Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 *Discharge Site 5 was not analyzed because the total drainage across Capital Drive onto the adjacent neighbors to the west will be reduced by directing upland areas to the western gutter line south on Capital Drive instead. It is worth noting that the basin area that will be released to the Discharge Sites 1, 2, 3, & 4 under the post developed condition will be larger than the existing conditions. The public and private roadway improvements will capture more upland areas and redirect some of the volume previously draining onto the neighbors to the west and sheet flowing into the park land to the east. For that reason, multiple underground storage tanks will be necessary, as previously discussed, to detain the water and reduce the peak discharge rates to match pre-developed levels. The areas and peak flow rates under the post developed condition are displayed in the following table. Table 2: Proposed Basin Data: Discharge Site 1 Discharge Site 2 Discharge Site 3 Discharge Site 4 South Capital Greenway North Capital South Capital Discharge Location Drive (East between Lot 13 & Drive, ditch east Drive (West Summary Gutter Line) 14, and greenway of gravel road. Gutter Line) east of lot 14. Private Roadway New Pavement draining toward New Pavement New Pavement Basin Summary from Private & the low point from Private & from Public Public Roadway west of the Public Roadway Roadway and and upland areas. and upland areas. upland areas. geenway. Impervious Area 10,945 18,470 13,960 6,045 (SF) Pervious Area (SF) 12,580 58,810 34,350 33,815 Total Area (SF) 23,525 77,280 48,310 39,860 Peak WQ Discharge 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.04 Rate (cfs) Peak 10-YR Discharge Rate with 0.27 0.16 (x 2)* 0.19 0.32 detention (cfs) "The combined flow rate out of the detention vault releasing runoff into Discharge Site 2 is 0.32 cfs, however, the flow is split into two level spreaders, each releasing 0.16 cfs per 38' level spreader, which matches the existing peak release rate per 38' section into Hendrick's Park. In comparing the two tables, it can be seen that the new development meets or reduces peak runoff rates during the 10-year storm when compared to the pre-developed condition. Through an iterative process, it was determined that multiple underground storage tanks would provide the most effective tool in reducing the peak discharge rates. The combination of underground storage facilities is modeled in Appendix C and detailed in the plans on Sheet C2. Branch Engineering, Inc. 6 Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 3.3 WATER QUALITY TREATMENT As noted previously, this report is intended to address the stormwater created by the improvements to the public roadway on Capital Drive, and the new private road circulating through the site. The primary stormwater management tools for the private roadway runoff will be underground storage and mechanical treatment due in large part to the lack of available space for filtration facilities. The northern and southern basins will be too small to justify the cost of mechanical treatment and will therefore have to pay the higher rate of SDC's for the impervious area created. The central basin will be directed through a combination of detention vaults as well as a mechanical treatment device such as the Contech CDS manhole. The basin area draining to Discharge location #2 likely would have a much larger peak flow rate if not for the layout of the multiple underground storage tanks located along the roadway. These detention facilities act as a pre-treatment, by collecting some solids and oils before releasing downstream. The peak discharge rate during the water quality storm, located just upstream of the final underground storage tank, is 0.08 cfs. It is at that location, just upstream of the 51'' detention tank, that the mechanical treatment structure will be located. A treatment manhole or some other proprietary treatment technology may be selected and approved by the City of Eugene when applying for the building permit for the roadway and associated utility installation. A majority of the public improvements will consist of replacing existing asphalt that doesn't currently have any water quality treatment. The new impervious area created by the public improvements, similar to the private roadway improvements, will be too little to justify the cost of mechanical treatment, but will be directed through catch basins and underground detention helping to filter out sediment before being released. The northern basin when released into the existing ditch will in some ways unintentionally act as a swale, treating runoff before being entering into Hendrick's Park. As mentioned previously, this report is primarily concerned with the public and private roadway improvements and how they will address stormwater with the intent that the private dwellings will address flow control and water quality when applying for building permits on a case by case basis. Possible water quality mechanisms for the private lots would be the use of mechanical treatment or perhaps lined planters, rain gardens, sand filters, or swales. 3.4 FLOW CONTROL AND DESTINATION Flow control devices and numerous underground storage facilities were applied to the runoff directed to the Discharge locations 1, 2, 3, & 4 in the HydroCAD analysis. Flow control will be met using orifices in underground storage facilities. The following table displays the summary of the various detention facilities proposed as part of the Capital Hill PUD development. For a schematic detail of the orifice layout, see sheet C2 of the plans. For additional information on the orifice size and elevation information, please refer back to the HydroCAD Analysis in Appendix C. Branch Engineering, Inc. 7 Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 Table 3: Detention Facilitites Storage 10 -Year 10-year Storage Volume Peak Peak Tank Summary (cubic- Destination Inflow outflow feet) (cfs) (cfs) S1 Utility Vault-776-Revised 130 G1 - East Gutter 0.23 0.19 S2 Utility Vault - 816 871 S6 & East Greenway 0.28 0.09 S3 Utility Vault - 816 871 S6 & East Greenway 0.33 0.12 S4 Utility Vault - 816 871 S6 & East Greenway 0.20 0.05 S5 Utility Vault - 816 871 S6 & East Greenway 0.31 0.12 S6 Utility Vault - 816 871 East Greenway 0.37 0.32 S9, 510, & Northern Ditch S7 Utility Vault-776 163 0.12 0.07 S8 Utility Vault - 816 871 S9, 510, & Northern Ditch D 0.25 0.07 S9 Utility Vault - 816 871 510, & Northern Ditch D1 0.23 0.13 S10 Two (2) 24" pipes, 185 Long 1162 Northern Ditch D1 0.38 0.19 6,000 Gal Tank, 18'L x 8'W x S11 936 G2 - West Gutter 0.58 0.30 The peak discharge rate into Destination #1, the existing eastern curb on Capital Drive, is actually reduced slightly under the proposed condition, in part due to the existing pavement draining toward the eastern curb and the new detention tank proposed. For the discharge to Location 2, it was determined through an iterative process that having various underground storage tanks collecting runoff every few hundred was more efficient than collecting all the runoff at one low point and then directing them to stepped/tiered underground storage facilities between lots 13 and 14. The second option required far more storage and would be more complicated to construct and install. The detention tank selected and used for the multiple storage tank system design is the Oldcastle Vault-816. By having all the storage facilities fall within the footprint of the roadway, or just outside the roadway, the stormwater improvements are far less likely to encroach on the existing vegetation. The existing condition draining to discharge location 2 was assumed to be a 38-foot-wide section of sheet flow draining from the top of the hill, located about 380 feet away. The basin area of roughly 14,900 square feet created a peak discharge rate during the 10-year design storm of 0.16 cubic feet per second (cfs). With the current layout proposed for the private roadway, the basin area directing runoff to the 38' level spreader increases dramatically (3x) up to 45,520 square feet. It is for that reason that several tanks were selected, and multiple level spreaders are proposed. By matching the peak discharge rate of 0.16 cfs / 38 linear feet of level spreader, the post developed improvements match the pre-developed discharge rates and runoff conditions. The peak discharge rate into Destination #3, the northern ditch, matches the existing rate by utilizing a combination of detention facilities. Since the new basin area draining to this destination is larger, a somewhat complex combination of facilities was required as well as the use of 24" detention pipes that will need to be constructed into the bank of the hill to the east due to cover Branch Engineering, Inc. 8 Capital Hill PUD, Tentative (14-020) August 22nd, 2017 concerns. If alternative detention methods are found to be either more effective or cost efficient, the use of the 24" detention pipes may be revised. The peak discharge rate into Destination #4, the western gutter line on Capital drive, is met by detaining a larger basin area than previously draining to the western gutter line. This required a larger underground detention tank, but the flow control device adequately reduced the runoff to match the pre-developed rate. For additional information on the facility details, or the HydroCAD analysis, please see Appendices A&C. 4.0 CONCLUSION The stormwater system for the Capital Hill PUD has been designed in accordance with the City of Eugene Stormwater Management Manual for Water Quality & Flow Control requirements. Branch Engineering, Inc. 9 APPENDIX A Stormwater Plan (Sheet C2) Existing Condition Basin Map Post-Developed Condition Base Map a z a z a a [V r O cc) a 0 a 0 N O d m c N C W L U C 0 m P O 7 0 'a O N O a %m ,t E; O e ;m IV re-ir anc ' E'GINEERING = / ~ , Since 1977 Q F civil transportation structural. geotechnical 5 p~ U SURVEYING J , Q = ca, 310 5th St-t 97 Spr ngF Id.OR9]4T/ p'. 541.]46.063] }L- / " Z w eran hE g In WW ~ ' 1 ✓ / ~ I OR Spr n9f eJtl OR Sle OR ni w o Aft LL , Z LLI w v! ^ _71 - w W o LLJ 021 - - J ZVo W o a J J ` W 00 U a\ / r U d ~ ~ ' " rev¢ions EXISTING BASIN LEGEND ~i■i■i~ BASIN LINE J~te: 8/11/17 drown by ® BASIN GRAPHIC SCALE designer project no laozo ® DESTINATION 0 50 100 EXISTING " BASIN MAP ( IN FEET ) sheet. B1 Q z z z a a [V r O m 0 ❑ a O N O d , m c N C C C W L U C 0 m a , 7 a 2 0 'a U O _ 0 a ~o O e N IV LEGEND PROPOSED BASIN LEGEND NEW PUBLIC STORMWATER SEWER LINE ■ ■ ■ ■ PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BASIN LINE ❑ NEW DETENTION VAULT uuuu uuuu PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT BASIN LINE NEW LEVEL SPREADER PROPOSED BASIN \Lri NEW STRIP DRAIN & UNDERGROUND DETENTION STORAGE ■ NEW CATCH BASIN OR BUBBLER ® DESTINATION zommmw--z--.Nm.- GRAPHIC SCALE 0 50 100 ( IN FEET ) anch E1' GINEERING z Sire 1977 0 civil . transportation F U structural geotechnical SURVEYING Q Z F 3105th Sheet Spring fie Id. OR 97477 p'. 541 746 0637 Z O w.erant In eerln OR WWSpnngfield OR OR Salem OR - U J ~ W 0 t,,e, LL 0 z 0 W Z Z z Q o U J LLJ a o W oz / 0 w U _ L C'21 w Q o 0 L O J 1 = Z 0 / A U W vN z J Z,o J Woa 2 ~JJ J J a"'= Q J ~oQ Jtr,a - W0Q a )00 U d IY U revisio C)~z ns'. date'. 8/11/17 drawn by design er project na'. 14.020 PROPSED BASIN MAP sheet. B2 APPENDIX B NRCS Soils Data a 495050 440 1'56"N u~ u~ ILI, r r 0 r N O N LL~ r ug u~ u'S r uS r Soil Map-Lane County Area, Oregon (Captial Hill - Tentative PUD) 495110 495170 495230 495290 0 r r 440 1'39 N 495050 495110 495170 495230 495290 M Map Scale: 1:2,640 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Meters N 0 35 70 140 210 Feet A 0 100 200 400 600 Map projection: Web Mercator Conermordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 1ON WGS84 uSDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey :r Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey 495410 u~ 440 1'56" N u~ r r 0 r N LL~ O N LL~ r ug u~ r u'S r uS r 0 r r 440 1'39" N 495410 1/6/2017 Page 1 of 3 Soil Map-Lane County Area, Oregon (Captial Hill - Tentative PUD) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (A01) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest (AOI) Stony Spot 1:20,000. Soils Very Stony Spot Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Soil Map Unit Polygons Wet Spot Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Pm 0 Soil Map Unit Lines misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil Other line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of 0 Soil Map Unit Points Special Line Features . contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed Special Point Features , scale. Blowout Water Features Streams and Canals Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Borrow Pit measurements. Transportation Clay Spot Rails Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Closed Depression Web Soil Survey URL: Interstate Highways Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) i Gravel Pit US Routes Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Gravelly Spot Major Roads projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Landfill Local Roads Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more Lava Flow accurate calculations of distance or area are required. . Background Marsh or swamp Aerial Photography This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. s-... Mine or Quarry Soil Survey Area: Lane County Area, Oregon Miscellaneous Water Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 16, 2016 Perennial Water Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales Rock Outcrop 1:50,000 or larger. Saline Spot Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 5, 2011-Jul 6, 2011 Sandy Spot The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were _ Severely Eroded Spot compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor Sinkhole shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Slide or Slip o~ Sodic Spot uSDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 Soil Map-Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Map Unit Legend Lane County Area, Oregon (OR637) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 102C Panther silty clay loam, 2 to 12 1.9 9.2% percent slopes 108C Philomath cobbly silty clay, 3 to 13.9 66.5% 12 percent slopes 109F Philomath-Urban land 0.8 3.7% complex, 12 to 45 percent slopes 125F Steiwer loam, 20 to 50 percent 4.3 20.6% slopes Totals for Area of Interest 20.9 100.0% USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 ~iiiilliiiid Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 Map Unit Description: Panther silty clay loam, 2 to 12 percent slopes---Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Lane County Area, Oregon 102C-Panther silty clay loam, 2 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 233b Elevation: 90 to 1,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 60 inches Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F Frost-free period: 160 to 235 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Panther and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 5 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Panther Setting Landform: Benches on hills, swales on hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down-slope shape: Concave, linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium and residuum derived from basic igneous and sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 10 inches: silty clay loam H2 - 10 to 42 inches: clay H3 - 42 to 52 inches: weathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 12 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 40 to 60 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: D Other vegetative classification: Poorly Drained (G002XY0060R) Hydric soil rating: Yes USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2 Map Unit Description: Panther silty clay loam, 2 to 12 percent slopes---Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Minor Components Bashaw Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Terraces Hydric soil rating: Yes Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Lane County Area, Oregon Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 16, 2016 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2 Map Unit Description: Philomath cobbly silty clay, 3 to 12 percent slopes---Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Lane County Area, Oregon 108C-Philomath cobbly silty clay, 3 to 12 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 233k Elevation: 200 to 2,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 30 to 60 inches Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F Frost-free period: 160 to 235 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Philomath and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 4 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Philomath Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest, interfluve, nose slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium and residuum derived from basic igneous rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 6 inches: cobbly silty clay H2 - 6 to 14 inches: cobbly silty clay H3 - 14 to 24 inches: weathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 12 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 12 to 20 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Hydric soil rating: No USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2 Map Unit Description: Philomath cobbly silty clay, 3 to 12 percent slopes---Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Minor Components Panther Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Swales Hydric soil rating: Yes Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Lane County Area, Oregon Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 16, 2016 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2 Map Unit Description: Philomath-Urban land complex, 12 to 45 percent slopes---Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Lane County Area, Oregon 109F-Philomath-Urban land complex, 12 to 45 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 233m Elevation: 350 to 1,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 60 inches Mean annual air temperature: 52 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 160 to 235 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Philomath and similar soils: 60 percent Urban land: 25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Philomath Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder, summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope, interfluve, side slope, crest Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium and residuum derived from basic igneous rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 6 inches: cobbly silty clay H2 - 6 to 14 inches: cobbly silty clay H3 - 14 to 24 inches: weathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 12 to 45 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 12 to 20 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Hydric soil rating: No USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2 Map Unit Description: Philomath-Urban land complex, 12 to 45 percent slopes---Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Description of Urban Land Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8 Hydric soil rating: No Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Lane County Area, Oregon Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 16, 2016 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2 Map Unit Description: Steiwer loam, 20 to 50 percent slopes---Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Lane County Area, Oregon 125F-Steiwer loam, 20 to 50 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 234h Elevation: 300 to 650 feet Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches Mean annual air temperature: 52 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 165 to 210 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Steiwer and similar soils: 85 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Steiwer Setting Landform: Low hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve, nose slope, side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium and residuum derived from igneous or sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 16 inches: loam H2 - 16 to 29 inches: clay loam H3 - 29 to 39 inches: weathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 20 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: C USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2 Map Unit Description: Steiwer loam, 20 to 50 percent slopes---Lane County Area, Oregon Captial Hill - Tentative PUD Hydric soil rating: No Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Lane County Area, Oregon Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 16, 2016 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1/6/2017 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX C HydroCAD Analysis Existing 10-Year Storm Analysis Post-Developed Water Quality and 10-Year Storm Analysis F I D1 v i 7 )W` r O 3~ o • E3 I v eA k stn9 Diten 9e 0 ex 5Y O Lor r~ o nN•, ° J t A O J r pg I ~ Eq 0.:. ~ ' fisting Basv wes cutter ^ u u ~ r ~ G4 ' ks, E1.s&, ner E1 49, 1~ e0 N N f J / • W / ~ O \ I I T "°lu ' J • Qw N E2 { 4 6i 3 VOW a x f M E ,f r' SF a C-/ de coo M O F J c M f i li II~"` , r I' x o 1 i y 1'"' 3SV3 SC3 1w1 Z T M ,m .p V 1\ Ih' MW T Subcat Reach Pon Link Routing Diagram for 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness _ 2017-0807_PreDev Prepared by Microsoft, Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCAD~ 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC DF 1 Existing Ditch E3 Existing Drainage Into Ditch E2 Existing 38 Section sF1 38 Wide section E4 Existing Basin to Wes Gutter E1 Existing W Basin to E t Gutter G2 G 1 F Existing West Gutkxiisting East Gutter Subcat Reach Pon Link Routing Diagram for 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness _ 2017-0807_PreDev Prepared by Microsoft, Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PreDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Summary for Subcatchment E1: Existing SW Basin to East Gutter Runoff = 0.30 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.109 af, Depth= 2.92" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 4,629 98 Extg Pavement 1,420 98 Concrete 5,790 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 3,555 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 4,165 80 Landscape 19,559 85 Weighted Average 13,510 69.07% Pervious Area 6,049 30.93% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.9 150 0.0800 0.32 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" 2.4 150 0.0050 1.06 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterwav Kv= 15.0 fos 10.3 300 Total Summary for Subcatchment E2: Existing 38' Section Runoff = 0.16 cfs @ 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.065 af, Depth= 2.34" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 14,600 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 14,600 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 17.7 300 0.3000 0.28 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" Summary for Subcatchment E3: Existing Drainage into Ditch Runoff = 0.19 cfs @ 7.99 hrs, Volume= 0.066 af, Depth= 2.72" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PreDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Area (sf) CN Descriotion 2,095 98 Pavement 10,625 80 Landscape 12,720 83 Weighted Average 10,625 83.53% Pervious Area 2,095 16.47% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.3 20 0.0300 1.16 Sheet Flow, Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.12" 8.3 90 0.1800 0.18 Sheet Flow, Woods: Liaht underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" 8.6 110 Total Summary for Subcatchment E4: Existing SW Basin to West Gutter Runoff = 0.38 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.138 af, Depth= 2.34" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 30,885 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 30,885 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 7.0 175 0.1450 0.41 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" 0.1 25 0.0800 5.74 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 1.1 300 0.0800 4.39 0.44 Channel Flow, Gutter Flow Area= 0.1 sf Perim= 2.0' r= 0.05' n= 0.013 Asphalt, smooth 8.2 500 Total Summary for Reach D1: Existing Ditch Inflow Area = 0.292 ac, 16.47% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.72" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.19 cfs @ 7.99 hrs, Volume= 0.066 of Outflow = 0.19 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.066 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.2 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.63 fps, Min. Travel Time= 1.3 min Avg. Velocity = 0.33 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 2.6 min Peak Storage= 15 cf @ 8.00 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.21' Bank-Full Depth= 0.50' Flow Area= 1.0 sf, Capacity= 1.01 cfs 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PreDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 1.00' x 0.50' deep channel, n= 0.150 Sheet flow over Short Grass Side Slope Z-value= 2.07' Top Width= 3.00' Length= 50.0' Slope= 0.0500'/' Inlet Invert= 886.20', Outlet Invert= 883.70' Summary for Reach G1: Existing East Gutter Inflow Area = 0.449 ac, 30.93% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.92" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.30 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.109 of Outflow = 0.30 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.109 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 3.94 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.0 min Avg. Velocity = 2.41 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.1 min Peak Storage= 1 cf @ 8.00 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.09' Bank-Full Depth= 0.25' Flow Area= 0.6 sf, Capacity= 5.00 cfs 0.00' x 0.25' deep channel, n= 0.013 Asphalt, smooth Side Slope Z-value= 20.0 0.1 Top Width= 5.03' Length= 8.0' Slope= 0.08257' Inlet Invert= 878.16', Outlet Invert= 877.50' Summary for Reach G2: Existing West Gutter Inflow Area = 0.709 ac, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.34" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.38 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.138 of Outflow = 0.38 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.138 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 4.18 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.2 min Avg. Velocity = 2.69 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.2 min 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PreDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Peak Storage= 4 cf @ 8.00 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.10' Bank-Full Depth= 0.25' Flow Area= 0.6 sf, Capacity= 4.99 cfs 0.00' x 0.25' deep channel, n= 0.013 Asphalt, smooth Side Slope Z-value= 0.1 20.07' Top Width= 5.03' Length= 40.0' Slope= 0.0820'/' Inlet Invert= 878.16', Outlet Invert= 874.88' Summary for Reach SN : 38' Wide Section Inflow Area = 0.335 ac, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.34" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.16 cfs @ 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.065 of Outflow = 0.15 cfs @ 8.03 hrs, Volume= 0.065 af, Atten= 1%, Lag= 1.3 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.32 fps, Min. Travel Time= 2.6 min Avg. Velocity = 0.25 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 3.3 min Peak Storage= 24 cf @ 8.03 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.01' Bank-Full Depth= 1.00' Flow Area= 39.0 sf, Capacity= 205.25 cfs 38.00' x 1.00' deep channel, n=0.150 Sheet flow over Short Grass Side Slope Z-value= 1.07' Top Width= 40.00' Length= 50.0' Slope= 0.3000'/' Inlet Invert= 800.00', Outlet Invert= 785.00' old- All if If D1a > ` 0 x • CO U WA/ • "N 8~,~.. Cx S1 EP43 P43 'ion x Upland Lan[ ape F 1~ O Proposed W Pu " m I J Basin Wr O i X 816 FO S7 P3 .V 6 o p K' P24 rtg0 P 2 ~oR roposedawgal~te EP24 T BI 1, Pri Rd Prof Und Land cape 'I In EP42~ J \\\27. 'r S4 S8 or Lan 0 816 F EAR 81 . ^ •m T _ N x p P23 J r e = EP23 Pry JW O a EP41 Upland andscap I J ~x N R2 P Aacn) n p o o x` K 916 vEA EP22 bbl x ,i L1 Upland Lands cape P22 S6.[ - Q J 6 F 10 YEAR 38 Wide ctiolt / Pr vale Rd2 S3 .4 1 /J a L2 P52 f\ 9rsF 10 R M Al P51 11- A "Uplan Landscape 'q \ • pa38 wide secson ' I- R_ n ' r away EP21 R1 O 7 lJpiano Landscape ® x acn> x Sl * / 1 P21 S2 \ ~ -11'\x" ; K.. S • PnareR s R1 Y S11 P11 zl I Basin ~Pr To r P53 1 S1 I - yy • _ l ~a w S nsF 1o ~ARI z 1 P12 F. Newt "adn (Peale - C 4 i o ~ _ off, _ s G2 G1 -.a ® r i .is g ter sti I x Subcat Reach Pon Link Routing Diagram for 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness _ 2017-0807_PostDev Prepared by Microsoft, Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCAD@ 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC DF 1 Existin Ron ~p S1 I E3 P43 24• etention Proposed NW Public Upland Landscape Basin A59 816 FO o v R S7 4-P3 P24 P 2 7 FOR 10 Posed NW Private EP24 I Basin Privatg Rd 4 Proposed W Public Upland Lantlscape b Ba i \\\27 EP42 S8 Upland Landscape S4 yyy 816 FOR 1 YEAR 816 5OR YEAR / P23 P41 EP23 Priv e Rd 3 Proposed NW Public Basin EP41 Upland Landscap R2 Upland Landscape (n Reach) SS 816 FOR 10 YEA EP22 S6 L1 F1 Upla d Landscape P22 38 Wid e Section 16 F 10 YEAR ' 8 Prvate Rd 2 S3 _ P52 816 FOR 10 YEAR L2 P51 Uplan Lantlscape 38 Wide Section EP21 SW Public oadway (Pub R 1 Upland Lantlsca\ ,r, \\\\\\\???777... / new Reach) P21 ES2 Private Rd 1 816 FOR 10 VEAR S11 //P11 Undergr no Tank Ne Basin (Private) P53 S1 776 F R 10 YEAR S Public oadway (Pu P12 New SW Basin (Private) G G1 Existing West Guneristing East Gutter Subcat Reach Pon Link 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Summary for Subcatchment EP21: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.19 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.072 af, Depth= 2.34" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 16,120 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 16,120 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 150 0.2000 0.21 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP22: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.22 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.083 af, Depth= 2.34" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 18,500 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 18,500 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 150 0.2000 0.21 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP23: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.20 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.075 af, Depth= 2.34" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 16,800 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 16,800 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 150 0.2000 0.21 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment EP24: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.09 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.033 af, Depth= 2.34" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 7,400 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 7,400 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 150 0.2000 0.21 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP41: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.20 cfs @ 7.96 hrs, Volume= 0.071 af, Depth= 2.54" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 1,309 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 940 98 Impervious 4,955 79 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG D 1,680 91 Gravel roads, HSG D 5,710 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 14,594 82 Weighted Average 13,654 93.56% Pervious Area 940 6.44% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.9 90 0.0600 0.26 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP42: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.05 cfs @ 7.98 hrs, Volume= 0.018 af, Depth= 2.34" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 4,115 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 4,115 100.00% Pervious Area 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.9 90 0.0600 0.26 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP43: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.21 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.075 af, Depth= 2.60" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 13,065 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 2,095 98 Pavement 15,160 82 Weighted Average 13,065 86.18% Pervious Area 2,095 13.82% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.3 20 0.0300 1.16 Sheet Flow, Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.12" 8.3 90 0.1800 0.18 Sheet Flow, Woods: Liaht underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" 8.6 110 Total Summary for Subcatchment P11: New SW Basin (Private) Runoff = 0.23 cfs @ 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.105 af, Depth= 3.28" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 4,885 98 Pavement 2,440 98 Parking 994 98 Patio 3,520 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 4,900 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 16,739 88 Weighted Average 8,420 50.30% Pervious Area 8,319 49.70% Impervious Area 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 23.9 150 0.0050 0.10 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" 2.4 150 0.0050 1.06 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 1.6 230 0.0050 2.45 0.85 Pipe Channel, 8.0" Round Area= 0.3 sf Perim= 2.1' r= 0.17' n= 0.013 Concrete pipe, bends & connections 27.9 530 Total Summary for Subcatchment P12: New SW Basin (Private) Runoff = 0.06 cfs @ 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.027 af, Depth= 2.77" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 994 98 Patio 4,165 80 Landscape 5,159 83 Weighted Average 4,165 80.73% Pervious Area 994 19.27% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 23.9 150 0.0050 0.10 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" 2.4 150 0.0050 1.06 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterwav Kv= 15.0 fos 26.3 300 Total Summary for Subcatchment P21: Private Rd 1 Runoff = 0.09 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.031 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 3,850 98 Pavement 3,850 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment P22: Private Rd 2 Runoff = 0.12 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.040 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 4,970 98 Pavement 4,970 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P23: Private Rd 3 Runoff = 0.12 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.040 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 4,990 98 Pavement 4,990 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P24: Private Rd 4 Runoff = 0.11 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.038 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 4,660 98 Pavement 4,660 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment P3: Proposed NW Private Basin Runoff = 0.12 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 0.042 af, Depth= 3.24" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 3,225 98 Extg Pavement 3,525 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 6,750 88 Weighted Average 3,525 52.22% Pervious Area 3,225 47.78% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P41: Proposed NW Public Basin Runoff = 0.05 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.016 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 2,028 98 Pavement 2,028 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P42: Proposed NW Public Basin Runoff = 0.06 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.021 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 2,545 98 Pavement 2,545 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Subcatchment P43: Proposed NW Public Basin Runoff = 0.08 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.025 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 3,125 98 Extq Pavement 3,125 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P51: SW Public Roadway (Pub) Runoff = 0.10 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.034 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 4,180 98 Pavement 4,180 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P52: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.48 cfs @ 7.99 hrs, Volume= 0.172 af, Depth= 2.52" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 3,690 80 Landscape 1,860 98 Pavement 30,110 80 Landscape 35,660 81 Weighted Average 33,800 94.78% Pervious Area 1,860 5.22% Impervious Area 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.5 160 0.1500 0.41 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" 1.2 400 0.0800 5.74 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 7.7 Runoff = 560 Total Summary for Subcatchment P53: SW Public Roadway (Pub) 0.04 cfs @ 7.88 hrs, Volume= 0.013 af, Depth= 4.22" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Area (sf) CN Description 1,640 98 Pavement 1,640 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach D1: Existing Ditch Inflow Area = 1.109 ac, 28.89% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.91" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.19 cfs @ 11.06 hrs, Volume= 0.269 of Outflow = 0.19 cfs @ 11.07 hrs, Volume= 0.269 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.9 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.64 fps, Min. Travel Time= 1.3 min Avg. Velocity = 0.42 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 2.0 min Peak Storage= 15 cf @ 11.07 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.21' Bank-Full Depth= 0.50' Flow Area= 1.0 sf, Capacity= 1.01 cfs 1.00' x 0.50' deep channel, n= 0.150 Sheet flow over Short Grass Side Slope Z-value= 2.07' Top Width= 3.00' Length= 50.0' Slope= 0.0500'/' Inlet Invert= 886.20', Outlet Invert= 883.70' 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Summary for Reach G1: Existing East Gutter Inflow Area = 0.540 ac, 46.53% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.23" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.27 cfs @ 8.14 hrs, Volume= 0.146 of Outflow = 0.27 cfs @ 8.14 hrs, Volume= 0.146 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 3.84 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.0 min Avg. Velocity = 2.49 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.1 min Peak Storage= 1 cf @ 8.14 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.08' Bank-Full Depth= 0.25' Flow Area= 0.6 sf, Capacity= 5.00 cfs 0.00' x 0.25' deep channel, n= 0.013 Asphalt, smooth Side Slope Z-value= 20.0 0.1 Top Width= 5.03' Length= 8.0' Slope= 0.08257' Inlet Invert= 878.16', Outlet Invert= 877.50' Summary for Reach G2: Existing West Gutter Inflow Area = 0.915 ac, 15.16% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.70" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.30 cfs @ 8.38 hrs, Volume= 0.206 of Outflow = 0.30 cfs @ 8.38 hrs, Volume= 0.206 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 3.94 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.2 min Avg. Velocity = 2.63 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.3 min Peak Storage= 3 cf @ 8.38 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.09' Bank-Full Depth= 0.25' Flow Area= 0.6 sf, Capacity= 4.99 cfs 0.00' x 0.25' deep channel, n= 0.013 Asphalt, smooth Side Slope Z-value= 0.1 20.07' Top Width= 5.03' Length= 40.0' Slope= 0.0820'/' Inlet Invert= 878.16', Outlet Invert= 874.88' 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Reach L1: 38' Wide Section Inflow Area = 1.774 ac, 23.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.40" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.16 cfs @ 10.62 hrs, Volume= 0.206 of Outflow = 0.16 cfs @ 10.64 hrs, Volume= 0.206 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 1.2 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.17 fps, Min. Travel Time= 1.9 min Avg. Velocity = 0.13 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 2.6 min Peak Storage= 18 cf @ 10.64 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.02' Bank-Full Depth= 1.00' Flow Area= 39.0 sf, Capacity= 76.97 cfs 38.00' x 1.00' deep channel, n= 0.400 Sheet flow: Woods+light brush Side Slope Z-value= 1.07' Top Width= 40.00' Length= 20.0' Slope= 0.3000'/' Inlet Invert= 800.00', Outlet Invert= 794.00' Summary for Reach L2: 38' Wide Section Inflow = 0.16 cfs @ 10.62 hrs, Volume= 0.206 of Outflow = 0.16 cfs @ 10.64 hrs, Volume= 0.206 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 1.2 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.17 fps, Min. Travel Time= 1.9 min Avg. Velocity = 0.13 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 2.6 min Peak Storage= 18 cf @ 10.64 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.02' Bank-Full Depth= 1.00' Flow Area= 39.0 sf, Capacity= 76.97 cfs 38.00' x 1.00' deep channel, n= 0.400 Sheet flow: Woods+light brush Side Slope Z-value= 1.07' Top Width= 40.00' Length= 20.0' Slope= 0.3000'/' Inlet Invert= 800.00', Outlet Invert= 794.00' 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Reach R1: (new Reach) [52] Hint: Inlet/Outlet conditions not evaluated Inflow Area = 0.458 ac, 19.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.71" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.09 cfs @ 9.38 hrs, Volume= 0.103 of Outflow = 0.09 cfs @ 9.39 hrs, Volume= 0.103 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.5 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 3.12 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.7 min Avg. Velocity = 2.33 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.9 min Peak Storage= 4 cf @ 9.39 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.09' Bank-Full Depth= 0.67' Flow Area= 0.3 sf, Capacity= 2.22 cfs 8.0" Round Pipe n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior Length= 130.0' Slope= 0.02007' Inlet Invert= 879.00', Outlet Invert= 876.40' O Summary for Pond R2: (new Reach) [57] Hint: Peaked at 876.52' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area = 0.777 ac, 28.51% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.88" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.17 cfs @ 9.03 hrs, Volume = 0.186 of Outflow = 0.17 cfs @ 9.03 hrs, Volume = 0.186 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.17 cfs @ 9.03 hrs, Volume = 0.186 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 876.52'@ 10.63 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 874.00' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 50.0' Square-edged headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 874.00'/ 873.20' S= 0.01607' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 9.03 hrs HW=875.54' TW=875.55' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Inflow Area = 0.384 ac, Inflow = 0.23 cfs @ Outflow = 0.19 cfs @ Primary = 0.19 cfs @ Summary for Pond S1: 776 FOR 10 YEAR 49.70% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.28" 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.105 of 8.33 hrs, Volume= 0.105 af, 8.33 hrs, Volume= 0.105 of Atten= 14%, Lag= 19.1 min for 10 yr event Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 883.36' @ 8.33 hrs Surf.Area= 32 sf Storage= 111 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.8 min ( 730.6 - 728.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 879.90' 130 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 879.90 32 0 0 883.95 32 130 130 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 879.15' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 879.15'/ 878.75' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 879.15' 1.9" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 883.65' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.19 cfs @ 8.33 hrs HW=883.36' TW=878.24' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.19 cfs of 3.31 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.19 cfs @ 9.88 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S10: 24" Detention Inflow Area = 1.109 ac, 28.89% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.91" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.38 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume = 0.269 of Outflow = 0.19 cfs @ 11.06 hrs, Volume = 0.269 af, Atten= 50%, Lag= 183.4 min Primary = 0.19 cfs @ 11.06 hrs, Volume = 0.269 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 888.01' @ 11.06 hrs Surf.Area= 587 sf Storage= 1,002 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 64.1 min calculated for 0.269 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 64.1 min ( 897.0 - 832.9) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 886.40' 1,162 cf 24.0" Round Pipe Storage L= 370.0' 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 886.40' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 886.40'/ 886.23' S= 0.00857' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 886.40' 2.4" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 888.20' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.19 cfs @ 11.06 hrs HW=888.01' TW=886.41' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.19 cfs of 3.98 cfs potential flow) ~__3=Orif 2=Orif ice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.19 cfs @ 6.09 fps) ice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S11: Underground Tank 6,000 Gallon Tank 18'L x 8'W x 7D Inflow Area = 0.915 ac, 15.16% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.70" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.58 cfs @ 7.98 hrs, Volume= 0.206 of Outflow = 0.30 cfs @ 8.38 hrs, Volume= 0.206 af, Atten= 48%, Lag= 24.3 min Primary = 0.30 cfs @ 8.38 hrs, Volume= 0.206 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 885.68' @ 8.38 hrs Surf.Area= 144 sf Storage= 814 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 22.9 min calculated for 0.206 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 22.8 min ( 781.2 - 758.4) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 880.03' 936 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 880.03 144 0 0 886.53 144 936 936 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 880.03' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 880.03'/ 879.63' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 880.03' 2.2" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 886.03' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.30 cfs @ 8.38 hrs HW=885.68' TW=878.25' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.30 cfs of 3.88 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.30 cfs @ 11.45 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Inflow Area = 0.458 ac, Inflow = 0.28 cfs @ Outflow = 0.09 cfs @ Primary = 0.09 cfs @ Summary for Pond S2: 816 FOR 10 YEAR 19.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth= 2.71" 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.103 of 9.38 hrs, Volume= 0.103 af, 9.38 hrs, Volume= 0.103 of Atten= 67%, Lag= 83.1 min for 10 yr event Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 885.52' @ 9.38 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 771 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 100.3 min calculated for 0.103 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 100.3 min ( 857.1 - 756.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 879.77' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 879.77 134 0 0 886.27 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 879.77' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 879.77'/ 879.37' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 879.77' 1.2" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 885.77' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.09 cfs @ 9.38 hrs HW=885.52' TW=879.09' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.09 cfs of 3.91 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.09 cfs @ 11.55 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S3: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.539 ac, 21.18% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.74" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.33 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume = 0.123 of Outflow = 0.12 cfs @ 9.15 hrs, Volume = 0.123 af, Atten= 64%, Lag= 69.0 min Primary = 0.12 cfs @ 9.15 hrs, Volume = 0.123 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 880.13' @ 9.16 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 806 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 87.0 min calculated for 0.123 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 87.0 min ( 840.2 - 753.2) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 874.12' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 874.12 134 0 0 880.62 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 874.12' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 45.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 874.12'/ 873.22' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 874.12' 1.4" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 880.12' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.12 cfs @ 9.15 hrs HW=880.13' TW=875.79' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.12 cfs of 3.41 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.11 cfs @ 10.04 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 0.01 cfs @ 0.39 fps) Summary for Pond S4: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.277 ac, 38.64% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.07" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.20 cfs @ 7.96 hrs, Volume= 0.071 of Outflow = 0.05 cfs @ 10.26 hrs, Volume= 0.071 af, Atten= 75%, Lag= 138.1 min Primary = 0.05 cfs @ 10.26 hrs, Volume= 0.071 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 885.40' @ 10.26 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 719 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 187.2 min calculated for 0.071 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 187.2 min ( 911.1 - 723.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 880.04' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 880.04 134 0 0 886.54 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 880.04' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 880.04'/ 879.64' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 880.04' 0.9" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 886.04' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.05 cfs @ 10.26 hrs HW=885.40' TW=876.50' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.05 cfs of 3.77 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.05 cfs @ 11.15 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Inflow Area = 0.500 ac, Inflow = 0.31 cfs @ Outflow = 0.12 cfs @ Primary = 0.12 cfs @ Summary for Pond S5: 816 FOR 10 YEAR 22.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.77" 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.116 of 9.02 hrs, Volume= 0.116 af, 9.02 hrs, Volume= 0.116 of for 10 yr event Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 880.54' @ 9.03 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 807 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 97.2 min calculated for 0.116 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 97.2 min ( 847.2 - 750.0) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 874.52' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 874.52 134 0 0 881.02 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 874.52' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 874.52'/ 874.12' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 874.52' 1.3" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 880.52' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.12 cfs @ 9.02 hrs HW=880.54' TW=875.53' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.12 cfs of 3.76 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.10 cfs @ 10.77 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 0.02 cfs @ 0.47 fps) Summary for Pond S6: 816 FOR 10 YEAR [62] Hint: Exceeded Reach R1 OUTLET depth by 0.02'@ 10.63 hrs [80] Warning: Exceeded Pond R2 by 0.01'@ 8.66 hrs (0.19 cfs 0.010 af) Inflow Area = 1.774 ac, Inflow = 0.37 cfs @ Outflow = 0.32 cfs @ Primary = 0.16 cfs @ Secondary = 0.16 cfs @ 23.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.79" 9.13 hrs, Volume= 0.413 of 10.62 hrs, Volume= 0.413 af, 10.62 hrs, Volume= 0.206 of 10.62 hrs, Volume= 0.206 of Atten= 62%, Lag= 61.5 min Atten= 14%, Lag= 89.6 min for 10 yr event Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 876.51' @ 10.62 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 765 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 30.4 min calculated for 0.413 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 30.3 min ( 889.1 - 858.7) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 870.80' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet ) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 870.80 134 0 0 877.30 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 870.80' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 870.80'/ 870.40' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Secondary 870.80' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 870.80'/ 870.40' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #3 Device 1 870.80' 1.6" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Device 2 870.80' 1.6" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #5 Device 1 876.80' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #6 Device 2 876.80' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.16 cfs @ 10.62 hrs HW=876.51' TW=800.02' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.16 cfs of 3.90 cfs potential flow) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.16 cfs @ 11.50 fps) =Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.16 cfs @ 10.62 hrs HW=876.51' TW=800.02' (Dynamic Tailwater) L2=Culvert (Passes 0.16 cfs of 3.90 cfs potential flow) Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.16 cfs @ 11.50 fps) ~__:=Orif ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S7: 776 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.155 ac, 47.78% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.24" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.12 cfs @ 7.91 hrs, Volume= 0.042 of Outflow = 0.07 cfs @ 8.23 hrs, Volume= 0.042 af, Atten= 43%, Lag= 19.4 min Primary = 0.07 cfs @ 8.23 hrs, Volume= 0.042 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 897.01' @ 8.23 hrs Surf.Area= 32 sf Storage= 152 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 16.8 min calculated for 0.042 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 16.7 min ( 725.0 - 708.3) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 892.25' 163 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 19 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 892.25 32 0 0 897.35 32 163 163 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 892.25' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 892.25'/ 892.15' S= 0.00507' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 892.25' 1.1" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 897.05' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.07 cfs @ 8.23 hrs HW=897.01' TW=890.72' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.07 cfs of 3.54 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.07 cfs @ 10.51 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S8: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.382 ac, 17.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.75" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.25 cfs @ 7.95 hrs, Volume= 0.087 of Outflow = 0.07 cfs @ 9.92 hrs, Volume= 0.087 af, Atten= 73%, Lag= 118.5 min Primary = 0.07 cfs @ 9.92 hrs, Volume= 0.087 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 902.12' @ 9.92 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 805 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 161.5 min calculated for 0.087 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 161.5 min ( 913.6 - 752.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 896.11' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 896.11 134 0 0 902.61 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 896.11' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 896.11'/ 895.71' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 896.11' 1.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 902.11' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.07 cfs @ 9.92 hrs HW=902.12' TW=892.50' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.07 cfs of 4.00 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.06 cfs @ 11.80 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 0.00 cfs @ 0.27 fps) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr 10 yr Rainfall=4.46" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 Summary for Pond S9: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.689 ac, 29.10% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.93" for 10 yr event Inflow = 0.23 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.168 of Outflow = 0.13 cfs @ 10.19 hrs, Volume= 0.168 af, Atten= 45%, Lag= 131.5 min Primary = 0.13 cfs @ 10.19 hrs, Volume= 0.168 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 892.55' @ 10.27 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 711 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 67.3 min calculated for 0.168 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 67.3 min ( 889.4 - 822.2) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 887.25' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 887.25 134 0 0 893.75 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 887.25' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 887.25'/ 886.85' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 887.25' 1.5" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 893.25' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.13 cfs @ 10.19 hrs HW=892.55' TW=887.99' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.13 cfs of 3.59 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.13 cfs @ 10.29 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 21 Summary for Subcatchment EP21: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 16.72 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Depth= 0.21 " Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 16,120 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 16,120 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 150 0.2000 0.21 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP22: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 16.72 hrs, Volume= 0.008 af, Depth= 0.21 " Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 18,500 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 18,500 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 150 0.2000 0.21 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP23: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 16.72 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Depth= 0.21 " Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 16,800 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 16,800 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 150 0.2000 0.21 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 22 Summary for Subcatchment EP24: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 16.72 hrs, Volume= 0.003 af, Depth= 0.21 " Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 7,400 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 7,400 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.0 150 0.2000 0.21 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP41: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.008 af, Depth= 0.30" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 1,309 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 940 98 Impervious 4,955 79 Woods/grass comb., Good, HSG D 1,680 91 Gravel roads, HSG D 5,710 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 14,594 82 Weighted Average 13,654 93.56% Pervious Area 940 6.44% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.9 90 0.0600 0.26 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP42: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 16.62 hrs, Volume= 0.002 af, Depth= 0.21" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 4,115 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 4,115 100.00% Pervious Area 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.9 90 0.0600 0.26 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" Summary for Subcatchment EP43: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.010 af, Depth= 0.35" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 13,065 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 2,095 98 Pavement 15,160 82 Weighted Average 13,065 86.18% Pervious Area 2,095 13.82% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.3 20 0.0300 1.16 Sheet Flow, Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.12" 8.3 90 0.1800 0.18 Sheet Flow, Woods: Liaht underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.12" 8.6 110 Total Summary for Subcatchment P11: New SW Basin (Private) Runoff = 0.04 cfs @ 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.022 af, Depth= 0.69" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 4,885 98 Pavement 2,440 98 Parking 994 98 Patio 3,520 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 4,900 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 16,739 88 Weighted Average 8,420 50.30% Pervious Area 8,319 49.70% Impervious Area 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 23.9 150 0.0050 0.10 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" 2.4 150 0.0050 1.06 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterway Kv= 15.0 fps 1.6 230 0.0050 2.45 0.85 Pipe Channel, 8.0" Round Area= 0.3 sf Perim= 2.1' r= 0.17' n= 0.013 Concrete pipe, bends & connections 27.9 530 Total Summary for Subcatchment P12: New SW Basin (Private) Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 8.04 hrs, Volume= 0.004 af, Depth= 0.42" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 994 98 Patio 4,165 80 Landscape 5,159 83 Weighted Average 4,165 80.73% Pervious Area 994 19.27% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 23.9 150 0.0050 0.10 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" 2.4 150 0.0050 1.06 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterwav Kv= 15.0 fos 26.3 300 Total Summary for Subcatchment P21: Private Rd 1 Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.009 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 3,850 98 Pavement 3,850 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 25 Summary for Subcatchment P22: Private Rd 2 Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.011 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 4,970 98 Pavement 4,970 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P23: Private Rd 3 Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.011 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 4,990 98 Pavement 4,990 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P24: Private Rd 4 Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.011 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 4,660 98 Pavement 4,660 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 26 Summary for Subcatchment P3: Proposed NW Private Basin Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 7.93 hrs, Volume= 0.009 af, Depth= 0.68" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Descriotion 3,225 98 Extg Pavement 3,525 79 Woods, Fair, HSG D 6,750 88 Weighted Average 3,525 52.22% Pervious Area 3,225 47.78% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P41: Proposed NW Public Basin Runoff = 0.01 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.005 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 2,028 98 Pavement 2,028 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P42: Proposed NW Public Basin Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.006 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 2,545 98 Pavement 2,545 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 27 Summary for Subcatchment P43: Proposed NW Public Basin Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 3,125 98 Extq Pavement 3,125 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P51: SW Public Roadway (Pub) Runoff = 0.03 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.009 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 4,180 98 Pavement 4,180 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment P52: Upland Landscape Runoff = 0.02 cfs @ 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.020 af, Depth= 0.29" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 3,690 80 Landscape 1,860 98 Pavement 30,110 80 Landscape 35,660 81 Weighted Average 33,800 94.78% Pervious Area 1,860 5.22% Impervious Area 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 28 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.5 160 0.1500 0.41 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2=3.12" 1.2 400 0.0800 5.74 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 7.7 Runoff = 560 Total Summary for Subcatchment P53: SW Public Roadway (Pub) 0.01 cfs @ 7.89 hrs, Volume= 0.004 af, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Area (sf) CN Description 1,640 98 Pavement 1,640 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach D1: Existing Ditch Inflow Area = 1.109 ac, 28.89% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.50" for WO event Inflow = 0.06 cfs @ 8.28 hrs, Volume= 0.046 of Outflow = 0.06 cfs @ 8.30 hrs, Volume= 0.046 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 1.3 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.44 fps, Min. Travel Time= 1.9 min Avg. Velocity = 0.23 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 3.6 min Peak Storage= 7 cf @ 8.30 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.11' Bank-Full Depth= 0.50' Flow Area= 1.0 sf, Capacity= 1.01 cfs 1.00' x 0.50' deep channel, n= 0.150 Sheet flow over Short Grass Side Slope Z-value= 2.07' Top Width= 3.00' Length= 50.0' Slope= 0.0500'/' Inlet Invert= 886.20', Outlet Invert= 883.70' 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 29 Summary for Reach G1: Existing East Gutter Inflow Area = 0.540 ac, 46.53% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.67" for WO event Inflow = 0.06 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.030 of Outflow = 0.06 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.030 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.1 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 2.65 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.1 min Avg. Velocity = 1.74 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.1 min Peak Storage= 0 cf @ 8.00 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.05' Bank-Full Depth= 0.25' Flow Area= 0.6 sf, Capacity= 5.00 cfs 0.00' x 0.25' deep channel, n= 0.013 Asphalt, smooth Side Slope Z-value= 20.0 0.1 Top Width= 5.03' Length= 8.0' Slope= 0.08257' Inlet Invert= 878.16', Outlet Invert= 877.50' Summary for Reach G2: Existing West Gutter Inflow Area = 0.915 ac, 15.16% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.38" for WO event Inflow = 0.05 cfs @ 8.06 hrs, Volume= 0.029 of Outflow = 0.05 cfs @ 8.06 hrs, Volume= 0.029 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.2 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 2.47 fps, Min. Travel Time= 0.3 min Avg. Velocity = 1.69 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 0.4 min Peak Storage= 1 cf @ 8.06 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.04' Bank-Full Depth= 0.25' Flow Area= 0.6 sf, Capacity= 4.99 cfs 0.00' x 0.25' deep channel, n= 0.013 Asphalt, smooth Side Slope Z-value= 0.1 20.07' Top Width= 5.03' Length= 40.0' Slope= 0.0820'/' Inlet Invert= 878.16', Outlet Invert= 874.88' 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 30 Summary for Reach L1: 38' Wide Section Inflow Area = 1.774 ac, 23.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.22" for WO event Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 8.59 hrs, Volume= 0.033 of Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 8.61 hrs, Volume= 0.033 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 1.7 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.10 fps, Min. Travel Time= 3.4 min Avg. Velocity = 0.09 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 3.5 min Peak Storage= 8 cf @ 8.61 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.01' Bank-Full Depth= 1.00' Flow Area= 39.0 sf, Capacity= 76.97 cfs 38.00' x 1.00' deep channel, n= 0.400 Sheet flow: Woods+light brush Side Slope Z-value= 1.07' Top Width= 40.00' Length= 20.0' Slope= 0.3000'/' Inlet Invert= 800.00', Outlet Invert= 794.00' Summary for Reach L2: 38' Wide Section Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 8.59 hrs, Volume= 0.033 of Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 8.61 hrs, Volume= 0.033 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 1.7 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.10 fps, Min. Travel Time= 3.4 min Avg. Velocity = 0.09 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 3.5 min Peak Storage= 8 cf @ 8.61 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.01' Bank-Full Depth= 1.00' Flow Area= 39.0 sf, Capacity= 76.97 cfs 38.00' x 1.00' deep channel, n= 0.400 Sheet flow: Woods+light brush Side Slope Z-value= 1.07' Top Width= 40.00' Length= 20.0' Slope= 0.3000'/' Inlet Invert= 800.00', Outlet Invert= 794.00' 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 31 Summary for Reach R1: (new Reach) [52] Hint: Inlet/Outlet conditions not evaluated Inflow Area = 0.458 ac, 19.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.40" for WO event Inflow = 0.02 cfs @ 8.25 hrs, Volume= 0.015 of Outflow = 0.02 cfs @ 8.27 hrs, Volume= 0.015 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.8 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Max. Velocity= 1.92 fps, Min. Travel Time= 1.1 min Avg. Velocity = 1.39 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 1.6 min Peak Storage= 1 cf @ 8.27 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.04' Bank-Full Depth= 0.67' Flow Area= 0.3 sf, Capacity= 2.22 cfs 8.0" Round Pipe n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior Length= 130.0' Slope= 0.02007' Inlet Invert= 879.00', Outlet Invert= 876.40' O Summary for Pond R2: (new Reach) [57] Hint: Peaked at 874.10' (Flood elevation advised) Inflow Area = 0.777 ac, 28.51 % Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.49" for WO event Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 8.27 hrs, Volume = 0.032 of Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 8.27 hrs, Volume = 0.032 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.04 cfs @ 8.27 hrs, Volume = 0.032 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 874.10' @ 8.27 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 874.00' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 50.0' Square-edged headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 874.00'/ 873.20' S= 0.01607' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf Primary OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 8.27 hrs HW=874.10' TW=871.10' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Inlet Controls 0.04 cfs @ 1.10 fps) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 32 Inflow Area = 0.384 ac, Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ Primary = 0.04 cfs @ Summary for Pond S1: 776 FOR 10 YEAR 49.70% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.69" 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.022 of 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.022 af, 8.01 hrs, Volume= 0.022 of Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min for WO event Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 879.90' @ 8.01 hrs Surf.Area= 32 sf Storage= 0 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 0.0 min ( 759.6 - 759.6 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 879.90' 130 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 879.90 32 0 0 883.95 32 130 130 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 879.15' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 879.15'/ 878.75' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 879.15' 1.9" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 883.65' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.08 cfs @ 8.01 hrs HW=879.90' TW=878.21' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.08 cfs of 1.08 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.08 cfs @ 4.17 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S10: 24" Detention Inflow Area = 1.109 ac, 28.89% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.50" for WO event Inflow = 0.07 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume = 0.046 of Outflow = 0.06 cfs @ 8.28 hrs, Volume = 0.046 af, Atten= 15%, Lag= 17.0 min Primary = 0.06 cfs @ 8.28 hrs, Volume = 0.046 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 886.55' @ 8.28 hrs Surf.Area= 388 sf Storage= 39 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 9.9 min calculated for 0.046 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 9.9 min ( 806.5 - 796.6 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 886.40' 1,162 cf 24.0" Round Pipe Storage L= 370.0' 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 33 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 886.40' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 886.40'/ 886.23' S= 0.00857' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf #2 Device 1 886.40' 2.4" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 888.20' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.06 cfs @ 8.28 hrs HW=886.55' TW=886.31' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.06 cfs of 0.09 cfs potential flow) ~__3=Orif 2=Orif ice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.06 cfs @ 1.86 fps) ice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S11: Underground Tank 6,000 Gallon Tank 18'L x 8'W x 7D Inflow Area = 0.915 ac, 15.16% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.38" for WO event Inflow = 0.05 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.029 of Outflow = 0.05 cfs @ 8.06 hrs, Volume= 0.029 af, Atten= 10%, Lag= 3.6 min Primary = 0.05 cfs @ 8.06 hrs, Volume= 0.029 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 880.16' @ 8.06 hrs Surf.Area= 144 sf Storage= 19 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 10.0 min calculated for 0.029 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 9.9 min ( 841.1 - 831.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 880.03' 936 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 880.03 144 0 0 886.53 144 936 936 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 880.03' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 880.03'/ 879.63' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 880.03' 2.2" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 886.03' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.05 cfs @ 8.06 hrs HW=880.16' TW=878.20' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.05 cfs of 0.06 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.05 cfs @ 1.76 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 34 Inflow Area = 0.458 ac, Inflow = 0.03 cfs @ Outflow = 0.02 cfs @ Primary = 0.02 cfs @ Summary for Pond S2: 816 FOR 10 YEAR 19.28% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.40" 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.015 of 8.25 hrs, Volume= 0.015 af, 8.25 hrs, Volume= 0.015 of Atten= 36%, Lag= 15.1 min for WO event Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 880.00' @ 8.25 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 30 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 17.1 min calculated for 0.015 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 17.1 min ( 830.6 - 813.5) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 879.77' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 879.77 134 0 0 886.27 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 879.77' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 879.77'/ 879.37' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 879.77' 1.2" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 885.77' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 8.25 hrs HW=880.00' TW=879.04' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.02 cfs of 0.17 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.02 cfs @ 2.29 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S3: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.539 ac, 21.18% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.42" for WO event Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ 7.99 hrs, Volume = 0.019 of Outflow = 0.03 cfs @ 8.17 hrs, Volume = 0.019 af, Atten= 30%, Lag= 10.5 min Primary = 0.03 cfs @ 8.17 hrs, Volume = 0.019 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 874.36' @ 8.17 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 32 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 13.6 min calculated for 0.019 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 13.4 min ( 819.1 - 805.7) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 874.12' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 35 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 874.12 134 0 0 880.62 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 874.12' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 45.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 874.12'/ 873.22' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 874.12' 1.4" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 880.12' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 8.17 hrs HW=874.36' TW=871.07' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.03 cfs of 0.19 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.03 cfs @ 2.37 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S4: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.277 ac, 38.64% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.59" for WO event Inflow = 0.03 cfs @ 7.93 hrs, Volume= 0.014 of Outflow = 0.01 cfs @ 8.65 hrs, Volume= 0.014 af, Atten= 56%, Lag= 43.5 min Primary = 0.01 cfs @ 8.65 hrs, Volume= 0.014 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 880.51' @ 8.65 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 62 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 43.7 min calculated for 0.014 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 43.5 min ( 800.1 - 756.5) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 880.04' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 880.04 134 0 0 886.54 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 880.04' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 880.04'/ 879.64' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 880.04' 0.9" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 886.04' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 8.65 hrs HW=880.51' TW=874.10' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.01 cfs of 0.61 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.01 cfs @ 3.29 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 36 Inflow Area = 0.500 ac, Inflow = 0.04 cfs @ Outflow = 0.02 cfs @ Primary = 0.02 cfs @ Summary for Pond S5: 816 FOR 10 YEAR 22.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.44" 7.98 hrs, Volume= 0.018 of 8.22 hrs, Volume= 0.018 af, 8.22 hrs, Volume= 0.018 of for WO event Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 874.80' @ 8.22 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 37 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 15.3 min calculated for 0.018 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 15.3 min ( 814.4 - 799.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 874.52' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 874.52 134 0 0 881.02 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 874.52' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 874.52'/ 874.12' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 874.52' 1.3" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 880.52' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 8.22 hrs HW=874.80' TW=874.10' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.02 cfs of 0.25 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.02 cfs @ 2.55 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S6: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 1.774 ac, Inflow = 0.08 cfs @ Outflow = 0.08 cfs @ Primary = 0.04 cfs @ Secondary = 0.04 cfs @ 23.90% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.45" 8.23 hrs, Volume= 0.066 of 8.59 hrs, Volume= 0.066 af, 8.59 hrs, Volume= 0.033 of 8.59 hrs, Volume= 0.033 of Atten= 35%, Lag= 14.1 min Atten= 5%, Lag= 21.3 min for WO event Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 871.13' @ 8.59 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 44 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 5.9 min calculated for 0.066 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 5.9 min ( 822.8 - 816.9 ) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 37 Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 870.80' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet ) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 870.80 134 0 0 877.30 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 870.80' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 870.80'/ 870.40' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Secondary 870.80' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 870.80'/ 870.40' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #3 Device 1 870.80' 1.6" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #4 Device 2 870.80' 1.6" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #5 Device 1 876.80' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #6 Device 2 876.80' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 8.59 hrs HW=871.13' TW=800.01' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.04 cfs of 0.33 cfs potential flow) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.04 cfs @ 2.75 fps) =Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 8.59 hrs HW=871.13' TW=800.01' (Dynamic Tailwater) L2=Culvert (Passes 0.04 cfs of 0.33 cfs potential flow) Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.04 cfs @ 2.75 fps) ~__:=Orif ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S7: 776 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.155 ac, 47.78% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.68" for WO event Inflow = 0.02 cfs @ 7.93 hrs, Volume= 0.009 of Outflow = 0.02 cfs @ 8.05 hrs, Volume= 0.009 af, Atten= 15%, Lag= 7.2 min Primary = 0.02 cfs @ 8.05 hrs, Volume= 0.009 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 892.62' @ 8.05 hrs Surf.Area= 32 sf Storage= 12 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 5.8 min calculated for 0.009 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 5.7 min ( 745.2 - 739.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 892.25' 163 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 38 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 892.25 32 0 0 897.35 32 163 163 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 892.25' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 892.25'/ 892.15' S= 0.00507' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 892.25' 1.1" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C=0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 897.05' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 8.05 hrs HW=892.62' TW=887.55' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.02 cfs of 0.33 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.02 cfs @ 2.95 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Summary for Pond S8: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.382 ac, 17.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.41" for WO event Inflow = 0.03 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.013 of Outflow = 0.01 cfs @ 8.45 hrs, Volume= 0.013 af, Atten= 48%, Lag= 27.1 min Primary = 0.01 cfs @ 8.45 hrs, Volume= 0.013 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 896.36' @ 8.45 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 34 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 27.9 min calculated for 0.013 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 27.9 min ( 845.5 - 817.6) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 896.11' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 896.11 134 0 0 902.61 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 896.11' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 896.11'/ 895.71' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 896.11' 1.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 902.11' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 8.45 hrs HW=896.36' TW=887.62' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.01 cfs of 0.20 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.01 cfs @ 2.41 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 14-020_TentPUD_Completeness_2017-0807_PostDev Type IA 24-hr WO Rainfall=1.40" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 8/11/2017 HydroCADO 10.00-16 s/n 09344 © 2015 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 39 Summary for Pond S9: 816 FOR 10 YEAR Inflow Area = 0.689 ac, 29.10% Impervious, Inflow Depth= 0.51" for WO event Inflow = 0.05 cfs @ 8.00 hrs, Volume= 0.029 of Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 8.44 hrs, Volume= 0.029 af, Atten= 26%, Lag= 26.4 min Primary = 0.04 cfs @ 8.44 hrs, Volume= 0.029 of Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-36.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 887.62' @ 8.44 hrs Surf.Area= 134 sf Storage= 50 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 13.6 min calculated for 0.029 of (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 13.4 min ( 805.9 - 792.6) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 887.25' 871 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 887.25 134 0 0 893.75 134 871 871 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 887.25' 8.0" Round Culvert L= 20.0' CMP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 887.25'/ 886.85' S= 0.02007' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.35 sf #2 Device 1 887.25' 1.5" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads #3 Device 1 893.25' 8.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Primary OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 8.44 hrs HW=887.62' TW=886.55' (Dynamic Tailwater) L1=Culvert (Passes 0.04 cfs of 0.41 cfs potential flow) ~2=Orif i ce/G rate (Orifice Controls 0.04 cfs @ 2.93 fps) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) CAPITAL HILL PU D TRAFFIC SAFETY AND STREET CONNECTIVITY STUDY Eugene, Oregon BEI Project 14-020 -Br_anc Ho"GINEERING.. Since 1977 civil • transportation structural • geotechnical S U R V E Y I N G www.BranchEngineering.com Prepared for: Carol Schirmer Schirmer Satre Group 375 W. 4t" Ave, Suite 201 Eugene, OR 97401 (Revised) August 8, 2017 310 5th Street Springfield, OR 97477 p: 541.746.0637 f: 541.746.0389 CAPITAL HILL PU D TRAFFIC SAFETY AND STREET CONNECTIVITY STUDY Eugene, Oregon BEI Project 14-020 Prepared for: Carol Schirmer Schirmer Satre Group 375 W. 4t" Ave, Suite 201 Eugene, OR 97401 Prepared by: QED PR ss \S G I N #6278OPE OREGON 4.9 J/o y f 3, 4°°~ N G\ EXPIRES: JUNE 30, 2019 -Br_anc Ho"GINEERING.. Since 1977 civil • transportation structural • geotechnical S U R V E Y I N G www.BranchEngineering.com (Revised) August 8, 2017 310 5th Street Springfield, OR 97477 p: 541.746.0637 f: 541.746.0389 Contents Page No. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Description 1 1.2 Traffic 1 1.3 Operational Safety 1 1.4 Results 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................3 2.1 Existing Conditions 3 2.1.1 Background 3 2.1.2 Capital Drive 3 2.1.3 Sight Distance 5 2.1.4 Existing Traffic Speeds and Volumes 7 2.1.E Roadway and Intersection Crash History 8 3.0 DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ....................................................9 3.1 Land Use 9 3.2 Development Traffic 9 3.3 Construction Traffic 10 3.4 Pedestrian and Motor Vehicle Accommodations 11 3.5 Fire Apparatus Access 12 3.6 Street Connectivity 13 4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations 16 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Street Design Guidelines Appendix B: Figures Appendix C: Collected Traffic Data Appendix D: ODOT Crash Data Appendix E: Site Plan Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Project Description The Capital Hill site is within the urban growth boundary (UGB) of Eugene and is located south of Hendricks Park between Capital Drive and the Ribbon Trail Park. Approval of the proposed land use applications will allow development of a residential subdivision near the north end of Capital Drive on existing tax lots 100, 200, 201, 300, and 400 of map 18-03-04-31. When completed, the site will consist of 33 total tax lots created from the five (5) existing parcels that are minimally developed with three existing single family detached dwellings and three attached dwelling units (multi-family). The approvals will allow existing development to remain and will result in construction of up to 31 new residences, which will likely be a combination of single family detached and multi-family attached dwelling units. 1.2 Traffic The development will not result in an increase in new traffic that would trigger a typical traffic impact analysis per Eugene Development Code (EC), section 9.8650, or result in a change in functional classification of the abutting or adjacent roadways. To address neighborhood concern regarding retention of the existing width of Capital Drive off site, the owner has chosen to provide this traffic safety analysis to demonstrate adequacy of the roadway with an unbiased opinion from a licensed professional engineer with expertise in traffic engineering. Based on the ITE trip generation rates, the existing site would contribute on average approximately five (5) PM peak hour trips and up to 49 average daily trips. To verify existing roadway volumes and to more accurately predict trip generation rates, a tube counter was placed on Capital Drive immediately north of Cresta De Ruta Street. The results indicated that the 13 existing occupied dwelling units generate an average of 4.53 vehicle trips/day/occupied dwelling unit. The suburban location away from commercial/retail development will result in fewer trips generated by the site. Using the collected data and the derived rate, the trip generation increase from the proposed development would likely include roughly 141 daily trips, assuming full occupancy of 31 new dwelling units. 1.3 Operational Safety An operational safety analysis performed for Capital Drive from Spring Boulevard to the north- end near the site considered crash history, geometric features, and the existing level of development with regard to the potential increase in traffic. The safety analysis indicates that existing facilities are generally adequate and appropriate to meet the existing level of traffic in addition to the potential post development traffic demand. The roads meet the built character of the Hendricks Park area's existing transportation infrastructure. 1.4 Results One existing infrastructure deficiency was discovered off-site that is not created or significantly impacted by the proposed development. There is a severed sidewalk between Alta Vista Court and the end of Capital Drive where there is a trailhead at Hendricks Park. The existing sidewalk does not complete a connection between Spring Blvd and the park trailhead. In the City of Eugene, private residences are responsible for frontage improvements on local streets abutting their private property. Constructability of a sidewalk may encroach on frontage property owners' frontages that do not appear to be currently developed to codified standards for setback(s) to fences, retaining walls, trash storage and other privately-owned facilities. Similar to the rest of © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 1 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 the developed hillside area, any constructed new sidewalk would not be capable of meeting ADA standards due to existing longitudinal slopes that exceed 5 percent along the roadway alignment and construction located at an existing top of bank. With or without the development, it is recommended that the City work with property frontage owners on Capital Drive to construct a minimum 2-foot width sidewalk where not present. Additionally, there are areas of on-street parking that create a narrower than typical condition that should be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer with or without the proposed Capital Hill PUD Development. © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 2 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 2.0 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to provide a traffic safety evaluation regarding the potential for an increase in traffic volume on Capital Drive resulting from approval and construction of the proposed Capital Hill Planned Unit Development (PUD) in Eugene, Oregon near Hendricks Park and the Ribbon Trail. The site is divided between two City of Eugene neighborhood precincts, with a portion of the site on the west side of Hendricks Hill in the Fairmount Neighborhood and a portion on the east side in the Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood. Based on the proposed layout, in accordance with Eugene Street Connectivity standards, there is no potential for traffic impacts to the Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood due to existing topographical constraints. The results of this document are intended to provide formal traffic safety documentation and analysis and to demonstrate compatibility with City of Eugene standards for development approval. 2.1 Existing Conditions 2.1.1 Background The site is within the urban growth boundary (UGB) of Eugene and is generally located between Capital Drive to the west and the City of Eugene's Ribbon Trail park property to the east, with Hendricks Park located to the north. The development site consists of existing tax lots 100, 200, 201, 300, and tax lot 400 of tax map 18-03-04-31. The site currently has driveway access at four locations on Capital Drive, that accommodate three single family residences and three multi- family dwelling units (apartments) constructed on the site. In total, the land use application involves development on approximately 13.10 acres of land, with some of the property located outside of city limits that will be annexed into the city concurrent with the subject development applications. 2.1.2 Capital Drive Capital Drive is an existing two-way local street constructed on cut/fill slopes with variable vertical street grades up to 16 percent. Capital Drive meanders uphill, starting at Spring Boulevard and ending at an undeveloped trailhead north of Cresta De Ruta Street. Capital Drive has an unposted statutory speed of 25 MPH and features intermittent on street parking between Spring Blvd and Cresta De Ruta Street. Capital Drive serves as the site's and local neighborhood's main access way to the City of Eugene's more significant transportation system facilities. Cresta De Ruta Street provides relief circulation via an additional local street connection that connects the top of the hill to the intersection of Spring Blvd and Capital Drive. With approximately 18.0 to 20.0 feet of nominal paving width, Capital Drive functions largely as what the City of Eugene refers to as a "queuing street" on page 36 of the Design Standards and Guidelines For Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways (November 1999), which is also included in Appendix E of the current (February 2016) Public Improvements Design Standards Manual. Per City of Eugene publications regarding vehicle lanes: "1) Two 10' vehicle traffic lanes are required on local residential streets when traffic volumes are expected to exceed 750 vehicles per day. 2) On local residential streets with traffic volumes less than 750 vehicles per day, a single 14' traffic lane may be permitted for both directions of vehicular travel. The single traffic lane is intended to create a "queuing street", such that when opposing vehicles meet, one of the vehicles must yield by pulling into a vacant portion of the adjacent © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 3 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 parking lane. This queuing effect has been found to be an effective and safe method to reduce speeds and non-local traffic." The list below includes a summary of the benefits of the narrow local residential streets as discussed and documented on page 47 of the Eugene Local Street Plan (August 1996): • Narrow streets cost less to build and maintain. • Narrow Streets reduce the negative impacts of stormwater runoff. • Narrow streets reduce negative environmental impacts of street construction. • Narrow Streets encourage more efficient land use. • Narrow streets increase traffic safety. • Narrow Streets improve neighborhood character. Pages from the Design Standards and Guidelines For Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways (November 1999) and the Eugene Local Street Plan (August 1996) are included as Appendix A. From the intersection of Spring Blvd to Cresta De Ruta Street, Capital Drive is improved with curbs constructed on both sides of the street and a 2.0-foot wide (nominal) sidewalk constructed on the south/west side of the street to Alta Vista Court. Capital Drive is not currently improved with curbing or sidewalks on either side of the roadway and on street parking is not permitted from the Cresta De Ruta Street intersection to the end of the street at Hendricks Park. Curb is provided on the west side of the road from Cresta De Ruta Street to the top of the hill. Capital Drive provides access to three existing single family residences north of the site's north driveway and is currently unimproved from the north driveway location to the southern boundary of Hendricks Park at the end of the road. Striping is not provided on Capital Drive to delineate travel lanes or curbside parking spaces, although the curb from Alta Vista Ct uphill to Cresta De Ruta Street has recently been painted/repainted yellow to prohibit parking on this section of the road around the vertical and horizontal alignments. Curb to curb measurements indicate that the existing paved surface width varies from roughly 18 feet to roughly 20 feet between Spring Boulevard and Cresta De Ruta Street, and is reduced to 12 to 14 feet in width from Cresta De Ruta Street and north. Figure 1 shows the location of existing sidewalk and the approximate alignment within the studied area and is included in Appendix B. As constructed, Capital Drive does not meet the current City of Eugene standards for paving width and sidewalk construction for a low volume local residential street that would be applicable if a new street were proposed for development, however, the existing roadway has topographical constraints that significantly prohibit feasibility of construction/reconstruction to meet the standard cross section elements and facility widths identified for construction of a new street per low volume local residential street standards. The previously described City of Eugene publications (1996 Local Street Plan, 1999 Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways, and the current Public Improvements Design Standards Manual) discuss the benefits of a narrow street and allow a reduced street width for a single 14-foot travel lane considered as a "queuing street" for up to 750 vehicles per day. The existing sidewalk, where constructed fronting neighboring developments, does not and cannot meet ADA standards due to existing longitudinal slopes on the roadway. The existing roadway construction on cut and fill slopes and the location of existing residences and residential driveways prohibit the reasonableness of widening the roadway to meet the City's minimum standards without encroaching upon existing private © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 4 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 development within or close to the right-of way and/or right-of way setbacks identified in applicable City of Eugene Development Code. Conflicting private development includes: retaining walls, fences, buildings, parking areas and driveways. 2.1.3 Sight Distance The existing driveway intersections on Capital Drive are located between Cresta De Ruta Street and the end near Hendricks Park. All of the existing four site driveways are planned to be retained to continue to serve current residences on the site in their existing function and capacity, while two of them will be reutilized as a looped connection through the site to provide access and circulation for the proposed new development and parcel frontages. Driveway intersection sight distance was measured in the field at the two existing site driveways that will provide access to new development on the site and at the proposed new access within the apex area of the curve that will serve proposed lots 19 and 20. Recommended intersection sight distances based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials' (AASHTO's) A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, (611 Edition-2011) are calculated from the following equation: ISD = 1.47VmaJor% Where: ISD= Intersection Sight Distance = the length of visible roadway (long leg of the sight triangle) along the major road (ft) as measured from the departing driver's observation point 14.5 feet back from the near edge of the traveled way at an assumed driver's eye height and object height of 3.50 feet above the road surface VmaJor = design speed of major road in mph t, =time gap (seconds) for departing driveway vehicle to enter the major road The time gap is assumed to be 7.5 seconds for a stopped passenger vehicle to turn left onto a two-lane highway with no median and 6.5 seconds for a stopped passenger vehicle to turn right into the nearest travel lane or cross the intersecting street. The time gap is considered the shortest acceptable gap in the traffic stream that a driver in the departing vehicle is willing to accept when maneuvering from the driveway (minor approach) onto the roadway (major approach) and accelerate to the design traffic speed. The assumed time gap is adjusted for minor street approach upgrades exceeding three percent by adding or subtracting 0.2 seconds for each percent grade. The time gap may also be adjusted for the number of lanes crossed when a roadway has multiple travel lanes per direction by adding 0.5 seconds for each additional lane crossed (one lane per direction is assumed in the default time gap value). The existing site driveway intersections do not require adjustments to increase the time gap since they are not located on uphill approaching minor street grades and since departing maneuvers do not cross more than one lane of travel. Based on the statutory speed of 25 MPH and rounding up to the nearest five-foot increment, the calculated AASHTO recommended intersection sight distance would be 240 feet when looking to the left and 280 feet when looking to the right (ISD based on left turns for sight distance to the right and right turn/crossing maneuvers when looking to the left). AASHTO recommendations are based on typical gap acceptance where a departing vehicle is entering a stream of traffic, and it is implied that there are a significant number of other road users on the major road approach. The street character, function, and associated relatively low traffic volumes on Capital Drive justify a reduced acceptable intersection sight distance as will be demonstrated later. © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 5 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 The available intersection sight distance at the northernmost site driveway on Capital Drive was measured at 230 feet when looking to the right with the planned street improvements and vegetation removal within the right-of-way and 168 feet when looking to the left. Figures 2 and 2A in Appendix B depict the existing driveway location and measured available intersection sight distance. Existing trees and shrubs within the right-of way along the east edge of the right-of way to the north and on the inside of the curve at the west edge of right-of way to the south limit the visibility of the existing approaches from the observation point within the driveway. The intersection sight distance can be improved with removal of trees on the inside of the curve within the right-of way to the south and along the east edge of the right-of way to the north. Capital Drive ends approximately 230 feet north from the observation point at the existing north driveway for motor vehicle travel, and there are approximately three residences north of this driveway (relatively low approaching traffic volume). In addition to the potential for improvement to the available sight distance and line of sight with tree and vegetation removal, the significance of the horizontal curvature to the south, will result in drivers traveling at less than mid-block speeds approaching the driveway (based on similar curves with posted advisory speeds on the roadway) and would reduce the AASHTO recommended intersection sight distance to 145 feet assuming the posted curve advisory speed of 15MPH can be assumed to be appropriate to substitute for the 25 MPH statutory speed. The existing south site driveway is located on the east side of Capital Drive approximately 150 feet north of the intersection at Cresta De Ruta Street, and is depicted on Figures 3 and 3A of Appendix B. The available intersection sight distance to the left from the observation point at the site driveway was measured as 235 feet, and to the right was measured at 200 feet with the planned right-of-way improvements, grading, and clearing at the top of bank. The potential line of sight availability and intersection sight distance is limited by horizontal curvature of the roadway in both directions. To the left (south) the roadway is on a down gradient from the driveway, and to the right (north) is on an up gradient. With horizontal and vertical alignments in both directions from the driveway, approaching drivers on Capital Drive will not be traveling at full mid-block statutory speeds, and will likely be traveling nearer to the posted curve advisory speed of 15 MPH, in which the AASHTO recommended intersection sight distance would be reduced to 170 feet assuming the design speed is consistent with actual conditions. The narrowness of the traveled way and the character and function of the section of Capital Drive fronting the site are similar to nearby existing constructed roads in the Fairmount and Laurel Hill neighborhoods. Roadways such as Sylvan and Cresta De Ruta streets, Madrona, Woodland, Highland and Malabar drives, and sections of Spring and Fairmount boulevards feature similar streetscapes to Capital Drive. The narrowness of these streets, with intermittent on street parking, horizontal and vertical alignments that work to lower travel speeds and calm traffic speeds to function similar to a "queuing street" and is discussed in the August 1996 Eugene Local Street Plan and the February 2016 Public Improvements Design Standards Manual, which also refers to the November 1999 Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways. The narrowness of Capital Drive does not necessarily require the time gap for left-turns from stop to match the AASHTO assumed 7.5 seconds utilized in the intersection sight distance equation for vehicles to enter the major street from a stopped position at the driveway for crossing of one standard 12-foot wide travel lane to turn left as is built into the AASHTO equation. The narrowness of the road and presence of intermittent on street parking and © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 6 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 horizontal and vertical alignment features calm traffic speeds on Capital Drive. Most importantly, approaches to the site driveways have adequate line of sight of the roadway to meet the AASHTO recommended criteria for stopping sight distance on the major street approaches to each of the existing and proposed driveways, should a driver at the observation point depart the driveway during the time which an approaching vehicle surpasses the recommended intersection sight distance, but is not within view of the departing vehicle's line of sight. At both existing driveways where additional traffic will be added after construction, measurements were made on the Capital Drive approaches that indicate approximately a six percent grade at the existing driveway near Cresta De Ruta Street and approximately a nine percent grade at the driveway near the end of Capital Drive. AASHTO recommends a stopping sight distance of 143 feet on up gradients of six percent and 165 feet for down gradient approaches based on a 25 MPH design speed. The AASHTO stopping sight distance for up gradients of 9 percent with a 25 MPH design speed is 140 feet and on down gradients is 173 feet. Trimming vegetation inside the curve approaching the northernmost driveway will enhance the available stopping sight distance to meet the standard for a 9 percent downgradient on the approach. One new access connection is proposed on Capital Drive within the apex area of the curve southeast of the intersection of Cresta De Ruta Street that will serve two residences at the proposed new parcels 19 and 20. This driveway location was selected because it is the safest location for access within this curve (safer than existing adjacent driveways). At the new proposed driveway location, the approach gradient on Capital Drive is approximately 16 percent up gradient to the right (north) and 16 percent downgradient to the southwest on the horizontal curve. The available intersection sight distances and location are shown on Figures 4 and 4A. The location within the curve should consider the 15-mile per hour curve advisory speed at this location when calculating safe intersection sight distance. The AASHTO recommended stopping sight distance for a downgradient of 16 percent and a design speed of 25 mph is 203 feet and for an up gradient is 133 feet. In considering intersection sight distance, volume of approaching traffic should also be considered. 2.1.4 Existing Traffic Speeds and Volumes A tube counter was placed on Capital Drive north of Cresta De Ruta Street to collect traffic data between 4:00 PM on November 911 and 8:30 AM on November 1111, 2016. The collected count data indicated that this section of Capital Drive serves between 54 and 64 total vehicle trips per day (two-way ADT), or an average of 59 vehicle trips/day. A tube counter was placed on Capital Drive east and uphill toward the site from the existing intersection at Alta Vista Court to determine the approximate 24-hour traffic volume serving that section of the existing roadway and to collect vehicle speed data. The tube counter collected traffic data for the 24-hour period from 5:00 PM on November 2, 2016 to 5:00 PM on November 3, 2016. The count data indicated that there were approximately 210 ADT vehicle trips traveling on that section of the roadway during that time. A tube counter was also placed on Capital Drive south and uphill toward the site from the existing intersection at Spring Boulevard for the 24-hour period from 5:00 PM on December 2, 2014 to 5:00 PM on December 3, 2014 to determine the approximate 24-hour traffic volume serving that section of the existing roadway. The count data indicated that there were approximately 258 total vehicle trips counted during that time. It is unlikely the traffic volume at © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 7 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 this location has significantly changed between the collection date and the present time, because there has not been any significant new development since then that would be expected to add traffic to Capital Drive. As with the count data collected east of Alta Vista Court, there is no way to determine how many of the counted trips during the 24-hour period were traveling to residences with driveways on Cresta De Ruta Street, because there is a separate route available to them. During the year 2016 tube counter deployments, traffic count volume data was collected simultaneously with speed data. The raw collected traffic data is included as Appendix C. The results of the speed data are included in the following table. North of Cresta 7 36 12 2 0 De Ruta Street* East of Alta 9 73 107 19 0 Vista Court *average 24-hour volume displayed for 40+ hour count As shown in the table, approximately 91 percent of the traffic traveling on Capital Drive near Alta Vista Court is traveling at 24 miles/hour or less and approximately 96 percent traveling north of Cresta De Ruta Street is traveling at 24 miles per hour or less. No vehicle speeds greater than 30 miles/hour were recorded at either location during the counted periods. 2.1.5 Roadway and Intersection Crash History The Oregon Department of Transportation's (ODOT's) Crash Analysis and Reporting Unit (CARD) maintains a database of detailed crash history for all roadways with reported crashes through the Oregon Traffic Accident and Insurance Report forms filed with ODOT's Driver and Motor Vehicles Services Division (DMV). A request was made to CARU for any reported crash data on the segment of Capital Drive from the intersection of Spring Boulevard to the end of the road near Hendricks Park for the most recent five-year period of available data (January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2014). The crash data included any reported intersection crashes on Capital Drive at Spring Boulevard/Madrona Drive, Alta Vista Court and at Cresta De Ruta Street, as well as the general segment of Capital Drive as described previously. The crash data received from ODOT did not include any reported crashes. Currently, the Accident and Insurance Reporting Form is required to be filed with DMV if the incident involves any property or vehicle damage that exceeds $1,500/incident, and/or if the accident resulted in an injury or a fatality. Crash data reports as received from ODOT are included as Appendix D. © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 8 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 3.0 DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 3.1 Land Use The result of the land use applications will allow five existing tax lots on the site to be divided into 33 separate tax lots. The post developed conditions may include up to 31 new residences bringing the unit total to 37, including three existing single family dwelling units and three existing attached multi-family dwelling units. A likely development scenario could include up to 28 new single family detached housing units (dwellings) and three (3) new multi-family attached housing units. Two existing driveways on Capital Drive are proposed to remain to continue to serve existing residences at 2875 and 2955 Capital Drive, while the other two driveways (as described previously) will be improved to create a private loop through the site to access newly constructed residences and existing residences at 2855 and 2995 Capital Drive. The two accesses proposed to be utilized as a loop through the site will not provide connectivity to other existing driveways. One additional driveway is proposed on Capital Drive between Cresta De Ruta Street and Alta Vista Court that will provide access for two new parcels created with the proposal (lots 18 and 19). A site plan is provided as Appendix E. 3.2 Development Traffic Based on available national average trip generation rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in the Trip Generation Manual, 91 Edition, peak hour trip generation of the entire development site (existing + proposed), with a total of 31 single family detached dwelling units and 6 multi-family apartment units, would create a total demand for up to 27 AM peak hour trips and up to 35 PM peak hour trips, which would equate to about one new car every two minutes during peak hour traffic conditions. Since the development does not result in greater than 100 peak hour trips during any one peak hour period, the proposal does not require a traffic impact analysis based on the TIA applicability of City of Eugene Development Code (EC) 9.8670 which looks at the entire site's highest peak hour trip generation potential. To approximate new daily traffic resulting from proposed development, a reference was made to tube count data collected near Cresta De Ruta Street that indicates the average daily trip generation per occupied dwelling unit is approximately 4.53 trips/unit/day, calculated from an average of 59 daily trips counted and 13 existing dwelling units occupied from Cresta De Ruta Street to the end of Capital Drive (including multi-family and single-family residences). The calculated trip generation rate is lower than the daily rate provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE's) trip generation rate derived from surveyed sites. The difference in rates is likely due to the study area's geographic location and the separation distance between the site and retail and other urban development attractors that would increase the average daily trip generation potential. There is no reason why the post development traffic conditions would be expected to generate any levels of traffic at a rate greater than the count data indicates on a per unit basis. The increase in traffic and the types and levels of traffic generated maintains consistency with the residential use designation of the site, surrounding development and the intended use of the existing street. The intensity of the proposed development is consistent with the density and objectives of the South Hills Study. The addition of the new trips will not change the functional classification or traffic character of Capital Drive. © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 9 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 Applying the calculated rate of 4.53 trips/dwelling unit/day to the site's potential 31 new dwelling units in the post-development conditions, the site's contribution to the daily traffic volume on Capital Drive would be 141 new daily vehicle trips. Assuming two existing residences that appear to be currently unoccupied on Capital Drive north of Cresta De Ruta Street are occupied at build-out, their contribution to the daily trip generation would be nine (9) additional daily trips, and the total ADT of Capital Drive would be 209 average daily trips north of Cresta De Ruta Street. The projected 209 ADT in the post developed conditions accounts for existing traffic, occupancy at the two currently unoccupied residences, and post-development traffic resulting from build-out of the site as planned. Assuming the 27 AM and 35 PM peak hour trips occur during those peak one-hour periods, the average hourly trip generation contribution from the site would be less than five trips per hour during the other 22 hours of a typical weekday. The 27 AM peak hour trips would result in one vehicle trip about every two minutes during the highest morning continuous one-hour period, with most of those trips exiting the site. The 35 PM peak hour trips would result in approximately 3 vehicle trips every 5 minutes during the highest afternoon continuous one-hour period. A comparison of the trip generation rate derived from collected tube count data on Capital Drive per unit to the applicable published national average daily trip generation rates is made in the following table: Existing Residential Properties north of Cresta De Ruta Street: Existing Occupied 13 59 4.53 Residential Dwellings Proposed New Residences at Capital Hill Site: Single Family Dwellings 28 9.52 267 127 4.53 Detached Multi- Dwellings 3 6.65 20 14 4.53 Family Proposed New Development Totals: 287 141 4.53 In addition to the traffic volumes displayed above, the additional two vacant residences that were not occupied during the traffic data collection period would generate an additional 19 daily vehicle trips per the ITE rate, or approximately 9 ADT trips per derived rate from collected traffic count data on Capital Drive. 3.3 Construction Traffic During the neighborhood meeting, a question was raised about construction traffic. Construction traffic is considered a temporary traffic condition, with a limited finite duration. The level of construction traffic that will result from the proposed development on the site will © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 10 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 be consistent with construction traffic that served to construct the existing residences on Capital Drive. Streets that serve residential uses are intended to serve development of residential properties. Construction traffic is not specifically a criterion in the Tentative PUD application; however, since a neighbor raised a concern at the neighborhood meeting related to construction traffic, it is being addressed in this traffic study. The construction traffic generated by this residential development within residentially zoned lands will be consistent with the construction traffic generated by the construction of the existing residential homes neighboring the development. In fact, given current local residential construction trends in subdivisions, it will likely be less due to the economy of scale found in building two or more houses at the same time which reduces redundant traffic from construction trades. Some large cities and other states have ordinances or criteria built into code regarding construction traffic related to residential development. There are no known criteria in the Eugene Tentative PUD application process addressing construction traffic. Due to the size of this proposed development, a traffic study isn't required by code based on the number of trips generated or type of vehicles generated. Neighbors can reasonably expect undeveloped properties to develop with the current zoning and permitted uses. The construction traffic generated by the permitted use via public streets that are open to traffic would be considered compatible in nature because there is no less intensive use possible than the residential zoning and use permissions within the City of Eugene's low density residential zone and as identified in the specific plan area of the South Hills Study. The standard of reasonable compatibility is construed to contemplate that a use will have some level of impact on abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood, but the level of impacts must be minimal relative to the reasonable expectation of occupiers of nearby properties given the zoning and character of the area. The term "minimal impact" recognizes that there will be some impact of uses, but the impact shall be as small as possible if such use is to be allowed with the practicable level of operation as a functional use. For all intents and purposes, the Capital Hill PUD is a residential development. The residential use is allowed outright in the underlying zoning and this development is likely the most compatible neighbor abutting property owners could reasonably expect. This is not a proposal for a commercial or industrial development next to residential homes or another more intrusive use. The level of impact would be as anticipated by the development of vacant property with the proposed number of dwelling units consistent with the South Hills Study. A traditional subdivision would likely result in roughly double the number of lots. 3.4 Pedestrian and Motor Vehicle Accommodations Projected motor vehicle traffic volumes on Capital Drive from Spring Blvd to Cresta De Ruta Street are consistent with a low volume residential local street, per Eugene Local Street Plan (August 1996), which indicates the low-volume residential street design standards and criteria for a new street to serve an average daily traffic volume of between 250 and 750 ADT would include a 45-foot right-of-way width constructed with 21 feet of paving to accommodate a 14 foot single travel lane and one 7-foot parking lane. Low-volume residential street construction is also identified in the City's Local Street Plan to provide two six-foot-wide setback sidewalks with a 6'6" planting strip between the curb and the sidewalk. All internal new and existing abutting street frontages are subject to frontage improvements required by the City of Eugene to meet the © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 11 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 standards identified per the applicable functional classification. The off-site roadways generally have been constructed with narrower sections including roughly 18-21 feet of paving and single curbside sidewalks as narrow as 2-feet with no planting strip through prior development applications. In some areas, neighboring properties were not required to construct their frontage sidewalks during prior development applications. The development proposal includes construction of curbside sidewalk and widening the existing paved width of the entire site's frontage on Capital Drive from Cresta De Ruta Street to the end of Capital Drive at Hendricks Park. The street improvements between Cresta De Ruta Street and Hendricks Park will widen the street to the standard 21 feet. A comparison of the collected existing traffic count volumes discussed in section 2.1.4 to the post development traffic volumes reported in section 3.2 is made in the following table to verify if the proposed development will generate enough trips to change the functional classification of the roadway justifying off site improvements to the existing low-volume residential roadways: SE of Spring 258 vpd 287 vpd 545 vpd 141 vpd 399 N,-pd yes BLVD East of Alta 209 vpd 287 vpd 496 vpd 141 vpd 350 vpd yes Vista Ct North of Cresta De 59 vpd 268 vpd 327 vpd 132 vpd 191 vpd yes Ruta St As shown in the table above, the addition of development traffic on Capital Drive does not change the codified paving width standards specified in the previously described City of Eugene documents, which are currently constructed on Capital Drive or planned to be improved to meet the standard at the Capital Hill PUD development site's frontage. 3.5 Fire Apparatus Access The City of Eugene's street standards require a minimum paving width of 21.0- feet including one 14-foot shared travel lane and one adjacent 7-foot parking lane. In areas where the 21-foot minimum paving width is not constructed, there are currently No Parking signs and/or yellow paint installed on the curb to designate some of the narrower portions of the road as no parking zones in most locations. Areas of Eugene including the recently reconstructed Crest Drive, have been built to a similar street standard of roughly 18-feet in width (exceeding the 14-foot minimum travel lane identified in the local street plan), when on street parking is prohibited. After careful evaluation following a neighborhood campaign that Capital Drive is not safe, it has been determined that the neighbors are correct with respect to one identified location. The off- © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 12 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 site portion of Capital Drive in the area constructed narrower than 21-feet with allowed on-street parking is not adequate to safely pass a fire truck in the event of evacuation of the hillside. Approximately 10 to 11 feet of clear passage was measured at approximately 2625 to 2635 Capital Drive where on-street parking currently occurs. This existing condition can be remedied by the residents fronting that portion of Capital Hill Drive applying to the City Traffic Engineer to remove the on-street parking and make the street meet local street standards and be safe for fire truck access. There are few, if any, locations where on-street parking should be permitted on Capital Drive. Further evaluation of the on-street parking related to fire access is recommended with or without the proposed development of Capital Hill PUD. The section of Capital Drive north of Cresta De Ruta Street to the end at Hendricks Park and the new street/loop to be constructed on the site to serve new and existing parcels are planned to be improved implementing the City's standard of a 21.0-foot minimum paving width in accordance to the City of Eugene's Public Improvements Design Standards Manual (PIDSM), as identified for local residential streets in Appendix E. This is an appropriate street standard for local residential streets with less than 750 ADT in Eugene. The existing condition at the top of Capital Drive includes a dead-end roadway with no emergency vehicle turn-around provisions and widths significantly narrower than fire access lane requirements. The proposed development will provide standard emergency vehicle turn- around accommodations and will widen all roadways fronting their property to meet city standard street sections, improving emergency vehicle access to the neighborhood. 3.6 Street Connectivity To determine if the proposed site and roadway conditions comply with the City of Eugene street circulation and connectivity standards, a reference was made to City of Eugene Development Code, section 9.6815. To demonstrate consistency of proposed onsite private street and existing public street layouts with the purpose and intent of the Street Connectivity Standards of EC 9.6815(1), EC 9.6815(2) is provided and discussed below with narrative: 9.6815(2) Street Connectivity Standards (a) All streets and alleys shall be public unless the developer demonstrates that a public street or alley is not necessary for compliance with this land use code or the street connectivity standards of subparagraphs (b) through (f) of this subsection. Finding: The proposed new street to be provided on the site will be privately owned and maintained and will comply with subparagraphs (b) through (f) of 9.6815(2). (b) The proposed development shall include street connections in the direction of all existing or planned streets within % mile of the development site. The proposed development shall also include street connections to any streets that abut, are adjacent to, or terminate at the development site. Finding: The nearest street to connect the north end of Capital Drive to is Highland Street, which is approximately 160 feet to the northwest, across land designated as the City of Eugene's Hendricks Park. The 160 feet linear distance also has approximately 40 feet of elevation difference (25% downgrade) from Capital Drive to Highland Street. On the west side of the site, the proposed onsite private roadway is located with the Ribbon Trail Park in between the site and Floral Hill Drive. Floral © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 13 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 Hill Drive is approximately 300 feet elevation difference over approximately 800 feet linear distance, which is approximately a 35-40% downgradient from the site. Essex Lane currently has unimproved right of way to complete a future connection between Alta Vista Court and Spring Blvd. A connection from the site to Essex Lane would not provide an improvement to travel distances or travel times over other existing roadways or the planned private street connection or provide any improvement to emergency vehicle access or emergency vehicle response times. The slopes required to complete a connection would be too steep to feasibly accommodate emergency vehicles and the City would not permit a public street across land zoned/designated for park use. (c) The proposed development shall include streets that extend to undeveloped or partially developed land that is adjacent to the development site or that is separated from the development site by a drainage channel, transmission easement, survey gap, or similar property condition. The streets shall be in locations that will enable adjoining properties to connect to the proposed development's street system. Finding: The site is separated from any undeveloped or partially developed land by the Ribbon Trail and/or Hendricks Park. (d) Secondary access for fire and emergency medical vehicles consistent with EC 9.6870 is required. Finding: The proposed private street layout provides a looped path with frontage to access proposed parcels. Access to lots several of the lots are proposed to be from separate access easements. All proposed access easements and private street connections comply with the minimum secondary street width standards shown in Table 9.6870. (e) Except for applications proposing needed housing, all applicants shall show that the proposed street alignment shall minimize excavation and embankment and avoid impacts to natural resources, including water- related features. Finding: The proposed private street alignment is designed to follow an existing elevation contour on the site to minimize embankment cut and fill to the highest extent practicable. The proposed private access easements on the site abutting lots 5, 6,7,8,9 and 10; lots 16 and 17, and; lots18 and 19 are also designed to minimize embankment cut and fill. (f) In cases where a required street connection would result in the extension of an existing street that is not improved to city standards and the street has an inadequate driving surface, the developer shall construct a temporary barrier at the entrance to the unimproved street section with provision for bicycle, pedestrian, and emergency vehicle access. The barrier shall be removed by the city at the time the existing street is improved to city standards or to an acceptable standard adopted by the public works director. In making a determination of an inadequate driving surface, the public works director shall consider the street rating according to Eugene's Paving Management System and the anticipated traffic volume. © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 14 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 Finding: Capital Drive at the frontage will be improved to meet City standards, including the driving surface. The remaining existing driving surfaces on Capital Drive and Spring Blvd comply with the standards and received a 2" asphalt overlay/inlay during the 2016 construction season with City of Eugene Project Number 4960. (g) In the context of a Type II or Type III land use decision, the city shall grant an exception to the standards in subsections (2)(b), (c) or (d) if the applicant demonstrates that any proposed exceptions are consistent with either subsection 1. or 2. below: 1. The applicant has provided to the city, at his or her expense, a local street connection study that demonstrates: a. That the proposed street system meets the intent of street connectivity provisions of this land use code as expressed in EC 9.6815(1); and b. How undeveloped or partially developed properties within a quarter mile can be adequately served by alternative street layouts. 2. The applicant demonstrates that a connection cannot be made because of the existence of one or more of the following conditions: a. Physical conditions preclude development of the connecting street. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography or likely impact to natural resource areas such as wetlands, ponds, streams, channels, rivers, lakes or upland wildlife habitat area, or a resource on the National Wetland Inventory or under protection by state or federal law. b. Buildings or other existing development on adjacent lands, including previously subdivided but vacant lots or parcels, physically preclude a connection now or in the future, considering the potential for redevelopment. Finding: The intent of this Street Connectivity section of the report is to provide the necessary documentation to satisfy the requirements for a local street connection study and to demonstrate how the proposal complies with the Purpose and Intent of EC 9.681 50) and/or to provide documentation why an exception to subsections (2)(b), (c) and/or (d) should be granted. Subsections (2)(b), (c) and (d) were discussed previously, where it is demonstrated that the existing and proposed roadways are sufficient to provide access and circulation to existing and proposed parcels on the site and adjacent/nearby properties and that construction of additional street connections to existing nearby roadways is infeasible due to topographical constraints that limit constructability and existing land designated for parks uses. The street and access layout is designed to provide sufficient emergency vehicle access and circulation, provide efficient use of the land, preserve natural areas on the site and comply with the paving width standards of 9.6870 to the highest extent practicable. © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 15 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations The proposed Capital Hill Planned Unit Development does not require a traffic impact analysis based upon the trip generation applicability of City of Eugene Development Code section (EC) 9.8670(1) based on traffic generated by the site. To determine if a traffic impact analysis could be required for traffic safety conditions per EC 9.8670(2), the existing level of traffic safety and crash history was evaluated at existing and proposed site driveway intersections and the full length of Capital Drive from Spring Blvd to Hendricks Park where there is expected to be a slight increase in traffic in the post development build-out traffic conditions. The review and analysis herein indicates that the addition of post development traffic will not significantly adversely impact existing levels of safety for road users - including bicycles and pedestrians - or create unsafe travel conditions. Existing hillside topographical features of the roadway were determined to limit the feasibility of constructing sidewalks (setback or adjacent) and/or widening on either side of the street. The engineering review of nearby traffic safety conditions concludes the following: • The available crash data from ODOT/DMV for the most recent five-year period at the intersection of Capital Drive at Spring Blvd and for the segment of Capital Drive from Spring BLVD to the end of the road at Hendricks Park and did not include any reported crashes. Therefore, there is no significant crash history. No crash reducing measures are necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development. • All traffic speeds recorded during traffic count collection periods were below 30 MPH and over 90 percent of recorded traffic speeds were traveling below 25 MPH. The posted and statutory speed on Capital Drive is 25 MPH. No speed reducing measures are necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed development. • Safe intersection sight distance at proposed development access locations can be achieved by minor trimming of vegetation and trees within the line of sight from the observation points of existing and proposed site driveways that will facilitate traffic resulting from development on the site. • There are currently adequate stopping sight distances provided on each of the approaches to the existing and proposed site driveways. • The proposed improvements at the site's frontage on Capital Drive and the proposed new private street on the site will be improved to meet the City of Eugene's minimum standard street paving width (where applicable) for the low volume local residential street functional classification criteria identified in on page 36 of Appendix E of the current (2016) Public Improvement Design Standards Manual (PIDSM), the August 1996 Eugene Local Street Plan, and the November 1999 Design Standards and Guidelines For Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways. The existing paved roadway width on Capital Drive is adequate for fire equipment transport from Spring Blvd to the site. All proposed streets meet current city of Eugene local street standards and are appropriate for the level of traffic projected to be generated by the proposed development. • The City of Eugene's identified minimum standard street paving width for a low volume residential local street including the proposed 21-foot roadway section, is appropriate © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 16 Capital Hill PUD Traffic Safety Analysis (Revised) August 8, 2017 for the proposed new and to be widened streets, given the applicable roadways will continue to serve less than 750 ADT. • Based on collected traffic volume data and a comparison to the City of Eugene's ADT thresholds, the existing levels of traffic on Capital Drive could support up to roughly 490 new daily vehicle trips near the intersection of Spring Blvd before a wider street paving width would be required based on an ADT that exceeds 750 daily trips. Traffic volumes on Capital Drive generally decrease from Spring Blvd toward the dead end at Hendricks Park. • Based on published national average trip generation rates (ITE), the proposed post development traffic conditions could generate up to 287 new vehicle trips during a typical 24-hour weekday period. Collected traffic data was analyzed and it was determined that the current trip generation rate for existing residences is approximately 4.53 trips/unit/day. The actual traffic generated by the site during the post development full build-out conditions is expected to be consistent with the current types and levels of traffic serving the existing residences in the neighborhood, which would result approximately 141 new vehicle trips/day based on the derived rate. • Based on the ITE rates, the post development conditions at the site at full build-out would generate up to the 27 AM peak hour trips and up to 35 PM peak hour trips. The 27 AM peak hour trips would result in one vehicle trip every two minutes during the highest morning one-hour period. The 35 PM peak hour trips would result in approximately 3 new vehicles trips every 5 minutes. • No measurable congestion from an engineering standpoint will result from these levels of new traffic generated by the proposed development. • Connectivity standards are met with this application, as connections to existing nearby local streets was demonstrated to be infeasible due to topographical constraints. The following recommendations are made and should be considered with or without the proposed development: • Off-site constructed improvements generally meet the city's standards with the exception of one area where the city allows on-street parking fronting 2625 to 2635 Capital Drive. In this location, it is recommended the city traffic engineer consider removing the on-street parking to better accommodate emergency vehicle access, to the existing homes on Capital Drive and the surrounding areas, with or without the proposed development. • A minimum width curbside sidewalk is recommended to be constructed on Capital Drive from Alta Vista Court to the end of the roadway with or without the proposed development, and it is recommended that the City of Eugene work with private property owners to construct the sidewalk at private property frontages off-site. © Branch Engineering, Inc. Page 1 17 Appendix A Street Design Guidelines © Branch Engineering, Inc. AUGUST 1996 EUGENE LOCAL STREET PLAN SECTION V. PROPOSED LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET STANDARDS The Eugene Local Street Plan proposes a broader range of local residential street types and include narrower street cross sections than are currently allowed. Local residential streets which are as narrow as possible have several benefits to the community. • Narrow streets costs less to build and maintain. Less road base is needed and less surface area is paved. This results in lower materials and labor costs. City of Eugene staff estimates that an 8' reduction in local street width results in at least a 10% reduction in paving, sidewalk, and finishing costs. Narrow streets reduce the negative impacts of stormwater runoff. Paved streets are impervious surfaces which prevent the filtration of stormwater into the ground. Therefore, streets increase the volume of stormwater runoff, which can cause flooding, erosion, and habitat destruction, as well as reducing the groundwater supply. Excess paving also causes increased pollution of surface waters as a result of contaminants from the roadway surface entering the stormwater system. The City of Eugene Stormwater Management Program recognizes reduced street widths as a means of reducing the volume of runoff in the Technical Memorandum #1: Residential Street Standards, published in March, 1995. Narrow streets reduce the negative environmental impacts of street construction. A narrow street cross section will help minimize environmental impacts by requiring less land than a wider street. For improvements on existing unimproved streets, narrow widths will reduce the need to remove existing plants and trees. Narrow streets encourage more efficient land use. The land saved by using narrow street designs can be used for other purposes including housing, landscaping and open spaces. Narrow streets increase traffic safety. Narrow street designs will discourage the use of local streets by through traffic and help reduce traffic volumes and speeds. This will help to create quiet, safe residential streets with low traffic volumes and speeds. According to Residential Streets, published in 1990 by the American Society of Civil Engineers, the National Association of Homebuilders, and the Urban Land Institute, "Excessive widths... encourage greater vehicle speeds." Lower vehicle speeds will also reduce the severity of pedestrian automobile accidents. According to the Center for Urban Transportation Research, approximately 55% of accidents are fatal to the pedestrian when vehicle speeds are 30 mph and over, while only 5% are fatal to the pedestrian when vehicle speeds are 20 mph or lower. Narrow streets improve neighborhood character. The positive environmental, land use, and traffic safety impacts of narrow streets all work to improve the character and livability of residential neighborhoods. The 1980 Bucks County, Pennsylvania publication, Performance Streets, recognized that the purpose of local streets should be "not solely to move traffic safely and efficiently, but to ensure that the needs of people for a residential neighborhood that is quiet, safe, pleasant, convenient, and sociable are met as well. EUGENE LOCAL STREET PLAN 47 NOVEMBER 1999 DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR EUGENE STREETS. SIDEWALKS. BIKEWAYS AND ACCESSWAYS Local Street Sub-Classifications Local streets are divided into several sub-classifica- tions: • Alleys • Access Lanes • Low Volume Residential Streets • Medium-Volume Residential Streets • Commercial-Industrial Streets Alleys: Alleys are streets that provide secondary access to residential properties where street front- ages are narrow, where the street is designed with a narrow width to provide limited on-street parking, or where alley access development is desired to increase residential densities. Access Lanes: These streets are designed for primary access to a limited number of properties. On this street type, the residential environment is dominant and traffic is subservient. Access Lanes can be constructed as cul-de-sacs, loop streets, or short streets connecting two other streets. Access lanes generally serve 25 or fewer homes and traffic volumes are less than 250 Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Low-Volume Residential Streets: These streets are designed for primary access to individual residential property as well as access to adjacent streets. As with the Access Lane, the residential environment is dominant. Traffic volumes are relatively low (250- 750 ADT). Medium-Volume Residential Streets: These streets are designed for primary access to individual residential property and to connect streets of lower and higher function and access the major street network. These streets are designed to accommo- date higher traffic volumes (750-1,500 ADT). Commercial/Industrial Streets: These streets are designed for primary access to commercial and industrial properties and to connect to the major street network. They are designed to accommodate higher traffic volumes and freight. Local Street Design Standards The typical design elements found in a local street right-of-way are: sidewalk and planting strip areas, parking lanes, vehicle traffic lanes, parking lanes, drainage and curbs, planting strips, sidewalks, utilities, street lighting, and occasionally a center median. The standards in paragraphs A-M below apply to both new and existing unimproved local streets, unless otherwise stated. A. Vehicle Lanes 1) Two 10' vehicle traffic lanes are required on local residential streets when traffic volumes are expected to exceed 750 vehicles per day. 2) On local residential streets with traffic vol- umes less than 750 vehicles per day, a single 14' traffic lane may be permitted for both directions of vehicular travel. The single traffic lane is intended to create a "queuing street", such that when opposing vehicles meet, one of the vehicles must yield by pulling into a vacant portion of the adjacent parking lane. This queuing effect has been found to be an effective and safe method to reduce speeds and non-local traff i c. 3) Two 12' wide vehicle traffic lanes are re- quired on local commercial and industrial streets. 4) In special circumstances, such as where a local street intersects with a collector or arterial street, additional width may be required for safe turning movements. B. Medians 1) Center medians are a design option for Low- Volume and Medium-Volume Residential Streets, but the street design must ensure the minimum 14' clear lane needed for fire apparatus. 2) Medians shall be landscaped with groundcover, trees, and shrubs less than 3' in height. 36 Appendix B Figures © Branch Engineering, Inc. FAIRMOUNT BLVD. O O Y 2 O 0 Q N 3 a M 0 0 I W 0 i J om N~ 0 ,ry N ° LEGEND - - - - - - - BOUNDARY LINE PROPOSED LOT LINE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE EXISTING SIDEWALK L) Lu Lu Lu z J u Q U_ LU J W Lu l/1 Lu z J u Q EAST 26 EAST 27TH WIMIAWN AVFNIIF EXHIBITS J AND JA HENDRICKS PARK - - - - r7 EXHIBITS 2 ~ I~°• f f ~ I AND 2A I ~ Al °„s I f.....o.+~ -LOT 22 nom, 9 a~ I' u J V "I ~q /0000 0 200 *NOTE. SURVEY PROVIDED BY TED BAKER I EXHIBITS 4 AND 4A T ~ J I -NJ ranch ENGINEERING= Si.. 1977 civil • transpo nation structu raI - geotechnical SURVEYING 1462 Q061WM&S ST. NE Sp3k9fPlJ1CF0 X&0A77 P: 5®3.]40.063] v ww,6ranch Englneering,c°m Spring Field OR I Sz1-OR Z 00 r Q J Q W a~ J LLLI J_ IL = cQ JV LQ IL 1 LL. Q V~ revisions. 0 date 8,8,2017 drawn by: MD designer: project no:. 14-020 FIGURE 1 OVERALL SITE AND CAPITAL DRIVE sheet FIG. 1 I N anch ENGINEERING= Si=1977 p A Q civil transportation CO LJ \ \ \ ~ structural - geototechnical SURVEYING 1462 (3001MMrMRST. NE (V P' 5®3.]40.063] g nee, n9.rom SPrin9field OR Salem OR I C4 C4 ~L I o o I F / ~ I I J J 0 1. 17 1 1.J z - N M N / / F Q J I J J N EXHIBIT 4 = _ - - / J LLL~I L~ a d a ry a W r) 1 \ / c ILL. z - 2Q _ 1 QV - SEE FIG. 2A DETAIL ` - L aQ 1 / revisions'. ~ \ D date 8/8/2017 LEGEND \ core by: MID BOUNDARY LINE Q \ designer: project 14-020 no: PROPOSED LOT LINE G FIGURE 2 EXISTING NORTH 25 ~ - - - - EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY ~ DWY LOCATION PROPOSED PRIVATE STREET CENTERLINE 0 50 \ sheer. FIG. 2 3 P ~s Q 0 h N 3 n h ri 0 m W e i O CL CL o- U 0 I a< N ° I 0 1 A I J \ ~O ~ I A \ - OVFo a Ali i N ! M \ 9~F I / I LINE OF SIGNr . AVAILABLE ISD = 230' (END OF STREET) WITH VEGETATION REMOVAL N 0 I ~ i ~ ranch ENGINEERING= Sixe1977 civil - transportation structural- geotechnical SURVEYING 1462 Q061b0.M&rMRST. NE SP8k9fW11DR19X0177 P: 5®3.740.0637 v ww,6ranc h Engl neering-,, Spring Field OR I Sz OR i 0 J ~ _ OBSERVATION POINT (DEPARTING VEHICLE) i ~ EDGE OF PAVING Z 0 i - I I ~ I OF 1 si~yT ~W LLI JLL \ 2 cQ TREES, VEGETATION, AND HORIZONTAL 1 J V ALIGNMENT LIMIT ISD INSIDE CURVE ON NB APPROACH 1 1 LL. 1 LL Q V~ 15 0 30 *ISD = INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE LEGEND PROPOSED LOT LINE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY - - PROPOSED PRIVATE STREET CENTERLINE sheet. FIG. 2A revisions'. date 8/8/2017 drawn by: MD designer: project no'. 14-020 FIGURE 2A EXISTING NORTH DWY ISD 0 O N 3 N I U `o J a a- U N V a N / 0 I J ' M 1 25 0 50 - M 0 )00A 1 0 1. 1_.. _.J 1 J 1 1 1 ~ \ 1 - . 1 r 0 } I ~ S I l~y_'a I i I I 11- 0 0 1 1 ~1 EXHIBIT 3A - ` 1 r i - ~ E - TRACT D GQ'~ SEE FIG. 3A DETAIL TRACT C / LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE PROPOSED LOT LINE - - EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE - - PROPOSED PRIVATE STREET CENTERLINE anch ' I lNEERING= N 7 civil - transportation structural- geotechnical / SURVEYING 1462 Qd61b0.M&SORe6 A77 Sp6A543I1C P .063 P: 503 740.0637 V ww,6ranch Engineering, cam Springfield OR I SzI- OR / I I Z 0 / Q J Q W a~ J LLLI J_ IL = cQ JV LQ~ 1 LL. Q~ V~ revisions. date'. 8/8/2017 drawn by: MD designer: project np:. 14-020 FIGURE 3 EXISTING SOUTH DWY LOCATION sheet. FIG. 3 N 61 1 1 ranch ENGINEERING= Sixe1977 civil - transportation structural- geotechnical SURVEYING 1462 Q061WM&S ST. NE Sp3k9fPlJ1CF0 XM177 P: 503.]40.063] v ww,6ranch Engineering,cam Spring Field OR I SzI- OR 0 Q 0 N 3 D ri M ri m J O O I i W 0 i a om U P 0 C 04 Nm f~i LEGEND PROPOSED LOT LINE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY 15..p - - PROPOSED PRIVATE STREET CENTERLINE 0 30 *ISD = INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE Z 0 Q J Q ~W aW J LL. J Q = V1 JV LQ IL 1 Q V~ revisions. date. 8/8/2017 drawn by: MD designer: project no'. 14-020 FIGURE 3A EXISTING SOUTH DWY ISD sheet. FIG. 3A A 0 e 0 N W 3 ri M ri m O O v i W i 0 a o- .o U N O `1 a 0 N m i 2 N ° LEGEND BOUNDARY LINE PROPOSED LOT LINE - - EXITING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE EXISTING SIDEWALK _ _ T J u LOT 19 ~ I I I I SEE FIG. 4A DETAIL ranch ENGINEERING= Sixe1977 civil - transportation structural- geotechnical SURVEYING 1462 Q061WM&S ST. NE Sp3k9fPlJ1DF0 XM177 in: 503.740.0637 v ww,6ranch Engineering,cam Springfield OR I SzIem OR Z 0L_ r Q J Q ~W a~ J LLLI J IL JV LQ IL 1 IL Q V~ revisions. date 8/8/2017 drawn by: MD designer: project no'. 14-020 FIGURE 4 PROPOSED NEW DWY LOCATION sheet: FIG. 4 Q 01, 0 3 ri M t\ 9 0 0 I v w c~ 0 i CL i a- 'o v U N 0 NS N ° anch ENGINEERING= 86x¢1977 civil • transportation / structural. geotechnical SURVEYING / 1462 Q061WM&S ST. NE Sp8kgfWJ1CF0 XM177 P: 503.740.0637 / vww,6r anc h Engineering,cam Springfield OR I Salem OR LOT LINE OF SIGHT . ' / \ AVAILABLE ISD 201' LOT 19 z OBSER'NTION POINT / r . . / Q / N. - - I EXISTING RETAINING WALL AND GRADE y C J LIMIT SIGHT DISTANCE ` Q oLLI CL N J W I LL u J Q m JV S Q LL o Q LL APPROACHING VEHICLE / V r (TYPICAL) / revisions. date 8/8/2017 LEGEND drawn by: MD designer: PROPOSED LOT LINE project 14-020 no: 15 - - EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY FIGURE 4A PROPOSED NEW DWY ISD 0 30 sheet. *ISD = INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE FIG. 4A Appendix C Traffic Data © Branch Engineering, Inc. Capital Drive SPD east of Alta Vista Ct P-b-, 2016 500 PM -2-5:15 PM Nov.3 Unit Typ e: Pi 1 oc-2500 v2.30 Serial Number: 14042237 ID: Location: Capital Drive Commend: East ofAItG Vi-Ct Dwell: 1087 Measuremend: English Start Date: 111212016 Start Time: 17:00 Export Version: Speed V2.02 Posted Speed: 25 Title: Total Speeds Date1,7- 5-14 MPH 15-19 MPH 2O-24 -25-29 M-0-34 M-5-39 MPF4- M-549 -50-54 -55-59 M-0 64 -65-69 M-0-74 M-5-79 M-0-99 -T-1 11/02/20161700-1714 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/02/201617:15-1729 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/02/20161730-1744 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/02/201617:45-1759 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 11/02/20161800-1814 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/02/20161815-1829 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/02/20161830-18:44 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/02/201618:45-1859 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/02/20161900-1914 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/02/201619:15-1929 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 11/02/20161930-1944 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/02/201619:45-1959 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/02/20162000-2014 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/02/20162015-2029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/02/20162030-2044 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/02/201620:45-2059 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/02/20162100-2114 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/02/20162115-2129 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/02/20162130-21:44 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/02/201621:45-2159 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/02/20162200-2214 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/02/20162215-2229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/02/20162230-2244 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/02/201622:45-2259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/02/20162300-2314 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/02/20162315-2329 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/02/20162330-2344 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/02/201623:45-2359 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1110312016 0000 - 0014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1110312016 00:15 - 0029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160030-0044 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/0312016 00:45 - 0059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160100-0114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/201601:15-0129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160130-01:44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/201601:45-0159 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160200-0214 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/03/20160215-0229 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160230-0244 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/201602:45-0259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160300-0314 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/201603:15-0329 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160330-0344 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/201603:45-0359 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1110312016 0400 - 0414 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1110312016 0415 - 0429 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160430-0444 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/0312016 04:45 - 0459 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1110312016 0500 - 0514 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1110312016 0515 - 0529 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160530-0544 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/0312016 05:45 - 0559 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1110312016 0600 - 0614 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1110312016 0615 - 0629 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20160630-0644 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/0312016 06:45 - 0659 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1110312016 0700 - 0714 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1110312016 0715 - 0729 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/03/20160730-0744 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/0312016 07:45 - 0759 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1110312016 0800 - 0814 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/03/20160815-0829 0 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 11/03/20160830-0844 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/0312016 08:45 - 0859 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1110312016 0900 - 0914 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/03/201609:15-0929 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/03/20160930-0944 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/03/201609:45-0959 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/03/20161000-1014 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/03/201610:15-1029 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/03/20161030-1044 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/03/201610:45-1059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/03/20161100-1114 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/03/201611:15-1129 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/03/20161130-11:44 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/03/201611:45-1159 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/03/20161200-1214 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 11/03/20161215-1229 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/03/20161230-1244 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/03/201612:45-1259 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/03/20161300-1314 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/03/201613:15-1329 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/03/20161330-1344 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/03/201613:45-1359 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/03/20161400-1414 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/03/20161415-1429 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/03/20161430-1444 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/03/201614:45-1459 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/03/20161500-1514 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/03/20161515-1529 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 11/03/20161530-1544 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/03/201615:45-1559 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/03/20161600-1614 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 11/03/20161615-1629 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/03/20161630-1644 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/03/201616:45-1659 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11/03/20161700-1714 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Branch ENGINEERING= Capital Drive SPD north of Cresta de Ruta Street November 9, 2016 400 PM Nov 9 - 830 AM Nov. 11 Branch ENGINEERING= wonm.er~n<nengin~~rlnq.<om Unit Type: PicoCount 2500 V2.30 Serial Number: 14042237 ID: Location: Capital Drive Comments: North of Cresta De Ruta 11.9. 16to 11.11.16 Dwell: 108 ms Measurements: English Start Date: 11/9/2016 Sta rt Ti me: 1600 Export Version: Speed V2.02 Posted Speed: 25 Interval: 15 Min Title: Total Speeds Date/Time 5-14 MPH 15-19 MPH 20-24 MPH25-29 MPH30-34 MPH35-39 MPH40-4 4 MPH45-4 9 MPH50-54 MPH55-59 MPH60-64 MPH65-69 MPH70-74 MPH75-79 MPH80-99 MPHTctal 11/09/20161600 - 1614 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 11/09/201616:15 - 16:29 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/09/20161630 - 1644 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 1645 - 1659 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 1700 - 1714 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 1715 - 1729 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/09/2016 1730 - 1744 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 1745 - 1759 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 1800 - 1814 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 1815 - 1829 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/09/2016 1830 - 1844 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/09/2016 1845 - 1859 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 1900-19 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 1915-19 29 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/09/2016 1930-19 44 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 1945-19 59 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 2000 - 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 20:15 - 20:29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/20162030-2044 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/09/2016 20:45 - 20:59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 2100-21 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 2115-21 29 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/09/2016 2130-21 44 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 2145-21 59 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 2200-22 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 2215-22 29 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/09/2016 2230-22 44 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/09/2016 2245-22 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 2300-23 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 2315-23 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 2330-23 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/09/2016 2345-23 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 00:00 - 00:14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0015 - 0029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/20160030-0044 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0045 - 0059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/20160100-0114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0115-01 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0130-01 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0145-01 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0200-02 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0215-02 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0230-02 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0245-02 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0300-03 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0315-03 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0330-03 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0345-03 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0400 - 0414 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0415 - 0429 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0430 - 0444 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0445 - 0459 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/20160500-0514 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0515-05 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0530-05 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0545-05 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0600 - 0614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0615 - 0629 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0630 - 0644 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 0645 - 0659 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0700 - 0714 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0715 - 0729 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0730 - 0744 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0745 - 0759 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0800 - 0814 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0815 - 0829 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 0830 - 0844 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0845 - 0859 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 0900 - 0914 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/20160915-0929 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/20160930-0944 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 0945-09 59 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 1000 - 1014 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 1015 - 1029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1030 - 1044 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 10:45 - 10:59 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 EUGENE SPRINGFIELD SALEM R 31 51h Street, Springfield, OR 97477 EIZER 1 8541.746.637 f: 541.746. 389 Capital Drive SPD north of Cresta de Ruta Street November 9, 2016 400 PM Nov 9 - 830 AM Nov. 11 Branch ENGINEERING= wonm.er~n<nengin~~rlnq.<om Unit Type: PicoCount 2500 V2.30 Serial Number: 14042237 ID: Location: Capital Drive Comments: North of Cresta De Ruta 11.9. 16to 11.11.16 Dwell: 108 ms Measurements: English Start Date: 11/9/2016 Sta rt Ti me: 1600 Export Version: Speed V2.02 Posted Speed: 25 Interval: 15 Min Title: Total Speeds Date/Time 5-14 MPH 15-19 MPH 20-24 MPH25-29 MPH30-34 MPH35-39 MPH40-4 4 MPH45-4 9 MPH50-54 MPH55-59 MPH60-64 MPH65-69 MPH70-74 MPH75-79 MPH80-99 MPHTctal 11/10/20161100-1114 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/20161115 - 1129 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 11:30 - 11:44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1145 - 1159 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 12:00 - 12:14 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 1215 - 1229 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 12:30 - 12:44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1245 - 1259 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 13:00 - 13:14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1315 - 1329 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11/10/2016 13:30 - 13:44 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/10/2016 1345 - 1359 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 14:00 - 14:14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1415 - 1429 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 14:30 - 14:44 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 1445 - 1459 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/20161500-1514 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/20161515-15 29 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/20161530-1544 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/20161545-15 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1600 - 1614 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 1615 - 1629 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1630 - 1644 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11/10/2016 1645 - 1659 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 1700 - 1714 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1715 - 1729 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 1730 - 1744 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 1745 - 1759 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 1800 - 1814 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/2016 1815 - 1829 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 1830 - 1844 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1845 - 1859 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 1900-19 14 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/20161915-19 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/20161930-1944 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/10/20161945-19 59 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 2000 - 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2015 - 2029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2030 - 2044 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 2045 - 2059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2100-21 14 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 2115-21 29 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/10/2016 2130-21 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2145-21 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2200-22 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2215-22 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2230-22 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2245-22 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2300-23 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2315-23 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/20162330-2344 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2016 2345-23 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/20160000-0014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0015 - 0029 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0030 - 0044 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0045 - 0059 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/20160100-0114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0115-01 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0130-01 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0145-01 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0200-02 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0215-02 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0230-02 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0245-02 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0300-03 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0315-03 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0330 - 0344 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0345-03 59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/20160400-0414 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0415 - 0429 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0430 - 0444 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0445 - 0459 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0500-05 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0515-05 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0530-05 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 05:45 - 05:59 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EUGENE SPRINGFIELD SALEM R 31 51h Street, Springfield, OR 97477 EIZER 1 8541.746.637 f: 541.746. 389 2 Capital Drive SPD north of Cresta de Ruta Street November 9, 2016 400 PM Nov 9 - 830 AM Nov. 11 Branch ENGINEERING= wonm.er~n<nengin~~rinq.<om Unit Type: PicoCount 2500 V2.30 Serial Number: 14042237 ID: Location: Capital Drive Comments: North of Cresta De Ru ta 11.9.16to 11.11.16 Dwell: 108 ms Measurements: English Start Date: 11/9/2016 Sta rt Ti me: 1600 Export Version: Speed V2.02 Posted Speed: 25 Interval: 15 Min Title: Total Speeds Date/Time 5-14 MPH 15-19 MPH 20-24 MPH 25-29 MPH 30-34 MPH35-39 MPH40-44 MPH45-4 9 MPH50-54 MPH55-59 MPH60-64 MPH65-69 MPH70-74 MPH75-79 MPH80-99 MPHTotal 11/11/2016 0600 - 0614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0615 - 0629 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0630 - 0644 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/11/2016 0645 - 0659 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0700 - 0714 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0715 - 0729 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0730 - 0744 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0745 - 0759 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 0800 - 0814 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2016 08:15 - 08:29 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5-14 MPH 15-19 MPH20-24 MPH25-29 MPH 400 PM to 359 PM 12 36 12 3 415 PM to 414 PM 12 32 12 3 430 PM to 429 PM 10 31 12 3 445 PM to 444 PM 10 34 12 3 500 PM to 459 PM 10 36 12 3 515 PM to 514 PM 9 36 12 3 530 PM to 529 PM 9 36 12 3 545 PM to 544 PM 8 36 13 3 600 PM to 559 PM 8 36 14 3 615 PM to 614 PM 8 37 13 3 630 PM to 629 PM 8 37 13 3 645 PM to 644 PM 8 35 13 3 700 PM to 659 PM 8 35 13 3 715 PM to 714 PM 8 37 13 3 730 PM to 729 PM 7 36 12 3 745 PM to 744 PM 8 35 12 3 800 PM to 759 PM 8 36 12 3 815 PM to 814 PM 8 36 12 3 830 PM to 829 PM 8 36 12 3 845 PM to 844 PM 7 37 12 3 900 PM to 859 PM 7 37 12 3 915 PM to 914 PM 7 39 12 3 930 PM to 929 PM 6 39 12 3 945 PM to 944 PM 6 38 12 3 1000 PM to 959 PM 6 38 12 2 1015 PM to 1014 PM 6 37 12 2 1030 PM to 1029 PM 6 35 12 2 1045 PM to 1044 PM 6 35 11 2 1100 PM to 1059 PM 6 35 11 2 1115 PM to 1114 PM 6 35 11 2 1130 PM to 1129 PM 6 35 11 2 1145 PM to 1144 PM 6 35 11 2 1200 AM to 1159 PM 6 35 11 2 1215 AM to 1214 AM 6 35 11 2 1230 AM to 1229 AM 6 35 11 2 1245 AM to 1244 AM 6 35 11 2 1:OOAM to 1259 AM 6 35 11 2 1:15AM to 1:14AM 6 35 11 2 1:30AM to 1:29AM 6 35 11 2 1:45AM to 1:44AM 6 35 11 2 2:OOAM to 1:59AM 6 35 11 2 2:15AM to 2:14AM 6 35 11 2 2:30AM to 2:29AM 6 35 11 2 2:45AM to 2:44AM 6 35 11 2 3:OOAM to 2:59AM 6 35 11 2 3:15AM to 3:14AM 6 35 11 2 3:30AM to 3:29AM 6 35 11 2 3:45AM to 3:44AM 6 35 11 2 4:OOAM to 3:59AM 6 35 11 2 4:15AM to 4:14AM 6 35 11 2 4:30AM to 4:29AM 6 35 11 2 4:45AM to 4:44AM 6 35 11 2 5:OOAM to 4:59AM 6 35 11 2 5:15AM to 5:14AM 6 35 11 2 5:30AM to 5:29AM 6 35 11 2 5:45AM to 5:44AM 6 35 11 2 6:OOAM to 5:59AM 6 35 11 2 6:15AM to 6:14AM 6 35 11 2 6:30AM to 6:29AM 6 35 11 2 6:45AM to 6:44AM 6 36 11 1 7:OOAM to 6:59AM 6 36 11 1 7: 15AM to 7:14AM 6 36 11 1 Capital Drive SPD north of Cresta de Ruta Street November 9, 2016 400 PM Nov 9 - 830 AM Nov. 11 Branch ENGINEERING= wonm.er~n<nengin~~rinq.<om Unit Type: PicoCount 2500 V2.30 Serial Number: 14042237 ID: Location: Capital Drive Comments: North of Cresta De Ruta 11.9.16to 11.11.16 Dwell: 108 ms Measurements: English Start Date: 11/9/2016 Sta rt Ti me: 1600 Export Version: Speed V2.02 Posted Speed: 25 Interval: 15 Min Title: Total Speeds Date/Time 5-14 MPH 7:30AM to 7:29AM 6 36 11 1 7:45AM to 7:44AM 6 36 11 1 8:OOAM to 7:59AM 6 36 11 1 8:15AM to 8:14AM 6 36 11 1 8:30AM to 8:29AM 6 37 10 1 6.835821 35 .55224 11 .50746 2.2 38806 Max 12 39 14 3 Min 6 31 10 1 Capital Drive Vol east of Alta Vista Ct --b,r , 2016 500 PM N-2-5:15 PM N-3 Unit Type: S-W Number Date/Time 1110212016 17:00 -17:14 1110212016 1715 -1729 11 /02/2016 17:3 0 -17:44 1110212016 17:45 -1759 11/02/2016 1800 -1814 1110212016 1815 -1829 11 /02/2016 18:3 0 -18:44 1110212016 18:45 -1859 11/02/2016 1900 -1914 1110212016 19:15 -1929 "Jo 212016 193 0 -19:44 11/02/2016 19:45 -1959 11 /02/2016 200 0 - 2014 111o 21201620:15 - 2029 11 /02/2016 203 0 - 20:44 11 /02/2016 20:45 - 2059 11 /02/2016 210 0 - 2114 111o 21201621:15 - 2129 11 /02/2016 213 0 - 21:44 11 /021201621 5 4- 2159 11 /02/2016 220 0 - 2214 111o 21201622:15 - 2229 11 /02/2016 223 0 - 22:44 11 /02/2016 22:45 - 2259 11 /02/2016 230 0 - 2314 111o 21201623:15 - 2329 11 /02/2016 233 0 - 23:44 11 /02/2016 23:45 - 2359 11/03/2016 0000 - 0014 1110312016 00:15 - 0029 11/031201600 30 - 0044 1110312016 00:45 - 0059 11/03/2016 0100 - 0114 1110312016 01:15 - 0129 11/031201601 30 - 0144 1110312016 01:45 - 0159 11/031201602 00 - 0214 1110312016 02:15 - 0229 11/031201602 30 - 0244 1110312016 02:45 - 0259 11/03/2016 0300 - 0314 1110312016 03:15 - 0329 11/031201603 30 - 0344 1110312016 03:45 - 0359 11/03/2016 0400 - 0414 1110312016 04:15 - 0429 11/03/2016 0430 - 0444 1110312016 04:45 - 0459 11/031201605 00 - 0514 1110312016 05:15 - 0529 11/031201605 30 - 0544 1110312016 05:45 - 0559 11/031201606 00 - 0614 1110312016 06:15 - 0629 11/031201606 30 - 0644 1110312016 06:45 - 0659 11/031201607 00 - 0714 1110312016 07:15 - 0729 11/031201607 30 - 0744 1110312016 07:45 - 0759 11/03/2016 0800 - 0814 1110312016 08:15 - 0829 11/03/2016 0830 - 0844 1110312016 08:45 - 0859 11/03/2016 0900 - 0914 1110312016 09:15 - 0929 11/031201609 30 - 0944 1110312016 09:45 - 0959 111o 312016 1000 -1014 1110312016 10:15 -10 29 "Jo 312016 103 0 -10 44 1110312016 10:45 -1059 111o 312016 1100 -1114 1110312016 11:15 -1129 "Jo 312016 113 0 -1144 1110312016 11:45 -1159 111o 312016 1200 -1214 1110312016 12:15 -1229 "Jo 312016 123 0 -1244 1110312016 12:45 -1259 111o 312016 1300 -1314 1110312016 13:15 -13 29 "Jo 312016 133 0 -13 44 1110312016 13:45 -1359 111o 312016 1400 -1414 1110312016 14:15 -1429 "Jo 312016 1430 -1444 1110312016 14:45 -1459 111o 312016 1500 -1514 1110312016 15:15 -15 29 "Jo 312016 153 0 -15 44 1110312016 15:45 -1559 111o 312016 1600 -1614 1110312016 16:15 -16 29 "Jo 312016 163 0 -16 44 1110312016 16:45 -1659 111o 312016 1700 -1714 -wtd Drive East of AI t3 Vida Q English 11/2/2016 17:00 Volume V1.03 15 Min Vehide Volume Westbound Eastbound Total 5 2 2 4 3 0 2 0 2 9 3 1 4 0 1 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 4 2 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 2 1 0 2 4 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 2 2 3 0 2 2 0 3 1 2 3 2 (Ranch ENGINEERING- 31051611 pn,gfiad, 1117171 1 1 111711117 =41.711111 bane g g ranch ENGINEERING' Appendix D MOT Crash © Branch Engineering, Inc. CDS150 11/17/2016 OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT DIVISION TRANSPORTATION DATA SECTION - CRASH ANALYSIS AND REPORTING UNIT CRASH SUMMARIES BY YEAR BY COLLISION TYPE Capital Drive January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2014 NON- PROPERTY FATAL FATAL DAMAGE TOTAL PEOPLE PEOPLE DRY WET INTER- COLLISION TYPE CRASHES CRASHES ONLY CRASHES KILLED INJURED TRUCKS SURF SURF DAY DARK SECTION YEAR TOTAL FINAL TOTAL PAGE: 1 INTER- SECTION OFF- RELATED ROAD Disclaimer- A higher number of crashes may be reported as of 2011 compared to prior years. This does not reflect an increase in annual crashes. The higher numbers result from a change to an internal departmental process that allows the Crash Analysis and Reporting Unit to add previously unavailable, non-fatal crash reports to the annual data file. Please be aware of this change when comparing pre-2011 crash statistics. Appendix E Site Plan © Branch Engineering, Inc. EXISTING ROAD . ROealamnimum 18 'vitlewiM1 mroaantl 1--gma m bNb aaas. H ~ °tl l PROPOSEDACCESS--,Y EASEMENT BOUNDARY BEPNEEN yT// FAIRMa NTAND LAUREL J HILL NEIGHBORHOODS qC P PROPOSED S SEE THROJGH. AGRICLUTURALTYPE FENCETOJ TERNIINATE AT NE IGH BOB S FENCE AT LOT 4. 9L OCB 2 EXISTING RIBBON TRAIL •Przporetlnew prime tlriva aeaglatlwdh--, 60 raauamIne-stl 60-IQ -vte tla •Pn~ale tlnve I3,21'un as ala 2way w,N paMg on me si tla allamr g D, emxgenW vaM1itleacceee In eNa tl,-., J'~P ROADIMPROVEMENT • Wraen w, T,gn.,--f-,g I--L, 21 mp --lred- dI-- t. p aenamt. 21 . Atla4' e,d-k m uphrI Rda L PRESERVATION AREA (INDIVIDUAL TAX LOT) PRESERVATION AREA(HOA) STORMWATER SOLAR LOT STANDARDS COMPLIANCE Fip- I I I snt „E _ 11 J VEHICLE AND BIKE PARKING IY i t.usww s. nE iuE.,rsuwm. =E.rnr.,uw .L CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY X11 PRESERVATION AREAS LEGEND HENDRICKS„ PARK 80- ACRES) ,ff7msr~avsrnw r - ~ ro-wE:~~oE.,~ ExISTNG BUILDING TO ro-we::a.,~:o.e REMAIN © .naaswe ~E.r EXIST N G AUILDINGSTO - m--- aaesE ~u~Ea~~nEE aREMAN. May be renovetl at alertlale. _ _FU- - { PRESERVATION BOUNDARY LINEIPRMATE) x w Ew ino i.. w..ES.iLf b~mamamaaby lm T. If v r w lno- wE o -rE PRESERVATION BWNDARVLINE (HOA) w.nns~,r..marE~. F Tobema-dby O~ M1omeumer's aasoaalim. ® cwuiv~srne~. (pNln private vnnerabm) PROPOSED fi SEE THROUGH AGRICULTURAL TYPE FENCE ~w-oEE..EUES- AT PROPERTY LNE C stuns eu.Ewu-in sMa2sESSKxuneare.s .o f .wt,.n4~.,w Ewano:.nirts.ssT,ff O wuane.E.iaa... u3, OWNERSHIP MAP LIGHTING NOTE Pop Up L S R SATRE GROUP ygTr # Dale Oesaipiion ® W-4th 5Was"'bR°1ta26,Enp5M1eneGR9"°' Phone'. 341.688.4540 Fax. 1.686.4sn PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT -TENTATIVE: SITE PLAN ' ' ' ' f~~ 1 -19-17 completeness review 3,w°B j 3,Avh SHEET NO wTV. n t 0 20 40 80 Checked . +ri. uxP.u[a N n1 Prn v w as CAPITAL HILL PUD N , h Date 3,3,2017 MAP 18.03.04.31, LOTS 100, 200, 201, 300, 400 e Phase L2 0 eY II,waw11-11 I 1. NEAR CAPITAL HILL AND SPRING BLVD, EUGENE, OREGON Tentative P.U D. .