HomeMy WebLinkAbout2nd Open Record Period: Applicant Comments 3-30-18
·
·
·
··
··
Image 2
Image 1
Image 3
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
March 28, 2018
DATE:
Capital Hill PUD
PROJECT:
Eugene Hearings Official
TO:
Bill Kloos, PC
CC:
Damien Gilbert, P.E.
FROM:
Principal, Branch Engineering, Inc
Capital Hill PUD (PDT 17-1)
RE:
In response to testimony provided in the record by GeoScience, Inc. dated March 21, 2018 regarding
Capital Drive Grade at South Portion, Proposed Capital Hill PUD, I offer the following relevant
information
1.Nowhere in the definition of Certified Engineering Geologist (CEG) is there credential, training,
or qualification to evaluate or design the complex geometric horizontal and vertical design of
a public roadway. This work is performed by Professional Engineers with proper training and
experience.
2.The CEG referenced utilizing a clinometer to determine the street grade. A slight imperfection
of parallel alignment to the longitudinal alignment would result in an inaccurate reading.
Clinometers are not used to design public streets. Similarly, the CEG didnt reference where
the measurement was taken. Downhill from the subject proposed driveway, the roadway
steepens to a grade similar to their reported, yet unreliable, grade.
3.The CEG referenced a LiDAR Digital Elevation Model with pixels that appear to be greater than
10-feet to determine street slopes. It should be noted that in his public testimony at the
hearing he qualified the accuracy of that data to being unclear and the data retrieved from an
airplane sometimes couldnt tell the difference between a tree, a bush, or ground. Given you
cannot clearly tell where the street is on that map, I question how a qualified professional
could even suggest using it to measure accurate street grades.
HEARINGEXHIBITT
310 5 Street, Springfield, OR 97477 | 541.746.0637 www.BranchEngineering.com
th
Technical Memo to Hearings Official - Capital Hill PUD (PDT 17-1)
March 28, 2018
4.The subject section of roadway, like the remainder of the project, was physically surveyed by
an Oregon licensed Professional Land Surveyor (P.L.S.) utilizing survey grade instrumentation
routinely utilized for the design and staking of public streets.
5.I have been the engineer of record for dozens of public street projects throughout the Lane
County area, and beyond.
6.City of Eugene will not permit a CEG or a Ph.D. to design a public street. They require a P.E.
to design a public street.
7.The project engineer for the applicant looked at this issue and the city
reviewed and considered the criteria under Eugene Code Sections 9.6735(2) and 7.420(b) were
met with the subject application.
8.Attached is an exhibit map utilizing the survey provided by a P.L.S., prepared and sealed by a
P.E., both qualified to do the job they are doing, demonstrating the actual street grades in
profile view. The outside curb is longer in run for roughly the same rise, and therefore, flatter.
Both the inside and outside slopes of the horizontal curve are less than 15-percent in the area
of the proposed driveway. Therefore, the criteria under Eugene Code Sections 9.6735(2) and
7.420(b) allow access from the public street where shown in the subject application.
9.The horizontal alignment of a roadway is the running slope of a roadway and measured and
designed in specific ways by professional engineers. American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and City of Eugene guidelines for designing public streets
both prescribe the methods of measuring and determining the slope of a public street in the
manor that I have used in this exhibit. Neither recommend utilizing pixilated models for
detailed street design or slope analysis.
Page | 2
Branch Engineering, Inc.
310 5th Street
Springfield, OR 97477
541.746.0637
p:
Springfield OR | Albany OR
revisions:
date:
3/28/18
drawn by:
designer:
project no:
14-020
DRIVEWAY
ACCESS
EXHIBIT #
sheet:
1
HEARING EXHIBIT U
March 28, 2018
Carol Schirmer
Schirmer Satre Group
375 W. 4 Avenue, Suite 401
th
Eugene, OR 97401
:
REGSIAR
EOCIENCE NC DDENDUM EBUTTAL
CHPUD
APITAL ILL
E,O
UGENE REGON
BEI.PN.14-020
RANCH NGINEERING NC ROJECT O
After reviewing the additional comments by Mr. Gunnar Schlieder presented in his Addendum to
Geotechnical Review of Capital Hill PUD dated March 21, 2018; it appears that he believes to have
found some physical evidence to support his theory that the supposed landslide areas he mapped
via LIDAR interpretation presented in his March 7, 2018 report exist and are active. The evidence
n the pavement
along a ¼-mile stretch of the 2800 block of Floral Hill Drive. I have revisited this stretch of Floral
Hill Drive and also rewalked the Ridge Line Trail on March 26, 2018 and offer the following
comments:
1.Floral Hill Drive is an old turnpike road section with at least one pavement overlay. The
edge of pavement alignment is almost never a straight on turnpike roads due to the edges
being undefined by a curb. Areas around mailbox locations and driveways will appear to
have widened pavement due to gravel placement and vehicle use, but the actual edge of
AttachedImage1
pavement is not discernable from aerial photographs.
2.The areas indicated as having offset pavement are at a mailbox location and in an area of
transverse pavement cracks that indicate failure in the soil material providing the lateral
support for the roadway, which in this case appears to be anthropogenic placed fill
material. Ponded water was observed at the time of our site visit in the drainage swale on
the upslope side of the roadway.
AttachedImage2and3
3.The power poles located on the upslope side of Floral Hill Drive all appear to be vertical.
4.There is no indication of lateral cracks in the pavement on the edges of the alleged ground
movement.
5.Although residences on both sides of Floral Hill Drive were only visually inspected from
the street, there is no indication of distress to residences that suggest 2- to 3-feet of lateral
movement has occurred.
HEARINGEXHIBITV
EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD SALEM-KEIZER
310 5 Street, Springfield, OR 97477 | p: 541.746.0637 | www.branchengineering.com
th
Geotechnical Review Addendum Rebuttal
Capital Hill PUD
Eugene, Oregon
6.Other than the area previously mapped by BEI, there is no indication of gross land
movement along the alignment of the Ridge Line Trail up slope of Floral Hill Drive.
7.The pavement deflections shown on several photographs included in
addendum report, in my opinion simply show rutting of an old roadway that likely has an
inadequate structural section for the wheel-loading that it is has been subjected to by
garbage trucks, delivery trucks, school buses, etc.. over the course of time. In addition,
the narrow road width appears to cause traffic in both directions to use nearly the same
wheel paths.
to manufacture evidence to support his area wide landslide theory, which is based solely on his
interpretation of LIDAR mapping that has questionable resolution in this area due to the
vegetation cover.
Sincerely,
Branch Engineering Inc.,
Ronald J. Derrick, P.E., G.E.
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
2
Branch Engineering, Inc.
HEARING EXHIBIT W
Summary of Dryer Legal Lot Research (None verified by city as of 2015)
Approx. Legal Basis for Legal Lot Status:
No. Map and Tax Lot Instrument/Date Size Lot?
County: LLs created by deed prior to 1962
City: LLs created by deeds prior to 1948 or 1962
1 18-03-04-31 Book 388, Pg. 462 .60 acLikely In City. Created by deed description and meets lot size requirements.
TL 300 (North) December 27, 1948
2 18-03-04-31 Book 397, Pg. 576 .38 ac Likely In City. Created by deed description.
TL 300 (South) March 28, 1949
3 18-03-04-31 Reel 5, Inst. 84550 1.60 ac Likely Created by deed description prior to 1962. (note that this parcel meets
TL 100 August 5, 1952 city requirements, so it is a legal lot regardless of whether the City or
County standards apply).
4 18-03-04-31 Reel 182, Inst. 48021 7.22 ac Possible TL 200 was created in 1964, too late in time to be discrete legal lot. TL
TLs 201north/200 August 1, 1960 201, north portion, was created in its current configuration in 1964, too
(combined, excepting late in time to be a discrete legal lot. As such, TL 201north/200
TL 201 south) (combined) are a legal lot created as the remainder of the referenced
1960 deed, after Lot 4 and Lot 5 of Plat of Capital Hill are verified.
5 18-03-04-31 Book 387, Pg. 340 3.60 ac Likely In City; Created by deed description and meets lot size requirements.
TL 400 November 17, 1948
6 18-03-04-31 Plat of Capital Hill .26 ac Possible This parcel is the remainder of Lot 4 of the 1912 plat (not vacated) after
TL 201 January 24, 1912 the north replat (vacated) is acknowledged and TL 2603 is legally
(Remainder Portion conveyed.
Lot 4) TL 2603 is legally conveyed because the west portion of TL 2603
has a valid 1960 deed signed prior to annexation (county rules),
and the entire property is now in common ownership. As such, the
expansion of TL 2603 (to include 2604 and 2605 and the strip) can
be viewed as a de facto property line adjustment and a single legal
lot.
7 18-03-04-31 Plat of Capital Hill 1.48 ac Possible This parcel is the remainder of Lot 5 of the 1912 plat (not vacated) after
TL 201 January 24, 1912 the north replat (vacated) is acknowledged and the TL 2601/2602 tract
(Remainder Portion is legally conveyed.
Lot 5) TL 2602 and TL 2601 are legally conveyed because TL 2602 has a valid
1960 deed prior to annexation (county rules), and both properties are
now in common ownership. As such, the TL 2602/2601 tract can be
viewed as a de facto PLA and a single legal lot.
HEARING EXHIBIT X
HEARING EXHIBIT Y