Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication MaterialsAM WPIanning WILLAMETTE GREENWAY Please complete the following application checklist. Note that additional information may be required after further review in order to adequately address the applicable approval criteria. If you have any questions about completing this application, please contact Planning staff at the Permit and Information Center, phone (541) 682-5377, 99 West 10th Avenue, Eugene. List all Assessor's Map and Tax Lot numbers of the property included in the request. Please indicate if only a portion of a lot is included in the request. Assessor's Map Tax Lot Zoning 17-03-29-40 00301 PL - Public Land Site address(es): 2727 Leo Harris Parkway Area of Request (square feet/acres): 3.5 acres Existing Use of Property: Athletic facilities, Autzen Stadium Complex Proposed Use of Property: Athletic facilities, Autzen Stadium Complex Adjustment Requested? ❑Yes ONo Specify type of adjustment being requested: Pre-application Conference (as required per EC 9.7005): Date: Conference No. Filing Fee A filing fee must accompany all applications. The fee varies depending upon the type of application and is adjusted periodically by the City Manager. Check with Planning staff at the Permit and Information Center to determine the required fee or check the City website at www.eugeneplanning.org Written Statement ❑X Submit a detailed written statement describing how this request is consistent with all applicable criteria (Section 9.8815 of the Eugene Code). Applications involving adjustments shall specifically address additional related criteria. Please note that it is the applicant's responsibility to provide adequate information demonstrating how the project satisfies the applicable approval criteria. Failure to provide such information may result in a denial of your application. www. eugene-or. goy/planning Planning & Development Updated: March 2014 Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail: planning@ci.eugene.or.us Page 1 of 5 Property Review Checklist Submit if applicable. This checklist will be provided to you at the required pre-development conference or limited consultation if determined necessary. JZ/Submit a completed Public Works Property Review Checklist and any supporting or required documentation if applicable. Site Plan Requirements Show location of the Willamette River ordinary low water line and the distance from the proposed development. Show the Greenway Boundary line. Show vicinity map drawing on the subject site plan (does not need to be drawn to scale. ❑X Show location of all existing and proposed structures. Indicate whether the existing structures will remain or be removed. Submit a tabulation of coverage, including the amount of area covered by building(s), parking, and the amount of area devoted to open space. Provide elevation drawings that portray the scale and appearance of proposed buildings. Show all proposed grading for streets, building areas, and other proposed development. Show date, north point, and standard engineer's scale on the site plan. Show assessor's map and tax lot numbers on the site plan. Landscaping and Vegetation Show location, species and size of existing vegetation. Specify areas which include riparian vegetation. Show proposed landscaping scheme. ❑ Indicate means of irrigation. FRI Show open space and landscaping proposed for open space. ❑X Show size and species of existing trees on site that are 8 inches or more in diameter at DBH (4.5 feet above ground). Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat FX Identify any existing significant fish and wildlife habitats (as required by Section 9.8815(5) of the Eugene Code). FX If applicable, show the specific locations of these habitats on the site plan. ❑X Describe potential impacts to these habitats resulting from the proposal, and provide any mitigation plan necessary to satisfy applicable criteria. www. eugene-or. goy/planning Planning & Development Updated: March 2014 Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail: planning@ci.eugene.or.us Page 2 of 5 Public Access Parking Area Development RI Show location, number, and dimensions of existing and proposed parking spaces, including aisle widths and disabled parking spaces. X❑ Show location, dimensions, and number of bicycle parking spaces, including long-term and short-term bicycle parking. ❑X Show landscaping and screening for parking area. RI Show means of protecting landscaping (i.e, curbs). X❑ Show location and height of proposed lighting for parking area. 19Show designated carpool and vanpool parking spaces for developments with 20 or more employees. Wastewater Requirements Al Show the location and flow line elevation of the existing public wastewater sewer at proposed connection point(s). RI Show the existing and proposed wastewater sewer layout. Water Supply ❑X Show diameter of existing and proposed water main. X❑ Show existing and proposed fire hydrants. Contour Intervals Show existing and proposed contours at one of the following intervals and must be based on City Bench Mark (North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAV 88). The City Bench Mark used must be noted on the plan. Indicate bench mark used. ❑X One-foot contour intervals for ground slopes up to five percent. ❑ Two-foot contour intervals for ground slopes between five and ten percent. ❑ Five-foot contour intervals for ground slopes exceeding ten percent. X❑ Indicate which bench mark used. ❑X Existing vegetation to be preserved shall be shown on contour map. Storm Drainage Requirements X❑ Show the location and flow line elevation of the existing piped public system at proposed connection point(s). ❑ Show existing and proposed storm drainage, including disposition of storm water for all lots. Planning & Development Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail: planning@ci.eugene.or.us www. eugene-or. goy/planning Updated: March 2014 Page 3 of 5 OX A description of the extent to which a watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development, including a stormwater analysis of pre- and post-development flows. RI If contributing stormwater runoff to a drainage-way, submit a stormwater analysis (3 copies) that addresses the capacity and any erosion issues of the downstream system. X❑ Delineate areas subject to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regulations regarding inundations or storm water overflow, all areas covered by water, and the location, width, and direction of flow of all water courses and the base flood elevation. Public Access Circulation RI Show circulation patterns, including width of travel lanes. RI Show location and dimension of existing and proposed curb cuts. ❑X Show existing and proposed pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths (including dimensions) and how they connect with adjacent properties. RI Show public sidewalks. ❑X Show any existing and proposed public access connections to, and along, the Willamette River. Supporting Analysis and Documents RI Submit a Geotechnical Analysis, if required to satisfy applicable criteria. la The applicant is responsible for meeting State/Federal wetland requirements. Submit a wetland determination and a letter of acceptance of the determination from the Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL) and if necessary, a wetland delineation report for potential wetlands identified on the Eugene Local Wetlands Inventory (LWI) maps, West Eugene Wetlands Plan (WEWP) maps, Wetland Determination reports, or other sources which indicate the potential presence of wetlands. [X Submit a legal description of property included in the Willamette greenway application. The legal description(s) must be typed on an 8%" x 11" white sheet of paper (no letterhead) so that it is suitable for recording. Planning & Development Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail: planning@ci.eugene.or.us www. eugene-or. goy/planning Updated: March 2014 Page 4 of 5 By signing, the undersigned certifies that he/she has read and understood the submittal requirements outlined, and that he/she understands that omission of any listed item may cause delay in processing the application. I (We), the undersigned, acknowledge that the information supplied in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. OWNER (Also the Applicant? E] Yes / ® No): State of Oregon Acting by and through the Board of Trustees Name (print): Attn: Mike Harwood Phone: 541.346.8267 Address: University of Oregon 1585 E. 13th Avenue City/State/Zip: Eugene OR 97403 Signature: APPLICANT❑ / APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE ® (Check one): Name (print): Karl Schulz Company/Organization: inici group, LLC Address: 4640 S Macadam Avenue, Suite 100 City/State/Zip: Portland, OR 97239 E-mail (if applicable): kss@inicigroup.com Phone: 503.972.2620 Fax: Signature: APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE ❑ / DESIGNATED CONTACT PERSON ® (Check all that apply): Name (print): Colin McArthur, AICP Company/Organization: Cameron McCarthy Landscape Architecture and Planning Address: 160 East Broadway City/State/Zip: Eugene, OR 97402 E-mail (if applicable): colin@cameronmccarthy.com Phone: 541.485.7385 Fax: Signature: Note: This is not a complete list of requirements. Additional information may be required after further review in order to adequately address the applicable approval criteria. Planning & Development Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail: planning@ci.eugene.or.us www. eugene-or. gov/plonning Updated: March 2014 Page 5 of 5 CAMERON McCARTHY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE & PLANNING City of Eugene Willamette Greenway Permit Application University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility September 23, 2021 160 East Broadway Eugene, Oregon 97401 www.cameronmccarthy.com University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application INDEX September 23, 2021 WILLAMETTE GREENWAY PERMIT APPLICATION FORM WRITTEN STATEMENT 1.0 Project Information ....................................................................................................2 2.0 Description of Proposal .............................................................................................4 3.0 Existing Conditions .....................................................................................................6 4.0 Detailed Project Description ....................................................................................10 5.0 Submittal Requirements ..........................................................................................12 6.0 Approval Criteria and Standards ............................................................................20 EXHIBITS A Plan Set ................................................................................................................................A B Graphic Renderings ...........................................................................................................B C Stormwater Analysis ..........................................................................................................C D Legal Description D E Geotechnical Analysis E F Parking Agreements F CAMERON MCCARTHY 1 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant's Request: Construction of a new Indoor Football Practice Facility for the University of Oregon Athletic Department. Property Owner: State of Oregon by and through the Board of Trustees for the University of Oregon Attn: Mike Harwood University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403 541.346.8267 Applicant: University of Oregon Foundation Attn: Paul Weinhold PHIT TOO, LLC, an Oregon Corporation 1720 E 13th Avenue, Suite 410 Eugene, OR 97403 Applicant's Representative: Colin McArthur, AICP Cameron McCarthy 160 E Broadway, Eugene OR 97401 541.485.7385 cmcarthur@cameronmccarthy.com Project Name: Subject Property: Location: Property Size: Development Area: Zoning: Overlay Zoning: CAMERON McCARTHY University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Assessor's Map 17-03-29-40 Tax Lot 00301 2727 Leo Harris Parkway 81.5 acres 3.5 acres PL - Public Land /WR - Water Resources Conservation Overlay 2 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 Pre-Application Conference: PC 21-76 Project Consultation; August 12, 2021 CAMERON MCCARTHY University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 2.1 Overview September 23, 2021 The University of Oregon, acting through the University of Oregon Foundation and PHIT TOO, LLC ("the Applicant"), requests Willamette Greenway (WG) permit approval to construct a new Indoor Football Practice Facility within the Autzen Stadium Complex site located at 2727 Leo Harris Parkway. The subject site is comprised of one parcel identified on Assessor's Map 17-03-29-40 as Tax Lot 00301. The University of Oregon owns this parcel. The Autzen Stadium Complex is an 81.5-acre site bounded by Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to the north and east and Leo Harris Parkway to the south and west. The development site is located approximately 2,200 feet from the Willamette River. As illustrated in the attached plans, the applicant requests approval to construct a new Indoor Football Practice Facility. The practice facility is envisioned as a 130,000 SF practice field that replaces an existing facility which is undersized. The new facility will allow the team to stay on schedule while ensuring a healthy environment for athletes, coaches, and staff. The new proposed practice facility is longer and wider than the previous building, and extended field boundaries allow the team to set up for multiple types of drills concurrently, maximizing the efficiency of allotted practice time. The longer field also allows for a broader diversity of plays during practice, better preparing the athletes for competition. A 40,000 SF connector building bridges the practice field and the existing football operations building (the Hatfield-Dowlin Complex). This includes an expanded lower-level weight room and upper-level players' lounge to provide dedicated spaces for student athletes to prepare for games. Operable kinetic windows open the players' lounge to the practice field. Additional operable kinetic doors open the lounge to an exterior terrace with views of the Moshofsky Center, creating a flexible multipurpose space where the team can study and gather between practices, or host special events. The applicant previously conducted the required Pre-application Conference (PC 21-76; August 12, 2021), per EC 9.7005, with City Staff. The proposal complies with all applicable Eugene Code criteria listed in EC 9.8815, consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 15, and the submittal requirements listed on the Type III Willamette Greenway permit application form. The attached materials and enclosed findings demonstrate that the proposal is also consistent with applicable policies contained in the Eugene- Springfield Metro Plan (Metro Plan) and other relevant refinement plans. CAMERON MCCARTHY 4 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 2.2 Background The Autzen Stadium Complex is a major recreational attraction for the Eugene- Springfield area, accommodating spectators annually at five to seven University of Oregon Ducks home football games, approximately 10 to 12 UO women's lacrosse matches, and approximately 10 to 12 UO women's soccer matches. As illustrated on Sheet L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan (Exhibit A), the Autzen Stadium Complex includes: ■ Casanova Center - home of the UO Athletic Department; ■ Autzen Stadium - used primarily for UO football games; Moshofsky Center - used as an indoor practice facility by UO athletic teams; ■ Pape Field - used for UO women's soccer and lacrosse matches and football practices; ■ PK Park - used primarily for UO baseball games and Eugene Emeralds games; ■ Hatfield-Dowlin Complex - used for UO football operations; ■ Ticket office buildings; accessory structures; parking; and associated infrastructure. As noted previously, the applicant proposes the construction of a new Indoor Football Practice Facility to replace the existing facility. The project is part of planned long-term athletic facility upgrades on the UO campus. The Autzen Stadium Complex is the subject of six prior Willamette Greenway permit approvals for the Moshofsky Center and outdoor athletic fields (WG 96-4), the Autzen Stadium expansion (WG 01-1), Phase I of PK Park (WG 08-02), Phase II of PK Park (WG 08-03), the Soccer/Lacrosse Complex (Pape Field) (WG 10-04), and the Casanova Center Extension (Hatfield-Dowlin Complex) (WG 10-05). This proposal is consistent with past Willamette Greenway approvals in both the nature of the proposed use and in provision of findings of compliance with approval criteria. Specifics of the proposal are discussed in Section 4.0 and findings of compliance are provided in Section 6.0. CAMERON MCCARTHY 5 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Location and Site Context September 23, 2021 The Autzen Stadium Complex is located in the Willakenzie Area of Eugene north of the University of Oregon. The complex is bordered by Leo Harris Parkway to the south and west, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (MLK Jr. Blvd.) to the north and east. The proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility is located west of Autzen Stadium. Proposed development will occur on approximately 3.5-acres of the 81.5-acre complex site. The proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility site is located approximately 2,200 feet north of the Willamette River. The site occupies the western portion of the Autzen Stadium Complex. The site is bordered by MLK Jr. Blvd. to the north, Leo Harris Parkway to the west and south, and the existing Casanova Center and the Moshofsky Center to the east. East of Autzen Stadium is PK Park (baseball stadium) and a large unpaved parking area used for football game-day parking. Further south, across Leo Harris Parkway, is Alton Baker Park - the region's major metropolitan park along the north bank of the Willamette River on either side of Interstate 5. The Autzen Footbridge spans the Willamette and provides a direct connection between the complex and the UO campus via a 12-foot wide asphalt path through the park. The east portion of the Autzen Stadium Complex contains Patterson Slough. The adopted Eugene Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan identifies Patterson Slough as a'Wetland Designated for Protection' and'Riparian Corridor Designated for Protection' (Goal 5 Water Resource Conservation Plan, Section IV, Map 13). Resource site E42-B is associated with the Patterson Slough riparian corridor. Resource sites WKZ-IA and WKZ-1 B are associated with Patterson Slough wetlands. A Wetland Delineation report for wetlands in Patterson Slough was submitted with the prior Greenway application (WG 01-1).' 3.2 Site Description and Current Use The project site consists of three existing outdoor playfields (Bob Kilkenny Field, Stephanie Kilkenny Field, and Bob Wilcox Family Field), with a landscaped pedestrian entry to the north. The site is bounded by MLK Jr. Blvd. to the north, Autzen Stadium and the Hatfield-Dowlin Center to the west, and the Moshofsky Center and Leo Harris Parkway to the south. The project involves three main components: the Indoor Football The delineation report received formal concurrence from the Oregon Division of State Lands on March 27, 2000 (WD #00-0094). CAMERON MCCARTHY 6 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 Practice Facility; landscape and pedestrian improvements; and a weight room expansion to the east that connects to the existing weight room through the Hatfield- Dowlin Complex. Access to the site is provided by MLK Jr. Blvd., a fully improved, 5-lane Minor Arterial street providing auto and transit access to the Autzen Stadium Complex. Abutting the site, Leo Harris Parkway is a fully improved Major Collector street with bike lanes. There are five existing entry gates to the complex for vehicles, with access either directly off MLK Jr. Blvd. or from Leo Harris Parkway. Entry 1 is located west of Autzen Stadium along the south side of MLK Jr. Blvd. Entry 2 is located east of Autzen Stadium along the south side of MLK Jr. Blvd. Entry 3 is located east of Autzen Stadium, at the intersection of MLK Jr. Blvd. and Kinsrow Avenue. Entries 4 and 5 are located southeast of Autzen Stadium, along the north side of Leo Harris Parkway. Entries 2, 3, 4, and 5 all serve the east parking lot. The Indoor Football Practice Facility project will utilize existing Entry 1 for primary vehicular access to the development site. Within the Autzen Stadium Complex existing off-street parking totals approximately 3,322 spaces (which includes 131 ADA-accessible parking spaces). On football game days additional off-street parking has been secured through off-site parking agreements between the UO and private parties. The UO has secured 1,822 off-site parking spaces for use on football game days. Additional off-site parking is provided by area hotels and other miscellaneous lots. A study of off-site parking in the vicinity of Autzen Stadium prepared by JRH Transportation in 2008 as part of WG 08-02 notes the existence of approximately 1,862 additional standard parking spaces and 10 bus parking spaces within 1/4-mile of the Autzen Stadium Complex. This includes: on-street parking spaces along Leo Harris Parkway, Kinsrow Blvd., and Centennial Loop, parking spaces in City-owned lots adjacent to the complex, and parking spaces in the Science Factory lots. These additional spaces, with the exception of those secured through off- site parking agreements, may not be counted towards Eugene Code requirements for parking at Autzen Stadium, per the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) governing parking at Autzen Stadium. The total inventory of parking spaces in the vicinity of Autzen Stadium is approximately 7,500 spaces; which includes existing parking spaces within the Autzen Stadium Complex, spaces secured through off-site parking agreements, and additional spaces outside these areas and within 1/4-mile. CAMERON MCCARTHY 7 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 The Eugene Code requires the UO to provide a minimum of 4,749 vehicle parking spaces on the Autzen Stadium Complex site or within 1,000-feet of that site (EC 9.641 0(3)(c)(1 )).2 The proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility project will be constructed on areas currently used as outdoor football practice fields and will not impact any parking spaces within the Autzen Stadium Complex site. As noted above, the UO has secured 1,822 off-site parking spaces for use on football game days, all of which are within 1,000-feet of the site and can be used to satisfy code requirements. Copies of the signed off-site parking agreements were provided to the City as part of the record for WG 10-05 and are included as Exhibit F Parking Agreements. The referenced off-site parking agreements are currently in effect. Existing on-site parking, following construction of the Casanova Indoor Football Practice Facility project, totals 3,322 parking spaces. On-site parking spaces plus off- site parking spaces under agreement total 5,144 vehicle parking spaces; or 395 parking spaces in excess of the code standard of 4,749 parking spaces, as illustrated in Table 1. Table 1. Available Parking at the Autzen Stadium Complex Site On-site Impacted Proposed Addition Total Spaces Spaces (Reduction) Existing On-site Parking 0 3,322 0 3,322 Off-site Existing Under Agreement 1,822 Total Parking Spaces Per EC 9.6410(3)(c)(1) 5,144 Surplus/(Deficit) 395 EC 9.6410(3)(c)(1) requires the UO to provide 4,749 parking spaces on-site or within 1000-feet of the site. Source: Cameron McCarthy, 2021. The Autzen Stadium Complex, and proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility site, is easily accessible by spectators using alternative modes of transportation (walking, biking, and transit). Many spectators walk to the complex from parking areas on the UO campus, downtown, or from area hotels using the Autzen Footbridge, Ferry Street Bridge, the riverside trail system, and public sidewalks along Coburg Road and MLK Jr. 2 EC 9.6410 notes that the minimum of 4,759 vehicle parking spaces is conditional so long as a city- approved intergovernmental agreement (IGA) incorporating a transportation demand management (TDM) plan for the Autzen Stadium Complex is in effect. The IGA between the UO and City of Eugene, and referenced TDM plan, is currently in effect. CAMERON MCCARTHY 8 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 Blvd. Prior construction at the complex resulted in the UO installing 8-foot wide setback sidewalks along the south side of MLKJr. Blvd., east of Leo Harris Parkway, and 8-foot wide curbside sidewalks along the north side of Leo Harris Parkway. Existing sidewalks along MLKJr. Blvd. and along the south side of Leo Harris Parkway west of the canoe canal are 12-feet wide. The area's network of on-street bike lanes and off-street paths also provides convenient bicycle access to the complex, where 427 bicycle parking spaces are provided (86 covered spaces and 341 uncovered spaces). The DeFazio Bridge and other improvements in the Ferry Street Bridge corridor provide capacity and access to the complex from the downtown and Coburg Road areas for spectators using alternative modes of transportation. Transit use for complex events is currently provided by a series of transit stops located along MLKJr. Blvd. CAMERON MCCARTHY 9 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application 4.0 DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION September 23, 2021 The applicant proposes to construct a new Indoor Football Practice Facility on University-owned property within the Autzen Stadium Complex site located at 2727 Leo Harris Parkway, as illustrated in the attached plans. Proposed improvements include: the Indoor Football Practice Facility; landscape and pedestrian improvements; a weight room expansion to the east that connects to the existing weight room through the Hatfield-Dowlin Complex; and associated site infrastructure. The new proposed practice facility is a 130,000 SF practice field that replaces an existing facility which is undersized. The new facility will allow the team to stay on schedule while ensuring a healthy environment for athletes, coaches, and staff. The proposed practice facility is longer and wider than the previous building, and extended field boundaries allow the team to set up for multiple types of drills concurrently, maximizing the efficiency of allotted practice time. The longer field also allows for a broader diversity of plays during practice, better preparing the athletes for competition. A 40,000 SF connector building bridges the practice field and the existing football operations building. This includes an expanded lower-level weight room and upper-level players' lounge to provide dedicated spaces for student athletes to prepare for games. Operable kinetic windows open the players' lounge to the practice field. Additional operable kinetic doors open the lounge to an exterior terrace with views of the Moshofsky Center, and creating a flexible multipurpose space where the team can study and gather between practices, or host special events. The proposal involves the replacement of the three existing outdoor playfields (Bob Kilkenny Field, Stephanie Kilkenny Field, and Bob Wilcox Family Field) with a new indoor practice facility. The west side of the new field facility includes a ground storage, equipment, and shop building, and the east side includes restrooms, secure equipment storage, medical space, a weight room expansion, additional athletic offices, and a player's lounge and outdoor gathering space. The building reflects the ethos of innovation that drives the University of Oregon. The efficient wood grid shell made from Oregon timber is curved into a signature form inspired by the University of Oregon "O." The center of the roof is paneled with tinted polymer ETFE panels, supported by a steel cable system, which allows for natural light to reach the field without harmful glare and insulates the interior against heat gain. Taking advantage of Oregon's largely mild climate, the building can be naturally ventilated for much of the year. CAMERON MCCARTHY 10 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 The new facility is designed to be low energy by employing natural ventilation and daylight for much of the year while maintaining ambient conditions that adhere to NCAA comfort guidelines, supplemented with an efficient HVAC system only when needed due to weather extremes. New tree plantings and a meadow mix are proposed along the western perimeter, abutting the facility and the intersection of Leo Harris Parkway and MLK Jr. Boulevard, as illustrated on Sheet 1-1.00 Materials and Planting Plan (Exhibit A). The proposed development includes several flexible plaza spaces. A north courtyard is located north of the site, and a new pedestrian access gate is proposed. In addition, a row of new trees are proposed along MLK Boulevard to the north and east. CAMERON MCCARTHY 11 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 5.0 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Filing Fee The required filling fee of $6,417.92 is provided via check with the initial submittal. 2. Written Statement This written statement is provided as part of initial application submittal. Findings of compliance with applicable criteria in EC 8.8815 are provided in Section 6.0. 3. Site Plan Requirements A copy of the Site Plan is provided as part of initial application submittal. One 8-1/2" x 11" copy of the Site Plan is included for public notice purposes. a. Show location of the Willamette River ordinary low water line and the distance from the proposed development. The Willamette River ordinary low water line is shown on the project vicinity map located on Sheet A0.000 Cover Sheet (Exhibit A). The proposed development is located approximately 2,200 from the ordinary low water line of the Willamette River as shown on the project vicinity map. b. Show the Greenway Boundary line. The Autzen Stadium Complex is within the Willamette River Greenway. The Greenway Boundary line is shown on Sheet 1-0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan (Exhibit A). C. Show vicinity map drawing on the subject site plan (does not need to be drawn to scale. A project Vicinity Map is included on Sheet A0.000 Cover Sheet (Exhibit A). d. Show location of all existing and proposed structures. Indicate whether the existing structures will remain or be removed. Existing structures are shown on Sheet C1.000 Existing Conditions Plan (Exhibit A). Proposed structures are shown on Sheet 1-1.000 Site Plan. CAMERON MCCARTHY 12 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 e. Submit a tabulation of coverage, including the amount of area covered by building(s), parking, and the amount of area devoted to open space. A tabulation of site coverage is included on Sheet L0.000 Cover Sheet (Exhibit A). Provide elevation drawings that portray the scale and appearance of proposed buildings. Elevation drawings that portray the scale and appearance of the proposed improvements are included as Sheet A3.000 Building Elevations (Exhibit A). g. Show all proposed grading for streets, building areas, and other proposed development. No streets are proposed. Proposed grading within the project area is shown on Sheet C3.000 Grading Plan (Exhibit A). h. Show date, north point, and standard engineer's scale on the site plan. Date, north arrow, and scale is indicated on all Plan Sheets. i. Show assessor's map and tax lot numbers on the site plan. The subject site is comprised of one parcel identified on Assessor's Map 17-03-29-40 as Tax Lot 00301. Assessor's Map and Tax Lot numbers are shown on Sheet L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan (Exhibit A). 4. Landscaping and Vegetation a. Show location, species and size of existing vegetation. Specify areas which include riparian vegetation. Location, species and size of existing vegetation is indicated on Sheets C1.000 Existing Conditions Plans (Exhibit A). Riparian vegetation associated with Patterson Slough is also shown on 1-0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan (Exhibit A). b. Show proposed landscaping scheme. Proposed landscaping is shown on Sheet 1-1.000 Site and Landscape Plan (Exhibit A). CAMERON MCCARTHY 13 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 C. Indicate means of irrigation. Proposed irrigation methods are noted on Sheet 1-1.000 Site and Landscape Plan (Exhibit A). d. Show open space and landscaping proposed for open space. Proposed open space and landscape areas are shown on Sheet 1-1.000 Site and Landscape Plan (Exhibit A) and discussed under the findings for EC 9.8815. e. Show size and species of existing trees on site that are 8 inches or more in diameter at DBH (4.5 feet above ground). Size and species of existing trees are indicated on Sheet C1.000 Existing Conditions (Exhibit A). 5. Significant Fish and Wildlife Habitat a. Identify any existing significant fish and wildlife habitats (as required by Section 9.8815(5) of the Eugene Code). The Metro Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Papers does not list any of the Autzen Stadium Complex site as a significant vegetation and wildlife area. The adopted Eugene Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan identifies Patterson Slough as a 'Wetland Designated for Protection' and 'Riparian Corridor Designated for Protection' (Goal 5 Water Resource Conservation Plan, Section IV, Map 13). Resource site E42-B is associated with the riparian corridor. Resource sites WKZ-IA and WKZ-1 B are associated with wetlands. The /WR Zone identifies site E42-B as a category'C' stream and applies a 40-foot conservation setback from the top-of-bank. The /WR Zone identifies sites WKZ-1A and WKZ-1 B as category'A' wetlands and applies a 50-foot conservation setback from the jurisdictional wetland boundary. Goal 5 Water Resource site boundaries and applicable conservation setbacks are shown on Sheet L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Overall Site Plan and Sheet 1-1.000 Site Plan (Exhibit A). Other than Patterson Slough, no area within the Autzen Stadium Complex site could be considered significant and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has not made any subsequent identifications. b. If applicable, show the specific locations of these habitats on the site plan. CAMERON MCCARTHY 14 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 Goal 5 Water Resource site boundaries and applicable conservation setbacks are shown on Sheet L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Overall Site Plan (Exhibit A). The Autzen Stadium Complex does not contain any significant fish and wildlife habitat areas. C. Describe potential impacts to these habitats resulting from the proposal, and provide any mitigation plan necessary to satisfy applicable criteria. The Indoor Football Practice Facility is located approximately 2,300 feet from Patterson Slough. No impacts to Goal 5 Water Resource sites or applicable conservation setbacks are proposed. The Autzen Stadium Complex does not contain any significant fish and wildlife habitat areas. This standard is not applicable. 6. Public Access Parking Area Development a. Show location, number, and dimensions of existing and proposed parking spaces, including aisle widths and disabled parking spaces. The location, number, and dimensions of existing parking spaces are shown on Sheet L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan (Exhibit A). b. Show location, dimensions, and number of bicycle parking spaces, including long-term and short-term bicycle parking. The location of existing bicycle parking spaces, including long-term and short-term is shown on Sheet L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan (Exhibit A). Dimensions and number of bicycle parking spaces are indicated on Sheet A0.000 Cover Sheet. C. Show landscaping and screening for parking area. Proposed landscaping and screening is shown on Sheet L1.000 Site and Landscape Plan (Exhibit A). d. Show means of protecting landscaping (i.e., curbs). Proposed curbs are shown on Sheet L1.000 Site and Landscape Plan (Exhibit A). e. Show location and height of proposed lighting for parking area. No parking area lighting is proposed. This requirement does not apply. CAMERON MCCARTHY 15 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 f. Show designated carpool and vanpool parking spaces for developments with 20 or more employees. The proposal does not involve a development with 20 or more employees. This requirement does not apply. 7. Wastewater Requirements a. Show the location and flow line elevation of the existing public wastewater sewer at proposed connection point(s). Location and flow line elevation of existing public wastewater lines are shown on Sheet C2.000 Utility and Stormwater Plan (Exhibit A). b. Show the existing and proposed wastewater sewer layout. Wastewater sewer lines are shown on Sheet C2.000 Utility and Stormwater Plan (Exhibit A). 8. Water Supply a. Show diameter of existing and proposed water main. The location and diameter of the existing and proposed water main in shown on Sheet C2.000 Utility and Stormwater Plan (Exhibit A). b. Show existing and proposed fire hydrants. Fire hydrants are shown on Sheet C2.000 Utility and Stormwater Plan (Exhibit A). 9. Contour Intervals a. Must be shown as below and must be based on City Bench Mark. The City Bench Mark used must be noted on the plans. The City Bench Mark is noted on Sheet C1.000 Existing Conditions Plans (Exhibit A). b. One-foot contour intervals for ground slopes up to five percent. One-foot contour intervals are shown on Sheet C1.000 Existing Conditions Plans (Exhibit A). CAMERON MCCARTHY 16 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 C. Two-foot contour intervals for ground slopes between five and ten percent. This requirement does not apply. d. Five-foot contour intervals for ground slopes exceeding ten percent. This requirement does not apply. e. Indicate which bench mark used. The City Bench Mark is indicated on Sheet C1.000 Existing Conditions Plans (Exhibit A). f. Existing vegetation to be preserved shall be shown on contour map. Existing vegetation is shown on Sheet C1.000 Existing Conditions Plans (Exhibit A). 10. Storm Drainage Requirements a. Show the location and flow line elevation of the existing piped public system at proposed connection point(s). Location and flow line elevation of the existing storm drainage lines are shown on Sheet C2.000 Utility and Stormwater Plan (Exhibit A). b. Show existing and proposed storm drainage, including disposition of storm water for all lots. Existing and proposed storm drainage, including disposition of storm water, is shown on Sheet C2.000 Utility and Stormwater Plan (Exhibit A). Disposition for the project will be met by offsite discharge to the existing public storm system in MLK Jr. Boulevard. C. A description of the extent to which a watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development, including a Stormwater analysis of pre- and post-development flows. This standard is not applicable. CAMERON MCCARTHY 17 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 d. If contributing stormwater runoff to a drainage-way, submit a stormwater analysis (3 copies) that addresses the capacity and any erosion issues of the downstream system. As noted above, stormwater destination requirements will be met via offsite discharge to the public storm drain system in MLK Jr. Boulevard. A stormwater analysis is included herein. e. Delineate areas subject to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regulations regarding inundations or storm water overflow, all areas covered by water, and the location, width, and direction of flow of all water courses and the base flood elevation. The entire site is within FEMA zone AE, as noted on Sheet C2.000 Utility and Stormwater Plan (Exhibit A). The location, width, and direction of flow of all water courses, as well as base flood elevations, are indicated on Sheets C2.000 Utility and Stormwater Plan and C3.000 Grading Plan. 11. Public Access --Circulation a. Show circulation patterns, including width of travel lanes. Circulation patterns and width of travel lanes are shown on Sheets L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan and L1.000 Site and Landscape Plan (Exhibit A). b. Show location and dimension of existing and proposed curb cuts. Location and dimension of existing curb cuts are shown on Sheet C1.000 Existing Conditions Site Plan (Exhibit A). No new curb cuts are proposed. C. Show existing and proposed pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths (including dimensions) and how they connect with adjacent properties. Existing and proposed pedestrian walkways, including dimensions, are shown on Sheets L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan and Sheet L1.000 Site and Landscape Plan (Exhibit A). Existing connections to adjacent properties are shown on Sheet L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan. d. Show public sidewalks. CAMERON MCCARTHY 18 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 Public sidewalks are shown on Sheets L0.000 Autzen Stadium Complex Site Plan and Sheet L1.000 Site and Landscape Plan (Exhibit A). e. Show any existing and proposed public access connections to, and along, the Willamette River. The proposed development is located approximately 2,200 feet from the Willamette River. Existing public access connections to and along the Willamette River are discussed in Section 4.0. No new public access connections are proposed. 12. Supporting Analysis and Documents a. Submit a Geotechnical Analysis, if required to satisfy applicable criteria. The Geotechnical Analysis Report for the subject site is included as Exhibit E. b. The applicant is responsible for meeting State/Federal wetland requirements. Submit a wetland determination and a letter of acceptance of the determination from the Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL) and if necessary, a wetland delineation report for potential wetlands identified on the Eugene Local Wetlands Inventory (LWI) maps, West Eugene Wetlands Plan (WEWP) maps, Wetland Determination reports, or other sources which indicate the potential presence of wetlands. The findings of an on-site delineation of the boundaries of jurisdictional wetlands in Patterson Slough was submitted with a prior Greenway application (WG 01-1). The delineation report received formal concurrence from the Oregon Division of Stand Lands on March 27, 2000 (WD #00-0094). No development is proposed within the conservation area setbacks applied to the Patterson Slough riparian or wetland sites. C. Submit a legal description of property included in the Willamette greenway application. The legal description(s) must be typed on an 81/2" x 11" white sheet of paper (no letterhead) so that it is suitable for recording. A legal description of the property included in the Willamette Greenway application, typed on 81/2" x 11" white paper, is included as Exhibit D. CAMERON MCCARTHY 19 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application 6.0 APPROVAL CRITERIA AND STANDARDS 6.1 Willamette Greenway Permit Criteria (EC 9.8815) September 23, 2021 The project site is within the boundaries of the Willamette River Greenway. Intensifications of uses, changes in use, or new developments within the Greenway require Willamette Greenway permit approval. The proposed project is considered an intensification of use and new development. Proper evaluation of this proposal must consider the criteria for development within the context of EC 9.8815, which defines the qualifying term "to the greatest degree possible" as follows: As used in this section, the words "the greatest possible degree "are drawn from Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 15 (F.3.b.) and are intended to require a balancing of factors so that each of the identified Willamette Greenway criteria is met to the greatest extent possible without precluding the requested use. Goal 15 (C.3.) provides that "lands committed to urban uses within the Greenwayshall be permitted to continue as urban uses..." Hearings Official approval of the prior Greenway permit application for development of the Moshofsky Center and outdoor athletic fields (WG 96-4) also considered this criterion within the context of established case law: In Stotter v. City of Eugene, 18 Or LUSA 135 (1989) the language ofa similar Eugene provision was construed. The Board determined that the standard does not mean that a proposed use in the Greenway has to be set back to the greatest possible degree but that, once the development is located according to the Willamette Greenway setback requirements and any local plan or land use regulation requirements, 'the maximum possible landscape area, open space and vegetation must be provided between the activity and the river.' Under this interpretation of the language of the criterion, the indoor practice facility and the parking on the south side of the facility can be located at the southern portion of the University of Oregon property. " Within the context of the above definition and interpretation, approval of a Willamette Greenway Permit under EC 9.8815 requires findings of compliance with the following: EC 9.8815: Willamette Greenway Permit Approval Criteria and Standards. Willamette Greenway permit approval may be granted only if the proposal CAMERON MCCARTHY 20 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 conforms to all the criteria in subsections (1) through (4), and the applicable standards of subsection (5) as follows: (1) To the greatest possible degree, the intensification, change of use, or development will provide the maximum possible landscaped area, open space, or vegetation between the activity and the river. The proposed project involves development of an Indoor Football Practice Facility, within the Greenway. The project is located entirely on University-owned land within the Public Land (PL) zoning district. All of the proposed improvements are well over 1/4- mile from the Willamette River. The Hearings Official in the prior approved Willamette Greenway permit for the Autzen Stadium expansion (WG 01-1) interpreted this criterion as follows: 'The intent of this criterion is, in large part, to ensure the continued integrity of the landscaping area and scenic qualities adjacent to the river, for the benefit of those enjoying the river's scenic and aesthetic attributes. " The Autzen Stadium Complex, and the proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility site within the complex, is separated from the river by the heavily wooded 375-acre Alton Baker Park. The park provides an extensive expanse of vegetation and natural landscaping along the river, which will not be impacted by the proposed project. The Indoor Football Practice Facility site occurs entirely in prior developed areas used as outdoor practice fields and surface parking and is further separated from the river by landscaping, surface parking, and Leo Harris Parkway to the south. The project site consists of an Indoor Football Practice Facility; landscape and pedestrian improvements; a weight room expansion to the east that connects to the existing weight room through the Hatfield-Dowlin Complex; and associated site infrastructure. The site is bounded by MLK Jr. Blvd. to the north, Autzen Stadium, the Hatfield-Dowlin Complex, Casanova Center, and the Moshofsky Center to the west, and Leo Harris Parkway to the south. All landscaping related to the proposed project will have minimal, if any impact on the river, or the scenic and aesthetic qualities sought to be maintained through this criterion. Because of the substantial distance between the Willamette River and the proposed project (2,200 feet), and the existing expanse of vegetation, open space and landscaping between the complex and the river, any changes in the landscaping proposed in conjunction with the proposed project will have minimal, if any, impact on the river's scenic qualities. CAMERON MCCARTHY 21 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 On the east side of the Autzen Stadium Complex, the Patterson Slough area contains existing vegetation and protected Goal 5 resources. Approximately 200 trees line both the east and west banks of the slough, within the existing east parking lot. The vegetation establishes a buffer between the complex site and developed residential areas to the west. The proposal will not impact vegetation associated with Patterson Slough. Regardless, and without minimizing the importance or integrity of existing vegetation along Patterson Slough, this vegetation has minimal, if any relevance to this criterion. This criterion is intended to maintain the scenic qualities of the Willamette River, and to ensure that intensification of development minimizes the impacts on the river's scenic qualities, as affirmed by the Hearings Official in WG 01-1. The proposed project will not adversely impact the existing significant landscape area, open space and vegetation between the stadium and the Willamette River. This criterion is satisfied. (2) To the greatest possible degree, necessary and adequate public access will be provided along the Willamette River by appropriate legal means. The proposal will have no impact on public access to and along the river. The development site itself has no physical frontage on the river and is separated from the river by Alton Baker Park. The Autzen Stadium Complex is removed from the Willamette River and intensification, change of use, or development within the Complex will not impact the public river access provided by Alton Baker Park. Necessary and adequate access from the Autzen Stadium Complex, and the Indoor Football Practice Facility site, to the Willamette River, and along the river, is provided by a series of multi- use paths in Alton Baker Park. The project is located north of Leo Harris Parkway, approximately 2,200 feet from the river, and will not alter the existing multi-use riverside path system to, along, and across the river. This criterion is satisfied. (3) The intensification, change of use, or development will conform with applicable Willamette Greenway policies as set forth in the Metro Plan. Willamette Greenway polices are established on pages III-D-4 and III-D-5 of the Metro Plan. Of these, several policies apply specifically to local government agency services, rather than individual property owners and land use proposals. Several other policies refer to situations or conditions that do not apply to the proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility project. To the extent that the proposed development constitutes "new development" that is located along a river corridor or waterway, the following policy is relevant: CAMERON MCCARTHY 22 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 Policy 5.• New development that locates along river corridors and waterways shall be limited to uses that are compatible with the natural, scenic, and environmental qualities of those water features. The Hearings Official in the Autzen Stadium Expansion decision (WG 01-1) found that Policy 5 specifically applies to "New development that locates along river corridors and waterways..." While the proposed site is within the Willamette River Greenway boundaries, it is located 2,200 feet from the river. The subject site is not located along the river corridor or waterway. The prior Greenway application for the Autzen Stadium Expansion (WG 01-1) provides evidence that the Autzen Stadium Complex is not considered part of the Willamette River corridor and describes the circumstances surrounding the inclusion of the complex within the Greenway Boundary. "Evidence that the Autzen Stadium Complex is not considered part of the Willamette River corridor can be found in the 1985 Willamette Greenway Management Proposal. As an implementation tool for the 1983 Eugene Parks Master Plan, the proposal was developed by a Willamette Greenway Study Committee that "took as its primary task to determine what'access' and 'natural vegetation and wildlife habitat' should be along Eugene's Willamette River corridor." (Willamette Greenway Management Proposal, Page 1). The Proposal's analysis, however, did not include the Autzen Stadium Complex, northern portion of Alton Baker Park, or the canoe canal as part of the river corridor. Because the Willamette Greenway Management Proposal did not include the Autzen Stadium Complex within the boundaries of its analysis of the river corridor, then the above Metro Plan policy is not applicable to this project or to the "specific land use action" (this Greenway permit application) referenced above. The fact that Autzen Stadium (built in 1967) is located within the Greenway boundary is a circumstance of the stadium area being in public ownership at the time the Greenway was established, rather than any physical characteristics of the area that would otherwise warrant its inclusion within the Greenway. The official Greenway boundary map - an aerial photograph depicting the stadium within an expansive parking area prior to development of either the canoe canal or Leo Harris Parkway - supports this observation. The canoe canal is a man- made waterway constructed in 1974 as part of a series of improvements to Alton Baker Park." The Indoor Football Practice Facility is located adjacent to two massive structures within the Autzen Stadium Complex, Autzen Stadium itself and the Moshofsky Center. The Moshofsky center is approximately 108,000 square feet in size and 72 feet tall at its CAMERON MCCARTHY 23 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 tallest point. The building is rectangular shaped and oriented with the longest side of the building, 450 feet long, spanning east to west. Autzen Stadium is the largest facility within the complex and towers over all other structures. Autzen's oval shaped design has large steep walls and spiraling access ramps on the east and west sides. The Indoor Football Practice Facility is approximately 208 feet in height. Per Sheet A1.100 Site Sections (Exhibit A), the proposed facility is roughly equivalent to the existing height of the Moshofsky Center, and slightly taller than the Hatfield-Dowlin Complex. The proposed facility will be visibly obstructed by Autzen Stadium to the west. The height, size, and location of existing structures within the Autzen Stadium Complex - Moshofsky Center, Hatfield-Dowlin Complex, Casanova Center, and Autzen Stadium - make the new indoor facility and associated developments visible from only the north and west, both of which directions from the site do not contain waterways and river corridors. As viewed from the south of the Autzen Stadium Complex, where Alton Baker Park and the Willamette River corridor are located, the new facility will not be visible and will be compatible, in form and material, to surrounding structures within the Autzen Stadium Complex. In regard to'waterways', the adopted Eugene Goal 5 Water Resources Conservation Plan identifies Patterson Slough as a 'Wetland Designated for Protection' and 'Riparian Corridor Designated for Protection' (Goal 5 Water Resource Conservation Plan, Section IV, Map 13). Resource site E42-B is associated with the riparian corridor. Resource sites WKZ-IA and WKZ-1 B are associated with wetlands. Eugene Ordinance No. 20351 applies the /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone to the subject property. Note that Patterson Slough, and associated resource sites, will not be impacted by the proposal and are not within the proposed development area, however Patterson Slough resource sites are within the vicinity of the project area and are therefore discussed in this context. The /WR Zone identifies site E42-B as a category'C' stream and applies a 40-foot conservation setback from the top-of-bank. The /WR Zone identifies sites WKZ-1A and WKZ-1 B as category'A' wetlands and applies a 50-foot conservation setback from the jurisdictional wetland boundary. The findings of an on- site delineation of the boundaries of jurisdictional wetlands in Patterson Slough was submitted with the prior Greenway application (WG 01-1). The delineation report received formal concurrence from the Oregon Division of State Lands on March 27, 2000 (WD #00-0094). No development is proposed within the conservation area setbacks applied to the Patterson Slough riparian or wetland sites. The Autzen Stadium Complex has been compatible with "the natural, scenic, and environmental qualities" of the river and Patterson Slough since the stadium was first constructed in 1967. Evidence of compatibility is demonstrated by the approval of six Greenway permits for the Moshofsky Center and outdoor athletic fields (WG 96-4), the CAMERON MCCARTHY 24 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 Autzen Stadium expansion (WG 01-1), Phase I of PK Park (WG 08-02), Phase II of PK Park (WG 08-03), the Soccer/Lacrosse Complex (Pape Field) (WG 10-04), and the Casanova Center Extension (Hatfield-Dowlin Complex) (WG 10-05). The Indoor Football Practice Facility is also not "new development" that is proposed for locating along the river. Rather, the proposal involves new development as part of a proposed expansion of an existing use. The proposal will not affect natural, scenic, and environmental qualities of the Willamette River corridor. The development site is located within the Autzen Stadium Complex, which is separated from the river by Alton Baker Park. Abutting the Autzen Stadium Complex, Alton Baker Park is approximately 1,700 feet wide and contains developed parkland, open space, and public access to the river. Alton Baker Park encloses the north bank of the Willamette River corridor and provides natural, scenic, and environmental qualities within the corridor area. This criterion is satisfied. (4) In areas subject to the Willakenzie Area Plan, the intensification, change of use, or development will conform with that plan's use management considerations. The project site is located within the boundaries of the Willakenzie Area Plan (WAP), an adopted refinement plan which imposes use management requirements consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 15 (see pages 154-156, Willakenzie Area Plan). The following use management standards apply to development within the Willamette Greenway in the WAP area. The policies are followed by findings addressing those policies. 1. Provisions that all new structures, expansion of existing structures, drives, parking area, or storage areas shall not be permitted within the first 35 feet from the top of the riverbank, unless the location of the floodway boundary requires a greater separation. There are three exceptions to this standard.- a. Structures designed solely for recreation use (e.g., a deck or steps leading to the river) and driveways for boat landings and water- related or water-dependent uses are permitted within the 35-foot setback. b. Public improvements, including pedestrian and bicycle trails, public plazas, and similar amenities, but excluding roads and parking areas, are exempt from the setback requirements specified above. c. Structures existing as of the date of adoption of this plan shall be allowed to rebuild at the same distance from the river that they were before destruction by fire, flood or other disaster. CAMERON MCCARTHY 25 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 This standard does not apply. The subject site is located approximately 2,200 feet from the top of the riverbank and the proposal does not include off-site improvements within the vicinity of the 35-foot setback. 2. Provision for public pedestrian and bicycle access along the river. The proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility will have no impact on the extensive system of existing public pedestrian and bicycle paths located off the Autzen Stadium Complex site within Alton Baker Park, between the complex and the river. Access to pedestrian and bicycle paths are provided by connecting sidewalks within the existing street system at Leo Harris Parkway and MLKJr. Blvd. This standard does not apply. 3. Provision that the area within the 35-foot setback area maybe included in any density calculation of a project. This standard does not apply. The subject site is not within the 35-foot setback area and, furthermore, has no density requirements. 4. Continuous building facades and opaque fences or walls exceeding 75 feet in length shall be discouraged within the Green way to allow for visual access to and from the river. The Hearings Official in the Autzen Stadium expansion decision (WG 01-1) provides an interpretation of this standard: 'The stated intent of this provision is to discourage large structures that could obscure views to and from the river. " As noted above the proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility is located approximately 2,200 feet from the river. With regard to views of the river, there are no surrounding properties across from the Autzen Stadium Complex, or the proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility site, which have any notable views of the river. Existing vegetation within Alton Baker Park screens any views from properties north of the complex and proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility site. As noted above, the Indoor Football Practice Facility is located adjacent to two massive structures within the Autzen Stadium Complex, Autzen Stadium itself and the Moshofsky Center. The Indoor Football Practice Facility is approximately 208 feet in height. Per Sheet AM 00 Site Sections (Exhibit A), the proposed facility is roughly equivalent to the existing height of the Moshofsky Center, and slightly taller than the CAMERON MCCARTHY 26 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 Hatfield-Dowlin Complex. The proposed facility will be visibly obstructed by Autzen Stadium to the west. The height, size, and location of existing structures within the Autzen Stadium Complex - Moshofsky Center, Hatfield-Dowlin Complex, Casanova Center, and Autzen Stadium - make the new indoor facility and associated developments visible from only the north and west, both of which directions from the site do not contain waterways and river corridors. As viewed from the south of the Autzen Stadium Complex, where Alton Baker Park and the Willamette River corridor are located, the new facility will not be visible and will be indistinguishable amongst surrounding structures within the Autzen Stadium Complex. As illustrated by the attached plans, existing vegetation within Alton Baker Park currently precludes views to the river from surrounding properties to the north, and proposed development associated with the Indoor Football Practice Facility will not have a measurable impact on visual access to and from the river. Additionally, the project site will not be visible from any location along the banks of the river itself. This above standard "discourages" continuous building facades and opaque fences within the Willamette Greenway. The existing development on the Autzen Stadium Complex site, the intervening park vegetation, and the distance of the project site from the river sufficiently address the impact of the proposed complex on visual access to and from the river. The proposal is consistent with this standard. 5. Activities or uses such as open storage of materials shall be discouraged within the greenway. Open storage of materials is not proposed as part of the project. Any outdoor storage areas, trash receptacles, etc. that may be located on the subject site will be subject to screening standards outlined in EC 9.6740 and will be addressed during building permit review. Furthermore, the IGA between the City and UO addresses the placement and maintenance of trash receptacles. The proposal is consistent with this standard. 6. Except from small identity and directional signs, business signs shall be oriented away from the river. The proposal does not include any business signs oriented toward the river. All directional and other proposed signage is located on the property and away from the river. Any signs that may be located on the subject site will be subject to sign standards outlined in EC 9.6600 - EC 9.6680. The proposal is consistent with this standard. 7 Significant fish and wildlife habitats, as identified in the adopted Natural Resources Special Study, or Metropolitan Plan Natural Assets CAMERON MCCARTHY 27 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 and Constraints Working Paper shall be protected. Sites subsequently determined to be significant by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife shall also be protected. The Metro Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Papers does not list any of the Autzen Stadium Complex as a significant vegetation and wildlife area. The Natural Resource Special Study has not been adopted. The draft Natural Resource Special Study (NRSS) lists Patterson Slough, east of the subject site, as part of Site E-42 (Alton Baker Riparian). There are two portions of Patterson Slough within the Autzen Stadium Complex, bisected by an existing roadway connecting the main parking area to the intersection of MLK Jr. Blvd. and Kinsrow Ave. The applicant previously submitted a detailed on-site delineation of wetlands associated with Patterson Slough as part of the prior Greenway application (WG 01-1). The proposed project will not impact wetlands or riparian vegetation associated with Patterson Slough. Other than Patterson Slough, no area within the Autzen Stadium Complex site could be considered significant and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has not made any subsequent identifications. This proposal is consistent with this standard. 8. The natural vegetative riparian fringe along the Willamette River, as identified on the Willakenzie Area Plan Natural Resource Area Map, shall be protected and enhanced to the maximum extent practicable. As shown on the Willakenzie Area Plan Natural Resource Areas Map (page 158 of the WAP), the riparian fringe does not extend to the subject site. The project is located 2,200 feet from the Willamette River and has no impact on the natural vegetative riparian fringe along the river. This standard is satisfied. 9. Scenic qualities and viewpoints, as identified in the Metro Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper shall be preserved. The Metro Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper does not identify any scenic qualities or viewpoints for preservation on the subject site, nor will the proposal affect areas in Alton Baker Park identified as having "prominent and plentiful vegetation." The proposal is consistent with this standard. Based on the above findings and condition, the proposal is consistent with EC 9.8815(4). (5) In areas not covered by subsection (4) of this section, the intensification, change of use, or development shall conform with the following applicable standards: CAMERON MCCARTHY 28 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 The project site is within the boundaries of the Willakenzie Area Plan. Therefore, the project site is covered by EC 9.8815(4) above. The proposal does not involve aggregate extraction. This criterion is not applicable. (6) When site review approval is required, the proposed development will be consistent with the applicable site review criteria. The subject property is within the PL Public Land Zone (EC 9.2680 through EC 9.2687). The provisions of EC 9.2690 through EC 9.2687 are applicable only to areas zoned PL which are not included on the city's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory. The subject property is included on the city's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory and Eugene Ordinance No. 20351 applies the /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone to the subject property. Therefore, sections 9.400 through 9.404 of the City's land use code in effect on July 31, 2001, including references therein (EC 9.2681 (1)), apply to the subject property. Per EC 9.402(c), public buildings and uses are permitted outright in the PL zone. Site Review approval is not required for the proposed use. This criterion does not apply. (7) The proposal complies with all applicable standards explicitly addressed in the application. An approved adjustment to a standard pursuant to provisions beginning at EC 9.8015 of this land use code constitutes compliance with the standard. As previously noted, no adjustments are proposed pursuant to the provisions beginning at EC 9.8015. A comprehensive review for compliance with applicable standards will be addressed as part of the building permit process as necessary. As demonstrated above, the proposal complies with all applicable standards fully and clearly expressed in EC 9.8815(1) through (7). This criterion is satisfied. CAMERON MCCARTHY 29 University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 EXHIBITS CAMERON MCCARTHY A University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 EXHIBIT A PLAN SET CAMERON MCCARTHY A University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 EXHIBIT B RENDERINGS CAMERON MCCARTHY University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 EXHIBIT C STORMWATER ANALYSIS CAMERON MCCARTHY University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 EXHIBIT D LEGAL DESCRIPTION CAMERON MCCARTHY University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 EXHIBIT E GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS CAMERON MCCARTHY University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit Application September 23, 2021 EXHIBIT F PARKING AGREEMENTS CAMERON MCCARTHY c K1nn\ /ENGINEERING 160 MADISON STREET, SUITE A EUGENE, OREGON 97402 541.513.3376 TECH MEMO DATE: September 9, 2021 TO: Colin McArthur, AICP Cameron McCarthy FROM: Kelly Sandow, P.E. Sandow Engineering RE: Peak Hour Trip Generation - University of Oregon Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway Permit As per your request, the following provides a peak hour trip generation estimate for the University of Oregon's proposed Indoor Football Practice Facility Willamette Greenway permit. Project Information The U of O is proposing the construction of a new indoor football practice facility within the Autzen Stadium complex. Currently on the west side of the complex (west of the Moshofsky Center and Hatfield Dowlin Complex) there are two outdoor practice football fields. The proposal is to replace both of the two outdoor practice fields with one indoor practice field. The new 152,510 square foot building contains the practice field and accessory areas, RENEWAL 06/30/22 mechanical areas, storage, and an expansion to the weight room. Tech Memo From: Kelly Sandow PE RE: Willamette Greenway Peak Hour Trip Gen Date: 9.9.21 The football team currently uses the existing Moshofsky Center for indoor practice. The current uses within the existing Moshofsky Center will be moved to the new facility and some of the facilities at the Hatfield-Dowlin Complex will be expanded into the new buildings. The new facility does not increase activity to the site, rather expands area available for the existing uses. The existing Moshofsky Center is planned to be repurposed for dedicated use as an indoor practice facility for the baseball and soccer teams. These teams currently hold practices within the sports complex (outdoor facilities). The existing Moshofsky Center will provide an option for indoor practice when weather is inclement. Trip Generation Estimate In general the peak hour trips are estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manuals for new facilities. However, this new building is considered an upgrade to the existing facilities on site. Therefore, the new indoor football facility is estimated to not increase vehicle trips to the site. The following provides further discussion regarding the use and trips on site: 1. The new building will be used exclusively as an indoor practice facility for the football program. This use already occurs on site at the existing Moshofsky Center. Additionally, the new building is explicitly replacing the outdoor practice field currently in use by the football program. While the new building will have a larger square footage than the existing outdoor practice field. The increase in square footage provides storage, mechanical areas and additional workout areas. The building does not increase trips to the site that are not already present on site. In summary, the proposed building replaces the existing uses on site and will not generate any new trips. 2. The existing Moshofsky Center will be repurposed for use as an indoor practice facility for the baseball and soccer teams. Both teams currently practice within the complex. The existing Moshofsky Center will provide the teams with practice facilities during inclement weather/air quality conditions The repurposing of the existing Moshofsky Center for use of an indoor practice facility for baseball and soccer will not add any additional trips to the site. 3. The practice facility does not increase attendance to football games, baseball games, soccer games, or day to day operations. Tech Memo From: Kelly Sandow PE RE: Willamette Greenway Peak Hour Trip Gen Date: 9.9.21 Conclusion: As per EC 9.8670 the City of Eugene considers impacts to a system based on the peak hours which are defined as the weekday AM, weekday PM, and Saturday Afternoon time periods. The new building will be converting the existing outdoor football practice field into an indoor football practice filed. The existing indoor football practice field will become an indoor practice field for the baseball and soccer programs which already occur on site. The site will not generate any new trips beyond what is currently generated. Memorandum Page 1 of 2 lqjff DATE: September 2, 2021 PROJECT: 2100102-2. M 0 TO: Colin McArthur Cameron McCarthy PHONE: 458-234-6354 EMAIL: cmcarthur@cameronmccarthy.com SUBJECT: Stormwater Treatment FROM: Kim Dorr KPFF Consulting Engineers PHONE: 503-664-3951 EMAIL: Kim.dorr@kpff.com This memo has been prepared to address Willamette Greenway Permit requirements for the proposed indoor football practice facility on the University of Oregon's Autzen Stadium site, west of the Hatfield Dowlin Complex. This memo describes how the proposed design meets the requirements of the City of Eugene Stormwater Management Manual and Eugene City Code, including stormwater quality, flood control, flow control, oil control, and source control. Existing Conditions The 10-acre development site consists of two turfed football practice fields and one grass practice field utilized by the University of Oregon (UO) football team. The three outdoor practice fields are bound by Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd to the north, Leo Harris Pkwy to the west and south, and the Moshofksy Athletic Center and Hatfield Dowlin Complex to the east. The development site soil composition is characterized as Hydrologic Soil Group Type A based on the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey for the project area. Soils of this group type typically have a high infiltration rate with low runoff potential. The overall site is served by a private 15-inch storm main that belongs to the University and discharges to an existing public 42-inch storm main in Leo Harris Pkwy. The 42-inch line flows west where it eventually outfalls to the Q Street Channel. At the northern, downstream end of the private 15-inch main, there is a water quality manhole that provides treatment for all drainage collected on the development site. Proposed Conditions The proposed conditions include an indoor football practice facility with connection to the Hatfield Dowlin Complex and new drainage infrastructure that includes roof drains and stormwater treatment. The proposed development will drain to a water quality manhole at the northwest corner of the site before discharging to the public main in Leo Harris Pkwy. Stormwater Quality The city of Eugene requires water quality treatment of an equivalent area for all new or replaced impervious surfaces. The 2014 City of Eugene Stormwater Management Manual (SWMM) implements a hierarchy system in which infiltration facilities must be considered first. If infiltration is not possible, filtration facilities must be sized; and finally, if the site has insufficient room for filtration facilities, a greatly increased SDC fee may be paid. 800 Willamette Street, Suite 400, Eugene, OR 97401 541.684.4902 FAX 541.684.4909 Eugene, OR Portland, OR Memorandum Page 2 of 2 September 2, 2021 lqjff infiltration was explored by the design team but was deemed infeasible, due to the presence of season-high groundwater. Several options for vegetated treatment were studies through the development site. Due to the limited space for a vegetated treatment facility and the nature of the use surrounding the practice facility, vegetated treatment was not possible. Mechanical treatment will be used to treat all drainage from the proposed development area. As stated above, a water quality manhole will be utilized to treat all incoming runoff from the site. Flood Control The destination of treated runoff leaving the site is a 42-inch public storm main located in Leo Harris Pkwy. The stormwater main flows east and outfalls into the Q Street Channel. The City of Eugene Stormwater Master Plan lists no capacity concerns for the 42-inch storm main. Therefore, per flood control standards, no detention or retention of stormwater will be required. Flow Control The proposed site is not above 500 feet, and there are no capacity issues with the public storm system, so flow control requirements do not apply. Source Control & Oil Control The proposed project does not include any facilities that are highly likely to generate pollutants that cannot be addressed through mechanical treatment, so source control is not required. Similarly, the project does not include the construction of any large parking lots or vehicle storage, so oil control requirements do not apply. COPIES: Colin McArthur, Cameron McCarthy, cmcarthur@cameronmccarthy.com Laura Sinn, Olson Kundig, lauras@olsonkundig.com 2100102- sb AUTZEN STADIUM COMPLEX PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A parcel of land lying in the Southwest one-quarter (SW 1/4) of Section 28 and Southeast one-quarter (SE 1/4) of Section 29, Township 17 South, Range 3 West, Willamette Meridian, said parcel being described as follows: Beginning at the corner common to Sections 28, 29, 32, and 33 in Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence run North 87° 51' West 100.0 feet; thence North 292.90 feet; thence North 61° 42' 14" West 366.22 feet: thence North 66° 25' 32" West 161.33 feet; thence North 71° 08' 50" West 369.06 feet; thence North 18° 51' 10" East 30.0 feet; thence North 71° 08' 50" West 260.0 feet; thence North 49° 07' 38" West 1059.04 feet; thence North 0° 29' 10" East 211.94 feet; thence North 88° 57' 30" East 2360.49 feet; thence South 84° 37' 30" East 276.69 feet; thence South 84° 32' 30" East 93.42 feet to a point Southerly and 80 feet opposite Centennial Boulevard Engineers Centerline Station L 47+39.24 P.C.S.; thence along the arc of a 492.96 foot radius curve right (the chord of which bears South 52° 32' 02" East 313.03 feet) a distance of 318.62 feet East to a point Southerly and 80 feet opposite Engineers Centerline Station L 43+68.91 P.S.C.; thence along the arc of a spiral curve right, the chord of which bears South 20° 25' 05" East 370.10 feet (said spiral curve being Southerly and 80 feet opposite and parallel to the 400 foot centerline spiral curve having an `a' value of 2.5) to a point Southerly and 80 feet opposite Engineers Centerline Station L% 39+68.91 P.S.C.; thence South 14° 00' 30" East 465.81 feet, to a point Southerly and 80 feet opposite Engineers Centerline Station L5 35.03.10 P.T.; thence along the arc of a spiral curve left, the chord of which bears South 16° 19' 5" East 242.43 feet (said spiral curve being Southerly and 80 feet opposite and parallel to the 400 foot centerline spiral curve having an `a' value of 2.5) to a point Southerly and 80 feet opposite Engineers Centerline Station L5 32+70 P.O.S.; thence South 62° 04' 32" West 344.33 feet; thence South 14° 00' 30" East 346.28 feet; thence North 87° 59' 00" West 1041.33 feet; to a concrete monument set by Simon Kiovdahl; thence North 87v 51' West 71.16 feet to the point of the beginning, all in Lane County Oregon. The bearings used herein are based upon the Oregon Coordinate System South Zone. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation 2.M0 Indoor Football Practice Facility University of Oregon Eugene, Oregon August 26, 2021 Prepared for University of Oregon Foundation Phit TOO, LLC, an Oregon Corporation 1720 E 13th Avenue, Suite 410 Eugene, OR 97403 In care of inici group, LLC 4640 S Macadam Avenue, Suite 100 Portland, OR 97239 Prepared by 9750 SW Nimbus Avenue Beaverton, OR 97008-7172 (503) 641-3478 1 www.gri.com DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 3 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 3.1 General .................................................................................................................................................................2 3.2 Geology ................................................................................................................................................................2 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2 4.1 General .................................................................................................................................................................2 4.2 Soils .......................................................................................................................................................................3 4.3 Groundwater ......................................................................................................................................................6 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 5.1 General .................................................................................................................................................................6 5.2 Site Preparation and Earthwork ..................................................................................................................7 5.3 Temporary Excavations and Groundwater Management ...............................................................10 5.4 Foundation Support ......................................................................................................................................12 5.5 Floor Support ...................................................................................................................................................17 5.6 Embedded Structures ...................................................................................................................................18 5.7 Seismic Considerations ................................................................................................................................19 6 DESIGN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 22 7 LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................................22 TABLES Table 5-1: Recommended MCER Response Spectral Values for RHA, 5% Damping ...................20 Table 5-2: Recommended SLE Response Spectral Values, 2% Damping .......................................................21 APPENDICES Appendix A: Subsurface Explorations and Laboratory Testing Appendix B: Site-Specific Seismic-Hazard Evaluation and Site-Response Analysis Appendix C: Ground Motions for Nonlinear Response History Analysis FIGURES Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Site Map Figure 3: Foundation Overexcavation Detail Figure 4: Surcharge-Induced Lateral Pressure Figure 5: Typical Subdrainage Details GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility August 26, 2021 DRAFT 1 INTRODUCTION As requested, GRI completed a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the proposed 2.M0 Indoor Football Practice Facility at the University of Oregon (UO) in Eugene, Oregon. The general location of the project site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate subsurface conditions at the site and develop geotechnical conclusions and recommendations for design and construction of the project. The investigation included a review of existing subsurface information for the project area, subsurface explorations, laboratory testing, and engineering analyses. This report describes the work accomplished and provides our preliminary geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the project. During final design, these preliminary recommendations will be reviewed and a final geotechnical report will be provided for the project. 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Our understanding of the project is based on information you provided, including a March 17, 2021, geotechnical scope of work document prepared by Walter P. Moore and Associates, Inc., and KPFF, Inc., the structural and civil engineers for the project, respectively. On this basis, we understand the project will include construction of a new indoor practice field facility in the area located immediately west of the existing UO Hatfield-Dowlin Complex. We understand the new facility will consist of a large, single- story, clear-span roof and shell structure that will be established near existing site grades and have a footprint on the order of 250 feet by 700 feet. Ancillary mechanical and storage areas will be present at the western end of the structure, and a separate, free-standing, three-story building housing a weight room and player's lounge will be constructed at the eastern end of the structure and immediately adjacent to the existing Hatfield-Dowlin Complex. Depending on the final configuration of the facility and any connections to the existing complex, differential settlements between new and existing structures and/or potential impacts to existing structures could be significant considerations for design. Preliminary grading plans for the project are unavailable at this time, although we anticipate the maximum height of cuts and fills for overall site grading will be less than about 5 feet. We understand the new roof and shell structure will be supported by isolated columns spaced about every 10 feet along the perimeter of the structure. Typical gravity loads will be resisted by the perimeter columns, while lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces will be resisted primarily by four sets of interior "abutment" columns located near the corners of the practice field. Preliminary information indicates the perimeter roof columns will have maximum dead, live, and lateral loads on the order of 150 kips, 125 kips, and 30 kips, respectively, and will be supported by isolated or continuous spread footings. Estimated loads for the abutment columns are still being developed at this time; however, we GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 1 August 26, 2021 DRAFT understand the abutment columns will be supported by mat foundations that may be equipped with ground anchors to resist uplift loading. Information regarding the planned type and configuration of the separate three-story weight room/lounge building is currently unavailable. However, we understand maximum columns loads for the building will be on the order of 300 kips of dead load, 300 kips of live load, and 75 kips of lateral load and will likely be supported by conventional spread footings. We understand the project will be designed in accordance with the 2019 Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC). Seismic design in accordance with the 2019 OSSC is based on the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-16 Document, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7-16). Anticipated seismic loading and performance criteria for the new structures are currently unavailable. 3 SITE DESCRIPTION 3.1 General The site of the proposed facility is bounded by Leo Harris Parkway to the south and west, Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to the north, and the existing Hatfield-Dowlin Complex to the east. The site is currently occupied by natural and synthetic turf outdoor practice fields, areas of landscaping and walkways, and maintenance facilities. Our review of available topographic information and our experience at the site indicate the ground surface in the existing field areas is relatively flat and near elevation 412 feet (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 [NGVD 291). The ground surface surrounding the site is generally above field grades, and landscape berms and/or retaining walls up to about 15 feet tall separate the fields from the surrounding areas. 3.2 Geology The results of this investigation and our experience in the project area indicate the site is typically mantled with alluvial gravel and cobbles that contain varying amounts of sand and silt. The alluvium is underlain by highly variable sand, gravel, silt, and clay soils that are derived from the weathering and decomposition of volcanic mudstone. These soils are underlain by predominantly silt and clay soils derived from the weathering and decomposition of sedimentary rock of the Eugene Formation that is present at greater depths. Our experience and review of available subsurface information for the project area indicates the depth to bedrock at the site is likely on the order of 150 feet to 250 feet. 4 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 4.1 General Subsurface materials and conditions at the site were evaluated between March 24 and July 8, 2021, with 11 borings, designated B-1 through B-11, and three cone penetration test GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 2 August 26, 2021 DRAFT (CPT) probes, designated P-1, P-5, and P-11. The CPT probes were advanced through previously backfilled borings to obtain specific information for seismic evaluations and are not discussed in significant detail below. The explorations were advanced to depths of about 19 feet to 100 feet below existing site grades at the approximate locations shown on the Site Map, Figure 2. Logs of the explorations are provided on Figures 1A through 14A. The terms and symbols used to describe the materials encountered in the explorations are defined in Tables 1A through 2A and the attached legend. Additional information regarding the subsurface-exploration and laboratory-testing programs completed for this investigation is provided in Appendix A. As part of our investigation, we also reviewed available subsurface information for the immediate project area, including the results of three drilled borings completed between 1996 and 2010. These borings were advanced to depths of about 30 feet to 150 feet below previous site grades at the approximate locations shown on Figure 2. Logs of the explorations are attached in Appendix A for reference and disclosed similar subsurface conditions to those encountered during this investigation. 4.2 Soils The explorations completed for this investigation generally encountered a layer of field surfacing material that typically extends to depths of about 2 feet to 3 feet below the ground surface. The surfacing materials consists of natural or synthetic field turf underlain by sand and pea gravel or open-graded crushed rock used for drainage purposes. Variable fill ranging from silt to sand was encountered beneath the field surfacing in some of the explorations and extends to a maximum depth of about 8 feet. These surficial materials are underlain by alluvium and possible fill consisting of gravel and cobbles that extend to depths of about 16 feet to 24 feet. The gravel and cobbles are underlain by sand, and gravel, silt, and clay soils derived from the weathering and decomposition of volcanic mudstone, which in turn are underlain by predominantly silt and clay soils derived from the weathering and decomposition of sedimentary rock. The materials encountered in the explorations completed for this investigation are similar to those encountered during our geotechnical investigations for other nearby projects. For the purpose of discussion, the materials disclosed by the explorations have been grouped into the following units based on their physical characteristics and engineering properties: a. FIELD SURFACING b. FILL c. GRAVEL and COBBLES (Alluvium/Possible Fill) d. SAND, GRAVEL, SILT, and CLAY (Decomposed Volcanic Mudstone) e. SAND, SILT, and CLAY (Decomposed Sandstone/Siltstone) GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 3 August 26, 2021 DRAFT The following paragraphs provide a description of the materials encountered and a discussion of the groundwater conditions at the site. a. FIELD SURFACING Borings B-1 through B-5, B-7, and B-11 were advanced in the natural turf field located at the western limits of the site (Wilcox Family Field) and encountered grass turf at the ground surface underlain by an approximately 2- to 5-foot-thick drainage layer consisting of sand and pea gravel. Borings B-6 and B-8 through B-10 were advanced along the north and south perimeters of the synthetic turf field located at the northeastern limits of the site (Bob Kilkenny Field) and encountered about 1.5 inches of synthetic turf at the ground surface underlain by an approximately 8-inch-thick drainage layer consisting of open- graded crushed rock, which is underlain by a nonwoven geotextile fabric. b. FILL Fill consisting of sand and silt were encountered beneath the field surfacing in borings B- 5, B-7, B-9, and B-11 and extends to depths of about 7 feet to 8 feet below the ground surface. The sand fill is typically brown, fine to coarse grained, and has a varying silt content ranging from some silt to silty. The relative density of the sand fill ranges from very loose to loose. The silt fill is typically dark brown to dark gray and contains trace to some sand and clay and scattered or a trace of gravel. Organic odors and scattered wood debris were observed in some samples of the silt fill. The relative consistency of the silt fill ranges from medium stiff to stiff. The natural moisture content of the sand and silt fill ranges from about 22% to 35%. It should be acknowledged that variations in this soil unit may be present that are not reflected in this description or the attached boring logs. In this regard, although not observed in the borings, our experience indicates that more significant amounts of wood debris may be present in the fill. c. GRAVEL and COBBLES (Alluvium/Possible Fill) Gravel and cobbles were encountered beneath the field-surfacing materials and fill soils that mantle the site and extend to depths of about 15.8 feet to 24 feet below the ground surface. Based on our review of historical aerial photographs and our experience in the project area, we anticipate regrading of the site could have occurred during previous phases of development and on-site soils could have been used as fill. In this regard, some of the gravel and cobbles may consist of reworked native soils, although obvious indications of fill were not observed during our investigation. For this reason, the gravel and cobbles will be referred to as "alluvium/possible fill" with the understanding that the upper portion of the unit may be fill and the bottom portion is likely undisturbed alluvium. The gravel and cobbles are typically subrounded to rounded and contain a variable sand and silt content ranging from some sand to sandy and trace to some silt. Although not GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 4 August 26, 2021 DRAFT observed in the borings, our experience in the project area indicates boulders are likely present in the gravel and cobbles. Similarly, our experience indicates wood debris could be present in the possible fill. The relative density of the gravel and cobbles generally ranges from loose to very dense and is typically medium dense to dense. The results of grain-size analyses on samples of the gravel and cobbles are provided on Figures 15A and 16A. It should be noted that the grain-size analyses were completed on disturbed samples obtained from the borings, and therefore may differ from actual conditions. It should be noted that significant loss of drilling fluid was observed in some locations in the gravel and cobbles, indicating "open-work" zones, or material with little sand and silt content. Open-work gravel and cobble deposits have a high permeability and are generally capable of allowing significant groundwater flows and accepting large volumes of drilling fluid or grout, which can be important considerations fortemporary excavation dewatering and the installation of grouted ground anchors. d. SAND, GRAVEL, SILT and CLAY (Decomposed Volcanic Mudstone) Soils derived from the weathering and decomposition of volcanic mudstone were encountered beneath the gravel and cobbles and extend to depths of about 20.7 feet to 50 feet below the ground surface. These soils are highly variable and range from sand to gravel to silt and clay. The gravel portion of the decomposed volcanic mudstone is generally subrounded to rounded, silty, and sandy. The sand portion of the decomposed volcanic mudstone is typically silty and contains scattered gravel. The silt and clay portions of the decomposed volcanic mudstone typically contain varying amounts of sand and scattered gravel. In general, the decomposed volcanic mudstone unit grades from coarse grained to more fine grained with depth. The relative density of the sand and gravel portions of the unit generally ranges from medium dense to very dense and the relative consistency of the silt and clay portions of the unit ranges from stiff to hard. The natural moisture content of the sand ranges from about 22% to 54%, and the natural moisture content of the silt and clay ranges from about 17% to 59%. The results of Atterberg-limits determinations for a sample of the decomposed volcanic mudstone are summarized on Figure 17A and indicate the soil has a moderate plasticity with a plasticity index value of about 16%. The results of laboratory consolidation testing completed on a sample of the decomposed volcanic mudstone are summarized on Figure 19A and indicate the soil is typically moderately to heavily overconsolidated and has a low compressibility in the overconsolidated range of pressures. Boring B-11 was terminated in the decomposed volcanic mudstone at a depth of about 26.5 feet. e. SAND, SILT, and CLAY (Decomposed Sandstone/Siltstone) Soils derived from the weathering and decomposition of sedimentary rock were encountered beneath the decomposed volcanic mudstone and extend to the maximum GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 5 August 26, 2021 DRAFT depths explored. The soils range from sand to silt and clay and are less variable in terms of composition and relative consistency compared to the overlying volcanic soils. In general, the sand soils are silty and contain a trace of clay. The silt and clay soils generally have a variable sand content ranging from a trace of sand to sandy. The relative density of the sand typically ranges from loose to medium dense. The relative consistency of the silt and clay soils ranges from medium stiff to hard and is typically stiff to very stiff. The natural moisture content of the sand ranges from about 42% to 44%, and the natural moisture content of the silt and clay ranges from about 34% to 60%. The results of Atterberg-limits determinations for samples of the decomposed siltstone/sandstone are summarized on Figure 17A and indicate the soil has a moderate to high plasticity, with plasticity index values of about 26% to 43%. The results of laboratory consolidation testing completed on a sample of the decomposed siltstone/sandstone are summarized on Figure 18A and indicate the soil is typically moderately to heavily overconsolidated and has a low compressibility in the overconsolidated range of pressures. All the remaining borings were terminated in the decomposed siltstone/sandstone at depths ranging from about 33.5 feet to 81.5 feet. 4.3 Groundwater The borings for this project were completed using mud-rotary drilling techniques, which do not allow direct measurement of groundwater levels at the time of drilling. However, our experience indicates relatively shallow groundwater levels are common in the project area throughout most of the year. To allow measurement and continuous monitoring of groundwater levels at the site, an electronic vibrating-wire piezometer equipped with a datalogger was installed at a depth of about 16 feet below the ground surface in boring B-3. Groundwater levels measured by the piezometer between June 3 and August 13, 2021, ranged from about 6.5 feet to 7.5 feet below the ground surface, which is consistent with our observations at nearby sites. We anticipate the groundwater level at the site will fluctuate in response to seasonal precipitation and the level of the nearby sloughs, ponds, and Willamette River and may approach the ground surface during periods of heavy or prolonged precipitation. In this regard, we understand design flood elevations at the site are typically above existing ground-surface elevations. 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General The results of our investigation indicate the site is generally mantled with field surfacing materials that extend to a maximum depth of about 5 feet. Fill soils consisting of silt and sand were encountered in some locations and extend to a maximum depth of about 8 feet. Scattered wood debris and organics were observed in some of the fill, and our experience in the project area suggests fill materials containing larger amounts of wood and other debris may be present at the site, which could be a significant consideration GRI #6497-A - 2.M0 Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 6 August 26, 2021 DRAFT during construction of the project. The field-surfacing materials and fill are underlain by relatively dense gravel and cobbles, which in turn are underlain by relatively dense/stiff sand, gravel, silt, and clay soils derived from the weathering and decomposition of volcanic mudstone and sedimentary rock. Groundwater levels at the site were measured at depths ranging from about 6.5 feet to 7.5 feet between June 3 and August 13, 2021, and we anticipate higher groundwater levels are likely to occur during the wet winter and spring months. As previously discussed, we understand design flood elevations are above the ground surface over much of the site. In our opinion, the primary geotechnical considerations associated with the project include the presence of fill and possible fill soils and relatively high seasonal groundwater levels at the site. Although not encountered during this investigation, the presence of wood and other debris in the fill and possible fill soils at nearby sites presents a risk of encountering unsuitable materials during construction of the project. Our experience with nearby projects indicates groundwater seepage into temporary excavations extending below the groundwater level can be a significant consideration for construction, particularly where zones of more permeable material are present. The results of our investigation indicate the new structures can be supported by shallow foundations as planned, provided the allowable bearing pressures and estimated settlements provided in this report are considered acceptable. In our opinion, the fill soils at the site are generally not suitable for foundation support but may be suitable for support of field surfaces, hardscaping, and building floor slabs, assuming they are relatively free of organics and debris. In this regard, it should be understood that the extents and condition of the existing fill soils are not well known and may not become apparent until construction proceeds. The following sections of this report provide our preliminary conclusions and recommendations for design and construction of the facility and will be reviewed during final design. 5.2 Site Preparation and Earthwork 5.2.1 Site Stripping and Subgrade Preparation The ground surface within the limits of all new building areas, walkways and hardscaping, and areas to receive structural fill should be stripped of existing vegetation, surface organics, soft or loose surface soils, and any unsuitable fill materials. If encountered, any remnants of previous site improvements including existing pavements, foundations and floor slabs, walls, underground utilities, tanks, or other structures, etc., should be removed from within the limits of the proposed improvements and the resulting excavations backfilled with structural fill. In our opinion, all debris from demolition activities should be removed from the site. Organic strippings should be disposed of off site or stockpiled on site for later use in landscaped areas. GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 7 August 26, 2021 DRAFT To limit the risk of subgrade disturbance, all site stripping and excavation to finished grades should be completed using track-mounted hydraulic excavators equipped with smooth-edged buckets. The use of bulldozers equipped with smooth-edged blades may be appropriate in areas of gravel and cobbles subgrade. Following stripping or excavation to subgrade elevations, the exposed materials should be evaluated by a GRI representative, which may include proof rolling with a loaded dump truck or similar heavy equipment. Any areas of soft, loose, or otherwise unsuitable material disclosed by the evaluation should be overexcavated to firm material and backfilled with structural fill. In areas of gravel and cobble subgrade, the subgrade should be compacted after stripping or excavation following recommendations provided by a GRI representative based on observed conditions during construction, and as discussed in the following sections. 5.2.2 Wet-Weather Construction In our opinion, earthwork for the project can be completed most economically during the dry summer months, typically extending from mid-June to mid-October. It should be understood that the silty fill soils that mantle portions of the site and, to a lesser extent, potential zones of the underlying gravel and cobbles with higher silt content, are moisture sensitive and easily disturbed by construction activities when wet. Furthermore, groundwater is present at relatively shallow depths at the site and may approach the ground surface during the wet winter and spring months or following periods of prolonged or intense precipitation. Therefore, if construction occurs during wet-weather or wet-ground conditions, granular work pads and haul roads may be required to protect areas of silty subgrade soils and provide a firm working surface for construction activities. In our opinion, a 12- to 18-inch-thick layer of granular fill should be sufficient to reduce subgrade disturbance caused by lighter construction equipment and limited dump truck traffic. Haul roads and other high-density traffic areas will typically require a minimum-18- to 24-inch-thick layer of granular fill to reduce the risk of subgrade deterioration. Relatively clean, fragmental rock or gravel up to about 4 inches in size is commonly used for this purpose and can be capped with a layer of more finely graded crushed rock. The use of a geotextile fabric over the subgrade may reduce the risk of disturbance and maintenance needs during construction. Our experience indicates the gravel and cobbles at the site will generally provide a suitable all-weather working surface for construction activities, particularly when capped with a layer of compacted crushed rock. 5.2.3 Site Grading Preliminary grading plans for this project are still be developed; however, we anticipate minor site grading will be required to achieve desired grades. In our opinion, any permanent cut and fill slopes should be not steeper than 2H:1 V (Horizontal to Vertical) GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 8 August 26, 2021 DRAFT and protected with vegetation to reduce the risk of surface erosion due to rainfall. Final grading across the site should provide for positive drainage of surface water away from exposed slopes to reduce the potential for erosion. All fill slopes should be overbuilt then trimmed back to desired grades using hydraulic excavators equipped with smooth-edged buckets to remove any soft or loose materials from the slope surfaces and reduce the risk of surficial sloughing or slumping of the slopes. 5.2.4 Structural Fill We anticipate the use of structural fill for the project will primarily include overall site grading and backfilling of temporary excavations for foundations and utilities. We recommend all structural fill consist of granular material such as sand, sandy gravel, or crushed rock with a maximum size of about 2 inches and not more than about 5% passing the No. 200 sieve (washed analysis). Granular fill should be placed in lifts and compacted with vibratory equipment to at least 95% of the maximum dry density determined in accordance with ASTM International (ASTM) D698, and the relative compaction of the fill should be evaluated based on field-density testing. Appropriate lift thicknesses during placement will depend on the type of compaction equipment used. For example, if hand- operated, impact- or vibratory-plate equipment is used, lift thicknesses should be limited to about 6 inches. If smooth-drum vibratory rollers or heavy vibratory-plates are used, lift thicknesses up to about 12 inches are appropriate. If backhoe- or excavator-mounted vibratory plates are used, lift thicknesses up to 2 feet may be acceptable. In our opinion, the gravel and cobbles at the site are likely suitable for reuse as structural fill, provided they are relatively well graded and do not contain excessive amounts of silt and material larger than about 4 inches. However, it should be noted that field-density testing of the gravel and cobbles will generally not be possible due to the relatively large size of the material, and the relative compaction of the fill will need to be evaluated based on visual observations during placement and performance testing using proof rolling with loaded dump trucks or other heavy equipment. In this regard, it should be understood that use of the on-site gravel and cobbles as structural fill will require additional observation and oversight by a GRI representative during construction, and use of the gravel and cobbles may not be practical in smaller fill areas or areas of limited access. All on-site materials to be used as structural fill should be reviewed by a GRI representative. All utility trench excavations located within the limits of new facilities, hardscape areas, or other improved areas should be backfilled with granular structural fill following the recommendations provided above. The use of backhoe- or excavator-mounted vibratory- plate compactors or "hoe-packs" is usually most efficient for compacting trench backfill; however, impact-plate compactors or "jumping jacks" are commonly used in shallow trenches. Particular care should be given when operating hoe-packs to prevent damage GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 9 August 26, 2021 DRAFT to the newly placed utilities. Flooding or jetting of the trench backfill to achieve the required compaction should not be permitted. In our opinion, the on-site gravel and cobbles should typically not be used for utility trench backfill due to difficulties in evaluating relative compaction without the use of field-density testing. On-site soils and strippings that are relatively free of debris may be used as fill in landscaped areas. These materials should be placed at about 90% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. The moisture content of soils placed in landscaped areas is not as critical as the moisture content of soils placed as structural fill, provided construction equipment can effectively handle the materials. 5.3 Temporary Excavations and Groundwater Management 5.3.1 General Based on our understanding of the project, we anticipate the use of temporary excavations will generally be limited to facilitating construction of new foundations and utilities. Basements or other embedded structures are not currently planned for the project. Where required, we anticipate temporary excavations for new foundations and utilities will generally be less than about 5 feet and 10 feet deep, respectively. The method of excavation and design of excavation support are the responsibility of the contractor and are subject to applicable local, state, and federal safety regulations, including the current Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) excavation and trench safety standards. The means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations and site safety are also the responsibility of the contractor. The information provided below is for the use of our client and should not be interpreted to imply we are assuming responsibility for the contractor's actions or site safety. In our opinion, temporary excavations in the gravel and cobbles at the site will be a significant consideration for the project, particularly in areas where the excavations extend below the groundwater level. Based on the results of our investigation and our review of current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards, we anticipate both Type B and C soils will be encountered in temporary excavations completed at the site. However, Type C soils will likely be encountered more frequently and will generally control utility trench requirements. It should be noted that Type C soils require evaluation by a registered professional engineer. 5.3.2 Groundwater Management As previously discussed, groundwater levels at the site are relatively shallow and, depending on the time of year the work is completed and the actual required depth of excavations, groundwater seepage may be encountered in the temporary excavations. Significant amounts of groundwater seepage were encountered in foundation excavations GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 10 August 26, 2021 DRAFT completed at the adjacent Hatfield-Dowlin Complex, and we anticipate similar conditions could be encountered at the site. Groundwater seepage, running-soil conditions, and unstable excavation sidewalls or subgrades, if encountered during construction, may require dewatering of the excavation and sidewall support. The impact of these conditions can be reduced by completing excavations during the summer months, when groundwater levels are lowest, and by limiting the depths of the excavations. We anticipate groundwater inflow in shallow excavations, if encountered, can generally be controlled by pumping from sumps established within the excavations. Although not currently planned, deeper excavations will likely require dewatering using wells or well points depending on the actual depth and groundwater levels at the time of construction. If groundwater is encountered in excavations, we recommend overexcavating the base of the excavations and installing a granular working blanket consisting of relatively clean, free-draining material such as 2- to 4-inch, open-graded crushed rock to facilitate groundwater management by pumping from sumps and provide a working surface for construction activities. Depending on the conditions disclosed during excavation, use of a geotextile fabric beneath the crushed rock may be appropriate. The need for and required thickness of the granular working blanket will depend on the actual conditions exposed in the excavations and the effectiveness of the contractor's dewatering efforts and must be evaluated based on observations during construction. However, for preliminary planning purposes, our experience indicates the required thickness of the granular working blanket may be on the order of 12 inches. 5.3.3 Open-Cut Excavations The inclination of temporary excavation slopes will depend in part on the composition and relative consistency/density of the soils, groundwater conditions encountered at the time of construction, and the contractor's ability to control these conditions. In this regard, we anticipate temporary excavation slopes can be cut in the range of 1 H:1 V to 1.5H:1 V if groundwater levels are maintained at least 2 feet below the bottom of the excavation. Flatter slopes may be necessary if seepage conditions are encountered. Some minor amounts of sloughing, slumping, or running of temporary slopes should be anticipated shortly after excavation, particularly if groundwater seepage occurs. A blanket of relatively clean, well-graded, crushed rock such as 2- to 4-inch-minus crushed rock placed against the slopes may be required to control these conditions. The thickness of the granular blanket should be evaluated based on actual conditions but would likely be in the range of 12 inches to 24 inches. In our opinion, the short-term stability of temporary slopes will be adequate if surcharge loads due to construction traffic, vehicle parking, material laydown, etc., are maintained a horizontal distance equal to the height of the slope away from the top of the open cut. GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 11 August 26, 2021 DRAFT Other measures that should be implemented to reduce the risk of localized failures of temporary slopes include (1) using nonwoven geotextile fabric to protect the exposed cut slopes from surface erosion; (2) providing positive drainage away from the tops and bottoms of the cut slopes; (3) constructing and backfilling embedded structures as soon as practical after completing the excavation; (4) backfilling overexcavated areas as soon as practical after completing the excavation; and (5) periodically monitoring the areas around the top of the excavation for evidence of ground cracking. It must be emphasized that following these recommendations will not guarantee sloughing or movement of the temporary cut slopes will not occur; however, the measures should serve to reduce the risk of a major slope failure. It should be realized that blocks of ground and/or localized slumps may tend to move into the excavation during construction. 5.3.4 Utility Trench Excavations In our opinion, trenches less than 4 feet deep that do not encounter groundwater can typically be cut vertically and left unsupported during the normal construction sequence, assuming trenches are excavated and backfilled in the shortest practical sequence. It should be noted, however, that some sloughing or raveling of the trench sidewalls may occur, particularly in the gravel and cobbles. Excavations more than 4 feet deep should be laterally supported or sloped at 1 HA V to 1.5H:1 V or flatter. In our opinion, adequate lateral support for the trench sidewalls may be provided by common methods, such as the use of trench shields or hydraulic shoring systems. 5.3.5 Boulder Excavation Although not encountered in the explorations completed for this project, our experience in the project area indicates boulders could be present in the alluvial gravel and cobbles. Depending on the rock composition, relative weathering, hardness, and size of the potential boulders, it may be possible to complete excavation of boulders by ripping with a large track-mounted hydraulic excavator equipped with a rock bucket and rock teeth. However, it should be anticipated that some rock chipping or other specialized methods of excavation may be required if very large and/or hard boulders are encountered. Project plans, specifications, and bid items should address the uncertainty associated with encountering boulders in excavations completed on site. 5.4 Foundation Support 5.4.1 General In our opinion, support for the new structures can be provided by shallow foundations as planned, provided the recommended foundation design criteria and estimated settlements provided below are considered acceptable. The allowable bearing pressures used for design of shallow foundations is typically controlled by tolerable settlements as opposed to bearing capacity considerations. In this regard, we anticipate the new GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 12 August 26, 2021 DRAFT structures will be designed to limit total foundation settlements to about 1 inch. If larger settlements are considered tolerable for the new structures, higher allowable bearing pressures could be considered for design. As an alternative to shallow foundation systems, GRI can provide recommendations for deep foundation systems such as continuous flight auger (CFA) piles, drilled shafts, or driven steel piles, if required. Specific information regarding estimated structural loads and foundation design requirements for the new structures is still being developed at this time. However, we understand maximum column loads for the roof and shell structure will typically be on the order of 275 kips of combined dead load and permanently applied live load. Similarly, maximum column loads for the separate weight room/lounge building are anticipated to be on the order of 600 kips of combined dead load and permanently applied live load. As currently planned, individual columns for the practice facility will be supported by conventional spread footings, with larger groups of columns being supported by mat foundations. The use of ground anchors may be required to resist uplift loading on the mat foundations. Foundation types for the building are currently being evaluated; however, we anticipate conventional spread footings will be used to support the building columns. As previously discussed in this report, fill soils extending to a maximum depth of about 8 feet were encountered in some locations at the site. In our opinion, these existing fill soils may be suitable for support of field surfaces, building floor slabs, and hardscaped areas but should not be used for foundation support. Therefore, all existing fill soils should be removed from within the limits of new foundations following the recommendations provided on Figure 3, and all new foundations established in the underlying gravel and cobbles or structural fill placed over the gravel and cobbles. To provide uniform foundation support and a working surface for construction, we recommend the gravel and cobbles subgrade be capped with a minimum-4-inch-thick layer of relatively clean, compacted crushed rock such as 1112- or 3/4-inch-minus crushed rock. As previously discussed in this report, a thicker layer of crushed rock may be required during wet-weather or wet-ground conditions, or if zones of gravel and cobbles with higher silt content are encountered. Prior to placing the crushed rock, the gravel and cobbles subgrade should be evaluated by a GRI representative, and the upper surface of the material compacted in-place as structural fill following the recommendations provided in this report and under the observation of a GRI representative. Any unsuitable materials encountered at subgrade elevation should be removed and replaced with structural fill following the recommendations provided on Figure 3. In this regard, it should be understood that the presence and thickness of fill soils at the site are variable and not well known, and the actual required extents of fill removal must be evaluated during construction by a GRI representative. GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 13 August 26, 2021 DRAFT The following sections of this report provide our preliminary geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of new foundations for the project. These recommendations will be updated when additional foundation design information is available, where appropriate. 5.4.2 Spread Footings In our opinion, spread footings established in the gravel and cobbles that mantle the site can be designed using a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 7,000 pounds per square foot (psf). This value applies to the total of dead load plus permanently and/or frequently applied live load and can be increased by one half for the total of all loads: dead, live, and wind or seismic. All spread footings should be established at a minimum depth of 2 feet below the lowest adjacent finished grade. The footing width should not be less than 4 feet for isolated footings and 3 feet for continuous footings. Adjacent footings should typically be provided with a minimum center-to-center spacing of at least two footing widths (clear spacing of at least one footing width), and any footings in closer proximity should be reviewed by GRI on a case-by-case basis. We estimate the total settlement of isolated and continuous spread footings designed and constructed following the recommendations provided herein and supporting permanently applied loads of up to 600 kips and 40 kips/foot, respectively, will be less than about 1 inch. Differential settlement between adjacent, comparably loaded footings should be less than half the total settlement. Our experience indicates settlement will occur relatively quickly as load is placed on the footings. 5.4.3 Mat Foundations In our opinion, mat foundations measuring up to 50 feet wide that are established in the gravel and cobbles that mantle the site can generally be designed using maximum average and peak allowable bearing pressures of 2,500 psf and 4,000 psf, respectively. However, the actual allowable bearing pressures used for design will depend on the distribution of loading on the mats and tolerable settlements, which should be reviewed by GRI during design. These values apply to the total of dead load plus permanently and/or frequently applied live load and can be increased by one half for the total of all loads: dead, live, and wind or seismic. All mat foundations should be established at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below the lowest adjacent finished grade. Any mat foundations with a significantly greater embedment depth should be reviewed by GRI on a case-by-case basis, as a lower allowable bearing pressure may be appropriate based on settlement considerations. Depending on the actual distribution of permanently applied loading on the mats, we estimate the total settlement of mat foundations designed and constructed following the recommendations provided herein will be on the order of 1 inch, which should be reviewed by GRI during design. Differential settlement between adjacent, comparably loaded mats could be up to about half the total settlement. Differential settlement across individual GRI #6497-A - 2.M0 Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 14 August 26, 2021 DRAFT mats may be on the order of one third to one half the total settlement, depending on the actual loading and relative stiffness of the mats. Due to the large size of the foundations and deeper stress influence relative to the spread footings, a significant portion of the estimated settlement is anticipated to occur in the silt and clay soils present beneath the gravel and cobbles. Settlement of these soils generally occurs over a longer period; therefore, some of the mat foundation settlement may occur as post-construction settlement. Mat foundations are typically analyzed as plates on elastic foundations. However, some time-dependent settlement due to consolidation of the underlying soils will result from placing sustained loads on the mat foundations. To account for short-term loading conditions (undrained conditions) such as the initial placement of new loads on the foundations, or future transient loading conditions such as wind or seismic forces, we recommend assuming a coefficient of subgrade reaction, k, of 400 pounds per cubic inch (pci) to evaluate isolated point loading on mat foundations designed and constructed following the recommendations provided in this report. To account for long-term loading conditions and the resulting consolidation settlement of the underlying soils (drained conditions), a significantly lower coefficient of subgrade reaction is generally appropriate for modeling the flexural behavior of the mats. The choice of an appropriate long-term value depends on the distribution of loading on the mats and estimated settlements. For preliminary design purposes, we recommend assuming a long-term coefficient of subgrade reaction value on the order of 50 pci. However, the actual values can vary significantly with location and loading beneath the mats and should be reviewed during final design. It should be understood that this recommended long-term value is intended for evaluating the flexural behavior and reinforcement requirements for the mats and should not be used for estimating foundation settlements. 5.4.4 Lateral Resistance Horizontal shear forces can be resisted partially or completely by frictional forces developed between the base of the foundations and the underlying material. The total frictional resistance can be estimated as the normal force (dead load plus real live load) multiplied by the coefficient of friction between the foundation and the underlying material. We recommend using an ultimate value of 0.45 for the coefficient of friction for foundations cast directly on compacted crushed rock as recommended. If additional lateral resistance is required, passive earth pressures against embedded portions of the foundations can be estimated based on an equivalent fluid having a unit weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), assuming the foundations are backfilled with structural fill or neat-formed in excavations. This value has been reduced from an ultimate value to limit lateral deformations and assumes the ground surface in front of the foundations is level and does not slope downward away from the foundations. The use of passive earth GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 15 August 26, 2021 DRAFT pressures should be reviewed by GRI on a case-by-case basis during design, as the magnitude of lateral displacement required to mobilize passive resistance depends on the embedment depth of the foundation. 5.4.5 Ground Anchors for Uplift Resistance We understand ground anchors may be used in conjunction with the mat foundations to resist uplift loading for the new practice facility. The specific design, installation, and testing procedures for ground anchors are typically developed by a specialty foundation contractor based on subsurface information and performance criteria provided by the owner's geotechnical and structural engineers. Ground anchors consist of small-diameter (commonly 4 inches to 8 inches), drilled-and-grouted, steel-reinforced elements. Ground anchors are typically constructed by drilling a cased hole to the desired depth into a bearing layer, placing a steel reinforcing bar or strands in the cased hole, and pumping grout from the bottom of the hole using tremie methods to form a bond zone as the casing is withdrawn. Provisions for secondary grouting should be incorporated into the design of the anchors to enhance the capacity of the bond zone, and it should be anticipated that at least one episode of secondary grouting will be required to achieve the desired bond-zone capacity. Our experience indicates ground anchors installed into the underlying gravel and cobbles can develop an allowable capacity of at least 150 kips with bond zone lengths on the order of 15 feet to 25 feet, depending on the actual anchor diameter and installation procedures. It should be noted, however, that the subsurface explorations completed for this project and our experience in the project area indicate the gravel and cobbles contain open-work zones that are generally capable of accepting large volumes of grout. The gravel and cobbles may also contain boulders. The presence of open-work zones and boulders can create challenging conditions for the installation of ground anchors and should be addressed in the contract documents and reviewed by the specialty foundation contractor. GRI should review all project submittals related to ground anchors and the specialty foundation contractor should have a contingency plan for mitigating potential issues and successfully installing the anchors. We recommend ground anchors be designed, installed, and tested in accordance with the current Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) publication PTI DC-35, Recommendations for Prestressed Rock and Soil Anchors and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) publication FHWA-IF-99-015, Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 4, Ground Anchors and Anchored Systems. In accordance with these documents, we recommend the anchors be designed with a minimum free-stressing length of at least 10 feet for bar anchors and 15 feet for strand anchors. However, this should be reviewed during design, as longer free lengths may be required to achieve the desired anchor capacities. Anchors should be GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 16 August 26, 2021 DRAFT installed with a minimum center-to-center spacing of 4 feet. All anchors should be equipped with appropriate corrosion protection measures. Prior to installing production anchors at the site, at least one verification-test anchor should be installed near the production-anchor locations. The verification-test anchor should be load-tested to confirm the design capacity of the anchors and evaluate the optimum length of the bond zone and load-deflection behavior of the anchors. The verification anchor should be tested to a minimum of 200% of the maximum allowable design capacity in accordance with applicable portions ofASTM D3689. We also recommend proof testing a minimum of 10% of the production anchors to 150% of the design load. A successful verification or proof test will typically sustain the test load for at least 10 minutes with less than 0.04 inch of movement. In addition, the measured deflection at the design load needs to be less than the maximum allowable deflection specified by the structural engineer. Corresponding deflections of the mat foundations should also be reviewed during design, and the ground anchor loading should be included in the mat foundation analyses. 5.5 Floor Support All floor slabs should be established in relatively firm, undisturbed soils that are free of organics and other debris. In our opinion, the fill soils encountered during this investigation are generally suitable for floor support; however, this should be reviewed during construction based on the actual conditions disclosed. To provide uniform floor support and a capillary break to reduce the risk of damp flooring, all slab-on-grade floors established near finished site grades should be underlain by a minimum 8 inches of free- draining, clean, angular drain rock. Any floor slabs that will be established below finished site grades and designed to be fully drained should be underlain by a minimum-12-inch- thick layer of drain rock equipped with underslab drainage systems following the recommendations provided in the Embedded Structures section of this report. The drain rock should have a maximum size of 1.5 inches and less than about 2% passing the No. 200 sieve (washed analysis). In our experience, 11/2- to 3/4-inch crushed rock has worked well for this purpose. To improve workability, the drain rock should be capped with at least 2 inches of more finely graded rock, such as 3/4-inch-minus crushed rock. The rock section should be placed in one lift and compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698 or until well keyed. In areas where floor coverings will be provided or moisture-sensitive materials are stored, it is also appropriate to install a vapor- retarding membrane in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. To evaluate isolated point loading on the floor slabs, we recommend assuming a coefficient of subgrade reaction, k, of 150 pci to characterize the subgrade support with a minimum of 10 inches of compacted crushed rock beneath the slabs as recommended. This value assumes the underlying subgrade could consist of silty soil. In areas where the underlying subgrade consists of gravel and cobbles, a value of up to 400 pci is appropriate. GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 17 August 26, 2021 DRAFT 5.6 Embedded Structures 5.6.1 Lateral Earth Pressures Although basements or other embedded structures are not currently planned for the project, we anticipate retaining walls may be used to accommodate overall site grading. The following sections of this report are applicable to site retaining walls and embedded building walls; however, any potential embedded structures should be reviewed by GRI, as additional considerations and supplemental recommendations may be appropriate based on site conditions. Design lateral earth pressures for embedded walls depend on the drainage condition provided behind the wall and the ability of the wall to yield. The two possible conditions regarding the drainage condition behind a wall are (1) backfill that is fully drained and therefore does not induce hydrostatic pressures on the wall, and (2) backfill that is not fully drained and therefore may induce hydrostatic pressures on the wall. The two possible conditions regarding the ability of the wall to yield are (1) a wall that is laterally supported at its base and top and therefore unable to yield, and (2) a wall that is not laterally restrained and yields by sliding or tilting about its base. The recommendations provided below assume embedded walls will be backfilled with structural fill. Heavy compactors and large pieces of construction equipment should not operate within 5 feet of any embedded walls to avoid the buildup of excessive lateral pressures unless the walls have been designed to accommodate these pressures. Otherwise, compaction close to the walls should be accomplished using lightweight, hand- operated equipment. In areas where the wall backfill will be fully drained yielding and non-yielding walls retaining horizontal backfill can be designed based on equivalent fluid unit weights of 35 pcf and 50 pcf, respectively. In areas where the wall backfill will not be fully drained, yielding and non-yielding walls can be designed based on equivalent fluid unit weights of 80 pcf and 90 pcf, respectively. To account for seismic loading conditions, the static earth pressures provided above should be increased by about 5 pcf and 15 pcf for yielding and non-yielding walls, respectively. Additional lateral pressures due to surcharge loadings in the backfill area can be estimated using the guidelines provided on Figure 4. At a minimum, we recommend using a uniform lateral surcharge pressure of 100 psf to account for construction equipment operating behind embedded walls. This temporary construction surcharge does not need to be included when evaluating seismic loading conditions. Resistance to lateral and vertical driving forces can be evaluated following the recommendations provided in the Foundation Support section of this report. If embedded structures are not fully drained using subdrainage systems, it should be assumed that the groundwater level at the site could rise to the ground surface during the design life of the project. Embedded structures that are not fully drained should also be GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 18 August 26, 2021 DRAFT designed to resist buoyancy, which is commonly accomplished by increasing the thickness of the base slab and/or by extending the base slab beyond the sidewall of the structure. The forces resisting uplift would include the weight of the structure and the buoyant weight of the backfill material placed directly over the portion of the base slab that extends beyond the wall of the structure. We recommend evaluating the uplift resistance of structural fill using a buoyant unit weight of about 60 pcf. If additional uplift resistance is required, the use of ground anchors installed through the base slabs could be considered. 5.6.2 Subdrainage In areas where embedded structures will be designed as fully drained structures, permanent subdrainage systems should be provided to reduce hydrostatic pressures and the risk of groundwater entering through embedded walls and floor slabs. Typical subdrainage recommendations for embedded structures are shown on Figure 5. The figure shows perimeter subdrains to drain embedded walls and a layer of free-draining, clean, drain rock beneath concrete floor slabs, which is drained by a system of underslab drainpipes. All groundwater collected by the subdrainage system should be drained by gravity or pumped from sumps. If the water is pumped, an emergency power supply should be provided to prevent flooding in the event of a power loss. If the perimeter wall drains and underslab drain system are routed to the same location, check values or other measures should be utilized so that water collected in the wall drains is not allowed to enter the drain-rock section beneath the floor slabs. 5.7 Seismic Considerations 5.7.7 Site-Response and Design-Acceleration Parameters We understand seismic design for the project is being completed in accordance with the 2019 OSSC and ASCE 7-16. As part of our investigation, we completed a site-specific seismic-hazard evaluation and site-response analysis for the project, the results of which are provided in Appendix B. As discussed in Appendix B, the results of these analyses were used to develop recommended ground motions for design purposes. A site-specific site-esponse analysis was completed for the project using nonlinear total stress analysis (TSA) procedures, which are described in more detail in Appendix B. The site-specific response analysis consists of three primary components: 1) review of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) to support selection of target response spectra at the base of the soil column; 2) selection and scaling of ground-motion acceleration time histories to match the target response spectra over the period range of interest; 3) one-dimensional site-response modeling to evaluate the site-specific influence of subsurface conditions on the resulting ground-surface response spectra; and 4) calculation of the surface-to-base response spectral ratios (i.e., ratios of the surface response spectra values to the input motion response spectra values) quantifying GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 19 August 26, 2021 DRAFT ground-motion amplification or attenuation at each spectral period to develop a recommended ground-surface response spectrum. Based on our review of available geologic and subsurface information for the project area and the results of subsurface explorations and in-situ geophysical testing completed for this project, it is our opinion the site can generally be classified as Site Class D in accordance with Chapter 20 of ASCE 7-16. The recommended response spectra for structural design were developed by comparing the site-specific spectra based on site-response modeling with the code-based spectra based on Site Class D conditions. Table 5-1 below provides a summary of the recommended multiperiod Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) horizontal response spectrum developed for nonlinear response history analysis (RHA), and additional details regarding the RHA are provided below and in Appendix C. The table also includes a summary of the corresponding vertical response spectrum, which was developed by applying published relationships of empirical vertical-to-horizontal response spectra models to the horizontal multiperiod MCER response spectrum as discussed in Appendix B. Table 5-1: RECOMMENDED MCER RESPONSE SPECTRAL VALUES FOR RHA, 5% DAMPING PGA 0.42 0.23 0.030 0.46 0.28 0.050 0.56 0.39 0.075 0.72 0.59 0.100 0 200 0.92 0 95 0.71 0 60 . 0.300 0 500 . 0.95 0 92 . 0.48 0 40 . 0.750 . 0.81 . 0.35 1.000 0.63 0.28 1.500 2 000 0.40 0 30 0.20 0 16 . 2.500 . 0.24 . 0.13 3.000 0.20 0.11 4.000 0.15 0.09 5.000 0.12 0.07 For dynamic analysis using the equivalent lateral force (ELF) design procedure, the MCER and design acceleration parameters are developed in accordance with Section 21.4 of GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 20 August 26, 2021 DRAFT ASCE 7-16. The 0.2- and 1.0-second MCER spectral values (Sms and SM,) are estimated to be 0.86 g and 0.63 g, respectively, while the corresponding design response spectral values (Sos and Sol) are estimated to be 0.57 g and 0.42 g, respectively. The resulting two-period MCER and design response spectra were developed in accordance with the guidelines provided in Section 11.4.6 of ASCE 7-16, and are summarized in Appendix B. In addition to the MCER and design hazard levels required by ASCE 7-16, we understand the design team will also be evaluating seismic performance of the new structures based on site-specific horizontal and vertical response spectra for a Service Level Earthquake (SLE). The SLE has been defined by the structural engineer as a ground motion with a 50% probability of exceedance in 30-years (i.e., return period of approximately 43 years) and was evaluated based on the 2014 USGS National Seismic Hazard Maps (NSHMs). Similar to the recommended values provided for the MCER hazard level above, the ratio of vertical- to-horizontal ground motions for the SLE hazard level was estimated using published relationships. Table 5-2 below summarizes the SLE horizontal and vertical response spectral values. Please see Appendix B for further discussion regarding the development of recommended response spectra for the SLE hazard level. Table S-2: RECOMMENDED SLE RESPONSE SPECTRAL VALUES, 2% DAMPING PGA 0.02 0.01 0.10 0.03 0.02 1.00 0.04 0.02 2.00 0.02 0.01 3.00 0.01 0.01 4.00 0.01 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.7.2 Nonlinear Response History Analysis (RHA) We understand the project structural engineers will use a numerical modeling program to analyze soil-structure interactions and evaluate the seismic demand on the structure for several input ground motions. The selection and scaling of the input ground motions were completed in accordance with Chapter 16 of ASCE 7-16. The ground-motion records for use in the RHA were selected from recorded seismic events having magnitudes, fault GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 21 August 26, 2021 DRAFT distances, soil conditions, and source mechanisms that are consistent with the earthquakes that dominate the seismic hazard at the project site. The multiperiod MCER horizontal and vertical response spectra discussed above were utilized as target response spectra for development of the time histories. The ground-motion modifications were completed utilizing spectral matching. Appendix C provides the site-specific time histories and additional details and discussions regarding the ground-motion development for nonlinear RHA for the project. 5.7.3 Liquefaction and Other Seismic Hazards Based on the estimated depth to groundwater and the relative density of the granular soils below the groundwater level at the site, it is our opinion the risk of liquefaction and/or soil strength at the site is low during a code-based earthquake. In our opinion, any potential minor strength loss in isolated zones of looser and/or softer soils at the site will not result in a loss of support or significant additional settlement beneath shallow foundations. Based on our review of the USGS interactive fault maps, no mapped crustal faults are located in close proximity to the site. Unless occurring on a previously unmapped or unknown fault, it is our opinion the risk of ground rupture at the site is low. The risk of damage by tsunami and/or seiche at the site is absent. 6 DESIGN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES We welcome the opportunity to review and discuss construction plans and specifications for this project as they are being developed. In addition, GRI should be retained to review all geotechnical-related portions of the plans and specifications to evaluate whether they are in conformance with the recommendations provided in our report. To observe compliance with the intent of our recommendations, the design concepts, and the plans and specifications, we are of the opinion all construction operations dealing with earthwork and foundations should be observed by a GRI representative. Our construction- phase services will allow for timely design changes if site conditions are encountered that are different from those described in our report. If we do not have the opportunity to confirm our interpretations, assumptions, and analyses during construction, we cannot be responsible for the application of our recommendations to subsurface conditions that are different from those described in this report. 7 LIMITATIONS This preliminary report has been prepared to aid the architect and engineer in the design of this project. It should be understood that the project are still in a preliminary design phase, and further geotechnical engineering analyses will be required to support final design. The scope is limited to the specific project and location described herein, and our description of the project represents our understanding of the significant aspects of the project relevant to the design and construction of the new structures. In the event that any GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 22 August 26, 2021 DRAFT changes in the design and location of the project elements as outlined in this report are planned, we should be given the opportunity to review the changes and modify or reaffirm the conclusions and recommendations of this report in writing. The conclusions and recommendations submitted in this report are based on the data obtained from the explorations made at the locations indicated on Figure 2 and other sources of information discussed in this report. In the performance of subsurface investigations, specific information is obtained at specific locations at specific times. However, it is acknowledged that variations in soil conditions may exist between exploration locations. This report does not reflect any variations that may occur between these explorations. The nature and extent of variation may not become evident until construction. If during construction, subsurface conditions differ from those encountered in the explorations, we should be advised at once so that we can observe and review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Submitted for GRI, Matthew Shanahan, PE, GE John K. (Jack) Gordon, PE Tadesse Meskele, PE, PhD Principal Associate Senior Engineer This document has been submitted electronically. GRI #6497-A - 2.11VI0 Indoor Football Practice Facility Page 23 August 26, 2021 agene 1trJ Club d Avcc / i~ o ~a v 1 rI3 r01•S F 83 h Av s rx ne~=" E-Broadway- Oakmont-r Dar N. U,~rr~~ C-] N. y a~ 0 4 - 4 Oakway Center ` p ~17 CL r- So n-e't s0frel S'e"ay Way Park _ nRi,1 62 MiR~l r126~ ~u"- n,~ Springt 1 G m;vwi 0.111fiet King A b,:vcj T i SITE. '.Aadluill y P~K 'A'illam ette Alton Baker Part 0 1,000 2,000 I I I Feet UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION 2.MO INDOOR FOOTBALL PRACTICE FACILITY VICINITY MAP ur fjrf 4/4 V ~ t-ain"oay Lnnp 'VV-,tk WCd Ln E 3 t,'r o cid Ln D SW ?SOT ~ ~©~•Rr AUG. 2021 JOB NO. 6497-A FIG. 1 alp WY F7 IN 1 ► 1 'B I loom -W - B-3 B-6 016 1 6 4-- ri 7 l~~'`~ B 8 B-1 P-1 B 11 rq o ~~i B-4 °f u A ~,7 { P-1 1 I ' B-5 ' I i 1 B-7 B-3 )MM -4jf r t I T / , 1 lop 07 • •••777 BORING COMPLETED BY GRI (MAY 24 - JUNE 8, 2021) CONE PENETRATION TEST (CPT) PROBE COMPLETED BY GRI (JULY 8, 2021) PREVIOUS BORING COMPLETED BY GRI (JULY - SEPTEMBER, 2010) PREVIOUS BORING COMPLETED BY GRI (AUGUST, 1996) 0 120 240 I I I Feet UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION 2.MO INDOOR FOOTBALL PRACTICE FACILITY SITE MAP AUG. 2021 JOB NO. 6497-A FIG. 2 /Zl GRANULAR STRUCTURAL FILL (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR DETAILS) NOT TO SCALE UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION 2.MO INDOOR FOOTBALL PRACTICE FACILITY FOUNDATION OVEREXCAVATION DETAIL AUG. 2021 JOB NO. 6974-A FIG. 3 X =mH LINE LOAD, Q L Z=nH For m_< 0.4: H Qh = Qr 0.2n H (0.16+nz)z For m > 0.4: ah = QL 1.28m zn H (m z+ n z)z LINE LOAD PARALLEL TO WALL ~X=mH POINT LOAD, Q p Z=nH For rrL< 0.4: AZ_ i _SA' 6h= QP 0.28nz H Hz (0.16 + nz)3 For m > 0.4: Qh = Qp 1.77m2 n2 Hz (mz+n2)3 a'h=a h COS2(1.10) gh A e A• (T'h X=mH DISTRIBUTION OF HORIZONTAL PRESSURES I VERTICAL POINT LOAD ~a H a STRIP LOAD, q #12 6h= 2q (R - SINg COS 2a) 7T (g in radians) STRIP LOAD PARALLEL TO WALL NOTES: 1. THESE GUIDELINES APPLY TO RIGID WALLS WITH POISSON'S RATIO ASSUMED TO BE O.S FOR BACKFILL MATERIALS. 2. LATERAL PRESSURES FROM ANY COMBINATION OF ABOVE LOADS MAY BE DETERMINED BY THE PRINCIPLE OF SUPERPOSITION. UNIVERSITY OTLL FOUNDATION PRACTICE E©0 2.MO INDOOR FOOTBALL FACILITY SURCHARGE-INDUCED LATERAL PRESSURE AUG. 2021 JOB NO. 6497-A FIG. 4 SEAL WITH ON-SITE IMPERVIOUS MATERIAL I I I I SLOPE TO DRAIN Q BACKFILL TEMPORARY - CONSTRUCTION SLOPE CLEAN, CRUSHED ROCK OF UP TO 1.5-IN. SIZE WITH NOT MORE THAN 2% PASSING THE NO. 200 SIEVE (WASHED ANALYSIS) (DRAIN ROCK) f °a ' I o o, 2 FT °Q (MIN.) WALL DRAINAGE IN. (MIN.) UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION 2.MO INDOOR FOOTBALL PRACTICE FACILITY TYPICAL SUBDRAINAGE DETAILS 3/4-IN.-MINUS CRUSHED ROCK WITH LESS THAN 5% PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (WASHED ANALYSIS) a da Q 2 IN. (MIN.) CONCRETE SLAB CLEAN, CRUSHED ROCK OF UP _ _ TO 1.5-IN. SIZE WITH NOT MORE THAN 2% PASSING THE VAPOR-RETARDING MEMBRANE SYSTEM NO. 200 SIEVE (WASHED S -12 IN. (MIN.) (SEE NOTE 1) ANALYSIS) (DRAIN ROCK) ~1!III' 1 (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR DETAILS) NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR DETAILS) 2 IN. (MIN.) 4-IN.-DIAMETER PERFORATED PLASTIC DRAIN PIPE, SLOPE TO DRAIN. TYPICALLY PLACED ON 20-FT CENTERS (FOR EMBEDDED STRUCTURES ONLY; SEE REPORT TEXT FOR DETAILS) 0 4-IN.-DIAMETER PERFORATED • ° /PLASTIC DRAINPIPE, SLOPE TO UNDERSLAB DRAINAGE DRAIN NOTES: 1) A VAPOR-RETARDING MEMBRANE SYSTEM IS a RECOMMENDED FOR MOISTURE-SENSITIVE AREAS. 2) DETAILS REGARDING INSTALLATION OF THE SYSTEM SHOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE DESIGN TEAM. AUG. 2021 JOB NO. 6497-A FIG. 5 DRAFT APPENDIX A Subsurface Explorations and Laboratory Testing GRI PN #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility August 26, 2021 DRAFT APPENDIX A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING A.1 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS A.1.1 General Subsurface materials and conditions at the site were evaluated between March 24 and July 8, 2021, with 11 borings, designated B-1 through B-11, and three cone penetration test (CPT) probes, designated P-1, P-5, and P-11. These explorations were advanced to depths of about 19 feet to 100 feet below existing site grades at the approximate locations shown on the Site Map, Figure 2. The subsurface-exploration work was coordinated and documented by a GRI representative, who maintained a log of the materials and conditions disclosed during the course of the work. A description of the subsurface explorations completed for this project is provided below. A.1.2 Drilled Borings The borings were advanced to depths of about 26.5 feet to 81.5 feet below the ground surface with mud-rotary and/or hollow-stem auger drilling techniques. The borings were completed using a CME 550 ATV-mounted drill rig provided and operated by Western States Soil Conservation, Inc., of Hubbard, Oregon. Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were typically obtained from the borings at about 2.5-foot intervals of depth in the upper 10 feet to 15 feet and about 5-foot intervals below these depths. Disturbed soil samples were obtained using a standard split-spoon sampler or a California-modified split-spoon (CMS) sampler. The outside diameters of the standard split-spoon sampler and CMS sampler used are 2 inches and 3 inches, respectively. The CMS sampler was used primarily when sampling soils with larger particle sizes. During sampling, standard penetration tests (SPTs) were conducted by driving the sampler into the soil a distance of 18 inches using a 140-pound hammer dropped 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the standard split-spoon sampler the last 12 inches is known as the Standard Penetration Resistance, or SPT N-value. The number of blows required to drive the CMS sampler the last 12 inches is denoted as the SPT N*-value. The SPT N- and N*-values provide a measure of the relative density of granular soils and the relative consistency of fine-grained soils. Samples obtained from the borings were placed in airtight jars and returned to our laboratory for further classification and testing. In addition, relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained by pushing a 3-inch-outside-diameter Shelby tube into the undisturbed soil a maximum distance of 24 inches using the hydraulic ram of the drill rig. The soils exposed in the ends of the Shelby tubes were examined and classified in the field. After classification, the tubes were sealed with rubber caps and returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing. GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page A-1 August 26, 2021 DRAFT Logs of the borings are provided on Figures 1A through 11A. Each log presents a descriptive summary of the various types of materials encountered in the boring and notes the depth at which the materials and/or characteristics of the materials change. To the right of the descriptive summary, the numbers and types of samples are indicated. Farther to the right, SPT N- and N*-values are shown graphically, along with laboratory test data, where applicable. The terms and symbols used to describe the materials encountered in the borings are defined in Table 1A and the attached legend. A.1.3 Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Probes The CPT probes were advanced through previously backfilled borings and to depths of about 19 feet to 100 feet below the ground surface using a truck-mounted CPT rig provided and operated by Oregon Geotechnical Explorations, Inc., of Keizer, Oregon. During the CPT, a steel cone is forced vertically into the soil at a constant rate of penetration. The force required to cause penetration at a constant rate can be related to the bearing capacity of the soil immediately surrounding the point of the penetrometer cone. This force is measured and recorded about every 2 inches. In addition to the cone measurements, measurements are obtained of the magnitude of force required to force a friction sleeve attached above the cone through the soil. The force required to move the friction sleeve can be related to the undrained shear strength of fine-grained soils. The dimensionless ratio of sleeve friction to point bearing capacity provides an indicator of the type of soil penetrated. The cone penetration resistance can be used to evaluate the relative consistency and density of granular and fine-grained soils, respectively. In addition, a piezometer fitted between the cone and the sleeve measures changes in water pressures as the probe is advanced and can also be used to estimate groundwater levels. The probe was also equipped with an accelerometer, which allows measurement of the arrival time of shear waves from impulses generated at the ground surface. This allows calculation of shear-wave velocities for the surrounding soil profile, which was the primary purpose of completing the probes. Logs of the CPT probes are provided on Figures 12A through 14A, which present a graphical summary of the tip resistance, local (sleeve) friction, friction ratio, pore pressure, soil behavior type index, and shear wave velocity measurements. The terms used to describe the soils encountered in the CPT probes are defined in Table 2A. It should be noted that the CPT probes were advanced through previously backfilled boreholes to obtain shear wave velocity measurements. In this regard, other data obtained from the CPT probes in the backfill zone are not representative of actual soil conditions and should be ignored. A.1.3 Vibrating Wire Piezometer A vibrating-wire piezometer was installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet below existing site grades in the location of boring B-3 to assist in evaluating groundwater levels GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page A-2 August 26, 2021 DRAFT for the project. At the time of installation, the piezometer was saturated with water, taped to a 1-inch-outside-diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) grout pipe in an inverted position to maintain saturation and inserted into the open borehole to the desired depth. The boring was then filled with cement- bentonite grout to near the ground surface. The installation was equipped with a steel monument that was grouted into the borehole collar to protect the piezometer cables from traffic and the elements. To permit frequent collection of groundwater data, the vibrating-wire piezometer was equipped with a datalogger placed in the steel monument. The datalogger is currently programed to collect groundwater data at four-hour intervals, and can be reprogrammed for other collection intervals, if desired. A.2 LABORATORY TESTING A.2.1 General The samples obtained from the borings were examined in our laboratory, where the physical characteristics of the samples were noted and the field classifications modified where necessary. At the time of classification, the natural moisture content of samples of fine-grained soil was determined. Additional testing included Torvane shear strength measurements, dry unit weight determinations, grain-size analyses, Atterberg limits determinations, and one-dimensional consolidation testing. A summary of the laboratory test results is provided in Table 3A. The following sections describe the testing program in more detail. A.2.2 Natural Moisture Contents Natural moisture content determinations were completed in conformance with ASTM International (ASTM) D2216. The results are summarized on Figures 1A through 11A and in Table 3A. A.2.3 Torvane Shear Strength The approximate undrained shear strength of the fine-grained soils was determined using the Torvane shear device. The Torvane is a handheld apparatus with vanes that are inserted into the soil. The torque required to fail the soil in shear around the vanes is measured using a calibrated spring. The results of the Torvane shear-strength testing are summarized on Figures 1A through 11A, where applicable. A.2.4 Undisturbed Unit Weight The unit weight, or density, of undisturbed soil samples was determined in the laboratory in conformance with ASTM D2937. The results are summarized on Figures 1A through 11A, where applicable, and in Table 3A. A.2.5 Grain-Size Analysis (Dry Sieve Method) Dry-sieve analyses were performed on selected soil samples in substantial conformance with ASTM D6913. The results are summarized on Figures 15A and 16A. GRI #6497-A - 2.M0 Indoor Football Practice Facility Page A-3 August 26, 2021 DRAFT A.2.6 Atterberg Limits Atterberg limits were determined for soil samples obtained from the borings in conformance with ASTM D4318. The test results are summarized on Figures 1A through 11A, where appropriate, on the Plasticity Chart, Figure 17A, and in Table 3A. A.2.7 One-Dimensional Consolidation Two one-dimensional consolidation tests were performed in conformance with ASTM D2435 on relatively undisturbed soil samples extruded from Shelby tubes. This test provides data on the compressibility and stress history of the soils, necessary for settlement studies. The test results are summarized on Figures 18A and 19A in the form of curves showing percent strain versus applied effective stress. The initial dry unit weights and moisture contents of the samples are also shown on the figures. GRI #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility Page A-4 August 26, 2021 DRAFT Table 1A GUIDELINES FOR CLASSIFICATION OF SOIL Description of Relative Density for Granular (Cohesionless) Soil Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense Description of Ri Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Very Stiff Hard 0-4 4- 10 0-11 10-30 11-26 30- 50 26 - 74 over 50 74 - 120 alative Consistency for Fine-Grained (Cohesive) Soils 0-2 0-3 less than 0.125 2-4 3-6 0.125-0.25 4-8 6-12 0.25-0.50 8-15 12-25 0.50-1.0 15-30 25-65 1.0-2.0 over 30 over 65 over 2.0 s-iz in. Gravel: 1/4 - 3/4 in. (fine) 3/4 - 3 in. (coarse) Sand: No. 200 - No. 40 sieve (fine) No. 40 - No. 10 sieve (medium) No. 10 - No. 4 sieve (coarse) Silt/Clay: Pass No. 200 sieve trace: 5 - 15 (sand, gravel) 5 - 15 (sand, gravel) some: 15 - 30 (sand, gravel) 15 - 30 (sand, gravel) sandy, gravelly: 30 - 50 (sand, gravel) 30 - 50 (sand, gravel) trace: <5 (silt, clay) Relationship of clay some: 5 - 12 (silt, clay) and silt determined by silty, clayey: 12- 50 (silt, clay) plasticity index test GRI PN #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility August 26, 2021 DRAFT Table 2A CONE PENETRATION TEST (CPT) CORRELATIONS Fine-Grained (Cohesive) Soils <5 Very Soft 5 to 15 Soft to Medium Stiff 15 to 30 Stiff 30 to 60 Very Stiff >60 Hard Granular (Cohesionless) Soils <20 Very Loose 20 to 40 Loose 40 to 120 Medium 120 to 200 Dense >200 Very Dense mererence Kulhawy, F. H., and Mayne, P. W., 1990, Manual on Estimating Soil Properties for Foundation Design, Electric Power Research Institute, EL-6800. GRI PN #6497-A - 2.MO Indoor Football Practice Facility August 26, 2021 Table 3A SUMMARY OF LABORATORY RESULTS Sample Information Atterberg Limits Moisture Dry Unit Liquid Plasticity Fines Location Sample Depth, ft Elevation, ft Content, % Weight, pcf Limit, % Index, % Content, % Soil Type B-1 S-7 25.0 14 12 Sandy GRAVEL S-7 26.1 44 Silty CLAY S-9 35.0 39 CLAY B-2 S-8 25.0 49 Silty CLAY S-9 30.0 60 CLAY 5-10 35.0 41 CLAY 5-11 40.0 34 CLAY 5-12 50.0 50 CLAY B-3 S-6 20.0 21 16 Silty GRAVEL S-7 25.0 39 35 Silty SAND S-7 26.0 47 Silty SAND S-8 30.0 51 Silty CLAY S-9 35.0 45 Silty CLAY B-4 S-7 25.0 42 Silty CLAY S-8 30.0 49 Silty CLAY 5-10 40.0 45 Clayey SILT 5-11 45.0 39 Clayey SILT B-5 S-1 3.0 22 28 FILL S-2 5.0 26 FILL S-9 30.0 52 CLAY S-9 31.0 56 Clayey SILT 5-10 35.0 49 Clayey SILT 5-11 40.0 43 Clayey SILT 5-12 45.0 40 Clayey SILT 5-12 46.0 41 Clayey SILT 5-13 50.0 45 Clayey SILT 5-14 60.0 43 Clayey SILT 5-15 70.0 37 Clayey SILT 5-16 80.0 41 Clayey SILT B-6 S-5 15.8 18 Silty GRAVEL S-6 20.0 15 Silty GRAVEL S-7 25.0 16 Silty GRAVEL 5-10 35.0 56 Clayey SILT 5-10 36.3 57 Clayey SILT 5-11 40.0 47 Silty CLAY 5-12 50.0 44 Silty CLAY 5-13 60.0 39 Silty CLAY 5-14 70.0 44 Silty CLAY B-7 S-1 5.0 26 FILL S-2 7.5 31 FILL Page 1 of 2