Bond Projects Preliminary Design Report

Athletics Scopes within Bond Work Packages 1 & 3

26 June 2026 - DRAFT REPORT 28 August 2026 - FINAL REPORT

HHPR

Bond Projects - Preliminary Design Report

Preliminary Design Report

Table of Contents

Section 1: Scope Overview

a. Work Package 1

b. Work Package 3

Section 2: Programming Approach

a. Established Goals

b. Evaluating Priorities

c. Cost Estimating

Section 3: Scopes of Work

Work Package 1 – Seismic Improvements to Gymnasium and Support Building

a. Bond Directive & Budget

b. Existing Conditions

c. Structural Diagrams & Narrative

d. Additional Opportunities and/or Impacts

Work Package 3 - Team space and softball field improvements, Athletics lighting

a. Bond Directive & Budget

b. Existing Conditions

c. Design Diagrams & Narratives

d. Additional Opportunities and/or Impacts

Section 4: Cost Summary & Recommendations

Appendix A: Structural Preliminary Design Narrative

Appendix B: Design Narrative Appendix C: Cost Estimate Appendix D: Approved Scope and Budget Understanding

Section 1: Scope Overview

a. Work Package 1 : Secure the Campus

As part of the safety and security allocations of the bond, a portion of WP1 includes seismic improvements for the Yoshida Event Center (YEC) and adjacent Support Building (HPE). Similar to the rest of campus, both were built in the late 1960s and while they have been well maintained, no significant renovation work has been done since. Both buildings are located at the southern end of the MHCC campus in Gresham, OR. Vehicular access to this portion of the campus is from NE 17th Street near the intersection with NE Kane Drive.

The gymnasium structure was assessed with a Tier III analysis to determine detailed information that will help estimate the cost of improvements. A systematic inspection was also completed of the original glu-lam roof members to ensure they remain in good condition and will perform as expected in a seismic event.

Early conversations during the process inquired about the use of the YEC as a ‘shelter’. In defining the use of the word ‘shelter’ it was determined that the intent is to continue to allow the building to serve the community in a variety of ways, for example as a base camp for wildfire operations when the threat is off-site. There is no intent to increase the building’s occupancy classification to a level suitable for uninterrupted use as a shelter after a seismic event.

b. Work Package 3 : Serve the Community / Enhance Campus Experience A portion of WP3 includes improvements to the MHCC Softball facility, as it is currently non-compliant with Title IX rules that compare these facilities against those of the MHCC Baseball facility. The primary areas of non-compliance include the field make-up as well as a lack of equivalent seating, sports lighting, press box, restrooms, and concession stand.

Scope within the Support Building related to Title IX, the women’s locker rooms are also below compliance level when compared to the men’s locker rooms.

Currently all five women’s sports share a single team locker room, while the men’s teams are divided between two locker rooms.

When considering alternations for the Support Building, the design team was also asked to investigate options to add an EMT classroom as well as a single-user ADA compliant restroom that could serve the public attending events in both the YEC and the adjacent outdoor Stadium.

Section 1: Scope Overview

SE STARK STREET

NE 17TH STREET

N E

K A

N E

D R

IV

E

S

TR

O U

TD

A

LE

R

D

Campus Vicinity Plan

YEC

SOFTBALL

FIELD

HPE

Section 2: Programming Approach

a. Established Goals The design team began with a site walk and observation of existing conditions. The initial site walk and meeting included stakeholders from Athletics as well as Campus Facilities and Operations. This was our first opportunity as a group to identify specific goals and measures of success for these portions of the bond.

Measures of success & project goals (in no particular order):

b. Evaluating Priorities The committee is establishing a process for effective decision-making.

Using tools such as the Project Goal Tracking Matrix pictured to the right helps visualize each scope of work relative to the original project goals. Understanding which scopes of work meet the most goals helps inform final project definition.

c. Cost Estimating Scopes of work were costed by a professional cost estimator familiar with this type of work and age of building. Because we are early in the project a 20- 25% design contingency was used to account for information to be developed.

This number is expected to decrease as more detailed information is provided.

The cost estimate is included in the appendix.

d. Recommendations Based on the cost estimates and priorities, recommendations for proposed Scopes of work to consider are in Section 4 of this report.

Section 2: Programming Approach

Symbol Meaning ✅ Fully Meets Goal Partially Meets Goal ❌ Does Not Meet Goal ➖ Not Applicable

Gymnasium Seismic

Relocate Climbing Wall

Shared Hitting Barn

Project Goal Pressbox Seating Lighting ADA Access Dugouts Women's LR Men's LR Training Rm EMT CR

Equitable for Everyone, ADA Compliance ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ➖ ✅

Safety of Students & Community ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ➖ ➖ ✅

Functional for Faculty, Staff & Student-Athletes ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅

Serving the Community ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ➖ ➖ ➖ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ➖ ✅

Updated Look — Consistent Branding & Identity ✅ ✅ ➖ ➖ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ➖ ✅ ✅ ➖

Title IX Compliance — Women's Sports ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ➖ ➖ ➖ ➖ ➖ ➖ ✅

Updated WiFi & Security Features ➖ ➖ ➖ ➖ ➖ ✅ ✅ ✅ ➖ ➖ ✅ ➖ ➖ ➖

Mt.Hood Athletics Bond Scope Project Goals Tracking Matrix

Softball Field Improvments Team Space Renovations ADA to Throwing

Area

Single-user Restroom in

YEC

Sample Project Goal Tracking Matrix

Section 3: Scopes of Work

Work Package 1 Seismic Improvements to Gymnasium (YEC) and Support Building (HPE)

a. Bond Directive & Budget Bond set aside a combined $1,925,000 for seismic improvements to the Gymnasium and $385,000 for seismic improvements to the Support Building.

b. Existing Conditions Both buildings are single-story precast, tilt-up concrete structures. The YEC has a unique wooden dome structure that spans over the basketball courts in the gymnasium. The dome is supported by an inner ring of structural columns and beams.

c. Structural Diagrams & Narrative KPFF details their process and findings in a Structural Preliminary Design Narrative included as Appendix A-II.

d. Additional Opportunities and/or Impacts KPFF also undertook an inspection of the wood domed roof to meet requirements associated with PACE insurance compliance. The report for this inspection is included in Appendix A-III.

An ADA compliant single-user toilet room was also identified as a need at the gymnasium, and ideally would also serve the adjacent outdoor stadium. This is diagrammed further in this report.

Section 3: Scopes of Work

Main Entry to Gymnasium at Yoshida Event Center (YE) Domed Roof of YEC

Lobby between YEC and HPEExposed Wood Roof

Section 3: Scopes of Work

Existing floor plan YEC and HPE Buildings

YEC

ADA Toilet Room See next page

HPE Building

Section 3: Scopes of Work

Universal changing table

9' -0

Mt.Hood Community College Bond Work: Athletics scope 22 May 202628

Universal Changing table electronic access for exterior door remain as storage

Conceptual Plan - Single-user Restroom

Section 3: Scopes of Work

Work Package 3 Locker room improvements

a. Bond Directive & Budget

b. Existing Conditions The HPE building has had very limited improvements and with few exceptions the finishes and configuration remains as it was first constructed. Currently the men’s teams share 2 locker rooms and the women’s teams all share a single room. Plans focus on reconfiguring space to create more equivalent conditions between the two gendered arrangements.

c. Design Diagrams & Narratives The HPE Conceptual Floor Plan is the result of program meetings with Athletics and Campus Stakeholders.

d. Additional Opportunities and/or Impacts There are several additional opportunities reconfigurations within the HPE could allow. Relocating the Training room from its current location not only provides a more efficient location relative to all teams, it also tallows the former space to be redefined as a new EMT Classroom. The EMT Classroom requires extra storage and a sink, and this space matches that need. Relocating Training requires an adjustment to the existing equipment room. The existing computer lab is under-utilized and can be repurposed to replace and supplement the Team equipment spaces.

A number of architectural requests were discussed during program conversations. These include the relocation of a climbing wall, additional doors to PE126 and PE117, relocation of laundry facilities, storage of specific team equipment, and the addition of shelving and furnishings within specific spaces.

These will be considered during the schematic design phase once the program is more defined.

Existing locker room shared by all women’s sports

Existing equipment room serving all sports

Section 3: Scopes of Work scale: 1/8" = 1/'-0" Plan layout B.2 vanity / mirror

Training OfficeLaundry

Equipment Storage Room 750 sf

Tubs & Ice

Lactation

Team Room

Storage A

Softball Volleyball 23 lockers bench

EMT Classroom study

T & F X-country Basketball 26 lockers

Secure door

Ball Wall

W D shelving

Existing team cabinets

Tables w storage below

Existing team cabinets

Basketball

T&F / XC

25 lockers

Team Room study be nc h

Movement area

Mt.Hood Community College Bond Work: Athletics scope 22 May 2026

TBD: explore efficiency in this room

Shelving / cabinets

Baseball 36 lockers shelving sink/ cabinets above

Storage B identify location for chair cart(s) and net storage

HPE Conceptual Floor Plan

Work Package 3 Softball field

a. Bond Directive & Budget

b. Existing Conditions

c. Design Diagrams & Narratives

d. Additional Opportunities and/or Impacts

Section 3: Scopes of Work

Approach to softball field and path to throwing area

Seating behind Home plate

Existing on-grade dugouts

Section 3: Scopes of Work Softball Field Improvement Plan

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

W

C3 C1

D2

A6

B8

C542 LF

C583 LF

B5 C1 D2 B1 84 SEATS A6 A5

C1

D2

A4

C4 423 LF

A5

B2

D2

C1

B1 180 SEATS

B6 165 SF

B7 800 SF

C6 50 LFC1D2B2A4D2

B3 A5 A5 A5

A377 LF

A2664 SF

A1 1,140 SF

A141,934 SF

C8

B5 1,857 SF

A5

C7 C9

A4

C2B4 4,250 SFC5 1,679 SF

D1

SCALE: 1" = '

10 20 40

Mt.Hood Community College Bond Work: Athletics scope 18 June 2026

SOFTBALL COMPLEX IMPROVEMENTS

CONSTRUCTION NOTES:

SYNTHETIC OR NATURAL TURF SOFTBALL FIELD.A1

SYNTHETIC OR NATURAL TURF BULLPENS.A2

30-FT TALL BLACK VINYL COATED CHAINLINK BACKSTOP

WITH 3-FT TALL PADDING.

A3

6-FT TALL BLACK VINYL COATED CHAINLINK FENCE.A4

VEHICLE OR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS GATE.A5

FOUL POLES.A6

ELEVATED ADA ACCESSIBLE BLEACHERS.B1

PROTECT AND RENOVATE EXISTING DUGOUTS.

IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE NEW PAINT, NEW DOORWAY

ACCESSES, MODIFIED ROOF STRUCTURES, UPDATED

INTERIORS, AND NEW PROTECTIVE FENCING.

B2

PROTECT AND RENOVATE EXISTING STORAGE SHED.

IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE NEW PAINT AND INTERIOR

STORAGE IMPROVEMENTS.

B3

INDOOR HITTING FACILITY.B4

FLAG POLE.B5

PRESS BOX.B6

RESTROOM & CONCESSIONS BUILDING.B7

SCOREBOARD FOOTINGS PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY

COLLEGE.

B8

NEW OUTDOOR HITTING FACILITY.B9

CONCRETE SIDEWALKS.C1

MAINTENANCE & EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS.C2

SIDEWALK TO AQUATIC CENTER AND TRACK & FIELD

FACILITIES.

C3

SANITARY SEWER.C4

STORMWATER FACILITY AND STORM DRAINAGE PIPES.C5

WATER SERVICE. CONNECT TO EXISTING WATER MAIN.

RELOCATE EXISTING WATER MAIN AROUND PROPOSED

BUILDING.

C6

INSTALL IRRIGATION IN OUTFIELD (NATURAL TURF

OPTION ONLY).

C7

IMPROVE EXISTING SIDEWALK ENTRY TO MEET ADA

ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS.

C8

INSTALL DRAINAGE IN OUTFIELD (NATURAL TURF ONLY).C9

TRACK & FIELD IMPROVEMENTS. IMPROVEMENTS

INCLUDE NEW THROWING CAGE, CONCRETE PAD, AND

RING.

D1

FIELD LIGHTING.D2

Work Package 3 Field Lighting

a. Bond Directive & Budget:

b. Existing Conditions

c. Design Diagrams & Narratives

d. Additional Opportunities and/or Impacts

Section 3: Scopes of Work

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

SAN

W

D2

D2

D2

D2

D2D2

SCALE: 1" = '

10 20 40

Mt.Hood Community College Bond Work: Athletics scope 18 June 2026

SOFTBALL COMPLEX IMPROVEMENTS

CONSTRUCTION NOTES:

FIELD LIGHTING.D2

Sports lighting concept (to be designed by vendor)

Track & Field throwing area

Section 4: Recommendations

Section 4: Cost Summary & Recommendations

The full professional estimate of cost is included as Appendix C.

The process to determine formal recommendations stemmed from the goal setting conversation held early in the process. From the beginning there was clear understanding that not all the desired scope would fit within the allocated budgets.

The different scopes of work were ranked with the goals and priorities of MHCC in mind. The image below illustrates the tool. Each project goal was given a weight factor and then applied to each scope of work to determine a rank. A high ranking illustrates scope that meets many of the project goals.

This tool also applied summaries of cost relative to the allocated bond dollar amounts. This comparison summary has helped shape the recommendations of work to move ahead into design and construction.

Project Goals Factor Equitable for All 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0 0 Improved ADA access 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Safety of Students and Community 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Functional for Student, Faculty and Student Athletics 0.6 1 0.6 0 0 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 Serving the Community 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 Updated Look - consistent branding and Identity 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 Title IX compliance - Women's Sports 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0 0.5 0.65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Updated WiFI & Security Features 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RANK 3.1 1.75 3.5 3.8 4.4 4.4 5.1 3.4 3.1 3.5 3.95 2.85 3.5 2.65 1.5 0.9

COST

Allocated Bond Dollars Work Package

RANKING KEY

High 4.0 - 5.4 Medium High 3.5 - 3.9 Medium 3 - 3.4 Medium Low 2.5 - 2.9 Low 0 - 2.4

COST with markups COST without markups

Medium Low Medium High Medium LowMedium Medium HighLow

Gym Seismic YEC Single User

RR

Relocate

Climbing wall Shared Hitting

BarnHPE Seismic

Field Replacement

SYNTHETIC

ADA Path to

Throwing Area Women's LR

Medium MediumMedium High Medium High High

Men's LR Training Rm & Relo Equip RmSports Lighting EMT CR

$1,890,354.00$873,766.00 $216,191.00 $1,065,350.00 $816,725.00 $1,457,130.00 $445,320.00

Restroom & Concessions

Field Replacement

NATURAL

High

Pressbox Seating

$3,076,851.00 $1,258,624.00 $316,200.00 not priced $2,631,089.00

Work Package 1 n/a n/a n/a

LowLow

$1,925,000.00 $385,000.00 $0

High

$2,554,150.00

$628,758.00 $0.00 $0.00

High n/aWork Package 3 $4,689,709.00 $0.00

$1,127,738.00$2,470,018.00

Goal Ranking Tool - Choosing by Advantages

Section 4: Recommendations

Recommendations: Work Package 1

Based on the matrix and cost of work, we recommend the Work Package 1 dollars be allocated in its entirety to the seismic upgrades of the Yoshida Event Center. The seismic assessment of the adjacent HPE shows less risk from a seismic perspective, and the money allocated toward improvements to that structure would be better utilized toward improvements to the higher occupancy gymnasium structure.

Recommendations: Work Package 3

Outlined in this draft are different scenarios of pricing within Work Package 3.

As one of the high priorities the field replacement is recommended. This was priced as both synthetic and natural turf options in the outfield, and maintaining clay surface for infield play. In both synthetic and natural pricing, related improvements such as new backstop, fencing, irrigation, dugout refurbishment, etc is included. See the cost estimate in Appendix C for further the full list of inclusions and exclusions.

There is a cost savings of $84,132 for a natural turf outfield over synthetic turf. We advise MHCC to consider long-term maintenance costs to assess if this savings is worth taking now.

With the remaining budget after field replacement is taken, the first option includes synthetic turf with the addition of a restroom/concessions building and the ADA path to the Throwing Area.

The second option includes natural turf with the addition of press box and seating, as well as improvements to the Women’s locker room. Note that the numbers in red still require markups to be applied, so this total needs further vetting.

Project Goals Factor Equitable for All 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0 0 Improved ADA access 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Safety of Students and Community 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Functional for Student, Faculty and Student Athletics 0.6 1 0.6 0 0 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 Serving the Community 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 Updated Look - consistent branding and Identity 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 Title IX compliance - Women's Sports 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0 0.5 0.65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Updated WiFI & Security Features 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RANK 3.1 1.75 3.5 3.8 4.4 4.4 5.1 3.4 3.1 3.5 3.95 2.85 3.5 2.65 1.5 0.9

COST

Allocated Bond Dollars Work Package

RANKING KEY

High 4.0 - 5.4 Medium High 3.5 - 3.9 Medium 3 - 3.4 Medium Low 2.5 - 2.9 Low 0 - 2.4

COST with markups COST without markups

Medium Low Medium High Medium LowMedium Medium HighLow

Gym Seismic YEC Single User

RR

Relocate

Climbing wall Shared Hitting

BarnHPE Seismic

Field Replacement

SYNTHETIC

ADA Path to

Throwing Area Women's LR

Medium MediumMedium High Medium High High

Men's LR Training Rm & Relo Equip RmSports Lighting EMT CR

$1,890,354.00$873,766.00 $216,191.00 $1,065,350.00 $816,725.00 $1,457,130.00 $445,320.00

Restroom & Concessions

Field Replacement

NATURAL

High

Pressbox Seating

$3,076,851.00 $1,258,624.00 $316,200.00 not priced $2,631,089.00

Work Package 1 n/a n/a n/a

LowLow

$1,925,000.00 $385,000.00 $0

High

$2,554,150.00

$628,758.00 $0.00 $0.00

High n/aWork Package 3 $4,689,709.00 $0.00

$1,127,738.00$2,470,018.00

Project Goals Factor Equitable for All 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0 0 Improved ADA access 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Safety of Students and Community 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Functional for Student, Faculty and Student Athletics 0.6 1 0.6 0 0 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 Serving the Community 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 Updated Look - consistent branding and Identity 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 Title IX compliance - Women's Sports 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0 0.5 0.65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Updated WiFI & Security Features 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RANK 3.1 1.75 3.5 3.8 4.4 4.4 5.1 3.4 3.1 3.5 3.95 2.85 3.5 2.65 1.5 0.9

COST

Allocated Bond Dollars Work Package

RANKING KEY

High 4.0 - 5.4 Medium High 3.5 - 3.9 Medium 3 - 3.4 Medium Low 2.5 - 2.9 Low 0 - 2.4

COST with markups COST without markups

Medium Low Medium High Medium LowMedium Medium HighLow

Gym Seismic YEC Single User

RR

Relocate

Climbing wall Shared Hitting

BarnHPE Seismic

Field Replacement

SYNTHETIC

ADA Path to

Throwing Area Women's LR

Medium MediumMedium High Medium High High

Men's LR Training Rm & Relo Equip RmSports Lighting EMT CR

$1,890,354.00$873,766.00 $216,191.00 $1,065,350.00 $816,725.00 $1,457,130.00 $445,320.00

Restroom & Concessions

Field Replacement

NATURAL

High

Pressbox Seating

$3,076,851.00 $1,258,624.00 $316,200.00 not priced $2,631,089.00

Work Package 1 n/a n/a n/a

LowLow

$1,925,000.00 $385,000.00 $0

High

$2,554,150.00

$628,758.00 $0.00 $0.00

High n/aWork Package 3 $4,689,709.00 $0.00

$1,127,738.00$2,470,018.00

Option 2 Natural Turf, Press box & Seating, Women’s Locker Room

Preliminary cost estimate = $4,663,106

Option 1 Synthetic Turf, Restroom & Concessions, ADA Path

Preliminary cost estimate = $4,660,695

Section 4: Recommendations

Recommendations: Work Package 3 continued

Additional options are possible if the field replacement is not taken into account.

A third option exists that limits work at the Softball field to only a restroom and concession building and the ADA path, but adds the community-focused interior improvements within the YEC and HPE buildings. Note that the numbers in red still require markups to be applied, so this total should be vetted further.

The last illustration provided is a summary cost of all interior improvements in the HPE. This cost exceeds the budget amount, so is not recommended.

Sports lighting:

Sports lighting has been separated to its own budget and is not reflected in the Options 1-4 above. As a high priority for MHCC we recommend maintaining the dollars allocated for this scope of work. The cost estimate is for an NCAA standard level of play (70 fc infield and 50 fc outfield) and results in a preliminary cost that exceeds the budget, however through conversations with Musco Lighting, they feel through the course of design refinement the cost is likely to be reduced to fit within the budget. Additionally, Musco Lighting provided some details of ways to significantly reduce cost and maintain an appropriate illuminated level of play.

If desired light levels were set at IES Class III standards (50 fc infield and 30 fc outfield) the budget could be reduced to $400,000 and the remaining dollars applied elsewhere. For reference, this level of lighting was just installed at Chemeketa Community College.

Project Goals Factor Equitable for All 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0 0 Improved ADA access 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Safety of Students and Community 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Functional for Student, Faculty and Student Athletics 0.6 1 0.6 0 0 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 Serving the Community 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 Updated Look - consistent branding and Identity 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 Title IX compliance - Women's Sports 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0 0.5 0.65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Updated WiFI & Security Features 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RANK 3.1 1.75 3.5 3.8 4.4 4.4 5.1 3.4 3.1 3.5 3.95 2.85 3.5 2.65 1.5 0.9

COST

Allocated Bond Dollars Work Package

RANKING KEY

High 4.0 - 5.4 Medium High 3.5 - 3.9 Medium 3 - 3.4 Medium Low 2.5 - 2.9 Low 0 - 2.4

COST with markups COST without markups

Medium Low Medium High Medium LowMedium Medium HighLow

Gym Seismic YEC Single User

RR

Relocate

Climbing wall Shared Hitting

BarnHPE Seismic

Field Replacement

SYNTHETIC

ADA Path to

Throwing Area Women's LR

Medium MediumMedium High Medium High High

Men's LR Training Rm & Relo Equip RmSports Lighting EMT CR

$1,890,354.00$873,766.00 $216,191.00 $1,065,350.00 $816,725.00 $1,457,130.00 $445,320.00

Restroom & Concessions

Field Replacement

NATURAL

High

Pressbox Seating

$3,076,851.00 $1,258,624.00 $316,200.00 not priced $2,631,089.00

Work Package 1 n/a n/a n/a

LowLow

$1,925,000.00 $385,000.00 $0

High

$2,554,150.00

$628,758.00 $0.00 $0.00

High n/aWork Package 3 $4,689,709.00 $0.00

$1,127,738.00$2,470,018.00

Project Goals Factor Equitable for All 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 1 0.6 1 0.6 0.5 0.3 0 0 Improved ADA access 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Safety of Students and Community 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Functional for Student, Faculty and Student Athletics 0.6 1 0.6 0 0 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 Serving the Community 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 Updated Look - consistent branding and Identity 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 1 0.3 1 0.3 Title IX compliance - Women's Sports 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 1 1.3 0 0 0.5 0.65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Updated WiFI & Security Features 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 1 0.3 0 0 1 0.3 0 0 0 0 1 0.3 0.5 0.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RANK 3.1 1.75 3.5 3.8 4.4 4.4 5.1 3.4 3.1 3.5 3.95 2.85 3.5 2.65 1.5 0.9

COST

Allocated Bond Dollars Work Package

RANKING KEY

High 4.0 - 5.4 Medium High 3.5 - 3.9 Medium 3 - 3.4 Medium Low 2.5 - 2.9 Low 0 - 2.4

COST with markups COST without markups

Medium Low Medium High Medium LowMedium Medium HighLow

Gym Seismic YEC Single User

RR

Relocate

Climbing wall Shared Hitting

BarnHPE Seismic

Field Replacement

SYNTHETIC

ADA Path to

Throwing Area Women's LR

Medium MediumMedium High Medium High High

Men's LR Training Rm & Relo Equip RmSports Lighting EMT CR

$1,890,354.00$873,766.00 $216,191.00 $1,065,350.00 $816,725.00 $1,457,130.00 $445,320.00

Restroom & Concessions

Field Replacement

NATURAL

High

Pressbox Seating

$3,076,851.00 $1,258,624.00 $316,200.00 not priced $2,631,089.00

Work Package 1 n/a n/a n/a

LowLow

$1,925,000.00 $385,000.00 $0

High

$2,554,150.00

$628,758.00 $0.00 $0.00

High n/aWork Package 3 $4,689,709.00 $0.00

$1,127,738.00$2,470,018.00

For reference - Not Recommended All HPE Interior Improvements

Preliminary cost estimate = $7,138,452

Option 3 YEC Restroom, Softball Restroom & Concessions, ADA Path, Training/Equipment, EMT Classroom

Preliminary cost estimate = $4,325,195

Mount Hood Community College

Structural Preliminary Design Narrative

KPFF Project No. 10022600042

June 18, 2026 (DRAFT)

Submitted To

Cannon Design

621 SW Columbia St.

Portland, OR 97201

Submitted By

KPFF Consulting Engineers

111 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 2600

Portland, OR 97204

Mount Hood Community College 1 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

Structural Preliminary Design Narrative (DRAFT) June 18, 2026

Structural Preliminary Design Narrative

Table of Contents

DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.

INTRODUCTION

PROJECT SCOPE

EXISTING STRUCTURAL INFORMATION

EXISTING STRUCTURAL ARRANGEMENT BY BUILDING

SITE VISITS

PROPOSED STRUCTURAL ALTERATIONS

SEISMIC EVALUATION TRIGGERS

PROPOSED STRUCTURAL WORK AT THE SOFTBALL FIELD

SUMMARY

APPENDIX I: GYM TIER 3 SEISMIC REPORT

APPENDIX II: Seismic Evaluation and Conceptual Seismic Strengthening Design

Appendix III: PACE Glue-Laminated Member Visual Observation Report

Mount Hood Community College 2 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

INTRODUCTION

KPFF was contracted in March 2026 as a sub-consultant to Cannon Design for the Mount Hood

Community College (MHCC) Gymnasium, Gym Support Building, and Athletics Facilities scope of the

CIP 2025 Bond Program Projects described in RFP 01152026. This narrative serves to summarize the structural-related components as they were understood during the preliminary design phase of the project.

This narrative should be read in conjunction with the project Preliminary Design Report by Cannon

Design. Additionally, it should be read in conjunction with the MHCC Tier 3 Seismic Report issued in

Draft form on June 16, 2026 (Appendix I), the Seismic Evaluation and Conceptual Seismic Strengthening

Design report issued December 21, 2015 (Appendix II), and the upcoming PACE Glue-Laminated

Member Visual Observation Report (Appendix III) that will be issued later this month.

The portions of the overall project described in this report include the Gym, also known as the Yoshida

Event Center, the adjacent Gym Support building, and the existing Softball field. These areas are located at the southern end of the MHCC campus in Gresham, OR. Vehicular access to this portion of the campus is from NE 17th Dr. near the intersection with NE Kane Dr.

Figure 1 – Portion of MHCC Campus Described in this Report

Mount Hood Community College 3 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

PROJECT SCOPE

This assessment entailed the review of the original design documents for the buildings following a site visit to observe existing conditions. Our review and the findings presented herein are limited to those conditions and components for which sufficient information could be found within the original structural drawings.

Observations and recommendations contained within this report reflect our engineering judgment.

Concealed issues may exist that cannot be revealed through available drawings and site observations alone. KPFF can in no way warrant or guarantee the condition of the existing construction of the building, or the future building performance.

EXISTING STRUCTURAL INFORMATION

The structural information available for review during this study is listed below:

Original Design Documents Provided to KPFF

1) “Health, Physical Education & Recreation Building” Lutes & Amundson AIA, 1967

2) “Detail Drawings - Health, Physical Education & Recreation Building”

Lutes & Amundson AIA, 1967

3) “Womens Physical Education Addition” Lutes & Amundson AIA, 1969

4) “Health, Physical Education & Recreation Building Seismic Evaluation” KPFF, 2001

5) “MHCC Domed Gymnasium Building: Seismic Evaluation & Conceptual Seismic

Strengthening Design” KPFF, 2015

EXISTING STRUCTURAL ARRANGEMENT BY BUILDING

Gym Building

The gym is a single-story building with a footprint of approximately 42,000 square feet that was constructed in approximately 1968. The outer perimeter of structural columns and beams is a square shape with sides of approximately 205 feet. A wooden dome structure with a 180 foot diameter that free spans over the basketball courts is contained within the overall square footprint of the building.

The dome is supported by an inner circumference of structural columns and beams.

Figure 2 - General Arrangement of Structural Elements

Mount Hood Community College 4 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

The lateral force resisting system (LFRS) of the building consists of wooden and metal diaphragms spanning to tilt-up reinforced concrete wall panels that are housed in the load-bearing concrete column and beam frames. The flat roof diaphragm that surrounds the dome is metal decking with an acoustical concrete topping supported by open-web joists. The dome diaphragm is a combination of a curved surface of 2x6 straight wood sheathing and a lattice of glue laminated (glulams) beams. The dome roof structure was designer-supplied and the original construction drawings were not available for our review. A more thorough description of the LFRS can be found in Appendix I.

Figure 3 - Example Glue-Laminated Member Joints (left), Locations of Mezzanines (right)

The columns and wall panel ends are supported by spread footings. The floor is a mesh-reinforced slab on grade that has rebar dowels cast into the wall panels around the dome and outer perimeters. A cast concrete ventilation tunnel exists around the perimeter of the dome.

Four mezzanines exist at the flanks of the north and south lobby entrances that are used to support mechanical equipment. The mezzanine floors are 6” reinforced concrete on deck construction supported by load-bearing reinforced CMU walls. The CMU walls are supported by grade beams that span between column foundation locations.

An expansion joint exists above the western entrance to the building from the adjacent Gym Support building. The joint physically isolates the Gym Support and Gym buildings. The joint is depicted as 2” wide by the original construction drawings.

Gym Support Building

The Gym Support building was constructed in 1967 with a significant addition in 1969 that approximately doubled the size of the structure. The structure is a one-story building constructed primarily with precast concrete tilt-up exterior walls and CMU interior partition walls. The metal deck roof has an insulating concrete topping and is supported by open-web steel joists spanning between steel wide flange beams and concrete fascia beams, which span between concrete columns. The columns are supported on spread footings, but the walls have no continuous foundations. The concrete structure was generally constructed with the same structural arrangement and details as the

Gym.

Mount Hood Community College 5 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

Figure 4 - Gym Support Building Layout

There are two mechanical mezzanines, one in the original structure and one in the addition. Both consist of cast-in-place concrete slabs that span between load bearing reinforced CMU walls. These walls, unlike others in the structure, have continuous grade beams that span to footings. To minimize remedial work, the walls supporting the mezzanines should remain unaltered if possible.

The drawings and details show reinforcing in all the CMU partitions and walls. A reinforced slab thickening is used to support the CMU walls where they are not supported by a grade beam. Detail sheet 319 shows a reinforced CMU wall that is connected directly to the underside of the deck as a shear wall. This wall was likely intended to be a temporary shear wall until the 1969 addition was built and completed the diaphragm’s support. During later seismic analysis of the structure, we will aim to use this wall as an existing shear wall to minimize the length of additional shotcrete wall that was proposed to be added on grid 8.5 during the 2015 seismic study.

Softball Field Structures

The softball field structures consist of free-standing, ground-mounted aluminum bleachers and permanent field-level dugouts along the 1st and 3rd baselines. The dugouts are constructed with presumably reinforced CMU walls and open-framed 2x rafters. Most visible wood connections are made with Simpson-type hardware. A plywood roof diaphragm is visible from below.

Mount Hood Community College 6 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

Figure 5 - Dugout Interior (left) and Bleachers and Dugout (right)

SITE VISITS

KPFF personnel attended site visits to the buildings on April 17th and May 27th, 2026. The site visits were used to assess if the existing structural drawings available are consistent with the general arrangement of the current building and to observe the current condition of the structures.

The concrete structures of the Gym and Gym Support building are approximately 60 years old and appear to be in good condition given their age. From past reports that were available for our review, small areas of cracking and spalling have been repaired over the years.

The condition of the softball dugouts show signs of deterioration due to the exposed framing and possible signs of past water ingress. If the dugouts are to remain, we recommend a more thorough survey of the structures to assess their condition and reuse.

An upcoming visual observation report for the glue-laminated (glulam) members of the dome roof based on PACE insurance requirements will be included in Appendix III of the final draft of this report.

PROPOSED STRUCTURAL ALTERATIONS

• Gym Building

The proposed seismic retrofit work to the Gym building is described in the Tier 3 Seismic Report that can be found in Appendix I.

• Gym Support Building

The snip on the following page shows the currently proposed changes to the Gym Support building by

Cannon Design. Descriptions of the structural-related impacts are provided following the snip.

Mount Hood Community College 7 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

Figure 6 - Proposed Interior Changes at Gym Support Building by Cannon Design

Removal of Interior Partitions

Several interior CMU and acoustic partitions are proposed to be removed or altered in Figure 6.

Based on the existing drawings, all interior walls are not load-bearing and non-structural except the walls supporting the mezzanines and the wall along grid 8.5 (Refer to green areas in Fig. 4).

Therefore, removing the partitions proposed by Cannon Design is structurally acceptable. Since the existing drawings show the partitions terminating above ceiling level, it would be best to remove the full height of partitions where openings are proposed to avoid installing lintels above door frames etc. Where multiple proposed openings leave less than 48” of unaltered wall between them, the multiple openings should be combined into one larger full-height opening.

New Lockers, Storage, and other Tall Items

New non-structural components such as lockers, storage cabinets, racking, and other tall items are required to be seismically anchored. Provide an allowance for the anchorage of these items to the existing slab on grade, or if preferred, to adjacent walls that are shown to have the necessary structural capacity.

Gym Support Building Seismic Retrofit

A seismic retrofit of the Gym Support building is included in the bond’s work package for the building.

It is assumed the seismic retrofit work will be voluntary and not required by chapter 34 of the 2025

Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC). Seismic analysis has not yet been performed on this structure, but an ASCE Standard 41-13, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings (ASCE 41-

13) Tier 1 seismic study was undertaken in 2015 that can be used to inform pricing for the various measures recommended at that time. The basis of the Tier 1 study was the Life Safety structural performance level at the BSE-1E seismic hazard which is consistent with our understanding of MHCC’s requirements. The 2015 study has been included in Appendix III of this report. A discussion of code-based triggers that would require a mandatory seismic evaluation are discussed in the following section.

SEISMIC EVALUATION TRIGGERS

The OSSC triggers of a mandatory seismic evaluation are a change in Risk Category, an alteration to the building’s primary structure, or the addition of significant mass to the structure. Given the era of the Gym Support building’s structural system, we anticipate that if a seismic evaluation is required, it

Mount Hood Community College 8 KPFF Project No. 10022600042 would result in several members of the LFRS requiring seismic retrofitting to meet code-level seismic resistance.

The Gym Support building is assumed to be Risk Category II, and the proposed alterations to the building will not require a higher risk category classification.

Per 3408.5.3 of the OSSC, structural alterations or the addition of mass to a structure only require seismic evaluation when the proposed alterations increase the demand-capacity ratio of a member of the LFRS by more than 10%. The members of the Gym Support building’s LFRS that would be affected by this requirement are the metal deck diaphragm, the tilt-up concrete shear walls, and the concrete columns and their foundations. At this phase, the currently proposed changes to the Gym Support building do not exceed the 10% threshold and will not require a mandatory seismic evaluation.

The seismic evaluation triggers for the Gym are described in the Basis of Study section of the Tier 3

Seismic Report included in Appendix I.

PROPOSED STRUCTURAL WORK AT THE SOFTBALL FIELD

The proposed structural work at the softball field includes new bidder-designed bleachers, pressbox, lighting poles, and netting support structures, possible alterations to the existing dugouts, and a new bathroom building.

Bidder-Designed Structures

Bidder-designed structures are to be designed per the structural design criteria that will be provided by KPFF in an upcoming design phase. Given the code defined special ice region near the Columbia

River Gorge, these structures will need to be designed to meet the ice loading requirements of the code. The foundations of bidder-designed structures will need to conform to upcoming geotechnical report recommendations. If requested, KPFF can design the foundations for bidder-designed items.

Alterations to Existing Dugouts

Structural alterations of the existing dugouts will require they meet OSSC chapter 34 alteration requirements. This may require strengthening the existing gravity members or the LFRS to meet current code requirements.

New Bathroom Building

The new bathroom building structure will likely consist of a light-framed wood roof supporting a plywood roof diaphragm and 8” solid-grouted reinforced CMU walls supported by foundations per geotechnical report recommendations. The floor will be constructed with a reinforced 4” thick slab on grade.

SUMMARY

The Gym and Gym Support buildings are 1960’s era concrete tilt-up buildings that appear in good structural condition given their age. Due to the seismic deficiencies found in the seismic analysis reports, we recommend the Gym is seismically retrofitted per the Tier 3 Seismic Report found in

Appendix I and a budget for the Gym Support building seismic retrofit is determined using the 2015 seismic report in Appendix II escalated to current costs. New structural work at the softball field will need to conform to structural design criteria by KPFF based in the 2025 OSSC.

APPENDIX I :

Gym Tier 3 Seismic Report

KPFF Project No. 10022600042

June 15, 2026 (DRAFT)

Submitted To

Cannon Design

621 SW Columbia St.

Portland, OR 97201

Submitted By

KPFF Consulting Engineers

111 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 2600

Portland, OR 97204

Mount Hood Community College 1 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

Gym Tier 3 Seismic report - DRAFT June 15, 2026

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

GYM SEISMIC ANALYSIS SCOPE

BASIS OF STUDY

EXISTING STRUCTURAL INFORMATION

NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING

ANALYSIS METHOD

RESULTS AND COMMENTARY

RETROFIT COMPONENT DESIGN

NONSTRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

CONCLUSION

APPENDIX A: CONCEPTUAL SEISMIC RETROFIT SKETCHES

APPENDIX B: ASCE 41-23 NON-STRUCTURAL CHECKLIST

Mount Hood Community College 2 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Yoshida Event Center Gymnasium building (gym) on the Mount Hood Community College (MHCC) campus was originally built in the late 1960’s of tilt-up concrete construction supporting a wood geodesic dome that spans over the gym area. KPFF performed a seismic evaluation per the Tier 3 procedure contained in ASCE Standard 41-23, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings

(ASCE 41-23).

From the acceptance criteria of ASCE 41-23, substantial structural deficiencies were found to exist in the building’s lateral force resisting system. These were primarily related to inadequate roof diaphragm capacity at the wooden dome and an incomplete seismic load path between the wooden dome and the supporting concrete structure below. An in-depth discussion on the seismic analysis performed is contained in this report.

To meet the targeted seismic performance objective criteria of Life Safety structural performance at the BSE-1E seismic hazard level, and Collapse Prevention structural performance level at the BSE-2E seismic hazard level, the building will need to be seismically retrofitted. The primary retrofit work will require fastening an overlay of structural sheathing over a portion of the top surface of the domed roof and installing steel clips between the existing wood dome structure and the existing concrete ring beam on the interior side of the dome. Proposed methodologies and commentary on the retrofit strategy are discussed in greater detail in this report.

Proposed conceptual seismic retrofit sketches for the gym building and a checklist of typical non-structural component bracing and anchorage is contained in the Appendix of this report. The estimated construction costs associated with the retrofit work will be quantified by a cost estimator and included in the Preliminary Design Report for the overall project.

Mount Hood Community College 3 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

INTRODUCTION

KPFF was contracted in March 2026 as a sub-consultant to Cannon Design for the Gymnasium, Gym

Support Building, and Athletics scope of RFP 01152026. The gymnasium portion of the scope entailed a seismic retrofit of the 1960’s era geodesic dome structure.

The gym, also known as the Yoshida Event Center, is located at the southern end of the Mount Hood

Community College (MHCC) campus in Gresham, OR. Vehicular access to the gym is from NE 17th Dr.

near the intersection with NE Kane Dr.

Figure 1 – Yoshida Event Center (Gym) location at Left and Interior View of Gym at Right

GYM SEISMIC ANALYSIS SCOPE

KPFF’s scope of work for the Gym seismic analysis study includes review of the provided original design documents for the building, multiple site visits to understand existing conditions, modeling and analysis of the structure, and creation of a set of conceptual retrofit sketches. The conceptual retrofit set will be reviewed by a cost estimator, with their cost estimate included in the final Preliminary

Design Report by Cannon Design on July 2nd, 2026.

Our review and the findings presented herein are limited to those conditions and components for which sufficient information could be found within the original structural drawings provided to KPFF and confirmed on-site by the visual observations of KPFF personnel.

Observations, analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained within this report reflect our engineering judgment. Concealed problems with the construction of the building may exist that cannot be revealed through drawings and site observations alone. KPFF can in no way warrant or guarantee the condition of the existing construction of the building, or the future building performance.

Mount Hood Community College 4 KPFF Project No. 10022600042

BASIS OF STUDY

The basis of the study was agreed to be ASCE Standard 41-23, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of

Existing Buildings (ASCE 41-23) published by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).

A Tier 3 Systematic evaluation was chosen because it can be adapted to both identify current structural deficiencies and analyze seismic retrofit concept designs. When considering the 1960’s era of this structure it was anticipated that it would be found to not conform to current seismic design standards and that a retrofit would be required.

As a comparison, where Tier 1 and 2 studies rely on a list approximate structural checks to meet acceptance criteria, a Tier 3 study resembles the typical design process for a new building applied forensically. The existing structural members and their arrangement are used to create a three-dimensional analytical model based on the existing material properties from drawings and site investigations. Once the model is created, seismic loads are developed based on the anticipated spectral accelerations of the targeted seismic hazards. The adequacy of each member of the existing lateral force-resisting system (LFRS) is checked to resist seismic loading demands. Members shown to be deficient are identified and either further analysis is performed, or a seismic retrofit strategy is developed.

The performance…