LBNL THUP PDR r0.pdf

Preliminary Design Report

Transit Hub & Utilities Project 100% 3A / 50% 3B Submittal

Berkeley, CA

August 3, 2020

Transit Hub & Utilities Project (THUP)

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

August 3, 2020 | 3

Contents

1 Executive Summary

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Reference Documents

2 Discipline Narratives

2.1 Civil Engineering

2.1.1 Codes and Standards

2.1.2 Storm Drainage

2.1.3 Sanitary Sewer

2.1.4 Domestic and Fire Water

2.1.5 Site Electrical and Telecommunications

2.1.6 Site Natural Gas

2.1.7 Other Utilities

2.2 Landscape Architecture

2.2.1 Existing Conditions

2.2.2 Codes and Standards

2.2.3 Landscape Design

2.3 Architecture

2.3.1 Transit Hub

2.3.2 Shuttle Shelter

2.3.3 Site Rough Grading and Welcome Center Floor Levels

2.4 Fire Protection

2.4.1 Codes and Standards

2.4.2 Fire Service Connection and Water Supply

2.5 Electrical

2.5.1 Codes and Standards

2.5.2 Site Power Distribution

2.5.3 Load Calculations

2.5.4 Standby Power

Figures

Figure 2-1: Water Shed Boundary Figure 2-2: Building 54 Existing Conditions Landscape Plan Figure 2-3: Retaining walls and Sitelines Figure 2-4: Enlarged view of Entry Plaza and Ornamental Zone Figure 2-5: Transit Hub Shuttle Travel Direction Diagram Figure 2-6: Campus Pedestrian Routes Passing Through the Transit Hub Figure 2-7: Detail view of the Transit Hub Bus Shelter Figure 2-8: Welcome Center Slopes through the Transit Hub Figure 2-9: Preliminary Site Section: Vertical “Hold” Elevations Figure 2-10: Preliminary Site Sections: with Rough and Final Grading Elevations Figure 2-11: Transit Hub Arial View for the North Figure 2-12: Transit Hub Ground Level View for the North Figure 2-13: Architectural Site Plan of THUP 3A / SSM 3A

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

4 | August 3, 2020

1 Executive Summary

1.1 Introduction

This Design Narrative describes the Transit Hub & Utilities Project (THUP). The THUP is a separate but supporting project to the Seismic Safety & Modernization (SSM) Project which constructs a new Welcome Center Building at the existing Building 54 Cafeteria Building Site.

The THUP constructs all site utilities, rough and final site grading outside of the new Welcome Center footprint, all landscape and a Shuttle Bus Shelter. The THUP is separated into 2 separate bid packages, and early “A” package and a final “B” package.

These packages are broken down below:

THUP A

• New and Relocated Utilities 5’ from the new Welcome Center Building footprint

• Rough Grading and related Site Retaining Walls outside of the new Welcome Center Building and Loading Dock footprint

• Landscape Demolition and Protection

• Site Lighting Infrastructure

THUP B

• Final Grading

• Landscape Plantings and Furnishings

• Shuttle Bus Shelter

• Final Site Lighting Fixtures

1.2 Reference Documents

• SSM B-THUP B 100% Preliminary Design Drawings, dated August 3, 2020.

• SSM B-THUP B 100% Preliminary Design Drawings, dated August 3, 2020.

• SSM Preliminary Design Report, dated August 3, 2020.

August 3, 2020 | 5

2 Discipline Narratives

2.1 Civil Engineering

The following sections summarize the design code and standard requirements as well as the existing conditions and proposed modifications to site grading and underground site utility alignments within the boundary of investigation to 5 feet of the new Welcome Center Building. The utilities considered include:

• Storm Drainage

• Sanitary Sewer

• Potable and Fire Water

• Site Natural Gas

• Site Electrical and Communications

Potential Points of Connection (POCs) to 5 feet of the Welcome Center Building have been identified.

The condition of existing assets was determined in consultation with LBNL Facilities engineering staff through a number of meetings and RFI logs.

The location of existing utilities shown on the sketches are based on a ground penetrating radar survey performed by LBNL.The scanned location of the existing utilities was marked and GHD surveyors surveyed the location of the utility paint marks.

Topographic information is originated from the GHD topographic survey (completed April 1, 2019). Utility depth information is reported from legacy data translated from UC Grid to California State Plan Coordinates (NAD83 elevation).

Underground utility information (including depth, size and location) will be confirmed during potholing scheduled for later phases of design.

Consultation with regulatory agencies will also be undertaken during later phases of design.

Improvements to the site layout, grading, stormwater management is included in the SSM Preliminary Design Report Submittal, dated August 3, 2020.

Refer to the Civil Drawings located in the THUP A and THUP B Preliminary Design Drawing sets.

2.1.1 Codes and Standards

The following codes, standards and design guidelines are recommended for the design of potable and fire water, stormwater management, storm drains, electrical, telecommunication and natural gas.

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

6 | August 3, 2020

Standards

• National Sanitary Foundation (NSF)/ American National Standards ANSI – all components that are in contact with potable water are required to comply with NSF/ANSI 61: Drinking Water System Components – Health Effects

• State of California - California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) – Standard Specifications

• American Water Works Association (AWWA)/ American National Standards Institute (ANSI Standards) o C104/ A21.4-16 Cement–Mortar Lining for Ductile-Iron Pipe and Fittings o C105/ A21.5-10 Polyethylene Encasement for Ductile-Iron Pipe Systems o C110/ A21.10-12 Ductile-Iron and Gray-Iron Fittings o C111/ A21.11-17 Rubber-Gasket Joints for Ductile-Iron Pressure Pipe and Fittings o C115/ A21.15-11 Flanged Ductile-Iron Pipe With Ductile-Iron or Gray-Iron Threaded Flanges o C116/ A21.16-15 Protective Fusion-Bonded Epoxy Coatings for the Interior and Exterior Surfaces of Ductile-Iron and Gray-Iron Fittings o C150/ A21.50-14 Thickness Design of Ductile-Iron Pipe o C151/A21.51-17 Ductile-Iron Pipe, Centrifugally Cast o C153/A21.53-11 Ductile-Iron Compact Fittings o C503-14 Wet-Barrel Fire Hydrants o C509-15 Resilient-Seated Gate Valves for Water Supply Service o C510-07 Double Check Valve Backflow Prevention Assembly o C511-07 Reduced-Pressure Principle Backflow Prevention Assembly o C550-13 Protective Interior Coatings for Valves and Hydrants o C600-17 Installation of Ductile-Iron Mains and Their Appurtenances o C651-14 Disinfecting Water Mains o C906-15 Polyethylene (PE) Pressure Pipe and Fittings, 4 In. (100 mm) Through 63 In. (1,600 mm), for Water Distribution and Transmission

• National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) o NFPA 24 Standard for the Installation of Private Fire Service Mains and Their Appurtenances o NFPA 25 Standard for the Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems

August 3, 2020 | 7

Codes

• 2019 California Building Standards Code (incl. Title 24, Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11 & 12)

• Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

Technical Guidance Documents

• C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance (Version 6), October 31, 2017

• Technical Guidance on Implementing Stormwater Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438 of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA 438) (EPA, December 2009)

LBNL Design Guidelines

• University of California Berkeley Lab LBNL Design Guidelines (Draft), LBNL 2006

• LBNL Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (December 2016)

• LBNL Construction Details & Design Guidelines (03/05/2019)

Other

• American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) International

• Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

• U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) o DOE-O-420.1 Facility Safety o DOE-STD-1066 Fire Protection

LBNL Specifications:

• Division 02 Existing Conditions

• Division 09 Finishes

• Division 31 Earthwork

• Division 32 Exterior Improvements

• Division 33 Utilities

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

8 | August 3, 2020

2.1.2 Storm Drainage

Existing Conditions The existing site is located within the North Fork of the Strawberry Creek watershed (Blackberry Canyon). There are two sub-watersheds (Northfork Strawberry Creek Watershed and Cafeteria Creek Watershed) at the site. The watershed boundary is shown on the below figure.

Figure 2-1: Water Shed Boundary

The Cafeteria Creek Watershed is drained to Cafeteria Creek and then to the south fork of Strawberry Creek. The Northfork Strawberry Creek Watershed drains to the north fork of Strawberry Creek.

The south fork of Strawberry Creek then traverses the UC Berkeley Campus and joins the north fork near the western side of the campus near Oxford Street. Stormwater is then directed into the City of Berkeley’s Oxford and Center Streets culvert. The runoff flows from the City of Berkeley’s storm drainage system and empties into the San Francisco Bay. (LBNL SWPPP, 2016).

Two storm drain ‘networks’ service the site; 1) B54, surrounding area and Lawrence Road; 2) Cafeteria Lot and Building 70 and 70A. The existing storm drains vary in size from 6-inch (located on the north side of the existing B54) to 10-inch on the south-east side of the building. The storm drains servicing the Cafeteria Lot, Building 70 and Building 70A range from 8-inch to 10-inch. The depth of the existing storm drains is 0n the order of 2-ft.

LBNL has indicated that there are a number of new storm drains located on site not currently shown on the basemap. Scanning and survey is scheduled for later phases of design to determine the location and size of these storm drains in order to further progress the design.

August 3, 2020 | 9

Proposed Improvements

The proposed storm drainage conditions are shown on Sheets C-111 and C-130.

The site will be graded to direct flows to the new stormwater management facilities/ BMPs. Ultimately, these BMPs will discharge to the existing stormwater network and City of Berkeley’s storm drainage system as per the existing condition. Infiltration is not feasible at the site.

Stormwater from the Cafeteria Lot will be directed via new and existing stormwater pipes to the north to the North Fork of Strawberry Creek.

Stormwater from the Welcome Center Building and surrounding landscaped areas will be redirected around the new building. An existing storm drain is currently located under the existing building near the center. This storm drain will be redirected to the west of the building to discharge to Cafeteria Creek. A new below grade storm drain will also be required from the new storage tank located at the south east of the building required as part of the stormwater management for the Project.

Storm drain catch basin (SDCB) N0036 E1860 will require reconstruction for the new retaining wall. In addition the storm drain pipe from SDCB N0035 E1910 to SDCB N0036 E1860 will require reconstruction for the new biotreatment facilities.

The conceptual storm drain network has been designed to meet the 1 in 100 year storm event. Mean Annual Precipitation (inches/hour) data was obtained from the Alameda County Hydrology and Hydraulics Manual, Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, 2018.

Preliminary pipe sizes have been determined with consideration of the drainage areas (proposed topography), conceptual location and depth of bioretention and planter boxes, the existing stormwater network and rainfall intensity. The piping between LID features will comprise of either 6-inch pipework or natural swales. All LID features will be lined with a perforated PVC pipe at the base to allow discharge of stormwater from the catchment area.

The storm drain network is mostly comprised of minimum 6-inch pipe, although 8-inch may be preferred due to maintenance requirements. A 10-inch storm drain is required along the east of the building which discharges to a 12–inch storm drain along the south of the new building. This is due to the large catchment area/ directed flow from Lawrence Road.

Velocities in the new pipes will be in excess of the preferred 10 feet per second during large rainfall events (i.e. the 1 in 100 year storm event). This is generally the preferred velocity to reduce the potential for scouring in the main. Design measures to reduce the inflow of silt and other solids will be explored during preliminary design to reduce the risk of scouring the main.

PVC is likely the preferred material type, although contamination testing should be undertaken at the site to confirm its suitability. PVC should be avoided in areas with contaminated soils (particularly hydrocarbons). Alternative materials could include polyethylene encased ductile iron or natural swales where located between LID areas.

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

10 | August 3, 2020

2.1.3 Sanitary Sewer

The LBNL sanitary sewer network is owned and operated by LBNL. The system eventually discharges to the City of Berkeley’s public sewer system.

Existing Conditions There are two sanitary sewer (SS) connections to Building 54 (located on the north and south side of the building). The north SS is a 6” Cast Iron (CI) pipe which discharges to Sanitary Sewer Manhole (SSMH) SSMH04N19E. The south SS is a 4” CI pipe.

There are three SSMHs in the Project Area. These include SSMH03N21E located in the parking lot and near Lawrence Road; SSMH03N18E near the proposed loading dock and near Building 70; and SSMH04N19E (collection MH for B54 laterals). SSMH03N21E also receives flows from the east buildings including buildings 58, 80 and beyond.

SSMH03N18E is shown on the record drawings to have an outside drop inlet structure.

The SS line grades in a North-East to South-Westerly direction to Seaborg Road and down Cyclotron Road. The system eventually discharges to the City of Berkeley’s public sewer.

The northern B54 SS building connection ranges from 3.25” to 6.5” cover. The southern B54 SS building connection cover is unknown. The 6” PVC lined SS pipe depth varies between 5” to 11” cover (basemap record drawings). The grades between the manholes range from approximately 10% to 22%.

The main SS pipe connecting these three MH’s is a 6” PVC lined CI pipe. According to LBNL Record Drawings 4B00U485J, this pipe was constructed in 1998 and the two SS connections were video inspected in September 2013. The SSMH’s were coated in FY 2015. The existing SSMH’s and pipelines are expected to be in good condition.

LBNL has reported that the existing sanitary sewer laterals are undersized and there are issues with the existing grease traps. The main sewer lines are reported to be in ‘good’ condition.

No capacity issues are anticipated.

Proposed Improvements

The proposed sanitary service improvements are shown on C131.

The two sanitary sewer service laterals located to the west and north of the Welcome Center Building will be demolished due to siting of the new building and excavation required for construction of the new loading dock. These are also in poor condition as noted above and not suitable for reuse.

A new 6” sewer service lateral will be constructed from the Welcome Center Building at Level 00 (elevation 770 ft) and discharge to SSMH03N18E (approx. invert elevation 756 ft). The new building sewer connection grade requires confirmation, but should not exceed 17% (based on existing invert levels) and should not be less than 2% (approximate required for self cleansing flow). The preferred maximum velocity is 10 ft/ second. Above this velocity there is a risk of scouring the pipe.

The preferred pipe material would either be PVC or ductile iron with polyethylene encasement. Contamination testing should be undertaken at the site to confirm the

August 3, 2020 | 11 suitability of PVC. PVC should be avoided in areas with contaminated soils (particularly hydrocarbons).

SSMH03N18E will require modification for the new SS connection, which would involve a new pipe penetration and benching.

New grease traps will be installed as part of the works (and are described in the Plumbing Section of the SSM Concept Design Report (dated 7 June 2019).

The impact of the increased loads from the Welcome Center Building on the existing sewer network will be considered once invert elevations and grades of the existing system are confirmed by LBNL. It is anticipated that the increased loads will not necessitate an upgrade to the sewer system.

2.1.4 Domestic and Fire Water

Domestic and fire water is provided by East Bay Municipal Utilities District (EBMUD).

Existing Conditions The existing B54 is currently supplied by a 6” high pressure city water (HPCW) pipeline from the north of the site from an existing 8” located near Lawrence Road and 2” copper from the west of the side near Building 70A. The 6” supply HPCW was replaced in 1997, and the 8” HPCW was replaced in 2002 (LBNL Record Drawings 4B00U500A). These are expected to be in good condition. The 2” copper pipe is in poor condition and most likely undersized.

There are four hydrants (HY) located within 80 to 250 feet of the building. These are:

• HY 3 located at the intersection between the Cafeteria Lot and Lawrence Road

• HY 46 located south of Building 23 and east of the Welcome Center Building.

• HY 9 located south of Building 70A.

• HY 15 located south west of Building 70.

HY 3 is reported to be in poor condition and will need to be repaired as part of the works.

HY 9 is used to fight wildland fires.

The existing Fire Department Connection (FDC) and Post Indicator Valve (PIV) for the building are located near Lawrence Road.

The latest sitewide hydrant testing was undertaken in 12/13/2018. Static pressure and residual pressure hydrant flow test results at HY 003 were 147 psi and 100 psi at 2100 gpm, respectively.

GHD also undertook a site wide pressure test 8/11/2012. Static Pressure at the Backflow Preventer (BFP) at B54 was measured at 152 PSI.

There is currently no fire truck access around the front of the building.

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

12 | August 3, 2020

Proposed Improvements

Domestic Water

The domestic water improvements are shown on Sheet C-132.

As described in the existing conditions text, the existing B54 2” copper water supply is in poor condition, undersized and will need to be replaced as part of the project.

In order to provide redundancy of supply to the building, it is recommended that a secondary water supply connection be provided to replace the 2” copper line. It is recommended that a new water supply pipeline be installed from the existing 6” HPCW located south of Building 23. The existing HY 46 may need to be moved slightly for the new isolation valves required for the new connection.

The 6” ductile iron pipe has capacity for 570 gpm assuming a maximum ‘operation as usual’ velocity of 6.7 fps. Regular operation above this value has the propensity to cause damage to the internal lining, including joints and other weak points as well as result in larger head losses.

It is anticipated that the new domestic waterline will be ductile iron with polyethylene encasement. The corrositivity of the soils require verification to determine if cathodic protection is required.

Fire Water

It is recommended that two (2) new fire hydrants be installed as part of the project water system improvements. These locations were determined in consultation with the LBNL fire marshal, and are located at Lawrence Road (on the proposed new waterline) and within the Cafeteria Lot (from the existing 6” HPCW supply from Lawrence Road). These hydrants are located approximately 200 feet from one another (i.e. within the 150-foot hose length requirement) and would be able to service the entire north face of the building and to the western retaining wall. The new hydrants will be protected with bollards.

In consultation with the LBNL Fire Mashal, the existing Fire Department Connection (FDC) and Post Indicator Valve (PIV) will be decommissioned and a new FDC and PIV will be located adjacent to the new hydrant in the Cafeteria Lot (approx 120 ft from the Welcome Center Building entry). Installing the FDC closer to the building compared to its current location reduces the length of underground piping. The new FDC and PIV will be protected with bollards.

Providing the fire hydrant and FDC in these locations will allow for a fire truck to nose-in to this parking area, and will provide sufficient space to run a suction line to the hydrant and two hose lines to the FDC, whilst maintaining all hoses on the driver’s side of the engine.

A new dedicated fire connection line will be installed from the FDC and building. A new double-check backflow preventer will be located at the point of connection to the building.

Two new standpipes will be installed at grade level on both ends of the south side of the building (at the south-west and south-east corners) and exposure sprinklers on the outside of the south side of the building.

August 3, 2020 | 13

No new additional fire access roads are proposed as part of the works given the site topography, and ‘non-negotiable grades’ at the front side of the building (2016 California Fire Code).

2.1.5 Site Electrical and Telecommunications

Electric power is purchased from the Western Area Power Administration and delivered by the Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) transmission system to the Lab’s Grizzly Substation located adjacent to Building 77. The Grizzly Substation consists of two Department of Energy (DOE) owned transformers with a combined capacity of 100 MW.

The substation is exclusively for LBNL use.1

Existing Conditions There are a number of underground low and high voltage power lines located within the project site. The main electrical duct banks are located along the existing pedestrian pathway north of the existing building and within the Cafeteria Lot, and to the east and west of the existing building.

The electricity to existing building B54 and B70A is fed from a transformer near Building 70 via EMH (Electrical Manhole) 146, EMH 153 and EMH 154. There is a 12kV feed for B70A, 480V feed for B70A and 480V connection for B54. There are no known issues with the conditions of these duct banks and manholes.

The conduit to existing B54 is surface mounted around the front of the existing building.

There is also a spare EMH 12A located to the east of the building. This spare is not currently in service and is not required to remain.

There is a 2” power line and fire alarm line located through the center of the site from existing B54 to the Cafeteria Lot. The status of these lines has been confirmed by LBNL.

The existing telecommunications connection is via Telecommunications Manhole (TMH) #510 and TMH #520 located to the north of the existing building. TMH #510 and #520 are reported to be in poor condition and undersized and will need to be upgraded for the project.

Proposed Improvements

The proposed site electrical and telecommunications improvements are shown on Sheet

ES-101.

The Welcome Center Building electrical service will be provided with new primary switch and transformer located by the loading dock. The primary switch will be feed from the new sectionalizing switch located behind the existing ATM building. New manholes and ductbank will be provided. The secondary ductbank will stub 5’ away from the building.

The existing sectionalizing switch GS-3-70 and GS-4-70 located at the B70 Substation Yard will be removed and replaced with new switches to accommodate a new circuit for Welcome Center Building. See section 2.5 for more information. The emergency power for the Welcome Center Building will be powered from the existing generator in building B70A. A 3” empty conduit with pull string wire and in a concrete encased ductbank will

1 Solar Energy Research Center Draft EIR, Impact Sciences Inc, Sept 2010Available at https://www.lbl.gov/wp-content/themes/LBL/docs/community/SERC/2010/DEIR/4_9%20Utilities090310.pdf

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

14 | August 3, 2020 be from B70A Chiller Room 3329 to the Welcome Center Building. See section 2.5 for more information.

The existing incoming surface mounted conduit and EMH 66 will be decommissioned and the electrical duct bank from EMH 154 to EMH 76 will require reconstruction/ regrading as a result of the excavation for the new loading dock. A portion of the existing electrical duct bank from EMH 153 to EMH 45 will also need to be locally relocated where in conflict with the Welcome Center Building wall.

The telecommunications route and point of connection will be as per existing alignment (via TMH 510 and TMH 520). TMH 510 and 520 are in poor condition and undersized and will need to be upgraded as part of the project. LBNL IT standards call for 4 (ea) x 4” conduits into the building.

The existing telecommunications and electrical duct bank on the east side of the building are critical infrastructure and LBNL has stated relocation of these duct banks and associated vaults will not be possible. EMH #12 will be required to be protected in place.

The current Welcome Center light well conflicts with at EMH #12A and is in close proximity to EMH #12. Design alterantives need to be considered to allow these critical structures and duct banks to reamin in-place.Potholing efforts will be performed by LBNL to determine the extents of these utilites in the horizontal and vertical configurations.

2.1.6 Site Natural Gas

Natural gas supply is provided by the Defense Fuel Supply Center in Oregon and delivered by the PG&E system. The point of delivery is a meter vault in the hillside area and above Cyclotron Road and below Building 88. Gas is distributed across the site via high pressure natural gas pipelines.2

Existing Conditions The existing B54 is serviced from an existing 2-inch low pressure natural gas line located within the Cafeteria Lot. This connects to a 4” high pressure natural gas line located at Lawrence Road.

There is also a 6” high pressure natural gas line located to the south-west of existing building.

Proposed Improvements

The existing 2” low pressure natural gas located in the Cafeteria Lot will be extended to meet the new building.

The existing 6” high pressure natural gas at the south west of the site will require relocation for the new building footprint.

2 Solar Energy Research Center Draft EIR, Impact Sciences Inc, Sept 2010. Available at https://www.lbl.gov/wp-content/themes/LBL/docs/community/SERC/2010/DEIR/4_9%20Utilities090310.pdf

August 3, 2020 | 15

2.1.7 Other Utilities

The design drawings show the location of all existing and decommissioned/ proposed utilities required to service the Welcome Center Building discussed in the sections above.

Utilities not required to service the building, but impacted by the work include a 3” compressed air (CA) line and 6” high pressure natural gas (HPNG) located to the east of the site. These utilities will need to be locally relocated to the southeast of the building and away from the building footprint.

It should also be noted that all low conductivity water (LCW) utilities are abandoned on site. Therefore no relocation for LCW utilities is required.

As noted in the SSM PDR, it is recommended that a construction coordination and sequencing plan be developed during the early phases of the next design phase to help mitigate and manage potential risks. These risks include, but are not limited to shallow bedrock, steep slope, and highly trafficked areas.

There are also a number of critical and high risk utilities at the site; including high pressure natural gas, electrical duct banks and compressed air lines which will be impacted by the works and almost all of the utilities impacted by the works service adjacent buildings. As a result, temporary feeds, connections and bypasses will be required during construction to mitigate the impact.

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

16 | August 3, 2020

2.2 Landscape Architecture

2.2.1 Existing Conditions

Figure 2-2: Building 54 Existing Conditions Landscape Plan

The existing landscape to Building 54 is a combination of a low maintenance rustic canyon area dominated by eucalyptus, pine, and oak trees, framing dramatic views of San Francisco Bay, and a relaxed, but more directly managed, landscape of perennials, shrubs and ornamental trees.

Overall the site slopes, with grades falling from Lawrence Road down to Building 54 and its parking lot. Below Building 54, the terrain falls at 3:1 (H:V) to 1.75:1 slope. An outdoor patio to the north of Building 54 provides a flatter area for socializing in a semi-protected area. A landscape area and high retaining wall separates this patio from a loading dock to Building 70 and Building 70A to the southwest of the building. A path traverses these retaining walls to provide access from Building 54 to Building 70A via the loading dock area. There is also a loading dock to Building 54 on its northeast face. Upslope, across Lawrence Road, sits Building 23, which provides residential quarters to visitors.

From different vantages of the project area and adjacent buildings, there are superb views of the bay, as well as less attractive views of rooftops, mechanical equipment and asphalt parking. The visual buffer of tall trees mitigates some of these views; however, this is not uniformly the case.

Vehicular circulation includes a one way entry on Lawrence Road to parking areas near the building entrance, and two way parking entry on the northern end of the parking lot. A driveway to the loading dock runs along the front (northeast) face of the building. Access

August 3, 2020 | 17 to the loading dock to Buildings 70 and 70A is accessed off Seaborg Road. Pedestrian circulation throughout Building 54’s landscape areas is functional in design, with many paths featuring stairs, often several flights. Paths run from Building 23 and Lawrence Road to the building entry, and parking areas, and to the southeast end of the building.

Paths and sidewalks to a shuttle stop along the one-way parking lot driveway also connect to the building’s main entry and far southeast entry, as well as to Lawrence Road. A gently sloping walk approximately follows the contours of the slope along the front, east side of the building. Paths also connect from the building entry to the exterior patio, and around the west side of the building, along a tall retaining wall, to building 70A.

A smaller path runs from the exterior patio to the north along the northeast face of Building 70 to an ATM machine, and down north slopes to McMillan Road.

Pavement styles vary, with a mix of treatments including concrete, asphalt path and curb, decomposed granite and concrete and metal stairs.

Site drainage follows topography, from east to southwest. Area drains collect drainage and direct it into storm drains.

According to the NRCS, soils of the site are the Xerorthents-Millsholm complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes and Altamont clay, 30 to 50 percent slopes, MLRA 15. Aside from indicating that these soils types are relatively low in organic matter, NRCS lacks soil characteristics descriptions for these soils types.

Per the LBNL Site Design Guidelines, the entry and parking area of the site is a designated Significant Ornamental Zone, and the southern side of the site is a Rustic Zone.

A review of legacy landscape plans and photographs provides some species information.

As noted above, eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus spp) are prevalent in the canyon downslope from Building 54. Pines, including Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) and coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) are also frame and buffer views. Mayten trees (Maytenus boaria ) help to create a sense of enclosure within the exterior patio, creating a visual barrier between the patio and the parking lot. Cypress and pine trees create evergreen accents and background to views from Lawrence Road looking towards the parking lot and front paths.

Non-native grasses are the dominant groundcover of the site. Agapanthus (Agapanthus umbellulatus), Mock orange (Pittosporum undulatum), Indian hawthorn cultivars (Rhaphiolepis spp), Sedum, (sedum spp), English Ivy, (Hedera helix), and other plantsprovide groundcover in the parking lot area. Hottentot fig (Carpobrotus edulis) provides partial groundcover on some sloped areas. Trimmed bamboo around the southwest side of the building and part of the patio provides evergreen screening and the visual uniformity of a shrub mass, enhancing the sense of boundary and “outdoor room” of those spaces.

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

18 | August 3, 2020

2.2.2 Codes and Standards

Regulatory requirements, campus design guidelines set standards that inform the project design and plant selection. These are indicated with notes for design below.

Regulatory

Code or Standard Relevant Sections

Design Implications

California Green Building Standards Code, CCR Title 24, Part 11

301.4;

301.4.1;5.304.6

Directs schools to comply with MWELO regulations. 5.304.6 provides additional ETAF allowance.

MWELO; AB 1882 Directs reductions in water use in all landscape areas with irrigation; special landscape area criteria provides for limited, specific use of higher water using plantings.

NPDES; Porter-Cologne Act

Detain and treat stormwater runoff from impermeable surfaces for a minimum of 85th Percentile storm. LID treatments provide multiple benefits and can integrate with landscapes.

Campus Design Guidelines LBNL Site Design Guidelines (2006) The Site Design Guidelines provided a specific vision for Building 54:

The area around the Cafeteria building presently serves as an important hub for the Laboratory activity and will be further improved to become the Central Commons. Like a traditional campus quad, this social heart of the Laboratory will be developed into the place where the primary eating, meeting, and event activities take place. To support these uses, additional usable outdoor areas will be provided, furnished with pedestrian-scaled lighting and seating, protected from wind but taking advantage of views and providing areas of sun and shade. All of the important pedestrian circulation pathways will lead to this area, and it will be well-served by the shuttle system and by a comprehensive signage and wayfinding system.

Other criteria pertinent to design development include the following vision statements:

Site and Facilities Vision Design Implications

Preserve and enhance the environmental qualities of the site as a model of resource conservation and environmental stewardship.

• Reflect the character of the Berkeley Hills in landscape design

• Observe best practices for sustainable landscapes

Build a safe, efficient, cost-effective scientific infrastructure capable of long-term support to evolving scientific missions.

• Landscape plantings should be well adapted to the locale, drought tolerant, and low maintenance;

landscape areas should be supportive spaces for collaboration and interaction

Build a more campus-like research environment

• Landscape areas should be supportive spaces for collaboration and interaction; planting design should create a sense of place and welcome

August 3, 2020 | 19

Improve access and connections to enhance scientific and academic collaboration and interaction.

• Exterior site design should facilitate connectivity between buildings; exterior spaces should be comfortable and pleasant spaces to meet and engage colleagues.

Additional detail relating to planting and landscape elements have also been provided:

Landscape Planting Zone Objectives Design Implications for Landscape Architecture

Provide screening landscape elements to visually screen large buildings

• Introduce new screening vegetation for future building sites

• Preserve important screening trees; where they can’t be preserved, replace with trees of adequate density, height and life-span

Projects or portions of projects which fall within the Rustic Landscape Zones identified on the LRDP Landscape Framework Plan shall provide new plantings consistent with this zone

• Plantings consistent with the natural setting of the Oakland and Berkeley Hills

• Plants that serve as perimeter buffers and dividing belts

• Native plants of Bay Area coastal range

Projects or portions of projects which fall within the Rustic Riparian Landscape zones identified on the LRDP Landscape Framework Plan shall provide new plantings consistent with this zone.

• Plant palettes for new plantings within the Rustic Riparian Landscape Zone shall be of species native to the Bay Area coastal range.

• Plant material should be drought tolerant, non-invasive, and low maintenance

When new plantings are provided within the Ornamental Landscape zones identified on the LRDP Landscape Framework Plan, they shall be appropriate to the zone

• Applicable to areas immediately around the Research Cluster development areas

• Plantings can be more ornamental and intentionally distinct from Rustic Landscape

• Within common areas and in visual proximity to pedestrian walkways and parking lots

• Allows for a unique planting palette for each developed cluster and special places like Laboratory entries and the Cafeteria Commons.

Provide a special feeling of arrival at Significant Ornamental Zones using distinctive landscape plantings and elements

• Specific areas identified for significant, special planting and landscape treatment.

Common Landscape Elements Design Implications for Landscape Architecture

Create a cohesive identity across the Lab as a whole by following established precedents for new landscape elements

• Cohesive identity covering signage, lighting, outdoor furniture, fencing and visual screening

• Design themes for signage and wayfinding may vary to express the identity of each Research Cluster

• Environmental art installations

Provide appropriate Site Lighting for safety and security

• Street and parking lot lighting for safety and security while limiting impacts to neighborhood

• Pathway lighting only on pedestrian spines (principal corridors) connecting major common areas and within common areas

• Low light bollards compatible with design themes

• Unique lighting at entry gates, critical arrival points, landmarks and service entries

• All lighting will be cut-off type lighting design to contain light

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

20 | August 3, 2020

Minimize further increases in impermeable surfaces at the Lab

• Asphalt or other impermeable paving for permanent roadways designed to support truck loads per Lab road standards

• Access roadways for limited or emergency access could be constructed with landscape pavers

Create landform elements consistent with design on the Hill

• Minimize impacts of new fill slopes

Screen Roofscapes • Guidance is focused on architectural treatments, however strategic shrub and tree placement can also play a role

Respect View Corridors • Strategic tree placement can focus sightlines and provide visual buffers

Minimize visual and environmental impacts of new parking lots

• Screen appropriate to location

• Native trees and shrubs can be maintained and planted to provide shade and screen distant views to lots

• Native shrubs and small trees can be planted at the lot’s perimeter to cause the parking and its screening to recede into the natural surroundigns

• Provide shade trees to break up large parking areas

Site Vegetation Manual (2001) The Site Vegetation Manual includes detailed guidelines for the overlay of fire-safe landscaping practices and irrigation zones upon the site’s different landscape zones. The project site’s Zone 1 for (Developed Areas) includes supplemental irrigation to maintain prevent ignition potential of plants near buildings; the site’s Zone 3 (Undeveloped Areas) uses no irrigation system. It also recommended tree heights for the west side of Building 45 to be up to 50’ tall and generally noted that in the area near the Cafeteria, trees should provide identity, character, amenity for social space, and shade.

LBL Revegetation Study (Date not known) Provides a comprehensive list of recommended trees, shrubs, and groundcovers for use on the LBNL grounds.

UC Presidential Policy for Green Building Design/LEED This policy directs UC projects to attain a minimum LEED-Silver rating as well as to meet the prerequisites of the Laboratories for the 21st Century Environmental Performance Criteria. Building 54 is directed to attain a LEED Gold rating which exceeds this standard. LEED Gold is discussed in Section 3.0.

Fire Safe Landscapes. In addition to the standards and codes presented above, LBNL shared guidance from the Diablo Firesafe Council that evaluates a range of native and non-native landscape plants in terms of its documented fire resistance. It should be noted that any plant that is desiccated will be more prone to become fuel. Appropriate design, including plant selection and placement; and maintenance, including pruning and irrigation, is essential to managing risk in fire-prone landscapes. This plant list, in conjunction with low water-use rankings of the Water Use Classification of Landscape Species (WUCOLS) considerably hones down the potential vegetation palette.

August 3, 2020 | 21

2.2.3 Landscape Design

Opportunities and Constraints Architectural concept. The proposed architectural site layout enlarges on the existing building footprint. It follows the contours of the canyon, with a gentle “elbow” or “boomerang” shape. The entry is sited at the outer bend of the elbow. An interior amphitheater/court space offers a large group gathering space with a dramatic view of the bay. The cafeteria will also feature a similar view, with some existing screening trees focusing the line of sight. The loading dock will be relocated to a shared access with the loading area for Buildings 70 and 70A. Accommodating this new feature will alter the existing path to Building 70A and may impact existing or result in new retaining walls.

Topography. The steep topography drives landscape design. Creation of more gently sloping paths, flat spaces needed for stormwater biofiltration or social areas will require regrading and likely need some terracing. Fewer retaining walls will likely translate to higher retaining walls. Large concrete walls can create an imposing, brutalist exterior environment. Shorter, but more frequent low walls can create a more visually welcome environment, accommodate more biofiltration areas, and incorporate social spaces such as outdoor amphitheater seating or lounge spaces of varying degrees of enclosure/exposure.

Figure 2-3: Retaining walls and Sitelines

Left: taller retaining walls create inhospitable spaces with exposed areas of wall;

Right, a sequence of lower walls creates spaces scaled to human body and more perception and enjoyment of greenery. It also creates space for LID biofiltration areas.

Pathways and accessibility. Accessible paths are difficult to achieve on the slopes of this site. To create an equitable, inclusive experience and enjoyment of the exterior spaces, however, this should remain an important goal. A more gently sloping path, such as 1:20, creates less visual “noise” than the handrails, ramps, and landings of the more “efficient” 1:12 path. Particular focus for accessibility should be from parking to the main entry and down to the patio between Building 70 and Building 54.

It should be noted that an existing path from Building 54 to Building 70A, that traverses a steep retaining wall and circumnavigates the lower loading dock, is not accessible, and will also be altered or removed as a result of relocation of the Building 54 loading dock to this same area. It is desirable to maintain a connection between these buildings, and has been proposed in the civil and architectural site design process.

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

22 | August 3, 2020

Site Lighting. Path and landscape lighting should be sufficient to create a safe walking environment at night, including maintaining visibility of potential trip hazards and of pedestrians both on paths and at streets. The International Elextrical (IESNA) provides the following guidance:

Table 2-1: Site Lighting Foot Candles

Application Foot-Candles (Fc)

Sidewalks by Roads 0.9 Fc

Walkways and Paths 2.0 Fc

Building Entrances 5.0 Fc

Building Grounds 1.0 Fc

Parking Areas 1.0 Fc

Determination of the number of light fixtures needed to achieve these standards depends upon the type of fixture and the specifications of each model used. Spacing in urban park settings, which may be comparable to the Campus Commons landscape area, could range from 15’ to 25’. Walkways in high use areas would generally entail closer spacing, approximately 10’ to 15’. Paths or areas with relatively low foot traffic might use spacings closer to 30’.

The pedestrian scale light fixture lamp option is LED. While halogen bulbs are less costly, LED provides greater energy efficiency, lifespan and ultimately a lower annual and lifetime cost.

An additional consideration is the environmental impact of lighting. Dark Skies light fixtures use shields and louvers to ensure that light is downcast, which benefits nocturnal wildlife species, urban astronomy, and other activities.

Prevailing winds. The majority of wind comes from the west, and the north. This should be considered when thinking about the exposure of pedestrians and development of social spaces. Adjacent buildings can shield these winds or exacerbate them, and vegetation can also help to buffer them.

North entry and northwest social area. There are opportunities for a range of social spaces that could accompany the main building entry and the transition from the entry to the patio between Building 54 and Building 70. The range of likely positive social interactions that could be supported in this environment include: arriving/departing;

meeting friends/colleagues (indoor or outdoor small gatherings); conversations in passing; meals; coffee/snack breaks;

Parking lot and Shuttle Stop. The parking area is also on sloping terrain, providing opportunities for terraced parking aisles while presenting challenges for accessible parking and an accessible route to the shuttle stop.

Accessible parking spaces could be accommodated near walkways to the parking lot near the path to the patio, and immediately adjacent to the shuttle stop.

Drainage and LID. Surface drainage follows topography, with storm drain inlets periodically capturing runoff and directing flows into the stormdrain system.

August 3, 2020 | 23

Requirements for stormwater detention and treatment can be met through a range of low impact development (LID) treatments. However, treatments that depend on infiltration to groundwater are not recommended on hillsides or sites with potentially contaminated soils. Therefore, systems must have liners, subdrains or other means of returning flow to the stormdrain system.

While rainwater capture of surface runoff can also be implemented to meet these requirements, there are factors that dampen their cost effectiveness. Capture devices would require storage areas such as above or below-ground cisterns, be sized to capture an adequate volume of water to meet treatment requirements, and provide substantial water use reduction benefits. In general these systems are challenging to justify in areas like central and southern California, where rainfall is seasonal.

Green roofs can also mitigate stormwater runoff, and provide additional benefits such as thermal mass for heating and cooling and visual buffering of rooftop areas. These systems, however, are also expensive, demand additional roof structure and may require seasonal supplemental irrigation.

An LID strategy that works with the site conditions and competing uses of the space is to detain runoff through a series of “flow-through” planters and rain gardens. To achieve this, flatter areas of landscape are needed for water to collect and flow slowly through.

Because plantings in these areas must be able to tolerate seasonal inundation, suitable species come from wetland and wet meadow plant communities. Therefore, these plantings may also need supplemental summer irrigation, which conflicts with water conservation goals of the Laboratory. There are suitable native selections for LID that use lower levels of water, but are not likely to perform well if deprived of any irrigation. An approach to mediate the tension between plantings and water conservation goals may be to include a greater use of aesthetically pleasing rock and cobble in the LID areas to reduce the volume of plants.

The area needed for Low Impact Development Best Management Practices can be reduced if the governing storm water manuals include Site Design Measures (SDMs) such as tree planting and vegetative strips that can provide stormwater credits.

Planting and Irrigation. As alluded to above in the discussion of Drainage and LID, some very limited planting areas in the Ornamental Zones will likely require low levels of summer irrigation in order to maintain their function. A drip irrigation system for limited summer watering tied to soil sensors is recommended to provide the minimum amount of water to sustain plantings on the hottest summer days. This option ensures plant success, but is not in alignment with current overall Lab policy to limit irrigation to an eighteen monthperiod. Use of grey water will be considered as a means to meet the requirement. Any use of irrigation will be minimized through drought-tolerant selections as discussed in greater detail below.

The Site Design Guidelines specify a more robust planting design in the Ornamental Zone, along with irrigation as described above. The Rustic Zone would use a more naturalistic plant palette and use only establishment irrigation for two years.

State and UC water use standards authorize an increase in ETAF for campus environments. It is the Client’s discretion and stated preference to reduce landscape irrigation below those levels.

100% THUP A / 50% THUP B Submittal

24 | August 3, 2020

This Ornamental Zone area is estimated at 9,268 SF. It is also advisable to install plantings in the Rustic Zone with a temporary above-ground irrigation system for an establishment period of up to two or three years.

To best manage water use in a landscape, planting areas are divided into hydrozones, or discrete areas of different levels of water use. To meet specific water reduction goals, hydrozones can be sized according to their plant factors (water use) to meet targets.