Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDR2004-00012 SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2004-00012 CITY OF TIGARD CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER suB D cr>m=ty 120 DAYS = 6/4/2005 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2004-00012 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2004-00025 Development Adjustment VA VAR2005-00004 Development Adjustment (VAR) VAR2005-00005 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval for a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however, no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two development Adjustments are also requested to reduce the site distance standard from 430 feet to 300 feet, and to reduce the street spacing standard from 200 feet to 138 feet. APPLICANT: Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. OWNER: Webstar VI, LLC Attn: Leonard Lodder, AIA 610 Glatt Circle 222 Commercial Street NE Woodburn, OR 97071 Salem, OR 97301-3410 LOCATION: 11140 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini- warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 1 OF 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE/BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Division (Gary Pagenstecher, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: _ 1. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall submit revised drawings and a narrative that demonstrate how the proposed Phase II meets the site design standards for the overall parcel. Without such demonstration, Phase II would require application for an additional approval. 2. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit and provided the alternative April 1, 2005 access way design can be approved (subject to Condition # 22 to first explore shared access), the applicant shall submit a revised plan showing that the visual triangle standard can be met. 3. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall submit revised site plans that show one (1) of the proposed new parking spaces reserved for carpool/vanpool parking. This space shall be located as close to the building entrance as possible, second in priority to ADA parking. 4. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall submit detailed plans that show that all service facilities including air conditioning units, HVAC, and gas meters are screened from public view. 5. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing two additional landscape islands along the row of parking spaces behind the building. 6. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, it is recommended that the applicant revise the Landscaping Plan to include only native trees and shrubs. Staff Contact: Matt Stine, City Forester (503-718-2589). 7. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall revise the Landscaping plan for that area between the north side parking lot and SW 68th Parkway to include a 3'/2 inch caliper tree and shrubs of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and 90% opacity within one year, and groundcover plants that will fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years to screen. 8. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall install protection measures at the driplines around trees to remain. Protection measures may be modified based on the acceptance of a plan prepared by a certified arborist and reviewed by the City Forester. 9. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, an inspection will be conducted by the City Forester to determine whether the measures are effective and that the preserved tree will remain viable. Should work occur on site in violation of the tree protection plan, the applicant/owner will be issued a stop work order until remediation measures can be determined. Remediation can include, but is not limited to, the penalties outlined in TDC Section 18.790.060. The construction documents shall include a notation to that effect. Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 10. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements and any other work in the public right-of- way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facilit Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Im rovement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 2 OF 38 11. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 12. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 13. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Shirley Treat, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Shirley Treat, Engineering). 14. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of 68th Parkway to increase the right-of-way to 35 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 15. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement erpnit, indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 68 h Parkway as a part of this project: A. 13-foot concrete sidewalk with tree wells or 9-foot concrete sidewalk with 4-foot planter strip; B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; C. streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City Engineer; and D. 20-foot driveway apron at the north driveway (if one-way access point) and 20-30 foot driveway apron at the south driveway (if applicable). 16. The applicant shall provide connection of the proposed building to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. 17. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. 18. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00- 7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 19. The applicant shall provide an analysis regarding the potential need for energy dissipaters for creek embankment stabilization at the outfall for the water quality pond and relocated storm line shown on the Site Utility Plan (Sheet C2). 20. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 3 OF 38 21. The applicant's plans shall be revised to indicate they will construct a combination of raised median and striped center turn lane along their frontage plus an additional 100 feet to the south. 22. The applicant shall consider and explore the feasibility of joint access with the property to the east and south and demonstrate that joint access cannot reasonably be achieved prior to any adjustment of the access spacing standard being approved. 23. The applicant's plans shall be revised to show the north driveway reduced to 20 feet wide (toward the south), if used as access only. 24. The applicant shall provide signage and directional arrows for the access and egress only locations. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Planning Division (Gary Pagenstec er, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 25. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall submit a letter from Clean Water Services indicating that the conditions of their service provider letter (File No. 4264) have been satisfied. 26. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall submit a letter from Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue (TVF&R) stating the conditions of approval cited in their February 25, 2005 letter (included below in Section VIII, Agency Comments) have been satisfied. 27. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall have their arborist conduct a site inspection to ensure the tree protection measures were followed and the preserved trees remain viable. The results of this inspection shall be submitted to the planning department. 28. Prior to final building inspection, the planning division shall be contacted to conduct an inspection to verify that the proposal was completed in accordance with this decision and the approved plans. 29. The applicant shall submit a separate sign permit for all tenant signage, prior to installation. Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 30. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar, 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG' format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). 31. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. 32. The applicant's traffic engineer shall provide post-construction sight distance certification for all access locations. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 4 OF 38 • 33. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 34. Prior to final building inspection, the applicantthshall pay $1,332.00 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of 68 Parkway. 35. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 72" Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of$712.00. 36. Prior to a final bui��iing inspection, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 68 Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of $2,005.00. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: Staff conducted a search of City records for the subject property and found no other land use cases that affect development of the property. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on SW 68th Parkwaymid-way between the SW Atlanta and Haines Streets intersection on the south and SW Pacifc Highway on the north. The property is zoned C-G with properties to the north and west also zoned C-G. The abutting properties to the south and east are zoned mixed use employment (MUE) and are developed with office buildings. Site Information and Proposal Description: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval for a 9,512 square foot, one- story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however, no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two development adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. SECTION IV. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity for written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. In addition, staff has posted a notice at the driveway to the site, visible from the street. No comments were received during the comment period from neighboring landowners or interested parties. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 5 OF 38 SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections: A. Zoning Districts 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts 18.620 Tigard Triangle Design Standards B. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.370 Variances and Adjustments 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.745 Landscaping and Screening 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage 18.765 Off-Street parking and loading requirements 18.775 Sensitive Lands 18.780 Signs 18.790 Tree Removal 18.795 Visual Clearance C. Land Use Decisions 18.360 Site Development Review D. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 E. Decision Making Procedures 18.390 Impact Study SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. ZONING DISTRICTS Commercial Zoning District: Section 18.520.020 Lists the description of the Commercial Zoning Districts. The site is located in the C-G: General Commercial zoning district. The present use of the site is vacant land. The proposed use, a veterinary clinic, is listed in the use classifications under "office" as a use permitted outright in the zone. Development Standards: Section 18.520.040.E States that development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.520.2 below: TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES STANDARD C-G Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 53,298 s.f. -Detached unit-Boarding, lodging, rooming house Minimum Lot Width 50' Avg. 410 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 0' 0'-10' -Side facing street on corner&through lots 0'-Side yard 0' 25'—40' -Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 0' -Rear yard 0' 9' - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a public -or private street. Maximum Height 45 ft 26' -2" Maximum Site Coverage 85% 56.94% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 24.08% [1] [1] Balance of site is in a reserved open space tract for the protection of Ball Creek NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 6 OF 38 As demonstrated in the table above, the proposal complies with the underlying zone development standards. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the underlying zone's development criteria are satisfied. 18.620 Tigard Triangle Design Standards 18.620.010 Purpose and Applicability Design standards for public street improvements and for new development for the Tigard Triangle include creating a high-quality, mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described in this chapter and other development standards required by the Community Development and Building Codes, such developments will be required to: Dedicate and improve public streets, to the extent that such dedication and improvement is directly related and roughly proportional to an impact of the development; The applicant's site plan shows, and narrative descries, a five-foot dedication along the subject parcel's western boundary adjacent to SW 68 Parkway. The dedication is for the extension of a sidewalk and planting strip in the public right of way along the Parkway for use by the general public and those using the proposed facility and, therefore, is directly related. Without the dedication, the street and sidewalk would not meet City standards and the project would have to be denied under Section 18.810. The proposed dedication and street improvements meet the proportionality standard as described in the finding below in the Impact Study section of this decision. Therefore, the right-of-way dedication and improvements to SW 68th parkway are required for this development. Connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage; According to the applicant's plan set and narrative, the proposed development will connect to the sanitary sewer, water, and storm drainage systems, consistent with this standard. Participate in funding future transportation and other public improvement projects in the Tigard Triangle provided that the requirement to participate is directly related and roughly proportional to an impact of the development. According to the applicant's narrative, the applicant agrees to participate in funding future transportation improvements that are directly related and roughly proportional to the impact of the development, consistent with this standard. The following design standards apply to all development located within the Tigard Triangle within both the C-G and the MUE zones. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. (Ord. 99-22) 18.620.020 Street Connectivity All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.370.010 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 7 OF 38 Design Option a. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. b. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. Performance Option a. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight street intersections per mile. b. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance. c. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. The distance along SW 68th Parkway between Hwy 99 and Hampton is approximately 5,200 lineal feet or just less than a mile. There are eight street_ intersections within this street segment. The roposed site is located midway along SW 68 Parkway on the east side. Any vehicle or pe estnan trips would effectively equal the straight line distance as the site is adjacent to 68 Parkway. Therefore, the Performance Option is met. 18.620.030 Site Design Standards All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one acre or larger a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, governing criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. The parcel has an area of 1.22 acres after dedication of the 5-foot right-of-way. Therefore, a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how the standards for the overall parcel below can be met. The applicant states that the first phase of development will total 9,512 square feet (7,917 SF on the ground floor and 1,595 SF on the second floor). The applicant's narrative states that Phase II would add 2,800 square feet. However, the proposed Phase II is not further discussed in the narrative or shown in the plan set. Therefore, a condition shall require the applicant to demonstrate how Phase II meets the site design standards for the overall parcel. Without such demonstration, Phase II would require application for an additional approval. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials - Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterial Streets. See Diagram 1 for some examples of how this standard may be met. The proposed building is located on SW 68th Parkway which is designated a minor arterial in the Tigard Triangle Street Plan. As the applicant states in the project narrative, the frontage along SW 68t Parkway is 344 lineal feet. Twenty-eight lineal feet is undevelopable due to the existence of a riparian zone adjacent to the water course located at the north end of the site. The length of the proposed building is 212 feet, which is 61 percent of the lot frontage. The site is bounded by adjacent properties to the east, north and south, so the locational standard for street intersections does not apply. Therefore, this standard is met. Building setback - The minimum building setback from public street rights-of-way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. According to the applicant's site plan, the building is set back from the 68th Parkway right of way from 0 to 10 feet variously along its west-facing elevation. Therefore, this standard is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 8 OF 38 • Front yard setback design - Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L-1 standard on public streets and an L-2 standard on accessways. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. The applicant's landscape plan, L1.1, shows the extent of landscaping proposed for the site. The landscape design for the front yard setback is designed to meet the L-1 standard and to contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement of 15 percent of the site. Landscaping and hard surface expansion of the pedestrian path are provide between the proposed building and the nine-foot sidewalk proposed for the right-of-way. Therefore, this standard is met. Walkway connection to building entrances - A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. This walkway must be at least six feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. A six-foot wide scored concrete %idewalk connects the proposed building's entrances with the proposed sidewalk along SW 68 h Parkway. The proposed buildingentrance is internal to the site for functional concerns providing a sheltered space for animals away from traffic. However, the site is not located near a public street intersection. Therefore, this standard is met. Parking location and landscape design - Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 Landscape Standard. See Diagram 2. The parking for the project is located primarily in back of the proposed building and includes a row adjacent to the side of the building. The side row, 20 feet in length represents, only 6 percent of the lot frontage and is screened by an eight foot landscaped area constructed to an L-1 landscape standard. As shown in the applicant's landscape plan, the interior side and rear yards are landscaped to an L-2 landscape standard. Therefore, this standard is met. However, the landscape plan includes tree and shrub species that are non-native. Matt Stine, City Forester, has commented on the proposed development and recommended that any trees and shrubs planted on the site should be native trees due to the proximity to the riparian corridor. Although not required, the applicant is strongly recommended to preserve the native riparian corridor through a landscape plan that utilizes native plants. The following are Mr. Stine's suggestions for native trees and shrubs to be planted on the subject site: Bigleaf maple Salal Douglas spirea Cascara Sword fern Bleeding Heart Oregon white oak Vine maple Serviceberry Western red cedar Pacific ninebark Evergreen huckleberry Douglas fir Red twig dogwood Snowberry Western hemlock Oregon grape Swamp rose Mock orange Oceanspray Note: Contact Matt Stine, City Forester (503-718-2589), for any questions you may have. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 9 OF 38 18.620.040 Building Design Standards Non-residential buildings. All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. Ground floor windows - All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. The proposed building's west facade is 212 feet long adjacent to SW 68th Parkway. 50 percent of this facade between 3 and 9 feet in height equals (6 x 212 x 1/2) 636 square feet. The design includes 643 square feet of applicable openings. Therefore, this standard is met. Building facades - Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off-set of at least 1 foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. The west facade of the proposed building facing SW 68th Parkway is articulated with a variety of building materials including glass bock, vertical steel panels, and horizontal cementations siding. Vertical and horizontal off-sets, curved walls, and recessed doors and windows further articulate the facade such that no portion of the facade extends greater that 40 lineal feet without one of these features being present. Pedestrian connections through the building are not required because it is less than 300 feet in length. Therefore, this standard is met. Weather protection - Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. The applicant states and the architectural drawing show that the roof is extended out over the main entrance to provide weather protection at the entry. Therefore, this standard is met. Building Materials - Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. Finish materials as called out in the applicant's Plan Notes (Sheet A3.1) include cementatious planking, prefinished steel vertical planking, metal roof edge cap flashing, stainless steel sheet cladding, painted exterior gyp board soffit, glass block, aluminum and glass curtain walls. The foundation is slab on grade and is not exposed more than two feet. Therefore, this standard is met. Roofs and roof lines - Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. The roofs of the proposed building are flat and hidden from view by parapet extensions of the building's walls. No false fronts or false roofs are proposed. Therefore, this standard is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 10 OF 38 Roof-mounted equipment - All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. The applicant states that "parapets at roof level changes will be used to screen roof top equipment from view." No roof-mounted equipment is shown on the plans or otherwise specified. There is insufficient information to determine if this standard is met. Therefore, a condition small require that all roof mounted equipment must be screened from view as seen from SW 68 Parkway. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: 1. Zoning district regulations - Residential only developments within the C-G and MUE zones shall meet the sign requirements for the R-25 zone 18.780.130B; non-residential developments within the C-G zone shall meet the sign requirements for the commercial zones, 18.780.130C; and non-residential develcpment within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone, 18.780.130D. 2. Sign area limits - The maximum sign area limits found in 18.780.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. 3. Height limits - The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. 4. Sign location - Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. The applicant states that "signage will be designed to meet the standards and area limits specified in 18.780.130C." Since no signs have been proposed in this application, but are anticipated, the proposed development will be conditioned to meet the standards in this section and the applicable requirements of Chapter 18.780. 18.620.060 Entry Portals Required locations. Entry portals shall be required at the primary access points into the Tigard Triangle. Location - Entry portals shall be located at the intersections of 99W and Dartmouth; 99W and 72nd; 1-5 and Dartmouth; Hwy. 217 and 72nd; and at the Hwy. 217 Overcrossing and Dartmouth. Design - The overall design of entry portals shall relate in scale and detail to both the automobile and the pedestrian. A triangle motif shall be incorporated into the design of entry portals. The subject property is not located at any of the portal locations listed. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening A. Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub- sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. 1. L-1 Low Screen - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots and along local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 3 1/2 inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provided a 3 foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. 2. L-2 General Landscaping - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 11 OF 38 Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be !provided at a minimum 2-1/2inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. The setback is 8 feet deep for a distance of 20 feet between the project's north side parking lot and SW 68 h Parkway, a minor arterial. The applicant's landscape plan specifies flax, viburnum, nandina and no trees. Therefore, a 3 '/z inch caliper tree and shrubs of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and 90% opacity within one year, and groundcover plants that will fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years, shall be required for that area. In addition, all remaining landscaping on the project site is subject to the landscaping and screening standards in Chapter 18.745 below. With a condition requiring the above planting scheme, this standard is met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Tigard Triangle Design standards have not been met. However, if the applicant complies with the conditions below, the standards will be met. Conditions: • The applicant shall submit revised drawings and a narrative that demonstrate how Phase II meets the site design standards for the overall parcel. • It is recommended that the applicant revise the Landscaping Plan to include only native trees and shrubs. • The applicant shall submit a separate sign permit for all tenant signage, prior to installation. • The applicant shall submit revised drawings demonstrating that all roof mounted equipment is screened from view as seen from SW 68 Parkway. • The applicant shall revise the Larwiscaping plan for that area between the north side parking lot and SW 68 Parkway to include a 3 1/2 inch caliper tree and shrubs of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and 90% opacity within one year, and groundcover plants that will fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years to screen B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS 18.370 Variances and Adjustments 18.370.020 Adjustments A. Purpose. he purpose of this section is to establish two classes of special variances: 1. "Development adjustments" which allow modest variation from required development standards within proscribed limits. Because such adjustments are granted using clear and objective standards, these can be granted by means of a Type 1 procedure, as opposed to the more stringent standards of approval and procedure for variances. 2. "Special adjustments" which are variances from development standards which have their own approval criteria as opposed to the standard approval criteria for variances contained in Section 18.370.020C. The applicant has applied for two adjustments to the access and egress standards in Chapter 18.705: 1) adjustment of the sight distance standard (18.750.030.H.1) to the original proposed single entrance driveway, and 2) an adjustment to the minimum access spacing standard (18.705.030.H.3) for the proposed access within 200 feet of the an existing driveway to the north. Analysis of these issues can be found in the findings for Section 18.705.030.H.1, below. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 12 OF 38 C. Special adjustments. Adjustment to access and egress standards (Chapter18.705). a. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved, the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, as governed in Section 18.390.030, using approval criteria contained in Subsection 2b below. b. The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment from the access requirements contained in Chapter 18.705, based on the following criteria: (1) It is not possible to share access; The applicant did not address the possibility of shared access in the project narrative. The proposed development includes access drives than cannot readily be designed to conform to the sight distance and access spacing standards within the subject parcel. Therefore, pursuant to 18.370.030.C.5.A, the applicant must demonstrate that access with an adjoining parcel cannot reasonably be achieved before an adjustment of the access spacing standard can be approved. (2) There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; There are no alternative access points from another street. There is some flexibility available in siting the required access on the subject parcel because the lot frontage on SW 68 h Parkway is approximately 344 lineal feet and the proposed building is 212 feet long. However, this change would further adversely impact the sight distance standard and conflict with the proposed parking plan. In a revised site development proposal received April 1, 2005, the applicant proposed an alternative access design to meet the sight distance standard by utilizing an additional access point to the south of the building and converting the ingress/egress to a one way through-drive approach from north to south. The proposed alternative meets the sight distance standards for the southern approach and maintains it for the north approach. However, the proposal would not be consistent with the access spacing standard as the proposed southern access way would be within approximately 150 feet of the existing driveway. As indicated above, the applicant must address shared access before an adjustment to the spacing standard can be approved. (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met; The applicant did not address the minimum access spacing standard. The access spacing requirement is not met with the proposed development because existing access ways north and south of the property are located within 200 feet of both the proposed north and south ingress/egress ways. To meet the separation standard, an alternative access may impact the location of the proposed building, as designed. However, the access separation could bemet by shortening the length of the building or moving it south on the site approximately 25 feet to achieve separation from the furthest existing access to the north. Although access provided 200 feet from the existing north access way could meet the spacing standard, it would not meet the sight distance standard for approaches from the south. Discussion with the City Engineer determined that, in this case, meeting the sight distance standard should take precedence over meeting the access separation standard because of the public safety issue involved. (4) The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 13 OF 38 Because the access spacing standard and the feasibility of joint access were not addressed in the applicant's narrative, staff has insufficient information, given the constraints of the site and building program, to conclude that the request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access. The applicant must still consider joint access before any adjustment to the access spacing standard can be approved. The sight distance standard has been addressed in the applicant's narrative and traffic engineering report. Based on the analysis in the findings for Section 18.705.030.H.1, below, the April 1, 2005 alternative best meets the standard. However, this issue must be resolved, first through consideration of a joint access agreement and, second, through an approved adjustment, if necessary, prior to construction. (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and Findings in the Access, Egress and Circulation Chapter of this decision condition the proposed development to meet the sight distance standards to the greatest extent possible including traffic management strategies that will result in a safe access. However, the applicant must still consider joint access before any access spacing adjustment can be approved. (6) The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. The visual clearance requirement is met in the applicant's original design, as demonstrated by the visual clearance triangle on the site plan. However, the proposed April 1, 2005 alternative design does not show the visual clearance triangle. Therefore, a condition will require that if the alternative design is approved (subject to the condition to first explore shared access), a revised plan must include a demonstration that the visual triangle standard can be met. FINDING All of the adjustment criteria are not met. The applicant has not considered joint access with the property to the south. To approve any adjustment request, the applicant must first demonstrate that access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved. If joint access cannot reasonably be achieved, and upon a showing that the visual triangle standard can be met, the applicant's requested adjustment to the minimum access spacing standard may be approved. Conditions: • The applicant shall consider and explore the feasibility of joint access with the property to the south and demonstrate that joint access cannot reasonably be achieved prior to an adjustment of the access spacing standard being approved. • Provided the alternative April 1, 2005 design is approved (subject to the condition to first explore shared access), the applicant shall submit a revised plan showing that the visual triangle standard can be met. Access, Egress and Circulation (18.705): Walkways: 18.705.030(F) requires that on-site pedestrian walkways comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; As described in the applicant's plans and narrative, on-site pedestrian walkways are proposed between the building entrances and the streets that provide access and egress, as well as to the parking lot. Therefore, this standard is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 14 OF 38 • Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; No required walkways cross parking areas. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The plan depicts concrete sidewalks and walkways, which meets the standard. The final construction documents will also need to show walkways with hard surfaced materials. Access Management: Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. DKS Associates submitted a memorandum discussing the sight distance issues that pertain to this development. The horizontal and vertical curves at this portion of 68 Parkway present special challenges in achieving the required sight distance. The 'ngineer has indicated that a speed study was conducted on 68 h Parkway to determine the 85 percentile speed of drivers. The speed was found to be approximately 43 mph in both the north and south bound directions. The City standard for sight distance is 10 times the speed for a required sight distance of 430 feet. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) calculations provide a 45 mph design speed stopping distance sight distance of 360 feet. The City recognizes AASHTO recommendations regarding sight distance. The original site plan proposed a single driveway at the north end of the site. The July 2004 impact study indicates that sight distance to the north is 440 feet, meeting the City requirements. Sight distance to the south is only 225 feet due to the horizontal curve and building placement. By moving the building back 10 feet the sight distance to the south would increase to 260 feet, still short of the requirement. The engineer's field observations confirmed that vehicles approaching the proposed site driveway from the south will not have sufficient stopping sight distance for vehicles exiting the site and turning north towards Highway 99. In a memorandum from DKS, dated March 8, 2005, additional information and recommendations were made. The engineer proposed three options: 1) relocate the driveway closer to the center of the curve, 2) narrow the roadway in some fashion to allow for driveway traffic to have better sight distance when exiting the site, or 3) add a second site driveway and re-design the on-site circulation so that traffic flows one-way through the site. The engineer proposed the driveway on the north would be for ingress only, while the south driveway would provide egress only. The engineer estimates that the intersection sight distance at the egress location would be over 400 feet to the south. Staff agrees that the north driveway cannot provide adequate sight distance and that another egress location is required. The proposed egress location does not meet the minimum 200 foot spacing standard for Collectors, as defined in 18.705.030.H.3. The applicant shall pursue the following options: 1) share access with the properties to the south and east, 2) relocate the driveway 200 feet from the existing driveway, or 3) apply for an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. This issue must be resolved through a shared access agreement or an approved adjustment prior to construction. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 15 OF 38 The applicant shall also revise the plans to provide a 20 foot driveway at the north end for ingress, provide directional arrows at the driveway and post signs limiting use to ingress only. If the south driveway is approved the applicant shall provide a 20 — 30 foot driveway, provide directional arrows at the driveway and post signs limiting use to egress only. The applicant's engineer shall provide post construction sight distance certification for all access locations. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel._ If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The proposed driveway is not located within 150 feet of an intersection, therefore meeting this criterion. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. The proposed north driveway is within 200 feet of a driveway to the north. The applicant has not addressed this standard and must revise the driveway location or apply for an adjustment to the spacing standard. The adjustment must be granted prior to beginning construction. The proposed south driveway is within 200 feet of the driveway to the south. The applicant must revise the plans to 1) share access with the adjacent properties, 2) relocate the driveway 200 feet from the existing driveway, or 3) apply for an adjustment to the spacing standards. The driveway location(s) must be resolved and approved prior to construction. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.J provides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with fewer than 100 parking spaces is one 30-foot accesses with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The applicant's site plan shows one 30 foot driveway with a 24-foot paved section and vehicular access within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances. Therefore, this standard is met. Section 18.705.030.K states that where a proposed parking facility indicates only one- way traffic flow on the site, it shall be accommodated by a specific driveway serving the facility; the entrance drive shall be situated closest to oncoming traffic and the exit drive shall be situated farthest from oncoming traffic. To meet the sight distance standard, the applicant's engineer has recommended a one-way traffic pattern, with a specified driveway with an ingress drive at the north end of the site and an egress drive at the south end. However, because the one-way proposal is designed to meet the sight distance standard and the applicant has been otherwise conditioned to provide signage, access restrictions to the ingress access way to the north, and median turn lane improvements, the directional requirement of this standard and the safety issue it addresses, although not met, are satisfactorily addressed. The proposed access is therefore consistent with TDC 18.705.030.K. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 16 OF 38 FINDINGS: The sight distance standard is met. However, the minimum spacing standards are not met by the applicant's proposal. Provided the following conditions of approval are implemented, the proposed development can meet the applicable access management standards. Conditions: • The applicant must relocate the north driveway or receive an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. • The applicant's plans shall be revised to show the north driveway reduced to 20 feet wide (toward the south), if used as access only. • The applicant must provide a shared south access or receive an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. • Applicant shall provide signage and directional arrows for the access and egress only locations. Environmental performance standards (18.725): These standards require that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 (Performance Standards) regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340-28-070) apply. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Odors. The emissions of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. This is an office use, which is permitted outright within the C-G zone. The applicant's narrative states that the above standards will be met. Based on the provision of adequate trash and recycling area, and the fact that the proposed use is not likely to generate noise, visible emissions, odors, glare and heat, or harbor insects and rodents, this standard is satisfied. Ongoing maintenance to meet these standards shall be maintained and any violation of these standards will be addressed by the City of Tigard's' Code Enforcement Officer. FINDING: The Environmental Performance Standards are met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 17 OF 38 Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street or a private drive more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.C. Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The applicant has provided a landscape plan that shows 11 street trees (Franks Red Maple) along SW 68th Parkway spaced 30 feet apart. However, the City Forester, Matt Stine, has commented that, due to the proximity of the site to the Red Rock Creek riparian zone, only native trees should be planted. Therefore, a condition shall strongly recommend that the applicant submit a revised landscape plan specifying native street trees. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.080 states that no buffer is required between abutting uses that are of a different type when the uses are separated by a street. No buffer is required between a proposed office use and existing office use. Buffering and/or screening are required for dissimilar uses. To the west is the 68th Parkway right of way. To the south and east are existing commercial businesses. To the north is the protected riparian corridor. Therefore, no buffering or screening is required and this standard is met. Screening: Special Provisions: Section 18.745.050.E requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The parking lot is located behind and to the side of the building. The proposed parking area contains 37 spaces, and therefore 5 trees in landscape islands are required. The parking area contains 6 trees. However, two trees are not located in landscape islands. Screening of the parking lot is provided by the building and the additional landscape requirements in the Tigard Triangle Design Standards, above. With a condition requiring two additional landscape islands along the row of parking spaces behind the building, the proposed development meets this standard. Screening Of Service Facilities. Except for one-family and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area; There is inadequate information provided in the plans to establish whether this standard is met. Therefore, the applicant will be required to submit detailed plans for Planning Division review prior to issuance of a building permit that shows all service areas including air conditioners and gas meters are screened from view. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 18 OF 38 Screening Of Refuse Containers. Except for one- and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. The applicant's site plan and narrative describe a six foot high masonry trash enclosure. Therefore, this standard is met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have not been fully met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. Conditions: It is strongly recommend that the applicant submit a revised landscape plan specifying native street trees. Submit detailed plans that show that all service facilities including air conditioning units, HVAC, and gas meters are screened from public view. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.755): Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate comp fiance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The applicant has submitted a written sign off from the waste hauler (Pride Disposal). Therefore, this standard is met. Location Standards. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclables shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The refuse container is accessed from the parking lot and is visible in order to enhance security for users. The proposed refuse container will not occupy any required parking stalls and screening has been conditioned to conform to Tigard standards previously in this decision. Therefore, this standard is met, NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 19 OF 38 Design Standards. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. The applicant has submitted a plan set that includes a detail of the proposed trash enclosure (Sheet A1.2), consistent with the dimensions prescribed in this standard. Therefore, this standard is met. FINDING: The applicant has provided evidence of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage design standards. Therefore, this standard has been met. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Location of vehicle parking: Off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwellings. Off-street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building with the following exceptions: a) commercial and industrial uses which require more than 40 parking spaces may provide for the spaces in excess of the required first 40 spaces up to a distance of 300 feet from the primary site; The 40 parking spaces which remain on the primary site must be available for users in the following order of priority: 1) Disabled-accessible spaces; 2) Short-term spaces; 3) Long-term preferential carpool and vanpool spaces; 4) Long-term spaces. The parking lot associated with this project is directly adjacent to the proposed building, in compliance with this standard. Joint Parking: Owners of two or more uses, structures or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same parking and loading spaces when the peak hours of operation do not overlay, subject to the following: 1) The size of the joint parking facility shall be at least as large as the number of vehicle parking spaces reuired by the Iarger(est) use per Section 18.765.070; 2) Satisfactory legal evidence shallbe presented to the Director in the form of deeds, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; 3) If a joint use arrangement is subsequently terminated, or if the uses change, the requirements of this title thereafter apply to each separately. Joint parking is not proposed with this application; therefore this standard is not applicable. Parking in Mixed-Use Projects: In mixed-use projects, the required minimum vehicle parking shall be determined using the following formula. 1) Primary use, i.e., that with the largest proportion of total floor area within the development, at 100% of the minimum vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060; 2) Secondary use, i.e., that with the second largest percentage of total floor area within the development, at 90(1/0 of the vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060; 3) Subsequent use or uses, at 80% of the vehicle parking required for that use(s) in Section 18.765.060; 4) The maximum parking allowance shall be 150% of the total minimum parking as calculated above. This proposal is not considered a mixed-use project as it will contain solely office space; therefore this standard is not applicable. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 20 OF 38 Visitor Parking in Multi-Family Residential Developments: Multi-dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide an additional 15/o of vehicle parking spaces above the minimum required for the use of guests of residents of the complex. These spaces shall be centrally located or distributed throughout the development. Required bicycle parking facilities shall also be centrally located within or evenly distributed throughout the development. This project does not involve a residential use. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Preferential Long-Term CarpoolNanpool Parking: Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long-term parking spaces shall provide preferential long-term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5% of total long-term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool/vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpools/vanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated for use by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The proposed parking associated with the office development is for 37 parking spaces. The applicant has not furnished information related to the relative number of long term versus short term parking, so staff must assume the total number of spaces may be utilized for long term parking. So, of the total 37 spaces being provided, 1 shall be marked as carpool and/or vanpool spaces for employees and located in accordance with this standard. A condition will be imposed to meet this standard. Disabled-Accessible Parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The applicant has indicated that there are 2 ADA handicap spaces provided. According to ORS 447.233, incorporated through reference to the Uniform Building Code (UBC), 2 spaces are required. Final determination of the number of required ADA spaces will be made by the building official during the review of the building permit application. As shown, the site plan appears to be in compliance with the ADA requirements. DEQ indirect source construction permit: All parking lots containing 250 spaces or parking structures containing two or more levels shall require review by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to: 1. Acquire an Indirect Source Construction Permit; or 2. Investigate the feasibility of installing oil and grease separators The proposed parking lot contains 37 spaces, therefore, standard is not applicable. Access Drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 21 OF 38 • The proposed access drive is clearly marked, and the parking area provides ample room to facilitate a forward entrance onto the public street. This standard is met. Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. There are no drop-off grade separated areas within the parking area. Parking Lot Striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The plans submitted show the parking spaces will be clearly marked with striping, consistent with this standard. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. The applicants site plan (Sheet A1.1) shows and narrative indicates that all proposed parking spaces contain a wheel stop. Therefore, this standard is met. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space"; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. No more than 50% of the required spaces may be compact spaces. The applicant's plans dimension the parking spaces to show that 21 spaces will conform to standard sized spaces and the 16 remaining spaces will conform to the compact sized spaces. The applicant's site plan shows a 24-foot wide isle. Therefore, this standard is met. Bicycle Parking Location and Access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. Wen the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. The applicant's site plan shows 4 bicycle parking spaces within 20 feet of the proposed building s entrance which are not located within parking aisles, landscaped areas or pedestrian ways. The spaces are visible from the street. Therefore, this standard is met. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section, 18.765.050.a The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required -for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 22 OF 38 of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored) to the ground, wail or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking, each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another-bicycle required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has provided details of the proposed bike rack, consistent with this standard. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. According to Table 18.765.2 of the Tigard Development Code, the minimum bicycle-parking requirement for an office use is 0.5 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet. Based on the proposed 9,370 square foot building, 4 bicycle rack spaces will be required. The applicant has proposed three racks that can accommodate 4 bicycles. Therefore, this standard is met. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. Table 18.765.2 states that the minimum parking for Office Uses is 2.7 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet. For the proposed 9,370 square foot building, 25 spaces are required. The site lies within the Zone B parkina area for purposes of calculating maximum number of parking spaces. The maximum allowed parking is 4.1 spaces per 1,000 g.s.f. or 38 spaces. The applicant has proposed 37 spaces in compliance with this standard. Off-Street Loading Spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 _g ross square feet or more; A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000-gross square feet or more. The building is not greater than 10,000 square feet; therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have not been fully satisfied; however if the applicant complies with the following condition, the standards will be met. Conditions: Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit revised site plans that show 1 of the_proposed new parking spaces reserved for carpool/vanpool parking. his space shall be located as close to the building entrances as possible, second in priority to ADA parking. Sensitive Lands (18.775) Purpose: maintain integrity of rivers, streams, and creeks. Sensitive land regulations contained in this chapter are intended to maintain the integrity of the rivers, streams, and creeks in Tigard by minimizing erosion promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quality, and fish and wildlife habitats, and preserving scenic quality and recreation potential. The regulations also implement the comprehensive_plan and floodplain management program, Clean Water Service (CWS) Design and onstruction Standards, the Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources), and protect public health, safety, and welfare. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 23 OF 38 Sensitive lands are lands potentially unsuitable for development because of their location within the 100-year floodplain or 1996 flood inundation line, whichever is greater; natural drainageways; wetland areas which are regulated by the other agencies including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands, or are designated as significant wetland on the City of Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridors Map; and steep slopes of 25% or greater and unstable ground. Sensitive lands permits shall be required for the areas in Section 18.775.020.F.1 above when any of the following circumstances apply: ground disturbance(s) or land form alterations involving more than 50 cubic yards of material; repair, reconstruction, or improvement of an existing structure or utility, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure prior to the improvement or the damage requiring reconstruction; residential and non-residential structures intended for human habitation; and Accessory structures which are greater than 528 square feet in size, outside floodway areas. According to the applicant's site plan and narrative, approximately 22 percent of the subject parcel is in sensitive lands (drainageways). Pursuant to Section 18.775.020, the applicant obtained a Clean Water Services service provider letter (File Number 4264, dated January 6, 2005) for the proposed development. The provider letter required (Condition #13) a minimum buffer from Red Rock Creek of 50 feet. The applicant's site plan shows that this condition has been met. All proposed development is located on the remainder portion of the subject parcel outside of any sensitive lands. Therefore, a sensitive lands permit is not required for the proposed development. FINDING The applicant has obtained a service provider letter from Clean Water Services. The provider letter contains conditions of approval for the proposed subdivision. To ensure sensitive lands located on the subject parcel are protected, the applicant must comply with all conditions of approval contained in the letter. Condition: Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall submit a letter from Clean Water Services indicating that the conditions of their service provider letter have been satisfied. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.0 lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-G Zoning District. No specific signs have been proposed with the development application. Therefore all subsequent signage will be reviewed through a Type I process and will be subject to the code standards in effect at the time of application submittal. FINDING: Because tenant signs will be reviewed and approved as part of a separate permit process, this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal (18.790): Section 18.790.030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. As required, the applicant submitted a tree plan (Sheet T1.1) prepared by David Hunter, a certified arborist. According to the arborist's report, there are 22 trees on the site, of which 11 exceed 12 inches in diameter. No trees greater than 12 inches in diameter are proposed for removal. The two trees proposed for removal are both less than 12 inches in diameter and are listed in the tree identification schedule as being in poor condition. FINDING: The applicant submitted a tree removal plan consistent with this standard. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 24 OF 38 Conditions: • Prior to any site work, the applicant shall install protection measures at the driplines around trees to remain. Protection measures may be modified based on the acceptance of a plan prepared by a certified arborist and reviewed by the City Forester. • Prior to any site work, an inspection will be conducted by the City Forester to determine whether the measures are effective and that the preserved tree will remain viable. Should work occur on site in violation of the tree protection plan, the applicant/owner will be issued a stop work order until remediation measures can be determined. Remediation can include, but is not limited to, the penalties outlined in TDC Section 18.790.060. The construction documents shall include a notation to that effect. • Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall have their arborist conduct a site inspection to ensure the tree protection measures were followed and the preserved trees remain viable. The results of this inspection shall be submitted to the planning department. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right- of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. The applicant has indicated in the narrative and on the site plan that a clear vision area will be maintained between 3 and 8 feet in height at the vehicular access of the property. However, the applicant's April 1. 2005 revised site plan shows an alternative access to the south which does not show vision clearance triangles. A condition is imposed in the Variance section of this decision, requiring a revised plan to show vision clearance triangles, if the through drive is necessary. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the vision clearance standards have been met or are have been elsewhere conditioned to be met. C. SPECIFIC SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.360.090(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Multi Family Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.E (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (100-year floodplain); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed elsewhere in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses; 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.13 (Drainage); and 18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled). NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 25 OF 38 Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. The proposed building location along SW 68th Parkway will provide the greatest separation between the subject site and adjoining properties. As described in the consulting arborist report, the applicant has proposed removing two trees of poor quality less than 12 inches in diameter, which will not require mitigation. Crime Prevention and Safety: A. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; B. Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; C. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; D. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and E. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. The areas most vulnerable to crime are in the interior of the property where the parking area is located. The applicant's elevation drawings show windows and the main entrance facing the parking area. In addition, the applicant's photometric plan shows four pole lights in the parking lot providing a minimum of 0.3 foot candles over the entire parking lot. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to an existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: the location of other transit facilities in the area; and the size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: bus stop shelters; turnouts for buses; and connecting paths to the shelters. Tri-Met was notified of the proposed development but did not provide any comment. The subject site is not served by any Tri-Met bus routes. Therefore no transit improvements are required for this site, apart from standard pedestrian improvements (i.e. sidewalks). FINDING: Based on the analysis above, these specific applicable development review standards are met. D. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 26 OF 38 • Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.620.080.A, Tigard Triangle Street and Accessway Standards, requires a Minor Arterial street to have a 70 right-of-way width and 44-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW 68th Parkway, which is classified as a Collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of right-of-way (ROW) from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 35 feet from centerline. The applicant's plans show the ROW dedication required. SW 68th Parkway is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct 13-foot sidewalks with street tree wells or 9 foot sidewalk with a 4 foot planter strip. The applicant's plans indicate they will remove the existing sidewalk and construct a 9 foot sidewalk and 4 foot planter strip. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. There are no opportunities for future street extensions through this development. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. There are no opportunities to extend the public street system due to existing development to the south and east. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that ocal or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. SW 68th Parkway does not exceed 12% grade along this frontage, therefore the criterion is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 27 OF 38 Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to _providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs r convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. No new streets are proposed with the proposed development of the existing lot. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. The site is located on SW 68th Parkway, which is designated for bicycle lanes in the Transportation System Plan. The proposed project will contribute to implerr1entation of the lanes on SW 68 Parkway. As a full street connection is provided by SW 68 Parkway, this standard does not apply. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. There is no minimum lot size in the C-G zoning district. The lot depth is 160- feet at its greatest extent and 344 feet wide. The lot size and shape are consistent with the lot size and shape standard. Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. The subject property has 344 feet of frontage on SW 68th Parkway, consistent with the lot frontage standard. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant's plans indicate they will be removing the existing sidewalk and constructing a 9 foot sidewalk with a 4 foot planter strip, thereby meeting this criterion. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 28 OF 38 Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing sewer in 68th Parkway. The applicant is proposing to construct a lateral to serve this development. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no significant upstream drainage areas that would contribute to this site as the adjacent, upstream property is developed with its own private storm system. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant's engineer has proposed constructing an on-site detention pond in order to meet this standard. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. 68th Parkway is a designated bicycle facility. There are no bike lane markings on the roadway currently. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. The applicant will need to contribute funds for the future striping of the bike lane along SW 68th Parkway. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 29 OF 38 The amount of the striping would be as follows: • 300 feet of 8-inch white stripe, at $2.50/If $750.00 • 8 Mono-directional reflective markers @ $4.00/ea $ 32.00 • 2 Bike lane legends @ $175/ea $350.00 • 2 Directional mini-arrows @ $100/ea $200.00 $1,332.00 Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. SW 68th Parkway is classified as a Collector, requiring a 6 foot bicycle travel lane. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are no overhead utilities in the vicinity of the proposed development along the SW 68th Parkway. The proposed utilities have been designed to be consistent with the undergrounding provisions of this standard. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: A Transportation Impact Study was prepared for this project by DKS Associates, dated July 2004. Sight distance and access were addressed in this report and discussed in more detail in this staff report under Section 18.705. The report evaluates traffic operations at the intersections of 68th Parkway/Highway 99 and 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street. The engineer states that additional traffic from the proposed project combined with other added traffic will not degrade traffic operations at these intersections below the City's standards. The trips gene[ated by this project added to the existing trips do not warrant a signal at the intersection of 68 Parkway/Atlanta Street. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 30 OF 38 Left turn lane warrants are not met with the new trips and existing trips. However, the engineer recommends a center turn lane in order to provide safer egress from the site. The applicant shall provide a combination of raised median and center turn lane striping for the entire project frontage plus an additional 100 feet minimum to the south. The raised median will provide additional assurances that the one-way only driveways are used as proposed. DKS also analyzed the following key intersections: SW 721d Avenue/SW Dartmouth SW 68th Parkway/SW Dartmouth The intersections of SW Dartmouth at 68th and 72nd Avenues have been identified as needing traffic signals. As development has occurred in the Tigard Triangle, and where a development introduces additional trips to these intersections, funds have been collected from the developers that will contribute to the future signal installation. The first project to contribute funds to the intersections was the Babies R Us project. A simple formula was established b?sed upon the impact from that development. That project had an impact of 1.1% at SW 72' Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street during the PM peak hour. For that impact, the City Council required the developer to pay funds in the amount of $20,000.00. At the intersection of SW 68t Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street, the impact from that project was estimated to be 0.75%. For this impact, the developer was required to pay $10,000.00. Using this same rationale, a proportionate share has been calculated for other projects in the Triangle, and can be calculated for this project. The DKS report shows that this project will generate approximately one PM peak hour trip to the intersection of SW 72' Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street. With a total entering volume (TEV) of 2,555 vehicles, the project impact is approximately 0.04%. Therefore, based on simple proportions, the project contribution to this intersection is $712.00. Likewise, the DKS report shows that the project will generate approximately four (4) PM peak hour trips at the intersection of SW 68t Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street. The TEV for this intersection is estimated to be 2660 vehicles; therefore the project impact is approximately 0.11%. Based on the same proportion used in the Babies R Us development, the project contribution to this intersection is $2,005.00. Funds for both intersections must be paid to the City prior to a final building inspection. Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant indicates they will be installing 2 new fire hydrants and a new domestic water meter with a double check. The applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed utilities to TVWD for review and approval of the water services. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's engineer has provided calculations for an extended dry detention pond for water quality treatment. This pond will also be used for detention. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 31 OF 38 To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facilityfor compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at signifcant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. In addition, a comment concerning the proposed development by the City Public Works Department identified the potential need for energy dissipaters for creek embankment stabilization at the outfall for the water quality pond and relocated storm line shown on the Site Utility Plan (Sheet C2). This issue must be addressed to ensure stabilization of the embankment and to avoid later sloughing that may adversely impact water quality. Gradin and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over one acre, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to site work. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat. Address Assignments: I he City of I igard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits. For multi-tenant buildings, one address number is assigned to the building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The City is responsible for assigning the main address and suite numbers. This information is needed so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system. Based upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi-tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map so suite numbers can be assigned. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of suites that must be addressed. In multi-level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "1", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "2", etc. FINDING: The Street and Utility Improvements Standards have not been met. Provided the applicant satisfies the following conditions, the proposed development would meet the applicable standards. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 32 OF 38 Conditions: • Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). • The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. • The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. • Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Shirley Treat, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Shirley Treat, Engineering). • Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of 68thParkway to increase the right-of-way to 35 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. • The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 68 Parkway as a part of this project: • 13-foot concrete sidewalk or 9-foot concrete sidewalk with 4-foot planter strip; street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City Engineer; and 20-foot driveway apron at the north driveway (if one-way access point) and 20-30 foot driveway apron at the south driveway (if applicable). • The applicant shall provide connection of the proposed building to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. • The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 33 OF 38 • The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. • The applicant shall provide an analysis regarding the potential need for energy dissipaters for creek embankment stabilization at the outfall for the water quality pond and relocated storm line shown on the Site Utility Plan (Sheet C2). • An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." • The applicant's plans shall be revised to indicate they will construct a combination of raised median and striped center turn lane along their frontage plus an additional 100 feet to the south. • Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as- built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar, 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). • Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. • Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay $1,332.00 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of 68th Parkway. • To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. • Prior to a final building inspectio d, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 72 Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of$712.00. • Prior to a final building inspectiop, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 68 Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of $2,005.00. E. IMPACT STUDY Section 18.360.090 states, "The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 34 OF 38 Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The applicant has provided an impact study addressing the project's impacts on public systems. The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Based on the use and the size of the use proposed, the applicant is required to pay TIF's of approximately $55,822. Final TIF payment will be assessed at time of building permit submittal. Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $174,537 ($55,822 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the street system. The unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $118,715. The value of the right-of-way dedications to SW 68th Parkway is approximately: 344.77 lineal feet x 5 feet wide =1,723 square feet @ $15 per square foot = $25,858. The value of improvements to SW 68th Parkway is approximately: Bike lane striping= $ 1,332. Future signalization of 68th and Dartmouth Street= $ 2,005. Future signalization of 72nd and Dartmouth Street= $ 712. The total contributions of this project to the street system is approximately $29,907. The value of the proposed improvements is less than the projected impact. Therefore, the level of exaction meets the test of proportionality. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City Public Works Department has reviewed the proposal and commented that, although directed closed pipe surface flow may be minimal most of the time due to slippage of the northern bank of Red Rock Creek, perhaps energy dissipaters for creek embankment stabilization should be required. A condition of approval shall require the applicant to provide an analysis of the outfalls for the water quality pond and relocated storm line shown on the Site Utility Plan (Sheet C2). The City of Building Division has reviewed the proposal and note that no issues were evident. The Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and noted that the application did not include a lighting plan. The applicant submitted a lighting plan in a revised plan set (Sheet E.2.0) that shows a minimum 0.3 foot candle light throughout the parking lot. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 35 OF 38 The City of Tigard Urban Forester has reviewed the proposal and commented that only native trees and shrubs (no red maple, etc) should be used due to the project's close proximity to the Red Rock Creek riparian corridor and perennial stream. The project will be conditioned to include only native plants. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R) has reviewed the proposal and offered the following comments: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required if the remaining distance to an approved intersecting roadway, as measured along the fire apparatus access road, is greater than 150 feet. 2) DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. 3) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the fire code official. 4) ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS — COMMERCIAL: Where buildings exceed 30 feet in height or three stories in height shall have at least three separate means of fire apparatus access. Buildings or facilities having a gross area of more than 62,000 square feet shall be provided with at least two separate means of fire apparatus access. Buildings up to 124,000 square feet provided with fire sprinklers may have a single access. 5) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet in height. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. 6) REMOTENESS: Where two access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. 7) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 28 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING' signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. 8) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS WITH FIRE HYDRANTS: Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 36 OF 38 9) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all- weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 75,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. 1o) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. PAINTED CURBS: Where required, fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted red and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at approved intervals. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red background. 12) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is less as calculated using IFC, Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. 13) FIRE HYDRANTS — COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. 14) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C, Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 15) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. 16) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly 17) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. FDCs shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. 18) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 37 OF 38 19) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 12, 2005 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 27, 2005 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type III Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS AT 5:00 PM ON APRIL 26, 2005. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. /GaryApril 122005 PREPARED : Pagenstecher DATE Associate Planner APPRO ED BY: Richard H. rsdorff April 12DATE5 Planning Manager is\curpin\gary\site development review\sdr2004-00012(cascade veterinary clinic)1sdr2004-00012 decision.doc NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 38 OF 38 eW.s CITY of TIGARD GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM W S.W.CORONADO VICINITY —_-- (I) Q CO ST SDR2004-00012 IIPI „�if0I . ■■�i . SLR2004-00025 �� VAR2005-00004 ...r, �� VAR2005-00005 CASCADE VETERINARY ■ REFERRAL CENTER co I ; ."SF-RR \/ � \ rn \ cERa , `� • `` = z ' f �`` - S.W. /,, / tli : =� ��� . > 1 \\ Q EVIL FAt R.; ii" o - F- 0 co Tigard Area Map A CO N / i 0 100 200 300 400 Feet 1"=311 feet w r uu . i, .,Ili, City of Tigard r 1 ST / -� Information on this map is for general location only and ATLAIV-A S W should be vented with the Development Services Division. ' 13125,ORW Hall Blvd / / Tigard, 97223 IJ/ (503)63639-4171 httpalwwerci tigard.or.us Community Development Plot date: Feb 7,2005;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR 4%2'4 . /; ' ,j1 /., r r", la r ; ;;` py y a i( d, . T � a` . i` i (:1 4.4- rr,..% /1 A .i di'554 /O. :1;5 . , , ' 1 ' i�' Ii/ £= s t\ I i . . s „ .., , / . , ,I —. I`, > - 4 - t Kff''-..,:&, r 1 • Citi I I I • o E ''nn ...l.''' ‘ ....: ' ',„, 1' -glii: i I , El:1, - ' I['s�-!I', ':I ; V f R tit 1 'vital I' k 6 . 1 y 5 i i Z iriL, w ,... 1 ':, ' , - � t * 14r da it"- ` ' Q • � ; , .er f \w wr— ": :1 � .7.' I:ke S °z j'i � a % j. N LL ig A \ \•,• ` . �Vwc . °\ 11. - z ' .\ - \* \ i<t\ I A-. ''' ill i i .,:qD ! , it CITY OF TIGAR • SDR2004-00012/SLR2004-00025/VAR2005-00004 & 5 SITE PLAN (Map is not to scale) N CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION alto SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2004-00012 AVI h CITY OF TIGARD CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER CommunitytDeve&pment Shaping Better Community 120 DAYS = 6/4/2005 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2004-00012 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2004-00025 Development Adjustment (VAR) VAR2005-00004 Development Adjustment VAR VAR2005-00005 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval for a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however, no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two development Adjustments are also requested to reduce the site distance standard from 430 feet to 300 feet, and to reduce the street spacing standard from 200 feet to 138 feet. APPLICANT: Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. OWNER: Webstar VI, LLC Attn: Leonard Lodder, AIA 610 Glatt Circle 222 Commercial Street NE Woodburn, OR 97071 Salem, OR 97301-3410 LOCATION: 11140 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single- family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25 ) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 12, 2005 AND EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 27, 2005 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. A eal: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. ITHE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON APRIL 26, 2005. I Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Gary Pagenstecher at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 1 L . CITY n,IIOARU VICINITY MAP 5T n �� ifAM SDR2004 00012 I�IIIIIIN SLR2004 00025 �`� v VAR2005 00004 11 mirminmso VAR2005-00005 7 A CASCADE \` mi ■ REFERRAL CENTER VETERINARY m klW p ty1 \ ,f .w. r++.w w N w /ill City of I 1 rla,,,irrt (Hsi. i ....... , ! ,.....— li C.' y 1 Lc i,r Cw✓"A o 4 1 ,V1 -4., ,, „,,,,r, (7) nail o a11;� .I` n , .. z i it I Q .1,, 174 .,,:h , ..i ., we ce v ICI . w 1`sll 11., �1 '1 Ll. a =' 51 E ,,„,:to-,. i=i .� 5 \ 4) 0 IAA 7 CITYOF T1GARD t SDR2004.00012/SU12 004-000 2S/VAR2005-00D04&5 (Map Is not to scale) N CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER I NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION ►, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW .111 CITY OF TIGARD Community Deve[opment Shaping A Better Community DATE OF NOTICE: February 8, 2005 FILE NUMBERS: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2004-00012 Type II Land Use Application SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW ISLR 2004-00025 DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENT VAR 2005-00004 DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENT (VAR; 2005-00005 FILE NAME: CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to construct a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two Development Adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 11140 SW 68t Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereb •rovided a fourteen 14 da seriod to submit written comments on the application to the City. , - - - -E DS AT 005 All comments should be directed to Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at (503) 639-4171 or by e-mail to Garyp(o_ci.tigard.or.us. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 18, 2005. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: • Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; • Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: • The application is accepted by the City • Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. • The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. • City Staff issues a written decision. • Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. If you want to inspect the file, please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the planning technicians. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled "Your Right to Provide Written Comments." L_ -. IIIMMITE11111 r1� ON1TY MAP - 01111.11 ST • ' Irj. SDR2004-00012 SLR2004-00025 mom VAR2005-00004 YAR2005 00005 ■ 11,1 CASCADE VETERINARY. 114.1 ofirAis 1111 REFERRAL CENTER rim an /1011111 =� N 11111111111 ■,■'■' .r.r. Ciry ofTip.d UC.c ST s.w. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS COUNTYWIDE Date: 6er(i , 2e0s Plans Check No. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE Project Ti : WORKSHEET ,j ug �1 y ,"l 1 (FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY USES) V � Applicant: V.4� Ve.!_. .1_,,(A,A2-(7. Mailing Address. I l l IA0 a) (C� 1/41 4a4-44-rWP Tax Map No. Site Address: Land Use Category Rate Per Trip Payment Method u RESIDENTIAL $269.00 ❑ CASH/CHECK LI BUSINESS/COMMERCIAL $ 68.00 CREDIT IK OFFICE $247.00 E BANCROFT(PROMISSORY NOTE) n INDUSTRIAL $259.00 n DEFER TO OCCUPANCY ❑ INSTITUTIONAL $111.00 LAND USE CATEGORY DESCRIPTION OF USE WEEKDAY AVG TRIP RATE WEEKEND AVG TRIP RATE(institutional) Cry C) a 3.1`t BASIS q Cj 1 2 ve_A--oupcm ejljuL CALCULATIONS 0° If , 5-x 2,3. 19 0-ace -' a 4.7 = = 6s 8 aa.— ADDITIONAL NOTES 0 11161(4_ QA-ipaiNZA-Cr\ WL/1- ',ACV —11F Chthy Qj 4c 4-tri\c, °it adiziti-idY\ I PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ROAD AMOUNT TRANSIT AMOUNT TOTAL FEE PREPARED BY MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: 4/5/05 TO: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner FROM: Kim McMillan, Development Review Enginee l y✓l RE: SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER Access Management (Section 18.705.030.H) Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. DKS Associates submitted a memorandum discussing the sight distance issues that pertain to this development. The horizontal and vertical curves at this portion of 68th Parkway present special challenges in achieving the required sight distance. The engineer has indicated that a speed study was conducted on 68th Parkway to determine the 85th percentile speed of drivers. The speed was found to be approximately 43 mph in both the north and south bound directions. The City standard for sight distance is 10 times the speed for a required sight distance of 430 feet. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) calculations provide a 45 mph design speed stopping distance sight distance of 360 feet. The City recognizes AASHTO recommendations regarding sight distance. The original site plan proposed a single driveway at the north end of the site. The July 2004 impact study indicates that sight distance to the north is 440 feet, meeting the City requirements. Sight distance to the south is only 225 feet due to the horizontal curve and building placement. By moving the building back 10 feet the sight distance to the south would increase to 260 feet, still short of the requirement. The engineer's field observations confirmed that vehicles approaching the proposed site driveway from the south will not have sufficient stopping sight distance for vehicles exiting the site and turning north towards Highway 99. In a memorandum from DKS, dated March 8, 2005, additional information and recommendations were made. The engineer proposed three options: 1) relocate the driveway closer to the center of the curve, 2) narrow the roadway in some fashion to allow for driveway traffic to have better sight distance when exiting the site, or 3) add a second site driveway and re-design the on-site circulation so that ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 1 traffic flows one-way through the site. The engineer proposed the driveway on the north would be for ingress only, while the south driveway would provide egress only. The engineer estimates that the intersection sight distance at the egress location would be over 400 feet to the south. Staff agrees that the north driveway cannot provide adequate sight distance and that another egress location is required. The proposed egress location does not meet the minimum 200 foot spacing standard for Collectors, as defined in 18.705.030.H.3. The applicant shall pursue the following options: 1) share access with the properties to the south and east, 2) relocate the driveway 200 feet from the existing driveway, or 3) apply for an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. This issue must be resolved through a shared access agreement or an approved adjustment prior to construction. The applicant shall also revise the plans to provide a 20 foot driveway at the north end for ingress, provide directional arrows at the driveway and post signs limiting use to ingress only. If the south driveway is approved the applicant shall provide a 20 — 30 foot driveway, provide directional arrows at the driveway and post signs limiting use to egress only. The applicant's engineer shall provide post construction sight distance certification for all access locations. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage, the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The proposed driveway is not located within 150 feet of an intersection, therefore meeting this criterion. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets along an arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local street shall be 125 feet. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 2 The proposed north driveway is within 200 feet of a driveway to the north. The applicant has not addressed this standard and must revise the driveway location or apply for an adjustment to the spacing standard. The adjustment must be granted prior to beginning construction. The proposed south driveway is within 200 feet of the driveway to the south. The applicant must revise the plans to 1) share access with the adjacent properties, 2) relocate the driveway 200 feet from the existing driveway, or 3) apply for an adjustment to the spacing standards. The driveway location(s) must be resolved and approved prior to construction. Section 18.705.030.K states that where a proposed parking facility indicates only one-way traffic flow on the site, it shall be accommodated by a specific driveway serving the facility; the entrance drive shall be situated closest to oncoming traffic and the exit drive shall be situated farthest from oncoming traffic. The applicant's engineer has recommended a one-way traffic pattern, with an access drive at the north end of the site and an egress drive at the south end. This configuration does not meet this standard. The applicant has been directed to pursue a shared access with properties to the south and east. If the applicant is unable to share a southern access with the adjacent property owners the applicant shall apply for an adjustment to this standard. The shared access or adjustment must be approved prior to construction. Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.620.080.A, Tigard Triangle Street and Accessway Standards, requires a Minor Arterial street to have a 70 right-of-way width and 44-foot paved section. Other improvements ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 3 required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW 68th Parkway, which is classified as a Collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of ROW from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 35 feet from centerline. The applicant's plans show the ROW dedication required. SW 68th Parkway is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct 13-foot sidewalks with street tree wells or 9 foot sidewalk with a 4 foot planter strip. The applicant's plans indicate they will remove the existing sidewalk and construct a 9 foot sidewalk and 4 foot planter strip. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. There are no opportunities for future street extensions through this development. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 4 extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. There are no opportunities to extend the public street system due to existing development to the south and east. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. SW 68th Parkway does not exceed 12% grade along this frontage, therefore the criterion is met. Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of- way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. PLANNING Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. PLANNING ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 5 Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. PLANNING Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. PLANNING Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant's plans indicate they will be removing the existing sidewalk and constructing a 9 foot sidewalk with a 4 foot planter strip, thereby meeting this criterion. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing sewer in 68th Parkway. The applicant is proposing to construct a lateral to serve this development. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 6 Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no significant upstream drainage areas that would contribute to this site as the adjacent, upstream property is developed with its own private storm system. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant's engineer has proposed constructing an on-site detention pond in order to meet this standard. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. 68th Parkway is a designated bicycle facility. There are no bike lane markings on the roadway currently. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 7 Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.E states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. The applicant will need to contribute funds for the future striping of the bike lane along SW 68th Parkway. The amount of the striping would be as follows: • 300 feet of 8-inch white stripe, at $2.50/If $750.00 • 8 Mono-directional reflective markers @ $4.00/ea $32.00 • 2 Bike lane legends @ $175/ea $350.00 • 2 Directional mini-arrows @ $100/ea $200.00 $1332.00 Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. SW 68th Parkway is classified as a Collector, requiring a 6 foot bicycle travel lane. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 8 Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under- grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case- by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under- grounding. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: A Transportation Impact Study was prepared for this project by DKS Associates, dated July 2004. Sight distance and access were addressed in this report and discussed in more detail in this staff report under Section 18.705. The report evaluates traffic operations at the intersections of 68th Parkway/Highway 99 and 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street. The engineer states that additional traffic from the proposed project combined with other added traffic will not degrade traffic operations at these intersections below the City's standards. The trips generated by this project added to the existing trips do not warrant a signal at the intersection of 68t Parkway/Atlanta Street. Left turn lane warrants are not met with the new trips and existing trips. However, the engineer recommends a center turn lane in order to provide safer egress from the site. The applicant shall provide a combination of raised median and center turn lane striping for the entire project frontage plus an additional 100 feet minimum to the south. The raised median will provide additional assurances that the one-way only driveways are used as proposed. DKS also analyzed the following key intersections: SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth SW 68th Parkway/SW Dartmouth The intersections of SW Dartmouth at 68th and 72nd Avenues have been identified as needing traffic signals. As development has occurred in the Tigard Triangle, and where a development introduces additional trips to these ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 9 intersections, funds have been collected from the developers that will contribute to the future signal installation. The first project to contribute funds to the intersections was the Babies R Us project. A simple formula was established based upon the impact from that development. That project had an impact of 1.1% at SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street during the PM peak hour. For that impact, the City Council required the developer to pay funds in the amount of $20,000.00. At the intersection of SW 68th Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street, the impact from that project was estimated to be 0.75%. For this impact, the developer was required to pay $10,000.00. Using this same rationale, a proportionate share has been calculated for other projects in the Triangle, and can be calculated for this project. The DKS report shows that this project will generate approximately one PM peak hour trip to the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street. With a total entering volume (TEV) of 2,555 vehicles, the project impact is approximately 0.04%. Therefore, based on simple proportions, the project contribution to this intersection is $712.00. Likewise, the DKS report shows that the project will generate approximately four (4) PM peak hour trips at the intersection of SW 68th Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street. The TEV for this intersection is estimated to be 2660 vehicles; therefore the project impact is approximately 0.11%. Based on the same proportion used in the Babies R Us development, the project contribution to this intersection is $2005.00. Funds for both intersections must be paid to the City prior to a final building inspection. Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant indicates they will be installing 2 new fire hydrants and a new domestic water meter with a double check. The applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed utilities to TVWD for review and approval of the water services. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 10 frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's engineer has provided calculations for an extended dry detention pond for water quality treatment. This pond will also be used for detention. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS Design and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over five acres, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to construction. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 11 Address Assignments: The City of Tigard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $ 50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits. For multi-tenant buildings, one address number is assigned to the building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The City is responsible for assigning the main address and suite numbers. This information is needed so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system. Based upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi-tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map so suite numbers can be assigned. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of suites that must be addressed. In multi-level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "1", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "2", etc. Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SITE PERMIT: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 12 the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Shirley Treat, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Shirley Treat, Engineering). Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of 68th Parkway to increase the right-of-way to 35 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 68th Parkway as a part of this project: A. 13-foot concrete sidewalk or 9-foot concrete sidewalk with 4-foot planter strip; B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; C. streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City Engineer; and D. 20-foot driveway apron at the north driveway (if one-way access point) and 20-30 foot driveway apron at the south driveway (if applicable). The applicant shall provide connection of the proposed building to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 13 The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." The applicant's plans shall be revised to indicate they will construct a combination of raised median and striped center turn lane along their frontage plus an additional 100 feet to the south. The applicant must relocate the north driveway or apply for and receive an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. The applicant's plans shall be revised to show the north driveway reduced to 20 feet wide if used as access only. The applicant must provide a shared south access or apply for and receive an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. If a shared access cannot be obtained, the applicant shall apply for and receive approval of an adjustment to 18.705.030.K, one-way vehicular access points. Applicant shall provide signage and directional arrows for the access and egress only locations. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO A FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as- built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar, 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 14 network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. The applicant's traffic engineer shall provide post-construction sight distance certification for all access locations. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay $1332.00 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of 68th Parkway. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of $712.00. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 68th Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of $2005.00. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SDR2004-00012 CASCADE VET CLINIC PAGE 15 DATE: February 11, 2005 TO: I I Richard Sather, Water Operations Supervisor X Howard Gregory, Streets Supervisor Eric Hand, Wastewater Operations Supervisor iG 't41 FROM: Brian Rager, Engineering Manager C RE: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATION SDR 2004-00012 Cascade Veterinary Referral renter Attached is a "Request for Comments ror the above-named project. Please route these materials between you for review. In order for me to provide a composite set of comments back to Planning by March 1, 2005, I will need to get your comments or questions back to me no later than February 22, 2005. If you would like to discuss this project in more detail, please let me know. We can meet individually or as a group , iellit& V dre-Az607dre, 1/mpg . /.-ycic.e az) A-ixzt4 ‘r. lC ern.b s W 4-- _ref-kZ./z hreD.Z. bs r4101(VI -5-616 PAGE 1 WW/STM ENTIRE REPLACEMENT OR LINING REQUIRED Revised January 25, 2005 1. TV'D 11/13/00, 5536D005 TO 5536D029, TAPE 0011-1, 10995 68TH PARKWAY, 8" CP. From downstream manhole at 213.6 feet is an open joint with earth visible. Slip line as per T 9/27/02 This line segment was previously repaired January 1994 for a separated joint. It may be that we have another joint issue due to ground movement which may be being caused by the pro amity of a large drainage swale (Red Rock Creek) immediately This area is wet year round, so much so that water is at ground level more often than not. Due to these facts, it may be best to stabilize the area prior to any repair being made. 2. TV'D 1/24/05, 36D084 TO 1A094, TAPE 0501-2, 68th at Dartmounth. Upstream manhole is where state system of I-5 enters city. Pipe is RCP and had long cracks throughout approximately 80% of 393If. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY oF ,,RD Community(DeveCopment Shaping Better Community DATE: February 8,2005 TO: Matt Stine,Urban Forester/Public Works Annex FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner[x24341 Phone: (5031 639-4171/Fax: (5031 684-7297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ISDRI 2004-00012/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR]2004-00025/ DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENTS[VAR)2005-00004&5 CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER< REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to construct a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two Development Adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet t to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. LOCATION: 11140 SW 68 h Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: FEBRUARY 22, 2005. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. X Written comments provided below: iMSrfL-L- oN y ti1iI --tees ,cifitAxds pa 10 LOSE PRoxtMtTY ra Al9r'IA 1- Aftw► 4 Peste rivf,4 51-0M1 jJO R E6 nor c4“-k-rcr PE4it. - J NTVE ►'le-T-A l oN_ Name & Number of Person Commenting: M S� Gary Pagenstecher-Cascade Veteriinary - -ferral Center.doc Page 1 • • TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE • SOUTH DIVISION COMMUNITY SERVICES • OPERATIONS • FIRE PREVENTION Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue February 25, 2005 Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Cascade Veterinary Referral Center Dear Gary, Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed site plan surrounding the above named development project. Tualatin Valley Fire& Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required if the remaining distance to an approved intersecting roadway, as measured along the fire apparatus access road, is greater than 150 feet. 2) DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. 3) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system,the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the fire code official. 4) ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS—COMMERCIAL: Where buildings exceed 30 feet in height or three stories in height shall have at least three separate means of fire apparatus access. Buildings or facilities having a gross area of more than 62,000 square feet shall be provided with at least two separate means of fire apparatus access. Buildings up to 124,000 square feet provided with fire sprinklers may have a single access. 5) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. Fire apparatus ac-rpss roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet in height. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building,and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. 6) REMOTENESS: Where two access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. 7) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet(12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 28 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING"signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. 7401 SW Washo Court,Suite 101 •Tualatin,Oregon 97062•Tel.(503)612-7000•Fax(503)612-7003•www.tvfr.com Gary Pagenstecher-Cascade Veterinary r',ferral Center.doc Page 2 8) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS WITH FIRE HYDRANTS: Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. 9) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 75,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. 10) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. 11) PAINTED CURBS: Where required, fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted red and marked"NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at approved intervals. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red background. 12) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS -REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute(GPM)or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi,whichever is less as calculated using IFC, Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. 13) FIRE HYDRANTS—COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. 14) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C,Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 15) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. 16) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly 17) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. FDCs shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. 18) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. 19) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. Page 2 of 2 Ga Pa enstecher-Cascade Veterinary pgferral Center.doc Page 3 Please contact me at(503) 612-7010 with any additional questions. Sincerely, Eric T. McMullen Eric T. McMullen Deputy Fire Marshal Page 2 of 2 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: February 8,2005 TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner(x2434) Phone: [5031639-4111/Fax: [5031684-1291 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW(SDRI 2004-00012/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLRJ 2004-00025/ DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENTS[VAR)2005-00004&5 ➢ CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER< REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to construct a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two Development Adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 fee to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. LOCATION: 11140 SW 68" Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: FEBRUARY 22, 2005. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. [PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: 9,200x5t \'t:S\44 poot) aw- -cU Mra tnronk, e('ke1(oc CX oY ?(Q44,1 kk c4` e br^cId or ce''Co Name & Number of Person Commenting: c.). 1\10\-€ a5b1 40 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY 112 TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community DATE: February 8,2005 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Val Menzel,Commercial Plans Examiner FEB 0 9 2005 FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division CITY OF TIGARD STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner(x2434) Phone: (503)639-4171/Fax: (503)684-1297 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW[SDRJ 2004-00012/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR)2004-00025/ DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENTS[VAR)2005-00004&5 ➢ CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER< REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to construct a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two Development Adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. LOCATION: 11140 SW 68 h Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: FEBRUARY 22, 2005. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: Name & Number of Person Commenting: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OFTIGARD Community,Development ,Shaping)4 Better Community DATE: February 8,2005 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner fx24341 Phone: (5031639-41T1/Fax: 15031684-129T SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MDR]2004-00012/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW[SLR]2004-00025/ DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENTS[VARI 2005-00004&5 CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER< REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to construct a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two Development Adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. LOCATION: 11140 SW 68" Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: FEBRUARY 22, 2005. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. _ Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: Name & Number of Person Commenting: _ . , TY OF TIGARD REQUEST FO. ,OMMENTS I 5e15 NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS t -.' -'zi` FILE NOS.: FILE NAME: CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS 14-DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO INTERESTED PARTIES OF AREA: ❑Central ❑East ❑South ❑West 3 CITY OFFICES LONG RANGE PLANNING/Barbara Shields,Planning Mgr. _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPTJPIanning-Engineering Techs. /POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer BUILDING DIVISION/Gary Lampella,Building Official /ENGINEERING DEPT./Kim McMillan,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineer/ PUBLIC WORKS/Matt Stine,Urban Forester ' _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder L'PUBLIC WORKS/Brian Rager,Engineering Manager ✓PLANNER—POST PROJECT SITE IF A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM-10 BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING! SPECIAL DISTRICTS _ TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.*L TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE * .1 TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* Z CLEANWATER SERVICES. Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Lee Walker/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N.First Avenue Beaverton,OR 97006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON * — CITY OF TUALATIN * / OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager 3406 Cherry Avenue NE Melinda Wood(WLUN Form Required) _ Steven Sparks,Dev.Svcs.Manager 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue Salem,OR 97303 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 Salem,OR 97301-1279 Beaverton,OR 97076 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING * _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE _ CITY OF DURHAM * 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 PO Box 23483 _ Bob Knight,Data Resource Center(ZCA) US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. .& Durham,OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV DVLP. Kathryn Harris _ Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPA/ZOA) Larry French(Comp.Plan Amendments Only) Routing CENWP-OP-G _CITY OF KING CITY * _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946 City Manager _ C.D.Manager,Growth Management Services Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 15300 SW 116th Avenue King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY _ OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY 1powersnes in Area) _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION(Monopole Towers) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,Planning 155 N. First Avenue —CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO * Routing TTRC—Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 / Steve Conway(GeneralApps.) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _Gregg Leion(CPA) _ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 * _Brent Curtis(CPA) — CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) Z Marah Danielson,Development Review Coordinator _Doria Mateja(ZCA)MS 14 Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section(vacations) _Sr.Cartographer(CPNZCA)MS 14 1900 SW 4th Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,SurveyorizcA)Ms is Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 —W'A.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A* _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION —STATE HISTORIC Dave Austin(wcccA)"911"IMoneeel.Tow.nl Sam Hunaidi,Assistant District Manager (Notify if ODOT R/R•Hwy.Crossing is Only Access to Land) PRESERVATION OFFICE PO Box 6375 5440 SW Westgate Drive,Suite 350 Dave Lanning,sr Crossing Safety Specialist (Notify if Property Has HD Overlay) Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221-2414 555-13th Street,NE,Suite 3 1115 Commercial Street,NE Salem,OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301-1012 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES —PORTLAND WESTERN R/R, BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northern/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Robert I.Melbo,President&General Manager 110 W. 10th Avenue Albany,OR 97321 _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS / COMCAST CABLE CORP. TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations Only) Randy Bice Is.e Map for Area C.ntxp (If Protect is Within%Mile ofa Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 —PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC L NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY —VERIZON / QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Ken Gutierrez,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. Ken Perdue,Engineering Florence Mott,Eng. ROW Mgr. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue PO Box 1100 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97075-1100 Portland,OR 97219 / TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J_BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC. Marsha Butler,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist,Demographics Alex Silantiev(s..M,pbx,eacv,r.00 Diana Carpenter(Appe E of Mall.oreew) 6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg. 12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Beaverton,OR 97008 Tigard,OR 97223-4203 * INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h:lpattytmasters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED: 15-Nov-04) (Also update:i;\curpin'setup\labels\annexation_utililies and franchises.doc when updating this document) MAILING RECORDS .. 4 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITYOFTIOARD Community Development Shaping Better Community , Patricia L. Luns{ord,, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specialist for the City of cigarac Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: {Check Appropnate Box(s)Below} ❑x NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR2004-000012/SLR2004-00025/VAR2005-00004 & 5 — CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B", and by reference made a part hereof, on April 12,2005, and deposited in the United States Mail on April 12,2005, postage prepaid. (C _..____ 2�1 (Person that Pr paredNOtice) Sraitt. Off'09Z;EGON ) County of Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) iI1it Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 6 v -- day of A , 2005. OFFICIAL SEAL SUE ROSS .' CPCY0 NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION 152 NOTARY! IC OF UREM MY COMMISSION EXPIRESS DEC.DEC.1,2007 /� �/ /5� My Corn ion Expires: CJ EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2004-00012 !' CITY OF TIGARD CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER Sfo AierCo ity 120 DAYS = 6/4/2005 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2004-00012 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2004-00025 Development Adjustment VAR VAR2005-00004 Development Adjustment (VAR) VAR2005-00005 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval for a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however, no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two development Adjustments are also requested to reduce the site distance standard from 430 feet to 300 feet, and to reduce the street spacing standard from 200 feet to 138 feet. APPLICANT: Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. OWNER: Webstar VI, LLC Attn: Leonard Lodder, AIA 610 Glatt Circle 222 Commercial Street NE Woodburn, OR 97071 Salem, OR 97301-3410 LOCATION: 11140 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini- warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request subject to certain conditions of approval. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in Section VI. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 1 OF 38 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE/BUILDING PERMITS: Submit to the Planning Division (Gary Pagenstecher, 639-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 1. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall submit revised drawings and a narrative that demonstrate how the proposed Phase II meets the site design standards for the overall parcel. Without such demonstration, Phase II would require application for an additional approval. 2. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit and provided the alternative April 1, 2005 access way design can be approved (subject to Condition # 22 to first explore shared access), the applicant shall submit a revised plan showing that the visual triangle standard can be met. 3. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall submit revised site plans that show one (1) of the proposed new parking spaces reserved for carpool/vanpool parking. This space shall be located as close to the building entrance as possible, second in priority to ADA parking. 4. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall submit detailed plans that show that all service facilities including air conditioning units, HVAC, and gas meters are screened from public view. 5. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing two additional landscape islands along the row of parking spaces behind the building. 6. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, it is recommended that the applicant revise the Landscaping Plan to include only native trees and shrubs. Staff Contact: Matt Stine, City Forester (503-718-2589). 7. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall revise the Landscaping plan for that area between the north side parking lot and SW 68th Parkway to include a 3'/2 inch caliper tree and shrubs of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and 90% opacity within one year, and groundcover plants that will fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years to screen. 8. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, the applicant shall install protection measures at the driplines around trees to remain. Protection measures may be modified based on the acceptance of a plan prepared by a certified arborist and reviewed by the City Forester. 9. Prior to issuance of a site/building permit, an inspection will be conducted by the City Forester to determine whether the measures are effective and that the preserved tree will remain viable. Should work occur on site in violation of the tree protection plan, the applicant/owner will be issued a stop work order until remediation measures can be determined. Remediation can include, but is not limited to, the penalties outlined in TDC Section 18.790.060. The construction documents shall include a notation to that effect. Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 10. Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements and any other work in the public right-of- way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Buildin_g Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 2 OF 38 11. The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. 12. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 13. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Shirley Treat, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Shirley Treat, Engineering). 14. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of 68th Parkway to increase the right-of-way to 35 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. 15. The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 68 h Parkway as a part of this project: A. 13-foot concrete sidewalk with tree wells or 9-foot concrete sidewalk with 4-foot planter strip; B. street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; C. streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City Engineer; and D. 20-foot driveway apron at the north driveway (if one-way access point) and 20-30 foot driveway apron at the south driveway (if applicable). 16. The applicant shall provide connection of the proposed building to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. 17. The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Improvement permit. 18. The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00- 7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. 19. The applicant shall provide an analysis regarding the potential need for energy dissipaters for creek embankment stabilization at the outfall for the water quality pond and relocated storm line shown on the Site Utility Plan (Sheet C2). 20. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 3 OF 38 21. The applicant's plans shall be revised to indicate they will construct a combination of raised median and striped center turn lane along their frontage plus an additional 100 feet to the south. 22. The applicant shall consider and explore the feasibility of joint access with the property to the east and south and demonstrate that joint access cannot reasonably be achieved prior to any adjustment of the access spacing standard being approved. 23. The applicant's plans shall be revised to show the north driveway reduced to 20 feet wide (toward the south), if used as access only. 24. The applicant shall provide signage and directional arrows for the access and egress only locations. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING INSPECTION: Submit to the Planning Division (Gary Pagenstechr, 63a-4171, ext. 2434) for review and approval: 25. Prior to final buildinc inspection, the applicant shall submit a letter from Clean Water Services indicating fiat the conditions of their service provider letter (File No. 4264) have been satisfied. 26. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall submit a letter from Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue (TVF&R) stating the conditions of approval cited in their February 25, 2005 letter (included below in Section VIII, Agency Comments) have been satisfied. 27. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall have their arborist conduct a site inspection to ensure the tree protection measures were followed and the preserved trees remain viable. The results of this inspection shall be submitted to the planning department. 28. Prior to final building inspection, the planning division shall be contacted to conduct an inspection to verify that the proposal was completed in accordance with this decision and the approved plans. 29. The applicant shall submit a separate sign permit for all tenant signage, prior to installation. Submit to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan, 639-4171, ext. 2642) for review and approval: 30. Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar, 2) a diskette of the as-builts In "DWG' format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). 31. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. 32. The applicant's traffic engineer shall provide post-construction sight distance certification for all access locations. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 4 OF 38 33. To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. 34. Prior to final building inspection, the applicantthshall pay $1,332.00 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of 68 Parkway. 35. Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 72' Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of$712.00. 36. Prior to a final bui[cling inspection, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 68 Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of$2,005.00. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: Staff conducted a search of City records for the subject property and found no other land use cases that affect development of the property. Vicinity Information: The subject site is located on SW 68th Parkwaymid-way between the SW Atlanta and Haines Streets intersection on the south and SW Pacifc Highway on the north. The property is zoned C-G with properties to the north and west also zoned C-G. The abutting properties to the south and east are zoned mixed use employment (MUE) and are developed with office buildings. Site Information and Proposal Description: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval for a 9,512 square foot, one- story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however, no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two development adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. SECTION IV. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity for written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. In addition, staff has posted a notice at the driveway to the site, visible from the street. No comments were received during the comment period from neighboring landowners or interested parties. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 5 OF 38 SECTION V. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA The proposal's consistency with these Code Chapters is reviewed in the following sections: A. Zoning Districts 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts 18.620 Tigard Triangle Design Standards B. Applicable Development Code Standards 18.370 Variances and Adjustments 18.705 Access Egress and Circulation 18.725 Environmental Performance Standards 18.745 Landscaping and Screening 18.755 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage 18.765 Off-Street parking and loading requirements 18.775 Sensitive Lands 18.780 Signs 18.790 Tree Removal 18.795 Visual Clearance C. Land Use Decisions 18.360 Site Development Review D. Street and Utility Improvement Standards 18.810 E. Decision Making Procedures 18.390 Impact Study SECTION VI. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA A. ZONING DISTRICTS Commercial Zoning District: Section 18.520.020 Lists the description of the Commercial Zoning Districts. The site is located in the C-G: General Commercial zoning district. The present use of the site is vacant land. The proposed use, a veterinary clinic, is fisted in the use classifications under "office" as a use permitted outright in the zone. Development Standards: Section 18.520.040.E States that development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.520.2 below: TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES STANDARD C-G Proposed Minimum Lot Size None 53,298 s.f. - Detached unit- Boarding, lodging, rooming house Minimum Lot Width 50' Avg. 410 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 0' 0'-10' -Side facing street on corner&through lots 0'-Side yard 0' 25' —40' -Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 0' - Rear yard 0' 9' - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a public -or private street. Maximum Height 45 ft 26' -2" Maximum Site Coverage 85% 56.94% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 24.08% [1] [1] Balance of site is in a reserved open space tract for the protection of Ball Creek NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 6 OF 38 As demonstrated in the table above, the proposal complies with the underlying zone development standards. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the underlying zone's development criteria are satisfied. 18.620 Tigard Triangle Design Standards 18.620.010 Purpose and Applicability Design standards for public street improvements and for new development for the Tigard Triangle include creating a high-quality, mixed use employment area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system, and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. All new developments are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described in this chapter and other development standards required by the Community Development and Building Codes, such developments will be required to: Dedicate and improve public streets, to the extent that such dedication and improvement is directly related and roughly proportional to an impact of the development; The applicant's site plan shows, and narrative descries, a five-foot dedication along the subject parcel's western boundary adjacent to SW 68 Parkway. The dedication is for the extension of a sidewalk and planting strip in the public right of way along the Parkway for use by the general public and those using the proposed facility and, therefore, is directly related. Without the dedication, the street and sidewalk would not meet City standards and the project would have to be denied under Section 18.810. The proposed dedication and street improvements meet the proportionality standard as described in the finding below in the Impact Study section of this decision. Therefore, the right-of-way dedication and improvements to SW 68t" parkway are required for this development. Connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage; According to the applicant's plan set and narrative, the proposed development will connect to the sanitary sewer, water, and storm drainage systems, consistent with this standard. Participate in funding future transportation and other public improvement projects in the Tigard Triangle provided that the requirement to participate is directly related and roughly proportional to an impact of the development. According to the applicant's narrative, the applicant agrees to participate in funding future transportation improvements that are directly related and roughly proportional to the impact of the development, consistent with this standard. The following design standards apply to all development located within the Tigard Triangle within both the C-G and the MUE zones. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. (Ord. 99-22) 18.620.020 Street Connectivity All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met. Variance of these standards may be approved per the requirements of Chapter 18.370.010 where topography, barriers such as railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street extensions and connections. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 7 OF 38 Design Option a. Local street spacing shall provide public street connections at intervals of no more than 660 feet. b. Bike and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-way shall be provided at intervals of no more that 330 feet. Performance Option a. Local street spacing shall occur at intervals of no less than eight street intersections per mile. b. The shortest vehicle trip over public streets from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance. c. The shortest pedestrian trip on public right-of-way from a local origin to a collector or greater facility is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance. The distance along SW 68th Parkway between Hwy 99 and Hampton is approximately 5,200 lineal feet or just less than a mile. There are eight street, intersections within this street segment. The roposed site is located midway along SW 68 Parkway on the east side. Any vehicle or pec estrian trips would effectively equal the straight line distance as the site is adjacent to 68 Parkway. Therefore, the Performance Option is met. 18.620.030 Site Design Standards All development must meet the following site design standards. If a parcel is one acre or larger a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how these standards for the overall parcel can be met. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, governing criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. The parcel has an area of 1.22 acres after dedication of the 5-foot right-of-way. Therefore, a phased development plan must be approved demonstrating how the standards for the overall parcel below can be met. The applicant states that the first phase of development will total 9,512 square feet (7,917 SF on the ground floor and 1,595 SF on the second floor). The applicant's narrative states that Phase II would add 2,800 square feet. However, the proposed Phase II is not further discussed in the narrative or shown in the plan set. Therefore, a condition shall require the applicant to demonstrate how Phase II meets the site design standards for the overall parcel. Without such demonstration, Phase II would require application for an additional approval. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials - Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of all street frontages along Major and Minor Arterial Streets. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterial Streets. See Diagram 1 for some examples of how this standard may be met. The proposed building is located on SW 68th Parkway which is designated a minor arterial in the Tigard Triangle Street Plan. As the applicant states in the project narrative, the frontage along SW 68t Parkway is 344 lineal feet. Twenty-eight lineal feet is undevelopable due to the existence of a riparian zone adjacent to the water course located at the north end of the site. The length of the proposed building is 212 feet, which is 61 percent of the lot frontage. The site is bounded by adjacent properties to the east, north and south, so the locational standard for street intersections does not apply. Therefore, this standard is met. Building setback - The minimum building setback from public street rights-of-way or dedicated wetlands/buffers and other environmental features shall be 0 feet; the maximum building setback shall be 10 feet. According to the applicant's site plan, the building is set back from the 68th Parkway right of way from 0 to 10 feet variously along its west-facing elevation. Therefore, this standard is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 8 OF 38 Front yard setback design - Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L-1 standard on public streets and an L-2 standard on accessways. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. The applicant's landscape plan, L1.1, shows the extent of landscaping proposed for the site. The landscape design for the front yard setback is designed to meet the L-1 standard and to contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement of 15 percent of the site. Landscaping and hard surface expansion of the pedestrian path are provide between the proposed building and the nine-foot sidewalk proposed for the right-of-way. Therefore, this standard is met. Walkway connection to building entrances - A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. This walkway must be at least six feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are encouraged. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirement per Section 18.520.040B and Table 18.520.2. A six-foot wide scored concrete ,idewalk connects the proposed building's entrances with the proposed sidewalk along SW 68 " Parkway. The proposed building entrance is internal to the site for functional concerns providing a sheltered space for animals away from traffic. However, the site is not located near a public street intersection. Therefore, this standard is met. Parking location and landscape design - Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-1 landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-1 Landscape Standard. See Diagram 2. The parking for the project is located primarily in back of the proposed building and includes a row adjacent to the side of the building. The side row, 20 feet in length represents, only 6 percent of the lot frontage and is screened by an eight foot landscaped area constructed to an L-1 landscape standard. As shown in the applicant's landscape plan, the interior side and rear yards are landscaped to an L-2 landscape standard. Therefore, this standard is met. However, the landscape plan includes tree and shrub species that are non-native. Matt Stine, City Forester, has commented on the proposed development and recommended that any trees and shrubs planted on the site should be native trees due to the proximity to the riparian corridor. Although not required, the applicant is strongly recommended to preserve the native riparian corridor through a landscape plan that utilizes native plants. The following are Mr. Stine's suggestions for native trees and shrubs to be planted on the subject site: Bigleaf maple Salal Douglas spirea Cascara Sword fern Bleeding Heart Oregon white oak Vine maple Serviceberry Western red cedar Pacific ninebark Evergreen huckleberry Douglas fir Red twig dogwood Snowberry Western hemlock Oregon grape Swamp rose Mock orange Oceanspray Note: Contact Matt Stine, City Forester (503-718-2589), for any questions you may have. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 9 OF 38 18.620.040 Building Design Standards Non-residential buildings. All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design standards. Variance to these standards may be granted if the criteria found in Section 18.370.010 C2, criteria for granting a variance, is satisfied. Ground floor windows - All street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0 to 10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building corner. The proposed building's west façade is 212 feet long adjacent to SW 68th Parkway. 50 percent of this façade between 3 and 9 feet in height equals (6 x 212 x 1/2) 636 square feet. The design includes 643 square feet of applicable openings. Therefore, this standard is met. Building facades - Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (a) a variation in building materials; (b) a building off-set of at least 1 foot; (c) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade; or (d) by another design features that reflect the building's structural system. No building facade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. The west façade of the proposed building facing SW 68th Parkway is articulated with a variety of building materials including glass bock, vertical steel panels, and horizontal cementations siding. Vertical and horizontal off-sets, curved walls, and recessed doors and windows further articulate the façade such that no portion of the façade extends greater that 40 lineal feet without one of these features being present. Pedestrian connections through the building are not required because it is less than 300 feet in length. Therefore, this standard is met. Weather protection - Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies, and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. Awnings and canopies shall not be back lit. The applicant states and the architectural drawing show that the roof is extended out over the main entrance to provide weather protection at the entry. Therefore, this standard is met. Building Materials - Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding may not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. Finish materials as called out in the applicant's Plan Notes (Sheet A3.1) include cementatious planking, prefinished steel vertical planking, metal roof edge cap flashing, stainless steel sheet cladding, painted exterior gyp board soffit, glass block, aluminum and glass curtain walls. The foundation is slab on grade and is not exposed more than two feet. Therefore, this standard is met. Roofs and roof lines - Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. The roofs of the proposed building are flat and hidden from view by parapet extensions of the building's walls. No false fronts or false roofs are proposed. Therefore, this standard is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 10 OF 38 Roof-mounted equipment - All roof-mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. The applicant states that "parapets at roof level changes will be used to screen roof top equipment from view." No roof-mounted equipment is shown on the plans or otherwise specified. There is insufficient information to determine if this standard is met. Therefore, a condition shall require that all roof mounted equipment must be screened from view as seen from SW 68t Parkway. 18.620.050 Signs A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development Code the following standards shall be met: 1. Zoning district regulations - Residential only developments within the C-G and MUE zones shall meet the sign requirements for the R-25 zone 18.780.130B; non-residential developments within the C-G zone shall meet the sign requirements for the commercial zones, 18.780.130C; and non-residential development within the MUE zone shall meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone, 18.780.130D. 2. Sign area limits - The maximum sign area limits found in 18.780.130 shall not be exceeded. No area limit increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. 3. Height limits - The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 10 feet. Wall signs shall not extend above the roof line of the wall on which the sign is located. No height increases will be permitted within the Tigard Triangle. 4. Sign location - Freestanding signs within the Tigard Triangle shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. The applicant states that "signage will be designed to meet the standards and area limits specified in 18.780.130C." Since no signs have been proposed in this application, but are anticipated, the proposed development will be conditioned to meet the standards in this section and the applicable requirements of Chapter 18.780. 18.620.060 Entry Portals Required locations. Entry portals shall be required at the primary access points into the Tigard Triangle. Location - Entry portals shall be located at the intersections of 99W and Dartmouth; 99W and 72nd; 1-5 and Dartmouth; Hwy. 217 and 72nd; and at the Hwy. 217 Overcrossing and Dartmouth. Design - The overall design of entry portals shall relate in scale and detail to both the automobile and the pedestrian. A triangle motif shall be incorporated into the design of entry portals. The subject property is not located at any of the portal locations listed. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 18.620.070 Landscaping and Screening A. Applicable levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable to the Tigard Triangle. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in other sub- sections of this section. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. 1. L-1 Low Screen - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots and along local collectors and local streets, planting standards of Chapter 18.745 Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. The L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 3 1/2 inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provided a 3 foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2 inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. 2. L-2 General Landscaping - For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, local collectors and local streets, planting standards of NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 11 OF 38 Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall apply. Trees shall be provided at a minimum 2-1/2 inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. Any tree planted in excess of a 2-inch caliper shall be eligible for full mitigation credit. The setbacc is 8 feet deep for a distance of 20 feet between the project's north side parking lot and SW 68 h Parkway, a minor arterial. The applicant's landscape plan specifies flax, viburnum, nandina and no trees. Therefore, a 3 1/2 inch caliper tree and shrubs of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and 90% opacity within one year, and groundcover plants that will fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years, shall be required for that area. In addition, all remaining landscaping on the project site is subject to the landscaping and screening standards in Chapter 18.745 below. With a condition requiring the above planting scheme, this standard is met. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the Tigard Triangle Design standards have not been met. However, if the applicant complies with the conditions below, the standards will be met. Conditions: • The applicant shall submit revised drawings and a narrative that demonstrate how Phase II meets the site design standards for the overall parcel. • It is recommended that the applicant revise the Landscaping Plan to include only native trees and shrubs. • The applicant shall submit a separate sign permit for all tenant signage, prior to installation. • The applicant shall submit revised drawings demonstrating tiat all roof mounted equipment is screened from view as seen from SW 68 Parkway. • The applicant shall revise the Larrgiscaping plan for that area between the north side parking lot and SW 68 Parkway to include a 3 1/2 inch caliper tree and shrubs of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and 90% opacity within one year, and groundcover plants that will fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years to screen B. APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS 18.370 Variances and Adjustments 18.370.020 Adjustments A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish two classes of special variances: 1. "Development adjustments" which allow modest variation from required development standards within proscribed limits. Because such adjustments are granted using clear and objective standards, these can be granted by means of a Type 1 procedure, as opposed to the more stringent standards of approval and procedure for variances. 2. "Special adjustments" which are variances from development standards which have their own approval criteria as opposed to the standard approval criteria for variances contained in Section 18.370.020C. The applicant has applied for two adjustments to the access and egress standards in Chapter 18.705: 1) adjustment of the sight distance standard (18.750.030.H.1) to the original proposed single entrance driveway, and 2) an adjustment to the minimum access spacing standard (18.705.030.H.3) for the proposed access within 200 feet of the an existing driveway to the north. Analysis of these issues can be found in the findings for Section 18.705.030.H.1, below. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 12 OF 38 C. Special adjustments. Adjustment to access and egress standards (Chapter 18.705). a. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved, the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, as governed in Section 18.390.030, using approval criteria contained in Subsection 2b below. b. The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment from the access requirements contained in Chapter 18.705, based on the following criteria: (1) It is not possible to share access; The applicant did not address the possibility of shared access in the project narrative. The proposed development includes access drives than cannot readily be designed to conform to the sight distance and access spacing standards within the subject parcel. Therefore, pursuant to 18.370.030.C.5.A, the applicant must demonstrate that access with an adjoining parcel cannot reasonably be achieved before an adjustment of the access spacing standard can be approved. (2) There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; There are no alternative access points from another street. There is some flexibility available in siting the required access on the subject parcel because the lot frontage on SW 68 h Parkway is approximately 344 lineal feet and the proposed building is 212 feet long. However, this change would further adversely impact the sight distance standard and conflict with the proposed parking plan. In a revised site development proposal received April 1, 2005, the applicant proposed an alternative access design to meet the sight distance standard by utilizing an additional access point to the south of the building and converting the ingress/egress to a one way through-drive approach from north to south. The proposed alternative meets the sight distance standards for the southern approach and maintains it for the north approach. However, the proposal would not be consistent with the access spacing standard as the proposed southern access way would be within approximately 150 feet of the existing driveway. As indicated above, the applicant must address shared access before an adjustment to the spacing standard can be approved. (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met; The applicant did not address the minimum access spacing standard. The access spacing requirement is not met with the proposed development because existing access ways north and south of the property are located within 200 feet of both the proposed north and south ingress/egress ways. To meet the separation standard, an alternative access may impact the location of the proposed building, as designed. However, the access separation could be met by shortening the length of the building or moving it south on the site approximately 25 feet to achieve separation from the furthest existing access to the north. Although access provided 200 feet from the existing north access way could meet the spacing standard, it would not meet the sight distance standard for approaches from the south. Discussion with the City Engineer determined that, in this case, meeting the sight distance standard should take precedence over meeting the access separation standard because of the public safety issue involved. (4) The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 13 OF 38 Because the access spacing standard and the feasibility of joint access were not addressed in the applicant's narrative, staff has insufficient information, given the constraints of the site and building program, to conclude that the request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access. The applicant must still consider joint access before any adjustment to the access spacing standard can be approved. The sight distance standard has been addressed in the applicant's narrative and traffic engineering report. Based on the analysis in the findings for Section 18.705.030.H.1, below, the April 1, 2005 alternative best meets the standard. However, this issue must be resolved, first through consideration of a joint access agreement and, second, through an approved adjustment, if necessary, prior to construction. (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and Findings in the Access, Egress and Circulation Chapter of this decision condition the proposed development to meet the sight distance standards to the greatest extent possible including traffic management strategies that will result in a safe access. However, the applicant must still consider joint access before any access spacing adjustment can be approved. (6) The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. The visual clearance requirement is met in the applicant's original design, as demonstrated by the visual clearance triangle on the site plan. However, the proposed April 1, 2005 alternative design does not show the visual clearance triangle. Therefore, a condition will require that if the alternative design is approved (subject to the condition to first explore shared access), a revised plan must include a demonstration that the visual triangle standard can be met. FINDING All of the adjustment criteria are not met. The applicant has not considered joint access with the property to the south. To approve any adjustment request, the applicant must first demonstrate that access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved. If joint access cannot reasonably be achieved, and upon a showing that the visual triangle standard can be met, the applicant's requested adjustment to the minimum access spacing standard may be approved. Conditions: • The applicant shall consider and explore the feasibility of joint access with the property to the south and demonstrate that joint access cannot reasonably be achieved prior to an adjustment of the access spacing standard being approved. • Provided the alternative April 1, 2005 design is approved (subject to the condition to first explore shared access), the applicant shall submit a revised plan showing that the visual triangle standard can be met. Access, Egress and Circulation (18.705): Walkways: 18.705.030(F) requires that on-site pedestrian walkways comply with the following standards: Walkways shall extend from the ground floor entrances or from the ground floor landing of stairs, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways shall be constructed between new and existing developments and neighboring developments; As described in the applicant's plans and narrative, on-site pedestrian walkways are proposed between the building entrances and the streets that provide access and egress, as well as to the parking lot. Therefore, this standard is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 14 OF 38 Wherever required walkways cross vehicle access driveways or parking lots, such crossings shall be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Required walkways shall be physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and parking by either a minimum 6-inch vertical separation (curbed) or a minimum 3-foot horizontal separation, except that pedestrian crossings of traffic aisles are permitted for distances no greater than 36 feet if appropriate landscaping, pavement markings, or contrasting pavement materials are used. Walkways shall be a minimum of four feet in width, exclusive of vehicle overhangs and obstructions such as mailboxes, benches, bicycle racks, and sign posts, and shall be in compliance with ADA standards; No required walkways cross parking areas. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Required walkways shall be paved with hard surfaced materials such as concrete, asphalt, stone, brick, etc. Walkways may be required to be lighted and/or signed as needed for safety purposes. Soft-surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways are provided in addition to required pathways. The plan depicts concrete sidewalks and walkways, which meets the standard. The final construction documents will also need to show walkways with hard surfaced materials. Access Management: Section 18.705.030.H.1 states that an access report shall be submitted with all new development proposals which verifies design of driveways and streets are safe by meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO. DKS Associates submitted a memorandum discussing the sight distance issues that pertain to this development. The horizontal and vertical curves at this portion of 68 Parkway present special challenges in achieving they required sight distance. The engineer has indicated that a speed study was conducted on 68 h Parkway to determine the 85 percentile speed of drivers. The speed was found to be approximately 43 mph in both the north and south bound directions. The City standard for sight distance is 10 times the speed for a required sight distance of 430 feet. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) calculations provide a 45 mph design speed stopping distance sight distance of 360 feet. The City recognizes AASHTO recommendations regarding sight distance. The original site plan proposed a single driveway at the north end of the site. The July 2004 impact study indicates that sight distance to the north is 440 feet, meeting the City requirements. Sight distance to the south is only 225 feet due to the horizontal curve and building placement. By moving the building back 10 feet the sight distance to the south would increase to 260 feet, still short of the requirement. The engineer's field observations confirmed that vehicles approaching the proposed site driveway from the south will not have sufficient stopping sight distance for vehicles exiting the site and turning north towards Highway 99. In a memorandum from DKS, dated March 8, 2005, additional information and recommendations were made. The engineer proposed three options: 1) relocate the driveway closer to the center of the curve, 2) narrow the roadway in some fashion to allow for driveway traffic to have better sight distance when exiting the site, or 3) add a second site driveway and re-design the on-site circulation so that traffic flows one-way through the site. The engineer proposed the driveway on the north would be for ingress only, while the south driveway would provide egress only. The engineer estimates that the intersection sight distance at the egress location would be over 400 feet to the south. Staff agrees that the north driveway cannot provide adequate sight distance and that another egress location is required. The proposed egress location does not meet the minimum 200 foot spacing standard for Collectors, as defined in 18.705.030.H.3. The applicant shall pursue the following options: 1) share access with the properties to the south and east, 2) relocate the driveway 200 feet from the existing driveway, or 3) apply for an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. This issue must be resolved through a shared access agreement or an approved adjustment prior to construction. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 15 OF 38 The applicant shall also revise the plans to provide a 20 foot driveway at the north end for ingress, provide directional arrows at the driveway and post signs limiting use to ingress only. If the south driveway is approved the applicant shall provide a 20 — 30 foot driveway, provide directional arrows at the driveway and post signs limiting use to egress only. The applicant's engineer shall provide post construction sight distance certification for all access locations. Section 18.705.030.H.2 states that driveways shall not be permitted to be placed in the influence area of collector or arterial street intersections. Influence area of intersections is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on approach to an intersection. The minimum driveway setback from a collector or arterial street intersection shall be 150 feet, measured from the right-of-way line of the intersecting street to the throat of the proposed driveway. The setback may be greater depending upon the influence area, as determined from City Engineer review of a traffic impact report submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer. In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of street frontage the applicant must explore any option for shared access with the adjacent parcel-. If shared access is not possible or practical, the driveway shall be placed as far from the intersection as possible. The proposed driveway is not located within 150 feet of an intersection, therefore meeting this criterion. Section 18.705.030.H.3 and 4 states that the minimum spacing of driveways and streets along a collector shall be 200 feet. The minimum spacing of driveways and streets alongan arterial shall be 600 feet. The minimum spacing of local streets along a local stree shall be 125 feet. The proposed north driveway is within 200 feet of a driveway to the north. The applicant has not addressed this standard and must revise the driveway location or apply for an adjustment to the spacing standard. The adjustment must be granted prior to beginning construction. The proposed south driveway is within 200 feet of the driveway to the south. The applicant must revise the plans to 1) share access with the adjacent properties,erties, 2) relocate the driveway 200 feet from the existing driveway, or 3) apply for an adjustment to the spacing standards. The driveway location(s) must be resolved and approved prior to construction. Minimum Access Requirements for Commercial and Industrial Use: Section 18.705.030.J provides the minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses: Table 18.705.3 indicates that the required access width for developments with fewer than 100 parking spaces is one 30-foot accesses with 24 feet of pavement. Vehicular access shall be provided to commercial or industrial uses, and shall be located to within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances; additional requirements for truck traffic may be placed as conditions of site development review. The applicant's site plan shows one 30 foot driveway with a 24-foot paved section and vehicular access within 50 feet of the primary ground floor entrances. Therefore, this standard is met. Section 18.705.030.K states that where a proposed parking facility indicates only one- way traffic flow on the site, it shall be accommodated by a specific driveway serving the facility; the entrance drive shall be situated closest to oncoming traffic and the exit drive shall be situated farthest from oncoming traffic. To meet the sight distance standard, the applicant's engineer has recommended a one-way traffic pattern, with a specified driveway with an ingress drive at the north end of the site and an egress drive at the south end. However, because the one-way proposal is designed to meet the sight distance standard and the applicant has been otherwise conditioned to provide signage, access restrictions to the ingress access way to the north, and median turn lane improvements, the directional requirement of this standard and the safety issue it addresses, although not met, are satisfactorily addressed. The proposed access is therefore consistent with TDC 18.705.030.K. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 16 OF 38 FINDINGS: The sight distance standard is met. However, the minimum spacing standards are not met by the applicant's proposal. Provided the following conditions of approval are implemented, the proposed development can meet the applicable access management standards. Conditions: • The applicant must relocate the north driveway or receive an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. • The applicant's plans shall be revised to show the north driveway reduced to 20 feet wide (toward the south), if used as access only. • The applicant must provide a shared south access or receive an adjustment to the spacing standards of 18.705.030.H.3. • Applicant shall provide signage and directional arrows for the access and egress only locations. Environmental performance standards (18.725): These standards require that federal and state environmental laws, rules and regulations be applied to development within the City of Tigard. Section 18.725.030 (Performance Standards) regulates: Noise, visible emissions, vibration and odors. Noise. For the purposes of noise regulation, the provisions of Sections 7.41.130 through 7.40.210 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply. Visible Emissions. Within the commercial zoning districts and the industrial park (IP) zoning district, there shall be no use, operation or activity which results in a stack or other point- source emission, other than an emission from space heating, or the emission of pure uncombined water (steam) which is visible from a property line. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rules for visible emissions (340-21-015 and 340-28-070) apply. Vibration. No vibration other than that caused by highway vehicles, trains and aircraft is permitted in any given zoning district which is discernible without instruments at the property line of the use concerned. Odors. The emissions of odorous gases or other matter in such quantities as to be readily detectable at any point beyond the property line of the use creating the odors is prohibited. DEQ rules for odors (340-028-090) apply. Glare and heat. No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or welding, which is visible at the lot line shall be permitted, and; 1) there shall be no emission or transmission of heat or heated air which is discernible at the lot line of the source; and 2) these regulations shall not apply to signs or floodlights in parking areas or construction equipment at the time of construction or excavation work otherwise permitted by this title. Insects and rodents. All materials including wastes shall be stored and all grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or create a health hazard. This is an office use, which is permitted outright within the C-G zone. The applicant's narrative states that the above standards will be met. Based on the provision of adequate trash and recycling area, and the fact that the proposed use is not likely to generate noise, visible emissions, odors, glare and heat, or harbor insects and rodents, this standard is satisfied. Ongoing maintenance to meet these standards shall be maintained and any violation of these standards will be addressed by the City of Tigard's' Code Enforcement Officer. FINDING: The Environmental Performance Standards are met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 17 OF 38 Landscaping and Screening (18.745): Street Trees: Section 18.745.040 states that all development projects fronting on a public street or a private drive more than 100 feet in length shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with Section 18.745.040.C. Section 18.745.040.0 requires that street trees be spaced between 20 and 40 feet apart depending on the size classification of the tree at maturity (small, medium or large). The applicant has provided a landscape plan that shows 11 street trees (Franks Red Maple) along SW 68th Parkway spaced 30 feet apart. However, the City Forester, Matt Stine, has commented that, due to the proximity of the site to the Red Rock Creek riparian zone, only native trees should be planted. Therefore, a condition shall strongly recommend that the applicant submit a revised landscape plan specifying native street trees. Buffering and Screening: Section 18.745.080 states that no buffer is required between abutting uses that are of a different type when the uses are separated by a street. No buffer is required between a proposed office use and existing office use. Buffering and/or screening are required for dissimilar uses. To the west is the 68th Parkway right of way. To the south and east are existing commercial businesses. To the north is the protected riparian corridor. Therefore, no buffering or screening is required and this standard is met. Screening: Special Provisions: Section 18.745.050.E requires the screening of parking and loading areas. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. Planting materials to be installed should achieve a relative balance between low lying and vertical shrubbery and trees. Trees shall be planted in landscaped islands in all parking areas, and shall be equally distributed on the basis of one (1) tree for each seven (7) parking spaces in order to provide a canopy effect. The minimum dimension on the landscape islands shall be three (3) feet wide and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. The parking lot is located behind and to the side of the building. The proposed parking area contains 37 spaces, and therefore 5 trees in landscape islands are required. The parking area contains 6 trees. However, two trees are not located in landscape islands. Screening of the parking lot is provided by the building and the additional landscape requirements in the Tigard Triangle Design Standards, above. With a condition requiring two additional landscape islands along the row of parking spaces behind the building, the proposed development meets this standard. Screening Of Service Facilities. Except for one-family and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or disposal area and service facilities such as gas meters and air conditioners which would otherwise be visible from a public street, customer or resident parking area, any public facility or any residential area shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall between five and eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area; There is inadequate information provided in the plans to establish whether this standard is met. Therefore, the applicant will be required to submit detailed plans for Planning Division review prior to issuance of a building permit that shows all service areas including air conditioners and gas meters are screened from view. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 18 OF 38 Screening Of Refuse Containers. Except for one- and two-family dwellings, any refuse container or refuse collection area which would be visible from a public street, parking lot, residential or commercial area, or any public facility such as a school or park shall be screened or enclosed from view by placement of a solid wood fence, masonry wall or evergreen hedge. All refuse shall be contained within the screened area. The applicant's site plan and narrative describe a six foot high masonry trash enclosure. Therefore, this standard is met" FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the landscaping and screening standards have not been fully met. If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, the standards will be met. Conditions: It is strongly recommend that the applicant submit a revised landscape plan specifying native street trees. Submit detailed plans that show that all service facilities including air conditioning units, HVAC, and gas meters are screened from public view. Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage (18.755): Chapter 18.755 requires that new construction incorporates functional and adequate space for on-site storage and efficient collection of mixed solid waste and source separated Recyclables prior to pick-up and removal by haulers. The applicant must choose one (1) of the following four (4) methods to demonstrate compliance: Minimum Standard, Waste Assessment, Comprehensive Recycling Plan, or Franchised Hauler Review and Sign-Off. The applicant will have to submit evidence or a plan which indicates compliance with this section. Regardless of which method chosen, the applicant will have to submit a written sign-off from the franchise hauler regarding the facility location and compatibility. The applicant has submitted a written sign off from the waste hauler (Pride Disposal). Therefore, this standard is met. Location Standards. To encourage its use, the storage area for source-separated recyclables shall be co- located with the storage area for residual mixed solid waste; Indoor and outdoor storage areas shall comply with Uniform Building and Fire Code requirements; Storage area space requirements can be satisfied with a single location or multiple locations, and can combine both interior and exterior locations; Exterior storage areas can be located within interior side yard or rear yard areas. Exterior storage areas shall not be located within a required front yard setback or in a yard adjacent to a public or private street; Exterior storage areas shall be located in central and visible locations on a site to enhance security for users; Exterior storage areas can be located in a parking area, if the proposed use provides at least the minimum number of parking spaces required for the use after deducting the area used for storage. Storage areas shall be appropriately screened according to the provisions in 18.755.050 C, design standards; The storage area shall be accessible for collection vehicles and located so that the storage area will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic movement on the site or on public streets adjacent to the site. The refuse container is accessed from the parking lot and is visible in order to enhance security for users. The proposed refuse container will not occupy any required parking stalls and screening has been conditioned to conform to Tigard standards previously in this decision. Therefore, this standard is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 19 OF 38 Design Standards. The dimensions of the storage area shall accommodate containers consistent with current methods of local collection; Storage containers shall meet Uniform Fire Code standards and be made and covered with waterproof materials or situated in a covered area; Exterior storage areas shall be enclosed by a sight-obscuring fence wall, or hedge at least six feet in height. Gate openings which allow access to users and haulers shall be provided. Gate openings for haulers shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide and shall be capable of being secured in a closed and open position; Storage area(s) and containers shall be clearly labeled to indicate the type of materials accepted. The applicant has submitted a plan set that includes a detail of the proposed trash enclosure (Sheet A1.2), consistent with the dimensions prescribed in this standard. Therefore, this standard is met. FINDING: The applicant has provided evidence of compliance with the Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage design standards. Therefore, this standard has been met. Off-Street Parking and Loading (18.765): Location of vehicle parking: Off-street parking spaces for single-family and duplex dwellings and single-family attached dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwellings. Off-street parking lots for uses not listed above shall be located not further than 200 feet from the building or use that they are required to serve, measured in a straight line from the building with the following exceptions: a) commercial and industrial uses which require more than 40 parking spaces may provide for the spaces in excess of the required first 40 spaces up to a distance of 300 feet from the primary site; The 40 parking spaces which remain on the primary site must be available for users in the following order of priority: 1) Disabled-accessible spaces; 2) Short-term spaces; 3) Long-term preferential carpool and vanpool spaces; 4) Long-term spaces. The parking lot associated with this project is directly adjacent to the proposed building, in compliance with this standard. Joint Parking: Owners of two or more uses, structures or parcels of land may agree to utilize jointly the same parking and loading spaces when the peak hours of operation do not overlay, subject to the following: 1) The size of the joint parking facility shall be at least as large as the number of vehicle parking spaces required by the larger(est) use per Section 18.765.070; 2) Satisfactory legal evidence shall be presented to the Director in the form of deeds, leases or contracts to establish the joint use; 3) If a joint use arrangement is subsequently terminated, or if the uses change, the requirements of this title thereafter apply to each separately. Joint parking is not proposed with this application; therefore this standard is not applicable. Parking in Mixed-Use Projects: In mixed-use projects, the required minimum vehicle parking shall be determined using the following formula. 1) Primary use, i.e., that with the largest proportion of total floor area within the development, at 100% of the minimum vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060; 2) Secondary use, i.e., that with the second largest percentage of total floor area within the development, at 90% of the vehicle parking required for that use in Section 18.765.060; 3) Subsequent use or uses, at 80% of the vehicle parking required for that use(s) in Section 18.765.060; 4) The maximum parking allowance shall be 150% of the total minimum parking as calculated above. This proposal is not considered a mixed-use project as it will contain solely office space; therefore this standard is not applicable. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 20 OF 38 Visitor Parking in Multi-Family Residential Developments: Multi-dwelling units with more than 10 required parking spaces shall provide an additional 15% of vehicle parking spaces above the minimum required for the use of guests of residents of the complex. These spaces shall be centrally located or distributed throughout the development. Required bicycle parking facilities shall also be centrally located within or evenly distributed throughout the development. This project does not involve a residential use. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Preferential Long-Term CarpoolNanpool Parking: Parking lots providing in excess of 20 long-term parking spaces shall provide preferential long-term carpool and vanpool parking for employees, students and other regular visitors to the site. At least 5% of total long-term parking spaces shall be reserved for carpool/vanpool use. Preferential parking for carpools/vanpools shall be closer to the main entrances of the building than any other employee or student parking except parking spaces designated for use by the disabled. Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces shall be full-sized per requirements in Section 18.765.040N and shall be clearly designated for use only by carpools and vanpools between 7:00 AM and 5:30 PM Monday through Friday. The proposed parking associated with the office development is for 37 parking spaces. The applicant has not furnished information related to the relative number of long term versus short term parking, so staff must assume the total number of spaces may be utilized for long term parking. So, of the total 37 spaces being provided, 1 shall be marked as carpool and/or vanpool spaces for employees and located in accordance with this standard. A condition will be imposed to meet this standard. Disabled-Accessible Parking: All parking areas shall be provided with the required number of parking spaces for disabled persons as specified by the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code and federal standards. Such parking spaces shall be sized, signed and marked as required by these regulations. The applicant has indicated that there are 2 ADA handicap spaces provided. According to ORS 447.233, incorporated through reference to the Uniform Building Code (UBC), 2 spaces are required. Final determination of the number of required ADA spaces will be made by the building official during the review of the building permit application. As shown, the site plan appears to be in compliance with the ADA requirements. DEQ indirect source construction permit: All parking lots containing 250 spaces or parking structures containing two or more levels shall require review by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to: 1. Acquire an Indirect Source Construction Permit; or 2. Investigate the feasibility of installing oil and grease separators The proposed parking lot contains 37 spaces, therefore, standard is not applicable. Access Drives: With regard to access to public streets from off-street parking: access drives from the street to off-street parking or loading areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic and provide maximum safety for pedestrian and vehicular traffic on the site; the number and size of access drives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Chapter, 18.705, Access, Egress and Circulation; access drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers on frontage not occupied by service drives; access drives shall have a minimum vision clearance in accordance with Chapter 18.795, Visual Clearance; access drives shall be improved with an asphalt or concrete surface; and excluding single-family and duplex residences, except as provided by Subsection 18.810.030.P, groups of two or more parking spaces shall be served by a service drive so that no backing movements or other maneuvering within a street or other public right-of-way will be required. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 21 OF 38 The proposed access drive is clearly marked, and the parking area provides ample room to facilitate a forward entrance onto the public street. This standard is met. Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian access through parking lots shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.705.030.F. Where a parking area or other vehicle area has a drop-off grade separation, the property owner shall install a wall, railing, or other barrier which will prevent a slow-moving vehicle or driverless vehicle from escaping such area and which will prevent pedestrians from walking over drop-off edges. There are no drop-off grade separated areas within the parking area. Parking Lot Striping: Except for single-family and duplex residences, any area intended to be used to meet the off-street parking requirements as contained in this Chapter shall have all parking spaces clearly marked; and all interior drives and access aisles shall be clearly marked and signed to show direction of flow and maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. The plans submitted show the parking spaces will be clearly marked with striping, consistent with this standard. Wheel Stops: Parking spaces along the boundaries of a parking lot or adjacent to interior landscaped areas or sidewalks shall be provided with a wheel stop at least four inches high located three feet back from the front of the parking stall. The front three feet of the parking stall may be concrete, asphalt or low lying landscape material that does not exceed the height of the wheel stop. This area cannot be calculated to meet landscaping or sidewalk requirements. The applicants site plan (Sheet A1 .1) shows and narrative indicates that all proposed parking spaces contain a wheel stop. Therefore, this standard is met. Space and Aisle Dimensions: Section 18.765.040.N states that: "except as modified for angled parking in Figures 18.765.1 and 18.765.2 the minimum dimensions for parking spaces are: 8.5 feet x 18.5 feet for a standard space and 7.5 feet x 16.5 feet for a compact space"; aisles accommodating two direction traffic, or allowing access from both ends, shall be 24 feet in width. No more than 50% of the required spaces may be compact spaces. The applicant's plans dimension the parking spaces to show that 21 spaces will conform to standard sized spaces and the 16 remaining spaces will conform to the compact sized spaces. The applicant's site plan shows a 24-foot wide isle. Therefore, this standard is met. Bicycle Parking Location and Access: Section 18.765.050 states bicycle parking areas shall be provided at locations within 50 feet of primary entrances to structures; bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas or pedestrian ways; outdoor bicycle parking shall be visible from on-site buildings and/or the street. When the bicycle parking area is not visible from the street, directional signs shall be used to located the parking area; and bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor which has an outdoor entrance open for use and floor location which does not require the bicyclist to use stairs to gain access to the space. Exceptions may be made to the latter requirement for parking on upper stories within a multi-story residential building. The applicant's site plan shows 4 bicycle parking spaces within 20 feet of the proposed buildings entrance which are not located within parking aisles, landscaped areas or pedestrian ways. The spaces are visible from the street. Therefore, this standard is met. Bicycle Parking Design Requirements: Section 18.765.050.C. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle racks: The racks required -for required bicycle parking spaces shall ensure that bicycles may be securely locked to them without undue inconvenience. Provision NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 22 OF 38 of bicycle lockers for long-term (employee) parking is encouraged but not required; bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall or other structure; bicycle parking spaces shall be at least 21/2 feet by six feet long, and, when covered with a vertical clearance of seven feet. An access aisle of at least five feet wide shall be provided and maintained beside or between each row of bicycle parking; each required bicycle parking space must be accessible without moving another bicycle• required bicycle parking spaces may not be rented or leased except where required motor vehicle parking is rented or leased. At-cost or deposit fees for bicycle parking are exempt from this requirement; and areas set aside for required bicycle parking must be clearly reserved for bicycle parking only. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced with a hard surfaced material, i.e., pavers asphalt, concrete or similar material. This surface must be designed to remain well drained. The applicant has provided details of the proposed bike rack, consistent with this standard. Minimum Bicycle Parking Requirements: The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is specified in Table 18.765.2 in Section 18.765.070.H. In no case shall there be less than two bicycle parking spaces. According to Table 18.765.2 of the Tigard Development Code, the minimum bicycle-parking requirement for an office use is 0.5 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet. Based on the proposed 9,370 square foot building, 4 bicycle rack spaces will be required. The applicant has proposed three racks that can accommodate 4 bicycles. Therefore, this standard is met. Minimum Off-Street Parking: Section 18.765.070.H states that the minimum and maximum parking shall be as required in Table 18.765.2. Table 18.765.2 states that the minimum parking for Office Uses is 2.7 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet. For the proposed 9,370 square foot building, 25 spaces are required. The site lies within the Zone B parking area for purposes of calculating maximum number of parking spaces. The maximum allowed parking is 4.1 spaces per 1,000 g.s.f. or 38 spaces. The applicant has proposed 37 spaces in compliance with this standard. Off-Street Loading Spaces: Commercial, industrial and institutional buildings or structures to be built or altered which receive and distribute material or merchandise by truck shall provide and maintain off-street loading and maneuvering space as follows: A minimum of one loading space is required for buildings with 10,000 gross square feet or more; A minimum of two loading spaces for buildings with 40,000 gross square feet or more. The building is not greater than 10,000 square feet; therefore, this standard does not apply. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the off-street parking and loading standards have not been fully satisfied; however if the applicant complies with the following condition, the standards will be met. Conditions: Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit revised site plans that show 1 of the_proposed new parking spaces reserved for carpool/vanpool parking. his space shall be located as close to the building entrances as possible, second in priority to ADA parking. Sensitive Lands (18.775) Purpose: Maintain integrity of rivers, streams, and creeks. Sensitive land regulations contained in this chapter are intended to maintain the integrity of the rivers, streams, and creeks in Tigard by minimizing erosion promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quality, and fish and wildlife habitats, and preserving scenic quality and recreation potential-. The regulations also implement the comprehensive_plan and floodplain management program, Clean Water Service (CWS) Design and onstruction Standards, the Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources), and protect public health, safety, and welfare. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 23 OF 38 Sensitive lands are lands potentially unsuitable for development because of their location within the 100-year floodplain or 1996 flood inundation line, whichever is greater; natural drainageways; wetland areas which are regulated by the other agencies including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State Lands, or are designated as significant wetland on the City of Tigard Wetland and Stream Corridors Map; and steep slopes of 25% or greater and unstable ground. Sensitive lands permits shall be required for the areas in Section 18.775.020.F.1 above when any of the following circumstances apply: ground disturbance(s) or land form alterations involving more than 50 cubic yards of material; repair, reconstruction, or improvement of an existing structure or utility, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure prior to the improvement or the damage requiring reconstruction; residential and non-residential structures intended for human habitation; and Accessory structures which are greater than 528 square feet in size, outside floodway areas. According to the applicant's site plan and narrative, approximately 22 percent of the subject parcel is in sensitive lands (drainageways). Pursuant to Section 18.775.020, the applicant obtained a Clean Water Services service provider letter (File Number 4264, dated January 6, 2005) for the proposed development. The provider letter required (Condition #13) a minimum buffer from Red Rock Creek of 50 feet. The applicant's site plan shows that this condition has been met. All proposed development is located on the remainder portion of the subject parcel outside of any sensitive lands. Therefore, a sensitive lands permit is not required for the proposed development. FINDING The applicant has obtained a service provider letter from Clean Water Services. The provider letter contains conditions of approval for the proposed subdivision. To ensure sensitive lands located on the subject parcel are protected, the applicant must comply with all conditions of approval contained in the letter. Condition: Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall submit a letter from Clean Water Services indicating that the conditions of their service provider letter have been satisfied. Signs (18.780): Chapter 18.780.130.0 lists the type of allowable signs and sign area permitted in the C-G Zoning District. No specific signs have been proposed with the development application. Therefore all subsequent signage will be reviewed through a Type I process and will be subject to the code standards in effect at the time of application submittal. FINDING: Because tenant signs will be reviewed and approved as part of a separate permit process, this standard has been satisfied. Tree Removal 18.790): Section 18.79 .030 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. As required, the applicant submitted a tree plan (Sheet T1.1) prepared by David Hunter, a certified arborist. According to the arborist's report, there are 22 trees on the site, of which 11 exceed 12 inches in diameter. No trees greater than 12 inches in diameter are proposed for removal. The two trees proposed for removal are both less than 12 inches in diameter and are listed in the tree identification schedule as being in poor condition. FINDING: The applicant submitted a tree removal plan consistent with this standard. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 24 OF 38 • Conditions: • Prior to any site work, the applicant shall install protection measures at the driplines around trees to remain. Protection measures may be modified based on the acceptance of a plan prepared by a certified arborist and reviewed by the City Forester. • Prior to any site work, an inspection will be conducted by the City Forester to determine whether the measures are effective and that the preserved tree will remain viable. Should work occur on site in violation of the tree protection plan, the applicant/owner will be issued a stop work order until remediation measures can be determined. Remediation can include, but is not limited to, the penalties outlined in TDC Section 18.790.060. The construction documents shall include a notation to that effect. • Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall have their arborist conduct a site inspection to ensure the tree protection measures were followed and the preserved trees remain viable. The results of this inspection shall be submitted to the planning department. Visual Clearance Areas (18.795): Chapter 18.795 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three (3) feet in height. The code provides that obstructions that may be located in this area shall be visually clear between three (3) and eight (8) feet in height (8) (trees may be placed within this area provided that all branches below eight (8) feet are removed). A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right- of-way and the driveway, and then connecting these two (2), 30-foot distance points with a straight line. The applicant has indicated in the narrative and on the site plan that a clear vision area will be maintained between 3 and 8 feet in height at the vehicular access of the property. However, the applicant's April 1. 2005 revised site plan shows an alternative access to the south which does not show vision clearance triangles. A condition is imposed in the Variance section of this decision, requiring a revised plan to show vision clearance triangles, if the through drive is necessary. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the vision clearance standards have been met or are have been elsewhere conditioned to be met. C. SPECIFIC SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL STANDARDS Section 18.360.090(A)(2) through 18.360.090(A)(15) provides additional Site Development Review approval standards not necessarily covered by the provisions of the previously listed sections. These additional standards are addressed immediately below with the following exceptions: The proposal contains no elements related to the provisions of the following and are, therefore, found to be inapplicable as approval standards: 18.360.090.3 (Multi Family Exterior Elevations); 18.360.090.5 (Privacy and Noise: Multi-family or Group Living Uses); 18.360.090.E (Private Outdoor Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.7 (Shared Outdoor Recreation Areas: Multi-family Use); 18.360.090.8 (100-year floodplain); and 18.360.090.9 (Demarcation of Spaces). The following sections were discussed elsewhere in this decision and, therefore, will not be addressed in this section: 18.360.090.4 (Buffering, Screening and Compatibility Between Adjoining Uses; 18.360.090.12 (Landscaping); 18.360.090.13 (Drainage); andp18.360.090.14 (Provision for the Disabled). NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 25 OF 38 Relationship to the Natural and Physical Environment: Buildings shall be: located to preserve existing trees, topography and natural drainage where possible based upon existing site conditions; located in areas not subject to ground slumping or sliding; located to provide adequate distance between adjoining buildings for adequate light, air circulation, and fire-fighting; and oriented with consideration for sun and wind. Trees shall be preserved to the extent possible. Replacement of trees is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.790, Tree Removal. The proposed building location along SW 68th Parkway will provide the greatest separation between the subject site and adjoining properties. As described in the consulting arborist report, the applicant has proposed removing two trees of poor quality less than 12 inches in diameter, which will not require mitigation. Crime Prevention and Safety: A. Windows shall be located so that areas vulnerable to crime can be surveyed by the occupants; B. Interior laundry and service areas shall be located in a way that they can be observed by others; C. Mail boxes shall be located in lighted areas having vehicular or pedestrian traffic; D. The exterior lighting levels shall be selected and the angles shall be oriented towards areas vulnerable to crime; and E. Light fixtures shall be provided in areas having heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in potentially dangerous areas such as parking lots, stairs, ramps and abrupt grade changes. Fixtures shall be placed at a height so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet, which is sufficient to illuminate a person. The areas most vulnerable to crime are in the interior of the property where the parking area is located. The applicant's elevation drawings show windows and the main entrance facing the parking area. In addition, the applicant's photometric plan shows four pole lights in the parking lot providing a minimum of 0.3 foot candles over the entire parking lot. Public Transit: Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to an existing or proposed transit route; the requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: the location of other transit facilities in the area; and the size and type of the proposal. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: bus stop shelters; turnouts for buses; and connecting paths to the shelters. Tri-Met was notified of the proposed development but did not provide any comment. The subject site is not served by any Tri-Met bus routes. Therefore no transit improvements are required for this site, apart from standard pedestrian improvements (i.e. sidewalks). FINDING: Based on the analysis above, these specific applicable development review standards are met. D. STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS Street And Utility Improvements Standards (Section 18.810): Chapter 18.810 provides construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. The applicable standards are addressed below: Streets: Improvements: Section 18.810.030.A.1 states that streets within a development and streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with the TDC standards. Section 18.810.030.A.2 states that any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall be dedicated and improved in accordance with the TDC. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 26 OF 38 Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.620.080.A, Tigard Triangle Street and Accessway Standards, requires a Minor Arterial street to have a 70 right-of-way width and 44-foot paved section. Other improvements required may include on-street parking, sidewalks and bikeways, underground utilities, street lighting, storm drainage, and street trees. This site lies adjacent to SW 68th Parkway, which is classified as a Collector on the City of Tigard Transportation Plan Map. At present, there is approximately 30 feet of right-of-way (ROW) from centerline, according to the most recent tax assessor's map. The applicant should dedicate the additional ROW to provide 35 feet from centerline. The applicant's plans show the ROW dedication required. SW 68th Parkway is currently partially improved. In order to mitigate the impact from this development, the applicant should construct 13-foot sidewalks with street tree wells or 9 foot sidewalk with a 4 foot planter strip. The applicant's plans indicate they will remove the existing sidewalk and construct a 9 foot sidewalk and 4 foot planter strip. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.810.030.F states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sacs since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. A barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street by the property owners which shall not be removed until authorized by the City Engineer, the cost of which shall be included in the street construction cost. Temporary hammerhead turnouts or temporary cul-de-sac bulbs shall be constructed for stub streets in excess of 150 feet in length. There are no opportunities for future street extensions through this development. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.810.030.H.1 states that full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography, railroads, freeways, pre-existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. Section 18.810.030.H.2 states that all local, neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15% for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. There are no opportunities to extend the public street system due to existing development to the south and east. Grades and Curves: Section 18.810.030.N states that grades shall not exceed ten percent on arterials, 12% on collector streets, or 12% on any other street (except that local or residential access streets may have segments with grades up to 15% for distances of no greater than 250 feet). Centerline radii of curves shall be as determined by the City Engineer. SW 68th Parkway does not exceed 12% grade along this frontage, therefore the criterion is met. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 27 OF 38 Block Designs - Section 18.810.040.A states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. Block Sizes: Section 18.810.040.B.1 states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: • Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; • For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. • For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. No new streets are proposed with the proposed development of the existing lot. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Section 18.810.040.B.2 also states that bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is not possible. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. The site is located on SW 68th Parkway, which is designated for bicycle lanes in the Transportation System Plan. The proposed project will contribute to implen1entation of the lanes on SW 68 Parkway. As a full street connection is provided by SW 68 Parkway, this standard does not apply. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.810.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. There is no minimum lot size in the C-G zoning district. The lot depth is 160- feet at its greatest extent and 344 feet wide. The lot size and shape are consistent with the lot size and shape standard. Lot Frontage: Section 18.810.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley. In the case of a land partition, 18.420.050.A.4.c applies, which requires a parcel to either have a minimum 15-foot frontage or a minimum 15-foot wide recorded access easement. In cases where the lot is for an attached single-family dwelling unit, the frontage shall be at least 15 feet. The subject property has 344 feet of frontage on SW 68th Parkway, consistent with the lot frontage standard. Sidewalks: Section 18.810.070.A requires that sidewalks be constructed to meet City design standards and be located on both sides of arterial, collector and local residential streets. Private streets and industrial streets shall have sidewalks on at least one side. The applicant's plans indicate they will be removing the existing sidewalk and constructing a 9 foot sidewalk with a 4 foot planter strip, thereby meeting this criterion. Sanitary Sewers: Sewers Required: Section 18.810.090.A requires that sanitary sewer be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains in accordance with the provisions set forth in Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 1996 and including any future revisions or amendments) and the adopted policies of the comprehensive plan. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 28 OF 38 Over-sizing: Section 18.810.090.0 states that proposed sewer systems shall include consideration of additional development within the area as projected by the Comprehensive Plan. There is an existing sewer in 68th Parkway. The applicant is proposing to construct a lateral to serve this development. Storm Drainage: General Provisions: Section 18.810.100.A requires developers to make adequate provisions for storm water and flood water runoff. Accommodation of Upstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.0 states that a culvert or other drainage facility shall be large enough to accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside the development. The City Engineer shall approve the necessary size of the facility, based on the provisions of Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). There are no significant upstream drainage areas that would contribute to this site as the adjacent, upstream property is developed with its own private storm system. Effect on Downstream Drainage: Section 18.810.100.D states that where it is anticipated by the City Engineer that the additional runoff resulting from the development will overload an existing drainage facility, the Director and Engineer shall withhold approval of the development until provisions have been made for improvement of the potential condition or until provisions have been made for storage of additional runoff caused by the development in accordance with the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary and Surface Water Management (as adopted by Clean Water Services in 2000 and including any future revisions or amendments). In 1997, Clean Water Services (CWS) completed a basin study of Fanno Creek and adopted the Fanno Creek Watershed Management Plan. Section V of that plan includes a recommendation that local governments institute a stormwater detention/effective impervious area reduction program resulting in no net increase in storm peak flows up to the 25-year event. The City will require that all new developments resulting in an increase of impervious surfaces provide onsite detention facilities, unless the development is located adjacent to Fanno Creek. For those developments adjacent to Fanno Creek, the storm water runoff will be permitted to discharge without detention. The applicant's engineer has proposed constructing an on-site detention pond in order to meet this standard. Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways: Bikeway Extension: Section 18.810.110.A states that developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the City's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. 68th Parkway is a designated bicycle facility. There are no bike lane markings on the roadway currently. Cost of Construction: Section 18.810.110.B states that development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions, and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements. The applicant will need to contribute funds for the future striping of the bike lane along SW 68th Parkway. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 29 OF 38 The amount of the striping would be as follows: • 300 feet of 8-inch white stripe, at $2.50/If $750.00 • 8 Mono-directional reflective markers @ $4.00/ea $ 32.00 • 2 Bike lane legends @ $175/ea $350.00 • 2 Directional mini-arrows @ $100/ea $200.00 $1,332.00 Minimum Width: Section 18.810.110.0 states that the minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. Minimum width for two-way bikeways separated from the road is eight feet. SW 68th Parkway is classified as a Collector, requiring a 6 foot bicycle travel lane. Utilities: Section 18.810.120 states that all utility lines, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface mounted transformers, surface mounted connection boxes and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above, and: • The developer shall make all necessary arrangements with the serving utility to provide the underground services; • The City reserves the right to approve location of all surface mounted facilities; • All underground utilities, including sanitary sewers and storm drains installed in streets by the developer, shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of the streets; and • Stubs for service connections shall be long enough to avoid disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. Exception to Under-Grounding Requirement: Section 18.810.120.0 states that a developer shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding costs when the development is proposed to take place on a street where existing utilities which are not underground will serve the development and the approval authority determines that the cost and technical difficulty of under-grounding the utilities outweighs the benefit of under-grounding in conjunction with the development. The determination shall be on a case-by-case basis. The most common, but not the only, such situation is a short frontage development for which under-grounding would result in the placement of additional poles, rather than the removal of above-ground utilities facilities. An applicant for a development which is served by utilities which are not underground and which are located across a public right-of-way from the applicant's property shall pay a fee in-lieu of under-grounding. There are no overhead utilities in the vicinity of the proposed development along the SW 68th Parkway. The proposed utilities have been designed to be consistent with the undergrounding provisions of this standard. ADDITIONAL CITY AND/OR AGENCY CONCERNS WITH STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS: Traffic Study Findings: A Transportation Impact Study was prepared for this project by DKS Associates, dated July 2004. Sight distance and access were addressed in this report and discussed in more detail in this staff report under Section 18.705. The report evaluates traffic operations at the intersections of 68th Parkway/Highway 99 and 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street. The engineer states that additional traffic from the proposed project combined with other added traffic will not degrade traffic operations at these intersections below the City's standards. The trips gene[ated by this project added to the existing trips do not warrant a signal at the intersection of 68 Parkway/Atlanta Street. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 30 OF 38 Left turn lane warrants are not met with the new trips and existing trips. However, the engineer recommends a center turn lane in order to provide safer egress from the site. The applicant shall provide a combination of raised median and center turn lane striping for the entire project frontage plus an additional 100 feet minimum to the south. The raised median will provide additional assurances that the one-way only driveways are used as proposed. DKS also analyzed the following key intersections: SW 72nd Avenue/SW Dartmouth SW 68th Parkway/SW Dartmouth The intersections of SW Dartmouth at 68th and 72nd Avenues have been identified as needing traffic signals. As development has occurred in the Tigard Triangle, and where a development introduces additional trips to these intersections, funds have been collected from the developers that will contribute to the future signal installation. The first project to contribute funds to the intersections was the Babies R Us project. A simple formula was established based upon the impact from that development. That project had an impact of 1.1% at SW 72' Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street during the PM peak hour. For that impact, the City Council required the developer to pay funds in the amount of $20,000.00. At the intersection of SW 68t Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street, the impact from that project was estimated to be 0.75%. For this impact, the developer was required to pay $10,000.00. Using this same rationale, a proportionate share has been calculated for other projects in the Triangle, and can be calculated for this project. The DKS report shows that thds project will generate approximately one PM peak hour trip to the intersection of SW 72n Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street. With a total entering volume (TEV) of 2,555 vehicles, the project impact is approximately 0.04%. Therefore, based on simple proportions, the project contribution to this intersection is $712.00. Likewise, the DKS report shows that the project will generate approximately four (4) PM peak hour trips at the intersection of SW 68t Avenue/SW Dartmouth Street. The TEV for this intersection is estimated to be 2660 vehicles; therefore the project impact is approximately 0.11%. Based on the same proportion used in the Babies R Us development, the project contribution to this intersection is $2,005.00. Funds for both intersections must be paid to the City prior to a final building inspection. Public Water System: Tualatin Valley Water District (TVWD) provides service in this area. The applicant indicates they will be installing 2 new fire hydrants and a new domestic water meter with a double check. The applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed utilities to TVWD for review and approval of the water services. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (CWS) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan shall be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the CWS Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant's engineer has provided calculations for an extended dry detention pond for water quality treatment. This pond will also be used for detention. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 31 OF 38 To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages throughout the project and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. In addition, a comment concerning the proposed development by the City Public Works Department identified the potential need for energy dissipaters for creek embankment stabilization at the outfall for the water quality pond and relocated storm line shown on the Site Utility Plan (Sheet C2). This issue must be addressed to ensure stabilization of the embankment and to avoid later sloughing that may adversely impact water quality. Grading and Erosion Control: CWS l esign and Construction Standards also regulate erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per CWS regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The Federal Clean Water Act requires that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) erosion control permit be issued for any development that will disturb one or more acre of land. Since this site is over one acre, the developer will be required to obtain an NPDES permit from the City prior to site work. This permit will be issued along with the site and/or building permit. Site Permit Required: The applicant is required to obtain a Site Permit from the Building Division to cover all on-site private utility installations (water, sewer, storm, etc.) and driveway construction. This permit shall be obtained prior to approval of the final plat. Address Assignments: I he City of I igard is responsible for assigning addresses for parcels within the City of Tigard and within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). An addressing fee in the amount of $50.00 per address shall be assessed. This fee shall be paid to the City prior to issuance of building permits. For multi-tenant buildings, one address number is assigned to the building and then all tenant spaces are given suite numbers. The City is responsible for assigning the main address and suite numbers. This information is needed so that building permits for tenant improvements can be adequately tracked in the City's permit tracking system. Based upon the information provided by the applicant, this building will be a multi-tenant building. Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall provide a suite layout map so suite numbers can be assigned. The addressing fee will then be calculated based upon the number of suites that must be addressed. In multi-level structures, ground level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "1", second level suites shall have numbers preceded by a "2", etc. FINDING: The Street and Utility Improvements Standards have not been met. Provided the applicant satisfies the following conditions, the proposed development would meet the applicable standards. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 32 OF 38 Conditions: • Prior to issuance of a site permit, a Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit is required for this project to cover street improvements and any other work in the public right-of-way. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans shall be submitted for review to the Engineering Department. NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall and the City's web page (www.ci.tigard.or.us). • The PFI permit plan submittal shall include the exact legal name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be designated as the "Permittee", and who will provide the financial assurance for the public improvements. For example, specify if the entity is a corporation, limited partnership, LLC, etc. Also specify the state within which the entity is incorporated and provide the name of the corporate contact person. Failure to provide accurate information to the Engineering Department will delay processing of project documents. • The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. The purpose of this plan is for parking and traffic control during the public improvement construction phase. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. • Prior to issuance of the site permit, the applicant shall submit a suite layout map to Shirley Treat, Engineering Department. If the applicant is not sure how many suites will be used, they must estimate a number. The City will then assign suite numbers and the address fee will then be calculated. The fee must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of the site permit. (STAFF CONTACT: Shirley Treat, Engineering). • Additjonal right-of-way shall be dedicated to the Public along the frontage of 68 h Parkway to increase the right-of-way to 35 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. • The applicant shall submit construction plans to the Engineering Department as a part of the Public Facility Improvement permit, indicating that they will construct the following frontage improvements along SW 68 Parkway as a part of this project: • 13-foot concrete sidewalk or 9-foot concrete sidewalk with 4-foot planter strip; street trees in the planter strip spaced per TDC requirements; streetlight layout by applicant's engineer, to be approved by City Engineer; and 20-foot driveway apron at the north driveway (if one-way access point) and 20-30 foot driveway apron at the south driveway (if applicable). • The applicant shall provide connection of the proposed building to the public sanitary sewerage system. A connection permit is required to connect to the existing public sanitary sewer system. • The applicant shall obtain approval from the Tualatin Valley Water District for the proposed water connection prior to issuance of the City's Public Facility Iprovement permit. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 33 OF 38 • The applicant shall provide an on-site water quality facility as required by Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 00-7). Final plans and calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Kim McMillan) for review and approval prior to issuance of the site permit. In addition, a proposed maintenance plan shall be submitted along with the plans and calculations for review and approval. • The applicant shall provide an analysis regarding the potential need for energy dissipaters for creek embankment stabilization at the outfall for the water quality pond and relocated storm line shown on the Site Utility Plan (Sheet C2). • An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the Public Facility Improvement (PFI) permit drawings. The plan shall conform to the "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Design and Planning Manual, February 2003 edition." • The applicant's plans shall be revised to indicate they will construct a combination of raised median and striped center turn lane along their frontage plus an additional 100 feet to the south. • Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall provide the City with as- built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) 3 mil mylar, 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable, and 3) the as-built drawings shall be tied to the City's GPS network. The applicant's engineer shall provide the City with an electronic file with points for each structure (manholes, catch basins, water valves, hydrants and other water system features) in the development, and their respective X and Y State Plane Coordinates, referenced to NAD 83 (91). • Prior to a final building inspection, the applicant shall complete the required public improvements, obtain conditional acceptance from the City, and provide a one-year maintenance assurance for said improvements. • Prior to final building inspection, the applicant shall pay $1,332.00 to the City for the striping of the bike lane along the frontage of 68 Parkway. • To ensure compliance with Clean Water Services design and construction standards, the applicant shall employ the design engineer responsible for the design and specifications of the private water quality facility to perform construction and visual observation of the water quality facility for compliance with the design and specifications. These inspections shall be made at significant stages, and at completion of the construction. Prior to final building inspection, the design engineer shall provide the City of Tigard (Inspection Supervisor) with written confirmation that the water quality facility is in compliance with the design and specifications. Staff Contact: Hap Watkins, Building Division. • Prior to a final building inspections, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 72 Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of$712.00. • Prior to a final building inspectiop, the applicant shall pay funds to the City for the future signalization of 68 Avenue/Dartmouth Street in the amount of$2,005.00. E. IMPACT STUDY Section 18.360.090 states, "The Director shall make a finding with respect to each of the following criteria when approving, approving with conditions or denying an application:" NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 34 OF 38 Section 18.390.040 states that the applicant shall provide an impact study to quantify the effect of development on public facilities and services. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standard, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Section 18.390.040 states that when a condition of approval requires the transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. The applicant has provided an impact study addressing the project's impacts on public systems. The Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) is a mitigation measure that is required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32 percent of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street s stem. Based on the use and the size of the use proposed, the applicant is required to pay TIF's of approximately $55,822. Final TIF payment will be assessed at time of building permit submittal. Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 percent of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100 percent of this projects traffic impact is $174,537 ($55,822 divided by .32). The difference between the TIF paid, and the full impact, is considered the unmitigated impact on the street system. The unmitigated impact of this project on the transportation system is $118,715. The value of the right-of-way dedications to SW 68th Parkway is approximately: 344.77 lineal feet x 5 feet wide =1,723 square feet @ $15 per square foot = $25,858. The value of improvements to SW 68th Parkway is approximately: Bike lane striping= $ 1,332. Future signalization of 68th and Dartmouth Street= $ 2,005. Future signalization of 72nd and Dartmouth Street= $ 712. The total contributions of this project to the street system is approximately $29,907. The value of the proposed improvements is less than the projected impact. Therefore, the level of exaction meets the test of proportionality. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The City Public Works Department has reviewed the proposal and commented that, although directed closed pipe surface flow may be minimal most of the time due to slippage of the northern bank of Red Rock Creek, perhaps energy dissipaters for creek embankment stabilization should be required. A condition of approval shall require the applicant to provide an analysis of the outfalls for the water quality pond and relocated storm line shown on the Site Utility Plan (Sheet C2). The City of Building Division has reviewed the proposal and note that no issues were evident. The Tigard Police Department has reviewed the proposal and noted that the application did not include a lighting plan. The applicant submitted a lighting plan in a revised plan set (Sheet E.2.0) that shows a minimum 0.3 foot candle light throughout the parking lot. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 35 OF 38 The City of Tigard Urban Forester has reviewed the proposal and commented that only native trees and shrubs (no red maple, etc.) should be used due to the project's close proximity to the Red Rock Creek riparian corridor and perennial stream. The project will be conditioned to include only native plants. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R) has reviewed the proposal and offered the following comments: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD DISTANCE FROM BUILDING AND TURNAROUNDS: Access roads shall be within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. An approved turnaround is required if the remaining distance to an approved intersecting roadway, as measured along the fire apparatus access road, is greater than 150 feet. 2) DEAD END ROADS: Dead end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved turnaround. 3) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the fire code official. 4) ADDITIONAL ACCESS ROADS — COMMERCIAL: Where buildings exceed 30 feet in height or three stories in height shall have at least three separate means of fire apparatus access. Buildings or facilities having a gross area of more than 62,000 square feet shall be provided with at least two separate means of fire apparatus access. Buildings up to 124,000 square feet provided with fire sprinklers may have a single access. 5) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet in height. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. 6) REMOTENESS: Where two access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. 7) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 28 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING' signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more, parking is not restricted. 8) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS WITH FIRE HYDRANTS: Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 36 OF 38 9) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all- weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 75,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. 1o) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. i i) PAINTED CURBS: Where required, fire apparatus access roadway curbs shall be painted red and marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" at approved intervals. Lettering shall have a stroke of not less than one inch wide by six inches high. Lettering shall be white on red background. 12) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is less as calculated using IFC, Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. 13) FIRE HYDRANTS — COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. 14) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C, Table C 105.1. Considerations for placing fire hydrants may be as follows: • Existing hydrants in the area may be used to meet the required number of hydrants as approved. Hydrants that are up to 600 feet away from the nearest point of a subject building that is protected with fire sprinklers may contribute to the required number of hydrants. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by railroad tracks shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants unless approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are separated from the subject building by divided highways or freeways shall not contribute to the required number of hydrants. Heavily traveled collector streets only as approved by the fire code official. • Hydrants that are accessible only by a bridge shall be acceptable to contribute to the required number of hydrants only if approved by the fire code official. 15) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. 16) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly 17) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of a fire department connection (I-DC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. FDCs shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. 18) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 37 OF 38 19) KNOX BOX: A Knox Box for building access is required for this building. Please contact the Fire Marshal's Office for an order form and instructions regarding installation and placement. SECTION IX. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 12, 2005 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 27, 2005 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. AAp e�al: The decision of the Director (Type II Procedure) or Review Authority (Type II Administrative Appeal or Type III Procedure) is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the notice of the decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS AT 5:00 PM ON APRIL 26, 2005. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon at (503) 639-4171. /GaryApril 122005 PREPARED : Pagenstecher DATE Associate Planner • (77R4 APPR• ED BY: is ar H.�B rsdorff April 12, 2005 ATE Planning Manager i\curpin\gary\site development review\sdr2004-00012(cascade veterinary clinic)\sdr2004-00012 decision.doc NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SDR2004-00012/CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PAGE 38 OF 38 1 aw.> .. CITY of TIGARD GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM I— ; S.W.CORONADO VICINITY cn a ST „iiiii,A .: �■ SDR2004-00012 ■■� SLR2004-00025 �� �� . VAR2005-00004 .....,...„,,, VAR2005-00005 )\ 1.. % : eMlNI S CASCADE VETERINARY ---\\ , 2\ ______ ■ REFERRAL CENTER 7IWA 0o S.W. / `:`� \\\`� y. Mi1. R.' , t,Mr �\ p se(F eE1p 1 \ fili 1-- 3 IIIIIII6 N 0 100 200 300 400 Feet 1"=311 feet sw..,are -Flj. (I1 City of Tigard I ��� Information on this map is for general location only and -ATLAN_A ST s W should be verified with the Development Services Division. --1 /// 1 __ 13125 SW Hall Blvd / / �Tigard,OR�7223 / Irf (503)639-4171 ht Owww.ci ti rd.Of.US Community Development Plot date: Feb 7,2005;C:lmagic\MAGIC03.APR inlirSi 'J ic 4'} s / : �`- r?'' rid.. 4 fa "'YiE s ' s�s 7 Xg�+..• /,', .,.1 may;' / J. _'��' d , h L r,�R Fa'�K -may/`. L 5{:ii 1;- 1 m, y . . ',..—::''' i-,;:gilittlf...?,,,z-; ; is ,,,i\ ‘-,,/- .• ;I;r'' l 'j � I� �P-gli e-. .rc r. ' I ! 0 x > if Z %il .I f 1 u .wziaw. 1. � 1 `5 Z ty� C r. i ( N�6�1, , GI I \! ; emu -I.`ty i � K 't� ' -,) I .I 16.la _1< z / .Y yFI. iLr` C/ -a Iitea ' ):,aa"1' 1. ‘ ll :\ � \ 6 LL 4 \ 'AAA \\ - r, Mil �`-- Z 5\ \ `` ',\ \ \mod e i 1 u1.i'� 'Alit \\ �� lr -.�-t rl , ell ii.- ---5 hr. • 1" . - \ \ 2' No, \ .., ,. ..-: B _ .7.,. --.. ``` ��• \ . O - \ ilz, lBi `,, `,-.��\t_...-11 ■6 ' - `/ (I1'r OF TIGARD SDR2004-00012/SLR2004-00025/VAR2005-00004 & 5 SITE PLAN (Map is not to scale) N CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. EXHIBIT., Attn: Leonard Lodder, AIA SDR2004-00012 222 Commercial Street NE CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER Salem, OR 97301-3410 Webstar VI, LLC 610 Glatt Circle Woodburn, OR 97071 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY oFnoARo Community'Development Shaping yl Better Community , Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specialist for the City of Tigard;Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: {Check Appropnate Box(s)Below} ❑x NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: SDR2004-000012/SLR2004-00025/VAR2005-00004 & 5 — CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (File No/Name Reference) Z City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B", and by reference made a part hereof, on April 12,2005, and deposited in the United States Mail on April 12,2005, postage prepaid. Liz (Person that P pared Notice) S7Agek. OAF OREGON ) County of`Washington )ss. City of Tigard ) Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the l O ' day of , 2005. OFFICIAL SEAL l' ':. SUE ROSS - _ N NO.375152 OTARY PUBLIC OREGON COMMISSlON NOTARY PU OF DREG I N MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC.1,2007 My COMM' Expires: / v/-01 EXHIBIT.. NOTICE OF TYPE II DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2004-00012 CITY OF TIOARD CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER community[Development Shaping Better Community 120 DAYS = 6/4/2005 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER CASE NOS.: Site Development Review (SDR) SDR2004-00012 Sensitive Lands Review (SLR) SLR2004-00025 Development Adjustment (VAR) VAR2005-00004 Development Adjustment (VAR) VAR2005-00005 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval for a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however, no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two development Adjustments are also requested to reduce the site distance standard from 430 feet to 300 feet, and to reduce the street spacing standard from 200 feet to 138 feet. APPLICANT: Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. OWNER: Webstar VI, LLC Attn: Leonard Lodder, AIA 610 Glatt Circle 222 Commercial Street NE Woodburn, OR 97071 Salem, OR 97301-3410 LOCATION: 11140 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single- family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. SECTION II. DECISION Notice is hereby given that the City of Tigard Community Development Director's designee has APPROVED the above request. The findings and conclusions on which the decision is based are noted in the full decision, available at City Hall. THIS APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. All documents and applicable criteria in the above-noted file are available for inspection at no cost or copies can be obtained for twenty-five cents (25c) per page, or the current rate charged for copies at the time of the request. SECTION III. PROCEDURE AND APPEAL INFORMATION Notice: Notice was posted at City Hall and mailed to: X The applicant and owners X Owner of record within the required distance X Affected government agencies Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON APRIL 12, 2005 AND EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 27, 2005 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. AAp e�al: The Director's Decision is final on the date that it is mailed. Any party with standing as provided in Section 18.390.040.G.1. may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.390.040.G.2. of the Tigard Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business days of the date the Notice of Decision was mailed. The appeal fee schedule and forms are available from the Planning Division of Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Unless the applicant is the appellant, the hearing on an appeal from the Director's Decision shall be confined to the specific issues identified in the written comments submitted by the parties during the comment period. Additional evidence concerning issues properly raised in the Notice of Appeal may be submitted by any party during the appeal hearing, subject to any additional rules of procedure that may be adopted from time to time by the appellate body. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON APRIL 26, 2005. Questions: For further information please contact the Planning Division Staff Planner, Gary Pagenstecher at (503) 639-4171, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. i •"`°"°"°° VICINITY nAP ST ,� ' SDR2004-00012 000,411111 SLR2004-00025 A ..... YAR2005-00004 YAR2005 00005 ,....., . _,,,#) \limo= CASCADE VETERINARY ■ REFERRAL CENTER '1 \ ;iv, ov .: 'I 4414 • 1 N I I I raj al I i P !LJI ' N e ,m MO ao PO r.. / Cl y of Tiyxa 1L7iíi__ - u1 ,r . ", is - y r C S I ! t X �;a I. z r I� —' ti� k, z am Z c 4 ri J',I!d ♦ oat � a cl i R . V t d 1 ir � Qi 04.6 � ski l'ii ,w : • i\\ O, eLL� � :, .4.?,or,v,,,;,, 0....,-, : u_12 17:9,0 1 y4 \--4,--"k\''''',-,;',6-*WV-"‘ ir \-}\- t I1 (ITt OF TIGARD I SDR]004-000 12/SLR2004-00025/VAR2005-00004&5 SITE 1.1J\N (Map IS not to scale( N CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER 1 S136AD-06505 1 S136AD-06502 EX H I B I T. . BANK OF SALEM WAY W LEE PO BOX 847 GENERAL CONTRACTOR SALEM, OR 97308 5210 SE 26TH PORTLAND,OR 97202 1 S 136 DA-00100 1 S 136AD-06503 BENENSON 68TH PARKWAY WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR KEY LLC THE BY RASH#125 37 3116 BY PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM PO BOX 260888 4706 NE GLISAN#101 PLANO,TX 75026 PORTLAND, OR 97213 151360A-00700 1S136DA-02400 HI HAT INC WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC 11530 SW BARBUR BLVD 5210 SE 26TH ST PORTLAND,OR 97219 PORTLAND,OR 97202 1 S136AD-06507 1 S136DA-02600 JHCB PROPERTIES LLC WEBSTAR VI LLC BY BAXTER THEODORE E&JUDY H C 610 GLATT CIR 11460 SW PACIFIC HWY WOODBURN,OR 97071 TIGARD, OR 97223 1 S 136DA-00600 LOUIE STEVEN P TR& LOUIE BEVERLY TR& EL AL 2720 SW 28TH CT PORTLAND,OR 97219 1 S136DA-02301 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN 6900 SW HAINES RD TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DA-02300 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN 6900 SW ATLANTA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-00101 OREGON STATE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'RETIREMENT FUND 11410 SW 68TH PKWY TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-02500 POLLOCK DONALD E 1834 SW 58TH AVE STE 202 PORTLAND, OR 97221 1S136AD-06300 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND, OR 97204 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 30-Dec-04 Y 40114, AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping Better Community I, Patricia L. Luns ord, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Senior Administrative Specialist for the City of Tigard; Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (Check Appropnate Box(s)Below) ❑x NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION FOR: SDR2004-000I2/SLR2004-00025/VAR2005-00004/VAR2005-00005 — CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER AMENDED NOTICE (File No./Name Reference) ® City of Tigard Planning Director A copy of the said notice being hereto attached, marked Exhibit"A", and by reference made a part hereof, was mailed to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit'B", and by reference made a part hereof, on February 8,2005, and deposited in the United States Mail on February 8,2005, postage prepaid. dzel- ,41.} , 9 J-766 (Person t at Pre e STATE OF oGoX ) County of Washington )ss. City of'Tigard ) c)nj /Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ' day of Y� , 2005. OFF'CIAL.SEAL SUE ROSS • v! NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.375152 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC.1,2007 , ' NOTARY '0;LIC OF BEGUN My Co I i :ion Expires: /.) -'/"-cOO 7 EXHIBIT A NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER,VENDOR OR SELLER: THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE,IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. NOTICE OF PENDING LAND USE APPLICATION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CI.� TIGARD OF TIGARD Community Devefopment Shaping A Better Community DATE OF NOTICE: February 8, 2005 FILE NUMBERS: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2004-00012 Type II Land Use Application SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW (SLR 2004-00025 DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENT VAR 2005-00004 DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENT (VAR; 2005-00005 FILE NAME: CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to construct a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two Development Adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. LOCATION: 11140 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. YOUR RIGHT TO PROVIDE WRITTEN COMMENTS: Prior to the City making any decision on the Application, you are hereby provided a fourteen (14) day period to submit written comments on the application to the City. THE FOURTEEN (14) DAY PERIOD ENDS AT 5:00 PM ON FEBRUARY 22, 2005. All comments should be directed to Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner in the Planning Division at the City of Tigard, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. You may reach the City of Tigard by telephone at (503) 639-4171 or by e-mail to Garyp(a�ci.tigard.or.us. ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD IN WRITING PRIOR TO 5:00 PM ON THE DATE SPECIFIED ABOVE IN ORDER FOR YOUR COMMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS THE CITY OF TIGARD APPRECIATES RECEIVING COMMENTS AND VALUES YOUR INPUT. COMMENTS WILL BE CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED WITHIN THE NOTICE OF DECISION. A DECISION ON THIS ISSUE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 18, 2005. IF YOU PROVIDE COMMENTS, YOU WILL BE SENT A COPY OF THE FULL DECISION ONCE IT HAS BEEN RENDERED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BECOME A PART OF THE PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD AND SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: • Address the specific "Applicable Review Criteria" described in the section above or any other criteria believed to be applicable to this proposal; • Raise any issues and/or concerns believed to be important with sufficient evidence to allow the City to provide a response; • Comments that provide the basis for an appeal to the Tigard Hearings Officer must address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity on that issue. Failure of any party to address the relevant approval criteria with sufficient specificity may preclude subsequent appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals or Circuit Court on that issue. Specific findings directed at the relevant approval criteria are what constitute relevant evidence. AFTER THE 14 DAY COMMENT PERIOD CLOSES, THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A TYPE II ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL BE MAILED TO THE APPLICANT AND TO OWNERS OF RECORD OF PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE, AND TO ANYONE ELSE WHO SUBMITTED WRITTEN COMMENTS OR WHO IS OTHERWISE ENTITLED TO NOTICE. THE DIRECTOR'S DECISION SHALL ADDRESS ALL OF THE RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA. BASED UPON THE CRITERIA AND THE FACTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE RECORD, THE DIRECTOR SHALL APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE REQUESTED PERMIT OR ACTION. SUMMARY OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS: • The application is accepted by the City • Notice is sent to property owners of record within 500 feet of the proposed development area allowing a 14-day written comment period. • The application is reviewed by City Staff and affected agencies. • City Staff issues a written decision. • Notice of the decision is sent to the Applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the site; all owners of record of property located within 500 feet of the site, as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll; any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the City which includes provision for such notice or anyone who is otherwise entitled to such notice. INFORMATION/EVIDENCE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW: The application, written comments and supporting documents relied upon by the Director to make this decision are contained within the record and are available for public review at the City of Tigard Community Development Department. If you want to inspect the file, please call and make an appointment with either the project planner or the planning technicians. Copies of these items may be obtained at a cost of $.25 per page or the current rate charged for this service. Questions regarding this application should be directed to the Planning Staff indicated on the first page of this Notice under the section titled '`Your Right to Provide Written Comments." I .. ... .w.Ca,w,,, YIp1wTY MAP i06/4 sT ' IMM : SDR2004-00012 SLR2004-00025 mom VAR2005-00004 mom mom VAR2005 OOOOS CASCADE VETERINARY �� ■ REFERRAL CENTER 416 A§ 1 \ i II s. 11116513 ST w o`....."....e:. AItMI—A .w. awn wr. n_) / ( r ■■ EL1 S136AD-06505 1 S136AD-06502 EX H I B IT. BANK OF SALEM WAY W LEE PO BOX 847 GENERAL CONTRACTOR SALEM, OR 97308 5210 SE 26TH PORTLAND,OR 97202 1S136DA-00100 1S136AD-06503 BENENSON 68TH PARKWAY WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR KEY LLC THE BY RASH#125 37 3116 BY PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM PO BOX 260888 4706 NE GLISAN#101 PLANO,TX 75026 PORTLAND,OR 97213 1S136DA-00700 1S136DA-02400 HI HAT INC WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC 11530 SW BARBUR BLVD 5210 SE 26TH ST PORTLAND,OR 97219 PORTLAND,OR 97202 1S136AD-06507 1S136DA-02600 JHCB PROPERTIES LLC WEBSTAR VI LLC BY BAXTER THEODORE E&JUDY H C 610 GLATT CIR 11460 SW PACIFIC HWY WOODBURN,OR 97071 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-00600 Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. LOUIE STEVEN P TR& LOUIE BEVERLY TR& Attn: Leonerd Lodder, AIA EL AL 222 Commercial Street NE 2720 SW 28TH CT Salem, OR 97301-3410 PORTLAND, OR 97219 1Si36DA-02301 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN 6900 SW HAINES RD TIGARD,OR 97223 1Si36DA-02300 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN 6900 SW ATLANTA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-00101 OREGON STATE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'RETIREMENT FUND 11410 SW 68TH PKWY TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-02500 POLLOCK DONALD E 1834 SW 58TH AVE STE 202 PORTLAND, OR 97221 1S136AD-06300 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND, OR 97204 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 30-Dec-04 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF A LAND USE PROPOSAL IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED ON THE SITE. In the Matter of the Proposed Land Use Applications for: Land Use File Nos.: SDR2004-00012/SLR2004-00025NAR2005-00004NAR2005-00005 Land Use File Name: CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER I, Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner for the City of Tigard, do affirm that I posted notice of the land use proposal affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) and did personally post notice of the proposed land use application(s) by means of weatherproof posting in the general vicinity of the affected territory, a copy of said notice being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the day of , 2005. 3 Signature of Pers Who Performed Posting h\Iogin\patty\masters\affidavit of posting for applicant to post public hearing doc CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 2004-00012/SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW . (SLR) 2004-00025/DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENTS (VAR) 2005-00004 & 00005 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to construct a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however no work is proposed in the stream or th associated buffer. Two Development Adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. LOCATION : 11140 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1 S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City- wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming , residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, 18.705, 18.725, 18.74:, , 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171 or by email to Garyp(a�ci.tigard.or.us. A copy of the application and all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and the applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. 0 CITY of TIGARD 1. GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM AREAAll°671 N STlip r• F1ED �_ (500') 00" �`� � 6 9 1613011066503 1<,> , FOR: Leonard Lodder ISSINISSISS r RE: I S 136DA, 2600 IMISMS11/11 \\7111111=1111. 1111 Id �p sl36uno16o® Property owner information is valid for 3 months from I ; the date printed on this map. A C m St c. \ 1118SNISSIPS S N` ui A N 0 100 200 300 400 Feet 61360401300 1"=284 feet ill § SW Pr A J4 111 _ City of Tigard Information on this map is for general location only and 'Y I � should be venfied with the Development Services Division. __A A ST S.W 13125 SW Hall Blvd I / h ,_ Tigard.O63 9 7223 (503)639-4171171 A ( http/tifhwr.ciligard or.us Community Development Plot date:Feb 3,2005;C:magicIMAGIC03.APR 1S136AD-06505 1S136AD-06502 BANK OF SALEM WAY W LEE PO BOX 847 GENERAL CONTRACTOR SALEM, OR 97308 5210 SE 26TH PORTLAND,OR 97202 1S136DA-00100 1S136AD-06503 BENENSON 68TH PARKWAY WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR KEY LLC THE BY RASH#125 37 3116 BY PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM PO BOX 260888 4706 NE GLISAN#101 PLANO,TX 75026 PORTLAND, OR 97213 1S136DA-00700 1S136DA-02400 HI HAT INC WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC 11530 SW BARBUR BLVD 5210 SE 26TH ST PORTLAND, OR 97219 PORTLAND, OR 97202 iS136AD-06507 1S136DA-02600 JHCB PROPERTIES LLC WEBSTAR VI LLC BY BAXTER THEODORE E&JUDY H C 610 GLATT CIR 11460 SW PACIFIC HWY WOODBURN,OR 97071 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-00600 LOUIE STEVEN P TR& LOUIE BEVERLY TR& EL AL 2720 SW 28TH CT PORTLAND. OR 97219 1S136DA-02301 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN 6900 SW HAINES RD TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-02300 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN 6900 SW ATLANTA ST TIGARD,OR 97223 1S136DA-00101 OREGON STATE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'RETIREMENT FUND 11410 SW 68TH PKWY TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-02500 POLLOCK DONALD E 1834 SW 58TH AVE STE 202 PORTLAND, OR 97221 iS136AD-06300 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND, OR 97204 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CPO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 30-Dec-04 Jan 31 05 02: 44p Fax 5 0? 390-6501 p. 2 iaait4icuv4 1o:a4 !CAA .7UJ009r t.ILy ul ilisarU �cv�iiv�i t• CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ,Ain.", PLANNING DIVISION crrYOFT1GARo 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD Community r TIGARD, OREGON 97223 skurpirrgA Ottta'07ITIOrgaUtY PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503.684.7297 (Attn: Patt1JPtanning) RIE-QUNT 'OR D.POOT D ROPE;RTY OViNER M " WING LIST Property owner information is valid for 3 months from the date of your request INDICATE ALL PROJECT MAP & TAX LOT NUMBERS (i.e. 1S134AB, Tax Lot 00100) OR THE ADDRESSES FOR ALL PROJECT PARCELS BELOW: ((40 , N c84-±- f4.e,K/.�� , -a ,ofL,P , 7Z" `T.ox I-L.e/t-.oT I S 1361?<a - r'SZ‘e-x-, PLEASE BE AWARE THAT ONLY 1 SET OF LABELS WILL BE PROVIDED AT THIS TIME FOR HOLDING YOUR NEIGHBQRtiOOD MEETING. After submitting your land use application to the City, an the pro ect tanner has reviewed your application for completeness, you will be Notified by means of an i er to obtain your 2 final sets of labels. 2 fnal_sets of bels need to be placed on envelopes with first class letter-rate postage on the envelopes In th rm of postage sta ps (no metered envelopes and no return address) and (The esubmitted to Ci for th _purpose of providing notice to proerty owners of the proposed land use appl►cati he decision. The 2 sets of envelopes must be kept separate. The person listed below will beeat -to pick up and pay for the labels when they are ready. NAME OF CONTACT PERSON L.ot--i.,6,KQ k /- ►-De-P. PHONE: / a3—3D,A3-66 FAX: /5 D3—pia --65D/ This request may be mailed, faxed or hand delivered to the City of Tigard. Please allow a 2-day minimum for processing requests. Upon completion of your request, the contact person will be called to pick up their request that will be placed in "Will Cal,' by their last name, at the Community Development Reception Desk, The cost of processing your request must be paid at the time of pick up, as exact cost can not be pre-determined. PLEASE NOTE: FOR REASONS OF ACCURACY, ONLY ORIGINAL MAILING LABELS PROVIDED BY THE CITY VS. RE-TYPED MAILING LABELS WILL BE ACCEPTED. Cost Description: $11 to generate the mailing fist,plus$2 per sheet for printing the list onto labels (20 addresses per sheet). Then,multiply the cost to print one set of labels by the number of sets requested. li *EXAMPLE/Tr **COST FOR THIS REQUEST ** 4 sheets of labels x$2./sheet=MOO x 2 sets= S16.00 / sheet(s)of labels x$7Jsheet=$4g x L sets= 4 JL. •, • sheets of labels x$2/sheet for interested parties x Z se15= $ 4.00 sheet(s)of labels x$2 heel for interested parties=$. x c ' GENERATE LIST = $.11.R4 GENERATE LIST = .. _, TOTAL = $31.00 �/,> TOTAL = V� . i1 Jan 31 05 02: 44p Fax 50? -390-6501 p. 1 • r • • • STUDIO FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL A R CHI TE CT URE Date: January 31, 2005 To: Patty in Planning Pages: 3 (incl. cover) City of Tigard Project: Cascade Veterinary Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd Referral Center Tigard, OR. 97223 Project No. 2004-10 Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 CC: • RE: Request for 500-foot Property Owner Mailing List Comments: Transmitted by: Leonard Lodder, AIA IeonardCa?studio3orch itecture.com If you have received this transmittal in error please call our number listed below. • 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301 T 503-390-6500 F 503-390-6501 www.studi o3orchitedure.com Aj CITY OF TIGARD 2/3/2005 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 9:33:04AM - ^. Tigard,Oregon 97223 mak ._.1 (503) 639-4171 Receipt #: 27200500000000000434 . Date: 02/03/2005 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid LANDUS Land Use Misc. - 17.0000 @$1.0000 100-0000-438000 17.00 Line Item Total: $17.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No.Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check STUDIO 3 ARCHITECTURE,INC CAC 1427 In Person 17.00 Payment Total: $17.00 cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 1S136DA-02600 WEBSTAR VI LLC 610 GLATT CIR WOODBURN, OR 97071 APPLICANT MATERIALS PRE-APR HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223-8189 a ,►t 503.639.4171/503,684.7297 CITY OF TIGARD OREGDN LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION File# Other Case # Date By Receipt# City Urb �I Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ''Sensitive Lands Review (I, II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment (IV) ❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) Site Development Review (II) ❑ Home Occupation (II) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) LUCA I ION WHERE PROPOSED AU I IVl i Y WILL OCCUR(Address if available) I!1140A.X LC) NU\� �,�a-�, T��_0 7Zz5, OK. g (51,412 - 472Ccc ZON'NG ULASSIHUA I ION PHONE NL, r fvJ. gel Older €I - 01 PRIMARY CD AC I PERSON Ln•e)L7 194.k. �� • ago • 6Sc0 {At:aG'i Ls;r more Tfhc'1 Drie) TeS-R. 1 G l o C LT �t � \/ D , �. 9707( PHONE NU / r� e?A ss so3 7A( OIb *when the owner and the applicant a-e different people, the applicant must be purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. Theners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. ..et I I �' i S THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: ♦ If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Sign re Date Ap cant/Agent/Representative's. Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date • PRE-APP.HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION 411110 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223-8189 IE1 VET) T*. 3. 39.4171/503.684.7297 OCT 2004 CITY OF OREGON Ciry ARD LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION PL4NNINr,°F,T1GARD File# jD R a o04-pcx)1 Other Case # s Date lOp.o) o- By CAS Receipt# .3.0u { -`I(F D'-{ City X Urb Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) ❑ Conditional Use (Ill) Ej Sensitive Lands Review (I, II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment (IV) ❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) CZ Site Development Review (II) ❑ Home Occupation (II) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACl IVI I Y WILL OCCUR(Address it available) I AX MAP& I AX LU I NUS. - 026C0 l O l AL TIE SIZE ZONING CLASSII-ICA I ION Q TEIZ G�1�IL�,Troc�t, = l .ZZ�tcras APPLICANT" \Yg T1�Cc [1 LLn !`�Al INC;ADDRESS/CITY/Sl Al E/Li NOICTN\VG/54P d�F1GE CdKK - to G L,ATT CI(Zc.LE, NvcovP.;tA04.1, oR ,7o7 I —PHONE NU. FAX NU. 50; '8t of tfSt 01' PRIMARYIM CONTACT PERSON PHONE NO. t—r A•liNRO 446. . ��4 . (o ff PROPER I YOWNNEER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) MAILI�t�'AUUKESS/( FATE/LIPL 1 D ff<Tt•1\N'e* -F(GP_ \'dKK - !o 10 G Gt ICG L>. Won?t=4-1K0 , C7K �7O t PHONE NO. FAX NO. 73 . . 8t d l 55 of 58 . *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The ners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) ITECang, A New VF1T '1 JA ( '?f ti.(1ST� GL(►.1(� ��I-ry t; 5. ._ tAha -tfoK .ee.)rp Pt-��1��to t.�rut�E x aa��ccw.1 Tt raJ E I1L.)t25 ��JkkG�,,Sz���uir�t[" APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Sig ture Date 1 D 1 Orx:>=17 Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Dat 1-ec)..1ni-lo pee_ STc-112t0 3 .6.11aGkFITCGru(Zc� 22Z GOu•twkP�G t..(_. Sr. pJE 5PG.1 lam. •"›'Z3o1- 3#Ic Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date CITY OF TIGARD 10/20/2004 A 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 12:07:05PM Tigard,Oregon 97223 4 II (503) 639-4171 Receipt #: 27200400000000004604 Date: 10/20/2004 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid SDR2004-00012 [LANDUS] SDR Under$1,000,000 100-0000-438000 3,536.00 ' SLR2004-00025 [LANDUS] 50%Joint App Fee 100-0000-438000 966.00 Line Item Total: $4,502.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check STUDIO 3 ARCHITECTURE,INC CAC 1393 In Person 4,502.00 Payment Total: $4,502.00 STUDIO 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. 1393 222 COMMERCIAL ST.N.E. SALEM,OR 97301 96-8/1232 PH.503-390-6500 / !�- Date ( !�% x § 1--q -71&.eIR.L). 1 $ 4.9 o of ::: Dom 8 o.,.;r... ® A wizar Branch 1.800-895-3345 rroria... wcb.com WEST COAST BANK For \ \A iG.l4L c. -- cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 PRE-APR HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OR 97223-8189 > l l 503.639.4171/503.684.7297 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION File # Other Case # Date • By Receipt# City Urb Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR 'Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Zone Change (Ill) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (IV) ❑ Planned Development(Ill) ❑ Zone Change Annexation (IV) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑ Sensitive Lands Review (I, II or III) ❑ Zone Ordinance Amendment (IV) ❑ Historic Overlay (II or III) ❑ Site Development Review (II) ❑ Home Occupation (II) ❑ Subdivision (II or Ill) LOCAL ION WHERE PROPOSED AC Hy'rY WILL OCCUR(Address it available) 1 tl(MA o s� ! '- r ' c I17a. - dZ 1 O 1 AL SI I E SIZE ZONING CLASSIFICAl ION 6-6 APPLICANT* MAILING AUURECl /Sl LI l PHUNEtp 5e PRIMARYON.t E 41R5 155 . 2k,1 , oI51 ONE NO. LX0146.g.9 Le a. . .. 5c '. !' . �5cc PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list it more than one) 11 /ZTP`VT'�..t..I�. MAILI � ��rP -' CL) (p o *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be pap purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. TheLucvners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) ge;;I►A F_ r ,d66d�LA'S �1T � t t. 3r 4 5161 NT 121 STD � 5-�.1tD�u2+0 IN. Tt7� j. 70� . 03D. I4 .1 44J1? ruuwl AC�FY� Sa.G,�Oen 5- 9.d4Z.AD tLL TdC., . 1n5. 03 . F4.3 APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signatu e Date l .5I Z65 • resentative's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date CITY OF TIGARD 2/2/2005 A 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2:07:53PM ,i,a Tigard,Oregon 97223 - _ (503) 639-4171 Receipt #: 27200500000000000426 Date: 02/02/2005 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid VAR2005-00004 [LANDUS]Admin Variance 100-0000-438000 246.50 VAR2005-00004 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 36.50 VAR2005-00005 [LANDUS]Admin Variance 100-0000-438000 246.50 VAR2005-00005 [LRPF]LR Planning Surcharge 100-0000-438050 36.50 Line Item Total: $566.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID AcctJCheck No.Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check STUDIO 3 ARCHITECTURE INC CAC 1425 In Person 566.00 Payment Total: $566.00 STUDIO 3 ARCHITECTURE INC. 1425 222 COMMERCIAL ST.N.E. SALEM,OR 97301 PH.503-390-6500 96-8/1232 1 Date ©I/Sy.0=>5 1 // N Ij7ert6;i ('i�`tl �p��t® $ 6. eia Aare �.,:,.. D.�.1�.on i r e.o�. Y Keizer Branch 1-800-895-3345 +�• wcb.com WEST COAST BANK For ' T _hLA5c�.>."ygT114°S*�r?�$Rr'"a'T.'.%�4.' ' _`.'s____--V1 i ..�ew. iue giAldlt--,,a, of -""—..rr InfE f3 ._ :its_'T�cf'�-1�"9t=Rre"�?y�'-.'__�y�i'C•'w+5_"_ _ ..__- cReceipt.rpt Page 1 of 1 10/16/2004 10:10 5039810158 tlwLL 24 5l 1M1L I MLNV rfAuc U4 rD' EBSTAR VII, LLC CLARKIL NORTHWOOD OFFICE PARK-610 GLATT CIRCLE Imo°TRIFI2TT P AT*ACM INCIUnrrsAmWOODSURN,OREGON 97071 GC wcu.dw• N WT EMI/ PICWD NOIIYAAD CAIOLYII 1i1+G11.3 TELEPHONE:( )9014155 FAX:(503)9111$153 October 18, 2004 To Whom It May Concern: Webstar VI, LLC authorizes Studio 3 Architecture, Inc to act as it's agent with respect to the design and development review process for the improvements proposed to the property at 11140 SW 68th Parkway,Tigard,Oregon 97223. OW LC Robert LE• e Managing ember 10/18/2004 12:32 5039810158 ENGLE E, SCHMI_TM=,tN PAGE 02 1liv/'1 �" U Wssnington County,Oregon 2004 06 16'2004 02.52:26 PM -0 t D0 Cra•1 hn•r k ORi1NVWALO 8493g t1o.p0 10.00111.00 ST0.00 tbek 00.Tow•t)1lAo ' 1."/ 0 n►t x a,c THIS SPACE RESERV 1111111IIIIiIJIJ!IIIIII1JIIIII1IIIII1llIIt! ootstas2ow ooaaYoozooze I.J.ryM•n.on Din ctor of AS, n,.nt and Taxation and G..dno o C.un ,.^'� -0r y Ci.i thelett in�.n County t5•:: '..- �'o0on d.n«.by cMrry leer the rknln tn.trum•nt o!�,,1�.,.�.»� wltl 117 n.edeee.nd Kondoe to tao Dow.•! x �t nc..N or•.r.cwn1Y ',::i•r Jerry It Hanson Photor elollinnent rind T•..tlen, . ~ I After recording return to: E.Orflor•County Clerk Webster VI. LLC W=61"C__.1 ,02 9767/ Until a:.harts is requested all tan statements shall be sent to the blowing address: Webstar VI, LLC bio Cjaft Grc,4 ik) he ,c e 4?e7/ : • ,:A►. WASH4NGTON COUNTY REAL PROPERTY TRANS R TAX Fife No.: 7034-361226 (GlM) w ... S� a8.eo f - 1' " !�'.'•` FEE PAID DA Date: August 04, 2004 -.44.-. l k STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Donald E Pollock, Grantor, conveys and warrants to Webstar VI, LLC, a Oregon Limited Liability Company, Grantee, the following described real property free of liens and encumbrances, except as specifically set forth herein: Parcel 2, PARTITION PLAT NO. 2000-025, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon. This property Is free from liens and encumbrances, EXCEPT: 2004-05 taxes a lien due Q but not yet payable. Premises are within the boundaries of the Tualatin Valley Water z District and are subject to the levies and assessments thereof.Statutory powers and assessments of Clean Water Services. Easement recorded October 11, 1968 inBook 720 O page 532. Agreement recorded October 26, 1984 In fee number 84042244. Easement U recorded January 17, 1986 in fee number 86002742. Easement recorded August 24, /— 1990 fee 90045866. lL 1. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements, if any, affecting title, which may appear in the public record, Including those shown on any recorded plat or survey. Page 1 of 2 10/16/2004 12:32 5039810158 ENGLE & SCHMIDTMAN PAGE 113 11111111111111111111111 200a-94936 APN:R2093438 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.:7034-361226(WM) -continued Date:08/04/2004 THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN This INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. The true consideration for this conveyance Is $667,500.00 this deed is given in connection with a 1031 exchange. (Here comply with requhemen of DRS 93.D30) Dated this I day of 20 1 )11/11,/° i2j1/1 Donald E °Hock STATE OF Oregon s. County of Wicbi This instr rn cwas acknowledged before me on this ! day of 1 , 20 6 by Donald E. PoNock as Donald E. Pollock of Donald E. Pollock,on behalf of the Dvf►aid E. lock. Notary Public for Oregon D My commission expires: y— — Cr OFFICIAL SEAL ANNR R SAVARIA NOTARY INUILANOREGON ♦ 00MI181S10ON NO.378567 MY 0OMM41i08 txNllee A►RIL i,200e Page 2 of 2 STUDIO A R C H I T E C T U R t LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To: City of Tigard Planning Division Date: October 20, 2004 Project: Webstar VI, LLC Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223-8189 Project No. 04-10 Transmitted VIA: ■US Mail Messenger Overnight Other ECourier Copy Date Description 3 Statory Warranty Deeds 3 List of Addresses for Neighborhood meeting let L/o 6v 11-4 Special Instructions: Please note that we discovered the enclosed information was not included in the package submitted today. Transmitted By: Leonard Lodder leonard Ccastud io3architecture.com cc: 222 Commercial Street NE Salem, Oregon 97301 tel 503-390-6500 fax 503-390-6501 www.studio3architecture.com AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHuOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: 'hTHE:APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF TIGARD A'COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME PROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE, TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION,THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT & COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: 1, L ip Loweee_ being duly sworn, depose and say that on the . day of �k7ts. 20 I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at(or near) 1114 g4 C,.w.[.o ee- . a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to aid persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at with postage prepaid thereon. gnat n e presence of a Notary Public) POSTING: I, 4...'....c:4.iIAJ lL7 , do affirm that I „at<(represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed l +kJELez wt£r.JT affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently re ig stered) It 1 4c 4sidu and did on the 17 day of l'TE..I1-te12., 20 p personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a 19 t/ t application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 1114 o Qcaeau.sIc„- T'i�.,c�lp �t2 _ (state location you posted notice on property) gnature presence of a Notary Public (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF C9 -poi, ) County of ) ss. (?)-(;'.6e4.) /Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the 4A. day of , 20o 6 . OFFICIAL SEAL LUCIE DAVIS NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ----;;���i� `h:g COMMISSION NO.376349 /7`GCG� lly • MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JANUARY 14,2008 NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON My Commission Expires: Applicant, please complete the information below: NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Address or General Location of Subject Property: Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): h:Vogin\pattylmasters\affidavit of mating-posting neighborhood meeting.doc ,60410,0 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The following notice shall be read to attendees at the beginning of a neighborhood meeting. This meeting is regarding (project name) iC TLc na � T. �Frca1'rc�S located at t l o )— d_I40 Pl-_>2e.��A�r and is being held as required by The City Of Tigard development review process. The purpose of this meeting is to inform neighbors of the project as currently planned. This meeting is not a decision forum and is not to approve or disapprove the project in whole or in part. It is to share information regarding the project and to solicit constructive input from neighbors and affected property owners. Application for the project being discussed here has not yet been submitted to the City. Therefore, the project will be at various stages of planning and some details may not be available at this time. Property owners of record within 500 ft. should have received a list of frequently asked questions along with the notice of this meeting. This meeting is not attended by City staff in order to encourage dialog between the developer and affected neighbors. Your comments and questions will be taken down and submitted with the application for consideration by the City planning staff. Property owners within 500 ft will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. For questions regarding the development review process, please contact the City of Tigard Planning Department. For project details, you will need to contact the developer. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 STUDIO ARCHITECTURE September 16, 2004 Webstar VI, LLC 1 1 140 68th Parkway Tigard, OR 97232 Re: NEW FACILITY FOR PORTLAND VETERINARY SPECIALISTS 11140 68' PARKWAY,TIGARD, OR Dear Interested Party: Webstar VI, LLC, the owner of the property located at 11140 68th Parkway, Tigard, OR 97232 is considering proposing a new facility for Portland Veterinary Specialists at this location. Prior to applying at the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Monday, October 4th, 2004 at 10:OOAM West Coast Bank 11675 SW Pacific Hwy. Tigard, OR Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 503.390.6500 if you have any questions. Sincerely, • / r Leonard Lodder, AIA Architect 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301-3410 T:503.390.6500 F:503.390.6501 www.studio3architecture.com STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The following notice shall be read to attendees at the beginning of the neighborhood meeting. This meeting is regarding NEW FACILITY FOR PORTLAND VETERINARY SPECIALISTS located at 11140 68TH PARKWAY,TIGARD, OR, and is being held as required by the City of Tigard development review process. The purpose of this meeting is to inform neighbors of the project as currently planned. This meeting is not a decision forum and is not to approve or disapprove the project in whole or in part. It is to share information regarding the project and to solicit constructive input from neighbors and affected property owners. Application for the project being discussed has not yet been submitted to the City. Therefore, the project will be at various stages of planning and some details may not be available at this time. Property owners of record within 500 ft should have received a list of frequently asked questions along with notice of the meeting. This meeting is not attended by City staff in order to encourage dialogue between the developer and affected neighbors. Your comments and questions will be taken down and submitted with the application for consideration by the City planning staff. Property owners within 500 ft will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. For questions regarding the development of the review process, please contact the City of Tigard Planning Department. For project details, you will need to contact the developer. ., . _ CITY of TIGARD r.,--- _ , - ___......_.., ____. 01 r E 7-1- , 1... i , _ _ _ / SEOCIRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM 1 -, , AREA 11101/IFIEN) , i _-----'4i 1 --//r,,, ..,,i,• ' , t, i 1 -r-------3 (500) ST ...) ..,-,..-.1- ii„. .4*.‘44; ;...--- ,,,,,,,,,,v, e-,_., 0, ! 1 >7 .---" -' .. .. ,4,,,,,,..:t,,,,,,44-14 k.,,,,.-4..:,,,,,,o....,..,,,,,,te."::; rt_ • - ,.. Z.:,P)444,0'.&t•NPA'1...'-:.?,,,,-,,..57,,,,-,,,,,,,,,.4,1;,,t,.., , ,," .....- --• ':' ,V,*?'''''.44.itif 7...___________1 6..ii .'..-3-',, 4,. 1...;.-,•?t-3,,,,.:."-Pit1.1,i,,,:p.....:1...4.1, .....o3,...,Ott 0,,,,,- t:1,4_,,,,,,,E,',.-‘,',,,, ,i,,, ..____ _ s- ----1\ -- CP V ,., .:t,.,.;-.- ...;. .,1-.-t; f t.-- 7:*-T, 1 4; 1'.;' :;?!.;.`;f:•!;f.7,14.A*4&;15tz.,.,?!?4; FOR: Leonard [odder 1— /\.. 1; s•-•-?-;' -,-;,...-,e,7;',3 .vr,,,,,,..e...t4,. _ , , I -'1,:ti-.;--,,,,,,,-;' ';- =;,--. T.J:4:."';',74. --.;;T.,..,•;.„;.,..zIk. . :,-1,, ,,. .,..0,,;,-„, ,:,.., , , . i. e,,-;a-2' [ .F_., ,';, 41'iyt.194,6i4v,g -- - .47.1.4,,t-Aff,:;,. __. ,- RE. I S136DA, 2600 , , ,,..I.4 ,,„-,. ..,,,,,,,. . -1*-7,v,,,,,,,E4..;.,,,,,, ,-; , 1 / 1 zj 7 „., I I Z"7""/ \ I \ -. , --__ . A, „.. ' 3,,,-` '''''*--, '.' ''..'3 (--- i - • 1,.,,,,/, Z mnempvel; . / 1, , Property owner information ,,,, • I /1 — is valid for 3 months from .. ' g Isawaltlill , — the date printed on this map. , 5 ' , / ., 1. j , , , I i', ,// 4: ' 1113111111eMa ' •Z' el / ,i , Z —/ ; \ ; I 1-7 i , < / \----illri+3'r' _,.. 4,,,.-- ,,,,, •,.„'''.. I .__ ';I ',-,,`,'-',,,,.-4±, ,,:i:•!:','-,,,Afe,- ,,l',#-.,,, ,, \ ,IN;\;.,:.;-.N''''';;;. ''''','''''',."',..I'',;,,...T1Y-%',., ,•,,L,'_,-, ', ,.., ,,,:„.:, ,,-,1 / , _ . L - ' ''' , if'i'.."''C'Ar'itc•4000060V, ' .", ' , Cl) , A , .P-,•-24 ".-;„ y N . , • ,. / o too 2c0 3,10 400 Feet . '' .'...... .d "''' 1 '';':,;' 101- I— 1.-- - . _ ___ . I --7'''..4. 44°.,iy.,'-'-';',-,,,',,,....--i.' Y$4,.',,;,,,';''.L .4--7'...-7''.-- ;-' .7°' "44C.4P:c• 'X''',,a0i'-.A- , ':ii.?.,VIA',Am'rt •:-:1::,-,.'T'',..F.,,,...f.,:V.,:::'..Y -,''' .4.*)..kqe,oft,:-!!.-4,..-if,r• , . __, ....., 4,1 .i*?'„-4,..'„,„e=,.„,i0,..,?,,-,A, I ave PA ''‘'... 1,,a,irtinA,trr,,,,,i ,,i,,''' ..".q!:.,414,R,„„i'et,,, ,44 „,*.u.'.....,..,.4.,,,r,,-, ,,- , .f.,,,.,:,.., .,:,,,t.,,A,14,-,:w. ,.. ... • _______L_ r- - Aidyil. .. ..s,..w.. .,,,,,,,, . ...%.,,,,,,,, .,,,, ,„ . ,. ...4,4,4,,,,,,,i, ,,,-,,,, ,,, ,,i ..., ,L., .•,.,•.„ :_,,,,, .- , -Lksr-t00,,,,..r.,A, City of Tigard li,,,i-4,44--.-:,, ,4,--7.-.,-.4.-i-j, , 40.fiV"2.-..'4.,A,P',' 2',"`sor-,4tr, .''''--', 1- ''.• -1‘T''''i "' -Z3„,:".A:?--,;"--Pir"4. -,..",,., g.%,.,, , '------- , t '444,-..„,,,,,--.. '" 4, ,,c.k'.?1,,.•:-,,,,tt&', .--.L,,, .ir-, . i '-:-1;•,.,-v,V,-.., -* ' InformatIon on tills map Is for general 1r:cation only and ,;,..-'," ..*: i ',.;•:‘.. ..,.. - '-.:',L.-4`..,.•.;.‹.-- 0:-• "71.0 -,'":- L-.,._ .. -,^.-__,. should be yenned with Fe Devciapment Services Mimeo - _ ,,i.airw .L.c,4 .L..`., 447. _.'. f` ST SW 13125 SW liall 81vd -iei ., F . -1 7gard.OR 87223 _ , 1 t / 1 ' (503)539;4171 1 . [ - li 1 , ; _I 1 i------1 , . 1 I ,!. ,..__.____ 1 II;___i Community Development Plot date:Sep 15,20t404.17wRC:1Mci afigargicicIMAAGIC03.APR • FREQUENTLY ASKED City of Tigard NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING QUESTIONS Shaping t "nt by What Is The Purpose Of This Neighborhood Meeting? The purpose of the meeting is to allow the prospective developer to share with you what they are planning to do. This is your opportunity to become informed of their proposed development and to let them know what issues or concerns you have in regard to their proposal. What Happens After The Neighborhood Meeting? After the neighborhood meeting, the prospective developer finalizes their submittal package (often taking into account citizen concerns) and submits an application to the City. Sometimes it takes a while before the developer's application is ready to submit, so there could be several months between the neighborhood meeting and the submittal of an application. Once an application is submitted to the City, Staff reviews it for completeness. Once an application has been deemed complete, the formal application review begins. It takes approximately 6-8 weeks from the time the application is accepted for a decision to be made. Many types of applications require a public hearing at which citizens are given the opportunity to provide comments or concerns. For all types of applications, property owners within 500 feet of the subject parcels receive notice of the public hearing (if applicable), notice of the decision, and are given the opportunity to appeal the decision. What If The Proposal Presented At The Neighborhood Meeting Is Not What Is Actually Submitted? Applicants are not required to submit exactly what was presented at the neighborhood meeting if it generally follows the type of development proposed. This provides for the opportunity to address the neighborhood issues and address other changes necessitated by the development or staff. If the • project is entirely different, a new neighborhood meeting would be required. In any case, notice of decision is sent to property owners within 500 feet of the proposed development allowing them the opportunity to appeal. How Do I Know What Issues Are Valid? A decision is reviewed based on compliance with the Tigard Development Code. Review the development code to familiarize yourself with what Is permitted and what may not be permitted. A copy of the development code is available for viewing at the Tigard City Library or a copy may be purchased at the Community Development Services counter. You may also contact City Planning staff and ask what the standards are for a specific issue. Be prepared, however, that you may not LIKE all the standards, but at least you know what they are. If a development meets the code standards, it can proceed. K • a e t I lea,* 1 4 u 1 OBS �, • 41 ASSIS �� r - sis ante , e rt e � o en-en •can CI ! le�' is f , 4 ;v :}'` R..�W'.z� .-�. •t , ..1. -Laa y�+ ... ,,,,AI; j: °u ,�Qst ion.tin articu a ro os . l ejo owLnt;s t t t >+nose'q s la: .res� ra . a.,nw.a....,.. i:,curpin;julia`r STUDIO ARCHITECTURE September 20, 2004 Webstar VI, LLC 1 1 140 68'h Parkway Tigard, OR 97232 Re: NEW FACILITY FOR PORTLAND VETERINARY SPECIALISTS 11140 68T" PARKWAY,TIGARD, OR NOTICE OF MEETING CHANGE Dear Interested Party: Webstar VI, LLC, the owner of the property located at 11140 68'h Parkway, Tigard, OR 97232 is considering proposing a new facility for Portland Veterinary Specialists at this location. Prior to applying at the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Monday, October 4th, 2004 at 6:00PM Landmark Ford 12300 SW 68th Tigard, OR Please notice that this supersedes the notice mailed to you on 09/17/2004 Please notice this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 503.390.6500 if you have any questions. Sincerely, I .�e"ftsw `nL.'‘" Leonard Lodder, AIA Architect 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301-3410 T:503.390.6500 F:503.390.6501 www.studio3architecture.com STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The following notice shall be read to attendees at the beginning of the neighborhood meeting. This meeting is regarding NEW FACILITY FOR PORTLAND VETERINARY SPECIALISTS located at 11140 68Th PARKWAY,TIGARD, OR, and is being held as required by the City of Tigard development review process. The purpose of this meeting is to inform neighbors of the project as currently planned. This meeting is not a decision forum and is not to approve or disapprove the project in whole or in part. It is to share information regarding the project and to solicit constructive input from neighbors and affected property owners. Application for the project being discussed has not yet been submitted to the City. Therefore, the project will be at various stages of planning and some details may not be available at this time. Property owners of record within 500 ft should have received a list of frequently asked questions along with notice of the meeting. This meeting is not attended by City staff in order to encourage dialogue between the developer and affected neighbors. Your comments and questions will be taken down and submitted with the application for consideration by the City planning staff. Property owners within 500 ft will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. For questions regarding the development of the review process, please contact the City of Tigard Planning Department. For project details, you will need to contact the developer. ' " _"- - � I 1 CITY o f T I G A R D _ _ , 1_ --- — /t_ -- ___ _ 1 /,_" _ `, (�, i i ocanrn c r+rnnusrioe srsrrM . e AREA NOUFIm� ' -7— ` e9 " I — (50O')5T I 7� 1 y' ‘14 s 'e 0.k1 i , , ' ` 44" f~ FOR: Leonard Lodder 4K ,&. /\\\'). \ / l� ' , uwY1NM ;. - i ,,,,, 's 0 r v�ism.1'a`r3F .A,..a /77 \ , , ' � ' , ,,,� RE: I S 136DA, 2600 I j noeuwea 1 `\ I f Property owner information ! 'w1tM10" Ais valid for 3 months from i ' /'\ \' r the date printed on this map. 1 11131416911410 <. :1_,. -- mow«ue / . / S,W. ed ir , ,,,,,,\ ! i i -,-?*,,,,,r•.t.•..,.',.',, ;r:3-.5-.5..v..-..:4 r. ',, ';\ ', H --�_-_-_ ,'y` r�any` , " -,M --_._.....�' i 4 Hai € i - aitc( I�" NA i3" wy ,'.. -.k'uM, '4\A i -s�`'k \w l IIJJ it 44 r� r ,t c ' ll a too aoo 30o aoo Feet , ., �4,,�� t S >< F_..t•1i 1�r t IJ] )! i•=26t feet v ,L r r .� Yn ?1 fy 1, h�k A r ya d �4i 1 1f y P`x t.t'-tt''-ttt-Y./ i . _,,,- . F we , City of Tigard r—- . �'- t �,,.,--.-���...��� (_ tr�tcamauon an Ibis r p 1s for canary local2ln o+ar and j ._ r 1 '� —= ST = _ , sh xdd be verified with Development 5eb;1�0 isicn �1 ii/�' I - S.W. 13125SW Mi161W r ! r—" 1:. .. .1 ___.---} ___ ---_- - TIg�N.OR B7223 I I I �__ ._�1.—._ (-r E0316344171 —_..._f— -..._... ._._�. ..._�._k-.___._.1 _.._._S__ - .__- I ;_ _. ___.—�__J. __-...- -. -_ .1_ _. _ Community Development I Plot date:Sep 15,200;C:lmagiclMAGIC03.APR das.�1- ^•f I�� FREQUENTLY ASKED City of Tigard NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING QUESTIONS s Community t om gy What Is The Purpose Of This Neighborhood Meeting? The purpose of the meeting is to allow the prospective developer to share with you what they are planning to do. This is your opportunity to become informed of their proposed development and to let them know what issues or concerns you have in regard to their proposal. What Happens After The Neighborhood Meeting? After the neighborhood meeting, the prospective developer finalizes their submittal package (often taking into account citizen concerns) and submits an application to the City. Sometimes it takes a while before the developer's application is ready to submit, so there could be several months between the neighborhood meeting and the submittal of an application. Once an application is submitted to the City, Staff reviews it for completeness. Once an application has been deemed complete, the formal application review begins. It takes approximately 6-8 weeks from the time the application is accepted for a decision to be made. Many types of applications require a public hearing at which citizens are given the opportunity to provide comments or concerns. For all types of applications, property owners within 500 feet of the subject parcels receive notice of the public hearing (if applicable), notice of the decision, and are given the opportunity to appeal the decision. What If The Proposal Presented At The Neighborhood Meeting Is Not What Is Actually Submitted? Applicants are not required to submit exactly what was presented at the neighborhood meeting if it generally follows the type of development proposed. This provides for the opportunity to address the neighborhood issues and address other changes necessitated by the development or staff. If the • project is entirely different, a new neighborhood meeting would be required. In any case, notice of decision is sent to property owners within 500 feet of the proposed development allowing them the opportunity to appeal. How Do I Know What Issues Are Valid? A decision is reviewed based on compliance with the Tigard Development Code. Review the development code to familiarize yourself with what is permitted and what may not be permitted. A copy of the development code is available for viewing at the Tigard City Library or a copy may be purchased at the Community Development Services counter. You may also contact City Planning staff and ask what the standards are for a specific issue. Be prepared, however, that you may not LIKE all the standards, but at least you know what they are. If a development meets the code standards, it can proceed. • 'tow' � 1 f 4 s r 1 i 1 . < ir!i �fY:! r„T.: ; r e d tto d C4 C Ev e I emen . et 1 GI liras 0 Ine 1� is .� �� t i- ' t (!i4(11RI1. 'fig,' I0 1 i+ -- _�_ t 11 dC P a 0 ow '4 j I ' [). oil ;. rlcurpl nljulia\cifi nfo2.doc • STUDIO MEETING REPORT Purpose of Meeting: Mandated Neighborhood Meeting Present at Meeting: Ken Triplett, Webstar VI, LLC ARCHITECTURE Clarke Berryman Webstar Vl, LLC cORPONA T E Leonard Lodder, AIA Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. Ken Lee Adjacent Property Owner Dick Aanderund Interested party Landmark Ford, Conference Room Location: 12300 SW 68th Parkway, Tigard, OR Date: October 4, 2004 Project Veterinary Specialists Clinic Project No. 2004-10 1 . The meeting was called to order at approximately 6:00 PM 2. The "Statement of Purpose" notice was read to the attendees as prescribed by the City of Tigard. 3. An overview of the proposed development is presented and an opportunity is provided for questions from the floor. 4. Questions were raised about the type of materials that were required for the cladding of the exterior of the building. Reference was made to the color and materials board showing that the materials selected did not include any of the materials proscribed by the Design Review Standards. 5. A question was also raised concerning the percentage of frontage. It was noted that the building was stretched out along the frontage to exceed the minimum 50% requirement. 6. There were no other questions raised and the meeting was adjourned. 7. This information is believed to be accurate. Please notify Studio 3 Architecture within 14 days of this report if any clarification is required. Distributed to: Report Completed by: Leonard Lodder,AlA Page 1 of 1 222 Commercial St NE Salem Oregon 97301 T 503-390-6500 F 503-390-6500 www.studio3architecture.com r K( It / ,+-/2cinel-. =m Pam(. )*h /04/7 f-s1 or' • 5� � �`� rr Prcki6ravIctiwuvi 5S3- 228-7S 1 f Lecr.1:66.0 \--e)1019COP 3�o • 6sao C°A y1M 44 so 3-'Mb -806 a AFFIDAVIT OF AILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: 5.1-1E:APPLICANT.1S:REQUIRED TO;fviAJLTHE-CITY OF TIGARD A`COPY-OF•THE 1 NEIGHBORHOOD`MEETING'NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME".TIME PROPERTY OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE, TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning-Division 1312S SSW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR '9722343189 IN ADDITION,-THEAPPLICANT:SHALL SUBMIT:THIS AFFIDAVIT:& COPIES OF ALL'NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION.` MAILING: I, 60k3.1142-10 L e:WOE-I being duly sworn, depose and say that on the I/4` day of G. pTE-tcc 1L. 20 24 , I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at{or near) 11.14t) 6g CouK.,.. .'. T , - , a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to/said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at :E-tht. , with postage prepaid thereon. 73"( gnat n he presence of a Notary Public) POSTING: I, L._:,.off _ . , do affirm that I rri!represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed 12E,L.tT affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) It t 4 t)4'' '— -_%4 , and did on the I/4-- day of �� r t,i-teLZ, 20 pit personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a 1.9 o 1.J EL. Ou-tF-a-1T'� application,and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 1114J 6 . - P^a`_-L anY ' Tied '2, ef:)n _ (state location you posted notice on property) -16nature presence of a Notary Public ' (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF fJrzz.Za-c2c—J ) County of 7/4.4.,4-‘,7--) ) ss. / Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the day of0-6-o1A-. , 2O `�" - OFFICIAL SEAL ,V` LUCIE DAVIS E `` NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON • \"''x COMMISSION NO.376349 MYCOI M!SSIONEXPIRESJANUARY14,2D0B rLC,u-/ , -) NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON My Commission Expires: Applicant,please complete.the information below: NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Address or General Location of Subject Property: Subject Property Tax Map(s)and Lot#(s): h:lloginlpatty\masters\afidavit or marling-posting neighborhood meeting.doc 1S136AD-06505 1S136AD-06300 BANK OF SALEM PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC PO BOX 847 COMPANY SALEM, OR 97308 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND,OR 97204 1S136DA-00100 1 135AD-06502 BENENSON 68TH PARKWAY WA /LEE KEY LLC THE GENE ONTRACTOR BY PROVIDENCE HEALTH SYSTEM 521 E 2 PORTLAND,OR 97213 RTLAND,0 97202 1S136DA-00700 1 S136AD-06503 HI HAT INC WA W LEE JERAL 11530 SW BARBUR BLVD CON R PORTLAND,OR 97219 5210 t "TH RTLAND, 97202 1 S 135A D-06507 1 S 135DA-02400 JHCB PROPERTIES LLC WAY W LEE GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC BY BAXTER THEODORE E &JUDY H C 5210 SE 26TH ST 11460 SW PACIFIC HWY PORTLAND,OR 97202 TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-00600 LOUIE STEVEN P TR& LOUIE BEVERLY TR& EL AL PORTLAND,OR 97219 1S136DA-02301 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN 6900 SW HAINES RD TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-023D0 OREGON EDUCATION ASSN 6900 SW ATLANTA ST TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-OD101 OREGON STATE OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'RETIREMENT FUND 11410 SW 68TH PKWY TIGARD, OR 97223 1S136DA-02600 POLLOCK DONALD E 1834 SW 58TH AVE STE 202 PORTLAND.OR 97221 1 36DA-02500 POL CK D LD E 1834 8TH AVE STE 202 P TLANC, 97221 Nathan and Ann Murdock PO Box 231265 Tigard, OR 97281 Sue Rorman 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Michael Trigoboff 7072 SW Barbara Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 David Chapman 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223 John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpin\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 23-Feb-04 4141)P 441164. CITY OF TIGARD OREGON STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The following notice shall be read to attendees at the beginning of a neighborhood meeting. This meeting is regarding (project name) ?OeTL�1.° \1 T. 9'., T(E_s, located at +en)- 1114 s L-32- P .a.'r and is being held as required by The City Of Tigard development review process. The purpose of this meeting is to inform neighbors of the project as currently planned. This meeting is not a decision forum and is not to approve or disapprove the project in whole or in part. It is to share information regarding the project and to solicit constructive input from neighbors and affected property owners. Application for the project being discussed here has not yet been submitted to the City. Therefore, the project will be at various stages of planning and some details may not be available at this time. Property owners of record within 500 ft. should have received a list of frequently asked questions along with the notice of this meeting. This meeting is not attended by City staff in order to encourage dialog between the developer and affected neighbors. Your comments and questions will be taken down and submitted with the application for consideration by the City planning staff. Property owners within 500 ft will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. For questions regarding the development review process, please contact the City of Tigard Planning Department. For project details, you will need to contact the developer. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 ST3 UDIO MEETING REPORT- - -- -- -- Purpose of Meeting: Mandated Neighborhood Meeting Present at Meeting: Ken Triplett, Webstar VI, LLC A H,T E T RE Clarke Berryman Webstar VI, LLC w a E Leonard Lodder, AIA Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. Ken Lee Adjacent Property Owner Dick Aanderund Interested party Landmark Ford, Conference Room Location: 12300 SW 68th Parkway, Tigard, OR Date: October 4, 2004 Project Veterinary Specialists Clinic Project No. 2004-1 0 1. The meeting was called to order at approximately 6:00 PM 2. The "Statement of Purpose" notice was read to the attendees as prescribed by the City of Tigard. 3. An overview of the proposed development is presented and an opportunity is provided for questions from the floor. 4. Questions were raised about the type of materials that were required for the cladding of the exterior of the building. Reference was made to the color and materials board showing that the materials selected did not include any of the materials proscribed by the Design Review Standards. 5. A question was also raised concerning the percentage of frontage. It was noted that the building was stretched out along the frontage to exceed the minimum 50% requirement. 6. There were no other questions raised and the meeting was adjourned. 7. This information is believed to be accurate. Please notify Studio 3 Architecture within 14 days of this report if any clarification is required. Distributed to: Report Completed by: Leonard Lodder,A!A Page 1 of 1 222 Commercial St NE Salem Oregon 97301 T 503-390-6500 F 503-390-6500 www.studic3architecture.com tr - c ►J Vi z-.- + IME- c /0tir � � If( rZ- 7) A cm t4 053- 22.8-7S7 I Le>019E ? LiM,CiJ so 3 -q?)t -e o6 B 1/17/05 HOWARD CLINIC CONCEPTUAL QUANI'I'I'Y UNIT RATE TOTAL 9,370 DIVISION I GENERAL CONDITIONS SF 1000 GENERAL CONDITIONS 8 mons 13,000.00 104,000 1005 BUILDING PERMITS BY WEBSTAR 1008 PERFORMANCE BOND 0.007 N/A 1010 FIRE&EXTENDED COVERAGE S 0.003 BY WEBSTAR 1030 FIELD ENGINEERING 1 LS 3,800.00 3,800 1400 CONC./SOILS TESTING BY WEBSTAR $OQ DIVISION 2.5 SITEWORK EXCAVATION/UT ILFIES 2I00 EXCAVATION @ PARKING/PAVING//STRIPING 16,000 SF 3.40 54,400 2110 BLG.EXCAVATE 880 CY 12.00 10,560 2120 BLDG.ROCK 440 CY 22.00 9,680 2130 BLDG.BACKFILL 1 IS 2,500.00 2,500 2140 FTGS.EXCAVATE 1 IS 2,000.00 2,000 2150 SIDEWALKS-PREP. 3,275 SF 1.60 5,240 2160 WATER 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000 2170 RAIN DRAINS 540 LF 10.00 5,400 2180 SANITARY SEWER 1 LS 3,000.00 3,000 2600 SIDEWALKS 3,275 SF 3.50 11,463 2622 TYPE C CURB 325 LF 12.00 3,900 CURB&GUTTER 35 LF 20.00 700 2750 IRRIGATION/LANDSCAPING 18,000 SF 2.00 36,000 2800 GARBAGE ENCLOSURE 1 EA 2,500.00 2,500 2850 BIKE RACKS 1 EA 750.00 750 149,093 DIVISION 3 CONCRETE ',ZOO FOOTINGS/WALLS/SLAB I LS 75,000.00 75,000 ,,00 2ND FLOOR CONCRETE I,500 SF 2.50 3,750 78.750 DIVISION 4 MASONRY 4025 MASONRY BLOCK @ DOG WARD 888 SF 10.00 8,880 4030 GLASS BLOCK 112 SF 15.00 5,040 4050 CULTERED STONE 350 SF 23.00 8,050 21,970 DIVISION 5 METALS 9,370 SF 2.25 21,083 21,083 DIVISION 6 WOOD&PLASTIC 6102 WOOD FLOOR SYSTEM 2,300 SF 6.00 13,800 6104 FLAT-ROOF STRUCTURE 4,300 SF 6.00 25,800 6105 FLAT-ROOF STRUCTURE(RADIUS) 2,900 SF 12.00 34,800 6106 STAIRS 43 LF 120.00 5,160 6150 WALL ASSEMBLY(EXT./INT.) 1 LS 72,000.00 72,000 6160 WALL ASSEMBLY(EXT./INT.)(RADIUS) 1 LS 65,000.00 65,000 6170 SUN SCREEN @ EAST ELEV. 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 6220 MILLWORK-WINDOW SILL 100 LF 7.00I 700 6410 CABINETWORK-LOWERS 239 LF 150.00 35,850 6420 CABINETWORK-UPPERS 183 LF 100.00 18,300 6425 RECORDS STORAGE 1 IS 2,200. 2,200 6430 CABINETWORK-RECEPTION 1 IS 15,000.00115,000 Z93,610 DIVISION 7 THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION 7100 INSULATION WALLS-EXT. 12,940 SF 1.20 15,528 7110 INSULATION WALLS-SOUND 15,568 SF 0.30 4,670 7120 WATERPROOF CONC.WALLS 1 IS 3,745.00 3,745 7200 SIDING/EXT.TRIM 1 LS 24,650.00 24,650 7250 SOFFIT PANELS/COLUMNS(MDO) 608 SF 4.00 2,432 7275 INSULATION-ROOF 7,200 SF 1.15 8,280 7300 MEMBRANE ROOFING 7,200 SF 2.00 14,400 7400 DECK MEMBRANE 800 SF _ 3.00 2,400 7610 METAL WALL PANELS(RADIUS) 1,922 SF 5.00 9,610 7620 FLASHINGS/SHEEFMETAL 470 LF 15.00 7,050 1/17/05 HOWARD CLINIC CONCEPTUAL QUANTITY UNIT RATE TOTAL 9,370 7630 FLASHINGS/SHEETMETAL-RADIUS 292 LI' 35.00 10,220 102,985 DIVISION 8 DOORS,WINDOWS AND GLASS 8100 DOORS/FRAMES/HARDWARE 63 EA 1,000.00 63,000 8360 STOREFRONT WINDOWS 2,096 SF 28.00 58,688 121.688 DIVISION 9 FINISHES 9250 GYP.WALLBOARD-WALLS 33,284 SF 1.75 58,247 9260 GYP.WALLBOARD-WALLS(RADIUS) I0,792 SF 1.90 20,505 9300 ACOUSTICAL CI:ICINGS 9,370 SF 2.20 20,614 9310 PLASTIC LAM.WAINSCOTI: 704 SF 6.00 4,224 9650 FLOORCOVERING 9,370 SF 3.35 31,390 9651 RUBBER BASE 3,073 LI' 1.40 4,302 9900 PAINTING 9,370 SF 2.00 18,740 158,022 DIVISION 10 SPECIALTIES 10440 DOOR SIGNS 63 EA 15.00 945 10520 FIRE EXT./CABINETS 6 EA 220.00 1,320 10800 'TOILET&BATH ACC. 5 EA 650.00 3,250 5,515 DIVISION 12 FURNISHINGS 12500 WINDOW TREATMENT EA 2.10 0 Q DIVISION 15 MECHANICAL 15400 PLUMBING 1 LS 43,000.00 43,000 15500 FIRE PROTECTION SF 2.50 0 15550 MEDICAL GASES BY HOWARD 15600 HEATING&VENTING 1 I.S ####### 170,000 Z 13,000 DIVISION 16 ELECTRICAL I Ls ####### 109,000 16300 SECURITY SYSTEM 1 1S 1,064.00 1,064 110"064 DIVISION 17 TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPUTER/TELEPHONE PRE-WIRE EA 125.00 BY I10WARD $Y HOWARD 17100 TOTAL DIRECT COST 1,383,579 1 383,579 18000 OVERHEAD/PROFIT 103,768 18500 UAB0.1'IY INSURANCE 7,437 20000 T/W TOTAL 1,494,784 $ 159.53 /lea rrotM __________..._____. mpacf Se [ Design Review Submission CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER 1 1 140 SW 68TH PARKWAY TIGARD, OR 97223 .7. ''',:),it ey. ; +• I •- 4 C • , i_. .s lie:6f • ,. l� �� FOR: WEBSTAR VI, LLC January 31 , 2005 STUDIO 3 RECEIVED FEB 0 7 2005 CITY OF TIGARD ItiMN ISONNE NELRING ARCHITECTURE INCORPORATED 222 COMMERICAL ST. NE SALEM, OREGON 97301-3410 STUDIO ARCHITECTURE3 " ` ° " ' ° " " ` ° Project Description: Project: Veterinary Specialists Clinic Project Address: 11140 SW 68th Parkway Tigard, OR 97232 Applicant_ Webstar VI, LLC Date: October 18, 2004 The project involves developing a strip of land along the east side of 68th Parkway, within the Tigard Triangle for use as an Veterinary Specialists Clinic. (Boarding of animals will not occur at this site). The first phase of development anticipates 9,512s.f of new building, (7,917s.f. on the Ground floor and 1,595s.f. on the Second floor). The design anticipates future growth of the facility of an additional 2,800s.f.. The site consists of about 1 .22 acres in a narrow strip along 68th Parkway south of Highway 99. A drainage or creek meanders along its northern edge at a depth of approximately 8'-0" to 10'-0" below the general grade. The site is zoned C-G for General Commercial, and abuts other land to the east, southeast, zoned MEU. 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301 T 503-390-6500 F 503-390-6501 www.studio3architecture.com Narrative Description: Tigard Development Code Title 18 Site Development Review Project: Cascade Veterinary Referral Center i Project Address: F 11140 SW 68'h Parkway Ti.ard, OR 97232 Applicant: Webstar VI, LLC Date: January 31, 2005 Tigard Development Code Title 18.360 Site Development Review. 1 The Land Use Permit Application consists of a Type II procedure with application previously filed for the property located at 11140 SW 68'h Parkway, Tigard, OR 97232. 2 A con-current Permit Application is filed for the purpose of requesting two variances, both of which constitute Type II procedures: a. Request variance/adjustment from sight distance standards in TDC 18.705.030.H.1, and b. Request variance/adjustment from minimum access spacing standard in TDC 18.705.030.H.3 Tigard Development Code Title 18.390 Decision Making Procedures. The following addresses the impact of this development on public facilities and services. 3 Transportation System: a. A Transportation Impact Study was commissioned from DKS Associates and their report dated July 2004 is attached as an exhibit to the application. b. The proposed development includes a single point of access and egress to 68'h Parkway. Pedestrian access, bicycle access and vehicular access will all coalesce at this point. c. Impacts on the public transportation system are documented in the above referenced report and it is understood that development will contribute to the funds allocated for traffic control at the intersections of 681h Parkway and Dartmouth Street as well as the intersection of 72' and Dartmouth Street. d. The project includes bicycle parking for at least 3 bicycles adjacent to the front entry point. 4 Drainage System: a. The project includes new impervious areas as follows: i. Parking area: 16,022.35 s.f. ii. Sidewalks: 5,683.51 s.f. iii. Building area: 7,933.33 s.f. iv. Curbs and trash encl: 711 .88 s.f. v. Total impervious area: 30,351 .07 s.f. b. The total area of the site is 53,299 s.f.. The total new impervious area amounts to 56.94%. c. Storm water from the impervious area will be directed into the City's storm water system through a retention pond. Narrative 01-31-2005.doc 1 d. On drawing C2, Keynote la should be ignored. The project will proceed with the upland storm water disposal method indicated as Keynote 1 b. 5 Parks System: a. The parks system will not be impacted by this development. 6 The Water System: a. The building will connect to the public water system for Iwo purposes. The first is to obtain potable water for consumption and cleaning in the proposed building. The second is to obtain potable water for irrigation. b. The impact of water use on this site is expected to be marginal. 7 The Sewer System: a. The building will require a connection to the City's Sanitary Sewer system. It is expected that the size of the connection will be a 4" diameter pipe. 8 The Noise Impacts: a. The noise produced by the new development will be the normal to a typical business function. b. The development will not include long term kennels for animals. Animal stays at the clinic are for short duration. 9 Road widening: a. The pre-application conference notes from Public Works indicate that 68th Parkway needs to be a 70ft. wide right-of-way extending 35ft. from each side of the current center line. The current right-of-way is only 60ft. The developer agrees to convey a dedication of a 5ft. wide right-of-way widening along the entire frontage of the current property. b. It is understood that the current curb to curb width of the roadway meets current City standards so that a half street improvement is not required at this time. Tigard Development Code Title 18.620 Tigard Triangle Design Standards. The following narrative addresses the specific standards contained in Chapter 18.620 of the Development Code. 10 This project will: (18.620.010.B) a. Dedicate a 5 foot strip of property to the City of Tigard along the East side of the right-of- way, (West side of property). b. Connect to public facilities including sanitary sewer, storm drains and water. c. Participates in funding future transportation improvements. d. Includes the following types, areas and percentages of development on the site: Building Footprint 7,933.33 s.f. 14.88% Exercise Yard 818.68 s.f. 1 .54% Concrete Sidewalk 5,683.51 s.f. 5.03% Asphalt paved drives and parking 16,022.35 s.f. 30.06% Landscape 13,263.27 s.f. 24.88% Riparian Zone 11,754.06 s.f. 22.05% Trash Enclosure 266.67 s.f. 0.50% Concrete Curbs 445.21 s.f. 0.84% Miscellaneous 1 1 1.57 s.f. 0.21% Total Site Area 53,298.65 s.f. 1 .22 acres 11 Street Connectivity: (18.620.020) Narrative 01-31-2005.doc 2 The site plan provides point of access to the right-of-way for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. 12 Site Design Standard: (18.620.030) a. The site has an area of 1.22 acres after dedication of the 5 foot right-of-way widening. The frontage along 68' is 344.77 feet. Approximately 28.75 feet of frontage is undevelopable because of impacts from the required riparian zone adjacent to the water course. The project includes provisions for future expansion, particularly on the South end of the proposed building. The length of the building along frontage is approximately 212.62 feet, generating 61.67% frontage. b. The building face is irregular but generally falls between 0 feet and 10 feet of the properly line along the right-of-way. The street front is punctuated with set back windows and doors, includes curved wall and straight wall portions with overhangs, etc. Building surface materials along the street include both by horizontal siding and vertical plank siding. c. The attached Landscape Plan, Ll, shows the extent of landscaping proposal for the site. The landscape design for the front yard setback is designed to meet and Ll standard. The right of way will be improved with a new 9'-0" wide concrete paved sidewalk, separated from the existing curb by a planting strip of irregular width. The width of the planting strip varies depending on the offset distance between the right of way center line and the road pavement centerline. The planting strip includes new street trees at 22 ft o.c.. The applicant may wish to modify the planting plan for street trees to allow a greater spacing with a tree type having a modestly wider habit approaching maturity. d. A 6'-0" minimum wide walkway connects the main entry of the building to the street adjacent to the entry drive. Additional walkways are provided from building exits and staff entry points to either the public sidewalk on the street side or the access drives internal to the site. Although the primary public entry to the building is internal to the site, there are additional staff entry points and exits along the street front. The location of the public entry is designed to reduce the potential for injured and/or traumatized animals from bolting into traffic etc. e. Parking areas are located to the North side and the rear of the building, (principally the rear of the building). Parking area adjacent to the right-of-way does not exceed 6% of the street frontage and is screened by a landscaped area designed to the L-1 landscape standard. Interior side and rear yards are to be landscaped to the L-2 landscape standard. 13 Building Design Standards: (18.620.040) a. The west elevation, (facing the street) has been designed with as much window as possible, given the building program and adjacent function. The building program is principally urgent and acute animal care including surgeries, intensive care units and recovery spaces. Longer term care will not occur at this facility. As such, window distribution and placement is designed to minimize the discomfort of passing pedestrians during the regular operation of the facility. The length of the west face of the building that falls in the 0 to 10'-0" wide zone along the right-of-way is 212.67 ft. The minimum required area of opening along this face, within a height of 3ft. to 9ft. above finished floor is calculated as follows: 212.67 ft. x 6ft. x 50% = 638.01 square feet. The actual area of openings in this zone is as follows: i. 455.58 square feet of window and door opening area facing street. ii. 187.89 square feet of window opening area, more or less perpendicular to the public right-of-way and located close to the corners where they occur. iii. Total area of applicable opening = 643.47 square feet. Narrative 01-31-2005.doc 3 b. The building façade is significantly articulated, with changes in plane and surface texture. c. The roof is extended out over the main entrance to provide weather protection at the entry. d. The exterior cladding materials are indicated on the elevations shown on drawing A3.1 . e. The building design does not rely on the roof compositionally. f. Parapets at roof level changes will be used to screen roof top equipment from view. 14 Signs: (18.620.050) Signage will be designed to meet the standards and area limits specified in 18.780.130C 15 Entry Portland: (18.620.060) Not applicable at this location. 16 Zoning: C-G General Commercial (18.520) a. Chapter 18.130 Use Classifications lists veterinary clinic uses under Office use in paragraph 18.130.020 C.6., and excludes it from the more general reference to "Animal- related" uses in paragraph 18.130.020 C.4.f. b. The particular use of the facility involves a small animal veterinary clinic, which falls under the heading of "Office" as a Permitted use according to Table 18.520.1 . c. The neighboring site to the east is zoned MUE Mixed-Use Employment. d. According to Table 18.520.2 the project meets the Commercial Development Standards as follows: Standard: C-G Requirement Project standard Minimum Lot Size: N/A 53,298.65 s.f. Minimum Lot Width: 50 ft. 344.77 ft. Minimum Setbacks: • Front Yard: 0 ft 0 to 10 ft. per 18.620.030 • Side Yard: 0 ft. • Rear Yard: 0 ft. Minimum Building Height: N/A Maximum Building Height: 45 ft. 26'-2" Maximum Site Coverage: 85% 56.94% Minimum Landscape 15% 24.08% Landscape Area Requirement: 22.05% Riparian Zone 46.93%Total Green Area Minimum FAR: N/A 17 Access/Egress/Circulation: (18.705) a. The project is served with a single access drive fully 30'-0" wide and suitable for simultaneous ingress and egress. The site plan shown on drawing A1.1 includes dimensions of the width of the access roadway at different points on the site showing a minimum of 24'-0" between the face of curbs or the face of a curb and the end of a vehicle parking space. b. A Transportation Impact Study provided by DKS indicates that the City's site distance standard is not met. The report provided by DKS indicates two possible solutions. i. One of these is to move the access drive to the south end of the property. However in a telephone conversation with DKS it was noted that simply moving the access point to another point on the curve would improve site distances to the south but would degrade site distances to the north. ii. The other solution offered involved moving the building to the east and placing the parking between the building and the street. This solution is specifically prohibited by 18.620.030. A.S. Furthermore it ignores the potential impediments to site distances caused by large parked vehicles. Narrative 01-31-2005.doc 4 iii. The principle concern affecting site distance for egress relates to the posted speed limit as it relates to the curve in the road. We recognize the concern however intuitively we expect that development on this site will contribute a traffic calming effect. While this will not fully mitigate concern, we understand that the design guidelines for the Tigard Triangle are directed towards developing an identifiable urban morphology in the core area. In support of pursuing these objectives we request relief to permit the designed access/egress point. 18 Environmental Performance Standards: (18.725) a. Noise: the project site will not produce noise at levels exceeding 40db between the hours of 9:00pm and 7:00am of the following day, or exceeding 50db between the hours of 7:00am and 9:00pm on the same day. b. Visible Emissions: the project will not produce visible emissions other than the emissions associated with normal space heating, cooling and ventilating. c. Vibration: the project will not produce discernable vibrations at or beyond the property line. d. Odors: the project operations will not emit odorous gasses. e. Glare and Heat: the project operations will not produce glare into the open sky or heat at and beyond the property lines during normal activities. f. Insects and Rodents: waste processing and removal operations will be managed to reduce the potential of insect and rodent propagation: 19 Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage: (18.755) The attached site plan shows a 25'-0" wide by 10'-8" deep by 6'-0" high enclosure with gates for storage of waste and recyclables is included at the south end of the site. A service provider letter from Pride Disposal Company, accepting the design and location of the enclosure is included with this application. 20 Off Street Parking and Loading Requirement: (18.765) a. The proposed development includes 9,370 square feet g.f.a. The minimum parking requirement at a rate of 3.3/1000 square feet = 31 spaces. The maximum parking allowed at a rate of 4.0/1000 square feet = 37.48. The actual parking provided in this phase is 37 spaces. The Site Plan, drawing Al .1 delineates the location of the spaces as well as the dimensions of parking stalls and access aisles. Of the 37 spaces, 21 meet the dimensional standards for standard size spaces, including the 2 accessible spaces. The remaining 16 spaces meet dimensional standards for compact spaces and are designated as "compact" on the site plan. Parking spaces are provided with wheel stops to prevent vehicle overhang at landscaped areas. b. Bicycle parking will be provided adjacent to the main entrance for a minimum of 3 bicycle spaces at 2'-0" wide x 6'-0" deep. (See Drawing A1.1, Note 1) c. Loading Space: Although the zoning code does not require a loading space for buildings under 10,000 square feet, space for loading trash is provided in front of the storage facility. Loading space does not constitute a permanent parking space for service vehicles. 21 Sensitive Land Review: (18.775) A "Water Quality Sensitive Areas Assessment" was conducted by environmental technology consultants, a division of Sisul Enterprises. A service provider letter from Clean Water Services, dated Jan 6, 2005 is attached to this application. The report prepared by ETC is included with this application. The limits of the 50 foot wide riparian zone adjacent to the stream bank are identified on the Site Plan, drawing Al.1 . 22 Signs: (18.780) Narrative 01-31-2005.doc 5 A "freestanding" ground based sign designed per section 18.780 is anticipated adjacent to the vehicular entrance. 23 Tree Removal: (18.790) David D Hunter, registered consulting arborist, was retained to prepare a tree inventory for the project, as well as a removal plan and protection plan. The complete report and plan is recorded on drawing T1 attached to this application. Trees with tag numbers 32 and 33 are the only trees which must be removed to accommodate the new development, but these trees are also listed in poor condition by the arborist and do not require mitigation. Drawing T1 includes specific instructions regarding the protection of both on-site as well as off-site trees from the effects of new construction. 24 Visual Clearance: (18.795) Drawing Al.1 shows the location of the visual clearance zones alongside the ingress/egress driveway. 25 Street and Utility Improvement Standards (18.810) a. It is our understanding that a 5'-0" wide right-of-way dedication is required from this project, but that "half street" improvements are not required at this time. b. A traffic study was commissioned for this project. The study carried out and prepared by DKS Associated is appended to this application. Narrative 01-31-2005.doc 6 Service FrcvIckr Letfe rs 12/15/2004 10:38 503625E179 PRIDE DISPOSAL CDMPM PAGE 02/03 *R *1*D*E DISPOSAL COMPANY P.O. Box 820 Sherwood,OR 97140 Phone: (503) 625-6177 Fax: (503) 625-6179 Leonard, I have reviewed your site plan for the Cascade Veterinary Referral Center located on 68th Parkway. Per our agreement, see that the enclosure measures 10 feet deep and the inside measurements of the enclosure measure 20 feet wide.Also,the enclosure includes a full swing gate with lock backs. We look forward to providing service here. If you have any additional questions,feel free to contact me at 503-625-6177 *124. Sincerely, )ct JJA.) Kristin Leichner Pride Disposal Company { 4,,,, 1 .. s C Qof k.. h >t f � z .�--- . t 4, , s l I. • f f qq 33e� cs pp yam,('�l.�`q,t AI. Y^, t 1 7 'Cy ;I L Si rg Gi' iv?c, i 744 rEf ' It's/f"` i.1:I ',,,'a, `�• '. u'• . j I 1 1. ut 1 c g it I.,, f .8 it "r ' `, ,/. :.-J! .1 is--• ;, ._ 1 1 0,f1L 1 r (: 1 '[ `; • • - e lid , 1 i " " % IN a At ••1 : - -- i t .• 1 • i1. /1 1�1 f Ver4��� 7 4 1 ,® 7V_ 4 s; 0 ' i' , I. �t!1� :lo11I ,\ `-ilM•v rr1 I VI II , S: . .'.\ c) • 1 ��, LAC sri illi1 :r., ,1/4.:.._.:.,..... -- 00- . --‘7-I fr.---- !III!' 1 110 ‘'‘. -• . _..-- ' ;1'. 1 1 1. i ,-% :-;z: 'If-, r '' , i j i /( � _` mj' a. r 1 1 Kt 1 / l 10 1 �•� .y I 1 S . Cascade Veterinary Referral Center tl ' 1'aY - for: Webstor Vt, LLC : 3 ;,�,, 111 a0 5W 6e7h Parkway 'ti1� 7: TIGAI 1 OREGON 9722] I •- E0/E0 3S d WdWOO 1VSOdSIQ 31I8d 6LT9SZ9E9S 8E:9T 090Z/St/ZI 01/19(2005 12:13 5039818159 triut_t 6 51..,himlL l n4ry rHl7C U1 Le—..(.. .d � '' Sv3 3fp 61 I File Number 3 re C1eanWater Services f yz69 } Our commltmanl 16 e)ear Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter Jurisdiction City.of Tigard Date January 6, 2005 Map&Tax Lot . 1S136DA02600 Owner Webster VI, LLC Site Address 11140 SW 68th Parkway Contact Address Robert Glatt Circle le Tigard, OR Woodburn, OR 97071 Proposed Activity New Veterinary Clinic Phone (503)981-0155 This form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter In accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards(R&O 04-9). 1 - - -_ - ( YES_ T.. YES NO_ NO Natural Resources 1.Alternatives Analysis ElAssessment(NRA) 1 Required El Submitted I (Sedion 3..02.6) District Site Visit ® ri I Tier 1 Alternatives Analysis illEl Date: December 28,2004 Concur with NRA/or ® ❑ 1 Tier 2 Alternatives Analysis El El submitted information Sensitive Area Present ® ❑ 1 Tier 3 Alternatives Analysis ElOn.site El Sensitive Area Present ® ❑ j Vegetated Corridor P ® Oft-Site Averaging ,..___._._.__..•,_.____.� —_.-._____--- --J Vegetated Corridor _.� .___—___-}Vegetated Corridor ❑ ® Present On-Site El ❑ i Mitigation Required 1-W----id-t-h-OIVegetated _ 50 Feet i On-Site Mitigation ❑ -Corridor(feet) I_ _ __ _-____ I Condition of Vegetated Marginal to Y x l Off-Site Mitigation ❑ Corridor Degraded E __......._.._....__a.__...__._—__-_ I __.__.- 1. i Planting Plan Attached ❑ Enhancement Required ❑ ( �9 IEncroachment into 1 _ { I Enhancement/restoration Vegetated Corridor completion date To be Determined (Section 3.02.4) 1 ,___-_ Type and square Footage i n T---- N None allowed ; Geotechnical Report ' of Encroachment l under this SPL i required Allowed Use II ! f i Conditions Attached Ei n { (Section 3.02 4) ; I , This Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality sensitive areas If they are subsequently discovered on your property. Page 1 of 4 E 1 1 1_:1 5Ei 9E ENGLE & SCHMIDTMAr4 PAGE 02 File Number 12iL( In order to comply with Clean Water Services (the District) water quality protection requirements the project must comply with the following conditions: 1 No structures, development, construction activities. gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Duality, pet wastes,dumping of materials of any kinc, or other activities shall be permitted within the sensitive area which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02.3 2 No structures, development, construction activities. gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, uncontained areas of hazardous materials as defined by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the vegetated corridor which may negatively impact water quality, except those allowed by Section 3.02 4 3. Pnor to any site clearing. grading or construction the vegetated corridor and water quality sensitive areas shall be surveyed, staked, and temporarily fenced per approved plan During construction the vegetated corridor shall remain fenced and undisturbed except as allowed by Section 3.02 5 and per approved plans 4 Prior to any activity within the sensitive area, the applicant shall gain authorization for the project from the Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL)and US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) The applicant shall provide the District with copies of all DSL and USACE project authorization permits 5. An approved Oregon Department of Forestry Notification is required for one or more trees harvested for sale,trade, or barter, on any non-federal lands within the State of Oregon 8. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's)for Erosion Control, in accordance with the CWS Erosion Control Technical Guidance Manual shall be used prior to, during, and following earth disturbing activities 7. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from the District or its designee is required pursuant to Ordinance 27, Section 4.B The District or City/County may require an easement over the vegetated corridor conveying storm, surface water management, and/or sanitary sewer rights to the District or City that would prevent the owner of the vegetated corridor from activities and uses inconsistent with the purpose of the corridor and any easements therein. 9 Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with Section 3 13 of R&O 04-9. 10 Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the greatest extent practicable 11 Removal of invasive non-native species by nand is required in all vegetated corridors rated 'good' Replanting is required in any cleared areas larger than 25 square feet 12. Should final development plans differ significantly from those submitted for review by the District. the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and if necessary, obtain a revised Service Provider Letter Page 2 of 4 01/19/2005 12:13 5039810158 ENGLE & SCHMIDTMAN PAGE 03 File Number �1 tC•� SPECIAL CONDITIONS 13. The vegetated corridor width for sensitive areas within the project site shall be a minimum of 50 feet wide, as measured horizontally from the delineated boundary of the sensitive area 14. For vegetated corridors that are 50 feet wide or less,the entire vegetated corridor shall be equal to or better than a"good'corridor condition as defined in Section 3.02.7, Table 3.2. 1E. Clean Water Services shall be notified 72 hours prior to the start and completion of enhancement/restoration activities. Enhancement/restoration activities shall comply with the guidelines provided in Landscape Requirements (R&O 04-9 Appendix D). 16 Prior to installation of plant materials, all invasive vegetation within the vegetated corridor shall be removed During removal of invasive vegetation care shall be taken to minimize impacts to existing native trees and shrub species 17. Enhancement/restoration of the vegetated corridor shall be provided in accordance with R&O 04-9,Appendix D. 18 Prior to any site clearing,grading or construction,the applicant shall provide the District with the required vegetated corridor enhancement/restoration plan in compliance with R&O 04-9 19 Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with Section 2.11.2 of R&D 04-9. If at any time dunng the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80%survival level. the Owner shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropeate planting opportunity and the two year maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting 20 Performance assurances for the vegetated corridor shall comply with Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2. 21. For any developments, which create multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership, the District shall require that the vegetated corridor and the sensitive area be contained in a separate tract The tract peal shall include language protecting the vegetated corridor and sensitive areas 22. Any water quality swale and detention pond shall be planted with District approved native species and designed to blend into the natural surroundings Page 3 of 4 01/19/2005 12:13 503981015E ENGLE & SCHMIUTMAN PAGE b4 File Number I1 CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON CONSTRUCTION PLANS 23 Final constructktnptana Shall Include lendscape plane. Plans shall include in the details a description of the methods tor removal and control of exotic species, location, distribution, condition and size of plantings, existing plants and trees to be preserved, and installation methods for plant materials. Plantings shall be tagged for dormant season identification, lags to remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes. 24 A Maintenance Plan shall be Included on final plans including methods, responsible party contact information, and dates (minimum two times per year, by June 1 and September 30) 25 Final construction plans shall clearly depict the location and dimensions of the sensitive area and the vegetated corridor(indicating good,marginal, or degraded condition) Sensitive area boundaries shall be marked in the field 26. Protection of the vegetated corridors and associated sensitive areas shall be provided by the installation of permanent fencing and signage between the development and the outer limits of the vegetated corridors Fencing details to be Included on final construction plans. This Service Provider Lytteir la not valid unless CWS-approved fits Dien is attached. Please call (503) 681-5106 with any questions. anion W.Reische Pro(sct Coordinator Environmental Plan Review Cc: Richard Bubtltz, Environmental Technology Consultants Attachments(1) Page 4 of 4 .....•—••• 01/19/2005 12:13 5039810158 ENGLE & SCHMIDTMAN reAt..it rio _ . - . . . . - . 4. a _.i,) e-,t?_A- qua-i Imams i - IS I 3G-3Aot‘on C:II ti 1 , • . 1 f , Approved , ..,Hri Clean Water Services 4 .SVINPIsitV•kt•- \ ''' '‘C S 1 .. .?$:t'a• :.; t . .51612...Pat6 f.e. N't .• ."' -,..1- ..-: ,K • i I-iZ ' t tr I/ •-44A4'. '" I : -.- i' ,.../..1•:.• !.„,7/ _1: d• ...•-•, ....- .4 : .... ... .•.,;- 'l•wl..,‘4' ;. 1 I .. : ' 1 , ...1-'L.k:-...,•••''...-r''''' 4 ;;'', ) /.1+, • ••': 1 , _.i.-- ;t ( .1-1----.1.` . t .. ‘ II. ..-74., -,...-- ,..) . .trt,,,t4o- ,. 4, 1 P 1 ! •.Jai 4 , 4'4 , .1 cei d ..,„ \ , . # 4 ,1 -4-- 1.1 * 1 ..• .44 ! 1 P• r^.4 ' 1 ' . ' .'. - 1 s- C —r_cl i rif ... .r. . . . , .. .. . . ...- .._...,.. t . ,• ,... . t 1111111 .. i16 1-1 r:C 1" - I. 1 ..:(\ /VA. • :." 1, , 1. ..••,-.07.i.Inv° , •...', .....-, ti, „• 4-*L,,•-•-,, -... i,-.:. ! , 10:01111I ...;,.k... / i 1. '. ,• , ! (.6 1 , .. st4 i'', • : 1 '2!!" - , 1 , . 0 - - . •__ 1 i r---"\ J. .., • s. • 4 . - .4.- L 1, . • - — 1 i, ,.,' s ifitgifirr/4•• -1:... i -.;, • i !.; - _ 1‘ 11 'sot •, i 1 4. f • • f 1 r. f 1 .,_. I .till 6 ‘. ;• . ' ---: ' 1 4444,i r. ii 1 P II, •._., • . V ,,. ... II z 1 I I Iv 1 __ .. Mitil____.: I l'' .• / • - n 1 • Ili i' -N,... .1.! gfi ..,P ... .4, , 74,--f, .. . ix, • 5 1 imk cot ...1.1t 1:. ,.1 c .fi, liar., 1 .. „, v... - , it 1 1 I , 2. ... I k; t _ _ ' 1•., 4 .. . .._ , ''' p 4 11 , • fiet'...-; - ..-..IP ., . 1 \ ' 'lc. r • • o :nl. . N--- !) i. • - 4414.4• 4 4-,,,:,-,' -: „ii.,„s,„,- „4- 1 1 c • iligp I. VP ., stitt, :N., 'i' ; I -3 . e ... kill:1k .. 1.it *- • 'I r , , :. .. • i.i .,, , __ "I 4 • 1 11)1 4 ..$'\ ‘.;474‘ • •\ /* i ., . . ‘kt*\ ‘. 1 P 1 tilSBISSE I 61919 \ •41;N,1N ‘\\ t ' I • ."' • .1)4,‘N .w..•••fleed..6•••• ./ !call Iiiltili f?II . El ti tk :dill 1 ii! 4 . \ . e i / ill 1 1,7 i 1 g : I 6 ! f 0 s 1 Cascade Veterinary Referral Center a I ' ' ;: ,,,.. :..f. ;7•:,, i'• • - ?=ba. I for: Webstor VI, LLC • ' it .*!'l '''' 'Ir1010 ''- „ , itii. ., -c 1)1.0 sw 681h forkway ....1 TIGARO,OREGON 97223 1 s ' " ..1;TAIIPALAC) Tv'ciae-El'c. Stu4j 1 Report for Websta r V1 , LLC �0 � a �Ti and Vetinary .c . 4. „„:3, :-,7;,xf. Transportation Impact Study �.,,. ' 99W' + Project 1. Site 11, ATLANTA ST ' a ME Z. E3 AYL•R z r= Prepared by CLINTON ST DKS Associates •RTMOUT il 'pr. TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS July 2004 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS July 15, 2004 Robert Engle Webstar VI, LLC 610 Glatt Circle Woodburn, OR 97071 Subject: Tigard Vet Clinic P/A No. 04118-000 Dear Robert: DKS Associates is pleased to submit this Transportation Impact Analysis for the proposed Tigard Veterinary Clinic, located on 68th Parkway in the City of Tigard. Traffic from the proposed site does not degrade operations at 68th Parkway/ORE 99W and 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street below City level of service standards. However, the current site plan does not provide adequate site distance to meet City standards. Additionally, it was found that the proposed project will generate 4PM peak trips at the intersection of 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street and 1PM peak trip at the intersection of 72m1/Dartmouth Street. It has been a pleasure to work with you. Please let us know if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, DKS Associates A Corporation Car Spring , P.E. Principal , „GiN E � F9 DKS YEARS . 1400 S.W.5-"Avenue Suitend, W �1 Portland,OR 97201-5502 (503)243-3500 (503)243-1934 fax www.d ksassoci ates.com 1 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 2 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 2 PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT 2 CHAPTER 2 6 EXISTING CONDITIONS 6 ROADWAY NETWORK 6 EXISTING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS 7 FIGURE 2-EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUMES 8 COLLISION HISTORY 9 PEDESTRIANBICYCLE 9 PUBLIC TRANSIT 9 CHAPTER 3 10 IMPACTS 10 TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION 10 SIGNAL WARRANTS 15 TURN LANE REQUIREMENTS 15 ACCESS SPACING 15 SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION 15 CHAPTER 4 18 MITIGATION 18 APPENDIX 19 Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 1 P04118-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Chapter 1 Introduction and Summary This report evaluates the transportation impacts of the proposed Tigard Veterinary Clinic located on 686 Parkway between ORE 99W and Atlanta Street in the City of Tigard.The site is currently vacant,but the proposed project would consist of a veterinary clinic approximately 8,500 square feet with approximately 20 employees and 38 parking spaces'. The proposed access to the surrounding street network is via a single ingress/egress point on 68th Parkway. This study focuses on traffic operations at the following intersections: • 68th Parkway/ORE 99W • 68'h Parkway/Atlanta Street In addition,all development within the "Tigard Triangle"(the area bounded by ORE 99W,Interstate 5 and ORE 217)must report the number of PM peak hour trips generated by the site through the following two intersections in order to determine each project's proportionate share of the cost of the traffic signals at these intersections : ■ 68`h Parkway/Dartmouth Street • 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street The study area is shown in Figure 1.Other issues covered in this report include site access,trip generation, site circulation for autos,pedestrians, and bicyclists, sight distance,and parking. Project traffic impacts were evaluated for both the weekday morning(7:00AM to 9:00AM)and evening (4:00PM to 6:00PM) peak periods, when traffic volumes in the study area are highest. In addition to project impacts,added traffic(traffic generated by nearby developments that have city approval)was also analyzed in order to best simulate future traffic operations in the study area.These projects are summarized in the appendix. PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT The traffic added by the proposed project will not degrade intersection conditions at either 68`11 Parkway/ORE 99W or 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street. Both intersections will continue to operate above the City's intersection performance criteria of LOS E2 for signalized intersections. The northbound approach to the 686 Parkway/ORE 99W intersection has queuing issues due to the vertical curve on 68`h Parkway. The proportionate increase in queuing from the site will not significantly degrade the intersection below current operating characteristics. 'Proposed site plan,Webster Group June 21,2004,provide by Leonard Ladder,Studio 3. 2 Tigard Transportation System Plan,DKS Associates,January,2002. Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 2 P04118-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS t NOT TO SCALE Q I- ap > 1 -01111111111111117 u)27:m O 111:11--- 99W Project Site v ATLANTA ST c Q Q Q BAYLOR ST o = _ _ _ _ z I— I— H- I- r— N O 6) N N- O t- CLINTON __ ST ART MOUTH S LEGEND Figure 0-Study Intersection STUDY AREA DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Table 1: Transportation Impact Summary Estimated Net PM Peak Hour Project Trips 16(5 in/11 out) Estimated Net AM Peak Hour Project Trips 28(20 in/8 out) Estimated Weekday AM/PM Peak Hour Project Trips 6 AM/4 PM Through 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street Estimated Weekday AM/PM Peak Hour Project Trips 1 AM/1 PM Through 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street Vehicle Access Points One full access on 68`"Parkway Pedestrian Facilities Existing sidewalks along both sides of 68th Parkway.Some existing sidewalks along Dartmouth Street,72nd Avenue,and ORE 99W. Number of Study Intersections 2 Analysis Periods Weekday AM Peak(7:00-9:00)/PM Peak(4:00-6:00) Nearest Bicycle Route ORE 99W Nearest Transit Stop 68`" Parkway/ORE 99W (approximately 850 feet from the site) Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 4 P04118-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Table 2: Intersection Level of Service Summary—(PM Peak Hour) Type of Existing+ Existing+Project+ Intersection Traffic Existing Project Added Traffic Control Level of Service 68th Parkway/Atlanta All-Way Stop B B B Street Major Street/Minor Street LOS Site Access Unsignalized N/A AIB A/B Level of Service 68th Parkway/ORE 99W Signalised C C C LOS=Level of Service A/A=Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS Project Oriented Transportation Mitigation Several intersection and road capacity improvements were recommended for the study area in the Tigard Transportation System Plan(TSP)3. Many of these improvements are to be funded in conjunction with development and include pedestrian and bicycle amenities as well as automobile capacity enhancement projects. The following improvements(related to the study area)were identified in the TSP. • Add a 2"d westbound left turn lane at the intersection of 68th Parkway/ORE 99W. • Change north/south movements to protected phasing at the intersection of 68th Parkway/ORE 99W. • Install a traffic signal at the intersection of 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street. • Install a traffic signal at 72"d Avenue/Dartmouth Street. • Extend Atlanta Street west to intersect with 72"d Avenue. In addition to the improvements mentioned in the TSP,some project-related mitigation measures include: • Sidewalks should be provided within the site property as well as along the frontage of 68th Parkway and should conform to ADA requirements.4 • The project access point should be a minimum 25 feet wide to accommodate safe ingress and egress to the site. A 36-foot wide access is recommended. The current site plan does not meet sight distance requirements of the City of Tigard for the proposed access location and site configuration. In order to meet the City's sight distance criteria,one option would be to reposition the building toward the east side of the lot.Also,the site access should be moved from the north end of the lot to the south end. 3 Tigard Transportation System Plan,DKS Associates,October 2001. ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities,Department of Justice,January 1998. Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 5 PO4 1 1 8-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Chapter 2 Existing Conditions The proposed Tigard Veterinary Clinic is located on 68th Parkway between Atlanta Street and ORE 99W in Tigard. The site is currently vacant, but the proposed project would consist of a veterinary clinic approximately 8,500 square feet with approximately 20 employees and 38 parking spaces. The clinic is proposed to have one full access on 68th Parkway. In consultation with City staff, the following intersections were selected for capacity analysis: • 68t Parkway/ORE 99W • 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street In addition to the above identified intersections,the following intersections were evaluated to determine the number of project trips traveling through them during the PM peak hour: • 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street • 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street The following sections summarize current traffic and transportation conditions in the study area, with supporting detail (traffic counts and level of service calculations)provided in the appendix. ROADWAY NETWORK Table 3: Existing Roadway Network Roadway Tigard Cross Posted On-Street Sidewalks Bike Classification Section Speed Parking Lanes 68th Parkway Collector 2 lanes 40 mph No Both Sides No Atlanta Street Collector 2/4 lanes 25 mph No East side No ORE 99W Arterial 5 lanes 35 mph No Both Sides No Dartmouth Street Collector 3 lanes 35 mph No No No 72nd Avenue Arterial 2/3 lanes 30 mph No Both Sides No Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 6 PO4 1 1 8-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS EXISTING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS While analysis of traffic flows is useful in attempting to reach an understanding of the general nature of traffic in an area,traffic volume alone indicates neither the ability of the street network to carry additional traffic nor the quality of service provided by the street facilities. For this reason,the concept of level of service (LOS) has been developed to correlate traffic volume data to subjective descriptions of traffic performance at intersections. Intersections are the controlling bottlenecks of traffic flow,and the ability of a roadway system to carry traffic efficiently is nearly always diminished in their vicinity. An intersection's level of service(LOS)is similar to a"report card"rating,based on average vehicle delay. Level of Service A,B and C indicate conditions where vehicles can move freely. Level of service D and E are progressively worse. For signalized intersections,level of service F represents conditions where the average delay for all vehicles through the intersection exceeds 80 seconds per vehicle,generally indicated by long queues and delays. Under this operating condition,delay is highly variable,and it is difficult to estimate average delay accurately because congestion often extends into and is affected by adjacent intersections. Descriptions of levels of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections are contained in the appendix.Level of service E is the City's minimum acceptable service level during peak periods. Intersection turn movement counts were conducted at study area intersections during both the morning (7:00AM to 9:AM) and evening (4:00PM to 6:00PM)peak periods (see appendix for traffic counts). Existing peak hour operating conditions were determined based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Traffic counts and level of service calculation sheets are included in the appendix. The existing study intersection turn movements are shown in Figure 2. All of the study intersections currently operate below the City's LOS E standard based on HCM methodology. The existing study intersection levels of service are shown in Table 4. Table 4: Existing Intersection Performance(AM/PM Peak Hour) Intersection Type of Traffic Existing AM Existing PM Control Level of service Level of Service 68th Parkway/Atlanta All Way-Stop B B Street Major Street/Minor Street LOS Major Street/Minor Street LOS Site Access Unsignalized N/A N/A Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C 68th Parkway/ORE Signalized 18.6 B 0.65 26.5 C 0.83 99W LOS=Level of Service Delay=Average Stopped Delay per Vehicle V/C=Volume-to-Capacity Ratio A/A=Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 7 PO4 1 1 8-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS tEXISTING NOT TO SCALE 00 N -N `r• `" 1m36(44) • ®®4- i384(1944) �► J 112(40) (16)4m.! 4j. (64)6411► zg . fovv 6`]N N \ 7c1Lr EXISTING ` oN \ Alir a" i m®m 4®44(64) Project * im364(260) Site (32)0®� QP Klobo®' ®!! -' " ________7) ,,, VP ATLANTA' ST — c Q Q ¢ BAYLOR ST 0 2 2 2 2 c\i CDao N. co h- r� co co CD co CLINTON_ ST — DARTMOUTH S )1 LEGEND Figure 2 -Study Intersection EXISTING f— -Lane Configuration ID -RightTurnMovement AM/PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ® -Through Movement m -Left Tum Movement AM(PM) -Peak Hour Traffic Volume DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS COLLISION HISTORY Table 5 summarizes the most recent available vehicle collision data at the study intersections over the last three years.'The 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street intersection experienced two crashes during the analysis period,while the 68th Parkway/ORE 99W intersection experienced 15 crashes during the same period. Neither of these intersections have a collision rate over 1.0 per million entering vehicles,the threshold typically used to indicate an unusually high safety related problem. The equivalent collision rates per million entering vehicles(MEV)are shown in Table 5. Table 5: Study Area Intersection Collisions(2000-2002) Intersection 2002 2001 2000 Total Collision Rate/MEV 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street 1 0 1 2 0.11 68th Parkway/ORE 99W 6 5 4 15 0.33 MEV-Million Entering Vehicles PEDESTRIANBICYCLE There are existing sidewalks on 68th Parkway along the project frontage,however no striped bike lanes currently exist. The current cross section of 68th Parkway(43'curb to curb)does allow adequate room for a shared bikeway environment, and would offer the opportunity for striping bike lanes in the future depending on the planned lane widths and whether or not a center left turn lane is needed. Atlanta Street does have some existing sidewalks,but no bike lanes. There are existing sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides of ORE 99W, and intermittently along Dartmouth Street in the vicinity of the project. There are sidewalk facilities along 72nd Avenue,but not currently any bicycle lanes. 68th Parkway,Atlanta Street and 72nd Avenue have all been identified in the TSP Bicycle Master Plan as possible future bike routes6, including delineated striping,although no funding for these projects has been secured. PUBLIC TRANSIT TriMet(the regional transit provider for the Portland area)currently offers 12 fixed routes that serve the City of Tigard. Four of these routes are express routes providing service to Portland and other suburban locations and only operate during the peak periods. Routes serving the study area include Route 78,which is designated as a regional bus route and travels on Atlanta Street before turning south on 68th Parkway and Routes 12,64X and 95X,which all travel along ORE 99W. TriMet also operates a dial-a-ride system that operates on a demand-responsive basis. The nearest bus stop to the site is on Route 12 and is located at ORE 99W/68th Parkway,approximately 850 feet away. ' Oregon Department of Transportation,collision data provided for 2000 through 2002. 6 Tigard Transportation System Plan,DKS Associates,October 2001 Figure 6-2. Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 9 PO4 1 1 8-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Chapter 3 Impacts This chapter reviews the impact of the proposed project on the existing transportation system. The analysis includes assessment of trip generation and distribution,capacity analysis of study intersections with existing and projected future traffic loadings,turn lane needs,access spacing, sight distance,and parking. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Based on information provided by the project applicant,the proposed veterinary clinic would consist of approximately 8,500 square feet of building space and 20 employees. The trip generation for this project was estimated using a trip generation survey of an existing veterinary clinic in the Portland region during the AM(7:00-9:00)and PM(4:00-6:00)peak hours. The trip generation rate for the site was calculated for 20 employees at the site based on information from the project applicant. The survey data was verified with trip generation data based on research conducted by the Institute of Transportation Engineers'(ITE)for similar land use types. Since ITE does not provide data for veterinary clinics in particular, a comparative land use was analyzed, in this case "clinic" (Code 630). Since the surveyed trip rate for the existing veterinary clinic was similar to the ITE clinic trip rate and is a more accurate portrayal of the land use being proposed,it was used to determine trip generation associated with the proposed site. Although the project would generate traffic throughout the day,the weekday AM and PM peak hour were analyzed, since this is when project traffic is generally greatest and when traffic is highest on adjacent streets. The proposed project would be expected to generate approximately 28(20 in/8 out)net new trips during the weekday AM peak hour and 16(5 in/11 out)net trips during the weekday PM peak hour. The estimated trip generation is summarized in Table 6. Table 6: Estimated Project Vehicle Trip Generation Size Trip Peak Hour Trips Land Use (employees) Rate/Employee8 In Out Total AM Peak Hour 20 1.4 20 8 28 PM Peak Hour 20 0.8 5 11 16 Trip distribution was based upon existing travel patterns in the study area and the Metro regional travel demand forecast model. Figure 3 shows the assumed distribution of project traffic on the existing street network. 7 Trip Generation Manual, 7`h Edition,Institute of Transportation Engineers,2003 code 640(Clinic). 8 Based on a trip generation survey conducted at the Veterinary Referral Center of Portland on June 17,2004. Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 10 P04118-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Ct NOT TO SCALE 410% Q I- goo -.NW //ef 1- `° 99w CO 20% IP 35% \d Project , Site 10% ATLANTA ST < > > < < < BAYLOR ST 0 2 2 2 2 2 z F- I- F- I- F- (y O C) co N- N- N- CD CO CD CLINTON ,_ STc. _ — ARTMOUTH 5% 20% LEGEND Figure 3 00%-Trip Distribution Percentage TRIP DISTRIBUTION 4 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS INTERSECTION CAPACITY Study intersection capacity was analyzed for the proposed Tigard Veterinary Clinic during both the AM and PM peak hour. The analysis focused on three operating condition scenarios: • Existing conditions (previous section) • Existing plus Project • Existing plus Project plus added traffic(traffic generated from City approved development) Existing Plus Project Table 7 compares existing intersection operating conditions with and without project traffic.The addition of project traffic does not substantially degrade either 68th Parkway/ORE 99W or 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street intersections to operating conditions below the city's requirements (LOS E). Project traffic has minimal affect on these intersections during both the AM and PM peak. Traffic volume for the Existing+ Project scenario are shown in Figure 4. Table 7: Existing+Project Level of Service Conditions(PM Peak Hour) Intersection Type of Traffic Control Existing Existing+Project Level of Service 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street All-Way Stop B B Major Street/Minor Street LOS Site Access Unsignalized N/A A/B Delay LOS WC 68th Parkway/ORE 99W Signalized 26.5 C 0.83 26.5 C 0.83 LOS=Level of Service Delay=Average Stopped Delay per Vehicle V/C=Volume-to-Capacity Ratio A/A=Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS Existing plus Project plus Added Traffic City staff provided information for added developments that are approved or currently under construction in the study area. A list of added developments assumed for this alternative and the total PM peak hour trip generation are included in the appendix. The traffic volumes associated with added developments would not cause a significant degradation in service level at either 68th Parkway/ORE 99W or 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street intersections. The additional traffic from the proposed project combined with other added traffic approvals would not significantly degrade the operations of either study intersection.Consequently,all study intersections would continue to 9 DKS Associates,written response from Kim McMillan,June 17,2004. Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 12 P04118-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS meet the City's LOS standards,operating at LOS E or better.Traffic volumes for the Existing+Project+ Added Traffic scenario is shown in Figure 4. Table 8 summarizes the level of service impacts. Table 8: Existing+Project+Added Traffic Level of Service Conditions(AM/PM Peak Hour) Intersection Type of Traffic Existing+Project Existing+Project+ Control +Added AM Added PM Level of Service 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street All-Way Stop B B Major/Minor Street LOS Site Access Unsignalized A/B A/B Delay LOS V/C 686 Parkway/ORE 99W Signalized 22.9 C 0.68 26.5 C 0.83 LOS=Level of Service Delay=Average Stopped Delay per Vehicle V/C=Volume-to-Capacity Ratio A/A=Major Street LOS/Minor Street LOS Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 13 P041 1 8-000 ' DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS JJF PROJECT TRIPS EXISTING + PROJECT EXISTING+ PROJECT+ADDED N07 TO SCALE ONcoo 00 O w a` l:Eic-E", ''o4mop N6 +:III36(44) `" ®36(44) ®®m ®0(0) ®mm+-®1384(1944) ®® ®i391(1946) 1 t* rm4(1) -34 j'm1/6(41) to. rim 11. 41 (0)OmJ 4 (16)4NIi 41'f, (16)4®J 4 K( .+®®u (f608)1448®—►�m®m (1615)1450® m®a (2)7or,-,.-N " (66)71Giir,,�r�or, (66)71® �r--w orn.- roc.).. \ o^�n ro E-,ci T� PROJECT TRIPS ` r in / ¢ VD // o N.-- �2(1) I- \N rn i m o(o) `� 99W (o)oI 4e ®i (o)o®• m mom ®m . o n o EXISTING+ PROJECT Project Site ,,, ,....„_ , r Q m 206(177) ®m+t El 44(64) 'I r m 364(260) (32)O m 4 4r. IP (6(0)05Z,oPT ATLANTA �,® ST `tea > ¢ ¢ Q BAYLOR ST EXISTING + PROJECT+ADDD o = _ _ _ _ z I- I- I- I- I- N O O) 0) N- ...23,s5F -: r- N . co (O N CLINTON STl OT- mijOm 4 44(64) ` ®44(64) 4 • Pi364(260) PARTMOUTH S (32)0 m 41. (68)4E mgoal t ®m L LEGEND Figure 4 Q -Study Intersection PROJECT AND EXISTING + PROJECT 4- -Lane Configuration m -RightTurnMovement AND EXISTING + PROJECT +ADDED in -Through Movement m -Left Turn Movement AM/PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Ana(PM) -Peak Hour Traffic Volume DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS SIGNAL WARRANTS The Tigard Transportation Systems Plan calls for a traffic signal to be installed at the intersection of 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street10 as signal warrant analysis based on 2015 volumes identified this intersection as a meeting signal warrants. Funding for this signal has not been secured,and there are no current plans for a signal to be installed. The peak hour,preliminary signal warrant was checked based on Existing+Project+ Added traffic volumes and it was found that the warrant is not met. TURN LANE REQUIREMENTS There are currently left turn lanes on all four approaches at 68th Parkway/ORE 99W. However, 68th Parkway at the site driveway is striped as a two lane road,with a cross-section of 43'from curb face to curb face. Therefore, turn lanes were evaluated to establish the need for a center left turn lane. Existing + Project+Added traffic volumes do not meet left-turn lane warrants." PROJECT TRIP CONTRIBUTION The City of Tigard requires each development project in the"Tigard Triangle"(defined as the area bounded by ORE 99W,Interstate 5 and ORE 217)to determine the number of PM peak hour trips that will travel through the following intersections: • 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street • 72°a Avenue/Dartmouth Street The City is planning to install traffic signals at these intersections and each project will contribute toward their cost based on the number of trips it sends through the intersections. This project would generate approximately 4 new trips at the 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Street intersection and 1 new trip through the 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street intersection during the PM peak hour. ACCESS SPACING The access spacing requirements for 68th Parkway are 400 feet maximum and 200 feet minimum based on the collector functional classification.12 The proposed access is located on the east side of 68th Parkway along an undeveloped stretch of the road. The closest curb cut south of the site is approximately 480 feet from the currently proposed access point. The Bank of Salem driveway is the closest access point to the north, approximately 400 feet from the site. Therefore,the proposed project meets the City's access spacing standards. SIGHT DISTANCE The City of Tigard requires that a driver has a minimum sight distance of 10 times the speed of the through street available in each direction. A speed study was conducted on 68th Parkway in order to determine the 85th percentile speed of drivers passing adjacent to the site,and found that the speed was 1°Tigard Transportation System Plan,DKS Associates,October,30 2001 Table 8-8#18. 11 Volume Warrants for left-turn storage lanes at unsignalized grade intersections, Highway Research Record Number 211. 12 Tigard Transportation System Plan,DKS Associates,October 30,2001 Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 15 PO4 1 1 8-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS approximately 43 mph in both the north and south bound directions. Consequently,the City requires 430 feet of sight distance from the site driveway north and south on 68th Parkway. At this distance,the southern approach will not have enough sight distance due to the orientation of the proposed building and severity of the horizontal curve. The maximum site distance under the current configurations of both the street and proposed building would be approximately 300 feet. Some alternatives to address the sight distance restriction include: • Moving the current site driveway from the north part of the site to the southern section of the site and restricting vehicle movement to a right in and right out only. • Develop an agreement with the adjacent property to allow a shared driveway. • Move the clinic building back from the street frontage. SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION This section discusses the access needs for motor vehicles,pedestrians and bicycles within the vicinity of the proposed development. A preliminary site plan for the proposed development is included in the appendix. 68t1i Parkway has existing sidewalks along the project frontage extending from ORE 99W to Atlanta Street. The proposed site plan identifies a pedestrian link between the current public right-of-way on 68th Parkway to the project site. The project access on 68th Parkway should be a minimum 25 feet wide to provide safe ingress and egress movements. PARKING Based on the site plan provided by the project sponsor,38 customer/employee parking stalls are proposed for the Tigard Veterinary Clinic. The City code for an office land use(deemed the most compatible to the vet clinic land use, which does not have a dedicated category)would require a minimum of 36 parking spaces based on analysis of the proposed building square footage.13 The 38 proposed parking spaces would meet current city minimum requirements.Parking characteristics are summarized in Table 9.Seven bicycle parking spaces would also be required on site to meet the City's minimum code requirement for the proposed project. According to the Parking Generation Handbook,a veterinary clinic is expected to have a peak hour parking demand of 1.6 spaces per thousand square feet. Therefore the parking demand for the Tigard Veterinary Clinic is expected to be 22 vehicles during the peak,well under both the required and proposed number of parking spaces for the site. 13 City of Tigard,Municipal Code,Table 18.765.2,April,2002. Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 16 P04118-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Table 9: Parking Analysis Land Use City Code Parking Requirements Expected Proposed Bicycle Per KSF Demand Spaces Parking Office(8.5 KSF) Minimum Maximum Minimum 36 55 22 38 7 Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 17 P04118-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Chapter 4 Mitigation The additional traffic from the proposed project combined with other added traffic would not degrade traffic operations at 68th Parkway/ORE 99W or 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street below the city's standards. However,adequate sight distance is not available and will require mitigation measures to meet current City code requirements. Project Mitigation Several intersection and road capacity improvements were recommended for the study area in the Tigard Transportation System Plan(TSP)". Many of these improvements are to be funded in conjunction with development and include pedestrian and bicycle amenities as well as automobile capacity enhancement projects. The following improvements(related to the study area)were identified in the TSP. • Add a 2nd westbound left turn lane at the intersection of 68th Parkway/ORE 99W. • Change north/south movements to protected phasing at the intersection of 68th Parkway/ORE 99W. • Install a traffic signal at the intersection of 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street. • Install a traffic signal at 72°d Avenue/Dartmouth Street. ■ Extend Atlanta Street west to intersect with 72nd Avenue. In addition to the improvements mentioned in the TSP,some specific,project-related mitigation measures include: • Sidewalks should be provided within the site property as well as along the frontage of 68th Parkway and should conform to ADA requirements.15 ■ The project access point should be a minimum 25 feet wide to accommodate safe ingress and egress to the site. A 36-foot wide access is recommended. The current site plan does not meet sight distance requirements of the City of Tigard. In order to meet the City's sight distance criteria,it is likely the building would need to be placed toward the east side of the lot.Additionally,the site access should be moved from the north end of the lot to the south end to provide adequate sight distance. 14 Tigard Transportation System Plan,DKS Associates,October 2001. 15 ADA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities,Department of Justice,January 1998. Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 18 PO4 1 1 8-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Appendix Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 19 P04118-000 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Level of Service Descriptions Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 20 P04118-000 TRAFFIC LEVELS OF SERVICE Analysis of traffic volumes is useful in understanding the general nature of traffic in an area,but by itself indicates neither the ability of the street network to carry additional traffic nor the quality of service afforded by the street facilities. For this,the concept of level of service has been developed to subjectively describe traffic performance. Level of service can be measured at intersections and along key roadway segments. Level of service categories are similar to report card ratings for traffic performance. Intersections are typically the controlling bottlenecks of traffic flow and the ability of a roadway system to carry traffic efficiently is generally diminished in their vicinities. Levels of Service A, B and C indicate conditions where traffic moves without significant delays over periods of peak travel demand. Level of service D and E are progressively worse peak hour operating conditions and F conditions represent where demand exceeds the capacity of an intersection. Most urban communities set level of service D as the minimum acceptable level of service for peak hour operation and plan for level of service C or better for all other times of the day. The Highway Capacity Manual provides level of service calculation methodology for both intersections and arterials.' The following three sections provide interpretations of the analysis approaches. 2000 Highway Capacity Manual,Transportation Research Board,Washington D.C.,2000,Chapters 16 and 17. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (Two-Way Stop Controlled) Unsignalized intersection level of service is reported for the major street and minor street(generally,left turn movements). The method assesses available and critical gaps in the traffic stream which make it possible for side street traffic to enter the main street flow. The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual describes the detailed methodology. It is not unusual for an intersection to experience level of service E or F conditions for the minor street left turn movement. It should be understood that, often, a poor level of service is experienced by only a few vehicles and the intersection as a whole operates acceptably. Unsignalized intersection levels of service are described in the following table. Level of Service Expected Delay (SecNeh) A Little or no delay 0-10.0 B Short traffic delay >10.1-15.0 C Average traffic delays >15.1-25.0 D Long traffic delays >25.1-35.0 E Very long traffic delays >35.1-50.0 F Extreme delays potentially affecting >50 other traffic movements in the intersection Source: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board Washington,D.C. ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE Arterial level of service is based on the average travel speed for the segment,section,or entire arterial under consideration. The average travel speed is computed from the running time on the arterial segment(s)and the intersection approach delay. It is strongly influenced by the number of signals per mile and the average intersection delay. On a given facility,factors such as inappropriate signal timing,poor progression, and increasing traffic flow can substantially degrade the arterial LOS.2 Arterial levels of service are summarized in the following table. Arterial Levels of Service Arterial Class I 11 111 Range of Free Flow 45 to 35 35 to 30 35 to 25 Speeds (mph) Typical Free Flow 40 mph 33 mph 27 mph Speed (mph) Level of Service Average Travel Speed (mph) A 35 30 25 B 28 24 19 C 22 18 13 D 17 14 9 E 13 _ 10 7 F < 13 < 10 < 7 2 1994 Highway Capacity Manual,Special Report 209,Transportation Research Board,Washington D.C., 1994,Chapter 11. Arterial Class According to Design and Functional Categories FUNCTIONAL CATEGORY DESIGN CATEGORY PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL MINOR ARTERIAL TYPICAL SUBURBAN I II INTERMEDIATE II II OR III TYPICAL URBAN II OR III III Existing Thu Jul 1, 2004 13:21:03 Page 1-1 Existing Thu Jul 1, 2004 13,21:04 Page 2-1 Tigard Vet Clinic Tigard Vet Clinic AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour Existing Existing Scenario Report Level Of Service Computation Report Scenario: Existing 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Command: Existing Intersection #2 ORE 99W/68th Parkway Volume: Existing Geometry: Existing Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X), 0.649 Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 18.6 Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Optimal Cycle, 56 Level Of Service: B Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Paths Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Routes: Default Routes Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Configuration: Default Configuration I II II II Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I II II II I Volume Module: as Count Date, 16 Jun 2004 a Base Vol: 64 36 16 152 76 28 4 1448 64 112 1384 36 Growth Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse, 64 36 16 152 76 28 4 1448 64 112 1384 36 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut, 64 36 16 152 76 28 4 1448 64 112 1384 36 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume, 64 36 16 152 76 28 4 1448 64 112 1384 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 64 36 16 152 76 28 4 1448 64 112 1384 36 PCE Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 64 36 16 152 76 28 4 1448 64 112 1384 36 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane, 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment, 0.60 0.95 0.95 0.73 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 0.69 0.31 1.00 0.73 0.27 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.95 0.05 Final Sat., 1132 1255 558 1379 1333 491 1805 3436 152 1805 3504 91 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.06 0.39 0.39 Crit Moves, **** .... .... Green/Cycle: 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.10 0.74 0.74 Volume/Cap: 0.33 0.17 0.17 0.65 0.34 0.34 0.53 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.53 0.53 Delay/Veh, 52.2 49.9 49.9 60.5 51.8 51.8 128.2 15.6 15.6 69.5 8.0 8.0 User DelAdj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 52.2 49.9 49.9 60.5 51.8 51.8 128.2 15.6 15.6 69.5 8.0 8.0 • HCM2kAvg: 4 2 2 9 4 4 1 20 21 6 13 13 Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Level of Service Calculations Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 21 P04118-000 tiExisting Thu Jul 1, 2004 13:21:04 Page 5-1 Tigard Vet Clinic AM Peak Hour Existing Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 0(5 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.571 Loss Time (sec) : 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.2 Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I I I I I I I Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Ignore Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 I II II II 1 Volume Module: ', Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 ‘cBase Vol: . 0 72 96 44 76 4 0 4 0 364 44 204 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 72 96 44 76 4 0 4 0 364 44 204 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 72 96 44 76 4 0 4 0 364 44 204 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 72 0 44 76 4 0 4 0 364 44 204 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 72 0 44 76 4 0 4 0 364 44 204 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 72 0 44 76 4 0 4 0 364 44 204 I II I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.35 0.62 0.03 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.18 0.82 Final Sat.: 0 554 0 205 354 19 0 598 0 637 140 647 II II II Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: xxxx 0.13 xxxx 0.21 0.21 0.21 xxxx 0.01 xxxx 0.57 0.32 0.32 Crit Moves: •**• •*** •*•* **** Delay/Veh: 0.0 9.7 0.0 10.5 10.5 10.5 0.0 8.5 0.0 15.3 9.2 9.2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 9.7 0.0 10.5 10.5 10.5 0.0 8.5 0.0 15.3 9.2 9.2 LOS by Move: * A * B B B • A * C A A ApproachDel: 9.7 10.5 8.5 12.9 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 9.7 10.5 8.5 12.9 LOS by Appr: A B A B Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR UExisting+Proj Fri Jul 2, 2004 16:28:00 Page 3-1 Existing+Prof Fri Jul 2, 2004 16:28:00 Page 4-1 Tigard vet clinic Tigard Vet Clinic AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour Existing+Project Existing+Project Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #3 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Avenue Intersection #4 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X), 0.878 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.931 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 29.4 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 33.8 Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: D Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: D Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I I I II 11 Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 II II II I I II II II Volume Module: a, Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 c< Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 <a Base Vol: 120 208 176 300 168 40 32 324 248 120 120 144 Base Vol: 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 120 208 176 300 168 40 32 324 248 120 120 144 Initial Bse: 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 Added Vol: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 Added Vol: 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Development: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 120 208 176 301 168 40 33 324 248 120 120 148 Initial Fut: 344 364 49 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 120 208 176 301 168 40 33 324 248 120 120 148 PHF Volume, 344 364 49 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 120 208 176 301 168 40 33 324 248 120 120 148 Reduced Vol: 344 364 49 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 120 208 176 301 168 40 33 324 248 120 120 148 Final Vol.: 344 364 49 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 II II II 1 1 I I I I I I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.81 0.19 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.50 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.88 0.12 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.22 Final Sat.: 332 353 376 377 322 77 338 369 393 186 186 405 Final Sat.: 412 391 53 338 360 379 332 353 377 383 325 91 I 11 . _ -II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat, 0.36 0.59 0.47 0.80 0.52 0.52 0.10 0.88 0.63 0.65 0.65 0.37 Vol/Sat, 0.83 0.93 0.93 0.26 0.67 0.10 0.11 0.52 0.35 0.33 0.75 0.75 Crit Moves: **•* .... .... .... Crit Moves: **** **** .... .... Delay/Veh: 18.6 25.1 19.3 39.3 20.2 20.2 13.9 51.3 25.1 26.9 26.9 15.7 Delay/Veh: 41.7 55.2 55.2 16.3 28.7 12.6 14.2 22.1 16.4 16.2 31.6 31.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 18.6 25.1 19.3 39.3 20.2 20.2 13.9 51.3 25.1 26.9 26.9 15.7 AdjDel/Veh: 41.7 55.2 55.2 16.3 28.7 12.6 14.2 22.1 16.4 16.2 31.6 31.6 LOS by Move: C D C E C C B F D D D C LOS by Move: E F F C D B B C C C D D ApproachDel: 21.5 31.5 38.5 22.6 ApproachDel: 49.1 24.1 19.1 27.1 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 21.5 31.5 38.5 22.6 ApprAdjDel: 49.1 24.1 19.1 27.1 LOS by Appr: C D E C LOS by Appr: E C C D Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Existing+Proj+Development Wed Jul 14, 2004 14,36:36 Page 1-1 Existing+Prof+Development Wed Jul 14, 2004 14:36:37 Page 2-1 Tigard Vet Clinic Tigard Vet Clinic AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour Existing+Proj.+Added Traffic Existing+Proj.+Added Traffic Scenario Report Level Of Service Computation Report Scenario: Existing+Proj+Development 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Command: Existing+Project+Development Intersection #2 ORE 99W/68th Parkway volume: AM Existing+Dev Geometry: Existing Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.655 Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 18.9 Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Optimal Cycle: 57 Level Of Service: B Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Paths Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Routes: Default Routes Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Configuration: Default Configuration I II II II Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I II II II I Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 cc Base Vol: 64 36 16 152 76 28 4 1448 64 112 1384 36 • Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 64 36 16 152 76 28 4 1448 64 112 1384 36 Added Vol: 3 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 7 4 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 7 0 Initial Fut: 67 37 18 152 78 28 4 1450 71 116 1391 36 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 67 37 18 152 78 28 4 1450 71 116 1391 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 67 37 18 152 78 28 4 1450 71 116 1391 36 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 67 37 18 152 78 28 4 1450 71 116 1391 36 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.59 0.95 0.95 0.72 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 0.67 0.33 1.00 0.74 0.26 1.00 1.91 0.09 1.00 1.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 1121 1216 591 1374 1342 482 1805 3417 167 1805 3505 91 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.06 0.40 0.40 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.10 0.74 0.74 Volume/Cap: 0.35 0.18 0.18 0.66 0.34 0.34 0.54 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.54 0.54 Delay/Veh: 52.6 50.2 50.2 61.0 52.0 52.0 129.3 15.8 15.8 69.4 8.0 8.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 52.6 50.2 50.2 61.0 52.0 52.0 129.3 15.8 15.8 69.4 8.0 8.0 HCM2kAvg: 4 2 2 9 4 4 1 20 21 6 13 13 Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR DExisting+Proj+Development Wed Jul 14, 2004 14:36:37 Page 5-1 Existing+Proj+Development Wed Jul 14, 2004 14:36:37 Page 6-1 Tigard Vet Clinic Tigard Vet Clinic AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour Existing+Proj.+Added Traffic Existing+Proj.+Added Traffic Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-way Stop Method (Future volume Alternative) 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street Intersection #6 Site Access Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.574 Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: B( 11.0) Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.3 Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service, B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound I II II II I Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign I II II II I Rights: Include Include Include Include Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Rights: Ignore Include Include Include I 11 II II 1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Base Vol: 0 324 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 II II II I Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 cc Initial Bee: 0 324 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Base Vol: 0 72 96 44 76 4 0 4 0 364 44 204 Added Vol: 0 0 7 13 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Bee: 0 72 96 44 76 4 0 4 0 364 44 204 Initial Fut, 0 324 7 13 224 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 Added Vol: 0 5 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial FUt: 0 77 96 45 79 4 0 4 0 364 44 206 PHF Volume: 0 324 7 13 224 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reduct Vol, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 324 7 13 224 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 PHF Volume: 0 77 0 45 79 4 0 4 0 364 44 206 Critical Gap Module: Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Critical Op:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 Reduced Vol: 0 77 0 45 79 4 0 4 0 364 44 206 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xaaxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xaaax xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 I II 11 II 1 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Capacity Module: Final Vol.: 0 77 0 45 79 4 0 4 0 364 44 206 Cnflict Vol, xxxx xxxx xxxxx 331 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 578 xxxx 328 I 11 11 11 1 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1240 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 481 xxxx 718 Saturation Flow Module: Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1240 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 478 xxxx 718 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx 0.01 Lanes, 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.35 0.62 0.03 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.18 0.82 1 11 11 11 1 Final Sat.: 0 553 0 202 355 18 0 593 0 634 137 644 Level Of Service Module: I II 11 II I Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xaax xxxxx Capacity Analysis Module: Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Vol/Sat: xxxx 0.14 xxxx 0.22 0.22 0.22 xxxx 0.01 xxxx 0.57 0.32 0.32 LOS by Move, • * • A * • * • * • • Crit Moves: •*•* **** •••• **** Movement, LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Delay/Veh: 0.0 9.7 0.0 10.6 10.6 10.6 0.0 8.5 0.0 15.4 9.3 9.3 Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 604 xxaax Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxxx AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 9.7 0.0 10.6 10.6 10.6 0.0 8.5 0.0 15.4 9.3 9.3 Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx xaaax xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 11.0 xxxxx LOS by Move: • A • B B B * A • C A A Shared LOS: • • * A • * • • * • B • • ApproachDel: 9.7 10.6 8.5 13.0 ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 11.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApproachLOS, • • • B ApprAdjDel: 9.7 10.6 8.5 13.0 LOS by Appr: A B A B Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR °Existing Thu Jul 1, 2004 13:36:34 Page 3-1 Existing Thu Jul 1, 2004 13:36:34 Page 4-1 Tigard Vet Clinic Tigard Vet Clinic PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Existing Existing Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #3 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Avenue Intersection #4 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X)) 0.877 Cycle (eec): 100 Critical vol./Cap. (X): 0.929 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 29.4 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 33.7 Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: D Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service, D Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement, L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II 11 I I II II 11 I Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 I II II II I I II II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 < Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 as Base Vol: 120 208 176 300 168 40 32 324 248 120 120 144 Base Vol: 344 364 48 BB 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 120 208 176 300 168 40 32 324 248 120 120 144 Initial Bee: 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 Added vol: 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 120 208 176 302 168 41 32 324 248 120 120 145 Initial Fut: 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 129 244 68 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 120 208 176 302 168 41 32 324 248 120 120 145 PHF Volume: 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 129 244 68 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 120 208 176 302 168 41 32 324 248 120 120 145 Reduced Vol: 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 129 244 68 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 120 208 176 302 168 41 32 324 248 120 120 145 Final Vol.: 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 129 244 68 I II II II I 1 II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.50 1.00 Lanes, 1.00 0.88 0.12 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.22 Final Sat.: 333 353 377 378 321 78 338 369 393 185 185 405 Final Sat.: 412 392 52 338 360 378 331 353 377 382 325 91 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.36 0.59 0.47 0.80 0.52 0.52 0.09 0.88 0.63 0.65 0.65 0.36 Vol/Sat: 0.83 0.93 0.93 0.26 0.67 0.10 0.11 0.52 0.35 0.34 0.75 0.75 Crit Moves: •••• •... .... .... Crit Moves: .... .... .... .... De1ay/veh: 18.5 25.1 19.2 39.5 20.2 20.2 13.9 51.2 25.1 26.9 26.9 15.6 Delay/Veh: 41.7 54.9 54.9 16.3 28.7 12.6 14.2 22.1 16.4 16.3 31.6 31.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 18.5 25.1 19.2 39.5 20.2 20.2 13.9 51.2 25.1 26.9 26.9 15.6 AdjDel/Veh: 41.7 54.9 54.9 16.3 28.7 12.6 14.2 22.1 16.4 16.3 31.6 31.6 LOS by Move: C D C E C C 8 F D D D C LOS by Move: E F F C D B B C C C D 0 ApproachDel: 21.5 31.6 38.5 22.6 ApproachDel: 48.9 24.1 19.1 27.1 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 21.5 31.6 38.5 22.6 ApprAdjDel: 48.9 24.1 19.1 27.1 LOS by Appr: C D E C LOS by Appr: E C C D Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DES ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Existing+Proj Fri Jul 2, 2004 16:31:31 Page 1-1 Existing+Proj Fri Jul 2, 2004 16:31:31 Page 2-1 Tigard Vet Clinic Tigard Vet Clinic PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Existing+Project Existing+Project Scenario Report Level Of Service Computation Report Scenario: Existing+Proj 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Command: Existing Intersection #2 ORE 99W/68th Parkway Volume: Existing Geometry: Existing Cycle (sec): 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.827 Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 26.5 Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Optimal Cycle, 94 Level Of Service: C Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Paths Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Routes: Default Routes Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Configuration: Default Configuration I II II II I Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 I II II II I Volume Module: s> Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 « Base Vol: 136 224 124 80 120 20 16 1608 64 40 1944 44 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 136 224 124 80 120 20 16 1608 64 40 1944 44 Added Vol: 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 140 225 126 80 120 20 16 1608 66 41 1944 44 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume, 140 225 126 80 120 20 16 1608 66 41 1944 44 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol, 140 225 126 80 120 20 16 1608 66 41 1944 44 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 140 225 126 80 120 20 16 1608 66 41 1944 44 I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane, 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.58 0.95 0.95 0.24 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 0.64 0.36 1.00 0.86 0.14 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.96 0.04 Final Sat.: 1098 1152 645 452 1594 266 1805 3447 141 1805 3520 80 I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.47 0.47 0.02 0.55 0.S5 Crit Moves: ++++ ++++ ++++ Green/Cycle: 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.01 0.65 0.65 0.03 0.67 0.67 Volume/Cap: 0.54 0.83 0.83 0.75 0.32 0.32 0.83 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.83 0.83 Delay/Veh: 49.1 63.4 63.4 74.8 44.6 44.6 193.4 17.5 17.5 103.4 19.8 19.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 49.1 63.4 63.4 74.8 44.6 44.6 193.4 17.5 17.5 103.4 19.8 19.8 HCM2kAvg: 9 16 16 15 5 5 2 24 24 3 33 36 Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DES ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR 1 DExisting+Proj Fri Jul 2, 2004 16:31:31 Page 5-1 Existing.Proj Fri Jul 2, 2004 16.31.31 Page 6-1 Tigard Vet Clinic Tigard Vet Clinic PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ExistingaProject ExistingaProject Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future volume Alternative) 1994 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection 95 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street Intersection k6 Site Access Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.541 Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R s 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 13.6 Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound I II II II Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign I II II II I Rights: Include Include Include Include Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Lanes: 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Rights: Ignore Include Include Include I II II II I Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Base Vol: 0 324 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I II II II I Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 es Initial Bee: 0 324 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Base Vol: 20 116 664 112 148 36 32 68 0 260 64 176 Added Vol: 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 7 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Bse: 20 116 664 112 148 36 32 68 0 260 64 176 Initial Fut: 0 324 2 3 224 0 0 0 0 4 0 7 Added Vol: 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Fut: 20 117 664 113 151 36 32 68 0 260 64 177 PHF Volume: 0 324 2 3 224 0 0 0 0 4 0 7 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 324 2 3 224 0 0 0 0 4 0 7 PHF Volume: 20 117 0 113 151 36 32 68 0 260 64 177 Adjusted Volume Module: Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Reduced Vol: 20 117 0 113 151 36 32 68 0 260 64 177 % Cycle/Cars: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx root xxxx PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 % Truck/Comb: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx JuLAX xxxx MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 Final Vol.: 20 117 0 113 151 36 32 68 0 260 64 177 Cycl/Car PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx XXXX XXXX XXXX 3000C I II II II I Trck/Cmb PCE: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Saturation Flow Module: Adj Vol.: 0 324 2 3 224 0 0 0 0 4 0 8 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Critical Gap Module: Lanes: 0.15 0.85 1.00 0.38 0.50 0.12 0.32 0.68 1.00 1.00 0.27 0.73 MoveUp Time:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.4 xxxx 2.6 Final Sat.: 74 435 0 209 279 67 159 339 0 539 169 466 Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 5.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.5 xxxx 5.5 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.27 xxxx 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.20 0.20 xxxx 0.48 0.38 0.38 Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 326 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 552 xxxx 325 Crit Moves: •••• •*** •**• **** Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1199 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 507 xxxx 948 Delay/Veh: 11.6 11.6 0.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 14.9 11.4 11.4 Adj Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.00 xxxx 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1199 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 506 xxxx 948 AdjDel/Veh: 11.6 11.6 0.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 11.0 11.0 0.0 14.9 11.4 11.4 I II 11 11 I LOS by Move: B B * C C C 8 8 * B B B Level Of Service Module: ApproachDel: 11.6 16.0 11.0 13.2 Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.2 xxxx 3.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 LOS by Move, * * * A • * * * * * * ApprAdjDel: 11.6 16.0 11.0 13.2 Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LOS by Appr: B C B B Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx AAxxx 1199 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 719 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx *.xxxx xxxxx 5.1 xxxxx Shared LOS: • * * A • • * * * * B ApproachDel: 0.0 0.0 xxxxxx 5.1 Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR DExisting+Proj+Development Wed Jul 14, 2004 14:34:09 Page 3-1 Existing+Proj+Development Wed Jul 14, 2004 14,34,09 Page 4-1 Tigard Vet Clinic Tigard Vet Clinic PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Existing + Proj. + Development Existing + Proj. + Development Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #3 68th Parkway/Dartmouth Avenue Intersection #4 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.912 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.975 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 31.0 Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R . 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 36.8 Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: D Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R I II II II I I II II II 1 Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 I II II II 1 I II II II 1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 c< Volume Module: » Count Date: 16 Jun 2004 cc Base Vol: 120 208 176 300 168 40 32 324 248 120 120 144 Base Vol, 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 120 208 176 300 168 40 32 324 248 120 120 144 Initial Bee: 344 364 48 88 240 36 36 184 132 128 244 68 Added Vol: 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 12 0 0 5 0 PasserByVol: 3 14 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 Initial Fut: 120 208 176 302 168 42 32 336 248 120 125 145 Initial Fut: 347 378 52 88 245 36 36 184 132 135 244 68 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 120 208 176 302 168 42 32 336 248 120 125 145 PHF Volume, 347 378 52 88 245 36 36 184 132 135 244 68 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 120 208 176 302 168 42 32 336 248 120 125 145 Reduced Vol, 347 378 52 88 245 36 36 184 132 135 244 68 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 120 208 176 302 168 42 32 336 248 120 125 145 Final Vol.: 347 378 52 88 245 36 36 184 132 135 244 68 1 II II II I I II II II I Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.49 0.51 1.00 Lanes, 1.00 0.88 0.12 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.78 0.22 Final Sat.: 330 350 373 375 317 79 336 368 392 181 188 403 Final Sat.: 410 388 53 337 359 377 329 351 374 381 324 90 I II II II I I II II II I Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.36 0.59 0.47 0.80 0.53 0.53 0.10 0.91 0.63 0.66 0.66 0.36 Vol/Sat: 0.85 0.98 0.98 0.26 0.68 0.10 0.11 0.52 0.35 0.35 0.75 0.75 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves, **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 18.7 25.5 19.5 40.3 20.5 20.5 13.9 57.9 25.4 28.0 28.0 15.7 Delay/Veh: 43.6 65.0 65.0 16.5 30.2 12.7 14.4 22.5 16.6 16.7 32.3 32.3 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 18.7 25.5 19.5 40.3 20.5 20.5 13.9 57.9 25.4 28.0 28.0 15.7 AdjDel/Veh: 43.6 65.0 65.0 16.5 30.2 12.7 14.4 22.5 16.6 16.7 32.3 32.3 LOS by Move: C D C E C C B F D D D C LOS by Move: E F F C D B B C C C D D ApproachDel: 21.8 32.2 42.5 23.4 ApproachDel: 55.4 25.2 19.5 27.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 21.8 32.2 42.5 23.4 ApprAdjDel: 55.4 25.2 19.5 27.6 LOS by Appr: C D E C LOS by Appr: F D C D Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR Traffix 7.6.0115 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to DKS ASSOC., PORTLAND, OR DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Traffic Counts Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 22 PO4 1 1 8-000 06/17/2064 1 1: 1 6 5636438666 TRAFFIC SMITHY PAGE 03 - INTERSECTION TURN Mvv�MENT SUMMARY REPORT Fi1e! DGBY,rnod T= 1.8% P= 0.82 Peak Hour 1LOCATION: A 07:15-08:15 1 210 66 HWY 99W AT 68TH PKWY/69TH AVE Total Entry Volume TIGARD OR 20 63I 177 3221 y-1292 E-1 1- '1301 4 T ^ 19 Date: 06/16/04 Day: WED Time: 07:00 - 09:00 T=4.2% T- 5.6% _ 1484 - <--- 1214 Report Prepared for: P= 0.89 P= 0.85 DKS ASSOCIATES 89 ", z- 68 Surveyed By: ; .-. 1577 -a 1643 TRAFFIC SMITHY, INC • 58 43 32 1225 NW Murray Blvd Suite 111 ; - T=%Trucks By Approach Portland, OR 97229 1 220 133 T Phone: 503-641-6333 Fax: 503-643-B866 • • P = PHF By Approach T=3.6% P=0.65 Report Reviewed by:JG EASTBOUND SOUTHBOUND NORTHBOUND WESTBOUND TIME PERIOD -1 -' -T T .l= < L ALL 07:00-07:05 8 117 0 1 5 7 5 3 2 5 74 2 229 07:05-07:10 5 132 2 1 1 10 4 1 1 3 56 1 217 07:10-07:15 5 125 ___..0 _ 2 3 11 8 7 2 6 78 0 247 .- 07:15-07:20 11 147 1 1 5 6 2 2 3 2 77 0 257 07:20-07:25 7 118 0 2 5 11 2 3 1 3 89 2 243 07:25-07:30 11 122 0 0 2 6 2 3 4 7 109 3 269 07:30-07:35 9 135 0 3 8 12 5 2 2 30 .102 1 289 07:35-07:40 5 144 0 1 2 13 0 4 5 2 101 0 277 07:40-07:15_.. _10 138 1 0 4 7 7 4 1 5 109 1 287 07:45-07:50 7 111 0 5 5 9 4 6 1 4 123 0 275 07:50-07:55 10 117 1 3 6 10 6 3 0 8 123 0 287 07:55-08:00 3 „119 0 2 9 12 5 3 2 4 118 4 __ 281. 08:00-08:05 3 126 0 2 4 16 5 3 2 16 105 5 287 08:05-08:10 4 90 0 0 4 15 13 8 7 1 77 0 • 219 08:10-08:15 9 117 1. ... 1 9 10 7 2 4 6 81 3 250 08:15-08:20 7 118 1 1 5 5 6 1 1 2 75 5 227 08:20-08:25 4 123 2 1 1 10 11 3 2 5 87 1 250 08:25-08:30 4 U3 ...0 0 3 13 8 3 2___ ._. 1 83 2 2_32 08:30-08:35 2 110 2 2 4 6 4 2 4 5 109 1 251 08:35-08:40 4 96 0 4 5 12 11 0 6 3 89 0 230 08.:4,0 Q8:45 G UJ2 0 3 6 8 7 2_. 3_. 3 102 1 253 _ 08:45-08:50 7 107 1 2 8 7 9 1 1 2 84 1 230 08:50-08:55 7 103 0 4 3 8 10 1 3 3 104 3 249 .0.8:55_09 p9 1 80_1. 1 2 5 5 1 1 1. ___75 -1 174 • TOTALS 149 2820 13 42 109 229 146 68 60 107 2230 37 6010 PHF 0.77 0.89 0.5 0.5 0.79 0 74 0.58 0 77 0.62 0.61 0.83 0 53 0.94 0/0 Trucks 2.7 4.3 7.7 14.3 0.9 0 4.8 4 4 0 0.9 5.9 0 4,6 Stopped Buses 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 Pedestrians 2 1 13 9 ©6/17/26 6 1 11: 1E 5636436666 TRAFFIC SMITHY PAGE 66 I INTERSECTION TURN Mt...CMENT SUMMARY REPORT File: DEFN T= 1.9% P= 0.84 • Peak Hour I LOCATION: 1 07:25-08:25 ,�, 124 245 SW 68TH PARKWAY AT SW ATLANTA STREET _ 86 Total 846 Volume TIGARD, OR �51 E. y L <-546 3 2 4 t 183 Date: 06/15/04 Day. TUE Time: 07:00 - 09:00 T=O%/o T= 0.6% B --> 42 Report Prepared for, P=0.58 p_ 0.89 DKS ASSOCIATES 3 y ..- 321 Surveyed By: i • TRAFFIC SMITHY INC j 14 ? 140 —? 5 59 98 � 1225 NW Murray Blvd Suite 111 1 1 T=%Trucks By Approach Portland, OR 97229 410 162 T I Phone: 503-641-6333 Fax: 503-643-8866 j P= PHF By Approach I 1 T= 5.2 % P= 0.75 , i Report Reviewed by:JG EASTBOUND SOUTHBOUND NORTHBOUND WESTBOUND TIME PERIOD - 4-1 y, L. 4-1 T r' ^ _ C_ ALL 07:00.07:05 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 6 6 13 1 14 46 07:05-07:10 0 1 0 0 5 2 0 5 6 17 3 6 45 07:10-07:15 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 2 :1 18 _ 1 __ _8 _ 44 07:15-07:20 0 2 0 0 8 2 0 5 11 16 3 8 57 07:20-07:25 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 2 5 7.2 2 6 43 07:25-07 30 0 1 0 0 6 5 0 7 8 .. . 1... . ?2___ 07:30-07;35 0 0 0 0 9 2 0 S 7 31 5 15 Ti 07:35-07:40 0 0 0 1 4 4 0 6 9 32 2 23 81 07:40-07:45 _.0 _..__ 0 0 1 7 0 0 2 5 22-- 2 14 53 07:45-07:50 0 2 0 0 15 2 1 3 10 34 4 20 91 07:50-07:55 0 0 0 0 4 1 1 5 8 34 3 15 71 07:55-08:00 0 0 1 0_ 4 4 0 3 4 25 6 12 59 08:00-08:05 2 1 0 li 2 1 3 11 25 2 8._.._. 68 08:05-08:10 C 0 0 1 8 5 1 5 14 29 1 10 74 08:10-08:15 C__._. ._. 1 0 1 5 4 1 _ 12 6 22 1 20 73 08:15.08:20 1 2 0 0 6 3 0 5 8 26 8 20 79 08:20-08:25 0 0 1 0 7 2 0 3 6 13 4 13 51 08:25-08:30 0 1-1__ .. 0 7 2 1 4 12 _ 20__ 4 10 62 08:30-08:35 0 0 0 0 9 2 1 3 9 27 6 9 68 08:35-08:40 0 2 0 3 3 2 1 3 12 17 2 9 54 06:40.08:'5 0 0 0 . 0._..__1 1 0 ___17. 77 1 0 S6 08:45-08:50 0 2 0 0 7 1 0 4 4 31 2 9 60 08:50-08:55 0 2 0 0 4 2 0 7 10 19 2 13 59 .0.8.:.55-.09:00 .._ 0 1 0__-. 0 5 .2 0 . 2 11 10_ _8 _9 48 TOTALS 3 19 5 8 144 55 8 105 2:2 560 79 290 1466 PHF 0.38 0.67 0.38 0.5 0.63 0 71 0.42 0 67 0.79 0.66 0.61 0.8 0.93 Trucks 0 0 0 0 2.1 1.£ 0 3.8 6.1 1 1 0 0 1.8 Stopped Buses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians 0 0 0 2 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Signal Warrants Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 23 PO4 1 1 8-000 1 , 68th Parkway PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis MinorTH l . Urban(1)or Major Street Minor Street Major and LT Minor RT RT , Minor Warrant Warrant No. Intersection Rural(2)* Lanes(1 or 2) Lanes(1 or 2) Volume Volume Volume Reduction` Volume Volume l Met'? 1, 1 68th Parkway/Atlanta Street 1 1 1 438 324 177 1.00 09 ,- 2 0.00 - 4 0.00 . 5 0.00 c2 6 _ 0.00 o - -- 1 7 0.00 0 8 000 a N. 10 0.00 0 , NN o 11 _ 0.00 0 rho, 12 0.00 0 - N, 13 0.00 - ;.Jr, 14 0.00 Jo 15 0.00 ! - + 17 0.00 - I ' 18 0.00 19 0.00 - 20 0.00 - . 21 0.00 ., 22 0.00 - ` 24 - — 0.00 I 25 0.00 - --_I 26 0.00 J - I 27 0.00 _ 8 _2 0.00 *Use Rural analysis for speeds on Major Street above 40 mph or in communities with less than 10,000 population DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Turn Lane Warrants Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 City of Tigard 24 P04118-000 Threshold Testing Left Turn Lane Warrant Analysis LT Va Warrant HRB Warrant Max. Est. No. Intersection Movement Speed PHF Va Volume Vo LT% Threshold Met? Queue 2 68th Parkway/Site LT 45 1.00 227 7 326 3.1% 599 No 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 17 18 19 19 20 21 22 22 24 24 24 24 24 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Added Trips and Other Projects Tigard Veterinary Clinic July 15,2004 ._ City of Tigard 26 P04118-000 TIGARD VET CLINIC Added traffic from approved development projects Per Kim McMillan, City of Tigard Development Location Trips by intersection (68th)72nd Andrus Office 72nd/Beveland (3) 7 Minute Man Beveland/Hermoso (2)5 Jacobson Law Office Beveland/Hermoso (1) 1 Spectrum Office 67th (1) 1 Green Office Haines/67th N/A Clarke Offices 72nd/ Beveland (10) 17 Water Tower Plaza Baylor/67th (0)0 ',Je±Icuid deter ri ,'vctho h Water Quality Sensitive Areas Assessment FOR 11140 SW 68TH PARKWAY TIGARD, OREGON PREPARED FOR WEBSTAR VI, LLC 610 GLATT CIRCLE WOODLAND, OREGON September 9,2004 4e rit,,,,.„,„ ,:,..„ p„, , t„ .„ ",„ ,o‘ ,, ° :; , , , l� , _,. 4 , , 6, , ..,„,,;-: ., ‘,..,1.... II .. i w,. ,,,...„.... _. ..., . ......._:_.„ or, ..--,/e.1 ./ 1it li Y a '��. pr�.. „dila r� PJ'I {3 .1+' _ems .Cr�'1� C 'Y'� ter" n 1 S ,,,,, r if"/fie i'-- ' -. N, 11.11 f r /f "-:e. -a+,r -' ii -r. . -;.,....-.4... .., ',,,,..—7.7- 4 Vg-At 4 --_- ;'. .4°7%..-. ill "0"*t : " I envnvmnenenta0 technology Consultants environmental technology Consultants Cmating C?-o„:arro«s&vimRweld- Ctolui A Division ofSisul Enterprises,inc. (an Oregon Corporation) www.envirotechcons.com 1924 Broadway, Suite A Vancouver, WA 9866.3 Phone:(360) 696-4403 FAX: (360) 696-4089 a-mail:etc-vancouver@gwest.net WATER QUALITY SENSITIVE AREAS ASSESSMENT For 11140 SW 68th Parkway Tigard, Oregon (Tax Lot 2600, Section 36DA, T1S, R1W, W.M.) Prepared for: Webstar VI, LLC 610 Glatt Circle Woodland, OR 97071 September 9, 2004 494, st s� Olt."� i►.� _, 19 , •m . Evaluated by: � a "a4,_ Ci as' Environmental Technology Consultants 1924 Broadway, Suite A Vancouver, WA 98663 (360) 696-4403 FAX (360) 696-4089 E-mail: etc-vancouver@qwest.net 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT, SITE DATA, AND EVALUATION SUMMARY 1 Introduction 2 Delineation of the Boundaries of the Sensitive Area 2 Vegetated Corridor Widths associated with the Delineated Sensitive Areas 3 Vegetated Corridor Conditions 4 APPENDIX A (Wetland Determination Documentation) APPENDIX B (Maps, Site Photos, Data Plots, References) PROJECT,SITE DATA, AND EVALUATION SUMMARY Site: 11140 SW 68`h Parkway;Tigard, Oregon ETC Project Number: 04-025 Project Staff: David Waterman,Richard Bublitz, Anna Martin Applicant/ Webstar VI,LLC Owner: 610 Glatt Circle Woodburn,OR 97071 (503)981-0155 Site Location: The site is located on the east side of SW 68th Parkway, approximately 0.1 miles south of Highway 99W. Legal description: TL 2600, Section 36DA, T1S, R1W, W.M.;Lat:45'26'21" Lon: 122 44'47". Acreage: 1.26 acres Topography: The site topography is dominated by an incised ravine in the north portion of the property. The remainder of the property beyond the top of ravine contains mild slopes to the west-northwest generally in the range of 3 to 10%. Much of the area appears to have been graded in the past. Land Use History: The parcel is currently vacant. No previous land usage was apparent during the site investigation. Adjacent Usage: Properties to the north and west are vacant. To the south and east is the Providence complex,which appears to be a regional campus containing primarily offices. Waterways: An unnamed tributary of Fanno Creek Floodway: None LWI Map Reference: City of Tigard LWI Other Wetland Determinations: None Determination: The perennial stream along the north property line is a jurisdictional water and was delineated out to the ordinary high water marks of the stream. No other wetlands or jurisdictional waters were identified on the site beyond the stream. 0.038 acres of the stream are present on the subject property as shown on Figure 1. Wetland Classes: R3UBI (Riverine, Upper Perennial,Unconsolidated Bottom, Cobble/Gravel) 1 Introduction The subject property consists of one 1.26-acre parcel in Tigard, Oregon. The site is proposed for commercial development. The applicant requested an assessment of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of Clean Water Services, the local regulatory authority on stream and wetland issues. The controlling document is Chapter 3: "Standard Design Requirements for Storm and Surface Water and Vegetated Corridors", in particular sections 3.02 (Sensitive Area and Vegetated Corridor Standards) and Appendix C (Natural Resource Assessments). This scope of work included only the assessment phase of the project. The applicant was informed that additional requirements such as alternatives analyses, mitigation plans, or rapid stream assessment (Appendix D) may be required later in the development process if impacts are proposed within the Water Quality Resource Area. The delineation and assessment field investigations were performed on September 2,2004. A preliminary site visit was performed on May 26,2003 for the purpose of providing the client a proposal. This report documents the investigation, best professional judgment and conclusions of the investigators. It is correct and complete to the.best of our knowledge. It should be used at your own risk until it has been reviewed and approved in writing by Clean Water Services. Delineation of the Boundaries of the Sensitive Areas The site was investigated in accordance with the guidelines set forth in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1, 1987) using the plant community methodology for sites less than 5 acres. A detailed discussion regarding the wetland determination is included in Appendix A of this report. Data plots sampled for the purpose of documenting site conditions are included in Appendix B of this report. The plot locations are shown on Figure 1. A. Perennial Stream An unnamed stream that is a tributary of Fanno Creek was identified along the north property line. The stream was delineated out to the ordinary high water marks, as defined by clear changes in vegetation on the banks. (Note that only the south bank was delineated, as the north bank of the stream was offsite and had no bearing on the subject property.) The stream was typically 7' wide with the banks defined by the side slopes of the fairly steep ravine. The streambed consisted of gravelly to cobbly material. There was a wider reach of stream that begins approximately 40' west of the east property line. This is an area where high flows spill out of the low-flow channel into a secondary channel that appears to be undergoing active scour and deposition processes (ie, it is not a dry remnant channel.) Pictures of this secondary channel are included in Appendix B. A strip of higher ground separates the two channels and contains numerous Alnus rubra (Red Alder, FAC) trees, but for simplicity this "island"was included within the boundary of the jurisdictional waterway. The stream was flowing both during our preliminary site visit on May 26, 2004 and during our detailed site investigation on September 2, 2004. The USGS map has identified this stream as perennial, and the character of the stream also indicates perennial flows. In Appendix C, section 4.2.c.2.a, it states that: "Streams are considered perennial until proven intermittent with adequate research and field documentation (photos, field data) following District methodology." Based on the best available evidence, we have concluded that this reach of the stream is perennial. The stream enters a corrugated metal pipe approximately 60' east of the west property line. The pipe carries flows out to SW 68th Parkway and then daylights again on the west side of the road. 2 B. Offsite Minor Drainage Feature Investigated East of the subject property, a minor drainage feature was identified that is aligned adjacent to the paved access drive into the adjacent Providence complex and flows in a general east to west direction. Approximately 100' east of the east property line the drainage enters a field inlet, and then is piped to the west across the remainder of that property and across the subject property out to SW 68th Parkway where it combines with the stormwater system. The field inlet and the reach approaching the field inlet were GPS-located and are shown on Figure 1. This feature has almost certainly been in its current form since the Providence complex was built. Readily available aerial photographs from www.portlandmaps.com are present back to 1996, and these show that the Providence complex was present from prior to the 1996 photograph. (Aerial photographs from that site are included in Appendix B.) Due to the time period involved since the pipe was installed, the piped condition now constitutes the "normal" condition, and we determined that further assessment of the upgradient and downgradient reaches was not warranted to determine if the feature was a jurisdictional wetland or waterway prior to being piped. Properties west of SW 68th Parkway were not investigated in detail, even if within 200' of the site, as per 3.02.4 (5) of the Clean Water Services code: "The Vegetated Corridor shall not be required to extend beyond an existing building or improved roadway separating the proposed development from the Sensitive Area." Vegetated Corridor Widths associated with the Delineated Sensitive Areas The first step in determining the vegetated corridor width is the determination regarding whether the stream is intermittent or perennial. We concluded above based on the best available evidence that the stream is most likely perennial. The second step in determining the vegetated corridor width is measuring the adjacent slope. Slopes are measured in accordance with Figure 3.2 (Vegetated Corridor Measurement Methodology) of the Clean Water Services document. The methodology involves dividing the net elevation difference across a 50' horizontal distance in the direction perpendicular to the stream. As shown in Figure 2 in Appendix B, net slope calculations are provided at approximately 30' intervals along the vegetated corridor based on a topographic survey provided by the applicant. The slopes are less than 25%. Therefore with a perennial stream with adjacent slopes <25% the vegetated corridor width in accordance with Table 3.1 is 50'. The 50' vegetated corridor is shown on Figures 1 through 3. Where the stream approaches the site from the northeast it has no potential for buffer encroachment deeper into the site than the onsite portion of the stream. The offsite minor drainage feature whose jurisdictional status was not definitively determined during this investigation is over 50' away from the subject property, and therefore has no potential for vegetated corridor encroachment onto the subject property. (See Figure 1.) 3 Vegetated Corridor Conditions The predominant vegetation associations as determined during our field investigation are shown on Figure 3. The following sections describe the two vegetation associations. Vegetation Community 1: Riparian Forest w/Rubus This community was characterized by a fairly full tree canopy along with a moderate coverage of native shrubs. Like the majority of the site, Rubus discolor (Himalayan Blackberry, FACU) is dominant in this area although it clearly has less influence on the character of the community as a whole relative to other portions of the site. This community was represented in Plot 1 shown on Figures 1 and 3. The following table shows the data sampled at Vegetation Plot 1: Species Name Stratum % Picea sitchensis* (Sitka Spruce) Tree 15 Aesculus hippocastanum (Horse Chestnut) Tree 20 Quercus garryana* (Oregon White Oak) Tree 20 Prunus virginiana* (Chokecherry) Tree 10 Rubus discolor** (Himalayan Blackberry) Shrub 60 Aesculus hippocastanum Shrub 10 Corylus cornuta* (Hazelnut) Shrub 15 Crataegus monogyna** (English Hawthorn) Shrub 2 Polystichum munitum* (Sword Fern) Herb 6 Rubus ursinus* (Trailing Blackberry) Herb 1 Tolmiea menziesii* (Piggyback Plant) Herb 1 *Native species **Noxious/Invasive species In accordance with Table 3.2 of Clean Water Services regulations, this community has a total tree canopy greater than 25%, and native cover by trees, shrubs, and groundcover between 50 and 80%. Therefore according to Table 3.2,this community meets the criteria of a"Marginal" corridor. Vegetation Community 2:Robinia/Rubus This vegetation association was the predominant vegetation above the top of the ravine. It was defined by a general lack of tree canopy and a weedy colonizing shrub stratum consisting of Robinia pseudoacacia (Black Locust) and Rubus discolor(Himalayan Blackberry). The groundcover was dominated by various non-native pasture grasses and weeds. The following table shows the vegetation sampled at Vegetation Plot #2. (Note that the vegetation was sampled in an accessible area where the vegetation had been mowed earlier this summer. Where the vegetation was not mowed the thicket of Rubus discolor was nearly 100%.) 4 Species Name Stratum Pyrus sylvestris (Apple) Tree 5 Rubus discolor** (Himalayan Blackberry) Shrub 35 Robinia Pseudoacacia (Black Locust) Shrub 25 Crataegus monogyna** (English Hawthorn) Shrub 1 Cytisus scoparius** (Scotch Broom) Shrub 1 Prunus virginiana* (Chokecherry) Shrub 1 Agrostis sp. (Bentgrass species) Herb 30 Festuca arundinacea (Tall Fescue) Herb 8 Hypochaeris radicata (Spotted Cat's Ear) Herb 8 Holcus lanatus (Velvetgrass) Herb 5 Chrysanthemum leucanthemum (Oxeye Daisy) Herb 5 Rubus ursinus*. (Trailing Blackberry) Herb 1 Taraxacum ofcinale** (Common Dandelion) Herb 2 Cirsium arvense** (Canadian Thistle) Herb 1 *Native species **Noxious/Invasive species In accordance with Table 3.2 of Clean Water Services regulations, this community has a total coverage by native trees, shrubs, and groundcover of less than 50% and it has less than 25% tree canopy. Therefore according to Table 3.2, this community meets the criteria of a"Degraded" corridor. 5 APPENDIX A Documentation Regarding Wetland Determination INTRODUCTION This report documents the investigation, best professional judgment and conclusions of the investigators. It is correct and complete to the best of our knowledge. It should be considered a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination of wetlands and other waters and used at your own risk until it has been reviewed and approved in writing by the Oregon Department of State Lands (ODSL) in accordance with OAR 141-090-0005 through 141-090-0055. (In accordance with the tiered report prioritization system currently in effect at ODSL, the wetland report will not be reviewed in a timely manner by ODSL if the project involves no wetland/waterway impacts. In this case, the report shall be subject to the review of the local regulatory agency.) METHODOLOGY This investigation was carried out in accordance with the guidelines set forth in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1, 1987) using the plant community methodology for sites less than 5 acres. A thorough meander survey of the property was performed prior to the establishment of plots to identify those areas with the potential to meet the three necessary criteria of wetlands. The plots were established at each change in the vegetation or hydrologic conditions. Each plot was sampled for vegetation, soils and hydrology. Vegetation was sampled using a 5' radius for herbs and a 30' radius for trees and shrubs, except where the above radii were not appropriate as noted in the data sheets. Soil pits were dug to a depth of at least 16", and the physical characteristics (Munsell characteristics, texture, presence of cobbles or gravel, redoximorphic features and presence of organic material) were investigated and recorded. The presence or lack of hydrologic indicators was noted. A wetland/non-wetland determination was made for each sample, based on whether all three of the necessary criteria(hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils,and wetland hydrology)were present. RESULTS Vegetation The majority of the site consists of a weedy vegetation association dominated by Rubus discolor (Himalayan Blackberry, FACU) and various pasture grasses and weeds including Holcus lanatus (Velvet Grass, FAC),Agrostis sp. (Bentgrass species, FAC), and Hypochaeris radicata (Spotted Cat's-ear, FACU). Where the site is not mowed, Robinia pseudoacacia (Black Locust, FACU) is a dominant plant on the shrub stratum,generally forming a dense thicket with the Rubus discolor. In the north portion of the site, starting at the top of bank of the ravine, there is a riparian forest with substantial forested canopy cover (-65%). Trees in this area include Aesculus hippocastanum (Horse Chestnut, UPL), Quercus garryana (Oregon White Oak, UPL), and Picea sitchensis (Sitka Spruce, FAC). The shrub stratum is dominated by Corylus cornuta (Hazelnut, FACU) and Rubus discolor (Himalayan Blackberry, FACU), although the Rubus has less influence on the plant community as a whole within this community. No plant communities were identified that met hydrophytic vegetation criteria. Plots 1 through 3 are included in Appendix B that represent the plant communities present on the site. Soils The Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Multnomah County identifies two major soil units on the site, Quatama loam (map units 37B and 37C) and Huberly silt loam (map unit 22). Quatama loam is a moderately well drained soil formed in mixed, loamy alluvium on old terraces. A typical profile contains a surface layer of dark brown (10YR3/3) loam from 0 to 9 inches. The subsoil consists of dark yellowish- lA brown (10YR3/4)loam from 9 to 15 inches followed by dark yellowish-brown (10YR3/4) clay loam from 15 to 21 inches. Permeability is moderate(0.6 to 2.0 in/hr) in the upper 15 inches and is moderately slow (0.2 to 0.6 in/hr) below. Included in this unit are areas of Aloha, Hillsboro, and Huberly soils. Of Quatama and its inclusions none are included in Hydric Soils of the United States, however Huberly is included on the 1995 revised hydric soils list. Huberly silt loam is a poorly drained soil formed in mixed silty alluvium on terraces. A typical profile contains a surface layer of very dark gray(10YR3/1) silt loam with faint mottles from 0 to 8 inches. The subsoil consists of grayish-brown (10YR5/2) silt loam from 8 to 15 inches; followed by grayish-brown (10YR5/2) silt loam with many distinct mottles from 15 to 25 inches. Below 25 inches is a fragipan. Permeability is moderate (0.6 to 2.0 in/hr) in the upper 15 inches, moderately slow (0.2 to 0.6 in/hr) from 15 to 25 inches,and slow (0.06 to 0.2 in/hr) below. Included in this unit are areas of Aloha, Verboort, and Quatama soils. Of Huberly and its inclusions. Verboort is included in Hydric Soils of the United States, and Huberly is included on the 1995 revised hydric soils list. Pertinent Inclusions: Aloha silt loam is a somewhat poorly drained soil formed in alluvium or lacustrine silt on broad valley terraces. A typical profile contains a surface layer of dark brown (10YR3/3) silt loam from 0 to 8 inches. The subsoil consists of dark brown (10YR4/3) silt loam with common, medium, faint mottles from 8 to 15 inches; followed by yellowish-brown (10YR4/4) silt loam with common, fine, faint mottles from 15 to 22 inches. Permeability is moderate(0.6 to 2.0 in/hr) in the upper 8 inches and is moderately slow (0.2 to 0.6 in/hr)below. Aloha is not included in Hydric Soils of the United States or in the 1995 revised list. The soil sampled on the ravine slope did not match well with the mapped Huberly or Quatama soils. We felt the soil matched better with the description of the Aloha silt loam inclusion. The soils above the top of the ravine did not match well with the mapped Quatama loam or any of its inclusions. The soil contained a higher clay content than the soils in the ravine, and was not a good match with the loam texture of the mapped series. Given the character of the site, we feel there is a good chance that the site contains old fill, resulting in an atypical soil profile. Based on research of readily available aerial photographs back to 1996, the fill appears to have been placed prior to 1996. Hydric soil indicators were not found in any of the soils investigated on the subject property. Hydrology Background information: Field investigations were performed on September 2, 2004. This is a time of year that seasonal wetland systems have commonly dried out,so direct observation of inundation or saturation was not strongly relied upon in making the determination of wetland hydrology. In the two weeks preceding and including the September 2"`' investigation, the Portland National Weather Service station had recorded 2.35 inches of precipitation. The following table shows precipitation recorded at the Portland National Weather Service station (recorded data and historical average). The station used for the WETS data is the Portland WSFO (0R6751) which is the station closest to the NWS station where the recent precipitation data is available, and therefore provides the best comparison. (Note that precipitation in Tigard may be somewhat different than at the Portland station,however the amount relative to the historical average should be approximately the same.) The low range represents the precipitation total that 30% of years will be less than the given 2A value. The high range represents the total that 30% of years will exceed that value. A value between the two figures (30th to 70th percentile)generally represents"normal" precipitation conditions. Month Recorded Historical WETS WETS Within WETS Data(in.) Average(in.) Low Range High Range Normal Range? October, 2003 3.02 2.88 1.57 3.52 Yes November,2003 4.09 5.61 3.72 6.73 Yes December,2003 7.45 5.71 3.89 6.82 High January,2004 4.86 5.07 2.98 6.16 Yes February, 2004 3.95 4.18 2.84 4.98 Yes March,2004 1.53 3.71 2.85 4.31 Low April, 2004 1.01 2.64 1.93 3.10 Low May, 2004 1.78 2.38 1.44 2.88 Yes June,2004 1.12 1.59 0.94 1.93 Yes July,2004 0.04 0.72 0.31 0.89 Low August, 2004 2.68 0.93 0.33 1.13 High Table 1: Rainy Season Precipitation Preceding Delineation Investigations The total precipitation in the water year of the field investigation (October 1, 2003) through September 2, 2004)was 31.53 inches. The historical average over the same time period is 35.42 inches. Therefore the total precipitation in the water year of the field investigation was 89% of normal. Site-Specific Information: On the flat ground above the top of the ravine, there was no evidence of wetland hydrology. Historically it is likely that a drainage course passed across the southern portion of the site in an east to west direction. That feature was piped when the Providence complex to the east was built. It is uncertain if historically this feature had wetland hydrology. In its current form on the offsite property it has the general character of a stormwater ditch and appears to be fairly flashy in direct response to storm events. Within the ravine in the north portion of the subject property, no springs or seepage areas were identified beyond the ordinary high water mark of the stream. The stream in the northern portion of the site is a tributary of Fanno Creek. It was flowing during the September 2' field investigation and also during a preliminary site visit performed on May 26t. Although precipitation in the two weeks preceding the field investigation was above normal, the stream appeared to have the characteristic of a perennial stream. The USGS map has it classified as perennial. We concluded that the stream is most likely perennial. 3A DETERMINATION AND CONCLUSIONS The south bank of the perennial stream was delineated out to the ordinary high water mark. (Note that the north bank was offsite and had no bearing on the subject property and was therefore not flagged or mapped.) There was a side channel that appears to experience overflows during high water events that was included within the ordinary high water mark. For simplicity the "island" between the main channel and the side channel was included within the jurisdictional waterway boundary. The main channel and secondary channel are shown in photographs in Appendix B. No other portion of the site met any of the three wetland criteria (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology.) Plots 1 through 3 represent conditions across the site. The only feature we identified having the potential to be regulated was a piped drainage feature that crosses the site. The condition of this feature as it approaches the subject property from the east appears to be more characteristic of a stormwater feature than a natural watercourse. It does not appear as a mapped drainage feature on the USGS map, the NWI, the LWI, or the SCS map. Photographs are shown taken from the upgradient property nearest to the location where it approaches the subject property. Given the time period involved since the feature was piped (prior to 1996), the current piped condition is considered the "normal" condition. If the feature above the subject property was found to be a jurisdictional waterway, it is likely that permits would be required by the regulatory agencies for any work proposed on the piped reach (for instance resizing the pipe, or realigning the pipe.) We recommend notifying the regulatory agencies (ODSL and the USACOE) in the event of any proposed modification to the piped reach. • 4A APPENDIX B Site Vicinity Map Plat Map USGS Map City of Tigard Local Wetland Inventory (LWI) Map SCS Soil Survey Map Site Overview Map Slope Measurements Map Vegetation Communities Map Site Photographs 1996 and 2002 Aerial Photographs Field Data Sheets Species List Indicator Category Definitions References SITE OVERVIEW MAP LEGEND FIGURE: 1 OF 3 PHOTO LOCATION 1d0 LOCATION OF SCALE: 1"=60' i, RHGT GS 7-10 :HEWN, V; SEPARATE SHEE- DRAWN BY: DW 4--___� environmental 7/,, technology /'/, /, DATE: 09/07/04 ,, consultants //j'//,/r• x0 DATA PLOT //%/ ,',-i v. LOCATION JOB #: 04-025 ////!%< NOTES ///i////,/ 4� � (1) ALL FEATURES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SOUTH OHWM (ORDINARY /j %i ' ` f�"' t t. WERE LAND SURVEYED EXCEPT FOR THE HIGH WATER MARK) - //S"' /,%+'.- " FOLLOWING, JURISDICTIONAL LIMIT OF,/ ;,%..-P, if f� _ (a) THE OHWM OF STREAM STREAM // /%�Q- WAS LOCATED BY ETC / { USING A LASER ////�/// � � RANGEFINDER AND COMPASS, //./"/ / {f; ,/ WATER QUALITY USING SURVEYED TREES AS j �r / /� RESOURCE AREA BASE POINTS - ACCURACY STREAM ENTFj%, a� = r <1 METER. Q . CMP PIPE %i///< • ` , ,, / (0 27 ACRES) (b) THE DATA PLOTS AND -- - I (FL OW i/l \ . i s OFFSITE DRAINAGE COURSE .y�� 1 CARRIED JE1I �,��/ r f.' /i / FIELD INLET WERE LY -1' THE E-St-BSI, i ( i 4• ;r: •LOCATED BY ETC USING A I ••• -SW -F{/(W--Y�))I 1 �� .-S TRIMBLE GEOXT WITH ,-. _ /, ^1, : DIFFERENTIAL CORRECTION i _/ i, - : -.....-0., ¢ y JlI (ACCURACY (1 METER). GPS it l / �;,//./// ��_4 } /r WORK TIED INTO LAND L -- \ ` ,L }u / I f.X itrj _` , / /I SURVEY BY LOCATING I �y �' �g !j O NUMEROUS SURVEYED = ' `c, / UTILITY FEATURES ALONG F : IA-. F % ( \\ : II 1i1 / ROADWAY 1• I� .�'_ F4n \ I I/III I (II 1 I III /1 I � � I i I'I)I IliiI , \: rr^^ i o• f I I , l 50' BUFFER ', /I!/i/lj j 1 PROPERTY LINES / , 11 l 1 I i x r: I / I I/ 1 I I IVI \ '� /. •v 1/ / / 3 ® i \ k ! ' �, \ • ' ' Ek Va �� i1 ,1 \ PIPE CL'DCATIDN - - �I,I MAXIMUM EXTENTS OF OFFSITE • APPR/'\' V ova �� - - - - -! _ .- I BUFFER CIF FEATURE IS 3 '-1ii� JURISDICTIONAL; DETAILED \ - . \\ • .'-�;'1 STUDY TO DETERMINE \ v \ i I •\ JURISDICTI❑NAL STATUS NOT -< �� - _- ' ARRANTED) lo 1 /-�',}lbv:, 5 L5 S E Z I' I ) / N Q -^� FIELD INLET; DRAINAGE ENTERS \ / PIPED SYSTEM - I I } , i / GRAPHICAL SCALE • - --- / ' I 30 0 30 60 90 120 ' '1.= I /,- GRAPHICAL SCALE / /,' / 15 0 15 30 45 60 / / `l�) /� N _ / 2, n ,',, j i - / n. // ,' � 11 / ( r. . / , ' " ar.:s��. �t o ;� � Ii ! '236 j / / 1' I -- ‘ -•--_‘-\,C\''''' ,,-. :: ___-—__.,-: -.> '/ ,______ ----—. I i - , _ / / J ' 1 / / \, ° 1 I / / r FIGURE: 2 OF 3_ /\ / __ SLOPE vEASUREIVENTS � SCALE: 1��=30� environmental 11140 SW 68TH PARkWAY DRAWN BY: DW // ,( technology TIGARD, OREGON DATE 09/08/04 consultants APPLICANT: WEBSTAR VI JOB #: 04-025 GRAPHICAL SCALE 15 0 15 30 45 60 N LEGEND / IVEGETATION COMMUNITY I: "4011114.1 RIPARIAN FOREST W/ RUBUS — — — — VEGETATION COMMUNITY 2: '\ — 110 A _—= ROBINIA/RUBUS 0 X VEGETATION DATA PLOT / \'VAA\ V`.,v`— v— Il's il :s .1 ''s '‘' ' ' 4- - • • �•` \ — _ — — — — - — 'rnlT i1. I l FIGURE 3 OF ?' VEGETATION COMMUN TIES SCALE ,"—,o' environmental 11 '140 SW 68TH PARk.WAY DRAWN B r DW /�r,._ � � technoltechnologyy TIGAP.D, OREGON DATE: 09/08/04 / •/ -• consultwts APPLICANT: WEBSTAR VI JOB #: 04-025 3 . • ' • 4l.„ liS (Z) Site Location 2,ERO _ ;• tr) 603 1:4 a C.) • V 1 Wt.0 • 2 3 8 1• • 2.11, 401,4 an01 •>•.[ A •7:1 plo.' • •'" ••• environmental technology consultants Subject Property: Plat Map 11140 SW 68th Parkway Tigard, Oregon Tigard, Oregon • 7 — „ SW VE141/./D , . T: _ i•rk-,, ...• ,,• ..:Ii•-% 1;1 .,..+,'-'UF •.,.,,14.. A. r, ,., ._ - , ,...•-.......,...F.:-.1.: 4 '—9 1-i. . ...i›. :..r_ ,_--7-.'....6^ .s s-r , i.•. . '.!'I T-1..E4F ., 4 m a., ., .7: r-, s,,,,-, a!,a,:'-,,i,.,..,4;:- • -- -, ..,4,11.,,, -.7.1 :.-: • . ., ...L,,.. ,,, - :, 3.- ,' t.21-. • "--8 -.l'" ”--- - ,,c1- :.,,:,f-, - , .„..;,,n;._Y-• :33,in !•;• r• ::-; •;:.‘.• . ' -----, 2=1_--,..r :-. 3.at ..-- ,,,.1_,-,2--"--,-----wi7 ,... — -•,:-: _? g_, 1 -._1..„,t--.7,_.f.:. y., •,-, ...1,Vi ...- :4,.._."',..,... -•••-•"-- ?NO:,I ..7-___., .. .4'.C.." r ' -.. ?f. r,,i, 7, ,,,t:H 41. •... .A yr, \...„ C.,P[1,-.u. irdy z P i FIE 7,4! ST • - tn - - sT,,,1 g., ......:4_,.. -:-... . _ • /, --,:zr .,,....o.ff4:ez .. Ig, —• _ =,.7-ec• - ...,...- ,_., .• r''' ----/ `---.• 3 ', e L.-", :5-,, ' r n ,,,on.,,,, -:',/----4,i .•! '71'.---3.--- —77----- ..• ...I ,_ " "---11 ".-• ,,...n Pt: 'I,- ,... -.• -il.A.11TA ST i,1 SW ' iii,INF'. 1,I:. ,• -- ..!..h.:.,.... - f 7- 5V_ EY-DR __,' sT :1;i ;r% '''/.' ;IsiG136!..pit.•, z: * ' - 1',_ 1 ; •.: --- , ,....• .-; _=c-: ,?,. ,- z• 1, 1:.11.,,,, ..1 . .......Ili I,..-k :-_-11 C• 1 ., :- :, ... a-c, \JI • • ',4 CLitITD14 • •?1' • i• .t. fL! ---- --it "•!!!,.,.,,', 4,.,.! • _ _ _ _ 4 ., ••-i ov,- - '. 1= , • : • -.,... SW ; 7.::: .f.,.. -:..,..I- :",..7•,,r4ii ;-: ' .. ' '3W HEW1Sil ,-sw •r7P.Arri: I, n Sr ,• 7. • — :.,....7.;.'" -':.. ',1.:,. :',..,....,..up,.....:1,..„ 11.1.4EvE.LAm F— - -. I •_ '— . Iii L.,:. .... -i.•-. -3w L? :'''. = :—SW SOO[PION),,:,,,•:- g , ?: ''''' ii tIR e-• 1 ,,,, .,sq,..c,us . t. :,,,-. - —71- ,a, fiovrou, sr ••••-., 0 ,- i-rA4 4., .\,.. -- -•-, -------- ,•-, , , .1,7 ,,,--- : . ,E.; ,g. \kks. .. . . ' ?.m,., ,..•-.W,Irlo r.i. VI ::7!, -- ' ..:; De.Lai I Map Scali:. !JO() I-t:,.,1 .., % . „ - ---' , .4 .• , environmental technology consultants Subject Property: SITE VICINITY MAP 11140 SW 68th Parkway Source:Thomas Brothers, 1999 Tigard,Oregon . _ . .._ ' .,,'.'-:- i:,7,,E,v, 4 2:.- • _ _ ,.: -,,,,,. , • 'r' 7ri. ni-- I • • --- : ....,..1•••:.1 ,•_:! -.,;••••5 . „ _;-,,,--;ie,a... R ,l; .' ; .'j .'' ' ) '-'11. • •.' 617.77.-:'..-.7. li,,i1,14T:1).;14.gEt. fr., . ,•-;:•,•4.--f• , - y,I ,,----/ ll ::::,*-_,7,4;• ...-z-.2,-;:_-• -,,f 4,,.-•-.,-.t7-7;,-,- , , ,,. ,....".1 11' ,,' ',t(------::,„) , -'11,r jc El _i Site Location ‘, , '':• - 1 ' ' . " 6 ---.,--- - • ''- :-.... , . I;, . , .,. . .. ts I I...51 0---- : ' • . :1 ----,---- ----- - - ' •;-• . , . , -zif,i • 1 • • =. -• ULTvrik-- i' . • - m .VI fT_ ----.U-•—• • • - -. 2,;'I--;.• .•. . ). • • . ::• • • - • i - • v.= I . s : -: [• •1 , •.,,- • .: _ ,, :,i . _: •.• k',•4 - •-k, • • : -. , , • , _ _ .. , • _ _ • ,1 . . . , ,. --,-....,11-1 4._• -,...., , I Ulm- w.: . ;;-:1 :' ; - ,-- ,i,,_ -_.__ _•____:&--,_ -__, --14-1-, - ,7!z=1-t4.}1? • '..,. ",:t..-7,- 7-=' ,.-_=-7:',-.1-7.1?----$ ;Av..!•". T., a ----7 7J1 I _ I •'' • -lie r_o'''I4 4---;:7-1 1,,k,:.' , Ic• IP S' 61'. 1 , ‘,..:'--:' .-- , _ __---- 1 -'_....-_-••=7-;-..-''''-_-t.--7::::7,-t__:=,-.:Z!'• ..:-...- 6._ ::: r - - - I an "-7-2 i • - - . ..i, • SCALE 1 24000 0 -r--7- L--.=-74._-_-_-___I—_-_:_. -._----F-,-,-_--",-,-_,_*2-7- _T.----- -..---z---r-_ --7----_-7---_ _, Ili I:AA ID 2::-...',0 -,i 0.•a_ iC:-..0 on'n 1 tiC....:: ':'"' :: 7 .....-4__a.... 1=,.J __.7-7- ___,-.--.r.i_ ---_:::7=-7_:-=,_ 5 0 =_=.1-7,-=-—--- --- -.L 7F--.---,--- ------ -----= --- =---77-- vl 2 NTIE environmental technology consultants Subject Property: PHYSICAL SETTING - 11140 SW 68th Parkway Lake Oswego Quadrangle Tigard, Oregon Sr _ 7 i I 1 I -i I;=i 4r_____rHv 1--[ ±---to , _ LL T- .F-1>_,, ---'1-11---'..-. L it_ __________\c-N,\2---; . 1 - _ii L____; ± / 7 ! . !-_-_,-,-/ .1 0/ I: -L 1 .);::-...."\ ,, ite 1 , :?tr rr I— iJ—, j� /f ?.-----1s< -- I 1_!. I i- I _ — ' t i + I'i`_L'amL_1_ I�_ �—_ T _ 1 _ � I • A n r - i71 /71 r— r I I ��L-`—T ice- __i 1 I - I I T J 1 -L]�;ter' !rT-'I 1 T r--� I_I J ' r 4! 1 {—.. j�! _1 ' I 1 .___; 1-,_,-_).,^—11 --f_..{sri-1 1— ,� i--�-���+ 1 'L-r-I / L I 1-Z�11-. " I SdL 22 — ) f l 1 I S L�� l + 1• environmental technology consultants Subject Property: LOCAL WETLAND INVENTORY 11140 SW 68th Parkway Source:City of Tigard Wetlands& Stream Corridors Map Tigard, Oregon -1:7.(...' -'--„....:';.':2, } 7p- 1 12 . ' 1 :,.!':''.':,•-11...1 4f.,_.'I'v:.'. a5C 7D 1B E. : 1 1 :.. . ..,4.;.." ,7D. 7G r. ,i .#' z - p 1 1 rc r9Cti �+`' 12A co.' r_'1 c7 ii ocatlon - iorapih. ��� .. r 1L r i 1 - i - r• 4C 3 e z22 l S Paz 'ram '''CO .r LEGEND . — (SCS Sheet 12, Inset A) 22 N - ` i • Map unit ZZ: Huberly Silt Loam(hydric) . • Map unit 37C: Quatama Loam(non-hydric) i a ,< n Scale 1.20000 environmental technology consultants Subject Property: SCS SOIL SURVEY Map 11140 SW 68th Parkway Source: Soil Conservation Service, 1972 Tigard, Oregon • ' • 3 y..,. r.r �„; * f;« Photo 1 ` ... . i �* _ ,,,'. '�. •• ,.Y' An overview of the south portion of the ,N :t+ ilk c rt t. '...A.:. _ s ' , ?-;. , psite. 31, • :ci.11. 0117d,„ ...i.4 4 - :,, 4.5.. . illit*W4. ; . .; - ,. ..z., .,.. ..,....;,... ., ..v .. .14._ f _.......„ r... _ 4. .r ....' '''''Z' ' . r '�.- •-'' ` sitiit �v . ,-- :,�•CAS- .• 416 'r d. vt4'r,� -k,., _ - _ ".vim.'\d -y i -•4kf •S ,-. -S yam . .f 4a.-}S r _--4 Photo 2 ,w � i,ii 4,,v • Another overview looking east. • ; • Much of this area south of the a ' t Y . L ..y C `„vr,-a :F i . ravine appears to have been graded _ - �4 t` f1 ,i ,i at some point in the past. A subsur- ti � _• „,... :• it, face pipe crosses in this vicinity of , �,,� ;p}� ..,..I.:,�' Y z ..� .� , the site. It transports flow from a � - ' ��, drainage feature picked up on the � • �''K " 't '"" ' . ;�r �.- = - ,-Fli: --,, ,.�adjacent property to the east. �. .•tom • •ti s` - e. ..ems '.r' r -k n x�-; i L ,,,�,. Photo 3 4 rr Another overview looking north /,g.. -rr�z c Y = 5 4 -4 toward the ravine. ti fiG:r`} *F''• } p ` �, L Q V G �� �%t' t T.r�,{`,l C.4101p �S tyl �`.i,M1Yvn 'y b y"'0.i. „7:, . �+ ,- .r. C yam, Ott �., .j.}`..- ". },., 04, . s; rr,r r d,4" ' . k _''. Photo 4 tv., h ,t, i?�� A view into an unmaintained thicket - w t N E3 4.Itt f� }.� ' ''�3 ` in the upland portion of the property. 'lot -_,, 'p-.,' °-=,r'� Robinia pseudoacacia (Black Locust, - r FACU) is the primary colonizer across - the site. r t C Y �i iç •r R'+^'� 1, i .- M c << Photo 5 A view of a drainage course that is offsite and upgradient of the site to ' ; � � the east. This feature is picked up in = ' : - 'i . t • I- a field inlet at the bottom of the photo , "`i• ' ; `t'Zi ,k,s j ;"fi ' and is carried in a pipe out to SW _ 44 =. 68th Parkway. The open channel is v x a te• A` Y P � wq , s over 50 away from the subject prop- .�.�c }1, erty, so an intensive study into the < > •` .. ,1. ; jurisdictional status of this feature ---`-_-.,-.5.. -,:,.----- ;*�, . ,r,'4i' _ was not warranted. '- ,t- F ��" ' ft ' •r_ ! m ti _:{. .•S4r.' 1:WP niN'LC$ 49¢• - ✓jC l� -�`�i Fr ''` x •- > ;=,. ,, Photo 6 ,, a te,,, , ' ' '� " ` ' g", y• Another view of the same offsite minor drainage course ,--Y 56 �`! i * ' .; that runs parallel to the paved drive that accesses the o f • ' �, adjacent Providence complex. 9,; t:r t} s ki.., " - - ..- 4e i.... - '' '',..,, z� �` r i7 t ry P � 4 0 ` ti � � } 1�tl�1�i7 ;� Ye • � � , 5 � , y e -. 4 tt,,j i' of Y4.4'� C-Y. :1/4, ,\ 1 a % t� �, asy ; . �ti` ,:,f,� Photo 7 ' ,/ , , - "Ill'''. i.' A view east up the stream corridor. s• - �' �1`. � -, ', �-, - The normal flow width is approxi- 6.+ " ` ..'•-' - 4'. r 1 `• `t r ` - -- mately 7' wide and contains a gravelly , k � _-r "i•t*'?' = to cobblybed. Based on the general ° - _ b • r Jt - � , characteristics of the stream we tit, 4 >" »? ; -ter `-'-� �r 47 �� '' determined that it is most likely a ems, -, s-� `'. „' 3�41a t1*� - 47 , r ; perennial stream. i v.tikit, j•' L ire pIB F- -• r$' Su ' 'y.' ''' �.�°'�71 t7 . ---+.. b y *„ f, k 4, !J ..; - . . d tom.. _ L6,._a • Photo 8 - ,, it< � ' 1 r!77'�9���� ��yM r, ,.�1r Beyond the main flow path, there was ' - ,,} `!,.; - 7 t a secondary flow path that we deter- 4 -, "t „y, �, '',,. r-, mined was within the ordinary high , ` '4 ° . . .� ', :, N r ' . . 1 fi�.r ',ter. water mark of the stream. On the left ' �' `` ,�� .� side of the photo where the Alnus , , ,-, y,w 9��; ,ram` Iti. ;g rubra (Red Alder, FAC) trees areifs,- - -f� `4`i1bt growing is slightly higher ground that ` ' „, separates the two channels. However '' =fit 3,, �- " , 1- the entire area was • included within ,� ,r°� �� � r ��'� ,� - ' ., V the jurisdictional limits of the stream Y , b4 J t as shown on Figure 1. i , ,��, 3' ° -1 'J- Alit t�IL „..,,, ,- „. ,..,,„..,4r.*„,„,, T., ry.......L.. cz.:. . ., „.; „0„,...,„.,, .. .,,, ,_.....,,,r e A,irAfpfi:a., „ii, e.„-ciiisice44.-,;;y7iNNIcti (,. ), -Iii.„ -,- �-Rom �,, �y '-';' t IV i r F�•��i '-4 ,•• 4 4. �''=xa, r- ,,:e- � i n ,.,, + k r 'i + r Y Photo 9 �, ; ,,, •,�,;.Ti. A view of where the secondary i` `�� '' ., >' "y channel joins with the main a ,q Q ,w s, 4' 2, *r yt ?- .4 �, *t ; t channel. The flow path bends in '''k � i;� "t �• ` ' 'y,..., ``,. - �'„4 front of the large Picea sitchensis r' i. -�, - `' a+, ' 'r� ,Y v y ' ,� , `--\ ' ',' ill (Sitka Spruce, FAC) to outlet back ' :t� , t ,;. , w & 5 k,,s� � into the main channel. likto ' -::::,‘-.i• -,' , 4 2,ti.„... _._. ,.,,,,,,,, ,...,-,„.„,..,`0 isms► a .; � , is •a _... • ate' F ,, f d �p 4 i,-t r,elt A '? - it p�wj.,ifivr�" ram..-.l�� :_ L .. I An-.:',,.. .`% y.-C.:i „ a.",. .r _'3�,. +. `a• "S --�1 4. 9 tc ,' 1- Photo 10 J> - ' ". �'' .. ;; • .,_ A view of the corrugated metal ' ,IE '.'k. N\u, - '' .. �, pipe inlet at the lower end of the ,:.� � � '" 4; g♦�,; -, J`1,`',,; _ , � , •stream on the subject property. E �� °4ir , \ "0,,,\ ' This pipe carries the flows out to ilt kir .. + ` ' -- _ k.`:. `'�k. SW 68th Parkway. �- ,, . . •Itt �: " �h,� ,� I, \ r , er. f ' • Ag' f :� ' . 10Lninaltila MOW l . .:} lft 77!'r'rya7.1" s�v,-.! 11. 1 a 7). #1 ' k. y. t f 4; iiii j l Nol • • . - � _..rr.A".40t." . •" 14, .' I a - _ f ;. F .R_ 4. + L * a rA.f,.- i_.tla ' 1� Ah1 ,M T:7..: x?7 igitiOr , . ' ,tom ,, X 3 M . t • environmental technology consultants Subject Property: 1996 Aerial Photograph 11140 SW Parkway Source: www.portlandmaps.com Tigard, Oregon x, ,4,,.......0.,„..,...• 1 F , _ fp...4'r.. . ; ...,,..... ... . ., .i.:), . t • w 4 • ' '[ i. )'. :VP'.y. A., a.` r••• r ��` rtr ' F �; r g . r" ifj .114 T. 0 get,- 'lc -1' • Atitf.R Y. bfl .q 1.• ,M. 1 d' ali �!{+1.w.�.� h 9 . ; 1+i7 1 Y M tc yr. a. qf ,^ " � 1.. • 13 *'. a , _ I rI I • � � _,C, # •'.�' + w sti k *. Ai.• 4t. r r'"L i '1' '_•-!..-4/' T- •'-' �"T r°. y i '• +Y 9* - , .. .. J al. R. y environmental technology consultants Subject Property: 2002 Aerial Photograph 11140 SW Parkway Source: www.portlandmaps.com Tigard, Oregon WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM PROJECT/SITE: 11140 SW 68th Parkway DATE:09/02/04 I PLANT COMMUt Riparian Forest with Blackberry _ OWNER/APPLICANT:Webstar VI CITY OR LEGAL:Tigard TRANSECT NUMBER: FIELD STAFF:David Waterman (COUNTY/STATE:Washineton/OR PLOT NUMBER: 1 SURVEY METHOD ROUTINE: X COMPREHENSIVE: PROCEDURE: PLANT COMMUNITY: X TRANSECT: VEGETATION DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR I. Aesculus hippocastanum Tree UPL 6. 2. Picea sitchensis Tree FAC 7. 3. Quercus garryana Tree UPL 8. 4. Rubus discolor Shrub FACU 9. 5. Polystichum nunitum Herb FACU 10. • PERCENT OF DOMINANTS THAT ARE OBL,FACW,FAC(NO'r FAC-): 20 *50/20 CRITERIA OBSERVATIONS/NOTES:Only sampled vegetation between OHWM and top of ravine,not beyond,regardless of vegetation radius. HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION? YES: NO: X RATIONALE: No majority of dominant hydrophytie vegetation SOILS SCS SERIES/PHASE AND TEXTURE CLASS: Aloha silt loam ''in comparison to SCS soil survey data CLASSIFICA'llON: Aquic Xeroquepts (DRAINAGE CLASS: somewhat poorly (HYDRIC SOILS LIST: No REDOXIMORPHIC FEATURES: I.Abundance MATRIX Concentration 2.Si,.; STRUCTURE DEPTH COLOR OR Depletion TYPE LOCATION % SIZE(mm) COLOR 3.Contrast 0-I I I0YR3/2 Concentration Concretion Matrix 0.5 2 Mn FP* Silt loam;contains seams of 10YR4/2 at<10%of profile 11-19 10Y124+/2 Silt loam;color between 4/2 and 5/2; vague intermixing between 4/2 and slightly redder 4/3 NOTES: HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS PRESENT Soil moist.but not saturated. 1.HISTOSOL: 6.REDOXIMORPHIC FEATURES(w/in 10"): 2.HISTIC EPIPEDON: 7.GLEYED/LOW CHROMA(<1): 3.SULFIDIC ODOR: 8.HYDRIC SOILS LIST: 4.AQUIC MOISTURE REGIME: 9.CONCRETIONS(w/in 3"): 5.FERROUS IRON TEST: 10.OTHER: HYDRIC SOILS? YES: NO: X 'RATIONALE: No hydric soil indicators present I.ABUNDANCE: F-FEW (<2%1 2.SIZE: F-FINE 1<5mm) 3.CONTRAST: F-FAINT (Evident only on dawn cxmninationl C-COMMON (2-20%) M-MEDIUM (3-13mm) D-DISTINCI' (Readily seen) M-MANY (>20%) C-COARSE (>I5mn) P.PROMINENT (Contrast strong))) HYDROLOGY NOTES:Above OHWM and approximately 2'above existing water level; RECORDED DATA: None 2.AERIAL PHOTO: No evidence of wetland hydrology 1.STREAM/LAKE/TIDE GAUGE: 3.OTHER: HYDROLOGY INDICATORS PRESENT:(PRIMARY,ONE REQUIRED) DEPTH OF SURFACE WATER IN. I.INUNDATION: 4.DRIFT LINES: DEPTH TO FREE WATER IN PIT IN. 2.SATURATION: 5.SEDIMENT DEPOSITS: DEPTH TO SATURATED SOIL IN. 3.WATER MARKS: 6.DRAINAGE PATTERNS: SECONDARY INDICATORS 1.OXIDIZED RHIZOSPHERES: 2.WATER STAINED LEAVES: 3.SOIL SURVEY DATA: (TWO REQUIRED) 4.FAC NEUTRAL TEST: 5.OTHER: WETLAND HYDROLOGY? YES: NO: X 'RATIONALE: No hydrology indicators present SUMMARY ARE srrE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS NORMAL: BASIS: YES: X NO: IS THE AREA A POTENTIAL PR013LEM AREA: BASIS: YES: NO: X IS SIGNIFICANTSIITE DISTURBANCE IN EVIDENCE: DISTURBED CHARACTERISTIC: YES: NO: X VEGETATION: SOILS: HYDROLOGY: EXPLANATION: IS THE HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION CRITERION MET? YES: NO: X IS THE HYDRIC SOIL CRrF ERION ME-I"? YES: NO: X IS THE WETLAND HYDROLOGY CRITERION MET? YES: NO: X WETLAND DETERMINATION: WETLAND: NON WETLAND: X DETERMINATION JUSTIFICATION: The vegetation, soil, and hydrology criteria were not met logxl(n•ironmental Technology Consultant.. Signature - / - �/ "ETLAND DETERMINATION DATA 'ORM PROJECT/SITE: 11140 SW 68th Parkway DATE:09/02/04 PLANT COMMUNITY:Robinia-Rubus OWNER/APPLICANT:Webstar VI CITY OR LEGAL:Tigard TRANSECT NUMBER: FIELD STAFF:David Waterman (COUNTY/STATE:Washington/OR PLOT NUMBER: 2 SURVEY METHOD ROUTINE: X COMPREHENSIVE: I PROCEDURE: PLANT COMMUNITY: X TRANSECT: VEGETATION DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM 1INDECATOR 1. Pyrus sylvestris 'free UPL 6. 2. Rubus discolor Shrub FACU 7. 3. Robinia psuedoacacia Shrub FACU 8. 4. Agrostis sp. Herb FAC 9. 5. 10. PERCENT OF DOMINANTS THAT ARE OBL,FACW,FAC(NOT FAC-): 25 _ *50/20 CRITERIA OBSERVATIONS/NOTES:Area mowed:blackberries cut down,otherwise would look like dense Robinia/Rubus thicket to south. HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION? YES: NO: X 'RATIONALE: No majority of dominant hydrophytic vegetation SOILS SCS SERIES/PHASE AND TEXTURE CLASS: Quatama loam (possibly disturbed) .in xunpartson in SCS soil survey data CLASSIFICATION: AyuulticHaploxeralfs 1DRAINAGECLASS: nxoderatelywell I HYDRIC SOILS LIST: No REDOXIMORPHIC FEATURES: I.Abundance MATRIX Concentration 2.Sine STRUC'T'URE DEPTH COLOR OR Depletion TYPE LOCATION % SIZE(mm) COLOR 3.Contrast 0-7 10YR3/2 Mixed matix color;silt loam w/ I OYR3/3 higher%clay than at Plot 1 7-16 IOYR3/3 Concentration Concretion Matrix 1 3 7.5YR4/4 FFF Silt loam to silty clay loam Concentration Mass Matrix 4 3 10YR3/4 CFF 16-I8 7.5YR4/3 Depletion Mass Matrix 30 15 I0YR5/2 MMF Heavy sticky,plastic,Silty clay loam NOTES: HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS PRESENT Soil dryer than down below in ravine;the 1.HISTOSOL: 6.REDOXIMORPHIC FEATURES(w/in 10"): soils here may have been disturbed in the 2.HISTIC EPIPEDON: 7.GLEYED/LOW CHROMA(<1): distant past from grading. 3.SULFIDIC ODOR: 8.HYDRIC SOILS LIST: 4.AQUIC MOISTURE REGIME: 9.CONCRETIONS(w/in 3"): 5.FERROUS IRON TEST: 10.OTHER: HYDRIC SOILS? YES: NO: X 'RATIONALE: No hydric soil indicators present I.ABUNDANCE: r--FEW (<2%) 2.SIZE: F-FINE (<5n,u,) 3.CONTRAST: F-FAINT (Evident only on close examination) C-COMMON (2-20%) M-MEDIUM (3.15mnU D-DISTINCT (Readily wen) M•MANY (>20%) C•COARSE (>15mm) P-PROMINENT (Contrast strongly/ HYDROLOGY NOTES:Up above top of bank:mild slope to west-nw:no evidence of RECORDED DATA: None 2.AERIAL PHOTO: wetland hydrology. I.STREAM/LAKE/TIDE GAUGE: 3.OTHER: HYDROLOGY INDICATORS PRESENT:(PRIMARY,ONE REQUIRED) DEPTH OF SURFACE WATER IN. I.INUNDATION: 4.DRIFT LINES: DEPTH TO FREE WATER IN PIT IN. 2.SATURATION: 5.SEDIMENT DEPOSITS: DEPTH TO SATURATED SOIL IN. 3.WATER MARKS: 6.DRAINAGE PATTERNS: SECONDARY INDICATORS I.OXIDIZED RHIZOSPHERES: 2.WATER STAINED LEAVES: 3.SOIL SURVEY DATA: ('TWO REQUIRED) 4.FAC NEUTRAL TEST: 5.OTHER: WETLAND HYDROLOGY? YES: NO: X 'RATIONALE: No hydrology indicators present SUMMARY ARE SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS NORMAL: BASIS: YES: X NO: IS THE AREA A POTENTIAL PROI3LEM AREA: 13ASIS: YES: NO: X IS SIGNIFICANT SITE DISTURI3ANCE IN EVIDENCE: DISTURBED CHARACTERISTIC: YES: NO: X VEGETATION: SOILS: HYDROLOGY: EXPLANATION: IS THE HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION CRITERION ma? YES: NO: X IS THE HYDRIC SOIL CRITERION MET! YES: NO: X IS THE WL TLAND HYDROLOGY CRITERION NME I? YES: NO: X WETLAND DETERMINATION: WETLAND: NON WETLAND: X DETERMINATION JUSTIFICATION: The vegetation, soil, and hydrology criteria were not metg d)I'77Rlinvirunmmunl'In inoIogyConsult:mts Signature /' WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM PROJECI%SITE:11140 SW 68th Parkway DATE:09/02/04 PLANT COMMUN( Needs OWNER/APPLICANT:Webstar VI CITY OR LEGAL:Tigard TRANSECT NUMBER: FIELD STAFF:David Waterman COUNTY/STATE:Washineton/OR PLOT NUMBER: 3 SURVEY METHOD ROUTINE: X COMPREHENSIVE: I PROCEDURE: PLANT COMMUNI Y: X TRANSECT: VEGETATION DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR I. Rubus discolor Shrub FACU 6. 2. Holcus lanatus Herb FAC 7. 3. 8. 4. 9. 5. 10. PERCENT OF DOMINANTS THAT ARE OBL,FACW,FAC(NOT FAC-): 50 *50/20 CRITERIA OBSERVATIONS/NOTES: HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION? YES: NO: X RATIONALE: No majority of dominant hydrophytic vegetation SOILS SCS SERIES/PHASE AND 1T_XTURE CLASS: Quatama loam (possibly disturbed) *in comparison ioSCS soil survey data CLASSIFICATION: Ayuultic Haploxcralfs 'DRAINAGE CLASS: moderately well (HYDRIC SOILS LIST: No REDOXIMORPHIC FEATURES: 'Abundance MATRIX Concentration 2.Size STRUCTURE DEPTH COLOR OR Depletion TYPE LOCATION % SIZE(mm) COLOR 3.contrast 0-10 LOYR3/2 Concentration Concretion Matrix I 1 7.5YR3/4 FED Heavy,hard silt loam;has scams of 10YR3/4 at-5%of matrix 10-18 7.5YR4/3 Depletion Mass Matrix 20 l0 10YR5/2 CMF Silt loam to silty clay loam NOTES: HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS PRESENT Heterogeneous:typical of disturbed soil 1.HISTOSOL: 6.REDOXIMORPHIC FEATURES(w/in 10"): 2.HISTIC EPIPEDON: 7.GLEYED/LOW CHROMA(<1): 3.SULFIDIC ODOR: 8.HYDRIC SOILS LIST: 4.AQUIC MOISTURE REGIME: 9.CONCRETIONS(w/in 3"): 5.FERROUS IRON TEST: 10.OTHER: HYDRIC SOILS? YES: NO: X !RATIONALE: No hydric soil indicators present I.ABUNDANCE: F.FEW (<2%) 2.SIZE: F.FINE (<5oni) 3.CONTRAST: F-FAINT (Evident only on clove examination) C•COMMON (2-20'Y) M•MEDIUM (5-15mm) D-DISTINCT (Readily seen) M-MANY (>2070) C-COARSE (>15mm) P-PROMINENT (Contrast strongly) HYDROLOGY NOTES:Along old drainage alignment that is now piped across area. No RECORDED DATA: None 2.AERIAL PHOTO: evidence tht the area experiences hydrology any more. 1.STREAM/LAKETIIDE GAUGE: 3.OTHER: HYDROLOGY INDICATORS PRESENT:(PRIMARY.ONE REQUIRED) DEPTH OF SURFACE WAITER IN. I.INUNDATION: 4.DRIF1'LINES: DEPTH TO FREE WATER IN PIT IN. 2.SATURATION: 5.SEDIMENT DEPOSITS: DEl'l'H TO SATURATED SOIL IN. 3.WATER MARKS: 6.DRAINAGE PATTERNS: SECONDARY INDICATORS I,OXIDIZED RHIZOSPHERES: 2.WATER STAINED LEAVES: 3.SOIL SURVEY DATA: (TWO REQUIRED) 4.FAC NEUTRAL TEST: 5.OTHER: WETLAND HYDROLOGY? YES: NO: X RATIONALE: No hydrology indicators present SUMMARY ARE SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS NORMAL: BASIS: Drainaee piped across this area prior to 1996 YES: X NO: IS THE AREA A POTEN'IIAL PROBLEM AREA: I3ASIS: YES: NO: X IS SIGNIFICANT SITE DISTURBANCE IN EVIDENCE: DISTURBED CHARAC'I'ERISTIC: YES: NO: X VEGETATION: SOILS: HYDROLOGY: EXPLANATION: IS THE HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION CRITERION MET? YES: NO: X IS THE HYDRIC S011.CRITERION MET? YES: NO: X IS THE Wli I'LAND HYDROLOGY CRITERION(AFT' YES: NO: X WETLAND DETERMINATION: WETLAND: NON WETLAND: X DETERMINATION JUSTIFICATION: The vegetation,soil, and hydrology criteria were not met 01998 Environmental Technology Consultant. Signature Cam/ SPECIES LIST Region 9 Indicator Scientific Name Common Name Category Epilobium watsonii Watson's Willow-herb FACW- Agrostis sp. Bentgrass species FAC Crataegus douglasii Hawthorn, douglas' FAC Holcus lanatus Grass, common velvet FAC Picea sitchensis Spruce, sitka FAC Poa sp. Bluegrass sp. FAC (most likely) Tolmiea menziesii Plant, piggy-back FAC Festuccc arundinacea Fescue, kentucky FAC- Cirsium arvense Thistle, creeping FACU+ Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn, one-seed FACU+ Acer macrophyllum Maple, big-leaf FACU Cirsium vulgare Thistle, bull FACU Corylus cornuta Hazel-nut, beaked FACU Hypochaeris radicata Cat's-ear, spotted FACU Polystichum munitum Fern, pineland sword FACU Prunus virginiana Cherry, choke FACU Robinia psuedoacacia Black Locust FACU Rubus discolor Blackberry, himalayan FACU Rubus ursinus Dewberry, california FACU Taraxacum of ficinale Dandelion, common FACU Trifolium sp. Clover sp. FACU (most likely) Aesculus hippocastanum Horse Chestnut UPL Chrysccntheaum leucanthemum Oxeye Daisy UPL Cytisus scoparius Scotch Broom UPL Geranium molle Dove's foot Geranium UPL Hype ricum pec foratum St. John's Wort UPL Pyrus sylvestris Common Apple UPL Quercus garryccna Oregon White Oak UPL Vicia sativa Vetch, common UPL INDICATOR CATEGORY DEFINITIONS Obligate Wetland (OBL). Occur almost always (estimated probability>99%) under natural conditions in wetlands. Facultative Wetland (FACW). Usually occur in wetlands (estimated probability 67%-99%), but occasionally found in nonwetlands. Facultative (FAC). Equally likely to occur in wetlands or nonwetlands (estimated probability 34%-66%). Facultative Upland (FACU). Usually occur in nonwetlands (estimated probability 67%-99%), but occasionally found in wetlands (estimated probability l%-33%). Obligate Upland (UPL). Occur in wetlands in another region, but occur almost always (estimated probability>99%) under natural conditions in nonwetlands in the region. If a species does not occur in wetlands in any region. it is not on the National List. An NI (no indicator) was recorded for those species for which insufficient information was available to determine an indicator status. A nonoccurrence (NO) designation indicates that the species does not occur in this region. The positive (+) sign indicates a frequency toward the higher end of the category(more frequently found in wetlands) and a negative (-)sign indicates a frequency toward the lower end of the category (less frequently found in wetlands). The wetland indicator categories should not be equated to degrees of wetness. Many obligate wetland species occur in permanently or semipermanently flooded wetlands, but a number of obligates also occur and some are restricted to wetlands which are only temporarily or seasonally flooded. The facultative upland species include a diverse collection of plants which range from weedy species adapted to exist in a number of environmentally stressful or disturbed sites (including wetlands) to species in which a portion of the gene pool (an ecotype) always occurs in wetlands. Both the weedy and ecotype representatives of the facultative upland category occur in seasonally and semipermanently flooded wetlands. Source: "National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary". U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. 1988. REFERENCES 1. Adamus, P.R. 2001. Guidebook .for Hydrogeon1orphic (HGM) - based Assessment of Oregon Wetland and Riparian Sites: Statewide Classification and Profiles. Oregon Division of State Lands, Salem, OR. 2. Chambers, K. L., Bruce Newhouse, and Peter F. Zika. Keys & Field Identification Characteristics Of Selected Willamette Valley Grasses, Sedges, & Rushes. Hortus Northwest Workshop, 1994. 3. Classification Of Wetlands And Deepwater Habitats Of The United States. U.S. Department Of The Interior, Fish And Wildlife Service, December, 1979. 4. Corps Of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, Environmental Laboratory, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,Mississippi, January 1987. 5. Dennis, La Rea J. Gilkey's Weeds of the Pacific Northwest. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 1980. 6. Gilkey, Helen M. and La Rea J. Dennis. Handbook Of Northwestern Plants. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 1980. 7. Gilkey, Helen M. and Patricia L. Packard. Winter Twigs: Northwestern Oregon & Western Washington. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis. Oregon, 1962. 8. Guard, Jennifer B. Wetland Plants of Oregon and Washington. Lone Pine Publishing, Redmond, Washington, 1995. 9. Hitchcock, C. Leo and Arthur Cronquist. Flora Of The Pacific Northwest. University Of Washington Press, Seattle, 1973. 10. Hydric Soils Of The United States, U.S.D.A., SCS, December, 1987. 11. National List Of Plant Species That Occur In Wetlands: 1988 National Summary. U.S. Dept. Of The Interior, Fish And Wildlife Service, September, 1988. 12. National List Of Scientific Plant Names. U.S.D.A, SCS,January, 1982. 13. Pojar, Jim, and Andy McKinnon, eds. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone Pine Publishing, Redmond, Washington, 1994. 14. Soil Survey Of Washington County, Oregon. USDA, SCS, July 1982. l5. Sunset Books and Sunset Magazine, ed. Sunset Western Garden Book. Sunset Publishing Corporation, Menlo Park, CA. 1995. 16. Taylor, Ronald J. Northwest Weeds. Mountain Press Publishing, Missoula, Montana, 1990. 17. Vepraskas, Michael J. Redoximorphic Features.for Identifying Aquic Conditions. Technical Bulletin 301. North Carolina Agricultural Research Service, North Carolina State University, December, 1992. Alk I 1 CITY Of TIGARD Community cDevefopment Shaping etter Community LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION 120 DAYS = 6/4/2005 FILE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR_) 2004-00012 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW_(SLR 2004-00025 DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENT ( AR) 2005-00004 DEVELOPMENT ADJUSTMENT (VAR) 2005-00005 FILE TITLE: CASCADE VETERINARY REFERRAL CENTER APPLICANT: Studio 3 Architecture, Inc. OWNER: Webstar VI, LLC Attn: Leonard Lodder, AIA 610 Glatt Circle 222 Commercial Street NE Woodburn, OR 97071 Salem, OR 97301-3410 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Site Development Review approval to construct a 9,512 square foot, one-story veterinary specialist clinic and associated parking on an approximately 53,299 square foot parcel. Sensitive Lands Review is required for a stream on site, however no work is proposed in the stream or the associated buffer. Two Development Adjustments are also requested for the site distance standard of 430 feet to 300 feet, and to the street spacing standard of 200 feet to 138 feet. LOCATION: 11140 SW 68th Parkway; WCTM 1 S136DA, Tax Lot 2600. ZONE: C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. APPLICABLE REVIEW Community Development Code Chapters 18.360, 18.370, 18.390, 18.520, 18.620, CRITERIA: 18.705, 18.725, 18.745, 18.755, 18.765, 18.775, 18.780, 18.790, 18.795 and 18.810. DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I ® TYPE II ❑ TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV DATE COMMENTS WERE SENT: FEBRUARY 8, 2005 DATE COMMENTS ARE DUE: FEBRUARY 22, 2005 I-I HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM ❑PLANNING COMMISSION (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30PM LI STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) DATE OF DECISION: MARCH 18, 2005 COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION ® VICINITY MAP ❑ DRAINAGE PLAN ® IMPACT STUDY ® SITE PLAN I-I STORM WATER ANALYSIS ® SIGHT DISTANCE ANALYSIS ® NARRATIVE ® TREE PLAN ® OTHER: MISCELLANEOUS STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171, Ext. 2434 13 ( 3cDA 2.(000 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: Vet Specialists Clinic COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 11/1/04 GRADING R_ Existing and proposed contours shown. Show proposed grading Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? No ❑ Adjacent parcel grades shown. NA ❑ Geotech study submitted? STREET ISSUES Right-of-way clearly shown. Show dimensions of existing/proposed Centerline of streets) clearly shown. ® Street name(s) shown. ® Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. ❑ Street profiles shown. NA ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo NA on adjacent parcel(s), etc. ❑ Traffic Impact and/or Access Report _ E. Street grades compliant? 0. Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate? Show dimensions E Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width NA appropriate? ❑ Other: 1) Sidewalk & planter strip, 2) 18.705.030.H 1) Triangle standards 18.620 require 13' Access, 3) 18.705.030.H.1 Sight Distance sidewalk with tree wells (trees 3.5"caliper) OR 4'planter with 9'sidewalk. Show sidewalk alternative on plans. 2) Driveway does not meet the spacing standards for a S'-�i"1 feels 14-40 Collector, 18.705.030.H.3. 3) DKS has stated 2/5/nit that sight distance is not met with current site configuration. DKS has made proposals as to how sight distance can be met. How is the applicant going to address this issue? 1 SANITARY SEWER ISSUES Existing/proposed lines shown. Provide a utility plan with proposed connections/extensions. ❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? WATER ISSUES `, Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? Provide utility plan. Show proposed lines/sizes. F Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? Show any proposed hydrants 1� Proposed meter location and size shown? Show on utility plan A Proposed fire protection system shown? Show on utility plan §ORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES r Existing/proposed lines shown? Provide utility plan. Show proposed system. Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention Provide calcs and show on plans. provided? REVISED. 11/01/04 I/A.i !�6"' f44' 1 #efrit 144Aim)- ci• cf4nzit-Z444, Le. srp,,k_e___ 4-6 GU,o Ai4A-urAl l`cUiAxAktougl_ �l r E Water quality/detention facility shown on plans? Show on plans ❑- Area for facility match requirements from calcs? n Facility shown outside any wetland buffer? ❑ Storm stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? 12 . 3 '01 The submittal is hereby deemed [ COMPLETE ❑ INCOMPLETE By: (� r � Date: 11/1/04 REVISED: 11/01/04 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: Vet Specialists Clinic COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: 11/1/04 ADING Existing and proposed contours shown. Show proposed grading Y_ Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? No ❑ Adjacent parcel grades shown. NA Geotech study submitted? STREET ISSUES ❑ Right-of-way clearly shown. _- - . Show dimensions of existing/proposed ® Centerline of street(s) clearly shown. ® Street name(s) shown. ® Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. ❑ Street profiles shown. NA ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo NA on adjacent parcel(s), etc. ❑ Traffic Impact and/or Access Report ® Street grades compliant? ❑ Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate?«r_ ►Show dimensions ❑ Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width . NA appropriate? [J Other: 1) Sidewalk & planter strip, 2) 18.705.030.H 1) Triangle standards 18.620 require 13' Access, 3) 18.705.030.H.1 Sight Distance sidewalk with tree wells (trees 3.5" caliper) OR 4'planter with 9'sidewalk. Show sidewalk alternative on plans. 2) Driveway does not meet the spacing standards for a Collector, 18.705.030.H.3. 3) DKS has stated that sight distance is not met with current site configuration. DKS has made proposals as to how sight distance can be met. How is the applicant going to address this issue? SANITARY SEWER ISSUES [ Existing/proposed lines shown. Provide a utility plan with proposed '., connections/extensions. ❑ Stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? WATER ISSUES Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? Provide utility plan. Show proposed _ lines/sizes. Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? _ Show any proposed hydrants T❑ Proposed meter location and size shown? Show on utility plan ❑ Proposed fire protection system shown? Show on utility plan TORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES Existing/proposed lines shown? Provide utility plan. Show proposed system. Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention Provide calcs and show on plans. provided? '' REVISED: 11/01/04 Water quality/detention facility shown on plans? Show on plans ❑ Area for facility match requirements from calcs? ❑ Facility shown outside any wetland buffer? ❑ Storm stubs to adjacent parcels required/shown? The submittal is hereby eemed COMPLETE ® INCOMPLETE it-2 3 .14 By: Date: 11/1/04 4071\ REVISED: 11/01/04 LEWIS & E"1 .R OF 7 -11\J\l EM111"". /1 consulting engineers 1E1660 s.w. boones ferry road DATE I I , _ V Li JOB No. 0 tualatin. oregon 97062 (503)885.8605 phone [503]685.1206 fax ATTENTION VAN VLL. . C‘icG-t L 1 �1E.15776 RE Incorporated TO G1`jy o f ` «!^r"' T`6/1F— vc-T- CLt Lit 7L.eoulu 1 hal i . 131 o5 5(�, HALL &-/D. J(,rcee-t, S cARLisis aL►u,c WE ARE SENDING YOU Attached ❑ Under separate cover via DSL 1 tJG the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints Plans ❑Samples ❑Specifications ❑Copy of letter ❑Change order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION . _ Cr,tvit.... PAS THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: M(For approval ❑Approved as submitted ❑Resubmit copies for approval IZgOr your use ❑Approved as noted ❑Submit copies for distribution ❑As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS C I 0 L E kto/4.,e -t c.c9 .-Pc S T v Su Goirr c t)t 014S L-' S u 7-1 I 77C-13 /TC- -,WZ, (- %>c' 1 lj Z1,1 / c. --,Csc)A.._) COPY TO ^J (. 00 STUD�Z�-Ce - NC-�Cc/l� Jr. iU€ SIGNED: ( — 7 30 I If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at e. LAND USE APPLICA ION Project: ze1 �y'�` COMPLETENESS REVIEW t_J COMPLETE igt INCOMPLETE STANDARD INFORMATION: 1:r Deed/Tide/Proof 0f Ownership Neighborhood Mtg.Affidavits, Minutes, list 0f Attendees ►; Impact Study(18.390) ( USA Service Provider letter r. Construction Cost Estimate # Sets Of Application Materials/Plans ' C. Pre-Application Conference Notes 40 Envelopes With Postage (Verify Count) •� WA-Y ftqat.tiz,S i r,N OFF PROJECT STATISTICS: 01 Building footprint Size 'A 0f landscaping On Site A 'I.Of Building Impervious Surface On Site vj lot Square footage PLANS DIMENSIONED;_ ►21 Building footprint '❑ Parking Space Dimensions(Include Accessible&Bike Parking) Truck loading Space Where Applicable 1 Building Height Access Approach And Aisle Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: B Vianityllap • Architectural Plan gi. Tree Inventory xisting Conditions Plan landscape Plan f:a '_ Site Plan 0 lighting Plan TREE PLAN/MITIGATION PLAN: r4 Wrve.i of ihre.A4Nni(UAL—1Or4 1m,$r?ie4 -4aL4 CO Paolo. to,, n(wt -- l►l Re-,riovJ 174.4..i OD Pt.b/a1icst Pn'llicum .w I D 0 NAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) I 4rbo:ts+ LI RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.3 30,.time es, N 18.620(agar,raiangi oesign Standards) IN 18.165 roe-sheN Parkmeloading kquiaemenn) ❑ 18.340 precu(s ioeupreution) 18.630(was,,ingron square Regional Enter) 18.715(kasiti,,e lands k,,iew) 18.350(Flamed Development) 18.705(A�ssrtgress<r,�laeoa) 18.780(Lens) 18.360(siteoerekQnrent k,,iew) 18.110{kre:s«r ksidenaal Unit) (Temporary use remits) 418-370(Yarianas/Adjusancna) CI I8.715(oensny enmputatiom) IA 18.790(k kmoral) 18.380(Zoning Mapyfen Amendment) (Design Capp b k y Sandals) 11 s 18.195(Ynsaal(),,mane Areas) 18.385 Permits) I8.125(Eariromr.aul Perr«rrwn a tandards) 18.791(wit,&,...,(wit)Orerlay o sa;� 18.390(tie itian Ming Pr.ed.resM pad soar) I S.I30(Exceptions r.ae,,d.pment Standards) ❑ 18.798(wuek i Goimaiaiaion taritia) 18.410(to l;re ndf.sanene) ❑ 18.140(Itistnri orertay) 18.810(sleet i utaq Improvement sundials) U 18.420(land Parttians) 18.742,,hoar,,Derivation Pests) III 18.4 30(,.,,,;,,;sans) 18.745(«xaping i Screening sundials) 18.510(ksidential toning District) 18.750(tlnaaGcnnedMu,,d Nome kgulacons) 18.5201eor.,,e�al tuning o�oira) B. 18.15S lined sold Waite/kgSng storage) 18.530(Yraustria! (Dnaim) ❑ 18.760 Ranconloming situations) ADDITIONAL]T MS: I.\curpin masters\revisedMand use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 1 T-Jan-01 ,diipuiV�HUI --- December 8, 2004 CITY OF TIGARD Leonard Lodder OREGON Studio 3 Architecture 222 Commercial Street NE Salem, OR 97301-3410 RE: Completeness Review-68th Parkway Veterinary Clinic Case File No. SDR2004-000121SLR2004-00025 Dear Mr. Lodder: The City has received your application for Site Development Review (SDR2004-00012) to develop a 1.22-acre site with a Veterinary Clinic located on 11140 SW 68th Parkway in Tigard. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before the application can be deemed complete: 1. Site Plan: You submitted a Site Plan (Sheet A1.1) dated October 18, 2004. Subsequently, changes were made and a revised Site Plans dated October 28, 2004 were received in our office on November 12, 2004. After further revision to address public facilities elements of the plan, the latest site plans were received by the City on November 30, 2004. Please provide a final Site Plan that includes any changes that may be required in response to the following information needs. 2. CWS Provider Letter. You have submitted the Water Quality Sensitive Area Assessment prepared by ETC. However, as cautioned on page 2 of ETC's report and required on page 5 of the Pre-application Conference Notes, CWS must review your proposal prior to your application being complete. Please contact CWS and after their review, submit a CWS provider letter. Additionally, your narrative needs to address all the relevant standards in Section 18.775, including, in particular, natural drainageways. 3. Tree Removal Plan: You submitted a Tree Identification Schedule (Sheet T1) showing all trees 6 inches and greater located on and adjacent to the subject parcel. However, a complete tree plan consists of additional materials including: a Removal Plan, Protection Plan, and a Mitigation Program (if required). Please have your arborist provide these materials pursuant to Section 18.790.030. Additionally, your narrative needs to address all the relevant standards in this section. 4. Building Design Standards: You submitted scaled plan and elevation drawings of the proposed clinic. Your narrative briefly addresses Section 18.620.040. However, your narrative does not address the standard sufficiently to determine whether the standard is met. In particular, 18.620.040(A)(1) requires that 50% of the street facing ground floor elevation (between 3 and 9 feet) be in window, display areas, or doors. Your narrative needs to provide the calculation that demonstrates the standard is met. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 • 5. Access/Egress/Circulation: The standards of Chapter 18.705 need to be addressed in your narrative. 6. Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements: Although your narrative addresses this chapter, some standards have not been addressed. In particular, parking space dimensions, including accessible and bike parking spaces need to be identified and shown on the site plan. 7. Environmental Performance Standards: The standards of Chapter 18.725 need to be addressed in your narrative. 8. Landscape Plan: A landscape plan is required that shows the relevant provisions of Chapter 18.745 have been addressed. 9. Lighting Plan: You submitted a Site Utility Plan (C2) which includes a legend identifying "light poles" and "wall mounted lights", however, there are none shown on the plan itself. Please provide a lighting plan. 10. Construction Cost Estimate: Please provide a construction cost estimate for the purpose of applying the appropriate development review fee. 11. Waste Hauler Sign Off: The waste hauler for your area of the City needs to review your proposal and provide the City with a letter confirming that the design of the waste storage area is satisfactory. Your narrative needs to address all the relevant provisions of Chapter 18.775. 12. Commercial-General Standards: Your narrative needs to address the relevant commercial zoning district standards in Chapter 18.520, including allowed uses and development standards. 13. Public Facility Plan Checklist: Please review the checklist for completeness. Two issues in particular need to be addressed: A) As noted in the Transportation Impact Study provided by DKS, the City's site distance standard (18.705.030(H)(1)) is not met. DKS offers several options that may meet the standard. It is the responsibility of the applicant to meet this standard, or to request an adjustment upon a demonstration that no practicable 6 alternative better meets the standard pursuant to Section 18.370.020(C)(5). An itg 4144 adjustment would be reviewed as a Type II procedure simultaneously with the current application. B) The storm drainage and water quality information and design you provided in the Site Utility Plan (C2) may be subject to revision based on Clean Water Service's comments and application of the CWS Design and Construction Standards. Additionally, Keynote 1 b is the City's preferred alternative to disposing of the upland stormwater located in the existing pipe that currently is aligned with the proposed clinic. Upon review and comment of your proposal by CWS, please incorporate in your revised plans any changes that may be required. Once this additional information is submitted, staff will review the additional materials to determine if the application is complete. Once the application has been deemed complete, you will be need to submit 12 (full set) copies of your revised and new materials (plan sets may be printed at 8 1/2 x 11 or 11 x 17 size as long as you include 3 copies of large set plans) and five additional copies of your reduced plan sets only. In addition, you will be asked to provide two sets of pre-addressed (no return address), stamped (not metered), #10 size envelopes (addresses of property owners located within 500 feet must have been obtained from the City of Tigard within the previous three months from the date of application completeness). • Once complete, the formal comment and review process will begin, which typically takes 6 to 8 weeks. It should be noted that staff has not reviewed the application submittal for compliance with the relevant code criteria, and that additional items may arise during the application review which may require further clarification. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 503-718-2434. Sincerely, �.� I etc/ g+ Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: SUB2004-00012 Land Use File is\curpin\gary\sdr2004-00012 incomplete.doc STUDIO i 1 • RECEIVED PLANNING ARCHITECTURE JAN 0 3 2005 Gary Pagenstacher, Associate Planner CITY OF TIGARD City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR. 97223 RE: 11140 SW 68th Parkway Case File No. SDR2004-00012/SLR2004-00025 Dear Gary, We are presently in the process of collecting the missing pieces of information so that the site design review process can be expedited. As we discussed during phone conversations, we were profoundly disappointed that our initial submission was not quickly reviewed to make a preliminary determination of completeness. Had this been done, we would have been able to fill in the gaps earlier. We hope that as we submit the additional information, you will be able to expedite the review process. We hope to make use of your offer to reduce the approval process on this next phase to help make up lost schedule on the first phase. Our client is anxious to move forward on this exciting project, and as a team we are committed to meeting the prescriptive requirements of the development code as much as practicably possible. Looking forward to your cooperation, I remain. Yours Sinc ly, Le nard Lodder. Cc: Ken Triplett— Webstar VI Bob Engel — Webstar VI Dr. Richard Howard — Webstar VI 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301 T 503.390.6500 F 503.390.6501 www.studio3architecture.com STUDIO Gary Pagenstecher ) Associate Planner City of Tigard ARCHITECTURE 13125SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR. 97223 19 January, 2005 RE: Cascade Veterinary Referral Center Completeness Review 11140 SW 68th Parkway Case File No. SDR 2004-00012/SLR 2004-00025 Dear Gary, Please find attached a series of documents required by the City of Tigard for a complete site plan review application. Since your letter of December 8, 2004, we have had to activate the services of several team members, to produce parts of the documentation enclosed, which they would otherwise only produce for a complete construction document set. We hope you will find the material in order. The supplementary information provided includes: 1. A revised site plan, coordinated between disciplines. 2. A CWS provider letter. 3. A revised tree removal plan, drawing Ti . 4. A revised narrative description including reference to the following: a. Percentage of opening in the street facing elevation b. Access/Egress/Circulation c. Off street parking/loading requirements d. Environmental performance standards e. Commercial general standards 5. A landscape plan, drawing L1 6. A site lighting, photometrics plan 7. A construction cost estimate 8. A waste hauler sign off from Pride Disposal. Per our letter dated 30 December, 2004, we would appreciate every effort you can bring to bear on processing this application, to help make up for the time lost during the initial application completeness review. If during an initial review you detect any gaps in the information, please call the undersigned as soon as possible. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, eonard Lodder Cc: Bob Engle, Dr. Richard Howard, Ken Triplett-Webstar VI 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301 T 503.390.6500 F 503.390.6501 www.studio3architecture.com (------- January 28, 2005 CITY OF TIGARD Leonard Lodder OREGON Studio 3 Architecture 222 Commercial Street NE Salem, OR 97301-3410 RE: Completeness Review-68th Parkway Veterinary Clinic Case File No. SDR2004-00012/SLR2004-00025 Dear Mr. Lodder: The City received additional materials for your application for Site Development Review, SDR2004-00012, on January 20, 2005. Staff has completed review of the submittal materials and has determined that the following additional information is necessary before the application can be deemed complete: Our preliminary review has shown that two access standards cannot be met by the proposed development including the sight distance standard in TDC 18.705030.H.1 and the minimum spacing standard in TDC 18.705030.H.3. You must obtain adjustments to these standards which will be reviewed under a Type II procedure simultaneously with the current application. The cost for these additional reviews will be $566.00 ($566.00 x 1/2 x 2). Based on our conversation today, I will add these adjustments to your application for review. Please submit this payment along with any additional materials required for your application to be complete. Please clarify that Keynote 1 b on the Site Utility Plan (C2), the City's preferred alternative to disposing of the upland stormwater, will be implemented and that la is not still being considered. The Applicant's narrative should be revised to address all of the relevant code PIP standards as identified in the Pre-Application Notes and through our subsequent discussions. The revised narrative should be collated with all supporting documentation and reduced plan sets and bound to facilitate review by various city offices, special districts, and local and state jurisdictions. You will need to submit 13 (full set) copies of your revised and new materials (plan sets may be printed at 8 1/2 x 11 or 11 x 17 size as long as you include 3 copies of large set plans) and five additional copies of your reduced plan sets only. In addition, you must provide two sets of pre-addressed (no return address), stamped (not metered), #10 size envelopes. A list of addresses of property owners located within 500 feet must have been obtained from the City of 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Tigard within the previous three months from the date of application completeness. A list is available on request as indicated in the information provided in your application packet. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 503-718-2434. Sincerely, �f� J�/�7( jet I 1 Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: SUB2004-00012 Land Use File i:\curpinlgary\site development review\sdr2004-00012 incomplete.doc STUDIO Gary Pagenstecher J Associate Planner RECEIVED City of Tigard ARCHITECTURE 13125 SW Hall Blvd. NS OP POP < . E 0 Tigard, OR. 97223 FEB 0 2 2005 January 31, 2005 Iq OITY OF Tipp R�RfNG RE: Cascade Veterinary Referral Center Completeness Review 11140 SW 68t Parkway Case File No. SDR 2004-00012/SLR 2004-00025 Dear Gary, Please find attached a series of documents required by the City of Tigard for a complete site plan review application. The supplementary information provided includes: 1 . A revised narrative description, with brief references to the permit applications filed under TDC 18.360, and the impact study required by TDC 18.390 assimilated into the Narrative. 2. A land-use permit application for the purpose of requesting two variances, both of which constitute Type II procedures: a. Request variance/adjustment from sight distance standards in TDC 18.705.030.H.1, and b. Request variance/adjustment from minimum access spacing standard in TDC 18.705.030.H.3 3. A Check in the amount of $566.00 to cover the cost of the concurrent application. We have requested the mailing labels and hope we can pick them up in the next day or two. If it is your intent that we retrieve all of the documentation dropped off to-date so that it can be collated and bound, please let us know as soon as possible since I will have them picked up at the same time we pick up the mailing labels. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Leonard Lodder Cc: Bob Engle, Dr. Richard Howard, Ken Triplett-Webstar VI 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301 T 503.390.6500 F 503.390.6501 www.studio3architecture.com TRANSMITTAL ARCHITECTURE Date: February 4, 2005 To: Gary Pagenstecher Project: Cascade Veterinary Referral Services City of Tigard Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Project No: 2004-10 Tigard, OR. 97223 Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 CC: RE: Drawings/Information Date: Copies: Description: 01/04/05 2 24" x 36" Preliminary drawings for Cascade Veterinary Referral Services 01/04/05 1 Packet of information Comments: Gary, If you find any loose copies of anything, will you please send them back to us. Thank you L Transmitted by: Leonard Lodder, AIA leonard(c�studio3architecture.com If you have received this tronsmittal in error please call our number listed below. 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301 T 503-390-6500 F 503-390-6501 www.studio3orchitecture.com 1 _ I�lid �, II 1i February 4, 2005 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Leonard Lodder Studio 3 Architecture 222 Commercial Street NE Salem, OR 97301-3410 RE: Completeness Review: 68th Parkway Veterinary Clinic Case File No. SDR2004-00012/SLR2004-000251VAR2005-00004/5 Dear Mr. Lodder: Today, the City received the additional materials we requested for your application for Site Development Review SDR2004-00012. Staff has completed review of the submitted materials and has determined that your application is now complete. Now, the formal comment and review process begins and typically takes 6 to 8 weeks to complete. I will make every effort to complete the review and issue a decision as expeditiously as possible. If you have any questions regarding the project review, please call me at 503- 718-2434. Sincerely, Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner C: SUB2004-00012 Land Use File is\curpin\gary\site development review\sdr2004-00012 complete.doc 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 STUDIO RECEIVED PLANNING FEB 1 0 2005 ARCHITECTURE o . . ow . . E o CITY OF TIGARD Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR. 97223 February 7, 2005 RE: Cascade Veterinary Referral Center Completeness Review 11140 SW 68th Parkway Case File No. SDR 2004-00012/SLR 2004-00025 Dear Gary, Thank you for your timely response to the latest submission of additional materials for the above referenced project. We have received your completeness review letter dated Feb. 4, 2005 in our office today. At this time I would like to reiterate our willingness to help you in any way possible to regain some of the time lost during the initial submission phase. If a follow-up meeting would help please give me a call. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, / onard Lodder Cc: Bob Engle, -Webstar VI Dr. Richard Howard, -Webstar VI Ken Triplett, -Webstar VI 222 Commercial St NE Salem,Oregon 97301 T 503.390.6500 F 503.390.6501 www.studio3architecture.com PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES CITY OF TIGARD Ail- PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES c�r,nun yDe ce4ment S(apmgA Better Community (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) NON-RESIDENTIAL PMGDE Lt_al--OL.I GAFF 1CKm APPLICANT: I E.ontzrh L000er AGENT: Phone: (031 3qo - US00 Phone: ( ) PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: I IIyO S 1v8 PoeLm TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): I S tillib A -6x000 NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: SITE DEVCL.O�mern Q.es'�� Sens.A Je_. L rJ Rc�+�w/ fiaiin-it ,er .s PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: oPosAL Cot- pt.as CeJelaPcr.es\ [ 101560 - IN ISd° stJare vo+ Je4rn4ry C.LAIe. or, I.at, GfreS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: r.,YEKfk Comer-.e:metal ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: L G- CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAM (C.I.T.)AREA: ERST ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18. 510 l T,e co-tr ,ANG t_V SkaJarcs Dic+a+e MINIMUM LOT SIZE: — sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: SO ft. Max. building height: Lts ft. Setbacks: Front 0-Cit. Side ,t9'` ft. Rear 95 ft. Corner - ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: 'Y % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: i.e.; %. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handouts THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, THE MEMBERS OF ANY LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE(S), AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. * NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • Y'1 NARRATIVE [Refer to Code Chapter 18.3901 The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. IMPACT STUDY [Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050) As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. V ACCESS [Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.7651 Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: Minimum pavement width: All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: Ff WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.705.0301 WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. SPECIAL SETBACKS [Refer to Cod hapter 18.730) • STREETS: feet from the centerline of LOWER INTENSITY ONES: feet, along the site's boundary. • FLAG LOT: 10-FO T SIDE YARD SETBACK. ❑ SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVIS ;NS [Refer to Code Section 18.130.010.B.1 BUILDING HEIGHT EXCE' IONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided tr at: ➢ A maximum building "oor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 4ra-ter-t-will exist; > All actual building s: backs will be at least half (1/2) of the building's height; and > The structure will .t abut a residential zoned district. IA' BUFFERING AND SCREENING [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7451 In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFER WIDTHS applicable to your proposal area are: M feet along north boundary. I ^, feet along east boundary. 10' feet along south boundary. C>- feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: Faetl,}ieS Fir LANDSCAPING [Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18.765 and 18.1051 STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. RECYCLING [Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Lenny Hing is the contact person and can be reached at (503) 625-6177. PARKING [Refer to Code Section 18.765.0401 REQUIRED parking for this type of use: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three (3) feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. HANDICAPPED PARKING: All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. I I LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.765.080) Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section R BICYCLE RACKS [Refer to Code Section 18.765) BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. Fes( SENSITIVE LANDS [Refer to Code Chapter 18.715I The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. s I I STEEP SLOPES [Refer to Code Section 18.775.080.CI When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. (/CLEANWATER SERVICES[CWSI BUFFER STANDARDS [Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 31 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION & ORDER 96-44 SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTH OF VEGETATED TO SENSITIVE AREA4 CORRIDOR PER SIDE 5 • Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% 15 feet 10 to <50 acres * >50 to <100 acres 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres • Natural lakes and ponds • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% 30 feet 10 to <50 acres >50 to <100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in • Natural lakes and ponds <25%slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine' "starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor,shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. 5Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 6The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced to 15 feet,if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • Restrictions in the Vegetate Corridor: NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection .provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the CWS Design and Construction Standards. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the R&O 96-44 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.C.) A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; ► Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two- thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; 1 Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. MITIGATION (Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.E.) REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • ➢ If a replacement tree of the size cut is not reasonably available on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. 177 CLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 18.795] The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. n ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMEN [Refer to Code Section 18.810.060] MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 f et unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partitio must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS ALL NOT EXCEED 2Y2 TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. CODE CHAPTERS - 18.330(Conditional Use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) JL 18.765(Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) 18.340(Directors Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) _ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) 18.350(Planned Development) 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) _..Z 18.780(signs) 18.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Arrassory Residential Units) - 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) - 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) 18.715(Density Computations) 18.790(Tree Removal) - 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) __IL_ 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) _ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) 18.740(Historic Overlay) 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) / 18.430(Subdivisions) S/ 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) ✓18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: Taps fv 1..le-eks ENece'►J2 AE.66on once a ciri-►O t hac he'Pr. err,4<\ COVIROe+e 4 et?,e-eS lJe(tinLari-,aoc hOeliAdt, Sena FA c .' Ctrca�',�e, m0s4 ackacess all aproJal Cr ;-4er ,on cot" C�,c,Y�er,s ic�enV,ctiec o(. e. La cc 1-1,es e t\O-re. [ 1 1 rj j- a..�le D,cs�Icin Stc kirCS C be G�6)-044cA -[�.n b..;e/h de itr, evaLair46h Nctx Yloor acP__d rated .446 • Cl S`en.54:,)e 1Qnclttc cue i e J �i11 cectu;re Ci�oeSSl4�nCi (t buc<t C;e,V%v 2a�1b� W�t+`e a 5\-anpar Gcar„neA Le mP-4 14 f ee-A e a �r can rr ci 4v NeAlpe.Ck \CW%arlce Or aAl,,\A • Qt-to&c TQEr Pi A}. C-Pprn ,, r_ar-r1C1 Arhnr.S4 ekS3r. al Cep Tj1C_ 1$. 1�5>045 PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. The Planning counter closes at 4:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One (1), 8%" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section The administrative decision or public hearing will typically occur approximately 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is a'ailable from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: iRec K;Leer CITY OF TIGARD PLANNIING DIVISION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: (503) 639-4I71 FAX: (503) 684-7291 E-MAIL (staffs fiat name)@ci.tigard.or.us TITLE 18(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNET ADDRESS: www.ci.tigard.or.us H:Ipatty\masters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 3-Oct-02 (Engineering section:preapp.eng) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES ➢ ENGINEERING SECTION < City Tigard, D Oregon Shaping A fetter Community PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Mapls): 1S136DA Tax lolls): 02600 Use Type: Commercial The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: X SW 68th Parkway to 35 feet from centerline (Collector with bike lanes) SW to feet SW to feet SW to feet Street improvements: ® Half street improvements will be necessary along SW 68th Parkway, to include: X 22 feet of pavement from centerline (Tigard Triangle standards) ® concrete curb ® storm sewers and other underground utilities ® 6-foot concrete sidewalk with planter strip ® street trees , spaced per TDC standards. ® street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. I I Other: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 6 Engineering Department Section • I 1 street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ❑ feet of pavement I I concrete curb n storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk street trees I I street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: I I street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: I I feet of pavement concrete curb storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: ❑ street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: I I feet of pavement concrete curb storm sewers and other underground utilities I I -foot concrete sidewalk street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. Other: street improvements will be necessary along SW , to include: ( I feet of pavement concrete curb n storm sewers and other underground utilities -foot concrete sidewalk I I street trees street signs, traffic control devices, streetlights and a two-year streetlight fee. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 6 Engineering Department Section Other: Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: (1.) (2.) Overhead Utility Lines: Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW Prior to , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in- lieu described above. Sanitary Sewers: The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property is a(n) 8 inch line which is located in 68th Parkway. The proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to connect the development to the public sewer. Water Supply: The Tualatin Valley Water (Phone:(503) 642-1511) provides public water service in the area of this site. This service provider should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (South Division) [Contact: Eric McMullen, (503) 612-7010] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm CITY OFTIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 6 Engineering Department Section . drainage plan for the site, may be required to prepare a su, Asin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. There is a storm sewer line running east-west across the subject property. This line will have to be relocated and an easement granted. There is a public system in 68t`' Parkway. On-site detention is required is the new impervious surface area exceeds 5000 sf. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 00-7) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be $210. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ® Construction of an on-site water quality facility. ❑ Payment of the fee in-lieu. Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. 1) A traffic impact report is required. The report should look at the intersections of 68th Parkway at Highway 99 and Atlanta Street. The report also must include the trip contributions to 68th/Dartmouth and 72"d/Dartmouth. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. CITY OFTIGARO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 6 Engineering Department Section Pay the TIF. PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from the Engineering Department. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The Engineering Department fee structure for this permit is considered a cost recovery system. A deposit is collected with the application, and the City will track its costs throughout the life of the permit, and will either refund any remaining portion of the deposit, or invoice the Permittee in cases where City costs exceeds the deposit amount. NOTE: Engineering Staff time will also be tracked for any final design-related assistance provided to a Permittee or their engineer prior to submittal of a PFI permit application. This time will be considered part of the administration of the eventual PFI permit. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 6 Engineering Department Section . • For a land partition, applicant must obtain an Enginee, Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: 4 — 4. 2(e .D. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT STAFF DATE Phone: [503)639-4171 Fax: [503)624-0752 document3 Revised: September 2,2003 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 6 Engineering Department Section