Loading...
PDR2008-00004 PDR2008 -00004 THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL 120 DAYS = 11/ 19/2009 (Inc._ _.:s a 5-week extension) DATE OF FILING: 9/30/2009 DATE MAILED: 10/2/2009 EXHIBITA CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Case Numbers: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PDR 2008-00004 Case Name: THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL Applicant's Name/Address: Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd. Portland OR 97212 Owner's Name/Address: William C. Reed & L is Lundberg 2300 SW 103x° Avenue Portland OR 97225 Address of Property 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Tax Ma /Lot Nos.: Washington Co. Tax Assessor's Ma No. 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR CONCEPTUAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISIONS STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 17, 2009 AND SEPTEMBER 21, 2009 TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS APPLICATION. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER Request: ➢ The applicant requested Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.83-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths, water features, and visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) attached (duel) single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. Taro single-family residences currently exist on the property and will be removed prior to development. At the August 17, 2009 public hearin the Planning Commission continued the hearing until September 21, 2009, then approved the Concept Plan as amended, for a 13-lot subdivision including 12 single-family detached dwellings and a 24-bed residential care facility. Zone: R-4.5: Low Density Residential District and PD: Planned Development Overlay Designation Applicable Review Criteria: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. Action: ➢ ❑ Approval as Requested Z Approval as Amended ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper and mailed to: • Owners of Record within the Required Distance ❑X Affected Government Agencies ❑x Interested Parties Z The Applicants and Owners The adopted findings of fact and decision can be obtained from the Planning Division/Community Development Department at the City of Tigard Permit Center at City Hall. Final Decision: THIS DECISION IS FINAL ON OCTOBER 2, 2009 AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON OCTOBER 17, 2009 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. V eal: decision of the Review Authority 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.. of the Tigard Community Development de which provides that a written appeal together with the required fee shall be filed with the Director within ten (10) business dayyss 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. JE- THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN APPEAL IS 5:00 PM ON OCTOBER 16, 2009. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON A FINAL ORDER APPROVING A LAND USE APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN. THE COMMISSION HELD PUBLIC HEARINGS TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON THIS APPLICATION ON AUGUST 17TH AND SEPTEMBER 21sT 2009. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS BASED THEIR DECISION ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER. (Includes a 5-week extension) 120 DAYS = 11/19/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL CASE NO.: Planned Development Review (PDR) PDR2008-00004 (Concept Plan Review) APPLICANT: Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. OWNERS: William C. Reed & Lydia Lundberg Attn: Mark Reed 2300 SW 103rd Avenue 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd. Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97212 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Concept Plan Review approval for development of a 2.83-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths, water features, and visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) attached (duel) single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. Two single-family residences currently exist on the property and will be removed prior to development. Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: The property is located at 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor s Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONES/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATIONS: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. (PD): The applicant has proposed a planned development overlay designation to accommodate the proposed private street and lot configurations on the subject property. The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (I'DR2008-0(XXX) PLANNING COMMISSION I'INAL, ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGF 1 01 17 character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropnate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a articular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission finds that the revised concept plan meets the applicable approval criteria of the Tigard Community Development Code and that the proposal will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City. The Planning Commission, therefore, APPROVES the requested Land Use Application based on the original application submittal as amended by The Village at Knoll Additional Narrative for Planning Commission and the revised Conceptual Site Plan (Sheets C0.1) and Concept Grading Plan (Sheet Cl) for a 13-lot subdivision including 12 single-family detached dwellings and a 24-bed residential care facility. CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The subject site includes two single-family houses located on two adjoining parcels totaling 2.83 acres, zoned R-4.5. The roughly square-shaped site slopes significantly across the diagonal with a northeastern aspect, from a 200-foot elevation at SW Knoll Drive to approxinnately a 154-foot elevation at the property's northeast corner. The site contains three significant mature trees fronting SW Knoll and other typical residential landscaping. Vicinii Information The site is located generally east of SW Hall Boulevard and north of SW Hunziker Road, more specifically along the east side and outside corner of SW Knoll Drive. Commercial development borders the site to the north, industrial zoned roperty to the east, while residential development borders the subject site to the south and west. The site is part o an island of land zoned R-4.5 containing 2 arcels, each with a residence. The area is bordered by C-G to the north, I-L to the east, I-P to the south, and CBD to the west across SW Hall Blvd. Three of these parcels along SW Hall Blvd have recently been rezoned to Mixed-Use Residential - 1 (CPA2008-00012) and are within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. Proposal Description The apphcant is requesting Planned Development Concept Plan Review approval for development of a 2.83-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths, water features, and visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) attached (duel) single-family homes and a two-story 14,712 square foot footprint Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff'. Two single-family residences currently exist on the site and will be removed prior to development. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL, ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 2 OF 17 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 to provide written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. On June 19, 2009 the City sent a request for comments to applicable special districts and local and state jurisdictions. On June 26, 2009 the City posted the site with a notice of development review. On July 27, 2009 the City provided notice of hearing to neighbors within 500 feet and to interested parties. On July 30', 2009, the City published notice of the public hearing in the Tigard Times. Staff has not received any written comments, to date, from neighbors regarding this application. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on May 24, 2007. Thirteen persons were in attendance. As recorded in the applicant's meeting notes, the issues raised at the meeting primarily concerned the impacts the development would have on the adjacent neighbors on SW Knoll Street including grading of the site, street improvements, traffic control, and the character of the buildings. The major concern was the potential traffic impact on SW Knoll and what sort of traffic calming would be applied. SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The applicable review criteria for Concept Plan review are contained in Community Development Code Chapters 18.350,-Planned Developments, and 18.390, Decision Making Procedures. This staff report is limited to the review of these sections and contains a staff recommendation for the Commission's decision on the Concept Plan, pursuant to Section 18.350.050. The following sections will be addressed later upon application of Planned Development Detailed Plan review: 18.350 lanned Developments) 18.510 esidential Zoning Districts) 18.705* Access, Egress and Circulation) 18.725 nvironmental Performance Standards) 18.745* andscaping and Screening) 18.755 ed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage) 18.765* Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780* Signs) 18.790 tee Removal) 18.795* ision Clearance) 18.810 Street and Utility Improvements) *According to Section 18.350.070.3 of the Planned Development Chapter, these chapters are utilized asguidelines, and strict compliance is not necessary inhere a development provides alternative designs and methods that promote the purpose of the PD Chapter. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES (CHAPTER 18.390) The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Concept Plan review. Type III procedures apply to quasi- judicial permits and actions that contain predominantly discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission with appeals to the City Council. The applicant held a pre-application conference, consistent with 18.390.050.A. The applicant's submittal included the required information, including an Impact Study for the proposed Village At Knoll, consistent with 18.390.050.B. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CHAPTER 18.350.) 18.350.010 Purpose: The six purposes of the planned development overlay zone are listed in the description of the applicable zone on the face page of this decision. 18.350.020 Process: A. Applicable in all zones. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGF3OF 17 The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. The subject site is currently zoned R-4.5. The applicant has elected to develop the project as a planned development and, therefore, is required to address the provisions of the Planned Development chapter. B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development concept plan; 2. The approval of the detailed development plan; and 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. The applicant has applied for review of the planned development concept plan. At the time of detailed development plan review the applicant must also apply for approval of the planned development overlay zone (PD). C. Decision-making process. 1. The concept plan shall be processed by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.350.050. This staff report and recommendation to the Planning Commission is limited to the concept plan review criteria listed below. The Commission shall make a decision on the proposed concept plan. Review of a detailed plan will require a new application and Planning Commission hearing. 2. The detailed development plan shall be reviewed by a means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by 18.390.050, to ensure that it is substantially in compliance with the approved concept plan. The applicant has applied for review of the concept plan. A separate application and hearing are required to review the detailed plan to ensure it is substantially in compliance with the approved plan. 3. The planned development overlay zone will be applied concurrently with the approval of the detailed plan. The applicant must apply for the (PD) overlay to the subject property at the time of detailed plan review. 4. Applicants may choose to submit the concept plan and detailed plan for concurrent review subject to meeting all of the approval criteria for each approval. All applicants are advised that the purpose of separatig these applications is to provide them clear direction in developing the detaed plans. Rejection of the concept plan will result in a corresponding rejection of the detailed development plan and overlay zone. The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. 5. In the case of an existing planned development overlay zone, once construction of the detailed plan has been completed; subsequent applications conforming to the detailed plan shall be reviewed under the provisions required in the chapter which apply to the particular land use application. This standard is applicable once construction of the detailed plan is completed. This standard is meant to apply to future modification or expansion of an existing plan. 6. If the application involves subdivision of land, the applicant may also apply for preliminary plat approval and the applications shall be heard concurrently with the detailed plan. The proposal does include subdivision of land. Application for preliminary plat approval shall be heard concurrently with the detailed plan review and approval. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 4 OF 17 D. Concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed plan. In the case of concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed development plan, including subdivision applications, the applicant shall clearly distinguish the concept from the detailed plan. The Planning Commission shall take separate actions on each element of the Planned Development application (i.e. the concept approval must precede the detailed development approval); however each required action may be made at the same hearing. The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. FINDING: The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. As shown in the above analysis, the applicant's proposal is consistent with the applicable process standards of the planned development chapter. 18.350.030 Administrative Provisions: A. Time limit on filing of detailed development plan. The concept plan approval expires after 1-1/2 years unless an application for detailed development plan and, if applicable, a preliminary plat approval or request for extension is filed. Action on the detailed development plan shall be taken by the Planning Commission by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria in 18.350.070. The applicant has applied for a concept plan approval only. The Planning Commission may approve the concept plan i it finds that it meets the approval criteria. The concept plan approval expires after 1-9/z years unless an application for detailed development plan or request for extension is filed. B. Zoning map designation. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Commission. The zoning map shall be amended to indicate the approved planned development designation for the subject development site. The approval of the planned development overlay zone shall not expire. The applicant may apply for detailed plan review and for application of the overlay zone. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Commission. C. Extension. The Director shall, upon written request by the applicant and payment of the required fee, grant an extension of the approval period not to exceed one year provided that: 1. No changes have been made on the original concept development plan as approved by the Commission; 2. The applicant can show intent of applying for detailed development plan or preliminary plat review within the one-year extension period; and 3) There have been no changes to the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions on which the approval was based. An extension of the Concept Plan approval is not applicable at this time. The applicant states that an extension is not anticipated, but if market conditions warrant, the applicant will file for an extension. D. Phased development. 1. The Commission shall approve a time schedule for developing a site in phases, but in no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than seven years without reapplying for conceptual development plan review. 2. The criteria for approving a phased detail development plan proposal are that: a) The public facilities shall be constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase; and b) The development and occupancy of any phase shall not be dependent on the use of temporary public facilities. A temporary public facility is any facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-0004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAI, ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 5 OF 17 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant intends on actively pursuing financing for the development based on the approval of the Concept Plan. It is anticipated that lots 1-14 will be developed and sold in sequence depending on the market conditions on the completion of the development. The applicant will be operating the Residential Care Facility (RCF) on lot 15. The general development schedule is planned to proceed on three phases, with the Detailed Plan being driven by triggering factors as outlined below. It is the applicant's intent to proceed with the detailed planning and site construction as expeditiously as possible, given current weak market conditions. The following phases are dependent on the market conditions, bank financing, availability of contractors, and saturation of the housing market. Phase 1: Site Development: Start Date: March 1, 2010 End Date: July 1, 2010 The site development portion of this project will include the following items: • Demolition/Deconstruction of existing buildings at 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; • Site Work including removal of any trees as specified by landscape plan; • Site Work including grading of lot; • Installation of all utilities including: • Storm water Facilities; ■ Sanitary Sewer Facilities; and • Water Facilities; • Installation and final grading of all roadways (not alleys); • Installation of site sidewalks adjacent to roadways (not interior side abutting homes). Phase 2: Construction of Residential Care Facility: Start Date: May 1, 2010 End Date: August 1, 2011 The construction of the RCF portion of this project will include the following items: • Construction of the general building; • Site Work for Lot 15 including parking area and re-paving of existing access to Park 217; • Reclamation and final planting of Natural Resource Area; and • Planting and final landscaping of Lot 15 and all areas NE of the lower roadway. Phase 3: Construction of Single-Family Homes: Start Date: July 1, 2010 End Date: December 31, 2011 The construction of the single-family homes portion of this project will include the following items: • Construction of the single-family and attached single-family homes; • Final Site Work for Lots 1 through 14 including remaining pathways, alleys and sidewalks; and • Final landscaping and site work for Lots 1-14 and Common Tract A. E. Substantial modifications to concept plan. If the Planning Commission finds that the detailed development plan or preliminary plat does not substantially conform to the concept plan, a new concept plan shall be required. A modification of the Concept Plan is not applicable at this time. F. Noncompliance. Noncompliance with an approved detailed development plan shall be a violation of this chapter. Compliance with an approved detailed development plan is not applicable at this time. G. Issuance of occupancy permits. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved detailed development plan including landscaping and recreation areas before any occupancy permits are issued. However, when the Director determines that immediate execution of any feature of an approved detailed development plan is impractical due to climatic conditions, unavailability of materials, or other temporary conditions, the Director shall, as a precondition of the issuance of a required permit, require the posting of a performance bond or other surety to secure execution of the feature at a time certain not to exceed one year. -I'I IE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 6 OF 17 Issuance of occupancy permits is not applicable at this time. FINDING: The applicant has applied for concept plan approval only. At the time of detailed plan review the applicant intends on applying for the (PD) overlay zone. The applicant is proposing a two-year three-phase development plan. The proposed dates for these phases may be unrealistic with respect to the Planned Development processing time line and on market conditions. The proposal is otherwise consistent with the applicable administrative standards for planned developments. 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements: A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required fora Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. The applicant included information regwired by Section 18.390.050 as shown in the findings above for the Decision Making Procedures section of this report. The additional information required by 18.350.040.B is shown below. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following: 1. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include: a) A description of the character of the proposed development and the rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant; APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The proposed Village at Knoll development will create a 15-lot subdivision plus 1 common tract including single-family homes, attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility (RCF) that will house up to 24 residents along with live-in staff. The RCF will be the focal point of this development meant to encourage and facilitate mtergenerational involvement. The project will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community including all single-family houses as well as the RCF. The single-family homes will be located closest to the street front along SW Knoll Drive. The attached single- family homes will follow, and the RCF will be located at the point on the property furthest away from the existing street. The Design Team conducted an Opportunities and Challenges Analysis of the property in order to frame the context for the planned Development Concept Plan. Challenges • The number one challenge presented by this sit is the slope of this site. Refer to TOPO layout section. • The site shape and setbacks limit the efficiency of site use. • There is a sensitive area buffer boundary at the northeast corner of the site. • The Right-of-way dedication reduces the buildable site area. • The proposed private street reduces the buildable site area. • The miti gation of trees for this site will increase project cost. With the strong slope of the site it will be impossible to save the trees we otherwise might during excavation. Opportunities • The site slope will be used to our advantage by using the grading to slope the storm water drainage to a bioswale on the eastern property line. • We will design the Residential Care Facility (RCF) on lot 15 to act as a retaining wall for the site. Visually from the street level, the RCF will only appear two stories tall. • The sensitive area on the north eastern corner will give a great buffer from the Park 217 Business Complex. • With having to remove most of the site's existing trees, we will be able to put new landscape trees to encompass the development and give a great buffer to the adjacent properties. b) An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning principles are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed; THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 7 OF 17 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The single-family homes will be designed with craftsman features including front porches, attached garages, colorful designs and exterior accents. The six homes at the top of the hill will have attached garages accessed by an alley creating a vibrant street area. There are mature trees on the site that will be retained to create an older community look and feel to the neighborhood. The attached single-family homes will also be designed with the same craftsman features as the free standing single-family homes. The attached homes feature zero lot-line common wall construction with attached garages for each unit. The garages are accessed from a rear alley. The RCF will be designed in the same manner as the houses, similar to the existingg project currently being constructed on SW Grant Street, and ones that have been operating in Milwaukie (Oatfield Estates) for the past six years. The RCF will have 24 suites for elders [+6 employees] for a maxi um of 30 total residents within the building. There will be landscaped paths and water features throughout the common tract for community access and usage. The common tract will also include visitor parking for the site. The Village at Knoll has two very distinct components of development; the Residential Care Facility and the Single-family Homes. We will describe the intentions of each separately for additional clarification. Residential Care Facility: The Owners of the existing property, William Reed and Lydia Lundberg, have spent the past eight years developing a forward thinking concept for the future of elder care, Elite Care. Elite Care will be the operating company that will run the facility, and will be in charge of the long term upkeep of the project. Current Elite Care projects include Oatfield Estates, a 72 unit project located at the top of Oatfield Hill in Milwaukie and Fanno Creek, an identical project to the one being proposed located on SW Grant Street in Tigard. As the owners of the existing property will retain ownership and management, there is a long term thought process to the development of this project. Shortcuts that might be taken by other development teams in the construction of the facilities, site improvements, building styles, and landscaping will not be taken to ensure the quality of building and the atmosphere for care. Please go to www.ehtecare.com for more information on the philosophy and management style of Elite Care. Single-Family and Attached Single-Family Homes: The owners of the property will be developing the site for the 14 lots. The contractor for this project, R&R Energy Resources, is Jointly owned by Bill Reed and Billy Lenz. The lots will not be sold out to individual builders, and by maintaining the construction "in house", it will allow for the architectural styles, building quality and size to remain constant throughout the project's construction timeline. R&R Energy Resources has built approximately 125 homes over the past 5 years including multiple projects for HOST Development (www.hostdevelopment.com), Blueberry Lane (www.blueberrypdx.com), as well as being the contractor for the Elite Care building at Fanno Creek in Tigard. c) An explanation of how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010: The applicant did not provide a specific response to each of the six purpose statements of the Planned Development Chapter. Instead, the applicant has referred the Commission to the Project Description, Architecture/Landscaping, gStatement of Intentions, and the Opportunities and Challenges Analysis sections of the Applicants' Narrative (pages 5 - 8), which have been included within this report in (a) and (b) above. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; and To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL, ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 8 OF 17 To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitiomng; and To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; and To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. d) An explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. The applicant did not provide a specific response to this criterion. Instead, the applicant has referred the Commission to the Project Description, Architecture/Landscaping, Statement of Intentions, and the Opportunities and Challenges Analysis sections of the applicant's narrative (pages 5 - 8), which have been included in a) and (b) above. 2. A general development schedule indicating the approximate dates when construction of the planned development and its various phases are expected to be initiated and completed. The applicant identified their three-phase plan, as shown above in the Administrative Provisions section of this report, to occur over a two-year period through 2011, depending on market conditions. 3. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the planned development. The applicant intends on actively pursuing financing for the development based on the approval of the Concept Plan. It is anticipated that lots 1-14 will be developed and sold in sequence depending on the market conditions on the completion of the development. The applicant will be operating the Residential Care Facility on lot 15. B. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in Subsection A above, the concept plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information: 1) Existing site conditions; 2) A site concept including the types of proposed land uses and structures, including housing types, and their general arrangement on the site; 3) A grading concept; 4) A landscape concept indicating a percentage range for the amount of proposed open space and landscaping, and general location and types of proposed open space(s); 5) Parking concept; 6) A sign concept; 7) A streets and utility concept; and 8) Structure setback and development standards concept, including the proposed residential density target if applicable. The applicant's narrative and plan set provide the required applicable information, including a Cover Sheet (C0.0), Conceptual Site Plan (C0.1), Preliminary Grading and Erosion Control Plan (Cl), Preliminary Storm Plan Preliminary Sanitary Sewer and Water Plan (C3), Preliminary Plat (C4), Existing Knoll Drive Profile ~C2), C5), Topographic Survey (TP), PUD Open Space Concept Plan (L1), Tree Preservation and Removal Plan (L2), Storm Water Pond (L3), Landscape Plan etas (L4), Landscape Planting Plan (L5), Landscape Materials Specifications (L6). C. Allowable uses In all residential zones, an applicant with a planned development approval may develop the site to contain a mixture of uses subject to the density provisions of the underlying zone and the density bonus provisions of 18.350.070.A.3.c. The following uses are allowed with planned development approval: a. All uses allowed outright in the underlying zoning district; b. Single-family detached and attached residential units; C. Duplex residential units; THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL. ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 9 OF 17 d. Multi-family residential units; C* Manufactured homes; f. Accessory services and commercial uses directly serving the planned development only and which are customary or associated with, but clearly incidental to the uses permitted in the zone, such as persona services, preschool or daycare, and retail uses less than 5,000 square feet in sum total; gg Community building; h. Indoor recreation facility; athletic club, fitness center, racquetball court, swimming pool, tennis court or similar use; i. Outdoor recreation facility, golf course, golf driving range, swimming pool, tennis court, or similar use; and j. Recreational vehicle storage area. The applicant has proposed single-family detached and attached residential units, consistent with the uses allowed in all residential zones with planned development approval. Groupp living, including residential care facilities restricted to five or fewer residents, is permitted by night in the R-4.5 zone. Group living with six or more residents, as proposed, is otherwise permitted as a conditional use. 18.350.070.A.3.c: Chapter 18.715, Density Computation and Limitations. Unless authorized below, density shall be governed by the density established in the underlying zoning district, using the minimum lot size established for that district. Where a project site encomppasses more than one underlying zoning district, density shall be aggregated for each district, and may be allocated anywhere within the project site, as deemed appropriate by the commission. Sheet C0.1 of the applicant's plan set includes a density calculation for the subject site: 2.83 acres (123,425 square feet gross) less 12,522 square feet for the private street and 315 square feet for right-of- way dedication for SW Knoll = 110,588 square feet net developable area. 110,588 square feet/7,500 square feet/lot = 14.75 lots (max). The Commission may further authorize a density bonus not to exceed 10% as an incentive to increase or enhance open space, architectural character and/or site variation incorporated into the development. These factors must make a substantial contribution to objectives of the planned development. The degree of distinctiveness and the desirability of variation achieved shall govern the amount of density increase which the Commission may approve according to the following: (1) A 1% bonus for each 5% of the gross site area set aside in open space, up to a maximum of 5%, is allowed for the provision of active use recreational open space, exclusive of areas contained in floodplain, steep slopes, drainage ways, or wetlands that would otherwise be precluded from development; (2) Up to a maximum of 5% is allowed for the development of pedestrian amenities, streetscape development, recreation areas, plazas, or other items from the Planning Commission's Toolbox." APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant will be asking for a 5% density bonus under section (2) for pedestrian amenities. In track "A" in the open space between the four attached single-family houses the aRe, cant plans on building a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill for the community to use as a recreational area. density calculation with the density bonus is reflected on the site plan on sheet CO. 1. Density bonus: 14.75 lots x 5% density bonus = .74 lots. 14.75 + .74 = 15.49 = 15 lots (max) FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicant's narrative and plan set contains all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. In addition, the applicant has provided a general development schedule, a statement of intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of the planned development, and the additional listed information for concept plan review. Staff suggests that the proposed schedule would be difficult to meet considering, among other things, the review process for detailed plan review would likely extend past the proposed March, 2010 beginning date. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 10 OF 17 The applicant's narrative is ambiguous with respect to planning objectives. On page 8 it appears that the applicant refers to the purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as the planning objectives. On page 12 the narrative refers to an unidentified page number for the listed objectives. While not explicitly stating objectives, the Project Description does state that "the RFC will be the focal point of this development meant to encourage and facilitate intergenerational involvement. The project will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community Staff finds that these objectives could provide substantial community benefits and would be worth consideration under the purposes of the Planned Development chapter. The applicant's narrative provides a cursory description of the character of the proposed development, rationale behind the assumptions and choices made, architectural style, innovative site planning principles, and innovations in building techniques. The applicant has proposed the minimum 20% open space facility and proposes a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill for the community to use as a recreational area. The applicant proposes craftsman style features for the proposed detached and attached homes including front porches, attached garages, colorful designs and exterior accents. The applicant states the project will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community including all single-family houses as well as the RCF. However, the applicant does not provide any insight into how the arrangement of buildings and the resulting open spaces would be used by the community, (in particular, the shared outdoor recreation area regwred for residential use), whether the proposed minimum open space is adequate, or how the quality of the craftsman construction and detailing would rise to the level of "innovation" or employ LEED standards. Further, the applicant did not explicitly address how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter or provide an explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. Therefore, the Planning Commission should consider whether the proposal has sufficiently addressed the concept plan submission requirements. The applicant has proposed a 15-lot subdivision but only 14 lots are allowed under the R-4.5 zone. Therefore, the applicant has requested a density bonus to increase the density allowed by approximately 2° o, even though 5% was requested. The Commission should consider whether the proposed gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill make a substantial contribution to the objectives of the planned development and provide the degree of distinctiveness and desirability of variation to ment any bonus. In addition, the proposed residential care facility (RCF), with greater than 6 residents, is not a use permitted outright (by right) in the R-4.5 zone. Therefore, the proposed RCF use would require additional conditional use review to ensure the use is compatible with other use in the vicinity and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding use and public facilities is minimized. The applicant's narrative does not provide a description of the RCF facility in terms of height, bulk, detailing, fenestration, or roof line. This review would be processed concurrently with the Planned Development Detailed Plan review. 18.350.050 Concept Plan Approval Criteria: A. The concept plan may be approved by the Commission only if all of the following criteria are met: 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for areas of open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant has provided a Concept Plan (Sheet L1), which includes specific designations on the map for areas of open space. The Concept Plan and this compliance narrative provide descriptions of the intended level of use for each sub-area, and how they relate to other proposed uses on the site. The Concept Plan specifically protects and enhances natural features of the site, particularly the Natural Resource Area on the northeastern property line. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement with respect to the identification of open space and the protection of natural resources on the site. However, the applicant does not provide insight into how the open spaces would be THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 11 OF 17 used by the community or whether the proposed minimum 20% open space is adequate given the intensity of use, density proposed, and significant slopes underlying the interior spaces. 2. The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Site Plan (Sheet C0.1) identifies areas of the site where significant natural resources have been delineated. The method for maximizing protection, preservation, and enhancement are outlined within this compliance narrative and visually displayed on the various plans. STAFF'S RESPONSE: The applicant has included the recommendations of Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter for enhancement of the vegetated corridor at the bottom of the site. In addition, trees have been identified for retention at the top of the site, as proposed in the applicant's Arborist Report. The City Arborist has commented on the proposal (see Other StaffComments on page 15), suggesting there may be other trees worth protecting and others that have been retained that could be removed as invasive species. 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space buffers. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The concept Plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, primarily through compatible street layout and architectural style. The plan also provides a landscape transition between the abutting residential neighborhood and the project. Buffering and screening details will also be provided along adjacent properties, as detailed on the landscape plan (Sheets L1-L6). STAFF'S RESPONSE: The applicant's proposal does integrate the proposed development into the neighborhood in several important ways including the placement of single-family detached dwellings of craftsman design adjacent to SW Knoll and the placement of the RCF to the rear of the site to minimize the scale and impact of the development as experienced from the public street. In addition, the open space buffers that include mature trees and water features located between the proposed single-family detached dwellings and SW Knoll provide an easily accessed amenity to the neighborhood. Further, the side yards of the dwellings of the two abutting properties look out on the proposed passive use facility. It should be noted, however, that the proposed frontage along SW Knoll is not to standard and will need to satisfy the appropriate radius standard per Washington County. 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridership, such methods may include separated parking bays, off street walking paths, shorter pedestrian routes than vehicular routes, linkages to or other provisions for bus stops, etc. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Conceppt Plan (Sheet C0.1) identifies methods of promoting walking paths around the site and including separate parl~ing bays, bicycle parking, and off street walking paths. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement. However, the applicant has not addressed transit ridership. Trimet's #78 bus line, linking Lake Oswego with Beaverton includes two bus stops within 300 feet of the project boundary on SW Hunziker at the intersection with SW Knoll. Sidewalk improvements along the three intervening lots on SW Knoll and applicable upgrades to the bus stops should be considered to mitigate for the impacts of the proposed development and promote walkability and transit ridership within the neighborhood. 5. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general arrangement on site. In the case of projects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Plan (Sheet CO. 1) identifies the proposed uses and their general arrangement on the site. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 12 OF 17 STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement that the proposed uses and their general arrangement on site have been identified. However, the density of the residential units represented may be problematic. The average lot size of lots 1-14 is 2,903 square feet, or 39% of the base zone standard of 7,500 square feet in the R-4.5 zone. As discussed in the Additional Discussion Areas below, the proposed private street design is in conflict with fire and safety standards and the City's street design standards, which may necessitate reducing the number of lots to accommodate the larger street and alley sections. 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Plan (Sheet CO. 1) demonstrates that development of the property pursuant to the plan will result in a development that has significant advantage in that it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the R-4.5 Zoning. The Plan protects and enhances the highest value natural features of the site. The Plan provides additional amenities and pedestrian oriented features that enhance the development project and the neighborhood generally. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement with respect to the proposed concept plan providinsignificant advantages over a standard development. Notwithstanding the difficulties with the proposal, the-plan would preserve neighborhood livability at overall densities consistent with the R-4.5 zone, while protecting natural features and providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. FINDING: The proposed concept plan provisionally meets all of the Concept Plan Approval Criteria and, therefore, may be approved by the Commission. However, as indicated in the Toolbox, the concept plan should reflect the maximization of opportunities where the objective is design excellence. It is the express intention of the concept plan review that the concept is entirely open for discussion. Staff supports the main objective of the applicant's proposal, to provide an intergenerational development utilizing LEED standards for development and therefore, does not recommend denial. However, as indicated in the findings for this report, staff is not comfortable recommending approval of the proposed planned development. Staff recommends that prior to approval of the concept plan, Commissioners consider the findings in this report and the issues raised in the following Additional Discussion Areas section, in addition to any others they may have, in order to provide the applicant with clear direction in revising the proposed concept plan and developing the detailed plan. SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AREAS 1. Concept Plan Submission Requirements. The applicant did not explicitly address how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter or provide an explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. Therefore, the Planning Comnssion should consider whether the proposal has sufficiently addressed the concept plan submission requirements. For example, the Purposes and Toolbox provide for: Such added benefits as increased open space in the City, alternative building designs, and aesthetic appeal. The applicant has proposed typical craftsman designed structures with unnamed LEED features. There is no indication in the submittal materials how aesthetics is being addressed. The applicant suggests that development control will be assured by the owners/builders and offers links to prior pro)ects to demonstrate their quality. Land use permits do not ensure ownershi as the permit runs with the land. Therefore, the quality of the project must be expressed in the landpuse proposal and assured through THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMNESSION FINAL ORDF.,R NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 13 OF 17 conditions of approval. For example, aesthetic appeal could be proposed for the distinctive features of the common areas such as the ponds, paths, stairways, and retaining walls, which should be constructed or faced with natural or natural appearing materials; retaining walls should not exceed 4 feet in height. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. The applicant proposed LEED Platinum design of the proposed residences and RCF. However, it is unclear whether the project would seek the LEED certification or just incorporate elements of the LEED Platinum standards. Without additional clarity there would be no assurance that innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials would be integrated into the project. Proposed open space should be commensurate with intensity of the density within the development. As proposed, with the 2% (5% requested) density bonus, the average lot size of lots 1-14 is 2,903 square feet, or 39% of the base zone standard of 7,500 square feet in the R-4.5 zone. Under the Open Space section, the Toolbox suggests that the degree of open space should be commensurate with the intensity of the density within the development. However, the applicant has proposed just the minimum 20% open space. The Commission may consider increasmg the open space allocation by not granting the density bonus, reducing the size of the RCF, or propose the applicant pay a fee in-lieu or offer an off-site location. Note: As discussed under the "access" issue below, the proposed private street design is in conflict with fire and safety standards and the City's street design standards, which also may necessitate reducing the number of lots. 2. Natural Resource Preservation. As the comments received from the City Arborist, below, indicate, there may be opportunities to preserve additional trees or groups of trees. In addition, the Commission may wish to consider requiring the applicant to remove Hawthorne trees #8 and #21, which they have scheduled for retention, because the species is listed as invasive by Clean Water Services. 3. Grp. The applicant's Grading Plan (Sheet Cl) shows mass grading for the proposed access and water quality facility in-'T'ract A. However, it does not show how the 14 lots or common open space areas would be graded. The character and quality of the passive use and shared outdoor recreation areas of the site may be adversely affected by the grading necessary for the proposed development. For example, the proposal is to include an area for common recreation and feature a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill. However, besides the pathways and water features shown on the Conceptual Site Plan (Sheet C0.1) there is no apparent plaza area to accommodate them. The interior open space slopes between the proposed dwellings are approximately 15% with no indication in the application materials on how this would be addressed. 4. Lot frontage. The applicant has proposed single-family detached lots (lots 2 thru 5) without frontage on a public or private street. Pursuant to the Lot standards in Section 18.810.060.13, these lots must have a minimum of 25 feet of frontage (unless reduced by the Commission). The proposed development plan shows approximately 95 feet between the private street ingress and egress, which may have to be widened to accommodate the required frontage. The frontage on SW Knoll will also be affected by the street design standards for corners (Washington County "eyebrow") which are not shown in the proposed site plan. To preserve the proposed passive use open space in this area, an easement would be required over the front portion of the affected lots. 5. Access and Street Des' . The section for the proposed one-way private street loop does not meet the design standards for rivate streets (20 feet wide with curb and 5-foot sidewalk). The code only provides for one-way streets )or multi-family developments and not for single-family. In addition, the applicant proposes alley access to the back of the single-family detached units and the front of the single-family attached units. The alley is shown as a 12-foot access way in an easement over the abutting properties, while Table 18.810.1 requires 16 feet in width. Section 18.705.03013 requires private residential access drives be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code. As shown in the following comments from TVF&R, the fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided (however, if the buildings are sprinkled, variations from the road design standards may be approved). The street design issue is complicated by the short driveways of Lots 7 thru 14 (2 to 18 feet) with access on the private street. The Planning Commission THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 14 OF 17 may grant deviations from the street standards, if sanctioned by the City Engineer, when it can be shown that public safety will not be compromised. This issue should be resolved prior to Planning Commission approval. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Tigard Police Department commented that they have no objections to the proposal. The City Arborist provided the following comment: Concept plan approval criterion 18.350.050.A.2 requires that: "The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management." Trees may be deemed "sinificant natural resources" due to species, size, and condition. The criteria for significance may be specified as follows: Species - Oregon native Size - Greater than six inches in diameter Condition - Good health and good structure According to the project arborist and landscape architect, the following trees meet the above criteria: Tree Number Tree Type Trunk Diameter Action 1 Ore on ash 13" and 20" Preserve 2 Ore on ash 7" and 20" Preserve 3 Oregon ash 45" Preserve 4 Oregon white oak 17" Preserve 5 Oregon white oak 30" Preserve 7 Oregon ash 18" Preserve 9 Oregon white oak 35" Preserve 11 Oregon ash 16" and 23" Preserve 12 Oregon ash 10" Preserve 13 Oregon ash 16" and 12" Preserve 14 Oregon white oak 32" Preserve 15 Oregon ash 20" Preserve 65 Oregon ash 12" Remove 66 Oregon ash 10" Remove 67 Oregon ash 6" Remove 68 Oregon ash 8" Remove A total of 16 significant natural resource trees (native trees in good condition) exist on site. Of these trees, four are scheduled for removal due to their location within building footprints or driveways. These four trees are clustered together and could potentially be preserved if the site design were significantly altered. However, the value of accommodating four more native trees would need to weighted against preservation costs by the Planning Commission. One more consideration for Planning Commission would be to require the applicant to remove the Hawthorne trees scheduled for retention (tree #8 and tree #21). These trees are listed as an invasive species by Clean Water Services due to their habit of forming dense thickets and displacing native understory species. Their seeds are primarily spread by fruit eating birds. Planning Commission may choose to waive mitigation requirements as an incentive for invasive tree removal. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Transportation was notified of the proposed development but did not comment. Clean Water Services provided a general comment letter dated July 1, 2009 addressing sanitary sewer, storm water, erosion control and sensitive areas. In addition, CWS issued a service provider letter with conditions of TIC VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 15 OF 17 approval dated February 13, 2008 (CWS File No. 05-002606) requiring mitigation for the vegetated corridor encroachment. Tualatin Valley Water District provided the following comment: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) 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 maybe modified as approved by the fire code official. (IFC 503.1.1) 2) 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. (IFC D105) This requirement applies to the access roadway from the Park 217 Business Park. 3) 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 26 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. (IFC 503.2. 1) The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. The fire district will not endorse the design of this project. In a previous conversation with the applicant regarding the feasibility of a one way access roadway (SW Knoll), we approved a design concept serving a 24-bed residential care facility. We did not discuss or approve parking within that narrow roadway or the inclusion of one- and two-family dwellings within the project. 4) 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. (IFC D103.1) 5) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. 6) 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 supportin not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 60,000 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. (IFC D102.1) 7) 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. (IFC 503.2.4 & D103.3) This requirement applies to all roadways shown on the submitted drawings. 8) GRADE: Fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed 10 percent. Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 5%) with the exception of crowning for water run-off. When fire sprinklers are installed, a maximum grade of 15% may be allowed. Adequacy of fire apparatus access shall be evaluated from the ppoint beginning at the first due fire station to a point within 150 feet of all structures within the develo ment. The approval of fire sprinklers as an alternate shall be accomplished in accordance with the provisions of ORS 455.610(5). (IFC 53.2.7 & D103.2) THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 16 OF 17 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. (IFC B105.2) 9) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single-family dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. (IFC B105.1) 10) 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. (IFC 508.5. 1) 11) FIRE HYDRANTS - ONE- AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS & ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: Where a portion of a structure is more than 600 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the structure(s), on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. (IFC 508.5.1) 12) 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. 13) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (IFC C102.1) 14) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adJ'acent 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. (IFC 508.5.4) 15) 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. FDC's shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. (IFC 912.2) This requirement applies to the residential care facility. 16) 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. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) PASSED: THE 2151 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009 BY THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. 13 ~4_ Jodie Inman, Planning Commission President Dated this 'Jam day of September, 2009. THE VILLAGE AT KNOI.I, (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC PAGE 17 OF 17 i i i w The Village at Knoll Additional Narrative for Planning Commission Based on Comments from 1St Appearance Note from Applicant: During the Planning Commission Meeting on August 17th, 2009, we presented to the planning commission a concept plan for a planned development that would take our existing 2.74 acre site and transform it into a multi- generational community centered on a Residential Care Facility (RCF), "Elite Care at Knoll". This 2.74 acre site was to be divided into 1 RCF lot, 6 detached single family home lots, and 8 attached family home lots for a total of 15 lots on the property. At the first meeting we were asking for a very small density bonus that would allow us to take the project from 14.7 lots to 15 lots to maximize the use of the site. The biggest challenges to our site always have been two sided. First, the constraints that are placed on development currently by multiple jurisdictions including Cleanwater Services, Tualatin Valley Fire, and the City of Tigard make a smaller infill site a challenge to develop. We have received approval of the site from CWS and TVF&R, and hope that the Planning Commission takes the changes that we have made based on their suggestions as sufficient to meet the requirements of the concept plan approval process. The second challenge to this site, and something that was addressed by the Planning Commission, is the slope of the site, and how to correctly grade the site for usable open space, sufficient parking, and to ensure that general site conditions can be met. Our updated concept plan has 2 major changes. First, the elimination of two lots (old lots #10/11) at the center of the lower section of attached housing along the lower road between the alley and the roadway. The removal of these two lots allows for an additional 4,000 SF approximately of open space (increasing the total from 20% to approximately 23.5% of the site) and will reduce the potential parking and road use loads for the entire project. The second major change is the elimination of the attached housing units as a result of the elimination of the two lots. There will now only be 12 stand alone single family residential units, and each of these units will have garages/parking spaces added as outlined in the parking section. We feel that our re-structured concept plan sufficiently addresses all of these issues, and hope that the Planning Commission agrees with our thoughts. We have attached an updated site plan along with basic information on the types of open space, usages, and essential layouts as requested by the Planning Commission. Assuming the Planning Commission moves forward with an approval, we will adjust the additional plan requirements including storm, sewer, landscaping, etc. accordingly based on the additional comments of the Planning Commission when we submit the detail plans at a future date. In summary, we feel that we are presenting a viable option for us as a development team, for the City of Tigard, and the surrounding neighbors that will enhance the community while establishing a true multi-generational community. Comments from the Planning Commission on August 17th, 2009: The comments that were made by Planning Commission members and staff during the initial concept plan review meeting seemed to focus on four main items. We will attempt to address each of these questions in sequence including the initial conditions proposed during the first concept plan review, and the changes that have been made to address the concerns of the Planning Commission. • Parking, including the quantity of parking, off-street/on-street parking, staff and resident parking, garage space and locations, driveway depths, and community event parking • Open Space, including the quantity of open space (20% to meet the requirement), quality and use of the open space, slope of the open space • Density Bonus including the granting of, the conditions that come out of granting the open space, and the additional lot that could be created. Also included in this were the setbacks and the housing styles and yard spaces This item essentially has been removed from consideration given the reduction in requested number of total lots from 15 to 13. • Narrative Comments from Staff including the use of the PC Toolbox and the "Purpose" detail from chapter 18.350.010 in the code. Parking Requirements Initial Concept Plan Parking Information The initial concept plan that was turned in had the following parking spaces located on the site: • 4-5 Spaces located under the RCF for Staff/Resident Parking • 6 Spaces located directly in front of the RCF for Guest Parking • 6 Spaces located to the South of the RCF along the street • 14 Garage "Inside" Spaces - one for each house • 12 Outside Off-Street Spaces - one for each house with exception of corner lots The comments that were made on the parking included the following: • Ensuring that the driveway dimensions were at least 18' on each driveway to ensure that cars could park without being in the alleyway. As an alternative, make them less than 7' so it is obvious that there is no parking in those spaces • Questions about where the visitors to the SFR and attached homes park • Subtract one lot and use for parking o Another comment about this not really helping, but parking still an issue • Friends for the SFR and large group gatherings - where does everyone park? • How will residents park their cars (not sure about residents of houses or RCF) • Other comments in general about the parking without being specific to single issues, more of an all around concern with the number and location of the parking spaces Parking Plan Modifications on the Updated Concept Site Plan We have made the following modifications to the parking plan in accordance with issues brought up by the Planning Commission: • Addition of 1 Space along with the reconfiguring for easier access in/out in front of the RCF for Guest Parking • Addition of 6 Spaces to the South of the RCF along the street • Increase from 14 Garage "Inside" Spaces to 21 Garage "Inside" Spaces o We are working with our architects on the design of the single family residences. Each house along the Knoll Street Frontage (Lots 1-6) as well as lower level Lots 8, 9 and 11 will have double car garages built into the natural slope of the site. Each of these double car garages will be full width double car garages, not tandem spaces. In addition, the change in site plan for Lots 7, 10 and 12 will have full depth single car garages. Previously, all houses only had single car garages. • Increase from 12 Outside Off-Street Spaces to 21 Off-Street Spaces o The increase in width at the base of the garages will also allow for cars to be parked off street on each of the lots. Lots 1-6, 8, 9 and 11 will have double wide parking spaces located behind the garages, and Lots 7, 10 and 12 will have the location of the houses reconfigured to ensure that the driveways are at least 18 feet deep to allow for one car in the garage and one car in the driveway. **Net Increase of 7 community Parking Spaces along with 19 Individual Parking Spaces along with the elimination of 2 complete buildings" Notes on Parking: We believe that the combined increase in parking for community of 7 spaces (effectively increasing by 50% to a total of 21 spaces (including the 2 between lots 8 and 9) will assist with the overall community parking. Given the slope of the site and the grading constraints along with the required roadway and walking widths, there are few options on this site to continue to increase additional parking. This leaves a total of 19 community parking spaces and 5 spaces under the RCF for staff/resident use (As a note, we currently only have 1 resident in our existing Tigard community that has a car on campus for the same number of residents) We also believe that by eliminating 2 houses, we will decrease community parking requirements due to sheer volume of people being reduced in the community. We also believe that having double car garages and double spots behind the cars will allow for friends and visitors to park in those spaces in addition to families who may have more than 1-2 cars - although having smaller 2 and 3 bedroom units will also assist with this. The increase of 19 parking spaces combined with the elimination of the 2 residential units will assist in the potential parking problems. Open Space Requirements Initial Concept Plan Open Space Information The initial concept plan that was turned in contained the following information regarding open space for the site: • Total Open Space of approximately 20% (I believe the figure was just over 20%) including: o Passive Use Areas of 6,288 SF ■ Shared Outdoor Areas of 4,200 SF (Code Requires 300 SF per 3 Bedroom Unit) o Minimal Use Areas of 18,516 SF • Ponds and pathways on the upper level outdoor/passive use areas • General Use areas in front of and between the common parking • Passive Use areas at the outer edges of the site including open space and landscaping areas The comments that were made on the open space included the following: • Scale of the open space seemed very small • Hard to tell what the open space is really going to look like • Open space should be addressed in more details • Would like to see more about the open space but can be looked at in the detail plan Open Space Modifications on the Updated Concept Site Plan • Elimination of Old Lots 10 and 11 (at the center of the site) allow for approximately 4,000 SF additional space (lot size was approx 5,125 sf but part was already used in landscape%pen space calculation) o This change increases the open space to approx 23.5% from the original 20% • Removal of these two lots allows for a gradual tier of the center section to allow for park-like features in the center section as well as landscaping areas to allow for the edible gardening that is prominent in the Elite Care communities. • Removal of two lots and elimination of "density bonus" removes the need for additional open space interpretation of the code during preliminary discussions as there are no questions about granting density bonuses based on the "quality" of the open space. o Detail plans will most likely require additional information regarding the formal layouts of these spaces • Restructuring of the pathways at the Knoll facing property including removal of the ponds allows for an approximately 4,000 sf. fenced common area at the entrance to the site for kids play area, grass area, or other use o We would like this area to remain very open to the homeowners for future use - depending on the mix of the community, we can provide potential options such as play structures, picnic tables, gazebos, or other areas depending on the community needs Notes on Open Space: One of the major concerns with open space that was addressed by the commissioners was brought up as a result of the request for the density bonus increase, and whether the open space was usable open space. Throughout this planned development, there are pathways that surround the entire site - each of which will have edible gardening planted throughout as part of our gardening process. We have done the same at our Elite Care project in Milwaukie to much success - residents, family members, and the neighborhood walk through the site and eat the blackberries, raspberries, blueberries, and other edible plants throughout the year. In addition, the two newly designed areas create additional community space. The large completely open space at the front of the site along SW Knoll, which has been reconfigured, and we now propose to be fenced in to allow for a margin of safety without having it open into Knoll or the sidewalk, is a large space that will allow the neighborhood to utilize the space for a variety of options including a play structure and surrounding area, central gazebo/picnic area, open grassy area for general play, or a variety of potential options. The central wedge shaped space between lots 3 and 4 has the water feature removed, and either a future water feature, open space, bench area, or other feature will be installed in this location. Finally, the space directly in the center of the site (Tract A on top of it) is now approximately 8,000 SF of open space not including the 7 parking spaces at the base of this. This space will have 3 distinct tiers to it to ensure that there are flattened, level spaces to the building. The top tier that abuts the sidewalk and alleyway will have a gentle slope from West to East (Left to Right) until it hits a retaining wall. This space will be used for additional edible landscaping, planting, and other passive uses. The space between the two retaining walls will be flattened, and will be used as a large level open area for use in picnics, community events, gardening, or other areas as designated by the community at large. The area directly abutting the retaining wall will be landscaped, as will the area abutting the second retaining wall (again moving East to West). The third tier will be a flat spot adjacent to the parking that will be used specifically for the gardening program through Elite Care. The retaining walls will be 42" or less in height to ensure that they do not have to be formally engineered. These retaining walls will most likely be made of recycled concrete (we will have pictures at the Planning Commission meeting on September 21 st) keeping with our theme of LEED certification, recycling and sustainability. In addition, all plants on site will be edible plants used for both the residents and the neighborhood as a whole. Overall, we feel that making these two substantial changes to the site, especially by reducing the site by two lots removing the criteria for bonus density greatly improves the viability of this site in terms of open space. Although we lost two lots, and the higher density, the overall site conditions improve with these two options. Planned Development Overlay Purpose This is an item that was addressed by the associate planner on the project, Gary Pagenstecher, and we felt that it was important to walk through the 6 items outlined in this section as an addendum to our initial project narrative that was submitted prior to the initial Planning Commission Meeting on August 17th Chapter 18.350.010 has a six-fold purpose that we will attempt to succinctly address here since many of these points were addressed throughout the narrative as well as during the presentation on August 17th 18.350.010 The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application offlexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City We believe that the property development here includes numerous flexible standards including reduced lot sizes (the average lot size is less than a typical R4.5 zone, but the overall number of lots remains the same), reduced street widths, rolled curbs to allow fire access, alleyways, common tracts with open space, common parking, and the inclusion of the RCF as the centerpiece of the development. 2. To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; We believe that we are adding the benefit of usable open space in this development, the preservation of a natural area (originally created through old storm drainage of Park 217 business center), the planting of additional healthy trees and the removal of unhealthy trees. The rolled curbs and continuous pathways that allow for residents of the neighborhood to have additional walking paths, while also integrating this new planned development with the neighborhood as a whole is a benefit to the community. In addition, by increasing the density through LEED developments, the sustainability of the community will be an improvement to the surrounding neighborhood. 3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; The Village at Knoll is a very distinct, different, extremely unique neighborhood. Intergenerational living is something that is talked about on a national level, but is currently being actually developed very rarely. The community that we are developing is truly intergenerational, with single family homes surrounding a RCF that will house elders for the last 3-5 years typically of their life. The project will be residential in nature, and the RCF will also have a residential feel to the buildings as seen by the pictures that were provided during both the submittal and the presentation. The benefit to the city of a increased density development that is not reliant on either the success of the elder care of the success of the single family homes, but the combined successes of the two distinct components of this neighborhood allows for long term benefits to the City of Tigard. In addition, by transitioning the development from the single family homes along SW Knoll, where there are existing houses, to the lower section of the lot which will house the RCF, closer to the industrial/commercial sites to the North and East of the project, a buffer of sorts will be naturally created from the existing neighborhood and transitioning through our site. 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; This site is very difficult to develop, as seen through the presentation and the discussions on the previous pages. The slope of the site, combined with the existing conditions are a challenge. Many of the trees on site are damaged, rotten, falling over, or non-native invasive species that will be removed and replaced with healthy, natural, well maintained trees. Those healthy trees that remain will be able to grow more naturally without the invasive species, and the natural area at the north end of the site will be preserved to ensure that there is a natural water drainageway in that area. Cleanwater Services has already signed off on the project, as has the City Arborist, and the Landscape plan presented by our landscape architects provides a buffer to the adjacent properties along with a very detailed planting plan to ensure that trees grow mature and healthy on the site over time. 5. To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; During the original development analysis of this site, a minor density bonus was requested, and subsequently has been removed from the requested development. We are developing less than the maximum of lots that are able to be built, while maintain services that the City of Tigard will need to have in order to maintain it's population as they age into retirement and assisted living ages over the next 20-30 years. In addition, this development allows the developer ample opportunity, allows the neighbors a site that is both buffered and accessible to them, and allows for increased services located within the City. 6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. (Ord. 06-16) We feel that the LEED certification that we will receive (the last 2 communities have both received the LEED Platinum designation) allows sustainability like few other projects across the country currently. In addition, using the design of the project and buildings to increase parking, decrease footprints, and generally re-shape the traditional development will allow for a sustainable community that the City of Tigard can be proud of. SUMMARY: We have spent considerable time taking into account the two main items that were addressed by the planning commission; open space and parking, and look forward to our presentation on September 21St, 2009 to fully walk through these ideas and the associated re-configuring of our site plan. We look forward to comments by the planning commission, the neighbors, and staff regarding this updated site plan. ~y- t`'t a I f VICINITY MAP GEC ~ _ , 5'S ° ~ 5 9 t• MP fa ' PDR2008-00004 ' nits e Q MP 5 r y - 4yA THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL S ~L ID erty AR A MAIN 5~ 171 ~5 _ -mot, w..,,'7 5~il hi, 55 r-', f Subject Site 1 ~ - zu. 1T yY J W3111 kF S~ KNOT l ¢ Tig e 2S1 1Ci .JJtJI P s OR ' 25101 Bud 150 0 ;r f J~~ 1 I i Information on this map is for general location ---'---7 I l i only and should be verified with the Development - , 1 5, f.,' ` J~ C',.• - y -1 j ~I ; Services Division. - if Scale 1:4,500 - 1 in = 375 it / -~44 f---l I~ -f Map printed at 19-Jun-09 09:46 AM r 1 +r + DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES THE CITY OF TIGARD r MANES NO WARR/JITY REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE "1 ` Y~ p - l I CONTENT. ACCURACY, TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE Jr1 DATAPROVIDED HEREIN. THE CITY OF nGARO SHALL ASSUME NO ~ i t LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE l INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED. City of Tigard !f 13125 SW Hall Blvd 4'"Y ' tq~Mq~s Tigard, OR 97223 503639-4171 Q www.tigard-or.gov M _J OF TIGARD Approved 1 -^.,nditlonally Approved I 1 F:)r only the work as described P:9MITNO. D vvac Attach I Job Add Date: i LEGEND: J 'er . I S17E RIAORIfAT10N m R 0 O\ -tt41LT! ~ ~ 0_ VOOLR mvw.a b R r~~r• ao 0 4 ~wasse..--- ,u ra mxec un o - , ~ooa"ri ~rw I 78 / ~Y: j±, a lozk sa xL\i o~mrnoi 1°r) • tuna ~41zwa:c) \ I b A 1\\ / l.~,, snrr:vRSC ,o~c (rnv,E) \ xenARpeMO NSAt NRE s m,w un esA ( aarwtal) - tui o s _ \ ` ! Lc* a\aavrort was . tzx,w s ~\_~C ` ,N C _ rl (rYN LPhD lwR - li WOW Nllm IMIS - 16) i z i~ of `~~;.~~'@.4~ l.~•'(~ Q ° t' s 161. V. to Ltw'bK ME--'rut amt \\l \ \ \ e 1 \1 rt 67 zssse m n , ax at9 ~4' rca u zw en 1:114 ` \ t ins tmio 1.114 \\V' ) QTR RAM1W mwR. J i.A iilo 11112 MOLE \ \ \ ? 2 NEIr 5 R eUBtIC SODx1.[. 1W. a e3 E?I `ems _ wumruu n• im `Ir 0 tutzs (sae ov61`mq Izziaslq xa s R. auvnu stmt ttmt ovens w voR otc-xw stmr a s ~ ' { / R ©,e R. Ac LWf-no,K nt rtmw rnum. h / ~ t a ~ iz Q a>srtx uv¢ c xax xoeni sa¢m. soaaus. olewats. vvnxtx - 2ex a xm / Ny; ,ey edxovrt Oo wamlc+v son. (To ox soq. 1, 12 (D l ~ fr/ h ~e voxto ova smcv vur xu PARIUNG: 10151,rPU6-a AW A6 (2xcwcE zON-1) / e r'.r H i' / a ~ uzrs > ,ax ,x - : a a swc¢Mr (z x Wacz t oe z a+ oetas» „ - a zvxzs Nom caa) I,J ~ ~ ` ,wcr •A• -wax vAa,w a svvm i r tIJ l 11 in/ GRAPHIC SCALE I o ,a so FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Z T e c E N G I N E E R S I n G CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN 2211,-1 2-21-w Civil - Structural - Surveying FOR: WCR COMPANY 3737 S. 13TH AVE.. PORTLAND. OR. 97202 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY +rr+,~~ Phone'. (50 E. 3) 235-8795 F- (503) 233-7889 CO 1 4 yb Email: zt-0zlecengineers.com TIGARD. OREGON ptMRES ,2nv2a,o - - z~.~ Ua mc: ~7e.,~,.9xg CITY OF TIGARD Approved [,X 1 .,ndi;ionallyApproved i F 3r only the work as described in: P'=.4MIT N0. PD11 X PR -CA-g>0 ~ See Le Attach Jcb .Addre Date: 2 ,ro I t3' 1 i aww ~ rywr ' \ IwSi 5f. p'YV,F WS~IC A[ . Y ssrw omun, rm amx, ~n+ z ~,n 2e aownu wmx ~ xm r ss. 1*av e ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY SECTION yT~'~•~~Y- s ~ I ~ ~ I ,11 I ' 11 `~\'1 \ .vrwr~ ,i u % ' it I i ` \ ;r • p"e GRADING KEYNOTES j1 (D 3nvu . , - `~Y~~•`~~~ _ n ~ Is~ ~ f ~~,~1 I ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ Q srtaru J p. \ , Nu wuwr, sun cx ""01B {f 1 yf 3s .vu ~f)Y. SECTION A-A J~~. l; 1 l BOfl01 WL1160'~ SLMFI•.IVNM. h GRAPHIC SCALE t o s w w y BENCHMARK: r J ~4'PJ ~ '+'2.,~ nzrom~s rya m w< mr a sw. vsn a arc a xw .F' sTC~zz~i wu ieu osc R cue a as aaa a urw q RkY eai - xzs ; / r a1z zax - uznova aaa a weA vac xovn, s¢ a aat sr¢v stawx. s1c rar - to a v. • auowsT cmei a wanin. a .iwx FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION w. RE150N Y..wwl37OE Z T e c ENGINEERS I n G CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN .wu -z1-m Civil - Structural - Surveying FOR: WCR COMPANY "J0 c1 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 m~ Ph. (503) z3s-8795 Fa.: (503) 233-7889 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY `+1 Erma: zvacoztaceA9maars.com TIGARD, OREGON V IX%RES 12/31/20lo PwT wTC~ s-,o-oo zzEC c,o mc: czze.,c,.owc MEETING RECORDS 9/21/09 IG pUB~C fIF•~I CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes September 21, 2009 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, Hasman, Inman, Muldoon, Vermilyea (arrived after roll call), & Walsh Absent: Commissioner Fishel, Alternate Commissioner Gaschke Staff Present: Community Development Director Ron Bunch Asst. CD Director Susan Hartnett Senior Planner Sean Farrelly Associate Planner Gary Pagenstecher Senior Administrative Specialist Doreen Laughlin 3. COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Doherty announced that she'd been appointed to State Legislature and that she prefers to stay on the Planning Commission if she can, and if her schedule allows it. If not, she will give notice in plenty of time to appoint someone else. Commissioner Walsh reminded the commissioners that the Urban Forestry Master Plan would be arriving a bit earlier than normal and he urged the commissioners to take some time to read through it prior to meeting on the 5th. President Inman reminded them that they had an email from Doreen Laughlin earlier with a link to that document - should thev want to look at it on- line. 4. CONSIDER MEETING MINUTES 8-17-09 Meeting Minutes: President Inman asked if there were any corrections, deletions, or additions to the minutes; there being none, President Inman declared the minutes approved as submitted. 5. PUBLIC HEARING Cont'd [Judicial] 5.1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL PLANNING COMMISSION MI?ETING MINUTES - September 21, 2009 - Page 1 of 5 REQUEST: The ap• ant is requesting Planned Development Re v approval of a Planned Development Concep, _ ran for development of a 2.74-acre site wits... 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. President Inman read from the Quasi-judicial Hearing Guide. No commissioner wished to abstain or declare a conflict of interest. No one in the audience wished to challenge any member of the Planning Commission for bias or conflict of interest. No one wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the commission. There were no ex parte contacts reported and no site visits. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Gary Pagenstecher said he didn't have a staff report but that the applicant was here to address them and to present further information in this continued meeting. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Mark Reed of NW Ventures Group, Inc., and applicant for the concept plan review, spoke about the changes since the last time he was before the commission. He distributed two handouts (Exhibit A). Referring to the August meeting, he said at that time it had sounded as though the Planning Commission liked the Knolls concept and the basic ideas for the plan; however, two main issues came out that needed to be addressed. One was parking and one was open space. He said they ended up eliminating two lots out of the planned development. So now, instead of having 14 single family homes in which 6 of them were detached, and 8 of them attached, they now end up with 12 detached single family homes. So there is no longer attached housing. The bottom line is it added 5,000 sq ft of essentially pure open space back into the project. He went on to describe the tiering of the open space - 3 levels - with the third tier as a flat open space. There's the possibility of community gardening. He then distributed photos of their existing facility in Milwaukee (Exhibit B). The photos showed how some of the sloped areas were used - from a planning standpoint. It showed, among other things, some examples of the recycled concrete walls that they use. He said from the open space percentage, when they initially did this plan, the minimum was 20%. He said they are currently at almost 23.5% - so they gained 3.5% of the site - essentially to open space - without taking away any of the other amenities of the project. In addition, by decreasing the two lots, they are no longer asking for the density bonus. The second item was parking. Reed noted that they'd asked their engineers to go back and help them redesign the houses. Now most of the houses have 2 car garages with two spaces behind it - essentially doubling the amount of off-street parking for every resident in the community. He went on to explain about garage set-backs and how they'd reconfigured the parking in Tract A so that there's not a greater than 180 degree turn into some of those spaces (which the old plan had). He said they'd reconfigured the lower portion of the site so the parking was re-angled, making it much easier for the residents to go through. In addition, those parking spaces ended at a wall so the parking doesn't go into general open spaces - it goes to a retaining wall. Also, on the lower portion of the site, they've added 6 additional parking spaces, so they end up with a net gain of 7 additional parking spaces - and PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES- September 21, 2009 -Page 2 of 5 a net gain of 19 off-stree aces with the garages, and the recot 1red parking driveway areas. And they also deducted 2 houses. So, essentially, they're taking away 15% of the potential people coming into the neighborhood with the loss of those 2 houses, while adding 26 total parking spots to the project. He said that with this new plan, the final product has more parking, more useful open space, and one that will be better for all the residents of the community. QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT (answers in italics) The commissioners thanked Mr. Reed for the good work and effort they'd put into this new plan. • You mentioned that all the homes have a 2 car garage or - most of the homes have a 2 car garage? I believe its 9 of the 12 lots that have them. Ifyou look on the plan marked COI (Exhibit A) there are little square box numbers behind each house. The one indicates a one cargarage, and the one car behind it. The 2's are 2 cargarages, 2 spaces behind them. There are 3 that have single cargarages and those are corner lots whereyou can't reallyget a turning radius to get a two cargarage in there. • You also mentioned you are not going to do features on the open space? You say you'll leave it up to the future homeowners to decide what to do. Will there be any funding of any future projects for the homeowners? Yes. I think we'd have a very hard time selling the lots if we say `good luck in fundingyour own center area. "So I think part of the HO association documents that would have to be done - there'd be a preliminary amount set aside essentially for the homeowners as the homeowners show up. • Did you consider townhomes at all as a way of keeping density? IYIe looked at them. The challenge is they get so close together -you decrease the amount of parkingyou can have ge on each one of them going for each individual home becauseyou end up with a sin gle-cargara through and thenyou end up with kind of the same problems we had with the original plan where you end up with more homes with less parking. When you increase the open space and take out that 5,000 sq ft of available lot square footage, it makes it real d ffcult to be able to have the houses be wide enough to have a two-cargara ge. There was some discussion about the alley variances although it had been already covered at the last meeting. Pagenstecher said he would check with the City Engineer on design and get some clearance up front during the application. • Commissioner Vermilyea said "I would suggest we make the recommendation to the Engineer that we allow variance to 12 feet on the alleyway." Inman said we can also very easily expect that this gets addressed before we come back with the detailed development plan. I'm personally fine either way. Deed said 1 think from our standpoint, if there's a note that can be made that the Planning Commission is in favor of it, per as long as the City Engineer signs off on it. I would love that to be in the record because it's a lot easier to go to the City Engineer saying `TIey the Planning Commission's already said they would like that, if its possible - can wefgure out a way to make it work?" Father than going to him blindly without recommendation. " PLANNING COMMISSION MYT-XING MINUTES- September 21, 2009 -Page 3 of 5 Thank you again for liste, ; to us and for your new presentaticl We appreciate the efforts you all went through and your patience in coming back to us. • One thing I appreciate with regard to the photographs you sent around (Exhibit B) that you have at the other facility, especially with the kind of multi-generational group that you're having, I particularly enjoy the raised beds. Seniors can garden that way. This is good! Yes - they re specifically designed for wheel-chair accessibility. There are a lot of residents who are 90 years old and up and in wheelchairs that can'tget out to garden. Here the garden is accessible - they can get in front of a bed - it works. They feel part of the community. • Is it going to be posted "No Parking"? Ve can. Absolutely. We figure that's necessary access for fire / emergency vehicles if needed. If parking is allowed there, none of those TVF&R vehicles would be able to clear that area. That would be my suggestion - absolutely no parking and a tow zone so that it is kept clear. That would be no problem. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN FAVOR: None PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL: None PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:33pm DELIBERATIONS • I was probably the most vocal last time around on this issue and I have to say they've addressed everything I had asked them to address and points I raised. I'm very, very satisfied with what I see and it's obvious they took us extremely seriously. I like everything I see. I have no objection, but would like the opinion of the City Engineer with regard to the alley issue we spoke about. But I certainly support this. • My gut feeling about the project is much better now. There's more flexibility - more space - places for people to visit without affecting the surrounding area. I'm very pleased. As far as the alleyway - I like the sidewalk in the middle. I would prefer we keep the sidewalk there. • This is a great plan. Thank you. I'm very pleased. • As far as the alleyway, I really like the idea of the sidewalk in the middle, so I would prefer that that stay. I agree with Commissioner Walsh that there might be some PLANNING COMMISSION MF_,F.TING MINUI'lS - September 21, 2009 - Page 4 of 5 technical reason v the City Engineer is looking for th, i foot width but, if possible, I would prefer that we do keep that sidewalk there. MOTION A motion was made by Commissioner Doherty, seconded by Commissioner Vermilyea as follows: "I move for approval of application PDR2008-00004 Village of the Knoll, and what will be included in that is what we discussed tonight in the staff report and the information we got at the last hearing and in the revisions presented by the applicant tonight." The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote, the Council voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Caffall, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Inman, Commissioner Muldoon, Commissioner Vermilyea, and Commissioner Walsh (8) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAINERS: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioner Fishel (1) 6. WORKSHOP I Downtown Code Amendments Senior Planner, Sean Farrelly, went over his PowerPoint in detail (See Exhibit C). QUESTIONS OF STAFF There were some general requests asking Farrelly to delve a bit further into some of the topics he'd brought up such as the sub-committee, the design review board, the MU-CBD use table, etc. 7. OTHER BUSINESS -None 8. ADJOURNMENT President Inman adjourned the meeting at 8:22 p.m. Doreen Laughlin, Planning Co ssion Secretary ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - September 21, 2009 - Page 5 of 5 I Exhibit A i 5' 15' '.y,.. Ir.v u. novM ~ Ac ~ . ,may Q Ii0011bYK u5 9nfH oFIW' TW fOR 91riFR aMA ~ N• YWM!el£ tV~fR - . x nx sr (mAc r o ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY SECTION ? yar _ I 4 f x T MOT 0 r'b ~ Y \ \ : y \ ~ A ~xnK oNraW Ib WEUAx oK a y'am' ~ I` -may Ou 'a. \ ` 1 \ yn s (wr u ~ ~ K, f ,`ss.~ ,.y a i/ 1 Po s~ A,; 1 \ GRADING KEYNOTES % 1 ~ ~ yI f~ 1RWll ~~j vrt~s -4 r 6 B= ~ i]-~ ~ Oj xRrosR WAU. r.Wr' \ ' \ * 5 d , I ) Oi rPmars rAMaNNr .7 y~ j # ~ ar e ~ w s _ rWru1 G r ?b ] l ''4o y' rv _ P ti' A L _ BOROY a WAll 161d RfY41( fFA IPMA WNWwAR rt,N11M4 PIAIUG AMA 41 IV' %',n',if'.. s+ j ym+auu lmsmnss SECTION A-A ' f ik: :i H".• _ rormll ar WAU Iuo sc.uE r.In x . l GRAPHIC SCALE 0 5 b 60 BENCHMARK: I _ '(~C.~, QEVAiMWS AH N rrC olv 6 eGAWJ. a , ~ J ~ d rm Sllrt~Cf MALL igASS tlY N tlR3 N N~fGMIR ff gANU11 M _L ! / arvAml _ Ixn / Z' i~ 'v' ~ srt I e.W. rAPnnu mWE x Porn rac Ilona ~ v AMnu san scmowr srt r.au . oP r s/M' v. • swnrrse mNU of FOR REVIEW ONLY art. a. " r NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION U2a4 - m REVISION Z T e c E N G I N E E R S I n c CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN =eA,' 1 N =-n-m Civil - Structural - Surveying FOR: WCR COMPANY Phone : 3]37 SE (503) 235-8795 STH eVE..POR F- ox: ((503}) 233-7889 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY d C~ EmaII =re~o~le~W~9mee...~,m TIGARD, OREGON ~.J evPlNCS Iz/v/zolo c'uo Il~c: tsm.:u.owc LEGEND: - - - Ne Y •v~arnu 2 1el SITE WFORM00 r?D. rre - TRACT a - _ a1pxoarun Nrau m. ,c2xm, m .rr"N,9n ~ fro 0 b % ~.n.crr._._---_... ru u.w. snac nxl Rzw„+~` r z.N1. R-3s ~ '1-A' i.soomdrr RE9WDN1 ' - n ~ ~ ~ \ ~ roru vrt Dx.S~.Er.RE Emv 1a y . 1a,as s (za35. w) ~ TMG A OFpGNnOx L54 / ~ .cn.ums xdi (mTMmE . I e x'~us f[E91E E R 2 _ (wau 7011m uers - u uNww zam wrs - ID) ,,x w ~ 4 xoiw Aga ofSCME ~BSUa(sgpKr~ ~ r"ll 1.~3 939 'r..._'ayP~ .C r, O 6 ],5 J I.3xe 933 V 1570 172.5 i:oi l4 \F 2. 600 1.114 - m 11,, 2, . \ ♦ IeT j~ o 013 1 vx3 en :i% ♦ • 2 n. onm~rrwroR m 12 n. ii i'BDe's iii. 14.712 N°Plxwosm cuRe R.n1 Exccm .v"'t`'~ 2 rei n O Ii Qx xEw 5 m rw, it a n i 711 - ErEeaar eaRxEn x D W Im O 1- salErvxx. 12' :R ( ( era1E) xEalwEUEx1. xee s rt. PUNIFR raxs'~`orzMOrur °sTCREEr~u 3 , j i''. ' ~ / •Q 1a rr.:EC. wu-woTR, uR. fYF8R0M COPUEP. ///t 1I 12 6 O BIIERA IFm C 40N. NOxM SIREFR. SIOfiNI(5. ORASW.'S. PNefNC . ]M Or Srlf f i - - 1 >?Be BOIeO/F/ Ro CODUER[W sl0f). - x f. - I aoamwr Oo sx>E~. a1aE P.waluc eRrw (D r ~ ' ~ Tn° ©rTrrcm oxu ssi¢ Pur .Ru PARKING: ` 1n>s 1 mRU s - . sswuM, I2 w veNx.E 2 ax oRrruh k i, x Y r,,... ...eey_..,.,~•4 E.¢ 3 rRRU 12 - 3 aR N SP AOT (2 x -E. 1 oR 2 oR .ar.Ewnn 1- 13 - N SPICES (-R co+m GRAPHIC SCALE 1s 30 tv+rml FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION „z CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN 4• Z T e c E N G I N E E R S Inc L21B•~I ~l 2-21-m ,vi] - Structural - Surveying FOR: WCR COMPANY 30 3737 S.E 8TH AVE., PORTUND. OR. 97202 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY e P11one: (503) 235-8795 F- (503) 233-7889 CO.'I 4 m~ Em.a: aeco2te en9 ezr com TIGARD, OREGON ENPIRES~1/31/x010 UntE: 9 PEC CnU P1LE. 12 ` it d L 1. ~F ~ T't~-i IF s ~.~yY. { , y y , f ~ ~y .e• y rat ♦~~•tl T ~ -T Vol 41 ONO .6' fd ll r ~ti ~ a Y 4 c~ x r . a L ~ i ~ ~ . r iP1 Y , }~R'N } ;'1 y T'~•I` 4 ~ y J~1.~ ~y } µ f ti b.` Ilk A Al~ ~f i ` y~{jt1f yew c; ~4~ 1 C yrl,- 5 f 4p ,(d , \ J -iw-: ~ t, ,~y{lvlr 1' ' 4f•' Yr ( y ~'•A4v ~ ' P•' for I 3 ~ V~ ry t`. y ,l t. a4' ~j 1 4r •~,4~ N17 ~,e. yCfii-,` r x" o R f Az~ , f 111 Lai 'Al Oio IJ f4l, t r f 4-1 l er , ~ t -..may I r I + I /rJJ' i to it4 ~ ak `..A -die, rs f N41 R L ~a. a ~ r low- moor IAL t to A,A AN* Y 6 11 ♦ .2~ i i y t ~y w ~ ~ + L ter, r s tar_ b L" 5' r: _ t !~c 4'~' _ ,,ii ` z +1 .t .~r~ ~ ~h.4 try!.~.+' 1L k -A ( \ l V• v ~ _ _ r ~ 1 i` t ~r' .t• ~ `'~i~~ ~ ~ 11 Tj Y ~+i ~IPA`~ 's..}#.:.~ Alt Y,` t ti,Yf f 7. , d tf ~ ~L t Ik ~y lltv~~P '1 fy. 'S St l- a , v~,~ .t ,,//fi~r q ~ ~ c,ti .~F n ~ 'T ~ ~ FYI ~ t+Y~ ^ 5,. 14141 vl~ rr~ I' 5a ,i c '1 1 , 4 ft. 77 t ' G `1 T ,.a. Z ' t .14 ,~3FVr"A 1~.~ in v' • .fir i. n. T ~.1 to m t f T~~ r ~ 1 k\ r ~ e- tr 4 ~.r 1~ I w as , t - `R fit. ~l-[~~ 7 ~f?~1~, , i V ~ i ! L •t. i ~ 1t+ . i, _,A 4 ' ~ t:~~`~~~ Vii'' ~ K C S 1 S, ! ~ 1 tit F r ~>t SQ 1 _ r. - { nx ..t{ d ~4 JPA ~ ~ Z ~h YY t i '7U b pd Al iR1 r ~s Y cur J4 , S ..Mq$l. Al Y v"~ .X -Iw . 1 ~ q. ~ yr1 i C ..fy • } Ti ~R.t1 t'.~y - ~s _ ,i, e 4-y' , a ti0 1~~~ ~ • -NA 40010 W, V. tie l~ i` ~ 5TH a ~ t~~#" , 'it 21 Y r . ry ~ ~ a a 9 mac., All j" W N ~a}L , f tL, _ t f r ~ ` + ~ •`x.1'`1• lop I t, 7A Pt's 7 ~ Y. •t' K~ i ~ t I« I ~ ~ ` ' \ ? ~ , _ ~s tt IN ` ,i ~ , K w a ~ ~ ► z . Wis. jijk Cot APOL L.W 'ti♦ . I 1 01, FIS t r AAAL. t l 1 't J . { ' ya ! ! ~a A ` ~ ti4* j ' ~.'+ti:~ ~ ~ 1t 1 1• i t c!,, , "~iT~~+ ,a•~ 7 oY t; ye ~ ye r 1 1 t\ 1A I. TA! l ' ' 1 a r x A 10 f.i 11 1 •h 2 \l ~.s 1 Z.L R~ k , I t ~ RH 4 f e ate,:. i r -•1 ,K..al'.' a i. ' i.'g: .t'~r yJ x ~ ti X 7r V.~ R ~ - vim- lr ♦ .k_ z'' -rte ~t.. / yt~.~f ~ ~ ` y Rrt,~, 3f~~"fir r 14 'imp , -14 4 1 ` t ~ ; ' s~ V 1 1 l * M7 1W Y . it' m fv.~ 7 ~ 3f i n \ s i t ter. t 3 Y , 41ii., 1. - t h. ~R ^N ~ Y R , 7 t a 'Fc TT ~~t ty xS t 1 I~t ~ Wires` r' tk~'~1~ ~ ~ c ~i i <.~„'•7 ~ -(rte .P" ~ i } 1Fk. ti;-~. ~ r 5 r Q 'Nr; L'1,~i r tt w. , s- ~ j 41 w h } ~ t t fy~.. w a t ~ sti ~r y~ x :r ~ s P-M h + r~ 1P r < , k. T~l y fr. 1 `~ty~ ~~•~'1~~ ~ bra.-~~'~,'t ~fS z t v F~ I ~ ...,tom.. • tiY t .~y.~affi~ f r r r' r~- c, !1 f4 kh- f T ' _r• 1•- _ :r:~. ter.- PLEASE SIGN IN HERE Tigard Planning Commission P Agenda Item # Page of Date of Hearings-~ Case Number(s) Case Name ~-t Location S If you would like to speak on this item, please CLEARLY PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (FOR the proposal): Opponent (AGAINST the proposal): Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: City of Tigard. Planning Commission - Agenda T MEETING DATE: September 21, 2009, 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER Too p.m. 2. ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 P.m - 4. CONSIDER MINUTES T08 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING zio p.m. 5.1 CONTINUED - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. 6. Downtown Code Amendments - Workshop 18 io p.m. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 9:1o p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT 9:20 p m PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA - September 21, 2009 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 wwrw.tigard-or.gov Page 1 of 1 t Agenda Item #5.1 City of Tigard Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner Re: The Village at Knoll (PDR2008-00004), Continued Hearing for Proposed Concept Plan Date: September 14, 2009 The Planning Commission continued the August 18, 2009 hearing for The Village at Knoll until September 21, 2009. The Commission raised several issues including the availability of sufficient parking and articulation of the proposed open space. In response, the applicant has provided additional narrative and a revised site plan for inclusion in the Commission's packet for review in advance of the hearing. Additionally, the applicant plans to provide additional documentation at the hearing including examples of the Rock Wall and a Profile View of the interior Open Space Area. 1 The Village at Knoll Additional Narrative for Planning Commission Based on Comments from P Appearance Note from Applicant: During the Planning Commission Meeting on August 17th, 2009, we presented to the planning commission a concep plan for a planned development that would take our existing 2.74 acre site and transform it into a multi-generational community centered on a Residential Care Facility (RCF), "Elite Care at Knoll". This 2.74 acre site was to be divided into 1 RCF lot, 6 detached single family home lots, and 8 attached family home lots for a total of 15 lots on the property. At the first meeting we were asking for a very small density bonus that would allow us to take the project from 14.7 lots to 15 lots to maximize the use of the site. The biggest challenges to our site always have been two sided. First, the constraints that are placed on development currently by multiple jurisdictions including Cleanwater Services, Tualatin Valley Fire, and the City of Tigard make a smaller infill site a challenge to develop. We have received approval of the site from CWS and TVF&R, and hope that the Planning Commission takes the changes that we have made based on their suggestions as sufficient to meet the requirements of the concept plan approval process. The second challenge to this site, and something that was addressed by the Planning Commission, is the slope of the site, and how to correctly grade the site for usable open space, sufficient parking, and to ensure that general site conditions can be met. Our updated concept plan has 2 major changes. First, the elimination of two lots (old lots #10/11) at the center of the lower section of attached housing along the lower road between the alley and the roadway. The removal of then( two lots allows for an additional 4,000 SF approximately of open space (increasing the total from 20% to approximately 23.5% of the site) and will reduce the potential parking and road use loads for the entire project. The second major change is the elimination of the attached housing units as a result of the elimination of the two lots. There will now only be 12 stand alone single family residential units, and each of these units will have garages/parking spaces added as outlined in the parking section. We feel that our re-structured concept plan sufficiently addresses all of these issues, and hope that the Planning Commission agrees with our thoughts. We have attached an updated site plan along with basic information on the types of open space, usages, and essential layouts as requested by the Planning Commission. Assuming the l Planning Commission moves forward with an approval, we will adjust the additional plan requirements including storm, sewer, landscaping, etc. accordingly based on the additional comments of the Planning Commission when we submit the detail plans at a future date. In summary, we feel that we are presenting a viable option for us as a development team, for the City of Tigard, and the surrounding neighbors that will enhance the community while establishing a true multi-generational community. Comments from the Planning Commission on August 17`n, 2009: The comments that were made by Planning Commission members and staff during the initial concept plan review meeting seemed to focus on four main items. We will attempt to address each of these questions in sequence including the initial conditions proposed during the first concept plan review, and the changes that have been made to address the concerns of the Planning Commission. • Parking, including the quantity of parking, off-street/on-street parking, staff and resident parking, garage space and locations, driveway depths, and community event parking • Open Space, including the quantity of open space (20% to meet the requirement), quality and use of the oper space, slope of the open space • Density Bonus including the granting of, the conditions that come out of granting the open space, and the additional lot that could be created. Also included in this were the setbacks and the housing styles and yard spaces This item essentially has been removed from consideration given the reduction in requested number of total lots from 15 to 13. • Narrative Comments from Staff including the use of the PC Toolbox and the "Purpose" detail from chapter 18.3 5 0.010 in the. code. Parting Requirements Initial Concept Plan Parking Information The initial concept plan that was turned in had the following parking spaces located on the site: • 4-5 Spaces located under the RCF for Staff/Resident Parking • 6 Spaces located directly in front of the RCF for Guest Parking • 6 Spaces located to the South of the RCF along the street • 14 Garage "Inside" Spaces - one for each house • 12 Outside Off-Street Spaces - one for each house with exception of corner lots The comments that were made on the parking included the following: I • Ensuring that the driveway dimensions were at least 18' on each driveway to ensure that cars could park without being in the alleyway. As an alternative, make them less than 7' so it is obvious that there is no parking in those spaces • Questions about where the visitors to the SFR and attached homes park ® Subtract one lot and use for parking o Another comment about this not really helping, but parking still an issue ® Friends for the SFR and large group gatherings - where does everyone park? ® How will residents park their cars (not sure about residents of houses or RCF) ® Other comments in general about the parking without being specific to single issues, more of an all around concern with the number and location of the parking spaces Parking Plan Modifications on the Updated Concept Site Plan We have made the following modifications to the parking plan in accordance with issues brought up by the Plannin€ Commission: • Addition of 1 Space along with the reconfiguring for easier access in/out in front of the RCF for Guest Parking • Addition of 6 Spaces to the South of the RCF along the street • Increase from 14 Garage "Inside" Spaces to 21 Garage "Inside" Spaces o We are working with our architects on the design of the single family residences. Each house along the Knoll Street Frontage (Lots 1-6) as well as lower level Lots 8, 9 and 11 will have double car garages built into the natural slope of the site. Each of these double car garages will be full width double car garages, not tandem spaces. In addition, the change in site plan for Lots 7, 10 and 12 will have full depth single car garages. Previously, all houses only had single car garages. • Increase from 12 Outside Off-Street Spaces to 21 Off-Street Spaces o The increase in width at the base of the garages will also allow for cars to be parked off street on eacl of the lots. Lots 1-6, 8, 9 and 11 will have double wide parking spaces located behind the garages, and Lots 7, 10 and 12 will have the location of the houses reconfigured to ensure that the driveways are at least 18 feet deep to allow for one car in the garage and one car in the driveway. "Net Increase of 7 community Parking Spaces along with 19 Individual Parking Spaces along with the elimination of 2 complete buildings" Notes on Parking: We believe that the combined increase in parking for community of 7 spaces (effectively increasing by 50% to a total of 21 spaces (including the 2 between lots 8 and 9) will assist with the overall community parking. Given the slope of the site and the grading constraints along with the required roadway and walking widths, there are few options on this site to continue to increase additional parking. This leaves a total of 19 community parking spaces and 5 spaces under the RCF for staff/resident use (As a note, we currently only have 1 resident in our existing Tigard community that has a car on campus for the same number of residents) We also believe that by eliminating 2 houses, we will decrease community parking requirements due to sheer volume of people being reduced in the community. We also believe that having double car garages and double spot! behind the cars will allow for friends and visitors to park in those spaces in addition to families who may have more than 1-2 cars - although having smaller 2 and 3 bedroom units will also assist with this. The increase of 19 parking spaces combined with the elimination of the 2 residential units will assist in the potential parking problems. Open Space Requirements Initial Concept Plan Open Space Information The initial concept plan that was turned in contained the following information regarding open space for the site: ® Total Open Space of approximately 20% (I believe the figure was just over 20%) including: o Passive Use Areas of 6,288 SF ■ Shared Outdoor Areas of 4,200 SF (Code Requires 300 SF per 3 Bedroom Unit) o Minimal Use Areas of 18,516 SF • Ponds and pathways on the upper level outdoor/passive use areas • General Use areas in front of and between the common parking • Passive Use areas at the outer edges of the site including open space and landscaping areas The comments that were made on the open space included the following: • Scale of the open space seemed very small • Hard to tell what the open space is really going to look like • Open space should be addressed in more details • Would like to see more about the open space but can be looked at in the detail plan Open Space Modifications on the Updated Concept Site Plan ® Elimination of Old Lots 10 and 11 (at the center of the site) allow for approximately 4,000 SF additional space (lot size was approx 5,125 sf. but part was already used in landscape pen space calculation) o This change increases the open space to approx 23.5% from the original 20% • Removal of these two lots allows for a gradual tier of the center section to allow for park-like features in the center section as well as landscaping areas to allow for the edible gardening that is prominent in the Elite Care communities. ® Removal of two lots and elimination of "density bonus" removes the need for additional open space interpretation of the code during preliminary discussions as there are no questions about granting density bonuses based on the "quality" of the open space. o Detail plans will most likely require additional information regarding the formal layouts of these spaces ® Restructuring of the pathways at the Knoll facing property including removal of the ponds allows for an approximately 4,000 sf. fenced common area at the entrance to the site for kids play area, grass area, or other use o We would like this area to remain very open to the homeowners for future use - depending on the mix of the community, we can provide potential options such as play structures, picnic tables, gazebos, or other areas depending on the community needs Notes on Open ,Space: One of the major concerns with open space that was addressed by the commissioners was brought up as a result of the request for the density bonus increase, and whether the open space was usable open space. Throughout this planned development, there are pathways that surround the entire site - each of which will have edible gardening planted throughout as part of our gardening process. We have done the same at our Elite Care project in Milwaukie to much success - residents, family members, and the neighborhood walk through the site and eat the blackberries, raspberries, blueberries, and other edible plants throughout the year. In addition, the two newly designed areas create additional community space. The large completely open space at the front of the site along SW Knoll, which has been reconfigured, and we now propose to be fenced in to allow for a margin of safety without having it open into Knoll or the sidewalk, is a large space that will allow the neighborhood to utilize the space for a variety of options including a play structure and surrounding area, central gazebo/picnic area, open grassy area for general play, or a variety of potential options. The central wedge shaped space between lots 3 and 4 has the water feature removed, and either a future water feature, open space, bench area, or other feature will be installed in this location. Finally, the space directly in the center of the site (Tract A on top of it) is now approximately 8,000 SF of open space not including the 7 parking spaces at the base of this. This space will have 3 distinct tiers to it to ensure that there are flattened, level spaces to the building. The top tier that abuts the sidewalk and alleyway will have a gentle slope from West to East (Left to Right) until it hits a retaining wall. This space will be used for additional edible landscaping, planting, and other passive uses. The space between the two retaining walls will be flattened, and will be used as a large level open area for use in picnics, community events, gardening, or other areas as designated by the community at large. The area directly abutting the retaining wall will be landscaped, as will the area abutting thf second retaining wall (again moving East to West). The third tier will be a flat spot adjacent to the parking that will be used specifically for the gardening program through Elite Care. The retaining walls will be 42" or less in height to ensure that they do not have to be formally engineered. These retaining walls will most likely be made of recycled concrete (we will have pictures at the Planning Commission meeting on September 21S) keeping with our theme of LEED certification, recycling and sustainability. In addition, all plants on site will be edible plants used for both the residents and the neighborhood as a whole. Overall, we feel that making these two substantial changes to the site, especially by reducing the site by two lots removing the criteria for bonus density greatly improves the viability of this site in terms of open space. Although we lost two lots, and the higher density, the overall site conditions improve with these two options. Planned Development Overlay Purpose This is an item that was addressed by the associate planner on the project, Gary Pagenstecher, and we felt that it was important to walk through the 6 items outlined in this section as an addendum to our initial project narrative that wa: submitted prior to the initial Planning Commission Meeting on August 17tH Chapter 18.350.010 has a six-fold purpose that we will attempt to succinctly address here since many of these points were addressed throughout the narrative as well as during the presentation on August 17`h 18.350.010 The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City We believe that the property development here includes numerous flexible standards including reduced. lot sizes (thc average lot size is less than a typical R4.5 zone, but the overall number of lots remains the same), reduced street widths, rolled curbs to allow fire access, alleyways, common tracts with open space, common parking, and the inclusion of the RCF as the centerpiece of the development. To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger- community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; We believe that we are adding the benefit of usable open space in this development, the preservation of a natural area (originally created through old storm drainage of Park 217 business center), the planting of additional healthy trees and the removal of unhealthy trees. The rolled curbs and continuous pathways that allow for residents of the neighborhood to have additional walking paths, while also integrating this new planned development with the neighborhood as a whole is a benefit to the community. In addition, by increasing the density through LEED developments, the sustainability of the community will be an improvement to the surrounding neighborhood. 3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; The Village at Knoll is a very distinct, different, extremely unique neighborhood. Intergenerational living is something that is talked about on a national level, but is currently being actually developed very rarely. The community that we are developing is truly intergenerational, with single family homes surrounding a RCF that will house elders for the last 3-5 years typically of their life. The project will be residential in nature, and the RCF will also have a residential feel to the buildings as seen by the pictures that were provided during both the submittal and the presentation. The benefit to the city of a increased density development that is not reliant on either the success of the elder care of the success of the single family homes, but the combined successes of the two distinct components of this neighborhood allows for long term benefits to the City of Tigard. In addition, by transitioning l the development from the single family homes along SW Knoll, where there are existing houses, to the lower section of the lot which will house the RCF, closer to the industrial/commercial sites to the North and East of the project, a buffer of sorts will be naturally created from the existing neighborhood and transitioning through our site. 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; This site is very difficult to develop, as seen through the presentation and the discussions on the previous pages. The slope of the site, combined with the existing conditions are a challenge. Many of the trees on site are damaged, rotten, falling over, or non-native invasive species that will be removed and replaced with healthy, natural, well maintained trees. Those healthy trees that remain will be able to grow more naturally without the invasive species, and the natural area at the north end of the site will be preserved to ensure that there is a natural water drainageway in that area. Cleanwater Services has already signed off on the project, as has the City Arborist, and the Landscape plan presented by our landscape architects provides a buffer to the adjacent properties along with a very detailed planting plan to ensure that trees grow mature and healthy on the site over time. 5. To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; During the original development analysis of this site, a minor density bonus was requested, and subsequently has been removed from the requested development. We are developing less than the maximum of lots that are able to bf built, while maintain services that the City of Tigard will need to have in order to maintain it's population as they age into retirement and assisted living ages over the next 20-30 years. In addition, this development allows the developer ample opportunity, allows the neighbors a site that is both buffered and accessible to them, and allows for increased services located within the City. 6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. (Ord. 06-16) We feel that the LEED certification that we will receive (the last 2 communities have both received the LEED Platinum designation) allows sustainability like few other projects across the country currently. In addition, using the design of the project and buildings to increase parking, decrease footprints, and generally re-shape the traditional development will allow for a sustainable community that the City of Tigard can be proud of. SUMMARY: We have spent considerable time taking into account the two main items that were addressed by the planning commission; open space and parking, and look forward to our presentation on September 21St, 2009 to fully walk through these ideas and the associated re-configuring of our site plan. We look forward to comments by the planning commission, the neighbors, and staff regarding this updated site plan. 1 - ' LEGEND: / / ~i alrsx P,,eow mAas 'e1 / / SITE lNF')RMAl1UN ~ n e n ' . ~nrc+ e ~ - I)~ K11at W. IYlzp a ~ ~ ~ n sy ~ 8 ioP oEx~n asanue ~ sao run Lol 3R 13 Z. S 1N JiIF MEA (eTa; IQPGPa1) - 1)YS>55 4 61Jt k) TRACT n Y ~ ~ ~ soPC~ ~ "obi[ la~Enrt) - i~. - Y r) se ~ ~ w EE~Ja."~ccs~ 1Kr"~K n.~uoNME(.uaA xacAnoP) : ixi.oo s i`/- ~ r ~i < % luWUw )aEO wn . 1) u.nw tar-o wrs • Is) In $ / 9R U¢A - .a 1 s) z O 'A ` I~ /t W rt~ MU5~0. ET MI[AS P50. R 1 3115 :,547 IN N z\ O f'I pow .as. sx i a~, s nsls 1 xs sn i 1S1Z 1616 1.0 SZ `5~n~ n J I 0 z.5)0 )z5 I, _ I S 1 S51 500 111 ~y,`,d,~`'l I E ]J 1J 1111 11 1.515 11191 Q 1 rt P.OW, RpG)IOEI TO I) rt 119]0 JAl ) )1} ~r xu.r NlDM, rrxx )PKr A 1S'11, All PRONSED MR 0.,41 [YRf9 .rD \ 2 rt p (I O MFP 5 rt. NIPUC SbEW'I1K. i9lm a ls]) _ µx Ett9POP GOP)1EP 1 ROSS - to] i) zS (SeYS)a RL ) (])i]OE~SPF) RE0.sPfYEM / OJ Nfl1 S rt. pl•WEEP Ittt ONE AEW SME) Af 5 ~ , T I Q 1E rt. A[ wlf-WAM, W". FKiF.TY CMPER / ~ / 1 ? T O 9tafEP tF1EL [ AIaW: NO9f" SriEfiS, SroE'WAEKS. MM'WAPS PYpIy . x9f. a" SrtE ' $ / E ' ~ s ~ s eanolPr Ixo CUW11[PCWL suE) / 1, !e) G O © 9UPFCP LESit o ft9PG FAST .1,r ~ ' 90Wg1M' (N Wa)SiR1Y. SqE). 0. RNCEO OPEN SPK( PJ* ARf,A PARKING: Ems I )WVU s - 1 muax/Im (1 n cAPICE,) ox 9Prv[9Wh l•. / ~•c L01J ])WN 12 - J OR I fPeLES/t01 (1 N GwcE 1 a9 1 C" OPn{M Y! / LmS IJ - 1 SPICES (wIC9 CavLR) "A' - -L) PMXVe IS SP+RS j ~ GRAPHIC SCALE FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Z TCONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN L22141-1 q ,PE "5 a e c ENGINEERS I n C. 1 r-m C':vll - structural - surveying FOR: WCR COMPANY . 113 1737 &E AVE.. BIN PORTLAND, - OR. 97202 m . -7 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY a Ph... (SO) 23 aPJ51e8oSz a Fnv (SOJ) 1331J-78D5 TIGARD, OREGON vo•1 4 enginee s.c m EXPIPES 11/51/1010 Rnll. 9 -U3 11EC Cn0 1111 . Lz1P+lC -1, Patty Lunsford From: Gary Pagenstecher Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 4:49 PM To: Patty Lunsford Subject: RE: Village at Knoll Continued until September 21, 2009 ,.iie ti ~-i< ~~JUVelI'il)t'I j VA' ~4 li=p- ,)m tl__1I,i :aKIl1D, S{?l lll(!~'l,a'~r' iii: he u~ yl From: Patty Lunsford Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:56 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: RE: Village at Knoll Continued until September 21, 2009 J -u of patty @t " ai~ rd-or.go From: Gary Pagenstecher Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 3:33 PM To: Patty Lunsford Subject: FW: Village at Knoll Continued until September 21, 2009 From: derrick [mailto: derrick. nwventures@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 12:01 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: RE: Village at Knoll Continued until September 21, 2009 The Village at Knoll Conceptual Plan will need to be extended 5 week until November 20, 2009 for local decision to be mad by the planning commission. From: Gary Pagenstecher [mailto:Garyp@tigard-or.gov] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 11:05 AM To: 'derrick' Subject: RE: Village at Knoll Continued until September 21, 2009 ',iere s', quest th- ,and J:atc the reason for the extension. From: derrick [mailto: derrick. nwventures@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 11:01 AM i • TO: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: RE: Village at Knoll Continued until September 21, 2009 Is there a form that needs to be filled out? If so can you send it to me via e-mail. Derrick From: Gary Pagenstecher [maiIto: Garyp@tigard-or.gov] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 9:21 PM To: 'derrick' Cc: Patty Lunsford Subject: Village at Knoll Continued until September 21, 2009 Derrick, Pursuant to the discussion at the Planning Commission last night, you agreed to the continuation of the hearing to September 21, 2009 and to requesting an extension of the 120-day review period for a final local decision. Please make the request for a five week extension until November 20, 2009. Thank you, Gary Gary Pagenstecher, AICP Associate Planner City of Tigard Community Development 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard OR 97223 503-718-2434 garyp@tigard-or.gov 2 g/17/V7 G pUB~C HEAgIN CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes August 17, 2009 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Vice President Walsh; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, Fishel, Hasman, Vermilyea, and Alternate Commissioner Gaschke Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Muldoon Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Community Development Director, Susan Hartnett, Assistant CD Director; Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner; Darren Wyss, Senior Planner; Doreen Laughlin, Planning Commission Secretary 3. COMMUNICATIONS - Ron Bunch, Community Development Director, introduced the new Assistant CD Director, Susan Hartnett, to the Commissioners. 4. CONSIDER MEETING MINUTES 7-6-09 Meeting Minutes: President Inman asked if there were any corrections, deletions, or additions to the minutes; there were none, and President Inman declared the minutes approved. 5. PUBLIC HEARING (Judicial] 5.1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. President Inman read from the Quasi-judicial Hearing Guide. No commissioner wished to abstain or declare a conflict of interest. No one in the audience wished to challenge any III ANNING COMMISSION MkFTING MINU'1'I ~ S - august 17, 2009 - Page 1 of 10 member of the commissir or the jurisdiction of the commissio- There were no ex parte contacts reported. Comm..,,ioner Walsh reported a site visit. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner, Gary Pagenstecher, gave the staff report on behalf of the City. [Staff reports are available one week before each meeting.] He distributed the applicant's amended review of the proposal (Exhibit A). After giving the staff report, he introduced the applicants who were present: Bill Reed, Mark Reed, Derrick Aragon, and Jason Hess (the CEO of Elite Care). QUESTIONS OF STAFF BY COMMISSIONERS (Replies in italics) There was a question as to whether Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue is okay with approving the project. Pagenstecher answered: Irrespective of the discussion areas I mentioned, based on their applicant's proposal, they're satisfied with that. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Mark Reed of NW Ventures Group, Inc. gave a background regarding the project. He noted the first facility was opened in Milwaukee in 2000. He said they also have a project on SW Grant St. in Tigard which was completed in 2008. It's currently 90% occupied. In June of this year it received the LEED Platinum designation, and is the first LEED Platinum Assisted Living project in the U.S. at this time. He said their concept is to create at the core of a community the assisted living building with additional housing units created in order to facilitate the community feel of that building - which is where the Village at Knoll concept came from. At this point Reed went over his PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit B). He went over the project objectives: Platinum LEED certified post assisted living community; 15 lots - 8 attached single family, 6 detached (stand alone) single family homes, & one residential care (assisted living); sustainability through architecture, minimization of "hndscape" (asphalt/ paving) and community and common designs. He went over the work completed to date: 2 pre-application conferences; 2 neighborhood meetings; preliminary engineering including streets, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water; grading & site plan. He said a traffic study had been done, a complete arborist survey, a complete landscape plan, approval of garbage company as well as two meetings with TVF&R - one two years ago and another meeting last week, hence the 2nd letter from TVF&R. Reed stated they were looking for Planning Commission assistance on the following: • Density Bonus of less than 2% to increase from 14 allowable lots to 15 lots (14.74 to 15.00) combined with lot sizes that are smaller than typical in R4.5 Zoning. • Use of alternative street designs to minimize hard surfaces (asphalt, paving) and allow for narrower alleys, roads, combined with one way driving directions. • Phased Development Timeline due to current market constraints and planning timeline. P1,ANNiNG COMMISSION MIT HNC; %11NU1'FS - August 17,2009- Page 2 of 10 • Site grading, slope d potential grading problems. • Easement vs. Street Frontage on Lots 2-5 • Preliminary understanding of the RCF that is the key component of this development (Conditional Use). Jason Hess, CEO of Elite Care, explained about Elite Care - the philosophy, the building design, and the technology. (Slide 5 of PowerPoint presentation). He said the results are phenomenal and that they're getting in front of a lot of people in DC because of what they're doing. He noted in the last year of life their elders are staying in the hospital less than one overnight stay where, in typical facilities, it's 20+ stays overnight in hospitals. There's less than one 911 call in the last 6 months of life, where the typical community sees 10 to 15. They believe this is due to the design of their building and the sense of community. They've been featured on NBC nightly news for their innovative ways. He said that people visiting don't worry about trying to find the caregiver to identify how Mom or Dad are being cared for, but rather they tend to what's important - and that's spending time with Mom and Dad. Hess said they're happy to be in Tigard and are happy that Mark and Bill Hess are part of the design team. He believes they've done a fabulous job with the site plan and he's happy they're part of the Elite Care team. Mark Reed continued his presentation. He showed photos of the Craftsman style residential living in Milwaukee (Oatfield Estates). He said it doesn't look like a traditional facility with sheer walls and flat roofs and some of those kinds of things. He said it's, rather, a very residential feel. He showed wheelchair accessible flowerbeds that encourage residents to get out and be part of their community. He showed photos of the Tigard facility off of SW Grant Street (Elite Care at Fanno Creek). He said it has community gardens with residents working in the gardens, as well as nice open areas. He also went over their responses to the staff report (see slides 7, 8 & 10). He said they're open to making changes to the start date. QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT (answers in italics) When you were talking about responding to the Arborist's comments, are you okay with removing the invasive trees mentioned in the arborist's report? Absolutely. iVe're fine with all those. Why are you going for a subdivision instead of - like- a common plat? A couple of reasons from a condo standpoint -condos are difficult from a construction and long term sales standpoint. Our company has been able to build all of our own projects. As soon you go to a condo - many times you have to go to an outside contractor andyou lose a lot of the abilio to keepyour details whereyou need to. About Elite care - what are the demographics? Jason Ness answered: Average age is 88 or earlier with Alzheimer's or dementia. So if you are working with some Alzheimer's /dementia residents -then is the facility secure? No. That's notpart of our philosophy. W/ leverage technology in terms of identijing where they're at, and we also build a sense of community. Wle have one of the highest staff ratios in the state. By the design of the building, technology, and excellent team members - we don't believe in locking people up. PLANNING COMMISSION MIT , I ING MIN LYFFS - August 17,2009-Page 3 of 10 So the parking - you have L4 residents - you mentioned 6 staff pow many parking spaces? Mark Hess answered: I want to say 13 or 14 parking spaces. Andyou've also got all the staff parking underneath, on the backside of the building. And residents? LVe allow couples to maintain cars. On rare occasions perhaps the wife is able to drive and the husband isn't. They may have a vehicle. So 14 parking spaces for any residents plus visitors? Correct. Okay. That seems a little light. Fanno Creek only has 12 parking spaces - 17 total including the staff. Is your Milwaukee facility based on the same concept - residential care facility and single dwellings? The facility in Milwaukee is a little over 6 acres and is .smack dab in the middle of a full residential neighborhood. It's bordered on all sides by single family homes much like this is. The concept is the same. It is absolutely critical that we build around neighborhoods. You talk about community. Many of the neighbors volunteer their time -,go to barbeques, andl or have folks that live there. For us, we see it as an essential part ofgetting ourphilosophy of belonging influence, and purpose. What will be the building height on the back? there's the potential from the base of the parking area to the top of the building to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 - 45 feet. That's from lowestpoint on grade to midway at the peak of the roof. Where do visitors to single family and attached homes park? A lot of them will be in the parking spaces that are also used for the assisted living facility. The homes are not age restricted at all? Th y're not age-restricted at all. No. How are the lots going to be graded? Are they going to follow the road slope or how's that work? Ve cut them into the slope and that helps retain the slope. Daylight basements. How are the soakage trenches going to work on a 15% slope? There's a bio-swale at the bottom. In looking at the plan - 3200 sq ft of open space? That's half of my lot size and I live on a small lot. The scale of this is really small. For instance, what are your side yard setbacks? It's hard to tell what is this really going to look like. It looks nice when you spread it all out at 30 scale - or 20... The building itself is fairly large - ii go to .Fanno Creek and take a look at it. Fanno Creek is 3 stories high and this place will be 2 stories high. The housing is designed so that the building zs symmetrical so that there's a house on each side - that looks like a ski chalet - each one of those has 12 units in it. So it is fairly large, nothing compared to some of the fairly close by apartment buildings but its a way ofgaining density -and also a way of allowing the elders to have a place of community. There was more discussion between the applicant and commissioners about the density issue. William Reed, Owner, commented regarding size. IVe are about sustainability and a big part of LEEDS is - how do you create more density and still make it do-able? I went to school back east. I'm used to more densely populated areas. I think you have certain vitality when the area isn't too big for the number o f people you're going to have. From the perspective of sustainability - we're going down that road whereyou're notgoing to have as mzrch square footage -you'regoing to have to be able to share withyour PLANNING COMMISSION MFV FING MIN U kS - .August 17,2009-Page 4 of 10 neighbors. Ifyou don't do tha` we're going to run out of land. So, from of 'eripective, its not so much about the side of the area as ;,,,.,,h as how-You c,r•eate community within that ea soyou have this cohesive unit working together. That's what we're trying to achieve with the design. You've asked for a density bonus to get you up to 15 lots. What happens if you don't get it? Bill Reed answered. It makes the project not as economical. he'll have to skimp someplace else to make it work. 1Ve're trying to c-r•eate the sustainabilitypart of it. We all believe bigger lots areprobably better but in the future the bigger lots aren't necessarily going to be there. I believe that the way the City of Tigard is going is more density. Ifyou don'tgive us the extra lot then we'll have to figure out how to move a house. That's not necessarily good, either for the City, or for the environment. Do you have any alternative layouts? No. This was expensive enough to do once. IYIe'd just take a house out somewhere. There were a few other questions and then the meeting was opened up to public testimony. I PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN FAVOR: No one had signed up and no one in the audience wished to testify. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN OPPOSITION: No one had signed up and no one in the audience wished to testify. APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL: [Not necessary.] President Inman said that before moving forward she would like to sum up the Commission's options: • Approve, as presented, the concept plan - meaning that they would come back before us with the detailed development plan which we could condition to require some of these additional information components. • Approve the concept plan, denying the density bonus. • Deny the application. • Continue, if need be. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:23pm DELIBERATIONS Commissioner Vermilyea wanted to go on record as being in favor of approving the concept plan and approving the density bonus. He stated that he's impressed with the idea; he's impressed with the use of space, impressed with the desire to achieve the density and the sustainable approach. He said with the small site that they have (2 '/2 acres or so) they've done quite a bit to both try to achieve high density and create some gaps where there's an opportunity for useable open space. He stated it's important to remember that this site is relatively close to Downtown and a Downtown Plan is coming into play in the next several years that's going to develop a lot more useable open and park space - common space in the PLANNING COMMISSION MFIF, 'ING MINUI FS - august 17, 2009 - Page 5 of 10 Downtown area; notwith -iding the fact that many of the resit' `s will be able to literally walk over to some of the hark space that will be developed in thu Downtown area. He went on to say that that's what we want. This will be nice and close to Downtown - the fact that it's close and dense is a very positive thing. "With respect to the character and quality of open space, I'm satisfied with what's been presented, moreover, to the extent that we feel that there's more detail - and we can certainly request that in the detailed plan and evaluate what those details are at that time. I believe, as I was going through, tracking the comments and concerns raised by staff and others, that all of those things were addressed - with the possible exception of the open space issue and, again, given that we can condition the consequent approval on further detail being provided, to address the issues staff raised, if we feel that is appropriate, we can certainly do that. My suggestion, however, is to approve the concept plan with the density bonus, as proposed, with no conditions." Commissioner Doherty: Agrees with Vermilyea. She likes the multi-generational idea. It's unique. She's impressed with the philosophy. She believes the open space should be addressed in more detail. Commissioner Walsh: Likes the concept. It's a challenging lot. Would like detail to help visualize better. Would like to see a different variation. Would like to see the open space more centralized. He said he's hung up on parking. Just 14 shared spaces. He has a hard time supporting the density bonus because he believes that lot should be used as additional parking. Commissioner Fishel: "I was feeling good about it until that parking issue came up. I think that using one of the lots wouldn't necessarily make the project any better." President Inman: "I'm personally on the fence - which is good because I wasn't on the fence when I got here. I am excited about moving forward with sustainable development. It's hard to do. It's expensive to do. It's hard to find. I like the way you've transitioned from the neighborhood with the single family up front and then back towards the residential care facility (RCF). I think where I have the greatest heartache is the single family homes. If you own one of those homes - how would you have a party? Friends for your 15 year old - for your graduation party... where would people park? And then, particularly in the attached houses in the back - some of those units have 4 foot side yards and 8 feet to the next building. They look out at a garage in the back of another house. I am on the fence and I don't know what I'm going to do at this point because I have concerns about what this will really look like when it gets on the ground and what it will really look like when you get through all the processes." Commissioner Doherty: "I like the concept but two things need to be addressed - open spaces & parking. I would strongly recommend that those be dealt with before a final vote in the detail plan process would be forthcoming." Commissioner Hasman: "I have a question for staff [and one for the applicant]. I agree with everything Commissioner Vermilyea said and I also understand the parking issue. What is your take as staff? Do you feel it's adequate parking?" Pagenstecher: "I haven't really address-ed PLANNING COMMISSION NIFF,IFING MINUI'I?S -August 17, 2009 - Page 6 of 10 that issue in the concept revier Merlon. I do know that 2.5 spaces per bed equired. 24 beds, 10 spaces, plus 6 staff - so 16 is about .,,at the minimum would be. I think the poi& well taken how the residents will park their... " Hasman: "And the other question is - Is it possible - you weren't sure if it was 12 or 14 spots... maybe it was 16 or 18? Or are you absolutely sure that there's just that number?" Applicant: "Ve have 16 proposed right now plus each house has a two cargarage on it so that'd be 28 parking spaces, including the houses, plus the 16 common spaces. So 16 common, single family - each have two - and then you've got - I think its S staff spaces currently on the plan -underneath the building. We originally had more parking but CleanlYlater Services made us have a SO foot vegetated corridor down on the bottom of the site. So we did have more parking but CfVS has a stiff arm. Commissioner Anderson: "I like the project. You know, we like to experiment and this is a great lot to do it at - because it's not big. I just think that the one-way streets - I think if we reconfigure it with 14 houses, I think you'll be happier with it." Commissioner Caffall: "I like the concept. I like the plan. I have a few reservations about parking. I'd like, on the detailed plan, to be able to see a little bit more about the open space but I think we can live with where we are now and look at it in more detail when the plan comes back." President Inman: "When you talk about conditions, one of the things we could condition would be for specific items to be addressed so we could require the detailed development to include detailed plans on the uses for the open space; how the grading would affect the open space; how the parking, particularly for the single family homes, would be addressed and any other concerns the Planning Commission has as an option." Commissioner Vermilyea: "We have to address the density bonus issue tonight. If there's ever a project when the density bonus is appropriate - this is it. It is a very, very small variance in what they're allowed to do anyway. 14.7 lots vs. 15 lots - this size. We're not talking about a very large variance and, to me, this is the kind of program we want to provide an incentive to. We've approved a lot of things that I've just kind of gone along with. This is the kind of program that we ought to be approving and we ought to be providing incentives to - and the density bonus, in my view, is exactly the right kind of incentive and this is the kind of development that deserves that kind of consideration. So I think it's critical that we approve that and that we deal with the rest of the conditions." Commissioner Walsh: "I like the project. I'm hung up on parking and the layout and that, in effect, whether it's 14 or 15 lots. So I would like to ask them to come back with alternatives. I'd like to see some alternatives and I realize that the concept plan wouldn't [inaudible] the expense of that but the detail yes. We should see some alternatives. I would like to see some movement around the open space, possibly, and the parking." Commissioner Vermilyea: "What's important to us given all our constraints? A well thought out plan? Meet the density requirements?" Pagenstecher: "You can provide them the opportunity to come back with either a 14 or 15 unit plan, depending on how they handle the density. You could decide then." 111,;INNING COMMISSION MkF,T1NG MIND FS-;August 17,2009 - Page 7 of 10 Commissioner Doherty: '-L m a bit confused - so we could go through and say "Yes, ve grant you the density bonus but we want you to come back with a plan for 14 or 15?" Bewersdorff: "No. You would approve the concept with the proviso that that concept will be approved with either 14 or 15 depending upon what you've reviewed in your detailed plan." Commissioner Doherty: "So say they come back with something fantastic with open spaces, parking, and 15 drawings - then we have the opportunity to go through and say - 15. So we're basically not granting a density bonus?" Bewersdorff: "You're giving them the opportunity to convince you based on the parking and your open space issues." Commissioner Vermilyea: "Here's my problem with that. We're asking the proponent to go out and begin detailed design work and go down a path - let's assume that they choose to design this on a 15 lot proposal, and they attempt to meet all the conditions that I assume we're going to [inaudible] regarding the open space and parking - and they come back to us after having poured a bunch of resources into detailed planning. And we say "no"? I don't think that's fair to the proponent. I think we need to give them clear guidance tonight or we continue this for a month or so and let them come back and give some more detail before we make the decision - so that at that point we can maybe address the issues that have been raised here tonight. I don't think it's fair to say we conditionally approve your concept plan - we're going to withhold the bonus until you prove to us that you deserve it and, by the way, if you spend all the money trying to prove to us that you deserve it, and we don't like it, now you're going to go back to square one? I don't think that's equitable." Commissioner Caffall: "I agree." Commissioner Walsh: "The bonus is not a gimmie. People have to work for it. They have to show us why. I think we have to have the ability to grant the bonus or deny the bonus based upon the merits. It's that simple." Commissioner Vermilyea: "But you also have to give the proponent some clarity upon which to rely in developing a detailed plan." President Inman: "I think the problem is the concept plan is where we look at alternatives so that we can avoid the situation where we're [inaudible] because the applicant has put so much time and effort into developing this plan that it seemed very onerous and expensive to make them go backwards. However..." Commissioner Walsh: "Cost of doing business." President Inman: "So. That being said - we are in this situation. Jeremy (Vermilyea) has a valid point that it would be unfair to ask them to forward two detailed development plans. PLANNING COMMISSION MI ,I,A'1NG MINI i'F ;S - ,August 17,2009- Page 8 of 10 I Density bonuses haven't I n granted by the Planning Commiss' , in years. They're hard- fought here. I agree withp-lemy's assessment that we either grant A or not or continue the hearing to allow the applicant to address those two. They could specifically address those items without forwarding two entire plans." MOTION A motion was made by Commissioner Vermilyea, seconded by Commissioner Caffall as follows: "I move that we continue the hearing for one month [to September 21S11 with the proviso that the proponent will address within their concept plan the issues that were raised tonight - specifically regarding use of open spaces within the project, and the parldng issue - and try to allay some of the concerns that have been raised." The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote, the Council voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Caffall, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Fishel, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Inman, Commissioner Vermilyea, and Commissioner Walsh (8) NAYS: Commissioner ABSTAINERS: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioner Muldoon (1) 6. WORKSHOP Transportation System Plan Briefing Senior Planner, Darren Wyss, gave a brief update on the Transportation System Plan. He said he will come on a bi-monthly basis to update the commissioners. Wyss made the following points regarding the TSP: • Phase one of the project is complete and consisted of gathering background materials and the development of draft goals and policies for the TSP • Goals and policies will be adopted into the Comp Plan at same time the TSP is adopted. • Background materials consisted of current conditions and a review of relevant planning documents (ODOT, County and Metro, for example) and whether City policy and code is in compliance. • Materials can be found on TSP webpage. • Phase one also included TAC, CAC (Commissioner Hasman is the Planning Commission representative), and Public Forum 1, where feedback was collected and incorporated as necessary. • Kittelson is now working on Phase 2 which includes a Needs and Deficiencies Report, Systems Solutions Report, Draft Facilities Plan, and a Financial Review. • Needs and deficiencies will look at problem areas in the City for all modes of transportation (bike, ped, transit, and motor vehicle). PLANNING COMMISSION MI ~,I~; PING MIN U'1'1 ~"S - ,August 17,2009- Page 9 of 10 • Systems Solutions 11 look at alternative solutions, such demand management, paid parking, parki..g reductions, etc. • Draft Facilities plan will identify future projects to make the system more efficient. • This is part of process where potential future projects and programs get identified. • To help, Wyss has been meeting with Councilors individually to get feedback and would like to extend the invitation to Planning Commissioners if they are interested. If Commissioners could provide feedback to questions in Attachment 1 (of Darren's memo) that would be helpful. (Email Darren Wyss or Doreen Laughlin with feedback.) • The next opportunity for community feedback is Sept 12th at Family Fest. Staff will have maps and surveys for community members to review/comment upon. • Community feedback is an important component that will hopefully make the decision- making run smoothly during the legislative process • Lastly, the contract with Kittelson was due to expire at end of year, but has been extended thru March 2010. • This will allow more time to develop the draft document and have the consultants present to both Planning Commission and City Council in the spring. Wyss ended saying if the commissioners have any questions about the process or materials being formulated, to give him a call. 7. OTHER BUSINESS None 8. ADJOURNMENT President Inman adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Doreen Laughlin, Planning Co s n Secretary o d~- ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION M1 "I A ING MIN UTf{S - August 17, ?009 - Pagc 10 of 10 Exhibit A Gary Pagenstecher From: Dalby, John K. [John.Dalby@tvfr.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:46 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: BREED@ELITECARE.COM Subject: The Village at Knoll (T) (Amended) Attachments: The Village at Knoll (T) (Amended).doc Gary, This is our amended review of this proposal. The applicant met with us this afternoon and we were able to resolve our previous concerns. As such, we have no objections to them presenting this proposal at the Planning Commission meeting on Monday August 17, 2009. <<The Village at Knoll (T) (Amended).doc>> i i Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue July 2, 2009 Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: (PDR) 2009-00004 The Village at Knoll 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 EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access maybe modified as approved by the fire code official. (IFC 503.1.1) 2) 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 26 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. (IFC 503.2. 1) The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. The proposed access roadway around the perimeter of the project is 15 feet with no parking allowed. We find this proposal acceptable. 3) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. 4) 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 60,000 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. (IFC D102.1) 5) 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. (IFC 503.2.4 & D103.3) The fire district will accept a drivable sidewalk on the northwest and southeast outside corners of the perimeter roadway so long as they are constructed to our surface loading requirements. North Division Office 14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton, OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.tvfr.com TVFO" R, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue We trust this letter will be helpful with the final design of this proposal insofar as fire apparatus access and firefighting water supplies are concerned. If there is anything about this letter you do not understand, disagree with, or wish to discuss further, please call me. Sincerely, jofut X. 29ag# John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshal II Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, North Division 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton, OR 97005-1152 (503) 356-4723 North Division Office 14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton, OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.tvfr.com Exhibit B ~ ~I w t Y2 I l The Village at Knoll Concept Plan City of Tigard Planning Commission August 17, 2009 i Project- Objectives • Elite Care Community -State of the art Platinum LEED Certified Post Assisted Living Community • "A Community within a Community" • 15 Lots • 8 Attached Single Family • 6 Detached (Stand Alone) Single Family • I Residential Care (Assisted Living) • SustainabilityThrough: • Arch itectu re/LEED Certification • Minimization of hardscape (Asphalt/Paving) • Community and Common Designs - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Work -Completed -To- -Date- • 2Pre-Application Conferences • 2 Neighborhood Meetings • Preliminary Engineering Including: • Streets including full profile for SW Knoll Drive • Storm Sewer, Sanitary Sewer, Water • Grading, Site Plan • Complete Traffic Study • Complete Arborist Survey • Complete Landscape Plan • Approval of Garbage Company • 2 Meetings with Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue C-oncept _Plan _ Not_ Detail _Plan • Looking for PC assistance on the following: o Density Bonus of less than 2% to increase from 14 allowable lots to 15 lots (14.74 to 15.00) combined with lot sizes that are smaller than typical in R4.5 Zoning o Use of alternative street designs to minimize hard surfaces (asphalt, paving), and allow for narrower alleys, roads, combined with one way driving directions (current SW Knoll is already one way) o Phased Development Timeline due to current market constraints and Planning Timeline o Site Grading, Slope and potential grading problems o Easement vs. Street Frontage on Lots 2-5 o Preliminary understanding of the RCF that is the key component of this development (Conditional Use) 0PLATIJVUM The -Elite- Care Story - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - o Philosophy o Belonging, Influence & Purpose +r d a Simple, Consistent & Routine o Presence, Empathy & Technique o Building Design . G Small Intimate Communities 0 12 Resident Rooms per house o No Hall Ways o Open Residential Kitchen o Community Focused o Sustainable Platinum LEED Certified o Technology o Family Connector 0 Delivers Transparency • Supports Independence & Safety o Proactive Responses Elite_ _Care_ _ at_ Oatfield- Estates Ilk, w.. g~ w' ♦ ~ e i t ''~yy 11. ~ Ir4 -1 Wlk a rAu Elite _Care _at_ _Fanno_ _Creek d ~ry w AL_ nom'"" R rT All 1. Cy 7 a Responses_ to _ Staff _Report_- _I ► Proposed Dates for Site Development May Be Off ► We understand and have a flexible starting point for development to be determined by planning commission approval process and market conditions ► Planning Objectives (18.350.010) ► Quick overview was provided in the Narrative - walk through items. ► Open Space ► We have provided the minimum 20% open space, and are only requesting density bonuses in the amount o f .25 lots (or less than 25o') The BBQ area, Gazebo, etc. would be used by residents of the development, the RCF and neighborhood Respons-es--to- Staff_ Report_ -_II ► Craftsman Style, Innovation and LEED buildings ► Craftsman Styles allow for each building to be individual while maintaining a community feel by incorporating the following: ► Rear Loaded Garages off Alley allow front porches to be seen from SW Knoll instead of garages ► Front Porches and Larger Windows allow for greater connectivity between buildings ► Streets with Rolled-Curb Sidewalks allow for the elderly residents of the RCF to safely walk through the neighborhood ► LEED and Innovation allow for higher sustainability including: ► Rain water collection used for Irrigation and Toilet Flushing ► Solar Panels allow for less electricity ► Retention and Planting of healthy trees allows long term benefits j`' ► Reduced pavement for lower heat-island effects & reduced rain-water runoff ► High density allows for "community within a community" Typical- Craftsman St le Just- Com leted a i S" . . T Kos i \ i R. ts~.~ji # a fy _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Responses_ _to_ _Staff_ Report_ III ► Open Space Requirements (Part 2) ► Open Spaces including the walking paths, gazebos, natural areas would be utilized by community much like Oat field Estates (Pictures) ► Slopes on Interior Spaces are mainly towards corners of site and not towards main interior open spaces ► Arborist Comments ► Extensive review of City Arborist, agree with comments, willing to make minor changes to plan depending on requirements ► Frontage ► Was designed in accordance with Washington county "Eyebrow" Corner according to Z-Tec Engineers (Drawing) ► Trimet Ridership ► 14 Additional Single Family Houses Only, minimal impact compared to apartments. Additional Discussion Areas - I ► LEED and Craftsman Designs - ► Ownership of RCF which provides greatest long term gain ensures that we will maximize entire community. ► Fanno Creek in Tigard and Blueberry Lane in Portland were both certified LEED Platinum as will this facility ► Natural Resources -Agree with Arborist ► Grading -Previously Discussed ► Frontage -Easement and reduction of 25 foot required for lots 2-5 only. All other lots meet requirement TVF&R -New Letter, Re-arming meeting from May, 2007 q PLEASE SIGN IN HERE - Tigard Planning Commission` Agenda Item # ! Page of l Date of Hearing Case Number(s) r , -2 coS - C oc',n 4 Case Name _-77\, ~i A\ LocationL If you would like to speak on this item, please CLEARLY PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (FOR the proposal): Opponent (AGAINST the proposal): Name: Name: ,~j, ddress: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: iiame: J,, nr Name: ddress: V ~t S1,edT'~ L Address: groco City, State, Zip: T7~r City, State, Zip: Name: ! Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: City of Tigard Planning Commission - Agenda MEETING DATE: August 17, 2009, 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER zoo p.m. 2. ROLL CALL zoo p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 p.m. - Introduction of new Assistant Community Development Director, Susan Hartnett 4. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:08 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 7:10 p.m. 5.1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. 6. Transportation System Plan Briefing - Workshop a:lo p.m. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 9:1o p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT 91sr.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA - August 17, 2009 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 503-639-4171 \T.-ww.tigard-or.gov Page 1 of 1 Agenda Item: Hearin Date: August 17, 2009 Time: ':GC P ~1 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION } FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 120 DAYS = 10/ 15/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL CASE NO.: Planned Development Review (PDR) PDR2008-00004 (Concept Plan Review) APPLICANT: Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. OWNERS: William C. Reed & -,Lydia Lundberg Attn: Mark Reed 2300 SW 103rd Avenue 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd. Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97212 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Concept Plan Review approval for development of a 2.83-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths, water features, and visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) attached (duel) single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. Two single-family residences currently exist on the property and will be removed prior to development. Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: The property is located at 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessors Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONES/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATIONS: R-4.5: Low Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a mir- mum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. (PD): The applicant has proposed a planned development overlay designation to accommodate the proposed private street and lot configurations on the subject property. The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for propperty development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areasor open space in the C1ty, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the 1 er community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of opens ace, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING GOhMSSIONHEARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 1 OF 17 to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of develo~? meat on a site within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, devefoper, neighbors, and the Gty, and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that the proposed Planned Development Concept Plan does not meet the Concept Plan Submission Requirements or the Concept Plan Approval Standards as outlined in this report. Therefore, Staff cannot recommend approval of the proposed Concept Plan. Staff recommends prior to approval of the concept plan, the Commission consider the findings in this report and the issues raised ul tfle Additional Discussion Areas, in addition to any others they may have, in order to provide the applicant with clear direction to revise their concept plan and in developing the detailed plan. CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION. SE CT ION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site Histo e slh ubject site includes two sirs le-family houses located on mTo adjoining parcels totaling 2.83 acres, zoned R 4.5. The roughly square-shaped site slopes significantly across the diagonal with a northeastern aspect, from a 200-foot elevation at SW Knoll 1Jrive to approximately a 154-foot elevation at the property's northeast corner. Tine site contains three significant mature trees fronting SW Knoll and other typical residential landscaping. Vicinity Information site is located generally east of SW I-Iall Boulevard and north of SW Hunziker Road, more specifically along Th-e- the east side and outside corner of SW Knoll Drive. Cominercial development borders the site to the north, Industrial zoned roperty to the east, while residential development borders the subject site to the south and west. The site is part 61 an island of land zoned R-4.5 containing 20 parcels, each with a residence. The area is bordered by GG to the north, I-L to the east, I-P to the south, and CBI to the west across SW Hall Blvd. Three of these parcels along SW Hall Blvd have recently been rezoned to Mixed-Use Residential - 1 (CPA2008-00012) and are within the owntown Urban Renewal District. Proposal Descri tp ion e appp cant is requesting Planned Development Concept Plan Review ap roval for development of a 2.83-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscapedppaths, water features, and visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of_ six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) attached (duel) single-familyhomes, and a two-story 14,712 square foot footprint Residential Care Facility which will house up to 4 residents and staff. Two single-family residences currently exist on the site and will be removed prior to development. 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 to provide written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. On June 19, 2009 the City sent a request for comments to applicable special districts and local and state jurisdictions. On June 26, 2009 the City posted the site with a notice of development review. On July 27, 2009 the City provided notice of hearing to neighbors within 500 feet and to interested parties. On July 30', 2009, the City published notice of the public hearing in the Tigard Times. Staff has not received any written comments, to date, from neighbors regarding this application. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 2 OF 17 The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on May 24 2007. Thirteen persons were in attendance. As recorded i1i the applicant's meeting notes, the issues raised at the meeting primarily concerned the impacts the development would have on the adjacent neighbors on SW Knoll Street including grading of the site, street improvements traffic control, and the character of the buildings. The major concern was the potential traffic impact on SW Knol and what sort of traffic calming would be applied. SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The applicable review criteria for Concept Plan review are contained in Community Development Code Chapters 18.350, Planned Developments, and 18.390, Decision Makin gg Procedures. This staff report is limited to the review of these sections and contains a staff recommendation for the Commission's decision on the Concept Plan, pursuant to Section 18.350.050. The following sections will be addressed later upon application of Planned Development Detailed Plan review: 18.350 Planned Developments) 18.510 esidential Zoning Districts) 18.705' Access, Egress and Circulation) 18.725 nvironmental Performance Standards) 18.745-~- andscaping and Screening) 18.755 ed Solid Waste & Recyclable Storage) 18.765' Off-street Parkingg and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780'- Signs 18.790 Tree Removal) 18.795 ision Clearance) 18.810 Street and Utility Improvements) Acording to Sazran 18.350.070.3 of the P1amBd Deza'oprwrn Chapter, these &apters are tadizal as guidelines, and strut anrpluaw is not 7YLMary ubm a dezelopmm pnnides alternatrE da igrrs aril nrthods that prrr w the p rpase of the PD Chapter. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES (CHAPTER 18.390) The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Concept Plan review. Type III procedures apply to quasi- judicial permits andactions that contain predominantly discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission with appeals to the City Council. The applicant held a pre-application conference, consistent with 18.390.050.A. The applicant's submittal included the required information, including an Impact Study for the proposed Village At Knoll, consistent with 18.390.050.B. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CHAPTER 18.350) 18.350.010 Purpose: The six purposes o the planned development overlay zone are listed in the description of the applicable zone on the face page of this decision. 18.350.020 Process: A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. The subject site is currently zoned R-4.5. The applicant has elected to develop the project as a planned development and, therefore, is required to address the provisions of the Planned Development chapter. B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMSSION LEAPING 8/17/2009 PAGE 3 OF U 1. The approval of the planned development concept laic; 2. The approval of the detailed development plan, an 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. The applicant has applied for review of the planned development concept plan. At the time of detailed development plan review the applicant must also apply for approval of the planned development overlay zone (PD). C. Decision-making process. 1. The concept plan shall be processed by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.350.050. This staff report and recommendation to the Planning Commission is limited to the concept plan review criteria listed below. The Commission shall make a decision on the proposed concept plan. Review of a detailed plan will require a new application and Planning Commission hearing. 2. The detailed development plan shall be reviewed by a means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by 18.390.050, to ensure that it is substantially in compliance with the approved concept plan. The applicant has applied for review of the concept plan. A separate application and hearing are required to review the detailed plan to ensure it is substantially in compliance with the approved plan. 3. The planned development overlay zone will be applied concurrently with the approval of the detailed plan. The applicant must apply for the (PD) overlay to the subject property at the time of detailed plan review. 4. Applicants may choose to submit the concept plan and detailed plan for concurrent review subject to meeting all of the approval criteria for each approval. All applicants are advised that the purpose of separating these applications is to provide them clear direction in developing the detailed' etailed plans. Rejection of the concept plan will result in a corresponding rejection of the detailed development plan and overlay zone. The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. 5. In the case of an existing planned development overlay zone, once construction of the detailed plan has been completed; subsequent applications conforming to the detailed plan shall be reviewed under the provisions required in the chapter which apply to the particular land use application. This standard is applicable once construction of the detailed plan is completed. This standard is meant to apply to future modification or expansion of an existing plan. 6. If the application involves subdivision of land, the applicant may also apply for preliminary plat approval and the applications shall be heard concurrently with the detailed plan. The proposal does include subdivision of land. Application for preliminary plat approval shall be heard concurrently with the detailed plan review and approval D. Concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed plan. In the case of concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed development plan, including subdivision applications, the applicant shall clearly distinguish the concept from the detailed plan. The Planning Commission shall take separate actions on each element of the Planned Development application (i.e. the concept approval must precede the detailed development approval); however each required action may be made at the same hearing. The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. FINDING: The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. As shown in the above analysis, the applicant's proposal is consistent with the applicable process standards of the planned development chapter. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING GONI IISSIONI FARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 4 OF 17 4P 18.350.030 Administrative Provisions: A. Time limit on filing of detailed development plan. The concept plan approval expires after 1-1/2 ears unless an application for detailed development plan and, if applicable, a reliminary plat approval or request for extension is filed. Action on the detailed development plan shad be taken by the Planning Commission by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria in 18.350.070. The aTplicant has applied for a concept plan approval only. The Planning Conunission may ap~rove the concept plan it finds that it meets the approval criteria. The concept plan approval expires after TT /2 years unless an application for detailed development plan or request for extension is filed. B. Zoning map designation. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Commission. The zoning map shall be amended to indicate the approved planned development designation for the subject development site. The approval of the planned development overlay zone shall not expire. The applicant may apply for detailed plan review and for application of the overlay zone. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Cornrr sSion. C. Extension. The Director shall, upon written request by the applicant and payment of the required fee, grant an extension of the approval period not to exceed one year provided that: 1. No changes have been made on the original concept development plan as approved by the commission; 2. The applicant can show intent of applying for detailed development plan or preliminary plat review within the one-year extension periodd, an 3) There have been no chan es to the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions on which the approval was based. An extension of the Concept Plan approval is not applicable at this time. The applicant states that an extension is not anticipated, but if market conditions warrant, the applicant will file for an extension. D. Phased development. 1. The Commission shall approve a time schedule for developing a site in phases, but in no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than seven years without reapplying for conceptual development plan review. 2. The criteria for approving a phased detail development plan proposal are that: a) The public facilities shall be constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase; and b) The development and occupancy of any phase shall not be dependent on the use of temporary public facilities. A temporary public facility is any facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant intends on actively pursuing financing for the development based on the approval of the Concept Plan. t is anticipated that lots 1-14 will be developed and sold in sequence depending on the market conditions on the completion of the development. The applicant will be operating the Residential Care Facility (RCF) on lot 15. The general development schedule is planned to proceed on three phases, with the Detailed Plan being driven by triggering. factors as outlined below. It is the applicant's intent to proceed with the detailed planning and site construction as expeditiously as possible, given current weak market conditions. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING 0ONNIISSIONHEARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 5 OF 17 The following phases are dependent on the market conditions, bank financing, availability of contractors, and saturation of the housing market. Phase 1: Site Development: Start Date: March 1, 2010 End Date: July 1, 2010 The site development portion of this project will include the following items: • Demohtion/Deconstruction of existing buildings at 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; • Site Work including removal of anytrees as specified bylandscape plan; • Site Work including. rading of lot; ® Installation of all ut ties including: ■ Storm water Facilities; ■ Sanitary Sewer Facilities; and ■ Water Facilities- - Installation and final grading of all roadways (not alleys); • Installation of site sidewalks adjacent to roadways (not interior side abutting homes). Phase 2: Construction of Residential Care Facility: Start Date: May 1, 2010 End Date: August 1, 2011 The construction of the RCF portion of this project will include the following items: • Construction of the general building; • Site Work for Lot 15 including parking area and re-paving of existing access to Park 217; • Reclamation and final planting of Natural Resource Area; and • Planting and final landscaping of Lot 15 and all areas NE of the lower roadway. Phase 3: Construction of Single-Family Homes: Start Date: July 1, 2010 End Date: December 31, 2011 The construction of the single-family homes portion of this project will include the following items: • Construction of the single-family and attached single-family homes; • Final Site Work for Lots 1 through 14 including remaining pathways, alleys and sidewalks; and • Final landscaping and site work for Lots 1-14 and C:onunon Tract A. E. Substantial modifications to concept plan. If the Planning Commission finds that the detailed development plan or reliminary plat does not substantially conform to the concept plan, a new concept plan shall be requiredp A modification of the Concept Plan is not applicable at this time. F. Noncompliance. Noncompliance with an approved detailed development plan shall be a violation of this chapter. Compliance with an approved detailed development plan is not applicable at this time. G. Issuance of occupancy permits. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved detailed development plan including landscaping and recreation areas before any occupancy permits are issued. However, when the Director determines that immediate execution of any feature of an approved detailed development plan is impractical due to climatic conditions, unavailabilty of materials, or other temporary conditions, the Director shall, as a precondition of the issuance of a required permit, require the posting of a performance bond or other surety to secure execution of the feature at a time certain not to exceed one year. Issuance of occupancy permits is not applicable at this time. FINDING: The applicant has applied for concept Ian approval only. At the time of detailed plan review the applicant intends on applying for the p(PD) overlay zone. The applicant is proposing a two-year t ree-phase development plan. The proposed dates for these phases maybe unrealistic with respect to the Planned Development processing time line and on market conditions. The proposal is otherwise consistent with the applicable adn nistratlve standards for planned developments. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004;) PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 6 OF 17 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements: A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. The applicant included information required by Section 18.390.050 as shown in the findings above for the Decision Making Procedures section of this report. The additional information required by 18.350.040.B is shown below. In addition, the aplicant shall submit the following: 1. A statement o planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include: a) A description of the character of the proposed development and the rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant; APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The proposed Village at Knoll development will create a 15-lot subdivision plus 1 common tract includmi single-family homes, attached single_-famnl homes, and a Residential Care Facility (RCF) that will house up to 2 residents along with live-i1 staff. The RCF will be the focal point of this development meant to encourage and facilitate intergenerational involvement. The project will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community including all single-family houses as well as the RCF. The single-family homes will be located closest to the street front along SW Knoll Drive. The attached single- family homes will follow, and the RCF will be located at the point on the property furthest away from the existing street. The Design Team conducted an Opportunities and Challenges Analysis of the property in order to frame the context for the planned Development Concept Plan. Challen The • The number one challenge presented by this sit is the slope of this site. Refer to TOPO layout section. • The site shape and setbacks limit the eficiency of site use. • There is a sensitive area buffer boundary at the northeast corner of the site. • The Right-of-way dedication reduces the buildable site area. • The proposed private street reduces the buildable site area. • The rrntr ation of trees for this site will increase project cost. With the strong slope of the site it will be impossible to save the trees we otherwise nught during excavation. Opportunities • The site slope will be used to our advantage by using the grading to slope the storm water drainage to a bioswale on the eastern property line. • We will design the Residential Care Facility (RCS') on lot 15 to act as a retaining wall for the site. Visually from the street level, the RCF will only appear two stories tall. • The sensitive area on the north eastern corner will give a great buffer from the Park 217 Business Complex. • With having to remove most of the site's existm' g trees, we will be able to put new landscape trees to encompass the development and give a great buffer to the adjacent properties. b) An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning principles are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed; APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The single-family homes will be designed with craftsman features including front porches, attached garages, colorful designs and exterior accents. The six homes at the top of the hill will have attached garages accessed by an alley creating a vibrant street area. There are mature trees on the site that will be retained to create an older community ook and feel to the neighborhood. The attached single-family homes will also be designed with the same craftsman features as the free standing single-family homes. The attached homes feature zero lot-lute common wall construction with attached garages for each unit. The garages are accessed from a rear alley. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING 8/ 17/2009 PAGE 7 OF 17 The RCF will be designed in the same mariner as the houses, similar to the existingg project currently being constructed on SW Grant Street, and ones that have been opperating in Milwaukie (Oatfield Estates for the past six years. The RCF will have 24 suites for elders [+6 erTloya] for a maximum of 30 total residents within the building. There will be landscapped paths and water features throughout the common tract for community access and usage. The common tract will also include visitor parking for the site. The Village at Knoll has two very distinct components of development; the Residential Care Facility and the Single-family Homes. We will describe the intentions of each separatelyfor additional clarification. Residential Care Facib The Owners o the existing roperty William Reed and Lydia Lundberg, have spent the past eight years developing a forward thinking concept Yor the future of elder care, Elite Care. Elite Care will be the operating company that will run the facility, and will be in charge of the long term upkeep of the project: Current Elite Care projects include Oatfield Estates, a 72 umt project located at the top of Oatfield IJM in Milwaukie and Fanno Creek, an identical project to the one being proposed located on SW Grant Street in Tigard. As the owners of the existing property will retain ownership and management, there is a long term thought process to the development of this project. Shortcuts that might be taken by other development teams in the construction of the facilities, site um rovements, building styles, and landscaping will not be taken to ensure the quality of building and the atmosphere f or care. Please go to www.elitecare.com for more information on the philosophy and management style of Elite Care. Sin le-Famil - and Attached Single-Fa mil y Homes: The owners-of the property will be developing the site for the 14 lots. The contractor for this project, R&R Energy Resources, is jointly owned by Bill Reed and Bill y Lenz. The lots will not be sold out to individual builders, and by maintaining the construction in house , it will allow for the architectural styles, building quality and size to remain constant throughout the project's construction timeline. R&R Energy Resources has built approximately 125 homes over the past 5 years including multiple projects for HOST Development (www.hostdevelopment.com), Blueberry Lane (aim-.blueberrypdx.com), as well as being the contractor for the Elite Care building at Fanno Creek in Tigard. c) An explanation of how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010: The applicant did not provide a specific response to each of the six purpose statements of the Planned Development Chapter. Instead, the applicant has referred the Commission to the Project Description, Architecture/ Land sca mg, Statement of Intentions, and the Opportunities and Challenges Analysis sections of the Applicants' Narrative (pages 5 - 8), which have been included within this report in (a) and (b) above. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; and To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varyin the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffeting and lot size transitioning; and To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a lanning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives conceptual review, then detailedpreview) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; and THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING GOMMISSIONI FARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 8 OF 17 1 4F To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable andinnovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. d) An explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. The applicant did not provide a specific response to this criterion. Instead, the applicant has referred the Commission to the Project Description, Architecture/Landscaping, Statement o} Intentions, and the Opportunities and Challenges Analysis sections of the applicant's narrative (pages 5 - 8), which have been included in (a) and (b) above. 2. A eneral development schedule indicating the approximate dates when construction of the planned develoopment and its various phases are expected to be initiated and completed. The applicant identified their three-phase plan, as shown above in the Administrative Provisions section of this report, to occur over a two-year period through 2011, depending on market conditions. 3. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the planned development. The applicant intends on activelyursuing financing for the development based on the approval of the Concept Plan. t is anticipated that lots 1-1 will be developed and sold in sequence dependin on the market conditions on the completion of the development. The applicant will be operating the Residential re Facility on lot 15. B. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in Subsection A above, the concept plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information: 1) Existing site conditions; 2) A site concept including the types of roposed land uses and structures, including housing types, and their general arrangement on the site; ~ A grading concept; 4) A landscape concept indicating a percentage range for the amount of proposed opens ace and landscaping, and general location and types of proposed open space(s); 5) Parking concept; 6) A sign concept; 7) A streets and utility concept; and 8) Structure setback and development standards concept, including the proposed residential density target if applicable. The applicant's narrative and plan set provide the required applicable information, including a Cover Sheet (C0.0 , Conceptual Site Plan 00.1), Prelirnulary Grading and Erosion Control Plan (Cl), Prelimnary Storm Plan C~ , Preliminary Sanitary ewer and Water Plan (C 3), Preliminary Plat (C4), Existing Knoll llrive Profile ~C5 , Topographic Survey (TP), PUD Open Space Concept Plan (L1), Tree Preservation and Removal Plan (L2 7 Storm Water Pond (L3), Is Plan Details (L4), Landscape Planting Plan (L5), Landscape Materials Speckations (L6). C. Allowable uses In all residential zones, an applicant with a planned develoment approval may develop the site to contain a mixture of uses subject to the density provisions of tR underlying zone and the density bonus provisions of 18.350.070A3.c. The following uses are allowed with planned development approval: a. All uses allowed outright in the underlying zoning district; b. Single-family detached and attached residential units; C. Duplex residential units; d. Multi-family residential units; e. Manufactured homes; f. Accessory services and commercial uses directly serving the planned development only and which are customary or associated with, but clearly incidentaFto the uses permitted in the zone, such as persona services, reschool or daycare, and retail uses less than 5,000 square feet in sum total; Community building; Indoor recreation facility; athletic club, fitness center, racquetball court, swimming pool, tennis court or similar use; i. Outdoor recreation facility, golf course, golf driving range, swimming pool, tennis court, or similar use; and j. Recreational vehicle storage area. TIE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING CO?\MSSION HEARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 9 OF 17 The applicant has proposed single-family detached and attached residential units, consistent with the uses allowed u1 all residential zones with planned development approval. Groupp living, including residential care facilities restricted to five or fewer residents, 1s permitted by right in the R-4.5 zone. Group living with six or more residents, as proposed, is otherwise permitted as a conditional use. 18.350.070.A.3.c: Chapter 18.715, Density Computation and Limitations. Unless authorized below, density shall be governed by the density established in the underlying zoning district, using the minimum lot size established for that district. Where a project site encomppasses more than one underlying zoning district, density shall be aggregated for each district, and may be allocated anywhere within the project site, as deemed appropriate by the commission. Sheet C0.1 of the applicant's plan set includes a density calculation for the subject site: 2.83 acres (123,425 square feet gross) less 12,522 square feet for the private street and 315 square feet for right-of- waydedication for SW Knoll = 110,588 square feet net developable area. 110,588 square feet/7,500 square feet/lot = 14.75 lots (max). The Commission may further authorize a density bonus not to exceed 10% as an incentive to increase or enhance open space, architectural character and/or site variation incorporated into the development. These factors must make a substantial contribution to objectives of the planned development. The degree of distinctiveness and the desirability of variation achieved shall govern the amount of density increase which the Commission may approve according to the following: (1) A 10% bonus for each 5% of the gross site area set aside in open space, up to a maximum of 5%, is allowed for the provision of active use recreational open space, exclusive of areas contained in floodplain, steep slopes, drainage ways, or wetlands that would otherwise be precluded from development; (2) Up to a maximum of 5% is allowed for the development of pedestrian amenities, streetscape development, recreation areas, plazas, or other items from the Planning Commission's Toolbox." APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant will be asking for a 5% density bonus under section (2) for pedestrian amenities. In track "A" in the open space between the four attached single-family houses the applicant plans on building a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill for the community to use as a recreational area. The density calculation with the density bonus is reflected on the site plan on sheet CO.1. Density bonus: 14.75 lots x 5% density bonus = .74 lots. 14.75 + .74 = 15.49 = 15 lots (max) FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the apppplicant's narrative and plan set contains all of the general information required for a Type III -PC procedure and the additional information required by 18.350.040.8. In addition the applicant hass~pprovided a general development schedule, a statement of intentions with regarJ to the future self ng or leasing of the planned development, and the additional listed information for concept plan review. Staff suggests that the proposed schedule would be difficult to meet considering, among other things, the review process for detailed plan review would likely extend past the proposed March, 2010 beginnilg date. The applicant's narrative is ambiguous with respect to planning objectives. On page 8 it appears that the applicant refers to the purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as the planning ob ectives. On pa e 12 the narrative refers to an unidentified page number for the listed objectives. While not explicitly stating objectives, the Project Description does state that "the RFC will be the focal point of this development meant to encourage and facilitate intergenerational involvement. The protect will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community Staff finds that these objectives could provide substantial community benefits and would be worth consideration under the purposes of the Planned Development chapter. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING CONMSSION HE ARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 10 OF 17 The applicant's narrative provides a cursory description of the character of the proposed development, rationale behind the assumptions and choices made, architectural style, irunovative site plannill principles, and innovations in building techniques. The applicant has proposed the minimum 2 % open space facility and proposes a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill for the community to use as a recreational area. The applicant proposes craftsman style features for the proposed detached and attached homes including front porches, attached ara es, colorful designs and exterior accents. The applicant states the project will incorporate LM platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community including all single-family houses as well as the RCS'. However, the applicant does not provide any insight into how the arrangement of buildings and the resulting open spaces would be used by the community (in particular, the shared outdoor recreation area required for residential use), whether the proposed minimum open space is adequate, or how the quality of the craftsman construction and detailing would rise to the level of "innovation" or employ LEED standards. Further the applicant did not explicitly address how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planne Development Chapter or rovide an explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. Therefore, the Planning Commission should consider whether the proposal has sufficiently addressed the concept plan submission requirements. The applicant has proposed a 15-lot subdivision but only 14 lots are allowed under the R-4.5 zone. There}ore, the applicant has requested a density bonus to increase the density allowed by approximately 2%, even though 5 /o was requested. The Commission should consider whether the proposed gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill make a substantial contribution to the objectives of the planned development and provide the degree of distinctiveness and desirability of variation to meet any bonus. In addition, the proposed residential care facility (RC F)f, with greater than 6 residents, is not a use permitted outright (by right) in the R4.5 zone TT . hhere ore, the proposed RCF use would require additional conditional use review to ensure the use is compatible with other use in the vicinity and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding use and public facilities is minin zed. The applicant's narrative does not provide a description of the RCF" facility in terms of height bulk, detailing, fenestration, or roof line. This review would be processed concurrently with the Planned Development Detailed Plan review. 18.350.050 Concept Plan Approval Criteria: A. The concept plan approved by the Commission only if all of the following criteria are met: 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for areas of open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant has provided a Concept Plan (Sheet 1-1), which includes specific designations on the map for areas of open space. The Concept Plan and this compliance narrative provide descriptions of the intended level of use for each sub-area, and how the relate to other proposed uses on the site. The Concept Plan specifically protects and enhances natural features the 7 relate site, particularly the Natural Resource Area on the northeastern property line. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff ag rees with the applicant's statement with respect to the identification of open space and the protection of natunyresources on the site. However, the applicant does notyrovide insight into how the open spaces would be used by the community or whether the proposed minimum 20 /o open space is adequate given the intensity of use, density proposed, and significant slopes underlying the interior spaces. 2. The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Site Plan (Sheet C0.1) identifies areas of the site where significant natural resources have been delineated. -The method for maximizing protection, preservation, and enhancement are outlined within this compliance narrative and visually displayed on the various plans. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING OOMNIISSIONHEARING8/17/2009 PAGE 11 OF 17 STAFF'S RESPONSE: The applicant has included the recommendations of Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter for enhancement of the vegetated corridor at the bottom of the site. In addition, trees have been identified for retention at the top of the site, as proposed in the applicant's Arborist Report. The City Arbonst has commented on the proposal (see Other Staff Comments on page 15 , suggesting there may be other trees worth protecting and others that have been retained that could be remove as invasive species. 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space buffers. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The concept Plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, primarily through compatible street layout and architectural style. The plan also provides a landscape transition between the abutting residential neighborhood and the project. Buffering and screening details will also be provided along adjacent properties, as detailed on the landscape plan (Sheets L1-1-6). STAFF'S RESPONSE: The applicant's proposal does integrate the proposed development into the neighborhood in several important ways including the placement of single-family detached dwellings of craftsman design adjacent to SW Knoll and the placement of the RCF to the rear of the site to rni= ~e the scale and i ipact of the development as experienced from the public street. In addition, the open space buffers that include mature trees and water features located between the proposed single-family detached dwellings and SW Knoll provide an easily accessed amenity to the neighborhood. Further, the side yards of the dwellings of the two abutting properties look out on the proposed passive use facility. It should be noted, however, that the proposed frontage along SW Knoll is not to standard and will need to satisfy the appropriate radius standard per Washington County. 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridershipp, such methods may include separated parking bays off street walking paths, shorter pedestrian routes t%an vehicular routes, linkages to or other provisions for bus stops, etc. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Plan (Sheet 03.1) identifies methods of promoting walking paths around the site and including separate parking bays, bicycle parking, and off street walking paths. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement. However, the applicant has not addressed transit ridership. Trimet's # 78 bus line, linking Lake Oswego with Beaverton includes two bus stops within 300 feet of the project boundary on SW Hunziker at the intersection with SW Knoll. Sidewalk improvements along the three mtervenmg lots on SW Knoll and applicable upgrades to the bus stops should be considered to mitigate for the inpacts of the proposed development and promote walkabibr and transit ridership within the neighborhood. 5. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general arrangement on site. In the case of projects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Plan (Sheet C0.1) identifies the proposed uses and their general arrangement on the site. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement that the proposed uses and their general arrangement on site have been identified. However, the density of the residential units represented may be problematic. The average lot size of lots 1-14 is 2,903 square feet, or 39% of the base zone standard of 7,500 square feet in the R-4.5 zone. As discussed in the Additional Discussion Areas below, the proposed private street design is in conflict with fire and safety standards and the City's street design standards, which may necessitate reducing the number of lots to accommodate the larger street and alley sections. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COlvMSSIONHEARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 12 OF 17 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Plan (Sheet CO. 1) demonstrates that development of the property pursuant to the plan will result in a development that has significant advantage in that it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the R-4.5 Zoning. The Plan rotects and enhances the highest value natural features of the site. The Plan provides additional amenities and pedestrian oriented features that enhance the development project and the neighborhood generally. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement with respect to the proposed concept plan providing significant advantages over a standard development. Notwithstanding the difficulties with the proposal, the plan would preserve neighborhood livability at overall densities consistent with the R. 4.5 zone, while protecting natural features and providin additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. FINDING: The proposed concept plan provisionally meets all of the Concept Plan Approval Criteria and, therefore, maybe approved by the Commission. However, as indicated in the Toolbox, the concept plan should reflect the maximization of opportunities where the objective is desi n excellence. It is the express intention of the concept plan review that the concept is entirely open or discussion. Staff supports the main objective of the applicant's proposal, to provide an intergenerational development utilizing LEER standards for development and therefore, does not recommend denial.7Iowever, as indicated in the findings for this re ort, staff is not comfortable recommending approval of the proposed planned development. Staf~recommends that prior to approval of the concept plan, 'dirimissioners consider the findings in this report and the issues raised in the following Additional Discussion Areas section, in addition to any others they may have, in order to provide the applicant with clear direction in revising the proposed concept plan and developing the detAi ed plan. SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AREAS 1. Concept Plan Submission Requirements. The applicant did not explicitly address how the proposal relates to the six purposes o the Planned Development Chapter or Manning an explanation of how the proposal utilized theTlanning Cominissloner's Toolbox. Therefore, the Plaarniing Commission should consider whether the proposal has sufficiently addressed the concept plan submission requirements. For example, the Purposes and "Toolbox provide for: Such added benefits as increased open space in the City, alternati-LE building designs, and aesthetic appeal. The applicant has proposed typical craftsman designed structures with unnamed LEED features. There is no indication in the submittal materials how aesthetics is being addressed. ihv cant su ggests that development control will be assured by the owners/builders and offers prior projects to demonstrate thee- qquality. Land use permits do not ensure ownersl i as the permit runs with the land. Therefore, the quaCity of the project must be expressed in the land puse proposal and assured through conditions of approval. For example, aesthetic appeal could be proposed for the distinctive features of the common areas such as the ponds, paths, stairways, and retaining walls, which should be constructed or faced with natural or natural appearing materials; retaining walls should not exceed 4 feet in height. To ps.ovide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innoziztize building and public facility construction methods and materials. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING GOMMISSIONI-EARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 13 OF 17 The applicant proposed LEED Platinum desi of the proposed residences and RCF. However it is unclear whether the project would seek the LEED certification or just incorporate elements of the LEED Platinum standards. Without additional clarity there would be no assurance that innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials would be integrated into the project. Proposed open space should be commensurate with intensity of the density within the development. As proposed, with the 2% (5% requested) density bonus, the average lot size of lots 1-14 is 2,903 square feet, or 39% of the base zone standard of 7,500 square feet in the R-4.5 zone. Under the Open Space section, the Toolbox suggests that the degree of open space should be commensurate with the intensity of the density within the development. However, the applicant has proposed just the minimum 20% open space. The Commission may consider increasinle the open space allocation by not granting the density bonus, reducing the size of the RCF, or propose applicant pay a fee in-lieu or offer an off-site location. Note: As discussed under the "access" issue below, the proposed private street design is in conflict with fire and safety standards and the City's street design standards, which also may necessitate reducing the number of lots. 2. Natural Resource Preservation. As the comments received from the City Arborist, below, indicate, there may be opportunities to preserve additional trees or groups of trees. In addition, the Commission may wish to consider requiring the applicant to remove Hawthorne trees #8 and #21, which they have scheduled for retention, because the species is listed as invasive by Clean Water Services. 3. Gr_ adin~. The applicant's Grading Plan (Sheet C1) shows mass grading for the proposed access and water quality facility in Tract A. However, it does not show how the 14 lots or common open space areas would be graded. The character and quality of the passive use and shared outdoor recreation areas of the site may be adversely affected by the grading necessary for the proposed development. For example, the proposal is to include an area for common recreation and feature a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill. However, besides the pathways and water features shown on the Conceptual Site Plan (Sheet C0.1) there is no apparent plaza area to accommodate them. The interior open space slopes between the proposed dwellings are approximately 15% with no indication in the application materials on how this would be addressed. 4. Lot frontage. The applicant has proposed single-family detached lots (lots 2 thru 5) without frontage on a public or private street. Pursuant to the Lot standards in Section 18.810.060.B, these lots must have a minimum of 25 feet of frontage (unless reduced by the Commission). The proposed development plan shows approximately 95 feet between the private street ingress and egress, which may have to be widened to accommodate the required frontage. The frontage on SW Knoll will also be affected by the street design standards for corners (Washington County "eyebrow") which are not shown in the proposed site plan. To preserve the proposed passive use open space in this area, an easement would be required over the front portion of the affected lots. 5. Access and Street Desip. The section for the proposed one-way private street loop does not meet the design standards for private streets (20 feet wide with curb and 5-foot sidewalk). The code only provides for one-way streets for multi-family developments and not for single-family. In addition, the applicant proposes alley access to the back of die single-family detached units and the front of the single-family attached units. The alley is shown as a 12-foot access way in an easement over the abutting properties, while Table 18.810.1 requires 16 feet in width. Section 18.705.030.1.3 requires private residential access drives be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code. As shown in the following comments from TVF&R, the fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided (however, if the buildings are sprinkled, variations from the road design standards may be approved). The street design issue is complicated by the short driveways of Lots 7 thru 14 (2 to 18 feet) with access on the private street. The Planning Commission may grant deviations from the street standards, if sanctioned by the City Engineer, when it can be shown that public safety will not be compromised. This issue should be resolved prior to Planning Commission approval. THE VILLAGE A'r KNOLL Ri_ i,oR1' (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION I it ARING 8/17/2009 PAC& 14 01' 17 SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Tigard Police Department commented that they have no objections to the proposal. The City Arborist provided the following comment: Concept plan approval criterion 18.350.050.A.2 requires that: "The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management." Trees may be deemed "significant natural resources" due to species, size, and condition. The criteria for significance may be specified as follows: Species - Oregon native Size - Greater than six inches in diameter Condition - Good health and good structure According to the pro)ect arborist and landscape architect, the following trees meet the above criteria: ree Num er ree e run Diameter Action 1 Oregon as 13" an 20" Preserve 2 Oregon as 7" an 20" Preserve 3 Oregon as 45" reserve 4 Oregon white oak 17" Preserve 5 Ore on w to oak 30" Preserve 7 re on as 18" Preserve 9 Oregon white oak 35" Preserve 11 Oregon as 16" an 23" Preserve 12 Oregon ash 10" Preserve 13 Ore on as 16" an 12" Preserve 14 Ore on oa 32" Preserve 15 Ore o20" Preserve 65 Oregon as 12" Remove 66 Ore on as 10" Remove 67 -Oregon as 6" Remove 68 Oregon as 8" Remove A total of 16 significant natural resource trees (native trees in good condition) exist on site. Of these trees, four are scheduled for removal due to their location within building footprints or driveways. These four trees are clustered together and could potentially be preserved if the site design were significantly altered. However, the value of accommodating four more native trees would need to weighted against preservation costs by the Planning Commission. One more consideration for Planning Commission mould be to require the applicant to remove the Hawthorne trees scheduled for retention (tree # 8 and tree # 21). These trees are listed as an invasive species by Clean Water Services due to their habit of forming dense thickets and displacing native understory species. Their seeds are primarily spread by fruit eating birds. Planning Commission may choose to waive mitigation requirements as an incentive for invasive tree removal. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Transportation was notified of the proposed development but did not comment. Clean Water Services provided a general comment letter dated July 1, 2009 addressing sanitary sewer, storm water, erosion control and sensitive areas. In addition, CWS issued a service provider letter with conditions of approval dated February 13, 2008 (CWS File No. 05-002606) requiring mitigation for the vegetated corridor encroachment. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING CONMSSIONHEARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 15 OF 17 Tualatin Valley Water District provided the following comment: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic ire sprinkler system, the requirements or fire apparatus access maybe modified as approved by the fire code official. (IFC 503.1.1) 2) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level o ire 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 m ''the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet in her ht. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a mrninum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. (IFC D 105) This requirement applies to the access roadway from the Park 217 Business Park. 3) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width o not less than 20 feet (12 feet or 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 26 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. (IFC 503.2.1) The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. The fire district will not endorse the design of this project. In a previous conversation with the applicant re2ardin the feasibility of a one way access roadway (SW Knoll), we approved a design concept serving a ~4-bed residential care facility. We did not discuss or approve parking within that narrow roadway or the inclusion of one- and two-family dwellings within the project. a) 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. (IFC D103.1) 5) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate pparked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed dnvmg surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or botli sides of the roadway and ii turnarounds as needed. 6) 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 60,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weigh. You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable o} supporting such loading. (IFC D102.1) 7) 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. (IFC 503.2.4 &D103.3) This requirement applies to all roadways shown on the submitted drawings. 8) GRADE: Fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed 10 percent. Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maxirnum 5% with the exception of crowning for water run-off. When fire sprinklers are installed, a maximum grade of 15% may be allowed. Adequacy of fire apparatus access shall be evaluated from the Xopmment. t beginning at the first due fire station to a point within 150 feet of all structures within the deThe approval of fire s rinklers as an alternate shall be accomplished in accordance with the provisins of ORS 455.610(5). (IFC 503.2.7 &D103.2) THE -VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING CONMSSIONHFARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 16 OF 17 9) COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 31000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi, whichever is ess as calculated usm' I C, Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (IFC B105.2) lo) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single-family, dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. (IFC B 105.1) 11) 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 maybe increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. (IFC 508.5.1) 12) FIRE HYDRANTS - ONE- AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS & ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: Where a portion o a structure is more than 600 feet from a hydrant on a ire apparatus access road as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the structure(s), on-site fire hydrants and mains shA be provided. (IFC 508.5. 1) 13) 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 Cy Table C 105.1. 14) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved ire apparatus access roadway. (IFC C102.1) 15) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. Thev 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. (IFC 508.5.4) 16) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet o a fire department connection (FDQ. Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. FDC's shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. (IFC 912.2) This requirement applies to the residential care facility. 17) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and ire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) P4-7 i Z7 July 31, 2009 PREPARED BY: ary Page stecher DATE sociate lanner 9 _ i July31, 2009 APPR D Bl :chard H. Bewers 6rf DATE Planning Manager r Attachments ° 1. Vicinity Map 2. Final Concept Site Plan THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL STAFF REPORT (PDR2008-00004) PLANNING OOMNIISSION HEARING 8/17/2009 PAGE 17 OF 17 I t t. i ~ JJ I t t i a rltii VICINITY MAP r= ` 00, O/Al t 't, q ill f p j PDR2008-00004 (r\ i . QAC,, t- THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL MJ _ ht 1N Subject Site • I - _ _ ~ - ~ > 217 iI t / C KNpLk ~R 2S1016 03331 rlq rv - 2S1016 315s70 i~ f r ~ r x 11 6 L ' r ~.p t r Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development 9~s y hG 1,' Services Division. y 11 i Scale 1:4,500 _ 1 in = 375 ft Map printed at 19-Jun-09 09:46 AM J I DATA IS OE RIVED FROM M ULTIPL E S OU RCES. THE C ITY OF TIGARD M~ES 1 Y ` : \ ) CONTENTCCUW.CY,T MEPNESSORCOMPLETENEES OFEANYTQ~THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN THE Cl- OF TIGARD SMALL ASSUME NO I LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS OMISSIONS. OR INACCURACIES IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESSOF HOW CAUSED. City of Tigard pD 13125 SW Hall Blvd - TIGgrl Mgps T Bard, OR 97223 a _ 503 6394171 a ,rj_, ~ wtvw.tigard-ocgov - YG. ~ F 5 W~Z~~ _ 5 titn~.lr~i/~r ups 1 ~:'<.a:-: ass yP_ SITE INFORNATION I ~ \ ~ / ) e iAF Y.W ElneC 1LY11 ,✓'Aw,M of / P : \ ~ ~ J/pp ~ ~j ..i.... ~OIYVG R-IS f»>iir fE1H1Y wT ].5a0 S.f w 1031 9R I •Y / $0 / role ulE uu (pEfaE o[ocurc - Iv.9ss sr (znx u) o ) ~yi )5 0.0.W. OFMA.oW ]ISS ! 16 p W[1V hs NWE (6F9rt) Pt. i- )l 7 TIUYS PUF (OEF9R) I 1 a 5 (s c5 wn~.vuµoPA,lus ABUS wx (uTSIE) !I' / ` \i:,_ JJ. IUMN KSIARO:S KK 1 = ~ PAIVAIE SB4i AKA 12522 ff 1 I \ - TMCT A t ;i k• xfr oE~.molr urA - Ilo see s / YuYB1 oo29tt - uB Sm/I soo . un mil / ~ 1.. «x f1]I91Y 1)1)516)1.135 l t YveeA1 OEV92}=IS IOmIi ~~CC/ 41E NFA \ \ .yam ~ ; i I i \ G VH SC.Vf 9A NG A ypl IoY). R. MFA ISO. R.) /AFAS (50. R.) \ \ f { J 5060 1]U 9 9 c° _ - _ _ _ _ I Y \ " ~ ~ / ,V ~ 5 J616 12B 939 Exmwc oxE-vnr slam a ~;I / i s ii ipio iise \ ♦ ll I / 6310 iu 158 752 } ;31 In, 3 t2 I 1 1.11 ~OP~- CUPS NaN ac- - ! / / OI 2 R now, OfdGipN r0 p R. MAIf-MUM, S x1!10 3110 1011 4W. EYEBROW COANEP 1 A-FS' TPUAL iWtr A 56613 ]3)11 PEOUPf]IENf > c- )PACT B 5671 Sbn S(PfRaCFfDS YMV. - v O IUI10 5f 15) 1%10 SI , !OR oHE-YNY SIRm AT ] / ` ` / 1 IfW 3 R. PUBLIC SUEWA(X. (1>l Y SIE) lilt OF SIZE E2BPM C°PHER. C E - - OS Il'W 5 R. PUNIER ) M c 1 1 f / y SrPER2. SOEWII(S. gMLMA13. VARI(YIC - 2Vi 5110 -A, .(2 i. ~ 4O Ib R. AC. Y NAIf-YAOM YN. FIISTHC OlE-WAY 91pFFr ``)W. ~ _ ~ \ / IIIJJJ O ~,Y~f~`p~i I«i„ WA.o.H, ll° / f 7/ { © BIfiLR IFVEI. 0 /ifNC f T p01ARAFf (fo y l~~\ ~ ~1'' / IxounPUi suE). BR( PAPFMIG NFA 0 BAS ~-y~~ _ / / j.. (F6TYU COrY]ElC PRABNL YALL GRAPHIC SCALE 0 U JU 60 FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION W if 1 RP ON ./,)/m CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN EzzeAleASE.°Wc ZT6ec ENGINEERS INC. ' SNOB 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY PHONE (563) 23s-379' KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY FAX: (5o3) 233-7839 TIGARD, OREGON Co.1 IXPiRES t]/Ji/1°10 ~l 1 ~ ~a L AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first dulysworn/affirrn, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Assistant for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: ~0_ ."pn,pii-B-(')INl- ❑x NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR PDR2008-00004/THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (File No./Name Reference) ❑ AMENDEDNOTICE HEARING BODY: HEARING DATE: ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer E Tigard Planning Commission (8/17/2009) ❑ Tigard City Council 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 ul 9 and de site he U e to Mail on July27, 2009, postage prepaid. (Person tha aced i oace) STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ss. City of Tigard Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the day of l~T rr r , 2009. OFFICIAL SEAL SHIRLEY L TREAT NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON N TARY PUBLI OF OREGO COMMISSION N0.418777 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 25, 2011 My Commission Expires: EXHIBI NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES THAT IF YOURECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT SHALL BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY AUGUST 17, 2009 AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 FILE TITLE: THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL APPLICANT: Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. OWNERS: William C. Reed & Lydia Lundberg Attn: Mark Reed 2300 SW 103`d Avenue 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd. Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97212 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.83-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BQ Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.390 OF THE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ASSISUVE LISTENING DEVICES ARE AVAILABLE FOR PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED HEARING. THE CITY WILL ALSO ENDEAVOR TO ARRANGE FOR QUALIFIED SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND QUALIFIED BILINGUAL INTERPRETERS UPON REQUEST. PLEASE CALL (503) 639-4171, EXT. 2438 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (MD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT WRY I'EN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED, >.,TION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL RECEIVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION. IF A PERSON SUBMITS EVIDENCE OR DOCUMENTS LESS THAN Z DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE, THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY MAY ALLOW A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING, SUBJECT TO ORS 215.428 OR 227178. IF THERE IS NO CONTINUANCE GRANTED AT THE HEARING, ANY PARTICIPANT IN THE HEARING MAY REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. A REQUEST THAT THE RECORD REMAIN OPEN CAN BE MADE ONLY AT THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ORS 197.763(6). INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE BASED UPON THE CRITERIA LISTED OR OTHER CRITERIA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH THE PERSON BELIEVES TO APPLY TO THE DECISION. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR THE DEVELOPMENT CODE. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON THE REQUEST, ACCOMPANIED BY STATEMENTS OR EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE HEARINGS AUTHORITY AND ALL PARTIES TO RESPOND PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE. 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 (25t) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO TT-IE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TWENTY- FIVE CENTS (25C) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER GARY PAGENSTECHER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223, OR BY EMAIL TO G.ARYP(a)TIGARD-ORGOV VICINITY MAP . G r Cy T 1 vm N~K f... fi t t a PDR2008-00004 vP~_ o; 9 q THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL {1 z, ~ i l r u n+v t `h s, • _ 1 Rn, sR,a: u c \ 1j0hRA1flP5 PDR2008-000( EXH I B IT-~- William C. Reed THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL PO Box 12564 Portland, OR 97212 William Reed & Lydia Lundberg PO Box 12564 Portland, OR 97212 William C. Reed & Lydia Lundberg 2300 SW 103"' Avenue Portland, OR 97225 Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. Mtn: Mark Reed 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd. Portland, OR 97212 2S101BC02100 2S101BC00600 ANNAND PROPERTIES III-H LLC DOUGHERTY, ALICIA 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD #150 12260 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S101BC01800 2S101BC00700 BEAUDOIN, MICHAEL E & GHAFFARI, ZABI & DONNA R GHAFFARI, FARIBA M 12490 SW KNOLL DR 15580 SW SNOWY OWL LN TIGARD, OR 97223 BEAVERTON, OR 97007 2S101BC00400 2S101BC02201 CARASOF, ALEX S & LILIYA V HUNZIKER ONE LLC 12330 SW KNOLL DR 956 WEST POINT RD TIGARD, OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 2S101BC02300 251018002200 CHRIS GILLETT INSURANCE INC HUNZIKER TWO, LLC 19522 SW NAEVEST BY MICHAEL/PAMELA ROACH MGRS TIGARD, OR 97224 956 WEST POINT RD LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 2S101BC01000 2S101BO00201 CLICKENER, ROBERT R & PATRICIA A JOHANSON TRANSPORTATION SERVICE 8485 SW HUNZIKER 5583 E OLIVE AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 FRESNO, CA 93727 2SI01BC00900 2S101BC00500 C KENE OBERT R & PATRICIA A KIM, DAE H 8485 HUNZIKER 12300 SW KNOLL DR ARD, 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BO0080 2SI01BB00900 CL EN , ROBERT R & PATRICIA A KNAUSS, WAYNE ET AL 8485 HUNZIKER c/o HUMBERSTON, RUSSELL D ARD, 97223 REVOCABLE TRUST PO BOX 4300 BEAVERTON, OR 97076 2S101BC03000 2SI01BO00101 COSTA, CLAUDIU & EMILIA KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC 12361 SW KNOLL AVE 12301 SE HWY 212 TIGARD, OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 2S102AA03200 25- 16000200 CRAGHEAD, GARY A JUDY A aKAM A GROUP LLC 12205 SW HALL BV 212 TIGARD, OR 97223 AS, 97015 2S1016C01600 2S101BO00100 DEFOE, JUDITH A MCGEE KNEZ, JOHN S SR & JEANNE M 12455 SW 68TH AVE 12301 SW HWY 212 PORTLAND, OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 2S101BC02202 2S101BC01200 LEACH, DOUGLAS W TRUST & REID, CHARLES O LEACH, SUSAN L TRUST 8445 SW HUNZIKER RD 8430 SW HUNZIKER RD STE 200 TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S102AA00500 2S102AA03301 LEARY, DAVID LYLE & REMEDIOS, DAVID & MARIA & LEARY, KATHLEEN JOAN TAYLOR, HANS & JULIE & 10020 SW JOHNSON ST DITTO, BRAD/SUSAN & ESMAILI, ASG TIGARD, OR 97223 265 N BROOKSHIRE AVE VENTURA, CA 93003 2S101BC01801 2S101BC03300 MILLER, LORI M SAUSE, MARILYN 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD 12419 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BC03100 2S101BC02800 NGUYEN, VUONG P SEVERSON, JAMES A & ROBIN O 12387 SW KNOLL DR 29404 SW HEATER RD TIGARD, OR 97223 SHERWOOD, OR 97140 2S101BB00801 2S102AA03500 NIKZAD, ABBAS SICKLES, DANIEL 12090 SW HALL BLVD 12437 SW HALL BLVD #8 TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BB01000 2S102AA03300 NIKZAD, ABBAS SKOURTES, MARIANELLY 13787 SW MARCIA DR PO BOX 2327 TIGARD, OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 2S101BC01100 2S101BC01700 NITSOS, BETTY MAXINE STEPHENS, BRYN 8465 SW HUNZIKER RD 12450 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BC01500 2S101BC01900 REED, WILLIAM & TAPIA, OSCAR & LUNDBERG, LYDIA ABARCA, MANUEL SALVADOR SOLIS PO BOX 12564 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD PORTLAND, OR 97212 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101 B000301 2S102AA03400 REED, WILLIAM C TIGARD TOWNHOMES INC PO BOX 12564 BY MERRILL & CHARLOTTE HODGES PORTLAND, OR 97212 PO BOX 2907 POULSBO, WA 98370 2S101BC03200 2S101BB01500 REID, CHARLES 0 WALTON CWOR PARK BC 8 LLC 12446 SW 131 ST AVE BY TTA/ePROPERTYTAX DEPT 325 TIGARD, OR 97223 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE,AZ 85261 2S 18801400 WALT CW PARK BC 8 LLC BY TTA/e OPERTYTAX DEPT 325 PO B 49 S,Ci TTSDALE, Z 85261 2S1 18801600 WAL N C R PARK BC 8 LLC BY TT OPERTYTAX DEPT 325 PO 4 TTS DAL 85261 Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Susan Beilke 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 11755 SW 1141h Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci Dayle D. & Evelyn 0. Beach 11285 SW 78th Avenue 11530 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Diane Baldwin Todd Harding and Blake Hering Jr. 3706 Kinsale Lane SE Norris Beggs & Simpson Olympia, WA 98501 121 SW Morrison, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97204 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 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 Ii lniirnln\satiin\IahPis\('IT Fact dor) 1 ipnnTFn 1R_nAr_nR i r rp_ RECEIVED PLANNING AUG 10 2009 CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY b, NEWSPAPERS 6605 SE Lake Raad, Portland, OR 91222 • PO Box 22109 PorOaod OR 97269-2109 Phone: 503-6114.0360 For 503-620.3433 E-mall: legals@commoewspapers.com AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Accounting Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of general circulation, published at Beaverton, in the aforesaid county and state, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that City of Tigard Notice of Public Hearing/PDR 2008-00004 TT11346 A copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 1 week in the following issue: July 30, 2009 C*a( 10* Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manag r) Subscribed and sworn to before me this July 30, 2009. EAL RGES OREGON O. 437285 S MAY 16.2013 NOT ARY PUBLIC FOR OR ON *:ME My commission expires Acct #10093001 Attn: Patty Lunsford City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Size: 2x10.25 Amount Due $171.17 pci" 'Please remit to address above. .r. AhK PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: The following will be considered by the Tigard v Planning Commission on Monday August 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. A the public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code and the ruleS of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Chapter 18.390. Testimony may be submitted in writing prior to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue. Failure to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. 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. A copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503-6394171, or by email to ggW& Tgard-or.gov. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 -THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL- REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessors Map 2S 101 BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low- Density Residential District. The R4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. X Vic INRY MAP > y II r < -'\{4 C 14~ J i~ 1~` 3 ~yT\YS C -yam Publish 07/30/2009. TT 11346 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE OF A LAND USE PROPOSAL .s. 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.: PDR2008-00004 Land Use File Name: THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL 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 appro imalocation(s) IF no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) 1 °Z-.3 6~<!~) Ste' ~ and did personally post notice of the Public Hearing on 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 2- 6 day of , 20 GCS Zi " Signature o erson V~Ko Performed Posting (In the presence of the Notary) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. s, Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the ' day of 20. ~OFFIC11 L SEAL KRlSTlE J PEERMAN NUrARY PUBLIC-OREGON , Sl'''y COMMISSION NO. 419242 fs ~Ie~Y Cn J!+i1!;SIOt: eX?!R.[:, dllCf 2011 .,p M NOTARY PUBLI F OREGON My Commission Expires: NOTIC OF PUBLIC H ARING. The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission on Monday August 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance widl Chapter 18.390 of the Tigard Municipal Code, and the rules of procedures adopted by the Planning Commission. "Testimony may be submitted in writing prior to or at the public hearing or verbally at the public hearing only. Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision-maker an opportuf to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeal based on that issue and failure to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. Further information may be obtained from the Planning Division (staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 503-639-4171. 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. A copy of the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing, and copies for all items can also be provided at a reasonable cost. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. The Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning, district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or withouL accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. REQUEST FOR COMMENTS low . ~1 City of Tigard REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: Tune 19, 2009 TO: Todd Prager, City Arborist FRONT: Cite of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner (t2434~ Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 624-3681 Email: gan742ktigard-or.gov PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single- family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. The Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. Attached are 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 pproposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: TULY 32009. 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 mi 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 attached: Name & Number of Person Commenting: • MEMORANDUM TO: Gary Pagenstecher FROM: Todd Prager, City Arborist RE: The Village at the Knoll Concept Plan Review DINE: June 22, 2008 As you requested I have provided comments on "The Village at the Knoll" concept plan. Concept plan approval criteria 18.350.050.A.2 requires that: "The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management" As we discussed trees may be deemed "significant natural resources" due to species, size, and condition. The criteria for significance may be specified as follows: Species - Oregon native Size - Greater and six inches in diameter Condition - Good health and good structure According to the project arborist and landscape architect, the following trees meet the above criteria: Tree Number Tree T e Trunk Diameter Action 1 Oregon ash 13" and 20" Preserve 2 Oregon ash 7" and 20" Preserve 3 Oregon ash 45" Preserve 4 Oregon white oak 17" Preserve 5 Oregon white oak 30" Preserve 7 Oregon ash 18" Preserve 9 Oregon white oak 35" Preserve 11 Oregon ash 16" and 23" Preserve 12 Oregon ash 10" Preserve 13 Oregon ash 16" and 12" Preserve 14 Oregon white oak 32" Preserve 15 Oregon ash 20" Preserve 65 Ore on ash 12" Remove 66 Oregon ash 10" Remove 67 Oregon ash 6" Remove 68 Oregon ash 8" Remove A total of 16 significant natural resource trees (native trees in good condition) exist on site. Of these trees, four are scheduled for removal due to their location within building footprints or driveways. These four trees are clustered together and could potentially be preserved if the site design were significantly altered. However, the value of accommodating four more native trees would need to weighted against preservation costs by the Planning Commission. One more consideration for Planning Commission would be to require the applicant to remove the hawthorne trees scheduled for retention (tree #8 and tree #21). These trees are listed as an invasive species by Clean Water Services due to their habit of forming dense thickets and displacing native understory species. Their seeds are primarily spread by fruit eating birds. Planning Commission may choose to waive mitigation requirements as an incentive for invasive tree removal. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding my comments. Page 2 of 2 1 City of Tigard REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: Tune 19, 2009 TO: Jim Wolf, Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner (x2434) Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 624-3681 Email: garypatigard-or.gov PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single- family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. The Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessorv residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. Attached are 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 pro osal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JULY 3, 2009. 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 attached: Name & Number of Person Commenting: ,1 ~01~ 1 V l CleanWater Services RECEIVED PLANNING Onr cunin~ilui~nl i~ char. JUL 0 9 2009 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD Date: July 1, 2009 To: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner, City of Tigard From: Jackie Sue Humphreys,~Clean Water Services (the District) Subject: The Village at Knoll, PDR 2008-00004, 2S101B000301, 01500 Please include the following comments when writing your conditions of approval: PRIOR TO ANY WORK ON THE SITE AND PLAT RECORDING A Clean Water Services (the District) Storm Water Connection Permit Authorization must be obtained prior to plat approval and recordation. Application for the District's Permit Authorization must be in accordance with the requirements of the Design and Construction Standards, Resolution and Order No. 07-20, (or current R&O in effect at time of Engineering plan submittal), and is to include: a. Detailed plans prepared in accordance with Chapter 2, Section 2.04.2.b-1. b. Detailed grading and erosion control plan. An Erosion Control Permit will be required. Area of Disturbance must be clearly identified on submitted construction plans. If site area and any offsite improvements required for this development exceed one-acre of disturbance, project will require a 1200-C Erosion Control Permit. c. Detailed plans showing each lot within the development having direct access by gravity to public storm and sanitary sewer. d. Provisions for water quality in accordance with the requirements of the above named design standards. Water Quality is required for all new development and redevelopment areas per R&O 07-20, Section 4.05.5, Table 4-1. Access shall be provided for maintenance of facility per R&O 07-20, Section 4.02.4. e. If private lot LIDA systems proposed, must comply with the current CWS Design and Construction Standards. A private maintenance agreement, for the proposed private lot LIDA systems, needs to be provided to the City for review and acceptance. 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway • Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 Phone: (503) 681-3600 • Fax: (503) 681-3603 • www.CleanWaterServices.org f. Show all existing and proposed easements on plans. Any required storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water quality related easements must be granted to the City. g. Site contains a "Sensitive Area." Applicant shall comply with the conditions as set forth in the Service Provider Letter No. 05-002606, dated February 13, 2008. h. Developer may be required to preserve a corridor separating the sensitive area from the impact of development. The corridor must be set aside in a separate tract, not part of any buildable lot and, shall be subject to a "Storm Sewer, Surface Water, Drainage and Detention Easement over its entirety", or its equivalent. i. All proposed encroachments, temporary or permanent must be reflected in the Service Provider Letter. j. Detailed plans showing the sensitive area and corridor delineated, along with restoration and enhancement of the corridor. k. Provide DSL and Corps of Engineers permits for any work in the wetlands or creek prior to any on site work, including grading and erosion control. Include permit number on cover sheet of plans or provide concurrence with the delineation. 1. Any proposed offsite construction activities will require an update or amendment to the current Service Provider Letter for this project. CONCLUSION This Land Use Review does not constitute the District's approval of storm or sanitary sewer compliance to the NPDES permit held by the District. The District, prior to issuance of any connection permits, must approve final construction plans and drainage calculations. Gary Pagenstecher From: Dalby, John K. [John.Dalby@tvfr.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:46 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: BREED@ELITECARE.COM Subject: The Village at Knoll (T) (Amended) Attachments: The Village at Knoll (T) (Amended).doc Gary, This is our amended review of this proposal. The applicant met with us this afternoon and we were able to resolve our previous concerns. As such, we have no objections to them presenting this proposal at the Planning Commission meeting on Monday August 17, 2009. <<The Village at Knoll (T) (Amended).doc>> 1 Tvro" Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue July 2, 2009 l t 6C 0 Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: (PDR) 2009-00004 The Village at Knoll 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 EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access maybe modified as approved by the fire code official. (IFC 503.1.1) 2) 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 26 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. (IFC 503.2. 1) The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. The proposed access roadway around the perimeter of the project is 15 feet with no parking allowed. We find this proposal acceptable. 3) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. 4) 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 60,000 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. (IFC D102.1) 5) 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. (IFC 503.2.4 & D103.3) The fire district will accept a drivable sidewalk on the northwest and southeast outside corners of the perimeter roadway so long as they are constructed to our surface loading requirements. North Division Office 14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton, OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.tvfr.com i r Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue 6) GRADE: Fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed 10 percent. Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 5%) with the exception of crowning for water run-off. When fire sprinklers are installed, a maximum grade of 15% may be allowed. Adequacy of fire apparatus access shall be evaluated from the point beginning at the first due fire station to a point within 150 feet of all structures within the development. The approval of fire sprinklers as an alternate shall be accomplished in accordance with the provisions of ORS 455.610(5). (IFC 503.2.7 & D103.2) 7) 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. (IFC B105.2) 8) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS - REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single family dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. (IFC 13105.1) 9) 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. (IFC 508.5.1) 10) FIRE HYDRANTS - ONE- AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS & ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: Where a portion of a structure is more than 600 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the structure(s), on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. (IFC 508.5. 1) 11) 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. 12) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (IFC C102.1) 13) 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. (IFC 508.5.4) 14) 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. FDC's shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. (IFC 912.2) This requirement applies to the residential care facility. 15) 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. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) North Division Office 14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton, OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.tvfr.com TVF Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue We trust this letter will be helpful with the final design of this proposal insofar as fire apparatus access and firefighting water supplies are concerned. If there is anything about this letter you do not understand, disagree with, or wish to discuss further, please call me. Sincerely, jo-fm X. Da MV John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshal II Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, North Division 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton, OR 97005-1152 (503) 356-4723 North Division Office 14480 SW Jenkins Road, Beaverton, OR 97005 Phone: 503-356-4700 Fax: 503-644-2214 www.tvfr.com - a City of Tigard REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: June 19, 2009 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner (x2434) Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 624-3681 Email: garyp(a,t Yard-or.gov PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL - REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single- family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. The Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. Attached are 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 pproposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: JULY 3, 2009. 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 mi 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 attached: Name & Number of Person Commenting: CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS 23 ` NOTIFICE N LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY D LOPMENT APPLICATIONS FILE NOS.: FILE NAME: [XI LLfI6E AT Kncs "C:~a;~cPT' ~i~c CITY OFFICES LONG RANGE PLANNING/Ron Bunch, Planning Mgr. V'C-URRENT PLANNING/Todd Prager/Arborist-Planner VPUBLIC WORKS/Brian Rager, Asst. Public Works Dir. _ BUILDING DIVISION/Mark Vandomelen, Plans Ex. Supervisor !VNGINEERING DEPT./Kim McMillan, Dvlpmnt. Review Engineer _PUBLIC WORKS/Steve Martin, Parks Supervisor _ CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder (JC ENGINEERING DEPT./Greg Berry, Project Engineer HEARINGS OFFICER (+2 sets) - COMMUNITY DVLPMNT. DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs. POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf, Crime Prevention Officer i!FLANNING COMMIS GRETCHE +12 sets). - CODE ENFORCEMENT/Christine Darnell, Code Compliance Specialist (DCA) )BILE/REFERENC +2 sets SPECIAL DISTRICTS 2 _ TUAL. HILLS PARK & REC. DIST.+~k"i"T'LIALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE r _ TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT ZLEAN WATER SERVICES ► Planning Manager North Division Administrative Office Development Services Department 15707 SW Walker Road John K. Dalby, Deputy Fire Marshall 1850 SW 170" Avenue David Schweitzer/SWM Program Beaverton, OR 97006 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton, OR 97006 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway Beaverton, OR 97005-1152 Hillsboro, OR 97123 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON _ CITY OF TUALATIN tlf _ OR. DEPT. OF FISH & WILDLIFE _ OR. DIV. OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager Devin Simmons, Habitat Biologist Melinda Wood (wLUN Form Required) _ Steven Sparks, Dev Svcs manager 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue North Willamette Watershed District 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100 PO Box 4755 Tualatin, OR 97062 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road Salem, OR 97301-1279 Beaverton, OR 97076 Portland, OR 97231 _ 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 17160 SW Upper Boones Fry. Rd. _ Joanna Mensher, Data Resource Center (ZCA) _ US ARMY CORPS. OF ENG. Durham, OR 97224 _ Paulette Allen, Growth Management Coordinator _ OR. DEPT. OF LAND CONSERV.& DVLP. Kathryn Harris (Maps & CWS Letter Only) Mel Hula, Greenspaces Coordinator (CPA20A) Mara Ulloa (comp. Plan Amendments & Measure 37) 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 (Powerlines in Area) _ OR. DEPT OF AVIATION (monopole Towers) Dept. of Land Use & Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland, Planing 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 _ Naomi Vogel-Beattie (Genera Apps Lake Oswego, OR 97034 _ Planning Division (ZCA) MS 14 _ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY (DEC) ODOT, REGION 1 _ Brent Curtis (CPA) _ CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _ Development Review Coordinator _ Doria Mateja (ZCA) MS 14 Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section (vacations) - Sr.Cartographer (CPIZCA)us,M1 1900 SW 4th Avenue, Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue, Suite 400 123 NW Flanders Jim Nims, Surveyor (ZCA) MS 15 Portland, OR 97201 Portland, OR 97201-4987 Portland, OR 97209-4037 _ OR. PARKS & REC. DEPT. _ WA.CO.CONSOL. COMM.AGNCY OD-OT, REGION 1 - DISTRICT 2A _ ODOT, RAIL DIVISION STATE HISTORIC Dave Austin (WCCCA) ^e1r (MenuPme Towers) Sam Hunaidi, Assistant District Manager (Notify if ODOT RJR-Hwy. Crossing is Only Access to Land) PRESERVATION OFFICE PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road Dave Lanning, Sr. Crossing Safety Specialist (Notify if Property Has HD Overlay) Beaverton, OR 97007-0375 Portland, OR 97221 555-13"' Street, NE, Suite 3 725 Sumner Street NE, Suite C Salem, OR 97301-4179 Salem, OR 97301 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES _ PORTLAND WESTERN FLR, BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE RJR, OREGON ELECTRIC RJR (Burlington Northern/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Bruce Carswell, President & General Manager 1200 Howard Drive SE Albany, OR 97322-3336 -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) Gerald Backhaus (see Mao forAea CO tan (If Project is Within/, Mile of a 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 _ NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY _ VERIZON _ QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Mike Hieb Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer, Engineering Coord. John Cousineau, OSP Network Lynn Smith, Eng. ROW Mgr. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue 4155 SW Cedar Hills Blvd. 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd, Rm 110 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Portland, OR 97209-3991 Beaverton, OR 97005 Portland, OR 97219 _ TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST. #23J _ BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST. #48 _ COMCAST CABLE CORP. _ COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC. Teri Brady, Administrative Offices Jennifer Garland, Demographics Alex Silantiev ($"Maples AreaG-t) Brian Every (Apps Eof MaNN Of WW) 6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue, B)dg. 12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue Tigard, OR 97223-8039 Beaverton, OR 97006-5152 Beaverton, OR 97008 Tigard, OR 97223-4203 +IF 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:\patty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED' 28-Aug-08) (Also update i.\curpln\setup\labels\annexalions\annexation_utilities and franchises.doc, mailing labels & auto text when updating this documet MAILING / NOTIFICATION RECORDS AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I, Patricia L. Lunsford, being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am a Planning Assistant for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: [0-kdppcopnaze B-(,) IkI 19 NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: PDR2008-00004/THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL (File No./\=c Reference) ❑ AMENDED NOTICE HEARING BODY: HEARING DATE: ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ® Tigard Planning Commission (8/17/2009 & 9/21/2009) ❑ Tigard City Council 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) nown on the attached list(s), marked Exhibit "B", and by reference made a part hereof, on October 2, 2009, and deposited the United States Mail on October 2, 2009, postage prepaid. (Person re ed ce STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ss. City of Tigard 37k- D Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the day of , 20j : 7NOTARY IAL SEAL 1 L TREAT \2'L Gs( BLIC - OREGON ies ON NO. 416777 MY COMS APRIL 25, 2011 NOTARY PURL C OF OREGON My C ommission Expires: qLXs ( 1 William C. Reed PDR2008-00004 PO Box 12564 THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL Portland, OR 97212 (Planning Commission Final Order) William Reed & Lydia Lundberg EXH I B IT~. PO Box 12564 Portland, OR 97212 William C. Reed & Lydia Lundberg 2300 SW 103`d Avenue Portland, OR 97225 Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. Attn: Mark Reed 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd. Portland, OR 97212 Mark Reed 2219 NE 8"' Portland, OR 97212 Jason Hess 2808 NE MLK, Suite C Portland, OR 97212 f OD ~ICf~-?1Di~ b-TI Ve4j4t~ res gasp%aago AI '1JF. 9 Oq i I r~61U~~MgPT CR 2S101BC02100 2S101BC00600 ANNAND PROPERTIES III-H LLC DOUGHERTY, ALICIA 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD #150 12260 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S101BC01800 2S101BC00700 BEAUDOIN, MICHAEL E & GHAFFARI, ZABI & DONNA R GHAFFARI, FARIBA M 12490 SW KNOLL DR 15580 SW SNOWY OWL LN TIGARD, OR 97223 BEAVERTON, OR 97007 2S101BO00400 2S101BC02201 CARASOF, ALEX S & LILIYA V HUNZIKER ONE LLC 12330 SW KNOLL DR 956 WEST POINT RD TIGARD, OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 2S101BC02300 2S101BC02200 CHRIS GILLETT INSURANCE INC HUNZIKER TWO, LLC 19522 SW NAEVEST BY MICHAEL/PAMELA ROACH MGRS TIGARD, OR 97224 956 WEST POINT RD LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 2S101BC01000 2S101BC00201 CLICKENER, ROBERT R & PATRICIA A JOHANSON TRANSPORTATION SERVICE 8485 SW HUNZIKER 5583 E OLIVE AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 FRESNO, CA 93727 2S101BC00900 2S101BC00500 C KENE )BERT R & PATRICIA A KIM, DAE H 8485 HUNZIKER 12300 SW KNOLL DR ARD, 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BC0080 2S101BB00900 CL EN , ROBERT R & PATRICIA A KNAUSS, WAYNE ET AL 8485 HUNZIKER c/o HUMBERSTON, RUSSELL D ARID , 97223 REVOCABLE TRUST PO BOX 4300 BEAVERTON, OR 97076 2S101BC03000 2S101BO00101 COSTA, CLAUDIU & EMILIA KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC 12361 SW KNOLL AVE 12301 SE HWY 212 TIGARD, OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 2S102AA03200 2S" 1BC00200 CRAGHEAD, GARY A JUDY A DKAMAS A GROUP LLC 12205 SW HALL BV 212 TIGARD, OR 97223 , 97015 2S 101BC01600 2S101BO00100 DEFOE, JUDITH A MCGEE KNEZ, JOHN S SR & JEANNE M 12455 SW 68TH AVE 12301 SW HWY 212 PORTLAND, OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 2S101BC02202 2S101BC01200 LEACH, DOUGLAS W TRUST & REID, CHARLES 0 LEACH, SUSAN L TRUST 8445 SW HUNZIKER RD 8430 SW HUNZIKER RD STE 200 TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S102AA00500 2S102AA03301 LEARY, DAVID LYLE & REMEDIOS, DAVID & MARIA & LEARY, KATHLEEN JOAN TAYLOR, HANS & JULIE & 10020 SW JOHNSON ST DITTO, BRAD/SUSAN & ESMAILI, ASG TIGARD, OR 97223 265 N BROOKSHIRE AVE VENTURA, CA 93003 2S101BC01801 2S101BC03300 MILLER, LORI M SAUSE, MARILYN 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD 12419 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BC03100 2S101BC02800 NGUYEN, VUONG P SEVERSON, JAMES A & ROBIN 0 12387 SW KNOLL DR 29404 SW HEATER RD TIGARD, OR 97223 SHERWOOD, OR 97140 2S101BB00801 2S102AA03500 NIKZAD, ABBAS SICKLES, DANIEL 12090 SW HALL BLVD 12437 SW HALL BLVD #8 TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BB01000 2S102AA03300 NIKZAD, ABBAS SKOURTES, MARIANELLY 13787 SW MARCIA DR PO BOX 2327 TIGARD, OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 2S101BC01100 2S101BC01700 NITSOS, BETTY MAXINE STEPHENS, BRYN 8465 SW HUNZIKER RD 12450 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BC01500 2S101BC01900 REED, WILLIAM & TAPIA, OSCAR & LUNDBERG, LYDIA ABARCA, MANUEL SALVADOR SOLIS PO BOX 12564 8335 SW HUNZIKER RD PORTLAND, OR 97212 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101B000301 2S102AA03400 REED, WILLIAM C TIGARD TOWNHOMES INC PO BOX 12564 BY MERRILL & CHARLOTTE HODGES PORTLAND, OR 97212 PO BOX 2907 POULSBO, WA 98370 2S101BC03200 2S101B801500 REID, CHARLES C WALTON CWOR PARK BC 8 LLC 12446 SW 131ST AVE BY TTA/eP ROPE RTYTAX DEPT 325 TIGARD, OR 97223 PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE,AZ 85261 2S 181B01400 WALT CW PARK BC 8 LLC BY TTA/e OPERTYTAX DEPT 325 PO B 49 S, TTSDALE, Z 85261 2S1 1BB01600 WAL NC R PARK BC 8 LLC DEPT BY TT OPERTYTAX 325 PO 4 TTSDAL 85261 Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Sue Rorman Susan Beilke 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci Dayle D. & Evelyn 0. Beach 11285 SW 78th Avenue 11530 SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Diane Baldwin Todd Harding and Blake Hering Jr. 3706 Kinsale Lane SE Norris Beggs & Simpson Olympia, WA 98501 121 SW Morrison, Suite 200 Portland, OR 97204 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 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:\curpln\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 16-Dec-08 Jun. 10. 2009 12:17PM WCR Company No. 0814 P. 1 CITY Oj TIGARD MMMMTY PLANMNG DZDEVVEL PMENT DEPARTMENT 5 SW FALL BOULEVARD RARD, OREGON 97223 PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX t (~Acrn 1'any/P]at7nin_~ ~MAjL; panic ri rd or.pav 7 71Y-27gy REQUEST FOR 500WFOOT PROPERTY OWNER. MA JUNG 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 ADpRESSE FOR ALL PROJECT' PARCELS BELOW, PLEASE BE AWARE THAT ONLY 1 SEA' OF LABELS MLL BE PRQVIDED AT THIS TIME. F4R HOLDING YOUR NEIGHBM, D FETING After submitting your land use application to the City, and the project planner leas reviewed your application for completeness, you will be notified by means of in incompleteness letter to obtain your 2 final sets of labels. YOU ;FiAVBEEN N011FIED BY PLANNING TQ OBTAIN YOUR BELS PLEASE XNDICATE THAT X0 ED 2 SETS OF LABELS. The 2 final sets of labels need to be placed on envelopes (no self-adhesive envelopes please) with first class letter- on the envelopes in the form of postage stamps (n4 metered envelopes and no return address) and resubbmitted to the City for the purpose of p er rovidinnonce to propty owners of the proposed land use application and the decision. The 2 sets o envelopes must beg separate. The person listed below will be called to pick up and pay for the labels when they are ready: NAME, OF CONTACT PERSON: b & r ( c. ( /A d PHONE: NAME OF COMPANY; AUe>,, ` r S FAX 6 - yY -4,r ~ 7 EMAIL: 0 e r J ~V~l ~,l tl e, i ~u.^e5 This request may be erns led, mailed, faxed, or band delivered to the City of Tigard. Please allow a 2-day minimum for processing requests, Upon completion of your request, the contact person listed will be called to pick up their request that will be placed in "Will 9' by the company name (or by the contact person's last name if no company) at %e Planning/Engineering Counter at the Peatut Center. 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 list, plus $2 per sheet for printing the list onto labels (20 addresses per sheet). Then, multiplythe cost print one set of labels by the number of sets requested. - EXAMPLE - - COST FORTHIS MQUEST - 4 sheets of labels x $2/sheet - UX x 2 sets = $16.00 sheer(s) of labels x Wsheet - &x / sets - I sheets of labels x Wsheet for interested parties x2 sets= $ 4.00 sheet(s) of labels x Wsheet for interested parties - sets = GENER ~ TST~= St TOTAL $31.00 e n TOT _$1 Ail 0 41119:. ~Jme 2S1016C01500 REED, WILLIAM LUNDBERG, LYDI A PO BOX 12564 PORTLAND, OR 97212 2S101B000301 REED, WILLIAM C PO BOX 12564 PORTLAND, OR 97212 APPLICANT MATERIALS APPLICATION PRE-APP. HELD BY CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATIO CEIVE e Cary of Tigwd Penrat Center 13125 S WHall Bluff, Tigrzn~4 OR 97223A P R 2 9 L 11 a Phone• 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 CITY OF TIGARD File # PI) P- I-" ortrou 4 Other Case # P tr` 1 r- . L2 Date By 5'veL Receipt# 2CVR'N,5 Fee `119-0) Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition (II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment (TV) t,;;a 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) L N PROPOSED A VI WILL OCCUR s available) !a3(ec~ r Ia39D SW 9A)6LL- Aye/uF -/7f,41ZpP CV-- TAXMAP & AX LOT NOS. TOTAL SI ZONING IFICA ~.7`-r f}CRES Cla3,ol3~ 7ZJr r~gsr~4.cf77 /UOrG~tfuJEST V'CJC/TZiCP.~~ ~/~C•C.P~ G~JC . MAILING ADDRESS/ ICANI'F,) / ~ ~ ~ A air ,v& A( rc. ' H NEN G TI-~6-olJ~ FAX NO. 5C93 PRIMARY CO A ERSON PHONE NO. ' /-~Aec `1~1-57~(o-ofb~ PROPERTY OWNS DEED HOLDER Am t' more t6n one 601cr4 iW C ,moo 4+c0 o~ C ~a c~Fj ' MAILING RESS A a~0 sr,~ lCZ3~ ~ q~~a5 PHONE NO. FAX NO. 5O3 •Z8Z - ~glr, - 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 owners 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 specific) ~~1T1!/~'l G>~ l 5l ~ifr~f/LY CUl3 ifiC.t~ ~ !~F uTl Crfi~E FffCrL! 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. , Ov~We6 Signature Date nei's Signature Date ' Owner's Signature Date , Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date l o ml 0y Applicant Agent/Representative's Signature Date ' Applicant/Agent/Representative s Signature Date 1312 5SV\ I I a I I I t 1 1. 1I~~ 1i,--m l.Illt 4T21 Gp 1,614.4171 Receipl 4: 27200800000000003050 Date: 10/22/2008 lJnc Items: Case No 1 ran Code Description Re\enuc Acc ouut \o A(Inuull Paid 1)1)I:2IIUti-00004 BLAND S~Cu11CCI)1U.111'1,111RCW 1011-Ulltul-4;RUUO 0A90.00 I'I)I~~(1n~-U110U1 (I.RI,I: I - 1 1'1:111nin~, Surc11:1r_c lieu-11000-_};,~i1;11 910.0(1 line Item Total: $7.412.1111 1'av 111eilk: \Iethod Pacer p'ser II) :Acct./Check No. Appro%ad No. 11(m Reccked ~~mount Paid 11_rl.: 1y1 1_NO 1?(; I It )LI)I\W( I.I V, 11i~~t; In I'~r,on 7A12.Uu NARRATIVE t The Village Green at Knoll 1 ' Land Use Application Concept Design Submittal Tigard, OR June 8, 2009 1 ' UN 1 0 2009 YOFTIGAFt_ t i TABLE OF CONTENTS i 1 ' Table of Contents ' Introduction ...........................................................................................................2 Project Design Team ............................................................................................3 Proposal General Description ...............................................................................4 ' Project Summary ..................................................................................................4 Vicinity & Site Information .....................................................................................4 Surrounding Area ...........5 ' Project Description ................................................................................................5 Architecture/Landscaping 6 ' Opportunities and Challenges Analysis ................................................................7 18.350.010 Planned Development ........................................................................8 18.350.020 Process 9 18.350.30 Administrative Provisions .....................................................................9 ' 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements .........................................10 ' 18.390.050 Type III Procedure ............................................................................13 18.350.050 Concept Plan Approval Criteria ........................................................14 ' 18.350.060 Detailed Development Plan Submission Requirements 16 1 1 ' The Village at Knoll Page 1 Narrative Proposal Summary Information ' Application Mark Reed ' Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd ' Portland, OR 97212 971.506.0167 ph 503.249.6837 fax ' reed (&-stdairy.corn Applicant's Represented William C. Reed & Lydia Lundberg 2300 SW 103`d Avenue ' Portland, OR 97225 503.292.5051 breed elitecare.com , Property Address 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Map and Tax Lots Parcel #'s 25101 BC 00301 and 2S101BC 01500 , Zoning R4.5 Residential ' Site Size 2.74 Acres (123,013 SF) , 1 The Village at Knoll Page 2 Narrative ' 1 Project Design Team t Developer Mark Reed North West Ventures Group Traffic Engineering 2401 NE MLK JR BLVD Brian Dunn Portland, OR 97212 Dunn Traffic Engineering 971-506-0156 7505 SE 32nd Ave Portland OR 97202 Architect of record 503-774-2669 Rod Graham GEN Architects inc. Natural Resource Specialist ' 1410 SW Morrison Street, Suite 800 Evren North West INC. Portland, Oregon 97205 P.O Box 80747 Portland OR. 97280 503-452-5561 ' Civil Engineer John Middleton Arborist Z-Tec Engineers Kevin Mackenzie 3737 SE 8th AVE. Overlook Tree Preservation Portland OR. 97202 4018 N Colonial Ave 503-235-8795 Portland OR 97227 ' Landscape Architect Gretchen Vadnais ' 12115 NW old quarry rd Portland OR. 97229 503-646-3517 Date of Report ' April 24, 2009 ' The Village at Knoll Page 3 Narrative Proposal General Description Project Summary Request ' The applicant request PUD for subdivision approval for 15 new lots. Thee lots will ' comprised of 6 single-family homes, 8 (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents. Vicinity & Site Information 1 The immediate area can be currently characterized as low to medium density ' with two single family houses, located on 2.74 acre site with R-4.5 designation. The site is generally located along the east side of SW Knoll, east of SW Hall BLVD and north of SW Hunziker Rd. street no. 12360 & 12390. ' { ` -GARflEfJ PL r' Fr ~ r / '.1.1.11 Cl Existing Property The Village at Knoll Narrative ' Page 4 6ARW~, PL U9 s I 1 r l / - - Existing Property Area Surrounding ' Both commercial and residential areas surround the Village at Knoll development. The north and east sides of the property are abutted by ' commercial developments. The south and west sides of the property are abutted by single family residential dwellings. 1 Project Description The proposed Village at Knoll development will create a 15 lot subdivision plus 1 ' common tract for single family homes, attached single family homes, and a Residential Care Facility (RCF) that will house up to 24 residents along with live ' in staff. The RCF will be the focal point of this of this development meant to encourage and facilitate intergenerational involvement. The project will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the ' community including all single family houses as well as the RCF. The single family homes will be located closest to the street front along SW Knoll ' Drive. The attached single family homes will follow, and the RCF will be located at the point on the property furthest away from the existing street. ' The Village at Knoll Page 5 Narrative ' Architecture/Landscaping The single family homes will be designed with craftsman features including front ' porches, attached garages, colorful designs and exterior accents. The six homes at the top of the hill will have attached garages accessed by an alley creating a ' vibrant street area. There are mature trees on the site that will be retained to create an older community look and feel to the neighborhood. The attached single family homes will also be designed with the same craftsman ' features as the free standing single family homes. The attached homes feature zero lot-line common wall construction with attached garages for each unit. The garages are accessed from a rear alley. The RCF will be designed in the same manner of the houses, similar to the ' existing project currently being constructed on SW Grant Street, and ones that have been operating in Milwaukie (Oatfield Estates) for the past six years. The ' RCF will have 24 suites for elders, with a maximum of 30 total residents within the building. There will be landscaped paths and water features throughout the common tract ' for community access and usage. The common tract will also include visitor parking for the site. ' Statement of Intentions The Village at Knoll has two very distinct components of development, • the ' Residential Care Facility and the Single Family Homes. We will describe the ' intentions of each separately for additional clarification. Residential Care Facility: ' The Owners of the existing property, William Reed and Lydia Lundberg, have spent the past eight years developing a forward thinking concept for the future of ' elder care, Elite Care. Elite Care will be the operating company that will run the facility, and will be in charge of the long term upkeep of the project. Current Elite Care projects include Oatfield Estates, a 72 unit project located at the top of Oatfield Hill in Milwaukie and Fanno Creek, an identical project to the one being proposed located on SW Grant Street in Tigard. As the owners of the existing property will retain ownership and management, ' there is a long term thought process to the development of this project. Shortcuts that might be taken by other development teams in the construction of , the facilities, site improvements, building styles, and landscaping will not be taken to ensure the quality of building and the atmosphere for care. The Village at Knoll Page 6 Narrative ' Please go to www.elitecare.com for more information on the philosophy and management style of Elite Care. Single Family and Attached Single Family Homes: The owners of the property will be developing the site for the 14 lots. The contractor for this project, R&R Energy Resources, is jointly owned by Bill Reed and Billy Lenz. The lots will not be sold out to individual builders, and by maintaining the construction "in house", it will allow for the architectural styles, ' building quality and size to remain constant throughout the project's construction timeline. ' R&R Energy Resources has built approximately 125 homes over the past 5 years including multiple projects for HOST Development (www.hostdevelopment.com), Bluebery Lane (www.blueberrypdx.com), as well as being the contractor for the ' Elite Care building at Fanno Creek in Tigard. Opportunities and Challenges Analysis ' The Design Team conducted an Opportunities and Challenges Analysis of the property in order to frame the context for the panned Development Concept Plan. Challenges • The number one challenge presented by this sit is the slope of this site. o Refer to TOPO layout section. • The site shape and setbacks limit the efficiency of site use. ' • There is a sensitive area buffer boundary at the north east corner of the site. • The Right of way dedication reduces the buildable site area. ' • The proposed private street reduces the buildable site area. • The mitigation of trees for this site will increase project cost. With the ' strong slope of the site it will be impossible to save the trees we otherwise might during excavation. ' The Village at Knoll Page 7 Narrative Opportunities • The sites slope will be used to our advantage by using the grading to slop ' the storm water drainage to a bio swell on the eastern property line. • We will design the Residential Care Facility (RCF) on lot 15 to act as a , retaining wall for the site. Visually from the street level, the RCF will only appear two stories tall. ' • The sensitive area on the north eastern corner will give a great buffer from the Park 217 Business Complex. ' • With having to remove most of the sites existing trees, we will be able to put new landscape trees to encompassing the development and giving a ' great buffer to the adjacent properties. • The challenges of this project can be leveraged to make opportunities on ' this site. The Planned Development objectives for this development include the following. 1 18.350.010 Planned Development , 1. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with ' Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; and 2. To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space ' in the City, alternative building designs, walk able communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict ' adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; and 3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through ' appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; and 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the ' use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, 5. presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; and , 6. To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and ' The Village at Knoll Page 8 Narrative ' 1 7. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural ' environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. (Ord. 06-16) ' 18.350.020 Process A. Applicable in all zones. The planned development designation is an overlay ' zone applicable to all zones. An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may ' apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. ' B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development concept plan; ' 2. The approval of the detailed development plan; and 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. C. Decision-making process. ' 1. The concept plan shall be processed by means of a Type Ill-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.350.050. ' 2. The detailed development plan shall be reviewed by a means of a Type 111-PC procedure, as governed by 18.390.050, to ensure that it is substantially in compliance with the approved concept plan. 3. The planned development overlay zone will be applied concurrently with the approval of the detailed plan. 4. Applicants may choose to submit the concept plan and detailed plan for ' concurrent review subject to meeting all of the approval criteria for each approval. All applicants are advised that the purpose of separating these applications is to provide them clear direction in developing the detailed ' plans. Rejection of the concept plan will result in a corresponding rejection of the detailed development plan and overlay zone. ' Response: The applicant has the right under section 18.350.020.. to separate review and approval of the Concept Plan from the review and approval of the Detailed Plan. Therefore this application is limited to the Concept Plan. The ' Detailed Plan will be submitted at some time in the future after the Concept Plan is approved, and within the 1.5 year time limitation for the Concept Plan is validity. All applicable criteria of these sections are met. The Village at Knoll Page 9 Narrative 18.350.30 Administrative Provisions A. Time limit on filing of detailed development plan. The concept plan ' approval expires after 1-1/2 years unless an application for detailed development plan and, if applicable, a preliminary plat approval or request for extension is filed. Action on the detailed development plan shall be taken by the Planning Commission by means of a Type 111-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria in 18.350.070. ' 8. Zoning map designation. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Commission. The zoning map shall be ' amended to indicate the approved planned development designation for the subject development site. The approval of the planned development ' overlay zone shall not expire. C. Extension. The Director shall, upon written request by the applicant and payment of the required fee, grant an extension of the approval period not ' to exceed one year provided that: D. Phased development. The Commission shall approve a time schedule for developing a site in phases, but in no case shall the total time period for all , phases be greater than seven years without reapplying for conceptual development plan review. Response: The applicant acknowledges the time frame specified in this section. ' It is in the applicant's intent to comply. An extension is not anticipated, but if market conditions delay the development schedule, the applicant will file for an ' extension. The applicant proposes a phased development schedule which is addressed in the following section. The proposal complies with this section of the code. ' 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an , application containing all of the general information required for a Type lll- PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional ' information required by 18.350.040.8. In addition, the applicant shall submit the following: 8. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned ' development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant. This statement should include: 1. A description of the character of the proposed development and the ' rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant, 2. An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site ' planning principles are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed, The Village at Knoll Page Narrative ' 10 3. An explanation of how the proposal relates to the purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010; and 4. An explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. ' C. A general development schedule indicating the approximate dates when construction of the planned development and its various phases are expected to be initiated and completed. ' D. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the planned development. In the case where a residential subdivision is proposed, the statement shall include the ' applicant's intentions whether the applicant will build the homes, or sell the lots to other builders. 1. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in Subsection A above, the concept plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information, the detailed content of which can be obtained from the Director. 2. Existing site conditions, 3. A site concept including the types of proposed land uses and structures, including housing types, and their general arrangement on the site; 4. A grading concept, 5. A landscape concept indicating a percentage range for the amount ' of proposed open space and landscaping, and general location and types of proposed open space(s); 6. Parking concept; t 7. A sign concept; 8. A streets and utility concept; and 9. Structure setback and development standards concept, including ' the proposed residential density target if applicable. 10. Allowable uses E. In residential zones. In all residential zones, an applicant with a planned ' development approval may develop the site to contain a mixture of uses subject to the density provisions of the underlying zone and the density ' bonus provisions of 18.350.070.A.3.c. The following uses are allowed with planned development approval: a. All uses allowed outright in the underlying zoning district; b. Single-family detached and attached residential units; c. Duplex residential units; d. Multi-family residential units; e. Manufactured homes; f. Accessory services and commercial uses directly serving the planned development only and which are customary or associated ' with, but clearly incidental to the uses permitted in the zone, such as persona services, preschool or daycare, and retail uses less than 5, 000 square feet in sum total, ' g. Community building; The Village at Knoll Page Narrative 11 ' h. Indoor recreation facility, athletic club, fitness center, racquetball court, swimming pool, tennis court or similar use; ' i. Outdoor recreation facility, golf course, golf driving range, swimming pool, tennis court, or similar use; and f Recreational vehicle storage area. , Response: The applicant has submitted an application containing all of the information required for Type III-PC procedure, as governed by section ' 18.390.050 listed above. The additional information required by 18.350.406 is also included in the application packet. The Planning Objectives for this project were listed previously on page These ' objectives are based on the Opportunities and Challenges Analysis, and are designed to address the purpose of the planned development provisions. The ' character and architectural style of the proposed development are framed under the architectural style, Statement of Intent, Proposed General Description, Planning Objectives, and Opportunities and Challenges. This analysis also ' addresses considerations mad relative to the Planning Commissioner's toolbox. The applicant intends on actively pursuing financing for the development based ' on the approval of the Concept Plan. It is anticipated that lots 1-14 will be developed and sold in sequence depending on the market conditions on the completion of the development. The applicant will be operating the RCF on lot , 15. The general development schedule is planned to proceed on three phases, with ' the Detailed Plan being the driven by triggering factors as outlined below. It is the applicant's intent to proceed with the detailed planning and site construction as expeditiously as possible, given current weak market conditions. ' The following phases are dependent on the market conditions, bank financing, ' availability of contractors, and saturation of housing market. Phase 1: Site Development , Start Date: March 1, 2010 End Date: July 1, 2010 ' The site development portion of this project will include the following items: • Demolition/Deconstruction of existing buildings at 12360 and 12390 ' SW Knoll Drive • Site Work including removal of any trees as specified by landscape ' plan • Site Work including grading of lot • Installation of all utilities including ' The Village at Knoll Page Narrative ' 12 1 o Storm water Facilities o Sanitary Sewer Facilities o Water Facilities • Installation and final grading of all roadways (not alleys) ' • Installation of site sidewalks adjacent to roadways (not interior side abutting homes) ' Phase 2: Construction of Residential Care Facility Start Date: May 1, 2010 End Date: August 1, 2011 ' The construction of the RCF portion of this project will include the following items: • Construction of the general building • Site Work for Lot 15 including parking area and re-paving of existing access to Park 217 ' • Reclamation and final planting of Natural Resource Area • Planting and final landscaping of Lot 15 and all areas NE of the ' lower roadway ' Phase 3: Construction of Single Family Homes Start Date: July 1, 2010 End Date: December 31, 2011 ' The construction of the single family homes portion of this project will include the following items: ' • Construction of the single family and attached single family homes • Final Site Work for Lots 1 through 14 including remaining pathways, ' alleys and sidewalks • Final landscaping and site work for Lots 1-14 and Common Tract A ' The applicant complies with section 18.350.040 of the code. 18.390.050 Type III Procedure 1 A. Pre-application conference. A pre-application conference is required for all ' Type 111 actions. 8. Application requirements. ' 1. Application forms. Type 111 applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director as provided by Section 18.390.080 E1; t The Village at Knoll Page Narrative 13 2. Content. T ' ype 111 applications shall. a. Include the information requested on the application form; ' b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; ' d. Include two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all persons who are property owners of record as specified in Section 18.390.050C. The records of the Washington County Department ' of Assessment and Taxation shall be the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the , notice list, e. Include an impact study. 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 requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication ' Response: The application packet includes the required form, with fees, the Compliance Narrative, plus various plan sheets, which provide the required ' information. Much of the specific criteria will be addressed in the application for the Detailed Development Plan approval. The general code compliance relative to site development criteria are summarized in the Concept Plan narrative. The ' applicant has provided the pre -addressed and pre-stamped mailing envelopes for public notice. The required Impact Study is included in the Impact Study section of the application. The applicant complies with all submittal requirements. , 18.350.050 Concept Plan Approval Criteria ' 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for ' areas of open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. ' 2. The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management. , The Village at Knoll Page Narrative ' 14 1 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into ' the existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space buffers. 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridership, such methods may include separated parking bays, off street ' walking paths, shorter pedestrian routes than vehicular routes, linkages to or other provisions for bus stops, etc. 5. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general ' arrangement on site. In the case of projects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a 1 significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing ' additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. (Ord. 06-16) ' Response: The applicant has provided a Concept Plan, which includes specific designation on the map for area of open space. The Concept Plan and this ' compliance narrative provide descriptions of the intended level of use for each sub-area, and how they relate to other proposed uses on the site. The Concept Plan specifically protects and enhances natural features of the site, particularly ' the Natural Resource Area on the northeastern property line. The Concept Plan identifies areas of the site where significant natural resources have been delineated. The method for maximizing protection, preservation, and enhancement are outline within this compliance narrative and visually displayed on the various plan. The concept Plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the ' existing neighborhood, primarily through compatible street layout and architectural style. The plan also provides a landscape transition between the abutting residential neighborhood and the project. Buffering and screening details ' will also be provided along adjacent properties. As detailed on the landscape plan ' The concept plan identifies methods of promoting walking paths around the site and including separate parking bays, bicycle parking, and off street walking paths. ' The Village at Knoll Page Narrative 15 The Concept Plan identifies the proposed uses and their general arrangement on the site. ' The Concept Plan demonstrates that development of the property pursuant to the plan will result in a development that has significant advantage in that it provides ' development consistent with the general purpose of the R 4.5 Zoning. The Plan protects and enhances the highest value natural features of the site. The Plan provides additional amenities and pedestrian oriented feature that enhance the ' development project and the neighborhood generally. Finding: Based on the above finding, the application complies with the Concept , Plan Approval Criteria. 18.350.060 Detailed Development Plan Submission Requirements A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application ' containing all of the general information required for a Type 111-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, the additional information required by ' 18.350.040.8 and the approval criteria under 13.350.070. c. Chapter 18.715, Density Computation and Limitations. Unless authorized ' below, density shall be governed by the density established in the underlying zoning district, using the minimum lot size established for that district. Where a project site encompasses more than one underlying zoning district, density shall ' be aggregated for each district, and may be allocated anywhere within the project site, as deemed appropriate by the commission. The Commission may further authorize a density bonus not to exceed 10% as an ' incentive to increase or enhance open space, architectural character and/or site variation incorporated into the development. These factors must make a ' substantial contribution to objectives of the planned development. The degree of distinctiveness and the desirability of variation achieved shall govern the amount of density increase which the Commission may approve according to the ' following: (1) A 1 % bonus for each 5% of the gross site area set aside in open space, up to ' a maximum of 5%, is allowed for the provision of active use recreational open space, exclusive of areas contained in floodplain, steep slopes, drainage ways, or wetlands that would otherwise be precluded from development; ' (2) Up to a maximum of 5% is allowed for the development of pedestrian entities, Streetscape development, recreation areas, plazas, or other items from the , Planning Commission's Toolbox." The Village at Knoll Page Narrative ' 16 ' o Response: The applicant will be asking for a 5% density bonus under Chapter 18.715 section (1) for pedestrian amenities. In tracked "A" in the open space between the four attached single family houses the applicant plans on building a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill for the community to use as a recreational area. The density calculation with the density bonus is reflected on the site plan on sheet CO. 1. ' Finding: The applicant will be providing pedestrian amenities and recreational areas that meet the code requirements for density bonus. 1 1 ' The Village at Knoll Page Narrative 17 IMPACT S~DY ' Impact Study ' "The Village at Knoll" 1 Purpose ' The purpose of this impact study is to review existing public facilities and address any proposed modifications that will help mitigate the proportionate project impacts that will ' likely occur as a result of development. Some of the necessary facilities to serve this site are currently exist in the site general ' area near the intersections of SW Knoll Drive and SW Hall Blvd. Additional needed services will be provided by new construction within the site. The transportation, storm water, sanitary, water and private utility system are or will be available and are adequate in the immediate vicinity of the site. ' Transportation System A new private local street will serve as the subdivision's access. When completed, this street will provide direct access to The Village at Knoll subdivision from SW Knoll Drive. The new private street will be one-way ingress and one-way egress access. A current driveway, located at the north east corner of the property will provide additional access to the assisted living facility through the Park 217 business park. The private street will be constructed as illustrated on the plans with 12' of pavement, rolled curbs, and where required, 5' sidewalks. There will be public parking on the side of the road as well as public parking spots. The street is looped to provide fire/ life/safety vehicle access. Limited improvements on SW Knoll will also be constructed to City of Tigard standards. The driveway that allows access to the assisted living facility will provide additional access points for fire and emergency vehicles. ' Drainage Systems Storm drainage and storm water will be detained by piped system within the private ' street. The design and size of the pipe shall be coordinated to accommodate the detention needs of this subdivision. Storm water quality will be provided with a filtration swale conveying the drainage to SW Knoll. A connection with the public system will be ' constructed in compliance with ODOT standards. The assisted living facility roof storm water will be routed to an internal building roof water collection and reuse system as a part of the LEED certification of this building. A foundation drain connection will also be used. Connection with the public system will be constructed in compliance with ODOT standards. i Sanitary Sewer Systems ' Sanitary sewer service will be provided to all lots by a newly installed line, which runs ' through the private street. Lateral connections shall be made to each residential lot. A Connection from this loop will connect into the existing sanitary sewer located within SW Knoll Drive. The Assisted Living Facility located on Lot 15 will have a private gravity SS lateral service that will discharge through the Park 217 business complex. Water Systems Domestic water service will be provided to all lots by individual service connection to a newly installed water line in the new public street, which is proposed to connect with an ' existing line in SW Knoll Drive. Noise Impacts ' No negative noise impacts are anticipated as a result of this subdivision. Noise levels generated would be typical of a small single-family neighborhood. No negative noise ' impact is anticipated as a result to the assisted living facility located adjacent to two commercial facilities. Parks System This project will have public parking and off road parking indicated in the plan, and will ' meet the City of Tigard standards. 1 t CWS SERVICE ~ PRO-- VIDER LETTER tleariWafer Services Our commitment is clear. CWS File Number Service Provider Letter 05-002606 Lis form and the attached conditions will serve as your Service Provider Letter in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (R&O 07-20). trisdiction: Washington County Review Type: Tier 1 Analysis ste Address 12360 SW Knoll DR SPL Issue Date: February 13, 2008 ocation: Tigard, OR 97223 SPL Expiration Date: February 12, 2010 ~plicant Information: Owner Information: me Name REED, WILLIAM & LUNDBERG, LYDIA Company LILLY, LILY Company [dress 12390 SW KNOLL DR Address PORTLAND OR 97212 TIGARD OR 97223 Phone/Fax Phone/Fax mail: E-mail: Tax lot ID Development Activity 2S101 BC- 00301, 01500 Residential Subdivision ' Pre-Development Site Conditions: Post Development Site Conditions: Sensitive Area Present: On-Site FRI Off-Site Sensitive Area Present: 1A 1 On-Site Off-Site getated Corridor Width: 50 Feet Vegetated Corridor Width: Variable: 36 to 53 Feet getated Corridor Condition: Degraded hancement of Remaining All On-Site VC Rgetated Corridor Required: ❑X Square Footage to be enhanced: (--3,413) Encroachments into Pre-Development Vegetated Corridor: Ipe and location of Encroachment: Square Footage: t 562 Mitigation Requirements: Cite /Location Sq. Ft./Ratio/Cost 265/1:1 Payment to Provide 297/1:1/$2,500 Conditions Attached X Development Figures Attached (2) ❑ Planting Plan Attached ❑ Geotech Report Required is Service Provider Letter does NOT eliminate the need to evaluate and protect water quality Insitive areas if they are subsequently discovered on your property. Page 1 of 5 CWS File Number 05-002606 In order to comply with Clean Water Services 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 Quality, pet wastes, dumping of materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted within the sensitive area or Vegetated Corridor which may negatively impact water quality, ' except those allowed in R&O 07-20, Chapter 3. 2. Prior 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 R&O 07-20, Section 3.06.1 and per approved plans. 3. Prior to any activity within the sensitive area, the applicant shall gain authorization for the ' project from the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL) and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The applicant shall provide Clean Water Services or its designee (appropriate city) with copies of all DSL and USACE project authorization permits. No impacts currently proposed. ' 4. 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. 5. Appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) for Erosion Control, in accordance with Clean ' Water Services' Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual, shall be used prior to, during, and following earth disturbing activities. 6. Prior to construction, a Stormwater Connection Permit from Clean Water Services or its ' designee is required pursuant to Ordinance 27, Section 4.13. 7. Activities located within the 100-year floodplain shall comply with R&O 07-20, Section 5.10. 8. Removal of native, woody vegetation shall be limited to the greatest extent practicable. 9. Should final development plans differ significantly from those submitted for review by Clean Water Services, the applicant shall provide updated drawings, and if necessary, obtain a ' revised Service Provider Letter. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 10. 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, except in areas of approved encroachments (See CWS Approved SPL Attachments for further details). ' 11. Vegetated Corridor mitigation in the form of Payment to Provide has been authorized for 297 , square feet of encroachments related to the above referenced project in accordance with R&O 07-20, Section 3.08.3. Payment of the $2,500 Payment to Provide mitigation fee shall be ' accepted by Clean Water Services prior to issuance of any utility, site development or construction permits. Clean Water Services shall issue a confirmation of payment letter following receipt of the funds. 12. For Vegetated Corridors up to 50 feet wide, the applicant shall enhance the entire Vegetated ' Corridor to meet or exceed good corridor condition as defined in R&O 07-20, Section 3.14.2, Table 3-3. ' 13. Enhancement/restoration of the Vegetated Corridor shall be provided in accordance with R&O 07-20, Appendix A. 14. 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&0 07-20, Appendix A). i Page 2 of 5 CWS File Number 05-002606 15. 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. ' 16. Prior to any site clearing, grading or construction, the applicant shall provide Clean Water Services with the required Vegetated Corridor enhancement/restoration plan in compliance with R&O 07-20. ' 17. Maintenance and monitoring requirements shall comply with R&O 07-20, Section 2.11.2. If at any time during the warranty period the landscaping falls below the 80% survival level, the owner shall reinstall all deficient planting at the next appropriate planting opportunity and the t two year maintenance period shall begin again from the date of replanting. 18. Performance assurances for the Vegetated Corridor shall comply with R&O 07-20, Section 2.06.2, Table 2-1 and Section 2.10, Table 2-2. ' 19. For any developments which create multiple parcels or lots intended for separate ownership, Clean Water Services may require that the sensitive area and Vegetated Corridor be contained in a separate tract and subject to a "STORM SEWER, SURFACE WATER, DRAINAGE AND ' DETENTION EASEMENT OVER ITS ENTIRETY" to be granted to the City or Clean Water Services. 20. The water quality swale and detention pond shall be planted with Clean Water Services ' approvgd native species, and designed to blend into the natural surroundings. CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED ON FINAL PLANS ' 21. Final construction plans shall include landscape plans. Plans shall include in the details a description of the methods for 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. Tags to remain on plant material after planting for monitoring purposes. 22. 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). 23. 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. ' 24. 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 and signage details to be included on final construction ' plans. ' This Service Provider Letter is not valid unless CWS-approved site plan is attached. Please call (503)681-3613 with any questions. 1 ' Julie Wirth Environmental Plan Review Attachments ( 2 ) ?age 3 of 5 a LEGEND: 0 196.53 S.F. REMOVE EXISTING A.C. ° IN NEW TRACT B . o APPROXIMATE PROPOSED BUILDING LOCATIONS ADDITIONAL 68 SF BUFFER DEDICATION 3 m APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES ° Z 3,677.49 S.F. (TRACT B) - m °o APPROXIMATE SENSATIVE AREA BUFFER BOUNDARIES N I j O O APPROXIMATE TREE LOCATIONS 13 ° r~ r' - _ _ 'n APPROXIMATE TREE LOCATIONS TO BE REMOVED. z m - _ °L.... m m ) ` J_ N r _ ~vlGroacL M2n~ ► 5(a 2. S PERVIOUSDRIVEWAY x'A' 4, taA -r on-sttf - 21 5 S f 562 S.F. OT 15 ENCRO M F. is J / NOTES: 1. BASE MAP DEVELOPED FROM AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH MAP DATED 2006, ENW AND TURNSTONE ENVIRONMETNAL FIELD NOTES, AND Z-TECH ENGINEERS PRELIMINARY GRADING AND EROSION 3 0 ofi. i/ a CONTROL PLAN (SHEET Cl). P, _ 16S.F.(FXISTING RNEWAY 2 562 SF TOTAL ENCROACHMENT TO BE MITIATED BY PTP (.297SF), N ° o . s~ a:. / t°'- IN BUFFER AREA TO~EMNN) BUFFER AVERAGING (68 SF), ONSITE MITIGATION (191R SF). TOP ra 3 MITIGATION WITH PTP 5~j-eF z UNCURBED PERVIOUS PAVEMENT wl- LJS C' r's.. f S- O Z!n O Co ti Approved Clean WateMrvices By d,,j Date APPROXIMATE SCALE 0 75 150 FEET T OR NWEST ~IV RINN w......r~ PO BOX 047, PORTLAND, OREGON 97280-1747 N (503)452-5561 Fax(503)452-7669 FIGURE 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH NATURAI f RESOURCE AREAS/BUFFERS 'A 12360 SW KNOLL ROAD 8G47tkC•q TIGARD, OREGON 4 LEGEND: b GWS E12 US - Dozbo o ~ APPROXIMATE PROPOSED BUILDING LOCATIONS Approved Clean Water Services zm rextlu'YAnMi-fwl F~~ R'e'u,t ~ APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES By JO Date 2-13 - ~ S o z r r \ i APPROXIMATE SENSATIVE AREA BUFFER BOUNDARIES 5PL /4{~ac~~~.+ 2~ 2- 0 0 196.53 S.F. REMOVE EXISTING A.C. APPROXIMATE TREE LOCATIONS Of w CL w IN NEW TRACT B a 3 APPROXIMATE TREE LOCATIONS TO BE REMOVED z m o ADDITIONAL 68 SFBUFFERDEDICATION_Mi}i1a~ie1.1 > o ° - 562 S.F. (LOT 15 3,677.49 S.F. (RtACT B) w .ARE217BUSINESS CENTER ENCROACHMENT) - v w PHASE I 846 S.F. (EXISTING DRIVEWAY IN BUFFER AREA TO REMAIN) NOTES: m G o \ ° - 1. BASE MAP DEVELOPED FROM AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH MAP S80-2 52411 #10 DATED 2006, ENW AND TURNSTONE ENVIRONMETNAL FIELD NOTES, m:~' Lz6•A99 11 a<rl #8 u NEW PERVIOUS DRIVEWAY AND Z-TECH ENGINEERS PRELIMINARY GRADING AND EROSION zo 0)Ipllb'I9Q WA C BEARING CONTROL PLAN (SHEET C1). a 3roAR oa9ASn M KE DO NOT IS RB 2. 562 SF TOTAL ENCROACHMENT TO BE MI-RATED BY PTP (21i-SF o ¢ ff9 16, ASti BUFFER AVERAGING (68 SF), ONSITE MITIGATION ((97 SF-/'- -TOI #7 #Q. MITIGATION WITH PTP SIo2~~ 5 arzs era MIR Bare % &2 p #91 q / a t T ASH I #1 4- PL #85 - 45q:/.b.1✓/1., n IV 15 #84 15 ai 1 •';`q, ~ + APPROXIMATE SCALE 1~'A ~~'14'5.10•PL 0 30 60 FEET #51 #~.7 \ 5 IrPL w as ,A #83 / us EVR[NNfi NW h CF1 ..c ..,..n .....R. .....u.a.. TRACTA 7-CH 64 L 10 ~W W PO BOX 80747, .PORTLAND, OREGON 97280-17, #79 P7.C. ' 10, .'o ~ NCURBED N (503)452-5561 Faz(503)452-7669 <`.s•ParoAR 15 T#S•8L0 P' jr PERVIOUS PAVEMENT FIGURE4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH NATUR, L ' RESOURCE AREAS/BUFFERS (DETAIL) yl•c.,. •,16 ~`g 12360 SW KNOLL ROAD TIGARD, OREGON UP~pE !'ACAS ID S pDNCEi'T pLP'N Gretchen Vadnais ' landscape architects, l.l.c. January 12, 2009 1 Derrick Aragon NW Ventures, Inc. 2401 NE MLK Boulevard 1 Portland, OR 97212 RE: PUD open space concept plan ' A concept plan (Sheet Ll, attached) has been prepared depicting the location of all proposed open space and landscape areas. ' There are (4) pertinent code requirements that need to be addressed 12115 nw old quarry rd for the PUD submittal. They include: portland, oregon ' 97229 • Minimum 48 square feet of outdoor private area (patio, terrace, or porch) for each ground-level residential dwelling unit, as ' per code section 18.350.070.4.e. The landscape plan will address this further when the detailed ' development plan is prepared. Architectural floor plans have not been finalized, but it is assumed that each of the residential units (#1- 14) will have some sort of patio or porch that fulfills this requirement. Planting will be added for screening as necessary to ensure privacy during use. • Minimum 300 square feet of shared usable outdoor recreation area for each three bedroom unit, as per code section 18.350.070.4.f. To meet this requirement, a large, contiguous open space (4,200 square feet) has been created in the center of the project between units #10-11. This is a hillside that will be replanted as a forested slope with an emphasis on native plant species.. The shared recreation area ' will be developed as a passive park facility, and may include picnic tables, benches, a small covered gazebo and walking paths. Due to its "central location, it will be visible from a number of units and the adjacent streets (to meet crime prevention and safety requirements). 503/646-3517 fax/288-9343 • Minimum 20 percent of the site (exclusive of buffers and minimal use open space ' facilities) shall be landscaped, as per code section 18.350.070.4.h. New landscape areas have been shown throughout the site. These include both of the ' improved open space facilities around the ornamental stormwater features, planting along the Knoll Drive frontage, additional screening along the south and west property lines, and foundation planting around the assisted living facility (lot #15). The total ' amount of landscape area provided is 24,706 square feet (or 20.02 percent). Landscape areas have been minimized on private lots, to allow owner flexibility in planting individual yards (although nearly all lots contain new trees required for mitigation). ' This also concentrates the majority of landscaping in common tracts that can be easily accessed and maintained by a Home Owner's Association. However, lots facing the private street frontage and lots adjacent to open spaces have designated landscape areas to , increase curb appeal and provide some screening from shared outdoor recreation areas. • Minimum 20 percent of the gross site area shall be designated as shared open , space facilities, as per code section 18.350.070.4.m. The gross site area (prior to dedication of SW Knoll Drive) is 123,425 square feet. Of ' this, 20 percent (or 24,685 square feet) is required in shared open space facilities. This is in addition to shared recreation facilities required for each unit. Up to 75 percent of the , shared open spaces can be satisfied through "minimal use facilities," which includes required buffering and screening, restoration planting in the Clean Water Services vegetated corridor, and areas with difficult access, such as steep slopes located in the SE ' corner of the property. With the 75 percent restriction, 18,514 square feet of "minimal use facilities" are required (18,516 square feet designated). The minimal use facilities have been located to provide maximum protection for existing natural resources being ' preserved, such as the vegetated corridor and trees along the north property line. The remaining 25 percent of shared open space facilities (6,171 square feet required; ' 6,288 square feet provided) are designated in two "passive use facilities" near the front of the project. These tracts are dominated by ornamental stormwater ponds that will utilize runoff from adjacent roofs before entering the piped stormwater system. Benches and pathways will be incorporated into these areas for passive recreation opportunities. Final planting schemes for each of the above requirements will be pursued in a detailed ' development plan once approval for the PUD concept plan has been obtained. Sincerely, ' Kathleen Baughman, partner ' Gretchen Vadnais Landscape Architects, L.L.C. ' Gretchen Vadnais landscape architects, l.l.c. ' September 17, 2008 ' Derrick Aragon NW Ventures, Inc. 2401 NE MLK Boulevard ' Portland, OR 97212 RE: description of landscaping for Knoll Drive property The landscape design for the Knoll Drive property responds to a number of planting requirements, as defined by both the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services. These requirements include: street trees, CWS planting requirements, tree mitigation planting, and buffer/screening requirements along the north and east property lines. Street trees are required along both public and private streets in this 12115 nw old quarry rd development. The landscape plan includes a variety of deciduous trees portland, oregon along the road frontages. Flowering varieties include Hawthorn, Crabapple, 97229 and Mountain Ash. Zelkova trees are used adjacent to the parking court and along Knoll Drive where there is space for a larger canopy. In areas where buildings are located in close proximity to the internal drives, a ' narrow, columnar Flowering Cherry has been specified. There are specific planting requirements in both the stormwater facility and vegetated corridor to meet Clean Water Services guidelines. This planting, as depicted on Sheet L2 of the set, has been design to meet minimum landscape requirements as defined in Appendix A of the Design and Construction Standards (R&O 07-20). For stormwater facilities, this includes herbaceous plugs of wetland grasses below the high water line in addition to shrubs planted an average of 5 feet on center in the remainder of the ' facility. A vegetated corridor (existing condition degraded) is located in the NE corner of the property. It is being restored to "good" condition through the planting of trees 10 feet on center and shrubs 5 feet on center. A ' grass /wildflower seed mix will be applied as a ground cover after planting. In all Clean Water Services areas, native plants have been specified to reflect historic plant communities. Tree mitigation is required due to a significant number of existing trees being removed for construction conflicts. Of the significant existing trees on the site, 34 percent are being retained in the development. The removed ' trees will be mitigated at a 2/3 ratio in accordance with City of Tigard requirements (or 258 mitigation inches, as shown on Sheet L1 of the plans). The result is the planting of (129) new 2" caliper trees throughout the ' development. These trees are a diverse mix of shade trees, flowering accent trees and conifers that will frame the buildings, provide pedestrian scale 503/646-3517 fax/288-9343 and add seasonal interest to the project. Riparian species such as Birch, Vine Maple and , Black Tupelo have been used as accents around the entry pond feature adjacent to Knoll Drive. ' Finally, the north and east property lines are required to be planted as Type "C" and Type "D" buffers, respectively. For the north property line (281 feet long), nine trees are , required, along with a continuous 4' tall hedge and (57) 1-gallon shrubs. Eight existing trees are being retained along the north property line, so only one additional tree was required to be planted in this buffer. In contrast, the east property line is 402 feet in ' length and requires the planting of (13) trees, a continuous 6' tall hedge and (161) shrubs. Three trees exist along the east property line, therefore an additional (10) trees have been planted along the east property line to meet buffer requirements. A combination of Oregon Grape, Parney Cotoneaster and Meserve Holly has been used ' to meet the hedge requirements along the property lines. All three shrubs are low maintenance, evergreen varieties that provide good wildlife habitat. Where the ' proposed driveway is located in close proximity to the property line (NE corner of project), an Arborvitae hedge has been shown instead. A variety of native shrubs and groundcovers are specified to meet the remaining planting requirements. Sincerely, Kathleen Baughman, partner Gretchen Vadnais Landscape Architects, L.L.C. 1 3,506 sf 3,877 sf. GmO- p.d.W, 1-d-pe architect,, LLc silte 218 . _ paUVd,m 9h3t CG ,r O It feL 5018893M IBJ.'. - - - / / i fat 50.81E8.931i A i ~w sp Aa / 1 U r xB.9 9 a ooe voo~ `mow 18 ' ti " ~sc Oa sn~ON ' a / ;2=: ` t ~ / ` 9PE ARC TOTAL GROSS SITE AREA - 123,425 sf I I t _ 18,516 sf (18,514 sf required) minimal use facility 5 4,200 sf 6,288 sf (6,171 sf required) o } Y / ' passive use facility `E.; \ ` to 24,804 sf (20.10 percent) in m g - shared open space facilities E-y vv w~wt 124,685 sf/20 percent required) \w7 i, 0 sf ~i ~a W 12 5,28 4,200 sf (4,200 sf required) v~ vvti I„ - shared outdoor recreation areas \ ~ r! - - - (14 units x 300 sf per unit) , 11,333 sf z a o v I 24 706 sf (20.02 percent) of L _ 1'¢ new landscape area provided s _ L (24,685 sf/20 percent required) I _ 3 i - - _ -r. Ks ~b, e~ , L1 ' PUD OPEN SPACE CONCEPT PLAN a m ot: 6 sheets °"W KNOLL DRIVE r _ ay 192 ~ 3 rv x 19d ~ e I 1 ti iy I S ■ / ■ I I ~ C" r i °1 ■ l I J~ I ~4 9-1` - ~y ti94 N 4 / 1\ I)1 t rf`r _1 ~I ( tea, 166 ^ S rsz • aCyC rs.eTOR~4arq=« ~ ~ ~ ~ID~ I.. • ~6d ~•n ~LLt V \ g y I, I ~~~IH HHEjI~-i~-~■~~! HitCla~_aa Iald toi a~xnmks al It~~~~~¢lasspel , _ Q4- ~I. sG I a iaaF YBZ ■ p a aCY ~S. NI' - L■lf■■ . li ~~f i~~eiiff€i iil@@Piii II I ~ ~ ~ ~~~r 'rm'' ~~'§!]l~~~l4ll~'lll4~~14i~~34~,~4` l $;IIf { 1 ~ I i . 1„• ~ ~ ~ I Iii III '~i1660.'nddfll~nlE iiilfl l al ll!ilei ~1 3 5 rl I ' :I If a;12€~~ ~t~ 9liti rri. 91dI' i I I 3. t t7~c jj~ _!Li ITT: [1-1-1 ~a; g~~s gx alets* laa IF ~a~~~yw~?(YpS+rTyfzbla a .7;6 n ._In I• " R A F l gz Y R3R8 ~t ss e $ 13 $e R I I I 1 I it Ij7]`i9Is t LII•IllI11~ files 1114 h@1g a ' F V r . ~r q p q + F Ncx f F N w» 4. Ise le It- H~ ~~~~~~~qn~• ~ ~c ~ ~ ~~~H g 7 C~q. p'I lilll i~ : $q 48n~s ,'C ago! ~ ~g m ~ ~ fl~ QL R R6■~ ~ a~~ ~7 g91i'ti li i dN & 4g $ B. t `s 9 k~4P. 16`~7a7■ k z Qq R' R ~4 g :F n e gg~Rne§~ g¢a aid Sq ¢Rgq ~a z lq i'afd {I n75 Ii lf'9 '~71aIih 13ilili ggHF Ig 3 ~9,.ailii991, H 4 a9~gax~gp Ra g~,~A• n3 g~ R ~dH~R O a'~3~p~7~~~~iSt~7U-7"~~~~3p ,l llp~~t~'i55~~~03:3~1~911~R~0~139'3116u~ ~ ~ a ■ s~e4c 3n SA $ H ~ ~g n R }~•a~ :-i +'I r'ri '-r. a uR H a sg5 g g e" is It1 I I E ®~_.1.a I4.[11•~I4E Hi ;;99q$'ggl~ f}gg E 1 ■ gdg e _sH .~Cce E R HR YHHS_ Iva 9~5.1!8~dI~J7;ii6illHHi8ii~ii CR" S H" R RR R s P_ P_ 1 .:_U KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY - for- R < 'a r tigazd, osegon nw ventures group a "-g e n N 2008 ne mIN it blvd suite qp $ R portland, oregon 97212 IeL 971.506.0156 1T 6 landscape plan ecr 1 1 From merxa , , 1 AadarJaer ewro9a Rose rvikev _ - It - !t ) G. Vadmb STORMWATER POND LEGEND VEGETATED CORRIDOR LEGEND LLcdscepe architects, wre - 2 . ~ Ro lEe~e n R A.\ n n - naar..ca IuewrnH a,,.m eawmin IaGSmh-d ey a °J f I , _ s+A.fl4 cwo rI~1tS . Ey eMb rw.m T9ff9 41Sn V . rh . 3/ see. wdh mD a. n M 1 9 trr m+v 37 rm swam PN~ rma>„d, w snsz i a µ f 1 - a ~e Q T Nm pier D pvm O fe~x S~IXiT~HB. w. w Fmm° "~'m cw r., mrmr. : W <w dd ma m S n. R 1 s b. aurae Aen Re~hlcm Ame Paagsra.e arc~e S- S R S 51120 1- sv^5' ~'ao• S ri f' F.aeN. wao9e O zr er. > _ W ,Tura Aan c"I PE ARC' - naa narA n K G 1 ~ O 4 b. Varl GeG Wb A J ~ Hdoyeoa ArcYar _ ruwm egwou. A S rJ. AaWaiclmr emro9e ~oTw mmam O N . Darga Y b. aavNT VAMe Oek MGETATED CORRIDOR .1 GETATED CORRIDOR NORSEi SUI81'=]0•-0' o (0 SMp' ~P'=e~s . 0 2.• b. DaNrne ~ ~ N~ Et. (241 AWffim av.Wa' / H 2I' Er. OcmmaeY o / c / R1MNG 0.(r9OE OF 811E PCOT SEASDFI (X1rfI~ O "N \ / 1 TIES OF EpriP1FM I~Y)iI 12 GV. M!D o (ANiNNHi~O SrD.IAR `pl _ m o `)F EOUVAIENT . IE[ilt l1 GAL Afd AFJSi BE USED. LO- ION OF at4rER -TER (w) AWaYe aw+mvan U p FOR IRRIGATION OF vEGETATEC 1 CCN6BNATLN RLIA9 trI-, Ars - um ell 24• b. aspen Grape $I m CORRIDOR arm STORr1L.TER FACRJTY rvELCCITY OF WATER RADD) fax 0h'aaf e N 6 IN PIPES NOT TO 1—— 5 FPS) `^J"Pl'°~P% abn mm F.. Si 1 " IZ,,,,,, ®n 1351 Hue nbaes Y ~We E' b. Nodks Pure' ~ S l Tn / / Rom pleaapa med•~p1 saMa W~ea •-Ta °,py 9e°e T see d ~ { ~ n ~ \ ~ ~neM1n~ PI90. B 5 - - / a O l50) SJnraYVbvpa urn V`'L'V•~'1.1 ~r ~ Plyeorrpue cgNmtw ra~al ~ ~ a (MPL9e WdGb-Wn 2s' W. C 9TOWary 00W An[ea' aebus IF RANTNG CIrIGOE OF SALE ROOT SFASOµ CCNTAaE1QED p40e m Camim RM 9H.BSpOF C0.9v IEirirf It GOAL Nr11 ieE W (9.HD ppe .4 • • ' r = s• ~ ~rru~ a unO oaa~ ~ aem ame m .ecemm `I FFOR 9TOR111 FAC LITY -ulN- nvu Eetlr . • . • . (SEE CIVLL DRAWINGS SfOiMYAll31 FAC1lIY 6®1sr lacve. T(sOrse A.W sae enwa m •pwea mpermdY we ( I FOR LOCATION OF GATE) Seen Rita VaeYN IeNIy (aaoe YmbnW arm) WN sa bb.Wq ~ Um l eCWi' tlon m hyd rq m e.\ I ame am m rep:m a [assn wemr Saviour eI >zo e w .o. uwam mvaaly. I \ r'2T sP • . • . eIV a1 -I-pp- TQW wpw 7 h .IXO D f F Fe.cve aarmlY . Zt0 mm pa e0mre mot \ 3090 Dian PawiY Fiye 25k aeyip flea Finaa SGweiec None (:onimm None A& 96 Weglp 91 1 f ~Al~-R OF"G 5fi Calortlsl Bmyam ( t / STORI'WATER -ILITY A— C Yamw TSAi IM 1 `l 1~l Fd t 1 AS PER - --IREMENrs o Camel «r neE Nw 9m~W 3~OOJ 'J Cx g~ ~n~ -"FIm ~M zo9D9°,we ~sgae It AOkn)ma V196 lr0e-leavm twe I- 31591 - 1 HIGN ROTE- TINE s. g9'JI/'p'a'.'/1 vr.n D14-EYm Criss 151h 95% I~ p" 1 t, / rAPFROXIHATE LCCATIOW Soieyo avacNVC Greden Gobaeca 10591 3596 O W I S~j' ` ` 1 TREATI'ENT AREA Sena NIi2 aLbwer mN ar Yen ,aril Oh" .I (d'18 h W and O ~j a .,:~=a ~ hy. cGNSERVAnoN x V•4 ~ I i ``i' • re Pex SauRE Foon saamnc Nave canlnN, Name lAa m wdw 91 Y{~•)'. ,u mre dpi ease sari oro 17. Iy 3 • ux Keie pi Gera reOW 030Po ^ i1 r~ Fcea'A acvb:aes Wm n Feam 21091 rOR Romp n F 4ca w nA NeYVe Rm Faeaw V_ 7M y ,rmra ' as Ravie AaN~aae nixa 9591 h0 3 } • . a seatl he o-am Irv N q0 emC Ver .r (zt35 Gt pN ud pre,.- 04 dac 2120 ^r~3 3 . aer,em r' aw rn Ilawam lelab wear uT+ssl u so Werrz ma.rnbr Ka enema by: Gv. -I~~ iS • 1 NDTE IF AIY SEEDING TREES a9 sNRLas N TIE FYISTWG CgtlLOfl APE RESENT AID CAN BE r€T/aED AFTOi V Y. ' en °'~'eB^°ve YEGEfA DTtD Wff REIACVII ACTMTES TF@9 NMBERS CAN BE USED TO • Cvrue eumrYere cFTSET FROV~FD RANT 0.rnNTITES L V 177 STORMWATER POND DL 6 sheets NORTH SCALH I'=1d-0' o. - MAINTENANCE NOTES STYE PREPARATION NOTES mrre ti',`w. n'~"r~l c«n, w~"ba~sw~m. ' ra"•s.«e :e c.~".m~ ox~m~°»m~iaW ~a"~,: , c m,m vdF.1.t .enu xn xb 1G CoNSTRU TD)N cmevln aa,aamv Femran uro-mewbu.mamna, arr+m+a rp°mwwaawy. m LLcd cape chttectl, € t. WmQumiryenae,heltkorvymrpdreclletmfialpea«aa l3wlamhd pw 4manm lemmpe+,p remwmpa mrm 2 wyp mna n.ltr,me,m viv pave Sgieore •eee - fl mpwLL Tepmi)mebmbekpkflvdrmmprL ee,amemeeW loel'vu apvry er,mL b mraay eea rvnor a~bW am,uroam 3105 ne b[oadw $ u„ Ab"o6-yWtls£rmmeGmblMWryekckpl,erdoml6e bpefl deayfml6e 'n~r~ Qa "rb 4,a 6vgv w mrmb fq o.P.Pb1e M1mbbm atlmml~•am"'r'o nua mr•rew -i.wo ry r"0 aaa)emmee.tl°q atrk OeYb Wd6a,vWV„riabmwaemCe uwm+wr,m~.e a,.cnP°rWm P+..~e"'usi wr~ •m.mar«a-. y - 1 1 Ao,OmmmPd<~Nnmbepriae kkW mJgeemmvbabAc F.n r.nam aay ~wmrub•P,ane•~bo-i.ee P~'^d,w 9TL33 -1 ~ Weexrf we amr, NT+ru W ue < 'I t J uor. l 2sJ `Tn®mnb ~o-A<mibhmmem l(~ NePYVVVEn,ppmreE qu,p w umrb ~Mrunwu m:.iubv pea, w .15tt 2N.9338 I b.'..um<.,-m-bmenrvn m.F:. ~m,•im,n.an.~p..eeeweo n wem.m amMmm~.... mybe.bwvn.a }aw kpamma OV memxnmlP bmabaub ama aanr m, ,aaPen m pePprae br em uy aDau fue 5IX1]88.933 «,ru.mt I ~ mrW buwe ve b 4 Pn,ne b u trr°.w, n n,vva q bra w armed b. raem D ~1 ° ~`41n 1 ~ aVaof.WYef0, ne4 ~m Pvda wb mmrc'amm~ vN.W+veYn.K emna WP,mc'a 4,mrYV L \1 ,7 l n.mmwm.e.ekPl.aa:.~ra via m,dmmPlm FN.mmw.m ..s+m wm4amrvww,mq amm FUN e.•m. ~.nar. WO1°IPIm vua. v"me°~ au+, ber aF.yp b mea a O aurae rm a e`w~+" WNn~"E~~rm n apr Fum"~nR rYaq nu S T n~..armllv...le.mmu.rdm=oo ®e.a®.e•mwm.u>.emP~a+ mU.. ~...a n. a w ma n m F,..a w.F a~a.~Pa~• r,1p°'r.rnm~ e"~q" wGl ,su rT T- fle- _ , mlw wr.e.aba ee®mmm..m,e Pena en•raPamm,y:r amr+a. as arna>rm Hmm a:wramrmP "w` aepp,m aPirb (e+a®1-mmap.g r wm'a'r)Fwaax aeby w m.waa.e mmu m evaan r rmm emn ;pAaW, ""'a".~.mm,e a ti•enm : O a n~ saeym.u kammm,Pabh kb bina)mrmPVadubmPbmOeM wma careP, w.na rmmr r a agar b nnFawrr as arx r.. m ~..u F w arr,L-w rr.r « ne. n - fl,p.E,~xnT .mim,w.,mF .mammTr•mmmmw~n+e.Iwr.k..ma.~re..eP~r..e .m. aw.trmN Waam~w.rmm b..NFra L°'aw P~wa. r tc.w[w 6 .~9E". °Y° w:9 mne,e a F.F.e w..P.. m..trl b~ wn r•.m. ,«.r.ea 1.~'~ •m.,a °W. n. Fw, ra ...r.m raW®m, kwbmma ib mwevmmmcb Weaeluymk6vaioul: eu. u mmlm,r8lbyammaPd•mipmbepan o-o-Jeuaamrae Prioa meq nrmavm+u nw°aaru"a mnr,wn a~4 rnvbvv any n.+ew,ve Vyeuw, re,Vriaw.PSrya a+aev OREGON /~P! 01 m N..+.ms Ntre..nwrw.mwaam Wsn w,r sewam unar 3044a mere et.'6, Fbrrmm .p 5/ILyO t . „;d.ew~,a,.ymF.mmr.«~,+e~,.~ ~ m~.wr.la..aama,lmaay...,Paaa L 8 Tcp~emartgeembamae moomma(m:amgfv..m®wmerm ~eemn~~ ur.°°wPm dude era rrw~v°o W, rT,°'.a1.~ma~~~.~~~r. 9pF ~a a ~•"•m ) aaa.:aemmrmlmaa.amp,maerma arxn uorym: an mUa w Wa~.a Parma mnF..a Hnnapn amn: ar.m.x c ~ m ruivn m a ®mm m Z kpmidd Were ala+lm Pim wrea m m m ea4 m w ere uq~r~ mw mnm m umuu ~ .r .m. r.ar xem ~ -a, mn1 mP°mP~ P"m~•bn°'°aa an"0es6,F.° v. d. aar day x r.Fay~ mad m an ~mana :an b w` ~`:a°"maney.~m$a°`°°° ba r~„krtek.;me.an:.~ u.anp.ra _ ,n.~.m " ~ae.mam pW ep:etamasam aeeaelmpmmmW emrlaekudmy b w b«erWar aM p,pusm eua 4rer°IDlra b+rAaeee.a m ww.'" ~'.,muye Mviwu pa avaV M vra'v J. Beyrrr OmmPymeuram eb"srtnamebeee eeoosmotneir Pmrr vrmrvrc. x er4 Nv,e4 a ~ pem m a ~mm m tr oaaem "TFn rvP v,a.0 uaxn x myse r'r ~ Irampba elylk ~minplmMu~vemJ nvlwlalma~v+.T'axiwremb m®n mW®"flP ,rrrnN b,R+m r~~°^'~r m °Xe1 ~m'b41 ~ m'm t' .aW a Orr,-+I ~,rwM ha+ W mau-vF,uO mmep Nmoary ievedeeploeePeun eW b.me.d.be eamPPaieom air ,auaaJ ~ Im ream b PariP•I i u en)' am a,+y~w sr,nP NO~~ Ouwa.n'~"t ibR e""~mn ,Pm N ~..,maM 30%ofbeaa ~ w armpy seos~ w uaamb e,.:ni W Nebo w ° deem °1 Ta aaaPanek.wmvuee mLPaeW9e8rtlmOrlyW)a[brle aym vm,e«v.mweuw mrwp4"vir "pwe aW°Pegle").,w•~bn .mere aesvL emrvlabbayybvmmbrm OVlPa as a rr,-rrvp l !HF.n W pvr,.m Iv weir lu~v avl meal a n a Mr, lam. VPye Pamm wlpmYb ereeu,r petl m u.ur b emeem FPF uea N. Ne awee enrrr~r n m~'emm,ap belw b eaR bmWy Pmptltle par ma« eddy r dart atJSa d06 era w m,bmma art WATER ouAUTr swaLE a~e..P.rr,TA„ w".e b. mme wam Faaa.I P.. as a mar m CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE NOTES QsnK5~5aYars Um eea. "mn° 61'°r''° °e"er' m'r °1Y' n m euU,aye; .aa'""a~y :°wYerw:"a e`el aW°°"~'"y ra nwrm.ma a,w naN m MAINTENANCE SQ-IEDULE PLANTING & INSTALLATION g rn m aL~~ py.mmowP.aa.rrmn.ara. ~m~r:ae ~m4°:~~~e'">;~ ~~g~, .e. h ~ >may arm.m TNReMm tiecrwc raba,.';'"a L m,',.W.y"a" a ~~m.a~ i°n. why tract. " ~oHHE~,i«+ / RawJE raNTRDL vxvE CWS SPECIAL CONDITIONS ~ pmuy armmx Pmem ,ybe P,r,y yw„'y~yL ~ ° ' = ~ ~ II~II I III PIwaH GRME RO OR HEM x mn.aa. wy mFmnmr m m W . p om ma amt oaf mm°ma. u a e ° .p°"«m."m u w w`w " ab.° m E X111= - II way as e~°'~~n. em~.ar m~°w`°Per` m AVm' . F•• a .mrr ~L a pm«. F..m..mm. ya p yam. w..a c ~i, .In°"`°F.emr,~""~"by. m"~..a..y v pe"."F~P>~)m°ee ~'w w a.. mm,nru:w. m mr roUm. lrrmr = 8 .o -I,- = = r.r1H1~'- arE x,~A✓=AI 31 ~II~I I -Pa,sN mwoe .m m~,.rmn a.. e°nw "r ..ram a~>~ x .v ar. m F.+rr prm mer,.rn m~amly « m X11-ii- HIM] ~w+.mefburb,m~raarpm r`°"nymw wFawwm++mF.®msey,wdenymnar m x.°'°:~.rw..~wp~aw:.em'~...m°r°°e N MH(tan- Y _ r.nur wue m eat u'n0iww°""mn amcnw'wun ) m - , My n vw u eery wnJ m m m . tar wrm am v III 111~III I PVCnaaJNE - ale EIIIIIIII DoueLEqulHr,.low, P.raamPaaPmp;,`y°~:p°,~yar""a"`re. °a"Pma° d°'°'"waee'°F..eae~m~.ay~..: :tr'a`:. d W x ~Pye aav tr anpe a mma ee+,m a.rma. , rrme awn nnuxmnm amen. bn dada mna III ~ pm mFaa xw.wx..m a rmaaey wPmm ,bma`° ana'4~°".mw.l°,"°r m~~.:. u ..err m.... a r°°°°rr".a w aw `O. u wrF°°`°y.~.:1"".; m~a a. P-rl N~iE: PROVIDE pRA1N VALVE I ♦ ben w.a Ss.br ur tr nnee.e R nu, w w eren w nwv.y e°' LOw POINT OF EACH ~r+envvaeeFama+vr amar 6i mrW~ma,aar _ ~ amn a P. Fr,a4arb rgavreq r a4 pgvwm O . z ~ TYP. 1111 III ~ P.r uT~,,L L,.E aye•mr w.o a,~ rom,a, x`°•ma F P.rmr. ~"P~mm"°".r.°maa .r..mm.m mr m-m Fm rp.n m r. ® N c emir rVm•~aW'vey F..re~yemp"r°uaem~. ~Fme mrmW~ ^I w apal mane um reemW) wma', um uflmeeemNb a`a eNDelee bFVv uwmra aft r n rwn Pad, Pwwa"m q w «,+ar a P.rr.,n. ar...a,b.m.,,a .P.~~r. a...r..w a wro W.,.m : mm.or .era. «n a ~p / ewmn•e am w ra ma a w',ma.ae mrp,a 1 ~t REMOTfi CONTROL VALVE DETAIL / 2 ROTOR HEAD DETAIL ~ L3, Nss `1,3 a. N r~ a'9°°npw"°'m P,a.a~ . «°o`elparya,n od m ma _ "~°°`~"`d '.Wry ne s~.r: wm~bvmuamwaFw wn Npi ..a fl nbeN uN mm w am q rw.wm Pab 3mem Svpmmva YnpN, W uN nnmm ~~m~ n pm w vbm ebniNYn a Wpe1 W W. ban µriq r.v 4mq ere wmyvra nw Pm~e~eM re egal w.e paMluwv nv m N Nmp um m a vae umim pa m IIMGATIONNOTES r= ~ m momma a am "tl`: „~a"°p : „ r' A ea.a,Pe mr r `N~~:r:: TMrF.«.r..p..yrrelnane:, .elm W,NmreWVn aeon nnme pw ,wa a.:y wwae +'~aaWma ma pva« Fbvm manapraammm R. ~NEH,ER pmFP._m~.,e m rmmm m ~wm°~°« m a F marem an m.Fan.m ~ Fm p mm n F~.. ~mna..vd,nmraaxa. arm .~F1n,yFm..mmwa.,wa.ma 4 m ~d~ a Bo~91O ~VILVE BO)( uv IOCCINP Llb Yl~ 9ER aeeri agree w wrm r ear awmm erau IvnennaH >~e'°e Y~~ n.iu I^w~w sm'~p/ml :mp, aP P✓ is m. mn.a,r a ,r.rmrr 'N pua+p rmam q w G a Tyum Fyeum Femn b tr vaea b a" mu'ubtrel ~rmwewee q w Pom m°~OVmb~ mm n mm mae span map.. n tr e`mr m°newr u rummy w maaF J avn. [amm Ioy emao: 9bPM. PxbP eE Prrn O SPRAY HEM.~'r "aeue lanevm .WrmPter n Fuwm bmey ummnum" eraemmu°' Pm4 aee,e,e v e.Ye b,u Pram Pew, .an6w-N4 IMmrtBe tmaY m 2 Fp~iae''I""" n m y °~m m b m ~muW b rrowm.rfa rennrrneo-as WINN& Fw"` II II II IL~II~ ro: w mna' y`".a"m"' :mm°od°.F :,'."wmwmn as m „y,,,, .,,a, p Fr,.. m anw ;e,n «m°.w"`° a. a p.m b m n a wn ma. a. z b III I III aDra. am,ra, lrfy p ----PINUH r,R.oE may.nme m rm n,m III °w.mm+°'. eib1Ya~"r:,Lw~nw anamePram Pm. ~IIF I- II~II~III III I III Y °11~L~11 ~lll~lll rro mPy wa as a n age. an mwr aw ~H ~.~„"'P`°m,a~~.a r m. pnr m m«y.n m. rm we. c.mre a.r .P .mp w ammPry,r. mm~ w II II~IIII a.menb, aP anma. atw r.®ee r. PPww caw.aerl bay .pmaaF mrw, _ III = r ~~II 111111 ~ ~ ~ ar aay,p, b~ n fl ~m km mFe>,wrrr.. ma m ..a..° Pmw:~ na a.a x/¢roe s nra:na INSTALLATIONSCHEDULE ~°:°bma«p P.:rmrr e o (y FW barb pmmb. Oeeon,ae ~Pm b,ma' n>b prpme.a'c v+,m+um wn bp. Kfl rln Yed bl QV. I - Ptk PIPE lltY HUC RNU ~Pmon Gw,m v ,moat neelev, w mde am mee ealane a m1 r.muruieee v ne m aFU a ay un Nn1 FIIEII~II III- II I III r Faaay .am am Paa abaaa trm pa F° wam .D myr°"`r." " "r ~m~ "m~d)aaPmro n° 3 GaAVEJ nIH~ ~111~I1~111 III - a a~a«.ar n a.F p,.,.r. e.rp n.r..~ e.w a Pael n""`.... w emm.'°~ „"Paw I w.y °°°'mr nrm •w ~ a«, ae'°"..m' ~m a P" Iii a, :P :nema we`aw~°°`° b ma mel .rmn .maw ne.m a.~.e mnb.e 111 4a+aem~amea.prm auua°.~ mvr awFetitibv tnm ~H .w tr ~s me YY to _ `rnb,rM im ` P.C TEROl LWE "a' earP+ra „-vr v+W m an. Harm p Y w.a tmoav asr mwvv wnwe ctwe pn a rurrey w mawA aarremea ' L4 IH Pwan rs:TER u a Lae.eav w D:naa :°w: °a. •~`paa°'" Dam w 2`°Mn.`°~'wm,~ w~ ~epr,aw~ aw'y eea. ~ Fnr.aa. ew eem Yne W rr~lry .m .umy ears F w M an Fprm ..pDSy~yP' p~ a °i'eV1 r' P"b ~eQ P a pervpe a, [aW a m mp °'°r.a."r"aer°`."..mbaaeewr:.a,nFd~n m°-`nn %3 DOUBLE Q'IEQC VALVE DBTAII. / 4 •'1 POP-UP SPRAY HEAD DECAIL I3.'' xs' \ L3.' m-,v. NTS a"• w, en.a~a. Fa,aro ro a+~m°°°"n."1+ "a m uP F.r.~'"",a, m"m m.eer gaarmu e n s~a~ P P.r p m.ar pa a..r: w° sheets NORTH PROPERTY LINE -'O' TYPE BUFFER 11 1 1 I'iNroree acyboium (10 PEST WIDE WITN 1' NIGH CdJTINNN9 HEDGE TOTAL AREA ]9Te ITNIONe oWa 1 1 1 rrnrobr vwac~.~ma P ,.,,,e Nana a«:aa 1 _I gi°PNarlr-apoa Mau. 3ta' on caper wna.ge m~mase `^~vvnu-ex ~Rbas °°'c}'i= Caetilm VednW 4'f 1-d...pe -hit-,, LLe •.VFGEfAiED CORRIDOR 'S ] Zoo medw.y G.loceaiu tae yaly. ry h _ ° 6 0 ' r3bT1 er) In de)eW.~ rorrhbn p w . Aca 93192 °-°~a'.T - ° clrolw Sao 9M1eel L2 far GeINeC IX15TING iREE3 03 54,3 93m Oueruu geryan 1 6f \ IL,mw Areleau \ P-119 P. xramtbn TO R IN (.x 503]88.9343 Saiw auvPab \ Arm cVCYalun Hf~3 > ~ ~ '1'~cheQ cmceo~e eaa.. t ~3 I . _ L l nawspr:g s, dea..ern . Fi 480 ~`co Flvm,..arlMb 'r 8 \ 'A"°1O9°u°' 1 "'Saa`~ \ r Xadllca nnw 1 ~ollb;;mo\ 9 10 \ - -1. TYUJ.a~anmae° e.ngnaao '3m.'~ ~ OREGON 4, rr~~ee~~IIaa P S/IZr90 t saa,e ar,~av 1 R9 'G+la,.v'N / w~ ' ~ ~ t C,9pE AR("Z,' ° I of ~ rdcYe ~ 1 1 It ~eY i [ev{6imr5~ a+s' \ J N ~ eso..aw Cabcem.e danx 1 ~ / CeneM.e m,acua cyryaa C~anldrnvas, 1 n• oa rsmm 3orb.~e e~nyax $ - Tree - ~ Eby 1 m man I y ' ~i Gm~ va°e'ela PUS-- 0 jr~0 Ftu A~ p~ 114 / + \ '9P J 9^W "O Oz .Y $ - \ l b 3E5 n 1 ~ I ( ffe W / - saw, acap>x I 4 , . a "ol i - 177 t ~i$aka.•er .t r ~ -PVIa+, ~avn F•.] ve.. a.e• a f ~ xon~• ~ ~ a ..a~ ~ o V ' wywlei 1. ~ 1 i I sy°W'.xiuPa• emu. I q> yJ_ / - _ ~ 1 ~ 1 nerlo,u .4aap. p - Hobaea,. dscola 1 1 O . _ p, - z ° Im • - p,yce s. ma zM/ce 1 - - _ ~ ;3 ~°°~9^ •a^z a.,wa .Ica ~d av. 1 _ - ~ ~ g -colarenler Isla,. L5 1 ~ea.ra.. , -Paamlage naale.° 13a"' 1 PcpvLe Uv.po+ea. 1 , Peamlevg. marsrw PLANTING PLAN of: 6 sheets I I NORTH :CAIE i'~2d-0' e STREET TREES 'C' BUFFER 'D' BUFFER MITIGATION TREES c tdn v.m.s. Tand...pe architects, FORTH PiCtFAiY WE T43]Ui2S C TYPE BUFFFA EAST FY[PFIi1Y LWE PEO S V TYPE LLe ~ mad = Pw45eCl ~ TREES FgCPFAIY L!E _ %1 FEET (-UMAA TMES W OLl PROPERTY l8E =402 FEET MEOIJIAA TF WOG lI✓ff8 to 1'9 29M = S 1FEES TOTAL PEOIhTED O PROPERTY UW 4021% - D TPEES TOTAL REIXHiEO M PROPERTY lAE 1415 b.-d-, suite2 200 (9 G iepra PYnem Cdr YI FOOT &fPFA IT" C HIGH CgRNU0l9 HEDGE 20 FOOT BIIFTffe VRlH 8' 1164 CGNTNLg1Ae FIED3E O (26) Asa u'ovNan PurtluW, Y4 57732 1 r ®tpa Gjtynl !jnp Haxtirrn TO- AflEA = 2,874 SF W T'GN. 94i11SS PEOUFEN TOTAL APEA = -1 W 1.1 t-(YL Sti,A10, fE01ME01 1-8 lal Vee Mope ~n V _ M fix 503]88.9'ilI TFE (9 TRESS FrOLMO waE TFM ro TT S FEMA-W xua B TFffB = EYJSnNCL T TREE a RtlIC® S lir£9 m e.STM n T1 - Pn]R'i'~ + (q dasyl Ang4 Naryy [ ' I,u Awe s~+n sn.~ r ®Faer Yoa~7. v+~oFa ala, Gt S 450 f9+r lnl ha~~byp nu~ae T-9 kel D>pYS ~ leer DnpW R ewpe eBm ueel Woe .aa red rL ic,weea AaBe O .P sn bn0 t z ~ Fn.~1ren taneagls 4' Fri Fa,oE cwlr+ne c /csi rEME c'9pE ARC (aa>til a0e0 Yeq 20' eW _ Q 2 ylan Tal beBYn~ Pe y.i 2 P Pa Calmautla rev4mna 5lfil~ H Iu1 r1M Lp bY4/6 5 &~irin AGIBe FYaY ,Illr 0 r calm w ~ Ma~nA.n O + Ion1~ ~ tym~,tr a~ (a~dYm .Yea Yea 90• aw o ° (481 7Yµ4 ~+Ya s,~ae,2~ (L7 Mss aa'iy'Yi'wm 5-8 IeN bnreYl been Ntq'Y9aa Y (m3pY Peymd Ault M f O ~m ea Fie ro a .m m zara.a rmam r>tiad, Fam• z onPa cxeen vax z smw , (w- 9= '°s~..e'en~y~' 'Q 1 aim, aY BapaeYetl aea 4n acl O I;F['~..~•ft~l seas r to ~aaa✓ n 1401 IWai spXY O , valor pew, sex 'o ~ cQ 4• w71e DeY~M:'w~ase~~ O1' ~ ~S 1491 x>m n,9etsen O ,Balm P 1 FlneanG CuraN z Iftf87pn BWtk T' peb~ CC D y W (1x07 CwYM'r t/W~ ry~ . 4• Pan s,nl - m as O 1 Isel 51Yno+u+vrAaaa .ae anger lr~sier rWn camam 3,,,..ean 3 E -w Wool ren. aa,me /~-1~ ` E e 9rnM`We 4 1 finpenq QFCU 0CO. ( 1 Y 'm i Phu. Ga~YY/a sago. ']~\/ay',•.'-L.✓,~/}[ CL~-•' o' (907 GelM4 tNM } /T-BIM Oq nasuissY a paM wm 4 PPB Saul ','.W,/ gavMaare, OO ex 1V4QIW 4. TeFr gaiKba O rl s~dr~ 1 P O z ne~ a . z I~ rwmonYao. win. A r . r . e• PRP9BnE-irgATm ~ M~nA ~~`F DOiGLA9 FIR 9TAKB DW VFH A w~RE ~ R APPRD.~ p.~ c a iWTCJ.L9Ndr6 ~ ~ ED AT- HD E P AHi HTl1YE a iFi ~ ;BALL 1' ABOVE BA]E aJF A2N.EA'~ .d FW9~GRADE ! g1DDODExDRaHe y J ,a'nC' PI.Wf W~ BieKE9 OUi91OE DF. h0 ((aj DRIP:IFE iYPICAI BFYaaaCOYETi JWAT BaCKFL.L i9x ECU41. BAOKFLLL Hlx ~iRle~ 4R PLANiiNG ~ I - PH rat HTL F+ODED I IT I II IA P~ 1 cO T - IH H. LEBEUD 574 der 21+2/09 I- II yppE gyy~E FRp11yA11J gnCKFOy uxi~u~iwTAT 1(8 Naffed GV. II Pam e ~inxxE. TH YT II SAP'aAce. H II lµDax _ - I Yd raes.eRCIAL --T- L RDiBLLl I I I I I I oBnLFrACTF+i,°.p Q" II 1 L=1 ~rr~,°up~ a~AK w, y~~~LL _ Ire _ ~ ~i I ~ m- rrbiBau BREAK uP db•.WLL ~Bx B~ OLRAOYKaE C~ F~ ~ ALL 910E9 RIB: L6 DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING DETAIL 3 SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER DETAIL ~r uw s ~~rJ naH H.TS L5 mH 9.Ts of: 6 sheets ' KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TREE SURVEY # TYPE SIZE CONDITION I ACTION I NOTES ' 1 Ash 14 good keep ( Ash 20 good keep 3 Ash 14,12,10,(4)8 multi-stem keep ' 4 Oak* 17 I good save *WA CO bearing tree 5 Oak* 30 good keep *WA CO bearing tree ' 6 Ash 10,9, good keep 7 Ash 18 good keep 8 Hawthorn 12,7,8 good keep ' 9 Oak 35 good keep 10 Fir 30 good n/a off property 11 Ash 16,21 good keep ' 12 Ash 10 good n/a off property 13 Ash 16,12 good n/a off property ' 14 Oak 32 good n/a off property 15 Ash 20 good keep 16 Ash 10,12 good keep ' 17 Elm 35 good remove too close to wall 18 Birch 20 good remove too close to wall 19 Elm 32 good keep in common area ' 20 Plum 8 good keep in common area 21 Hawthorn 16 multi-stem keep in common area rr 22 Sycamore 27 good keep in common area t( Z Sycamore 26 good keep in common area "4 Birch 18 good remove in road Birch 16 topped, decay remove in sidewalk ' 26' Birch 12 topped, decay remove in road 27 Birch 12 volunteers remove in road ' 28 Apple 18 decay, multi-stem, topped remove in building 29 Cherry 14 topped, decay remove in building 30 Birch 18 topped, decay remove in common area ' 31 Apple 14 diseased remove in common area 32 Birch 16 decay, imbalmed, poor health remove in building 33 Birch 16 good remove in building ' 34 Birch 10 good remove in common area 35 Birch (2)12 good remove in common area 36A Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in sidewalk 36B Cedar 8 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in sidewalk 36C Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in sidewalk t 36D Cedar 16 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in sidewalk 36E Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road 36F Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road 36G Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road R6H Cedar 9 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road ;I Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road ' -I Cedar 7 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road _jK I Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road ' Page 1 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TREE SURVEY , 36L I Cedar I 9 row cedars topped diseased (dead) I remove in road -76M Cedar I 11 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road , "N Cedar 8 row cedars topped diseased (dead) I remove in road '460 I Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) I remove in road .iP Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road 36Q Cedar 6 I row cedars topped diseased (dead) I remove in road 36R Cedar 7 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road ' 36S Cedar 7 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road 36T Cedar 12 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road 36U Cedar 10 row cedars topped diseased (dead) remove in road ' 37 Walnut 16 ivy, deceased, wall remove too close to wall 38 Walnut 12 heavy ivy remove in road t 39 Apple 24 diseased, hollow, broken top remove in road 40 Apple 14 diseased, dead stump remove in building 41 Walnut 14 great shape remove ' 42 Cherry 8,7 good remove in sidewalk 43 Unknown 6 good remove in building 44 Plum 14 flush remove in building ' 45 Plum 14 cuts, decay remove in building 46 Plum 12 lean remove in building 47 Plum (2)8,16 good remove in road , 48 Holly (5)6 good remove in sidewalk 49 Birch 10 good remove too close to road 3 Hawthorn 12 good remove in common area ''1 Plum 12 good remove in common area 2 Plum 14 good remove in common area ' 53 Hawthorn 10,8,(2)6 good remove in common area 54 Maple 9 good remove in road/sidewalk 55 Plum 12 good remove in common area ' 56 Maple 8 good remove in common area 57 Unknown 5 good remove in common area 58 Hawthorn 9,7,(2)5 good remove in common area , 59 Hawthorn 10,8,(4)6 good remove in road 60 Apple (2)10,7 good remove close to building 61 Hawthorn (2)6 good remove in building , 62 Plum 6 volunteers remove in building 63 Plum 10,7,5 good remove in building 64 Cherry 6 good remove in building ' 65 Ash 12 good remove in building 66 Ash 10 good remove in building ' 67 Ash 6 good remove in building 68 Ash 8 good remove in driveway 69 Birch 6 good remove in road ' 70 Unknown 6 good remove in road/sidewalk 1 Hawthorn 10 healthy cluster remove in building Hawthorn 10 healthy cluster remove in building ' Hawthorn 8 healthy cluster I remove in building Page 2 t ' KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TREE SURVEY 74 Hawthorn 12 healthy cluster remove in building 75 Hawthorn I 12 I healthy cluster I remove close to building i ; S ' Hawthorn 9 healthy cluster remove in road -77 Corkscrew Willow) 9 good + remove in building ' . 8 Corkscrew Willow 6 good remove in building 79 Oak 8 fair remove in building ' 80 Deodar Cedar 10 good I remove in building 81 Deodar Cedar 10 good remove in building 82 Birch 6 good remove in building ' 83 Cherry 7 good remove in building 84 Plum 14,10 multiple leaders, decay remove in building 85 Apple 14 topped, pipe in SE side remove in building ' 86 Ash 16 fair remove in road 87 Apple 12 fair remove in road 88 Apple 7 good remove in road 89 Apple 8 good remove in road 90 Cherry 6 good remove in road ' 91 Blue Spruce 12 good remove 92 Alder 6 fair remove close to sidewalk 93 Alder 11 fair remove in retaining wall ' 94 Alder 11 clump/multi-stem keep needs retaining wall 95 Sweetgum 3,6 fair n/a off property i ' Page 3 ARBCRISTREPORT i MEMORANDUM TIGARD, t TO: Gary Pagenstecher I FROM: Todd Prager, Ci Arboris • t ' RE: Knoll Drive Property Concept Plan Review ' DATE: December 9, 2008 As you requested I have provided comments on the "Knoll Drive Property" concept plan. Concept plan approval criteria 18.350.050.A.2 requires that: ' 'The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management" I identified seven trees that may be considered "significant natural resources" due to species and condition. My recommendation is that the applicant work in conjunction with his project arborist to preserve any or all of these trees wherever possible. The specific trees ' that I recommend for preservation are as follows: Tree Number Tree Type Trunk Diameter Condition 4 oak 17 inches good 17 elm 35 inches good 18 birch Winches good 41 walnut 14 inches good 54 maple 9 inches good ' 56 maple 8 inches good 91 bluespruce 12 inches good Also, please note that there appears to be a grading conflict with tree #94. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding my comments. 1 Arborist Response 1 This memorandum acts as the applicant's response to Todd Prager, City Arborist's preliminary review of the Knoll Drive Property arborist report on December 9, 2008. In ' that letter, Todd Prager identified seven trees that he thought might be considered "significant natural resources". The applicant's response to Todd Prager and the concept plan approval criteria ' 18.350.050.A(2) ( "The Concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or , management') is as follows: Tree 4 ' Tree number four is located within the sensitive area boundaries and we will be saving this tree per the recommendation. ' Tree 17 and 18 Trees 17 and 18 are located on the North West edge of the property. Both trees are ' located adjacent to the proposed private street and retaining wall. During the design process we have worked with our arborist and engineers, and they have determined , that these two trees will have to be removed due to their close proximity to the new street and retaining wall. The root spread of these trees would not be able to be avoided during the construction phase of the project. Trees 41, 56, 91 ' Trees 41, 56, and 91 are on an extreme four foot slope, and with the heavy excavation needed for this site, our arborist has concluded that the root structures would not be salvageable. In addition, tree 56 is less than 12" diameter which does not have to be included in the mitigation requirements of the City of Tigard code (18.790.030.B(2)). We have included ALL trees on site in an effort to be as comprehensive as possible, but , only trees greater than a 10" diameter are required to be accounted for during elimination. Tree 54 , Tree 54 is located in the middle of the proposed private alley of the development and will not be able to be saved. This tree also meets the same criteria as above (less than ' 10" diameter). During the process of construction we will save all trees possible. The arborist report we ' submitted are trees that we identified can be save during construction. We will have an arborist on site to consult and identify salvageable trees during excavation and ' construction. Au st 9 2007 Reference: Tree Inventory 'Watiow- 12360 & 12390 SW Knoll Drive property Tigard, Or. ' Contact' Mark.Reed / Northwest Ventures Group ; Phone: 971-506-0167 I liave'visi#ed the aforementioned property in order to provide a visual assessment"and: ; tree invehtoryof ~24) tagged"trees; The trees were tagged:starting from th6'NE-*cormr of thi ' '76perty: The odsfing,metal building, adjacent'to the Business Park, locates tree 41. ' Tle tagged trees"are numbered from 1-24: The tag~•are located=at:Approximately 4':5 feet and are.oia the SW side of each trunk: above.grour tt level (DBkI) - ' The,following abbreviations will be used:.DBH-diamefer. at lireasf heig.it ' - GFI= Good:~iealtla~ _ _ _ - GS- Good' Sl7r' ,e. re? ' PH- boor Iiea.ltIi ; ' PS="Poor Stxiichire LS. Limb Spread.. Th6 tiees'are- inveiiPried as folloWS: r ' #1. 'Oregon ash (Fraxinus oregona) co-*dominant•13"+20" stems..PW'G-S/ 25'LS, s oregona] .co=dominant. ?"+10"-steins: GHLGS115' LS. inu ' #2. region ash (Rax" #3_. Oregon ash multi stemmed 45" measured below DBH (approximately 8'stems). ; GHI GS/ 48'LS. #4.Oregon white oak•(Quercus gaiTiana)'17"DBH.'GIU GS/ 20' LS ; 1 '##5.Oregon White `oak 30"DBH: OH/ GS/ 35'LS. #6`c.Oregon ish co-dominant 9"+10" D$H. GH/ PS. Tree hay-a broken stem'-over ; 1 - parking spot, adjacent to Business Park: ; 17.,Oregon ash 18"DBH GH/ GS125'LS. - #8. Common Hawthorne {Crataegus monogypa) multi. stemxned•'-12"-i•7"+8" DBH: t : GH/ 1'S! 25'LS . ' " . • • . _ - • . ~ , • . , ' #-9. Oregon white-oak-35"DBA =Tree is one-sided as :a.resiilt of fir.free'growing next.to it.. r GHf GS/AO.'L,5. Page.2. !2360 &12390 SW Knolls Drive Property #1 O..Douglas fir ( Pseudotsuga menziessii)'34" DBH. At approximately 25' tree splits into (2)- tops and has several widow makers and large deadwood: GH/ PSI 40'LS. #11. Oregon ash co-dominant 16 23 DBH. GIV GS/25 LS. #12.-0 regon. ash 1.0"DBH GH/GS/• 10'f-S. , #13. Oxegori ash co=dominant •16"+12" DBH: - GH/ GS/ 35'LS. '#14. Oregon White oak 32 DBH. GIV GSA/ 25 LS: #I.5:-Oregon asli 20"DBH; GIV GSI 25' LS: , x#16. 'Oregon ash- co--dominant 12"+10 DBH: PH/ PS/ 20'LS: F61ice 6n left side of #,u-nk,.. 40.-American elni (Ulihiis'Ameiicana) 35' DBH'. G14/ GSI.35'LS.• Growing next to• existing driveway.. , . , Eat~ope'a u n b' •c h (Betuta - P'endula) 20" DBH. Tree is i~'Y-covered and has. been to1?Ped: 8• - . • It 'is .growing next to the driveway. GIV PSI 20'LS: 419. American elm 32 DBH located at fiont of house. GIV GS/ 45 LS. Tree has dune flux. ' ##20: Flowerin plum rums cei•asifera 8" DBH. PW.GS112'LS-. Tree is-located at - ' -front of house •at-right•side of 'Walkway. #21. Common havt+thome Cratae s mono a .miulti'sien'ed.' 16' DBH, ' GH! PSI 18'LS. 22 -S- camore 27" DBH. GH/ GS/•35'LS, Located at front of 1.2390 SW'Knolls ' - : Drive: . . • #21:*S 'camore 26" BH, ' GH/ GS/ 24'LS. Located at front of 12390 SW Knolls: - ' #24: Eiir pean birch 18" DBH. GWPS/ 24'LS;• Tree has 'been severely topped. . k ( Page 3, 12360'.& 12390 SW Knolls Drive Property. Based on my.findings of these (24) trees that axe to be preserved, a licensed'Arborist . ' should be'on site during. any construction oi• excavafion. The trees with thelhighest value are located around the tyro homes -at-the front of the ' property. If these trees are going to-be salvaged, preservation fencing shoiild be erected prior to any construct on. To help combat any constructionx trauina it would-benefit these ' trees by injecting some deep r'oot.fe tilizer before and after job eorripletzon: Also, the ' installation of a 3'-' Iayei of mulch around the_base of these trees will 'help. red' 6e soil eoMpactiori. It'ismy understanding that I have been offered the:rnost up to-`date mapping and. r inf0r7natiori to provlde.this tree inventozy. Overlook ee Preservation; Inc. shall not be t held responsible foi any errors based- on. the information presented. ; = If you'require any further-techirical informations please feel free to confect me at 503-70,4=8024. - Sincerely, . Kevin MacKdiizie Pt6siderit ' Overlook Tree Preservation, Inc, , Certified Arbor•ist 4 PN-0742AT' Uvin0*11m WMI LLC CF.A'I7Ft~DAT~'N~~2AT., 414,1k. Crx~Qt~►i- ~►Ytro~nAr~~;~ stss? . November 2, 2007 Reference: Addendum Report Location: 12360& 12390 SW Knoll Drive Contact: Mark Reed/ Northwest Ventures Phone: 971-506-0167 Overlooks Tree Preservation originally visited the aforementioned site and provided a Tree Inventory for (24) tagged.trees for possible.reteption on July 31St; NO. On,Septeiriber 9U' of this. year l walked the proj~pity with Bill Reed and discovered a nurliber of diseased, deeayed. or.structiirally iuisound trees. Front the topggraplucak triap. tliat.was provided by Ztecl~ Engineers, there are :approximately (25) trees over. 12'-' in . diaiiiefer at breast height that are consid,bred zuldesh-able.'Thesb't.rees.ban present a hai2ard to.people, or structures:.Finthennore. with grad e.changes acid encroachunent•of foi~nclatioz~s, roadways and extruded curbs; the amount of root doss to the trees will be' . . dettinieiital to their structural integrity. If yoit i'equtre any fiufhci technical information please feel tree to contact meat 503-704- 8024. Sincerely, Kevin MacKenzie Overlook'Tree Preservation, Inc: Certified Arborist # PN-0742AT TREE INVENTORY # TYPE SIZE CONDITION ACTION REQUIRED 1 Ash 14 CONDEM KEEP 2 Ash 20 CONDEM KEEP 3 Ash 14,12,10,(4)8 MULTI-STOMP KEEP 4 W-QAK 17 GOOD KEEP 5 W-QAK 30 GOOD KEEP 6 ASH 10,9 GOOD KEEP 7 ASH 18 GOOD KEEP 8 HAWTHORN 12,7,8 GOOD KEEP 9 OAK 35 GOOD KEEP 10 FIR 30 GOOD KEEP 11 ASH 16,21 GOOD KEEP 12 ASH 10 GOOD KEEP 13 ASH 16,12 GOOD KEEP 14 OAK 32 GOOD KEEP 15 ASH 20 GOOD KEEP 16 ASH 10,12 CONDEM KEEP 17 ELM 35 GOOD KEEP 18 B 20 GOOD KEEP 19 ELM 32 GOOD KEEP 20 PLUM 8 GOOD KEEP 21 HAWTHORN 16 MULTI-STOMP KEEP 22 SYCAMORE 27 GOOD KEEP 23 SYCAMORE 26 GOOD KEEP 24 B 18 GOOD KEEP 25 B 16 TOPPED,DECAY REMOVE 26 B 12 TOPPED,DECAY REMOVE 27 B 12 TOPPED,DECAY REMOVE 28 AP 18 DECAY,CONDEM,TOPPED REMOVE 29 CH 14 TOPPED,DECAY REMOVE 30 B 18 TOPPED,DECAY REMOVE 31 AP 14 DISEASED REMOVE 32 B 16 DECAY,INBALM ED,POOR HEALTH REMOVE 33 B 16 GOOD REMOVE 34 B 10 GOOD REMOVE 35 B (2)12 GOOD REMOVE 36 CEDAR 10,18,10,16,(3)10 ROW CEDERS TOPPED DISEASED(DEAD) REMOVE 37 W 16 IVY DISEASED REMOVE 38 W 12 HEAVY IVY REMOVE 39 AP 24 DISEASED HOLLOW BROKEN TOP REMOVE 40 AP 14 DISEASED,DEAD STOMP REMOVE 41 W 14 GREAT SHAPE KEEP 42 CH 8,7 GOOD KEEP 43 LINK 6 GOOD KEEP 44 PLUM 14 FLUSH REMOVE 45 PLUM 14 CUTS DECAY REMOVE 46 PLUM 12 LOAN REMOVE 47 PLUM (2)8,16 GOOD KEEP 48 H (5)6 GOOD KEEP 49 B 10 GOOD KEEP 50 HAWTHORN 12 GOOD KEEP 51 PLUM 12 GOOD KEEP 52 PLUM 14 GOOD KEEP 53 HAWTHORN 10,8,(2)6 GOOD KEEP 54 MAPLE 9 GOOD KEEP 55 PLUM 12 GOOD KEEP 56 MAPLE 8 GOOD KEEP 57 UNK 5 GOOD KEEP 58 HAWTHORN 9,7,(2)5 GOOD KEEP 59 HAWTHORN 10,8,(4)6 GOOD KEEP 60 AP (2)10,7 GOOD KEEP 61 HAWTHORN (2)6 GOOD KEEP 62 PLUM 6 VOLUNTOORS PLUMS KEEP 63 PLUM 10,7,5 GOOD KEEP 64 CH 6 GOOD KEEP 65 ASH 12 GOOD KEEP 66 ASH 10 GOOD KEEP 67 ASH 6 GOOD KEEP 68 ASH 8 GOOD KEEP 69 B 6 GOOD KEEP 70 UNK 6 GOOD KEEP 71 HC HEALTH CLUSTOR REMOVE 72 HC HEALTH CLUSTOR REMOVE 73 HC HEALTH CLUSTOR REMOVE 74 HC HEALTH CLUSTOR REMOVE 75 HC HEALTH CLUSTOR REMOVE 76 HC HEALTH CLUSTOR REMOVE 77 CW 9 GOOD KEEP 78 CW 6 GOOD KEEP 79 OAK 8 REMOVE 80 TC 10 GOOD KEEP 81 TC 10 GOOD KEEP 82 B 6 GOOD KEEP 83 CH 7 GOOD KEEP 84 PLUM 14,10 MULTI-TOPPED DECAY REMOVE 85 AP 14 TOPPED,PIPE IN SE SIDE REMOVE 86 ASH 16 OK KEEP 87 AP 12 OK KEEP 88 AP 7 GOOD KEEP 89 AP 8 GOOD KEEP 90 CH 6 GOOD KEEP 91 BLUE SPRUCE 12 GOOD RETAIN s /"'cam " \ \ LEGEND - CXITMC ONC-fV,Y p p "~1' 1r, ' I - - _ ~ I r i " , y N ; dd ~ J O nvE m acw„ a UO m v3Apy/ 1 p / 181 W M .E Y EN6nN.^ C+i 'NCY SIaER y I . S l 1 r~ IINNI/11,, `M \ _ 14 / 'l' /1111 ~k.. //fl ~ ' ~ftISDNC COrvCRFIE R-NM - GRAPHIC SCALE _~--f', III 0 13 ~fl 6D FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION m flEVI510N unnn 6/])/W "Y L n- L22811 B0.5EDWG Ra 2 2 ZTeC ENGINEERS, INC. CONCEPTUAL TREE PLAN 96l ANN 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY NOD * a PHONE: (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY Ll Q FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON IMPACT I~,ySIS AI*4 h~ September 4, 2007 Project* 0068.0 Mark Reed - Northwest Ventures Group ' 2808 NE MLK Jr. Blvd., Ste P Portland, OR 97212 ' RE: Assessment of Need for Traffic Impact Study - Knoll Drive Property Development ' Dear Mr. Reed: Dunn Traffic Engineering, LLC has prepared this letter to identify whether or not a formal traffic impact analysis is needed for the proposed Knoll Drive Property development located along SW Knoll Drive in ' Tigard, Oregon. Specifically, this letter compares the estimated site trip generation potential for the proposed development with the traffic study warrant criteria cited in the City of Tigard's Code Section 18.810-15(AC) - Traffic Study. Based on the findings contained in this letter, it is our conclusion that the ' proposed site development will not generate enough traffic to warrant a formal traffic impact study. Project Background The proposed site development will consist of 14 single family homes (6 detached and 8 attached), plus an assisted living facility designed for 26 residents. Residents of the single family home units and visitors to the assisted living facility will access the site from SW Knoll Drive, between SW Hall Boulevard and SW ' Huntziker Road. Staff and residents of the assisted living care facility will use an access easement through the Park 217 Business area to the north, which has several driveways accessing both SW Hall Boulevard and OR 99W. ' Site Trip Generation Estimate Estimates of the average weekday, weekday a.m., and weekday p.m. peak hour vehicle trip ends for the proposed site development were derived from empirical observations at other similar developments. ' These observations are summarized in the standard reference manual, Trip Generation, 7th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (Reference 1). Table 1 summarizes the estimated site trip generation potential for a typical weekday as well as during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak ' hours. TABLE 1 SITE TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATE ' Average Weekday AM Peak Weekday PM Peak ITE Weekday Hour Trips Hour Trips Land Use Code Size Trips Total In Out Total In Out Assisted Living 254 26 beds 69 4 3 1 6 3 3 Single Family Homes 210 14 units 134 11 3 8 14 9 5 ' Total 203 15 6 9 20 12 8 ' As shown in Table 1, the proposed development will generate only 203 average weekday trips, with 15 trips occurring during the weekday a.m. peak hour, and 20 trips occurring during the weekday p.m. peak hour. Mo/i Drive Property Deve%pment - / Project A 0068 Traffic Impact Study Requirements ' Section 18.810-15(AC) of the City of Tigard's Street Utility Improvement Standards presents specific criteria to help identify whether or not a traffic study is needed for new or expanded developments. The criteria, along with appropriate responses specific to the proposed development site, are provided below: 1. A traffic study shall be required for all new or expanded uses under any of the following circumstances: a) When they generate a 10% or greater increase in existing traffic to high collision intersections identified by Washington County. ' Response: The site trip generation, as defined in Table 1, is too low to generate a 10% impact on high collision intersections that may exist along nearby high-volume roads such as SW Hall Boulevard or OR 99W. ' b) Trip generation from the development onto a City street at the point of access increases by 500 average daily vehicles or more and the existing Average Daily Traffic volume of the ' adjacent street is 6, 000 ADT or more. Response: The estimated net Increase of 203 average daily trips from the proposed development is much lower than the threshold of 500 added average daily site trips, ' regardless of the existing ADT on the adjacent streets. c) If any of the following issues become evident to the City Engineer. ' (1) High traffic volumes on adjacent roadway that may affect movement in or out of site; Response: SW Knoll Drive is a low-volume local street and it can adequately facilitate the ' movement of site traffic in and out As for the access to the assisted living center, estimated site traffic volume flows (as shown in Table 1) are very low and should be accommodated readily by the existing Park 217 access drives on SW Hall Boulevard and OR 99W. ' (2) Lack of existing left-turn lanes onto the adjacent roadway at proposed access, Response: Left-turn lanes already exist along SW Hall Boulevard and OR 99W. Left-turn , lanes are neither necessary nor appropriate on the one-way street of S W Knoll Drive. (3) Inadequate sight distance at access points, , Response: The ability to achieve adequate sight distance along SW Knoll Drive has been addressed in a separate letter from Dunn Traffic Engineering, LLC. (4) The proximity of the proposed access to other existing drives or intersections is a ' potential hazard, Response: The two proposed site-access driveways along SW Knoll Drive are similar in ' style and spacing as other single family driveways present along this local roadway. (5) Proposal requires a conditional use permit, and, Response: Although the proposed assisted living facility will need a conditional use permit, this facility will generate very few trips and not substantially more or less than ' what could be generated by housing built in conformance with the underlying zoning. X11111 September 2007 J MAIM EN.M.1I11O Page 2 ' K7oll Drive Property Development *ard Ptvjec 0068 (6) Proposed development may result in excessive traffic volumes on adjacent local streets. Response: The proposed development is a low trip generator and traffic associated with ' the single-family component of the site will not overwhelm traffic levels on SW Knoll Drive. 2. In addition, a traffic study may be required for all new or expanded uses under any of the ' following circumstances: a) When the site is within 500 feet of an ODOT facility and/or Response: The proposed development site is physically located more than 500 feet from OR 99W. ' b) Trip generation from a development adds 300 or more vehicle trips per day to an ODOT facility. Response: The estimated net increase of 203 average daily trips from the proposed ' development is lower than the ODOT threshold of 300 added average daily trips. c) Trip generation from a development adds 50 or more peak hour trips to an ODOT facility. ' Response. The estimated increase of 15 to 20 peak hour trips from the proposed development site is lower than the ODOT threshold of 50 added peak hour trips. ' Conclusions Based on the findings documented in this letter, it is our conclusion that the proposed site development will not generate enough traffic to warrant a formal traffic impact study. We trust that this letter provides an adequate assessment of the potential need for a traffic study associated with the proposed Knoll Drive Property development. If you have any questions or comments regarding this letter, please contact me at (503)-774-2669. Sincerely, PR DUNN TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, LLC ~~GIN~~~ sot Brian J. Du /,P. E. OR O~, ' Principal ~'i9~~ ~3 }490~»~~ JOSEPH ' File: traffic study need letter rinal, doc 1 ll 1111 September 2007 1 J TRAFFIC ENGIN.11. Page 3 %WWW durtritraffic co t September 4, 2007 Project 0068 1 City of Tigard CD - Development Engineering ' 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Preliminary Sight Distance Analysis and Certification for Knoll Drive Property - Tigard, OR , (Casefile #2S101 BC, Lots 301 & 1500) Dear Development Engineering Staff Member. ' This letter presents the results of a preliminary sight distance analysis and identifies specific mitigation measures designed to achieve sight distance certification for the NW Ventures' proposal for the Knoll , Drive Property development along SW Knoll Drive in Tigard, Oregon. PROJECT BACKGROUND ' NW Ventures (The Applicant) is proposing to develop two parcels of land fronting the northeast side of SW Knoll Drive, where the roadway proceeds through a 90-degree curve between SW Hall Boulevard and SW Huntziker Street. The addresses to the proposed Knoll Drive Property development are 12360 ' and 12390 SW Knoll Drive. A conceptual site plan that provides sufficient detail on the site boundary, site development details, and ' proposed vehicle access scheme is provided in Attachment `A'° to this letter. As shown in the conceptual plan, the proposed development will consist of a mixture of townhomes and a senior care facility. Access to the individual townhome units within the development as well as the pick-up/drop-off location for the senior care facility will take place from two driveways along SW Knoll Drive. A secondary access with ' parking for the senior care facility will be provided in the extreme northeast comer of the site whereby vehicles will use an existing access easement that connects with Park 217 and the driveways to SW Hall Boulevard and OR 99W. ' SW Knoll Drive is a one-way Local street under the jurisdiction of the City of Tigard. As a one-way street, it flows in a clockwise fashion with traffic entering from SW Hall Boulevard to the west and exiting onto ' SW Huntziker Street to the south. The roadway is paved and there are open grass and gravel shoulders, with various driveways to single family residences. There is a crest vertical curve located in the roadway just west of the 90-degree bend, whereby cars exiting off of SW Hall Boulevard must proceed uphill until the roadway flattens out at the beginning of the 90-degree bend. There is no speed limit sign posted ' along the roadway, and there are no bicycle lanes or sidewalk facilities. As there are no parking enforcement signs, vehicles occasional park along the open graveled shoulders along the road. ' It is the two proposed site-access driveways to SW Knoll Drive that are the subject of this preliminary sight distance certification letter and the analysis contained herein. As shown in the attached site plan, the Applicant is proposing two site-access driveways, with an entrance-only driveway located at the ' extreme northwest comer of the site frontage along SW Knoll Drive and an exit-only driveway at the extreme southeast comer of the site frontage. As explained later in this letter, intersection sight distance from the Applicant's proposed exit-only driveway location is sub-standard, with no viable means of ' mitigation, except for perhaps to reverse, or flip-flop, the traffic flow of the two proposed site driveways whereby the proposed entrance becomes the exit and visa versa. In lieu of switching the traffic flow at these driveways, the Applicant intends to pursue a variance to the City's sight distance standards to allow Kno// DnVe Property Development 'lard, OR Project A 0068 for the proposed site-access driveway scheme as shown in the site plan. If however, the variance is denied, the following sections of this letter were prepared to explain how preliminary sight distance certification can be achieved by flip-flopping the traffic flow at the two proposed site-access driveways t and removing vegetation within the public right-of-way. SIGHT DISTANCE ANALYSIS ' It is important to emphasize here that sight distance certification is not necessary for whichever driveway location becomes the entrance-only drive to the Knoll Drive development property. This is because SW Knoll Drive is a one-way street that flows in a clockwise fashion, whereby entering vehicles will have no conflict with other vehicle movements. Sight distance certification, however, is required for whichever driveway becomes the exit-only drive. This is because drivers who will be exiting the proposed development will need to see a sufficient enough distance to make a decision whether or not to turn left ' onto SW Knoll Drive. Existing Sight Distance Intersection sight distance measurements were taken at each of the proposed site-access driveway locations along SW Knoll Drive, under the assumption that either driveway could become the dedicated exit-only driveway. These measurements were conducted in conformance with the parameters set forth in the City of Tigard Code Section 18.705.030.H.1, and are based on a driver's eye height of 3.5 feet ' looking at an object height of 4.25 feet above the road. Although the City code requires a measurement from 15 feet behind the edge of pavement, only 10 feet of distance could be achieved from the northwest driveway location, given the presence of dense vegetation along the site development frontage and ' adjacent property frontage. Based on measurements taken in the field, intersection sight distance was measured to be exactly 175 feet at both driveway locations. Required Sight Distance _ The required level of intersection sight distance is based on the prevailing travel speed of the adjacent roadway, SW Knoll Drive. As mentioned earlier, there is no speed limit sign posted along SW Knoll Drive. So, in order to get a realistic assessment of normal driver speeds on SW Knoll Drive, a 48-hour speed ' survey was conducted on midweek days in July 2007. The location and results of this speed survey are presented in Attachment "B" to this letter. As the results show, the 85th percentile speed of approaching cars on SW Knoll Drive is 22 mph. Based on these results and the design standards identified in the AASHTO "green book" (Reference 1), drivers should have at least 213 feet of intersection sight distance when accessing SW Knoll Drive. This design value is based on Exhibit 9-58 in the AASHTO publication for Case 82 (Right Turn From Stop), which is the equivalent of making a left-turn from a stop onto a one- way street. It is important to emphasize here that the cited design standard of 213 feet is only necessary for drivers looking at traffic approaching from the west on SW Knoll Drive. There are no cars approaching from the south, as the street is one-way. ' A comparison between the available intersection sight distance of 175 feet and the AASHTO design standard of 213 feet clearly shows that adequate intersection sight distance is lacking at both proposed driveway locations. At the proposed exit-only driveway in the southeast location, sight distance is ' obstructed by the fence line of a neighboring residence across the street. A picture illustrating this is provided in Attachment °C" to this letter. At the other driveway location to the northwest, sight distance is limited somewhat by dense vegetation at the west end of the site frontage, but more so by the vegetation ' that lines the adjacent property west of the site. Pictures illustrating this vegetation and how it obstructs sight distance are also provided in Attachment "C" to this letter. As shown in these pictures, the dense vegetation consists of juniper bushes and a semi-mature deciduous tree. _ ■ September 2007 ' I TiAFFICENGMEERING - Paget ject 0068 ' Knoll Drive Property Development - ; f, OR Pro SIGHT DISTANCE MITIGATION t Based on right-of-way information and aerial photography supplied by Metro, using MetroMap, it is clear that the fence line of the neighboring residence across the street is located entirely within private property. Therefore, the sight distance limitation at the southeasterly driveway location cannot be ' mitigated without removing this fence line, which is outside the control of the Applicant and unlikely to happen. The dense cropping of vegetation lining SW Knoll Drive west of the site is, however, contained within the t public street right-of-way. Removal of this vegetation can increase available intersection sight distance from the northwest driveway location dramatically. An exhibit has been prepared and included as Attachment "D" to this letter to show how the removal of this vegetation can mitigate the sight distance deficiency and increase intersection sight distance to as much as 260 feet and beyond. This finding is supported by our observations in the field, and as seen by the "close-up" picture provided in Attachment "C", where one can actually see the edge of SW Hall Boulevard, which is over 300 feet away from the ' proposed exit-only driveway. PRELIMINARY CERTIFICATION OF SIGHT DISTANCE In conclusion, I hereby certify that adequate intersection sight distance can be achieved at the proposed northwest driveway location to SW Knoll Drive, assuming the site driveway is designed as an exit-only access and as long as vegetation located within the public right-of-way is removed in such a manner that ' 260 feet or more of intersection sight distance is achieved. We trust that this analysis and the mitigation measures identified herein adequately address the sight ' distance requirements as set forth in the Tigard Development Code and the design standards specified in AASHTO. If you have any questions or comments regarding this letter, please contact me at (503)-774- 2669. Sincerely, DUNN TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, LLC ' LG~ Brian J. D /n, .E. ;Z~~ Principal Enclosure: Attachments "A" through "D". ' References: 1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). A Policy on Geometric Design of ' Highways and Streets. 2004. File: sight distance certification final.doc PR ~aGINl;F~ C7 2 cc 60027PE r OR O ' q9q 3,1 9N~OSEP~~ EXPIRES: ~D Ir► 5eotember2007 ERAFFlC ENGINEERING Page 3 ' j~/1• S71TFcr s~" f1 EROSION CONTROL KEYNOTES - l'~ ~.•.r Q n .RU SdYOI[roa ta. % C ~ U~ Et I.mea AAEa mr S~gTat m. - - _ m,....+,«e.a..~v r a .zwinm romwwaYrtrYz p Elal alAYE taiORiR WCAAeap YYQtE minl Sol GRADING KEYNOTES uIII(- ds ei's a _ ~~ir.. ? ''A • ' `r ' ~ - ~ t w.i® swuAvx~u 4emE rAa' x lwa d -dr+ - .IA - -ya: a°4 a trtasrtwL Ce - - ;~"u ' ' . 'b - rw ~kGs~ A ,WANE ~c_ J~e. ~ All myrrmm~ / i •jlylp~A a g, a / e enasnru u r ` i i t a 4FTM u n E : n i - lA it $"AxL EI r • O EROSION CONTROL GENERAL NOTES ` t N1d d AF9dAim NOd xst E At)OYlaL fd r1aYi IYf WUId rop a TE E9c nwlp xu E np[p!0 at'1 fl M uIYAdMIpYl4c1011 !q • • . YNAIBVId 6 NL UaiA1 Na saYdr NY11R Y(A91AS a ACPO06 ■w WrdiF1 AEaS1Ad m E]n.E Yf4 NAIAKS nAnalaa V a - t~ ' ~ • ~ a +~4sulG+o rmAU aaumn. sawA6 ac EaDd N[tu7aY .vo a AT >mYBa NIIiaL MN1+A1aEVEl awa, RL 01eL Ala tY[l t0 OA0. atL i. ♦ YaYl IIi101i 10a -xvak"s KUia uMi 'IE m F1. Ild.[ ALL Gm1 , G Crum l R A A Eaa A, r+vrC ff9m Is x "mwty f 11065MMt 1101 NB1 Ti]gpF{NR 11Fa MA M ,U1l11 1 C r Y~ ~ R ' _ i AV l[ m ulwAm S ilk m AM 'n ",a V V• V" O _ ^ mss-, Q .rile r ~1y mneic101 nn u1 m4ducnl is m 5 Ev 40 Anl R M 16M. \~~Ar ~ r. : ! ~L @9! Xvosm Iue'E¢umUJdICAHC EII~efleO- H DAL1P xY ]E Sa1Aa0 a 1 , y`Yy. _ ? 1 Fl 4 . CM 1 :1 l 0 ! ¢ l i'MA®OAA16 dnwCS 91A1 E NML! AT M tdL fNIJ ! Q; i9tM911Ld a+11pAE.F•I RHgfTlO.WlAfO. AAC aM1fNEl mtMYGT01o M1K.Qt .Ydbk YA9RS YArff To h/Ft fIlUm "cE IDAaAC dAr Nl rAln rEAl Aa~auYA ip Ya lwla4 W M s t : ~VV ' 'fn _ ! I 1 m'IDJONIa a H ad•C AAAp fN1a d M IuA f/a1 E atNaT rEa[[ NAm n Yc nnA NRI m a A macmt Aunt x m 1NE UP MgM E u . /I .r OYna•r¢ E1aO w/ e A ma E rB17 IA[ WRd6 Scat R 1. 7 - M A No W N SI 1[ nYOEi~ ofi G+P[cA! _ • • ` ` ~1 R' 1mIG0Y® R H .M ftA:LMT/~1aK1E Id ft OMAPR a [OICA.GYI. AIFA0 a M JA[ 0ml`lln MWIQ t0.IIMd Af- ) A IIEIi Wlnm 4 H 4INmAFJ SIro11101 f4 II.• *W it aA159VCa] N Q%d41n1 AM m M Jni 1VrIIT li0 FSirax AI[ a 4 RAtm A3 AMfl1 tl RL Y' 3LYaT W 40EYi LVaI IMTIA Idi IM dmE X arr+¢ M1aL it neAG SYALL E Ipi•aY A0 Vrat TAM nmmE I Fd am1 TAE d 1 j -'cq• J pAlE11 gYMZ CfIP•L 4Q aNCIYCi OaCVEnA s H [snoul Aft d YE ensaeneA MM M 1EAW ALOAAalaln /E MRiMm li / 0aE W SCOW sir Yor [srNntl nx Kidd ifi n- 1 • 0h -ml mete rtAaa Am m IA{~},3 rNNL E anwi NA L N. H ET IaY11 dd aYaW ed rYaLUY•A YWES au E d G~ Ai X®[C Td W4EM= AVON EWA so M pAK BW ~I T Oi[CL n YH tMaOt ILLIUTW 10 nlCrt OIYnOL HAwC Y(! 0.Vi - AT0(R. • . , . y +a 49[YTUOd Ae1a1 Offs I071a1M1 H srt. MvN cwu q mt E acmexm • IS H eMOEt NULL 10" Ei WAVO 1101 W" 5 RUT 6TMUM ~v 4 O1 l w[c IATK A[aRlAEYMa+md ffiN. AYAVI[la3dc1 .Ot f r E rY// pr, A BENCHl[ABK aroam LE m m of • Ta WOOD d -ft a um Wommm PA"me 11 am atta mm Or FAIWY amlMW E'6 ODA=-IXn GRAPHIC SCALE rt [ex - AAno0 a1E EY nAd lac YOAH SE a 1NaL zr[[E 0 13 m eo O CT69AAEAY.T Q.IAW ---'F- Add POR REVIEW ONLY ROIf 4R-ft-"mrayrn.+wrEaawala EL*a-~~+t~f NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 11 s PRELIMINARY GRADING ineA ZTeC ENGINEERS, INC. & EROSION CON'T'ROL PLAN AS W R 3737 S.E. 8TH 50335-L5-8 95 OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY Q FAX: (503) 233-7x89 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TIGARD. OREGON cl ~ EXnl16 a/SA/i0o6 I ' ATTACHMENT A 1 1 1 1 A L' 1111 ' / RAfNC fXOINLfYiNO I ' ATTACHMENT B 1 LI 1111 ' i nurnc teoulruma 1 4. + f sr 1. + t b ~ ~ s t ~ln w"t ' e r. s~' mil` ! ax•wu":vw:.,r.< 3- y'~y ' 4t~ Y; aS a S J 'Ilk F{ -,tr w y ~ 5 t J 00006 Y Type of report: Tube Count - Speed Data Page 1 of 5 LOCATION: SW Knoll Drive QC JOB 10272201 DIRECTION: EB CITY: Tigard STATE: Oregon DATE: Aug 12007 Start Time 1 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 Total Pace Number 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 999 Speed in Pace 12:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 01.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 04:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 05:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 06:00 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 16-25 2 07:00 4 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 16-25 7 08:00 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 21-30 4 09:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11-20 1 10:00 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 21-30 3 11:00 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 11-20 5 12:00 PM 1 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 16-25 10 01:00 6 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 6-15 4 02:00 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 16-25 3 03:00 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 16-25 5 04:00 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 16-25 5 05:00 3 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 16-25 9 06:00 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 16-25 4 07:00 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6-15 2 08:00 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16-25 3 09:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 10:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 11:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6-15 1 Day Total 35 34 31 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 102 16-25 65 Percent 34.3% 33.3% 30.4% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% AM Peak 7:OOAM 11:00AM 7:00AM 7:OOAM Volume 4 4 4 11 PM Peak 1:00PM 12:OOPM 5:OOPM 1:o0PM 7:OOPM 5:OOPM Volume 6 8 6 1 1 12 Counter Comments: 48-hour speed survey. Knoll is one-way street. Map of tube location will be emailed to JR. Report generated on 8/3/2007 SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (hftp://www.qualitycounts.net) I Type of report: Tube Count - Speed Data Page 2 of 5 LOCATION: SW Knoll Drive QC JOB 10272201 DIRECTION: EB CITY: Tigard STATE: Oregon DATE: Aug 2 2007 Start Time 1 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 Total Pace Number 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 999 Speed in Pace 12:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 02:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 04:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 05:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 06:00 1 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 16-25 7 07:00 5 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1-10 3 08:00 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 11-20 3 09:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 10:00 11:00 12:00 PM 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 Day Total 10 11 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 16-25 16 Percent 35.7% 39.3% 17.9% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% AM Peak 7:OOAM 6:OOAM 6:00AM 6:OOAM 6:OOAM Volume 5 4 3 1 9 PM Peak Volume Counter Comments: 48-hour speed survey. Knoll is one-way street. Map of tube location will be emailed to JR. Report generated on 8/3/2007 SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) r Type of report: Tube Count - Speed Data Page 3 of 5 LOCATION: SW Knoll Drive QC JOB #:10272201 DIRECTION: EB CITY: Tigard STATE. Oregon DATE: Jul 30 2007 Start Time 1 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 Total Pace Number 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 999 Speed in Pace 12:00 AM 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 PM 01:00 02:00 03:00 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 11-20 6 04:00 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 16-25 7 05:00 2 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 16-25 5 06:00 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 6-15 3 07:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 08:00 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 11-20 4 09:00 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 21-30 1 10:00 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11-20 2 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 Day Total 19 15 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 16-25 24 Percent 43.2% 34.1% 20.4% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% AM Peak Volume PM Peak 3:00PM 3:OOPM 4:OOPM 5:OOPM Volume 7 4 4 1 Counter Comments: 48-hour speed survey. Knoll is one-way street. Map of tube location will be emailed to JR. Report generated on 8/3/2007 SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) Type of report: Tube Count - Speed Data Page 4 of 5 LOCATION: SW Knoll Drive QC JOB 10272201 DIRECTION: EB CITY: Tigard STATE: Oregon DATE: Jul 31 2007 Start Time 1 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 Total Pace Number 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 999 Speed in Pace 12:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 01:00 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11-20 1 02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 03:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 05:00 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16-25 1 06:00 2 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 11-20 6 07:00 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 11-20 4 08:00 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 16-25 6 09:110 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1-10 3 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 11:00 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11-20 3 12:00 PM 7 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 16-25 10 01:00 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 11-20 4 02:00 2 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 16-25 6 03:00 2 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 16-25 5 04:00 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11-20 2 05:00 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6-15 2 06:00 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 16-25 4 07:00 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 16-25 3 08:00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 16-25 2 09:00 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16-25 4 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-10 0 11:00 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6-15 1 Day Total 38 48 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 11-20 61 Percent 38.0% 48.0% 12.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% AM Peak 9:OOAM 6:00AM 8:00AM 6:00AM Volume 5 5 2 1 PM Peak 12:OOPM 12:00PM 12:00PM 5:OOPM 12:OOPM Volume 7 7 3 1 17 Counter Comments: 48-hour speed survey. Knoll is one-way street. Map of tube location will be emailed to JR. Report generated on 8/312007 SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) Type of report: Tube Count - Speed Data SUMMARY - Speed Data Page 5 of 5 LOCATION: SW Knoll Drive QC JOB 10272201 DIRECTION: EB CITY: Tigard STATE: Oregon DATE: Jul 30 2007 3:00PM -Aug 2 2007 10:OOAM Start Time 1 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 Total Pace Number 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 999 Speed in Pace Grand Total 102 108 57 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 274 16-25 165 Percent 37.2% 39.4% 20.8% 2.2% 0.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Cumulative Percent 37.2% 76.6% 97.4% 99.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 85th Percentile: 22 MPH Mean Speed(Average): 15 MPH Median: 16 MPH Mode: 18 MPH Counter Comments: 48-hour speed survey. Knoll is one-way street. Map of tube location will be emailed to JR. Report generated on 8/3/2007 SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) I i 1 1 ATTACHMENT C 1 1 1 I I I 1.1 1111 I i, RAffIC iHOINCQMG 1 t r~ 4 I'M r~ a -v pr45. m®r r ;nom r r r t 3 Y".1C'{ttt r CM Z. ~ i Yrn r_ ~ ~.°Y~ryg re ~3.. t sa'~ t }$^.r# ~ _ r n cl^r ~'3 r>rkrh5~~ Wiens. ~a `xu~" A L- Fir •t`~'~R X - _ wrxriFF - di~£: x.+•t..9Aw~w.,.,......... ,m.. .~d<~~9.VM14w(nt. iuw-Jrll91Wuv_""' 5, _ ~.-PE1?-,... vsvx«..sw..~au. v::eJ ti,%+'s"ruu^"... •,c ~..w. ,.~1 i 'di : rr ! ; ~ 1' ~ Nq A~F~ ! Y E 1 q _ X+ + ~ °f 9 , fi k17~~JY 1 zk ~,~+~tT' x~"y. ~H;~., k sr y ,~~~~a~~~~" ` ~~~i~~~~~~~ ~rp~,'a2~ir5~~'Y~r~i~9 yr, ~ ~ r s ~ ~ ~.-t, t't w$k' r "'4"a • ~n~ GP :f:: i u ~ t <,Ysr~}>FYes °r5t~b'a",~a.F'~ ~.t Sa ^~1~te~~ ~pR,~{~ . ,~~~s~xx~'4~ ~ x ry ~ ~ II 1 v ~ Fat.' e"' R ~ ~ ~ k'~ ~ a sr~ tr ~ ~'i a !.A s i 4 ix 3P ~ r S ~ Ix h t PP I I I+ r>t ~t 4 m r `r i~ v "kt~~ III ~ f ~ ,+f r ~ a _ Ila,~P~~~°' t x a kX L~ t h Z ~dti ? kti i. raj ~ xs- ~ rY urs.~ z P~ ' r ~Ym iY r.. v 5x~"c r>ti 4'+~}LrLt i"n MY~ 2~}r~ t _ a p e rP ~ ~2. ~ s ~ I ' S Tlv ar ,~.``tLx. i4~ "~"z`t~s f _..y= ,u, y' ; _ _ `ab►. i - s c c'r , v.. i 3t c ~ '~G2 far + 8:. 1 ~ C p~ w tt YYr~ T 4r~ , ,r ' ~ l .♦jr ~ f ~~~CCC ~i~j L F t~ , fah ~t<. ~ a iA1 f ~ > s t" K~ y 4W~ 1 .7tM # r P 10 8 YY t i !t k~ ~f r eN. pro, TOV l Rill ry a } P >s r l~l II ' 3 `c i YffJ~~ L & t +a + .:Jt..c*c~~F~l~`s'<~ ;.,,ai.`",EC ♦~.r~d 1 I I 1 1 1 ATTACHMENT D 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 4ullll J RAfFl[ 1H0 W F[11NG i Map Output etro Page 1 of 1 ' Ma gym{ Legend t k - Places rim Slolion >i: ~ ~ Library , School SW Hail Blvd. Freeways Slreeis 1 s---? Taxlots Streams Urban Grawih Sour Stream shading i r `rxt' - r t~" a~ Parks 2008 aerial phoie Zoning r i dos w c~f~ ~$~:~~~'r•~,~, aFi ri~#~i'f~ r c,~t ~ 0061 IND ED MFR MLIC POS RUR ' SI'R t r ~Yv'l f£i,ull Div ca i 40"'m J 1 ~ t n y tA~rai(a ~ a s a'"'"x"K a e r ~ ~ -e~, r •i MEE* S& Cre!al by Meuv Dti13 Ret~axe Ce ai 't~ MeuoMap, xWw. mcva-l e~iotLr,)q; arc _ _ _ _ s. `vt ti 1J t'aiaC 7 U EN D i., ysstm6 Intetsectmi igf,t bi tarl'bt T76 t tick. c.J C #cr wl Hitt Sic fit'-) ancr.. 26p" C) mml ut?,of2-131), )x~~tF cir r ai IT etati«,a to FZem c r~ lvvitJiirt t3t.iI I r gilt afmti~ayti i t http://mica.metro-region.org/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName--metromap_plan&ClientV... 8/3/2007 , 1 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES r CITY b, Y TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six (6) Months) REAM MG DE A In W Vff &p- t!rn - RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: IV~ VCrI I ~R~S ~n ~ _ ~Vli , AGENT: /~MRK 1 Eth Phone: ( ) ~~T Phone: X711 S-06 - 016 PROPERTY LOCATION: 23 6 a Sc~ ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: K h o I / Z 3 9 d S k no-~Q TAX MAP(S)/LOT # (S): .Z S 1 O 1 . 00 n l 5° 0/S Gb NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: PL tD n~l~za~p~vt - EU~~vt/ (PDT ) scIV47iveLfllvs RE- 449) ~ory0/~~fJ~y. L ys~ j;FR,(njT (CUP S b S etiJ 5y8 J PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 1~1J~~ S A n 5 a~ ,!4H67- oN 7~-acs^~ 5 7it-: - r104LdOE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ~ MAP DESIGNATION: Low bens(T' rSIc(P, ON-L ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: R - W 5 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Referto Code Section 18. -s/y ) MINIMUM LOT SIZE: ZZO sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: Sd ft. Max. building height: 30 ft. Setbacks: Front 2 0 ft. Side Ste' ft. Rear / ft. Corner /S- ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: - -d2=0/0 Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: GARAGES: ZD ft. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED PARTIES, 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. NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Chapter 18.390) 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. s~ s~ Z7/~Gf~ j'~ 1r C~jissis lave Rif QTR' OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 9 Residential Apphcation/Planning Division Section a 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 minirrmum, 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 ppublic 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 specificall y 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. 'VZKACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18.765) , Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: D Minimum pavement width: ,2 O l t^ ) V t44.9 5+~-e 6-f~ i- ` s i D E w W _1K WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.705) Within all ATTACHED HOUSING (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling SHALL BE CONNECTED BY WALKWAY TO THE VEHICULAR PARKING AREA, COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION FACILITIES. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATION (Refer to Code Chapter 18.715) -SEE EXAMPLE BELOW. The NET RESIDENTIAL UNITS ALLOWED on a particular site may be calculated by dividing the net area of the developable land by the minimum number of square feet required per dwelling unit as specified by the applicable zoning designation. Net development area is calculated by subtracting the following land area(s) from the gross site area: 2. 7Yae- - V 35-166 sFIAe- 1 19 35't( 5F gres5- All sensitive lands areas including: o ► Land within the 100-year floodplain; _/5' ► Slopes exceeding 25%; / b ley s( 5F NET ► Drainageways; and sbo 5;#A'.Ir ► Wetlands for the R 1, R 2, R 3.5, R 4.5 and R 7 zoning districts. Public ri ht-of-wa dedication: /►'~A~ /3. S Nl is ► 'le-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities; or miau /o, g 'inoins ► Multi-familyallocate 15% of gross acres for ublic facilities; or ility IN- If available, the actual public tacsquare foootage can be used for deduction. oCe :yLt~iLCO~ 5 F l 8. /.Z D 3 O. 6 3 -fOa 6 v-4afeZ( EXAMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: (USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE (3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE) WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS) Single-Family Multi-Family 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 43,560 sq. ft. of gross site area 8,712 sq. ft. (20%) for public right-of-way 6,534 sq. ft. (15%) for public right-of-way NET: 34,848 square feet NET: 37,026 square feet (minimum lot area) - 3.050 mum lot area 11.4 Units Per Acre = 12.1 Units Per Acre Note: The Development Code requires that the net site area exist for the next whole dwelling unit. NO ROUNDING UP IS PERMITTED. Note: Minimum Project Density is 80% of the maximum allowed density. TO DETERMINE THIS STANDARD, MULTIPLY THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS BY.8. TTY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 9 'denual Application/Planning Division Section SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.730) ► STREETS: feet from the centerline of ► FLAG LOT: A TEN (10)-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK applies to all primary structures. ► ZERO LOT LINE LOTS A minimum of a ten (10)-foot separation shall be maintained between each dwelling unit or garage. ► MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL building separation standards apply within multiple-family residential developments. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES UP TO 528 SQUARE FEET in size maybe permitted on lots less than 2.5 acres in size. Five (5)-foot minimum setback from side and rear lot lines. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE UP TO 1,000 SQUARE FEET on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. (Note: See applicable zoning district for the primary structures' setback requirements.) ❑ FLAG LOT BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730) MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 11/z STORIES or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 2'/2 stories, or 35 feet in R 7, R 12, R-25 or R-40 zones provided that the standards of Section 18.730.010.62 are satisfied. BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.745) 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 byte 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 24 be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes maybe found in the Development Code. The ESTIMATED REQUIRED BUFFERS applicable to your proposal area is: Buffer Level G along north boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. Buffer Level along 777t boundary. Buffer Level along east boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: ,FZKLANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745, 18.765 and 18.705) STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as riveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private proI, erty within six (6) feet of the ri ht-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 allarking 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. ,RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recyclingg~enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parkin lot is roEN ed. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Pride Disposal can be reached,at (503 625-6177. PARKING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.765 & 18.705) ALL PARKING AREAS AND DRIVEWAYS MUST BE PAVED. ► Single-family............ Requires: One (1) off-street parking space per dwelling unit; and One (1) space per unit less than 500 square feet. i. Multiple-family......... Requires: 1.25 spaces per unit for 1 bedroom; 1.5 spaces per unit for 2 bedrooms; and 1.75 spaces per unit for 3 bedrooms. 6 y gyp l., ytytS 0 s~Ji~t~ earn Hsu rc= ) DwL~«y u~✓r~ 30 S/~A CITY OF TTGARD Pre Application CA rence Notes p ~Z, i1 _ N 5 yes 7,.7 / `Page 3 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Secuon ~5' Multi-family dwelling units with more than ten (10) required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall consist of 15% of the total required parking. NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. Parking stay shall be dimensioned as follows: ► Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. lo. Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. u, Handicapped parking: All parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person pp~arking spaces. The mnumum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, is 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. ,a BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Code Section 18.765) BICYCLE RAGS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle rags shall be located areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. V' ZSENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.775) 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 res onsibilito precisely identif sensitive land areas, and their boundaries, is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the de irtitions of sensitive lands must be clean 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. STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.775.070.C) When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a eotechnical re ort must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.0. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.0. CLEAN WATER SERVICES (CWS) BUFFER STANDARDS (Refer to CWS R&O 07-20/USA RegLdations -Chapter 3) 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: (See Table 3.1 on following page) QTY OF UGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division section TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION & ORDER 07-20 SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTH OF VEGETATED TO SENSITIVE AREA' CORRIDOR PER SIDE2 • Streams with intermittent flow draining: Q5% 0 10 to <50 acres 15 feet 0 >50 to Q00 acres 25 feet Existing or created wetlands m.5 acre 25 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre Q5% 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% 0 10 to 60 acres 30 feet 0 >50 to Q00 acres 50 feet ♦ Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure in 25- ♦ Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow foot increments from the starting point to ♦ Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres the top of ravine (break in Q5% slope), Natural lakes and ponds add 35 feet past the to of ravine3 '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. 'Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 'The 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. 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, eecept as pmzidai far in dx USA Design and Constnazion Standan-s. 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 CWS R&O 07-20 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 and the "Tree Plan Requirements Handout" included in your pre-application conference packet) 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 p~arcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned Ivelo ment, or conditional use is filed. PROTECTION IS PREFERRED OVER REMOVAL WHEREVER POSSIBLE (Address all items in the Cites Tree Plan Requirements Handout). QTY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section THE TREE PLAN SHAL NCLUDE the following: ► Identification of the location, size, species, and condition of all existing trees greater than 6-inch caliper. ► 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 cali pper requires that two-thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainaof from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees tote 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 s 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 damages is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. ► 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 withn 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 parry may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. 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. The applicant shall show the clear vision areas on the site plan, and identify any obstructions in these areas. ❑ FUTURE STREET PLAN AND EXTENSION OF STREETS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.030.F.) A FUTURE STREET PLAN shall: ► Be filed by the applicant in con.unction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing roposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include boundaries of the proposed land division and shall include other parcels within 200 feet surrounding and adjacent to the proposed land division. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site. Where 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. QTY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 9 Residential Application/Planning Division Section ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 21h TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 11/z times the muumum lot size of the applicable zoning district. ❑ BLOCKS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.090) The perimeter of BLOCKS FORMED BY STREETS SHALL NOT EXCEED 1,800 FEET measured along the right-of-way center line except where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies o water or, pre-existing development. When block lengths greater than 330 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block CODE CHAPTERS oso. a. S 18.330'(Conditional Use) 18.620 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards) 18.760 (Nonconforming Situations) 18.340 (Director's Interpretation) 18.630 (Washington Square Regional Center) X8.765 (Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) -p-_11 8.350 (Planned Development) 18.640 (Durham Quarry Design Standards) _Lfl 8.775 (Sensitive Lands Review) 18.360 (Site Development Review) ✓18.705 (Access/Egress/Circulation) X18.780 (Signs) 18.370 (Variances/Adjustments) 18.710 (Accessory Residential Units) 18.785 (Temporary Use Permits) 18.380 (Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ~J 18.715 (Density Computations) ~ 18.790 (Tree Removal) 18.385 (Miscellaneous Permits) x/18.720 (Design Compatibility Standards) 18.795 (visual Clearance Areas) 18.390 (Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) X18.725 (Environmental Performance Standards) 18.798 (Wireless Communication Facilities) 18.410 (Lot Line Adjustments) ✓18.730 (Exceptions To Development Standards) 8.810 (Street & Utility Improvement Standards) 18.420 (Land Partitions) 18.740 (Historic Overlay) 18.430 (Subdivisions) 18.742 (Home Occupation Permits) ~G 18.510 (Residential Zoning Districts) 8.745 (Landscaping & Screening Standards) 18.520 (Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.750 (Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) 18.530 (Industrial Zoning Districts) X18.755 (Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: ?I POtVC,O 6~-1/~ZaP/~1~7✓ 7- 42~Y1E(7/ (l~J~ilphcc~ Lyl eclle/j~7J Raul w nt 77'19- c u P , 564 _ 812 . ss~s~T~~J 41illw6Z R- UsE Z j~c CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 9 Residential Apphcadon/Planning Division Section I 1 ayd G r- LI.~Z't+LfL~' f e. r era ,S ~ cu~~U PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. Public hearing before the Planningg 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 b mail or dropped off at the counter without Plannin Division acce tance may be returned. The P anning counter closes at 5:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2" x 11". One 81/2" x 11" ma of a proposed project shall a so be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Applications- pplications 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. 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 G~ Tc oci nJc L A basic flow chartwhich illustrates the review process is available from the Plannmi Division upon request. Land use applications regwnn%a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public eating. 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. SUBDIVISION PLAT NAME RESERVATION (Washington County Surveyor's Office: 503-648-8884) PRIOR TO SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION LAND USE APPLICATION with the City of Tigard, applicants are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyors Office in order to obtain approval/ reservation for any subdivision name. Applications 2. not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. 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 -a plication 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 Qt vs olic is to a 1 those s tem development credits to the first buildin permit issued in the develo ment KJNLPSS O RWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER A HE TIME THE DEMO ITIO PERMIT IS OBTAINED). QTY OF MARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 9 Residential Application/ Planning Division Section 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: p QTY OF TIG PLANNING DIN71SION - STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-639-4171 FAX: 503-624-3681 DIRECT: 503-718- 2,;k3 EMAIL: r~}I @tigard-orgov TITLE 18 (QTY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTCODE) INTERNET ADDRESS: www.tigard-or.gov H\patty\masters\Pre-App Notes Residential.doc Updated: 27-Feb-08 (Engineering section: preapp.eng) QTY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 9 of 9 Residential Applicanon/Pla =g Division Section NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING MATERIALS 1 NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING May 9, 2007 ' RE: The Village At Knoll 12360 & 12390 SW Knoll Drive, Tigard, OR 97223 t Dear Interested Party: ' Northwest Ventures Group has been retained by and represents the owners of the property listed above, 12360 & 12390 SW Knoll Drive in Tigard, (Tax Map #'s 2S101BC Lot 00301 ' and Lot 01500). We are considering proposing a 15 unit subdivision which will create 15 lots plus 1 common tract for single family homes, attached single family homes, and a ' Residential Care Facility (RCF) at this location. The RCF will be the focal point of this development meant to encourage and facilitate intergenerational involvement. The project will incorporate LEED building techniques and methods throughout the entire community. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals, 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 Thursday, May 24th, 2007 at 7:00 PM Meeting to Be Held at Tigard City Hall (13125 SW Hall Blvd) In the Red Rock Creek Conference Room Please notice this will be an information meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be ' altered prior to the submittal of the application to the city. ' I look forward to discussing the proposal, and the vision for the project with you. Please contact me at 971-506-0156 if you have any questions regarding this proposal or the meeting. ' Thank you, W&46i ' Mark Reed Northwest Ventures Group ' 2808 NE MLK Jr. Blvd, Suite P Portland, OR 97212 (971) 506-0156 1 Attachments: Preliminary Site Plan; Location of Site in Relation to Surrounding Area y - CITY of GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM AREA NOTIFIED (500') mnnenlo J mn11oo1n moron/oo GARDEN PL FOR: Mark Reed m12MO2509 27 nil /7 tS111n"°° RE: 2S101 BC; 301/1500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - mmnlloo m02AA03208 2SIlMD7700 7511111ecno0 Q motecoeooo rnn1C01700 n1C0o40 Property owner information is valid for 3 months from 2nltAlnin the date printed on this map. rnmcoo111 mono MIC031 rnO2Mn000 mmc]n1o O ' 21. ~ nICn 1 m0172 mnleneel mnlclomt rnnecnol nlcnl 2ou2umsol nlcn: mneelttoo mnleoetoo mcmo mcm mem M1111100211 291111110221112 nICIn N~~k A \Q M1111 122111 N s~ mnlclnol rnn1C1I27n mollBn110 0 100 200 300 400 Feel V= 295 feet a mn0002100 Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the Development Services Division. Po 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 9p (503) r 1 hlt ://www Lor.us 5 ~ annK n~ evsu+ESS c~°' - ¢ ~.u E5 10 - - n-cw__- i. 181 - . CAR. - - '.80 ° _490_ 19LT-- kr ` + Z, ice, \ ,1 ~ GVt / / ! J• t ,i if ,Q, ti o 'may` - / ♦ t _ t 1F ( /J 4'aptr AFC :a 201 .20 Op / . p ® a. FF t DR 578 ' E2 . .414P 1 ,y~M: _ ,.j CAft• ~ ` °t87.. ;x ~ a, o,i ( FF 7-5 V i E5 • oy~' 1.1 FF - AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE QTY 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. MAIL NG: ' q~ HAY I,- , being duly sworn, depose and say that on the ( day of 20 b , I caused tq have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at ' (or near) Ww s l ayo ~ tOX fold. ~t4aa- 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 pllainlyaddressed to said persons and. were deposited on the date indicated ' above in the United States Post Office located at ~(lfri Sc,CYr- r ~G~7~t~~• , with postage prepaid thereon. Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) I POSTING: I, 1-42t -9- 99tD -,do affirm that I am (represent) the parry initiating interest in a proposed land use application for 6 L.t.u tT ' lU eDI V IStcvt IRC>r• mej U r? affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address(s) and all tax lot(s) currently registered) " a;ago sco lt~ js+etvr4- 16Ae,v > R~ 3 , and did on the :OTC day of 4Y , 20_a~L personally post notice indicating that the site maybe proposed for a ff-WK ~tsttnU land use application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. I The sign was posted at . (Z3&_0 Su? 4ZL- ' VaNsr c(-- radke%- -jLts AD,Ams-rc T-o DP-toqu ArY_ I C P[ xY ow'&'T~ f b u)A t-V_c,t _F PXK - I C a34v scc2 lc tXz,f _ - -ez<i fl (state location you posted notice on property) Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) I (THIS SECTION FOR ASTATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE /NOTARIZE) STATE OF County of ) ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the S day of , 20~. OFFICIAL SEAL NAI.Y SITHOVONO NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 373267 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT,1, 2007. NOTARY PTYB LIC OF ORE GCO My Commission Expires: i \curpln\masters\neighborhood meetings\affidavit of mailing-posting neighborhood meeting.doc Page 5 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE ' THE FOLLOWING NOTICE SHALL BE READ TO ATTENDEES AT THE BEGINNING OF A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. 1 This meeting is regarding ,(12roject name) located at ~ project location.) , and is being held as required by the City of Tigard development review process. I ' 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 feet should have received neighborhood meeting information and 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 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 feet 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. I 1:\c tupln\masters\neighborhood meetings\neighborhood meeting statement of purpose.doc I ' Page 6 4tG ~ 2S101i BC-02100 2S101BC-00500 ANNAND PROPERTIES III-H LLC CORDOVA MARIA G ' 8260 SW HUNZIKER RD #150 12300 SW KNOLL DR Hai uei TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BC-01800 2S102AA-03200 BEAUDOIN MICHAEL E & CRAGHEAD GARY A JUDY A DONNA R 12205 SW HALL BV ' 12490 SW KNOLL DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BB-01400 251018C-01600 ' CALWEST INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LLC DEFOE JUDITH A MCGEE BY ePROPERTYTAX INC 12455 SW 68TH AVE DEPT #207 PORTLAND, OR 97223 ' PO BOX 4900 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85261 2S101BB-01600 2S101BC-00600 ' C WEST INDUST IAL HOLDINGS LLC DOUGHERTY ALICIA BY e OPERT AX INC 12260 SW HALL BLVD DEPT PORTLAND, OR 97223 ' PO B 4 0 S TTSDAL , AZ 85261 25101813-01500 2S1 01 BC-02201 C~WEST INDU TRIAL HOLDINGS LLC HUNZIKER ONE LLC BY eP OPE AX INC 956 WEST POINT RD DEPT # LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 PO X 49 ' S OTTSDALE, AZ 85261 251016C-00400 2S1 01 BC-02200 CARASOF ALEX S & LILIYA V HUNZIKER TWO LLC ' 12330 SW KNOLL DR BY MICHAEL/PAMELA ROACH MGRS TIGARD, OR 97223 956 WEST POINT RD LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 2S101BC-02300 2S101BB-00900 ' CHRIS GILLETT INSURANCE INC KNAUSS WAYNE ET AL 19522 SW NAEVEST c/o HUMBERSTON RUSSELL D , TIGARD, OR 97224 REVOCABLE TRUST PO BOX 4300 BEAVERTON, OR 97076 2S10113C-00900 251018C-00100 ' CLICKENER ROBERT R & PATRICIA A KNEZ JOHN S SR & JEANNE M 8485 SW HUNZIKER 12301 SW HWY 212 TIGARD, OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 ' 2S1D1BC-01000 2S1D1BC-00101 , CLI EN ROBERT R & PATRICIA A KNEZ REALTY GROUP LLC 8485 HUNZIKER 12301 SE HWY 212 TI ARD, R 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 t 2S10 BC-0080 2S X CLIC ROBERT R & PATRICIA A KNGROUP LLC , 8485 UNZIKER 12TI RD, 0 97223 212 CL , R 97015 2S101BC-02202 2S 01 BB-00801 ' LEACH DOUGLAS W TRUST & 8 <EA N LEAC H SUSAN L TRUST 8162 RHAM RD 8430 SW HUNZIKER RD STE 200 TI AR97224 PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S102AA-00500 2S101BC-03200 ' LEARY DAVID LYLE & REID CHARLES 0 LEARY KATHLEEN JOAN 12435 NW KNOLL DR 10020 SW JOHNSON ST PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 ' 2S1018C-03300 2S102AA-03301 MARTINEZ DAVID J & REMEDIOS DAVID & MARIA & ' MELGREN SHANESSA TAYLOR HANS & JULIE & 12419 SW KNOLL DR DITTO BRAD/SUSAN & ESMAILI ASG TIGARD, OR 97223 265 N BROOKSHIRE AVE VENTURA, CA 93003 ' 2S101BC-01700 2S101BC-03000 MILITARU DANIEL V & ROBERTS DAVID PETRACHE VIOLETA 12361 SW KNOLL DR 3876 WOODMERE PARK BLVD #6 TIGARD, OR 97223 VENICE, FL 34293 ' 2S101 BC-01801 28101 BC-02800 MILLER LORI M SEVERSON JAMES A & ROBIN 0 8365 SW HUNZIKER RD 29404 SW HEATER RD TIGARD, OR 97223 SHERWOOD, OR 97140 ICI 2S 101 B C-03100 2S 102AA-03500 ' NGUYEN VUONG P SICKLES DANIEL 12387 SW KNOLL DR 12437 SW HALL BLVD #8 TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101BC-01100 2S102AA-03300 NITSOS BETTY MAXINE SKOURTES MARIANELLY ' 8465 SW HUNZIKER RD PO BOX 2327 TIGARD, OR 97223 CLACKAMAS, OR 97015 ' 2S101BC-01500 2S101BC-00700 REED WILLIAM & SUMMERS JOSEPH R LUNDBERG LYDIA BEVERLEY C PO BOX 12564 13870 SW 121 ST AVE ' PORTLAND, OR 97212 TIGARD, OR 97223 ' 2S1D1BC-00301 2S10113C-01900 REED WILLIAM C TAPIA OSCAR PO BOX 12564 8335 SW HUNZIKER ST PORTLAND, OR 97212 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S111BB-01000 2S102AA-03400 ' ZEEVES BRIAN TIGARD TOWNHOMES INC 8162 SW DURHAM RD BY MERRILL & CHARLOTTE HODGES TIGARD, OR 97224 PO BOX 2907 ' POULSBO, WA 98370 . 1 25101 BC-00201 WESTEC AMERICA INC ' 8255 SW HUNZIKER TIGARD, OR 97223 2S101 BC-01200 ' WILDER GEORGE C & LUCETTE A 8445 SW HUNZIKER ST ' TIGARD, OR 97223 1 'l Nathan and Ann Murdock Mildren Design Group PO Box 231265 Attn: Gene Mildren Tigard, OR 97281 7650 SW Beveland Street, Suite 120 ' Tigard, OR 97223 ' Sue Rorman Susan Beilke 11250 SW 82nd Avenue 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Naomi Gallucci ' 11285 SW 78th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Diane Baldwin ' 3706 Kinsale Lane SE Olympia, WA 98501 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street ' Tigard, OR 97223 ' Alexander Craghead 12205 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223-6210 ' Gretchen Buehner 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97224 II John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 ' CPO 4B 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 ' Tigard, OR 97224 ' ;PO 4M Pat Whiting 8122 SW Spruce ' Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARD - EAST INTERESTED PARTIES (i:\curpln\setup\labels\CIT East.doc) UPDATED: 12-Dec-06 jj~q, r`J(~-~ 2~ ZCX~"l r F- 1 X39'0 SW kno J )girt boa Loa IfOr ~I►~w,N c~~. r yS zt~Ce'C' So>- ~,2y~831 K3S ~Prtr c1~~ i22~U g1~ud r~~2 g1U a~m~. 3 B f ~2 Zr C,1 , ac,.~1 ~-se~g^l' ~ TCI.~~~^, ¢-/'U}~'z fi- ~C'•' ~(8~-~.~~v c:. l;el~2rzft~ 3' s i-\ .503 - 3 fig ~q 'd 42 c iautaZrt~~~3-~0-~~ Q.Y~G~~GjG24 S ~ a C- The Village at Knoll ' Neighborhood Meeting May 24, 2007 List of Questions from Neighbors 1. Is the street going to remain one-way 2. What is the existing drainage to the street? 3. What curb drainage is the developer going to be required to install? ' 4. Will the developer have to bring in dirt? 5. Will we keep the current grade or make changes? 6. Are there going to be speed bumps installed, or anything else to slow down traffic through SW Knoll? 7. How many living units in the RCF? 8. What is the style of the living units? Suites or other? 9. Are you going to eliminate the side street cars (talking about neighboring property) due to volume levels? 10. Isn't there a pond on the back of property (talking about drainage ditch along Park 217 side) 11. How large will the group home be? 12. What are the single family home sizes? ' 13. Are the homes going to be one level above grade or two levels above grade? 14. Will developer be required to do half street improvements other than along their own street frontage? 15. Will the rest of neighbors be required to do half street improvements? 16. Will we be able to abate the traffic problems that result from the apartment buildings along SW Hall Blvd directly across Knoll? Reason is that the tenants of those buildings clog the access to SW Knoll. 17. Another question about a speedbump (another neighbor responded that the city looked into it previously and deemed it a hazard due to slope and curve of street) ' 18. Not question - but applaud for attempt to get LEED certification 19. Question about ensuring the preservation about the residential neighborhood. 1 PROPERTY DEED I I " 5 PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE TRI-COUNTY ' 9020 SW Washington Sq. Rd., Suite 220 rk Tigard, OR 97223 Title: 503-679-0505 Fax: 503-643-3746 -,0", ~ 1k PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE Escrow: (503) 350-5075 Fax: (503) 292-9753 ' of Oregon, Tnc. Visit us at: www.pnvltor.com ' PRELIMINARY COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ' January 6, 2006 Order Number: 05269275-W Property Address: 12360 & 90 SW Knoll Drive Tigard, OR 97223 ' Pacific Northwest Title of Oregon, Inc, 2ND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT 7417 SW Beav-Hillsdale Hwy. Suite 300 ' Portland, OR 97225 Attention: Sherri Marsden Telephone: (503) 350-5075 t Reference: Reed Amount Premium ALTA Owner's Policy (1992) $ TO COME .$350.00 Government Service Charge $ 50.00 City Lien Search City of Tigard $ 35.00 This is a preliminary billing only; a consolidated statement of all charges, credits, and advances, if any in connection with this order will be provided at closing. Pacific Northwest Title is prepared to issue on request and on recording of the appropriate documents, a policy or ' policies as applied "for, with coverages as indicated, based on this preliminary commitment that as of December 27, 2005 at 5:00 p.m. title of the property described herein is vested in: ' WILLIAM C. REED and LYDIA LUNDBERG, as tenants by the entirety ' Subject only to the exceptions shown herein and to the terms; conditions and exceptions contained in the policy form. This commitment is preliminary to the issuance of a policy of title insurance and shall become null and void unless a policy is issued, and the full premium paid. ' Description: See Exhibit A Attached hereto and made a part hereof 1 1 . ' Page 1 of Preliminary Commitment Order Number: 05269275-W t SCHEDULE B GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies , taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in takes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records, ' 2. Any facts, rights, interest, easements or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 3. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance 1 thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the public records. ' 4. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. 5. Statutory liens or other liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not shown by the public records. ' SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: ' 6. City liens,'if any, of the City of Tigard. NOTE: We have requested a search and will advise when we have received a response. 7. Easement for utilities over and across the premises formerly included within the boundaries of SW Knoll Drive ' now vacated, if any such exist. .8. Trust Deed, including the terms and provisions thereof to secure the amount noted below and other amour#s ' secured thereunder, if any: Grantor William C. Reed and Lydia Lundberg, as tenants by the entirety Trustee Pacific Northwest Title of Oregon, Inc., an Oregon corporation ' Beneficiary Washington Mutual Bank Dated July 7, 1998 Recorded July 13, 1998 ' Fee No. 98075354 Amount $269,600.00 Loan No. 01-0875-001287766-8 (Affects Parcel 1) ' 9. Trust Deed, including the terms and provisions thereof to secure the amount noted below and'other amounts secured thereunder, if any: Grantor William Reed and Lydia Lundberg, as tenants by the entirety ' Trustee Pacific Northwest Title Tri-County, an Oregon* corporation Beneficiary First Mutual Bank, a Washington corporation Dated November 18, 2003 I Recorded : December 3, 2003 Fee No. 2003-201144 Amount $187,500.00 Loan No. 7142982605 (Affects Parcel II) r Page 2 of Preliminary Commitment Order No. Order Number: 05269275-W I. SCHEDULE B - CONTINUED 10. Roadway Easement, including the terms and provisions thereof: Between Crow-Spieker-Hosford #67, a Texas limited partnership And Warren C. Craig and Anne M. Craig Recorded July 30, 1980 Fee No. 80026192 NOTE: Said easement is also shown on the plat of CROW PARK 217. ' 11. Unrecorded leaseholds; rights of parties in possession, and security. interests in trade fixtures, personal property or unattached improvements, if any. ' 12. No search has been made for Financing Statements filed in the office of the Secretary of State. Exception may be taken to such matters as may be shown thereby. No liability is assumed if a Financing Statement is filed in the office of the County Recorder covering timber, crops, fixtures or contracts on the premises wherein the lands are described other than by metes and bounds or under the rectangular survey system or by ' recorded lot and block. NOTE: Taxes paid in. full for 2005-2006: Levied Amount $2,047.19 ' Account No. 2511 BC-01500 Levy- Code 023.74 Key No. R458505 ' (Affects Parcel 1) NOTE: Taxes paid in full for 2005-2006: Levied Amount $2,384.72 Account No. 2511 BC-00301 Levy Code 023.74 Key No. R458383 ' (Affects Parcel 11) NOTE: We find no judgments or Federal Tax Liens against WILLIAM C. REED or LYDIA LUNDBERG. ' NOTE: Washington County Ordinance No. 193, recorded May 13, 1977 in Washington County, Oregon, imposes a tax of $1.00 per $1,000.00 or fraction thereof on the transfer of real property located within Washington County. ' NOTE: Oregon law provides that monetary judgments may become a lien on real property owned by the judgment debtor. We find no judgments against the vested owners of the herein described property other than those, if any, listed as a numbered exception above. Page 3 of Preliminary Commitment order Number: 05269275-W SCHEDULE B - CONTINUED ~ t If you have any questions regarding this report or your escrow closing please contact Sherri. Marsden at (503) 350-5075, located at 7417 SW Beav-Hillsdale Hwy., Suite 300 Portland, OR 97225. , Email address: sherrim@pnwtor.com PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE OF OREGON, INC. Ji Goodbaudy ' Commercial Title Officer Telephone : (503)671-0505, Extension 2048 Direct (DID) No. : (503) 350-5018 ' Fax (503)646-2009 Email jimaoodOpnwtor.com JLG:mlj cc: William C. Reed cc: Pacific NW Title ' Attn: John LaVeille i 1 1 1 I Page 4 of Prellminary Commitment Order Number: 05269275-W I ' Exhibit A PARCELI: ' That part of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: ' BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon; and running thence along the Northerly line of that certain tract of land conveyed to Frona K. Williams by Deed recorded on Page 93 of ' Book 189, Washington County Deed Records, South 82°55' East 123.2 feet to an iron pipe at the Northeast corner thereof; running thence South 22°47' West along the Easterly line of the Williams property a distance of 283.65 feet; running thence North 57°13' West 270.77 feet to an iron rod; running thence South 24°42' West ' 64.55 feet to an iron rod set on the Southerly line of the part of Knoll Drive (dedicated in the plat of KNOLL ACRES, .a plat of record) vacated by Deed recorded on Page 372 of Book 322, said Deed Records; running thence North 32°16' West along the Southerly line of said vacated portion of Knoll Drive for a distance of 98 feet to an iron pipe at the Southeast corner of Lot 10 of KNOLL ACRES, a plat of record; running thence North 11 °27' ' East 198.5 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of that tract conveyed to Frona K. Williams by Deed recorded on Page 373 of Book 355, said Deed Records; running thence South 80024' East 40 feet to the Northeast corner of KNOLL ACRES; thence continuing South 80°24' East 241.1 feet to the place of beginning. ' TOGETHER WITH a perpetual exclusive easement for roadway purposes as set forth in roadway easement from Crow-Spieker-Hosford No. 67 to Warren C. Craig and Anne M. Craig, and recorded July 30, 1980 as Fee No. 80026192, described as follows: A tract of land situated in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon, being described as follows: BEGINNING at the Northeast corner of that tract of land conveyed to Warren C. Craig and Ann M. Craig by Deed recorded October 20, 1961 in Book 451, Page 382, Washington County Records, which point bears South 82055' East, a distance of 123.2 feet from the Northwest corner of the Wm. Graham Donation Land Claim; thence North ' a distance of 50.00 feet; thence West parallel with the North line of Craig Tract, a distance of 15,00 feet; thence South a distance of 50.00 feet to a point on the North line of said Craig Tract; thence South 82055' East, along said North line, a distance of 15.00 feet to the point of beginning. ALSO such portions of the private roadways, driveways and parking areas that are to be built in the future development of the property adjacent on the North of the Craig Property in order that Craig be given access to that portion of SW Garden Place not vacated by City of Tigard Ordinance No. 79 37, which was recorded May 29, ' 1979 as Recorder's Fee No. 79020481, Washington County Deed Records. PARCEL II: ' PARCEL A: A part of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the County of Washington ' and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39; thence South 82°34' East ' on claim line 123 feet; thence South 22°47' West 303.65 feet; thence North 67°13' West 10 feet to the true place of beginning of the tract to be described; thence North 67013' West 238.27 feet to the East line of a roadway; thence South 22047' West 100 feet; thence South 67013' East 238.27 feet; thence North 22047' East 100 feet to the place of beginning. t TOGETHER WITH the right to use in common with others, a certain roadway connecting the above premises with the County Road, the center of said roadway being described as follows: ' Page 5 6f Preliminary Commitment Order Humber: 06269276-W _ BEGINNING in the center of the County Road, North 60°59' West 280 feet from the most Southerly corner of a tract conveyed to Frona K. Williams by Deed from A.H. Vincent recorded April 24, 1940, in Book 189, Page 93, ' Deed Records; thence North 22047' East 429.97 feet, situate in the County of Washington and State of Oregon. PARCEL B: The following described portion of that tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette ' Meridian, conveyed to Frona K. Williams by Deed recorded in Book 189, Page 93, Washington County Deed Records: ' BEGINNING at an iron rod on the Easterly fine of said Williams Tract, South 22°47' West 283.65 feet from an iron pipe at the Northeast corner thereof, and running thence South 22°47' West, along said Easterly line, 120.06 feet to an iron rod at the Northeast corner of Lot 1, TIGARDIA TERRACE, a subdivision of record in said County; thence North 67°13' West, along the Northerly line of said. Lot 1, 265.07 feet to an iron rod at the Northwest corner thereof, on the Easterly line of SW Knoll Drive; thence along the Easterly line of SW Knoll Drive, North 17°40' East 53.50. feet to an iron rod and North 32°16' West 3.80 feet to an iron rod; thence North 24042' East 64.55 feet ' to an iron rod; thence South 67013' East 270.77 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion described above as Parcel A. 1 1 1 1 Page 6 or Preliminary Commitment Order Number: 05269276-W , S.W. 1/4 NA 1/4 SECTION A T 2S R I W AP WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON . ' le8 SCALE t = t00 INITIAL POINT KNOLL ACRES GEORGE °RI HARDSON D.L.C. No. 38 434.18 saD° 24 a 26(.1 ' '2 • 1 NORTH LINE W14LIAM M.W. CORNER 1 200 500 400 30,1 w,•. eRi IiAN 20Ac, o o 2.09Ac, D.L.C. Ne 39 ~ H.E. CORNER 1 , - I*h . /9fltONA WILLIAMS A N ~ 'Got r /~889 3 a o r CE .9 ~ ry Ji>•/~ YACATEO tc.S•No.12029) KK OLL IV 32Z ► /372 ' r 3000 I $ 3100~N1 V, 500 ,75A C. JJ~?-033 1 + H ocv. I~ o u 3300 84.83 ' r•f J,E ad r r ee w 2 3200 ~ 1600 ,23Ac. w 1! J J J O1" U? INITIA POIN r s°. se 1 TIGARpIA 7£ N f!t "Q B 1100' .116 1700 IT xa... 1200 100 07 1 1 1 T~ 1r-~J r~ b 1 1800 fP ejsa,te " ` _ ' EASEM ;a k 1 d V 1801 e0.li - a+ - 1 ENr 't .b N t f rs~ ` 452 a zr4.9o • tfo 8 E J r • t'~ r) r . 20! 924c, f r f 104 963 30 r 4 3 h / I • . „ ~ ~ ° N ~Q1 f x \ NCO. e~ s ' ~13g r ff 1 \ 1^M wi f Ac. ° f f6t3~ar9 ~ 9f ff~2.zB ~ j f f ~'w 2200 (f/y"iOa43; I l ~f z3go AL'. 2~k~R rQ p I Let IC ~3_>s> a r° >f 2201 O O N n too OV 05 fO 9°ej f 23 1. 4 2100 n & $ . Je AC. f f 1 THIS MAP IS.FURNISHED AS A CONVENIENCE BY PACIFIC NORTHWEST TITLE This map is not a survey and does not show the location of any i mprovements. The company assumes no liability for errors therein. MAP 2S101BC 00301 01500 2S 1 01BC 2S 1 01BC ~i+d'woLoFY kl~ I% ¢ 2 O } J mi'ox 00 .22 9 1 1 b1 0 J1Y f . . . I , I b ~ ;H . 1 F / maA„~M - - M~i• - 1P I Ja, I-A _ Ice (n((Wa;% n _ }E{ •ew ~ anY, ,~Ieu:aa "+w•-- u3°~' .:rp.fr. ^•,F:k' ~;''ea ' . ''"'~a.' ' ~~91P(L_:,T ES 3S`w - -{-b`~._j~~ w.» _ r•Wi ,laf.: .4Jflia'• ' /n, T~j $ 13000 44 , 'n^IN Y a Ats yi'',; ^ 19 loo ,a. ,Z6 WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON 1 I \ '',,,7; SW7/4 NWi/4 SECTION OI T2S RIW W,M. Boo 330o SCALE 1' = 700' 0' I 1500 os 103 I09 I 1600 100 ~ bI6 Azk AC ' Va., 'BOO IIII I 4 .aoit 1801 SW.SCOFFINSr SIRE ° i •fiy~~/~~e~3 ~830~0 ~ g - ~ ~ ' ^m " . i~ •"IT~/Y(\ t b~~1p''' S FOR ADDITIONAL MAPS VISIT OUR WEBSITEAT `sz`er,;"•, u02 III z / _ ,.,vb www,w.waahlnplon.orus 'gsaauul~/' ' ~J,; • " I ~ ~ be 22 3 U00 , Ins.. "'m \/-0, aa,K' (a :a,~,-.:: g~r;:;.::.-'`•f • J,''^ _ o I I / ZeW, 3800, 1~00,,031]OO.,Ol IAO. 3900 f. 2 x 1600 J 1 / p sB a 280 p 'I• ) ( J / r d 1 / ~ ®n 8 - a ' o` CANT )GIRAP 4 .J e:ae" ®5t 4D o- PLOT DAT E: June 282007 2 _ FOR ASSESSMENT y PURPOSES ONLY-DO NOTRECYON 1. 1• . . - b i.w.A"~~ FOR OTHER USE ee manwo .a,.. m Nwa•. M a+r adpme coa~nas-nee BV+eMnmv a, an alma uemwr h mey . 'F i. J 1. arum Neda4s P,wu cmauPw eµovpy qo PeCe+b M m Mtl+smoa,ammubrmdM :I± .tfr• n~ 11 i TOPO MAP LEGEND wuvo rxwu xno «T v,~a~snauswemconr ror, ~.xnn xrar....~rra, \ " oxx,~.~ • LL/ ~x....A x„ v w,F x mxng... _ who t nswe avr naxr ~ _ - ~-\\\m r \ ~ \ R \ \ i. ~T.bK.I.w % Via our rmi ux~ tl~ Q our \ LL i¢n C xq' ~ ~ ~ \ \i, / , ~ / LL ml l~O laa 9d MY , . eI t , ~ IT ~ , x.or I11 \ . rtox F/ f m QY ~e,O ~R/ $ s' ' I \~c.~ 1 •J uxmcr, l ~ 1, l ~ / ] ~ /Q I I f b• REFERENCES: BENCHMARK: +~x n g..a me x ax'1°.. v°1. mev o°.."`w. \ J \~1 ~ / Kunx e< 9 p b~ ~ (l JI i ' h a m/ h 6LL~xx~ -f . l A WA4 TN COUNTY d GRAPHIC SCALE ' ZTec ENGINEERS, INC. TOPOGRAPHY MAP S.E. BTH AVE. PORTLWb, OR. 9]20] F(1Rui!`O lI~~. o.Aiv ~ ~~o CONCEPTUAL PLAN SET LEGEND THE V I Iil J 111 AA(x E GREEN s+ - 9 WO TA A msms sJNa, -sJ- AT KNOLL -N- FNTNiOYAIFp - - ~ - ENmNC fTZa - - 1 u alai N=~NNA MAP 2S 1W 113C TL 301 & 1500 -ax 12360 SW KNOLL DRIVE tl y b~w / TIGARD, OREGON i/ m ENSIP,O ENTINC WI, PoIE EN9lWG P09ER PQE VICINITY MAP AU❑ ENSN& uTm NETw - rzsN9c TIREET acx Ep5TIN0 ntt[ C) iw APPIE e aN°x xorc[ ro [xarAmc c ®AR en, rvn-v eua - ._.4,1~ errexnae a¢5 A ur x~w~€s ra N iN - ✓ pSRW lUtt NOIIgLAAM"[ENTER. NAY NAWNIONN A V e 410Y RiAFS ARE SEi fORM N OAR \ \ 951-0°1-0010 NN0.1fN ONI 951-001-0090. MAY 9YUCNING 11& R11RA •901153-19EI. R R]IYJCO 1 PoIDNIAL IRO)EPCAP9N fAOtltt 091(RS 1 ww =AM \I 'iu' UII,, I\lil~ Dig Safely. Y YAWi f - l \ , I '..a-' ~ °AIE NE NI~aN _ i / EiEALp10Y 1f111PHH01F NNY9El6 III{ I ICI 1 xr xA,WAE OPT - 1 1I A lwaw 901}m.t111 U. 1v _ NIEA NOW9 50132&t311 M W -{041311 ~ ~ i a eaw a NANNNANrF ~ ensow f /r `SHEET INDEX: \ GRAPHIC SCALE o Jo 9° 120 CO.0 COVER SHEET CO.1 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN Cl CONCEPTUAL GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN ~ 3 3AC3E - ~ C2 CONCEPTUAL STORM PLAN C3 CONCEPTUAL SANITARY SEWER AND WATER PLAN C4 CONCEPTUAL PLAT C5 EXISTING KNOLL DRIVE PROFILE TP EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP L1 CONCEPTUAL TREE PLAN FOR REVIEW ONLY 1OF1 PROPOSED SETBACK EXHIBIT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION °'s°Htr rv9 3-1,-N1 COVER SHEET 33Y'_' Ezze+, erse.owc REVISM am/00 ENGIIITEERS INC. ti ' NN Y FOR: WCR COMPANY N0 E° 3737 S.E. 8TH A(5b3) 235-8, OR. 97202 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY cQ,o d PHONE: (503) 235-8795 4 FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON Y NtNNn~.I1~~.<wlNt 5_ C-O N.NNi _ GEVFaAL CUMNERC141 .~5 s I L _ SITE INFORMATION I T 3K1 w li ~a AOOREA: / e ~ ~ ' - - Q _ K a36p sN Kxcu pl MGM, oR / /f ~ ~ 7Ax NNP. mnep nwl .ii°o. / 6 1 VN CN . _ RWC R-AS ~ f./ - - lON OENSIY AENOfI1n1L 10 TOT& (BFf nOfdC.end) . 1A4b W (ze331 .1C 3157 RNs I 7). stts xac (ursrej (oast[) 1 d i rtaw,ws N NOW / { M nRUNVrt MFAS pf WBJNL REmIAQS NRF I :vr TRACT A \ r>~ ne967 sn6tr NuA z522 s NEI OE1£IOPNFNi AREA ~ 110.5Be 4 / O N DDV47Y • ilo seen sop • 11.)5 ~ _ ` I ` ~ F DBVNTY BDXUS . sx . IV 15 . p.)t "SW WN DENS,IY • 11.]5 1 0.71 • 155 ' ~ YWMUY R1~9R Is.0.e•12 L TOm IJiU p50. R. M6A5950. R. r r / m i J00o 322) 839 \ { 3111 SY1 939 F,OSiMO ONE-WY 51Rf£1 ~ ~ ~ _ _ - _ - / / / ] .2)5112 1636 9~ 1 4 „ / / e 2270 722 1150 V / 9 2654 751 115p / 10 251] 52 1158 _ ~ 11 2M 8 '158 2773 1 57 00.5 58 ND)L ` \ \ 1 14 - / / IS 2m167133 984 1 11 PROPo CUR8 Rlllll ExC 2 R u. OEOICATm TO I) R. N -NDnI, EYEBROW CORNER f at~ J / O TINCT A M741 -1 2 - fOUXB:NEN7. 'I R 65 . 7YPIGL mlGi B 2677 3677 ) -E 1p N'm1Y E%CEFOS NW. J I + \ L'Y ` _ \ 'i / OXEN 5 R. PUn1G Se1fNLLK. 12-o 50157 296 p7x aP L1E) (z1x eP SIIE) ii~+ow coarw. ~ ~y 1 _ ~ - _ Q NEN s R. P1.wNn SIZE 4 & , ~d 'r 1 f' ,l i / O 16 R. AC. WlY'-nDM NW, 51fRF15. SDEnAUCi. pfe+EMAYS, P-G . M OF EN6nN0 w-- S,REET ```)4' T~ ' / - / % O MERfH BOUxORRY ILO 74 < ~ © euErt3+ 1tYEl o AEONG EAST eourNNRr (70 ° N+» v - - - ! \ / O BWE PIAKWO MfA 7 ~ ~'r~'% \ mYa w: EUSMC OO111,M RRAMXC NAtt 'If r GRAPHIC SCALE 0 3 30 60 FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTIRUCTION ~p^[1 ~T w avN REVISION 2 2 p (2284-1 Z ll ec ENGINEERS, INC. CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN K' 122811BA5E.DRIG FOR: WCR COMPANY sNOm 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 .n •,,~a*`a PHONE: (503) 23-8795 KNOLL DRIVE ORPROPERTY CO.1 4 EROSION CONTROL KEYNOTES OEt WBIALL smExr fE1NG TP. Q PNNECT IAiI! fH01 AIMEIfNH01, I1P. awc 8 WSFALL W,M1 WXBNW'AOe BIIRNHE " - Ip6S3 SF. RFBI¢'E FFSINC AC ~ \ \ ~ N.tEf lnrtf E{ NSIALL BBIN.i NNSIBUCIKN iENxw NiaNl REFS W IEBYN. IXII BEBI`_ NEPEB FQI A \\Q lsTi.1Y Sf. (iPAR B) _ GRADING KEYNOTES alSFW DM CNOIFN WADY IAII \ 3 / / f II~ sNCIXlK1T 6! O 9YC ms FAY ltlaN1FFA6/EBAI4%CN I AF~~w A _ ` \ 2'x\5\ \ ]{SBlim'm~- Oj znm]Fr HNL >a m,, ^ nm~ 0 ! R EAu _ Y ~ ~ e iFr nu . ¢lp f•1 V l V~ ~ ~ ~ A3 r'" ~l Il ff HALL z n w s Fr r YFIHNL ~ ~ y. ~ T n svr EY1 ~ c / / zor ~ 4L~ Y r v y~ ~ I- ~ ~ I¢ tunas PAIUQN Q I e 4 V s EROSION CONTROL GENERAL NOTES 14- - - ~ _ ~ 1. HNE11 4A BE9AWID NHAN 91NL BE RSPltl58lE f!Y PNNH NAAIUIEY A1D s. HE ESS FA(U11E5 AWL BE NSPEL'ED BIS181' THE NflM.VIf/aINBACI¢N NO I - O L : II t 1 /YANIl11NVR 6 NL fNO3¢I MO SEBeENf (01180. YEA901~ N AttYx¢WI~ NM NWiNNIH A5 lECESSNtY w A9HE HEN 49fma0 IHN°BONI. ' CtISiM° INC-NAl' SxfEEI ' = d R 3 ~ S I / V 5®~EIN~AaNMlE nAZAm! teF9f~nAINN, eKOK A00 MO tt9~X~k OwB4Gi IX 6 I ➢YE SHNL A➢Ylpi BE NLWFD 1¢ N.VMMAe: Y¢E MIN 1/! 1HE BNtlLLA ~~~~f Gw~3' ,aav - sir NE um1 ewxs uo mn>_nxa ua AwL eE awn mm W PANX¢ I`1 / n z nE NxpIIXIAH¢I a nESE Esc PVN9 Aro alaNUlwA xAwmoNEC HE a:Naxc ffuumis AIDE xor FWSr smlENCIAOw uEN Nro nE O ( k I ' ~I Gp A 01 ' IEPI.~mQI; NID 1!'QUaN a 1113E 6C FMERS 6 M R~tlL®IfY 6 HE O°NSHEIY SISIFY ANAMIg JAMCM INII NL C061N1¢BBY 6 09 m ND APN BY HE LaM N IN) rEaNH¢IANNSVRS 5 a EsnaeEn. w HE lEwa9l SMML ff n If W IW ) FIfYIHE llf aS 9W1 BE NlTNIID Ai 11E eE¢NN1B ff WXSIBUCHpI ~Y ~ ¢K I-~ ~ ' .J Q ~lE PIX YANIFNNIa AFHR PBBSf 6 APPNHFIl Ila YAM/NED gNA11M ff M PRQECC Ae¢AWN. YFAAAEB YAY BE ,,~y~ `?1 i~ ~ t. ~r [✓jp~ @WED W 161RE WAi NL PA~fB IDEAS /IE I¢Pi llUll i¢A HE 0.1Mig1 a HC 9" p V `I I ~I a AE BGHOVi6 a nE ¢FAIEIC IRIS 91fHN ON na NM19WL BE ¢ NN6L O , t ~ I ~ YABI¢D x BE tun PNax m wasNUClaE aNx¢ 1NE memcncll PFApuxL, xo \ \ lT ✓ eN¢YONICE BE'R® tE ¢FIAxc W11S AWl K PHOIrt1EIl nE YNIlNS 9W1. !E 9. SWO ORNI MEI; BA91; N° NFA NUWS AWL 9E PBOIELRD e1R PAICNFXi ° rA I ) - i r I YNIrAH® nr nE APP°rWrtAWVnuclm Fa nE luuHa ff m161NCmE AIIFAa3 AIE mNUID NwAN l~utlAl a xE-rsrrlamm. i r 1 ~/T / +y 6 r1E E!C FAQINH AllBN OI iHS PLAY YVlf E 4p60001®N aYnNLT,M fN I¢ PAMlmff AAiFAaS MO 1ERTAH01 ARE W BE NAf¢H AT PAP0.Y AB Wa'9N£ ?W In6 \ I l l \ ♦ SBPENf ND 4AO1i VR11 MkH 0a6 Fi ENIIX rIff~04W1LF S~SRY°¢i tt A SH/CL ff PElE9 mw IAHH HWI APH)NQ I m F N ff -A IX IIIUM APPICW HASH SINONNS W6WICNx FxaiY+c aE-war 5lreri 1 rn L I/ _ HINII¢I lE N:f NAHEH~EIM6011TPIENNIIM YEAAN¢5 !•1 BE N r " ( / / - n AE ~LV plgw ffNNiNIC11LN P@la. HElE EBC FAe11E3 9111E AEAE AID It IPAfIdFBM AS 1FIDE0 iBR pFIPECRD S1Utl1 E'ENIS 110 m FNAAE NAT SWINIr 6FFtC SQ 111E EN¢90N FIE!EfIHl11 Ilw SEDeENi E°XHNL PUNNIC.AIp OF9A1 Nm sEOeElrr LWe1 oABI BES x!r aArE nE Am Ewux (o+APnN A) Pa BEWE11B1R ~ a ae ~~/aJ ~ ~ ~ ~ /~r ~fi0 ~ 13 n[ lElelPFn 9WL IElled ESC YFA91E311R1 ICRTAHIM rs fULT ESTI919E6 14. NilIB1 EC EPS+ Nff R:GIR➢ m 9E YANIAWEO W 91E AIO AYMI/9E W OISIAVT r rb °'Ly / I / 1 "1 /l ~b' ~ MSPECIURS IIPeI IEa6T. y xsilYC llN B xM~ xN1 BENCHMARK: / EILYAnws NE w rIE an a ncum. BARB m °tt a ncum 3A' NWMABIE currEa eortwlAll /1sn suss CIA; x CIAN o xE cffnB a awauN / wl n- Nw ~ 15"s caarx/c~-scn) ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY SECTION 9E i.nN. - BAIAHNI °EMia IL S- I N PJAFH Pllf, NOIIB SNE a I¢A%1 SNEEf 1~ FOR REVIEW ONLY gar°aw,A - yA' e. eA mBESrmxn a NSTRUCTION AT PAffwtt E l°.!e a ;a, NOT FOR CO pkv H/3l/!B NEV 90N 3 3 Z''e( ENGINEERS, INC. CONCEPTUAL GRADING eti & EROSION CONTROL PLAN NN 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY A-Y1 FAX: PHONE: (50 (503) 3) 233--77 23889 8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TIGARD, OREGON CL Q _ eswca~®~ _ _ i ) ` 7CIp Earl / T~°i ~r~ *9d 9K~ ~~~g` z E!~ nsec~aa . ✓'C~ F ~ 1 ~ \ ~ 'IB ~~t:1 L x 217 ! ~9 Gob - r v + \ 1 I ! j j~ . _ +o _ - I \ v w STORM PLAN KEYNOTES ~ a 1 % _ ! /t.- i 1 i -'r`i 1 L' q t t rz' art tsa Y y - l O WAM ? ! i7" s;.~1 5' '111 z i wrESUa.auurwc Raaram t (D SWH a G ! r r r L i i oar roy AT WLIR srsrrx\ 1 a - Oa wrrm xi awurc / ° w t>ss X. 1. X. n. ocrtmc« wxo t ~J~` n - J i i .~l r t r I r 1 1 D SWtI wtu OB MOE uwt n.ISnw ac car ;mm ~ ~ ~ _ ( 51 =r--l~ r ' I/i`~ ~ sroBM rwE J \\~~Y~• ~ f 3 J ,Y f h. 11l I 1 i I 4% ~ ' O °u~a,. ro RoxB ➢PK'q zs' arc" B.sw ~ ii;n ~ 1. 7 r ~r~ ~ I II 1 ~ - > 3 OO scau ramccn°rr ~f v~~ _ v 0 1 4 i(lJ N r f Burnm~ mrmr°E mwcnw[ wxess srNS 00 mxc we ttrrx aawour f l ® t!: r \ ~v r 7' V ® T~A m B~wvrs%ew+~osvri ~ oroia r,~s. Ffto swa rR w U-1 O1K Rnr srem fit' ( v~ ti .tz v t r !v ~,~"~dL _ _ ®mee. sw uwxs ~~'~l~l ~ % =~'v'~ ' , T~ fa ~ fi~ / 'rr 'i ~10~ , ®rn~it av+BSr~aE exa wows 1~ it 'a , \ 1 ~r 4 y , Q$ v ill II IIr)J I ~ - ®omw°sm REtMdle MM]FTIf ~ -]"J• m~ l / l \ `G~,` t~ w l , ,+p{~~ yxrr_ rowwmt wusuaE ucw rlc ( a ~"r rt` i r 1 v !(l/17 , ® r°>M~`rK.wBOO`im°iunw~ m rs°+wwc m°rexES s \w,.' N' gfly r?`fi -r ter, ti L/, li au m GRAPHIC SCALE / 0 la JO 50 FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ~p ~T >n RN" : Zt ~~'~C ENGINEERS ~LVCe CONCEPTUAL STORM PLAN 122811 BnSE.OwO JNM Y "B N01E° 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY PHONE: (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY m Q ^°'4 FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON C2 ,III it ~u I I I'TIt 1` \ 51x ux J ~f W 15295 / o,\ LEN (Xe) 11699 / \ LE W (X) 116]9 /i I/ I foel LE Wi(5)116.15 I / ~-7 w_ X961 .9~~ ~ \ \,%\~h\ r i 1,~-os°-_-- ~/O ~ l Ir. w(Xllasz 'aj0~ Clef I, 1~ rll \ \ , \\\\~1\ \ \ \ \ /y - ~~u 1 : { I\ , I I l \ r SANITARY SEWER KEYNOTE / a~a°p~ ~p a r ~w./L a ~I II 1 II vII v ~p)~~l VA\~V~~~ 1/.~ a''`7-ate, / d / rr 1 F 2 1 I 1 1 ' ) I q \ , \ \ \ s 1y ~ IE1L sswl 1 ox mmxc LwE J~ P ~ , I ( "4 m, , ti ~ 4x,=~ - I I 1 \ \ \ ~ \ ~ t 7°n'w w o°snxalnro ~ y; } ~ , <i vf§`" . 1 . - 1 III 1 I ~ v V vV v 'v ~ ~ 1 ~~i z 1n ~ e- vcac ss a s-a.om / L I z 0.:, i i1 ° zo ^ I I! d I 1 : \ \ \ 16 i' it f J / 15 I 1 F $ ' + ° FC I I I I / ECM=IE°.]{ / "}~t,~ ~ . n jl-i 1 I I ,1 1 I I5 I F , aye 4 C IXlf~1w131 ° ~ l~ _ } ~I Imo= I i yl e, ' 1 l~ -Y ~ w L~ weue we ss a stems IXSnlac oxE-war smE a ~w a q- f I I RR e ~ s ssux 3 t` / -f t' I x I /I Q 55Yx /1 WATER KEYNOTES Erw=°b It Qe 9z u e• X9L ss • s-ouos z 7. \ \ \ ❑i m a' xanx LNE v om W.o, r) . ! 2 f r / ` ro K eE Ilvcx nEy ILS 1 0: 591r is r~ I a' r=>,... a / \ / l /ir, . - : /f z❑ xEw C weuc m xxmt IwE EE wr= e 5 C + + w ' / ° 5 ♦ T B 1 ) \ j e (ryy 1 _ / P E S m u N D JOwR 10 5° v C m A e s °.m ~r i a ( I.. 1, r^\~r~ I 3 fl~l a / ❑s xEx nl¢xmXW1r ) msr9x= ant-ro:r smm a r+ - z e - y I I Y~I,rI/ I/pplF' r .,+a,\ *L+` _ _ swx ~e h f / 'I ) 0 lI'~ - SY`=\\~ © 31t- X®QIIYL NAIFx IEIFX, M. 4 C OU+-Ia3.X9 i 11r' ace MN1L 1 ss Aipe ~ Q~gyg ° y Er` s J 1 /I iI O le' %9 C eA FA WE FAS I O . M. ! xor usm 44, ° Y s rxF5N1aE uxE EI/ ~'T / r ` m 3J / z I p zs' caLmxm wnXJC Nxmyweuc , s I y;-~,~!~ h r GRAPHIC SCALE w+°wW SEVEN c~sL9lv+r ss wJG ser9 , I I~ ~ I/ to r : _ O ~ ~ Tom/ - ~I r o ,s so so 9 IXSINC 4' W 1 1°EVxiE sm srsa91 mX IbL er tot u onr. ~I ' * z r T- a 6 I ❑ mmdX.`IOl x AMMv rnx awrzn n r l~/ r Fr'°„~.{ r \ ~`i 1 4- ~ r' (w .cXr ~ ❑0 EoX ~ xrowMS~Mx~wam m crs s+umums. f ~ I C/ V~ 1 wca - m ,e rar Lain FOR REVIEW ONLY 9 -ATE ~,/~l 1/ f NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 7~^ TAT ® rax~c s ww sic FwX o SX REw51aN A-x "n q Z 1L ~'C ENGINEERS il~l~. CONCEPTUAL SANITARY SEWER I ea. lzzBS1 BASE.CWC W & 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 972 202 WATER PLAN - PHONE: (503) 235-8795 FOR: WCR COMPANY c3 q o- FAX; (503) 233-7889 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TIGARD, OREGON 1- TT._ - ,rrBU,ns Vii/ ~-s~.fys -b~Q~.a \ 1\0~,1\~,y e\4\\`~\\`_ ~ ~ r r- I J C ra... ` zsl i'aF F!'{' \I t~ ~ . ! 1"F UE1u \ \ ` , t / / I ! 7r / i r1 I . ,y l .,,c,\ „ \ I 1 }~/YL9)OxR . fir r-, x ~ \ I I \ 11 5~ / u l / \ \ y,l I~jl11l~~ill \x,111\~3Da~. 1 / 0.09 eu. ~ ! ! I 'I ~ I I I 11 `A!`, I\I I ~ I I ~ \._J ( rl / j111~ I111(~W IrI I'II~-'`\\ IIII\ l/I ' /o ,I 1 I I I I I IlIU~I ~II~I~ I i I \ \ \ 4 l / 1 i~ w' r'!1/~Ila I///~Ildl'191 ICI j I\ I I I I , I 111 ! g°~ / 1 tl W. ~A l 1'[)) M m~f✓ / 1 F 1,. 1 I tl I I\ I I I I I / r 1TI InI I I llcyyi i I L 7 pp,~ ( f7/, r I v llI/I 1.01 1 I /I ys \ f~ v `'(\z /fR 11 ~il I f l i i I ~i l 012 1 x \ u I fo Ill I l far / I~•. ) ~x`"ll~C f l l 1 " - ~ ~ ~ / I''s I ft\ I" I. r2.TLS eat rL \ ~ \ I / ~ ~ 1 ~ II ~ ) 111 /,h / / l I 1 YN,E,~USFN \ lq au niwrvu~c vxBw. scan a° , / I I i i ®r - fl - Ir. ~ ! I Y- I / ^ 1 / I GRAPHIC SCALE I ~ ) f 0 13 SO 60 FOR REVIEW ONLYf J F OT FOR CONSTRUCTION TAT aid DWG m B/2)/O9 V L22 641W 2-21-07 ZTec ENGINEERS, INC. CONCEPTUAL PLAT •~52fei M` ~1 MM 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY PHONE: (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY _ C4 4 09` FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON UL o T " o / zo, l - r r W N6~ _ _ ~ Y Nlll EYEW N C NER E11CEE0 6 ~ ~ 5°Ei~u~"+tT~Nmm ucuus wri G G ~ ~ ~ ~ EM ONE-NPx SIREFf •T ~ _ ~ - ` ~ { ~ ' ~ EIEeROW CORNER. a / spy, saS NVSaj ~ All, 1965 -anx - Exmurc nfir Nax sTREfT ~ C.l CROM ~ -27 41.15 v r ~ ~ ~ . OAIBS~ y -.w - 969 KNOLL RD PROFILE v.. r.9oN/9v sW e Gn'2 GRAPHIC SCALE FNFOR REVIEW ONLY KNOLL RD PLOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ' M N a'~ m 2-21-07 EXISTING KNOLL DRIVE PROFILE m V610N 97z7,oe flE ZTec ENGINEERS INC. Y 961 JNM 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY >~c NOTED PHONE: (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY C~J Q FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON APPLICATION COMPLETENESS REVIEW = LAND USE PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION i 120 DAYS = 10/15/2009 FILE NO.: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 FILE TITLE: THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL APPLICANT: Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. OWNERS: William C. Reed & Lydia Lundberg Attn: Mark Reed 2300 SW 103 d Avenue 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd. Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97212 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. The Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low-Density- Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. DECISION MAKING BODY BELOW: ❑ TYPE I ❑ TYPE II ® TYPE III ❑ TYPE IV COMMENTS WERE SENT: JUNE 19, 2009 COMMENTS ARE DUE: JULY 3, 2009 ❑ HEARINGS OFFICER (MON.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:00 PM ® PLANNING COMMISSION (MON.) DATE OF HERRING: AUGUST 17, 2009 TIME: 7:00 PM ❑ CITY COUNCIL (TUES.) DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 7:30 PM ❑ STAFF DECISION (TENTATIVE) DATE OF DECISION: COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION ® VICINITY MAP ® DRAINAGE PLAN ® IMPACT STUDY ® SITE PLAN ® STORM WATER ANALYSIS ® TRAFFIC STUDY ® NARRATIVE ® TREE PLAN ® OTHER: MISCELLANEOUS STAFF CONTACT: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner (503) 718-2434 City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tiga, OR 97223 :i June 17, 2009 Mark Reed Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd Portland, OR 97212 RE: Completeness Review for Village at Knoll (Case File No. PDR2008-00004) Dear Mr. Reed: The City received your revised supplemental application materials on June 17, 2009 for a Planned Development concept plan review (PDR2008-00004) for a proposed subdivision of 14 single-family lots and one residential care facility on Tax Lots 2S101BC-00301 and 01500. Staff has completed a preliminary review of the submittal materials and has determined that the application can be deemed complete. 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. A tentative date has been set for a hearing with the Tigard Planning Commission on August 17, 2009. Please confirm that this date is acceptable to you. In addition, at your request, a copy of our Notification List for Land Use & Community Development Applications has been included for your review. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 639-4171, extension 2434. Sincerely, Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner End: Notification List Phone: 503.639.4171 e Fax: 503.684.7297 9 www.tigard-or.gov TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 June 8, 2009 Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner RE: Response: Completeness Review for Village at Knoll (Case File No. PDR2008- 00004) Dear Gaiv, I have reviewed your completeness review letter on the Planned Development Application North West Ventures submitted on April 29, 2009. The 5 items on your completeness letter will be address as followed: 1. Narrative: The Narrative has been reviewed and changed to comply with your completeness letter. 2. Plan Set: The plan set Index that refers to TP1 has been included in the full size plan set. The sheet index on the engineering plan set does refer to L1 conceptual tree plan. The first page of the landscape plan set is labeled L1 for the PUD open space concept plan. Considering they are two different sets of plans and two different sections in the concept plan application we didn't feel it would be confusing for the reader. The landscape plan will be provided in a full size copy. No sign concept is included because at this point there is not a sign plan for this development. 3. Frontage on Public/Privet Street: We feel that extending lots 2-5 to SW Knoll drive and creating the open space with an easement would meet the cities code requirement of lots 2-5 having frontage. At this point in the application process we would like this issue to be discussed at the Planning Commission meeting. When we submit for the detailed plan review we will change the plans in accordance with what is concluded at the Planning Commission meeting. 4. Envelopes with Postage: We will provide two sets of pre-addressed and stamped #10 envelopes when we submit the revised application 5. Number of Application Copies: We will supply 23 copies and one 8.5" Z 11" plan set with one compact disk of the application. I would also like a list of where the 23 copies of the application will be distributed. f ~ When we submit the revised application when is the nett Planning Commission meeting Thank you for all of your assistance on this project. Thank you, City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ® Tiga.., OR 97223 May 21, 2009 T. ~$-qty Mark Reed Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd Portland, OR 97212 RE: Completeness Review for Village at Knoll (Case File No. PDR2008-00004) Dear Mr. Reed: The City received your supplemental application materials April 29, 2009 for a Planned Development concept plan review (PDR2008-00004) for a proposed subdivision of 14 single-family lots and one residential care facility on Tax Lots 2S101BG00301 and 01500. 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. Narrative: Your narrative includes a reference to Planning and Design Objectives but does not include the objectives (page 8). Please review your narrative to address this and any other inconsistencies. 2. Plan Set: Your plan set includes a Sheet Index identifying sheets TP1 and 1 Of 1, but these plans are not in the set. Sheet TP (existing conditions) has been provided in reduced size under its own tab. Under the Sheet Index, L1 is titled Preliminary Tree Plan which can be confused with the other L1 which is titled PUD Open Space Concept Plan and is only provided in reduced size. A sign concept is not included. Please provide consistent materials where the small and large set plans agree and are accounted for in the Sheet Index. (Of the six landscape plans only the PUD Open Space Concept Plan (1-1) need be included in the large set plans.) 3. Frontage on Public/Private Streets: Section 18.810.060.B requires lots to have frontage on private or public streets and explicitly exempts alleys. Although the Planned Development chapter gives the Commission flexibility with respect to 18.810.060, staff believes that their discretion relates to the frontage minimums expressed and not to whether alleys can provide frontage. Your site plan shows proposed lots 2-5 with frontage on an alley. These lots would either need to be carried through to Knoll or be accessed from behind with a private street. It may be possible to provide the proposed open space through easements over the extended portion of the lots so that your density calculation would not otherwise be affected as it would with additional area dedicated to streets. Please address this issue in a revised plan set and narrative. 4. Envelopes with postage. Please supplytwo sets of pre-addressed (no return address), stamped (not metered), # 10 size envelopes. Addresses must have been obtained within the previous three months from the date of application completeness. Phone: 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.684.7297 www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 5. Number of Application Copies. As this is a concept planned development request, all members of the commission, in addition to agencies and special districts will receive copies. Please submit 23 full sets of your revised application materials (each set shall be an exact duplicate of all information pertaining to the application, narrative, forms, letters, studies, plans, etc.). In addition, one reduced (8.5" x 11") plan set, and a Compact Disc of the full application shall be included. Once these materials have been received and the application has been deemed complete, a hearing before the Planning Commission will be scheduled. 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 639-4171, extension 2434. Sincerely, I Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner I 2 City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tig, , OR 97223 December 12, 2008h e. Mark Reed Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd Portland, OR 97212 RE: Completeness Review for Planned Development Concept Review for Village at Knoll (Case File No. PDR2008-00004) Dear Mr. Reed: The City received your original application on October 22, 2008. The application was not accepted at that time pending receipt of items required for acceptance including title, documentation of the neighborhood meeting, large scale plans, and a vanity map. In addition, your decision to pursue the concept plan review only (instead of concurrent review for the concept and detailed plan) was not made until early November with the revised submittal materials received by the city on November 14, 2008. This letter is the completeness review for the Planned Development concept plan review (PDR2008-00004) for a proposed subdivision of 14 single-family lots and one residential care facility on Tax Lots 2S I OIBC-00301 and 01500. 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 substantively complete: 1. Narrative: You submitted a narrative that partially addressed the Concept Plan Submission Requirements (18.3 5 0.040). However, you must also provide findings for the Concept Plan Approval Criteria (18.350.050). 2. Neighborhood Meeting: You provided a list of attendees and a list of questions from neighbors. Please provide the Minutes of the meeting and the required Affidavits of Mailing and Posting. 3. Pre-Application Notes: You submitted Pre-Application notes for Planning but omitted the Engineering notes. Please provide both sets of notes. 4. Open Space Calculation: You submitted a Landscape Plan (L 1) which did not indicate a percentage range for the amount of proposed open space and landscaping, and general location and types of proposed open space(s). Please revise your landscape plan accordingly, specifically addressing the Shared Open Space Facilities standards in 18.350.070.4.m. Phone: 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.684.7297 . www.tigard-or.gov . TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 5. General Development Schedule: The schedule you submitted appears to be inconsistent with the review timelines required for site permits. Please revise. 6. Arborist Comments: Please review the enclosed comments by the City Arborist. Please address these comments in your revised narrative. 7. Public Facility Checklist: Please review the enclosed Public Facility Checklist and contact Greg Berry at 718-2468 if you have any questions. You may revise your plans accordingly. 8. Submittal Materials: You submitted a reduced size Preliminary Site Plan which is inconsistent with the large Preliminary Site Plan. Several plans have hand lettered titles using similar base maps. Please ensure submittal materials are legible and consistent. Carefully organize all materials in a logical order ensuring a complete submittal which is easily referenced by Planning Commissioners and others reviewing the proposal. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your application, please don't hesitate to contact me at 718-2434. Sincerely, c t L e~ r% Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner i C: PDR2008-00004 Land Use File 2 J MEMORANDUM A TO: Gary Pagenstecher FROM: Todd Prager, City Arborist RE: Knoll Drive Property Concept Plan Review DATE: December 9, 2008 As you requested I have provided comments on the "Knoll Drive Property" concept plan. Concept plan approval criteria 18.350.050.A.2 requires that: "The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management" I identified seven trees that may be considered "significant natural resources" due to species and condition. My recommendation is that the applicant work in conjunction with his project arborist to preserve any or all of these trees wherever possible. The specific trees that I recommend for preservation are as follows: Tree Number Tree T e Trunk Diameter Condition 4 oak 17 inches good 17 elm 35 inches good 18 birch 20 inches good 41 walnut 14 inches good 54 maple 9 inches good 56 maple 8 inches good 91 bluespruce 12 inches good Also, please note that there appears to be a grading conflict with tree #94. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns regarding my comments. Project. I, )>Pe ca--a LAND USE APPLIC TION Date. Z COMPLETENESS REVIEW ❑ COMPLETE ,`INCOMPLETE LIZ 21 STANDARD INFORMATION: Deed/Tltle)Proof of Ownership Neighborhood Mtg. Affidavits, Minutes, List of Attendee Impact Study (18.390) USA Service Provider Letter NVJ Construction Cost Estimate Envelopes with Postage (Verify Count) ❑ # Sets Of Application Materials/Plans - "Paper Copies" Pre-Application Conference Notes # Sets Of Application Materials/Plans - "CD's" i 9 jI-,.-" 7 r- PROJECT STATISTICS: ,2'1 Building Footprint Size % of Landscaping On Site f ❑ ° % of Building Impervious Surface On Site tot Square Footage PLANS DIMENSIONED: A-1 Building Footprint Parking Space Dimensions (Include Accessible 8 Bike Parking) Truck Loading Space Where Applicable 'Building Height ❑ Access Approach and Aisle yX Visual Clearance Triangle Shown ADDITIONAL PLANS: Vicinity Map Architectural Plan /Er Tree Inventory Existing Conditions Plan Landscape Plan Site Plan ❑ Lighting Plan TREE PLAN l MITIGATION PLAN: ❑ f E v6rilY it -IRC-F-AL L 0-Q ❑ ADDITIONAL REPORTS: (list any special reports) ❑ ❑ RESPONSE TO APPLICABLE CODE SECTIONS: ❑ 18.330 (Conditional Use) ❑ 18.630 (Washington Square Regional Center) ❑ 18.775 (Sensitive Lands Review) ❑ 18340 (Director's interpretation) ❑ 18.705 (Access/Egress/Circulation) ❑ 18.780 (Signs) 18.350 (Planned Development) ❑ 18.710 (Accessory Residential Units) ❑ 18.785 (Temporary Use Permits) ❑ 18.360 (Site Development Review) ❑ 18.715 (Density Computations) ❑ 18.790 (Tree Removal) ❑ 18.370 (Variances/Adjustments) ❑ 18.720 (Design Compatibility Standards) ❑ 18.795 (Visual Clearance Areas) ❑ i 18.380 (Zoning Map/Text Amendments) ❑ 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 & Utifity Improvement Standards) ❑ 18.410 (Lot Line Adjustments) ❑ 18.740 (Historic Overlay) ❑ 18.420 (Land Partitions) ❑ 18.742 (Home Occupation Permits) ❑ 18.430 (Subdivisions) ❑ 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) ❑ 18.620 (Tigard Triangle Design Standards) ❑ 18.765 (Off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) ADDITIONAL ITEMS: l:\curpln\masters\forms-revised\land use application completeness review.dot REVISED: 6-Jun-07 PUBLIC FACILITY PLAN Project: NCR Knoll Dr. COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST Date: December 1. 08 GRADING ® Existing and proposed contours shown. ❑ Are there grading impacts on adjacent parcels? No ® Adjacent parcel grades shown. ❑ Geotech stud submitted? Not required STREET ISSUES ® Right-of-way clearly shown. ® Centerline of streets clearly shown. ® Street names shown. ® Existing/proposed curb or edge of pavement shown. Show compliance with Washington County Eyebrow-Corner standard detail M-405.5 attached ❑ Street profiles shown. Show Knoll on P.L plans ❑ Future Street Plan: Must show street profiles, topo N.A. on adjacent parcel(s), etc. ❑ Traffic Impact and/or Access Report ® Street grades compliant? ® Street/ROW widths dimensioned and appropriate? ❑ Private Streets? Less than 6 lots and width PD appropriate.? ❑ Other: Submit preliminary Knoll Dr. site distance evaluation SANITARY SEWER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown. STEP is required at each building (CWS R&O 07-20 10.01 a.4.)* ® Stubs to adjacent parcels re uired/shown? WATER ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines w/ sizes noted? Show extent of required improvements to undersized line in Knoll St. ® Existing/proposed fire hydrants shown? ® Proposed meter location and size shown? ® Proposed fire protection system shown? STORM DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ISSUES ® Existing/proposed lines shown? Although detention is provided, submit downstream analysis describing point of disposal. ❑ Preliminary sizing calcs for water quality/detention Submit provided? ® Water quality/detention facility shown on plans? ❑ Area for facility match requirements from calcs? ® Facility shown outside an wetland buffer? ® Storm stubs to adjacent parcels re uired/shown? REVISED: 12/02/08 * If applicant wishes to propose serving each parcel with a separate STEP, submit a request which references attempts to acquire an easement. The request will be forwarded to CWS for consideration. The submittal is hereby deemed ❑ COMPLETE ® INCOMPLETE ,,V ^7 A,13SAAz, By: Date: December 1, 2008 REVISED: 12/02/08 Al~ Ti, 1 . c, CCA- La N C~ I ~L 1-~~ 7-.<< r 6 Q 1 t , rc ► S 6q5 ly,X b 75.- 12 2 Gary Pagenstecher From: Kim McMillan Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 9:52 AM To: Mike White; Gary Pagenstecher Cc: Todd Prager Subject: RE: Knoll Street Subdivision Attachments: image001 Jpg Thanks, Mike. Those are all pertinent comments from engineering. Kim Kim McMillan Development Review Engineer Direct: 503-718-2642 Fax: 503-624-0752 From: Mike White Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 4:25 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: Todd Prager; Kim McMillan Subject: Knoll Street Subdivision I looked at the proposed subdivision and had some questions. The driveway(s) shown should be private streets. Subdivision lots should abut either a public or private streets. The street area is normally deducted from the total area prior to calculating density. It appears that that was not done. The width of the "private street(s)" are usually 20' curb to curb. Private street sections are to be built to public standards. IE 3-1/2" of A/C over a 9" rock base. The alley looks like it is to be pavers. The grading plan does not show how lots will be graded prior to building. This is particularly important when trees to be saved are in close proximity of proposed grading. Although a subdivision plat can be recorded before improvements have been constructed no building permits can be issued until the subdivision improvements are substantially complete. I think the planning commission would need to see these items more complete or explanations thereon to be able to make an informed decision. Mike White „ City of Tigard s Senior Engineering Technician Engineering f 9 1k503;- 639-4171 ext2464 ~~like', ,Tigard -or, gov 13125 Sv'i Hal( Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 1 A R=25' R=36' PAVEMENT LINE R=25' R=25' L I J I I NOTE: VA I E S EYEBROW CORNERS SHALL BE CERTIFIED FOR MIN. SIGHT DISTANCE. EASEMENTS FOR SIGHT DISTANCE MAY BE REQUIRED. I R=55' - - - - R=55' cG~~ PAVEMENT LINE - - R=55' MIN. FACE OF CURB WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF LAND USE EYEBROW -CORNER AND TRANSPORTATION REVISION DATE WASH. COUNTY NO. M-405.5 Greg Berry From: David Schweitzer [SchweitzerD@CleanWaterServices.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:42 AM To: Greg Berry Subject: FW: Sanitary pumping 2S1 01 BC-00301 Greg: Sorry I didn't have this at hand when I called. I did some research with the Tax/map lot you provided and came up with this forward. Here's what was suggested to Mark Reed over a year ago. They may be using Chapter 10 as the justification and so proposing a public STEP system. Hope it helps. David Schweitzer EIT Project Manager Engineering Plan Review Phone (503) 681-4474 Fax (503) 681-4439 http://cleanwaterservices. orb/ From: Mark Reed [mailto:reed@stdairy.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 16:34 To: David Schweitzer Subject: RE: Sanitary pumping David - Thank you for the quick response to our question. I know that we don't want to be a pain in the ass - but with the investment we have, we want to explore every alternative just in case the easement doesn't work out. I will go through the guidelines that you have referenced below and see if we can make that work. Thank you again for the meeting. Mark Reed Northwest Ventures Group 2808 NE MLK Jr. Blvd Suite P Portland, OR 97212 971-506-0167 From: David Schweitzer [maiIto:SchweitzerD@CleanWaterServices.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 4:26 PM To: reed@stdairy.com i l Cc: Julie Wirth Subject: Sanitary pumping Mark: Thanks for your inquiry. If you look on line at R&O 07-20 Design and Construction Standards chapter 10 it offers a Septic Tank Effluent Pump (STEP) System which if the conditions are met may apply. However since the District specifies gravity laterals R&O 07-20 Chapter 5.09.3 exploration of the granting of an easement leading to the downhill existing sanitary system would be the best route. David Schweitzer EIT Project Manager Engineering Plan Review Phone (503) 681-4474 Fax (503) 681-4439 http://cleanwaterservices. org/ 2 . : : OF TIGARD Approved .1)4 1 ^)nditionally Approved 1 1 Far only the work as described in: PI9MIT NO. Pi DR,ao -v>reloy 3tiu Lett r tu: Follow I Attach 1 1 Job�d/�dy i7 • e,: Date: 4/243/1,4.• _. i LEGEND: s..<:. © OUTSIDE PAPAW SPACE 4 - 0 A44W[I 41, - .,- = ..,•..,,,,,__ • • -.._. - ....,,,,,...,„. ! .11:-.1" .-. y - 'ay Q \ _•�n ca // i �,19 �`` SITE INFORMATION � �. ♦ © s''",.'''.' •1 ADORES: I •F' F7- , S •, 12360 SW KNOLL DR TIGARO.Olt •: F90 AF' "T LIR I.,A �� I 190 0 �•., ' _ s... -_... ------- TAX NAP:MIRK 11301 ars '�°•�- A a\ $7' �, , 7,500 S.F.NW.LOT SIZE .�, , I '•.�' 13 ` 0 TOTAL SIZE AREA(BEFORE DEDICATION).123,425 SF(283 34 AC) ' • - .� �.�✓' RAW.DECICAD011 315 SF' i .. � 1 4A, i i� WETLANDS rpiE( �) " `l.. / E .1 t . I , \ � ','` NATURAL UIJNS ACE AREAS ACE( h) (vQL �� NATLRAL RE9DURCES NONE • `'��"��° /� /4, _'" • ` TOTAL LOT AREA(AFTER DEDK M) :F) .F.123 10 sF �'�•,„ \\� j 6 \ �, \ - ��' NET DEVELOPIENT AREA .,23,110 SF r •�``` i'`- ..` ` 0 '-A, BROWN zalm IIIYTS_12 MAIM ZONED oNTS.18) L� FF `` _-,\•�'.. '4'��- -'',"(. '.,`•'•.. ••} ' ' SITE AREA \� 4 • 4r4 TOTAL MFA, Q _um (S0.FT.)♦ 1 3.111 2 3,243 Q 3 3.060 1,333 939 �••„ `•Ay, J� ',j� valmll�lllnl/000U�, 4 3,431 1,534 939 �.-` • �� O ✓�'� ; 5 3,616 1,594 939 -•-•`....„:�.`2 i\ \ •p. 6 3,513 1,636 979 E_YISTING ONE-WAY:7REET-/ `�'� \s\ �� ! 111111111118 7 2,172 553 1,012 \• n� �� `, 4 6 2.570 725 1.114 �''� \IIIIIIIII,pIIlllpll� 9 2,654 690 1,114 0 \`\ 10 2.773 L013 1,114 '`, —`� 3 11 $723 611 1,114 \. y'6,r . 12 2,643 814 1,194 `�\1:\. :,`� A I RUT 1111:01 `�;` O BUFFER LEVEL C ALONG NORTH STREETS,SIDEWALKS,DRIVEWAYS,PARK/NG-26X OF SITE _�•,� -� r � ���► Q4 '� ;��. � BOUNDARY(TO CONNERCNL SOE). ��,. ,�i,1 '97 ll► n © :r © BUFFER LEVEL D ALONG EAST COSTING ONE-WAY :TR ET—�1'x-.- iy 1®�`� a #' , BOUNDARY(TO INDUSTRIAL SIDE). 4h.'-•=18 7`i� ../'�•��` ^^., I” A7' '1, 0 7 BIKE PARKING AREA ! r �-›..... 199 12 C/q �';. O waste 7 :; /,/ ,.y 4 :QA„,,, l` >,°e. ! �iy°��ikeit 1,j�� { O FENCED OPEN SPACE RAY AREA,,,,li% '•ii / i j:-� — PARKING: r; L' ._ ■ F I:i ;,: , i,.' O LOTS 1 1}RU 6-4 SPACES/LOT(2 N GARAGE,2 ON DRNEWAY) !r/ f+i �i 71 w l4. LOTS 7 THRU 12-3 OR 4 SPACES/LOT(2 N GARAGE.1 OR 2 ON DRNEWAY) ;li i ':/ i:it P ;:�' •..�-'` L015 13-4 SPACE(UNDER COVER) �j M. TRACT•A•-PUBLX:PAWING 19 SPACES i / r/ !l r t j / $ _ GRAPHIC SCALE 0 15 30 SO / ' / (NFar) FOR '°�"" '° '�` OR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION m "`v°'°" d3< '. ram;TIT DATE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN ZOO W3.: JWS L22841-1 ,, 049,_ •'. . ZTec ENGINEERS Inc. —N' L22B41C1 vrcR 2-21-0T Civil — Structural — Surveying "`� i=30• C°"® 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY .� KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY +O.7 Na:, 9° . Phone: (503) 235-8795 Fax: (503) 233-7889 Email: 2tec®ztecengineers.com TIGARD, OREGON � EXPIRES 12/31/2010 PLOT DATE: 9-10-09 ZTEC CAD FILE: L22841C1.DWG CITY OF TIGARD Approved .IS ^•7nd;;ionally Approved i I F 3r only the work as described in: . Pr_9MIT No. PDi2.coq -0e00y See Letter to: Follow ■ I Attach I .;c,b Address 20, E, (6-74/7„.. Date: 912111/4%9' - 5• 15• SIDEWALK CNOr1l11taANMIw�C� 0 ``�, 1 " t%.53 SF.RENO 24 MOUNTABLE GUTTER 2 -0----0-----_Q_______j `` l ,58.g,&FF A BFgCATK1N FOR BUFFER A ..� -- `\.I. -,_.� :3,677.49 SF.(TRACT B ME7 1MCF .,a' © ' � II:: ONE—WAY DRIVEWAY SECTION ---: —\ 1>P� P� j w , � ,�� l \ f5l \� ` \- - s ry,i^.�-`\ftft *I0� ,,� \;;\\\`':'''.-\ %i ,• �:/' ''wed_ —%' / io . O i �Y.� t i ;'11- .L \\.' \, \,k\''• 401��._• `�.44.; r�Y• imipam,, ,_.,,,,,..„ r b , - "� }}� �� j :.2r, { e -1?T. \\ ?rte ,',r ` z GRADING KEYNOTES �•,� 1/ \.`V ape, ' O i ,1 A ,r i r i 1 , . ` \\ ib 1'f O1 2 FT TO 7 FT WALL !� �I 7� b ` i Jj;; %' _. ''" + r Aft .--./ / .'• !/ ; (( ; ` ' G i `''' ? f 1 1 ,'4:/ O 3 Fr WALL i; .. t I 1 i t ?µry,..- 3 5 FT WALL �``�{ \ � - _. � ,�Pr ,• p//• r, I L' I O4 7 FT WALL \ cP s „�i i i eL I 1 � ,: �� O■ EXISTING r/NF..•.WAT STREET--'/ �\•--• ` N j...1 t i � .� 5 10 FT NAIL �\ .\ `���\ �., — _ ,:- iit.,::: i I 9111111\ \�L Y •r 1 6A •''i /T r '..,: �_Bn�.• ` O6 3.S FT NALL \ , , 1 j' ��r �'� r �II!IAl11GII�IIIWI� u ',' 7 2 FT TO 5 FT WALL \ \ .,` , n UN II. ti OB PFRNOUS PAVEMENT \ \ � � w ii I e t`a 1F � : O TOP OF WALL 180.5 •F �� '4O 00:44 • 1\\., \\`:, • 4`t �/ \-"'''.. 8011111 OF WAIL 16ao 10 157.0 \mil/- �1.v 14:4. � ;a ., ~\EYJST NG Ohf....N'A�STR,.c: _ 7 m 'w. / �,- I - ( :SPA lO1 OF OF 1 164.0 15.04 20.9t i r^* 1 j---7 4(`.,°,o a �' • �i wi T ,, ( , - '....---4-......._____ BOTTOM OF NAU,6i.0 sOEwAUC 18 0' J (.... I v`e r ��1 f' I i1 GRASS WALKWAY,SEATS,ETC. PARKING AREA r �. t1 r`•/ BSS �.tj r,•:..-11 '6l /� II 1 \ i� 15 WALL rrs�W� �.'•'+j•. �� lath _' ' ;:r' ''j\mil'.. f % �:; ,rte �� 1`l�; ab ~ 7.;,'''' SECTION A-A t-_..e=— ?; - '.,.: `//'; lOP Cf OLL,76.5 10 1755 977 OFWAIL16670 . �, s•,,,' 7 i s i f it J7 'l GRAPHIC SCALE n✓ BENCHMARK: %X 0 15 30 60 IJ; ELEVATIONS ARE TO 7HE OTT OF TICARD.BASED pl CITY OF nGARO ,r ; Y.-----.17-' ((01 BENCMARY/154 BRASS DISC N CURB 0 NW CORNER OF BURNHAM r/: i! / E DEW- 30 ►QT STREET tAroH HALL BLVD. %,/ 4•q, • , SIZE T.B.N.-RAILROAD SPIKE N POWER POLE.NORM SIDE CF KNOLL STREET /i i l;• ------141'i t; t NEST OF DRIVEWAY. EL-196.96 SECONDARY 911 T.B.Y.-TOP OF 3/4•LP.I SWniWLST CORNER OF F+ FOR REVIEW ONLY RTE. 199.E NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRUM m Dili 3UB'[IT13 JO!AD.: etr REVISION int9oY n LPPEN19 6/SOB .N1"A , JwS L22841-1 SINE ✓ Z T e c ENGINEERS I n C. CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN L22841C1 _ /69 ECM ti ICak amp J1.161 2-21-07 Civil — Structural — Surveying FOR: WCR COMPANY 1T-30' - coN 3737 S.E. 23 235-8795 PORTLAND, OR. 97202 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY `�rPti�a Phone: (503) 235-87., Fax: (503) 233-7889 Cl 4 Email: ztec®ztecengineers.com TIGARD, OREGON EXPIRES 12/31/2010 PLOT DATE: 9-10-09 ZTEC CAD FILE: 122841 C1.DWC LEGEND r�1I` Pit VILLLgG �J GREEN •`R- Du215m AT KNOLL � 7�. � /TM— ORM POI RIVAICII MAP 2S 1W 1BC TL 301 & 1500 4 411111,,o, 00 12.1n SR Mu at 1110 ' ' r_ ,,, 12360 SW KNOLL DRIVE EMIR GU•mI I `' 01N�SI.rW»4E TIGARD, OREGON . a WRIT WOW r. a IXIR NRE - Exs15s POW POI VICINITY MAP ..0 DISK 15Q ROW 11 01441101511111011 • a Sr ON ,j 01!1501110 N NNE B NO C ¢0011 a DIM � 1G1 St WNBILI'.IA AMAX OREM 4I PERMS 100 F fl -'�•i�` 10 faw eX6 NAM BY N[ N NOM 11116E*MIS PA SFr(ORNM'ONI 11111 WIIIIK / BSI 0NdN0 REARM OAR 162-001.0020 I0[ Y I ,' / 11VDI1 d11T CRUD IIII NARY OF M SE 151. PILO O /♦♦ ` \�__ R REV=I0 MOOR NDY �`\\ , . '/ PRIME UIDFAOiN1C FROM MISS MI DOOM IIIMI `` ` \ LILL K�(IDW Safely. W1Q E / I-1100-34-7744 EILICOC/MEOW WIMPS *. 15Q.SAS •E 7004, SOS-211-4211 Ea 4113` "- Y4l DIRE 5 03.121-4111 = NE ',03403.120 \\ , �11113.01100 II115111Q 10W11A0 y n 15101 w•url. 7 SHEET INDEX: / GRAPHIC SCALE o 20 w 120 C0.0 COVER SHEET CO.1 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN Inal.40TM Cl PRELIMINARY GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN C2 PRELIMINARY STORM PLAN C3 PRELIMINARY SANITARY SEWER AND WATER PLAN C4 PRELIMINARY PLAT C5 EXISTING KNOLL DRIVE PROFILE TP1 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY Li TREE PLAN FOR REVIEW ONLY 1OF1 PROPOSED SETBACK EXHIBIT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION R 2-21% ZTec ENGINEERS, INC. ID. a .I..'1":1' '• COVER SHEET FOR: WCR COMPANY AS NOS 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 1� 4Z•.,, PHONE: (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON CO.O EXPIRES 12/31/20011 rw°Metal-01 tpI011L= ALZEI BASL.M(4 12/19/70011 LW=IK WU=IOr • 0 = s ct conk m1.IO1cwL .,,,', T.�e 'a"ilanu_ 1,..../........._ r---N___@3' _, rr-_"_ 571E INFORMATION i 11 . /-- w\ r -1--ye .main �I'j /�- Q,�_ veo»m.Mt ICAO.m u. ,.ri x,._. WI 201911112901311104 a-Bs 411,1 10 00 i 6 w __as.1� r.soo er.w Lnr sa f 1 ) „ I \ 0 HMI 9a Wu mwmp-,uea Sr I,..r 1 cROW (mrsq PPS `i s um0n Pni(a�rvrt�) loltAl Was.WAS S ux asw¢z xpc �1 amm�l,JEE -naves ... ,, WOW man-00503/75c0•5575 f a\)t,,,,, PAWED WS naWn-.75+nBP•m /s.�_ "e. I e.•.....1. / rrw man-u,os,1� . , \. M, �' �� f,I<i'L - / Jly. X11,. IAG1(S0.R.) kiAS 150.R.) X00 IS•7 OS '¢YiJ k ' r E am >u 1156 1111111111111111111‘ 1 3616 NH 172B LY2 MIL CIIII-VM MO O ' LfL•�t / b 1EI ,156 ),. MY I 1156 NOM P�S,IIIII t1IU,r (I'S / 21U i 1156 PROPOSED cues OH dCEEJ .BOHOL COWER © ��/ !/ / OI 3 W.OOMfI.ttI•TO IJ R xNf-WIITN _ PEOU1nIaNr. ( HAD B Ix,D seursl z9e,B NW/11 II I I*I STUD WIND ErcEms WN. � i NEW 5 R.ROWS SIX.,. (Enl 01 511E) Oa OB sITp roe OK MYPSOW AI ° `I $'` F e / O r,. , '.M♦ /l O] 1F/!R.PUMFA SLITS,S17014110.5.DHOWS,PALLING•1K OS SITE y •S•. ! O OO .R.AC.NW-MOM MN. MIN e1F-N'AEU )� ;!\ , O KIPPER LEVEL[onto 1IDmH a4»LOrr.fro a; } l / L.- CWYEALUL SIDE). ,(� ./ ©SUTER LEVEL O',ow EAST BOIL..(10 4111•.MI �/ `\ ` ``�� 1kiwa•77 1 [�4DUSIPW SIOE)�� ' Oe ea AMONG S1 WA i COME caaa,e murrx Mu. /I,f r`� GRAPHIC SCALE 0 IS .D W FOR REVIEW ONLY Iv NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION . .)_ ea '°'''''''''. vn uWS 2-I,-0) --gym s� ...., REVISION e� "='/m ` •'.E X11 ZTec ENGINEERS, INC. ,, CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN L220419ASE.OWC 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY "5 Nn'E' PHONE (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY e C0.1 Q' FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON EXPIRES 12/31/3010 A1modU_oLL-MLJBensamAFnMeYY,W,rangamsten ix HALF SELEPOP EROSION CONTROL KEYNOTES ®...,moan RR N. .• ® MOIST KOS F.S11•014110r.rr o ® 6M0 MAW/=mum lYRMQ m •�'." mum/ M153 Sr.M11QE 00S40 AC. C 06141.DRAW CO61ND1Y MOTS ANM RS A MAIL 1.TRACT WOK YY Mill D MA.M um MtPAp. �.�,�• � 1FIIIP Sr MAC, !WIN�i GRADING KEYNOTES 2 gib 0 [[DSIA.H.1a LOIN a,LIQ slum 4 n l 1� Ip '/� 'e���\\ � �`�• � serr m laver p 911;..TED slaulMOanuE ruu[Yna s1 un YJ © >I '4� `\3"11\\ ,S S s[.011 H O )1 Hu rtal ` D aMMn rexHH DHau. O O ISfI� m n ��\ O rno.II IT WI pMAM Pal/i',� ,� �� m M O wolnlmws •Aci„`,- f TRACT A ` 1Y-, 'O A51um1 MLA O 2 n*on SILL °�(Y�7-'11•. o 1� /A / 0 4'L A`f: - le Q Fn Ma :* • K� ISO• O lnnu -y: o C11111 i -�. o K A Sr e q 1011016 M'Da2T 1. ' x.11` Vi- •(� ` I, V U \•$. �- , i ,3861 D ' 1� \I / '-t6: - `4:� O• ' CI 1 EROSION CONTROL G .- / o 1p GENERAL NOTES +w �� ,” '3 —____ .1 S Lea a 0/31014110 3304 WO.M[@[lata 1a MOM YS1ALLAla M0 4 M�ISan[S 5051 M/MID Dal n M APNCM11asu oe NO ]'6"050 05 fay 511353 J Q M /�• f Ilk' 3 w0MM3❑Ms ISMbx Am IMMO[0111111p1K5 Y ACCOM000 MI IMriAYm AS MHSSAm 10 DIM 261 CarMO rmE20IY1s 5 1. 4// . IOW.SIMI A10 ROOM nouns.KU M Ca!DOOM M YH010100 MO• e rt 11 V MOM M CWM MAIM.l MEM MAYIM.Kt 2000 Am CMS P.0 DT OS,CM l 1. Al m K SMLL SEpO(1 H MIAs O AttLLLA.1011 ION in M!43001 i .111,7s,,,,,,,01' . -_���+ IOMM.Alt CAMS 9396 AIM D2MYMx2 SKS Sums M MAW MOOT TO PAMG \ 1 I 0 ® 3. M wlMTIAMM Or TICE[SC RAMS MO COMSMMC.p w170.43 M WOG OPWA1I016 SMML x11 Mal SpExt-UD[M MAW MID M , , `� GW/ IUIEI1 MI Am.CCOYO r DM 6 CO TAI RS 6 M P 01 I rt H TH WO .1MI- �r"��// DMM Ml O'x61MClp 6 CMWfaD NM APMOMD Ol M 10C.A1� � N MD MQIA /1NOfClPrL 6 FS1W b1A M 0.Ml1AG Sum' 1T :: )fr7I E!p YNMMMMIU Ma M MOECi 6 Al/r01p IB L Y16110D PPOM ID Q161NC10M OIAIL LdSWICBIY MIYD. _ [y[p0 M aFID1G WIS MW!H POYIICD. M wMWGS 9 1 n M AMInCYII/COx11AtiM1 ra M 01MAglx H W16WUCIIOM 0511115 9005 ri 114 M.W Mb1 E Ctl6 WCa Y fau0b1 yL" 1 YD P.M pAO.Y AfrMm AD Y 9a A YAwu l5 ro x6LR ruAO a Dots xol pa M o.AMAM Mrt1L In.CO M SMAO•MM.MO Ua 1MAY S VluG 1 rp DOT P IIA M r "�j_ '. � 01• `•� apAK.D[MOUIE~Alt Oa 51050505005: 961.101 ` 'S •1 1�` S ? 11 0. >. x ESC r.¢1rts vat CO!6 ru11 051 10511511 rauoorrs RI MIV,Aa to r MH Ma MOOS vs a vs 111 nuy nl.rsa nDY Wan m L� 5!COMMA& SOW W16aICa1 Rem,Mt CSC!AIMS SI.H Mrs/911.21.1.M MT lane mOV]I 10MO IA01113 YLL 1 i r ,,;: w ,. 's 3• 1G:` IFSMID AS x3110 TOP LAMM STOW MYn MM O MX W1 SEMI, CRFC1. OIfBOM N[101141 W YpEXi�IM4 RAIWG MM Mop 1�A� � [ ..CO IAWI MMx DOTS x011LL(M. xwML(puma 1)Pp HYMOEYR P •� 'iD w --� 144.� 13 M DCSIWI Sums IaME 1.35•6 Ma EMLYY 6 MLY n.AU•a ..M.EC Lq6 AM WM.m M MIAs PI Srt MM AMAMI O OISRT o lia .** ,4411111, l j . .SfC10.5 IPDM HHCSI. t zG°' i. /1°•.1 -/.. V +r�`:..M•. L 1,05 BENCHMARK: . :\ ...A.".366 ll[wwE 131T Of 11Gm.xor Ox Ott Cr et nun H.MYMAHF OO11EI •w 16C•OM•x x.CpMA Cr YMMV4 Sllal/W MIL K M*W ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY SECTION tea' Ma GRAPHIC SCAR• SR IAA-MU M M..Y P IMn POIL x011 at I.101Mr S1iF1 0 15 30 r0 FOR REVIEW ONLY °1° o.'1wM scow us.-re v ve LP.•nuor menM NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 1010n a'Mrs ". '-31 ZTec ENGINEERS, INC. MAIM & EROSION PRELIMINARY DING ��• l22•A16ASE.00, . -.. �;�.�;.�� 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 '`S IMO a� PHONE: (503) 235-8795 ono FOR: WCR COMPANY Q FAX: (503) 233-7889 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TIGARD, OREGON C1 43*30455 12/31/2006 JAPH rs5 m-0 04_pr6Au»E-IU72M1M9lAwp,27729/2111111x011:25 PM,WU SUE PC. 4 i ow __- _, ,411#1 \, . ti �'/• — _____ • .'T,1141N4p., IA N,__ 1-- i "I-., , i .7.' v N.Zi '! '. .� I. [ rA �K Kilt•d i – (f J 7 R�./� y.,, �' '} I / 'V\ `''' ,1, STORM PLAN KEYNOTES 0 o / rpor OI Ir LE.our Isis 4y Y.'• ;A,,�'71 `J. I( r h \_4 a . IIIEeu�rrso MO TOrAN ED MP '}_ '^ f' ,., o �f®'�f+` t/ a C 1 opuc,YU A,n R.SE ssm // :572n/0 �ic°s"sa rn onpnnY wYo T ` �i p II..G t%T-WN IA- , y'^ `.' ,..� I - _ :- ` Qrs, '':#� ©SIONN WC \� Ill l___ =!� O Pulp.r0 van O ttP1 l�GlG DASH " 71 _ Q SCOUR PROEM. ,0� f-Y� _� T �p �r : ,1 ®WrtiDY COMYM SPEW. 2[ A if _ t• i I SL1 //, O rams STAr6 ®nom,A.D. �• ® w.111 LOTS p.aS ` I 0 I MATE Y S.A.TRENCH QEMENES � J 0 Mt.R.Y DRAWS e.�` //� ®vRPVOSEP PERMS vAKY.n [ ` 0•\ � ! ®OYECI ROOE DM.70 SM.RUCKS NR UCH LOT I THROUGH IH ALL J .nAg S' GRAPHIC SCALE 0 15 11 MD FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION N.., .IMI R r :flirt*'SA AMY 2_2I-0' ZTec ENGINEERS, INC.IMMO x[wsoY .n,/oE CONCEPTUAL STORM PLAN ® FOR: WCR COMPANY A4 NO SS 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 r� PHONE: (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY 4 FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON C2 ocwas I2/3I/2010 21Na1m,_91-0MLwneWL4-1Yt7MW1lAwo.t/1YI00i tM1:75 Mt WYPSag I@ F...1',..).' • • n�, ,rs i , w■r•■w■w _ �S. • • 1 may,.-7 '°`a � � 3 a v. ,V.-"i. t Ind. .i \� -'�,, i O. iks�: - ? J/ • ©\,„„,/,,,, �l • 1-``� . z r su,[x RN 151.52 107.7/11. �.7y/� �-r ,.r. v-_ a ..s ./ , �[art 1`E)iws••t r x t E FI . \ .. � � Eau � +�• [ .. �}` ! . ' �� , ' I w i 1 �\s . / SANITARY SEWER KEYNOTES 4- • rim I g f U ; q_', I.•a._ /...1:-''''-,.......... _ ---11•'•r' ,f '� ;� 4► 'l3 $s”' 1 , t>tmwi°o,o COME u[• 1v If R.PUKE SS•s-oms SSW 2 x,:,r n.w.,zie_•� . f�".-� t . ,+. ,'I.i� s ../ f I C g Q 11141110 73 Fl�/:;%W � : ` . A n I '1';;I''' m / •/ .er/ r a 00416054 a N. s •� ,00 svxunErs,o I; ',x \ t is , �� ' q- ,' / ft..' ' 1'C7 / A �` `/% WATER KEYNOTES w u e'PUKE Rc SS r 3,3.006 SSW u u 5'PR•s-0005 a e' eo rom.uu.+°` { ,515 ^ e a./1; /JS' y} v. ▪ soma r My uc..i g rFnli t r r!4s o , A /r, Q , / r ¢1.11u4.om PS WM.., .....12 LI: II R.D1.1111335 n Y ' _ eiik .e 6 0 orRac aroo'II [ran-tin itc7./ G• .0 % o /` rry[swa[0.errs e_ . �T■ ,� i IS u[•RC 55.s-0.005■ El 3/4'RESt0.7.WEE WW2 ny :. \ > • (] Y.a,o,r/Y s cnu. A R.G,[r SS LASERS /. Y�..i�/' A t `. / //) / © .'ix[0.w Y01 UM fR ,y — ,/ / - ❑_ ,r R.l[sara uc us[+w'-re. m x's PRESSURE u[ �..� • a. t GRAPHIC SCALE ▪ S.NWH SI A e 55 MSS Sfn.CE 5 R \ i r( ;�"._�i. / 0 5 30 60 rsmrc r• Q u,SUPER lnwp t/ �.... I r Mr ® roc n[i , ./WWI MR r rrn / FOR REVIEW ONLY 0 w,�[u REM if / ,`,�-• NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 1p PUPAE ZTec A nm[aUMW9QRNLOS15 °"�°'I °�/° ' {t1�r'�s n _= 0 L 1 �r�.. ENGINEERS, INC. PRELIMINARY SANITARY SEWER �. s� & WATER PLAN _. .1: `"° 3737 S.E. 8TH PHONE: (503) 235-8795 97202 'n' FOR: WCR COMPANY — Q FAX: (503) 233-7889 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TIGARD, OREGON C3 il 000105 12/31/1001 7APS Oy1-0 ,paOt •M11t41Ml.A[ir 17/19/ 2 111IMP@1OP r ....... I ul qR \ UM WW1 �� /I 1 601 m. =I !:..,..., I ` ��I \ 31.930 Iy O. .+! I( 1 \, Oso om. 1 J,513.yR / . :000 s+IP ,54 I /A0.HwR 11.. `` \ , f ', I \ i , i / I-ft. / a i ; • 1 I R A.1 Ie 1 I ' J1 kir \ f i� 1 r I eS I r'"- \ IIE E\SD+[iVl 1611' -....SLE ant me ,, - 33.0 E R 1 I -_��1 - _-_-1 11\- 'f 007 was■ p1 r ■LR14 R 1 .`� YIw y 1r_' /r ,/ - rI�_' .ter 9r1� ` ✓ 1 u 50.0 ,ow.M1 r , Ln3 q R I /r " 0311 m. 1 A i $ r;./_...`ee,, _`_rya:: (pllsaya C 1 / /r fi OD)..IR ■ MU aR`3 rr/ 4 /r O.R 1 PUBI[Al by \4 ;. /D / h ili RAW WwEyA95c ARMY Im �`i\_ r 0 .�``\` If S. \T(]/ GRAPHIC SCALE 0 15 30 W FOR REVIEW ONLY il NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION s•147> d Rte" R U""' F9® „•, 2 2 ZTec ENGINEERS, INC a PRELIMINARY PLAT • L3°'-' -!' u2sAl.ASCOwc AS AWED 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY NM fI PHONE: (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY 4 — FAX: (503) 233-7889 11GARD, OREGON C4 CORMS 12/31/3000 NlyONVIN I W110 W N. '^4..i,{_.--.t ''J> V ...^is _ I'IlLf m +[_ ..; r - f 1 Ti i AA_-. AID • '-, _ i•..,,- -..„ 4,Aili 0 \I �: ��«,•tier' ��z � , ( 3 Y Q w IOIC Y ' 0 8 RG01O.Gm a g1 x Y °...OM.. MI 11110-0010 PIER 12 2m - 11.x.COBOL I a y/4� yA Y 3 ''•'. 4.. .R` Sett - -. ! �'¢'.�` i *-a y T I4-. �Q6� :Al _` 4 -.4, 1�;sd .2223 a115 ¢ Cl GNW Ib _sv il1./ rrt. cltl ,s '/;.. OAHU Sil7Y ::'R ft! AS 00 ? . I•m 2.Oe l•m Ha Hm e.w ,•m e.m `"i KNOLL RD PROFILE �+�, ~ 3 A /., �C.Yr_- i 44 S7; ?i x," \ GRAPHIC SCALE t ,\ 0 13 30 e0 FOR REVIEW ONLY KNOLL RD PLAN I1 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ..L.r.,l ' REVISION rove o"�N.A Z 12 01 ZTec ENGINEERS INC. „,,, EXISTING KNOLL DRIVE PROFILE ICE Y, u2e.-1 3737 S.E. 8TH AVE., PORTLAND, OR. 97202 FOR: WCR COMPANY AS NOTED 4Z'� PHONE: (503) 235-8795 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON C5 MITES 12/31/2010 t. AIaMLNa14t7K1Y21M"ASE ,1fIWI*1MIMIML NMI SIX Mc .. ...... ... ••• .,... LEGEND • 000mouloes nue 0 NM MINIMININIMIIIMIM ---------------___ .ror., c,-Zr-4.1._ — -,',.'izz•z.. ..---.-.. - ....,4 ..._________ ,......0, ''•-:-.,.-,,,,\.,N.I''l; • - -- —----(a•-•-- .0"'',:', ,'' ,.••."`',41,....':-.---. le men(9.(ma RR Emma WS CV 2A Mrs solv ARM ROM. \i --------- ,92,-.: '.0...• .\ ,' \ , ... a -..- Av,„„, ''-- ""•••• V 71 ••••■••..... ...7----------......- C.P• , 2:-----------AZS-.......:‘,..A.:',25.,■'.•,,&...., ' . , ,,,..1 •01110,111.1210 -.7-1:_-_------:-NN,N'NNA. ''',.••' ' , , , -... r..771 •■■••■■.......■ •\:•-':\\\ ^ y , %_,.. --- r. ± \ '' ,\ • ,„„ ......,.. i ",,/,•,, e. ,„„ 1-------1 ' .',.'N...' . . . 001/ _, ---,---,‘AAZA.A,.., • \\\• ',,•. . 0....,..,..,, 10".0.1 ; ,i,•,.....f5..,,,,. •L''''' • -crit,::::::=•. • '''''''''''\II\ \ a. \ *101 7/7/44 • ORIN....9.0 a Few sonA.YAW \ \\ I / 1 ..,4( 0121124 , A 1 . t„ wet, \ r= u -- \ 'OA\\,\.11 1 \ , \ \..p"'•-. •, . - // / ,,, 7 •,.. ra • \ ; ::: ,,..,.2:7*/,,, q../11,141/:, ///;1 :41;,iidett,11,11.) ::41t'.\., ii /44'1 e' HI ■\\",i1,;HI , C,, \\‘`. ; \\'',r1;pci, . ... nna.""="411 ., ...„, 'ill:i 1 , .. ...,,,.. , , , ,, .11. ,, , 1 r1 0 . / • -, ,, , / 4.7., i .., I ,y,' i i„-/ 'I LI;\ti.1% 11 i 11■1 1,I : 1 : '‘) \'`,,,\\i,.\'\'',,\\ ), ../;*-/ / p - p.....„ . 4, ....,..., tittii„.4 . _,,,, 7,c.#7/4;ki, i f 4) . ,. . Rm.. .., (... ..'.. ' 1/ If• ' ' .••''- ..' -.' lipill// / ;• , Ili(illt 11 , t 1 ( : „ ., \ . /,,,,,,../ / (f)iiii / ,./i . 41;,, , ,, , , , ; , , , ,, • Iti; ,,,,,;,;,, ii ii, ., , 1/?7, hi ; i i ) ) ) , j , , i , tr' REFERENCES: r Zw771.4,1 1 r.4 Z:X., WO Q ' 111111' !A, .. x\\,, •,-",,,, \-• I 1 ■ , ; 5..(--iw. / .64st \ V•Z‘zz,.. ..%....„,/ 1 i , , j i ____, / I ............ nil al 1,. ._.OA 7 Ab, , It \ ‘,\\,,, --,-..„: . s,..! tto i / --.- BENCHMARK: / • / .;.: / ''-.4111 i /''' i ‘ • \,:'Wi / I : ,1'. \ \‘------- 41/44'1F ' / -l'IL*TiPPla"-t" //)//0*----J,..t 1110W11/11:/:11/■/41'1:\' :1: .. .-71.-------..' CS .....,,,A•5.2( 1 or<eV= ■„, 'Is ow i r,--__L-_-r.-_-2._■ '''...- 1 .,..i 2/ ---'_=:_---■ ofti,, / 4*, / I, • a 1 I • i' . I er•.■Far ow _# e ay. i4.4*------- .. 2 ,..--------.---- - 1 1 =••= 7 i . ., = I I N a YIP 2S MIK g WARINGTON WW1 0, .1.m. • 1 GRAPHIC WAS 20 0 OR 20 49 0 W '...., ,,,. AN 174-05 ...... ZTec ENGINEERS, INC. 5737 5.E ATH AVE.170171.4.02 OR 97202 PROW:(503)235-R795 FAX(503)233-7(3219 ,...9 wi TOPOGRAPHY MAP FOR: WCR COMPANY KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY TIGARD, OREGON 1.2.-1 1.21111•11, TP • IS - �1M��1 __ V 1.17,1"-- u. -1f P141.)---0. .- �.c i;,,,,I 17 4 CHI \ ;I .s 9' ' N:' \. 1, 'II gym' ii .1 •1 P' . kri4: , dr,Aia'"*/ .41P.' . .- '' "ri.,4 . *44,414 g ''' s \ ---,-=....r /' f`•-•' • 9 To a so /I IIJ \\\ /,,,qqq �. • Si f. t 1 „lag j3 rN�G��M 9 c,® '\ —1 Its ,, oi,� �1 1 �if1 "' 6° LEGEND I1e w MINE at;,, F�" /" cI nn.'r `\ i%.,...1,',— ®IS,6�l ISa� ./ , wr n L, -- �4:, �•°, , " L .•J� '7, IM.IIgN MAP II It _ 1/(:741:7;we 1 /1K/ 1 ;:, ® P./„ ' IL ii 0,..../ i_s:.,.......7.0- S' fr GRAPHIC SCALE 0 15 b SO FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION <.I..> Mares °n"'g.'31' .1:1` 1 s ' ZTec ENGINEERS, INC. m1. PRELIMINARY TREE PLAN ,,,.ta,� 13261-1 FOR: WCR COMPANY "S NOTED F 3737 S.E.PHONE: (503) 2355--8799 R. 97202 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY Q"�' FAX: (503) 233-7889 TIGARD, OREGON Ll %PrtS,x/31/z0p! 3:^M�. agaymA IV-m+I�4144,12/I9/mae x1:13 R4,MP IOr a INTERIOR SETBACKS PERIMETER SETBACKS Perimeter Max Interior Interior Interior Interior Perimeter Distance Minimum Building Front Interior Side Rear Corner Dist. Garage Perimeter Perimeter Side Between Lot Size Height Setback Setback Setback From Street Setback Front Setback Rear Setback Setback Buildings Zoning Requirement 7500 30 20 5 15 15 20 20 15 5 Proposed: Lot 1 3111 30 12.95' 3.55'/3.85 26.81' N/A 26.81' 33.5' N/A 38.91' 7.63' Lot 2 3243 30 16.50' 3.78'/4.65' 24.51' N/A 24.51' 41.56' N/A N/A 7.63'/9.3' Lot 3 3060 30 10.16' 4.65'/4.78' 25.20' N/A 25.20' 55.77' N/A N/A 9.30' Lot 4 3411 30 12.78' S'/5.3' 29.45' N/A 29.45' 78.43' N/A N/A 10.68' Lot 5 3616 30 10.89' 5.28'/4.64' 27.56' N/A 27.56' 72.30' N/A N/A 10.68'/9.28' Lot 6 3513 30 8.10' 4.64'/4.61 31.09' N/A 31.09' 50.85' N/A 40.61' 9.28' Lot 7 2172 30 15.74' 3.77'/0' 2.75' N/A 2.75' N/A 28.25' 39.77' 0.0' Lot 8 2870 30 17.17' 0'/7.01' 8.03' N/A 8.03' N/A 33.43' N/A 0.0'/ 13.40' Lot 9 2654 30 15.87' 6.39'/0.0' 14.14' N/A 14.14' N/A 49.26' N/A 13.40'/0.0' Lot 10 2517 30 16.41' 0.0'/4.95' 8.05' N/A 8.05' N/A 53.52' N/A 0.0' Lot 11 2638 30 21.27' 5.04'/0.0' 8.10' N/A 8.10' N/A 101.91' N/A 0.0' Lot 12 2773 30 18.42' 0.0'/6.43' 14.17' N/A 14.17 N/A 102.04' N/A 0.0'/12.54' Lot 13 2723 30 15.68' 6.11'/0.0' 18.67' N/A 18.67' N/A 101.06' N/A 12.54'/0.0' Lot 14 2649 30 21.12' 0.0'/5.84' 8.53' N/A 8.53' N/A 90.11' 35.84' 0.0' Lot 15(RCF) 25647 30 2.00' 10' 10'/5' N/A N/A N/A 104.59' 7.97'/10.33' N/A INTERIOR SETBACKS PERIMETER SETBACKS Perimeter Max Interior Interior Interior Interior Perimeter Distance Minimum Building Front Interior Side Rear Corner Dist. Garage Perimeter Perimeter Side Between Lot Size Height Setback Setback Setback From Street Setback Front Setback Rear Setback Setback Buildings Zoning Requirement 7500 30 20 5 15 15 20 20 15 5 Proposed: Lot 1 3111 30 12.95' 3.55'/3.85 26.81' N/A 26.81' 33.5' N/A 38.91' 7.63' Lot 2 3243 30 16.50' 3.78'/4.65' 24.51' N/A 24.51' 41.56' N/A N/A 7.63'/9.3' Lot 3 3060 30 10.16' 4.65'/4.78' 25.20' N/A 25.20' 55.77' N/A N/A 9.30' Lot 4 3411 30 12.78' 5'/5.3' 29.45' N/A 29.45' 78.43' N/A N/A 10.68' Lot 5 3616 30 10.89' 5.28'/4.64' 27.56' N/A 27.56' 72.30' N/A N/A 10.68'/9.28' Lot 6 3513 30 8.10' 4.64'/4.61 31.09' N/A 31.09' 50.85' N/A 40.61' 9.28' Lot 7 2172 30 15.74' 3.77'/0' 2.75' N/A 2.75' N/A 28.25' 39.77' 0.0' Lot 8 2870 30 17.17' 0'/7.01' 8.03' N/A 8.03' N/A 33.43' N/A 0.0'/13.40' Lot 9 2654 30 15.87' 6.39'/0.0' 14.14' N/A 14.14' N/A 49.26' N/A 13.40'/0.0' Lot 10 2517 30 16.41' 0.0'/4.95' 8.05' N/A 8.05' N/A 53.52' N/A 0.0' Lot 11 2638 30 21.27' 5.04'/0.0' 8.10' N/A 8.10' N/A 101.91' N/A 0.0' Lot 12 2773 30 18.42' 0.0'/6.43' 14.17' N/A 14.17 N/A 102.04' N/A 0.0'/12.54' Lot 13 2723 30 15.68' 6.11'/0.0' 18.67' N/A 18.67' N/A 101.06' N/A 12.54'/0.0' Lot 14 2649 30 21.12' 0.0'/5.84' 8.53' N/A 8.53' N/A 90.11' 35.84' 0.0' Lot 15(RCF) 25647 30 2.00' 10' 10'/5' N/A N/A N/A 104.59' 7.97'/10.33' N/A • .9 ;...7,.',..'4".....:;:.:::,,,..".�•;• .:�: . ,, 2S 1 01BC 2S 1 01BC ..ky •1. 's, i f /• 'r, ti / •'>/'v,.X::x.:f•.y, .,/.,1.,..4•.xt .t •:`mss. .,K•j: u,, ;' .' ..,K. .,A•,.r5`. •�y' i'X i_ti x'r, _ _ • ‹:::t.': "XT \. ,.,.�Y,�Is, :i r, r v t •:K •K ��?;• •\ vk'. , "{vw}�s•,`':'' ..K� f�•:.'• kr v •. >: �,L\ , :l`,••I .:::<. l%. \;R A..r.'•?C,V"/:•'A.1,Y r. r.\ :t Y,K"A. 5 r. \ % •'�'• '':•.:• :Y.;:.':.'7�X'r •r•"'' "`'i �,.. :!t NM`•w:;x;t k'r•.. 'r.'Y. i . t Y`?:.: n:t..}. '•s:\'Ke: x ,: K i x' ..•SyX.i f Y,!'ti a : .1 - N' .,-,_..,\ :.r-.,: ; .;..re k/>• :*:....X.;.:(21..t > p ". ,_ ,::!% t' i'`.%%�• :%'`•'•'Y .,i x r. .:y..:xi;w,?.�.. r: • ''}. x % �• �'r,'•'K;;4 'r. ;i'r.'7:,•K.:''}•ti z i x•e '' 't x r..t `'r.'vX.;x";u ri''r.'!' rz� .s <• • PA , r,`:.'"%.4.':-.,:n •;. 1 _ . ?:% %x X.r a i.'y••x,•f�t.rx, :,t :.:.k� ,• KX, � =7:••:x:•?•,u•,x r_ - -:-'-,-:,,W.:.,-a 'P :S. ..1'-rt>•s f ,.r w x'' Al 14C.. K '4. X00 J \--. ' ::j=: . l .Y • w r• '. A 4 ' t 55' '• x yr 1 .cI) rif€1 r t t•w w .-s - 1`'i' � ., r: Y. y :a.' ••':>� �:("''w,"':,A•e,'`�r j�"c ,r S�1 .too ....wm.. :w•r Y ..`te-rix+ir L,,,,.\-21,:. '•�W;V J1dt i. } • i t 'rc+t_ll y ...+,w xe.m4•a w„u ` 3cr �as :: :v +ma, Aa - t�t .v{rt,K,•• Iii,-. f..ry,t. 'x+ +` o�x. - w ,te r r' r' 'r I%-t• s' y>rs R't,,k ::tti :;`.:••' euo 0 l..... .. 9dr .'`Y;-I.' ' 1—ti I nv woo Y •''t•'1i SA/t•• ,xxb K'M �_< %' /k VA IYI 23-75 [ a /t L`\ ::",:''''m•,t"W•t,',:::,. �,, ti 3 WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON X.?.% ;. ; I.00 sj, ej.j �\\ }y;"H'•;::%' ); SW1/4 NW1l4 SECTION 01728111 W W.M. .t•' . .. ]]00 { \ \\ '':•ti SCALE I'�100' •.•17!':.iir•�;r•i;i:: I...K 0251'4-34:3.: J I"'" .n.e ,•:i•,..::?3: '� � v.11� 'xr��r�Slay.� 6'� .''.i ''Y r. 'r. _f,•.' 19 ]i� / ,K .,:i •: 1g P IR ✓� .a.'i... . � '"' ; a Q6.t r• 1“.x.•t a. . �i- *•• ,eoo `'+ no ,o, xXy.z::.`::}•.? gil;k y'I..�ei. P���.: 0 'r/ 1¢00 »rs�1y�� ' .n.e xu.o .;%',C'':.'�;' e�.�...1.,1:.!.:��:.�:5.+1� . x..,{..%.T,'Y' ', �°• CT' r 'J ] h''"'4ir,. :(:XX'.v} '.t�: ,,,,,1;:,;.:,��;;:>�.-�! iI{•'� w r €I a l• . IT j`• AA - •;•: >, y •j.. e.r1••t••.01�+ f•':,:' I�ryl '� fv: q �r) v r r rr Y .. ti. ..e. X'.`�.T�}. %%:.. •�1 ,14� a tt,x t0 „.N21%,:.2, .'ti:•t t {JrL' �<�'1�.*1■e�...eir]�e.1�1:11J '_r'1� ��•,! .,1111 , \ m o•. • ,e' 't,\r tf l•K o�s etC.e'....1.=.e,.l•••Y.�• N: • ' 'u j i i.:.4.., ' ,ti,[.K:::•s b ...a•e♦ ,.;,, :4 : '..f;,''•:"kr' °� rrtt� n. eoo :" `;pus;'-I'. i1 P ..:is:S.•.ava..v,.. rr ,. I 1 •. HK lea 'w .1'""6m�' � ..r\ :r", ;: `Si :.i :14stl irs :';; SWSCOFFINS4, g r, �+ ... 'r ...,.,..,.:,x...,.:..„, ,:\'',..,:<':-X' 'r,: .:•): /�.'�i���.`.�y.°.�e�.�Sv S FIFE s i aye ."749,19111,,,,,n� r R ^N 'mow` -;I _ i ,:• i ': /'dt t::7.4):0:t.:4£�:+� �so. i �`�., ''•(xA9 t. S xx0� �0� / I _ ",��� _` :/::....., YKJ�:: `ris%'%�!: FOR ADgTI rcawe VI$JT OURWEBiIIeAT Y• rl' L%' ' I a / ,2' '•N � r : K Won.ocn. 5 . "�%:.'..• ty ei 0.'p \I! N d�? 'J ,s; rt ` :r Y,.: .f�yk'.:;!,#:::':. • ry,�r'\iA.1; !� :,.„„0,:,...:„.. �- ,:<- ' s. _=, 0/00 '� /� ++ f /"i;:%', t' K:Y:v} .12.s. ;'ri.•r` 3.K))•�` ;r �A' I MY -\ + . :<...U.'::,..,?::;:";• :i• _ a )i VI4 ig,•. ..)::%:e. _'' n '\ o. (g/1I; j. .Y Z�4•�: F 'Y}%•L i x; -. v •.o .,.i: �> _,-4.;...s W,Q;�"' m, f ..am •\. ' 'rH I ','vrK iy•:: x;• F.+.'.:x !,.04i:.',2.41r> r :'•• ]...e `, old , is ` t 'r ` t.r t w:-%.•%.A.. �s r /.:\ >it '•'�:: i ::{:.:..-....>,.. x,�o.oc ♦ 1 1 n Y i{Jf• e K x * } w ] Dl, .;A:.!.: 6 Y `:rlw.r. I • •'••'9 r �• Y,`'J,'' Y1''�l :•.1. }'4•.•"t .>%.,r"Y.Y.xw.xxu .' , r y '''•ti.y?'vr:�r t ' / ♦ 4@ i j/ j •,,•C;x. w/,.;: ,x ";{K xv=• n f• ti Y;;A '., ' •,K - , r / j;i'K ..t.:..... ` _ • cane, Taxtom Fw:231018C '•L • :, %>, I 'Yr•t / 1 i ...:•:' %•% /, Y 4 t -K NOe r0o x+u1 • ,x•`t:'x"t, /,']• \�w„ \ 1 .'\' K- : two 6A Iwo K •r/..:1! n•\ a . l •x. •K,x. +. t' ioi raw.,oi.ri�o. .:t.::.�.`n,;u.•{V i'r,'4' au..a yk,i�':x: ,� r i r. ..21:a....22.;K s'T''i .:K,'r,' x.00 •., ; .?.. X•L'� \- Kt7 f Kv'i:•i f,C"':](tix:%Kx;{.•`: : \ •6.�' ':K .•is'r,' "': ; ' x''' f''• f;v=' :k'. Y•:. .••r::% i.:;Y.-.• . <.; �.+ �J x.00 '' i • ''x,'k • 7 ,• r.,:'' :K'. • .y..X.••,.ti d•x :' k ;K / (� �xeoo ° t �;'y 1'':<"•fy,' ti K ▪�X'Y 'ryTri; i .K % G / < "` 4x; '.'1`:•: ^''C.x:. ':,, „•i•K,' 'J X %`�.^•, 1; Y. '/.:K \ I ' ,ai • :. Y. 1,•%' .'y •:y 4-t. y . t Ki't. ..c 'K�i: x�'i / .{t,i{'r,';K;x t';x;:•.K,r' \';'':.. .▪ .,.....„4:::-....:_-:.:- • '• ,x�: .: :. r,:K'\' •X}: :i / ..•.* 1.%.i•: ::;•:K': :u;y,?... i'K ' Y ••>:: X.rx`:•:,,X i ':g' 1r i'{ . '5'55 v •,:•:>.r.. :% : o. •:i v .:•t`K +:r,;r. f.; 'Assessment ' <' .i:•. r.';• •• i% .; t. .:�•:. ..ors„ r %. :•'ri'w•a ` '•1<.•' :'x.• 'r.•�' : •r,"K,•'r,';� •.... '\ "K K'Y. >. .' C . Y,•; .\. !!•• ti r- CtART�OC�I miy,..:'.,�.a K ;e::,J>.rt,f•.:.;K`i :X;..Y.}, r ,.., 1 ;rr. t. :.::ft. i , ••:ir',• r.x:: .4).��:x..,,.• :t^.. r i T' K'K :K.:t;x;u ;. x yi :�; •x •:Kw:i „+` 1 (�4 ,,\n•• y'',*l•,. .. ,''Y Y.:i }X.. ,� 1 '. •r,'•:t;�;a "..)2,..X,• w:•:v xX. ,X x' t•':i% x' \;�.�J 44 w ':#•: ny ft:'it. X;i , {' ''k.%,... r; ,� �• �i';tt taxation ' . .'r:K�:X� ,5i• ' .i�X'r,"' K;. + •. -:/. *} •:. .;t : �:.*'•:K .A �� 'i PLOT GATE:June 26,2007 :K ]r:K i r. ; ,K v '`••. •'• ,7'..'... ..".....'.1.•• a FO ASSESSME T PURPOSES _K Y'ti x•:: .i .S.,;-•...:C. �.', `:r •r %. ,.V...'•' ';.^ .i• •N...•:\:.';::>x :K X, �► ONLY-DON p J REL ON •:K ••1"x'' x u,)L..12..3:„,. '. ri"'K';v t'e'':,, -.k'''' : ;/....,...:<,;! 'x : :▪ > FOR OT Hi USE :'. •: ::T ./"• S.. ti '', K::: .t ]:':•fi'%% ',w.•'A X w S.%•.K'.K•x .}. :,I}•".C::.. ,'•".•.� •'''l :.',t; y ., x. '•x.'• :;rk ...:...."';;!..1:...U.'x•XX' •A.:'l4:A 4:>. !>.•.R:\ A. •t.:: B.p.v.. trn.n�.xa.:=.... g,...w 1 ,u vWnryn.I hi�,N.mw1 K,..xw x,lyl. k ':�:: l x1..r.,�: k •.•t �; }} : •y. ;:. "'<'..}.xi�.%:X�:.,` ,'%. ✓.�.%:•, „k, x ,\' ( v nr�MeenO..• ann :.` % :1•: .4.........Y.%)..›..:': l•.. a..::,,,i.14,..• :,'. x•_ ux %.•. •ti ••: 'v f .•.t l' 1•:..:: .•:\ anarp ,rex nw,vw.ban ••rcpPl V ":::,Y. x .K^:' } 'r."K ,> iC.K ,::i...y>{ t ..a '.�:( :=r:•r K:� ,•:. •''X.'v; `, .n,:. ..•`.K �'A.` r,,,:::;.?":.?:;,:ii:)",-,:.'s,' ,:.} .: . :•.{ :'::: Y 1;f 1 'a � .. ^ :f::• '.•0.,_ ,K.•K•.0'.. , /".t,,K J,,r t 'x S :• ti}!.x. � r,�'''' ..'ti if':. ;i�:i.'Jx;.;;i •u•. ✓•.X.• ..-:fit:,t,?:•, i. K K•. �'.`+cw.: � ;•K };>.: A .�•? .•i K.z•:t• i . ::i i•'i :r':•il, u;••i %:!�; x'% ! ti y,.;ti ;: :i 1;'yi••. .. �... •.. •K.' : K,x": • ' . Y :' '''.. :<•: ' :. .. •, e:•/-;G. .. .. .. t •k u:X ,i Xx %{r,-.4: V4'e:•,%',x .. •:•-•• •• • •... rlr_non l LEGEND ==O 1 •9..yr ■ • = • ° own e, vrr. NM SAMr.�:e _--^�•� .uwn)wwns tern. _ Oamno nun u. --...,_`rr' 1\�� �• \ !•184. tie"' ------S-'' s‘‘,*' ‘s• i‘,s N Vnib.‘:\ ��\ `\\\ \' 4\�\\\`,\\`\` i` '� " •,, ... 7 / '10 0.011 Q. ar t �i `\ \ l ` � �,I a .� \\ `' `tt ; \\ i` \O � s \ II ` • it )•l;y''Iy71 1 / i '{L11l`ti 'If I` �`b 4 � �+• / f \.' •,, rI!!V7/ ; 111'114W jL' 1 X11 f `� fr�'�•\ i \ ,� e /, ;�r s Ans. r ♦ D..r t�ytOier;.,1, III i, 1 `�`, \ ice\. t //'• • `"" ! i / "` / J �+ Q•�}{Li Ij III I 1 1 i I `.`'\ \` ‘i \ \, :`•" 15 t ,/prl'' I L J I/•/ /�144/ I!t i 1 1 1 I 1 4 ' \Lai \i �' `` ' , ,//� '� `i �r l 1/ �/ f'Itom, F ; : I g 1 . ,. ItBP6BgNCR$: •� N*'0L, / ) i,�$ ! ' .0 {L J ' , I I ' 1' , ', i Ng AI me P I!. .st., ■,Onke' / ( I ) i ; 1 L ; ; BENCHMARK: S`�i 4•■ �" 0, a%'•�'� ''''.:-7,,,,-,'' „�• :°r..�. \ �+- rev vi vry _ „ • �+ i\- / ` \ Z.. '. \/\ " ilits i JP, 4=7 ///''.cl..--_ ili,',1,1:1:111 I 4 .k I .. . /-„ / I .,:c,:z.,77. 1 t f arwve 4`•,;: = a w ae�i ma ow�v ~ )M Lot]Oi 'L WV 25 LrIWC' E =IM ZTec ENGIN a ,~ _ EERS, INC. TOPOGRAPHY MAP riL� 1111.111.111.1111 )]) (b] '9�°. 202 • (b])2]]-71989 FOR WCR COMPANY ∎,,,, L1WL:rteaMeonq:rre cem KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY man, OREGON TP L 0 196.53 S.F.REMOVE EXISTING A.C. LEGEND: a IN NEW TRACT B ,1 APPROXIMATE PROPOSED BUILDING LOCATIONS ADDITIONAL 68 SF BUFFER DEDICATION zw •. APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES oz 3,677.49 S.F.(TRACT B) O ftp O " . APPROXIMATE SENSATIVE AREA BUFFER BOUNDARIES m Lu M � t 5 O C O CL — APPROXIMATE TREE LOCATIONS CL J '14 •. wnr.s rcomrerta r'*uc,�usacvrur,.c W Q '--i �l�•r ay. '^Y's--. ii ,r- t3 O Flt z r 3:; :..,.44,, po t ( APPROXIMATE TREE LOCATIONS TO BE REMOVED. co 17 m O , _ a-cL c l���� 5(n Y o ��*„ '' 9 ,�4 r � `-;. �o-: ....:- 2 EW PERVIOUS DRIVEWAY lh A.• m -t 6'1-5-6:1, (¢Jr S,-P v ,�au _ i � y,"it_ , 562 S.F.(LOT 15 f "' P�l7 _ Z 7 7 5: 1 = z s ,}- T = 4s l vi ti _',ENCRO4gHMENT) / �� moi;_ .¢ �' /yam` 1 o i '` 'r �:.. tsz ;rxncrw �� \ NOTES %. / N ro 4 R C14 �r fix` _ '�� Amp "`��, � \ 1. BASE MAP DEVELOPED FROM AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH MAP • / DATED 2006, ENW AND TURNSTONE ENVIRONMETNAL FIELD NOTES, z o Y\ '` ' r j �� `°`"� in / C- AND Z-TECH ENGINEERS PRELIMINARY GRADING AND EROSION , Q rys CONTROL PLAN (SHEET C11). CD ZE 846 S.F.(EXISTING RIVEWAY 2. 562 SF TOTAL ENCROACHMENT TO BE MITIATED BY PTP Z`►}SF (, ), =- _ 1 •/ INBUFF ERAREATOREMAIN) BUFFER AVERAGING (68 SF), ONSITE MITIGATION ('JS�L SF). TOTP DuRm ONE-my sm.Eu 95 13 s MITIGATION WITH PTP z UNCURBED �Y`°I r �s ,I■ % PERVIOUS PAVEMENT Approved Clean Watir erviices Dmw 0K_„u.SrRMTB it'll Date 194 •/ 7� - Lug 'l �r r- �- �t �� t r ,�C�+✓t�'1�Pil'r� l Lam• \� APPROXIMATE SCALE `_` C++7� A""`x` 0 . 75 150 FEET N .:1VNENNOR HWEsr9 - -rn Ylr tlnorrla�nclural frcr rrct unctili+glc PO BOX 60747,PORTLAND,OREGON 97280-1747 N (503)452-5561 Fax(503)452-7669 FIGURE 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH NATURAI ii RESOURCE AREAS/BUFFERS gUn2 12360 SW KNOLL ROAD TIGARD,OREGON r O LEGEND: C3 GWS G72 �t VS- ooz6Q C* Approved APPROXIMATE PROPOSED BUILDING LOCATIONS Clean Water Services m Jar'enUv�a��vt ec- +I ars ut zBy, i cJ Date Z-I3-o APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES o APPROXIMATE SENSATIVE AREA BUFFER BOUNDARIES m M ` > o Nr}tgahat� `• CL 196.53 196.53 S.F.REMOVE EXISTING A.C. Q APPROXIMATE TREE LOCATIONS a- IN NEW TRACT B z v> APPROXIMATE TREE LOCATIONS TO BE REMOVED to o ADDITIONAL 68 SF BUFFER DEDICATION M �iq aTl e(`1 i N 1 } m O� o 562 S.F. LOT 15 w 41'2S217BUSPYESS CENTER ( 3,677.49 S.F.(TRACT B) ENCROACHMENT) v w FKASEI Lu w 846 S.F.(EXISTING DRIVEWAY to toIN BUFFER AREA TO REMAIN) NOTES: G N S80 2 E # -CS?10 \ mi- 1. BASE MAP DEVELOPED FROM AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH MAP } N 24110i 30"per °7 ,f„ 5 DATED 2006, ENW AND TURNSTONE ENVIRONMETNAL FIELD NOTES, \_ y�easx 11 8 NEW PERVIOUS DRIVEWAY AND Z-TECH ENGINEERS PRELIMINARY GRADING AND EROSION (2))rwUlm WA C BEARING f� `' CONTROL PLAN (SHEET Cl). Q �• 32"O.9P. 10 ;SH . uaistm o cn 2,; u M KE DO NOT IS RB No i 9 i 1 rsrur 2. 562 SF TOTAL ENCROACHMENT TO BE MITIATED BY PTP (7R�SF Li ==��, « t,, . ,Er=: BUFFER AVERAGING (68 SF), ONSITE MITIGATION (1917- SF : :.TOl 7 5 3V x S83°o2 \ MITIGATION WITH PTP 5 S}-. 'mss� 8° Aq =;d= 7'.10"ASH I4P X91 . r J U 20'ASH JCP `titi:Yy.M t#1 41 PL X85 ,45 PL 14'AP 15 X84 15 r APPROXIMATE SCALE 14'x]0'PL i #51 tt8.7 c��A ;... ; r 5 0 30 60 FEET 121PL .n ` �� 86�1o'A i HAW �� ��A � `�' � EYRENNOR RWEST= �" 6"B e.vk"nmertta:.star.[r....rn..s..unapt. \. O BOX 80747 PORTLAND,OREGON 97280-17' X79 1D"T.C. � J^;y ...0 } P NCURBED S;Pg7,0+R 15 10"T.CBo PERVIOUS AVEMENT �( FIGURE 4(503)452-5561 Fax(503)452-7669 �'' ` �- �o Y..`: - ,�•} .� h055.84) PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH NATUfL 16P� 'I RESOURCE AREAS/BUFFERS (DETAIL) �ii 12360 SW KNOLL ROAD #77 ' / TIGARD,OREGON 9tv 5"C.W. " s • 1 1 INTERIOR SETBACKS PERIMETER SETBACKS Perimeter Max Interior Interior Interior Interior Perimeter Distance 1 Minimum Building Front Interior Side Rear Corner Dist. Garage Perimeter Perimeter Side Between Lot Size Height Setback Setback Setback From Street Setback Front Setback Rear Setback Setback Buildings Zoning Requirement 7500 30 20 5 15 15 20 20 15 5 1 Proposed: Lot 1 3111 30 12.95' 3.55'/3.85 26.81' N/A 26.81' 33.5' N/A 38.91' 7.63' Lot 2 3243 30 16.50' 3.78'/4.65' 24.51' NIA 24.51' 41.56' N/A N/A 7.63'/9.3' 1 Lot 3 3060 30 10.16' 4.65'/4.78' 25.20' N/A 25.20' 55.77' N/A N/A 9.30' Lot 4 3411 30 12.78' 5'/5.3' 29.45' N/A 29.45' 78.43' N/A N/A 10.68' 1 Lot 5 3616 30 10.89' 5.28'/4.64' 27.56' N/A 27.56' 72.30' N/A N/A 10.68'/9.28' ' Lot 6 3513 30 8.10' 4.64'/4.61 31.09' N/A 31.09' 50.85' N/A 40.61' 9.28' Lot 7 2172 30 15.74' 3.77'/0' 2.75' N/A 2.75' N/A 28.25' 39.77' 0.0' Lot 8 2870 30 17.17' 0'/7.01' 8.03' N/A 8.03' N/A 33.43' N/A 0.0'/ 13.40' Lot 9 2654 30 15.87' 6.39'/0.0' 14.14' N/A 14.14' N/A 49.26' N/A 13.40'/0.0' 1 Lot 10 2517 30 16.41' 0.0'/4.95' 8.05' N/A 8.05' N/A 53.52' N/A 0.01. Lot 11 2638 30 21.27' 5.04'/0.0' 8.10' NIA 8.10' N/A 101.91' N/A 0.0' 1 Lot 12 2773 30 18.42' 0.0'/6.43' 14.17' N/A 14.17 N/A 102.04' N/A 0.0'/ 12.54' Lot 13 2723 30 15.68' 6.11'/0.0' 18.67' N/A 18.67' NIP, 101.06' N/A 12.54'/0.0' 1 Lot 14 2649 30 21.12' 0.0'/5.84' 8.53' N/A 8.53' N/A 90.11' 35.84' 0.0' Lot 15(RCF) 25647 30 2.00' 10' 10'/5' N/A N/A N/A 104.59' 7.97'/ 10.33' N/A 1 1 1 1 r ' 2S 1 01 BC 2S 1 01 BC 'AND 21'NOa0A T9e AC ,<r QI` 9v ]65� ,S- I 199 i\ .3N ~3 `1' '3.0 I)I4YP �r ]o• ,c. •j.V ,r, .9112 d a` a� Y' )1 6 1 o� 00 o'" - r n 'ist0 z u` o� Nt ,<, pe, a ''� eW` ^�-�-,� alk' 1 �3N�'2Ji t .r 2 2" .31 AC 7{y``, m`, t 'z� 5 Ip +o , Itsfi. p a.r0 500 - 'tN, A3 AC ,s11' 30` ^I xf y 2 J 10 400 elw conrlsaveLL a \ �s6u 'NEG` < r" - Nb1> r' ]o'/ .28 AC GRNIAN OLC 39 �� .41 AC NO i, ,CHS" any"'): 1762.27 j� Ica 27,w9 11'ILLIgAl� ,a,: ' oz ' - zsi0zia„ HAFl1�A1D. 39 34.91 tc a�C;;<^ 1 5 J - s 301 °ersp +asaup^ .'!f. ,W' y 116727 I�Oe r `,a ,267Wc Sy a /I 2S7W 1800 'V VHa,. t"aei ;c- II133 AC 3000 s� (cs 4,050} gqI 1 c`�(��3 ^o da ;zstdtao Z° WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON a7ozu`,' ;j 23-75 Ne, N \���� ;(tr'�, SW114NW1/4 SECTION 01T2SRIWW.M. 900 SCALE 1'= 100' 8 ' a 3300 _ 1500 \ <, s'. 138 AC 2 .74 Ac \ n 103 ' '< ( 1r�`• 44 `` 0 15x.0 100 4� 3200 Ne2 ICS 4,889) / n da 1.87 AC ,EAST n I 8 1600aaezj n ,$ 101 t77,eg m e s 13 AC / 200 3.84 AC 1¢00 ° ry 4.12 AC .30 AC 1100 J 1700 ? _ - ```- _- _ Czenc29,0351 PASa12 21 ,r� l�` 7a' f , ;t J j 11 QRtye�� ^ . GAC 8 rsi'pi 8 r i mbi` '^ %,:' '- •<� ;f}f Q fi9_ildY'9 III p •;.89 Aa yX,.JJ481J.:glis5ll 111111 °j4 _ 1800 c 'P `-��ti I / gd„'^ ` -�x4- I 11j1j1 I ��ea ey .30 AC 1801 �2p F &"Nr#fid ra4ap / / SW SCOFFINS'" 4 III ° -20' r gr) r I r � !" %42 °ja'w l'^' 3 V of wilq STREET x I �°,°;6 '�I—Illjl �JIQ 1?aoac f 1900Ar 3 ry.30 AC n m°ry E4er FOR ADDITIONAL MAPS VISIT OZ, zi7p>A6, I ''T I Iql� °p / -j<, OURWEBSI7EAT �m \ 9 / , zo.0p �^ (( www.co.washI;iqton.or.us +\4^� .32AA�- i(fl 2202 11 201 / - 7B-N]7 ! ,�L 'g �' 96fiu.oa I 99 AC III app .82 Acn,•, a, 23 / \III / / _--,, � f ao' - i ''iwiaxtiw'`�?�:"`.- ) j(• ;>;<. ;<`:;rte,;, z' '1'lb AC�y>b1•dr r' /aa4r,6Ja Ir�Pll �,��ti n< `J � � !l^ �l� '`�`' > >. '814'..^ �'�B >) I;': ICG23AM1 m'�, ,�azAC� ,t- y�'� 6S�>e� g•' va \ ms's /� / �� I � � l n 14$ � >-�i� �, �' :Aa 2200 lug J 1.09AC a ! y. a^ 100 / Ir !N ,<- ,) ;<�,1• Ics zs,]93J n 0 3.81 AC1 / 1 ' 2201 a02100 ,4 °a j ' i z1YAc-< Cancelled Taxlots For. 2S101 BC X, 2401 ,�>,r`- , 200-A7,2401-A1,2401-A2,2000,300,2203. " I > 2400,2600.1400,102,1300,104,2700, •>`'� I 4.49 AC � / ! / f ! ,, // (CS 23.M2) �1> 2900 ^J r ); .3e ac C.�/ 2500 ;<' ,r, ,),. � �, >`- J\ r "<;. Y" X5 A 8 AC �1 2800 °V 0 , ' 23 <" yl, ^. .'•. � J 1.3e AC, / Zxa vl , Qr \ N >t� �f0 s 0 Assess @ W tr�\ ,tom 0 „ r)r S -C:4RTOGRAPHY ti 9 0^ i X26!,`Ca� 2' OI Sm ^D \ f �aaJ J O O .Y R o � � B w e.30A EG \ f l K` S� J 9 J �r a a PLOT D n LO ATE:June 2 2007 6 FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES •., ON DO NOT RELY N a,6 <b >` e FOR OTHER'1 � sent' T USE M area ;Gleatetl amss-hatched s de eMher sha�r7 ora Map s'r 1 by D m orre/e a71dm 6th are rerJOB on not imJr..at a mos! :k n n Pae-' N aY am9rtt P a^car/ N boundaries. le s_ cult e a 'ate m= H". PmPaNY M 'r- p PPS -0 `J• 1 ?9. farthe most cmem in/ormaUon. X' •�I z 1 tV rl, �F F' %1 "1 <T .a , /` 0C 1 r\1 D