Loading...
SUB1998-00002 120 DAYS = 7/18/98 EXHIBIT A CRY OF TIGARD Community Dev&pment ShiapingA Better Community CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Case Number(s): SUBDIVISION [SUM 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [PORI 98-0003 ZONE CHANGE (Z01D 98-0002/VARIANCE [VARI 98-0003 Case Name(s): FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Name of Owner: Steve Turner, S.R. Turner Construction Name of Applicant: Same As Above Address of Applicant: 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 408 City: Portland State: Oregon Zip: 97225 Address of Property: 11300 SW Fonner Street City: Tigard State: Oregon Zip: 97223 Tax Map(s)/Lot No(s).: WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Lot 02000 Request: > The Planning Commission APPROVED, subject to conditions, a request for Subdivision approval to divide one (1) parcel of 2.83 acres into 12 lots ranging in size from approximately 7,448 to 8,711 square feet and to additionally develop a 6,009 square foot water quality tract. Also approved was Conceptual and Detailed Planned Development Review to create lots less than the 7,500 square foot minimum allowed in the R-4.5 zoning district. An amendment to the zoning map was approved to place Planned Development (PD) Overlay on the property. Lastly, approval for a variance to the minimum access spacing standards for a Minor Collector from the City standard of 300 feet to 135 feet.. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. Zone: Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre; R-4.5. The purpose of the R-4.5 Zoning District is to establish standard urban low density residential sites. The R-4.5 zone allows, among other uses, single-family residential units, public support facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, home occupations, temporary uses, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. Action: > ❑ Approval as requested 9 Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: • Owners of record within the required distance 9 Affected governmental agencies O The affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator O The applicant and owner(s) Final Decision:% DATE OF FILING: MAY 14,1998 THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON MAY 27,1998 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290 (B) and Section 18.32.370, which provides that a written appeal may be filed within ten (10) days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee(s) of $1,745.00 plus transcript costs, not in excess of $500.00. THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL IS 3:30 P.M. ON MAY 27,1998. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-00031VAR 98-0003/ZON 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF TIGARD 3 PLANNING COMMISSION CRY OF MA W FI aL aRDE1 N0.: 9s8-05 PC Sfwp4A'!~!& A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SUBDIVISION, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, ZONE CHANGE AND VARIANCE. SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE(S): FILE NAME: FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Subdivision SUB 98-0002 Planned Development Review PDR 98-0003 Zone Change ZON 98-0002 Variance VAR 98-0003 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Subdivision approval to divide one (1) parcel of 2.83 acres into 12 lots ranging in size from 7,448 to 8,711 square feet and to additionally develop a 6,009 square foot water quality tract. The applicant has also requested Conceptual and Detailed Planned Development Review to create lots less than the 7,500 square foot minimum allowed in the R-4.5 zoning district. An amendment to the zoning map is requested to place Planned Development (PD) Overlay on the property. Lastly, the applicant proposes a Variance to the minimum access spacing standards for a Minor Collector from the City standard of 300 feet to 135 feet. APPLICANT(S): Matthew Wellner OWNER(S): Steve Turner Land Tech, Inc. SR Turner Construction 8835 SW Canyon Lane, S-402 8835 SW Canyon Lane, S-402 Portland, OR 97289-6297 Portland, OR 97289-6297 COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION(S): Low Density Residential; 1-5 Dwelling Units Per Acre. ZONING DESIGNATION(S): R-4.5; Single-Family Residential (7,500 Square Feet) or (5,000 Square Feet Per Unit). The purpose of the R-4.5 zoning district is to establish standard urban low density residential home sites. LOCATION(S): 11300 SW Fonner Street; WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Lot 02000. The subject property is located east of the intersection of SW Fonner Street and SW 115th Avenue, on the south side of SW Fonner Street south across the street from SW 113th Place. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA:Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION Notice is hereby given,that th6, My of T1gard.Planrnng Commission has APPROVEX__:_ the proposalysubject to eertalln-cond[ttons of,approvaL The fi'Itlmgsand conclusions on z which the deeision'is based are,noted in Sei om 71:1: :S PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 1 OF 29 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALL: CONDITIONS" BE'SATISFIED. PRIOR TO'. RECORDING THE FINAL.PLAT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY 3"UNLESS rOTHERWISEa$PECLFIEt), THE A; STAFF 'CONTACT FOR ALLr CONDITIONS IS BRIAN RAGER WITH THE ENGtNEERINGj 4 n DEPARTMENT AT.(503) 639-4171 dt ~ 1. Prior to approval of the final plat, A public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Once redline comments are addressed and the plans are revised, the design engineer shall then submit nine (9) sets of revised drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards which are available at City Hall. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the"public improvements. 3. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on- site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 4. The applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way (ROW) on SW Fonner Street to provide 30 feet from centerline. The applicant shall also dedicate additional ROW for the new public street to give 46 feet of ROW along the straight section and a 49-foot radius bulb. These dedications shall be shown on the face of the final plat. 5. The applicant shall construct standard half-street improvements along the frontage of SW Fonner Street. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 20 feet (NOTE: if the applicant can demonstrate that the existing pavement section meets current City standards, then they will be permitted to saw cut the edge of existing asphalt and add onto the width); B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb and/or curb and gutter; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. 'Five (5)-foot concrete sidewalk; F. street striping; G. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer; PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 2 OF 29 • H. underground utilities (NOTE: the applicant may be eligible to pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding existing overhead utilities); 1. street signs; J. commercial driveway apron at private street entrance; and K. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Fonner Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 6. A profile of SW Fonner Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 7. There shall be no direct vehicular access from Lot 1 onto SW Fonner Street. 8. The applicant shall construct the new public street to meet local street standards with a 28-foot curb width and a 40-foot curb radius at the bulb. 9. Any extension of public water lines shall be shown on the proposed public improvement construction drawings and shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Water Department as a part of the Engineering Department plan review. NOTE: An estimated 12% of the water system costs must be on deposit with the Water Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans from the Engineering Department and construction of public water lines. 10. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate the location of the existing 24-inch transmission water line in SW Fonner Street. 11. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate that the proposed public sanitary sewer line to serve Lots 1 through 3 shall be relocated to be within the new private street. = 12. The applicant shall ensure that City maintenance vehicles can access any downstream sewer manholes behind any of the proposed lots. A maintenance access road at least ten (10) feet in width, and built to meet City standards, shall be provided from the edge of the private street to the manhole(s). The applicant will have two (2) choices for delineating the access road(s) on the plat and construction plans: A. place the roadway within a tract to be conveyed to the City on the final plat, or B. place the roadway within a public sanitary sewer and maintenance access easement. If Option B is selected, the applicant shall place restrictions on the plat to prohibit parking, fences, gates or other structures from being placed within the easement. 13. The applicant's engineer will need to provide the City's Engineering Department with a subbasin study to evaluate which adjacent properties will need to access the sewer that is being extended into this site. The City Engineer will then make a decision as to where the applicant must extend sewer stubs. This evaluation will take place along with the review of the construction design plans. 14. Final design plans and calculations for the proposed public water quality facility shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) as a part of the public improvement plans. Included with the plans shall be a proposed landscape plan and maintenance plan. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 3 OF 29 15. The public water quality/detention facility shall be placed in the tract on the final plat and shall be conveyed to the City of Tigard. 16. The applicant shall provide a maintenance access road to the public water quality/detention facility as approved by the City Engineer. 17. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans-Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994." 18. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the street or a public facility approved by the Engineering Department. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 19. The applicant shall provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report shall be incorporated into the final grading plan. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permits. 20. The design engineer shall indicate on the grading plan, which lots will have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as, lots that will have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information. will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections and/or permits will be necessary when the lots develop. 21. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Fonner Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $4,950 and it shall be paid prior to approval of the final plat. 22. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: A. submit for City review, three (3) paper copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative; B. the subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County and by the City of Tigard; and C. the right-of-way dedication for SW Fonner Street shall be made on the subdivision plat. 23. The applicant shall provide proof that the existing home has been connected to the sanitary sewer system. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 24. Lots 7 and 9 shall be revised to provide a minimum of 25 feet of lot frontage. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 4 OF 29 25. Roof drains from the existing house and all impervious surfaces must be drained to an approved Public system. STAFF CONTACT: Jim Funk, Building Division. 26. Off street parking is permitted on one (1) side of the street only. Provide "No Parking" signage and curb markings per UFC 902.2.4 and 901.4.5.2. Alternatively, the applicant may go to the City Council to request off street parking prohibition. STAFF CONTACT: Jim Funk, Building Division. 27. The applicant shall post a cash deposit to ensure that a total of 304 caliper inches are mitigated on-site, at another site, or payment for the cost of purchasing and planting of mitigation trees shall be made into a citywide tree fund. The City has previously received estimates of $150 to purchase and plant a two (2)-inch caliper tree but the applicant can provide their own estimate to ensure this planting. The applicant may also upsize street trees, from a two (2)-inch caliper to a larger caliper tree as partial mitigation. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 28. The applicant shall post a cash deposit for the cost of purchase and planting of sufficient number of street trees prior to recording the final plat. The City has previously received estimates of $150 to purchase and plant a two (2)-inch caliper tree but the applicant can provide their own estimate to ensure this planting. The estimate should bond for enough caliper inches for the entire street frontage. If it is found that certain existing trees could serve as street trees these funds would later be refunded. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 29. The applicant shall install tree protection measures for trees that were identified as suitable for preservation. The consulting arborist shall provide written assurance that the protective measures have been installed. Weatherproof signage shall be installed identifying each protected tree area and listing the arborist name and number as the contact person should future builders need to work within protected tree areas. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 30. The applicant shall pay a final plat review fee of $295. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. ti ~~aTHE4FOLLOWING CONDITIONS STALL BE SATISFIED= f r` PRIOR`TO THE ISSUANCE 01FBUILDING. PERMIT 31. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a recorded mylar copy of the subdivision plat. 32. Prior to issuance of any building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: A. all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities; B. all local residential streets have at least one (1) lift of asphalt C.. any off-site street and/or utility improvements are completely finished; and D. all street lights are installed and ready to be energized. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 5 OF 29 33. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) mylars, and 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF' will be acceptable. Note: if the public improvement drawings were hand-drawn, then a diskette is not required. i, , ° THE FOLLOWING CONDITION SHALL BE SATISFIED . PRIORTO THE'ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS• x 34. Street trees shall be planted according to the approved street tree plan. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. IN AD DITIONTHE.APPLICANT SHOULD BE AWARE OFTHE 5:= FOLLOWING SECTION' - S OF THE COMMUNITY ;DEVELOPMENT y iCODE THIS-IS NOT AN EXCUISIVE'LIST° N. ~z 18.160.170 Improvement Agreement: Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: 1. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and 2. Include in the agreement provisions that if such work is not completed within the period specified, the City may complete the work and recover the full cost and expenses from the subdivider. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to be paid and may also provide for the construction of the improvements in stages and for the extension of time under specific conditions therein stated in the contract. 18.160.180 Bond: As required by Section 18.160.170, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one (1) of the following: 1. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; 2. A surety bond executed by a surety company authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon which remains in force until the surety company is notified by the City in writing that it may be terminated; or 3. Cash. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Engineer an itemized improvement estimate, certified by a registered civil engineer, to assist the City Engineer in calculating the amount of the performance assurance. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 6 OF 29 18.160.190 Filing and Recording: Within 60 days of the City review and approval, the applicant shall submit the final plat to the County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS Chapter 92. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.162.080 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: Centerline Monumentation In accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes 92.060, subsection (2), the centerline of all street and roadway rights-of-way shall be monumented before the City accepts a street improvement. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 1. All centerline-centerline intersection points; 2. All cul-de-sac center points; and 3. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. Monument Boxes Required Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.164 Street & Utility Improvement Standards: 18.164.120 Utilities All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface-mounted transformers, surface-mounted connection boxes, and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 7 OF 29 18.164.130 Cash or Bond Required All improvements installed by the subdivider shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one (1) year following acceptance by the City. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.160.180. 18.164.150 Installation: Prerequisite/Permit Fee No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 18.164.180 Notice to City Required Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 18.164.200 Engineer's Certification Required The land divider's engineer shall provide written certification of a form provided by the City that all improvements, workmanship and materials are in accord with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade, prior to the City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for operation and maintenance. SUBDIVISION APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID ONLY IF THE FINAL PLAT IS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF TIGARD WITHIN EIGHTEEN (18) MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History: The property is developed with a detached single-family residence. The City Council recommended approval of annexation to the City through Zone'Change Annexation (ZCA 97-0002). This application was heard by the Boundary Commission on April 30, 1998. The City has no record of any more recent development applications for this property. On May 4, 1998, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing. and approved this application with conditions requiring the applicant to develop the project with a public street rather than the proposed private street. Vicinity Information: Adjoining properties to the north, south, east and west are all developed with detached single-family residences. Surrounding areas have a mix of established older residences and newer development. Many larger trees have been preserved in this area. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 8 OF 29 Site Information and Proposal Description. The subject property is currently developed with a detached single-family residence. At the time of application, a total of 163 trees existed on the site. Several of the trees in the vicinity of the proposed private street intersection at SW Fonner Street were recently removed along with substantial areas of overgrown berry bushes and smaller trees. The site is fairly level. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Impact Study: Section 18.32.050 states the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Alternatively, an applicant may specifically concur with the requirement for dedication of right-of-way to the public and waive the impact study analysis by dedicating the right-of-way and completion of a waiver statement. An impact study was provided. The impact study states that the applicant will construct half-street improvements along the projects' SW Fonner Street frontage and construct internal street improvements and utilities to serve the development. Any required street improvements to certain collector or higher volume streets and the Washington County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected Jo recapture 32% of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Presently, the TIF for each trip that is generated is $179. The total TIF for a detached single-family dwelling is $1,790. The applicant has proposed to construct half-street improvements on the SW Fonner Street frontage. Southwest Fonner Street is designated as a Minor Collector Street facility that accommodates traffic from adjoining local neighborhoods to access Major Collector and Arterial Streets. Assuming a cost $200 per lineal foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the half-street improvements to SW Fonner Street is $35,800 ($200 x 179 lineal feet). Improvements to SW Fonner Street are not currently listed as eligible for a Transportation Impact Fee credits. Upon completion of this development the future builders of the residences will be required to pay,TIF's of approximately $21,480 ($1,790 X 12 dwelling units). Based on the ..estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 % of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100% of this projects traffic impact is $64,440 ($5,370 x 12 dwelling units). For these reasons, the cost of all proposed street improvement requirements as discussed within this report are less than the impact of the development and, therefore, roughly proportional. Use Classification: . The applicant is proposing to build detached residential dwellings. This use is classified in Section 18.42 (Use Classifications) as Single- Family Detached Residential Units. Section 18.50 lists detached single-family residences, as a permitted use in the R-4.5 zone. The applicant proposes to develop 12 detached single-family residences. This is the primary permitted use within the R-4.5 zoning district. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 9 OF 29 Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.50 states that the minimum lot area for each dwelling unit in the R-4.5 zoning district is 7,500 square feet. An average width of 50 feet is required in the R-4.5 Zoning District. The net site area standard is not applicable because a Planned Development Overlay is implemented through this subdivision. However, the applicant has proposed that all but one (1) of the lots comply with the minimum lot size standard. Density standards are reviewed elsewhere within this report. Development Standards: Section 18.50 contains standards for the R-4.5 zone. Single-family detached residential units are a permitted use in the zone, and must comply with the following dimensional requirements: Minimum lot size 7,500 Square Feet Average lot width 50 Feet Front setback 15 Feet Garage setback 20 Feet Interior sideyard setback 5 Feet Corner sideyard setback 10 Feet Rear setback 15 Feet Maximum building height 35 Feet The Planned Development approach to development does not require that a minimum lot size be maintained. The Planned Development approach also does not require the use of the standard setbacks, however, the applicant proposes to comply with the standard R-4.5 setbacks as listed above. Planned Development: Section 18.80 allows the option for an applicant to create a more efficient, economically viable development that preserves natural land features while implementing the density range provided through the Comprehensive Plan. This type of subdivision normally permits higher density than would be possible given the minimum lot size requirement for the zoning district. Section 18.80.130(A)(1) (Planned Development Review - Approval Standards) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community Development Code Sections. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.88, 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these sections has been reviewed within this report. The Planned Development Code Section 18.80 lists Section 18.160 (Subdivisions) as an applicable review criterion for Planned Developments that has been reviewed elsewhere within this report. The Planned Development Review is a three step process as follows: 1. Approval of a planned development overlay zone; 2. The second step is the approval of the planned development concept plan; and 3. Approval of a Detailed Development Plan is also required. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Overlay as a Zone Change with this application to comply with the first step. The applicant has also requested Conceptual Planned Development approval with this application to comply with the second step. Because this application is for a subdivision, Section 18.80.015(E) allows the Conceptual PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 10 OF 29 and Detailed portions of . the Planned Development Review to be consolidated as is proposed through this action to comply with the third step. The Planned Development Code Section 18.80.060 lists approval criteria for Planned Development applications. The Planning Commission must find that these criteria have been met in order to approve a Planned Development in an "Established Area". The subject property is defined as an "Established Area" by the Comprehensive Plan. Development of the land in accordance with the provisions of the "Established Area" would: 1. Result in an inefficient use of the land; The proposed planned development results in a more efficient use of land because street width requirements may reduce other property's below the 7,500 square foot minimum lot requirement; 2. Result in removing significant natural features; It is expected that a similar number of trees would be removed if the property had been developed as a Planned Development or if it had not been developed as a Planned Development; and 3. Result in a change in the character of the area surrounding significant historic or building; It is expected that a similar number of trees would be removed if the property had been developed as a Planned Development or if it had not been developed as a Planned Development. The Planned Development approach eliminates the requirement for sidewalks within the project that is consistent with adjoining development and may be considered to continue the established character of the area. The Planned Development approach is the most feasible method of 'developing the area; and In terms of development project costs, the Planned Development approach is expected to be somewhat less costly because higher project density would be permitted to spread development costs and no sidewalks would be provided. The site is of a size and shape that the compatibility provisions of 18.92 can be met. The site is a slightly irregular shape but subdivision of the property does not create building sites that appear difficult to develop. As proposed, at least one (1) lot and possibly others would be below the 7,500 square foot minimum lot size. The overall subdivision, however, would not have lots that average less than 5,575 square feet. Pursuant to Section 18.40, Lots with 5,575 square feet of area would exceed the maximum density permitted for a Low .Density Residential (1-5 dwelling units per acre x 1.25) development in the Planned Development in an "Established Area". Section 18.80.120(A)(3) provides further review standards for Planned Development that have been addressed below as follows: Relationship to the natural and physical environment: (i) The streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible; (ii) Structures located on the site shall not be in areas subject to ground slumping and sliding; PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 9M5 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 11 OF 29 (iii) There shall be adequate distance between on-site buildings and other on-site and off-site buildings on adjoining properties to provide for adequate light and air circulation and for fire protection; (iv) The structures shall be oriented with consideration for the sun and wind directions, where possible; and (v) Trees with a six inch caliper measured at four feet in height from ground level, shall be saved where possible; The provisions related to adequate light and air are addressed elsewhere within this report by the requirements for the maintenance of minimum setbacks. The development will partially comply with minimum fire and life safety standards if "No Parking" signage restrictions are placed on one (1) side of the proposed 28-foot-wide private street. A Condition of Approval requiring this "No Parking" signage has been recommended. Adequate water pressure and fire hydrant locations to accommodate fire flow needs will be addressed thought the public improvement plan review. The locations of curbs shall be widened within the cul-de-sac width to provide a 90-foot paved section or as otherwise approved upon consultation with the Building Division and the Fire District. Solar accessibility is addressed elsewhere within this report. The applicant has proposed to remove trees as part of this development. The tree removal and mitigation plan is discussed in detail elsewhere within this report. Buffering, screening, and compatibility between adjoining uses: (i) Buffering shall be provided between different types of land uses (for example, between single-family and multiple-family residential, and residential, and commercial); (ii) In addition to the requirements of the buffer matrix, the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy and extent of the buffer required under Chapter 18.100: (a) The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; (b) The size of the buffer needs in terms of width and height to achieve the purpose; (c) The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; (d) The required density of the buffering; and (e) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; (iii) On-site screening from view from adjoining properties of such things as service areas, storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: (a) What needs to be screened; (b) The direction from which it is needed; and (c) Whether the screening needs to be year-round; Screening and buffering are not required where single-family detached residential uses adjoin other detached single-family residential uses. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE' 12 OF 29 Privacy and noise: (i) Non-residential structures which abut existing residential dwellings shall be located on the site or be designed in a manner, to the maximum degree possible, to protect the private areas on the adjoining properties from view and noise; This criteria is not applicable because the applicant has proposed to create future residential building sites. Private outdoor area: residential use: (1) In addition to the requirements of subparagraph (iii), -each ground level residential dwelling unit shall have an outdoor private area (patio, terrace, porch) of not less than 48 square feet; (ii) Wherever possible, private outdoor open spaces should be oriented toward the sun; and (iii) Private outdoor spaces shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the use of the space; Provision of common outdoor open space areas is not required because the applicant has proposed to create building sites for single-family residences rather than a multiple-family residential development such as an apartment complex. Shared outdoor recreation areas: residential use: (i) In addition to subparagraphs (ii) and (iii) of this section each multiple- dwelling development shall incorporate shared usable outdoor recreation areas within the development plan as follows: (a) Studio units up to and including two (2) bedroom units, 200 square feet per unit; and (b) Three or more bedroom units, 300 square feet per unit; (ii) Shared outdoor recreation space shall be readily observable from adjacent units for reasons of crime prevention and safety; (iii) The required recreation space may be provided as follows: (a) It may be all outdoor space; or (b) It may be part outdoor space and part indoor space; for example, an outdoor tennis court and indoor recreation room; or (c) It may be all public or common space; or (d) It may be part common space and part private; for example, it could be an outdoor tennis court, indoor recreation room, and balconies on each unit; or (e) Where balconies are added to units, the balconies shall not be less than 48 square feet; PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 13 OF 29 The provision of common outdoor open space areas is not required because the applicant has proposed to create building sites for single-family residences. Access and circulation: (i) The number of allowed access points for a development shall be provided in Chapter 18.108; (ii) All circulation patterns within a development must be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles; and (iii) Provisions shall be made for pedestrian and bicycle ways if such facilities are shown on an adopted plan; A single point of access has been proposed to be provided to SW Fonner Street through the development of the subdivision. Section 18.108 requires a minimum of one (1) point where up to 19 dwelling units are served. The design of the proposed street improvements has been reviewed by the Engineering Department, the Police Department and the Fire District. The Engineering Department reviewed street improvement requirements in detail elsewhere within this report. Completion of the streets throughout the development as specified through the Conditions of Approval will comply with the standards of the Community Development Code as has been reviewed elsewhere within this report. Landscaping and open space: (i) Residential Development: In addition to the requirements of subparagraphs (iv) and (v) of section A of this subsection, a minimum of 20% of the site shall be landscaped; (ii) Commercial Development: A minimum of 15% of the site shall be landscaped; and (iii) Industrial Development: A minimum of 15% of the site shall be. landscaped; Section (i) is applicable to this request. Although one (1) of the lots is proposed to be reduced below the 7,500 square foot minimum, the Planned Development Review still requires that a minimum of 20% of each site be landscaped. This standard is applicable to this property but because the smallest lot would be approximately 7,448 square feet, compliance with this standard does not appear to be an issue due to required building setbacks. Section (ii) and (iii) are not applicable because no commercial or industrial development is proposed. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 14 OF 29 Public transit: (i) Provisions for public transit may be required where the site abuts a public transit route. The required facilities shall be based on: (a) The location of other transit facilities in the area; and (b) The size and type of the proposed development; Southwest Fonner Street is not a transit served facility. Based on previous discussions with Tri-Met, even if SW Fonner Street were later to become a transit served facility, the 12 lot subdivision as proposed would not necessitate the need for a bus stop. (ii) The required facilities shall be limited to such facilities as: (a) A waiting shelter; (b) A turn-out area for loading and unloading; and (c) Hard surface paths connecting the development to the waiting area; Southwest Fonner Street is not a transit served facility. Based on previous discussions with Tri-Met, even if SW Fonner Street were later to become a transit served facility, the proposed 12 lot subdivision would not necessitate the need for a bus stop. Signs: (i) In addition to the provisions of Chapter 18.114, Signs: (a) Location of all signs proposed for the development site; and (b) The signs shall not obscure vehicle driver's sight distance; All future signage at the site will be reviewed through the sign permit process for conformance with the provisions of Chapter 18.114. Parking: (i) All parking and loading areas shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.106; Each of the residences to be developed on these parcels will be reviewed during the building permit review process to verify the provision of required off-street parking spaces. Drainage: (i) All drainage provisions shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.84 and the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; The Engineering Department reviewed this application and their comments are addressed in SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS/Storm Drainage Section within this staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 15 OF 29 Floodplain dedication: (1) Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. This site does not adjoin areas within the 100-year flood plain. The City recently updated park system development fees such that the fee that is currently assessed will fund planned park improvements. Park system impact fees will be assessed for each dwelling unit prior to the issuance of building permits. Solar Access: Section 18.88.040(C)(1) contains solar access standards for new residential development. A lot meets the basic solar access lot standard if it has a north-south dimension of 90 feet or more and has a front lot line that is oriented within 30 degrees of a true east-west axis. A subdivision complies with the basic requirement if 80% or more of the newly created parcels meet this standard. Alternatively, an applicant can meet the City's Solar Access Standards by complying with the protected Solar Building Line Option or the Performance Option. Energy efficiency is ensured through the location of the residence with sufficient solar access or through the design of the homes that incorporates window glazing with solar orientation. An applicant can request an exception to the solar access standards based on the following development constraints: Site topography in excess of a 10% slope, shade from existing on-site or off-site vegetation or structures, significant natural features, existing street public easement patterns, impacts to density, cost or amenities of the project that adds five (5)% or more to the cost of each lot. As proposed, two (2) of the 12 lots comply with the aforementioned subdivision design alternatives of the Solar Access requirements. The Basic Standard is not met because the Solar Access provisions require that a north-south dimension of 90 feet or more be provided. The applicant has provided a north-south dimension of approximately 50 to 70 feet for the majority of the lots. Based on development constraints having to do with the property dimensions, the orientation of adjoining development and the applicant's use of a Planned Development, it is not recommended that the applicant be required to reconfigure the subdivision to comply with this standard. Based on the north-south dimension of the property, the applicant would likely lose approximately 15% of the project density. For this reason, it is recommended that the Planning Commission allow an eight (8) lot adjustment to the Solar Access standard. Solar Balance Point: Section 18.88.050(B) requires that one and two (2) family residences that are developed on lots that were exempted from Compliance with the Basic Solar Access standards comply with the Solar Balance Point requirements. Prior to the issuance of building permits the developer of each building site will be required to provide calculations that demonstrate compliance with the Solar Balance Point provisions. Densi : Section 18.92.020 contains standards for determining the permitted project density. The number of allowable dwelling units is based on the net development area. The net area is the remaining area, excluding sensitive lands and land dedicated for public roads or parks. The net area is then divided by the minimum PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 16 OF 29 parcel size permitted by the zoning district to determine the number of lots that may be created on a site. The applicant has provided calculations concerning the allowed density for this site. The total site area is 2.83 acres or 123,274 square feet. With a deduction of 21,321 square footage from this site for the proposed private street, 101,953 square feet remains. After deduction of the ten (10)-foot Public Street right-of-way along the SW Fonner Street frontage, an additional 1,513 square feet is deducted, leaving a net site area of 100,440 square feet. No floodplain, wetlands, drainageways or steep slopes exist on the property. By dividing the minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet into the buildable area, the applicant is permitted to develop up to 13 dwelling units. The applicant has proposed 12 dwelling units, therefore, this subdivision as proposed complies with the maximum density standard. Landscaping: Section 18.100 contains landscaping standards for new development. The applicant must also comply with the standards set forth in Section 18.100.035 that requires that all development projects fronting on a public or private street, or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length plant street trees. A street tree planting plan was provided with this application. The plans compliance with the applicable standard is reviewed immediately below. Section 18.100.035(B) states the specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: 1. Small or narrow stature trees (under 25 feet tall and less than 16 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet apart; 2. Medium sized trees (25 feet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart; 3. Large trees (over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart; The preliminary plat map proposes street trees along the street frontage of the entire project. The applicant proposes to plant Maple trees at varying distances on center. In most instances these trees are proposed to be provided at greater distances than the maximum spacing standard for large specimen trees. The applicant shall post a cash deposit for the cost of purchase and planting of sufficient number of street trees prior to recording the final plat. The City has previously received estimates of $150 to purchase and plant a two (2)-inch caliper tree but the applicant can provide their own estimate to ensure this planting. The estimate should assume plantings will be necessary at 40 feet on center. If it is found that certain existing trees could serve as street trees, these funds would later be refunded. Visual Clearance Areas: Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 30-foot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway and then connecting these two (2) 30-foot distance points with a straight line. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, signs, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height.. The height is measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 17 OF 29 located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. Through the building permit review, setbacks of the structures will be checked. Based of the location of the buildable areas on this property, it is expected that future site improvements can comply with this requirement. Tree Removal: Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. An arborist report was provided with this application. A total of 163 trees were present when the survey was conducted. Smaller trees and undergrowth and several larger trees were removed prior to this Public Hearing. Of the 163 total trees, the arborist found that 56 trees are in excess of 12 inches in caliper and healthy trees. Of these 14 trees are proposed to be removed for the proposed private street. Approximately, an additional 11 healthy trees may be impacted by the future development of homes based on their location within the proposed lot lines. If all of these trees were eventually lost due to construction impacts the applicant would be preserving 56% of the healthy trees over 12 inches in diameter. The total diameter of healthy trees that could be lost is 608 inches. The mitigation standards require that where between 50 to 75% of the healthy trees in excess of 12 inches in diameter are removed due to development that the applicant shall mitigate for one half of the caliper inches lost or 304 caliper inches. The arborist also identified 20 trees of varying sizes that were unhealthy and unsuitable for preservation. Some of these trees were also within building envelope areas. However, because these trees are unhealthy they are not included in mitigation calculations. Although the applicant appeared to understand this in the narrative, it should be noted that because a minimum of a two (2)-inch caliper street trees are required to be planted regardless of the whether a site has existing trees, required street trees do not mitigate the loss of the existing healthy trees. A total of 304 caliper inches must be mitigated on-site, at another site, or payment for the cost of purchasing and planting all or a portion of the required 304 caliper inches shall be made into the Citywide tree fund. The City has previously received estimates of $150 to purchase and plant a 2 inch caliper tree but the applicant can provide their own estimate to ensure this planting. The applicant may also upsize street trees as mitigation for an inch per inch mitigation for any tree in excess of two (2) inches in caliper size. The applicant shall install tree protection measures for trees that were identified as suitable for preservation. The consulting arborist shall provide written assurance that the protective measures have been installed. Weatherproof signage shall be installed identifying each protected tree area and listing the arborists' name and number as the contact person should future builders need to work within protected tree areas. Subdivision Design: Section 18.160.060(A) contains standards for subdivision of parcels into four or more lots. To be approved, a preliminary plat must comply with the following criteria: PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 18 OF 29 1. The proposal must comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations; 2. The proposed plat name must not be duplicative and must otherwise satisfy the provisions of ORS Chapter 92; 3. Streets and roads must be laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of partitions or subdivisions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern; and 4. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. Compliance with the standards listed in Criterion 1 are addressed elsewhere within the staff report. The proposed Fonner Woods plat name is not duplicative of other plats. Compliance with the applicable development standards has been reviewed elsewhere within this report. The applicant also proposes to finish required street frontage improvements along SW Fonner Street as well as provide a private street to serve the development. Through the Conditions of Approval, 'street improvements to SW Fonner Street have been required. An explanation has been provided for the water quality treatment facility. No common areas or other open space facilities have been proposed. Variance: Section 18.160.150 allows approval, approval with conditions, or denial a request for an access variance to the 300 minimum street spacing standard for Minor Collectors contained in Section 18.164. To be approved a Variance must have been found to comply with the following findings: 1. There are special conditions or circumstances affecting the property that are unusual and peculiar to the land as compared to other lands similarly situated; The site is across from SW 113th Avenue that connects to the north side of SW Fonner Street. Strict compliance with the spacing standard by aligning the street across from SW 113th Avenue would require substantial remodeling of the existing structure. The existing structure was apparently constructed before SW 113th Avenue was and the property owner, therefore, had no way of knowing where the home should have ultimately been located to have been incorporated into Lot 3 of the subdivision. 2. The variance is necessary for the proper design of the subdivision.' The applicant is required to provide for a street connection to a Public Street. There are no alternative alignment locations available based on the length of the property frontage on SW Fonner Street and its otherwise landlocked condition. Based on the limited number of homes that would access SW 113th Avenue and the proposed private street due to their cul-de-sac design both streets and SW Fonner Street can function in a safe manner if approved as proposed. Other than locating the street across from SW 113th Avenue the applicant has chosen the next best location. in terms of distance from the next closest street intersection, SW 113th Avenue. 3. The granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to rights of other owners of property; and...Granting of this Variance will still result in a safe traffic condition due to the limited number of average daily trips these two (2) cul-de-sac streets are expected to generate. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 19 OF 29 4. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property right because of an extraordinary hardship that would result from the strict compliance with the regulations of this title. The variance is necessary for the continued enjoyment of the existing detached single-family residence. If the proposed private street were located along the westem property line, it would require extensive remodeling and likely relocation of the residence based on position of the home on the property. Street and Utility Improvements Standards: Section 18.164 contains the following standards for streets and utilities serving a subdivision: Street Improvements: Section 18.164.030(A) requires streets within and adjoining a development to be dedicated and improved based on the classification of the street. The applicant has been required to complete street improvements such as curb, gutter and sidewalk along the property frontage on all public streets through the recommended Conditions of Approval. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.164.030(E) requires a Minor Collector Street to have 60 feet of total width. A Local Street is required to have from 36 to 50 feet of right-of-way and a 24 to 32-foot paved section between curbs and sidewalks depending on the number of dwelling units to be served by the development. The applicant proposes to dedicate an additional ten (10) feet of right-of- way for the SW Fonner Street frontage to provide 30 feet from centerline in compliance with this standard. The applicant proposed a private street with 40 feet of width and a 28- foot paved width. The Planning Commission required that the applicant revise the plan to provide a public street with 46 feet of total right-of-way width and a 28-foot paved section. While this paved width complies with the public street width range, this would not allow parking on one (1) side of the street throughout the development, given the minimum clear width requirements of the Uniform Fire Code. Therefore, the applicant shall obtain City Council approval for "No Parking" designation on one (1) side of the street prior to recording the final plat. Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets: Section 18.164.030(F) states that a future street plan shall be filed which shows the pattern of existing and proposed future streets from the boundaries of the proposed land division. This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sac since they are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with this section by providing a discussion concerning providing a street extension due to existing development constraints to the east, west and south. To the west and east, large single-family residences preclude a future street extension. To the south, the Genesis Subdivision precludes a street extension. The applicants proposed street connection and street spacing variance address access constraints to the north. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.164.030(G) requires all local streets that abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 20 OF 29 street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. This site is not precluded from compliance with these standards. The applicant complies with these standards through their future streets plan as addressed above. Curbs, Curb Cuts, Ramps, and Driveway Approaches: Section 18.164.030(N) requires the following: Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair, bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080, and; 1. concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required; except 2. where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City Engineer approval; and 3. asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shall be built to City configuration standards. The street improvements have been addressed through the Engineering Department's review of the requisite street improvements. Block Design: Section 18.164.040(A) states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. The block design as proposed complies with the applicable dimensional criteria as reviewed below. The dimensional criteria address the needs for convenience in circulation and traffic safety. The site does not have topography or environmental constraints that constrain access options. Block Sizes: Section 18.164.040(B)(1) states that the perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: 1. Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; 2. For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. 3. For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. It is not possible to comply with the block size standard due to existing development constraints on adjoining properties. For this reason, the applicant cannot reasonably provide a future street connection to an adjoining property as discussed under the exceptions listed in Criterion 1. Criterion 2 is not applicable because the site adjoins SW Fonner Street that is designated as a Minor Collector Street. Criteria 3 is not applicable to this development because the site is zoned for residential use. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98.0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 21 OF 29 Block Lengths: Section 18.164.040(B)(2) states that when block lengths greater than 600 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. Due to development constraints the applicant is also precluded from extending a pedestrian/bicycleway through the site. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.164.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. This standard is not applicable to this development because the applicant is subdividing through a Planned Development Overlay for the property. This design approach does not require the applicant to comply with minimum lot size standards, therefore, the lot depth to width ratio requirements do not apply. Lot Frontage: Section 18.164.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley for detached single-family residences. The minimum frontage width standard is met for most of the lots as proposed because 10 of the 12 lots would have in excess of the 25-foot minimum frontage requirement. As shown, Lots 7 and 9 do not comply with this standard. Lots 7 and 9 shall be revised to provide a minimum of 25 feet of lot frontage. The Planned Development standards do not waive this requirement. Sidewalks: Section 18.164.070 requires sidewalks adjoining all residential streets. The Conditions of Approval require that a sidewalk be provided along the property frontage on SW Fonner Street. Though the use of a private street as a Planned Development, the new lots would not have sidewalks along their street frontages throughout the development. Sanitary Sewers: Section 18.164.090 requires sanitary sewer service. Sanitary Sewer facilities exist in SW Fonner Street that would serve a portion of the property. An additional sewer line exists adjacent to the property's south west comer that would serve the remainder of the property. Both facilities are expected to have sufficient capacity to meet the additional demand that will be created by the development. Storm Drainage: Section 18.164.100 requires adequate provisions for storm water runoff and dedication of easements for storm drainage facilities. Existing storm drainage facilities are in place to serve this site. The applicant is required to demonstrate though the Conditions of Approval that downstream facilities have sufficient capacity to serve this site. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS: Sections 18.164.030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drains) are required to be addressed through the development review process. A review of other utilities and development requirements related to Grading and Erosion Control, Water Quality and Above Ground Utility Lines are also addressed below: STREETS: This site abuts SW Fonner Street, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City's Transportation Plan Map. The roadway is still under Washington County jurisdiction, but because the site lies within the USB, the City of Tigard will make all decisions regarding planning and engineering review. A minor collector street requires a PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 22 OF 29 right-of-way (ROW) width of 60 feet. At present, there is approximately 20 feet of ROW south of the centerline of the street. The applicant's plan indicates that they will dedicate additional ROW to provide 30 feet from centerline to meet the City standard. The roadway is paved, but not improved to City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that they will construct a half-street improvement on Fonner Street adjacent to their site frontage to meet City standards and to mitigate their impact to the transportation system. Staff could not tell if the existing pavement section will meet City standards, so the applicant will need to verify this prior to construction. If the existing pavement section meets City standards, then the applicant will be permitted to saw cut the edge of the existing asphalt and add the necessary width to meet the City width standard. If the section does not meet City standards, then the half-street .improvement shall extend to the roadway centerline. Proposed Private Street The applicant is proposing to serve this project with a private street. It appears the reason for this proposal is to avoid providing a wider ROW for a public street. For instance, a public street with a 28-foot paved width would require a ROW width of 46 feet to allow for 5-foot sidewalks on both sides and 4-foot planter areas for street trees. The applicant's plan indicates that they will provide a 40-foot wide tract area for their private street. The applicant believes that they will need to remove more trees if a 46-foot ROW is required, so they have applied for a Planned Development in order to qualify for a private street serving more than six lots [TDC 18.164.030(S)(3)]. Although Staff would prefer a public street in a project of this size, past decisions by the City indicate that a private street could be approved. There are no other public streets in the area that this new street could align with and connect to in the future; therefore, no more than the proposed 12 lots will ever be served by this street. Staff, as well as the City Council, are concerned with private streets that have the same appearance of a public street. In a recent discussion with the Council, Staff was directed to implement a few "appearance" requirements for private streets. For instance, where the private street intersects a public street, a commercial driveway apron shall be constructed. The applicant's plan shows a typical curb return approach similar in nature to a public street; this will need to be changed on the construction plans. Also, in addition to the blue street name signs installed by the City, we are now installing an additional sign that indicates that the private street is not maintained by the City. In light of these issues, the Planning Commission revised the application to require that the proposed private street be developed as a public street. Several Conditions of Approval were modified to reflect this change. Access Spacing Variance The applicant has requested a variance to the City's intersection spacing requirement found in 18.164.030(G)(1), which states that offset intersection spacing along a collector street shall be a minimum of 300 feet. The proposed offset between the new private street and SW 113th Place is approximately 125 feet, which does not meet the TDC requirement. The applicant makes the argument that aligning the new private street with 113th Place will require: 1) removal of more trees, and 2) removal of the existing house valued at approximately $ 100,000. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98.0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 23 OF 29 Staff has reviewed the applicant's argument and concurs that the existing house would likely have to be removed or relocated. However, Staff does not concur that more trees would have to be removed in order to align the streets. It appears to Staff that more trees over 12 inches in diameter will be removed with the applicant's proposed street alignment. The applicant makes a point that if this application were reviewed under Washington County regulations, the offset would be approved. Washington County's offset distance is a minimum of 50 feet on a minor collector street. The applicant also makes a point that this particular offset does not pose a left turn conflict hazard for cars turning left into either street from Fonner Street because the new private street will be offset to the east of SW 113th Place. If the new street were to be offset to the west of SW 113th Place, there would be a left turn conflict. It is Staff's opinion that because of the unique issue with the existing house and the nature of the offset, there will not be a negative impact to public safety and welfare and, therefore, the applicant's plan should be approved. SANITARY SEWER: There are two (2) existing public sanitary sewer lines near this site that will serve the new lots. One (1) 8-inch.line was stubbed to the southwest property comer out of the Genesis subdivision. The applicant proposes to extend a new public line from that stub into the site to serve Lots 4 through 12. The other 8-inch line is located in SW Fonner Street. From that main line, the applicant proposes to extend a public sewer line southerly behind Lots 1 through 3. Overall, Staff agrees that the concept shown on the applicant's plan will work, but there are two (2) main concerns that the applicant will need to address prior to approval of formal design plans: 1) the applicant must evaluate the surrounding drainage basin and provide public sewer stubs to any adjacent uphill, unsewered properties, and 2) the applicant must provide maintenance access roadways to all manholes to be located behind the new lots. In order to address the first concern, the applicant's engineer will need to provide the Engineering Department with a subbasin study to evaluate which adjacent properties will need to access the sewer that is being extended into this site. The City Engineer will then make a decision as to where the applicant must extend sewer stubs. This evaluation will take place along with the review of the construction design plans. Regarding accessibility of the sewer lines, the City is concerned whenever new public lines are proposed to be located in back and side yards of new lots. This type of location presents problems for City maintenance crews, who must clean the sewer lines every one .(1) or two (2) years and repair any future problems with those lines. Unless the cleaning truck can access the downstream sewer manhole on a given length of line, that line can not be adequately cleaned. The City's policy in approving sanitary sewer line designs is to ensure that adequate maintenance access is provided. Adequate maintenance access can either be: 1) place the main lines within a paved public or private street, such that manholes are accessible in the street, or 2) where main lines must be located in the back or side yards of lots, provide a paved access road from the street back to the downstream manhole. Staff believes the applicant can easily move the sewer line behind Lots 1 through 3 into the private street and adequately serve those lots. However, the southerly line that ties into the Genesis sewer line will need to be located in side and back yards of one (1) or two (2) lots. The applicant's plan would result in two (2) downstream manholes and, therefore, PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 24 OF 29 two lengths of public sewer line, that would be impossible to clean properly. The manholes in question are behind Lots 9 and 10. The applicant's plan does not indicate that they have planned for maintenance access roadways to reach these manholes. Staff suggests the applicant's engineer revise the sewer layout and minimize the number of manholes behind the lots. A maintenance access road(s) will need to be added to the plan prior to approval of the construction design plans. The applicant will have two (2) choices for delineating the access road(s) on the plat and construction plans: A. place the roadway(s) within a tract to be conveyed to the City on the final plat; or B. place the roadway within a public sanitary sewer and maintenance access easement. If Option B is selected, the applicant shall place restrictions on the plat to prohibit parking, fences, gates or other structures from being placed within the easement. Assuming the applicant will be willing to address the concerns listed above, - Staff will support the application. STORM DRAINAGE: here is an existing drainage channel that cuts across the southern half of this site and flows from west to east. A small northerly portion of the property slopes toward SW Fonner Street. The applicant submitted a downstream analysis that indicates that the downstream drainage channel is adequately sized to handle the additional storm water from this development. The majority of the site runoff will be directed to the southeast corner of the site into a water quality pond. Lot 1, a portion of Lot 2 and the half-street improvement drainage will be directed into the existing roadside ditch in Fonner Street. No adverse downstream impacts should occur. WATER: This site will be served from the City's water system. There is an existing 6-inch public water line in SW Fonner Street that can adequately serve this site. The Public Works Department indicates that the applicant will need to revise their plan to show the new water line on the east side of the new private street. Public water lines in Tigard are required to be on the south and/or east side of streets. Public Works also indicates that there is a 24-inch transmission line in Fonner Street that is not reflected on the applicant's plans. The applicant will need to show this transmission line on their construction plans. STORM WATER QUALITY: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65% of the phosphorus contained in 100% of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, .the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 25 OF 29 The applicant is proposing to construct an extended dry detention pond to treat the runoff from the site. The preliminary calculations provided in the SDR application indicate the pond will be adequately sized to handle this site. This pond facility will be privately maintained by either the developer or the future homeowners within the subdivision. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL: USA Design and Construction Standards also regulates erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per USA regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion. control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The applicant's design engineer will be required to prepare a final grading plan for review and approval. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the street or a public facility approved by the Engineering Department. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The applicant will also be required to provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report will need to be incorporated into the final grading plan and a final construction supervision report must be filed with the Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permits. EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES: There are existing overhead utility lines along SW Fonner Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 180 lineal feet; therefore, the fee would be $4,950. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Building Division reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Provide a Fire Hydrant at the intersection of SW Fonner Street and the new street. The cul-de-sac must have an inside turning radius of 25 feet. Roof drains from the existing house and all impervious surfaces must be drained to an approved Public system. Off street parking is permitted on one (1) side of the street only. Provide "No Parking" signage and curb markings per UFC 902.2.4 and 901.4.5.2. Note: The location of the Fire Hydrant will need to be reviewed and approved for compliance with traffic safety issues if located within the Clear Vision area at the SW Fonner Street intersection. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 26 OF 29 The Water Department reviewed this proposal and provided the following comment: Although we have no objections to the basic concept, we do have the following concerns: standard locations of water mains are south and east side of centerline. The minimum distance from centerline of pipe to face of curb is six (6) feet. The City owns and operates a 24-inch transmission main on SW Fonner Street. Please note the location on plans. Other affected departments have reviewed this application and have offered no comments or objections. SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Other affected agencies have reviewed this application and have offered no comments or objections. SECTION VII. NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER COMMENTS Prior to submittal of the application, the City received two (2) letters from neighboring property owners concerning this development. The following letter was received from Eric and Colleen Schultheis: As the owner of the CF Tigard House 11180 SW Fonner Street, I have a few concerns regarding your proposed development as the subject property borders our Historic District Overlay. I am certain with proper communication and cooperation we can protect the integrity and Historic Significance of the area for all concerned. 1 request the following in your plans: ❖ Visual buffer along West line to protect the Historic District. The Community Development Code does not require screening and buffering measures to be undertaken between adjoining detached single-family residential land uses. However, as part of the tree mitigation plan, the applicant has proposed to provide a row of trees that would serve this purpose. ❖ Trees along West line are "Wind Hardened" and must not be topped, removed or have their root structure built upon or cut into, or damaged during construction. The applicant will need to remove trees on the subject property's southeastern comer to construct the Water Quality Treatment facility. It does not appear necessary to remove trees along the property line. It does, however, appear necessary to remove trees within the center of Lot 12 in order to develop this property. ❖ Stone fence along the west line to minimize the impact of increased noise level. Because the applicant is proposing single-family detached residential use, a sound attenuation wall is not expected to be necessary to address noise impacts. Noise emissions from either the new residences or the neighboring property would be expected to be similar and not to exceed residential standards. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 27 OF 29 ❖ Holding pond with natural purification system to assure run-off is clean and will not flood or property. The applicant has proposed a water quality treatment facility to treat storm water runoff from this development. As a requirement of all new development, the applicant is expected to analyze upstream and downstream conditions and upsize any existing drainage utility deficiencies with the storm drainage system. The following letter was received from Jay and Nora Becker owners of the home at 11555 SW Fonner Street: Last week we attended a meeting to describe the proposed subdivision to be placed on Tax Lot 2000 whose west-side is adjacent to my property. Plans show that the developer/builder SR Turner Construction L.L.C. is planning on placing lots 6, 7, 8 and 9 along my property's eastern edge. I have two (2) concerns: 1. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS DURING DEVELOPMENT. My home office is in the northeast corner of my home and only 25 feet from the property boundary along which development is to occur. My main entrance and main area of landscaped rolling green grassed hills fills the northeast corner of my property. During the entire work day 1 am present in this area. I have a bad case of Asthma for which I take constant medication and this condition makes me especially sensitive to dust. Further, the developer has stated that depending on economic conditions, building might proceed over several years time. This is a long time to contend with construction noise and dust. Based on past practice, it is expected that street and utility construction would occur in a short period of time on this site. Although development of all the lots within the development could take several years, upon commencement of construction of any single lot it is expected that completion would occur in a short time period due to construction costs associated with extended delays. 2. VISUAL IMPACT OF ADJOINING LOTS. Views from my downstairs office and upstairs bedroom are going to be looking directly onto homes built on Lots 6 through 9. It is unlikely that, when given the number of owners with adjoining lots a free choice, that what they will choose to do along our common property line will end up being consistent with one another. It is likely because of personal constraints and tastes that what will result along their back property lines and my common property line will be appealing when taken as a whole, because it is visually inconsistent due to lack of uniform development and a single vision. I think these problems can be addressed by either the Planning Commission or the Hearings Officer by requiring as a Condition of approval that a neighbor friendly and visually attractive fence at least five feet high be built along the west side of this development. I would be willing to let the developer build this fence on my side of the property line if the gain of a few feet was of value to him and it would avoid a large tree in the corner of this site. Further a nice attractive neighbor friendly fence along his shared property boundary, I believe would make marketing these lots easier since they would become more private from my property. PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 28 OF 29 1 hope you will be able to share these concerns and solutions with the City of Tigard Planning Commission. The Community Development Code does not require a fence between detached single-family residential. properties. The applicant has proposed to provide newly planted trees as a buffer around the entire perimeter of the project. The applicants' preliminary tree mitigation plan proposes to plant a row of trees around the entire perimeter of the development that would provide for screening and buffering. SECTION Al. CONCLUSION The City of Tigard Planning Commission has APPROVED, subject to the CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL contained within this staff report, Subdivision (SUB) 98-0002, Planned Development Review (PDR) 98-0003, Zone Change (ZON) 98-0002 and Variance (VAR) 98-0003 - FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION. IT IS:FUR F .ORDERED'~TNATrTNE APPLICANT~AND ALL PA6TIES{TO THESE` : 'ry PROCEEDINGS-BE NOTIFIED OF THE ENTRY OF TM ORDER.. PASSED: This 4th day of May, 1998 by the City of Tigard Planning Commission. (Signature box below) Nick Wilson, Planning Commission President is\curpln\mark_r\su b98-02.dfo PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC SUB 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 29 OF 29 A', 3con ' o\ ~e-ss t=y S o i 1 a.7n sf. V `ys ~ xE`1 a © G i0 BE aEHa.40~ N~A• e.~6~ Sf. 4 N ~i .o 3 Q a,a96 - MWSE 10 N ;EYMN , m 32..W I . Z ~ l b y. !0 9E N :WAG ~ o, i E1 V 7 7.-4 o st• _-Tract "A" 7s, Storm Water t;•a Quality Facility Q =a' 6,009 sq. ft- Nag 7.726 si. Sy B ,.8 i o j'A ~ J. t a. 6 T,44a st. 7,aes Sf. Q N. 40.1 LL z ~6g sf, 0 7 0. 9.- v. 7.625 sf. v. 10 as g 7,500 st. N 7,667 st. 6 ° a o - ys~ P, ,yb'O wo go dw ve 00 ae Oo anOo am go 9 7.660 st. Founer Woods 1 ~i6 Subsion m. . c~s~ Moc~ a case w~si: , , SUB 98-0002 SITE PLAN PDR 98--0003 I ZOK 98-0002. j EXHIBIT MAP H ( au~R.rrn VAR 98 0003 i j- ST 3 CITY of TIGARD h OEOORAVMIC INFOR YATION DYD TEY VICINITY MAP . . SUB 980002 SW sAL/BI LN PDR 980003 SW ER OLaT ZON 980002 N 5~ VAR 980003 Founer Woods PprrT j j - Z SUBJECT T a r PARCEL Subdivision WB E~ PP~N~\No t- ST WATK~N C ONN D N LL to sor •c P r~ e8RK PT N 9 m yon `~1GS r m 0 400 800 Feet cr 0 v I"= Soo feet o~ OT r ` M City of Tigard AVEN ST ST rj Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified vAth the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tlgard, OR 97223 (503) 839-4171 httip1h w.ci.tigard.or.us Community Development - - Plot date: Mar 24, 1998; cAmagic\magic011.apr EXHIBIT B NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 98-05 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISISON h:\patty\docs\sub98-02.Ibs SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003/ZON 98-00021VAR 98-0003 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION (Page 1/1) STEPHEN C HALE 8835 SW CANYON LANE, SUITE 402 PORTLAND OR 97225 MATT WELLNER LAND TECH, INC. 8835 SW CANYON LANE, SUITE 402 PORTLAND OR 97225 JAY BECK 11550 SW FONNER STREET TIGARD OR 97223 STEVE TURNER S.R. TUUNER CONSTRUCTION 8835 SW CANYON LANE, SUITE 408 PO BOX 25216 PORTLAND OR 97289-0216 STEVE TURNER SR TURNER CONSTRUCTION 8835 SW CANYON LANE, S-402 PORTLAND, OR 97225-6297 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF TIGARD OREGON NOTICE: PEOPLE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST PRINT THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS ON THIS SHEET. AGENDA ITEM /t: s , Page -L of DATE OF HEARING: S/ CASE NUMBER(S): -oocC4, - 003 OWNER/APPLICANT: ~iL✓ LOCATION: PLEASE PRAT YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, AND ZIP CODE PROPONENT (For the proposal) -OPPONENT (Against the proposal) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \ (Print AWWAddraslLp & Affl&dm) (Print NaadAddrasfAp & AffEm a ) Name• S Tz~hen /~a ~c Name- Address: G 3 l SVV C~syu--r G,~. 94 Z Address- City: State: Oj2 Zip: S 7 Z- Z,S City: State- Zip, ~el~✓ Name 4 Name: Address: W3 S -5w Address: City: State: 09 Zipe _<1 City: Stats• Zip* Name: Namee Name: L/" rm /-gPC Name: Address: Address- may: / g >R a State: ~R 7itt: -72-23 City: State: Zip• Name: Name- Address: Address: City: State: Zige City: State- Zip- v CITY of noun AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING Community rDeve4ment O A ShupingA (Better Community ST, 2~E OF ON - ~ " \\11 County t f'Washington ) ss. City of TWard ) 1, (Patricia L. Lunsfor( being first duly swom/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Specia!ut II for the City of TWart( Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: (CherJrPpprapioe Bogs) BEM ❑ NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE FFk No.Mame Reference) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARING FOR: Ez AMENDED NOTICE (File No Nam Rderence) (Date d Public Hearing) ❑ City of Tigard Planning Director ❑ Tigard Hearings Officer ❑ Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: ❑ AMENDED NOTICE (Dam d - Hearing) ❑ c~City of Tigard Planning Director C V1 Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission ❑ Tigard City Council ❑ NOTICE OF FOR: 7 (Typ&KM of Notice) File No.Mame Reference) (Dam d Pudic Hearing, a appbc=ie) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOnCE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OSER NOTICEM of which is attached, marked WWR "A" was iled to each named person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked E1mn " on the day of 1998, and deposited in the United States Mail on the day of 1998, postage prepaid. r OWL (P Prepared i Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the _j~~day of OFFICIAL SEAL DIANE M JELDERKS NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 046142 N ARY PUBLIC OF 0 EG MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07, 1999 111 Commission E~gle'eS: 17A~ 44 ► 4 SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 CITY OF TIOARD PRE-APP: HELD WITH: Vb GENERAL INFORMATION DATE OF PRE-APP.: 1Z - Cl- Q"1 Property Address/Location(s): 11300 S1„/ (:n rFOR STAFF USE. ONLY C ray) nev Wo o~S) ~ g=o 3 Case No.(s):__ua 9'~= ODOaZ ' Tax Map & Tax Lot #(s): 2 S i 3A~ a)nn Other;Case No:(s) UyQ qP ~0o03 : P Receipt No: - X03 Site Size: a3 ~1G►'eS Application Accepted By: Date: ' 9 Property Owner/Deed Holder(s)': SR T.~rnc_°✓ ~r,5~'►-~,cf~a.-> Address: £335 51../ ~.,vnr,Lr,`~yGB Phone: 292 -5920 Date Determined To Be Complete city:PQ, l car zip: C=r?.2-6 d 19 .S/~ Tyr.-,~~ ~ar,►-vcT,'n Camp :Plan/Zone Designation::: Applicant*:. Address: AP35 ~I.JCo.,..c~r~Lr, Phone: 29_-2 -31DO 0W. City: zip: CIT Area: ' When the owner and the applicant are different PeoPle the applicant Recording Date and Number: must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written . from the owner authorization or an agent of o the owner. The owner(s) Rev: 8/31/98 :'i:)curplnVnasterslwbapp.doCmust sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS The owners of record of the subject property request Subdivision approval to divide a: ✓ Application Elements Submitted: Or"(Z, (1) parcel into 12 lots between Application Form g . Owner's Signature/Written Authorization and"'- square feet in size. '1161 , I I Title Transfer Instrument or Deed ~El' WA. CO. Subdivision Name Approval Q~- Site/Plot Plan ( a Y) (provide any additional information here) of copies based on pre-app check list) Site/Plot Plan (reduced 81/:"x 11") Applicant's Statement of copies based on pre-app check list) y) p"' Filing Fee (Preliminary Plat).... $?o*29000 (+-ot) (Final Plat) $ _295.00 1 List any VARIANCE OR OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS to be considered as part of this application: l C-?_;~rlr10, a r is r~ c°~ L.f-mac- P~a n r, ~%~1~C~1 ✓"~r1~ APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application In the "Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject proReEW. • If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subje„^t to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All of 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, may 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. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this day of 19 ° Owner's Signatu Owner's Signature r Owner's Signature ees Signature 2 i ".a r- as) - 9 8 0 6: 1- 3 A S _12 _ T u r n e r C o n s t r u c t i o n S O 3 2 9 2- 6 2 9 7 P_ C32 } MOR TITLE INSUR _ . CE ft R SETTLEMENT STATEMENT FILE NO. 71 -'ESCROW OFFICER: KATHY SMITH BUYER: S:UCTION, L.L.C_ BY: JAMES B. WILLIAMS CAROL L. V LLIAMS SUITE 408 IC//Vq` PORTLAND' ;OR` 7225' SELLER: VIRGINIA J. HODGES 11300 S.W. FONNFR STREET TIGARD OR 97223 PROPERTY: 11300 S.W. FONNUR STREET TIGARD OREGON 97223 SETTLEMENT DATE: 11-05-97 PRORATION DATE: SALE PRICE: 390,000.00 s r s o o a x DEBIT CREDIT SALE PRICE 390,000.00 FIRST LOAN CREDIT 312,000.00 to WASHINGTON FEDERAL DEPOSIT(S) IN ESCROW 80,004.82 EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT......' 5,000.00 HELD 'OUTSIDE ESCROW BY'WINDERMERE CRONIN & CAPLAN RE PROPERTY TAX' •PROR11.1* QK.. ;C t/DR PxOSl:07-01-97 Co 11-05-97 0 8.7022/day 1.105.17 ORIGINATION F$E......... 6,240.00 co WASHINGTON FEDERAL APPRAISAL FEE 600.00 to MAY & ASSOCIATES FLOOD HAZARD 27.00 to WASHINGTON FEDERAL ESCROW FEES 350.00 to TICOR TITLE INSURANCE DOCUMENT.PRICPARATION PER 175.00 to WWM TNGiTON F$D$R?k.T. ENDORSEMENTS' TO ALTA POLICY 50.00 to TICOR TxTL$'INSURANCE LENDER'S POLICY 347.00 to TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY RECORDING DEED 38-00 RECORDING TRUST DEED/MORTGAGE 28.00 TRANSFER TAX 195.00 COMPLT'N CONVEY/LIEN DOCS, MAILING & COP 45.00 to TICOR TITLE INSURANCE WIRE FEE 15.00 to TICOR TITL$..INSURANCE GROSS DUE FROM BUYER 398,110.00 TOTAL PAID BY/FOR BUYER 398,109-99 GROSS DUE FROM BUYER...... 398,110.00 TOTAL PAID BY/FOR BUYER 398,109.99 NET FROM BUYER 0.01 WE CERTIFY THAT WE HAVE DEL RED S OF E APPLICABLE ESCROW ACCOUNT STATEMENTS TO THE ABOVE PARTIESt IMPORTANT TAX DOCUMENT PLEASE RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS FIDE ~ ,Mar--09-98 06:43A S - R - uvner Construction 50392-6297 P-01 S. R. TURNER CONSTRUCTION LLC P. 0. BOX 25216 PORT1.AND, OREGON 97289-0216 8835 S, W. CANYON LANE #408 PORTI.AND, OREGON 97225 PHONE: 503-292-5920 FAX: 503-292-6297 FAX COVER PAGE Ti IIS COPY IS ENT HY A MANI:IAL FAX MACHINE. THE, KF. ARE A PAOES TNCLUDrNG TiIIS C(.)VFR SIII?ET HF.ING TOTAL 01" 4 7'k ANS M17' IaATF.: TO q ~COMPA ` FLAX FROM: IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PA( FS CORRECTLY, PI-EASE CALL: 50:3- 292-5920 AND REQUEST A RE'1RANSM1SSION, NOTES : i I CITY OF TIGARD March 20, 1998 OREGON Matt Wellner Land Tech, Inc. 8835 SW Canyon Lane, #402 Portland, OR 97225 RE: Notice of Complete Application Dear Mr. Wellner: This letter is to inform you that your application for Subdivision Review (SUB 98-0002) is considered complete and has been accepted by the Planning Division. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171. Sincerely, "C' William D'Andrea Associate Planner, AICP iAcurp1n\W1 \sub98-02.112 ; c: SUB 98-0002 land use file Steve Turner, S.R. Turner Construction 1998 Planning correspondence file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Ask March 16, 1998 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Mr. Matt Wellner LAND TECH, INC. 8835 SW Canyon Lane, #402 Portland, OR 97225 RE: Notice of Incomplete Application Submittal Dear Mr. Wellner: The Planning Division has conducted a preliminary review of Subdivision (SUB) 98-0002, an application for a 12 lot subdivision, and have found that certain application materials were not provided with the submittal. The Planning Division is unable to continue processing this application, pending submission of the following items and plan notes: 1. Narrative addressing the Planned Development Established Area approval criteria of Section 18.80.060. 2. Additional Zone Change fee of $752.50. The Planned Development (PD) process requires a Zone Change to apply the PD designation on the zoning map. The City of Tigard Zone Change fee of $1,505 is being applied, since Washington County does not have a Zone Change fee. 3. Square footage calculation for the proposed private street. 4 Revised lot area calculation for the proposed lot no. 12. The water quality facility shall be provided in a separate tract. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (503) 639-4171. Sincerely, William D'Andrea, Associate Planner, AICP 0cur0nWftub9&MAr c: SUB 98-0002 land use file Steve Turner 1998 Planning correspondence file 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 ti r s Co' 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING March 18, 1998 William D'Andrea City of Tigard Planning 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: SUB 98-0002 Additional Material Mr. D'Andrea, This letter is in response to your letter dated March 16`h, 1998. I apologize for not including all necessary material within my first submittal. With this letter I have included all necessary documentation to deem this application complete. I have included three copies of a site plan, which show the proposed area of Lot 12, and the private drive. The storm water facility has been placed within a tract, reducing the area of Lot 12 from over 13,000 square feet to just under 7,500 square feet. As well, I have included a response to section 18.80.060 as requested. An additional zone change fee of $752.50 has been submitted as part of this packet. The initial application stated that all proposed lots meet, and or exceed the minimum lot size covered by the governing zone. This is no longer true due to the fact that the storm water facility must be placed in a tract. The applicant has requested that this application be reviewed as a planned development. Thus, the new sub 7,500 square foot lot should not cause any problems. The initial application also did not include any flag lots. Due to the fact that the storm water facility has been placed within a tract, a flag lot has been created. Proposed Lot 12 is a flag lot with approximately 39 feet of frontage on the proposed private drive. This flag lot meets all requirements of the Tigard Municipal Code. I appreciate the efficient manner in which you have reviewed this application for completeness. If any further material is necessary please contact me. Thank You, Matt Wellner • feature or building; RESPONSE - Does not apply. 2. The planned development approach is the most feasible method the area; and RESPONSE - The applicant has not proposed a planned development in order to develop the subject site at a higher density than that in place by the governing zone. The applicant has proposed the planned development overly in order that the proposed private access width can be reduced and the subject site can be developed to proper density. The applicant has proposed the most feasible development for the subject site. Denying this request for the planned development approach would destroy the most feasible method to develop the area. 3. The site is of a size and shape that the compatibility provisions of Chapter 18.92 can be met. RESPONSE - The applicant does meet the compatibility provisions of Chapter 18.92. The residential density calculation shows that the subject site's density is that of 13.1 units. With the proposed planned development the applicant has proposed 12 lots. Thus, the applicant exceeds the compatibility provisions of Chapter 18.92. y 1 /i 'Clo~ 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING RESPONSE TO CODE SECTION 18.80.060 18.80.060 Planned Development Allowed and Disallowed A. A planned development shall be allowed on all lands shown on the comprehensive plan map as "Developing Areas". RESPONSE- Section 18.138.030 states that: All land, which is annexed, to the City shall be classified as an established area or as a developing area on the plan map and on the zoning map. The subject site has recently received approval for annexation from Washington County to the City of Tigard. Once this approval is recorded the subject site will be shown on the comprehensive plan map as an "Established Area". B. A planned development shall not be allowed in residential zones located in areas designated as "Established Areas" on the comprehensive plan map except, the Commission may approve a planned development within an "Established Area" where the Commission finds: 1. Development of the land in accordance with the provisions of the `Established Area" would: a. Result in an inefficient use of land; RESPONSE - Does not apply. b. Result in removing significant natural features; or RESPONSE - Does not apply. C. Result in a change of the character of the area surrounding a significant historic 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 h~ 'J PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING TWELVE (12) LOT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Narrative and Supporting Information Including: Vicinity Map Plat Name Reservation Form Arborist's Tree Plan Storm Drainage Analysis Neighborhood Meeting Packet • Area Map/Future Street Plan EXHIBITS A - Preliminary Plat Page 1 (Front Pocket) B - Preliminary Plat Page 2 (Front Pocket) C - Arborist's Tree Survey (Back Pocket) D - Application Form and 8'/2 x 11 Site Plan (1 Copy Each in First Application Packet) TWENTY-FOUR COPIES OF ALL ABOVE INFORMATION HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS MADE FOR SUBMITTAL AT THE TIME OF THE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE. i ~ y 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING March 4, 1998 NARRATIVE FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF A 12 LOT SUBDIVISION Fonner Woods 11300 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 Applicant Contact: Planning Contact: • Steve R. Turner Land Tech, Inc. (Matt Wellner) P.O. Box 25216 8835 SW Canyon Lance #402 Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97225 Phone: (503) 292-5920 Phone: (503) 291-9398 Statement of Intent The intent of this submittal is to obtain preliminary permission to subdivide Tax Lot 2000 of Tax Map 2S1 3AC, into twelve (12) lots for detached single family dwellings. The applicant is requesting that this application be processed as a Planned Development. Thus, the minimum lot size that is required by the R-4.5 zone (7,500 square feet) is not necessarily applicable. The number of lots within this subdivision has been determined by the residential density calculation. In order to submit this application as a Planned Development, the applicant must request a zone change. Tigard Municipal Code section 18.80.015A states, "The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones." Thus the applicant would like to request a zone change in order to add this overlay to the site's existing R-4.5 zone. Also included with this application for subdivision is a request for an Access Spacing Variance. The location of the proposed access does not comply with the access spacing guidelines stated in • the code. An application for annexation from Washington County to the City of Tigard has been -1- • submitted. Subdivision Plat Name Reservation The applicant has received approval for the subdivision plat name "Fonner Woods". A copy of the approved request form is included along with this application. Chapter 18.32.050(B)(5) - Impact Study The purpose of this section is to quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services in the area. The subject site maintains approximately 177 feet of frontage along SW Fonner Street. Fonner Street is designated as a Minor Collector. A Minor Collector requires 30 feet of right-of-way on either side of that street's centerline. Currently SW Fonner Street maintains 20 feet of right-of-way on either side of centerline. Thus, approval of this development should require dedication of 10 feet of right-of-way along the subject site's frontage on SW Fonner Street. In addition to dedication of right-of-way for SW Fonner Street, upon approval of this subdivision, a %2 street improvement should be required along SW Former Street. Street improvements on SW Fonner Street should include 20 feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires and a five foot wide sidewalk. • Access to the subject site is proposed via a private street that will terminate in a cul-de-sac within the subdivision. The proposed private street will maintain 40 feet of right-of-way with a paved surface of 28 feet. The cul-de-sac will maintain a paved radius of 40 feet. A full street improvement will be done in construction of this private street. This application has been submitted as a Planned Development. It is for this reason that the applicant has proposed a more narrow private street width. Street improvements on the private street should include 28 feet of pavement, curb to curb, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires and a five foot sidewalk. The private street will be labeled "No Parking" on one side. The applicant has proposed no pedestrian pathways within the subdivision. The applicant has submitted a future development plan for the surrounding area. The applicant is confident that this future development plan shows a lack of availability for any connection to be made with the subject site. "Genesis No. 3," located contiguous to the south of the subject site contains no easements or tracts which allow for a north/south pedestrian bicycle pathway. Parcels contiguous to the east and west both have high value structures on them that interfere with any feasible placement of an east/west pedestrian bicycle connection. Pedestrian bicycle pathways are normally created to shorten travel time between bus stops. There are currently no bus lines servicing SW Fonner Street, and service is not in the near future. Thus, there is no need for a pedestrian bicycle pathway. Pedestrian circulation will be served within the subdivision by the • proposed sidewalks, which can be seen on the preliminary plat. -2- There are existing overhead utility lines, which run adjacent to the subject site along SW Former Street. Prior to recordation of the plat, the applicant shall either place these utilities underground or pay the fee in-lieu of $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The applicant has proposed to connect all lots to the existing 6" water line located in SW Former Street. The applicant will extend this public water line into the proposed subdivision. The extended water line will connect service to all proposed lots. Extension of this line will properly serve all lots in the proposed subdivision as well as one proposed hydrant. Extension of this line will cause little to no impact on the surrounding neighbors. The applicant has proposed to connect lots 1, 2, and 3 to the existing 8" sanitary sewer line in SW Fonner Street. The applicant has proposed to connect lots 4 through 12 to the existing 8" sanitary sewer line located south west of the site. The applicant will extend these public sewer lines into the proposed subdivision. The extended sanitary sewer lines will connect service to all .proposed lots. Initial review of the site by the applicant has shown no unsewered properties uphill from the subject site. Extension of these lines will properly serve all lots in the proposed subdivision. Extension of these lines will cause little to no impact on the surrounding neighbors. A storm drainage plan and a downstream analysis have been submitted as part of this application. The proposed subdivision has been designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to a proper . storm drainage system. The proposed drainage system can be seen on page 1 of the preliminary plat. Construction of this storm system will properly serve all lots in the proposed subdivision. Construction of the proposed storm system will cause little to no impact on the surrounding neighbors. In fact, construction of the proposed storm system would lesson the amount of storm water that collects on the subject site and on neighboring properties. The applicant has shown a proposed storm water facility on page 1 of the preliminary plat. The storm water facility has been designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. This system has been designed to substantially lesson the impact of development on the surrounding property owners. There are no proposed open space tracts within this subdivision that may serve as an addition to the city park system. The proposed subdivision is only 12 lots. A subdivision of this size would be destroyed by the requirement of a park. The proposed subdivision would not force any impact upon the local park system. Noise impacts of the development on the surrounding community will be held to a minimum. Once construction is complete, noise will not be an issue. During construction of the subdivision noise suppression will be addressed to City of Tigard code standards. Hours of construction will be held true to those set forth by law. The subject site is zoned R-4.5. Surrounding zones in the • area are also low density residential. Any screening or buffering requirements made by staff will -3- • be taken into consideration. The proposed subdivision has been designed to properly accommodate fire protection. The private street access and cul-de-sac allow for a proper fire vehicular turn around. As well, one hydrant has been proposed in order that proper fire service is provided to all lots. Chapter 18.80 - Planned Development The applicant would like to request a zone change in order to incorporate the Planned Development overlay on the subject site. Although the Planned Development overlay would allow sub 7,500 square foot lots, the applicant has not proposed lots below the minimum lot size. However, the applicant has requested review as a Planned Development due to the lack of area available for proper access. The applicant has proposed a private access maintaining 40' of right-of-way terminating at a cul-de-sac with a 40' radius. Approval of the Planned Development overlay should allow this private street. Chapter 18.92 - Residential Density Calculation SINGLE FAMILY - 43,560 SQ FT X 2.83 ACRES = 123,274.8 SQ FT • = 24,654.9 20% PROW 98,619.9 SQ FT / 7,500.0 MIN LOT 13.1 UNITS/ACRE RESPONSE: Due to the fact that the applicant is submitting this application as a Planned Development the minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet does not necessarily apply. However all proposed lots within this subdivision do meet and or exceed the 7,500 square foot minimum lot size of the R-4.5 zone. No density transfers are being requested. Blocks One new private street has been proposed for this subdivision. No new blocks will be created. The existing subdivision to the south (Genesis No. 3) does not promote a through connection. As well, the locations of substantial dwellings both to the east and west of the site hinder the possibility of a feasible east/west connection. Development of the subject site does not promote any through connections that may complete a block length. Thus, a proposal for a public street is not necessary. No pedestrian/bicycle pathways have been proposed in this application due to.the lack of connectivity that the surrounding subdivisions promote. • -4- • Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets A future street plan has been included with this application. The future street plan includes an interpretation of what the applicant can foresee as feasible future development in the area. Feasible future private and public access has been shown on this plan. As well, all existing pedestrian/bicycle pathways have been shown. No existing or proposed bus routes can be found on SW Fonner Street. Residential Development Solar Access Requirements The applicant would like to request a total exemption from the Solar Access Requirements due to the large amount of existing vegetation. The applicant plans to make every effort to retain the existing vegetation. As well, the applicant plans to plant over 167 maple trees in order to mitigate trees the applicant plans to remove. The applicant believes that this existing and proposed vegetation creates more than enough on-site shade to qualify this subdivision as exempt from the Solar Access Requirements. All existing trees over 6" in diameter can be located on page 2 of the preliminary plat. Trees to be retained or removed 6" in diameter and more have been labeled on page 2 of the preliminary plat. A tree plan has been included with this application. • Chapter 18.102 - Clear Vision Area The applicant will meet all requirements of this section. Construction plans, which will be approved by City of Tigard Engineering, will address this chapter. Chapter 18.106 - Parking and Loading The applicant will meet all requirements of this section. Each single-family residence will maintain at least 2 off-street parking spaces. All proposed driveways will have an access width of 15' and a paved width of 10'. Chapter 18.108 - Access, Egress, and Circulation The applicant will meet all requirements of this section. Scaled plans of the applicant's proposed access are included with this application. One private street access has been proposed within this application. All proposed lots within this subdivision will obtain access to SW Former Street via this private street. Construction plans, which will be approved by City of Tigard Engineering, will address this chapter. The proposed private street maintains 40 feet of right-of-way and has a paved width of 28 feet. • The proposed private street will terminate in a cul-de-sac, which maintains a radius measured -5- • from centerpoint to outside edge of 40 feet. The proposed private street will maintain sidewalk from its beginning on its left side up to the proposed storm water facility. Within this application the applicant has also requested and Access Spacing Variance. The applicant has addressed this variance in a separate section. Street Trees The applicant will place street trees within the subdivision along the proposed private street and along SW Fonner Street as required by code. Proposed street trees can be seen on the preliminary plat. Where applicable the applicant would like to substitute existing trees for street trees. These trees can also be located on the preliminary plat. Chapter 18.150 - Tree Removal Plan Requirements A tree plan prepared by a certified arborist has been submitted with this application. This tree plan has accurately determined the location, size, and health of each tree on the subject site. On page 2 of the preliminary plat the applicant has shown which trees the developer has chosen to remove. These trees must be removed in order to create a proper access, and adequate building pads for the individual single family dwellings. . The applicant has located 66 trees over 12" in size. The developer has chosen to remove 43 of these trees over 12" in size. The tree plan prepared by the certified arborist accurately shows that 13 of these 43 trees are unhealthy and would be hazardous to the proposed subdivision. These figures show that the developer is liable for 30 trees over 12" in size. Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.150.025 (B)(2c) states: Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070D. The applicant has proposed to retain approximately 55 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper. This figure falls well into the 50 to 75 percent range. Thus, the applicant should mitigate 15 trees, or 50 percent of the trees to be removed. The total caliper of these 30 trees equals 667 inches. According to this number, the applicant must mitigate 333.5 inches. The' applicant has initially proposed to mitigate these trees with 167 two-inch caliper maple trees. The developer may choose to use a larger caliper of tree, reducing the number of trees needed. The developer may also choose to place multiple species of trees, but has yet to make that decision. Finally the developer may choose to plant larger than 2" street trees, reducing the number of trees needed. The proposed trees can be located on page 2 of the preliminary plat. NOTE: The tree mitigation plan is PRELIMINARY. • The tree plan prepared by the certified arborist includes a protection program defining standards -6- i • • and methods that will be used by the developer to protect trees during and after construction. Trees chosen to mitigate will meet City of Tigard Municipal Code standards. Chapter 18.160 - Land Division: Subdivision The material submitted with this application satisfies all requirements of this chapter. The applicant has followed or is currently following the process for subdivision application stated within this chapter. Chapter 18.160.120 - Criteria for Granting a Variance (For Access Spacing) The applicant has proposed a private street access for this subdivision. The subject parcel maintains one existing dwelling. The location of this dwelling can be seen on the preliminary plat. Washington County Assessment and Taxation values the property at approximately $273,000. Improvements to the property equal approximately $-100,000. The subject parcel is located at 11300 SW Fonner. Fonner Street is designated as a minor collector. Within the City of Tigard a minor collector requires 300 feet of access spacing. Within Washington County the access spacing requirement for a minor collector is 50 feet. • Fonner Street is a County Road. However, due to circumstances held between the City of Tigard and Washington County, the City of Tigard, under Tigard Code standards reviews Fonner Street. The applicant has proposed an access that meets Washington County requirements for access spacing, but does not meet City of Tigard Requirements for access spacing. Due to the location of the existing dwelling the applicant has chosen to propose location of the access at the east property line. Thus, this proposed location requires the applicant to request an access spacing variance. The value of the existing dwelling is such that the developer would like to maintain its location. The dwelling is valued at approximately $100,000. Section 18.160.120 (B) states: A variance may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied provided the Hearings Officer finds: 1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property, which are unusual and peculiar to the land as compared to other lands similarly situated; RESPONSE: The subject site contains one existing dwelling. The value of this dwelling is such that the owner does not wish to destroy or move it. The developer would like the existing dwelling to remain intact as part of the proposed subdivision. SW 113`h • is located just across SW Fonner Street from the subject site. In an ideal situation -7- i 9 0 • SW 113`h Place would simply continue onto the subject site directly across from the existing entrance to SW 113"' Place. However, this site is not subject to ideal conditions. Due to the location of the existing dwelling there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property, which are unusual and peculiar to the land as compared to other lands similarly situated. 2. The variance is necessary for the proper design or function of the subdivision; RESPONSE: The applicant has designed the proposed subdivision with both the preservation of the existing dwelling and the preservation of the existing trees in mind. This variance is necessary in order to preserve both the existing dwelling and the greatest number of trees on the subject site, thus preserving the proper design and function of the subdivision. Admittedly the location of the proposed private street does deem it necessary to destroy several trees. However, a greater number of large, established and clustered trees would be destroyed if this variance were not approved. Placing the private street directly across from the existing entrance to SW 113`hwould destroy several trees that would not be destroyed by building pads within proposed lots 1,2, and 4 as seen on the submitted preliminary plat. Placing these building pads on the east side of the subject site would destroy the same trees that the proposed private street would. Thus, the proposed layout best serves for preservation of both the existing dwelling and the greatest number of trees. Tigard Municipal Code section 18.150.01.0(A) states: After years of both natural growth and planting by residents, the City now benefits from a large number of trees. These trees of varied types add to the aesthetic beauty of the community, help clean the air, help control erosion, maintain water quality and provide noise barriers. With this in mind the applicant believes that approval of this variance is necessary for the proper design and function of the subdivision. 3. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the rights of the other owners of property; and RESPONSE: The major reason for access spacing requirements is to guarantee that a new access will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the rights of the other owners of property. One major problem with new access is that it will cause a conflicting left turn from the minor collector onto a local street. This proposed private street does not create this problem. The proposed private street will be located 134.8 feet east of the entrance to SW 113`h Place. A • new entrance located to the west of SW 113`h Place would create this problem. -8- • Thus, the major reason for the access spacing requirement is not an issue due to the easterly location of the proposed private street. Within Washington County the access spacing requirement for a minor collector is 50 feet for a parcel with 70 feet or more of frontage. Fonner Street is a County Road. However, due to circumstances held between the City of Tigard and Washington County Fonner Street is reviewed by the City of Tigard, under Tigard Code standards. Within the Tigard Municipal Code the access spacing requirement for a minor collector is 300 feet. The applicant is aware that the City of Tigard reviews this request. However, the applicant has proposed access spacing, which almost triples that of Washington County's requirement. Thus, the requested variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the rights of the other owners of property. 4. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right because of an extraordinary hardship, which would result from strict compliance with the regulations of this title. RESPONSE: There are two reasons for requesting this variance. First the applicant wishes to ,.retain the location of the existing dwelling. Second, the applicant wishes to • preserve the greatest number of trees on the subject site. It is the developers right to develop his/her property to the maximum density allowed by the governing zone. The applicant is aware that this right is not in jeopardy. However, development to maximum density should not force destruction of a relatively high valued structure. This dwelling will fit in excellent with the proposed subdivision. Second, the applicant has designed this subdivision with tree preservation in mind. Tree mitigation in the City of Tigard is an expensive venture. Rather than destroying a high number of large, established and clustered trees and replacing them with young trees, the applicant would like to preserve as much of the existing vegetation as possible. The developer should not be forced to mitigate so many more trees to.offset a problem that has not been created. Lastly, the Fonner Street community is recognized for its dense, established vegetation. The developer would like to retain this aesthetic within this proposed subdivision. Approval of this variance would best retain this right. Chapter 18.164 - Street and Utility Improvement Standards • The applicant's preliminary application follows the requirements stated within this chapter. The -9- ~ Ur ~y 4a CU ,qoO ` ¢ rig N t m FT O kOta St Ile, sW lb ry Sum r a@F s~ est sw Tjoal -Gret Q s o~ sr 7 ~ .0 ~ y ~ J@ w ~ y 5 P S~ st Sw Errol St e~~U 11300 SW Fortner St, Portland, OR 97223 S~ ot`° sw a~ rberra sL ~ y~Q 49, P Aldo • SW e a0I e airy Que w ar t Bake i zza SW Mari n tro's izza e r P, c h 3 co Imer's D natd t w Gaar t Rest rant } ncorp rated > ¢ a fi w ^ tiv Od °re 3 fi c co 44`y< ¢ y }ti G~ } t'l SW 13uir Mountain R Qa 3 > Q 5 4Z b b C c') a d ¢ rn d ao 15 t 0 mi 01 04 0.6 Streets Plus Page 1 Copyright &J 19811-1996, Miaosofl Corporation and/or its suppliers. All nghts reserved. JAN-21 98 11:25 FROM:WASH CO SOYOR 503-681-2909 TO:LOECH PAGE:01/01 JAN-09-98 FRI 13:38 LAND TECH INC 503 291 1613 P.02 MAR 22 '95 10:41AM WACO LAND USEiTRAN$P P.2/2 • SUBp n ON PLAT NAMM I request that the Washington County Surveyor's Office reserve the following subdivision name. ~p~,~1c°t~ Wo0~5 Section, Township and Range In city or county C;fjQC Ax Surveyor I understand that if the name is not used within two years, it will be a►ltomatically cancelled. • Name, address and telephone number of person reserving Plat name. it, p Q Y - 7D 1 Signature Date. Nam pproved by: Washington County Surveyor's Office 1 yl ' 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 Tom'✓. PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING March 3, 1998 Fortner Woods Subdivision 12 lot residential subdivision zoned R4. S City of Tigard Project # Report by Stephen C. Hale PE, PLS Calculations executed by Hydrocad Software. Methodology per U.S.A. design standards, July 1996. Hydrographs are SCS TR - 20 method, using type IA 24 - hour distribution • The existing site is forested 2nd growth with light brush. The site has 2 basins. One basin that covers most of the site and converges the storm flows into a draw that exits the west property line at an existing pre - developed flow of Q25 = 0.94 CFS. The proposed developed site directs all the flows into a water quality/detention pond at the existing draw, just inside the property. The pond treats the storm water as required and detains the flows to the pre - developed flows. The flows exit the west property line as they do presently and follow the existing draw to the creek approximately '/4 mile to the west. There are no downstream structures present that could be impacted by the sites storm flows. The site is very close to the upper most portion of the contributing basin that runs through the site. All upstream contributing storm flows are taken into account for the pond design. The 2nd basin consists of lot 1, portions of lot 2 and frontage improvements. The small amount of impervious area and the negligible increase in the developed flow would not make it cost affective to direct this small amount of flow to the pond. The pond is designed to treat this basin 2 quantity by treating flows from the existing house and from future development up slope just east of the site. Please find all maps, sketch's and calculations attached. If you have any questions please call Steve Hale at 291 - 9398. 1 Z, IG~ ti• - - e t A• on I S •~O < II Sch • • • Tigar e ■ saw / • ■ 4`./~ s ■jl M~I d~~ I~•~ I °■slla■•~ a■ ■ , ~i• ~ r 0 Q o ° . ♦ ,•i~-y~O° •_I~~ •\■ae ~,■wj`Ir~` ° ■ran~i e ■ o• Lf .I■ ,a 11 Ijl 0 ~if ` ¢¢r~~ia ■ !`i'!~ 0 >f~i d■ - ~a+ y~tp \ i i / '~~1 r~~ I l~li ' ' (f O rEl I: L5■■`~ a. j • ti; : C'~ ° ■ _i' ° ° ■ a IA, • / a\ , • A '~3i1 ° I TXpa~jr■ o ~.!r / / --y+{..~~_`/.' 9l1 ° ' '~r j =y` I • ' III'30 °i -d,_.. r \ n ° ° e 1' Yz___i~~ . 80 .per d ~~_-~"~~~`~I' ifs ° ' ~O ' ~ - 1 -/I~ ° ° ° ~ * aIs•~ I`N to III + ® • j~p ' ~ ,l ~ t , ■ / ~ / _ I, I • i © Yaat9 . a~° S11G . }BATTLER . ~Fc \ ~ o - L • • ` W ` a • ?5u a f~ lfq \IS .lei / • ■ ■ \ ■ ■ ■ y' v / a tam .00 ■ `1J F ! ROA. r7i ' igari L)i 0 a ( 1 ~ r~ r / I , ■I jr p7 11 s7;.} - -`F_V:; > p. 'Qr 1Q~rr, •y~'~'/• r^'.: A~'- + `Afr, S):n y'' ..•S : ":i.+~r' .'ie i:r' '1!(s T- ~y {r "Yltt nr~'Li. M1r~~,,S,fl Y.f;. Z7r.: -~.~ii. e,•ia: -.nYf• ii~L ,1 G,!Rl` .)y~'' /i.~~ ,:Fd' Y,. ?~T~/ 1•,~,i .'~~'J I~+~L~i;Si~J r .,•'!'t'.7LA..ln 1'..:,t., lr.~ r. 'f... 3';• Ir >~V yvr)?2q ~S',I• •ri. rG`.t,n1~ 't .i: '~1{:1+~~3rc~~V' r?~I~KR.~r-~ ~ 'z~4~t. y~i r„';;j~ 'i;~ ~ ,Gi1.~ L ~ ~S',.~~ a,~'~;~,.~il -~d'tf1 9b ,~y C~ a,...`.~•' ^?1 -pxi tIJ)! hY~w.` IF,~~',W :;rTrt .f~-'f)~ t, v~``4y4.1 ~aa,(i7,,a ~~1~, ~7~.z ~~;r8~ Via, ~',g,^5~.'~•~.. r~t~_C,idt~4'.r", r Os vi.~ ,i~'•~„J'_~,,G"a~ ~ -~i,~ ,s T4rF, I,t : ~ ,JEi rA,a , ~ a ,`t`~ ^'-'T ~ r ~ ~~~'G4~ re . J • ~ .'r ~q~,ju;,(,,c~'' ~ }~rl TM ri , ~,ht' t^ f ~ Y ;V A^ i~L . '':1N ~ ,F'' i F••" t^J ,,•sI. ` 4 .a,~ •rSY f'$'if~ ~r yt .,~.ba~i"I J'. J ~/;L~f/~%7, ly,,,rYn ~(.s~' f '~'y~1~~ .~I' ru^. to •s~t s,, '~'I•~',Q t~! rt} -f, ''Y'.,~~?`.'.7 _ ,~Qf i:`y~i -~L£ •L'~' IT`i\+'. ~:~a , ~,ry'V f , O ~1\ F Ifl ,~A ~ Y. ~ I o _ X47•. ~ ~ KrT o ~tR,.... Z•I~j .k'•a T~4.yL)t_ '~';t •''~"L~`Sltnn't'l,a~Lf?Zby`~ Ex~.t tb,S.. ;F,- .:rr"'' y r~ N' s itr a 'ir '•f~±+ y a~'.~. ~ }-s ~ P #rLLy 1 pe ' •',T4 • T F i ~ ~ ~ r _ -T ~fa iy~'.,,,,1' J' / t rfr f .7~"~ ~✓..Gt"Q1 ~8 ,~4ti '1~J 1 ~ \ i t•'t, !"tV;i .v a p ija'1; $ 854`J ^iT•t A.'4 i. R. Z ( •:3,;~`4L" T,qf g i L 3"t" •10,x" xi' _ rt1 54ya'"y1, s^ . O_ ID, ...e, '4,+, N' P l L , 'e ~-q w ~~,\?-6~ . S'.4`~"",,i' i.~ , ,i ' ; d' 'A., r S I~` ~1 ` 's~ hKt.~ yg /f', 4~StiT r•g: g Y t 7 b JJ~./~J ~ f../ .5, `L .I r.v~' y/ I~) .,~,?Z>,ps,r~~As't r't 3 - •r:•.,- y J7th yYd ii ~.,~r~. .~i 1 ~ .,J ,t. 7~~~,tlt t'tkl5.f' ^ J~.,R 'f• '~at:'YU;SUjp~.y , ~A ~ A 4Gb ry',,~° ~ ' r, e s ':=ti~r.b jy, t'9~` ~~~~!L \ii: .off.' r;~+'.~J- 'l b~;~^F;`;,,lC~''~•`~~}~~~'p~ •r~~-'~>v ~l 'if~ ra'~'j ~L"7,f`~i ~,"11~5:..~..ti ~~jy'Y t tl~. . ti•} ;~'l st~~. :.wtl.•= J , ati Jr,, i t M'c8:r,•}..~~ , y .1~ :t I.t er.-~- b1. i ; i? ~ f . ~s.L k~ .a r. w',~F rrAA~' .yc. c .S~ `..,0.••.i . ~ i .z r t `~t~c;~`t ;;va. c ~ its' . : ~f. t g, rs`.; ~ y FYI: f . C ~ ~ •!~?'°4'r •b' kl iY`tF ~,t1 .r `j, ti, !'~~~L .r.. ~.>~ZO~ ..llrlb• f. G •.~f~.•J i,;a•ZZ 't' _ `*,~t~'~- ~'J5~ '1 Lst , _ . mod:' 7 i' Tyr •r '~.2,. 09 V- 8 1 t' t r I # * u 1- ~1 kA . iJ : yr:(~Iti Lr? it 47+~A n 'it l ?.ry~,'c~ir• r li + - JgA r b. 1 . 1' :J' i f r 1, nh '~`.a , s. X11 _ • '1 f, 4.,, u, s.,. t a~ ` tJ Y I - tf ! 7 z 1, s>17w s * ..e:i4.t , f• •r•1 ~'f 'rnr.3~r\ s. C. r r. w d~ 1~'% ~,1~ . ( r. ~ 1 Via` ~l•~:.~0;>_rt c 4 'i El ~ l .T t t7 ~,t!•_~' l~{ y 1 , eZy`.~, s~t_ t y't { aj l~w:t1d. y~ All, .f t R 1-t y .e:.• i:4dy yc85b ~eLE,, "k ~~''i~:~',,~~MA,~`~} # ..i. ~ r .I: '.y.h:.4irythLLiW ;T-J. ~l. ~ r:; 44y, ..••..i~'iT'.. "~~~•j -~s' viY:~.fr_. s B ...~`[!~L*ofa •~r• -,it S,_t ii ~8t{n t: ~.,*:.•,I -I~.~r. ~6,r i;: 1; rA~i if;ti l1+ar"a k,).;~ 1fi cEi. 'i t,~,,j(fa:,' `~3 , .r r. r' ~ ,sY d 4 , ~ , ~s n.•.~, S.'~?r ?,3! + n` i.. ~ . •'F'`r ' .;'S+r{:t' F•°. t.4?~ ~ t- ;'aC`.3•.. - r:'! 1•~ ~..r E~ ,iFi y.,. ~F,L~ 3r*, r4•~„Sfk•A J p'~rl,' ~a~ ,LC~}i S. ~ '++'.r• ~ ..4 J:t u':i. n; ;G .,+y `~`~,"•}'i.~jti'¢"'u, •.,"tn•,'.~': Q ql Z+ ytf~('• t•~~,~•y _ :rt.,.- `~:'~;~["'J!c~ lri:~;J?~:},~,.~,.,••~,t.-l'ri t ~.h,~~;~ ~ t,. ~.J~ i~s J~ ly., _:iir ~f,~ 'oSb~n,,: iS ^4~ih•. •~dL£S~-.''6•a• *i....: f: ,:t:7 T ,w ~v^ ' ~}'I•°c`~\ :l •r' ~i, 1 •s'. : •t i~ ~ie~n x'" \ . r. _"ar i'~~ •i..-',~'~'• 't~'jr:Y< iw • 8 i f. ;r .V. .7*- •tiµ9j~`r ~ .y. . ~ Fx;.~r • i ii:~ $TA S'- '~ei ,r~~1+, ~t}R,~:~ty,+{5 '"'r~ tr et: . +t ~ ~',.t ~ 3 ''f,~.. t3, a.1 .4a. - :.ra.-.~,•.~r '1.. ~ . / Yt F".^;1~ t s '1• :I l~, a.. S a:, 6' t f 4 h ar "\'"7'=~ ",Y.~ V0: v'!mv',..•r:'; l 1l' 1 •r . i % yy uZ ~L E r i ~4 t t\ n. 1 rr • t t" a pG w iy `-L' : sl , r'a i. = q , l ~LJ•1 t j,, i ~`C 1a A ~f~`•.. I. +'1 f ,:•1'f. tn lt-1- Y ' wI.'.•~r.:'S?~':.~'t~l . ~ 1 r•. "zf"'t" T'~pr .,fir • fl•: y.' ~ ':.i`d; t^a ~T,l nr3.:.:!j.+y. r^ y„`~'A.^: .i^ ~ d l` ~ r~,•i r t, ~`.,ftJ « t.;ri` . ~I. '2i,~'S ~ ..?Fr.1.'JL~ .1T`1r~-ji$.f • tlL£" E I .:i 4 1. ~i7:, r..lttf.~'.4:~~:2~?.~r~ r~ST.N')1 "3:'✓-' ~a ?i: • cc~_ • !5 .c~5t ,1 ~ ~M1 .t 4~~T 1...~t N.•1r_T~•,. 'fi'r ^iS' M~~`i_~ ~~i3:I `','•Y.~,,F~::j'.'..vJ,v 44 ~rv c ~j(e1 '~i~'-1 ~L•:~ t~ ~ 1''~~ a; Q)tr3,re~ "~~'^~~~~q.?N t:S^: Y .zA:v~/.H ~s4Tc;.`I~ ?a"~.•~'- ~ { :T - "•~1~.' ~ ~ w .~t'" Errr ,r4, ~.t.. .etoj; ~ '~•J J] • H ~ tt .A • }:tv, ~~~rtax D V ~.4w•G'~~a, .,yam, .r'~'•^ fib: s,; t ir- , r.•n . ! 3,. ; f,,'' ~ty~~r~ r ' 1 It .j r .rf , a ~ - h ~".:`/'+a ~ ~ ~..-:Q`-:.~li. r,l. 3x t i. • , s r .,~y_~{ J:r,:: .Ct BLE.r ~Q - ~ r; ¢Yn .~y. ~t .w~:«iZ~.~~•~~,}~,`",,~ •'~FW'Y -~'".t-~.i .r :`CJ'G.rv ~i~: _ •.~7.t":'i~'' 1~`1t~•.•-+R.'A•;fra'.l/~`ELE- rJ'1;. •4 ,Q'~@2;~.~/.••.,r !i 1~ ~tT~s. ~is;:l.:S+',b~,A: Z. tf ~ti,-'~ .`dZ c:,~1. :r.~. rt:: ,r' ;.,,w%r. ;?~r a3_ .f iJ,. s~-. '1e. ~,cta1`s•<.vt 'I. e ' ~9G±.' t£tI'~_:'tt f¢ ~t LS` ~~~+J--}f 'r"~} f ~I ToF6 } 4 ss" ,.t fi-S t; I' ` e..,..q,' 3~S",+,. J 4 ti: ~t~k ~jT~'/ L j,c-,.,~ i• V54 ~ .C''N5T:°. ' fi .v'. J-- Jti'f° 'W~S•L~*' ?«.i$ r S^,''"'`;t, • IT A!J .'"j. s t t 1 r1 ` ;tt4 rr '£T 4 t y ZZ Y.. 5. : 78~`f ~f: J' r h ' :~t~ . i~t"s,, ` t, ° a T g _ Y-.'br,•3 .4• ~~3'Pi ~y-~ ~ Zt4 ,1. .fit,- ~ ~~~1: . or V Sb: 'rt.•T., E9.:_ •t' : j;. e'?'~. ° ~ 3 S ti A,.t ~ 5u i , v A r~' f y.o•ri. 1 ~ ~ t . 1 - +Y ff i . ttit A a4 v? d+x n 1 raid - 4~ :+i t r ~t JSb b b _ 7 .!!1). `oG .%...T~t~ w._ L``rl~sr 1 ~l t :Ji+',~ZiZ~ ~I'•et'3f_J..F:1 ~p ie54: }i EI r 'l i'. '`Y rtlS4 ,tl54 _ _ < ri ~;~~~7i f• • r .al - 'y~ \a' ~ ~ 1 't ~ • ~ n: v' - ,BS _ S :F '~4.-'i (A 9F~ (.•~~t•T 3 ~)r\. .Z Fn~:~ •ZZ y~Z v' . a' s 854. '',r °8S4 f1 l:, ,'A S~~I7'i Li.~ \ rC p •tq_p4.` / ,3. i t'~ yry S ,i ul. CC"~'' ,s. t' 1.;+:°t :ice ~ i':~,. ` r ~£T svfr~' i.: 'ir, i ,t~' t } t ~t►ay ..tr, q .t ~y'• 1. y ~-.`f.' • . '1;1,x' i i ",:r. ~ ~ 'Ah t ~ ~i r•'.tV~ "11, ,~'A"' ~c-!M.`~• ,y?j'• Ab'.•?i~Sr,; ,~'4 'i"~.,",w;, ,y~~. ;'S}~' '~•1.~~' ,.~,;4~. u, , "l^j.,l T., ..yt ,Tjr: a,. 'a., y i ;i fig' S, ti„: •;R•. •.Yt 'f:', x •f'i ~V n: rir.. ~V`:r ''-tI'ss 'ic' _ '1 w „5 _r. r.~ y,4. .a. ,,i: 1-i~ •954-.. t..7~ ` ~r_,:. .7' !a. i 9 .a . „ Ya,.', Sfd:~, '4~Aa j95.4,'., ~ ,r •:~~r tf3..:J; `,tl54^: • iu4?ylt' ~r, b5 ~ : t 'fit, '3 m' .,4 .t .•,i a; 4 J' •3~•."'•r~7 t 7i~+,.t. a 4 Taa',,~ ET~..)~.,:C~ -tx 1,?. `tcY'•:e:::;', ~ i' , J 5' ,'h ' / '"I~.t. 4~ f`.:'r: !1'~+ !''"i tl~~?~ "i7'f~ '1~..V! r~~.`5:i y'S;,,✓;~ ,:I:;, .954: =.~:w: .[I,';,0 ~ r t ,85 .k•; ! J,~ a r:,,~.:,:.;'r~. ;('`i. ~.{P: £.i, - ~:r•'.t•,14t fr ~.^n• ! `I `ta•Kr~ tM.. ,f. ..,I.• a •y. 1 /#~qi4,, 061 - ~ 1 V1y,~ Acr;"' ~ s ,fi~R :Y; R•."? , ~ ,:t~~i'+ a ,fir Z`Z}.~Sd81]d~+. ~-;.t} .r tag Z t `'1,4G ; > \ ..•'854 ^:t. _ `~i: x f` Jp• _ I r" • j •Cl, a } 'L7r' I .t . 7 ~ t \ / J/., rJ ~Rv- ~,,"1;Y ~~:i. tY~,< 1't\ 'i,,;'t. 4,, YZZ..-....._. 1. !•t 'i.i t6it1 .i. 1 ~ b U!I~ ;.;-a<Y,4t~l•fr.-' r. ~..;?s.f?;.'1 t a .Nr a7j. Lr 'sz r.r e. 'ita •.i r ` "ft •iV i n. ::O 7 ' I .,r. / •:)s+c.'~\ `q. 'ar. ;~:t-~ti~ zd 'I r,~ _ ~•ssa.z4ozd' ~ a'• ~ 1 ril•' ,p( -.`_~`-f~}f i~ 4' ..Y .rer'• ~-r'' ~ /y.~r ' 3S 4w.- ~ 7+ ~p~V' .^114 • • t •:r !vfi ;>L f . r 'T SiLIB ~ ,jilt ~ .",j.: :N~ _ ~i t'. 1~9 1~•. ~ r'r„ ~'x`y~•'i'; ~ ;~;~.t ^5wa' i •►1'zz'; ~ . ~ -7.~ ,tic - . ~ ' ~{r i ~.aot'~ > ~ .i,. , \ l .J,.t, fir' - . ~t 2kd~' ~ ! M14''' m ~ ~ . ) 'I.• q,t '~/9.ti i i :iv I~ •1~ V~b:';, n,. ~ :M: ,.rte Ct , ~ m •if: ':'i f<+,. Ai,. '~r'.r.~r.?} 9Z' _+e_~, , `..tKr` r ,LPL t EI', ~8~b. o~'a,~ 1: Te '•i' "'J' .~Lj"?.'• d'y~ y'S' .P~t•L^E: 7. i •£L 1 ~ 't S', fib. ` $>t•~: ~ !.?f~: a^ ~'i 1~~.~,• ~':l•~ +T~ 3.., +t 1. 'l. :":•p. .r :~4 :'S~ i/ rt t~ : .~3:: i,. .r'I 'y '.J I.Pp7fi ~f,~y,T. ~'~r~ J.~ Jt` ~ ~O ny' 1 Y^'y'y~'•• ~1::i J4~rY'r. i. G'J, ♦♦'1~ 'l.'. .i _.Si',Li'' L S4;,r/ Mj,~ .;r. i,.l c,^. \ tt:L«~Y _ Y ,~4,,yy ,4. _ 'F ?.4~ ~O~ 1". ~`'y~ 'I' ..Z V y ~ \•J ;i'~• ,T:•Y;y \ + .`.'i: '7`tl.. r'I".''i.~ I. is,. .ti•ctr.; .vS' x~.`O:. Y'1;.:1. 't A: ,i. r' `•f„ }s ~.r_~ d :ti"`.?r`T•• I _ ~ 5 .y. ;r;' y[~ ; _ ^ i.'+~ieT •I ~ ai y~.' 1, J 7, Z4. rtC:+'. ~ t•.t ;i~ <r'J7a~:~ir ,rk.! -.r~'; E- d:.: Jr' 2:5, 1'I ' 1333 000 0Z b,[ 05 4 vs t? • r -5 41-o~J • N38Wf1N 1371 S / 122 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 13. Soil and • Hydro- Flooding Soil name and logic map symbol group Frequency Duration Months Klickitat : 25E, 25F, 25G B None Knappa : 26 B None Labish : 27 D Frequent Very long Dec-Apr Laurelwood: 28B, 28C, 28D, 28E, 29E, 29F B None McBee: 30 B Frequent Brief Nov-May Melbourne: 31 B, 31C, 31 D. 31 E, 31F B None Melby: 32C,32D,32E,33E,33F,33G C None Olyic: 34C,34D,34E,35E,35F,35G B None Pervina : 36C,36D,36E,36F C None Quatama : 37A, 37B, 37C, 37D C None • Saum: 38B, 38C, 38D, 38E, 38F C None Tolke : 39E, 39F B None Udifluvents : 40 B Frequent Very brief Nov-Apr Verboort: 42 D Frequent Brief Dec-Apr Wapato: 43 D Frequent Brief Dec-Apr Willamette: 44A, 44B, 44C, 44D B None Woodbu : 45A, 45B 45C, 45D C None Xerochrepts: ' 46F: Xerochrepts part B None Haploxerolls part C None 347D: Xerochrepts part D None Rock outcrop part. 'This mapping unit is made up of two or more dominant kinds of soil. See mapping unit description for the composition and behavior of the whole mapping unit. 9 • STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN Table III-1.4 "n" AND "k" Values Used in Time Calculations for Hydrographs "n," Sheet Flow Equation Manning's Values (for the initial 300 ft. of travel) n, Smoot surfaces (concrete, asphalt, gravel, or bare hand packed soil) PU 0.011 Fallow fields or loose soil surface (no residue) 0.05 Cultivated soil with residue cover (s<- 0.20 ft/ft) 0.06 Cultivated soil with residue cover (s> 0.20 ft/ft) 0.17 Short prairie grass and lawns 015 pexe Dense grasses 0.24 Bermuda grass 0.41 Range (natural) 0 3 Woods or forest with light underbrush d~ EAi5~" Woods or forest with dense underbrush 0.80 *Manning values for sheet flow only, from Overton and Meadows 1976 (See TR-55, 1986) "k" Values Used in Travel Time/Time of Concentration Calculations Shallow Concentrated Flow (After the initial 300 ft. of sheet flow, R = 0.1) k, 1. Forest with heavy ground litter and meadows (n = 0.10) 2. Brushy ground with some trees (n = 0.060) 3. Fallow or minimum tillage cultivation (n = 0.040) 8 4. High grass (n = 0.035) 9 5. Short grass, pasture and lawns (n = 0.030) 11 6. Nearly bare ground (n = 0.25) 13 7. Paved and gravel areas (n = 0.012) 27 Channel Flow (intermittent) (At the beginning of visible channels R = 0.2) kc 1. Forested swale with heavy ground litter (n = 0.10) 5 2. Forested drainage course/ravine with defined channel bed (n = 0.050) 10 3. Rock-lined waterway (n = 0.035) 15 4. Grassed waterway (n = 0.030) 17 5. Earth-lined waterway (n = 0.025) 20 6. CMP pipe (n = 0.024) 21 7. Concrete pipe (0.012) 42 8. Other waterways and pipe 0.508/n Channel Flow (Continuous stream, R = 0.4) k. 9. Meandering stream with some pools (n = 0.040) 20 10. Rock-lined stream (n = 0.035) 23 11. Grass-lined stream (n = 0.030) 27 12. Other streams, man-made channels and pipe 0.807/n** III-1-16 FEBRUARY, 1992 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN • Table III-1.3 SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type lA rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. LAND USE DESCRIPTION CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP A B C D Cultivated land(1): winter condition 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush & grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. Good condition: grass cover on k75% of the 68 80 86 90 area Ve"elco A~ Fair condition: grass cover on 50-75% of 77 85 90 92 the area Gravel roads & parking lots: 76 85 89 91 Dirt roads & parking lots: 72 82 87 89 • Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs etc. 98 98 98 98 Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds etc. 100 100 100 100 Single family residential(2): Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre %Impervious(3) Separate curve number 1.0 DU/GA 15 shall be selected for 1.5 DU/GA 20 pervious & impervious 2.0 DU/GA 25 portions of the site 2.5 DU/GA 30 or basin 3.0 DU/GA 34 3.5 DU/GA 34428 4.0 DU/GA ~DU/GA ~13ur;., ~3-r.l) 13~ Idou~ 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DU/GA 50 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA 56 PUD's, condos, apartments, %impervious commercial businesses & must be industrial areas computed (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Sec. 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system. • (3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. III-1-12 FEBRUARY, 1992 I RATIONAL METHOD RAINFALL INTENSITIES FOR EAST WASHINGTON COUNTY • (for Ranges d 2 West) S Rainfall Inten ' inches per hour) 1. 0 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.40 4.00 4.50 5 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.40 4.00 4.50 10 1.30 1.70 2.20 2.50 3.00 3.50 1.10 1.40 1.80 2.10 2.50 2.90 15 20 0.90 1.20 1.50 1.80 2.10 2.40 .-..30 0.75 0.95 1.20 1.40 1.65 1.90 40 0.60 0.75 1.00 1.15 1.30 1.60 50 0.55 0.70 0.85 1.00 1.15 1.35 • 70 0.45 -0.55 0.70 0.82 0.95 1.10 100 0.40 0.45 0.55 0.67 0.75 0.90 180 or more 0.35 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.85 ` 1, TA n U S _ i fo,. 7e- Shea-r spa 160-CH3 sit e 2 S~•~~ 13 ~ s«~ 13c si., G ~ - o.q4 cis Qz s - r.. co C;i p td o ~ ~Cu 6 ~ ~s LL. F a 0 0 fr rlrIA4 8- PAC STUe0 102 qg- C UT cn 8.. PVCSTUE OUT N' ° 91 co 4.. SERVCE E W. gOg 96g, S CAT 0 1.39 . WELI s TO REMOVED _ r'~•r r i / i ' r T f r - - r Ir 1. r ` ~ r f Ir r ' r Q -t T e r 1 1 lR ~ ~ ~ / f f /mar t i r r 'G` -1 r r 1 t Data for FONNER WOODS &DIVISION ~ Page 1 Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 3 Mar 98 HydroCAD 4 .53 001083 (c) 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems • SUBCATCHMENT 1 BASIN #1 (EXISTING-PREDEVELOPED) PEAK= .94 CFS p 8.69 HRS, VOLUME= .50 AF ACRES CN SCS TR-20 METHOD 2.77 81 LAWNS TYPE IA 24-HOUR .12 98 IMPERVIOUS RAINFALL= 3.9 IN 2.89 82 SPAN= 0-24 HRS, dt=.17 HRS Method Comment Tc (min) DIRECT ENTRY TOTAL Tc 68.0 • • 6F {6 lb7 .6g6s 6 < '3'g pHb3S b .6".16 a V lf7Ogflj O^d 8 6y zp~npB~ S j~ d j? • I I 1 7s oGS i 9 L f OI r / I / I / °o II I C9g, I gb I ~ $ a~ o I I r i / I~ , I < ~ ~~~Ca 1 J~' iaols I L rn~ro :4 4 £88'~ O~ Qu u94 9 I i I l 00 ls~SC JZ G/ZSc / ~ o os I ' I I ~D 1 ~ I I JS ~ I `T l 'l ~'JF pW3 ~ V II sot ) ; G ZZ JS° Sfl I / bo\ ` ' -.31WO 0.0L-} II .8 I I I Y J S QLS ' D. 43 c fs I I - - - ' t `il = / O l zo~-'~-~' I t 9 w~~ o r, b i h c h t~ r~ cif NOO p u~~G 1 C Y 5 ~~n i "'W'A4 'i C' ,M i :?c) n t a,• 2 ahd 3 = O.53cFr ~n c~-ccs(7 i-1 is n~slisi6lt i r - - - --l-~a v- -~S. l S z.o - ~7 - Co ~s x L G ~iG = 2 3 G - d - - T~ - U s, - 5 s - i9- • G'~~ 3 ~'y r = 9 3 L__--x !~?S -X S S - - 00 - - --Z -v --5---- d.~ 0 L D. 7 CIV. - Sv o. z 3 - S j 100 0 S i li .5 '7 3 / / S s u r G I / /3v . c.i - - - - - - J l - s - :9 _ o ef/ 50 - -4-7 5 ~ 0 2- Data for FONNER WOODS *DIVISION . TYPE IA 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.9 IN Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 2 Mar 98 H droCAD 4.53 001083 c 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems WATERSHED ROUTING S r't~ 13 G S in ~o ~o.~,c~ S, Q co~ II 1 f rc X34 Sign r0 ~e ~Gli l 4 "I 4u' G S 1 FOMH[/ S ~ / ~2,ins z pd~ fall 3 J3 i; ~C_ 4 4-5 /-d n r) t r O SUBCATCHMENT REACH A POND LINK • Data for FONNER WOODS DIVISION TYPE IA 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.9 IN Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 2 Mar 98 HydroCAD 4.53 001083 (c) 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems • RUNOFF BY SCS TR-20 METHOD: TYPE IA 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.9 IN, SCS U.H. RUNOFF SPAN = 0-24 HRS, dt= .20 HRS, 121 POINTS SUBCAT AREA Tc WGT'D PEAK Tpeak VOL NUMBER (ACRE) (MIN) --GROUND COVERS (%CN)-- CN C (CFS) (HRS) (AF) 2.89 35.0 71%90 29%98 - - 92 - 1.87 8.19 .72 /2 J 50 31.0 54%90 46%98 - - 94 - 35 8.12 .13 81 30.0 549.90 46%98 - - 94 - 58 8.11 .22 • • Data for FONNER WOODS *DIVISION • Page 1 Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 2 Mar 98 HydroCAD 4.53 001083 (c) 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems REACH 3 12" ADS PIPE-CB TO DITCH OUTFALL Qin = .93 CFS Q 8.11 HRS, VOLUME= .35 AF Qout= .93 CFS Q 8.12 HRS, VOLUME= .35 AF, ATTEN= 0`k, LAG= .5 MIN DEPTH END AREA DISCH (FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND+TRANS METHOD p `C 0.0 0.0 0.00 PEAK DEPTH= .35 FT .1 0.0 .07 n= .01 PEAK VELOCITY= 3.7 FPS .2 .1 .29 LENGTH= 70 FT TRAVEL TIME = .3 MIN .3 .2 .64 SLOPE= .005 FT/FT SPAN= 0-24 HRS, dt=.2 HRS .7 .6 2.74 .8 .7 3.20 .9 .7 3.49 .9 .8 3.52 1.0 .8 3.49 1.0 .8 3.28 • • Data for FONNER WOODS *DIVISION i Page 1 Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 3 Mar 98 HydroCAD 4 .53 001083 (c) 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems • POND 1 WATER QUALITY Qin = .19 CFS @ 8.20 HRS, VOLUME= .10 AF Qout= .08 CFS @ 11.54 HRS, VOLUME= .10 AF, ATTEN= 590, LAG= 199.9 MIN ELEVATION CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD (FT) (CF) PEAK STORAGE = 1440 CF 87.0 0 PEAK ELEVATION= 89.8 FT 88.0 1 6.FLOOD ELEVATION= 94.0 FT 90.0 1592 START ELEVATION= 87.0 FT 92.0 5454 SPAN= 0-80 HRS, dt=.3 HRS 94.0 12043 5 x FINER ROUTING Tdet= 795.4 MIN (.1 AF) ROUTE INVERT OUTLET DEVICES 1 P 87.5' .5" ORIFICE GRATE w4 ,e" Qu° 1,{% or; icy 1 PI r-2 SQR(2g) SQR(H-r) 79 f~ r~ H4 Y4 I t 2 P 89.8' 2.3' SHARP-CRESTED RECTANGULAR WEIR X 3 11=Iev. G-r Z G T Q=C L H-1.5 C=3.27+.4 = eng H POND 1 INFLOW & OUTFLOW WATER QUALITY v~red .19 STOR-IND METHOD 6 7 Q PEAK STOR= 1440 CF 7 14- 0 Z C • 15 PEAK ELEU= 89.8 FT 4 h 0,3 (e $JM+nPr S arr . 14 ~.13 Qin= ,19 CFS C J1 .12 Qout= .08 CFS U .11 LAG= 199.9 MIN U .10 v .09 o .087 ~ou -1 .06 i ~ 05 ; s 4 h o.,. .04 1 02 2e~«+ 01 ' 0 , 00m ~n m in m in m in m in m in m in m in m cv iv m v v to ~n 0 r r m TIME (hours) i cC i L Lo z_.f - ~1 X Z~~0 1 ~ 70o X 6.03 = I f0 2- • ion ~~O►~~ SG. g) e- 0 G( r . Via G f J° L~~ };or! ) 4,k G~ ~o gig val~"'~. `p ~f A J/ 1 r 4 L3 L-0 t ~ r 'iJ S % j //fJ dU pU -VF ALL i ~ Q>~ ~ ~ f 21P R ~ cJ' X11 GH ALA f +132 pia , _.op_ Way STAR ~s~~ Fp,CI~~TY 1 ~ `'~~sogtic~'~~ /NII ~ 9 1 TOP WALL=91.8 3 7 OVERFLOW ELEV. = 91.3 8.0' 3' 7 3 _ .7 Q I IE IN-89.8 TREATMENT SURFACE ELEVATION G ELEV. = 89.8 z z 4 .6. 4„ ADS SCREW Q IN CLEANOUT POND BOTTOM w a ORIFICE ELEV. = 88.0 DIA.=1 2' _ o°0 0°04oo°o0I II= I1~ oa°°OO~oooo0 IE OUT = ±87.3 6" ADS 4" ADS ° o°~ ~ o g IE IN=87.4 IE IN=87.5 ~ 1 /2 CU. YD. OU TFALL a ¢ Q a Q 3/4" DRAIN ROCK ±=87.0 \f2'D P4C ADS SCRE • v' f 2" WEEPHOLE ON CAP 00 .a: I.E.=87.5 O0° a O 00000 0 0°00OOO°o 9 18" °0°0°0000000°°°° EF 18" ORIFICE 18" °°o°°° ° CLASS 100 SUMP DIA.=4.2" SUMP a SUMP RIP RAP • 6' 1.5' 4.2' 2' - 0" 3'-0" DETENTION unified WATER QUALITY EXTENDED DRY sewerage POND OUTFLOW DEVICE UfA agcy DRAWING . 150 • _ FILE ORAFT:STORM SD DRAWINr SD1finr.H.z vinT 1.1 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING • FOR FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION January 280', 1998 7:00 PM THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE ATTENDED THE MEETING: King Phelps 8835 SW Canyon Ln #402 Portland, OR 97225 (503)291-9398 Steve Turner 8835 SW Canyon Ln #408 Portland, OR 97225 (503)292-5920 Michael Cameron 11340 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)292-5446 Colleen Schultheis 11180 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)624-1605 Eric Schultheis 11180 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)624-1605 Jesse Metcalf 11200 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)625-9877 Tom Abeyta 11370 SW Erste Place Tigard, OR 97223 (503)691-9300 Mark Dahlen 12775 SW 113 Place Tigard, OR 97223 (503)968-1141 LouAne Mortensen 11160 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)620-3072 Mike Woodley 11590 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)590-5404 Fred Parish 11385 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-5811 Loreta Parish 11385 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-5811 Jim Hellhake 12709 SW 113th Place Tigard, OR 97223 (503)968-7437 Dave Howard 11350 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)968-2015 Jay Beck 11550 SW Fonner Street Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-9443 • MEETING MINUTES: • King Phelps began the meeting by introducing himself and the Land Tech, Inc. as a representative of S.R. Turner Construction. • King stated that the exhibit map shown details the proposed twelve-lot subdivision. King then showed where existing and proposed utilities are located. • King stated that one existing dwelling can be found on the property, and that a portion of that dwelling was to be removed. • King then stated that the purpose of the meeting was for the local residents to voice their concerns, and for the developer to hear them. King stated that the meeting was to be recorded for the purpose of minutes. • After explaining the layout of the subdivision King then opened the forum to testimony from all present. • One citizen voiced a question concerning lot number one of the proposed subdivision. Steve Turner stated that he was not positive at this point, but that he hoped to save all • vegetation over 12" in diameter. The citizen then stated that he would like to see some of the vegetation remain, to act as a barrier. • One citizen then asked if King could better explain the storm water and how it related • to the Humbolt Creek subdivision. King stated that storm water coming off of the proposed subdivision would be taken care of by the proposed storm system seen on the preliminary plat. • The citizen then asked when construction would be done (hours of the day). King stated that the Tigard City Code regulated hours of operation for construction of the subdivision (possibly 7-5). The citizen then asked how long construction would take. King Phelps stated that 2-3 months was likely. The citizen then asked about the homes. Steve Turner stated that the houses would be similar to the homes in the Genesis subdivision as well as those found across Fonner in 113th. • Eric Schultheis who owns the property just east of the proposed subdivision then asked if a home would be located on lot 12 of the proposed subdivision. Steve Turner stated that a home would be present. Eric then asked about the proposed water quality facility. King Phelps then explained how the water quality facility would work. Eric then asked what kind of protection would surround the facility to keep children out. King stated that a retaining wall would be along the east to keep the earth from sloughing over, and that the facility would be fenced to keep children out. • Eric then asked about how the amount of water handled by the facility would be determined. King stated that Engineering calculations approved by the city would be . done in order to construct the proper facility. King explained further how the facility would work, and how overflow would be bypassed beyond the pond. • Eric then asked about the trees, and which would be removed. Steve Turner stated that he hopes to retain all trees that do not hinder construction of the subdivision and its dwellings. Steve then explained about mitigating trees in the City of Tigard. Eric stated that he hopes that trees adjacent to his parcel will be saved due to the buffer that they provide for trees on his lot which have not been subject to westerly wind. He stated that if the large trees on lot 12 come down, then it is likely that a strong wind would damage the trees on his lot. Steve stated that he does not intend to clear cut the site, and again that he hopes to save as many trees as feasibly possible. • Eric stated that his property is designated as a historical landmark, and that he is interested in what kind of buffer would be placed between his parcel and the proposed subdivision. Steve Turner stated that we have yet to address that issue to date. • Jay Beck, who owns the property at 11550 SW Fonner (adjacent to the west) stated that he is also concerned about what kind of buffer would be placed around the subdivision. Jay stated that he does not want multiple styles of fencing to be placed along the back property line, as seen in the Genesis 3 subdivision, as the lots get purchased and owners put fences up. He said that if fencing were to be designed initially then different styles would be present. Steve Turner stated that fencing style • requirements could be placed in CC&R's to be written for the subdivision. Jay asked if a perimeter fence could be built as part of the subdivision. Steve Turner stated that • 0 unless a fence is required to buffer a street or different zone, then the developer would • not likely build a fence. Steve stated that we haven't addressed perimeter fencing, but that we would take a look at it. • Eric Schultheis then asked about topography. King Phelps described the topography of the site, and how it would effect storm water runoff. Eric asked if we were going to change topography. King stated that we will do grading along the east line of the property to direct storm water, and that it will be done properly to retain the aesthetics of the site and the surrounding parcels. • Eric then asked if we asked if the developer planned to place any kind of aesthetic barrier around the detention facility. Steve Turner stated that we do not currently have any plans. Eric stated that he would like to see that issue addressed. • Eric asked if we were familiar with wildlife in the area and if we planned on addressing the issue. King Phelps stated that we will address all wildlife issues stated within the Tigard city code. • One citizen then stated that several generations of raccoons and other wildlife do live in the area. King Phelps stated that this is an issue that should be taken up with the city. • • Eric then asked who at the city of Tigard planning department would be handling This issue. Steve Turner stated that he does not have the name of the person at the meeting, but that they would receive information about who to speak with at the city. • Eric then asked about when building would begin. Steve stated that he hoped to begin this summer. • Tom Abeyta, who resides at 11370 SW Erste Place, stated that he purchased his lot 10 years ago to live in a cul-de-sac and to have an open green space in his rear yard. He stated that he is not too excited about losing his privacy in his back yard. He stated that it has been nice having wildlife in the backyard and that it is sad that no provisions are in place to protect it. He then asked about whether a pedestrian pathway would be placed near his property. He is concerned about vandalism that has occurred to other citizens near a pedestrian pathway in the area. King Phelps then stated that he did not believe that the city would require a pedestrian pathway, but. that he could not be sure until the project was reviewed. • Tom stated that he is very concerned about drainage and privacy for his parcel. He said that his father has had some problems with development near his home, and that he does not want the same to happen to him. King Phelps stated that the only real grade level change will be within the storm retention facility. • • Tom then asked about the style and price of the homes. Steve Turner stated that they would be similar to those on 113a' and cost approximately 250,000 dollars. • • Tom then asked about CC&R's. Steve Turner stated that they would be similar to • those within the Genesis subdivision. • Tom then asked about the process. King Phelps then tried to explain the process from beginning to end. • Tom then asked about where on the lots will the houses be located. Steve stated that city code determines the widths of the lots and that houses would probably be placed closer to the front of the lots, and have larger rear yards. King then explained setback requirements. • A question was then posed about who would maintain the storm water facility. King Phelps stated that the Unified Sewerage Agency would maintain the facility. • Jim Hellhake, who owns a lot within the Humbolt subdivision then asked about the storm system and what would happen if the system could not handle the storm. King Phelps stated that a larger than 25 year storm would bypass the system and go directly into the storm system. King then explained how the treatment system works. • One citizen then asked about insect and misquotes in the area due to the pond. King stated that he has a pond near his home and that they haven't had a problem with bugs. He said that this is a dry pond, and that it doesn't remain in the system for any • long period of time when there is not storm. • One citizen then asked if a water quality facility was a choice of the developer or a requirement. King Phelps then stated that this is a requirement, and that the developer would rather not build it. King then went on to explain a bit more about the treatment part of the water quality facility. • Jim Hellhake then asked about where we are in the permit process. King Phelps & Steve Turner then explained where we were in the application process, and how they can stay involved with this process (speaking with a planner, hearings, etc.). • Jim then asked about foliage along Fonner Street. Steve Turner stated that due to sight distance issues some foliage would need to be removed. He also said that street trees would be required and that trees would be mitigated on the site. • Jay Beck then said that as a condition of approval he would like an architectural fence or some sort of barrier to be required along the rear property lines of proposed lots 6,7,8, and 9 to be constructed to maintain an aesthetic buffer in the area. • One citizen then stated that a few large trees do exist on the property line along proposed lot 12, and that he would like them to be left untouched. Steve Turner stated that an arborist would go to the subject site and do a tree plan. • 0 Steve Turner then explained what the arborist would be studying within his tree plan. • King Phelps then explained how some trees are sensitive to tampering with dirt and roots and that a great deal of precaution would be taken in grading and construction. • A question was then asked about emergency services, and if this subdivision is properly designed to handle them. King Phelps then stated that the private street and cul-de-sac would need approval from the fire marshal, and that it has been designed to meet fire marshal requirements. • A question was then posed concerning off street parking. King Phelps then stated that the private street would be labeled no parking on one side. • A question was then raised concerning the sidewalk. King showed on the preliminary plat where it would be located. • One citizen then stated that he was nervous about what the city would actually require upon the developer. King stated that you can never be 100 percent sure until you receive the conditions of approval. • King Phelps then asked if there were any more questions or comments. He then closed the meeting. • THESE MINUTES WERE RECORDED JANUARY 28TH, 1998 BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 AND 9:00 PM. ALL PRESENT PARTIES WERE AWARE OF THE RECORDING. Matt Wellner Land Tech, Inc. 0 • 8835 S.W. Canyon Lane Suite 402 Portland, OR 97225 Phone: 291-9398 Fax: 291-1613 Land Tech, Ine. January 7th, 1998 RE: Proposed Development at 11300 SW Fonner Dear CIT Representatives and Residents, Land Tech, Inc. is representing the owner of the property located at 11300 SW Fonner (2S1 3AC 2000). We are considering proposing a subdivision at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to ':::'discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: th January 28 Dat 1998 tre: 7:00 P.M. Place: Tigard City Hall (Town Hall Room) ?Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Please note that this will be an informational meeting on our preliminary development plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. We look forward to discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 291-9398, if you need further information before the meeting. Sincerely, Matt Wellner Land Tech, Inc. Planner • Land Tech, Inc. 19Y? W I JhW SW 1/4 NE 1/4 SECTION 3 T2S R I W W.M. WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON SCALE 1% 100' ~ S rya.m TM un SEE MAP U eoe,nal'~c+.now ~ 25 1 DAB - o' l\JJ C J\/J J C H A E L ~110a'~ w rJ -ana"aa "'r~ 9 rzau w 1L o a 4.p a g j900 2 a4 ua eo1 ocwl l T X V 3403 501 IC. + m 3000 ~2700 2800 C aAa 24v -r~ 60' m 3 202 Lot 3200 1Or r, -rl l•• ADAe. 17 E I^ w i 3500 t 6 l7 4700, ° w lLl 3100 0 - $ I6 Haas 33oo w E S N 36001 - } U T U) wo' S a 204 $ ' s 3- 4 w "oo % nA,. N w a IS 3700 0 ua n.u pool p+.u1 ~•_l~ 6 CC aspD STREET V 14 ~F 38000 It r PART 0 WT 10 1 7 SnpAi (0 cno xclcnTs 1od 4400 oo ~ «.c I Cp 13 3900 203 1 _ - 1 a .27A. 1 :y < e 8 L • so.M - r~ and • o g, 4000 ! or . r'j~• 4100 9 e6000 •5800+ 600 1 200 10 s a' a 5700 9 tOAr. . `4300 900 / ! d B at _aiiw4 ua - _ _ SEE MAP It O .67At. ' `4• 1 2 12 _3600 2V 1 I~ 8 2S 13AD ad VV SEE MAP $ : W 7` '•1 r «vi'i Taa~ 1000 y 31 1 25 138D S•400U 25500 w 1 .I$ 4 6 5 C+ 6 w, Q I • FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY u.a}' J I • s • DO NOT RELY ON FOR ANY OTHER USE Tuo 690p a OL 1501 +ir•~ .5300 uP•.4•r .lUa s w • 1100 ^ 520041-•• 1oa ro• T /3Ae V 1 •ar«r roe ' 4 hg .rn. oa 1300 1401 1200 s S 3 o.114r itAr 1503 11504 11502 1t lIA4 5~(p qLt/ !2 w'~ .34A. .54& a 2 n a 1400 E =O:c 3 .~e4e. n j 2 1 N .a• ri { ~ t v S. •.a ON.l~rR~c ST. 1701 1600 a town 900 1600 Lam. aa,v: r ( 23W 2200 2101 6D ~ =000 4Nc .BOAC I 100A. a s4Ar c64". 0.42AC 1 I F cArcr-a----6 r~ ~2 1a •4 b Y 6 e 6200 1" - ar• 1 tLV o, 2400 2 3-7 • 2 L„ N f AJAC ~ . UI V K • rrr1 _ _ - ~Y 1 uc wa 2600 1 1 4 14SAL 6440. 23-74 1700 23-74 b~ T IGARD ai 4«, 2S 13AC caa. ov. I 1 ivm - - SEE MAP 306 • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING • STATE OF OREGON ) SS. City of Tigard ) being duly swom, depose and say that on 1998 1 caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the atta ed list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) {Soo sv Fonn~- (2,S1 3A6 ~2o n) a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at 32-25 s S`7 41--, A-'22225 with postage prepaid thereon. Signature On the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLFTEINOTARIZE) Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the day of i ^ n , 192~ U OFFICIAL SEAL gE~IERLY A. JORDAN NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSIOtl ,0.058747 , 7rA,,51O~! EXPj- S OCT. 22, 2000 rAY cc'• NO ARY PY.BL1C OF P~tGON My Commi n Expire (applicant. ?lease complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) - - - - - - ?i~SE OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NAME- l TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOP'-NiENNT: dame of ApplicsndOwner: I AdL-ess or General Locadon of Subject Properrf: ~ub7e L-c' ?rope^' Tas tilap(s) and Lot -(s): -Z n:'login%oacryvn=em .n%V AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING, RLTURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO: 'gar : Planning Division 13125 SW HaU Boulevard'':.:;;.:..: . Tigaid, OR 97223 do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed Sv6o4;v16;On affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) I I.-~OO Fflr, r,er- C251 3AC 20100) , and did on the 2?44. day of far, ~v , 19 EO personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a 5application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 1 130 D 51,./rz]r,Y✓ (state location you posted notice on property) • Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the day of 19_a~ OFFICIAL SEAL i PEVERLY A. JORDAN NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ON N0.058747 COivi>V1ISSI 00o r ~Y cor:+":ZiSSION EXPIRES OCT 22,2 N ARY P LIC O REGON My Comml ion Exp es: (Applic3nt, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) NAME OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NA.IM: 'T'YPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: I Name of Applicant/Owner. Address or Geaeral Location of Subject Property. Subject Propery Tax.Nlap(s) and Lot T(s): _ L------------------------------------------------------- n `bgmipacy4rasterslatTpost.rst • • Larry Emme Fred & Loreta Arant Parish Ricky & Barbara Oak 11221 SW Fonner St 11385 SW Fonner St 11245 SW Former St Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 • Ronald & June Hobbs David Fleming Robert Davis 7205 SW Ventura Dr 11227 SW Former St 11195 SW Former St Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 George Erickson Jr. & Ideen Marlene Jon & Judith Fessler Colin Mortensen & Ane Louise 11175 SW Fonner St 11180 SW Former St 11160 SW Former St Tigard, OR 97223 ' Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Jesse & Ruth Metcalf Ronald Rissmiller & L Diane Virginia Hodges 148 E Carmel Green St 11230 SW Fonner St 11300 SW Fonner St Port Hueneme, CA 93041 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Thomas Fisher Robert Holmes Eleanor & Earl Quimby PO Box 11370 11400 SW Fonner St 11480 SW Fonner St Portland, OR 97211 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 David Mary Lynn Filler Jay & Nora Beck Mitchell & Carla Shults • 11500 SW Fonner St 11550 SW Fonner. St 2074 Laurelei Ave Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 San Jose, CA 95128 TIGARD CITY OF Beverly & Robert Bowlsby James & Renette Hier 13125 SW Hall Blvd 11200 SW Morgen Ct Louis & Eli Bedard Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 16101 SW 72nd Ave #150 Portland, OR 97224 Dwight Sigworth & K Karen Thomas & Ruby McKernan William & Darlene Lambiaso 11185 SW Morgen Ct 11205 SW Morgen Ct 11225 SW Morgen Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Barbara Sattler Roger & Maili Johnsen Phillip & Sonya Sakash 11245 SW Morgen Ct 11265 SW Morgen Ct 11285 SW Morgen Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 hen & Timea Mahar John & Karyn Clarke Thomas & Deborah Abeyta 390 SW Erste Ct 11380 SW Erste Ct 11370 SW Erste Ct Tigard, OR 97123 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Edwin & Ethel Honeycutt Jr. •Jon Culbertson • Paul & Kathryn Schoppe 11375 SW Erste Ct 11385 SW Erste Ct 11395 SW Erste Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 • Rodney & Rebecca Brummett Larry & Angela Frank Laurence & Laura York 11490 SW Sonne Ct 11480 SW Sonne Ct 11470 SW Sonne Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Richard & Joyce Knutson Randall & Melissa Myers Mark Dahlen & Jill White 11475 SW Sonne Ct 6655 SW Hampton St #100 12775 SW 113th PI Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Danny & Karen Garner Joseph & Tracy Feyder Cynthia Calhoun 12753 SW 113th PI PO Box 540 SE 119th 11340 SW Fonner St Portland, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97216 Tigard, OR 97223 David & Christa Howard K,-- ✓ I SwA n So n 13 evGv)Y F--o,,: ~ G 11350 SW Fonner St I1~11 ~J St,✓ =✓o~wo0~ L opP 12 00 6 1-✓ 131I I /-IOvr"1~ irl /U. Portland, OR 97223 -r; go ,d OR -7-7-223 T ~c,✓~ OR 9-722-4/ W,jllc,~ AII~Ci Llork G. z~)Ie~ liCo7 Sr.~, 11905 Sw 1~5 K ~ Cov✓t 13~°/O Sw Sho✓e D✓;ve I ICD" I S 5~"~ ~1QJQ~ ~v✓ I T 9ord, OR °17223 T~oro~ , OR 97223 T,'~a✓o~, OR `7~722~1 Q ► I I (_j+~OSS l~rv-y ~,✓e5-f'e-r~.car~ ~-i redo. /''lam I"~ys I1035 Sw 13 Sty, A,1e►-N`.~ I3~°G'S Sw Fei""` St✓ee1' 1 S.1 SW ylsfi /~.~e~,~~ T(-ro1, OR 9~~~3 -r5Qrd , OR 9-72a3 T*,Do,✓o( , OR ~72~1 / K-- I I iQ C~r~ Sf~ Nero SCO -it Rv55e I Z°HO SW Glo tier L i )y pr f 138(0 SL✓ Tvon wooo~ Loa 313°) I leayw~or Creek R Tgo, ✓c ( 1 O(~ 9-72--23 Sc~rpoose,G~4 970,E Fot Owo~er, ~O+r(ziroc SoAe.- Ca) Woo Ie""ll II$~q S~.✓ N~flrr~ .~s N. 11 112ti5 SW /1v~9e►-~ Gt. 1235 Sw 13:2,,,) C,,t T.~a✓d1 oR 97~~3 ~~a.-~~ oR 9~z~3 T~9a~d, oR 9-72-~3 n►,e + Jr.--~ leoQC~ J"ne SCI ~f''rid~~ T 7 SwT,~ek~ D.- ~5~`7'Gl Sw 1`x(0 /eve, Taro!, 0 R OR 97~~y NAME ADDRESS (INCLUDING CITY AND ZIP) PHONE /f &~7-vj 4 o z t Tt•r~.~ 15,,E 8 S-~.v . t4i &f< c37-2 Z9 29l ~S9$ 67. ~Z Z~Jl- 5120 M,t~7At t Ap,~ V13 ~ ~ Sw FONNt3yt. T! GP.cn ,oa . Zz3 29Z - S ~ `~6 !L /~VCTHt=lS O~ rUNNG~{t / / -/OW F 112-00 SW P:M-h~ a W- (QG 57ZZ3 625--W77 i J 13-70 'Sw ~---`t' ( Inc-- iCPARa-) Yz g-~zz3 6,21-934V "Aei rvl f Z v"uv (e S.4.j. F o VAN.tV,' ' i38S`Sc~ T 6 3 -.Sk// Al t4- 9 AkC- i 2-7o sw 1 ?1A /,4 z0 7 37 J a c K [15,5e 5w ~dw~ e2 S 7( #Rj qV3 i i i JANUARY 28,1998 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FONNER WOODS CITY 1' TIGARD iigord Orecoa Y :O; PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES s Community Coy n`ty RESIDENTIAL 04TE. 1 Z-~i - G~l sr*F: VA-. ZS .!50 l Z APPLICANT: AGENT: STEVE T~ RNE~ Phone:I I Phone: I I Zaz 59zo PROPERTY LOCATION: ADDRESS: I l 3 0 0 5w e-P- TAX MAP/TAX LOT: Z S I 3>4C 2-( 2500 NECESSARY APPLICA11ONISI: US D 1 y l S 1 N ~l E~ ~ M tJ-C Zd F nJ PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: IZ CSC 5y~'p1 y ~5`aN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: L Q\A J ZONING DESIGNATION: . S CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT C &t)TT-> A l- FACILITATOR: TEAM AREA. PHONE: [5031 ZONING DISTRICT DIMEN inimum lot size:-l~sq. ft. Average lot width: 50 ft. Maximum building height: ~Uft. Setbacks: Front ft. Side S ft. Rear 15 ft. Comer /5- ft. from street. Maximum site coverage: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: % [Refer to Code Section 18. J O I ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL R 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 2'/2 times the average width, unless the parcel is less than 1'/2 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. (Refer to Code Section 18164.060 Lots) CITY OF TIURO Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 10 Bosldsntlsi ApplleotlonRlonnlnp oMslon Soedou Adak 149j' 300 1 e' 600 r.r6aa n m o °i ~x 2.1100, wD 103 1105 5700 _ 9 x ero t ' 106 15 .i5ac I .36'ac 900 8 6700 6100 6000 5900 Tl r J .J7AC. 1 ,67AC./'----'- 7 G. 402 1 • ut., fi I ° ° , m v ,p 8 SBAC t 25600 I 8 r R ^ 14 s I .z trR, l r f) 1\1 5 I 102 c ' W7 b 4I IroT'[ 152{' el b+ ~y ° ° Ltl F I' I CATIAL R R R S U •s99 Ib f. IMH o _ 101701. 9 540 u ,5500 " xi o S mQ 1'r'a ~r4 fix. 4Q xes•IS't ,2~' s i 01 1 b u 6 , + I -95 $ t w-* 5800 W 1 600 WS V yl \ 6400 4 9 4Cao 6 0J3AC. '1_ 1 $a, x c wo0 f• 8{$' i 6 .e7Ac +fi 1000..1. ,zss 690Q1 • = 1501 °t W A` I -w'- •I SE ly :ser.e' e, ,tw,d• Ito' I• , s: 5700 >s ( - e t 6500 I + s~ ~A {I el eo • -MAC, 1100 ! OOs~ti 05300 oo 8 g 3 • a • y~ V w I ,qla •A i 5200 i i x{r44E 100 }'•8 3 /7D! .I ~ R I \95 \V •'P f 2 ♦ 59 ~1 ^ .6300 4 100 1401 ' 1D 16919 _ t/i, 1200 _1"'tl N I 51AC .1200 " I i b a P S 5600 1 I ~`♦~,f` Ca4op94t"101200' 0 7O •0 °~AO nz9 0,{600 $ 0 W 1503 1504 1. ) n.a esse ,34AC .54AC We 2 I ,P 1300 3 e t :.J y~ uc,s « 12 b P, o~ a e 0100 « a ^ 9I 101400 u^ 4 ~p . t!•9; R.9 rG 2 b x Inn « 1400 ° _ 6700 5500 . a°0s eo 1500 5 to? 'c'o ° tel. I • • _ o ^ ~ * 13 ,se- se I of P° , pM M: TP.ACT IB 3 r6ae. a O♦ 6 6 ,oA 0) ° r 1600 . n SOOOi ° " 8 I S ~ 8 w aces II a •"fie • s 1 ° R n' A 3tA.ri'iJa /!••IA 10.1700 'o , 7 100 c~ 104 5 ~ K 46! 1.615 Y 9 /I/A/.~ILA//~/AA/ArAe `04 6800 41 .7.46,w ne i21 r,& ST. a 1 -r-C. R. 095 A' t ..p'E 800 S ; 8 0 !M I xn° s si [ ao c ~alFQN,`A \ 80! 802 812 Q 3~ 2000 1900 9 toA r6L eP 2600 ° IlJtw 5000 set Y - nsl 1900 1800 I ♦ .i6Ac. iBAt, : ,20aC ~ s^ : 4400 SLW.l w 1701 1600 ^ o 0 2800 d.69AC Flit. ° . 10 yo 10r,° IT 40 307-46,11 6100 2000 i r c +Q, c 18 Seel ~ pl. 2200 101 MAC. !{SAC Oa{At .30Aa ° 0.11 1 250o P-300 j 06{00. .a2 At J "I • • ° 10° 16 * 2900 ^ = Nw al u e 1 s 8050 S tyo 24015 0 .64A4 - : I 300 09• ~Y 19 .s.le 4939 A 1^ , A x w W " " ` / 0 0 42 SPPC~. 00 2 ' 9o t ' Q. i% n "E w 12200 ' 14 X xerli I. 1. • . 9! TISE. 90° • ° uo.o•E Sr..' ° s ♦ d ' 9A • + 3000 5 4800 1 .9s w , 22- e " 0 0 ?3.96 6200 ° Iw 806 C 2100• 0 001110 11 "sts•ia 38 12 ° f r 3;00 `I~ " ,13A0. 9 v 20 1 4401 O n mse ° • t0 23 1 9 2 .eo 14 t s»•sst l i 2 e° J v o 1 tl 2400 5 807 \ l ° 1lA x~a 4700 R/AC n .4300 vo r e'G !r MW 6 ; f 1 44 C ,0 y C td`^ eo ; ,t •7~• II 37 1 G,~ • t9. N r - - - - •seru'r -.74.1 1 . 809 3200 xl; J' E " 910 n 00 xer _ _ ~g , I st 3G00 83500 3400 46 460 111. t'~ 0. ° °4600 1 0 "II 119.s eerbw 808 26 25 22 suss[ In F ,0 -!a I ; i \ 0 04 °n 2';T f ° •,ti :3700 s 410 q w 36 3 • tes 2600 45 TRACT°F" w ' 27 ^ .':o.n *0 10 as > Rr rare 135AO I .I 1700 p9 l✓~ = n R•,r , Y ws•!i 1 S.W. y§ R•Jr• ' 1 ° J A . 0 ^ 4500 7 A46At % ✓J 19g0 xel'oe t. t N' ,l 1 toA4 / 811 3800 10 ;4:00` ♦ . _ _ . . ~(rvw• Bi0 O ^ I ' L . 3900'00 4100 4200 98 4400~,, 1 x e9°!i4 a\e! L 1 47. 28 0 ` 29 30 0 31 0 32 g° 33•' 34 xar. t K. can " KwtlM u ' I: \I J9Nx l NKn IIN 5 9eAx O LFONNER STREETS k $89.5 , out JON ITI ry7 INITIAL POINT !w•9e• . + *L- IN ,x19°.t lt'[~ / "J,v ! •7 ' lAL 8600 asoo 9500 a 9400 8900 8800 0400 80 BI ' 'r 89 87 M188 ^ s~4, ts, 91 ^ J 9600 9300) 9.,. sl R, ° ~ •yA` P ;Is b 7700 IS7A7 82 ORGEN CT TRACT 79 11 , ..°im.'rrlyr.' + .s• R a ° °d, R 9oao M ~z + ~M d C64 AC ° M1 85 N 9~ w.7• !0 u9 .1 'L5 ' ,Etp1RIW-0nE PAINT Y IM 11' r E . T a" § 0 ntNwr _pP { 10000 99W etw G.1 92 N' a9 e . , fi 8100 8200 +'S t9 AREAIl`VA~ , 76 ~ 75 !a 8000 200 -10100 9700 W a _ 9100 " S 94 93 (n 10 83 95 FUTURE STREET PLAN ^ 74 Z X9800 78 5xm 84 01 100.47 au.z " 7900 is 01 +o 96 ss 6 .t» . A DEVELOPMENT PLAN . 1 10200 6 ! 77 9° Jt > p° e9 •a • 022 E 74 "FONNER WOODS" 73 S 9 la,N Rr! 0.lY 600 IRE / VISION ~~1.N, GEa 9~lt 11~ J 12-LOT S~DI R 10300 ( l 10900 66 t 3 ~ ~ ,o 4s• 10800 JS 67 11100 ' 9°,QQ,O ° 9> $ 10700 8 TRACTVWC d 1 b 68 9S We AC MMWI _01M E .n ~t 10fA0 9t ~l,tl ^,,:••'~=1 i 4L~a .s.w G~ Sp° 1~s ~w.s` ' 20 10500 g 69 104,0 70 -71 •~lt .xy F j 4V ' 91 °y , aa' : x 3 aRry . R iii'. g n < 0i R 96 , . >..ss.. r 1. a w b ;.kigar.. 2 3W a .q x p e sG! 2400 i N d: 8 V p v is i 45 # 4 j i 8 09 I F i w < 40 5 1x. x .x < > p... 3 t f` ~1€ waJ y ~r,,µ 3e.~V...' ........`c>..~..,.`....i'~! ``<8 3 R ni :Y''ff : ; k 0 : m _ - ° - ! W 3 e if .S N $ is'&c.... ! a i t i t s . T OFOOR~INIC INFORMl1T 104 SYSTEM V40 MI-ft MAP . . . N SUB 98--0002 SW 9AMa1 W - POR 96-0003 SW ER' OIST ZION 99SS-0002 t2 L S7 VAR 9B--4003 N 't ~ pIS S~rS Pte Ire ~ pe PAS ~ pIS ~ ~ ~ Former Woods SUBJECT T Subdivision PARCEL ; N \ ~ ST \`Il 11 WAT \f <n N° D ZZ r 1 /J Pie T~ PA S N 9Z ~YG r p 0 400 600 Feel s rn n cT 1'= 509 feel oL v m City of Tigard 1~1 HAVEN ST ~ft N ST Information on this map is for general IoceOM Orly Sad G Should be verified with the Development Swvlcas Dh9ston. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 W httpJfwww.cl.tigard.or.US Community Development - - - - - - - - - - - Plot date: Mar 24, 1998; c:lmagiclmaglCU l.apr ! 0 SPECIAL SETBAC Streets. feet from the centerline of ➢ Establishe areas: feet from ➢ Lower intens zones: feet, along the site's boundary. Flag lot: Ten ( )-foot side yard setback. Zero lot line lots: inimum ten (10)-foot separation between buildings. Multi-family resident) building separation: [Refer to Code Section 96.0301 Accessory structures up to 528 square feet in size may be 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 1000 square feet on parcels of at least 2.5 acres in size. [See applicable zoning district setbacks for primary structuresJ 6'BD*or ~to NAME u ml Ing a Subdivision land use application with the City of Tigard, applicant's are required to complete and file a subdivision plat naming request with the Washington County Surveyor's Office in order to obtain approval/reservation for any subdivision name. Applications will not be accepted as complete until the City receives the faxed confirmation of approval from the County of the Subdivision Name Reservation. (County Surveyor's Office: 648-8884) FLAG LOT BU NG HEIGHT PROVISIONS Maximu eight of 1'/2 stories or 25 feet, whichever is less in most zones; 2'/Z stories, or 35 feet in R-7, R-12, R-25 0 -40 zones provided that the standards of Code Section 18.98.030[61 are met. RESIDENTIAL DEN~TY ALC ULATION 19 ee examale bEloWl 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: 1. All sensitive lands areas including: a. Land within the 100 year floodplain; b. Slopes exceeding 25%; and C. Drainageways. 2. Public right-of-way dedication. a. Single-family allocate 20% of gross acres for public facilities; and b. Multi-family allocate 15% of gross acres for public facilities. [Refer to Code Section 18.921 EXAMPLE OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS: EXAMPLE: USING A ONE ACRE SITE IN THE R-12 ZONE (3,050 MINIMUM LOT SIZE) WITH NO DEDUCTION FOR SENSITIVE LANDS Single-Family Mull-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 3.050 (minimum lot area) - 3.050 (minimum lot area) 11A Units Per Acre = 121 Units Per Acre *The Development Code reoulres thatthe net site area amfor the ne>Q whole dweinno Rah. NO BOUNDING OP IS PERMITTED. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 10 Residential An011Catica/Plannln0 eMalon Seotion • 0 PKe perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre- existing development. When block lengths greater than 600 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.0401 RESIDENTIAL D TRANSFER The City of ' rd allows a Residential Density Transfer of up to 25% of the units that could otherwise have been developed sensitive lands areas listed in the density calculations that may be applied to the developable portion o e site. [Refer to Code Section 92.0301. It is the res onsibili of he a an for a residential development application to provide a detailed calculation for both the permitted resi tial density and the requested density transfer. RESIDE NSITY TRANSITION Regar s of the allowed housing density in a zoning district, any property within 100 feet of a designated establishe rea shall not be developed at a density greater than 125 percent of the maximum Comprehensiv Plan designation (not zoning) of the adjacent parcel. Transition area applies to any property which i a designated established area. The subject property is designated as an c"SrAae.lsF_ ea. The subject property is adjoined by established/developing/areas to the north, south, east and west. FUTURE SIRE STREETS 1. A future street plan shall: a. Be filed by the applicant in conjunction with an application for a subdivision or partition. The plan shall show the pattern of existing and proposed 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. b. Identify existing or proposed bus routes, pullouts or other transit facilities, bicycle routes and pedestrian facilities on or within 500 feet of the site. 2. 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. [Refer to Code Section 18.164.0301 ESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SOLAR ACCESS REQUIREMENTS All subdivisions and minor partitions are subject to solar access requirements. These requirements state that a minimum of 80% of all lots created must be oriented for solar accessibility. The basic standard, which determines solar accessibility, requires that 80% of total number of proposed lots: 1. Demonstrate a north-south dimension of at least 90 feet. 2. Demonstrate a front lot line orientation within 30 degrees of a true east-west axis. CRY Of TIGARD Pre-AppNcatlon Conference Notes page 3 of 10 Residential 11pnlloetlen/PlennlOY oNlSloo Seotloo • 0 The total or partial exemption of a site from the solar access requirement may be approved for the following reasons: 1. East, west or north slopes steeper than 20%. 2. Off-site shade sources (structures, vegetation, topography). 3. On-site shade sources (vegetation). Adjustments allowing a reduction of the 80% solar lot design requirement may be made for the following reasons: 1. Reduced density or an increased cost of at least five percent due to either: a. East, west or north slope greater than 10%. b. Significant natural feature. C. Existing road or lotting pattern. d. Public easement or right-of-way. 2. Reduction in important development amenities. 3. Pre-existing shade (vegetation). PLEASE NOTE: Maps and text are required which are sufficient to show that the development complies with the solar design standards, or that specific lots should be exempted or adjusted out The following items shall be included in the analysis: 1. The north-south lot dimension and front lot line orientation of each proposed lot. 2. Protected solar building lines and relevant building site restrictions, if applicable. 3. For the purpose of identifying trees related to exemption requests, a map showing existing trees which are at least 30 feet tall and over 6 inches diameter at a point 4 feet above grade shall be submitted. This map shall include the following a. Height. b. Diameter. C. Species. d. A statement declaring that they are to be retained. 4. Copies of all private restrictions relating to solar access. The design characteristics of a developed solar-oriented lot are high levels of wintertime sun striking the south walls and roofs of the house, house orientation maximizing south window area, and a south-sloping roof area. To achieve this, one may utilize the following: 1. Protected Solar Building Line - The solar building line must: a. Be oriented to within 30 degrees of a true east-west axis. b. Provide a minimum distance of 70 feet from the middle of the lot to the south property line. C. Provide a minimum distance of 45 feet from the northernmost buildable boundary of the subject lot to the north property line. 2. Performance Options - There are two performance options which may be utilized as follows: a. The house to be oriented within 30 degrees of an east-west axis and have at least 80% of the ground floors south wall protected from shade. b. At least 32% of the glass and 500 square feet of the roof area face south and be protected from shade. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Appticadon conference Notes Page 4 of 10 Resldeoft UP11CetlooR1e80109 oM=Ion seetlen PLEASE NOTE: Regardless of the option[s] used through the deslun of the Subdivision or Minor Land Partition, all one and two family, single-family residences are reviewed through the building permit process for compliance with Solar Balance Point standards. Please contact the Building Division for further information regarding the Solar Balance Point standards and the options that are available related to building height and construction. PARKING AND ACCESS All parking areas and driveways must be paved. ➢ Single family RPni~irac off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit ➢ Multiple family: Requires 1.5 parking spaces per unit for 1 bedroom. (Multi-family - requires 2 parking spaces per unit for 1+ bedrooms.) Multi-fa ily dwelling units with more than 10 required spaces shall provide parking for the use of guests and shall c sist of 15% of the total required parking. (Refer to a Section 18.106.0301 No more than 4 of required spaces may be designated and/or dimensioned as compact spaces. Parking stalls shall be imensioned as follows: ➢ Standard parking pace dimensions: 8 ft. 8 inches X 18 ft. ➢ Compact parking s ce dimensions: 8 ft. X 15 ft. ➢ Handicapped parking: II parking areas shall provide appropriately located and dimensioned disabled person parking s ces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the park stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is availa a upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surfac and an appropriate sign shall be posted. BICYCLE BACKS Bicycle racks are required for multi-family, Comm cial and industrial developments. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic an in convenient locations. Bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the basis of one space for every fifteen 15) required vehicular parking spaces. .DI~V EwAY Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: I Maximum access width: Minimum pavement width: l®~ REQUIRED AY LOCATION Within II attached housing (except two-family dwellings) and multi-family developments, each residential dwelling hall be connected by walkway to the vehicular parking area, common open space and recreation facilities. VISION AREA The City requires that clear vision areas be maintained between three and eight 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. [Refer to Code Section 181021 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Applicedon Conference Notes Page 5 of 10 Besidentlal AppllcaUOn/PlanalnD BMaloo section BUFFERING AND EENING In order to rease privacy and to either reduce or eliminate adverse noise or visual impacts between adjacent develo ents, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site p imeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupie by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertic and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advi ble even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fence , utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in t Community Development Code. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.1001 The required buffer widths which are applicab to your proposal area are as follows: ft. along north boundary. ft. along east boundary. ft. along south boundary. ft. along west boundary. In addition, sight obscuring screening is required along STREET TRES reEet trees are required for all developments fronting on a public or private street as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six feet of the right-of-way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two inches when measured four 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 on ree for every seven parking spaces must be planted in and around all parking areas in order to provide a getative canopy effect. Landscaped parking areas shall include special design features which effective screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berm decorative walls, and raised planters. For detailed information on design requirements for parking are and accesses. ° (Refer to Code Chapters 18.10 ,18106 and 18.108) EE REMOVAL PLAN ~forNtree pan he planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, major partition, site development review, planned development or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. The tree plan shall include the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the city; ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.150.070.D. according to the following standards: b Retainage of less than 25 percent 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; b Retainage of from 25 to 50 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two- thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; CITY OF TIGARD Pre Plication Conference Notes page 6 of 10 Ruldentill APP11catlOD01900109 OWN SOCHOR 0 i b Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070.D; b Retainage of 75 percent or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. Trees removed within the period of one (1) year prior to a development application listed above will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.150.070.D. (Refer to Code Section 18150.0251 MITIGATION 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 within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. )P. The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. In lieu of tree replacement under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. (Refer to Code Section 18150.010 [Dl SIGNS 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 review before the Hearings Officer. SENS DS The ode provides regulations for lands which are potentially unsuitable for development due to areas within a 100-year floodplain, natural drainageways, wetland areas, on slopes in excess of 25 percent, or on unsta le ground. Staff will attempt to preliminarily identify sensitive lands areas at the pre-application conference ased on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive lands areas, n their boundaries, is h responsibility of the applicant. Ares meeting definitions of nsitiv lands 'must bg clear indicated on plans submitted with h development application. [Refer to Code apter18.841 cnY of nwo R8400111catlon comemnce Notes Page 1 of 10 teSld1atlS1APP11 0081PIX01109 UMS108 SB0000 0 • apter 18.84 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. sidential development is prohibited within floodplains. 'ES ien -steep slopes exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which dresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.84.040.13. The )ort shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations achieving the requirements of 18.84.040.13.2 and 18.84.040.13.3. .WERAGE AGENCY (USA] BUFFER STANDARDS, R a 0 96-44 .moose: nd development adjacent to sensitive areas shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated rridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. :sign Criteria: ,e vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet wide, measured horizontally, from the defined undaries of the sensitive area, except where approval has been granted by the Agency or City to Juce the width of a portion of the corridor. If approval is granted by the Agency or City to reduce width of a portion of the vegetated corridor, then the surface water in this area shall be directed an area of the vegetated corridor that is a minimum of 25 feet wide. The maximum allowable croachment shall be 15 feet, except as allowed in Section 3.11.4. No more than 25 percent of length of the vegetated corridor within the development or project site can be less than 25 feet in dth. In any case, the average width of the vegetated corridor shall be a minimum of 25 feet. :strictions in the Vegetate Corridor: structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, mping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract )m the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as allowed below: A gravel walkway or bike path, not exceeding 8 feet in width. If the walkway or bike path is paved, then the vegetated corridor must be widened by the width to the path. A paved or gravel walkway or bike path may not be constructed closer than 10 feet from the boundary of the sensitive area, unless approved by the Agency or City. Walkways and bike paths shall be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to existing vegetation; and Water quality facilities may encroach into the vegetated corridor a maximum of 10 feet with the approval of the Agency or City. cation of Vegetated Corridor: any residential development which creates multiple parcels or lots intended for separate vnership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and all not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. [Refer to R a 0 96,44/USA Regulations - Chapter 3, Design for SWMI E ie applicant shall submit a narrative which provides findings for all applicable approval standards. Failure provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete -d delay review of the proposal. Applicant should review code for applicable criteria. 3D Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 1g IeeUOORleeeleg oM IGO seoneo 0 CODE SECTIONS _18.80 18.92 18.100 ✓18.108 _ 18.120 8.150 _ 18.84 _ 18.96 Z' 18.102 _ 18.114 _ 18.130 8.160 _ 18.88 _ 18.98 ✓18.106 _ 18.116 _ 18.134 18.162 8.164 IMPACT STUDY As a part of the application submittal requirements, applicants are required to include impact study with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. (Refer to Code Chapter 18.32 Section .050) When a condition of approval requires transfer to the public of an interest in real property, the approval authority shall adopt findings which support the conclusion that the interest in real property to be transferred is roughly proportional to the impact the proposed development will have on the public. [Refer to Code Chapter 18.32 Section.2501 NEIGHBORHOOD ME The applicant shall notify all property owners within 250 feet and the appropriate CIT Facilitator of their proposal. A minimum of 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. [Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) UILDING PERMITS ans or 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. RECYCLI Applic t should contact franchise hauler for review and approval of site servicing compatibility with Pride Disp sal's vehicles. CONTACT P SON: Lenny Hing with Pride Disposal at (503) 625-6177. [Refer to Co Section 18.1161 ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMMENTS: 1 ]21 M) tJ~ ~E\)E LoPM 1~ N ~~~S S ec a IF WAS `Q CRz-AT r-- LC:)-ZS SE7- Q0 ZGr✓E N!! To /ADD `7~D --f' ~ ,4NNE,Y•4-rtotJ - ~Jt~► N,4i ~y IC d o' MN I~- Cot I l . 17,0 .~byw 4 i5 f+ © A &P.0 o✓eY Fa♦Im Ut ru far % Ad uI Ld L 00" tf r v CIVOFTIGAMO"plicagontWerenoeIda 6) Firs Flow PeV- /)7r•,/.v_ /Vva GPA$7 P2090110 lesIdI10e1 ApolltetlonRlenemy IM:100 Sectloo e lie ~r , o e d 3 L` I f r o ^ ~r 61 U J t J/ 4 n t rt It v le Id e. 14 /Y) C 4/ !1 IQ G 1 1 7~ou r 4 o ~v (s l 0 PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. . _tZ Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. CNo _M~ Public hearing before the Planning Commission. (PD) Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All applications must be accepted by a Planning Division staff member of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. Applications will NOT be accepted after 3.00 P.M. on Fridays or 4.30 on other week days. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 8.5 by 11 inches. One 1 8Vh" x 11" map of a proposed project should be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision Application with unfolded maps shall not be accepted The Planning Division and Engineering Division 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, to 20 day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard C_rtsA 0 oyt4o i . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. 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. PLEASE NOTE The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects of good 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 Buy questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. Additional pre-application conference(s) is/are required if an application(s) is/are to be submitted . more than six (6) months following this pre-application conference, unless the additional conference(s) is deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division. PREPARED BY: LZ~ D~L4LeA CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION PHONE- 15031639.4M FAX- (50316841291 h:Uogin\patty\preapp-r.mst (Engineering section: preapp.eng) 26-Mar-97 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Appticadon Conference Notes page 10 of 10 Residential Rpplleatioll/Plaoalo9 DMeloo se611e8 20,00 (SJBAV(SI,DU) _ l3 of Tid6td;,Oregon. PR'E APPLICATION. CONFERENCE: NOTES ENGINEERING SECTION PUBLIC FACILITIES The purpose of the pre-application conference is to: (1.) Identify applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions. (2.) To provide City staff an opportunity to comment on specific concerns. (3.) To review the Land Use Application review process with the applicant and to identify who the final decision making authority shall be for the application. The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments area projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication: The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of- way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: 1 (✓f 5vJ rN~ SST to ~y feet from centerline.(I``'"L ( V K ar~n1 Cut-AESA<-- to f, feet r WIZ11 ~ (MOI)C k1M11AXe0) ( ) to feet from centerline. Street improvements: Z street improvements will be necessary along Sv.1 Fa'►"04!f__ S.->T :Fvu---wQ>1A street improvements will be necessary along 1 w~1 5 ( Street improvements on N e shall include Z o feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires (a fee may be collected if determined appropriate by the Engineering Department), a five-foot wide sidewalk (sidewalks may be required to be wider on arterials or major collector CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 5 Engineering Department Section streets, or in the Coal Business District), necessary stit signs and traffic control devices, streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. C. Street improvements on W-- J CQLT>C-SNP 3Z fren shall include feet of pavement fl°- cae, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires (a fee may be collected if determined appropriate by the Engineering Department), a five-foot wide sidewalk (sidewalks may be required to be wider on arterials or major collector streets, or in the Central Business District), necessary street signs and traffic control devices, streetlights, and a two year streetlighting fee. (J~ Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in4ieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. There are existing overhead utility lines which run adjacent to this site along SW F&-ANd- -~O_ T_ . Prior to r Pte( , the applicant shall either place these utilities underground, or pay the fee in-lieu described above. In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to execute a non-remonstrance agreement which waives the property owner's right to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district. The following street improvements may be eligible for such an agreement: (1.) (2.) Pedestrianways/bikeways: Sanitary Sewers: cs> +lY The nearest sanitary sewer line to this property ice) inch linelwhich *located 1 C-1) 5ag"sC r SM= A,,p li-A Fct, ~.SThe proposed development must be connected to a public sanitary sewer. It is the developer's responsibility to c-Ts-NC> K*kkL- g4-x~-OZ_ ►tsro Sl' a-~ s Std osT-~ T VN XVX42W., 10157 Pl c0 c~Pr4u_ -r~S 5r . C, NIJ~-r p+vE Ads -ro - M~cr~ 0- c~ . CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference'Notes Page 2 of 5 Engineering Department Section Water Supply: • • The j~~,ra Water Bit -Phone: (503) GS1 4111 provides public water service in the area of this site. The District should be contacted for information regarding water supply for your proposed development. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (Contact: Gene Birchill, (503) 526-2469) provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a subbasin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. A downstream analysis will also likely be necessary to determine if runoff from the proposed development will cause adverse impacts to the existing storm system downstream of the site. • '&,m P'_~ A~ l7 D~w~.l Sr Aj"_ St S 4-R•- IZ6,lcc~.J AP~GR~✓o~-- tuc-wm TES t~ «w lnl S..$j~~~f a.! /~IPuua-~i Other Comments: All proposed sanitary sewer and storm drainage systems shall be designed such that City maintenance vehicles will have unobstructed access to critical manholes in the systems. Maintenance access roadways may be required if existing or proposed facilities are not otherwise readily accessible. • cer_c,t-r cF ~csay 5'tIt CS A c -E~-c~ 5 €c-t c~ sS T~~„l ;"C> t NTC M tTiL1~. 1~cs+.~t SIH-j S IZ-o - FOUf ~-,Pa• Toil NZf aa~EiP~AP~.~ .4LuU~1 chi ~E ¢ &AJ 52-~ WM,,4 c ~Nt- 4= &nJ l r3 1 . ° P` ( ~tt'C f ~ l►Sa~K . CM, . ww tom. NC ss.dt ~I C-1- VICA-tL- W kj Fd-H" 2 S Wz-) cox DE-Sc~ c,~.t-77 ~.ao t, 2- w, ('+'9l W 2&I P Puy a.► oWe 5 DG STORM WATER QUALITY The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) (Resolution and Order No. 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference-Notes Page 3 of 5 Engineering Department Section 65 percent of the phosph*s contained in 100 percent of thoorm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of new impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof, the fee shall be Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with t e development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: 2lo •oiD Construction of an on-site water quality facility. ( ) Payment of the fee in-lieu. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance. The Traffic Impact Fee program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TIF is based on the proposed use of the land, the size of the project, and a general use based fee category. The TIF shall be calculated at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances, payment of the TIF may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of the payment until occupancy is permissible pnly when the TIF is greater than $5,000.00. 111;~~ f PERMITS Engineering Department Permits: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a permit from the Engineering Department. There are two types of permits issued by Engineering, as follows: Street Opening Permit (SOP). This permit covers relatively minor work in a public right-of-way or easement, such as sidewalk and driveway installation or repair, and service connections to main utility lines. This work may involve open trench work within the street. The permittee must submit a plan of the proposed work for review and approval. The cost of this type of permit is calculated as 4% of the cost of the work and is payable prior to issuance of the permit. In addition, the permittee will be required to post a bond or similar financial security for the work. Compliance Agreement (CAP). This permit covers more extensive work such as main utility line extensions, street improvements, etc. In subdivisions, this type of permit also covers all grading and private utility work. Plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The cost of this permit is also calculated as 4% of the cost of the improvements, based on the design engineer's estimate, and is payable prior to issuance of the approved plan. The permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security, and execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. Prior to City acceptance of any permitted work, and prior to release of work assurance bond(s), the work shall be deemed complete and satisfactory by the City in writing. The permittee is responsible for the work until such time written City acceptance of the work is posted. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference'Notes Page 4 of 5 Engineering Department Section NOTE: If an Engineering Permit is required, the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Department. Building Department Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Department. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, contact the Development Services Counter at 639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit can not be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS All subdivision projects shall require a proposed grading plan prepared by the design engineer. The engineer will also be required to indicate which lots have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections will be required when the lots develop. The design engineer will also be required to shade all structural fill areas on the construction plans. In addition, each homebuilder will be required to submit a specific site and floor plan for each lot. The site plan shall include topographical contours and indicate the elevations of the corners of the lot. The builder shall also indicate the proposed elevations at the four corners of the building. PREPARED BY: IS/1117 ENGINEERING DE ARTMEN Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 hAoginXpattykpreapp.eng (Master section: preapp-r.mst) December 23, 1996 CITY OF TIGARD Pre•Application Conferenceflotes Page 5 of 5 Engineering Department Section CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST CITY OF TIGARD The items on the checklist below are required for the succesful completion of your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be returned and submitted with all other applicable materials at the time you submit your land use application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call the City of Tigard Planning Division at (503) 639-4171. Staff: \h) D Date: 12-~S APPLICATION & RELATED DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE V MARKED ITEMS A) Application form (1 copy) 13) Owner's signature/written authorization C) Title transfer instrument/or grant deed D) Applicant's statement No. of Copies E) Filing Fee $ S + ~A _pULE SITE-SPECIFIC MAP(S)/PLAN(S) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE./ MARKED ITEMS A) Site Information showinNo. of Copies ~L 1. Vicinity map 2. Site size & dimensions 3. Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) 9r, 4. Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds V-11- 5. Locations of natural hazard areas including: o (a) Floodplain areas o (b) Slopes in excess of 25% 0 (c) Unstable ground 0 (d) Areas with high seasonal water table ❑ (e) Areas with severe soil erosion potential o (f) Areas having severely weak foundation soils o 6. Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map Inventory including: o (a) Wildlife habitats o (b) Wetlands 7. Other site features: (a) Rock outcroppings I] (b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level or" 8. Location of existing structures and their uses 9. Location and type of on and off site noise sources o3 10. Location of existing utilities and easements 11. Location of existing dedicated right-of-ways LAND USE APPLICATION,/ LIST PAGE 1 OF 5 B) Si Development Plan Indicatin : No. of Copies 1. he proposed site and surrounding properties ❑ 2. C ntour line intervals ❑ 3. Th location, dimensions and names of all: (a) Existing & platted streets & other public ways and cements on the site and on adjoining properties ❑ (b) Pr osed streets or other public ways & easements on t e site ❑ (c) Altern tive routes of dead end or proposed streets that re ire future extension ❑ 4. The location a d dimension of: (a) Entrances nd exits on the site ❑ (b) Parking an circulation areas ❑ (c) Loading and rvices area ❑ (d) Pedestrian and icycle circulation ❑ (e) Outdoor comm areas ❑ (f) Above ground uti 'ties ❑ 5. The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: (a) Existing permanent st uctures, improvements, utilities, and easements which are I cated on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet f the site ❑ (b) Proposed structures, impr vements, utilities and easements on the site ❑ 6. Storm drainage facilities and analy is of downstream conditions ❑ 7. Sanitary sewer facilities ❑ 8. The location areas to be landscaped ❑ 9. The location and type of outdoor lights g considering crime prevention techniques ❑ 10. The location of mailboxes ❑ 11. The location of all structures and their one ation ❑ 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement a eements ❑ C) Grading Plan Indicating: No. of Copies Zy The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: 1. The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating: (a) General contour lines E3" (b) Slope ratios ❑ (c) Soil stabilization proposal(s) ❑ (d) Approximate time of year for the proposed site development 2. A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: (a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report ❑ (b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals ra" (c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated 2"' LAND USE APPLICATION / LIST PAGE 2 OF 5 D) Architec ral Dra s Indicatin No. of Copies The site de lopment plan proposal shall include: 1. Floor plans I icating the square footage of all structures proposed for us on-site 2. Typical elevation wings of each structure E) Landscape Plan Indicating: No. of Copies Z-4 The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate: 1. Description of the irrigation system where applicable 0 2. Location and height of fences, buffers and screenings ram 3. Location of terraces, decks, shelters, play areas, and common open spaces ❑ 4. Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials M", 5. Landscape narrative which also addresses: (a) Soil conditions ❑ (b) Erosion control measures that will be used ❑ F) Sign Drawings: ❑ Sign drawings shall be submitted in accordance with Chapter 18.114 of the Code as part of the Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct a sign. G) Traffic Generation Estimate: H) Prel ina Partition/Lot Line Adiustment Ma Indicatin : No. of Copies 1. T e owner of the subject parcel ❑ 2. Th owner's authorized agent ❑ 3. The ap scale (20,50,100 or 200 feet=1) inch north arrow and date ❑ 4. Descri tion of parcel location and boundaries ❑ 5. Locatio width and names of streets, easements and other public ways wit in and adjacent to the parcel ❑ 6. Location o all permanent buildings on and within 25 feet of all property lin s ❑ 7. Location and idth of all water courses ❑ 8. Location of an trees within 6" or greater caliper at 4 feet above ground level ❑ 9. All slopes greater han 25% ❑ 10. Location of existin utilities and utility easements ❑ 11. For major land parti 'on which creates a public street: (a) The proposed ri ht-of-way location and width ❑ (b) A scaled cross-se ion of the proposed street plus any reserve strip ❑ 12. Any applicable deed res ictions ❑ 13. Evidence that land partiti will not preclude efficient future land division where applicable ❑ LAND USE APPLIG-kTION J LIST PAGE 3 OF 5 1) Subdivision Prelim Plat Map and Data Indicating: *No. of Copies Z~ 1. Scale equaling 30,50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet 2. The proposed name of the subdivision 3. Vicinity map showing property's relationship to arterial and collector streets 4. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyer and designer (as applicable) d 5. Date of application d 6. Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided d' 7. Names of adjacent subdivision or names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of un-subdivided land 8. Contour lines related to a City-established benchmark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater than 10% 9. The purpose, location, type and size of all the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): (a) Public and private right-of-ways and easements (b) Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines t~ (c) Domestic water mains including fire hydrants (d) Major power telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) ❑ (e) Watercourses ❑ (f) Deed reservations for parks, open spaces, pathways and other land encumbrances ❑ 10. Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated on the plans 2-11, 11. Plan of the proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire hydrants 12. Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision 13. Scaled cross sections of proposed street right-of-way(s) 14. The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow 15. Location, width & direction of flow of all water courses & drainage-ways 16. The proposed lot configurations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots. r~ 17. The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the location of proposed tree plantings 2--1 18. The existing uses of the property, including the location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting 19. Supplemental information including: (a) Proposed deed restrictions (if any) ❑ (b) Proof of property ownership a" (c) A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improvements 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, wetlands & marsh areas 21. If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application ❑ LAND USE APPLICAMON / LIST PAGE 4 OF 3 Solar Access Calculations: K) Other Information No. of Copies ❑ h:Uogin~patty\mastersUtid ist.mst May 23, 1995 LAND USE APPLICATION J LIST PAGE 5 OF 5 RECEIVED PLANNING FEB 0 5 1998 February 3, 1998 Tuesday Tigard City Hall CRY OF TIGAW 13125 SW Hall Boulevard. Tigard, OR 97223 639-4171 VOICE Dear Mr. D'Andrea, Last week we attended a meeting to describe the proposed sub division to be placed on Tax lot 2000 whose West side is adjacent to my property. Plans show that the developer/builder S. R. Turner Construction L.L.C. is planing on placing lots #6,#7, #8, and #9 along my property's Eastern edge (Lot 2000 Western edge, See Figure I and Figure 2. enclosed with this letter). I have two concerns: a) Environmental concerns during development. \ My home office is in the North East corner of my home and only 25 feet from the property boundary along which development is to occur. My main entrance and main area of landscaped rolling green grassed hills fills the North-East corner of my property. During the entire work day I am present in this area. I have a bad case of Asthma for which I take constant medication and this condition makes me especially sensitive to dust. Further, the developer has stated that depending on economic conditions building might proceed over several years time. This is a long time to contend with constant construction noise and dust. b) Visual impact of adjoining lots. Views from my downstairs office and upstairs bedroom area are going to be looking directly onto homes built on lots #6, #7, #8, and #9. It is unlikely that when given the number of owners with adjoining lots a free choice, what they choose to do along our common property line will end up being consistent with one another. It is likely because of personal constraints and tastes what will result along their back property lines and my common property will be unappealing when taken as a whole, because it is visually inconsistent due to lack of uniform development and a single vision. I think these problems can be addressed by either the planning Commission or the Hearings Officer by requiring as a "condition of approval" that a neighbor friendly and visually attractive fence at least five feet high be built along the west side of this development. I would be willing to let the developer build this fence on my side of the property line if the gain of a few additional feet was of value to him and it would avoid a large tree in the corner of his site. Further, a nice attractive neighbor friendly fence along this shared property boundary, I believe, would make marketing these lots easier since they would become more private from my property. I hope you will be able to share these concerns and solutions with City of Tigard Planning Commission. Jay and Nora Beck 11550 SW Fonner ST Tigard, OR 97223 639-9443 VOICE Eric & Colleen Schultheis 11180 SW Former St. Tigard, OR 97223 Telephone/FAX 503.624.1605 SCHULTHEIS@IMAGINA.COM 1.28.98 Land Tech, Inc. 8835 SW Canyon Lane Suite 402 Portland, OR 97225 cc City of Tigard Planning Department City of Tigard Planning Commission City of Tigard Planning Council RE: Proposed Development at 11300 SW Former St. Tigard, OR Dear Land Tech, Inc. • As the owner of the C.F. Tigard house (11180 SW Former St.) I have a few concerns regarding your proposed development as the subject property borders our HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY. I'm certain with proper communication and cooperation we can protect the integrity and Historic Significance of the area for all concerned. I request the following in your plans: • Visual buffer along West line to protect HISTORIC DISTRICT • Trees along West line are "wind hardened" and must not be topped, removed, or have their root structures built upon, cut into, or damaged during construction. • Stone fence along west line to minimize impact of increased noise level. • Holding pond with natural water purification system to assure water run-off is clean and will not flood our property. • Sin 111theis is 0.46AC. 9 0 w r` ~ 1503 ' 1504 '1502 / 7z.41 e5.3e M N 34Ac. 34Ac 5100 CO ISZ7s a N N .34Ac. ~e !D O M N N N Y N N 2 e ~N a Wa A b a It ~ b 1aze9 a 1400 0 0 o ° 5000 tl1 . /BAc. a n 61 r :4E i° 57 N 87 1P' i 1 3.56 I Z I t'~~L ' s 67046'w n5' Y T T -r 4 -11C. R. 495 ~ (o j. S LP. 336. -rt-L O°NI I . NIN COR 85,/827 v • I S. COLLINS 40 73:99 16( S87°46'w 6100 i 900 1800 1701 2300 2200 2101 23AC. 2000 pA" goAc. 1 ioDAc. t89 . 64AC. 0 64Ac. 0.42 Ac A • b o a r a n 1..._ n a a 1 a y a L , ~ S89°5VE `191, _ = I_► Q~ n • f v p" s 1 r 'Ed O M b h 73.96 b pt~ n o 0 6200 ~w in f 589°53'E 191' I W ZSA~ 2.3~78 w o 'o 0; 2400 2 a 45AC. 50j 11 0 0 i 11 No all W.- p m - - - _ - • 5 87046' w -174.1- "99055'W 191 _ I6 I • 53900% 191 ! aq S8 1 173.18 SB7° 46'w 2600 150 o TO I _ W 'a I.35AC. 1(15,0 A 1700 714 1.46AC. 23 ~74 n ' c N ~ Cam. SE!, G _ • ..~.8-i° 4.... 0 N X90 d 511 8 89.1' SEE MAP 2S 13D6 4 NW V4 SEI/4 SECTION 3 T2S RIW W.M. 2S I 3DB WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON SCALE I"" 100' r ~ CEWER m E6C tow ( \ SEE NAP a m Riw ) 1 2S 1 SAC ror[alr aw1 eowrcR SEE MAP +0.. a..,Utt .SLW -FOMER MAD loll 6,1. R. 37 2S I 3AO 23 78\ 7 9000 69006600 •,•8700 8600 a 9500 , DOW bt v" e 91 p` ~y 87 _ 66 M109 ! 90 n, lci xa swl e 44 y (J IN •:J J r Y 91 a'' cuauio m un rr nn ! 4b Y 7700 a .ei, b4•oe}s,am,.ea,rA ~Q F 79 R CL s e2. a 9oooa~ "P MORGEN cT,,~ TR YYi - voOrt • ` x 4 8300 + r.e•4e. j q, aooo 9900 w b as • ..R 92 wtb r• 8000 8100 ¢ 8200 aayF ~S * SEE MAP LJS X10100 73p b 76 9100 i d• 00 74 •N " W .5 83 9100 $ 94 93 N Y/r 'L 2S 1 30A Q\J '~1y ?9800 78 14 b 4a 79009 93 r.. .•^N 7201 @ N a 77 r + a., 96 23-~~ sa 7300 ~4 57 y 31ozW p2 N r, Y e w. • „ e r n 4o s L>a n 1 N Z~ +...r m EN~S\5 ,1w>Tr a,*.b bi d TIW' 400 ~ R L) ~ R 10.AD r : 'Q G 10 11000 1\1 0 3 7 38 0 72 d C @ °652 ~h q SB . _ 8 ~W 6 °a 66 G~K . ~$A 7600 4'•,',"'0 3 152 ..rear. ~ Q ! ruor..w a L J 10600 ° _ o•P ~y'+• .np ,.r 61 eDP 75DO CP 6900 • 3 LL 110500 + S11200 r~+P~°'a .u6ate. bs s -AL 70 65 10400 71 p~ n .6800 I p ' dye 23 6210 o•' P"G4 0 - V,• • 0 4 &K TERRACE r ..r~•O • ! b 9 ¢ +A113W 11500 9 -Ile. & 600 TRAl.BDRIVE a•M Ai 6400 'Y 24 a.r 4 5500 `3 h 3- a. +•''a 4 62 fP '52 i w i 72 m Y w if R>' a 64 t 71400 S 4CF '^4~ fv+u' _ °:a _ •.b n•PQ . . 6100 * wr ue.a- / i6 . P 6500 ..a4 4 e ' ~."5670 F 5400 700 Y « •{r•. 11600 2 ~G g r! s9~•~4•"'• 3 51 .~3 44•' i P p,' y E000 6. 00 SEE MAP 5700 5300 >D .aso°ra 800 r M 1 R r 1 29 1 3CA a •1900 2 ,F ° 6600 9~ 4 ai 5800 >P S a 17006i affis oe a 29 I`> OQ f 4900 8 2000 ~[i1 5900 J * • P 5200 ea 4e m PA R 'A 10 Z A \ R00 t 6700 \1 5 . pP sa/y s 49 900 °aW TRacr E• 9 O2 > 14 Y 4 2po r ~ 0 500 g r b`~ 15 ° 39 Z< 5100 oPe. a..a 6 Q MI RA 48 100 s COup,, d' . 15 y 9 GENES ,4000 azoD y s . a 'e 38 W g 40 8001 8000 _ IAS itaiol i4 3 e g : e! 2270 P~ A a 9 ••r . 3300 r 1100 * a aa. A L 47 8 7 8e FOR ASSESSMENT 2300 Is a 3200 s 31 O g WOO 8 430 + PURPOSES ONLY 240 E 8 'O a •Ta m ° a r c DO NOT RELY ON IT P pq,y` t + r 37 1000 0 FOR ANY OTHER USE .3400 s y ,O S 3100 32 b m { 44000 m 4 46 i 8 R 2700 lcol e 7 c -0 3800 E un p S E 3 42 3 pP 1300 9 d 3„ ' 3500 •,Oj F 36 a .ar a an 4700 8 9 8 3000 m g500 2700 2600 28W o 2900 % 33 3G0 0 4600 yib 45 4 a- 3700 4 M 5 6 9 S 1400 I 2 ? •p 34 43 t 44 ° 10 8 f rrOa PONT t era Jill w, ,.•s• u a . MI71AL un 35 osu~ R mar. •,•a~er. r. V J RG 1 N 1A } VJRG1.N JA I6EE EXODUS rAIR1-1r1V~N 2S I 30C ACF?ES Ac R5- s CDJRT TIGARD PLAT l\l J 2S 13DB FROM 'WCCR13 SUNSET CORRIDOR B03 221 7393 1997.07-10 IS'44 #882 P.02/02 J uu- - •'ir s 1 • a'a 91 IIO w 1 t 00 9 6000 5800 600 °b t►p p~fRACT 9 ~ 2./IAC. ` ' 4200 M I •oyF "e" 5700 I -WI 90 ' !I .~yya+ 670 A t, ~ 8 -n ei•,a'S ^ tao~ 1 • 60o N b-I7 23-178 n° LL~ t^ K I ri ll 9' 0 7' E l i{ 6 1 00 144.74 0 a . of 1 r 73,iG(,`i" 72.10 o I.27AC. s " 540C 5500 0 w,37, } to . l.) s ° b w 5 a+ 6 W I s p t!f ~ O' Z ~ .s 't 1.J .15300 90 CLo 5ave.e'w tao' 1501 0 64.41 l00 •O' q w .34AC. 2-74" 5200 r a 1 Ir er446'E loo 4 ~12. 1300 1401 a r'h,1: .lam 3 U~o = a tf .+s fiSoa 1200 * m QS 1 Ac. ZZAc ^ 1 1503 ' 1504 0.46AC. a fm 72.41 l9.3e w/~ _ ti ~ N N o .34AG 34Ac 5100 ~Q 10278 a a r N O N N 2 X ~ M ~ 10 A T a n a a . io W e 1S7.e8 • 1400 -A w 1e o 0 3 5000-'- !L W . I°I• tla ;73 9• w 37 60 '1 13.E 1ou r N 11 a' A' ~(_E - T" ~ C a 495 a j ~ 1 •+s'r R N t Y"~ 3lR8• __Y 'fq a 53 F1t0z 'N~l•~•~t 1-95* ryyaa 18i.i - "tai •.a 'X'11r~1, t900 1800 I74• •46'71 2000 500 2200 2101 2100 2.83At 046AC SOaC. • 0 64Ae. C. 4Z 41 50 AC .4 A C. i er a 1 7 „ Q •O \ ~ I ps ~ Y. s 23 P R oA n • 22'E 191' Pftb ►00 -78 Soy : 4 " 1 I Wilt 9 - 0 07.4a w 174.1 e I a w 1 tr_' t•0!f t 191 70 00 ,Ac. di 1700 1 1 I.46Aa ~ r w I w a / 123on74 C ~ ' i Of•aD 174 w • a'X 177.0' r. ~>t•u! 17 s ce , SEE MAP 2b 1 3D8 December I!J~J/ S M T W T F S 6 1 2 3 4 5 12 13 7 8 9 10 11 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 27 26 21 22 23 24 25 2 30 31 28 9 U 8:00 8:30 9:00 1f1..E 9:30 d e a r r 10:00 Eon:::c~:r~::> :~~utsc3:E~s X, X. 10:30 > > > > s<` > > > > I > < < 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 1 1:13AM Friday, November 21, 1997 S.R. Turner Construction, LLC 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Ste. 408 Portland OR 97225 PH (503) 292-5920 FAX (503) 292-6297 City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard. Oregon 97223 RE: Pee-Application for a Subdivision on SW Former Attn.: Julia Hajduk Attached please find my information for a pre-application conference regarding a site located on S.W. Fonner Street in Tigard. 1. For your records the applicant can be listed as: S.R. Turner Construction, LLC 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Ste. 408 Portland, Oregon 97225 Contact name is: Steve R. Turner Engineering Company: Land Tech Engineering and Surveying 2. The Proposed site plan is attached. It reflects development to meet the overlay zone for this site which allows 7500 square foot single family lots. (In fact the average lot size is 7900 square feet when the whole affected site is taken into account). This average takes into account the fact that some lots are larger than 7500 square feet and some are smaller. 3. The proposed use is a single family neighborhood. 4. Attached is a Tax map and current parcel numbers. 5. I am the current property owner together with Carol and Jim Williams. 6. The topographic information is on the site plan, as drawn by our engineers, and has been field verified for accuracy. Additionally, they have reviewed the invert locations of adjacent sewer lines, water, and other utilities and feel that no significant problems exist in serving the site. (None that we are aware of at this time). In general, the site has an older single family home on it currently as well as an attached apartment rental unit which would be removed in favor of creating a new lot. The existing home does not have a public • • sewer system hook up, tit has a septic system), which would be corrected after development was completed). We intend to create a public street to serve all lots within the subdivision. Sincerely, Steve R. Turner COMI(NITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. egal P X 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360 otice TT 9102 66 BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 0 Legal Notice Advertising • City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 SW Hall Blvd • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commiss: • Accounts Payable on Monday, May 4, 1998, at 7:30 P.M., at the Tigard Civic Cente Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. Both public c and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will conducted in accordance with the rules of Chapter 18.32 of the Tig: Municipal Code, and rules and procedures of the Planning Commissi AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficien STATE OF OREGON, )ss allow the hearings authority and all the parties to respond on the requ•. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) precludes an appeal, and failure to specify the criterion from the Cc munity Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a commen 1. Kathy being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. Further informat Director, or his principal clerk, of tht~f n^ rA m„a 1 at; n mimes may be obtained from the Planning Division at 13125 SW Hall BI% a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 639-4171. and 193.020; published at Tigard in the PUBLIC HEARINGS: aforesaid county and state; that the .-SUBDIVISION (SUB) 98.0001! STIR q R (1(1(17 ~ Epn n a r WnnA a S» ~ PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 98-0003/ 8.0002 a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the VARIANCE (VAR) 98-0003/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 9 . > FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION < - entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and The applicant has requested the following development applications: Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2 consecutive in the following issues: acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,448 square feet to 8,711 squ feet and an approximately 6,009 square foot water quality facility; April 2 3 ,19 9 8 Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving gre: than six (6) dwelling units and tc reduce the minimum lot size be 7,500 square feet; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street sr ing of approximatey 135 feet, whereas the Code states that the mi-um V ,z r r , 2~ street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.).Zone Cha. I` J t to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning M ` LOCATION: 11300 SW Fonner Street;. WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Subscribed and sworn to before me this' lyd ~y of A°x11,1998 02000. The subject site is located.east of the intersection of SW.For. Street and SW 115th Avenue, onlthe south side of SW Fonrier St- across from SW 113th Place. ZONE: Residential, 4.5 Units Per A No Public for Oregon R-4.5. The purpose of the R-4.5 Zoning District is to establish stanc. brban low density residential sites. The R=4.5 zone-allows, among o My Commission Expires: uses, single-family residential units, public support facilities, resider treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, ht 14t, AFFIDAVIT occupations, temporary•uses, residentail fuel tank, and accessory st: tures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Developn Code Sections 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.88, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.: 18.106, 18.108, 18.150,~18~..1760~and 188.164. i i aA+ecr . w~ +I t 7'I79102 - Publish April 23, 1998. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING CITY OF TIGARD Community Development ~Q Shaping A Better Community ffATE oho EGON ) ~ ~1 v N\Z_ O 0~ County of `Washington ) ss. City of `Zigard ) I, Patricia L. Lunsfon( being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath depose and say that I am an Administrative Speciahst II for the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon and that I served the following: {Check Appropriate Box(s) Below) NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: AMENDED NOTICE (File NoJNarne Reference) City of Tigard Planning Director NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: C~76U619-0004 W AMENDED NOTICE (File NoJNarne Reference) (data of ublic Hearing) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Heari r and Plannin Commission Tigard City Couny NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER FOR: L~7 AMENDED NOTICE (File NoJNarne Reference) (Date of Public Hearing) City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard Planning Commission Tigard City Council NOTICE OF: FOR: E:~? (Type/Kind of Notice) (Rle NoJNarne Reference) (Date of Public Hearing, if applicable) A copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE/NOTICE OF DECISION/NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER/OTHER NOTICEIS) of which is attached, marked Exhibit "A was iled to each d,person(s) at the address(s) shown on the attached list(s), marked Exhib- on the day of - 1998, and deposited in the United States Mail on the day of 1998, postage prepaid. (Per r o ' e) Subscribed and sworn/aff irmed before me on the day of'19 9V OFFICIAL SEAL DIANE M JELDERKS NOTARY PUBLIC-ORREGO EGON NOTARY PUBLIC OF ORE COMMISSION NO. 046142 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 07, 1999 MY Commission Emires: Z EXHIBIT A2j k CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, MAY 4, 1998 AT 7:30 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO(S): SUBDIVISION (SUB) 98-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PORI 98-0003 VARIANCE [VAR] 98-0003 ZONE CHANGE IZON) 98-0002 FILE TITLE: FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION OWNER/ Steve Turner PLANNING Matthew Wellner APPLICANT: S.R. Turner Construction CONTACT: Land Tech, Inc. 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 408 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 402 PO Box 25216 Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97289-0216 REQUEST ➢ A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,44800 square feet to 8,711 square feet and an approximately 6,009 square foot water quality facility; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units and to reduce the minimum lot size below 7,500 square feet; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. LOCATION: 11300 SW Fonner Street; WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Lot 02000. The subject site is located east of the intersection of SW Fonner Street and SW 115th Avenue, on the south side of SW Fonner Street across from SW 113th Place. ZONE: Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre; R-4.5. The purpose of the R-4.5 Zoning District is to establish standard urban low density residential sites. The R-4.5 zone allows, among other uses, single- family residential units, public support facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, home occupations, temporary uses, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.88, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE 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. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. SUB 98.0002/PDR 98-0003NAR 98-000320N 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF 5/4/98 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT W TTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPO*ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO QR AT THE PUBLIC HEAFW. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRE ED 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 IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER APRIL 13, 1998, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. 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 197763(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 THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. 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 (25C) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE 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 (25~) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER MARK ROBERTS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. 13 SUBJECT' - PARCEL r MA` vwTM n - > m I J I ~ 1 1 ♦ ~ F 1~yQ~ I I m rFNPoNVEH, _5T I N I I -I`1 _ 1J~T SUB 98-0002JPDR 98-0003NAR 98-000320N 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF 5/4/98 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING s r~,g q 8 -ooma 1 blv&v W OOR5 5sul8 PC 10-F 3 EXH I]3I T B 2S 1 03AC-00600 2S103AC-01200 EMME LARRY M PARISH FRED C & LORETA ARANT TR 11221 SW FONNER ST 11385 SW FONNER ST TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103AC-01300 2S103AC-01400 OAK RICKY J & BARBARA T HOBBS RONALD E AND JUNE E 11245 SW FONNER ST 7205 SW VENTURA DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S 103AC-01401 2S 103AC-01501 FLEMING DAVID L VOORHEES JO 11227 SW FONNER 11145 504 NNER RD TIGARD, OR 97223 J;WMD, OR 97223 2S103AC-01502 2S103AC-01503 VOORHEES JOHN J DAVIS ROBERT J 11145 SW FONNER 11195 SW FONNER TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103AC-01504 2S103AC-01700 ERICKSON GEORGE W JR FESSLER JON L AND JUDITH L 11175 SW FONNER ST 11180 SW FONNER TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103AC-01701 2S103AC-01800 MORTENSEN COLIN N METCALF JESSE C & RUTH G 11160 SW FONNER 148 E CARMEL GREEN TIGARD, OR 97223 PORT HUENEME, CA 93041 2S103AC-01900 2S 1 03AC-02000 RISSMILLER RONALD W AND HODGES VIRGINIA A 11230 SW FONNER 11300 SW FONNER RD TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S 1 03AC-021 01 2S 1 03AC-02200 FISHER THOMAS L HOLMES ROBERT W PO BOX 11370 11400 SW FONNER PORTLAND, OR 97211 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103AC-02300 2S103AC-02400 QUIMBY ELEANOR N & EARL H FILLER DAVID E MARY LYNN 11480 SW FONNER ST 11500 SW FONNER TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103AC-02600 2S 1 03AC-05000 BECK JAY W AND NORA C MYERS RANDALL C & MELISSA K 11550 SW FONNER ST 6655 SW HAMPTON #100 TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 W DOD s 5" P9 a o~ 2S 103AC-05100 2S 103AC-05200 DAHLEN MARK S & GARNER DANNY A & KAREN E 12775 SW 113TH PL 12753 SW 113TH PL TIGARD, OR 97223 PORTLAND, OR 97223 2S103AC-05300 2S103AC-06100 FEYDER JOSEPH A & TRACY L CALHOUN CYNTHIA L PO BOX 540 SE 119TH 11340 SW FONNER PORTLAND, OR 97216 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103AC-06200 2S103DB-00100 HOWARD DAVID L & CHRISTA S SHULTS MITCHELL T/CARLA P 11350 SW FONNER ST 13030 SW 115TH AVE PORTLAND, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DB-07900 2S103DB-08000 COUTURE JOEL W AND METZ MERRITT TERRY AND 11270 SW MORGEN CT 11230 SW MORGEN CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DB-08100 2S103DB-08600 BOWLSBY BEVERLY J & ROBERT A SIGWORTH DWIGHT L AND 11200 SW MORGEN CT 11185 SW MORGEN COURT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DB-08700 2S103DB-08800 MCKERNAN THOMAS J AND RUBY LAMBIASO WILLIAM J AND DARLENE 11205 MORGEN COURT 11225 SW MORGEN CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DB-08900 2S103DB-09000 SATTLER BARBARA J JOHNSEN ROGER C & MAILI H 11245 SW MORGAN CT 11265 SW MORGEN CT TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DB-09100 2S103DB-09200 SAKASH PHILLIP M & SONYA M MAHAR STEPHEN J & TIMEA 11285 SW MORGEN CT 11390 SW ERSTE PL TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97224 2S103DB-09300 2S103DB-09400 CLARKE JOHN G & KARYN S ABEYTA THOMAS J AND DEBORAH L 11380 SW ERSTE PL 11370 SW ERSTE DR TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103DB-09500 2S103DB-09600 HONEYCUTT EDWIN E JR & ETHEL L CULBERTSON JON C 11375 SW ERSTE PL 11385 SW ERSTE PL TIGARD, 08 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 9 boa t o nrnIU;e w0005 S 3 P~ d~ 2S103D13-09700 2S103D13-09800 SCHOPPE PAUL & KATHRYN J BRUMMETT RODNEY L & REBECCA S 11395 SW ERSTE PL 11490 SW SONNE PL TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 2S103D13-09900 2S103D6-10000 FRANK LARRY AND ANGELA YORK LAURENCE A & LAURA J 11480 SW SONNE PLACE 11470 SW SONNE PL TIGARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223 STEVE TURNER MATT WELLNER S.R. TURNER CONSTRUCTION LAND TECH, INC. 8835 SW CANYON LANE, SUITE 408 8835 SW CANYON LANE, SUITE 402 PO BOX 25216 PORTLAND OR 97225 PORTLAND OR 97289=0216 • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community DATE: ril 21998 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: CRY of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William WAndrea, Associate Planner Phone: 150316394M fax: [50316847297 RE: SUBDIVISION [SOB) 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PORI 98-0003/VARIANCE (VAR] 98-0003/ZONE CHANGE [ION] 98-0002 ➢ FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Q A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,500 square feet to 13,387 square feet; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. Attached is the Site Plan, VlCIRDY Map and Api liunCS Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - APRIL 13,1998). 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 FOLLOWIN6"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. Written comments provided below: (Please provide &e fodouiy information) Name of Person(s) Commenting: Phone Number(s): SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003/VAR 98-0003/ZON 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS 0 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS NOTIFICATION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS CRAii08i-[CI[EI [SI"[Wl ~:Y'= x ~ ®°Pt~c~tlirntitl~ll.WUDIriryCRBuIQU'; - CITItEN 1NYOLYEMENTTEAMS ` FILE NO[SI.: S03 qR~._ ® z FILE NAMEISI: \00(Z:5 a.. .x.~~... .{ti. .s1, f.",.31 T4,. }'•}~i Esw~ WIFFIC SZ4 i.. -ADVANCED PLANNING/Nadine Smith, Pianna„ sw.rvt.er COMMUNITY DVLPMNT. DEPTJDvtwaet. s-. T«nda.e. LICE DEPTJJim Wolf, Cim.PrwWJ_0nk.r UILDING DIVJDavid Scott, awdiNonkw AeEbLGINEERING DEPTJBrian Rager, Ovtp..R..r..Pwn.r E-MA-tER DEPTJMichael Miller, oo«.~ ra..e.r _ CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley, CIrylt-dr PERATIONS DEPTJJohn Roy, Prap«ryrwsp.r _ OTHER A SPECULL DISTRICTS` _ TUAL HILLS PARK & REC. DIST.O_ TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE O TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT O 4:-UFpFIED SWRGE. AGENCY O Planning Manager Fire Marshall Administrative Office Julia Huffman/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road Washington County Fire District PO Box 745 155 N. First Street Beaverton, OR 97006 (place in pick-up box) Beaverton, OR 97075 Hillsboro, OR 97124 a .I i.. f-, arc w } IOCALAND STAiEIORISDICT[ONS _ CITY OF BEAVERTON 111 _ CITY OF TUALATIN OR. DEPT. OF FISH & WILDLIFE _ OR. DIV. OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager 2501 SW First Avenue 775 Summer Street, NE _ Mike Matteucci, Naiya„a. cot»d. PO Box 369 PO Box 59 Salem, OR 97310-1337 PO Box 4755 Tualatin, OR 97062 Portland, OR 97207 Beaverton, OR 97076 OR. PUB. UTILITIES COMM. _ METRO - LAND USE & PLANNING O _ OR. DEPT. OF GEO. & MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street, NE _ CITY OF DURHAM O 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street, Suite 5 Salem, OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland, OR 97232-2736 Portland, OR 97232 PO Box 23483 US ARMY CORPS. OF ENG. Durham, OR 97281-3483 _ Paulette Allen, GrowthManagernent Coordinator _ OR. DEPT. OF LAND CONSERV.& DVLP_ 333 SW First Avenue _ Mel Huie, Greenspaces Coordinator (CPAVZOA's) 1175 Court Street, NE PO Box 2946 _ CITY OF KING CITY O Salem, OR 97310-0590 Portland, OR 97208-2946 City Manager _ METRO AREA BOUNDARY COMMISSION 15300 SW 116th Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street _ OREGON DEPT. OF TRANS. (ODOT) _ WASHINGTON COUNTY +It King City, OR 97224 Building #16, Suite 540 Aeronautics Division Dept. of Land Use & Trans. Portland, OR 97232-2109 Tom Highland, Ptanmrq 155 N. First Avenue _ CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO O 3040 25th Street, SE Suite 350, MS 13 Planning Director _ OR. DEPT. OF ENERGY Salem, OR 97310 Hillsboro, OR 97124 PO Box 369 Bonneville Power Administration Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Routing TTRC - Attn: Renae Ferrera _ ODOT, REGION 1 O _ Brent Curtis (CPA'.t PO Box 3621 Sonya Kazen, Dvtpmt. Rev. Coord. _ Scott King (CPA's) _ CITY OF PORTLAND Portland, OR 97208-3621 123 NW Flanders _ Mike Borreson (En*naer) David Knowles, Planning Bureau Dir. Portland, OR 97209-4037 Jim Tice pGA-s) Portland Building 106, Rm. 1002 _ OREGON, DEPT. OF ENVIRON. QUALITY !1'om Harry (c..m Pt. Apps.) 1120 SW Fifth Avenue 811 SW Sixth Avenue _ ODOT, REGION 1 - DISTRICT 2A O _ Phil Healy (c~ m Pt. Apps.) Portland, OR 97204 Portland, OR 97204 Jane Estes, Permit spactamt _ Sr. Cartographer(cpvzcA-,us14) PO Box 25412 Portland, OR 97298-0412 W . 4 = UTILIT1f PROYIDERS'AND'SPECIAL AGENCIES _ BURLINGTON NORTHERN/ SANTA FE R/R _ METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS r/PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC _ TCI CABLEVISION OF OR. Reed Fay, Division Superintendent Jason Hewitt Brian Moore,Svc.Design Consultant Linda Peterson 1313 W. 11th Street Twin Oaks Technology Center 9480 SW Boeckman Road 3500 SW Bond Street Vancouver, WA 98660-3000 1815 NW 169th Place, S-6020 Wilsonville, OR 97070 Portland, OR 97201 Beaverton, OR 97006-4886 _ COLUMBIA CABLE COMPANY _ PORTLAND WESTERN R/R _ TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Craig Eyestone _ NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY Steve Myhr, Region Manager Michael Kiser, Project Planner 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Scott Palmer Catellus Property Management 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton, OR 97005 220 NW Second Avenue 999 Third Avenue, Suite 2120 Portland, OR 97232 Portland, OR 97209-3991 Seattle, WA 98104-4037 _ GENERAL TELEPHONE Paul Koft, Engineering _ OREGON ELECTRIC R/R -SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS. CO. R/R _US WEST COMMUNICATION MC: OR030546 (BURL/NVONNORTNFMNIMEAFFR/RPRMAMPJ Clifford C. Cabe, Construction Engineer Pete Nelson Tigard, OR 97281-3416 Reed Fay, Division Superintendent 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard 421 SW Oak Street 1313 W. 11th Street Portland, OR 97232 Portland, OR 97204 Vancouver, WA 98660-3000 0 • IMO/CAYSS AV"PiATOC MOTIF/CAT/ON If W00118A "0' Of ffig SVaMCT P&OP92f r "41 AMr/A" CITE YitOltCli. (YAOlLCT OLAMM IJ IS AN"CAS15LE FOA /MO/CAf1AG ~MS 10 MOnFV) . Mpatty4nasterswcnotice.mst 16,)an~98 CITY of TIG AR D 5\\v GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM V AREA NOTIFIED SUB 98-0002 2s omcwwo ' Former Woods S103AC05 3b: CL _ Subdivision 2S o3AcA5 iWACOI 2$10 3001, . 2S103AC0 200< 2S103A X5000,' 2 0 2300 S103A , 0 . AC01 0• •a." 2S,03A 0 2S103 1701 2S103ACO 101 2 C02400 2SI03AC02600 2S103AC01700 2S103D 0 2S103D 0 2S103DB00100 a ,030 o 50 100 150 200 250 Feet 2SWB09 0 t•=1s8feet C 2S 03DB10 0 n 2S1 B NO 103D809 0 2S o3DBO81 0 City ofTigHrd 2 103DBOSWO Information on this map is for general location only and 2S103 0 should be verified vAth the Development Services Division. 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639.4171 h"pJAw .ciAlgard.or.us Community Development Plot date: Mar 24, 1998; c:\magic\magic0l.apr Sent By: 503 848 8338; Mar-27-01 11:44; Page 1/2 Ilk - 1? "IF'- 2-- TO: Mathew Scheidegger Voice Phone Number: From: TOM WHELCHEL Company: Fax Number: 503 848 8338 Voice Number: 7onthis quote for the trees for lot 11 Fonner Woods (12958 SW 113th plc) could you fax me the letter in reference to the tree removal as soon as you can. Thanks for all the ue. Tom Whelchel Date: 3/27/01 Pages: 1 of 1 Sent By: ; 503 848 8338; Mar-27-01 11:45; Page 2/2 BEACNAM LANDSCAPE SNPPLY 361 S. 13TH AVE C"ORNELIUS OR 97123 Phone 503-359-9797 MARCH 26, 2001 QUOT , -10 2"-3" RED MAKE TREES (FOB) @ $36.00 EACH TOTAL- $360.00 Tom Whelchel Builder Inc. 1020 SE 61 st Way ~~rr Hillsboro OR 97123 503-848-8338 COMMIJ~ City of Tigard Attn: Kevin Young 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard OR 97223 This letter is in reference to the property at 12958 SW 113th Place Tigard (legal: 2s103AC 07500) There are two large fir trees that set in the middle of the proposed home to be built on the lot described above. I would like to remove the two fir trees to better take advantage of the lot. The trees which the diameters at the base are 27" and 18" would be replaced with 23" of new trees per our conversation. This would be accomplished by adding approximately 8- 2" diameter fir trees and 4- 2" Maple trees. The location would be determined by the home owners that I am building this house for. The new trees will be planted prior to final inspection on proposed home. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 503-349-3052 or 503-848-8338. Thank You T m Whelchel MAR-22-2001 14:21 FROM:HALSTEADS ARBO CONS 503-848-7627 TO:503 848 8338 P. 002/003 HA LSTEAp'S ARBORICULTURE CONSULTANTS aspecialists in the care and piaservation of trees, Davldhlalsteatl, Consultant B.S. Philip Hickey, Consultant, a, S, PhMIP Whitcomb, Consultant P.O. BOX 1182 • Tualatin, OR 97062 (503) 245-1383 March 22, 2001 ATTN.: Mr. Tom Whe/chel Tom Whelche/ guilder, Inc. y 1020 SE 61 °f Way Hillsboro, OR 97123 Fx 503.848 8338 i Reference: Tree Assessment for Proposed Development Location; 12958 SW 11Yh Avenue, Tigard Subject Tree Survey/MifigationRepoOregon With your approval,! have inspected the site, existing trees on site and the Site Plan 223OG (enclosed) for the proposed single house pro ject located at 12958 SW 113"' Avenue, Tigard, Oregon. The purpose of this inspection was to identify y ' all trees on-site and evaluate the pmservafion potential of all trees six inches in trunk diameter (measured at 4.5 fleet above ground) and larger under the forthcoming construction In accordance with the City of Tigard's Thee Ordinance Chapter 18.150. TREE ASSESSMENT There are a total of bmag trees 6 inch in diameter and larger located within project boundaries. Fifteen of these trees are less than twelve inches in trunk diameter measured at 4.5 feet above ground and are not required to be part of I th# City of Tigarft Tree MidgebonAdentihcation Program." 4+ There are five trees remaining within project boundaries that are twelve inches in trunk diameter and larger that are required to be part of the City of Tigard 's "Tree MitrgatioMdentifcation Program." One of these trees, an 184nch triple trunk Wild Cherry is hazardous, should be removed, and will not be mitigated. In addition, there are two trees, a 12 inch Wild Cherry and a 20 inch Douglas-fir tree that will be preserved and are not required to be part of the City of Tigard's "Tree MitigationAdentfication Program." There ale two Douglas fir trees that am preservable, are within hardscape boundaries and/or will not survive construction trauma and will need to be removed. Email: hacaspititone.com www.spi dtone.com/-.h ac CCau 0068646 MAR-22-2001 14:22 FROM: HALSTE S ARBO CONS 503-848-7627 T0:503 848 8338_ P. 003/003 - Page 2 March 22, 2001 Reference. Tree Assessment for Proposed Development Location: 12958 SW 1IrAvenue, Tigard, Oregon Subject. Tree SurreyAWItigation Report Amount of Preservable Tree Retainage = 89%. Preservable Tree Retainape of between 75 and 100 percent does not require mitigation according to City Ordinance. All preserved trees should do well and survive construction trauma pro viding their root zones are not disturbed and the tree care and preservation guidelines listed below are followed Tree Care and Preservation Guidelines Before construction begins, preserved tree(s) root zone(s) MY need to be protected by the installation of orange colored Tree Protection Fendng out to the canopy dripline of preserved tree(s). Fencing needs to be attached to 7-1oot tall steel fence posts placed eight feet apart on center forming a protective line around the preserved trees and fence posts need to be securely anchored in the soil to a depth of two feet. The fencing, as described, will need to be maintained throughout the entirety of the project. Before any work is done within the protected area and/or if the fencing needs to be adjusted due to hardscape construction, it will first require the approval of the consulting arborist and then adjustments will need supervision on-site. All free removal within project boundaries needs to be completed in a careful manner as to not damage any preserved trees. Any tree removed within 15 feet of a preserved tree needs to have the stump groundout rather than excavated to reduce overall root trauma. If I can be of further assistance and/or if more technical Information is needed, please contact me immediately. Sincerely, David Halstead BS CA ASCA t „i t I j , II 11 August 19, 1998 CY OF TI OREGON Steve Turner S. R. Turner Construction 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 408 Portland, OR 97225 Re: Tree Protection Fencing at the Fonner Woods Subdivision Site Dear Steve: This letter is in follow up to additional complaints the City has received concerning preliminary site work that has taken place at the Fonner Woods Subdivision property. Based on our recent discussion, you stated that you intend to preserve more trees than initially appeared possible. The Community Development Code encourages these kinds of efforts. However, as part of protecting existing trees, Condition of Approval #29 of the Final Order for this subdivision, required that protective measures such as fencing needs to be installed around the dripline of protected trees. Based on the street and utility improvements that need to be constructed the City understands that maintenance of protective measures for tree dripline's may not be possible at all times during construction but these measures are required to be maintained to the extent possible. For these reasons, protective measures need to be installed immediately or work at this site will be stopped Please feel free to contact me concerning this information at (503) 639-4171. Sincerely, Mark Roberts Associate Planner, AICP is\curpin\mark_r\letters\tumer.doc c: Brian Rager, Matt Harrell, Letha Thomas, Mike Mills Land Use File SUB 98-0002 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 01/10/2001 18:39 503-63W58 KLANN PAGE 01 ldl~ RECEIVED PLANNING JAN 11 2001 CO',.,-'ER PAGE CITY OF TIGARD TO: 1~rJ~11JG ~G~ FROM: KLANf--A TEL : 5 0 3 Q. Ck FA GE C S; ] TO FOLLOW COMMENT: i 01/10/2001 18:39 503-638-3658 KLANN _ PAGE 02 January 10, 2001 Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Mgr. City of Tigard 13125 S-W Hali Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Bewersdorff; We have made application to build on Lot 10, Former Woods. in locating the house on the lot, we find it impossible to save tree #220. We would propose that if we.arp granted permission to remove this tree, that we replace it witch 12 trees of 2" diameter or the equivalent. We are including a plot plan showing the location of both the tree to be removed and the replacement locations- Please contact us as soon a possible regarding this matter. Thank you for ycur consiceration. Sinc;er Mindy Klann K & W Development, Inc. 4.,... . 01/10/2001 18:39 503-638-3658 KLANN PAGE 03 i Jan 10 01 02:06p Carol Williams 2453994 p.3 Wy OF TIGAAD FONNP WOODS LOT 10 t ~.soa sa ~1 r ` 37 - - - _ N e9^56-o>a-..r... 14698' 7-PA ' -atr _ w . mw~a • JIiZ1 - Tv / ~ I _ MAIN F,13?wR, 1 ~3 , 2-37 Cal 00', ~ rye i f V i' of 33 tQ, I i i J / /a97.Z S.W. 113TH PLACE a3c~ a S, o 3 N: fit) Ovum molff V bS,n :700M~. C O TI woe ron rn..oawr.~ es n~ TIMOR~ 9wgmdw •rea ne sou ALL a MUNN nr y .u® d fm saw •w. er11t es a w~► aa~ ~qwn~ i t r'1 r i A 7 P 1 1 M 0. I PINE VALLEY BUILDERS INC. 1052 TROON RD. LANE OSWEGO, 0191084 TO: MATT SCHEIDEGGER FROM: GREG HICKS AS PER OUR DISCUSSION 2-9-01, AT YOUR REQUEST FOR MITIGATION ON THE REMOVAL OF ONE 36" FIR TREE ON LOT #12 IN THE FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION, I WILL PAY THE CITY OF TIGARD $540 AS THE BID I HAVE SUBMITTED INDICATES. fRECOVED PM AR 2P CWXVI'*. Y DRIP-0~ iViii~', MIKE'S TREE SERVICE LICENSED BONDED INSURED CCB# 94729 6545 S.W. Alfred • Tigard, OR 97223 • Office (503) 246.4410 • Mobile (503) 680-0767 WORK ORDER wVo cusmhm A UNT NO. QUANTITY DESCRIPTION ANIMINT Q, , \ p L. CLEAN UP: O Yes O-IQo TOTAL 00 Directions: Crew Houm I Risk Factor. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 s ! 10 Customer Sienature Hutt RECEIVED PLANNING SEP 0 4 1998 J i w,o~ CITY OF TIGARD 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 l PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING September 4, 1998 City of Tigard Planning Department c/o Mark Roberts 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Tree Mitigation for Fonner Woods (SUB 98-0002) Dear Mr. Roberts, This letter is in regards to a new tree plan that has been developed with Raymond Myer of Tree Care Unlimited, Inc. With our original application you received a plan that was much less precise than the one that is included with this letter. All of the dense brush and small trees have been cleared off of the site, making it easier to locate all of the trees over 12" in caliper. The plan that is included with this letter is an exact reflection of the trees over 12" in caliper that currently exist or have been recently removed from the site. The developer has chosen to cut down fewer large trees than what was originally proposed with the subdivision application. Thus, the required inches for mitigation should be reduced. If you find it necessary, you should go to the site to verify the enclosed plan.. This plan makes it very simple to locate all of the large healthy trees on the site. The arborist and applicant have located 83 trees larger than 12" in caliper on the subject site. The arborist has identified 12 of these 83 trees as unhealthy and unfit for this proposed subdivision. Thus, 71 of these 83 trees must be saved, or mitigated. The applicant has proposed to save 48 of these 71 trees. Therefor the applicant has proposed to remove 23 healthy trees from the subject site or 32 percent of the healthy trees. Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.150.025 (B)(2c) states: Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070D. The applicant has proposed to retain 68 percent of the existing trees over 12 inches in caliper. Thus 50 percent of the inches to be removed must be mitigated. The total caliper of healthy trees that the applicant has proposed for removal is 456 inches. Thus, the applicant is responsible to mitigate 228 inches. The applicant has initially proposed to mitigate these trees with 114 two-inch caliper maple trees. The developer may choose to use a larger caliper of tree, reducing the number of trees needed. The developer may also choose to place multiple species of trees, but has yet to make that decision. Finally the developer may choose to plant larger than 2" street trees, reducing the number of trees needed. The original application included a preliminary tree mitigation plan with 2" caliper trees planted around the perimeter of the subdivision. The applicant would simply like to alter that plan by reducing the number of trees. The perimeter of the property will likely be the location for the mitigation, there will only be fewer trees than originally proposed. Thank you for allowing us to reduce our mitigation from our original proposal. The developer has made every effort to save as many large trees as possible on the subject site. If you have any questions, or require any additional material please contact me at (503) 291-9398. Thank You, t_/W Matt Wellner 09/17/98 09:41 0503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD lih001 ssasaa~a$aaaaza~aasaaaaa~~a sss ACTIVITY REPORT Asa asa~as~*~a$~xxsaaa~aaaaas~~ TRANSMISSION OR T%/R% NO. 7518 CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME 09/17 09:40 USAGE TIME 01'00 PAGES 2 RESULT OR pages . post It' Fax Note 7671 Dale Gr 17 e To x/1/1 I)p ~e.- Fran cow t~ a ~A T J4 -M ca. o ~i'J Phone 0 G¢ - 7 Phone S j Fax # -7 q } Fit _ i' qy OF TWM C-0 5835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 2914 613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - sUBDMsIoN PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - WNsTRucnON sURXEYING _ '7 September 4, 1998 City of Tigard r45 R Vef~acSrM~~4N- v Planning Department r k im it y k sx- l Lf -2 c/o Mark Roberts C4 ~ 1 X.L a s ~ 13123 SW Hall Boulevard loas'1S P, ~e -e~lwca~'r? Tigard, OR 97223 reVev,.ed *o 1., 1f'!CQ d Re: Tree Mitigation for Former Woods (SUB 98-0002) r-e- ul'e.~ 'L,, e-o, J} UI Dear Mr_ Roberts, ~atv This letter is in regards to a new tree plan that has been ,r__ w.,.~.~..,.... tYl~ Vl of Tree Care Unlimited, Inc. With our original application you received a plan that was much less precise than the one that is included with this letter. All of the dense brush and small trees have been cleared off of the site, malting it easier to locate all of the trees over 12" in caliper. The plan that is included with this letter is an exact reflection of the trees over 12" in caliper that currently exist or have been recently removed from the site- The developer has chosen to cut dowrn fewer large trees than what was originally proposed with the subdivision application. Thus, the required inches for mitigation should be reduced. If you find it necessary, .w • ._1_. T•1-:_ ~7~~ +~..l.e. ~ro~r cYr'th~P tr1 1Af•.A'fP all • 88354& Canyon Lane #402 • Portl OR 97225 • Phone: 291-9398 Fax: 291-1613 LandTech, :Inc. (Lettcr of Transmit1VE® SEP - 8 1998 /1. ~ \O . V k RO J e'v+s COWUNITY DEVELOPMENT To: ~ M Cr7t G' ~y From: 1 ~C>W~ Date: Re: F0- n _,0,' WWC~-5 Project: Attn: Job#: q0r ❑ Urgent M/For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle . . . . . . . . . . COPIES DESCRIPTION f)cJ; pk)~ n I Sp Y~ao~~e~~ COMMENTS: Q✓ I ~a I i ► q o. I r O r1 33:3. lVew J°~ i • TREES TO BE SAVED FONNER WOODS TREE NO. SIZE (INCHES) COMMON NAME 1 46 Fir 2 20 Spruce 3 26 Spruce 4 16 Sweetgum 5 54 Fir 6 20 Pine 7 28 Pine 8 26 Oak 9 30 Maple 10 16 Cherry 11 22 Locust 12 32 Locust 13 14 Birch 14 15 Birch 15 18 Cherry 16 14 Locust 17 13 Locust 18 13 Locust 19 32 Fir 20 21 Fir 21 36 Fir 22 34 Fir 23 34 Fir 24 21 Fir 25 21 Fir 26 18 Fir 27 40 Maple 28 24 Filbert 29 20 Fir 30 13 Cherry 31 13 Cherry 32 13 Cherry 33 13 Cherry 34 13 Cherry 35 I 13 Cherry 36 13 Cherry 37 24 Fir 38 18 Fir 1 • TREES TO BE SAVED • FONNER WOODS 39 14 Ash 40 27 Fir 41 18 Fir 42 24 Fir 43 42 Fir 44 28 Fir 45 34 Fir 46 24 Fir 47 24 Fir 48 24 Cherry TOTAL INCHES= 1068 2 • HEALTHY TREES • TO BE REMOVED FONNER WOODS TREE NO. SIZE (INCHES) COMMON NAME A 48 Fir B 13 Service Berry C 18 Maple D 16 Red Cedar E 13 Birch F 20 Red Cedar G 18 Spruce H 16 Maple I 20 Cedar J 14 Birch K 14 Birch L 26 Locust m 21 Spruce N 18 Fir O 24 Fir p 22 Fir Q 21 Fir R 24 Fir S 16 Cherry T 24 Fir U 22 Fir V 14 Walnut W 14 Walnut TOTAL INCHES= 456 1 -1 NOTE: AS OF 9/4/98 THESE TREES HAVE ALREADY BEEN REMOVED 1 • UNHEALTHY TREES • TO BE REMOVED FONNER WOODS TREE NO. SIZE (INCHES) COMMON NAME AA 12 Spruce BB 21 Apple cc 14 Apple DD 12 Pine EE 28 Apple FF 14 Cherry GG 20 Birch HH 20 Pine 11 20 Pine JJ 18 Sweetgum KK 10 Cherry LL 12 Wild Plum MM 15 Fir NN 12 Hawthorne 00 10 Hawthorne pp 12 Plum QQ 14 Cherry RR 24 Deciduous SS 14 Ash TOTAL INCHES = 302 NOTE: UNLESS LABELED ON PLAN, TREE HAS ALREADY BEEN REMOVED AS OF 9/4/98. ALL UNHEALTHY TREES HAVE BEEN INSPECTED BY A CERTIFIED ARBORIST 1 %Sep=01-98 01:01A S_R_ Turner Construction 503 292-6297 P_01 S. R. TURNER CONSTRUCTION LLC P. O. BOX 25216 PORTLAND, OREGON 97289-0216 8835 S. W. CANYON LANE #408 PORTLAND, OREGON 97225 PHONE: 503-292-5920 FAX: 503-292"6297 FAX COVER PAGE THIS COPY IS BEING SENT BY A MANUAL FAX MACIM411. TARE ARE A TOTAL OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET BEING TRANSMITTED. DATE: fegr/Z cl TO: COMPANY: G «llf~ FAX FROM: 4. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES CORRECTLY, PLEASE CALL: 503- 292-5920 AND REQUEST A RETRANSMISSION. r NOTES: Le G~2o~~ "Sep=01-98 01:01A S_R. Turner Construction 503 2c~.2-6297 P_02 SeReTURNER COPIgTRUCTlO1'I L LC. Sept. 1, 1998 Mark Roberts i' Associate Planner City ofTigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., T*Ud, Oregon 97223 RE: Your letter of Aug. 19, 1998, Fortner Woods tree protection Dear Mark, I have been out of town on vacation and just read your letter today. I would like you to know that prior to leaving on 8/20/98' and prior to getting your letter, I.had installed protective fences around the base of several trees that were adjacent to the pile of brush we were chipping up at the Fonner Sit.. It is important to note that most of these trees were not slated to be saved under our submitted plan but as I had told you during your lest visit we were going to make every effort to do so because they are important to us as well. As we had told and shown you as well, during your lest site visit, a significant number of trees that were slated to be removed had in fact been left in place. It is our intention to not remove them. What I feel you are responding to is the neighbor to the east who retakes it his personal project to call every time we arrive at the site to do any clean up activity. We had discussed with you our plan to remove the brush by chipping as well on that visit. As you mentioned, we must first clear and grub the brush from around the trees. That has been done now, We don't expect the remaining construction work to start with out the agreed protection to be in place and will do so as soots as we receive our construction permits. (We understand that will be some time this week). Please contact me if 1 may meet you again at the site to discuss this issue further. Sincerely, Steve R. Tlunei S.R. Turner Construction, LLC PS- I would like to request that your offices look into what I feel is a Zoning violation on the part of the neighbor to the east. I understand his property is designated as a historic site because of the old farm house which is on the site and enjoys some tax benefits as a result of the this designation. Additionally he has converted the garage on the site into a commercial recording studio and is operating a business out of the location in the upstairs area. The site is not zoned as a (NC), (neighborhood commercial) zone and is therefore violating the use for the residential zone. He may also be in violation of the Historic deApabon. (51335 S.W. Canyon Ln.. Suite 408 P. 0. Box 25216, Portland, 01(97225 503-292.3920 Fax 503-292-6297 .MAY-19-98 TUE 09:12 LAND TECH INC 503 291 1613 P.01 0 8835 SW Canyon Lane 4402 Portlod, OR 97225 Phone; 291-9398 - Fax: 291-•1613 S;22d£MEN, '.L: .y~..JN:4.4b :n4a F, rM'x yx(.. ,:a :FO: yt: xn:o xi4 k i . o{;.qs}a>::3Fia Z ii::ict«l:S;.`;';; &S °::l ;a~>.o:r ..~l:l X, G~dq.~~li~Il~?~~~~a~J~~e~~~~~1►~JF^~~~ To: j~a d ° 7 S Fax: Prom: S few Date: e, vs Re: ~^G Hi? 2.- Ltioo~t ~/d t Pages: Z CC: ❑ Urgent O For Review M'Please Comment ❑ Please Reply 0 Please Recycle . . . . . . . . . . MOTES: y.. o / G l2. ? Scf~ ¢>'OM^~ Zio"J'+ii3.'hx.x•N,.,....,....,; •,n,. r ,r7" s.~xa'n:.s, n~ a;eHH dPf; b.KJxk;xdc:~:l >!:>:>Q ~G;~y"~;~f:.,s!6:~. N4»c .C:T?~~• roan ^b:o4^. ,a: )xaxn abo-. x k.kne.~c~H.xa.:k' ya~. :>~+~.~4:.~}Abt?C !{aee.a ~ F.a>nk^>+4 ~xa:MO• .bM(<~'. ..,fs,,~x~~700~' /}i•>` al A~e'Lxoo ~ `s•3.Wrexaw.. ' 6R<•+Cy, n ;2:$'e:a>4~ x~x<br~ ~v; y:~~9 ~ ' ' .^fd°. a<• x~a. x.>•..;..,,, w>r, ~+<r. „ e:n . ~•4 6 .4xa:e air. p~~ {.y ~b e k 2 '~.,A. C~ w'-0~ „SV:'i.:S. At :L•:' K'~G>. e {.<:Y,t ~N}rA%Fnk :OOa 3, <:nt!yx ~i Yx'>C"b~ •%3a yo. aY:o.,k. ,t~ d~<:. 4 < brF% tM1n:,'a ^r~n~x n~i:sAS:a< i6rtx;>G , xSfh°.~„a „ fF> ~4:> r:¢:r::~ ;L~~~ k.te'<h<'e:: ,yf'' ~~5'd~,^ `t k »,~`y~(i::k.. . . • • • • • . . • • v<:x c c:::'~.E~~'.c~'•~`?.cx:u~'tcM4t~.??~?~'~ ~ :«iL> ~;q:`~.Mu`:c.~asa~`.g,~y.~> e~• q',..... °~',6~ n:a • aae>.~i` Ek~4'<'~.C?~(C~.. 'w~ wJ.i'AYn~6.',f:. .MAY-19-98 TUE 09:13 LAND TECH INC 503 291 1613 P.02 N PARCEL Q r,~ 133.37 N t JLt 7JT NO, 3273 p 2 ~ h 46. D' G 7,431. sf. Q) ~ t ~ ~ J33.33' ~o existing house t Qc- to remain ,j t t 8,168. sf. r' Q Z: L------ t I r r-~Z.-_~ O< t t 90, 79 ^ t ~ ~ O rO PARCEL 2 40.68 O t i to be removed l, Qrr r~ 1 r? t t ~ , IV J~ Q 114.80' tK ~QO O~ OQ ( J LX66, 19' i r . `1y R-4,9, oo ~ '92 6ri 00 6. ~6, Q0 q~ X35' 04 v2~ ry~~ tt tt 3.13' (O)0 006 $w 8 12 -P~~6 y9 G g.2 00 rs . oo R_b9. o. 1D 11 o, G: \DWG\401\401base.dwg Thu May 14 14:55:39 1998 SCH ~ ON SlSN3,~ ~ z8 98 19 08 l Z'PS 99,99 LF '6Zl ZL 'OS QS " 1S 000,L '1s '000'L 'L L L'8 ll Ol ~S '96b'L ti 00'0=H Zf'Lf'l .69= 7 Zl b 00'6t,=6X' is 1B581Of8 O g~ 6V91 =7 o c„ ON1N3lNn000 ~G y1 6(~4 8 o j 00 'ON if 8;~ J ,L9'Zf~< '6L8'L 00 00 o a; 0 Po F 00'6t, =6( L /ss 08'Sl =7 o rn 0 o~ cs' ~ o ~ rn rn o0 c~ Ch 7 9z fel ~I y N 4 c, o /o 1A OZ 9 00 ~0 ~S ~5Z'L ,s67Z 00'ZOl V7 ,I 0 o .0 0 N 99'0 Z 73JtYVcl loLf'018 0~ 6! 06 'ON 1 N3nl?000 '1S '89 L'8 Z O F I U1 ~I o x f ff'l v \ ti ~ ~ rn ,o '9~ }S ' LCt'L Qr) Z o O -rj f'LZf'9oL6 ~M 'oN 1 N3wnooo ~ o l 730Ydd o 'is ' L26'8 N I ti l ti I 0 I a I o99~_~ 1S 911 1 7 c ® c -------------e c - - - - - 1338-IS I / _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - V I~ / 0.* 37VOS 073H I I (,J o ti ` „Lf'Pl S'7'd 7730.(&,, 03d"V15 I y ddo WW"n7V Z I 30 14. Irlj I I In I I I I fpo0en-1 ~aUUD~ I I I I • I I ✓y I I a I G: \DWG\401\401base.dwg Fri May 15 08:43:50 1998 SCH £ ' 0 N S I S N 3 0 J9 99 19 09 l Z'~S y [1lsu~' ~Y L£ 6Zl _ ` ZL '08 O - 3 js.o 0' is 'Z- 111, 2 01 r_ v.. 96' fl, Z_ 00 L, oil 'ON 1 N3", Q ~r 6 t'v 00 -4 'ON h,s..._6 ~L 00 CL Z, A L f Zl CPA Z~o 9 , / A4 o t3 ~ -t , sz / 9 w f If ,96'lL Ol low 0 / / pan o~ 0' 730(YVof ON 1 N3lNN~RC/ I 'JS '29l 8 I uiocuaj of i O snot' 6ui;sixa- C N3 I I -is (0 od -9 ' I O O £LZr90L6 ~73M (3) ON 1 N31Nn000 I 73o6ldd 2 6'2 1.. I ti C , - ON- - ~ ~ - - _ - - - 133b~1 S cV3NN0-J ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I~ 073H „L£'j~l S7d 7730.(&,, 03dWb'1S d d0 nnN1nn7V I ~ I I I i I I I ~ , CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Minutes May 4, 1998 1. CALL TO ORDER President Wilson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center; Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Wilson; Commissioners Anderson, Castile, Griffith, Neff, Padgett, and Scolar Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Holland Staff Present: Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Mark Roberts, Associate Planner; Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner; Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer; Jerree Gaynor, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS: None 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES Commissioner Griffith moved and Commissioner Scolar seconded a motion to approve the March 16, 1998, meeting minutes as submitted. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed by a 6-0 vote. Commissioner Padgett abstained. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS President Wilson reviewed the hearing criteria and procedures. 5.1 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 98-0001/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 98-0005 CANDLEWOOD EXTENDED STAY HOTEL PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Planned Development and Site Development Review approval to construct a 64,844 square foot, 125 room, four (4)-story extended stay hotel. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION(S): General Commercial (C-G). ZONING DESIGNATION(S): General Commercial (C-G) with Planned Development Overlay (PD). LOCATION(S): The subject site is located at the west end of SW Beveland Street on the east side of Highway 217; WCTM 2S 101 BD, Tax Lot 00100. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.62, 18.67, 18.80, 18.84, 18.98, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150 and 18.164. Commissioner Castile reported a site visit for this application. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 1 STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Julia Hajduk presented the staff report on behalf of the City. She reviewed the specifics of this proposal to construct a four story 125 room extended stay hotel in the Tigard Triangle. She said that it involved some slight grading, construction of an on-site water quality facility, removal of most of the trees, and mitigation of wetlands. Ms. Hadjuk commented that many of the Tigard Triangle design standards could not be applied because the site was located at the end of a cul-de-sac. With the access driveway being the only frontage on a public street, the building placement and design standards and the parking lot design standards were not applicable. She noted Conditions 1 and 2 which were intended to require compliance with what standards did apply. She mentioned the planned development overlay requiring approval of the conceptual development plan, pointing out that the Commission was also reviewing the detailed plan at this time. Ms. Hadjuk reported that the applicant has not yet received final permit approval from the Division of State Lands (DSL) and the Army Corps of Engineers for its wetlands fill and mitigation. She mentioned a letter received from USA in which Ms. Smith suggested not approving the site development plan until the resources issues were involved. She said that she did not think that was necessary as Condition 3 adequately addressed the issues by requiring that the applicant obtain a DSL permit prior to issuance of a building permit while reserving staff s ability to review the plan, should DSL require significant modifications to the plan. Ms. Hadjuk reviewed the access and traffic issue. She noted that the 20 foot wide Beveland Street was the only way in and out of the site but no improvements were warranted by the development. She mentioned that the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District (TVF&R) would allow the sprinkling of the building and the posting of no parking signs on Beveland in lieu of their requirement for two access points for a structure of this type (Condition 10). She recommended a modification to Condition 10 to require the applicant to petition the City Council to provide no parking signs on one side of Beveland from Hermosa to the western end of Beveland or, if Council turned the request down, to provide an alternative acceptable to TVF&R. Ms. Hadjuk noted the fax received from Mike Robinson supporting staffs interpretation of the frontage road. She recommended approval of the application with the conditions as listed in the staff report and the modification to Condition 10. Commissioner Griffith asked for clarification on the Fire District's expectations if the Council did not approve no parking signs. Ms. Hadjuk said that staff discussed alternatives with the applicant, such as widening Beveland or gaining access through the Phil Lewis School site, but left it open for other alternatives. President Wilson asked for clarification on how many intersections there were on Bevelarid. Ms. Hadjuk reviewed the location of the four intersections. President Wilson said that he had difficulty with staffs interpretation on this matter. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 2 Commissioner Padgett asked for verification that the design, as submitted, would not preclude a frontage road along Hwy 217 built in the ODOT right-of-way. Ms. Hadjuk said that was correct. Commissioner Castile spoke to the difficulty in knowing what the site would look like without the wetland fill and mitigation design. Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager, explained that, as long as the application met the conditions - even if the design changed - it would not be so different as to affect the Code standards. He recommended that the Commission approve the design as submitted and staff would check any redesign against the Code. Ms. Hadjuk said that she did not see any modifications that could not be addressed through the minor modifications approval process. However if a significant design change did occur, then the applicant would have to go back through the process. President Wilson asked for more information on the frontage road. Mr. Bewersdorff said that the frontage road was a dotted line on the Triangle Master Plan but it was not clear that the road was necessary. He confirmed that ODOT did participate in this discussion. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION • Bill Langston, Project Coordinator, 17962 Calvin, Irvine, CA, 92614, introduced the project team that has been working on this for a year, including Gretchen Vetnay, landscape architect. He mentioned that the neighborhood meeting went well. He said that they agreed to install a fence along the property line abutting the Johnson property to prevent guests from wandering into the neighbor's yard. He suggested that Mr. Johnson decide whether it was a chain-link or wood fence. He commended the staff on their excellent work. Mr. Langston reviewed the history of the Candlewood Hotel chain founded by Jack DeBor of Residency Inns. He mentioned the type of professional business clientele they served with an average stay of 14 days per guest. Mr. Langston reviewed the elevations and the location of the various site elements. He pointed out the wetlands mitigation and buffer areas. He said that they studied noise factors affecting the neighborhood and. soundproofed the building. He presented the illustration of the standard building design as seen from Beveland Street. • Rita Mroczk, 3980 SW 170'h, Aloha, wetlands biologist, reviewed the standard wetland delineation process which she used for this application. She said that the DSL representative agreed with her methodology and conclusions. She said that Kendra Smith at USA raised several issues because of her personal interest in wetland delineations (having been a wetland delineator prior to working at USA) but USA had no authority to review wetlands delineations. She said that she met with Ms. Smith on site to present her methodology and conclusions which Ms. Smith did not disagree with. She noted that Ms. Smith felt that the offsite wetlands in the south corner in the right-of-way should be buffered as well. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 3 Ms. Mroczk stated that they would submit the planting plan for the water quality pond as requested by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. She mentioned that she met with Tigard staff last week to resolve many of the issues. She said that it did not appear that there would be any major changes in the wetlands acreage or mitigation design, just the minor adjustments that were standard on applications these days. Commissioner Griffith asked about the Corps' involvement. Ms. Mroczk said that she did not know if the Corps has made a decision yet, as they have not sent any written material back. Ms. Hadjuk reported that she received a phone call from the Corps today regarding the issues yet to be resolved. She said that the Corps staff person agreed that the Tigard staff condition requiring the wetlands permit prior to the building permit was satisfactory. • Steve Hale, LandTech Engineering, 8835 SW Canyon Lane, #402, Portland, concurred with the conditions as stated. He said that he would do an hydraulic analysis to insure that the water pressure in the lines extended down Beveland from SW 72"d was adequate for fire hoses. He said that he did not foresee any difficulty, as the existing 12 inch line had plenty of pressure in it, and the site was lower than the connection to the existing main. Mr. Hale said that the second pond to the south of the mitigation area was the water quality facility and detention pond required by ODOT to detain the 50 year storm water runoff. He reviewed the storm water management design for the site, including the water coming from Beveland beyond SW 72"d. He reviewed the sanitary sewer system design, stating that there should be no problem in extending adequate sewer to Beveland and to the property to the north. Mr. Hale said that the Fire Marshall liked the circle at the end around which the engines could go. He said that the sprinkler system was a standard design. Mr. Langston commented that they would design the hydrant layout so that any portion of the building was within 150 of a hydrant, based on his conversations with the Fire District. Commissioner Griffith asked if the sprinklers and hydrants were off the same single source line. Mr. Langston said yes but there would be sufficient pressure for the hydrants. Mr. Langston commented that he thought that this would be a better environmental project than what was on site currently, and beneficial to all, citing the utilities work in particular. President Wilson asked why a connection to the north and south was not feasible. Mr. Langston explained that the elevations to the north and the plans for the site to the south made a connection not feasible. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN FAVOR • Gordon Martin, 12265 SW 72nd Avenue, said that, while he supported the development, he had some concerns and questions. He asked for a review of the Beveland street improvements PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 4 and traffic projections. He emphasized that the dotted line along Hwy 217, the frontage road, absolutely had to be maintained because in the future that road would be critical to the traffic circulation in the Triangle with the rebuilding of the I-5/217 interchange and the Dartmouth flyover. He said that he would accept the State's assurances that they had sufficient right-of- way for the future improvements. He asked for confirmation that his property to the north would have access to the sewer extended for this project. The Commission addressed Mr. Martin's question regarding the street improvements and traffic projections. Mr. Hale confirmed that they projected 708 trips per day. Mr. Bewersdorff explained that because the project itself did not trigger a street widening, they were not requiring the improvements listed in the Triangle standards for curbs, sidewalks, and cross-sections. Mr. Martin commented that he found that an interesting interpretation of the Triangle standards but he would go along with the neighboring residents' desires. He said that he had understood at the neighborhood meeting that the developer would do the necessary improvements to Beveland according to the design standards. He asked to talk with staff about their thinking behind their implementation of the Triangle design standards. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN OPPOSITION None APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL • Mr. Langston said that their studies showed that the extended stay hotel would generate less trips than a single family residential or medium density multi-family development in the same location. He reiterated that the traffic studies showed that this project did riot warrant street improvements. He mentioned the condition requiring them to bring the street surface up to code. • Mr. Hale said that the "end of the bulb" needed repair. He concurred that this project did not warrant the street improvements. He reported that ODOT has looked at his preliminary plans and found no problems. Mr. Langston said that they never intended to do anything to the right-of-way for the future frontage road as that was under ODOT's control. Mr. Hale said that he asked ODOT about the frontage road, and ODOT said that there was plenty of right-of-way available. He said that they would install a chain-link fence along the right-of-way per ODOT's request. • President Wilson closed the public hearing PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATIONS Commissioner Padgett asked for confirmation that staff's position was that the increased traffic generation on Beveland was too low to require improvements to the street based on the Triangle design standards. Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer, said that because the traffic on Beveland, including the hotel traffic, did not exceed the capacity of a local street built to standard (28 feet curb to curb), and because this project had very little frontage on Beveland, staff did not require the half street improvements they would have normally required. Commissioner Castile asked how this would affect future developments along Beveland. Mr. Rager said that staff typically required half street improvements when property fronting a street was redeveloped. At that time they would require widening the road. President Wilson expressed his concern that the almost all of the Triangle design standards dealt with the project's relations to the street it fronted on. He noted that this project, because of its location at the end of the cul-de-sac, bypassed nearly all the design standards - a loophole of concern to him. He said that he thought that this was a good project but questioned whether or not it met the standards for connectivity. President Wilson pointed out that this project's traffic would impact the intersection at SW 72nd and Dartmouth with its deteriorating level of service. He commented that he saw a missed opportunity here to find another connection to provide relief for that intersection, citing the connectivity standards. Ms. Hadjuk explained that eventually Beveland would connect all the way through, thus addressing the street connectivity issue. President Wilson said that he could accept that interpretation. Mr. Bewersdorff commented that cul-de-sacs were not so much a loophole as a condition not considered. He mentioned that staff has had some difficulty with them because the standards did not take into account where the building would actually be located. Commissioner Griffith expressed concern about the single source for both the sprinklers and the fire hydrants. Ms. Hadjuk commented that that was why TVF&R wanted to some additional standards in conjunction with the sprinklers. Commissioner Griffith moved to approve SDR 98-0001/ PDR 98-0005, subject to the conditions as submitted, including the modification to condition #10 reviewed tonight. Commissioner Scolar seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed by a 7-0 vote. > President Wilson recessed the meeting at 8:15 p.m. for a break. > President Wilson reconvened the meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 6 5.2 SUBDIVISION (SUB) 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 98- 0003/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 98-0002NARIANCE (VAR) 98-0003 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Subdivision approval to divide one (1) parcel of 2.83 acres into 12 lots ranging in size from 7,448 to 8,711 square feet and to additionally develop a 6,009 square foot water quality tract. The applicant has also requested Conceptual and Detailed Planned Development Review to create lots. An amendment to the zoning map is requested to place Planned Development (PD) Overlay on the property. Lastly, the applicant proposes a Variance to the minimum access spacing standards for a Minor Collector from the City standard of 300 feet to 135 feet. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION(S): Low Density Residential; 1-5 Dwelling Units Per Acre. ZONING DESIGNATION(S): R-4.5; Single-Family Residential (7,500 Square Feet) or (5,000 Square Feet Per Unit). The purpose of the R-4.5 zoning district is to establish standard urban low density residential home sites. LOCATION(S): 11300 SW Fortner Street; WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Lot 02000. The subject property is located east of the intersection of SW Fonner Street and SW 115th Avenue, on the south side of SW Fonner Street south across the street from SW 113th Place. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Mark Roberts presented the staff report and graphics on behalf of the City. He reviewed the specifics of the request to divide a 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging in size from 7,448 sq.ft. to 8,711 sq.ft., and to develop a 6,009 sq.ft. water quality tract. He noted the requests for a Conceptual and Detailed Planned Development Review (to create lots less than the 7,500 sq.ft. minimum allowed in an R-4.5 zone), for a Planned Development Overlay, and for a variance to the access spacing standards. Mr. Roberts reviewed the location of the site and the surrounding. He mentioned that the applicant needed the variance in order to maintain the home currently existing on the site, incorporated into Lot 3. He recommended approval subject to the conditions of approval listed in the staff report. President Wilson asked if the primary reason why this was a private street instead of a public street was the absence of a six foot sidewalk. Mr. Roberts said yes. He said that the reason appeared to be to maintain the mature trees in the field. He commented that the area typically did not have sidewalks. President Wilson asked if any lots would be lost as a result of full sidewalks. Mr. Roberts said no. He mentioned the Fire District requirement for a 90 foot radius cul-de-sac bulb. He said that widening the cul-de-sac bulb and putting in sidewalks would reduce the lot sizes somewhat but not reduce the number of lots because the Planned Development Overlay did not require minimum lot sizes, just an overall maximum number of dwelling units. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 7 • • Commissioner Scolar asked about the cul-de-sac being shown as only 80 feet. Mr. Roberts noted the condition of approval that the applicant either work out a solution with the Fire District or widen the cul-de-sac. President Wilson asked for further discussion of the safety concerns regarding left hand turning conflicts. Mr. Rager said that staff backed off from the City offset requirements because this was a "good" offset that would work without left-hand turning conflicts. He commented that while he did not agree with the applicant's argument that aligning with SW 113th necessitated additional trees coming out, he did agree that they would lose the house if they had to align the street. He noted that the County standards were 50 feet as compared to the City standards of 300 feet. He said that staff felt comfortable in recommending the variance because logistically the offset would work. Commissioner Griffith asked how wide Fonner Street was at this location. Mr. Rager said that the existing pavement width was between 18 to 20 feet wide. He noted the applicant's proposal to widen their side of Fonner along their frontage. President Wilson asked if there were items other than a private street that required a Planned Development Review. Mr. Roberts said no. Commissioner Castile asked what other options did the applicant have besides widening the cul-de- sac to 90 feet. Mr. Roberts said that sprinkling the homes or a hammerhead might satisfy the Fire District. He said that possibly a driveway could be used as a turn around. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION • Matt Welner, Planner, LandTech, Inc., 8835 SW Canyon Road, 9402, Portland, introduced the project team members present, including Steve Turner, Project Developer. He said that they agreed with all the conditions except Condition 13. He asked that Condition 13 be reworded to say that the proposed public sanitary sewer line for Lots 1 to 3 shall be located as approved by the City of Tigard Engineering Department" instead of the current requirement to relocate the sewer line to the proposed private street. He said that they could work that out with staff. Mr. Welner said that they were given a radius of 80 feet for the cul-de-sac bulb at the preapp conference. He mentioned that they chose private streets because they were narrower. He noted the condition requiring a sidewalk along the Fonner Street frontage but not elsewhere. • Steve Hale, Project Engineer, LandTech, Inc., 8835 SW Canyon Road, #402, Portland, said that they wanted a narrower right-of-way and no sidewalks in order to preserve trees and have more room for tree planting. He explained that they wanted the sewer condition changed because the route they initially designed allowed extensions to other properties while a route through the private street did not. In addition, the private road route required a line 20 feet deep going through the hill as opposed to a shallower, more accessible line going the other route. He PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 8 said that they wanted Engineering to decide on the route because he believed that he could demonstrate that their original proposed route was the better route. Mr. Hale reviewed the storm water management facilities and water flow. He mentioned that the pond was both a water quality facility and a detention pond. He held that he was doing water quality for USA planners, and detaining the water so that what came out of the property remained the same as it had before this development. Mr. Hale said that the water pressure should be adequate, given the lay of the land, but he would not know for certain until he performed the hydraulic analysis. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN FAVOR None PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN OPPOSITION • Jay Beck, 11550 SW Fonner, explained that his property to the west of the project fronted on four of the lots. He expressed his concern regarding buffering and screening. He stated that the staff report dismissed it as an issue. He argued that his situation was like a single family residence looking onto a multi-family development. He referenced his letter to the Commission in which he asked for a requirement to install fencing along the property line, in addition to the required trees. APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL • Mr. Welner said that they proposed planting trees along the property line in response to Mr. Beck's letter. He commented that, although he could not guarantee it, it was likely that the owners would install fences along their back property lines. He pointed out that the City Code required no screening or buffering between single family and single family. • President Wilson closed the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATIONS Commissioner Padgett asked for staff's opinion on the request to change Condition 13. Mr. Rager said that he was not convinced that a route along the private street necessitated a depth of 20 feet. He commented that staff did not want to run sanitary sewer or other utility lines through private property unless it absolutely could not be helped. He said, while he was willing to talk about it, he did not see that moving the line from the route going through private property over to the private street with its easier access as an onerous request. President Wilson asked the applicant for clarification on whether he had understood the condition to mean that the entire development would be served by a line in the street. Mr. Hale explained that in order to put in a sewer line in the private street that would serve all the lots, he had to go PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 9 through a hill. He argued that their route was more economical. He said that he would agree with whatever the Engineering Department decided but he wanted the Engineering Department to make the decision. Jay Beck pointed out that installation of the sewer via the applicant's preferred route went through his lot. Mr. Rager explained that there was a public easement that gave anyone the right to tie into a utility line (with the City's permission). He mentioned that they did have to restore the property to its original condition. Commissioner Castile asked about using a private sanitary sewer line to serve some of the homes. Mr. Rager said that private sanitary sewer lines were not legal pursuant to USA regulations and the Uniform Plumbing Code standards. President Wilson expressed his concerns regarding the private street. He noted the Council discussions and the prior difficulties with private streets. He said that he thought that the PUD ordinance was intended for situations with unusual topography which was not the case here. He spoke to requiring a public street built to full public standards. Commissioner Padgett asked what the minimum width was for a public street. Mr. Rager said that a public street was 28 feet wide from curb to curb with a 46 foot right-of-way to accommodate sidewalks on both sides. Commissioner Padgett asked if they could eliminate the sidewalk on one side. Mr. Rager said that staff did not recommend doing so on a public street. President Wilson spoke to sticking to their standards, especially in a situation without sufficient evidence to support a request to modify them. Commissioner Padgett asked if President Wilson was stating that in general, trying to get more lots or larger lot sizes were not valid reasons in and of themselves to allow private streets. President Wilson said yes. He supported the PUD to allow lot size adjustments but not private streets. He asked for a condition for a public street. Commissioner Neff asked for staff's opinion. Mr. Roberts reviewed the applicant's proposed tree mitigation plan to plant trees around the perimeter of the site. He said that staff did not recommend the public street because a private street was allowed under the planned development regulations. The Commission discussed the issue of a public street versus a private street. Mr. Roberts said that a public street would result in slightly smaller lots but no change to the density. Commissioner Castile concurred with President Wilson that in the future the homeowners would probably ask the City to take over maintenance of the private street. He supported requiring a public street. Commissioner Padgett commented that he has never supported private streets because of the myriad of problems associated with them. He said that private streets should be the rare exception, not the common exception. Commissioner Neff spoke to the City developing a consistent policy on how to handle private streets fairly. He commented that the Commission has been sending mixed signals to the staff by PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 10 I • • approving private streets recently. President Wilson suggested a policy that single family detached developments (especially on large lots) should have public streets. He said that multi-family developments expected private streets. He mentioned two other situations for allowable private streets: a property with short setbacks or a topography that made it difficult to put in full street improvements. Commissioner Padgett spoke against setting a precedent by requiring buffering between single family developments, especially since the Code did not require it. President Wilson moved to approve SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003/ZON 98-0002NAR 98-0003 be approved as written subject to the change that the private street be required to be a public street built to public street standards. Mr. Roberts reviewed the changes to the conditions of approval necessitated by requiring a public street. These included: • Condition 4: adding a second sentence to read "they shall also dedicate right-of-way for the new public street to give 46 feet of right-of-way along the straight section and a 49 foot bulb radius"; • Conditions 8, 9, 10: deleted; • A new Condition 8: "The applicant shall construct the new street to meet the local street standards with a 28 foot curb width and and a 40 foot curb radius at the bulb"; • Condition 27: deleted • Condition 29: delete the fire code clearance requirements for a private street, keep the offstreet parking conditions and signs prohibiting offstreet parking, add a requirement that the applicant petition the City Council for the off street parking signs; • Condition 16: In the first line, replace "private" with "public"; • Condition 17: Rewrite to read "The public water quality/detention facility shall be placed in a tract on the final plat and shall be conveyed to the City of Tigard." • Condition 18: Rewrite to read "The applicant shall provide a maintenance access road to the public water quality/detention facility as approved by the City Engineer." Mr. Rager explained that he changed Conditions 16, 17, and 18 because with a public street, the storm drainage system then become a public system. Commissioner Griffith asked what kind of access road was needed in addition to the primary street adjacent to the line. Mr. Rager said that they wanted to make sure that they could get to the control structures of the pond. President Wilson amended his motion to include the changes in the conditions of approval as outlined by staff. Commissioner Padgett concurred. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed by a 7-0 vote. 6. OTHER BUSINESS: None PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 11 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Jerree nor, Pl g Co ission Secretary ATTEST: Pr dent Nick Wilson PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 4, 1998 - Page 12 5.~ Agenda Item: ~4 , 120 DAYS =1/18/98 Hearing Date: May 4,1998 r STAFF REP'QRT TObTUM PLANNING COMMISSIOR .,q - ono j FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREG, - SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE(S): FILE NAME: FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Subdivision SUB 98-0002 Planned Development Review PDR 98-0003 Zone Change ZON 98-0002 Variance VAR 98-0003 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Subdivision approval to divide one (1) parcel of 2.83 acres into 12 lots ranging in size from 7,448 to 8,711 square feet and to additionally develop a 6,009 square foot water quality tract. The applicant has also requested Conceptual and Detailed Planned Development Review to create lots less than the 7,500 square foot minimum allowed in the R-4.5 zoning district. An amendment to the zoning map is requested to place Planned Development (PD) Overlay on the property. Lastly, the applicant proposes a Variance to the minimum access spacing standards for a Minor Collector from the City standard of 300 feet to 135 feet. APPLICANT(S): Matthew Wellner OWNER(S): Steve Turner Land Tech, Inc. SR Turner Construction 8835 SW Canyon Lane, S-402 8835 SW Canyon Lane, S-402 Portland, OR 97289-6297 Portland, OR 97289-6297 COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION(S): Low Density Residential; 1-5 Dwelling Units Per Acre. ZONING ' DESIGNATION(S): R-4.5; Single-Family Residential (7,500 Square Feet) or (5,000 Square Feet Per Unit). The purpose of the R-4.5 zoning district is to establish standard urban low density residential home sites. LOCATION(S): 11300 SW Fonner Street; WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Lot 02000. The subject property is located east of the intersection of SW Fonner Street and SW 115th Avenue, on the south side of SW Fonner Street south across the street from SW 113th Place. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA:Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. SECTION 11. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommentls ttiat~the Plar nmg Commission find that;:ft a pri posed development wi(I` not adversely aff ect the health,safety and welfare of Ethel City; Therefore;gstaff-,: recommends}APPROVALsubfect; :_togathe followirigrecommender! condifions~ o J - f3 5/4198 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 1 OF 29 S CONDITIONS OF APPROAL ALLrt CONDITIONS. SHALL .BE SATISFIED. ;PRIOR-TOAECORDING'.THE FINAL PLAT 3 WITH WASHINGTON 000NTY ,.a;. UNLESS .OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, THE ;STAFF CONTACT FOR ALL 300NDITIONS IS -BRIAN RAGER -WITH THE, ENGINEERING s DEPARTMENT AT,(503) 639-4171- 1. Prior to approval of the final plat, A public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. Six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Once redline comments are addressed and the plans are revised, the design engineer shall then submit nine (9) sets of revised drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards which are available at City Hall. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on- site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 4. The applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way (ROW) on SW Fonner Street to provide 30 feet from centerline. This dedication shall be shown on the face of the final plat. 5P)64~0 ° at '46 5. The applicant shall construct standard half-stree improvements along the frontage of SW Fonner Street. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: A. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 20 feet (NOTE: if the applicant can demonstrate that the existing pavement section meets current City standards, then they will be permitted to saw cut the edge of existing asphalt and add onto the width); B. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage; C. concrete curb and/or curb and gutter; D. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff; E. Five (5)-foot concrete sidewalk; F. street striping; G. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer; H. underground utilities (NOTE: the applicant may be eligible to pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding existing overhead utilities); 514/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 2 OF 29 I. street signs; • • J.. commercial driveway-apron at private street. entrance; and K: - 'adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Former Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 6. A profile of SW Fonner Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade.. 7 There shall be no direct vehicular access from Lot 1 onto SW Fo ne Street. GLJo wA~ o l d' Keu) ~_-Itc W)Y4 4 Z9 '4b~ 8. The applicant shall cam a s tement to be placed on the final plat to indicate that the proposed. private street wi be jointly owned and maintained by the private property owners who abut and tak access from it. 9. Prior to approval of the f al plat, the applicant shall prepare Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's for this project, to be recorded with the final plat that clearly lays out a maintenan plan and agreement for the proposed private street. The CC&R's shall obligate the p ' ate property owners within the subdivision to create a homeowner's association to ens a regulation of maintenance for the street. The applicant shall submit a copy of the C&R's to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) prior to approval of the final plat. '10. The pavement and rock section the proposed private street shall meet the City's public street standard for a local resi ntial street. 11. Any extension of public water lines shall be shown on the proposed public improvement construction drawings and shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Water Department as a part of the Engineering Department plan review. NOTE: An estimated 12% of the water system costs must be on deposit with the Water Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans from the Engineering Department and construction of public water lines. 12. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate the location of the existing 24-inch transmission water line in SW Fonner Street. 13. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate that the proposed public sanitary sewer line to serve Lots 1 through 3 shall be. relocated to be within the new private street. 14. The applicant shall ensure that City maintenance vehicles can access any downstream sewer manholes behind any of the proposed lots. A maintenance access road at least ten (10) feet in width, and built to meet City standards, shall be provided from the edge of the private street to the manhole(s). The applicant will have two (2) choices for delineating the access road(s) on the plat and construction plans: A. place the roadway within a tract to be conveyed to the City on the final plat, or B. place the roadway within a public sanitary sewer and maintenance access easement. If Option B is selected, the applicant shall place restrictions on the plat to prohibit parking, fences, gates or other structures from being placed within the easement. 5/4198 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 3 OF 29 15. The applicao engineer will need to provide tlity's Engineering Department .with a subbasin study to evaluate which adjacent properties will need to access the sewer that is being extended into this site. The City Engineer will then make a decision as to where the applicant must extend sewer stubs. This evaluation will take place along with the review of the construction design plans. 16. Final design plans and calculations for the proposed1xivaate water quality facility shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) as a part of the public improvement plans. Included with the plans shall be a proposed landscape plan and maintenance plan. t 17. Th, lica emen o e paced on tlf' II t o i he-proposes-prl~i to NO uality/detention facility MW- d r or The subdivision. u 18. Prior to approval ofte final plat, the applicant shall prepare Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R' for this project, to be recorded with the final plat, that clearly lays out a mainten nce plan and agreement for the proposed private water quality/detention facility. CC&R's shall obligate the private property owners within the subdivision to create omeowner's association to ensure regulation of maintenance for the facility. The ap 'cant shall submit a copy of the CC&R's to the Engineering Department (Briag Pager) pr roval =ftthe final plat .A 19. Xa"s~ vev~`de vLCCt4 ►~oee~ control plan hall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans-Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994." 20. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the street or a public facility approved by the Engineering Department. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 21. The applicant shall provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report shall be incorporated into the final grading plan. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permits. 22. The design engineer shall indicate on the grading plan, which lots will have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as, lots that will have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections and/or permits will be necessary when the lots develop. 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Fonner Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $4,950 and it shall be paid prior to approval of the final plat. 5/4198 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 4 OF 29 24. Final Plat Application Anission Requirements: A. submit for City review, three (3) paper copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative; B. the subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County and by the City of Tigard; and C. the right-of-way dedication for SW Fonner Street shall be made on the subdivision plat. 25. The applicant shall provide proof that the existing home has been connected to the sanitary sewer system. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 26. Lots 7 and 9 shall be revised to provide a minimum of 25 feet of lot frontage. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 27. No Parking signage shall be posted on :ens e side of the proposed private street and as needed within the cul-de-sac bulb to re a 90-foot clear width distance, or as otherwise approved upon consultation h t e uilding Division and Fire District. The cul-de-sac must have an inside turning ra 'us of 25 feet, or as otherwise approved upon consultation with the Fire District. FF CONTACT: Jim Funk, Building Division. 28. Roof drains from the existing house and all impervious surfaces must be drained to an approved Public system. STAFF CONTACT: Jim Funk, Building Division. 29. Off street parking is permitted on one (1) side of the street only. Provide "No Parking" signage and curb markings per UFC 902.2.4 and 901.4.5.2 STAF~`0u~ Wg~~ CONTACT: Jim Funk, Building Division. +4 e4 i-a of wa.1; ¢ 30. The applicant shall post a cash deposit to ensure that a total d`f'304 caliper inches are mitigated on-site, at another site, or payment for the cost of purchasing and planting of mitigation trees shall be made into a citywide tree fund. The City has previously received estimates of $150 to purchase and plant a two (2)-inch caliper tree but the applicant can provide their own estimate to ensure this planting. The applicant may also upsize street trees, from a two (2)-inch caliper to a larger caliper tree as partial mitigation. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 31. The applicant shall post a cash deposit for the cost of purchase and planting of sufficient number of street trees prior to recording the final plat. The City has previously received estimates of $150 to purchase and plant a two (2)-inch caliper tree but the applicant can provide their own estimate to ensure this planting. The estimate should bond for enough caliper inches for the entire street frontage. If it is found that certain existing trees could serve as street trees these funds would later be refunded. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 5 OF 29 32. The applica0hall install tree protection measuror trees that were identified as suitable for preservation. The consulting arborist s all provide written assurance that - the protective, measures have been installed. Weatherproof signage shall be- installed identifying each protected tree area and listing the arborist name and number as the contact person should future builders need to work within protected tree areas. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. 33. The applicant shall pay a final plat review fee of $295. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. r THE,fOLLO- WING=CONDITIONS_SHALL: BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THEISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: = 34. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a recorded mylar copy of the subdivision plat. 35. Prior to issuance of any building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: A. all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities; B. all local residential streets have at least one (1) lift of asphalt C. any off-site street and/or utility improvements are completely finished; and D. all street lights are installed and ready to be energized. 36. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) mylars, and 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF' will be acceptable. Note: if the public improvement drawings were hand-drawn, then a diskette is not required. A THE .FOLLOWING CONDITION SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR,TO THE.ISSUANCE OF'OCCUPANCY PERMFTS pel K. 37. Street trees shall be planted according to the approved street tree plan. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Roberts, Planning Division. -d 1N ADDITION, THE APPLICAN SHOULD t 4p THE T a* a FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .3» .rem -T- "ISIS r r.`r= -.5.c. 'trr-} ec~__s ..r^+t --z +r. ri ..a utre*='--er.-. CODE; TNOT. AN EXCLl131VE LISTr - 18.160.170 Improvement Agreement: Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: 1. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 6 OF 29 2. Include in the agree provisions that if such work is n9completed within the r...,. , period-specified,. the-. City may..complete. the. work and ,recover., the full cost and s r expenses from the subdivider. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to be paid and may also provide for the construction of the improvements in stages and for the extension-of time under specific conditions therein stated in the contract. 18.160.180 Bond: As required by Section 18.160.170, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one (1) of the following: 1. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; 2. A surety bond executed by a surety company authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon which remains in force until the surety company is notified by the City in writing that it may be terminated; or 3. Cash. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Engineer an itemized improvement estimate, certified by a registered civil engineer, to assist the City Engineer in calculating the amount of the performance assurance. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. 18.160.190 Filing and Recording: Within 60 days of the City review and approval, the applicant shall submit the final plat to the County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS Chapter 92. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.162.080 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: Centerline Monumentation 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 7 OF 29 In accordance wittWegon Revised Statutes 92.060, s Section (2), the centerline of all street and roadway rights-of-way shall be monumented efore the City accepts a street improvement. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 1. All centerline-centerline intersection points; 2. All cul-de-sac center points; and 3. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. Monument Boxes Required Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.164 Street & Utility Improvement Standards: 18.164.120 Utilities All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface-mounted transformers, surface-mounted connection boxes, and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above. 18.164.130 Cash or Bond Required All improvements installed by the subdivider shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one (1) year following acceptance by the City. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.160.180. 18.164.150 Installation: Prerequisite/Permit Fee No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 18.164.180 Notice to City Required Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. SW98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 8 OF 29 18.164.200 Engineer's Certifid&n Required The land dividees,engineer-shall provide,written`certification-of°-a form provided •by-the- City- that all improvements, workmanship and materials are in accord with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade, prior to the City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for operation and maintenance. SUBDIUISION_APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID ONLY IF THE FIhFALIPLAT IS SUBMITTED TO 7HECITY~OFTIGARD$WITHINEiGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE" - EFFECTIVE; DATEfOF THIS DECISION t 7,6 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION . Site History: The property is developed with a detached single-family residence. The City Council recommended approval of annexation to the City through Zone Change Annexation (ZCA 97-0002). This application was heard by the Boundary Commission on April 30, 1998. The City has no record of any more recent development applications for this property. Vicinity Information: Adjoining properties to the north, south, east and west are all developed with detached single-family residences. Surrounding areas have a mix of established older residences and newer development. Many larger trees have been preserved in this area. Site Information and Proposal Description: The subject property is currently developed with a detached single-family residence. At the time of application, a total of 163 trees existed on the site. Several of the trees in the vicinity of the proposed private street intersection at SW Fonner Street were recently removed along with substantial areas of overgrown berry bushes and smaller trees. The site is fairly level. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: Impact Study: Section 18.32.050 states the applicant shall either specifically concur with a requirement for public right-of-way dedication, or provide evidence that supports that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Alternatively, an applicant may specifically concur with the requirement for dedication of right-of-way to the public and waive the impact study analysis by dedicating the right-of-way and completion of a waiver statement. An impact study was provided. The impact study states that the applicant will construct half-street improvements along the projects' SW Fonner Street frontage and construct internal street improvements and utilities to serve the development. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 9 OF 29 Any required streeprovements to certain collector &igher volume streets and the Washington County raffic Impact Fee (TIF) are mitigation measures that are required at the time of development. Based on a -transportation impact study prepared by Mr. David Larson for the A-Boy Expansion/Dolan II/Resolution 95-61, TIF's are expected to recapture 32% of the traffic impact of new development on the Collector and Arterial Street system. Presently, the TIF for each trip that is generated is $179. The total TIF for a detached single-family dwelling is $1,790. The applicant has proposed to construct half-street improvements on the SW Fonner Street frontage. Southwest Fonner Street is designated as a Minor Collector Street facility that accommodates traffic from adjoining local neighborhoods to access Major Collector and Arterial Streets. Assuming a cost $200 per lineal foot, it is estimated that the total cost of the half-street improvements to SW Fonner Street is $35,800 ($200 x 179 lineal feet). Improvements to SW Fonner Street are not currently listed as eligible for a Transportation Impact Fee credits. Upon completion of this development the future builders of the residences will be required to pay TIF's of approximately $21,480 ($1,790 X 12 dwelling units). Based on the estimate that total TIF fees cover 32 % of the impact on major street improvements citywide, a fee that would cover 100% of this projects traffic impact is $64,440 ($5,370 x 12 dwelling units). For these reasons, the cost of all proposed street improvement requirements as discussed within this report are less than the impact of the development and, therefore, roughly proportional. Use Classification: The applicant is proposing to build detached residential dwellings. This use is classified in Section 18.42 (Use Classifications) as Single- Family Detached Residential Units. Section 18.50 lists detached single-family residences, as a permitted use in the R-4.5 zone. The applicant proposes to develop 12 detached single-family residences. This is the primary permitted use within the R-4.5 zoning district. Dimensional Requirements: Section 18.50 states that the minimum lot area for each dwelling unit in the R-4.5 zoning district is 7,500 square feet. An average width of 50 feet is required in the R-4.5 Zoning District. The net site area standard is not applicable because a Planned Development Overlay is implemented through this subdivision. However, the applicant has proposed that all but one (1) of the lots comply with the minimum lot size standard. Density standards are reviewed elsewhere within this report. Development Standards: Section 18.50 contains standards for the R-4.5 zone. Single-family detached residential units are a permitted use in the zone, and must comply with the following dimensional requirements: Minimum lot size 7,500 Square Feet Average lot width 50 Feet Front setback 15 Feet Garage setback 20 Feet Interior sideyard setback 5 Feet Corner sideyard setback 10 Feet Rear setback 15 Feet Maximum building height 35 Feet 5/4198 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 10 OF 29 The Planned Development aeoach to development does not re* that a minimum lot size be maintained. The Planned Development approach also does not require the use of the, standard, setbacks, 4however,t-therapplicanVproposes to'cdmply-with,-th6-standard R-4.5' r setbacks as listed above. Planned Development: Section 18.80 allows the -option for an applicant to create a more efficient, economically viable development that preserves natural land features while implementing the density range provided through the Comprehensive Plan. This type of subdivision normally permits higher density than would be possible given the minimum lot size requirement for the zoning district. Section 18.80.130(A)(1) (Planned Development Review - Approval Standards) requires that a development proposal be found to be consistent with the various standards of other Community. Development Code Sections. The applicable criteria in this case are Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.88, 18.92, 18.100, 18.102, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. The proposal's consistency with these sections has been reviewed within this report. The Planned Development Code Section 18.80 lists Section 18.160 (Subdivisions) as an applicable review criterion for Planned Developments that has been reviewed elsewhere within this report. The Planned Development Review is a three step process as follows: 1. Approval of a planned development overlay zone; 2. The second step is the approval of the planned development concept plan;. and 3. Approval of a Detailed Development Plan is also required. The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Overlay as a Zone Change with this application to comply with the first step. The applicant has also requested Conceptual Planned Development approval with this application to comply with the second step. Because this application is for a subdivision, Section 18.80.015(E) allows the Conceptual and Detailed portions of the Planned Development Review to be consolidated as is proposed through this action to comply with the third step. The Planned Development Code Section 18.80.060 lists approval criteria for Planned Development applications. The Planning Commission must find that these criteria have been met in order to approve a Planned Development in an "Established Area". The subject property is defined as an "Established Area" by the Comprehensive Plan. Development of the land in accordance with the provisions of the "Established Area" would: 1. Result in an inefficient use of the land; The proposed planned development results in a more efficient use of land because street width requirements may reduce other property's below the 7,500 square foot minimum lot requirement; 2. Result in removing significant natural features; It is expected that a similar number of trees would be removed if the property had been developed as a Planned Development or if it had not been developed as a Planned Development; and 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 11 OF 29 3. Result in a J&nge in the character of the area•rrounding significant historic -or building; It.is expected that a similar number of trees would be removed if the property had been developed as a Planned Development or if it had not been developed as a Planned Development. The Planned Development approach eliminates the requirement for sidewalks within the project that is consistent with adjoining development and may be considered to continue the established character of the area. The Planned Development approach is the most feasible method of developing the area; and In terms of development project costs, the Planned Development approach is expected to be somewhat less costly because higher project density would be permitted to spread development costs and no sidewalks would be provided. The site is of a size and shape that the compatibility provisions of 18.92 can be met. The site is a slightly irregular shape but subdivision of the property does not create building sites that appear difficult to develop. As proposed, at least one (1) lot and possibly others would be below the 7,500 square foot minimum lot size. The overall subdivision, however, would not have lots that average less than 5,575 square feet. Pursuant to Section 18.40, Lots with 5,575 square feet of area would exceed the maximum density permitted for a Low Density Residential (1-5 dwelling units per acre x 1.25) development in the Planned Development in an "Established Area". Section 18.80.120(A)(3) provides further review standards for Planned Development that have been addressed below as follows: Relationship to the natural and physical environment: (i) The streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the greatest degree possible; (ii) Structures located on the site shall not be in areas subject to ground slumping and sliding; (iii) There shall be adequate distance between on-site buildings and other on-site and off-site buildings on adjoining properties to provide for adequate light and air circulation and for fire protection; (iv) The structures shall be oriented with consideration for the sun and wind directions, where possible; and (v) Trees with a six inch caliper measured at four feet in height from ground level, shall be saved where possible; The provisions related to adequate light and air are addressed elsewhere within this report by the requirements for the maintenance of minimum setbacks. The development will partially comply with minimum fire and life safety standards if "No Parking" signage restrictions are placed on one (1) side of the proposed 28-foot-wide private street. A Condition of Approval requiring this "No Parking" signage has been recommended. Adequate water pressure and fire hydrant locations to accommodate fire flow needs will be addressed thought the public improvement plan review. The locations of curbs shall be widened within the cul-de-sac width to provide a 90-foot paved section or as otherwise approved upon consultation with the Building Division and the Fire District. Solar accessibility is addressed elsewhere within this report. The applicant has proposed to remove trees as part of this development. The tree removal and mitigation plan is discussed in detail elsewhere within this report. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 12 OF 29 i Buffering, screening, and c4atibility between adjoining uses* (i)''- •'i, Buffering"shall be ~orovided-between different types-of land -uses (for -example,- between single-family and multiple-family residential, and residential, and commercial); (ii) In addition to the requirements-of the buffer matrix, the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy and extent of the buffer required under Chapter 18.100: (a) The purpose of the buffer, for example to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust, or to provide a visual barrier; (b) The size of the buffer needs in terms of width and height to achieve the purpose; (c) The direction(s) from which buffering is needed; (d) The required density of the buffering; and (e) Whether the viewer is stationary or mobile; (iii) On-site screening from view from adjoining properties of such things as service areas, storage areas, parking lots, and mechanical devices on roof tops shall be provided and the following factors shall be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the screening: (a) What needs to be screened; (b) The direction from which it is needed; and (c) Whether the screening needs to be year-round; Screening and buffering are not required where single-family detached residential uses adjoin other detached single-family residential uses. Privacy and noise: (i) Non-residential structures which abut existing residential dwellings shall be located on the site or be designed in a manner, to the maximum degree possible, to protect the private areas on the adjoining properties from view and noise; This criteria is not applicable because the applicant has proposed to create future residential building sites. Private outdoor area: residential use: (i) In addition to the requirements of subparagraph (iii), each ground level residential dwelling unit shall have an outdoor private area (patio, terrace, porch) of not less than 48 square feet; (ii) Wherever possible, private outdoor open spaces should be oriented toward the sun; and (iii) Private outdoor spaces shall be screened or designed to provide privacy for the use of the space; 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 13 OF 29 Provision of comm utdoor open space areas is not r.ired because the applicant has proposed to create uilding sites for single-family residences rather than a multiple-family residential development such as an apartment complex. Shared outdoor recreation areas: residential use: (i) In addition to subparagraphs (ii) and (iii) of this section each multiple- dwelling development shall incorporate shared usable outdoor recreation areas within the development plan as follows: (a) Studio units up to and including two (2) bedroom units, 200 square feet per unit; and. (b) Three or more bedroom units, 300 square feet per unit; (ii) Shared outdoor recreation space shall be readily observable from adjacent units for reasons of crime prevention and safety; (iii) The required recreation space may be provided as follows: (a) It may be all outdoor space; or (b) It may be part outdoor space and part indoor space; for example, an outdoor tennis court and indoor recreation room; or (c) It may be all public or common space; or (d) It may be part common space and part private; for example, it could be an outdoor tennis court, indoor recreation room, and balconies on each unit; or (e) Where balconies are added to units, the balconies shall not be less than 48 square feet; The provision of common outdoor open space areas is not required because the applicant has proposed to create building sites for single-family residences. Access and circulation: (i) The number of allowed access points for a development shall be provided in Chapter 18.108; (ii) All circulation patterns within a development must be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles; and (iii) Provisions shall be made for pedestrian and bicycle ways if such facilities are shown on an adopted plan; A single point of access has been proposed to be provided to SW Fonner Street through the development of the subdivision. Section 18.108 requires a minimum of one (1) point where up to 19 dwelling units are served. The design of the proposed street improvements has been reviewed by the Engineering Department, the Police Department and the Fire District. The Engineering Department reviewed street improvement requirements in detail elsewhere within this report. Completion of the streets throughout the development as specified through the Conditions of Approval will comply with the standards of the Community Development Code as has been reviewed elsewhere within this report. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 14 OF 29 Landscaping and open spa* . '(i) Residential Development: In addition to the requirements of subparagraphs (iv) and (v) of section A of this subsection, a minimum of 20% of the site shall be landscaped; (ii) Commercial Development: A minimum of 15% of the site shall be landscaped; and (iii) Industrial Development: A minimum of 15% of the site shall be landscaped; Section (i) is applicable to this request. Although one (1) of the lots is proposed to be reduced below the 7,500 square foot minimum, the Planned Development Review still requires that a minimum of 20% of each site be landscaped. This standard is applicable to this property but because the smallest lot would be approximately 7,448 square feet, compliance with this standard does not appear to be an issue due to required building setbacks. Section (ii) and (iii) are not applicable because no commercial or industrial development is proposed. Public transit: (i) Provisions for public transit may be required where the site abuts a public transit route. The required facilities shall be based on: (a) The location of other transit facilities in the area; and (b) The size and type of the proposed development; Southwest Fonner Street is not a transit served facility. Based on previous discussions with Tri-Met, even if SW Fonner Street were later to become a transit served facility, the 12 lot subdivision as proposed would not necessitate the need for a bus stop. (ii) The required facilities shall be limited to such facilities as: (a) A waiting shelter; (b) A turn-out area for loading and unloading; and (c) Hard surface paths connecting the development to the waiting area; Southwest Fonner Street is not a transit served facility. Based on previous discussions with Tri-Met, even if SW Fonner Street were later to become a transit served facility, the proposed 12 lot subdivision would not necessitate the need for a bus stop. Signs: (i) In addition to the provisions of Chapter 18.114, Signs: (a) Location of all signs proposed for the development site; and (b) The signs shall not obscure vehicle driver's sight distance; 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 15 OF 29 All future signage• the site will be reviewed throo the sign permit process for conformance with the provisions of Chapter 18.114. Parking: (i) All parking and loading areas shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.106; Each of the residences to be developed on these parcels will be reviewed during the building permit review process to verify the provision of required off-street parking spaces. Drainage: (i) All drainage provisions shall be generally laid out in accordance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 18.84 and the criteria in the adopted 1981 master drainage plan; % The Engineering Department reviewed this application and their comments are addressed in SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS/Storm Drainage Section within this staff report. Floodplain dedication: (i) Where landfill and/or development is allowed within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. This area shall include portions of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway with the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. This site does not adjoin areas within the 100-year flood plain. The City recently updated park system development fees such that the fee that is currently assessed will fund planned park improvements. Park system impact fees will be assessed for each dwelling unit prior to the issuance of building permits. Solar Access: Section 18.88.040(C)(1) contains solar access standards for new residential development. A lot meets the basic solar access lot standard if it has a north-south dimension of 90 feet or more and has a front lot line that is oriented within 30 degrees of a true east-west axis. A subdivision complies with the basic requirement if 80% or more of the newly created parcels meet this standard. Alternatively, an applicant can meet the City's Solar Access Standards by complying with the protected Solar Building Line Option or the Performance Option. Energy efficiency is ensured through the location of the residence with sufficient solar access or through the design of the homes that incorporates window glazing with solar orientation. An applicant can request an exception to the solar access standards based on the following development constraints: Site topography in excess of a 10% slope, shade from existing on-site or off-site vegetation or structures, significant natural features, existing street public easement patterns, impacts to density, cost or amenities of the project that adds five (5)% or more to the cost of each lot. As proposed, two (2) of the 12 lots comply with the aforementioned 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 16 OF 29 subdivision design altemativdaf the Solar Access requirements. is Basic Standard is not met because the Solar-Access provisions require that a north-south dimension of 90 feet or . _more-be,provided:.. The applicant has provided--anorth-south dimension"of approximately 50----- to 70 feet for the majority of the lots. Based on development constraints having to do with the property dimensions, the orientation of adjoining development and the applicant's use of a Planned Development, it is not recommended that the applicant be required to reconfigure the subdivision to comply with this standard. Based on the north-south dimension of the property, the applicant would likely lose approximately 15% of the project density. For this reason, it is recommended that the Planning Commission allow an eight (8) lot adjustment to the Solar Access standard. Solar Balance Point: Section 18.88.050(B) requires that one and two (2) family residences that are developed on lots that were exempted from Compliance with the Basic Solar Access standards comply with the Solar Balance Point requirements. Prior to the issuance of building permits the developer of each building site will be required to provide calculations that demonstrate compliance with the Solar Balance Point provisions. Densi : Section 18.92.020 contains standards for determining the permitted project density. The number of allowable dwelling units is based on the net development area. The net area is the remaining area, excluding sensitive lands and land dedicated for public roads or parks. The net area is then divided by the minimum parcel size permitted by the zoning district to determine the number of lots that may be created on a site. The applicant has provided calculations concerning the allowed density for this site. The total site area is 2.83 acres or 123,274 square feet. With a deduction of 21,321 square footage from this site for the proposed private street, 101,953 square feet remains. After deduction of the ten (10)-foot Public Street right-of-way along the SW Fonner Street frontage, an additional 1,513 square feet is deducted, leaving a net site area of 100,440 square feet. No floodplain, wetlands, drainageways or steep slopes exist on the property. By dividing the minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet into the buildable area, the applicant is permitted to develop up to 13 dwelling units. The applicant has proposed 12 dwelling units, therefore, this subdivision as proposed complies with the maximum density standard. Landscaping: Section 18.100 contains landscaping standards for new development. The applicant must also comply with the standards set forth in Section 18.100.035 that requires that all development projects fronting on a public or private street, or a private driveway more than 100 feet in length plant street trees. A street tree planting plan was provided with this application. The plans compliance with the applicable standard is reviewed immediately below. Section 18.100.035(B) states the specific spacing of street trees by size of tree shall be as follows: 1. Small or narrow stature trees (under 25 feet tall and less than 16 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 20 feet apart; 2. Medium sized trees (25 feet to 40 feet tall, 16 feet to 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 30 feet apart; 3. Large trees (over 40 feet tall and more than 35 feet wide branching) shall be spaced no greater than 40 feet apart; 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 17 OF 29 The preliminary plat op proposes street trees along the s&t frontage of the entire project. . The applicant proposes. to plant Maple trees at varying distances.. on center. In most.. instances these trees are proposed to be provided at greater distances than the maximum spacing standard for large specimen trees. The applicant shall post a cash deposit for the cost of purchase and planting of sufficient number of street trees prior to recording the final plat. The City has previously received estimates of $150 to purchase and plant a two (2)-inch caliper tree but the applicant can provide their own estimate to ensure this planting. The estimate should assume plantings will be necessary at 40 feet on center. If .it is found that certain existing trees could serve as street trees, these funds would later be refunded. Visual Clearance Areas: Section 18.102 requires that a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property adjacent to intersecting right-of-ways or the intersection of a public street and a private driveway. A visual clearance area is the triangular area formed by measuring a 304oot distance along the street right-of-way and the driveway and then connecting these two (2) 30-foot distance points with a straight line. A clear vision area shall contain no vehicle, hedge, planting, fence, wall structure, signs, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three feet in height. The height is measured from the top of the curb, or where no curb exists, from the street center line grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area, provided all branches below eight feet are removed. Through the building permit review, setbacks of the structures will be checked. Based of the location of the buildable areas on this property, it is expected that future site improvements can comply with this requirement. Tree Removal: Section 18.150.025 requires that a tree plan for the planting, removal and protection of trees prepared by a certified arborist shall be provided with a site development review application. The tree plan shall include identification of all existing trees, identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper, which trees are to be removed, protection program defining standards and methods that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. An arborist report was provided with this application. A total of 163 trees were present when the survey was conducted. Smaller trees and undergrowth and several larger trees were removed prior to this Public Hearing. Of the 163 total trees, the arborist found that 56 trees are in excess of 12 inches in caliper and healthy trees. Of these 14 trees are proposed to be removed for the proposed private street. Approximately, an additional 11 healthy trees may be impacted by the future development of homes based on their location within the proposed lot lines. If all of these trees were eventually lost due to construction impacts the applicant would be preserving 56% of the healthy trees over 12 inches in diameter. The total diameter of healthy trees that could be lost is 608 inches. The mitigation standards require that where between 50 to 75% of the healthy trees in excess of 12 inches in diameter are removed due to development that the applicant shall mitigate for one half of the caliper inches lost or 304 caliper inches. The arborist also identified 20 trees of varying sizes that were unhealthy and unsuitable for preservation. Some of these trees were also within building envelope areas. However, because these trees are unhealthy they are not included in mitigation calculations. Although the applicant appeared to understand this in the narrative, it should be noted that because a minimum of a two (2)-inch caliper street trees are required to be planted 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 • FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 18 OF 29 regardless of the whether a saas existing trees, required street As do not mitigate the loss.of the existing healthy trees. A total of 304 caliper inches must be mitigated on-site, at another site, or payment for the cost of purchasing and planting all or a portion of the required 304 caliper inches shall be made into the Citywide tree fund. The City has previously received estimates of $150 to purchase and plant a 2 inch caliper tree but the applicant can provide their own estimate to ensure this planting. The applicant may also upsize street trees as mitigation for an inch per inch mitigation for any tree in excess of two (2) inches in caliper size. The applicant shall install tree protection measures for trees that were identified as suitable for preservation. The consulting arborist shall provide written assurance that the protective measures have been installed. Weatherproof signage shall be installed identifying each protected tree area and listing the arbo.rists' name and number as the contact person should future builders need to work within protected tree areas. Subdivision Design: Section 18.160.060(A) contains standards for subdivision of parcels into four or more lots. To be approved, a preliminary plat must comply with the following criteria: 1. The proposal must comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations; 2. The proposed plat name must not be duplicative and must otherwise satisfy the provisions of ORS Chapter 92; 3. Streets and roads must be laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of partitions or subdivisions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern; and 4. An explanation has been provided for all common improvements. Compliance with the standards listed in Criterion 1 are addressed elsewhere within the staff report. The proposed Fonner Woods plat name is not duplicative of other plats. Compliance with the applicable development standards has been reviewed elsewhere within this report. The applicant also proposes to finish required street frontage improvements along SW Fonner Street as well as provide a private street to serve the development. Through the Conditions of Approval, street improvements to SW Fonner Street have been required. An explanation has been provided for the water quality treatment facility. No common areas or other open space facilities have been proposed. Variance: Section 18.160.150 allows approval, approval with conditions, or denial a request for an access variance to the 300 minimum street spacing standard for Minor Collectors contained in Section 18.164. To be approved a Variance must have been found to comply with the following findings: 1. There are special conditions or circumstances affecting the property that are unusual and peculiar to the land as compared to other lands similarly situated; The site is across from SW 113th Avenue that connects to the north side of SW Fonner Street. Strict compliance with the spacing standard by aligning the street across from SW 113th Avenue would require substantial remodeling of the existing structure. The existing structure was apparently constructed before SW 113th 5/4198 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 19 OF 29 Avenue wad the property owner, therefore, li no way of knowing where the home should Fiave. ultimately been located to have been incorporated into Lot 3 of the subdivision. 2. The variance is necessary for the proper design of the subdivision. The applicant is required to provide for a street connection to a Public Street. There are no alternative alignment locations available based on the length of the property frontage on SW Fonner Street and its otherwise landlocked condition. Based on the limited number of homes that would access SW 113th Avenue and the proposed private street due to their cul-de-sac design both streets and SW Fonner Street can function in a safe manner if approved as proposed. Other than locating the street across from SW 113th Avenue the applicant has chosen the next best location in terms of distance from the next closest street intersection, SW 113th Avenue. 3. The granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to rights of other owners of property; and...Granting of this Variance will still result in a safe traffic condition due to the limited number of average daily trips these two (2) cul-de-sac streets are expected to generate. 4. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property right because of an extraordinary hardship that would result from the strict compliance with the regulations of this title. The variance is necessary for the continued enjoyment of the existing detached single-family residence. If the proposed private street were located along the western property line, it would require extensive remodeling and likely relocation of the residence based on position of the home on the property. Street and Utility Improvements Standards: Section 18.164 contains the following standards for streets and utilities serving a subdivision: Street Improvements: Section 18.164.030(A) requires streets within and adjoining a development to be dedicated and improved based on the classification of the street. The applicant has been required to complete street improvements such as curb, gutter and sidewalk along the property frontage on all public streets through the recommended Conditions of Approval. Minimum Rights-of-Way and Street Widths: Section 18.164.030(E) requires a Minor Collector Street to have 60 feet of total width. A Local Street is required to have from 36 to 50 feet of right-of-way and a 24 to 32-foot paved section between curbs and sidewalks depending on the number of dwelling units to be served by the development. This section does not refer to private street minimum width standards but these are called out in Section 18.108 as 25 feet of total width with 20 feet of paved width. The applicant proposes to dedicate an additional ten (10) feet of right-of-way for the SW Fonner Street frontage to provide 30 feet from centerline in compliance with this standard. The applicant has proposed a private street with 40 feet of width and a 28-foot paved width. While this exceeds the minimum private street width standard, this would not allow parking on one (1) side of the street throughout the development, given the minimum clear width requirements of the Uniform Fire Code. 5/4198 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 20 OF 29 Future Street Plan and Exte&n of Streets: Section 18.164.03 states that a future _ street : plan ..shall _be _filed_.which._shows...the pattern_.of,existing _and proposed future__ ~a _ streets from the boundaries' of the proposed land-division.- This section also states that where it is necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed and a barricade shall be constructed at the end of the street. These street stubs to -adjoining properties are not considered to be cul-de-sac since they, are intended to continue as through streets at such time as the adjoining property is developed. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with this section by providing a discussion concerning providing a street extension due to existing development constraints to the east, west and south. To the west and east, large single-family residences preclude a future street extension. To the south, the Genesis Subdivision precludes a street extension. The applicants proposed. street connection and street spacing variance address access constraints to the north. Street Alignment and Connections: Section 18.164.030(G) requires all local streets that abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is precluded when it is not possible to redesign, or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints, the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. This site is not precluded from compliance with these standards. The applicant complies with these standards through their future streets plan as addressed above. Curbs, Curb Cuts, Ramps, and Driveway Approaches: Section 18.164.030(N) requires the following: Concrete curbs, curb cuts, wheelchair, bicycle ramps and driveway approaches shall be constructed in accordance with standards specified in this chapter and Section 15.04.080, and; 1. concrete curbs and driveway approaches are required; except 2. where no sidewalk is planned, an asphalt approach may be constructed with City Engineer approval; and 3. asphalt and concrete driveway approaches to the property line shall be built to City configuration standards. The street improvements have been addressed through the Engineering Department's review of the requisite street improvements. Block Design: Section 18.164.040(A) states that the length, width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. The block design as proposed complies with the applicable dimensional criteria as reviewed below. The dimensional criteria address the needs for convenience in circulation and traffic safety. The site does not have topography or environmental constraints that constrain access options. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 21 OF 29 Block Sizes: SecJ& 18.164.040(B)(1) states that th*rimeter of blocks formed by streets shall. not exceed 1,800 feet measured along the right-of-way line except: 1. Where street location is precluded by natural topography, wetlands or other bodies of water or, pre-existing development or; 2. For blocks adjacent to arterial streets, limited access highways, major collectors or railroads. 3. For non-residential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. It is not possible to comply with the block size standard due to existing development constraints on adjoining properties. For this reason, the applicant cannot reasonably provide a future street connection to an adjoining property as discussed under the exceptions listed in Criterion 1. Criterion 2 is not applicable because the site adjoins SW Fonner Street that is designated as a Minor Collector Street. Criteria 3 is not applicable to this development because the site is zoned for residential use. Block Lengths: Section 18.164.040(B)(2) states that when block lengths greater than 600 feet are permitted, pedestrian/bikeways shall be provided through the block. Due to development constraints the applicant is also precluded from extending a pedestrian/bicycleway through the site. Lots - Size and Shape: Section 18.164.060(A) prohibits lot depth from being more than 2.5 times the average lot width, unless the parcel is less than 1.5 times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. This standard is not applicable to this development because the applicant is subdividing through a Planned Development Overlay for the property. This design approach does not require the applicant to comply with minimum lot size standards, therefore, the lot depth to width ratio requirements do not apply. Lot Frontage: Section 18.164.060(B) requires that lots have at least 25 feet of frontage on public or private streets, other than an alley for detached single-family residences. The minimum frontage width standard is met for most of the lots as proposed because 10 of the 12 lots would have in excess of the 25-foot minimum frontage requirement. As shown, Lots 7 and 9 do not comply with this standard. Lots 7 and 9 shall be revised to provide a minimum of 25 feet of lot frontage. The Planned Development standards do not waive this requirement. Sidewalks: Section 18.164.070 requires sidewalks adjoining all residential streets. The Conditions of Approval require that a sidewalk be provided along the property frontage on SW Fonner Street. Though the use of a private street as a Planned Development, the new lots would not have sidewalks along their street frontages throughout the development. Sanitary Sewers: Section 18.164.090 requires sanitary sewer service. Sanitary Sewer facilities exist in SW Fonner Street that would serve a portion of the property. An additional sewer line exists adjacent to the property's south west comer that would serve the remainder of the property. Both facilities are expected to have sufficient capacity to meet the additional demand that will be created by the development. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 22 OF 29 Storm Drainage: Section 1064.100 requires adequate provil&s for storm water runoff and dedication. of easements, for, storm drainage facilities. Existing storm drainage` facilities are_. `in place to, serve- this - site..:} The'-Applicant is required to demonstrate though the Conditions of Approval that downstream facilities have sufficient capacity to serve this site. PUBLIC FACILITY CONCERNS- Sections 18.164.030(E)(1)(a) (Streets), 18.164.090 (Sanitary Sewer), and 18.164.100 (Storm Drains) are required to be addressed through the development review process. A review of other utilities and development requirements related to Grading and Erosion Control, Water Quality and Above Ground Utility Lines are also addressed below: STREETS: This site abuts SW Fonner Street, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City's Transportation Plan Map. The roadway is still under Washington County jurisdiction, but because-the site lies within the USB, the City of Tigard will make all decisions regarding planning and engineering review. A minor collector street requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 60 feet. At present, there is approximately 20 feet of ROW south of the centerline of the street. The applicant's plan indicates that they will dedicate additional ROW to provide 30 feet from centerline to meet the City standard. The roadway is paved, but not improved to City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that they will construct a half-street improvement on Fonner Street adjacent to their site frontage to meet City standards and to mitigate their impact to the transportation system. Staff could not tell if the existing pavement section will meet City standards, so the applicant will need to verify this prior to construction. If the existing pavement section meets City standards, then the applicant will be permitted to saw cut the edge of the existing asphalt and add the necessary width to meet the City width standard. If the section does not meet City standards, then the half-street improvement shall extend to the roadway centerline. Proposed Private Street The applicant is proposing to serve this project with a private street. It appears the reason for this proposal is to avoid providing a wider ROW for a public street. For instance, a public street with a 28-foot paved width would require a ROW width of 46 feet to allow for 5-foot sidewalks on both sides and 4-foot planter areas for street trees. The applicant's plan indicates that they will provide a 40-foot wide tract area for their private street. The applicant believes that they will need to remove more trees if a 46-foot ROW is required, so they have applied for a Planned Development in order to qualify for a private street serving more than six lots [TDC 18.164.030(S)(3)]. Although Staff would prefer a public street in a project of this size, past decisions by the City indicate that a private street could be approved. There are no other public streets in the area that this new street could align with and connect to in the future; therefore, no more than the proposed 12 lots will ever be served by this street. Staff, as well as the City Council, are concerned with private streets that have the same appearance of a public street. In a recent discussion with the Council, Staff was directed to implement a few "appearance" requirements for private streets. For instance, where the 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 23 OF 29 private street inter-*s a public street, a commercial dri ay apron shall be constructed. The applicant's pla?rshows a typical curb return appro ch similar in nature to a public street; this will need-to be changed on the construction plans. Also; in addition to the blue- street name signs installed by the City, we are now installing an additional sign that indicates that the private street is not maintained by the City. 18.164.030(S) also indicates that the applicant shall ensure the continued maintenance of private streets by establishing a homeowners association. It is recommended that the applicant place a statement on the face of the final plat indicating the private street will be owned and maintained by the properties that will be served by it. In addition, the applicant should record Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) along with the final plat that will clarify how the private property owners are to maintain the private street.. These CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to approval of the final plat. The City's public improvement design standards require private streets to have a pavement section equal to a public local street. The applicant will need to provide this type of pavement section. Access Spacing Variance The applicant has requested a variance to the City's intersection spacing requirement found in 18.164.030(G)(1), which states that offset intersection spacing along a collector street shall be a minimum of 300 feet. The proposed offset between the new private street and SW 113th Place is approximately 125 feet, which does not meet the TDC requirement. The applicant makes the argument that aligning the new private street with 113th Place will require: 1) removal of more trees, and 2) removal of the existing house valued at approximately $ 100,000. Staff has reviewed the applicant's argument and concurs that the existing house would likely have to be removed or relocated. However, Staff does not concur that more trees would have to be removed in order to align the streets. It appears to Staff that more trees over 12 inches in diameter will be removed with the applicant's proposed street alignment. The applicant makes a point that if this application were reviewed under Washington County regulations, the offset would be approved. Washington County's offset distance is a minimum of 50 feet on a minor collector street. The applicant also makes a point that this particular offset does not pose a left turn conflict hazard for cars turning left into either street from Fonner Street because the new private street will be offset to the east of SW 113th Place. If the new street were to be offset to the west of SW 113th Place, there would be a left turn conflict. It is Staff's opinion that because of the unique issue with the existing house and the nature of the offset, there will not be a negative impact to public safety and welfare and, therefore, the applicant's plan should be approved. SANITARY SEWER: There are two (2) existing public sanitary sewer lines near this site that will serve the new lots. One (1) 8-inch line was stubbed to the southwest property comer out of the Genesis subdivision. The applicant proposes to extend a new public line from that stub into the site to serve Lots 4 through 12. The other 8-inch line is located in SW Fonner Street. From that main line, the applicant proposes to extend a public sewer line southerly behind Lots 1 through 3. 5/4198 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 24 OF 29 Overall, Staff agrees that thoncept shown on the applicant's 0I will work, but there are two (2) main concerns that the applicant will need to address prior to approval of formal design plans:- 1)=-the applicant-must-evaluate--the-surrouhding drainage basin and" - provide public sewer stubs to any adjacent uphill, unsewered properties, and 2) the applicant must provide maintenance access roadways to all manholes to be located behind the new lots. In order to address the first concern, the applicant's engineer will need to provide the Engineering Department with a subbasin study to evaluate which adjacent properties will need to access the sewer that is being extended into this site. The City Engineer will then make a decision as to where the applicant must extend sewer stubs. This evaluation will take place along with the review of the construction design plans. Regarding accessibility of the sewer lines, the City is concerned whenever new public lines are proposed to be located in back and side yards of new lots. This type of location presents problems for City maintenance crews, who must clean the sewer lines every one (1) or two (2) years and repair any future problems with those lines. Unless the cleaning truck can access the downstream sewer manhole on a given length of line, that line can not be adequately cleaned. The City's policy in approving sanitary sewer line designs is to ensure that adequate maintenance access is provided. Adequate maintenance access can either be: 1) place the main lines within a paved public or private street, such that manholes are accessible in the street, or 2) where main lines must be located in the back or side yards of lots, provide a paved access road from the street back to the downstream manhole. Staff believes the applicant can easily move the sewer line behind Lots 1 through 3 into the private street and adequately serve those lots. However, the southerly line that ties into the Genesis sewer line will need to be located in side and back yards of one (1) or two (2) lots. The applicant's plan would result in two (2) downstream manholes and, therefore, two lengths of public sewer line, that would be impossible to clean properly. The manholes in question are behind Lots 9 and 10. The applicant's plan does not indicate that they have planned for maintenance access roadways to reach these manholes. Staff suggests the applicant's engineer revise the sewer layout and minimize the number of manholes behind the lots. A maintenance access road(s) will need to be added to the plan prior to approval of the construction design plans. The applicant will have two (2) choices for delineating the access road(s) on the plat and construction plans: A. place the roadway(s) within a tract to be conveyed to the City on the final plat; or B. place the roadway within a public sanitary sewer and maintenance access easement. If Option B is selected, the applicant shall place restrictions on the plat to prohibit parking, fences, gates or other structures from being placed within the easement. Assuming the applicant will be willing to address the concerns listed above, Staff will support the application. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 25 OF 29 0 STORM DRAINAGO i There is an existing drainage channel that cuts across the southern half of this site and flows from west to east. A small northerly portion of the property slopes toward SW Fonner Street. The applicant submitted a downstream analysis that indicates that the downstream drainage channel is adequately sized to handle the additional storm water from this development. The majority of the site runoff will be directed to the southeast corner of the site into a water quality pond. Lot 1, a portion of Lot 2 and the half-street improvement drainage will be directed into the existing roadside ditch in Fonner Street. No adverse downstream impacts should occur. WATER: This site will be served from the City's water system. There is an existing 6-inch public water line in SW Fonner Street that can adequately serve this site. The Public Works Department indicates that the applicant will need to revise their plan to show the new water line on the east side of the new private street. Public water lines in Tigard are required to be on the south and/or east side 'of streets. Public Works also indicates that there is a 24-inch transmission line in Fonner Street that is not reflected on the applicant's plans. The applicant will need to show this transmission line on their construction plans. STORM WATER QUALITY: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65% of the phosphorus contained in 100% of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant is proposing to construct an extended dry detention pond to treat the runoff from the site. The preliminary calculations provided in the SDR application indicate the pond will be adequately sized to handle this site. This pond facility will be privately maintained by either the developer or the future homeowners within the subdivision. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL: USA Design and Construction Standards also regulates erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per USA regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 26 OF 29 The applicant's design enginewill be required to prepare a final ding plan for review and approval. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" -graded to° insure`°that ,the,,drainage-,is'-directed, to- the--street-,or a public facility approved by the Engineering Department. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The applicant will also be required to provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report will need to be incorporated into the final grading plan and a final construction supervision report must be filed with the Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permits. EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES: There are existing overhead utility lines along SW Fonner Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 180 lineal feet; therefore, the fee would be $ 4,950. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Building Division reviewed this proposal and has offered the following comments: Provide a Fire Hydrant at the intersection of SW Fonner Street and the new street. The cul-de-sac must have an inside turning radius of 25 feet. Roof drains from the existing house and all impervious surfaces must be drained to an approved Public system. Off street parking is permitted on one (1) side of the street only. Provide "No Parking" signage and curb markings per UFC 902.2.4 and 901.4.5.2. Note: The location of the Fire Hydrant will need to be reviewed and approved for compliance with traffic safety issues if located within the Clear Vision area at the SW Fonner Street intersection. The Water Department reviewed this proposal and provided the following comment: Although we have no objections to the basic concept, we do have the following concerns: standard locations of water mains are south and east side of centerline. The minimum distance from centerline of pipe to face of curb is six (6) feet. The City owns and operates a 24-inch transmission main on SW Fonner Street. Please note the location on plans. Other affected departments have reviewed this application and have offered no comments or objections. SECTION VI. AGENCY COMMENTS Other affected agencies have reviewed this application and have offered no comments or objections. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 27 OF 29 SECTION VII. ftEIGHBORING PROPERTY OAR COMMENTS Prior to submittal of the application, the City received two (2) letters from neighboring property owners concerning this development. The following letter was received from Eric and Colleen Schultheis: As the owner of the CF Tigard House 11180 SW Fonner Street, I have a few concerns regarding your proposed development as the subject property borders our Historic District Overlay. I am certain with proper communication and cooperation we can protect the integrity and Historic Significance of the area for. all concerned. I request the following in your plans: ❖ Visual buffer along West line to protect the Historic District. The Community Development Code does not require screening and buffering measures to be undertaken between adjoining detached single-family residential land uses. However, as part of the tree mitigation plan, the applicant has proposed to provide a row of trees that would serve this purpose. ❖ Trees along West line are "Wind Hardened" and must not be topped, removed or have their root structure built upon or cut into, or damaged during construction. The applicant will need to remove trees on the subject property's southeastern corner to construct the Water Quality Treatment facility. It does not appear necessary to remove trees along the property line. It does, however, appear necessary to remove trees within the center of Lot 12 in order to develop this property. ❖ Stone fence along the west line to minimize the impact of increased noise level. Because the applicant is proposing single-family detached residential use, a sound attenuation wall is not expected to be necessary to address noise impacts. Noise emissions from either the new residences or the neighboring property would be expected to be similar and not to exceed residential standards. ❖ Holding pond with natural purification system to assure run-off is clean and will not flood or property. The applicant has proposed a water quality treatment facility to treat storm water runoff from this development. As a requirement of all new development, the applicant is expected to analyze upstream and downstream conditions and upsize any existing drainage utility deficiencies with the storm drainage system. The following letter was received from Jay and Nora Becker owners of the home at 11556 SW Fonner Street: Last week we attended a meeting to describe the proposed subdivision to be placed on Tax Lot 2000 whose west-side is adjacent to my property. Plans show that the developer/builder SR Turner Construction L.L.C. is planning on placing lots 6, 7, 8 and 9 along my property's eastern edge. 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 28 OF 29 have two (2) concerns: 1. ENVIRONMENTAL C`ONCERN'S DURING"DEVELO"PMENT: ' My home office is in the northeast corner of my home and only 25 feet from the property boundary along which development is to occur. My main entrance and main area of landscaped rolling green grassed hills fills the northeast corner of my property. During the entire work day I am present in this area. I have a bad case of Asthma for which I take constant medication and this condition makes me especially sensitive to dust. Further, the developer has stated that depending on economic conditions, building might proceed over several years time. This is a long time to contend with construction noise and dust. Based on past practice, it is expected that street and utility construction would occur in a short period of time on this site. Although development of all the lots within the development could take several years, upon commencement of construction of any single lot it is expected that completion would occur in a short time period due to construction costs associated with extended delays. 2. VISUAL IMPACT OF ADJOINING LOTS. Views from my downstairs office and upstairs bedroom are going to be looking directly onto homes built on Lots 6 through 9. It is unlikely that, when given the number of owners with adjoining lots a free choice, that what they will choose to do along our common property line will end up being consistent with one another. It is likely because of personal constraints and tastes that what will result along their back property lines and my common property line will be appealing when taken as a whole, because it is visually inconsistent due to lack of uniform development and a single vision. I think these problems can be addressed by either the Planning Commission or the Hearings Officer by requiring as a Condition of approval that a neighbor friendly and visually attractive fence at least five feet high be built along the west side of this development. I would be willing to let the developer build this fence on my side of the property line if the gain of a few feet was of value to him and it would avoid a large tree in the corner of this site. Further a nice attractive neighbor friendly fence along his shared property boundary, I believe would make marketing these lots easier since they would become more private from my property. I hope you will be able to share these concerns and solutions with the City of Tigard Planning Commission. The Community Development Code does not require a fence between detached single-family residential properties. The applicant has proposed to provide newly planted trees as a buffer around the entire perimeter of the project. The applicants' preliminary tree mitigation plan proposes to plant a row of trees around the entire perimeter of the development that would provide for screening and buffering. April 23, 1998 PR AR D Mark Rob " s, AIC DATE ssociate P nn April 23, 1998 APPR VE Richard Bew rsdorff DATE Planning Manager i:curplnlsub98-02.dec 5/4/98 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUB 98-0002 - FONNER WOODS SUB. PAGE 29 OF 29 ~ 1 \ 'V. S1. ® 0~ t tO~A~ ? N, e140 St' ; Q 4 PO ~ 0 e gee sue, I I I ~ P• • ar ~ II _,t{ Tti a MW~ t+}~5 ij^ \ REr~ ~ ~ S1 h S7X Gvq IC& CL i tea. ^✓q y ova 5 CCIDV N e Q ~ 72e ~ ~ OQ • le a° • b ;2.s2e s!. V P 6 11 e•JcS s`. V son* :r. ? 625 s.. . , dy t. ~ C 10 15~fl St. a Paso* 'o go Pa b 00rr~.wo 5b-' 0000 ~~p 9 Fouuer Woo 1.64 St. Su 1 510 ,Z~= xxcs~ scas~~ O. SUB V `+.-0002 PDR 9$"0003 1T~C p Z41A 9%--0002 1 ~ VAR 99.•0003 h1p H► CITY of TIGARD N OeOOeA/"IC INFORMATION eYeil•1 - - VICINITY MAP H 1 ery- N~lvMr//S' SUB 980002 S"MUM - PDR 98--0003 ZOK 98-0002 M EA Ot eT VAR 980003 .+.Ne.. eNe...r eee er.+.Ne...r.. Fonner Woods T SUBJECT Subdivision PARCEL QP 1- S wA1KIN CT. r t sir P~ r~ N o X04 Soo Feet. _MRA - Sc m - ~ J V- 501 rest j m City of Tigard VEN ST - BIS - T - - Infamwdon an t Ns mep is for general 1watim arty end ehaAd M verlM1ed w11h the ibv - ' _ _ _ - 13125 SW 11ae 9hd Tsprd, OR 97223 w _ ~ - - - - Plot date: Mar 24,1998; c:\maglc\maglc0l.apr Community Development e_'c L't e01 it t City of Tigard TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Community Development MAY 4, 1998 - 7:30 P.M. ShapingABetter Community TIGARD CIVIC CENTER - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS 4. APPROVE MINUTES 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (SDR) 98-0001/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 98-0005 CANDLEWOOD EXTENDED STAY HOTEL PROPOSAL: The applicant has requested Planned Development and Site Development Review approval to construct a 64,844 square foot, 125 room, four (4)-story extended stay hotel. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION(S): General Commercial (C-G). ZONING DESIGNATION(S): General Commercial (C-G) with Planned Development Overlay (PD). LOCATION(S): The subject site is located at the west end of SW Beveland Street on the east side of Highway 217; WCTM 2S101 BD, Tax Lot 00100. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.62, 18.67, 18.80, 18.84, 18.98, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.116, 18.120, 18.150 and 18.164. 5.2 SUBDIVISION (SUB) 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 98-0003/ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 98-0002NARIANCE (VAR) 98-0003 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Subdivision approval to divide one (1) parcel of 2.83 acres into 12 lots ranging in size from 7,448 to 8,711 square feet and to additionally develop a 6,009 square foot water quality tract. The applicant has also requested Conceptual and Detailed Planned Development Review to create lots. An amendment to the zoning map is requested to place Planned Development (PD) Overlay on the property. Lastly, the applicant proposes a Variance to the minimum access spacing standards for a Minor Collector from the City standard of 300 feet to 135 feet. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION(S): Low Density Residential; 1-5 Dwelling Units Per Acre. ZONING DESIGNATION(S): R-4.5; Single-Family Residential (7,500 Square Feet) or (5,000 Square Feet Per Unit). The purpose of the R-4.5 zoning district is to establish standard urban low density residential home sites. LOCATION(S): 11300 SW Fonner Street; WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Lot 02000. The subject property is located east of the intersection of SW Fonner Street and SW 115th Avenue, on the south side of SW Fonner Street south across the street from SW 113th Place. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community PUBLIC NEARING NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, MAY 4. 1998 AT 7:30 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO(S): SUBDIVISION (SUB] 98-0002 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PORI 98-0003 VARIANCE (VAR] 98-0003 ZONE CHANGE IZONI 98-0002 FILE TITLE: FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION OWNER/ Steve Turner PLANNING Matthew Wellner APPLICANT: S.R. Turner Construction CONTACT: Land Tech, Inc. 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 408 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 402 PO Box 25216 Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97289-0216 REQUEST > A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,44800 square feet to 8,711 square feet and an approximately 6,009 square foot water quality facility; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units and to reduce the minimum lot size below 7,500 square feet; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. LOCATION: 11300 SW Fonner Street; WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Lot 02000. The subject site is located east of the intersection of SW Fonner Street and SW 115th Avenue, on the south side of SW Fonner Street across from SW 113th Place. ZONE: Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre; R-4.5. The purpose of the R-4.5 Zoning District is to establish standard urban low density residential sites. The R-4.5 zone allows, among other uses, single- family residential units, public support facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, home occupations, temporary uses, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.88, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ASSISTIVE 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. 320 (VOICE) OR (503) 684-2772 (TDD - TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEVICES FOR THE DEAF) NO LESS THAN ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. u SUB 98-0002/POR 98-00031VAR 98-00031ZON 98.0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF 514198 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING ANYONE WISHING TO PRESENT W TTEN TESTIMONY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING PRIOR TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEA G. ORAL TESTIMONY MAY BE PRE TED AT THE PUBLIC. HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE PLAN ON ING COMMISSION WILL RECEIVE A S AF 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 IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER APRIL 13, 1998, ANY PARTY IS ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. 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 197763(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 THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY. AT THE HEARING IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. 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 (25~) PER PAGE, OR THE CURRENT RATE CHARGED FOR COPIES AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST. AT LEAST SEVEN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO THE 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 MARK ROBERTS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER AT (503) 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223. _ s I= SUBJECT PARCEL P' \ WAryM TIN I L ` "KF* , :y SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003/VAR 98-0003/ZON 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION NOTICE OF 5/4/98 PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING i 1 8.711 st. V «E+ o O Z t0 SE ©OvED" + 8.340 st. g 4 3 ~ 8.486 5L % 0 ir/ w 10 / C n I 1 V v \ REMAIN ~ .o ~ iv, S2~ of 92.9 \ C \ b p TO ( REMOVED \ na v +-a .a O. ~ 4 0 . \ J^ 7.:G0 sf. y 'q. II'~I =s n/ ~ f1 a . Jena L+L. t 7.726 sf. .5 G0 fii~ Q ; Az 12 7.923 st. :2.929 st' i - 1~+7' Q V 10.7 LL 1 2i e + 11 g "0 8.45 st. O j 7.625 st. io 1 8 7,500 st. E 7.667 st. 9 a'• 9 00 0000 000006 00 010 00 00 00 00 00 7,640 St. •~.72K Founer Woods ,27 S Subdivision m- CASE NOW & CASE MAMECSI: SUB 98-0002 SITE PLAN PDR 98-0003 ZON 980002 E-K-HI B IT MAP N ~.Rn VAR 98-0003 + WNI - sT - 3 - CITY of TIGARD O[OOa•/NIC INFORMATION •Y•T!Y VICINITY MAP SUB 98--0002 PDR 98--0003 SW ER OI. ST ZON 98-0002 VAR 980003 - - - SUBJECT T Founer Woods Subdivision PARCEL a QP~N~\NpE r S WATK~N l rn N r_ ~ r C ~ T Rg(a P N ti '(is r 0 400 SW Feet C m T t 504 teat ~ OL v OT r M City of Tigard AVEN ST ST • G, Information on this map Is for general location only and should be verl0ed wlti, LMe Development Sarvlces Division. 17125 SW Hag Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 039-4171 w http•Jlwww.cl.tlgard.or.us 'Community Development - - - - - ~ _ - - - - - - - - Plot date: Mar 24, 1998; cAmagic\magic01.apr • • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD •-~`~I - L i . Community Development I} ~5~' tV L✓ U U LS Shaping A Better Community ~ DATE: April 1998 APR 31998 RECEIVED PLANNING TO: Julia Huffman, USA/S1VM Program 9v APR 2 2 1998 CITY OF TIGARD FROM: CIO of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: VIIi1Ham D'Andrea, Associate Planner Phone: 150316394M Fax: [50316841291 RE: SUBDIVISION (S91111 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (POR198-0003/VARIANCE (VAR] 98-0003/ZONE CWGE I1011198-0002 ➢ FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Q A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,500 square feet to 13,387 square feet; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. Attached is the SRO Plan, VIClnlty Map and Applicants Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: [MONDAY - APRIL 13,19981. 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. Written comments provided below: (Please provide the following information) Name of Personisl Commentin • v Phone Number(s): v SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-00031VAR 98-000320N 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAUREQUEST FOR COMMENTS UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY MEMORANDUM DATE: April 20, 1998 TO: William D'Andrea, City of Tigard FROM: Julia Huffman, USA ~ 1-1 SUBJECT: Fortner Woods Subdivision, SUB 98-0002, PDR 98-0003, VAR 98-0003, ZON 98-0002 SANITARY SEWER Each lot within the development should be provided with a means of disposal for sanitary sewer. The means of disposal should be in accordance with R&O 96-44 (Unified Sewerage Agency's Construction Design Standards, July 1996 edition). Engineer should verify that public sanitary sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend service as required by R&O 96-44. STORM SEWER Each lot within the development should have access to public storm sewer. Engineer should verify that public storm sewer is available to uphill adjacent properties, or extend storm service as required by R&O 96-44. Hydraulic and hydrological analysis of storm conveyance system is necessary. If downstream storm conveyance does not have the capacity to convey the volume during a 25-year, 24-hour storm event, the applicant is responsible for mitigating the flow. WATER QUALITY Developer should provide a water quality facility to treat the new impervious surface being constructed as part of this development. The facility would be maintained by the City of Tigard as it will be within the city limits. The facility should be in a separate tract and not part of any buildable lot. 155 North First Avenue, Suite 270, MS 10 Phone: 503/648-8621 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 FAX: 503/640-3525 A REQUEST JPJPQ", fNTS CITY OF TIGARD CommuninJ Development APR 15 1998 Shaping A Better Community DATE: April 21998 CITY OF TIGARD TO: Jim Wolf, Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea, Associate Planner Phone: [5031639-421 Fax: [50316847291 RE: SUBDIVISION (SUB) 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (POR) 98-0003/VARIANCE (VAR) 98-0003/ZONE CNANGE IZONI 98-0002 ➢ FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Q A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,500 square feet to 13,387 square feet; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. Attached is the Site Plan, Vicinity Map and Applicants Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: (MONDAY - APRIL 13,19981. 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. Written comments provided below: a, t5k -cwt a\\ yti4nuy \-w4. NsOa ,rd o~n AAis% v wvnVoW a's tV 01 do QN%JQ \ ell A0 eXOvCk MQ- \W& ryM . ~Th1 (e JWk ~y oAqK4 "rntank \A to U1at ~'t,PS 004 vV W4W / ok \A Y( "A . k~oWe.'1c'/ M owlk- 0*0 `c4X0 cor664\1CkCA. ac-11 J a o,, I \0 t 1 o rvrv.\oed5 r~ alonl {t/ pk!ase provide the foamiq infom,ation) Name of Person(s) Commenting: Phone Number(s): x 10\0 SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003NAR 98-000320N 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DATE: April 22, 1998 TO: Mark Roberts, Planning Division FROM: Brian Rager, Development Review Engineer RE: SUB 98-0002, Fonner Woods Subdivision Description: This project is for the division of one parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,500 sf to 13,387 sf at 11300 SW Fonner Street (WCTM 2S1 3AC, Tax Lot 2000). This site lies within the Urban Service Boundary (USB). Findings: 1. Streets: This site abuts SW Fonner Street, which is classified as a minor collector street on the City's Transportation Plan Map. The roadway is still under Washington County jurisdiction, but because the site lies within the USB, the City of Tigard will make all decisions regarding planning and engineering review. A minor collector street requires a right-of-way (ROW) width of 60 feet. At present, there is approximately 20 feet of ROW south of the centerline of the street. The applicant's plan indicates that they will dedicate additional ROW to provide 30 feet from centerline to meet the City standard. The roadway is paved, but not improved to City standards. The applicant's plan indicates that they will construct a half-street improvement on Fonner Street adjacent to their site frontage to meet City standards and to mitigate their impact to the transportation system. Staff could not tell if the existing pavement section will meet City standards, so the applicant will need to verify this prior to construction. If the existing pavement section meets City standards, then the applicant will be permitted to saw cut the edge of the existing asphalt and add the necessary width to meet the City width standard. If the section does not meet City standards, then the half-street improvement shall extend to the roadway centerline. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 1 Proposed Private Street The applicant is proposing to serve this project with a private street. It appears the reason for this proposal is to avoid providing a wider ROW for a public street. For instance, a public street with a 28-foot paved width would require a ROW width of 46 feet to allow for 5-foot sidewalks on both sides and 4-foot planter areas for street trees. The applicant's plan indicates that they will provide a 40-foot wide tract area for their private street. The applicant believes that they will need to remove more trees if a 46-foot ROW is required, so they have applied for a Planned Development in order to qualify for a private street serving more than six lots [TDC 18.164.030(S)(3)]. Although Staff would prefer a public street in a project of this size, past decisions by the City indicate that a private street could be approved. There are no other public streets in the area that this new street could align with and connect to in the future; therefore, no more than the proposed 12 lots will ever be served by this street. Staff, as well as the City Council, are concerned with private streets that have the same appearance of a public street. In a recent discussion with the Council, Staff was directed to implement a few "appearance" requirements for private streets. For instance, where the private street intersects a public street, a commercial driveway apron shall be constructed. The applicant's plan shows a typical curb return approach similar in nature to a public street; this will need to be changed on the construction plans. Also, in addition to the blue street name signs installed by the City, we are now installing an additional sign that indicates that the private street is not maintained by the City. 18.164.030(S) also indicates that the applicant shall ensure the continued maintenance of private streets by establishing a homeowners association. It is recommended that the applicant place a statement on the face of the final plat indicating the private street will be owned and maintained by the properties that will be served by it. In addition, the applicant should record Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) along with the final plat that will clarify how the private property owners are to maintain the private street. These CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to approval of the final plat. The City's public improvement design standards require private streets to have a pavement section equal to a public local street. The applicant will need to provide this type of pavement section. Access Spacing Variance The applicant has requested a variance to the City's intersection spacing requirement found in 18.164.030(G)(1), which states that offset intersection spacing along a collector street shall be a minimum of 300 ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 2 feet. The proposed offset between the new private street and SW 113th Place is approximately 125 feet, which does not meet the TDC requirement. The applicant makes the argument that aligning the new private street with 113th Place will require: 1) removal of more trees, and 2) removal of the existing house valued at approximately $ 100,000. Staff has reviewed the applicant's argument and concurs that the existing house would likely have to be removed or relocated. However, Staff does not concur that more trees would have to be removed in order to align the streets. It appears to Staff that more trees over 12 inches in diameter will be removed with the applicant's proposed street alignment. The applicant makes a point that if this application were reviewed under Washington County regulations, the offset would be approved. Washington County's offset distance is a minimum of 50 feet on a minor collector street. The applicant also makes a point that this particular offset does not pose a left turn conflict hazard for cars turning left into either street from Fonner Street because the new private street will be offset to the east of SW 113th Place. If the new street were to be offset to the west of SW 113th Place, there would be a left turn conflict. It is Staffs opinion that because of the unique issue with the existing house and the nature of the offset, there will not be a negative impact to public safety and welfare and, therefore, the applicant's plan should be approved. 2. Water: This site will be served from the City's water system. There is an existing 6-inch public water line in SW Fonner Street that can adequately serve this site. The Public Works Department indicates that the applicant will need to revise their plan to show the new water line on the east side of the new private street. Public water lines in Tigard are required to be on the south and/or east side of streets. Public Works also indicates that there is a 24-inch transmission line in Fonner Street that is not reflected on the applicant's plans. The applicant will need to show this transmission line on their construction plans. 3. Sanitary Sewer: There are two existing public sanitary sewer lines near this site that will serve the new lots. One 8-inch line was stubbed to the southwest property corner out of the Genesis subdivision. The applicant proposes to extend a new public line from that stub into the site to serve Lots 4 through 12. The other 8-inch line is located in SW Fonner Street. From that main line, the applicant proposes to extend a public sewer line southerly behind Lots 1 through 3. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 3 Overall, Staff agrees that the concept shown on the applicant's plan will work, but there are two main concerns that the applicant will need to address prior to approval of formal design plans: 1) the applicant must evaluate the surrounding drainage basin and provide public sewer stubs to any adjacent uphill, unsewered properties, and 2) the applicant must provide maintenance access roadways to all manholes to be located behind the new lots. In order to address the first concern, the applicant's engineer will need to provide the Engineering Department with a subbasin study to evaluate which adjacent properties will need to access the sewer that is being extended into this site. The City Engineer will then make a decision as to where the applicant must extend sewer stubs. This evaluation will take place along with the review of the construction design plans. Regarding accessibility of the sewer lines, the City is concerned whenever new public lines are proposed to be located in back and side yards of new lots. This type of location presents problems for City maintenance crews, who must clean the sewer lines every one or two years and repair any future problems .with those lines. Unless the cleaning truck can access the downstream sewer manhole on a given length of line, that line can not be adequately cleaned. The City's policy in approving sanitary sewer line designs is to ensure that adequate maintenance access is provided. Adequate maintenance access can either be: 1) place the main lines within a paved public or private street, such that manholes are accessible in the street, or 2) where main lines must be located in the back or side yards of lots, provide a paved access road from the street back .to the downstream manhole. Staff believes the applicant can easily move the sewer line behind Lots 1 through 3 into the private street and adequately serve those lots. However, the southerly line that ties into the Genesis sewer line will need to be located in side and back yards of one or two lots. The applicant's plan would result in two downstream manholes, and therefore two lengths of public sewer line, that would be impossible to clean properly. The manholes in question are behind Lots 9 and 10. The applicant's plan does not indicate that they have planned for maintenance access roadways to reach these manholes. Staff suggests the applicant's engineer revise the sewer layout and minimize the number of manholes behind the lots. A maintenance access road(s) will need to be added to the plan prior to approval of the construction design plans. The applicant will have two choices for delineating the access road(s) on the plat and construction plans: 1) place the roadway(s) within a tract to be ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 4 conveyed to the City on the final plat, or 2) place the roadway within a public sanitary sewer and maintenance access easement. If Option 2 is selected, the applicant shall place restrictions on the plat to prohibit parking, fences, gates or other structures from being placed within the easement. Assuming the applicant will be willing to address the concerns listed above, Staff will support the application. 4. Storm Drainage: There is an existing drainage channel that cuts across the southern half of this site and flows from west to east. A small northerly portion of the property slopes toward SW Fonner Street. The applicant submitted a downstream analysis which indicates that the downstream drainage channel is adequately sized to handle the additional storm water from this development. The majority of the site runoff will be directed to the southeast corner of the site into a water quality pond. Lot 1, a portion of Lot 2 and the half-street improvement drainage will be directed into the existing roadside ditch in Fonner Street. No adverse downstream impacts should occur. 5. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) Design and Construction Standards (adopted by Resolution and Order No. 96-44) which require the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. In addition, a maintenance plan is required to be submitted indicating the frequency and method to be used in keeping the facility maintained through the year. Prior to construction, the applicant shall submit plans and calculations for a water quality facility that will meet the intent of the USA Design Standards. In addition, the applicant shall submit a maintenance plan for the facility that must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to construction. The applicant is proposing to construct an extended dry detention pond to treat the runoff from the site. The preliminary calculations provided in the SDR application indicate the pond will be adequately sized to handle this site. This pond facility will be privately maintained by either the developer or the future homeowners within the subdivision. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 5 • 6. Grading and Erosion Control:. USA Design and Construction Standards also regulates erosion control to reduce the amount of sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system resulting from development, construction, grading, excavating, clearing, and any other activity which accelerates erosion. Per USA regulations, the applicant is required to submit an erosion control plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of City permits. The applicant's design engineer will be required to prepare a final grading plan for review and approval. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the street or a public facility approved by the . Engineering Department. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). The applicant will also be required to provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report will need to be incorporated into the final grading plan and a final construction supervision report must be filed with the Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Existing Overhead Utility Lines: There are existing overhead utility lines along SW Fonner Street. Section 18.164.120 of the TMC requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, at the election of the developer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. If the fee in-lieu is proposed, it is equal to $ 27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The frontage along this site is 180 lineal feet; therefore the fee would be $ 4,950.00. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 6 Recommendations: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT: Note: Unless otherwise noted, the staff contact for the following conditions will be Brian Rager, Engineering Department (639-4171). 1. Prior to approval of the final plat, A public improvement permit and compliance agreement is required for this project. six (6) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Once redline comments are addressed and the plans are revised, the design engineer shall then submit nine (9) sets of revised drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should. only include sheets relevant to public improvements. Public improvement plans shall conform to City of Tigard Public Improvement Design Standards, which are available at City Hall. 2. As a part of the public improvement plan submittal, the Engineering Department shall be provided with the name, address and telephone number of the individual or corporate entity who will be responsible for executing the compliance agreement and providing the financial assurance for the public improvements. 3. The applicant shall provide a construction vehicle access and parking plan for approval by the City Engineer. All construction vehicle parking shall be provided on-site. No construction vehicles or equipment will be permitted to park on the adjoining residential public streets. Construction vehicles include the vehicles of any contractor or subcontractor involved in the construction of site improvements or buildings proposed by this application, and shall include the vehicles of all suppliers and employees associated with the project. 4. The applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way on Fonner Street to provide 30 feet from centerline. This dedication shall be shown on the face of the final plat. 5. The applicant shall construct standard half-street improvements along the frontage of SW Fonner Street. The improvements adjacent to this site shall include: a. City standard pavement section from curb to centerline equal to 20 feet (NOTE: if the applicant can demonstrate that the existing pavement ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 7 section meets current City standards, then they will be permitted to saw cut the edge of existing asphalt and add onto the width) b. pavement tapers needed to tie the new improvement back into the existing edge of pavement shall be built beyond the site frontage c. concrete curb and/or curb and gutter d. storm drainage, including any off-site storm drainage necessary to convey surface and/or subsurface runoff e. 5 foot concrete sidewalk f. street striping g. streetlights as determined by the City Engineer h. underground utilities (NOTE: the applicant may be eligible to pay a fee in-lieu of undergrounding existing overhead utilities) i. street signs j. commercial driveway apron at private street entrance k. adjustments in vertical and/or horizontal alignment to construct SW Fonner Street in a safe manner, as approved by the Engineering Department. 6. A profile of SW Fonner Street shall be required, extending 300 feet either side of the subject site showing the existing grade and proposed future grade. 7. There shall be no direct vehicular access from Lot 1 onto SW Fonner Street. 8. The applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the final plat to indicate . that the proposed private street will be jointly owned and maintained by the private property owners who abut and take access from it. 9. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall prepare Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) for this project, to be recorded with the final plat, that clearly lays out a maintenance plan and agreement for the proposed private street. The CC&R's shall obligate the private property owners within the subdivision to create a homeowner's association to ensure regulation of maintenance for the street. The applicant shall submit a copy of the CC&R's to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) prior to approval of the final plat. 10. The pavement and rock section of the proposed private street shall meet the City's public street standard for a local residential street. 11. Any extension of public water lines shall be shown on the proposed public improvement construction drawings and shall be reviewed and approved by the City's Water Department, as a part of the Engineering Department plan ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 8 • i review. NOTE: An estimated 12% of the water system costs must be on deposit with the Water Department prior to approval of the public improvement plans from the Engineering Department and construction of public water lines. 12. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate the location of the existing 24-inch transmission water line in Fonner Street. 13. The applicant's construction plans shall indicate that the proposed public sanitary sewer line to serve Lots 1 through 3 shall be relocated to be within the new private street. 14. The applicant shall ensure that City maintenance vehicles can access any downstream sewer manholes behind any of the proposed lots. A maintenance access road at least 10 feet in width, and built to meet City standards, shall be provided from the edge of the private street to the manhole(s). The applicant will have two choices for delineating the access road(s) on the plat and construction plans: 1) place the roadway within a tract to be conveyed to the City on the final plat, or 2) place the roadway within a public sanitary sewer and maintenance access easement. If Option 2 is selected, the applicant shall place restrictions on the plat to prohibit parking, fences, gates or other structures from being placed within the easement. 15. The applicant's engineer will need to provide the Engineering Department with a subbasin study to evaluate which adjacent properties will need to access the sewer that is being extended into this site. The City Engineer will then make a decision as to where the applicant must extend sewer stubs. This evaluation will take place along with the review of the construction design plans. 16. Final design plans and calculations for the proposed private water quality facility shall be submitted to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) as a part of the public improvement plans. Included with the plans shall be a proposed landscape plan and maintenance plan. 17. The applicant shall cause a statement to be placed on the final plat to indicate that the proposed private water quality/detention facility will be jointly owned and maintained by the developer or by the future homeowners within the subdivision. 18. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant shall prepare Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) for this project, to be recorded with the final plat, that clearly lays out a maintenance plan and agreement for the proposed private water quality/detention facility. The CC&R's shall ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 9 obligate the private property owners within the subdivision to create a homeowner's association to ensure regulation of maintenance for the facility. The applicant shall submit a copy of the CC&R's to the Engineering Department (Brian Rager) prior to approval of the final plat. 19. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, February 1994. 20. A final grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed contours. The plan shall detail the provisions for surface drainage of the lots that are to be "pad" graded to insure that the drainage is directed to the street or a public facility approved by the Engineering Department. A soils report shall be provided detailing the soil compaction requirements consistent with the requirements of Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 21. The applicant shall provide a geotechnical report, per Appendix Chapter 33 of the UBC, for the proposed grading slope construction. The recommendations of the report shall be incorporated into the final grading plan. A final construction supervision report shall be filed with the Engineering Department prior to issuance of building permits. 22. The design engineer shall indicate, on the grading plan, which lots will have natural slopes between 10% and 20%, as well as lots that will have natural slopes in excess of 20%. This information will be necessary in determining if special grading inspections and/or permits will be necessary when the lots develop. 23. The applicant shall either place the existing overhead utility lines along SW Fonner Street underground as a part of this project, or they shall pay the fee in-lieu of undergrounding. The fee shall be calculated by the frontage of the site that is parallel to the utility lines and will be $ 27.50 per lineal foot. If the fee option is chosen, the amount will be $ 4,950.00 and it shall be paid prior to approval of the final plat. 24. Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: A. Submit for City review three paper copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. B. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 10 C. The right-of-way dedication for SW Fonner Street shall be made on the subdivision plat. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 25. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the Engineering Department with a recorded mylar copy of the subdivision plat. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permits within the subdivision, the public improvements shall be deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Substantial completion shall be when: 1) all utilities are installed and inspected for compliance, including franchise utilities, 2) all local residential streets have at least one lift of asphalt, 3) any off-site street and/or utility improvements are completely finished, and 4) all street lights are installed and ready to be energized. 27. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide the City with as-built drawings of the public improvements as follows: 1) mylars, and 2) a diskette of the as-builts in "DWG" format, if available; otherwise "DXF" will be acceptable. Note: if the public improvement drawings were hand- drawn, then a diskette is not required. . . . . . INADDITION, THE APPLICANT' SHOULD' BE AWARE OF:THE . ::FOLLOWING SECTIONS:OF THE COMMUNITY 1DEVELOPMENT CODE: THIS IS,NOT AN EXCLUSIVE LIST: 18.160.170 Improvement Agreement: Before City approval is certified on the final plat, and before approved construction plans are issued by the City, the Subdivider shall: 1. Execute and file an agreement with the City Engineer specifying the period within which all required improvements and repairs shall be completed; and ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 11 2. Include in the agreement provisions that if such work is not completed within the period specified, the City may complete the work and recover the full cost and expenses from the subdivider. The agreement shall stipulate improvement fees and deposits as may be required to be paid and may also provide for the construction of the improvements in stages and for the extension of time under specific conditions therein stated in the contract. 18.160.180 Bond: As required by Section 18.160.170, the subdivider shall file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: 1. An irrevocable letter of credit executed by a financial institution authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon; 2. A surety bond executed by a surety company authorized to transact business in the State of Oregon which remains in force until the surety company is notified by the City in writing that it may be terminated; or 3. Cash. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Engineer an itemized improvement estimate, certified by a registered civil engineer, to assist the City Engineer in calculating the amount of the performance assurance. The subdivider shall not cause termination of nor allow expiration of said guarantee without having first secured written authorization from the City. 18.160.190 Filing and Recording: Within 60 days of the City review and approval, the applicant shall submit the final plat to the County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS Chapter 92. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. 18.162.080 Final Plat Application Submission Requirements: ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 12 • • Three copies of the subdivision plat prepared by a land surveyor licensed to practice in Oregon, and necessary data or narrative. The subdivision plat and data or narrative shall be drawn to the minimum standards set forth by the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 92.05), Washington County, and by the City of Tigard. STREET CENTERLINE MONUMENTATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS FOLLOWS: Centerline Monumentation In accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes 92.060, subsection (2), the centerline of all street and roadway rights-of-way shall be monumented before the City accepts a street improvement. The following centerline monuments shall be set: 1. All centerline-centerline intersection points; 2. All cul-de-sac center points; and 3. Curve points, beginning and ending points (PC's and PT's). All centerline monuments shall be set during the first lift of pavement. Monument Boxes Required Monument boxes conforming to City standards will be required around all centerline intersection points, cul-de-sac center points, and curve points. The tops of all monument boxes shall be set to finished pavement grade. 18.164 Street & Utility Improvement Standards: 18.164.120 Utilities All utility lines including, but not limited to those required for electric, communication, lighting and cable television services and related facilities shall be placed underground, except for surface-mounted transformers, surface-mounted connection boxes, and meter cabinets which may be placed above ground, temporary utility service facilities during construction, high capacity electric lines operating at 50,000 volts or above. ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 13 18.164.130 Cash or Bond Required All improvements installed by the subdivider shall be guaranteed as to workmanship and material for a period of one year following acceptance by the city. Such guarantee shall be secured by cash deposit or bond in the amount of the value of the improvements as set by the City Engineer. The cash or bond shall comply with the terms and conditions of Section 18.160.180. 18.164.150 Installation: Prerequisite/Permit Fee No land division improvements, including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, sidewalks, curbs, lighting or other requirements shall be undertaken except after the plans therefor have been approved by the City, permit fee paid and permit issued. 18.164.180 Notice to City Required Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance. If work is discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City is notified. 18.164.200 Engineer's Certification Required The land divider's engineer shall provide written certification of a form provided by the . City that all improvements, workmanship and materials are in accord with current and standard engineering and construction practices, and are of high grade, prior to the City acceptance of the subdivision's improvements or any portion thereof for operation and maintenance. THIS.APPROVA. L SHALL;B.E VA. LID FOR 18'MONTHS . . THE EFFECTLVE DATE OF.THIS DECISION i:\eng\bdanr\comments\sub98-02. bdr ENGINEERING COMMENTS SUB 98-0002 Fonner Woods Subdivision PAGE 14 ~Q REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD RECEIVED PLANNI ommunity Development ping;4 Better Community DATE: April21998 APR 10 1998 TO: Michael Miller, Operations Water Department Manager CRY OF TORD FROM: Cull of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William FAndrea, Associate Planner Phone:150316394fl1 Fax: [50316847297 RE: S98OMSION (SUB) 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [PORI 98-0003/VARIANCE [VAR] 98-0003/ZONE CHANGE IZONI 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Q A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,500 square feet to 13,387 square feet; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. Attached is the Site Plan, VlCinitY Map and AppliCanYS Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: [MONDAY - APRIL 13.19981. 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. Written comments provided below: AL--rNo"&4 N)aT I"YE- ~(~JE(:TtoNS To T f4£ 'FSa Zcc, ('otic~_PT_ LJF A~ ~d-i v TLk1E. 62LL,t+0/NI4 C'~MMCAM : OF- rL Mai&L IS a S/OE •'O/V OF Cl 6WpJ5 AND Qpia&rES A, 24-/A/cJJ- /LAAjsM,.qsloA-) A441A( oN LJ JGAJAJEV-. _dg;VSt< .Je re 44164-nC03 JA/ PL A&6 . I (Please provide the following information) Name of Person(s) Commenting: Phone NUmber[sl: K 3gs- SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003NAR 98-000320N 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS f REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community RECEIVED PLANNING DATE: rilAp 2, 1998 TO: Brian Moore, PGE Service Design Consultant APR 10 1998 CITY OF TIGARD FROM: Cull of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: W1111am D'Andrea, Associate Planner Phone: [50316394171 Fax: [50316841297 RE: SUBDIVISION [SUB) 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [PORI 98-0003/VARIANCE [VAR] 98-0003/ZONE CHANGE UONI 98-0002 ➢ FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Q A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,500 square feet to 13,387 square feet; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. Attached is the SRO Plan, VICInItD Map and Applicaors Statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other. information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: MONDAY - APRIL 13,19981. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your. comments. If you are unable to respond by tbe.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. Written comments provided below: (Please provide t& following infonnation) Name of Person(s) Commenting: Phone Number(s): S1 c~ - SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003NAR 98-0003/ZON 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development RECEIVED PLANNING Shaping A Better Community DATE: April 2,1998 APR 0 6 1998 TO: David SCOtt, Building Official CITY OF TIGARD FROM: Cull of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: William FAndrea, Associate Planner Phone: [50316394171 Fax: [50316847297 RE: SUBDIVISION (SUB) 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW [PORI 98-0003/VARIANCE (VAR) 98-0003/ZONE CHANGE QON) 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Q A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,500 square feet to 13,387 square feet; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. Attached is the Site Plan, VlClnity Map and Applicant's Statement fqr your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on.the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: [MONDAY - APRIL 13,1998). 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. J/ Written comments provided below:: 1 Gi & iL TYi(-r ImAearee711yti d~ ~al~~ir eist~ f~~ A. d7toy1We A ~J " c. GC. dZ y•Xz- GNP-O4-Ja e Al!dJ AA U.0 0) 15.e J:'1rA121!* 00, ~-pk C 1 f)be if 7 -64-"e 7-- d AIR G K JJ y c d (Please provide the following information) Name of Persons) Commenting: Phone Number[sh !i SUB 98-00021PDR 98-0003NAR 98-0003/ZON 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shapings~. Better Community RECEIVED PLANNING A,N~ING DATE: HI 21998 APR 0 6 1998 TO: John Roy, Property Manager ~yoFt►G~ FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT. William FAndrea, Associate Planner Phone: [50316394Th Fax: [50316847297 RE: SUBDIVISION [SUB] 98-0002/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PORI 98-0003/VARIANCE (VAR) 98-0003/ZONE CHANGE IZONI 98-0002 ➢ FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Q A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision preliminary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between 7,500 square feet to 13,387 square feet; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. III.- I Attached is the Site Plan, ViCinity Map and APPIICanCS S18teme111 for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: [MONDAY - APRIL 13,19981. 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. PLEAS HECK 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. Written comments provided below: (Please proz ide the following information) Name of PerSonISJ Commenting: Phone NUmber[sk SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003NAR 98-000320N 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAUREOUEST FOR COMMENTS CROWN 8835 SW Canyon Lane Suite 408 Portland, OR ' 97225 phone (503) 421 2382 fax (503) 292 6297 CONSTRUCTION LLC C C B# 14 3 3 0 8 September 21, 2000 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 To Whom It May Concern: I am interested in purchasing Lot 6 at the Fonner Woods sub division, 12955 SW 1130' Place. After reviewing numerous house plans, it appears impossible to build a plan and provide adequate driveway access without removal of a tree designated to be saved per the construction plan for the sub division. The health of this tree is in question and any excavation near the root system would undoubtedly destroy it. The CCR's for the sub division require written approval from the City of Tigard to remove this tree. I would greatly appreciate this approval and/or any options and suggestions you may have to quickly resolve this issue. Sincerely, Marjorie D. Tucker Manager Approved by: /W ,y TP-!i c s (2` ` Gfh-~ P6.fL s l z E o tZ Lti P-U r~L2 h1v S j F-7 E 11" t T 1 1~ ()L 6 lJ~cr v w~ ,a J &J "-rAr (C O.T) o I- ~c1v 1~- ~V` ` Gi +e. • 1~~ ~3! L T Sep-01-99 03:22A S.R_ Turner Construction 503 292-6297 P.O1 , S.R. TURNER CONSTRUCTION LLC P.O. BOX 25216 8M S.W. CANYON LANE, SUITE #408 PORTLAND, OR 97225 PHONE: 503-292-5920 FAX 503-292-6297 FAX COVER PAGE This copy is being sent by a manual fax machine. There are a total of © pages including this cover sheet being transmitted. DATE: ^ ~ r ~G~GGf~ TO: ~ GtJ 4 COMPANY: FAX FROM: F _ we ~2~ rho ~ sr Sep-01-99 03:22A S_R_ Turner Construction 503 292-6297 P_02 &Jaw itea ARBORIST REPORT Nature of the Report: Inspection of 150 trees Address of the Report: Fonner Woods Development Tigard, OR Date of the Report: August 27, 1999 Report Submitted To: Steve Turner Construction 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 408. Portland, OR 972.25 4 There are 42 trees that are dead, 41 Oaks and 1 Ash. Fifteen Oak trees have smaller leaves from transplant shank, but should recover by next. Spring. Overall, the Ash trees have done well. These were planted bare root in the Spring of 1999 and show proper planting procedures. The trees are being well watered and maintained. Replacement trees should be planted late October - November of 1999 for best results. Sincerely, Rick Graebe Sales Representative Tree Care & Landscapes Unlimited, Inc. F Certified Arborist by the International Society of Arboriculture, License #PN-1406 Oregon Dept. of Agriculture Comm. Applicators License # 98736 Residential and Commercial Spraying • Fertilizing • Pruning • Landscape Installation • Landscape Maintenance • Consultation MEMBER: National Arborist Association , International Society of Arboriculture • Oregon Association of Nurseryrpen . Oregon Golf Course Superintendents' Association - Oregon Landscape Contractors Association State Licensed Tree Service #62635 • Landscape Contractor #5659 • Chemical Application #000231 • Insured P.O. Box 1566 • Lake Oswego, OR 97035 • (503) 635-3165 • Vancouver (360) 737.2646 - FAX (503) 635-1549 F-rn~R-TOCCrnoCi /,71w^1 nnu 1 CITY OF TIGARD r Community Development Shaping A Better Communi PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION FILE NO(S): SUBDIVISION [SUB) 98-0002 120 DAYS= 7/18/98 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PORI 98-0003 VARIANCE [VARI 98-0003 ZONE CHANGE QONI- 98-0002 FILE TITLE: FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION OWNER/ Steve Turner PLANNING Matthew Wellner APPLICANT: S.R. Turner Construction CONTACT: Land Tech, Inc. 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 408 8835 SW Canyon Lane, Suite 402 PO Box 25216 Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97289-0216 (503) 291-9398/(503) 291-1613 (503) 292- 5920/(503) 292-6297 REQUEST: A request for the following development applications: 1.) Subdivision pre~im ary plat approval to divide an approximately 2.83 acre parcel into 12 lots ranging between square feet to t9,871 square feet; 2.) Planned Development Review to allow a private street serving greater than six (6) dwelling units; 3.) Variance approval to allow a minimum street spacing of approximately 135 feet, whereas, the Code states that the minimum street spacing shall be 300 feet on collector streets; and 4.) Zone Change to record a Planned Development Overlay Zone on the Zoning Map. LOCATION: 11300 SW Fonner Street; WCTM 2S103AC, Tax Lot 02000. The subject site is located east of the intersection of SW Fonner Street and SW 115th Avenue, on the south side of SW Fonner Street across from SW 113th Place. ZONE: Residential, 4.5 Units Per Acre; R-4.5. The purpose of the R-4.5 Zoning District is to establish standard urban low density residential sites. The R-4.5 zone allows, among other uses, single- family residential units, public .support facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes, family day care, home occupations, temporary uses, residential fuel tank, and accessory structures. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.32, 18.50, 18.80, 18.88, 18.92, 18.96, 18.100, 18.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160 and 18.164. CIT AREA: Central CIT FACILITATOR: List Available Upon Request DECISION MAKING BODY: DATE COMMENTS DUE: MONDAY - APRIL 131998 STAFF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING- TIME: Z00 PM X PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: T A TIME: 1:3011"M CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: TIME: 1:30 PM COMPONENTS RELATED TO THE PROJECT AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING IN THE PLANNING DIVISION VICINITY MAP X LANDSCAPE PLAN X NARRATIVE X SITE PLAN X TREE PLAN ARCHITECTURAL PLAN TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ARBORIST REPORT OTHER STAFF CONTACT: William D'Andrea, Associate Planner (503) 639-4171 Ext 315 SUB 98-0002/PDR 98-0003NAR 98-0003/ZON 98-0002 FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION PROPOSAUREQUEST FOR COMMENTS ,I s 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING TWELVE (12) LOT SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Narrative and Supporting Information Including: Vicinity Map Plat Name Reservation Form Arborist's Tree Plan Storm Drainage Analysis Neighborhood Meeting Packet Area Map/Future Street Plan EXHIBITS A - Preliminary Plat Page 1 (Front Pocket) B - Preliminary Plat Page 2 (Front Pocket) C - Arborist's Tree Survey (Back Pocket) D - Application Form and 8%2 x 11 Site Plan (1 Copy Each in First Application Packet) TWENTY-FOUR COPIES OF ALL ABOVE INFORMATION HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS MADE FOR SUBMITTAL AT THE TIME OF THE PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE. y I 1-0 3 E ` i i ~ 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING March 4`h, 1998 NARRATIVE FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF A 12 LOT SUBDIVISION Fonner Woods 11300 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 Applicant Contact: Planning Contact: • Steve R. Turner Land Tech, Inc. (Matt Wellner) P.O. Box 25216 8835 SW Canyon Lance #402 Portland, OR 97225 Portland, OR 97225 Phone: (503) 292-5920 Phone: (503) 291-9398 Statement of Intent The intent of this submittal is to obtain preliminary permission to subdivide Tax Lot 2000 of Tax Map 2S1 3AC, into twelve (12) lots for detached single family dwellings. The applicant is requesting that this application be processed as a Planned Development. Thus, the minimum lot size that is required by the R-4.5 zone (7,500 square feet) is not necessarily applicable. The number of lots within this subdivision has been determined by the residential density calculation. In order to submit this application as a Planned Development, the applicant must request a zone change. Tigard Municipal Code section 18.80.015A states, "The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones." Thus the applicant would like to request a zone change in order to add this overlay to the site's existing R-4.5 zone. Also included with this application for subdivision is a request for an Access Spacing Variance. The location of the proposed access does not comply with the access spacing guidelines stated in the code. An application for annexation from Washington County to the City of Tigard has been -1- • submitted. Subdivision Plat Name Reservation The applicant has received approval for the subdivision plat name "Fonner Woods". A copy of the approved request form is included along with this application. Chapter 18.32.050(B)(5) - Impact Study The purpose of this section is to quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services in the area. The subject site maintains approximately 177 feet of frontage along SW Fonner Street. Fonner Street is designated as a Minor Collector. A Minor Collector requires 30 feet of right-of-way on either side of that street's centerline. Currently SW Fonner Street maintains 20 feet of right-of-way on either side of centerline. Thus, approval of this development should require dedication of 10 feet of right-of-way along the subject site's frontage on SW Fonner Street. In addition to dedication of right-of-way for SW Fonner Street, upon approval of this subdivision, a %Z street improvement should be required along SW Fonner Street:.. Street improvements on SW Fonner Street should include 20 feet of pavement from centerline, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires and a five foot wide sidewalk. Access to the subject site is proposed via a private street that will terminate in a cul-de-sac within the subdivision. The proposed private street will maintain 40 feet of right-of-way with a paved surface of 28 feet. The cul-de-sac will maintain a paved radius of 40 feet. A full street improvement will be done in construction of this private street. This application has been submitted as a Planned Development. It is for this reason that the applicant has proposed a more narrow private street width. Street improvements on the private street should include 28 feet of pavement, curb to curb, plus the installation of curb and gutters, storm sewers, underground placement of utility wires and a five foot sidewalk. The private street will be labeled "No Parking" on one side. The applicant has proposed no pedestrian pathways within the subdivision. The applicant has submitted a future development plan for the surrounding area. The applicant is confident that this future development plan shows a lack of availability for any connection to be made with the subject site. "Genesis No. 3," located contiguous to the south of the subject site contains no easements or tracts which allow for a north/south pedestrian bicycle pathway. Parcels contiguous to the east and west both have high value structures on them that interfere with any feasible placement of an east/west pedestrian bicycle connection. Pedestrian bicycle pathways are normally created to shorten travel time between bus stops. There are currently no bus lines servicing SW Fonner Street, and service is not in the near future. Thus, there is no need for a pedestrian bicycle pathway. Pedestrian circulation will be served within the subdivision by the • proposed sidewalks, which can be seen on the preliminary plat. -2- • There are existing overhead utility lines, which run adjacent to the subject site along SW Fonner Street. Prior to recordation of the plat, the applicant shall either place these utilities underground or pay the fee in-lieu of $27.50 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The applicant has proposed to connect all lots to the existing 6" water line located in SW Fonner Street. The applicant will extend this public water line into the proposed subdivision. The extended water line will connect service to all proposed lots. Extension of this line will properly serve all lots in the proposed subdivision as well as one proposed hydrant. Extension of this line will cause little to no impact on the surrounding neighbors. The applicant has proposed to connect lots 1, 2, and 3 to the existing 8" sanitary sewer line in SW Fonner Street. The applicant has proposed to connect lots 4 through 12 to the existing 8" sanitary sewer line located south west of the site. The applicant will extend these public sewer lines into the proposed subdivision. The extended sanitary sewer lines will connect service to all proposed lots. Initial review of the site by the applicant has shown no unsewered properties uphill from the subject site. Extension of these lines will properly serve all lots in the proposed subdivision. Extension of these lines will cause little to no impact on the surrounding neighbors. A storm drainage plan and a downstream analysis have been submitted as part of this application. The proposed subdivision has been designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to a proper • storm drainage system. The proposed drainage system can be seen on page 1 of the preliminary plat. Construction of this storm system will properly serve all lots in the proposed subdivision. Construction of the proposed storm system will cause little to no impact on the surrounding neighbors. In fact, construction of the proposed storm system would lesson the amount of storm water that collects on the subject site and on neighboring properties. The applicant has shown a proposed storm water facility on page 1 of the preliminary plat. The storm water facility has been designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from newly created impervious surfaces. This system has been designed to substantially lesson the impact of development on the surrounding property owners. There are no proposed open space tracts within this subdivision that may serve as an addition to the city park system. The proposed subdivision is only 12 lots. A subdivision of this size would be destroyed by the requirement of a park. The proposed subdivision would not force any impact upon the local park system. Noise impacts of the development on the surrounding community will be held to a minimum. Once construction is complete, noise will not be an issue. During construction of the subdivision noise suppression will be addressed to City of Tigard code standards. Hours of construction will be held true to those set forth by law. The subject site is zoned R-4.5. Surrounding zones in the • area are also low density residential. Any screening or buffering requirements made by staff will -3- i be taken into consideration. The proposed subdivision has been designed to properly accommodate fire protection. The private street access and cul-de-sac allow for a proper fire vehicular turn around. As well, one hydrant has been proposed in order that proper fire service is provided to all lots. Chapter 18.80 - Planned Development The applicant would like to request a zone change in order to incorporate the Planned Development overlay on the subject site. Although the Planned Development overlay would allow sub 7,500 square foot lots, the applicant has not proposed lots below the minimum lot size. However, the applicant has requested review as a Planned Development due to the lack of area available for proper access. The applicant has proposed a private access maintaining 40' of right-of-way terminating at a cul-de-sac with a 40' radius. Approval of the Planned Development overlay should allow this private street. Chapter 18.92 - Residential Density Calculation SINGLE FAMILY - 43,560 SQ FT X 2.83 ACRES = 123,274.8 SQ FT 24,654.9 20% PROW • = 98,619.9 SQ FT / 7,500.0 MIN LOT 13.1 UNITS/ACRE RESPONSE: Due to the fact that the applicant is submitting this application as a Planned Development the minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet does not necessarily apply. However all proposed lots within this subdivision do meet and or exceed the 7,500 square foot minimum lot size of the R-4.5 zone. No density transfers are being requested. Blocks One new private street has been proposed for this subdivision. No new blocks will be created. The existing subdivision to the south (Genesis No. 3) does not promote a through connection. As well, the locations of substantial dwellings both to the east and west of the site hinder the possibility of a feasible east/west connection. Development of the subject site does not promote any through connections that may complete a block length. Thus, a proposal for a public street is not necessary. No pedestrian/bicycle pathways have been proposed in this application due to the lack of connectivity that the surrounding subdivisions promote. -4- • Future Street Plan and Extension of Streets A future street plan has been included with this application. The future street plan includes an interpretation of what the applicant can foresee as feasible future development in the area. Feasible future private and public access has been shown on this plan. As well, all existing pedestrian/bicycle pathways have been shown. No existing or proposed bus routes can be found on SW Fonner Street. Residential Development Solar Access Requirements The applicant would like to request a total exemption from the Solar Access Requirements due to the large amount of existing vegetation. The applicant plans to make every effort to retain the existing vegetation. As well, the applicant plans to plant over 167 maple trees in order to mitigate trees the applicant plans to remove. The applicant believes that this existing and proposed vegetation creates more than enough on-site shade to qualify this subdivision as exempt from the Solar Access Requirements. All existing trees over 6" in diameter can be located on page 2 of the preliminary plat. Trees to be retained or removed 6" in diameter and more have been labeled on page 2 of the preliminary plat. A tree plan has been included with this application. • Chapter 18.102 - Clear Vision Area The applicant will meet all requirements of this section. Construction plans, which will be approved by City of Tigard Engineering, will address this chapter. Chapter 18.106 - Parking and Loading The applicant will meet all requirements of this section. Each single-family residence will maintain at least 2 off-street parking spaces. All proposed driveways will have an access width of 15' and a paved width of 10'. Chapter 18.108 - Access, Egress, and Circulation The applicant will meet all requirements of this section. Scaled plans of the applicant's proposed access ate included with this application. One private street access has been proposed within this application. All proposed lots within this subdivision will obtain access to SW Fonner Street via this private street. Construction plans, which will be approved by City of Tigard Engineering, will address this chapter. The proposed private street maintains 40 feet of right-of-way and has a paved width of 28 feet. • The proposed private street will terminate in a cul-de-sac, which maintains a radius measured -5- • from centerPoint to outside edge of 40 feet. The proposed private street will maintain sidewalk from its beginning on its left side up to the proposed storm water facility. Within this application the applicant has also requested and Access Spacing Variance. The applicant has addressed this variance in a separate section. Street Trees The applicant will place street trees within the subdivision along the proposed private street and along SW Former Street as required by code. Proposed street trees can be seen on the preliminary plat. Where applicable the applicant would like to substitute existing trees for street trees. These trees can also be located on the preliminary plat. Chapter 18.150 - Tree Removal Plan Requirements A tree plan prepared by a certified arborist has been submitted with this application. This tree plan has accurately determined the location, size, and health of each tree on the subject site. On page 2 of the preliminary plat the applicant has shown which trees the developer has chosen to remove. These trees must be removed in order to create a proper access, and adequate building pads for the individual single family dwellings. The applicant has located 66 trees over 12" in size. The developer has chosen to remove 43 of these trees over 12" in size. The tree plan prepared by the certified arborist accurately shows that 13 of these 43 trees are unhealthy and would be hazardous to the proposed subdivision. These figures show that the developer is liable for 30 trees over 12" in size. Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.150.025 (13)(2c) states: Retainage of from 50 to 75 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50 percent of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.150.070D. The applicant has proposed to retain approximately 55 percent of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper. This figure falls well into the 50 to 75 percent range. Thus, the applicant should mitigate 15 trees, or 50 percent of the trees to be removed. The total caliper of these 30 trees equals 667 inches. According to this number, the applicant must mitigate 333.5 inches. The applicant has initially proposed to mitigate these trees with 167 two-inch caliper maple trees. The developer may choose to use a larger caliper of tree,.reducing the number of trees needed. The developer may also choose to place multiple species of trees, but has yet to make that decision. Finally the developer may choose to plant larger than 2" street trees, reducing the number of trees needed. The proposed trees can be located on page 2 of the preliminary plat. NOTE: The tree mitigation plan is PRELIMINARY. • The tree plan prepared by the certified arborist includes a protection program defining standards -6- i and methods that will be used by the developer to protect trees during and after construction. Trees chosen to mitigate will meet City of Tigard Municipal Code standards. Chapter 18.160 - Land Division: Subdivision The material submitted with this application satisfies all requirements of this chapter. The applicant has followed or is currently following the process for subdivision application stated within this chapter. Chapter 18.160.120 - Criteria for Granting a Variance (For Access Spacing) The applicant has proposed a private street access for this subdivision. The subject parcel maintains one existing dwelling. The location of this dwelling can be seen on the preliminary plat. Washington County Assessment and Taxation values the property at approximately $273,000. Improvements to the property equal approximately $100,000. The subject parcel is located at 11300 SW Fonner. Fonner Street is designated as a minor collector. Within the City of Tigard a minor collector requires 300 feet of access spacing. Within Washington County the access spacing requirement for a minor collector is 50 feet. Fonner Street is a County Road. However, due to circumstances held between the City of Tigard and Washington County, the City of Tigard, under Tigard Code standards reviews Fonner Street. The applicant has proposed an access that meets Washington County requirements for access spacing, but does not meet City of Tigard Requirements for access spacing. Due to the location of the existing dwelling the applicant has chosen to propose location of the access at the east property line. Thus, this proposed location requires the applicant to request an access spacing variance. The value of the existing dwelling is such that the developer would like to maintain its location. The dwelling is valued at approximately $100,000. Section 18.160.120 (B) states: A variance may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied provided the Hearings Officer finds: 1. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property, which are unusual and peculiar to the land as compared to other lands similarly situated; RESPONSE: The subject site contains one existing dwelling. The value of this dwelling is such that the owner does not wish to destroy or move it. The developer would like the existing dwelling to remain intact as part of the proposed subdivision. SW 113"' • is located just across SW Fonner Street from the subject site. In an ideal situation -7- • SW 113`' Place would simply continue onto the subject site directly across from the existing entrance to SW 113`'' Place. However, this site is not subject to ideal conditions. Due to the location of the existing dwelling there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property, which are unusual and peculiar to the land as compared to other lands similarly situated. 2. The variance is necessary for the proper design or function of the subdivision; RESPONSE: The applicant has designed the proposed subdivision with both the preservation of the existing dwelling and the preservation of the existing trees in mind. This variance is necessary in order to preserve both the existing dwelling and the greatest number of trees on the subject site, thus preserving the proper design and function of the subdivision. Admittedly the location of the proposed private street does deem it necessary to destroy several trees. However, a greater number of large, established and clustered trees would be destroyed if this variance were not approved. Placing the private street directly across from the existing entrance to SW 1130'would destroy several. trees that would not be destroyed by building pads within proposed lots 1,2, and 4 as seen on the submitted preliminary plat. Placing these building pads on the east side of the subject site would destroy the same trees that the proposed private street would. Thus, the proposed layout best • serves for preservation of both the existing dwelling and the greatest number of trees. Tigard Municipal Code section 18.150.010(A) states: After years of both natural growth and planting by residents, the City now benefits from a large number of trees. These trees of varied types add to the aesthetic beauty of the community, help clean the air, help control erosion, maintain water quality and provide noise barriers. With this in mind the applicant believes that approval of this variance is necessary for the proper design and function of the subdivision. 3. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the rights of the other owners of property; and RESPONSE: The major reason for access spacing requirements is to guarantee that a new access will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the rights of the other owners of property. One major problem with new access is that it will cause a conflicting left turn from the minor collector onto a local street. This proposed private street does not create this problem. The proposed private street will be located 134.8 feet east of the entrance to SW 113`h Place. A new entrance located to the west of SW 113`'' Place would create this problem. -8- • Thus, the major reason for the access spacing requirement is not an issue due to the easterly location of the proposed private street. Within Washington County the access spacing requirement for a minor collector is 50 feet for a parcel with 70 feet or more of frontage. Fonner Street is a County Road. However, due to circumstances held between the City of Tigard and Washington County Fonner Street is reviewed by the City of Tigard, under Tigard Code standards. Within the Tigard Municipal Code the access spacing requirement for a minor collector is 300 feet. The applicant is aware that the City of Tigard reviews this request. However, the applicant has proposed access spacing, which almost triples that of Washington County's requirement. Thus, the requested variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the rights of the other owners of property. 4. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right because of an extraordinary hardship, which would result from strict compliance with the regulations of this title. RESPONSE: There are two reasons for requesting this variance. First the applicant wishes to retain the location of the existing dwelling. Second, the applicant wishes to • preserve the greatest number of trees on the subject site. It is the developers right to develop his/her property to the maximum density allowed by the governing zone. The applicant is aware that this right is not in jeopardy. However, development to maximum density should not force destruction of a relatively high valued structure. This dwelling will fit in excellent with the proposed subdivision. Second, the applicant has designed this subdivision with tree preservation in mind. Tree mitigation in the City of Tigard is an expensive venture. Rather than destroying a high number of large, established and clustered trees and replacing them with young trees, the applicant would like to preserve as much of the existing vegetation as possible. The developer should not be forced to mitigate so many more trees to.offset a problem that has not been created. Lastly, the Fonner Street community is recognized for its dense, established vegetation. The developer would like to retain this aesthetic within this proposed subdivision. Approval of this variance would best retain this right. Chapter 18.164 - Street and Utility Improvement Standards The applicant's preliminary application follows the requirements stated within this chapter. The -9- > . i qw00 o, N ~0 a! o kota St ye ae syy s4m 0 -b h spy ~ mss! o~ a ~ w Ti a oGret m rot ~ m Q s~ "'A C 9~~a ¢ m ~ r Py tilt S~ W Errol St a~ 11300 SW Fonner St, Portland, OR 97223 am Sw Alberta St_ r~ 3m 4a4, • SW P Aldo m Dpi Ta e & airy Oue ~a SW Marion W Park S Bake iaa ~o tro's iaa a Aye ¢ r L n w Gaarde I Im S M Donald t Rest rant ncorp rated ¢ a fi s m } `o~tim Oo,'r ~4a > u~ v' ~y< fi h w 5 Z. ° o Sw But! Mountain R QQ ro N ¢ ¢ 5 m a D c ¢ M N C f1 d pd 6 • ,~.o: 0 mi 0.2 04 0.6 orL Streets Plus copyrigto (0 1998-1996, Miuosofl Corporation and/or its suppliers. AO rights reserved. Page 1 JAN-21 98 11:25 FROM:WASH CO SURVEYOR 503-681-2909 TO:LANDTECH PAGE:01/01 JAN-09-98 FRI 13:38 LAND TECH INC 503 291 1613 P.02 MAR 22 199 10; 41AM WACO LAND USE/TRA1.1$P p, 2,r2 • suop L tSiON PLAT RAMM I request that the Washington County Surveyor's Office reserve the following subdivision name. 1 / rn p-'N %e-v WOoc4_ Section, Township and Range In city or county C; 0 T°r' yJ Surveyor I understand that if the name is not used within two years, it will be automatically cancelled. • Name, address and telephone number of person ras®rving Plat name. ~S SC10 Signature Bite. Nam pproved by: Washington County Surveyor's office r Free - - - i Car ue Landsgjpes UNLIMI, • UNLIMITED, INC. ARBORIST REPORT. Address of the Report: Fonner St Tigard, OR - Date of the Report: February 10, 1998 Report Submitted To: S R Turner Construction Attn: Steve Turner -8835 SW Canybn Lane, Ste 408 Portland, OR 97225 Nature of the Report: Inspection" of Trees for- Development Considerations On February 6, 19.98 a. walk through of the site was performed and the trees were evaluated. The total number of tree to be removed due to road construction is 23. The total number of-trees to be removed due to poor health or being hazardous is 23. Four of the • trees should have Ivy removed to increase their health. Refer to enclosed map. Trees to'be removed because of road,construction are as follows: .8 through 11, 25 through 27, 29 through 34, 49; 53,.54 (only if damage occurs during construction), 78 through 82, 115, and Llu (011iy ii daluaye Occurs during C:O11sLiuL;1_lU11) Other trees to be removed because of poor health or because of being potentially hazardous are as follows: 3 7 12 15 16 18 19 21 22 28 35 36 47 50 .52 62 ..64 70 72. 73 75 76 112. Ivy should be.removed from trees 38 through 41 to increase health and vigor.. If.any tree has its drip line more than 1/2 way into the foundation zone of the proposed house, it should be removed. The reason for this is the damage resulting from excavating around the tree to the root system will promote a weak and 'potential hazardous tree. Grade changes plus or minus 6" within the root systems of mature • trees will affect their health and stability. Residential and Commercial Spraying • Fertilizing • Pruning • Landscape Installation • Landscape Maintenance • Consultation MEMBER: National Arborist Association • International Society of Arboriculture • Oregon Golf Course Superindents Association • Oregon Landscape Contractors Association • Oregon Association of Nurseryman State Licensed Tree Service #62635 • Landscape Contractor #5659 • Chemical Application #000231 • Insured P.O. Box 1566 • Lake Oswego, OR. 97035 • (503) 635-3165 • Vancouver (360) 737-2646 • FAX (503) 635-1549 Enclosed. are care instructions for trees during the construction- process. If you have any further questions please feel free to call me at the office at (503). 635-3165. Sincerely, Raymond E. Myer, General Manager Tree Care Unlimited, Inc. Landscapes Unlimited, Inc. Certified Arborist by the International Society of Arboriculture, License # PN-0160 Oregon Landscape Contractors Lic..# 11604 Oregon.Dept. Of Agriculture, Commercial Pesticide Applicators License-# 00187 _ r Tree LandscaDes *Care SAVING TREES AND SHRUBS UNLIMITED, INC.I • UNLIMITED,.INC. THROUGH CONSTRUCTION Follow the below listed instructions in order to provide the proper protection before, during and after construction. I. BEFORE' A. .Identify the trees to be protected, verify their health and structural strengths, review plans, determine stability and check.for the grade and drainage changes. B. check with local government agencies for tree protection ordinances. C. remove any low limbs that, might be in the way of construction equipment, and prune as needed. D. Leave a protective covering on the soil, i.e., existing ground cover or mulch. E. Notify all other contractors that these trees are to be saved and protected. , F. Install a temporary fence to protect the trees and their root systems. For every inch in diameter of the trunk (D.B.H.) allow 1 foot of radius from the trunk as the protected area. Example: 241! D.B.H. = a 24' radius of protected root system. G. Identify any insect or disease problems that may require treatment. • II. DURING CONSTRUCTION: A. Keep equipment off of the root system to avoid compaction. B. Keep equipment away from structure to prevent damage to trunk and. limbs..- C. Don't allow chemicals to be dumped on the ground near the tree, i.e., gasoline, diesel, paint, herbicides, cleaners, thinners, etc.. D. Provide means of temporary irrigation if the project runs through the summer. E. If roots or limbs are cut or damaged, have them inspected by an Arborist and repaired'or treated. according to his/her recommendations. F. Protect the trees from excessive heat, i.e., equipment, paving and/or burning. III. AFTER CONSTRUCTION: A. Carefully landscape the area under the tree, being careful.of the roots and structure. B. Provide insect and disease control, fertilization, irrigation, and drainage. C. Avoid direct irrigation spraying onto the trunk. D. Do not cover existing root systems with.more than 211.of soil. The more soil you add, the greater the chances of Residential and Commerci.4Vrf gF lginNQPgnrA~st@iscape Installation - Landscape Maintenance • Consultation MEMBER: National Arborist Association • International Society of Arboriculture • Interstate Professional Applicators Association • Oregon Landscape Contractors Association • Oregon Association of Nurseryman State Licensed Tree Service #63635 • Landscape Contractor #5659 • Chemical Application #000231 • Insured P.O. Box 1566 • Lake Oswego, OR. 97035 • (503) 635-3165 • FAX (503) 635-1549 TREE *VEY TREE SIZE COMMON NAME GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS YIN YIN YIN 1 46" Fir Good N N N 2 20" Spruce Good N N N 3 10" Fir Poor N N Y 4 N/A Laurel (Shrub) Good N N N 5 26" Spruce Poor Weak N N N Top 6 N/A Laurel (Shrub) Good N N N 7 12" Spruce Bad Y Y Y 8 48" Fir Good Y - Multi Possible Y in road Stem 9 2@ 18" Maple Good N N Y in road 10 5 @ 16" Western Red Cedar Good Y co- N Y in road • dominant root system 11 12 Service Berry Bad Possible N Y in road 12 6" Maple Poor N N Y 13 14" Walnut Good N N N 14 14" Walnut Good N N N 15 18" Apple Bad Y rot Y Y 16 16" Sweetgum Bad Y broken top Y weak Y limbs 17 54" Fir Good N N N 18 21" Apple Bad Y rot Y Y 19 14" Apple Bad Y rot Y Y 20 26" Oak Good Double top Possible N IL 21 28" Apple Bad Y rot Y Y • TREE OVEY • TREE SIZE COMMON NAME GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS Y/N Y/N YIN 22 12" Pine Bad Y - No top Possible Y 23 20" Pine Good N N N 24 2 @ 14 Pine Good Co-dominant No if N leaders cabled 25 12" Birch Good No - Leaning Possible Y in road 26 10" Deodora Cedar Good N N Y in road 27 20" Western Red Cedar Good N N Y in road 28 10" Conifer Dead y Y Y 29 18" Spruce Good N N Y in road 30 16" Maple Good Possible/ Possible Y in road Leaning 31 N/A Laurel (Shrub) Good N N Y in road 32 20" Deodora Cedar Good N N Y in road 33 14" Birch Good N N N if no root damage. Y in road 34 14" Birch Good N N N if no root damage. Y in road 35 20" Birch Poor Y multi and Possible Y weak tops 36 14" Cherry Poor Y rot Possible Y 37 3 @ 10" Maple Good N N N 0 TREE &VEY • TREE SIZE COMMON NAP,[E GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS Y/N Y/N Y/N 39 4 @ 8" Locust Good N N Ivy in trees only 40 32" Fir Good N N Ivy in trees only 41 14" Locust Good N - although Possible Ivy in leaning tree only 42 2 @ 8" Cherry Good N N N 43 7" Birch Good N N N 44 15" Birch Good Broken Top Possible N 45 14" Birch Good Broken Top Possible N 46 18" Cherry Fair Rot Possible N 47 10" Cherry Poor Rot y Y 48 16" Cherry Good N N N 49 21" Spruce Good Leaning Possible Y - in road 50 20" Pine Poor, pitch Leaning y Y moth TREE *VEY 0 TREE SIZE COMMON NAP'[E GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS YIN YIN YIN 51 20" Pine Good N Multi top N N 52 18" Sweetgum Poor No Top Y Y 53 26" Locust Good N Multi N Y in road trunk 54 18" Fir Good N N N if not root damage for road/ otherwise Yes 55 24" Fir Good N N N 56 22" Fir Good N N N 57 11" Locust Good N Co- N N dominate leader 58 11" Locust Good N Co- N N dominate leader 59 21" Fir Good N N N 59A 6" Fir Good N N Y crowded 60 36" Fir Good N N N 61 21" Fir Good N N N 62 15" Fir Fair Double top Possible Y crowded 63 18" Fir Good N N N 64 7" Fir Good N N Y crowded 65 4 @ 10" Maple Good N N N 66 6" Cherry Good N N N 67 34" Fir Good N N N TREE OVEY TREE SIZE COMMON NA.4E GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS YIN YIN YIN 68 34" Fir Good N N N 69 21" Fir Good N N N 70 8" Fir Good N N Y Crowded 71 8" Cherry Good N N N 72 8" Hawthorne Fair N N Y not a good tree 73 2 @ 10" Plum Bad Y split and Y Y broke 74 10" Hawthorne Good N N N 75 8" Hawthorne Fair N N N 76 3@ 6" Hawthorne Fair N N Y not a good tree 77 20" Fir Good N N N 78 5 @ 6" Hawthorne Fair N Possible Y - in road TREE ORVEY TREE SIZE COMMON NAIIE GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS YIN YIN YIN 79 24" Fir Good N N Y in road 80 21" Fir Good N N Y in road 81 16" Cherry Fair Possible Possible Y in road Co-dominate Leaders 82 24" Fir Good N N Y in road 83 11" Cherry Good N N N 84 Vary Cherry Good N N N 85 y Cherry Good N N N 86 811- 14" This is a grove of trees 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 -1 r 100 • TREE &VE, Y TREE SIZE COMMON NAIME GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS Y/N Y/N Y/N 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 2 @ 6" Ash Good N N N 110 24" Fir Good N N N 111 8" Ash Good Co-dominate N Ivy N leaders choking tree 112 2 @ 14" Ash Bad Broken tops Y Y 113 8" Ash Good N N N 114 10" Ash Fair Weak N N N tree 115 6" Ash Good N N Y in road 116 10" Pine Good - thin N N N if foliage possible Y if for road 117 18" Fir Good N N N 118 Avg 8" Cherry, This is a grove Good N N N 119 120 TREE OVEY TREE SIZE COMMON NAME GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS Y/N Y/N YIN 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 27" Fir Good N N N 136 18" Fir Good N N N 137 24" Fir Good N N N 138 18/ 22" Fir Good Co- N N N dominate trunks 138A 42" Fir Good N N N 139 28" Fir Good N N N 140 34" Fir Good N N N 141 24" Fir Good N N N 142 24" Fir Good N N N TREEGVEY TREE SIZE COMMON NA14E GENERAL STRUCTURAL HAZARD REMOVAL # DBH HEALTH DEFECTS Y/N Y/N Y/N 143 Avg 8" Cherry Grove Good N N N 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 10" Fir - Co Dominato root system Good N N N 156 10" Fir - Co Dominate root system Good N N N 157 10" Cherry Good N N N 158 12" Cherry Good N N N 159 2 @ Cherry Good co N N N 1211/ 1 dominate @ 8 if trunks 160 8" Cherry Good N N N 161 8" Cherry Good N N N 162 8" Cherry Good N N N 163 8" Cherry Good N N N 8835 SW Canyon Lane #402 Portland, OR 97225 PHONE: (503) 291-9398 FAX: (503) 291-1613 CIVIL ENGINEERING - SUBDIVISION PLANNING & DESIGN - LAND SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING March 3, 1998 Fonner Woods Subdivision 12 lot residential subdivision zoned R4. S City of Tigard Project # Report by Stephen C. Hale PE, PLS Calculations executed by Hydrocad Software. Methodology per U.S.A. design standards, July 1996. Hydrographs are SCS TR - 20 method, using type IA 24 - hour distribution • The existing site is forested 2na growth with light brush. The site has 2 basins. One basin that covers most of the site and converges the storm flows into a draw that exits the west property line at an existing pre - developed flow of Q25 = 0.94 CFS. The proposed developed site directs all the flows into a water quality/detention pond at the existing draw, just inside the property. The pond treats the storm water as required and detains the flows to the pre - developed flows. The flows exit the west property line as they do presently and follow the existing draw to the creek approximateiy 4 mile to the west. i here are no downstream structures preseni that couid e impacted by the sites storm flows. The site is very close to the upper most portion of the contributing basin that runs through the site. All upstream contributing storm flows are taken into account for the pond design. The 2°d basin consists of lot 1, portions of lot 2 and frontage improvements. The small amount of impervious area and the negligible increase in the developed flow would not make it cost affective to direct this small amount of flow to the pond. The pond is designed to treat this basin 2 quantity by treating flows from the existing house and from future development up slope just east of the site. Please find all maps, sketch's and calculations attached. If you have any questions please call Steve Hale at 291 - 9398. ~ o~oQO ~ 41 OT a 41k • • R t A on . A II • ■ Sch ° ■ ° • Tigar ~t.e e ■ • • ■ ® • m ❑ ■ I r~,~ • , ~ . ~ • ~ ...rte ; • a at -8 a to 'Iff 1J1~,1 1 o Cl ; j o I'(. , u{-• _8 0 26A • • . . a a... a i •_Iv,~p■\•s• ~i•'`%f/v~■• •■~°y oa~?I~' ■v i •1 T rn ! I o e a 1 1 t.~~' 0 {'1 d' G) ~1P ■ i 1 J 1 a mic - - a0-4- , ■ • .e il• 1ll1 ~•■I •_g aJ ■rt •y' /~C / • v o 4 \ ~ t~ _ fffi\ ~ ~ ~ ~_~L-~ I+ I • ` n r v1`°a J- , G:-~~T' ti. ■ • ®~'a--lc' - ° • ~ 8'~ r ~/'~i-~p ate Jjjr•~~ i -O j i ■ ° • V lI tts_° ° ■ a ■ ~/1 --Vl ~'..71 v- aJe. s` ■t ■ I o_ //I 1VV,,, / • 1 N t e •,E ° ra+'. - r i ■ i ■ n ■ a ■ a :°C IN, NJ I a 41 ySATTLER"- Vk~ 71 46F A • ■ ~ ~%I-_~~f l~ ~ ♦ • ~~n ~ _ ~,F 111 f ~ !h 1~ t 7• 18 /3 a JJ • . • > I ❑ • _ a • r igarl igh /lit. ~4✓i.y S ~ i ~ ~ ~~ryC. l., IEET NUMBER 45A 45C 1420000 FEET '42 r . n , p,2 ~ r;'~, 1, -:1•,. f t' f ~ *r # a '!tom - . , \6 i°~ :•E Ft 1 ~ , + <J.3';`%![: i+ t, h`., t : ,1.. r•f~x~{ 1;~rya,', .I ~ " p ,:q5 ro 42•;' ' ~ ,n ~d rk • t ~~5 'i7~`~.: tr" ,f:<• j^,R.. A'at17 t SY .1 ,+?'/c' i, 45 C ;13•.' 43 NJ 4t' - • r 2.2; ,,gtl.o ,13 '/.it J. r 4 ~r i 4wr A r1.GV W4'F.4.>V„ iJ~ rte + J8 '`0 ~v.a 1i9 o-~ h t' I'" I' 1.' , •1 1- tS.f'y 221 ; _ M k,.,y'U~''~' f •1 A~• .1 ,.i G 'r Ai f' ti r;F nn0 i ,22 W, d ~ ,ir Q5C r d +•R J+, I _ ••.,:1 . k, a4ry. L r;... f '2; \r.1..`1 `Jl:~•k~ ,1 Jr,f' ~4 F a ~~~=r1 ~ ~ .q' •Pro`gress { f h, A. , `Yi,~,,.•42~,t.:'r::1:5` `°`i ' e.~~~+%yy, y •a, .r,r. ` g~. ,9 , i' tZt C ~~t. .t e ' t ~ w [JL ~ Zy7 tf~. 3@ r.{!:r 1. q~ r t ~ r ••[kR-, t,l_n 1.3 = t!~ 1 t,ti t t ~ ~6 ,~F "r p'~ .i ~•"ii tip l]li~'~'i~ .T•1~i~;- J, } -22 ,i , n~~~'t~? F . Y u r r r ~r } 5~'. rt I: t - e1 f r' 42. l • ^ nt ! f, p Ci / Cw .jr 1- •S;\7 s _1 1 .2, f c J `c;~ ~i.F .,r Kf:•~' a1'v ~,•.li ' .'t o st7 1 , / i . c , i• • e. ~tS•,~1~41 ~ - .J ra r l •4I456~ - I'` J ° ' P / 1 't' 1' ~;.f F 4 CorYIeYB K' + v ,@~'''t`tSrl 19C \ P~ ~ ~ rxlt?! 13' r"', r_ di' ~ ~A~~'a x,7 ~ t r Jµ. {%i~~ 0 5g'..n. 3 0 [ ~.a e ;45B !r t r-\ , •da ~ a+~RC e r•~ ..r "t'~ ~ r , ',-"f 0 0 it ~ , - A3 ~t. 013 ~y ~ 45pp~~ ,.•1Ti f'F' t',fi~f: ',p.lri f Y'r ' 45A -~I'' "i1. z~' „i~}`T••.• : i i ~ ''45B~ r<t ~ r r . lYJ'•.c» ! p x }Y•~ f.! ~ Woei' i:r r~, y , 'E - < i +i ; i s51, o-n t „456. 11 JJ { l 7L $'t.. e rJ s tf` f j\ • yc i i t 'Al T4` s'' %e~ k.4 a3 •y i H ;;4f 5 \ :.J .`•7~:.. •1 ,•kcw- ...c..J Lr ,o 7. 6.E~`: 1'.'•~ t, .r^, t \t~: .,`'y;t "l,17 ♦ ..1 x':, :c.11~`,. .~.',5 ,~4Siai ~[r[i~~tt .43, 4y;t, 1 J i y 1Y ♦ Z r,:,. • ' I. ,t NF'7 't _ '`r .)ate t' r W 4 J* 1,~ S:r ~h IFd,I a rr , Ir ,+a, \ '`~r ~•r 13 : .'Y , , - . X11+i K, r r,r , iJ1 , 4 : ,r ~~'"1 R~ ilL v ' `P!-,rf~t ' p, •{~~'r, try- L a % J ` 2z 22 tea cr}J tj1` 1f j1 :JOb4f _ 458 r+ 458. N~ ~t \ wi ,-•n,.b ;Y t.~ ~~y ~ 1, , ~ :~~~'I 1 • r• t` 45A• 45{x, j i 1 f ~ • . 13 458'•''r . +t1 y•1 1' , 27r w'' is ,r i;: ~ L t f ! - v d q{ . 45C trJ / t C f _ 3 fNfi ~jrt! +~F ...i 4 k,lr'` - i 5,., '1 ~iraL{r. 't,~t'.{:f' h• .,.',^"Y4j,~ ! Q E V E . bt$•r~ ff + 4 :..1~ .43. :,lea„ S ~ ~ b • A•',•j 47 ~Ft'~k 1', yard a(YS +.'S$q ',~t~4 ~ • F. ` 3 .Uf ~,1,`+•s ~ @'"'1~1 4 • )//I,IC f + ,r .t,r ~ .x s , y'~ " :t~j p ~ ~e `l=~r[.'y~ }it~pg r•~S I ~ , 22 ~ ~ ~ k ~ r 'd ~ n13; a: .x~. f~'~~ ,dv''L~ ~ i` f r •-t n • o A r; y~,•." + 4 C~ , y _ i '~e 1; fir. , by yr' lx~~'^ r °''t~/~+,~, Lj' 45A I ~ .+•^i'.'t. f i ~~J.+ f.'r,.~` Y,.rf~i, P 'utJ Y f` Sir .y'•~w,~ 9+~• L S"f ' x~2"fi'F':}'t ~ ~1'3,r i ~o ~i.7V7{j:+{ - i t { ~ . 1 i 1:1 ~:'?e ri•,torl:' ,}.•r. .J T;r :t '~:~P ~1 Y t .f? f l..r ♦ •.i^ a1"R'tr,. ,y '•4t ; ~ ~ -F+e ti)'~ ' :.'0 - tf.' 2Ant g E - "4. yQ'{j - ,.,r,..../ r + r" `o~,: ;>r r .!Gree bui~ '1 l,„ lY ,4''{lp•, . ^r1,~ ,Lt... _ ` ~k v. ,n~.,' ~ G~~~ n a}rr 'r ~ ~ t~ Fe, u# ~ Ij ,t., • ~ . .,~:r ~ ~3f76~ i44'+ 37~~~r",`\z,') 6 M''1',Y~•+\.F~~•;i.X. ,-:•`.fir 35' ~t~~i+ ym,•;'$'. ~°~~T ~ °f' ~t .•~t{ ;1-,~t t' `r ~;bFjtk~s`~. ~ e , . 1 i w t ~ ~1 t t!r~,7 4$ ~ , ',2J2' ~.~y f•••~?a j' ~e~{ • . , y y ' nt ~ P a i, - r t k iJt~'f a [ 1 't , uK'"'. . '71 ''.~~."'r '1 = i , !~r j l•`Ws!.' 1 't ~ ? 3 ~ 3 . F 7l,',~~:it!y ,.w :;~I' ~ ~ y,~~h.:~ .r -k.,~i•t{,. 'f.ww '~S rS y t~ r Jam, 1~y a ~ - ,•t:;hillYif!~'x-!.. + 1~ '~rlr F , . r'' i!;.'L 37A' , r ~t' l J. p ~a~-. r1nYri A A,"~,y~„: [r.~, tg l,r 45C ~ F, .:•6•~°I*, r•1 rt e a^Pub•' S~ J~,. 13 r ti;.,yE}~] ."'i7(i Ydlt•y,,•! i ty.,•~rf v` e.. - K ac N•tt;t r, .`,J-, I.f i"1 ) r i~• Y ,c,, •'Q}. S,• li i' r yr t~~ - s.., d~r`.,~ J+S.rs it t),' 1 f,4ia° ~,~13~~'.u fp6}un~" ~a7 a 4ik Ah ' t 3 f_ rt 37C ! ~ C"u ~ pC f ; M. ti t • 1 . e T . r S 7: l..•m, r -t Z. t p J. .t),' ~:f•Y lTi, t R f. ' \ i 'X ~ u F '-i t, it Fh., ..~Yx,;t;' . 1 h i~•' t''•;t < t. t~ Y', , ,~1+:`i.. .rf i J ay1~l•«. t" `,F rl.Q r tr Y z t ,1 •R. r iti t .;,,1: y' , A 1 ~;S>:x `1r. .1tiY;7w~~.~si .M• 'S~ `S'• F\k~'xrW~)t. ~'~+rf j~a ~ r t i~. 1~,.G t`cr.:c~r'i'rF+v~~l. :i.C yr..f ~.}.4t r.l •t Y~,. rp t t-i' t _l,, vy '~`,i• r X;t t `t„ s*'" t>ya r-~ r *r,: ! a r~,i ,,,r < G j , \ 'a ;V'( x•~ a •:iyt s.r7`- I~; r 2 ~ ~ 1~ fi ,.~F45C ~s,,,~'fi, r`J` cft~, ,,v.{• r F w F~. ~.,,t~`. ;S ~y~y~'(~ J i' 4ty't'++~~ f'+,,•, ~L} f: 5;, I' { el,t<jJ4+~~!30 ;;`fin 'r.Y' x.,;t, ~'`1._. 'i ,~d 9ti •{.'b:i,i y.•} r e , '"tl~f?~ ; , z1 i#f . r-A 37q~~l, p tJ' {'3 r - 'r, iJl~r,'. A•at- .'-.r 4 • !•n. ~w •~r "VA B ~456'„„~~ t.{•{~!':~'~x'i+ i. ~ ;wv'1!C- •a ,y.ry^ t,. r, •e t~r~ e y~~ d ~+u htr- '4 > :.,j ;4;~ , ~f:1>: mtrl:: 13 fhy :y'lJ r.+~txs , ~ t h~fc` ticti r ~ rt; !S:,~vS• r~' t~ D 'v'. s i,~ "~st `;v, l~~' •a fs ~$y,,~r."!~,y,^!'Cs~)}~'•,1 , 1. 1.:.~~« }r ,~T ` il,: r,.1,. F ~t~. i,7" w; 5,`.''*,~(~``, t;~2.a 1` l 1 t:: .{J, a`~•. ~=~'1.~3,'~ '2 $o r'.. "r'. {t ,,r. arC h', 1 j-A it , _"'f. .r.18/ '4'Jx •~"r ny<y ;,nr .~,r vi~„1:C ..1•fy,' 't, `f.•.•. 45C 2._~t 1 y:', t, ~t ~,k:~1 Il •',Y ,t [.r ~ii`fr,i- ! -x a~ Ut` q'r ~ • r. , r,u` `C _ r ' "f • t 2 `f" '`!t•'. . t • ' y `n q~ a jj P't, \~S~y~l~+mj ~ } 7~`~ ~r.k~. At ' ~1~ f~u rrii w ~ 5 • 1 ~ j J{,~g~ s,wr ' r; rr- ~ , v...f• K-1 T... 1 ~ ~,4 ~f;~'~d * f aYr~~'. r1 rn'~i 'tir.'ti; 1 i. r so , 't~`&. -'~3r S' y„ N~ ~ ~ r. ..~t,^~ 1 t "f r t. 7 .l~r"' A n ~ ✓ h 71 ~.'4 'ice' i 'rJ' ° .••1~ C , r}.'JD;i.,'r . . sv _ tiya ,~j,,t,~y~ s.., /3 *i',,,r ~t r; i l i 5 `?+1 T 1t' •a'r ' F ,Y` '9 f • r~ , ryw°,Y ~~Y',•2't22•r~. b1 '45 iT • ty ~S " [t ,i rfY , f n.4 v t n 4 # ~M" s~ ti~v'~t~ x ltq 6J f i 'zi t ~yl \,1 4.5B f' t' ~ , J ,1~4 iyLi.•: ~ .J,f. y _ t !g J 1, . . I' C t• ~j e A f vv; y.: J C yr' 4 "1t~ . ' "~R t ~5 ^ ~ t , • ~d~ 't~~~~J42n~o~ + 1~i Y ti?2~ t 'r~ ~ ^~ia-Jl~ ~t i.. r~k 1 2 ' • w l y~* y L Y P 5 1,~ T . .N ~ 5 ' ~ ~ f .'a~ ' r , > .7 , ~ .~Si,4 ~ Y• ! ~r±~ ,~„yJt r' fir: •t 2y~~ ~ O,L ~t,5'.'`';~~ f J;~ 1 ~t4~~ ~ pg. ,,Y'r~~ ` r r 6, , 'J< ; r ~ %tt l 'r ~Tlr Wr" ,!t ~ ~/'Jf' 't f ` i n ' ~ •k ' ~`,~r n ~ - 3 al+t ?''f ~ t ~ \1' d - ~ ) ,3~ B ~ ' 2'L a, ~ Re _.t ,~,kb , t ` 1.3Yr" +S lc(= r u x ~`t' ~ J . ,~'i" o „~~,.~,,.~.i J>1,• .,a5 ~oy. 4 ~ t `F `reek!~,~`% wt,'S ,xf'~ R ;,:>i;: K f ~ ~AiL,. •`•~N r,r `•'yy. ~K:t ;4?>+" ~c.•:y{ rF..t; i:.YV"'r;,d; ;0'ia ' •a 'Yi .f ~l~ : ru ~fJ~iih~2' t} t: lr~Lw ~;`.~r. ~,ie ~~,~rW lh i 1~ , ~ .k Y/~ : G r d,. 1 t f: , r:rr k tx;w a ..ea{ - k.tai, r ',;rk..arJV a .cl~:..f~,r~l,r.'J•:.\i,~i~+'`C 122 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 13. Soil and Hydro- Flooding Soil name and logic map symbol group Frequency Duration . Months Klickitat : 25E, 25F, 25G B None - Knappa : B None Labish : 27 D Frequent Very long Dec-Apr Laurelwood: 286, 28C, 28D, 28E, 29E, 29F B None McBee: 30 B Frequent Brief Nov-May Melbourne: 31B, 31C, 31D, 31E, 31F B None Melby : 32C, 32D, 32E, 33E, 33F, 33G C None Olyic: 34C,34D,34E,35E,35F,35G B None Pervina: 36C, 36D, 36E, 36F C None Quatama : 37A, 37B, 37C, 37D C None • Saum: 38B, 38C, 38D, 38E, 38F C None Tolke : 39E, 39F B None Udifluvents : 40 B Frequent Very brief Nov-Apr Verboort: 42 D Frequent Brief Dec-Apr Wapato: 43 D Frequent Brief Dec-Apr Willamette: 44A, 44B, 44C, 44D B None Woodbu : 45A, 456 45C, 45D C None Xerochrepts: ' 46F: Xerochrepts part B None Haploxerolls part C None '47D: Xerochrepts part D None hock outcrop part. 'This mapping unit is made up of two or more dominant kinds of soil. See mapping unit description for the composition and behavior of the whole mapping unit. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN • Table III-1.4 "n" AND "k" Values Used in Time Calculations for Hydrographs "n," Sheet Flow Equation Manning's Values (for the initial 300 ft. of travel) ns Smoot surfaces (concrete, asphalt, gravel, or bare hand packed soil) 0.011 Fallow fields or loose soil surface (no residue) 0.05 Cultivated soil with residue cover (s<- 0.20 ft/ft) 0.06.- Cultivated soil with residue cover (s> 0.20 ft/ft) Short prairie grass and lawns 0.15 pex~/.r Dense grasses 0.24 Bermuda grass 0.41 Range (natural) Woods or forest with light underbrush •40 ~XiS~'' Woods or forest with dense underbrush 0.80 *Manning values for sheet flow only, from Overton and Meadows 1976 (See TR-55, 1986) "k" Values Used in Travel Time/Time of Concentration Calculations Shallow Concentrated Flow (After the initial 300 ft. of sheet flow, R = 0.1) k, 1. Forest with heavy ground litter and meadows (n = 0.10) 2. Brushy ground with some trees (n = 0.060) 3. Fallow or minimum tillage cultivation (n = 0.040). 8 4. High grass (n = 0.035) 9 5. Short grass, pasture and lawns (n = 0.030) 11 6. Nearly bare ground (n = 0.25) 13 • 7. Paved and gravel areas (n = 0.012) 27 Channel Flow (intermittent) (At the beginning of visible channels R = 0.2) k, 1. Forested swale with heavy ground litter (n = 0.10) 5 2. Forested drainage course/ravine with defined channel bed (n = 0.050) 10 3. Rock-lined waterway (n = 0.035) 15 4. Grassed waterway (n = 0.030) 17 5. Earth-lined waterway (n = 0.025) 20 o. {-rr yiYc %is = V.VL'}l) 21 7. Concrete pipe (0.012) 42 8. Other waterways and pipe 0.508/n Channel Flow (Continuous stream, R = 0.4) k. 9. Meandering stream with some pools (n = 0.040) 20 10. Rock-lined stream (n = 0.035) 23 11. Grass-lined stream (n = 0.030) 27 12. Other streams, man-made channels and pipe 0.807/n** • III-1-16 FEBRUARY, 1992 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR THE PUGET SOUND BASIN Table III-1.3 SCS Western Washington Runoff Curve Numbers (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type lA rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. LAND USE DESCRIPTION CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP A B C D Cultivated land(1): winter condition 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush & grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: 65 78 85 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. Good condition: grass cover on k75% of the 68 80 86 90 area pe•relo'o 1) Fair condition: grass cover on 50-75% of 77 85 90 92 the area Gravel roads & parking lots: 76 85 89 91 Dirt roads & parking lots: 72 82 87 89 • Imper~ viou surfaces, pavement, roofs etc. 98 98 98 98 Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds etc. 100 100 100 100 Single family residential(2): Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre %Impervious(3) Separate curve number 1.0 DU/GA 15 shall be selected for 1.5 DU/GA 20 pervious & impervious 2.5 DU/GA 30 or basin 3.0 DU/GA 34 3.5 DU/GA 38 4.0 DU/GA 4 DU/GA 3-l=ull 13.Idou 4 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DU/GA 50 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA 56 PUD's, condos, apartments, %impervious commercial businesses & must be industrial areas computed (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Sec. 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system. • (3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn).are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. III-1-12 FEBRUARY, 1992 i RATIONAL METHOD RAINFALL INTENSITIES FOR EAST WASHINGTON COUNTY • (for Ranges d 2 West) S Rainfall Inten ' inches per hour) 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.40 4.00 4.50 0 1.90 2.50 3.00 3.40 4.00 4.50 5 10 1.30 1.70 2.20 2.50 3.00 3.50 - 15 1.10 1.40 1.80 2.10 2.50 2.90 20 0.90 1.20 1.50 1.80 2.10 2.40 30 0.75 0.95 1.20 1.40 1.65 1.90 40 0.60 0.75 1.00 1.15 1.30 1.60 50 0.55 0.70 0.85 1.00 1.15 1.35 • 70 0.45 -0.55 0.70 0.82 0.95 1.10 100 0.40 0.45 0.55 0.67 0.75 0.90 0.70 0.85 180 or more 0.35 0.40 0.50 0.60 SXce " ~Iot- CGIc.S 160-CH3 =.4 Q 1:J v ~ s! 2 ~7 q4 c15 f• f /I /s J ~ti r r. i \ - - % f j r m 3 4 ~ rn SS 33 s 1 cD N D ~ i LL, i O- C1- 8" PVC STUBO 102.49' = 91.79' PVC STUBOUT W. 91 8" PVC .69 LAT ' OUT S 4.. SERVICE S.E. = 90.19' s 91.39' LD O , WEL 70 REMOVED` f` 1 i f / j ~ f Jf`~ ~Y rf J G ; S S J f , i / j• ^ D i f• l ! if ~ r i xi i 1 ~s+ ~ _ fY f 1 i l~~! ,j Data for FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Page 1 Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 3 Mar 98 HydroCAD 4 .53 001083 (c) 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems • SUBCATCHMENT 1 BASIN #1 (EXISTING-PREDEVELOPED) PEAK= .94 CFS Q 8.69 HRS, VOLUME= .50 AF ACRES CN SCS TR-20 METHOD 2.77 81 LAWNS TYPE IA 24-HOUR .12 98 IMPERVIOUS RAINFALL= 3.9 IN 2.89 82 SPAN= 0-24 HRS, dt=.17 HRS Method Comment Tc (min) DIRECT ENTRY TOTAL Tc 68.0 • p e V e. Co 0 e l~ G s i "7 1"27 lye j-~6£l6 - .6'9-1g 3 41 1~ p3S 6 no o^. sb ZOln08~S^d .9 iy d 1 I is oog 9'< OI ; I I / 1 II 9,94 e6 8 I i 1801s rnnro :q Q ` ; Ss £88 C O`` Q,s 494- 1 9 ' 6 ti ~s 9Z<. t I I I !s 00sL i J Z Z S V ~ o 06 , WI , f 1 1 G 1 1 1 ' 1 4 I; ; 2 Syrnnc 90t 1 1 ' G Z J oo~ 1 rn ! ~ ~ .trlwa aru -yr ~ II ' zoi Q 1 oo~ 9 7n,97Q 9 puT~~ IT NOD 'I C:7M i a1)n /n GrCcSQ / l t law°^ Z Ghd 3 0.53 cFr 1. ) a Q r ~S~ svu 11 3 /~~~c e 0- 'y I34 s,'., i~~ ~ G l3Gs~~n ~ 2-31.7 - a = All Zs S S ' D, O - - - . / [i r.~ ...s ` C /'7 G~ /rj e~--• Gam/ e / t ✓7 P S 4 % - ? 15 2, Z-. ~Ls - - r 00 , a r~ I 0 u u~ d U 0 Z- = s Data for FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION TYPE IA 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.9 IN Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 2 Mar 98 H droCAD 4.53 001083 c 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems WATERSHED ROUTING S 13c s:n ~d f o.~cl /moo r, O ~ t S c 1 <<~1<~4~► GS J34 Si'n To ~c Fonnv S f ~2,.~ns iG a IJ i fc 4 G1°"5 O SUBCATCHMENT REACH Q POND I I LINK • • Data for FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION TYPE IA 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.9 IN Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 2 Mar 98 HydroCAD 4.53 001083 (c) 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems • RUNOFF BY SCS TR-20 METHOD: TYPE IA 24-HOUR RAINFALL= 3.9 IN, SCS U.H. RUNOFF SPAN = 0-24 HRS, dt= .20 HRS, 121 POINTS SUBCAT AREA Tc WGTID PEAK Tpeak VOL NUMBER (ACRE) (MIN) --GROUND COVERS (%CN)-- CN C (CFS) (HRS) (AF) 2.89 35.0 71°%90 29°%98 - - 92 - 1.87 8.19 .72 omm► /2 J 50 31.0 54%90 46%98 - - 94 - .35 8.12 .13 81 30.0 54%90 46%98 - - 94 - 58 8.11 .22 • Data for FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Page 1 Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 2 Mar 98 HydroCAD 4.53 001083 (c) 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems F'60 Si2i75 • REACH 3 12" ADS PIPE-CB TO DITCH OUTFALL Qin = .93 CFS @ 8.11 HRS, VOLUME= .35 AF Qout= .93 CFS @ 8.12 HRS, VOLUME= .35 AF, ATTEN= 0%, LAG= .5 MIN DEPTH END AREA DISCH (FT) (SQ-FT) (CFS) 12" PIPE STOR-IND+TRANS METHOD O ~C 0.0 0.0 0.00 PEAK DEPTH= .35 FT 1 0.0 .07 n= .01 PEAK VELOCITY= 3.7 FPS .2 .1 .29 LENGTH= 70 FT TRAVEL TIME = .3 MIN .3 .2 .64 SLOPE= .005 FT/FT SPAN= 0-24 HRS, dt=.2 HRS .7 .6 2.74 .8 .7 3.20 .9 .7 3.49 .9 .8 3.52 1.0 .8 3.49 1.0 .8 3.28 • • Data for FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION Page 1 Prepared by Land Tech, Inc. 3 Mar 98 HydroCAD 4 .53 001083 (c) 1986-1997 Applied Microcomputer Systems • POND 1 WATER QUALITY Qin = .19 CFS @ 8.20 HRS, VOLUME .10 AF Qout= .08 CFS @ 11.54 HRS, VOLUME= .10 AF, ATTEN= 59%, LAG= 199.9 MIN ELEVATION CUM.STOR STOR-IND METHOD (FT) (CF) PEAK STORAGE = 1440 CF 87.0 0 PEAK ELEVATION= 89.8 FT 88.0 1 6.FLOOD ELEVATION= 94.0 FT 90.0 1592 START ELEVATION= 87.0 FT 92.0 5454 SPAN= 0-80 HRS, dt=.3 HRS 94.0 12043 5 x FINER ROUTING Tdet= 795.4 MIN (.1 AF) ROUTE INVERT OUTLET DEVICES/ i 1 P 87.5' .5" ORIFICE GRATE Lv4 ~e- Que ({y or; iL4e- 1 PI r-2 SQR(2g) SQR(H-r) { - MEMO 2 P 89.81 2. 3 1 SHARP-CRESTED RECTANGULAR WEIR X 3~ eY. v t Z h G rG T L1 Q=C L H-1.5 C=3.27+.4 =Leng - H POND 1 INFLOW & OUTFLOW WATER QUALITY .19- .18- STOR-IND METHOD O , 1 7 PEAK STOR= 1440 CF 7 O Z C • .16 pail PEAK ELEV= 89.8 FT .15 . 1 4 ~r 13 Qin- .19 CFS~~ 0.3L Ste,- S oY~ 0 12 Qout= .08 CFS `u .11 LAG= 199.9 MIN .10 v .09 o .07 / Ll- .05. I Scr hour .04 1 .03 .02 1 0 ' 00m U) ^ W u) m Ln CD Ln CS) In CD Ln m d) m Ln m - - cv c~ ~ ~ v v ~ ~n ~ ~n r r co TIME (hour5) au ~ j` V p l v r-~ e CG (L r c G 1 l ~ a 2 c I FL/2- Z-d1s / ey- ;4 '~5 LoI ll'' x Lto~o 70o X6.03 = An • n i o rz Igo r~ ! 4 Z~o- ~~~er7~cci VGTenTi~n ~rj ~70n C~ vv~ r - 144' Si je- 6r' S, d~ S~a~~eJ Grp 3. I i7 {neon : gig 11 ! ~ ~ 2 ~ 14- ~ j G t3 d~ e .v e 1~ d v t. d L<J D ~ S ~-oru~e it f i bc9 / j / JXo ll l; S L G O / i c I c l 0VC"rlV w /rt GPI f j l / j r-~=~ ~Se e c~ e+ l / ~aa OUTFACE i' _ • Q'~ ' J mill RIP RAP 5, HIGH ° ±132 LF 0- cloys R ?-JAI RETAINING WALL ¢ 3'I WALL ±91.8 \ ----~QP ~STORM WATER FACILITY < 45 • lam. 1 , TOP WALL=91.8 r OVERFLOW ELEV. = 91.3 8.0' TREATMENT SURFACE ELEVATION Q I IE IN=89.8 ELEV. = 89.8 z_ - z 4" ADS SCREW Q IN CLEANOUT III 4 , POND BOTTOM w ; ORIFICE ELEV. = 88.0 DIA.=1 2 000 000 -00%0090" ' 01 I I` 0 0l I0 p 0 0 0 IE OUT = 187.3 6" ADS 4" ADS c° 000" _ I a IE IN=87.4 IE IN=87.5 1 /2 CU. YD. w OUTFALL ¢ 4.1 3/4" DRAIN ROCK t=87.0 12' DIP ; 6°ADS ECRE • w N " 4. ON CAP cn 00 2 WEEPHOLE f I.E.=87.5 000 .e 0°° 00 0 00000 °00° 9 ' ORIFICE 1-14 4 . V1000- °00000 18„ 18" 18.. SUMP DIA.=41, SUMP o° CLASS S 100 SUMP RIP RAP -L . J. a, c • - n 6' 1.5' 4.2' 2'- 0" 3'-0" DETENTION WATER QUALITY EXTENDED DRY unified uff; sewerage POND OUTFLOW DEVICE agency DRAWING NO. 150 _ FILE DRAFT: STORM SD DRAWING Srr16DCH.,i PI nT 1 .1 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING • FOR FONNER WOODS SUBDIVISION January 28`h, 1998 7:00 PM THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE ATTENDED THE MEETING: King Phelps 8835 SW Canyon Ln #402 Portland, OR 97225 (503)291-9398 Steve Turner 8835 SW Canyon Ln #408 Portland, OR 97225 (503)292-5920 Michael Cameron 11340 SW Former Tigard, OR 97223 (503)292-5446 Colleen Schultheis 11180 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)624-1605 Eric Schultheis 11180 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)624-1605 Jesse Metcalf 11200 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)625-9877 Tom Abeyta 11370 SW Erste Place Tigard, OR 97223 (503)691-9300 Mark Dahlen 12775 SW 113 Place Tigard, OR 97223 (503)968-1141 LouAne Mortensen 11160 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)620-3072 Mike Woodley 11590 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)590-5404 Fred Parish 11385 SW Former Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-5811 Loreta Parish 11385 SW Former Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-5811 Jim Hellhake 12709 SW 113th Place Tigard, OR 97223 (503)968-7437 Dave Howard 11350 SW Fonner Tigard, OR 97223 (503)968-2015 Jay Beck 11550 SW Fonner Street Tigard, OR 97223 (503)639-9443 • MEETING MINUTES: • King Phelps began the meeting by introducing himself and the Land Tech, Inc. as a representative of S.R. Turner Construction. • Kina stated that the exhibit map shown details the proposed twelve-lot subdivision. King then showed where existing and proposed utilities are located. • King stated that one existing dwelling can be found on the property, and that a portion of that dwelling was to be removed. • King then stated that the purpose of the meeting was for the local residents to voice their concerns, and for the developer to hear them. King stated that the meeting was to be recorded for the purpose of minutes. • After explaining the layout of the subdivision King then opened the forum to testimony from all present. • One citizen voiced a question concerning lot number one of the proposed subdivision. Steve Turner stated that he was not positive at this point, but that he hoped to save all • vegetation over 12" in diameter. The citizen then stated that he would like to see some of the vegetation remain, to act as a barrier. • One citizen then asked if King could better explain the storm water and how it related • to the Humbolt Creek subdivision. King stated that storm water coming off of the proposed subdivision would be taken care of by the proposed storm system seen on the preliminary plat. • The citizen then asked when construction would be done (hours of the day). King stated that the Tigard City Code regulated hours of operation for construction of the subdivision (possibly 7-5). The citizen then asked how long construction would take. King Phelps stated that 2-3 months was likely. The citizen then asked about the homes. Steve Turner stated that the houses would be similar to the homes in the Genesis subdivision as well as those found across Fonner in 113I'. • Eric Schultheis who owns the property just east of the proposed subdivision then asked if a home would be located on lot 12 of the proposed subdivision. Steve Turner stated that a home would be present. Eric then asked about the proposed water quality facility. King Phelps then explained how the water quality facility would work. Eric then asked what kind of protection would surround the facility to keep children out. King stated that a retaining wall would be along the east to keep the earth from sloughing over, and that the facility would be fenced to keep children out. • Eric then asked about how the amount of water handled by the facility would be determined. King stated that Engineering calculations approved by the city would be • done in order to construct the proper facility. King explained further how the facility would work, and how overflow would be bypassed beyond the pond. • Eric then asked about the trees, and which would be removed. Steve Turner stated that he hopes to retain all trees that do not hinder construction of the subdivision and its dwellings. Steve then explained about mitigating trees in the City of Tigard. Eric stated that he hopes that trees adjacent to his parcel will be saved due to the buffer +t +11 - «-n-7 F r -r- - his lnt tx7hirh hax~a not been $11b1P( to wP_,$tP_,T1V wind. He stated that if the large trees on lot 12 come down, then it is likely that a strong wind would damage the trees on his lot. Steve stated that he does not intend to clear cut the site, and again that he hopes to save as many trees as feasibly possible. • Eric stated that his property is designated as a historical landmark, and that he is interested in what kind of buffer would be placed between his parcel and the proposed subdivision. Steve Turner stated that we have yet to address that issue to date. • Jay Beck, who owns the property at 11550 SW Fonner (adjacent to the west) stated that he is also concerned about what kind of buffer would be placed around the subdivision. Jay stated that he does not want multiple styles of fencing to be placed along the back property line, as seen in the Genesis 3 subdivision, as the lots get purchased and owners put fences up. He said that if fencing were to be designed initially then different styles would be present. Steve Turner stated that fencing style • requirements could be placed in CC&R's to be written for the subdivision. Jay asked if a perimeter fence could be built as part of the subdivision. Steve Turner stated that unless a fence is required to buffer a street or different zone, then the developer would • not likely build a fence. Steve stated that we haven't addressed perimeter fencing, but that we would take a look at it. • Eric Schultheis then asked about topography. King Phelps described the topography of the site, and how it would effect storm water runoff. Eric asked if we were going to change topography. King stated that we will do grading along the east line of the property to direct storm water, and that it will be done properly to retain the aesthetics of the site and the surrounding parcels. • Eric then asked if we asked if the developer planned to place any kind of aesthetic barrier around the detention facility. Steve Turner stated that we do not currently have any plans. Eric stated that he would like to see that issue addressed. • Eric asked if we were familiar with wildlife in the area and if we planned on addressing the issue. King Phelps stated that we will address all wildlife issues stated within the Tigard city code. • One citizen then stated that several generations of raccoons and other wildlife do live in the area. King Phelps stated that this is an issue that should be taken up with the city. • • Eric then asked who at the city of Tigard planning department would be handling this issue. Steve Turner stated that he does not have the name of the person at the meeting, but that they would receive information about who to speak with at the city. • Eric then asked about when building would begin. Steve stated that he hoped to begin this summer. Tnm A1,Px,ta urbn racirlae at 1 1'27(1 CW F.rste Place- stated that he niirr_ha ed his lnt 10 years ago to live in a cul-de-sac and to have an open green space in his rear yard. He stated that he is not too excited about losing his privacy in his back yard. He stated that it has been nice having wildlife in the backyard and that it is sad that no provisions are in place to protect it. He then asked about whether a pedestrian pathway would be placed near his property. He is concerned about vandalism that has occurred to other citizens near a pedestrian pathway in the area. King Phelps then stated that he did not believe that the city would require a pedestrian pathway, but that he could not be sure until the project was reviewed. • Tom stated that he is very concerned about drainage and privacy for his parcel. He said that his father has had some problems with development near his home, and that he does not want the same to happen to him. King Phelps stated that the only real grade level change will be within the storm retention facility. • • Tom then asked about the style and price of the homes. Steve Turner stated that they would be similar to those on I I P and cost approximately 250,000 dollars. • Tom then asked about CC&R's. Steve Turner stated that they would be similar to • those within the Genesis subdivision. • Tom then asked about the process. King Phelps then tried to explain the process from beginning to end. • Tom then asked about where on the lots will the houses be located. Steve stated that city code determines the widths of the lots and that houses would probably be placed closer to the front of the lots, and have larger rear yards. King then explained setback requirements. • A question was then posed about who would maintain the storm water facility. King Phelps stated that the Unified Sewerage Agency would maintain the facility. • Jim Hellhake, who owns a lot within the Humbolt subdivision then asked about the storm system and what would happen if the system could not handle the storm. King Phelps stated that a larger than 25 year storm would bypass the system and go directly into the storm system. King then explained how the treatment system works. • One citizen then asked about insect and misquotes in the area due to the pond. King stated that he has a pond near his home and that they haven't had a problem with bugs. He said that this is a dry pond, and that it doesn't remain in the system for any long period of time when there is not storm. • One citizen then asked if a water quality facility was a choice of the developer or a requirement. King Phelps then stated that this is a requirement, and that the developer would rather not build it. King then went on to explain a bit more about the treatment part of the water quality facility. • Jim Hellhake then asked abort where we. are in the permit process. King Phelps & Steve Turner then explained where we were in the application process, and how they can stay involved with this process (speaking with a planner, hearings, etc.). • Jim then asked about foliage along Fonner Street. Steve Turner stated that due to sight distance issues some foliage would need to be removed. He also said that street trees would be required and that trees would be mitigated on the site. • Jay Beck then said that as a condition of approval he would like an architectural fence or some sort of barrier to be required along the rear property lines of proposed lots 6,7,8, and 9 to be constructed to maintain an aesthetic buffer in the area. • One citizen then stated that a few large trees do exist on the property line along proposed lot 12, and that he would like them to be left untouched. Steve Turner stated that an arborist would go to the subject site and do a tree plan. • 0 Steve Turner then explained what the arborist would be studying within his tree plan. • King Phelps then explained how some trees are sensitive to tampering with dirt and roots and that a great deal of precaution would be taken in grading and construction. • A question was then asked about emergency services, and if this subdivision is properly designed to handle them. King Phelps then stated that the private street and cul-de-sac would need approval from the fire marshal, and that it has been designed to meet fire marshal requirements. • A question was then posed concerning off street parking. King Phelps then stated that the private street would be labeled no parking on one side. • A question was then raised concerning the sidewalk. King showed on the preliminary plat where it would be located. • One citizen then stated that he was nervous about what the city would actually require upon the developer. King stated that you can never be 100 percent sure until you receive the conditions of approval. • King Phelps then asked if there were any more questions or comments. He then closed the meeting. THESE MINUTES WERE RECORDED JANUARY 28TH, 1998 BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7:00 AND 9:00 PM. ALL PRESENT PARTIES WERE AWARE OF THE RECORDING. Matt Welllner -YVrr vv.vvu Land Tech, Inc. • Eric & Colleen Schultheis 11180 SW Fortner St. Tigard, OR 97223 Telephone/FAX 503.624.1605 SCHULTHEIS @IMAGINA.COM 1.28.98 Land Tech, Inc. 8835 SW Canyon Lane Suite 402 Portland, OR 97225 cc City of Tigard Planning Department City of Tigard Planning Commission City of Tigard Planning Council RE: Proposed Development at 11300 SW Fortner St. Tigard, OR Dear Land Tech, Inc. • As the owner of the C.F. Tigard house (11180 SW Fonner St.) I have a few concerns regarding your proposed development as the subject property borders our HISTORIC DISTRICT OVERLAY. I'm certain with proper communication and cooperation we can protect the integrity and Historic Significance of the area for all concerned. T r-me-st the following in vour plans: • Visual buffer along West line to protect HISTORIC DISTRICT • Trees along West line are "wind hardened" and must not be topped, removed, or have their root structures built upon, cut into, or damaged during construction. • Stone fence along west line to minimize impact of increased noise level. • Holding pond with natural water purification system to assure water run-off is clean and will not flood our property. • S46. 8835 S.W. Canyon Lane Suite 402 Portland, OR 97225 Phone: 291-9398 Fax: 291-1613 0 Land Techjnc. _ January 7'h, 1998 RE: Proposed Development at 11300 SW Fonner Dear CIT Representatives and Residents, Land Tech, Inc. is representing the owner of the property located at 11300 SW Fonner (2S1 3AC 2000). We are considering proposing a subdivision at this location. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary permits, I would like to =?;discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners an :residents. You are invited to attend a meeting on: Dade: January 28t , 1998 Time: 7:00 P.M. Place: Tigard City Hall (Town Hall Room) Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Please note that this will be an informational meeting on our preliminary development plans. These plans may be altered prior to the submittal of the application to the City. We look forward to discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 291-9398, if you need further information before the meeting. Sincerely, Matt Wellner Land Tech, Inc. Planner • Land Tech, Inc. 1997 1 Q~ f J a t R ~~pNN~ SjR 2 \235 At Ip •O W 1 1 a 8,711 sf. rn w \389 1 WELL rn y ® o TO BE REMOVED 2 8,340 sf. ? 0 01 N 7N £ 8,486 sf; > HOUSE TO <r !J REMAIN O1- SCALE 1" = TO FIT B 82.8• hp °i • ' ' 3 S TO BE \ ' d REMOVED ` o. \ J b 4115 LF 1-3 HIGH 4 RETAINING WALL 7,500 sf. ^ 3 o '416•40.09ME 120•a _ n r ~ 7.726 sf. ~ /383 \~~•v ) rn \5 6 ~y25.8 L- _x b b o~ ~ 7,883 sf. / ~ •s. 12 > 12,928 sf. z _ 0 2~ 9 40.0' 7,625 sf. ° 11 N. f Ir8,045 sf. _ rn <a m .4 U Co. 8 10 N 50 ~ J 7,667 sf. 7,500 sf. I a3• • 9 \36? 353 0 7,640 sf. Nj6•jq 02 E N 1235 D SS LAT O SW 1/4 NE 1/4 SECTION 3 T2S R I W WM• WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON to SCALE I'•100'FN., W z SEE MAP "°O1i°'a"p1 lal mo.aw,!tgnoq 25 13AB z .ool,«o,:ooAO4 loo.toO,,oAlta, 1 H A E L .r4.sl.e..vr LL u an ra stl a 9 '2900 ezsu j x aT, s` Z W ~ y 7 x u,• uaAOl natty 7 Q U 3400 F 501 W 000 x700 2800 ~ 4800 Q 3 202 Ea AC. ,o Q .IS.tC 17 ~vY~ l a. .SSA,. 3200 r E ll -p s F tt t I W i 3500 ? 6 1 z 4700 ~ 7 oa LLI ' - - - - - - - - - - N l7 f!7 a 16 3300 n, 71100 e• O N • 36001 - S W 00' S 204 5 3 4 V 446007 14 a IS 3700 - ♦ td I' taaa fie, nw uaml U:.wl roo'- 6l 4500 STREET V 14 <R 3800 _ Tu vanr or wr ro ' 7 ~5D210 CMO XE14MT! 4400 , lost w t 1 .nn 13 * 53900 203 b ~ i B CI Y Iw.eq - -tii AiT tt1"~ - ~ •J,'1. p S asap 4000 0 0>• 1 ':trea,'olv"' \ C}~~ 4100 t 9 6000 t5B00t Tr.er { 600 \ 4200 . 10 •r 5700 9 bi LNAC. \ ao P II ,it4 900 a43 00 - • ap• p .6/Ar./ •irw[ lie _ _ SEE MAP I 12 5600 23 _ 178 25 13AD SEE MAP S S $ 417 L 2S 138D YO Ar. as Tue y it 400V 1550 0 N 1 IS C r4 wrf'~ Q ~I + FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY s ~t•tt4i. 86300 6900 • a t•nrr 1501 w ! DO NOT RELY ON FOR ANY OTHER USE • 1100 7 to v to : t -"A,. .slAe. 3 ,1 a.r.: a lae 4 FAR 5200 F' 1300 1,I 1401 s 1200 -L" i N = ' O.SIAa tide o.aua 3 g O 1503 ' 154 , 111502 5100 CO -11 _M .lUe. .54& 34A,. e SooI 3 1ae00 oZ . • 9 a,".r~ , U) 2 ,,r«Y nY la' ~ «uT ST. . , `•T+c.a ass A t 9 1• S wa SW, =a ON.frR~- . tw nnrr at eea av,n i taus tnvt•r " 61 2000 900 I B00 I 1101 1600 a 00LY1 2200 00 A 2300 064" 2101 :MAC S83At aMt .SOAa i Ltt4e Lou. .tIAC OfAat. O.a24e 1 I f auru_t _n m l 6200 2400 2 3-78 o. a"i••_=-- I~ w ,I k 2600 I -I - \ uaAa 23-7~4 06A° 23 74 I :I TIGARD 2S 13AC b ,4tn • SEE MAP WB - • AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) ) SS. City of Tigard ) 1, MGM L✓~~ being duly swom, depose and say that on 108 1 caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the atta ed list, a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposed development at (or near) 11300 SL/ Fon 2S 13AC --)-Dncp a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at 3225 S E7+E% with postage prepaid thereon. Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (TL71C C> f'Tll1IU CI14 A STATt nr noF-,-l1N. All1TAQV DI IR1 1( Tf1 !'rIAADI CTC/AIl1T~ D17C1 Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the day of , 1 g11~ 0 OFFICIAL SEAL eEVERLY A. JORDAN NOTARY PUBLIC OP.=GON COM%jISSl04d N0.058747 pliY C0~1~:1iSSIO~I EXFir.ES OCT. 22, 2000 NO ARY P LIC OF etGON My Commi ' n Expire Oct aD X000 G: pplicsnt. please Complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) r !A..'v OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NIA.tiiE: TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Name of kpplicant'Owner I I ~ Ad&ess or General Locarioa oI Sunject Property: I ~ubjec' prooe c v Tart Mao(s) and Lot #(s): L-------------------------------------------------------- n:UOginbanyvnast~rst~.:rnal.msi , AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE SIGN POSTING, RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT TO: city T . Pl ..:.....::.::...:;:::anning Divisioa_.. . • . 13125 SW Hall Boole . . Tigard; OR 97223 I, /'10. rY,Y , do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed Sv6ol;v;6ior\ affecting the land located at (state the approximate location(s) if no address(s) and/or tax lot(s) currently registered) 11300 SV Fors r,ei' 0251 3AC 2000) , and did on the aA, day of r„ ~y 19 personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a S~ J&::~ application, and the time, date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at 11300 S1,./ Fror,r,PV ~►-~~c~" th 40 olr;~ca,~ (state location you posted notice on property) Signature (In the presence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FOR A STATE OF OREGON, NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETEINOTARIZE) Subscribed and swom/affirmed before me on the day of 19 q~ r 0 OFFICIAL SEAL BEVERLY A. JORDAN )4..~. i NOTARY PUBLiC OREGON a COMMISSION N0.058747 rr~Y cor:~acsslo~l Ex~IRES OCT. 22.2 00 N ARY P LIC O REGON My Comml ion Exp es: ~-D (-Applicant, please complete information below for proper placement with proposed project) TYPE OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED NA.IE: - F TYPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: Name of Applicant/Owner. Address or General Lomdon of Subject Propertr. I Subject P: operv Tax Nfap(s) and Lot T(s) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J n•: logm~pacy~rrauerslari_posc_._r. st Larry Emme Fred & Loreta Arant Parish Ricky & Barbara Oak 11221 SW Fonner St 11385 SW Fonner St 11245 SW Fonner St Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 • Ronald & June Hobbs David Fleming Robert Davis 7205 SW Ventura Dr 11227 SW Fonner St 11195 SW Fonner St Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 George Erickson Jr. & Ideen Marlene Jon & Judith Fessler Colin Mortensen & Ane Louise 11175 SW Fonner St 11180 SW Fonner St 11160 SW Fonner St Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Jesse & Ruth Metcalf Ronald Rissmiller & L Diane Virginia Hodges 148 E Carmel Green St 11230 SW Fonner St 11300 SW Fonner St Port Hueneme, CA 93041 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Thomas Fisher Robert Holmes Eleanor & Earl Quimby PO Box 11370 11400 SW Fonner St 11480 SW Fonner St Portland, OR 97211 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 David Mary Lynn Filler Jay & Nora Beck Mitchell & Carla Shults 11500 SW Fonner St 11550 SW Fonner St 2074 Laurelei Ave Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 San Jose, CA 95128 TIG nr, rrrv n-F 13everiv_ & Robert Bowlsbv James & Renette Hier 13125 SW Hall Blvd 11200 SW Morgen Ct Louis & Eli Bedard Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 16101 SW 72nd Ave #150 Portland, OR 97224 Dwight Sigworth & K Karen Thomas & Ruby McKernan William & Darlene Lambiaso 11185 SW Morgen Ct 11205 SW Morgen Ct 11225 SW Morgen Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Barbara Sattler Roger & Maili Johnsen Phillip & Sonya Sakash 11245 SW Morgen Ct 11265 SW Morgen Ct 11285 SW Morgen Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 hen & Timea Mahar John & Karyn Clarke Thomas & Deborah Abeyta 390 SW Erste Ct 11380 SW Erste Ct 11370 SW Erste Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Edwin & Ethel Honeycutt Jr. Jon Culbertson Paul & Kathryn Schoppe 11375 SW Erste Ct 11385 SW Erste Ct 11395 SW Erste Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 • Rodney & Rebecca Brummett Larry & Angela Frank Laurence & Laura York 11490 SW Sonne Ct 11480 SW Sonne Ct 11470 SW Sonne Ct Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Richard & Joyce Knutson Randall & Melissa Myers Mark Dahlen & Jill White 11475 SW Sonne Ct 6655 SW Hampton St #100 12775 SW 113th PI Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Danny & Karen Garner Joseph & Tracy Feyder Cynthia Calhoun 12753 SW 113th Pl PO Box 540 SE 119th 11340 SW Fonner St Portland, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97216 Tigard, OR 97223 David & Christa Howard ~o r Swa n5o r, 13 evGvl y Fe 11350 SW Fonner St 11~11rJ 5~✓ =~or.woq~, l opt 12200 SW C3~.11 /-lovr"laiv . Portland, OR 97223 -r OR 9-7-2a3 9-7-12~ ►IQ~ AIk A; Cl -k G. 11905 SW Q,5+-, Cost 13~~0 sw shore D, .ve 161ys SL-/ Clan( Go~.r1" T9a,.o(, OR' 9-7 2-) 3 OR 972.23 Turd, OR -1-72-2-11 13i I1 !_•~~r1S5 1~Y~-y ~,/eS-}'e~-,--~ar~ ~-ir~do~ /''bsf~s I+o35 sw 135ti A~er"~ +3('65 SW Fe,-,-, T~ roj , OR 9-7223 T~ard , OR 9-723 T'~Q✓~ ~ (~l\ `77~~1/ Kcx+~,; e too, I I io G~r~ Sfy Ner,- .SCO 4t R'-'55e 12~`~a SW Glacier L; ly Dr. ►+38(o SW S~onwooo( Look 31 ~2i I Pgayw)pr,~ c,,eek Rkoo~ 0(~ °F7-)23 9rT2D3 ~poose,C,lQ 970 EoZ 14 O wde r , r(~ roc So le r Co, I Woo I e"Y 11829 S1,✓ Marry ,1~ H. Il 112ti5 sw /1or5cn C-+. lz35~ SW 132r,oZ C"'t T;5a,-(::(I DR 9-7aD3 Tea,-~~ oR 9-723 ORt nr,e + v`l7 .SwT, Sl-j I`Y&ii, A,, V71 06~ NAME ADDRESS (INCLUDING CITY AND ZIP) PHONE -m 4 o Z_ t 1t-►4,,..~ ji 5v 1 W< '977*2 7-f 8~/3~ S W ,~uti•`-c ¢DY, ~Z Z~Z- 5`12o mjA4e 0"or% 03geSw Fo,~,~c3+t. T~GP,c~,otr,~']2,z3 29Z -Sy ~6 Slo ccS lc] ~o vlvc.Q r c ~ o~L Q'77M.Z.3 Z4~-( ~ l/~ ~ 5 /G. Mvc.THtr~S ~I J~ ~UNN~,fZ f) /~2~ G12 °l~°l°C~ CJ o~ / -~OGZS sE 1 l 2 do S uS ~v'~rC,~ a.~ LQG`/7 223 r-2 S" 4B 77 I l 1'3'16 -rW pi-- I falN2a7 Cfel '7ZL3 ~9 f- 93 Gm G~~i~~ L` Z S w 3 4- s Q r 3c> F0 V-- N1 1" / and " (3 8 S stj igooo,-~ T 6 3 - 5kl / Al 4f-l- t- A kE 12-7 6 sw 13 ~Lg c.L A-rzi) 76-8 - 75(37 ~04ww- Sw F"" SGSf-~alS~. J &CK 0510 514) ~aw1e2 S 7r eR~ c39- qY3 I JANUARY 28,1998 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FONNER WOODS naoe 6000 ^ 5800 600 300 T Or RW? 5700 9"'. 2.!/0.a /exc. z• ro 1 Sea 103 1105 900 106 - _ _ I x era' c 'B 1 .33AC I 36AC 1 .670.x/ 6200 6100 6000 5900 r J s2 AC. 151 !2 H 1 F^ -6 I +4a I 8 7 6 1402 5600 J I $ ° r F 38Ac x JE a 6 w 7 - - _ `'a 1 1 r~ 1~~ r 5 x~ 14 102 lil ° ♦yP vrort 1 6300 X11 SS e, \ IM.y4 i 1 e :I • I .IOAC.4 1000 m s 6 M 1% R ~1 INITIAL rR + R S o9n I 5a nl U° I ° ° I - 1.27Ac. .e 5400 05500 3e I . 0 0i 9 m A L~ y 405 <03 i eea•IS'c 8R LLI ffiac S2AF I \ 2°" 5800 ,2. 5 °0, 5 Vo+ 6 We V y 600 6400 w.d J I seS me xoa \ 4 0r 804 4 3 I406 e 0f3Ae. w I eos++ ;1 72.!! ^ ro c A eyM'L b. 6""`66.4 LPL * - 5300 1501 10001 Se x4'1 leo I ° elal d 10 . 1 340.6. ° s,+!' w ss 5700 + 1100 an 6500 $ 3 1 = .83AC a 61•x'6 loo 41 4 Fs 5200 i 11 S I >e 10. 1100 4° M'• 0 3 (1= 1 00 1401 " esa! 4mi 11 1 n5n _ I 1200 $ . 31AC @2Ac 6 * o Yd 2 y „a 0.46AC -.14 1503 11504 11502, 168 °b 5600 I a:>^ No•°9R X0,1200' e w ~ a2yf 34Ac. .34AC 2 I n~♦ 0f(.jp9r O .o 34AC_ &l00 Oa c ' s J; y 12 `l 2 g 0.r + o° 130 P E i 5500 I 1400 ° 4 ♦ f,o A + e w9 6700 IS1Af ' I°~ o / b °5000 4 ° ? y 13 w so 1 m S' x1500°' ° 5 et o S t° " 6 " oAy° 6 a "-;STPAC r _ " S I 1, °x elq '8r 6 < al. + n .ac +°0.6 r ` 1600 ` eop Io1.5: x[1at5 i 31111'16 X0'1700 s 7 eqJ° u xu m u t 1 se Q 5100 1 =1'46'1 ST. T A. 195 ••9Y 8 6600 - 400 - •a 530. 801 Seo i51a i0xyr•ltS4'L"°~ 1600 .a' 0 ~e+b ~SG~\O y°i 4 1°att i69AC 8C2 X812 803 2000 1900 : 9 Qp• +°•0 60. l /5 ni~ Serve 1 w 6 00 2000 1900 1800 1 1701 16)0 y .3841,. .38AC.. 2oAC 07AC s e r ♦ 2500 'o t~p0[5'~ 5000 1 2300 2200 101 MAC. 2 00 a46AC .30AC I 1.00AC 1850.6. ° tau °o ° y °°0 10 ~o o° . 17 02800 40 .64A4 06uC .42AC 1 o w ° II 2500~$'e A + o " I , l_ 805° +0 'ao 2400 u 16 •''°002900 w = xm 411 w c " J. q ' y ` 00. 5° IS 0 . ♦ .s.lax, 490° n"a (0 ~e °1 • 42 SPP~G °0 2300 : eo ,o• 1. 19 39 s5n_[ ur 01 Q= 1 '220 :u 0 ' 14 y oo xevuo.o,c ^ a, >1.u1 n F - + o e 73." 0 e " "4 h ' 806 1 ` '4 2100 13 qo s 3000 : 4800 1 e 0 6200 ^ s 4401 .25AG 43 3`0 ACT~~Ai~ .zzwy 38 00 a1. 1 F 2400[ I t 2 Q e o I, o c y ne.a 12 t ,o ) 20 3. .91At qp : e .43AC e . 807 23 74 ~21 4700 , o - a~ r - - - - - •351.46 1 I ° 44 ✓x' L Y y f le 4ja°e' + rzl.ll x F xeY '1 I _ - Ig I d•° 809 9, S,°'a0,° s Aae '?.C II 37 6 $ 3500 ee;'s! v.'t + 3204 - 46 °o• 3600 13400 'S0 1 fn•4e'1 $ P a °e o k. xn•STI.4•'1 saYS![ m m.= to I 08 o•' 0 26 t 1 % 225 2600° 10 a 3700a°po Slo 25 22 :I 4600 { I o Id6Aa 45 ♦ : e•;o 3'q 36 8 _ I. iRACTP° 27 41.4 No ,q o L! a 1 IT00 p~ p+ ° 4.a„ 41a9 41sl9' m D nag 1 L46Ac. 2 IzsAS " ° s. Ye. 4~ar' 45001 1 • c+a of " I - - - ° (w 810'~/ 811 "e:•oe I. c 90.46 x S+• s1'e 4u°o 1i b v 3800 S u: s 40°0 4100 4200 +x4300° 4400 °35 i '0 28 LFONNER STREETS 47 a ° a$ 32' 33 6 o 589,5 'r n "la. s. l CM . 29 0 0 30 o 31 _ 34 1 J4xxl xM:Sllx SW15 L!x[ oYNIX 1, =ICSUN .aLA. er = 1 x419• xY.'t au. easy 1NP0INT INITIAL POINT en'Stu1' 9500 0 9400 8900 8800 8700 = 8600 T Mir. 8500 °J• + ! r 8400 4 i~L "a, 80 81 87 - 88 89 90 p-awv a 9500✓ ~ J •T ~ I lT.N I u r~ ~ _ , a 4 e CTS ) pray 7700 79 ~ d 82 .9 9oooy' MORGEN TRAWL" POINT ' e fY 4Y i 2 ° •a. o i so 8300 It f.84 Ac. 92 Motese,r -4-1 10070 ~4' 9900 " W is 85 Stm 509 ` i 75 76 N ' se 941 i`' 8100 8200 0 -10100 0 0- ae 9700 a (r : ^ 9200 ~ 8001) c Y 1,, AREA MAP 74 w 50 " • 83 a 9100 95 $ 94 93 x~1A FUTURE STREET _ a ET PLAN ° A r-4% :9800 79 ~jn pso 84 s + 7900 b „zl 1410.1! 5• V, , 421! °41 U.+y *,Zo 10200 N p' " r°r 96 " DEVELOPMENT PLAN E~ ° ,655 o 23-74 73 MVIACT' ;tf, xx~wo "FONNER WOODS» ISSn • ~a1.+a I_`'1l 1o2?r p~& ° $ ~ / 10300 0 6 10900 " 11 666 1\1 J 12-LOT SUBDIVISION 72 ® j < 6 1 GI-9. 10900 i 67 ° ry 10 o 1100 `y0o" 10700 a 68 TRACT M a'y~A W b `9 108AC e, 'EM 10600 °a °5 i + 1¢ e 20 10500 U 69 Y ~ 10400 70 a a. -71