The URL can be used to link to this page

SLR1990-00011POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions please contact City of Tigard Records Department. .L 1 {'"Nr of Hwy. 217, W. of 84th 181 35AC, 101 , 2800, 4800 & 1S1..,35AD 120011300, 1400,1500 . w .1p �. _... �.m .a .. w .,444.44 ..... r.� v 4444_ �.� 4444_ �..,�.....,.,_. .....�`�, 4444 .�..:...,..�...�....,,...y.�.,. - ...� . .� . ,._ . U. �. `4444 ,"....... .. ��° r." �?...«..,... � .,..�.,.....,,..,a....��,.... -� -55. c°7-`: C w; `'c r ,,- Q°►. , 6 \L W fa 17u) c.0 y l 4�„ v 1 f "j'.w w 1a ♦ 5�.: CA 44.47, 4iir"t 44 ...�.. . ,.w+..ywv k.., .-. � ,..+r.w.uwn.....- ..�...�....m.. 114.0 ty 0,4/640641 4-td Sj'ra. • .. a_ ....H,_.., .- ,V la .. «....�»" w. , '.. 1 ► .r«,a 4)�^„ 1 \rS e 09,) w. t J6A a f� Cr a-A41 R. { pt'S) p ) 1.4' //b.R.4.)-t)tit 7441$ s).10 i1 k► mr r t�...1P�Y/�4�ii c + °� ri ale t} •�1,r ;4.. rf,. �'��.'". k.''t::4,,.. w.. r.. uw.y w. ease. s , h.. uu ..+rr.cu+*++.u,w.+�.w.r.,....•• ...+r Ju W ^� p� I nre)-...44?4t4-4?_.....!--) di° !Ty? ty ,m ), `'c✓��.✓l r C-(4.! C LN444 er'01A fq dci .smcpia4:444 ,(:4tr rt, January 22, 1991 Eugene Davis 13095 SW Henry Beaverton, OR 97005 RECEIVE Ali 2 8 1991 art OF TIGARD C17 61) `'d" 4:4Pa> 2C1/ ' • Re Violations of State Permit No. RF 4570 Dear Mr. Davis: DIVISION OF STATE LANDS STAT8 LAND BOARD BARBARA ROBERTS Governor l'HIL KEISLING 5eeretary of State A NIHON l' MEEKER t,-tatt, Irt,n-uret This letter is to follow up our letter of August 20, 1990, regarding your violations of the above-referenced permit. You have resolved some of the violations including the fill in Ash Creek, the culvert and fill in the outlet from the south pond, and you have removed the cattle from the site. Additional remaining violations include your failure to install the required buffer plantings and to file the required open-space dedication. We have received your proposed planting plan. As discussed with you at our recent meeting, the plan is acceptable except for the species proposed for the Wetland area along Ash Creek. These species must be replaced with specie5 adapted for saturated soil conditions, These include Oregon Ash, Cottonwood, Alder, Red Osier Dogwood, and Bladk Hawthorne. The use of ornamental/exotic species, Such as ornamental pines, is not acceptable in place of Species listed in the approved planting plan. These can be used in addition to the approved spedies to provide extra buffering. As it is your responsibility to ensure the survival and growth of the plantings, we recommend that you seek profe8ional advide on the proper planting and maintenance techniques to avoid the additional expense of replacing non-surviving plan5, We expect the plantings to be completed during this planting seaSoft, If the plantings are not SubStantially complete Within the next 2 month80 the Division Will 75 Stitt-utter Stheet NE Salehi, OR 97310 (503) 378-3805 FAX (503) 3784844 i'y Lc, 11, • IsOCKHAR7* INVESTMENTS October 18, 1993 Mr. Ed Murphy Director of Development City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Highway 217/Greenburg Road Site. Dear Mr. Murphy: We are proposing a development consisting of a luxury 150 unit, all suites hotel (to be expanded to 250 units), a first class athletic club combined with full social amenities, conference and meeting facilities and a high energy restaurant and lounge located at Highway 217 and Greenburg Road. This development would not only infuse the local economy, but would also create a very prestigious attraction for the City of Tigard. This unique combination of facilities will inherently complement and enhance each phase of the development., .marketing and sales for one phase will automatically provide additional saler, for the other facets. The "Club", with its corporate clients and private memberships, will be a dynamic draw to the hotel and dining facilities, a combination which is non-existent elsewhere in Portland. This athletic club will be one of only two "premier" athletic facilities in Oregon. The conference center, which will accommodate 1,000 people for sit down banquets, will draw a significant degree of room revenue and trickle down to other entities. The restaurant and meeting facilities will offer a broad range of dining options to the public and hotel guests. And, it goes without saying, the hotel will provide an enhancement and support to the "Club" and restaurants. The development is composed of All Suites Hotel - 150 Units + Expansion Ability for 100 Mc re Units The all suites hotel will offer the full range of services to attract the corporate traveler, the surrounding communities corporate businesses for conference and entertaining facilities, as well as attracting the vacationing tiraveler, High Energy Restaurant and Lounge A 6,000 square foot food and beverage Service facility for hotel guests, club members and the public will be aimed towards the upscale market with a high energy lounge and complementing restaurant (possibly a Planet Hollywood), 12725 SW 66th Avenue Portland, OR 9722 Tel 503-639,900() Pak 503-6844204 Real Estate Doelopmetit itivestmails t,0 Athletic Club with Full Social Amenities The athletic club will be of the first class Multnomah Athletic Club or Bellevue Athletic Club style. The members-only, 100,000 square foot athletic club for dues paying member and hotel guests, will be a full service facility to include spacious exercising rooms with a complete range of complementing club facilities. These will include a semi-Olympic size pool, spas, sauna, free weight rooms, life cycles, nautilus circuit, tennis courts (indoor and outdoor), racquet ball, aerobics rooms, tanning, massage spa and meeting rooms. In addition, there will be cafe services for the locker rooms and a dining room for members only. Conference Facility The conference facility capacity will accommodate 1,000 for sit down banquets. This will be the largest conference facility on Portland's West side at 14,000 square feet. Again, I would like to emphasize the favorable impact this development would have on the City of Tigard and the prestige it will offer Tigard. I look forward to working with you in the future. If I may offer any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. LOCICHART INVESTMENTS Patrick G. Lockhart, CRA cc: Dr. Gene Davis Curtis Pickering Steve Seeger Jim Van Handel Dennis Walsch ' ' ":•-'0' • • „ ,„ , - , October 18, 1993 ,OCKHAR INVESTMENTS Mr. Ed Murphy Director of Development City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Highway 217/Greenburg Road Site. Dear Mr. Murphy: We are proposing a devoloprnent consisting of a luxury 150 unit, all suites hotel (to be expanded to 250 units), a first class athletic club combined with full social amenities, conference and meeting facilities and a high energy restaurant and lounge located at Highway 217 and Greenburg Road. This development would not only infuse the local economy, but would also create a very prestigious attraction for the City of Tigard. This unique combination of facilities will inherently complement and enhance each phase of the development...marketing and sales for one phase will automatically provide additional sales for the other facets, The "Club" , with its corporate clients and private memberships, will be a dynamic draw to the hotel and dining facilities, a combination which is non-existent elsewhere in Portland. This athletic club will be one of only two "premier" athletic facilities in Oregon. The conference center, which will accommodate 1,000 people for sit down banquets, will draw a significant degree of room revenue and trickle down to other entities. The restaurant and meeting facilities will offer a broad range of dining options to the public and hotel guests. And, it goes without saying, the hotel will provide an enhancement and support to the "Club" and restaurants. The development is composed of All Suites Hotel - 150 Units + Expansion Ability for 100 More Units The all suites hotel will offer the full range of services to attract the corporate traveler, the surrounding communities corporate businesses for conference and entertaining facilities, as well as attracting the vacationing traveler. High Energy Restaurant and Lounge A 6,000 square foot food and beverage service facility for hotel guests, club members and the public will be aimed towards the upscale market with a high energy lounge and complementing restaurant (possibly a Planet Hollywood), 12725 SW 66th Avenue Portland) Olt 97223 Tel 503,639-9000 • Fax 503-6844204 Real Estate Development investmenis t• 4 Mr. Ed Murphy October 18, 1993 Page Two Athletic Club with Full Social Amenities The athletic club will be of the first class Multnomah Athletic Club or Bellevue Athletic Club style. The members-only, 100,000 square foot athletic club for dues paying member and hotel guests, will be a full service facility to include spacious exercising rooms with a complete range of complementing club facilities. These will include a semi-Olympic size pool, spas, sauna, free weight rooms, life cycles, nautilus circuit, tennis courts (indoor and outdoor), racquet ball, aerobics rooms, tanning, massage spa and meeting rooms. In addition, there will be cafe services for the locker rooms and a dining room for members only. Conference Facility The conference facility capacity will accommodate 1,000 for sit down banquets. This will be the largest conference facility on Portland's West side at 14,000 square feet. Again, I would like to emphasize the favorable impact this development would have on the City of Tigard and the prestige it will offer Tigard. I look forward to working with you in the future. If I may offer any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, LOCKHART INVESTMENTS Patrick G. Lockhart, CIA • cc: Dr. Gene Davis Curtis Pickering Steve Seeger Jim Van Handel Dennis Walsch , •. • , " "." • Hi -r i{t . t1a • fey t�.�•r. ., r a � • 1„ ..,.. -�.n ... ,�� ...: .vw � �. .._� 0�� 1 y. Ar.) •. r •• ]ffi , ., ... e,.s ..4Y4tlw'nM =.arx �r r. Nava ^.++.Ya,. -,. ur..«n. a .• .w+ +. �1 S t., ! 14J LN.h. r>, N..,..� �..� +...::.a.r wa>.�.. .,s.+,..w w ♦ r+u.. ,. '.. +.r. r... ». r �«.+,. •*.,w....wr posowarnses■nremummommursoma ATTORNEYS JOHN H. BAKER AlA RALPH DOLLIGERt ANDREW E. GOLDSTEIN**t LEWIS B. HAMPTON DARIN D. HONN HARLAN EDWARD JONES* E. ANDREW JORDAN BRUCE IL ORR* ARTHUR L. TARLOW *Admitted Oregon and Washington •*Admitted Nevi York $01 Counsel' LEGAL ASSISTANTS BARBARA S. KELLY AMY SAMMONS LAWRENCE VIVIAN T. LENTZ MMILENELMWASMO PATRICIA L. MORGAN MARY CAROL SCHNELL 1600 SW CEDAR HILLS BLVD. SUITE 102 PORTLAND OR 97215 (503) 641-7171 FAX (503) 641.2991 161 E 8TH SY SurrE 325 16(10t 601 VANct(itiVEkt, WA 0066&0601 (106) 6070610 PAX (106) 60374004 060 THIRD AVENUE irm 171)6011 NEW ititito Nit 10611 (2il) 011-2666 FAX (211) (4146 , • • ' PI.F.ASE REPLY TO: Portland Office RECEIVED PLANNING JAN 3 0 1991 Timothy V. Ramis O'Donnell, Ramis, et al. 1727 NW Hoyt St Portland OR 97209 Re: City of Tigard Case No. SLR 90-0011 (Davis) Our File No. 40117/22061 Dear Tim: This office represents Gene Davis with respect to the Final Order in the above-referenced case, a copy of which is enclosed. Among other things, the Final Order requires the developer to prepare and record Covenants, Conditions and ReStrictions and Property Ownevs' Association Bylaws which afford the City the opportunity to perform maintenance on common property and assess property owners the cost thereof or issue citations for failure to maintain. The Final Order • also directs the formula by which property owners will be assessed for maintenance charges. As you can see on pages 15 and 16 of the Final Order, the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and Bylaws require approval from the City Attorney. Therefore 1 enclose our first draft of proposed Covenants, conditions and Restrictions and BylaWs for your review. You will note at the bottom of page 14 of the Final Order that we have been given only 60 days from the date of the final decision to carry out the condition of recording the Cov'enantS, Conditions and Restrictions and Bylaws. Therefore, I rust that your review will be conducted leaving Us sUfficient time to make any necessary changes and accomplish the recording. Tim Ramis January 29, 1991 . Page 2 Please contact me if you have any questions pertaining to the enclosures. I will look forward to receiving the results of your review in the near future, and I will then prepare originals for your signature. Very truly yours, BOLLIGER, HAMPTON & TARLOW E. ANDREW JORDAN RAJ/SA /2208G -2 Enclosures cc w /enc Keith Liden, City of Tigard Dr. Gene Joel Shaich DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, AND RESTRICTIONS OF ASHBROOK FARMS This Declaration, made this <... g 1991, by Eugene Davis and Vivian M. Davis, ereinafter called the Declarant, Witnesseth: Whereas, Declarant is the owner of the real property described in Article I of this Declaration, and is desirous of subjecting the real property described easements liens and restrictions, covenants, reservations, charges hereinafter set forth, each and all of which is and are for the benefit of said property and for . each owner thereof, and assllit said property, shall inure to tarc�ln��reo�,aandpass with to and bind the and successors in parcel and evin interest and any owner thereof; Now, therefore, Declarant hereby declares that the real property described in and referred to in Article I hereof is, and shall be, held, transferred, sold and conveyed subject to the conditions, restrictions, easements, liens and charges hereinafter set forth. Building Site shall mean any lot, or portion thereof, or lots or a parcel of land of record and in aw or more contiguous to i� single ownership and upon which a dwelling or building may conformance a be erected in c with the requirements of these Covenants. Association shall refer to the Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association. Residential Lots shall refer to those lots on which single - family or duplex residential housing is planned to be built. Common Property shall refer to that property described in Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein, which is intended to be devoted exclusively to open space Use. Properties shall refer to all property described in Exhibit 2. PAGE DECLARATION 01? COVENANTS CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS 1 � DEC 4488 (/PDH/V?/0l/28/ 1 4 •• • "'t•'4.:i • Js ' t •••••,;•" „ „ ,t , • .70t '•• r • ARTICLE I Property Subject to This Declaration The real property which is, and shall be, held and shall be conveyed, transferred and sold subject to the conditions, restrictions, covenants, reservations, easements, liens and charges with respect to the various portions thereof set forth in the various articles of this Declaration is located in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon, and is more particularly described in Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated herein, and is referred to herein as the "Properties". No property other than that described above shall be deemed subject to this Declaration, unless and until specificallY made subject thereto. Declarant has no immediate plan to expand the Properties. The Declarant may, from time to time, without a vote of the Association or approval of the City of Tigard, Oregon, and without limitation as to number of lots or common property, subject additional real property to the conditions, restrictions, covenants, reservations, liens and charges herein set forth by appropriate reference hereto. If additional property is added to this planned community, it shall be subject to this Declaration and its owners shall be members of the Association. The expenses related to the Common Property and other common expenses, and votes in the Association, shall be allocated to the new property in proportion to the formula Set forth in the Association's bylaws. If additional property is made subject to this Declaration after the start of any fiscal year, the, additional property shall be assessed expenses, pro rata, for the year beginning on the date an addendum to this Declaration is recorded making the additional property subject to this Declaration. ARTICLE II General Purpose of Conditions The real property described in Article I hereof is subjected to the covenants; teiltrictloos; conditions, reservations; lions and charges hereby ...declared. to insure the best use and the most .appropriate deveIopmeut and improvement of each building.. Site to protect open spacei-wttitnds. and habitat; • to protect. the owners of building. 8itot against such improper use of surrounding Building Sites as will depreciate the value of their property; to preserve; so far aa practicable; the natural beauty of the proporty,e. to guard tgaint the erection of poorly designed or proportioned structures and any SttUdtbite0 built of improper or unsuitable materials; to obttit hormoniout color . • PAd 2. IACIARATION. tOVEINAk$1 CONDITIONS AND-AUtT.Wit006 44800/01511/0/0I/28/9.1.4 • schemes; to insure the highest and best development of the property; to encourage and secure the erection of attractive homes and buildings with appropriate building location on Building Sites; to prevent haphazard and inharmonious improvement of Building Sites; to secure and maintain proper setbacks from streets, and adequate free spaces between structures; and in general to provide adequately for a high type and quality of improvement on the property, and thereby to enhance the values es of investments made by purchasers of Building Sites. 1 i t7 ty X11'# �,��1.�'i 3 ni.tr {t „pyj, ur 1 ,h�1F34? . ik! ,ti ?r -; � , i >�{.+t•'�' r. Ott �z .� t)»t� {I. i,. Jri�. ARTICLE III Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions A. ,Architectural Gong,. No building shall be erected, placed, altered or substantially repaired on any planned �' + p � until the building plans, premises andlot plan the location r n of such building have been a • conformity and . g approved in writing as to harmony of external design with existing structures in the development, and as to location of the building with respect to topography and finished ground elevation, by an architectural committee selected .� pursuant to the by-laws laws of the Association, or by a representative designated by a majority of the members of such committee. Until the Declarant turns over control of the Association, Declarant shall Z • have all duties and responsibilities of the committee. In the event of death or resignation of any member of the committee, the remaining member or members shall have full authority to appr ove or disapprove such desi g n a n d location, designate representative like ea hori tyIn the event the committee, or its designated representative, fails to approve or disapprove a proposed design and location within days p p tions have been submitte d after plans and d tot�.t such approval royal will n d s ecifica . pp of be required and this Covenant will be deemed to have been fully complied with. Neither the members of such entitled nor re i presentative shall be any p for service ” b performed pursuant to this Covenant, but may obtain reimbursement of their actual expenses. Nuisanc0s. No noxious o L.V or. activity shall be carried on upon: an, of e' y r offensive tied r area. described p Y t o r Commoxi Property or other ... r shall an" � � .. thereon which may be or becomet an. �anno.ance or ythin- be donh,. planned' community, y_ o ntz�sancetothe tent_, shack, _era er barn o basecrie C,• uctures. No trailer, nt ga igata.on of rtother. outbulslYin , o •h , . house" g t� er than guest by �s and servants' a wilding cite covered .. quarters erected on temporarily or pormanentl�. "� � nor .lime ese overran s sha11 at an" t y� hall any structure of a' PAGE 3 DtdrARATtON OP COVtiljtiM CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS 44 t38N%DDH%Vpitil %28%91 - 9 temporary character be used for human habitation. D. Utilitygagmenta. Where no alleys are provided, an easement is hereby reserved over the rear and side five feet of each Building Site for utility installation and maintenance. E. Egncea. No fence, wall, hedge, or mass planting on any Building Site shall be permitted to extend beyond the minimum building setback line established herein except upon approval by the architectural committee as provided in Section B of this Article. F. Minitil_and.EXCaVatiotni Oil drilling, oil. development operation, refining, mining operations of any kind, or quarrying shall not be permitted upon or in any of the Building Sites in the Exhibit 2 property nor shall oil wells, tanks, tunnels, mineral eX0tVatiOnS or shafts be permitted upon or in any of the Building Sites covered by these Covenants. G. RtiagigttY....:10100t0...ASsociatima. There shall be created. by Declarant an association to be known as the Ashbt00%.Vatms; Property Owners Association. The owner(s) Of each Building Site to which these covenants apply . shall become a Member of the Association and shall have tights, entitlements and obligations. as set forth in this Declaration and in the Association's bp-laws, which Shall include formation of an Architectural Co MMittee and the duty to pay aSSessMents for maititenahoa and upkeep. of the Common Property. voting rights of owners and .„...6 maintenance assessment formula shall be governed by the by-laws Of the Association. The Association shall have the tight to assess and lien property purSuant to.ORS 94.704 through 94.728. The Association shall be created by Declarant on or before the firSt conveyance of a lot or Building Site, • H. $UbdiVition...Of_lbtS NO Lot shall be partitioned or Subdivided after intial conveyance without. theexpross written consent of Declarant or the Architectural Committee, and • appropriate governmental authorities. I. DAt0.1i0A.40LLO.01011alito. These Covenants to run • with the Iota and shall be binding on•oll_owtiero..of..:E*hibit• 2 property and oll_peroont.. claiming under them until January 1, 2616; at which time theCovenotitOoholl be automatically extended ..for oucteooive periods of 25 yeoto,unleso by *vote of • seventy-five percent (76%) of the shares inthe'A000ciatioik entitled to tote, it IS ogteed to dissolve these : covenahto_in whole or in pott, These Covehonto..mAy be amended :At any time by obtaining a written consent or affirMabiVe :Vote of seventy-five percent (75%) of theohoteo of the..A000ciotion entitledt0:votel. provided, howevetithOt. no 'Amendment ot disSolition Shall be made to any portion of thete. covenants Witholitt• prior written consent PAGE 4: btliAkAti0OHOV. tOittHANt$i..tONDITIC$48.A06 AgttttiOTIONS • • 44061iitibttiVV/01/16,914.• CO ti of the City of Tigard, Oregon. J. Violation of Covenanta. If an owner of any Exhibit 2 property, or any of them, or their heirs or assigns shall violate or attempt to violate any of the covenants herein, it shall be lawful for any other person or persons owning any of the Properties or the Association in its own name, or the City of Tigard, Oregon, to prosecute any proceedings at law or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such covenant, and either to enjoin such violation or recover damages, dues or other relief for such violation. it ',�'•, "w` K. ,- . .v-n-, . Declarant does not agree to build any improvement, except as may be required by the City of y p P' y Tigard, Oregon, and does not hereby limit Declarant °s rights to add improvements which are not described in this Declaration. L. Turnover of Control. Declarant shall have full control over all votes of the Association until turnover of control to the Assocication. The Association shall assume control of the Association and hold a Turnover Meeting within 120 days after lots representing seventy -five percent (75 %) of the Votes have been conveyed to a party or parties other than Declarant. M. Common Proper.. The Common Property will be owned by the Association or may be dedicated to the City of Tigard, Oregon or other governmental entity. The deed to the Common Property will be conveyed to the Association or dedicated by Declarant on or before the date of the Turnover Meeting. The p shall served and used only as open space excepp t as Property tbepermitted�by the City of Tigard, Oregon and approved by the Declarant or, after turnover, by the Association. N. Association .Powers. The Association Shall have the powers S p ecifi.ed by ORS 94.630, as amended from time to time, unite ss otherwise provided in this Declaration or in the Associa txon ByLaws. 0. B rve Acco t. A reserve account shall be established by Declarant pursuant , ' the P oun ant to ORS 94 aq5 �. hereafter, Association shall be responsible for administering the account pUrSuant to that Statute, P. Maintenance an&Re..p r of- Comthe fail lrtY. The city ,� onmto maa.nta�.ntorireoarrthe Common propeowners or the Association If of Tigard, Oregon : � repair rty. i problem cited after notice to the Association and all. owners, the pr et' .` s not remedied in a reasonable time, the City of Tigard may �. undertake the necessary repair or maintenance and charge the PAGE 5 DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, GONDITYONS AND RESrRIdTIONs 4488H// b 1/VE10i/28%91 -4 • owners or Association for the reasonable costs thereof, and if the charge is not paid in a reasonable time, the City shall have liens against the Exhibit 2 propertyin the amount of the charges. Such liens shall be prorated based upon the number of votes of each owner(s). Any owner paying in excess of his/her prorata share of expenses shall have a right of contribution against other owners paying less than their prorata share, plus costs and reasonable attorneys fees incurred in enforcing such right. Q. CQnleYanCe_Ol_CaMMOR_ErOSeitY. The ASSociation may Sell, convey or subject to a security interest any portion of the Common Property upon an affirmative vote of sixty percent (60%) of the votes of the Association. No such sale, conveyance or security interest shall change the herein restrictions on use of the Common Property. R. WithdLAWAild_EXPWeLtY. The Declarant may withdraw any real property described in Exhibit 2, except Common Property, from this Declaration on or before 10 years from the date of recording of this Declaration; provided, however, that a provision shall be made in the plan of withdrawal to pay expenses for maintenance and upkeep of the Common Property consistent with the formula set forth in the Association's by-laws. S. Ule_a_ELQRattr. As of the date of this Declaration, neither the number of lots or units, nor the allowed uses of Exhibit 2 Property, except the Common Property, have been determined. Exhibit 2 Properties zoned for residential, commercial or other use may be redesignated and subdivided by Declarant prior to sale of lots pursuant to subdiviSion and/or planned community regulationa of the City of Tigard, Oregon. T. caniinlILLIZJILJDOignantE. Invalidation of any one of these Covenants or any part thereof by judgments or court order shall not affect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. U. Attorney Fees. If any provision of this Declaration is breached and suit to enforce the Provision is filed, the prevailing party may obtain reasonable attorney fees at trial or on appeal. PAdk 6# DtetiAR4T1'.00 00. COlftN40t$4 •t0HbiTi00$ Ni) A. -g8TAItt1000. • • • • .• .•448801bbilll."#/01/28/014 . H 4.5 rf. • x. ; r WHEREFORE, Declarants hereby set their hands this day of 19 STATE OF OREGON County of Eugene Davis, Declarant Vivian M. Davis, Declarant ) ss. This instrument was subscribed or acknowledged before me on January 1991 by Eugene Davis and Vivian M. Davis. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON MY Commission Expires: This Declaration is approved by the City Attorney of Tigard, Oregon, this day of 19 . PAd8 CITY ATTORNEY Tigard, Oregon . • DECLAARATtON OF' COVENANTS; • CO1DrTIONS A.ND RESTRICTIONS 4488i /DDH/VF /01128/91 -4. A1■ A•'- �f, .? ��.��' ,o 1:.A )t'° � f1 .w ..•7 'f� ".4r �� BY-LAWS OF ASHBROOK FARMS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION ARTICLE I NAME AND LOCATION The name of the organization is Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association, hereinafter referred to as the "Association". The Association may be incorporated by Declarant or upon a majority vote of the Board of Directors. The principal office of the Association shall be located at 13095 SW Henry, Beaverton, Oregon 97005, but meetings of members and directors may be held at such places within the State of Oregon, County of Washington, as may be designated by the Board of Directors. ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS Section 1. "Association" shall mean and refer to the Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association, its successors and assigns. Section 2. "Properties" shall mean and refer to that Certain real property described in Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Ashbrook Farms dated , 19 , and such additions thereto as may hereafter be brought within the jurisdiction of the Association. Section 3. "Common Area" Shall mean all real property owned by Declarant or the Association for the common use and enjoyment of the Owner and specifically described in Exhibit 1 of the Declaration. Section 4. "Lot" or "Building Site" Shall mean and refer to any Separate lot or parcel of land shown on any recorded sUbdivision plat map of the PropertieS except for • the Common Area: $0otion 5. 0.1eaidential Lot" Shall mean a lot on which is dOn8ttO0t6t1 or planned a 81..ngle.,,.faMily or duplex. • reSidence J $6dtiott 6. "MUlti-FamIly tot" Shall mean a 16t On • • Whidh are .o6httuoted or planned 4potmeht dweilihg$ of mote • • • PAGE 14. -BY-LAW 8 44MibbiliVP/0/0/7014.• than two units per lot. Section 7. "Commercial Lot" shall mean a lot on which is constructed or planned any office, hotel, motel or other commercial use Section 8. "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of the fee simple title to any Lot or Building Site which is a part of the Properties, including contract sellers, but excluding those having such interest merely as security for the performance of an obligation. Section 9. "Declarant" shall mean and refer to Eugene and Vivian M. Davis, and their successors and assigns if such successors or assigns should acquire more than one undeveloped Lot or Building Site from the Declarant for the purpose of development. Section 10. "Declaration" shall mean and refer to the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Ashbrook Farms, a planned community, applicable to the Properties recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Washington County, Oregon for the Properties. Section 11. "Member" shall mean and refer to those persons entitled to Association membership as provided in the Declaration. ARTICLE III MEMBERS Section I. Membership. All Owners of any Properties subject to the Declaration shall be Members of the Association. Section 2. Annual Meetings. The first annual meeting of the Members shall be held within one year from the date of formation of the AsSociation, and the Association shall hold at least one meeting annually thereafter at a time and place determined by the Board of Directors. section 3. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Members may be called at any time by the president of the Board of Directors or by the Board of DirecterS, or upon written requet of the Members who are entitled to vote twenty-five percent (25%) of all of the shares of the ASsociation. PAdk 01440.1$ 448911/ 06111,0/01/2 /014 • • .°"1`'""' ' "'" ‘" Section 4. Notice of Meetings. Written notice of each meeting of the Members shall be given by the secretary or person authorized to call the meeting by mailing a copy of such notice, postage prepaid, at least 10 days before such meeting to each Member entitled to vote, addressed to the Member's address last appearing on the books of the Association, or supplied by such Member to the Association for the purpose of notice. Such notice shall specify the place, day and hour of the meeting, and, in the case of a special meeting, the purpose of the meeting. Section 5. Quorum. The presence at the meeting of Members or proxies entitled to cast twenty percent (20%) of the votes shall constitute a quorum for any action except as otherwise provided in the Articles of Incorporation (if the Association is incorporated), the Declaration, or these By-Laws. If, however, such quorum shall not be present or represented at any meeting, the Members entitled to vote shall have power to adjourn the meeting from time to time, without notice other than announcement at the meeting, until a quorum as aforesaid shall be present or be represented. Section 6. Proxies. At all meetings of Members, each Member may vote in person or by proxy. All proxies shall be in writing and filed with the Secretary. Every proxy shall be revocable and shall automatically cease upon conveyance by the Member of his/her Lot. Section 7. voting. The owner or owners of a Residential Lot shall have one vote per lot. The owner or owners of an undeveloped Commercial Lot or Multi-Family Lot shall have one vote per 7,000 square feet in such lot rounded to the closest 7,000 square foot increment but in no case less than one vote. The owner or owners of a developed Commercial Lot or Multi-Family Lot shall have one vote per 2,000 Square feet of apartment, office or other commercial space, except that the owner or owners of a developed Commercial Lot developed with hotel or motel Space shall have one vote per five (5) units of hotel or motel space. For purposes of this section, "developed" shall mean the earlier of substantial completion or occupancy, whether full or partial, of a Commercial, hotel or motel structure. Where two or more owners own interests in a single lot or building site, the votes allocable to such lot or building Site shall be voted as such owners may determine among themselves; provided, however, that not more than the votes alloCated to each lot or building site shall be voted by sUch colledtive ownerS. PAGE. 8, bY=,,LAW8'• . •44090/OpH/VP/01/8/414...... F�''� ��.. t��:,i rat fY i7t;r �t��t �i. ��7+�?'{t ", ��;U�tM i;f,u�.. »� t. ��. }t ;+��f �� °�jif rf ..•��;�. For v.it�:.ii �r J, �' ; �� t.. S.�kiM�. ARTICLE IV BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section 1. Number. After turnover by Declarant, as • Association provided in the Declaration, the aff a5rsd�.rectorsswha must be shall be managed by a board of five (5) Members of the Association or an officer or director of a Member of the Association. Section 2. Term of Office. At the first annual meeting, the Members shall elect two directors for a term of one year and three directors for a term of two years and three directors for a term of three years. At each annual meeting thereafter the Members shall elect two or three directors for a term of two years. Section 3. Removal. Any director may be removed from the Board, with or without cause, by a majority vote of the Association. In the event of death , resignat ion or removal of a director, his or her s►e Board c shall be selected by the remaining Members of the and shall serve for the unexpired term of his or her predecessor. Section 4. Compensation. No director shall receive compensation for any service rendered to the Association. However, any director may be reimbursed for actual expenses incurred in the performance of duties. Y Section 5. Action Taken Without a Meeting. The directors shall have the right to take any action in the absence of a meeting which the. could take at a meeting by obtaining the written approval of all the writ directors. Any action so approved . Shall have the same effect as though taken at a meeting of the directors. ARTICLE V ELECTION OF DIRECTORS Section 1. . Electio the Board of Election � ' � n to ... Directors . .. Y' . , may �. ir, res ectstoheachction b. secret written hallo she 1 be - Y ... + ., .. ._. ... .. the .Members or their proxx.es ma castr P y to exercise under The pered ons of these-By-Laos. vacant', as many votes as •they •are enti s receiving► the • largest nui �; son ., P the rove riot ' tuber of votes shall be eleoted Cumulative voting is .ot permitted. WAGE 4 •14Y4Aws 44890lbbH /VF /O l/`28/91 =4 LLI ARTICLE VI MEETINGS OF DIRECTORS Section 1. Regular Meetings. '7); lar meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held quarterly without notice, at such place and hour as may be fixed from time to time by resolution of the Board. The Board may dispense with regular meetings. Upon majority vote of a quorum. Section 2. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held when called by the president of the Association, or by any two directors, after not less than three (3) days° written notice to each director, mailed or delivered to the director's last known address. Section 3. Emergency Meetings. Emergency meetings may be held without notice. The reason(s) for the emergency shall be stated in the minutes of the meeting. Emergency meetings of the Board may be conducted by telephone communications. Section 4. Quorum. The number of directors constituting a quorum for the transaction of business shall be three (3). Every act or decision by a majority of the directors present at a duly held meeting at which a quorum is present shall be regarded as the act of the Board. ARTICLE VII POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Sedition 1. Powers. The Board of Directors shall havo power to (a) Adopt and publish .. rules and regulations governing the use Of the common. Area, facilities, and other commonly' Used property, and the personal conduct Of the Members and their' • • - guests thereon, and to establish penalties for the infraction • • . • thereof; t`''\\I • kNO, (b) Suspend the votitig tightt.ohd tight. toLHIIe/Of the common area of 110Mbet during any period in which :Silic11:0ember. shall be in default in the.. Payment of any assessment levied by the Aotodlotioo, Such rights may also be suspended after • notice and hearing, for a period not to exceed 66 days for infraction of Publialled tulea and tegulttons;' • (d) t*ateta0 all powers autie and uthdtity vested in or delegated to the 0.660 and not reserved to the•Atiembethip. , PAE 5 , .0t4:08' 4.400/00HAW01461014' ': ��P -. ■ 1q -� rk LEW> ^ L� ST R 6 d s r� _.�....�....,i- • 4 by other provisions of these By-Laws, the Articles of Incorporation (if the Association is incorporated) or the Declaration; (d) Declare the office of a member of the Board of Directors to be vacant in the event such member shall be absent from three (3) consecutive regular meetings of the Board of Directors; (e) Employ a manager, independent contractors, or such employees as they deem necessary, and to prescribe their compensation and duties; and Section 2. Duties. It shall be the duty of the Board of Directors to: (a) Cause to be kept a complete record of all the acts and affairS of the Association and to present a statement thereof to the Members at the annual meeting of the Members, or at any special meeting when such statement is requested in writing by owners holding twenty-five percent (25%) of the votes of the Association; (b) Supervise all officers, agents and employees of the Association, and see that their duties are properly performed; (c) Prepare an annual budget of anticipated common area expenses. (d) Fix the amount of the annual assessment for all common expenses related to the Common Area and other commonly used property against each Lot at least thirty (30) days in advance of each annual assessment period; (e) Send written notice of each assessment to every Owner subject thereto at least thirty (30) days in advance of each annual assessment period; and (f) FOtedld.be_the lien ag aihSt any„.poperty fOt•Whith assessments are not paid. within .u)ta after du0,66t0..,:• or btihil. an. aCtiOn. at law ogaiht. 'the Owoot petsobally obligated to pay the $aitie • . (g) taauoi. or cause an appropriate officer to issue, upon demand by any person, a certificate -aettihqt.otth.whethet or not ) .... any assessment has ,)7000. paid toaohable.thatge may. be made by the Board for the iaatlande of:attoh dettifjdatea, If •6 certificate States an a$SOSSMent hop bebri paid, such certificate shall be dohdiuolve eVidende of such payment; PAO: t, 8.V,,,,LAW.• • • 448914./bb0/vr-o1i28Y91.,4. (h) Procure and maintain adequate liability and hazard insurance on property owned by the Association or for which the Association is responsible; (i) Cause all officers or employees having fiscal responsibilities to be bonded, as it may deem appropriate; (j) Cause the Common Area to be maintained;----__ tO1/4 cav (K) Cause the exterior of dwellings and other P structures to be maintained; (1) Maintain insurance as required pursuant to ORS 94.675 or other applicable statutes; (m) Prepare and distribute the annual financial statements; (n) Enforce compliance with these By-Laws and the Declaration; (o) File the necessary tax returns for the Association. ARTICLE VIII OFFICERS AND THEIR DUTIES Section 1 Enumeration of Offices. The officers of the Association shall be a president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer, who shall at all times be Members of the Board of Directors, and such other officers as the Board may from time to time by resolution create. SeCtion 2 Election of Officers. The election of officers shall take place at the first meeting of the Board of Diredtors following each annual meeting of the Members. Section 3. Term. The officers of the Association shall be elected annually by the Board and each shall hold office for one (1) year unleS8 he shall sooner resign, or shall be removed, or otherwise disqualified to serve. Section 4. Special Appoittm.ents. The Board may elect such other officers as the affairs of the Association may require, each of whom Shall ho)d Offide for Sildh period, have such authority, and perform such duties as the Board may, from time to time, determihe, Section S. Resignation and kemoval. Any officer may be removed from office with or without cause by the Board. Any 14 • BY-LAWS • . • 44000/DONYV#104819I-4 LL1 officer may resign at any time by giving written notice to the Board, the president or the secretary. Such resignation shall take effect on the date of receipt of such notice or at any later time specified therein, and unless otherwise specified therein, the acceptance of such resignation shall not be necessary to make it effective. Section 6. Vacancies. A vacancy in any office may be filled by appointment by the Board. The officer appointed to such vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the term of the officer replaced. Section 7. Multiple Offices. The offices of secretary and treasurer may be held by the same person. No person shall simultaneously hold more than one of the other offices except in the case of special offices created pursuant to Section 4 of this Article. Section 8. Duties. The duties of the officers are as follows: (a) The president shall preside at all meetings of the Association and Board of Directors; shall see that orders and resolutions of the Association and Board are carried out; shall sign all leases, mortgages, deeds and other written instruments and shall co-sign all checks and promissory notes. (b) The vice-president shall act in the place and stead of the president in the event of absence, inability or refusal to act, and shall exercise and discharge such other duties as may be required by the Board. (c) The secretary shall record the votes and keep the minutes of all meetings and proceedings of the Board and of the Members; serve notice of meetings of the Board and of the Members; keep appropriate current records showing the Members and director 8 of the Association together with their addresses, and shall perform such other duties as required by the Board. (d) The treasurer shall receive and deposit in appropriate bank accounts all monies of the Association and Shall disburse such funds as directed by resolution of the Board of Director8; sign all checks and promissory notes of the A58odiation; keeP PtoPer books of account; cause an annual audit of the Association books to be made by a public accountant at the completion of each fi8dal year; and prepare the annual budget and a statement of income and expenditures to be presented to the membership at its regular annual meeting, and deliver a copy to each of the Members. PAGE . .0,•• tit440$ •448.00561i/V#/bi/25/.91,,4:• „, e • it yi ", ' • I" ARTICLE IX COMMITTEES The Board of Directors shall appoint an Architectural Control Committee, as described in the Declaration, or may designate itself as the Architectural Control Committee. In addition, the Board of Directors shall appoint other committees as deemed appropriate in carrying out its purpose. ARTICLE X BOOKS AND RECORDS The books, records and papers of the Association shall at all times, during reasonable business hours, be subject to inspection by any Member. The Declaration, the Articles of Incorporation (if the Association is incorporated) and the By-Laws of the Association shall be available for inspection by any Member at the principal office of the Association, where copies may be purchased at cost. ARTICLE XI ASSESSMENTS As provided in the Declaration, each Member is obligated to pay to the Association annual and special assessments which shall be secured by a continuing lien upon the property against which the assessment is made. The amount a particular Member is required to pay shall be calculated by dividing the Member's total number of votes (as determined by the formula set forth in Article III, Section 7) by the total number of votes held by all Members at the time of assessment. The Member's assessment shall equal Such percentage multiplied by the total assessment for common expen8e8 assessed to all Members. ARTICLE XII MEMBERS OBLIGATION All Members of the ASsociation Shall obtain liability insurance doverage, having limits of not les8 than $5000000 per oCcarrence. The insurance coverage obtained and maintained by the Board of DireCtorS may be brought into contribUtion with insurance boUght by Owners or their mortgagees. PAGE 9. -0Y-iiA4 8' • .44.890/0b0/VVO1/*41-4, • ARTICLE XIII AMENDMENTS Section 1. Prior to turnover of control, these Bylaws may be amended by Declarant. After turnover of control, these By-Laws may be amended, at a regular or special meeting of the Members, by a vote of a majority of a quorum of Members present in person or by proxy or by unanimous vote of the Board of Directors. Amendments shall not be effective until approval in writing by the City of Tigard, Oregon. Section 2- In the case of any conflict between the Articles of Incorporation (if the Association is incorporated) and these By-Laws, the Articles shall control; and in the case of any conflict between the Declaration and these By-Laws, the Declaration shall control. ARTICLE XIV TURNOVER Turnover of control over the Association Shall occur as provided in the Declaration. Until the turnover meting, Declarant shall exercise full control over the Association. Notice of the turnover meeting shall be provided by Declarant consistent with Article III, Section 4 of these By-Laws. ARTICLE XV MISCELLANEOUS The fiscal year of the Association shall begin on the first day of January and end on the 31st day of December of # h that year, except tha the first .. iscal year shall begin on the date of organization. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, wet bolo Declarants of Ashbrook Farms,. a plooried• community, have hotoufito sot our hands thil PACE 44601.t/660/VVi0116/0'. 6 -4 !.' day of and 19 adopt ,. t the foregoing as the Bylaws of Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association pursuant to ORS 94.625. STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County o._..r._ This instrument was acknowledged before me on January 1991 by and NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: These By -Laws are approved by the City Attorney of Tigard, Oregon, this day of y 19 CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s): SLR 90-0011 2. Name of Owner: Bmgeng Davis Name of Applicant: Same Address City Egan:TiEite-0 Zip 97005___ 4. Address of Property: North of. Hi hwa 217 west of SW 84th Avenue Tax Map and Lot No(s).: 151 35AC tax lots 101 2800 480gj and 151 qmpic tax lots 1200 1300 1400 & 1500. 5. Request_forSeltiveIands review aggsgmal_tamgml_pemmi4Ave Landson leaview—SXML-1-86—which=a0.114=AWat=s&LII&E:grag& RESWAYREMISIMM1Y determined to be within JO.ML-121—YEIC eeated is amplayal to adtallt_thEAVIA dedicated as rivate o. n s • ace to include the existin lake and 40 foot erimeter as well as 40 feet alon Of Ash Creek. ZONE; C-P and R-4.5 Commercial professional and Residential 4.5 mnitALVIall 6. Action: Approval as requested X Approval with conditions Denial the southern border 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, mailed to: The applicant and owner(s) X. Owners of record within the required distance The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision:, THE DE9ISION SHALL BE AN APPEAL XS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, obtained from the Planning Department, P.O. Box 23391# Tigard, Oregon 97223. and FINAL ON JanuarE 18, 1991 UNLESS and statement of Conditions can be Tigard city Hall, 13125 SW Hall, 9. Ap.”=_ALL Any party to the deCision may appeal this dedidion in accordance with 18.32.290(B) and Seotion 18.32.370 which ptovides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and dent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and muSt be accompanied by the appeal fee (t.315.00) and transcript costs (varies up to a Maximum of $00.00). The deadline for filing of an apOal in 3:30 p.m. January 18. 1991 l�. Ouelltionak If yon have any questions, please call the Cit'Y of Tigard Planning Department, 69-4111. ' • . 11— 111 /\1i d 5 A FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON cy‘f BEFORE THE LAND USE BEARINGS OFFICER Regarding an application by Gene Davis for Sensitive ) FINAL ORDER CD Lands Review and modification of conditions of approval ) of SL 1-86 for land adjoining Ash Creek in the C-P and ) SLR 90-0011 f R-4.5 zones in the City of Tigard, Oregon (Davis) I. SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a Sensitive Lands Review to modify conditions of approval of Sensitive Lands Review SL 1-86 (1) to allow cattle grazing in an area that SL 1-86 required to be open space, (2) to reduce the area that SL 1-86 required to be preserved as open space, (3) to defer formation of a property owners association SL 1-86 required to maintain the open space, and (4) to place additional fill within the 100-year flood plain of Ash Creek. In July, 1987, after four hearings, hearings officer Beth Mason approved SL 1-86. That decision authorized the applicant to fill portions of the property. In return, it required the applicant to excavate two ponds, to preserve the majority of the site as open space, to replant vegetation in areas affected by development, to form a property owners association to manage the open space, to obtain necessary state and federal permits and local certifications regarding the impact of filling on the flood plain, and to discontinue use of the open space for grazing, among other things. The applicant did not appeal SL 1-86. The applicant undertook most of the filling and some of the impact mitigation measures required by SL 1-86, but did not form a property owners association, did not discontinue use of the property for grazing, and did not comply with state and federal permits in all regards. The City of Tigard began enforcement proceedings in 1989 to require the applicant to comply with the terms of SL 1-86. During the enforcement process, the applicant proposed changes to the conditions of SL 1-864 This application was filed to consider those changes. Farther enforcement by the City and the Oregon Division of State Lands has been deferred pending action on this application. Hearings officer Larry Epstein held public hearings regarding the application on November 27 and December 20, 1989. The applicant and three witnesses testified in favor. Thirteen witnesses testified largely in opposition to the proposed changes. City staff and ODSL recommended approval of some of the requested changes and denial of others. A list of exhibits is included as an appendix to this final order. LOCATION: North of Highway 217 west of 89th Avenue. WCTM 1S1 35AC, Tax Lots 101, 2800, and 4800, and 151 35AD, Tax Lots 1200, 1300, 1400 and 1500 APPLICANT: Oene and Vivian Davis, 13095 SW Henry Street, I3eaverton, Oregon PROPERTY OWNER: Same APPLICABLE LAW: Tigard Community Development Code Chapters 18,84 (Sensitive Lands); Comprehensive plan policies 2.1.10 3,2.1, 3.22, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.5.3, and 4.2.1 STAFF RECOMIVIENDATION: Conditional approval in part and denial in part EXAMINER'S DECISION: Conditional approval in part and denial in part Page Hearings Officer decision SLR 96.00.1.1 (bavis) • •• • • • . „. . ..„.... the applicant to preserve the open space as he represented he planned to do. In the 1990 proceedings, the applicant argued that hearings officer Beth Mason did not provide any rationale for requiring preservation of the open space to the extent required; however, it is patently clear that all Ms. Mason did was impose a condition that required preservation of the area the applicant said he would preserve. No further rationale would have been necessary. b. In 1987, it was assumed that e Ash Creek most the (elevation 162 feet plain mean sea level (tnsl)) extended over area required to be preserved as open space. See the 1987 plan in Exhibit 27. In early 1990, , the applicant had a survey property prepared. survey land the flood topographic serve of the ro area. That serve revealed that does not extend as far as assumed in 1987, about 2 acres of assumed to be in the flood plain was not in the flood plain, including a 1.12 acre triangle illustrated on Exhibit 22 and the adjoining roughly 3/4; cre to the east. The applicant now proposes to exclude that land from the required open space. c. The applicant also proposes to exclude from the required open space an undetermined area at the southeast corner of 11 1300 south of Ash Creek. The applicant proposes to use that area for a single family dwelling in the future. d. The applicant proposes to reduce the open space area around the pond at the northeast corner of the site. City staff recommend the applicant be required to dedicate 40 feet around the pond for open space purperes. The applicant points out he does not own 40 feet around all sides of the pond. Whe1e he does own that much land, he argued that 40 feet is an excessive amount of land to dedicate. Furthermore, he argued that it would prevent him from building a home on the southeast corner of TL 1300 and would prevent him front transporting cattle from the area south of the and to the area north of the pond. He argued that the area west of the pond could be regraded so cattle can walk west of the pond without having their wastes pollute the pond. He further argued the dedication proposed by City staff would force a planned road farther north and would leave less developable area for TL 1103. City staff pointed out the road in question is speculative; it has not been approved official road map: The applicant proposed a 25 -foot setback between the as propo a pond and the proposed road. 4. The applicant also ro oses modification of condition of approval of the decision in SL 1 -86 to allow cattle grazing on land dedicated for open space until that land is developed for urban uses. particular, the applicant proposes togn a cattle on the 2± acres between the two ponds and on an undetermined 1`n articul . , mined aim west of the south pond. To reach the area the applicant proposes to walk cattle from property to the two ponds, the , north ('TL 1300 and 1103) along edge _sh a the west ed a of the north pond and Creek via a bridge illustrated in Exhibit 23. To reach the area west of the south pond, the applicant proposes to build a bridge to cross the outfall from the south pond to Ash Creek. b. The applicant presented expert testimony that, although ma ho of the area would uali as a jurisdictional wetland under federal rules, the area the north pond is not a wetland, and grazing will not adversely wetlands . fenced, side rails are installed adjoining affect we water bodies, provided the pond and creek are fen ced, sta the e bridge over the creek and outf g over the . y , and gr g rotate around different areas of the site. The testimony was that grazing maintains vegetation and provides a better Page 3 - !Y'earrngs Officer decision SLR 90 -0011 (Dais) • • b. The total wetland area identified by the applicant's consultant is 9.3 acres including adjoining property to the north. Of the 7.29 acres of wetland on the applicant's property, about 5 acres will be retained or improved c The filling will cause the flood plain downstream of the site to rise .06 feet (less than 3/4 inch). Upstream of the site, proposed channel excavation was expected to lower the flood plain an undetermined amount. & The banks of Ash Creek were to be graded to a maximum slope of 1 foot vertical for 3 feet horizontal. G. Plan designation and zoning : The west portion of the site is designated and zoned C-P (Commercial-Professional). The east portion of the site is designated and zoned Low Density Residential and R-4.5 (Residential). H. Transportation The site has access to a number of different public streets. The west side of the site has access to SW95th Avenue and from there to SW Oak Street The northeast corner of the site has access to SW Oak Street The southeast portion of the site has access to SW 89th Avenue. Cattle could be trucked from the southeast portion of the site to the northeast portion of the site without crossing the north pond area, although it would be inconvenient I. Surrounding land uses : There are single family detached dwellings east and north of the property. Northwest of the property are commercial and office uses. South of the property is SR 217. m. APPLICABLE APPROVAL, CRITERIA & DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A, Chapter 18.84 (Sensitive Lands Review). 1 Chapter 18.84 contains the regulations for land subject to sensitive lands review. Sensitive lands review is intended to implement flood plain protection measures and to protect rivers, streams, and creeks by minimizing erosion, promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, and preserving scenic quality and recreational potential, Section 18,84.015(C) requires Hearings Officer approval of lancHorm alterationg in the 100-year flood plain. 2 Section 18.84,026 requires use of designs, materials, and practices that minimize flood damage and the potential for damage, 3. Section 18.84.040 provides lanclform alterations subject to sensitive lands review must comply with the following criteria: it Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the flood plain storage function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundar)q b. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year flood plain shall be Pdge 5 - liearings Officer. decision SLR 90 -0011 (Dear) 4 fi 5 shall require: a. The strew flow capacity of the zero -foot floodway bye maintained; m b. Engineered drawings and/or documentation showing that there will be no detrimental upstream or downstream effect in the flood plain area, and that the te criteria set forth in the sensitive lands section of the code have been t; c. •. planted, on the commercial or industrial. land abutting residential buffer, and which d u tely screens the development from view by the adjoining residential land d which is of sufficient width to be noise attenuating, and d. The dedication of open land area for greenway purposes adjoining the flood plain including portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a�a loan pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the adopted pedestrian/bicycle path. y plan. 5. Policy 3.4.1 provides the City shall designate significant wetlands as areas of significant environmental concern. The Metzger - Progress Community Plan, adopted by Washington County ,e area was annexed by Tigard, identified the west part o wasrop on Cou otentiall si .cant wildlife habitat. Areas along Ash Creek and of the property identified as significant wetlands by the Oregon Division of State Lands. Ash Brook are 6. Policy 3.4.2 provides the City shall: . the riparian a. .Protect fish and wildlife habitat along stream corridors by managing p requiring that areas of standing trees and habitat and controlling erosion, and by r+eq natural vegetation along natural. drainage courses and waterways be maintained to the maximum extent possible... 7. Policy 3.5.3 provides: The City has designated the 100 -year plain Creek, i tributaries, o ea • flood lair► of Fanno Creek its �` g' � phone of th ce and the Tualatin l�ivei� as gx�,e Y are allowed within or adjacent to the nwa , which will y and/or development system. Where landfill � 100 -year flood plain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the flood plain. 8 Policy 4.2.1 provides that all development within the Tigard Urban Planning Area shall comply with applicable federal, state and regional water quality standards. IV. HEARING, TESTIMONY, AND NPO & AGENCY COMMENTS A. Rearing, The examiner received testimony at the public hearing about this application on that testimony is included herein as %Tovenaber 27 and December 20, 1990 A A ► record of t 13 (raped Proceedings); and Exhibit C (Written Exhibyt A (Parties of Record); lExhibi Pry Testimony). These exhibits are filed at the Tigard City Hall. a of their testimony. 14. Witnesses aid a sitestimony. 1 Keith Lid. en testified on behalf of the City .. of Tigard Plmnin e P aentr He Page 7 hearings �O decision ecision SLR 90.0011 Mao's) S.•yM� d. 44 J.� � �.. i 'j �,M�1 /4�1f ��,� 't warranted because the applicant did not have a use for the property for which filling is necessary. Several also suggested that if additional filling is to be done, • have to start the Sensitive Lands Review process over, then the applicant should ha includin a delineation o f wetlands on the property based on the federal rules including etl an Epler adopted in 1989. ado p Mr. E p and Mr. doom n gre introduced photographs showing flooding along Ash Creek as evidence that further filling will exacerbate flooding. Mr. Hannevig and Mr. and Mrs. Beck presented similar testimony about Ash Brook. Mr. Redfern argued that the area of proposed filling has steep, unstable side slopes that show evidence of undercutting. Further filling there would exacerbate the problem. Given the lack of any additional hydraulic specifications or analysis, further filling is not justified. E Several witnesses argued in favor of requiring a property owners association at this time so that future purchasers of the property would know of the limits on use of the open space. C. NPO di Agency Comments 1. The Tigard Planning Department recommends that the open space on the site be modified to exclude the area within 230 feet of SW 89th Avenue and that the applicant modified recommend that the applicant be be allowed to conduct cattle grazing in that area. They �� pp orm the property • • • . required owners association t® ensure proper maintenance of the wured to form purchasers and to facilitate open space by applicant prospective end party further filling of the property in the the a l�cant an enfoxcernent by the City. They recommend . g • They further propose absence of a use for the property or additional hydraulic study. Th y .. consistent with these recommendations. modifications to the conditions of approval 2. The Tigard Engineering Department finds that the applicant has complied with the conditions of approval of SL 1 -86, except conditions requiring fencing to keep cattle out of open space areas and requiring establishment of the open space. They conclude f•able information does not show that the ponds applicant improve drainage o r t h e area. They conclude there is no justification � er filling of the property. conclude that downstream drainage problems do not warrant the proposed changes to filling or open space. They recommend formation of a property owners i eq. means to ensure. maintenance of the open space. association or uivalent to make it clear whether recommend modifying the condition prohibiting grazing livestock can cross the open space. 2 The Tigard Operations Division opined that the use of the wetland area for cattle grazing may be incompatible with USA and other regulations. 3. The S State Highway Division, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Department, and ep Metzger Water District have no objections to the proposed changes. Division of State Lands recommends that open e site be • t the o n space ®n the The Oregon Di _ . ..., ,. that the applicant feet of SW 89th Avenue and modified to exclude the area within 230 that area. See map accompanying titbit 6. be allowed to conduct cattle grazing ,... � .. ns of approval from SL 1-86. Otherwise they support maintenance of the conditions ppi' ion of Fish and Wildlife oppose grazing on the property except The p 5. a Oregon Division . They o e °ersuasiV�ely that the whole purpose. .... � 89th venue. within 230 feet of SW 89 Y o existing argue habitat by controlling of the mitigation plan is to enhance and p grazing. Page 9 - Hearings Officer deel.dah SLR 00 -00.11 ( aWi) . i•_ - - -- - . :.- ...__ � � { : � • . ` � � � ' r * s ::,;,.•.,' ,, + a .� c ti -..i t t _ rt . r - i i: Y .i ma . z t i'.v . !' ' - :° ... -":'5 ?.. - 2 1 a ., t " }} ..* - * ,r '.- a „ :.. "�, . ._ s'. t • < ; -. ._A ryl a r K.,s s w L. } y _ , -z _ .• mo.. _:N.. .• . . rr+4_ _y - ; . � �s P- t i mppG ``BLI .STR ■ r. ? f <s . (1) Conditions upstream and downstream of the site may have changed since 1987, leading to a change in the assumptions under which he 1987 hydraulic analysis was prepared. For instance, if downstream conditions have worsened due to erosion and sedimentation, or if upstream conditions have increased the flow of water across that site, then those changes should be considered when determining the effect of additional filling on the site The applicant decried the need for an updated hydraulic study, but failed to demons'aute conditions up-- and downstream from the site are sufficiently similar to obviate the need for such an update. (2) City Code section 18.84.03013 appears to allow the City to waive an updated hydraulic study only for 21/2 years after approval of the Sensitive Lands Review, or until about January, 1990 in this case, assuming conditions have not changed. Because another year has passed, the City does not have the authority to waive an updated hydraulic study. (3) The applicant did not bear the burden of proof that the proposed filling would fulfill Chapter 18.84. Relying on the 1987 hydraulic analysis as proposed by the applicant, the filling will increase the 100 year flood plain by .06 feet. Although this is a small change, 18.84.040A(3) prohibits any increase in water surface elevation of the 100 year flood. Therefore, the additional filling should not be permitted. (4) Based on Sheet 7 of 9 of Exhibit 30, the zero-foor rise floodway of Ash Creek is more than 26 feet wide in the area in question. The applicant did not show that filling to =ate a 26-foot wide channel would avoid filling in the zero-foot rise floodway. Clearly, filling in the zero-foot rise floodway is prohibited. It may be that the City erred in authorizing filling to create a 26-foot wide channel given restrictions on filling in the zero-foot rise floodway. In any event, the hearings officer is not convinced that the proposed filling should be authorized without additional analysis. B. Proposed changes to conditions of SL 1-86. 1. There is nothing in the City Code to prohibit changes in the conditions of approval of SL 1-86. On the Contrary, such actions are expressly provided for. See 18.32.250F(4), which provides a refit for changes in conditions of approval shall be treated as a new administrative action. Although the decision in SL 1-86 may reflect what was perceived to be an agreement among the parties to that case, there is nothing in the decision that prohibits its modification by the City. Other parties to SL 1-86 haVe a right to participate in the 1990 application review and can appeal this decision if they believe it violates applicable law, SL 1-86 does not prevent the applicant from requesting changes to that decision. 2. The decision is SL 1-86 required preservation of open space the applicant proposed to keep as open space. The applicant proposed that that area be open space, because he believed the area in question was in the flood plain. Once he learned that all of the site south of Ash Creek is not in the flood plain, it was reasonable (from an economic standpoint) for him to try to regain use of that land. However, the hearings officer concludes the applicant proposes to regain use of more land than is appropriate given the location of the base flood elevation on the °as built° contour map in Exhibits 21 and 22 and the applicable standards of the Code and Comprehensive Plan. Page 11 - hearings Officer decision SLR 90-0011 (13aVis) filling authorized by SL 1.86. Ash Creek clearly is a significant wetland area and contains a foodway. Their continued existence and protection can be achieved only by their dedication as open space. A 40 -foot buffer around the creek is necessary to protect it from adverse effects due to sedimentation, erosion, and surface water quality impacts. The buffer around the north pond will vary as discussed more below. (2) The applicant objects to dedicating land 40 feet north of north pond as a buffer, because of its impact on the location of a future street and on the developable area of TL 1300 and 1103. The future road should have no bearing on the decision, because the City has not considered or approved it. Its location is purely speculative assuming it is built at all. Furthermore, the hearings officer is not convinced that the impact of the 40 -foot buffer on adjoining developable land is significant, given the applicant planned to provide a 25 -foot wide buffer anyway, there is a substantial developable area that remains north and east of the buffer, and no use is proposed for the area to the north that would be precluded by the dedication of the 40 -foot buffer. On the other hand, given the north pond is developed in an upland area that is not part of a wetland, and the farther north one goes, the farther away the wetland is, the hearings officer concludes a 40 -foot buffer i excessive. A 25 -foot buffer measured north from the top of the pond bank, re afi►terl with trees consistent with the ODSL permit, will protect the pond from significant degradation. (3) Rased on Exhibits 21 and 22, there is less than 40 feet of width between the top of the north pond banks and the east and west edges of the site adjoining The distance varies from about 12 feet to about 35 feet. The applicant should dedicate as open space all of the land east and west of th end within the site, for the reasons listed in B2a(2) above. (4) The applicant argues there is a developable area on the southeast corner of TL 1300 where he wants to build a house. The record does show there is suf for such a purpose there. development land Moreover, such develo ment would appear likely to remove substantial vegetation that now helps stabilize the land south flowing into the creek. The �d offer officer the ad licant should contine to dedicate 4Q.fott w e b f .... south of Ash Creek on TL 1300 for the-Same' reasons as in finding B2a(2) above. ')phis effectively eliminates any potent al,for a building site a the southeast. cozier' OfTL00. (5) Based on the foregoing, the applicant should dedicate as oPen space all of the 1.83 acres illustrated in brown on Exhibit 22, except for a 15 -foot wide strip along the north edge of that area. applicant proposes grazing on the open space and proposes to have cattle cross ��,.. . tiro ca the open s ace to reach land to the. west. The record contains conflicting testimony on the ptential adverse and beneficial impacts of grazing, a The hearings officer is swayed by the weight of the evidence that grazing is . quality, . use of the significantly adverse to the protection of surface waterii ' 'cantl adverse to . Grazing significantly adverse ,.. . to pollute the water, potential for animal wastes p the protection of the wetlands on the site and to the maximization of wildlife habitat ro p . ::. Therefore, .� ..,lodes the from awn on any officer concludes protection and diversification. hib prohibited off' a hearings of the area. identified as open applicant should pro grating .. ng Page 13 Hearings Officer decision SLR 90 -0011 eDa1is, r ~�3.r.: 1 ^ 1r r�Pq� 1�5 • t'`Nt('�r3 i V„ .1 1,x.1 �}`:�� reasonable time, consistent with 18.32.250F(3). In this case, a reasonable time is deemed to be 60 days after the date the decision becomes final, unless a further delay is warranted for reasons beyond the applicant's control, such as due to weather. VI. Si' n VISIT BY HEARINGS OFFICER The hearings officer visited the site without the company of others. VII. CONCLUSION AND DECISION The hearings officer concludes that the proposed landform alteration and change's conditions of approval of SL. 1.86 comply in part with the applicable approval criteria for a sensitive lands review permit. In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby: 1. Approves modification of the open space to exclude the area within 230 feet west of SW 89th Avenue and at least 40 feet north of the centerline of Ash Brook and 40 feet east of the south pond; grazing sh ll e; provided, befofb 2. Authorizes cattle on the area excluded from the open ac such grazing occurs, the area within which grazing is permitted be securely fenced to prevent cattle from entering into the open space; 3. Prohibits cattle grazing in or movement through the areas designated as open space p edge of TL 1300 and as necessary to reach the except cattle can move along. the west grazable land south of Ash Creek from north of the north pond, subject to conditions; 4. Affirms the requirement of SL 1 -86 that a Pip Y. ert owners association be formed as therein; provided, a deed covenant or equitable servitude can be used to P acccom described the same purposes as the property owners association if approved by the City Attorney; and 5. Denies the request for additional fill in Ash Creek. implementing ^ ions authorized herein, the applicant shall comply with Before the modifications the following conditions of approval: 1. Condition of approval 5 of the decision in SL 1 -86 is amended as follows: , . y and shall designate as open space in 5. The applicant cause to have surveyed an : , gn p 5P ant shall c y on Exhibit including land perpetuity that land shown in pink int 6 of this decision, Ancl�u within 40 feet of the south pond and Ash Brook and land within 25 feet north of the top of the north pond bank in the County Recorder The applicant shall execute a. p s and restrictions a property owners association, covenants, equitable servitude or equivalent approved the . which ediants, i.on tion , apportions the maintenance for said area airmon the properties, included in application s ollow: sin a fai' ' ly residences among one shapre each, duplexes sit n . office space one r 2000 square feet of gross floor �sPP one shire per lot, offic p � • per area, motel - one share per five units, Page 15 Hearings Officer decision SLR 90 -0011 (bai'is) {�.. 1..4y.•� 1.:..4'.5.., X 1 . a, .. .. ... , :':.. a •,t e�, x. .. �.;t. �i..e t', t., EXHIBITS IN THE RECORD The following exhibits were introduced into the record: 1. Planning department staff report and notice 2. Hearings officer decision in the matter of SL 1 -86/V 87 -02 (Exhibit A of staff report) and exhibits cited therein 3. Supplemental decision in the matter of SL 1 -86/V 87 -02 (Exhibit B of staff report) 4. Map illustrating plan approved in SL 1 895 (Exhibit C of staff report) 5. Zoning map (Exhibit D of staff report) 6, Memo dated October 25, 1990 from Joel Shaich (ODSL) (Exhibit E of staff report) 7 . One page narrative by the applicant department with attachments 8. November 25 letter from CPO #4 to City planning 9. November 25, 1990 postcard from Thomas tracy to Epstein 10. November 26 letter from Davis to l /M Cliff Epler 11. 19 items in a packet of materials dated November 26 from Nancy Tracy 12. November 27,1990 letter from Jeff Gottfried (Fans of Eanno Creek) to Epstein 13. November 27, 1990 letter from Nancy Tracy 14. December 17,1990 memorandum to file from Keith Liden re: USA comments 15. 8 items in a packet of materials dated December 17 from Nancy Tracy* 16. December 19, 1990 letter from Gene Herb (ODFW) to Epstein 17. December 20, 1990 letter from Nancy Tracy to Epstein 18. December 20, 1990 letter from Roger Redfern to Epstein 19. Proposed grading plan for Ash Creek dated January, 1987 1990 20. Proposed open space and storm drainage map from WB Wells dated dated February 2, 21. As built contour map for Ash grading WB Wells ary 1,1990 sly Creek lmg by 22. As built contour map for Ash Creek grading with color coding dated November 21, 1990 23. 6 photographs on 2 pink pages 24. 14 unmounted photographs and 2 oversized pages of photographs by Bloomgren 25 16 unmounted photographs 26. 25 mounted photographs and by corresponding 8t/2 x 11 acetate overlays illustrating 1987 27. 3 oversized drawings an p g plan, proposed changes by applicant, and proposed changes by City staff to applicant (in frame) 28. Oversized photograph of site by a y PP 1987 for filling of Ash Creek (o (oversized, July 19 1987) 29 j Construction drawings fo 30. Drawings for filling of Ash Creek and Master (oversized, January 4 The applicant objected to introduction of this packet because ... the information it contained is irrelevant. The hearings officer accepts the packet into the record, because it contains some information that is marginally relevant: P age 17` Hearings Officer decision � �� SLR 90.0011 (Davis) W x i u t �sw1 �t •,': yr, ;.'i Pr �� .:. -§ �r a'tr:.vllrr.. i r,k} �.�c. � � �.. y' 7 � ''� � � j rr �:i 70! x..,,:,:ft r��. ilt •.v atsy.t �b:l >�!r t },y.F; ,..!+ +.�. rJ P ,t.itn'v,'ii+�tt + 1r + *, :1 =� ?f:.7 t,.. anmeasxmornmeressmirormariresswarsomissamme LE/ANDREW JORDAN April 20, 1993 Joel Shaich Division of State Lands 775 Summer Street Salem OR 97310 . ' Deed Restriction for Dr. Davis Property Our File No. 40117/22061 ]Dear Joel: Dick B ersdorff has pointed out an error in the survey submitted to you along with the form of deed restriction for wetland protection. This error is • Wells and Associates and should be ready for being corrected by W.B. �•� week. When the new survey is ready, copies will be resubmission early next sent directly to you and Dick so that we might conclude this matter as quickly as possible. Please call me if you have any questions. RECEIVED PLANNING APR 21199 Very truly yours, n�'t aL,r.Y- r. %r•'� its'. s'.. 1600 SW Cedar Hills Blvd Suite 100 Portland OR 97225 PAX (503) 641-2991 ' (503) 641 -7171 TARLOW, JORDAN & SCHRADER E. ANDREW JORDAN. cc Dr: Eugene Davis Dick ck Bewersdolff A totai Aliiikigehtelit br`gardd adoii From. Dr. Gene „�cty- fr i i z 6547297 P. We Tt;vt S. -R-9 tc N)-02 ®t.,..o/' gre4A. L-A.Aths) o vA s , u l� (C-91 4vL 741 A Post -it's beand iax trahsmittal memo 70 10 of pages • J 7b 0 ih., L II J From f:a:t # , Ger 7 -46 --fir Co, Dept, ,. //a. m . �o �y p(Oig4i'�1(7f� A.. 0 C`En.) 6. Fax# 626- 3i62_Faxa / �y�{i4u� �Cw, .ua��,ly�p yi,�..i�; uxY� , �c�i'. k ''•��r. � ^�• 07`11/91 10:55 1D503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TRANSACTION # 12061 CONNECTION TEL 6263767 CONNECTION ID 1 13;54 /1 07/1 START TIME 60 USAGE TIME 1 PAGES 1ij001 x' -fa 64-1 tc.e From Dr. Gene Davis 4f314.')A-7- roc .164...r. 9 ea ° (C -C-"—° r) 0 2 f, f"- ri IrLe. ozy .01,4111, .0% A A 5 *"1" 1C716'' 4'411 ,A4Sta Ai1A\ A -60 e-4 z j z 0 ra E 0 IL a cn 0 d't."7"ci .‘144e04.:( • • 061,4>ii- LEGIEILITYSTRIP IZSZ! s,. tigsr '6131 rEttspr'dr.tea JUL 10 '91 10t59 MCKEEVER/MORRISPINC. P.2/2 b. The articles of incorporation, bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall prohibit amendment, modification or dissolution unless authorized by the City of Tigard. c. The articles of incorporation, bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall authorize the City of 'Tigard to issue citations for the failure of the owners to maintain or repair the open space designated pursuant to this condition. If the problem cited is not remedied in a reasonable time, then the covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall authorize the City of Tigard to undertake the necessary repair or maintenance, bill the batmen or association for the cost theatof, and, if the bill is not paid in a reasonable time, file liens against the owners of the property. d The articles of incorporation, bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney. 2. Livestock are permitted only outside of the open space identified in condition 1 above, except that cattle can move along the west edge of TL. 1800 and as necessary to reach the grazable land south of Ash Creek from the area north of the north pond consistent herewith. The width of this cattle path shall not exceed five feet t a,a 021thir .;`' • As.; 4“*.06, the applicant shall iNitlikmorefoloofi, keep cattle from encroaching on the vegetation on the West bank of the north pond, vattiotta13 :19444ge.NAttt ,,,quall,s41CP41kto,ProYeitit-46attleW Erbilt fallitiging,tmeolOwhtn they Cross the wage, intensively revegetate the area between the cattle path and the north pond, gtade the cattle path so its elevation is lest than the top of the bank of the north pond measured lateral to the path, and install berms Where topography is such that sediment or waste from the cattle path could flow by (gravity to Ash Creek. Before tan icit_a_eigetAimpl,ttkoAPPUca*estaciPis*Initg PlC for those improvements $0,7thei,plattitigmeatitcand. if necessary; the Division of State Lands and Corps of Engineers) for review and approval. reademaystamagyee isa h this area til the 'lan ' ffirector • other a. •1 - ci " a •. Ail' w 1 titg e di eCi •str I #J I 4 th tug_onjo c./t,l_,Lhiaila. Until this condition is fulfilled, the applicant will have to convey cattle by truck from the grazable area north Of the north pond to the grazable area south of Ash Creek. Other agricultural activities in other locations on the property shall be subject to approval of the Division of State Lands and the Planning Coirector, 3. Additional filling is prohibited on the property unless authorized by a subsequent sensitive lands review. 4. Except as modified herein, the conditions of approval c L 1-86 continue to apply. 5. Corididong 1, 2, and 3 and the remaining conditions of SL 146 shall be futlfilled Within 60 days of the date this decision becomes final, unless the Planning Director authorizes additional tittle due to reatons beyond the applicant's contra Pdat Id - &coin& Officer decision rrenc9ti4ll'yrtaigo:7- 4 Larry Epstein, PC Attorney At Law Larry Epstein, member Oregon State Bar and American Institute of Certified Planners E. Andrew Jordan Bolliger, Hampton, & Tarlow 1600 SW Cedar Hills Blvd, Ste 102 Portland, OR 97225 May 10, 1991 RECEIVED NANNING MAY 13199' ° 722 SW Second Avenue, Suite 400 Portland, Oregon 97204 (503) 223.4855 • FAX (503) 228-7365 SUBJECT: City of Tigard/Ashbrook Farms; City of Tigard case no. SL 1 -86 and SLR 90-11 (Davis); Your file no. 40117/22061 Dar Andy: I am writing in response to your request for a clarification dated April 15. I conclude that the ambiguity in condition of approval no 5 of the decision in SR1 -86 should be construed in the manner you suggested. That is, as modified by the decision in SLR 90- 11, the condition was intended to require that the applicant designate as open space land within 40 f eet of the south pond where that 40 -foot area is within 230 feet of SE 89th Avenue, but not elsewhere around the south pond. I draw this conclusion based on the following, CONCLUSION AND DECISION no pp modification of the open 1 approves the Ynodi space the centerline of Ash Brook and 40 feet west ofo� � 89th Avenue and at least 40 feet north the south pond. This 'CONCLUSION AND DECISION clarifies the intent of revised condition no. 5. on page 12 of the decision Finding �,B.2.b o e area be decision i City . ODSL staff recommendations that the open space a reduced to exclude the area within 230 feet of 89th Avenue. The finding provides: [ ]s long as the area excluded from the open space is at least 40 feet from the limit of the south pond and Ash Brook, the hearings officer accepts the recommendations of those agencies to reduce the open space, The h......, eanngs t south pond and Ash officer notes the area excluded from the .buffer from the Creek [ski, the � at, to maintain a 40 -foot ens ace will not . be a uniform 230 feet from 89th Avenue, At the south end of that area, the area excluded from will vlud the open space will be less than 230 feet from 89th Street, based on Exhibit 22, I intended that the modification to condition no 5 reflect this discussion, The purpose of that condition was to ensure that the area excluded from open en space did not encroach within of the South p . ` p c u+Ythin 40 feet and That condition was not intended to require a g suggests the decision that uniform 40-foot � uffer around all of the south pond, There is nothing in gg� being required around y im ose such a re uiremen 40-foot would have had to explain i t the w�ole pond, Tc ° , p . ,_. .. t, why such a condition was warranted; no such explanation is provided I hope this resolves the doubt raised by revised condition nog 5 acid regret that its ambiguity as drafted left you at odds with City staff regarding its interpretation, w;. 1 li'� „1�' i � .•fit !14 �f 722 SW Second Avenue, Suite 400 Portland, Oregon 97204 (503) 223 -4855 + FAX (503) 228 -7365 April 17, 1991 E. Andrew Jordan Bolliger, Hampton, & Tarlow 1600 SW Cedar Hills Blvd, Ste 102 Portland, OR 97225 SUBJECT: City of Tigard/Ashbrook Farms; City of Tigard case no SL 1 -86 and SLR 90-11 (Dav s); Your file no. 40117/22061 Dear Andy: request for a clartfxcation dated April 15. I will issue a written . I received your requ p b � {� ont of town, for the clarification by May 15. Sorry I cannot respond sooner, ut I will + r next week and a half, and my schedule is full to the brine in the meantime and upon my return. Ti d s Officer A'rPORNEYS JOHN IL BAKER, AIA RALPH BOLLIGERt ANDREW 1. GOLDSTEIN**t LEWIS IL HAMPTON JOHN IL HOLIAWAY, JR. HARLAN EDWARD JONES* E. ANDREW JORDAN BRUCE H. ORR* AKEDUR L. TARLOW eAciniitted Oregon and Washington s•Actiirilded INICW York fotX enunki LEGAL ASSISTANTS nAlinAnA 5, KELLY MARLENE L. KERNER JUDY SAMMONS LAWRENCE yrs/AN T LENTZ PATRICIA L MORGAN MARY CAROL SCE-WELL 1600 SW CEDAR HILLS BILYD, Writ 102 p�RthAND OR 97225 (S03) 441-1111, FAX (503) 6414991 5irit PO BOX 891 VANtailtrEiti WA 954544891 (too 694.06,ij FAR (206) 60-45J4 00 TIHRD AVENUE IFixedit NEW y�K3 NY iotii (212) 815-idod MX (212) 544-1485 PLEASE REPLY TO: Portland Office April 15, 1991 Larry Epstein Attorney at Law 722 SW 2nd Ave 41400 Portland OR 97204 R City of Tigard/Ashbrook Farms Case No. SL1-86, SLR90-0011 (Davis) Our File No. 40117/22061 Dear Larry: As you know, this office represents Dr. Gene Davis with respect to the above matter. Since your decision of January 2, 1991, a controversy has arisen between the applicant and the staff of the City regarding a provision in your deciSion. It is the purpose of this letter to request a clarification of your decision to resolve the controversy. This request is based on a letter of April 9, 1991 (enclosed) from Ken Elliott suggesting that we submit this question to you for clarification. Specifically, the controversy arises as a result of condition of Approval No. 5 of the decision in SL1 -86. YOU amended that condition, on Page 15 of your decision, to read a5 follows: 50 The applicant shall cause to have surveyed opeft. Sad Jo ptpetuity_that. land shown in pink. on txhi,bit 6 of' thi. dedi$iohl. • - - 40 feet of the and an wJEnIo. 25 feet north Of the top Of the north pond :•bAhk, (]mphasis Added) tatd on the Above. 14h60..age4 the btaft has .concluded• that this condition quiteS .40 loot buffet.Atouod. of the 000th•Viohd: • ($0e enclosed letter dated match.' 25, It ±5 Out position .that. • , .4 ,4; =.■*, Larry Epstein April 15, 1991 Page 2 this interpretation is incorrect for the following reasons: 1. The language of Condition No 5 as amended does not say that there is a 40 foot buffer around the entire perimeter of the south pond. Rather it says that the open space land includes land shown in pink on Exhibit 6 and includes land within 40 feet of the south pond and Ash Brook. Exhibit 6 is enclosed and does not show a buffer around the entire perimeter. Rather, it shows a "40 foot buffer" at the south eastern corner of the pond where Ash Brook enters the pond. That "40 foot buffer" notation on Exhibit 6 is consistent with Condition No 5 which says that the buffer includes land within 40 feet of the south pond and Ash Brook. That condition was adopted by you because the applicant had requested that 230 feet from Southwest 89th Avenue be excluded from open space. You granted that request but you were concerned that, at the south end of the pond, 230 feet from Southwest 89th would encroach upon the pond and upon Ash Brook. To rectify that matter, you ordered exclusion of the 230 feet from open space but required that there be at least a 40 foot buffer near the south end of the pond and around Ash Brook. That is what the condition says, that is what Exhibit 6 says, and it is my personal recollection that the purpose of the 40 foot buffer was only to protect the south corner of the pond and Ash Brook. 2 Obviously, there is no reason to have a 40 foot buffer on the north and northwest side of the south pond because that is all open Therefore, the staff's conclusion that thereT isae40 foot buffer All the way around south pond iS clearly erron eons d Condition No. 5 should be read in conjunction with Paragraph 1 of Article VII, CONCLUSION AND DECISION, which reads as follows: 1 Approves Modification of the open space to exclude the area within 230 feet West of Southwest 89th Avenue and at least 40 feet north of the center line of Ash Brook and do feet east of the south Pond. • Larry Epstein April 15, 1991 Page 3 That paragraph of your decision clearly identifies the purpose of Condition No. 5. That decision states that all the land 230 feet west of 89th Avenue is excluded from open space and requires a buffer 40 feet north of the center line of Ash Brook and 40 feet east of the south pond. That buffer area, based on your decision, is confined to the southeast corner of the south pond. There is nothing in your conclusion and decision nor is there anything in the conditions of SL1-86„ upon which your decision was based, which indicates or requires a 40 foot buffer around the entire perimeter of the south pond. As indicated in your decision, and as indicated on Exhibit 6 which is cited in Condition No. 5, the 40 foot buffer is confined to that southeastern corner. 4. We find nothing in the original decision by Beth Mason (SL1-86, V87-02) nor in your decision, other than the ambiguously written Condition No. 5, which indicates that it was the intention of either Ms. Mason or yourself to require a 40 foot buffer on any portion of the pond other than the southeast corner where Ash Brook enters the pond. Based on the above, we request a clarification from the Hearing's Officer with respect to the existence of the 40 foot buffer presently being required by the staff. Very truly yours, BOLLIGER, HAMPTON & TARLOW E. AND JORDAN 8:40/68/2268G.2 Enclosures dd: Dr. Gene Davis Elliott. Bill Oalet4ki . . dotty Offer ji6'�,� `4 �`y7 rX�drf �. 14pf•� ��t ��?;.it'•41., .t ^� ,ix 14f d *�rii ^.. i. �. !tijll��w'�; eF �t'a f., . r ?t! ..r;" r ATTORNEYS JOHN H. BAKER, MA RALPH IIOLLIGERt ANDREW E. GOLDSTEINb °t LEWIS B. HAMPTON JOHN IL HOLLOWAY, JR. HARLAN EDWARD JONES* E. ANDREW JORDAN BRUCE II. ORR* ARTHUR L. TARLOW *Admitted Oregon and Washington s +Admitted New York tot Counsel LEGAL ASSISTANTS (BARBARA S. KELLY MARLENE L. KERNER JUDY SAMMONS LAWRENCE VIVIAN T. LENTZ PATRICIA L MORGAN MARY CAROL SCHNELL 1600 SW CEDAR 'H02LS BLVD. PORTLAND Olt 97225' (003) 6419111 FAX (503) 64i 2991 101E13THST,SUITE325 P0IIOX COI ., VA1NC011VERi,WA 95666.0891 (206), 694 -9633 FAX (206) 693.4534 909 Tl IRD AVENUE 17TH FLOOR' NEW YORK, NY 1002 (212) 826.2000 ,N FAX (2)44 -� s . . April 23, 1991 Jerry Offer City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard OR 97223 Re: Ashbrook Farms (Gene Davis) Case Nos. SL 1 -86, SLR 90-0011 Our File No 40117/220 6 PLEASE REPLY TO: Portland Office RECEIVED PLANNING APR 2 5 1991 Dear Jerry: Enclosed is a copy of a letter I received from your Ken Elliott, regarding alteration of the City Attorney, d alt ► ing conditions of approval of SLR 90 -0011. regarding responsibility for maintenance costs on the common area and a description of maintenance required. Pursuant to Ken's le tter, please forward me the necessary application form, f any required to seek ek a change in the conditions regarding liability for common area maintenance. In addition, Ken has suggested that Davis aid the City negotiate a description of the maintenance required in the It seems to me that such the above decision. negotiation is best begun by the City preparing a maintenance requred in the above description of ma i . of Engineers' decisions including the DSL and Corps we will . description permit Once your •on deemed necessary. We arrive at a + conclusive contact you for any negotiation p . in a v�ould hope to arc i ,- ectavecrurchasers of short period of time so that prosp p. the property can be apprised of the maintenance required. Please contact me if u question pertaining if o have any q y to the above. ver AMPTDt TARLOW E. ANDREW 41,6RON EAJ /vF /h3000 -r1 Enclosure Ui JEFF H. BACHRACH CHARLES E. CORRIGAN* STEPHEN F. CREW CHARLES M. GREEFF WILLIAM A. MONAHAN NANCY B. MURRAY MARK P. O'DONNELL DENNIS M. PATERSON III Timmy V. RAMIS SHEILA C. RIDGWAY* WILLIAM J. STALNAKER *Also Admitted to Practice in State of Washington O'L NEIL, RAMS, CREW & C ATTORNEYS AT LAW BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Pordand, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222-4402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE March 25, 1991 E. Andrew Jordan, Esq. Bollinger, Hampton & Tarlow 1600 S.W. Cedar Hills Boulevard Portland, Oregon 97225 Re: City of Tigard/Ashbrook Farms Case Nos. SL 1-86, SLR 90-0011 (Davis) Dear Andy: IGAN CLACKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE 181 N. Grant, Suite 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266-1149 JAMES M. COLEMAN KENNETH M. ELLIOTT GARY M. GEORGEFF* ROBERT J. McGAUGYIEY* Special Counsel You have requested that the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Ashbrook Farms apply only to the commercial units and not to both the commercial units and the residential units. While the city at this time does not object to this change, we have advised the city that it cannot proceed to modify the conditions of approval of SLR 90-0011 without complying with the formal application process. While we regret the further delay this involves for your client, the Tigard City Code does not proVide for an abbreviated process. In addition, you have asked us to provide a maximum amount that the Declarant or the Association will be required to pay in any year to maintain the open space in the Ashbrook project. The city is open to negotiating the description of the maintenance required, but it is not willing to provide a maintenance cost ceiling in the Decl6ration. further KmElbjci • Let me khow. if you would like to discuss these stue cc: 'Terry Offer nbtni\90024-4vordaniti Sinderely yours, 0 CREW & coRRIGAN . lliott 44, APR-2 —9 I MON 13 O R E C es 0 ZS na at na .9 at at April 22, 1991 Larry Epstein, EN° 722 SW Second Avenue, No. 400 Portland, Oregon 97204 Re: Citrot Tigard/Ashbrook Fens • 4 Case No. SL 1-860 SLR 90-0011 (Davis) Dear Larry: OrlOK- 0 Skviirt- Wa have receiy6d a copy of Andy aordan's etter to you dated April 15, 1991, egarding the size of the buf er arottd the south pond. After r Jawing the letter, the City' S 1.ime4D r.r Bill Baierski, and I rec sidered the orders and reviewed the issue with Joel Shaich of the Division of State Lands. AS you know, neither Bill nor I was present or inVolved in the proceedihgs on this oasa before you However, after reviewing the orders and its exhibits with Joel SohaiCh, who was present at the hearings, we believe Mr. Jordan's interpretation as to the size of the buffer around the south pond ies accurate, although the language in condition of Approval No 5 is ambiguous. W hope that this letter clarifies the City's position _ . , ..._ ,. with respect to the size of the btffer arodnd the south pond. We Would appreciate your revieW of thig, iseue if at all possible prioe to May 6 1091, in order to expedite this matter. Very truly yours, OttY.:6ffer Plannihg DepartMent 1 Nom ao 1s „,„.0.4■4*.i• JEFF H. BACHRACH CHARLES L CORRIGAN* STEPHEN P. CREW CHAMPS M. GREEFF WILLIAM A, MONAFIAN NANCY B. MURRAY MARK F. O'DONNELL DENNIS M. PATERSON III TIMOTHY V. RAMIS VERA C RIIXIWAY• WILLIAM J. STAMMER 1.001•11.1■111.11.1 0Alto Admitted to Practice ' IA Stare of Washington, DATE: TO FAX #: Phone 0: FROM: O'DONNELL, RAMIS, CREW re CORRIGAN. ATTORNEYS AT LAW BAII•OW Ili WRIGHT BUILDING 172 N.W. Hoyt $treet Portiandt Ore 800 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222-4402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE nlignagatT-commzET April 22, 1991 CLIENT NO.: 90024-4 Jerry Offer City of Tigard Planning Department 684-7297 Nancy B. Murray &DONNELL, RAM/S0 CREW & CORRIGAN 1127 N.W. Hoyt Street Portlandl, OR 97209 FAX 0 (503) 43u2944 CLACKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE 181 N. Grant. suite 202 Ctnby, Oreprt 97013 (503) 266-1140 JAMFS M. COLEMAN ICENNETH M. ELLIOTT GARY M. CEORGEFP ROBERT S. McGAUGHEY* Special Counsei COMMENTS: Attached is letter yoU trilby want to send to Lay Epstxin on your letterhead. PAGES TO FOLLOW, EXCLOD/NG COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT REatilE All OF THE PACES, PLEAgE CALL Tiit UNDERSIGNED AT (503) 222-4402 ImktbIA,TELY. THANK 'YOU. Stab t aoyoi J. Sefe t A AtStOPMVsP-i•, • • frosAsolt,4,PIA 3'41, „ „.,—. , e sc. etc Ny$ affrr the date the decision becomes final, unless a further delay is arranted tr rrallons beyond the applicants control, such as due to weather. VI. SITE VISIT BY HEARINGS OFFICER The hearings officer visited the site without the company of others. VII. CONCLUSION AND DECISION The hearings officer concludes that the proposed landform alteration and change t in conditions of approval of SL 1-86 comply in part with the applicable approval criteria for a sensitive lands review permit. In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby: 1. Approves modification of the open space to exclude the area within 230 feet west of SW 89th Avenue and at least 40 feet north of the centerline of Ash Brook and 40 feet east of the south pond; 2. Authorizes cattle grazing on the area excluded from the open space; provided, before such grazing occurs, the area within which grazing is permitted shall be securely fenced to prevent cattle from entering into the open space; 3. Prohibits cattle grazing in or movement through the areas designated as open space \ except cattle can move along the west edge of TL 1300 and as necessary to reach the grazable land south of Ash Creek from north of the north pond, subject to conditions; 4. Affirms the requirement of SL 1-86 that a property owners association be formed as described therein; provided, a deed covenant or equitable servitude can be used to accomplish the same purposes as the property owners association if approved by the City Attorney; and 5. Denies the request for additional fill in Ash Creek. Before implementing the modifications authorized herein, the applicant shall comply with the following conditions of approval: 1, Condition of 'approval 5 of the decision in SL 1-86 is amended as follows: kti 5, Th e applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall designate is open space in , „...,„ ,... ,,,,,, t„...,,' perpetuity that land shown in pink on Exhibit 6 of this decision, including land 1-- ,... . ,,:.-,. Within 40 feet of the South pond and Ash Brook and land Within 25 feet north of the , ,- ,....— top of The nurth pond bank. CO a, The applkarit shall execute and file in the office of the County Recorder C9 covenants, CtniditiOlig, and restriVions and a property owners association, Ill equitable servitude or equivalent Approved by the City Attorney which ...11 apportions the maintenance cos tS for said area among the properties included in thiS application as follows: single family residences - one share each, duplexes - On share per lot, office space - One shat t per 2000 square feet of gross floor area; motel , one share per five unitg, Pdge „ ()Peet deel.i.loh SLR 90,6611 tbdtM - • ^ • • . • 4, ■,'Ve, 4 44 ,p1r • , • •-• • • • NELL, RAMIS, CREW & JEFF H. 13ACHR.ACH CHARLESE. CORRIGAN* STEPHEN F. CREW CHARLESM. GREEFF WILLIAM A. MONAHAN NANCYB. MURRAY MARK P. O'DONNELL DENNIS M. PATERSON III (A TIMOTHY V. RAMIS V- SHEILA C. RIDGWAY* WILLIAMJ. STALNAKER A1TORNEYSAT LAW BALLOW& WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 2224402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 CLACKAIVIArOUNTYOFFICE 181 N. Grant, Suite 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266-1149 JAMES M. COLEMAN KENNETHM. ELLIOTT GARY M. GEORGEFF* ROBERT J. McGAUGHEY* Spacial Counsel Dear Ms. Tracy: The Planning Department of the City of Tigard has asked me to provide you with further information regarding standing as a supplement to Mr. Liden's letter of January 4, 1991. Specifically, in your January 28, 1991, letter you asked 0. . . why such challenges were part of the framework of any hearings process held in the City of Tigard . • I am sure you are aware, the City has historically attempted to keep the procedural complexities inherent in land use regulation to a minimum. Unfortunately, when it comes to the law of standing, the City is without authority to override the state law. The legiSlatUre and the state courts control the law of standing and the City of Tigard is obliged to follow it. Even if we wished to Completely eliminate it from our procedUres, we could not. One of the actibns whch the City has taken to redOdeprOdedUral tapt.i. to appoint i hearings officer knowledgeable n land. use procedures Who can Atbib in creating the proper record to astute' that the rules are complied. Wit'h4 I can tell fto4 your letter that • you unaraind that . mt. Epstein takes this responsibility Seriously. Z. appreciate your observation that Mr. Epstein 14a0 in charge of the hearing and tot the attorney for any of the parties. go lOhq at the state oohtihudt to have.. 'a law. of standing, parties to land uto.cAteti whether they ate.tptetehted,..1t)y lawyttt or not, may invoke the issue and challenge the ability ok,....othett to testify at the .rh.e,atihq, rottuhattiy tot ail Ot itSt;10: has been tiAta lett frequently in redent years 8iktoeh years ago, when I titbt beoatio.ihVolVed land use litigation .thallehqtt :.to • ttandihq were raised in virtuily every contested Cage, For apptokitiately fiVe ytatti the flood of standing O'DONNELL, RAMIS, CREW RRIGAN Ms. Nancy Tracy February 18, 1991 Page 2 substantially reduced because the courts have lowered the evidentiary showing necessary to establish standing. For those of us who have lived through the prior era, this is a blessing. From your letter it sounds as if you can appreciate why I say that. While standing challenges are now increasingly infrequent, when they occur they are fraught with opportunities for confusion and frustration. I hope that this brief explanation will help put the matter in perspective I also hope that participants in the hearing will come to understand the service that the City is providing by putting these matters within the jurisdiction of a competent hearings officer who can assist in creating the proper record to enable participation by all who are qualified under the law. Very truly yours, Timothy V. Ramis TVR/lf tvr\tigarcKtracy.al cc: Te ard City CounCil r. Pat Reilly, AdMinistrator Mr. Ed Murphy, Community Development Lawrence Lee Epstein, Esq. MY— 0-91. WED 19 LIMM ORESIC M032432944 O'DONNJLLP RAMIS, CREW & CORRIGAN JEFF H. BACHRACH CHARTYS E CORRIGAN* STEPHEN F. CREW C14ARLPS M. GREEFF W1LUAM A. MONAHAN NANCY IL MURRAY MARX P. 0113011NETZ DENNIS I4 PATERSON ill TIMOTHY V. RAMIS SHEILA C. RIDGWAY* MICHAEL C. ROBINSON" WHIM J STALNAKER ime.0 4atario To 'RAM'S NTAIld Of WAtIONOrOl4 "MAO AAMTMID TO PANT= Of Mm Of WISMSIN ATTORNEYS AT LAW EATIOW & WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oman 97209 IELEPHONE: (803) 222-4402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 PIXASE REPLY TO PORTLAND onla nagiltan. LTMESKIMTMEQQ.VELBEZT DATE: May 8 1991 CLIENT NO 90024-4 TO Jerry Offer City of Tigard Planning Department FAX 0: 684"7%97 Phone #; rgOM: Nancy B. Murray 0,DONNELL, PtAMIS CREW & CORRIGAN 1/27 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 FAX 0 (503) 243-2944 giVREIsi COMMENTS: P.. 01 CLACKAMAS COW'!TY OFFICE 101 N. Grant, Salta 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266.1149 .1■•■•••■■■••■ JAMES M. COLEMAN KENNETH M. Rayon GARY M. GEOROPIP. ROBERT 3. McCATIGHEY* Special Counael PAGES TO FOLLOW, EXCLUDING COVER SHEET. It YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL THE UNDERSIGNED AT (503) 222-4402 IMMEDIATELY. THANX YOU SIGNED r. r' ;V! ,f , ril:t j a }r!::F�L,..,:S.,i r�1:l .. pr;�). /.. n�C.)il� -.,. f•.Y ;f.... ,'�r;`4..y _ O'DONNELL, I MIS CREW CO :•'� GAN sY/ JEFF H. BACHRACH CHAMPS E. CORRIGAN(' STEPHEN 1. CREW CHARLES M, Gt EFFR' WIWL,IAM A, MONA,IIAN NANCY B, MURRAY MARK IP, OD►NNF1L DENNIS M, PATERSON III TIMOTHY V; RAMIS SHEILA C. yUDGWAY' MICHAEL C, ROWNSONAe WILLIAM J', S AINAIZER AITORNL'Y5 NT LAW BA LOW a WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W, Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONEt (503) 322-4402 FAX: (503) 243.2944 PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE May 7, 1991 CAM COUNTY OFFICE 161 N, Grant, Suite 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266.1149 APOS M. c t MAN BENNETH M. ELLIOTT GARY M. GEORd3EFF0 ROBERT J, McGAUGI4EY° Special Counsel E. Andrew Jordan, Seq. Bolinger, Hampton Tart' 1600 S.W. Cedar Hills Boulevard Portland, Oregon 97125 Re: City of Tigard/Ashbr iok Farms Case Nast. St 1 -B6, SLR 9O -O011 (Davis) We that you have requested from the City a understand areas in t of the 'mainenanoe required for the common n aro .• March 12, x:991 r �.ette�' description o .� We refer yob '� � ° describing the required ,,, aka ®vo oaptt�r�a��3 matter, to You in which we proposed la &g� a ��,a+�g you revise n that letter, suggested that y . . maintenance. of the revised drat Article e 5 o, paragraph P � Tlx on pad art Declaration to read a s follows except t as modified to refer to the Division of State Lands Perirnit No. 4570 • P. MAIDISMOLOSLAD 14 Declarant, or the eA:er aci a tion � � , twhen t6eiodo shall t�ave the vo� ex and duty. t a maintain the omrion PrOPrty in ao oar daht filth all a pplioabie state and federal laws and re uirm rita, inolu O h 1 .n.tat.On those in the city ._Q: Tigard Order Ni r 1�tay its, 1997, and dated Jan�i'�, e ate and ,any ��'y.. _2w �;991r a ah [t. rzny.. orpa• .� of ®Ol ndme�tn t�aexet�o � a�ld in hands jo cgov+ari o State Remcva l ` a 1l armit No. 46101 an �� nd ��.� a, nehdments t e E tc and to eesess..i 1 � nS if oo to aro hot paid in a re ddha,le t . 2. Once Doolaran � � i� mptriho, e v ed ta the 0 � 'i�u vO�t P>caert "ih accO tdan by aty��T�g a�� a � r� hr4d h y aonetjod n of appt -ova) §tit and y m . 3 I 8 �Ykxry,i. M "try— •--9 1. WbED 1 9,:: es 6 CRE e4 C es C3 24 25at at O'DONNELL, RA/41S, CREW & COR LOAN E. Andrew Jordan, Esg1 May 7, 1991 Page 2 Arty Corps of Engineers /Oregon Division, of Stet ly Lands Removal and Fill Permit No. 4570, the 1Deolirant, or the Association when formed, shall taintain thr Common Property to provide open spa4e and wetland habitat and serve flood plain required by the Orders and lain pur�►c�eee as Permit described above. Vegetation shall be pi =}rated maintained and replaced as necessary to provid6 buffers between the wetland habitat and commercial development, Streets and Any g the ,i�reete�ck grazing areas. An damage to t� Common Property, including without limitation any wetland habitat, Shall be promptly re a 3.red . Improvements such as berms, brid..-, es, 1 f enczeG, paths and vegetation shall be g mai ntainOd to prevent mto and to maintain the Common property, including without limitation its wetland areas. 3. lnaart here the current paragraph P after deleting the first sentence. please let us know if you would like to discuss thi6 . proposed language. kivigitiojd cc: Mrn r Otter M 41 /4ot iii\ocfduf.4 sincerely yours, p 1 ONCN tL7 CIS, CREW & CORRIGAN I. o v , Cert h I Elliott ;r9bPf}Sr N '1 January 15, Mayor Gerald Edwards Tigard City Council 13125 S.W, Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR Dear Mayor Edwards and Council members, I am here to ask for clarification on City policy on Sen- sitive Land Reviews. The SLR in question was SLR - 9o-oo11, Davis. held on Nov. 27 and Dec. 20. I and many others who came to testify at this hearing were astonished to have challenged our right to give testimony on an issue that involved public waters of the state of Oregon. In addition most of those involved had been in attendance and given testimony at the Ititial hearing on this mitigation in 1987. I want to make clear that this request is in no way a cri- ticism of the Hearings Officer, Larry Epstein, whose effort to manage the hearing in an even-handed manner was commendable. It is City policy in regard to sensitive lad S reviews which confounds Understanding and needs clarification, Residents of Tigata are ,itold that the City of Tiara has ho :staff biologist, hydtoiogist or tpeol*lio' and must depetW..upon.litoessionals.in. the field to prov140-utl-- dotstadihg and reooittliendatiohso Yet this It What happened - a biologist wiih, the 'United •tatet. Fish And Wildlife, who it 41.06 a Vigtita resident, challenged AS to his right to testify. The head of the Wetlands Conservancy wa tt .ohalletgedi a tegionaily recognized authority . • w page 2 clarification City policy on wetlands /wildlife ecology was challenged. A senior bi ologlet with the USDPW declined to testify as he assumed he could not meet City of Tig ;:rd specifications. So l not speaking for myself alone. The experience con- founded all of these participants. One person told me that in 20 years of testifying on wetlands and sensitive lands issues, he had never before been challenged. I will Share the City ification, and so ask that you for providing the time cern. s response to this regttest for clar' it be written and sent to me. Thank in which I could present this con- Sincerely, 41/11C9 tr14,--rrA-C/4 s� Nancy Lou Tracy S.W. pine St. Tigard, OR 97223 JEFF H. DACHRACH CHARLES E. CORRIGAN* STEPHEN F. CREW CHARLES M. GREFCF WILLIAM A. MONAHAN NANCY B. MURRAY MARK P. O'DONNELL DENNIS M. PATERSON III TIMOTHY V, RAMIS SHEILA C. IUDGWAY* WILLIAM J. STAMMER '?Also Admitted to Practice in State of Washington O'1 ': ELL, RAMIS, CREW & C I .AST ATTORNEYS AT LAW BAU.OW & WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222 -4402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE April 9, 1991 E. Andrew Jordan, Esq. Bolinger, Hampton & Tarlow 1600 S.W. Cedar Hills Boulevard Portland, Oregon 97225 Re: City of Tigard /Ashbrook Farms Case Nos. SL 1 -86, SLR 90 -0011 (Davis) Dear Andy: CLA.CKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE 181 N. Grant, Suite 202 . Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266 -1149 JAMES M. COLEMAN KENNETH M. ELLIOTT GARY M. GEORGEFF* ROBERT J. McGAUGHEY* Special Counsel We understand that you have expressed to Jerry Offer some confusion with respect to the size of the buffer zone around the Pond. . Larry Epstein's order that south from Lary. E saround allasideser tthe uth and We understand f the size of this buffer is to be 40 feet south pond. If y u find the final order to be gclarification. we suggest that you submit eth�e request to Larry Epstein ambiguous, y q hat you provide us and the City with Io,.. , y, this g raised you do s ©, g es that ernativel tha: be p your request. Alternatively, issue might copies of our re oast g y g Y � i titter to you. conditions of before Larry Epstein at a he ours March n modifying l the con approval, as we suggested in Let us know if you would like to discuss any of these issues. • sincerely yours, 0' ION ELL .y,, IS, CREW & CORRIGAN KME /bjd dd t jetty offer • bill Bearski ljott ," ;; ,:ai 7a 4. ""`.4'» V "i :<:•'la'" dig, k "4" yip 1 1'!: xuK rr�o-gw",+9 » a»i �r ..i1* • - ' — - ' - - JEFF H. BACHRACH CHARLES E. CORRIGAN* STEPHEN F. CREW CHARLES M. GREEFF WILLIAM A. MONAHAN NANCY B. MURRAY MARK P. O'DONNELL DENNIS M. PATERSON III TIMOTHY V. RAMIS SHEILA C. RIDGWAY* WILLIAM J. STALNAKER *Also Admitted to Practice in State of Washington CYD NEU, RAMIS, CREW & C ATTORNEYS AT LAW BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222-4402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE March 25, 1991 E. Andrew Jordan, Esq. Bollinger, Hampton & Tarlow 1600 S.W. Cedar Hills Boulevard Portland, Oregon 97225 Re: City of Tigard/Ashbrook Farms Case Nos. SL 1-86, SLR 90-0011 (Davis) Dear Andy: naginee.911166011*.11.1UWVIMIWINIALWoomme.,....er. Codpie CLACKAMAS COUNTY OFFIC 181 N. Grant, Suite 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266-1149 JAMES M. COLEMAN KENNETH M. ELLIOTT GARY M. GEORGEFF* ROBERT J. McGAUGHEY* Special Counsel RECEIVED PLANNING MAR 27 1491 You have requested that the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Ashbrook Farms apply only to the commercial units and not to both the commercial units and the residential units. While the city at this time does not object to this change, we have advised the city that it cannot proceed to modify the conditions of approval of SLR 90-0011 without complying with the formal application process. While we regret the further delay this involves for your client, the Tigard City Code does not provide for an abbreviated proceSs. In addition, you have asked us to provide a maximum amount that the Declarant or the Association Will be required to pay in any year to maintain the open space in the Ashbrook project. The city is open to negotiating the description of the maintenance required, but it is not willing to provide a maintenance cost ceiling in the Declaration. Let me know if you would like to discuss these issues furtheri XMElbjd cc: dtty bffer tibiti1\004.4\iottlatat1 . Sincerely yours, 0' CREW & CORRIGAN Ke ne liott O'D JEFF H. BACHRACH CHARLES E. CORRIGAN* STEPHEN F. CREW CHARLES M. GRF.EFF WILLIAM A. MONAHAN NANCY B. MURRAY "MIRK P. O'DONNELL DENNIS M. PATERSON III TIMOTHY V. RAMIS SHEIIA C RIDGWAY* WILLIAM J. STALNAKER ■••■•■■* Miro Admitted to Practice in State of Washington NELL, RAMIS, CREW & C ATTORNEYS AT LAW SALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222-4402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 PLEASE REPLY TO PORThAND OFFICE February 27, 1991 E. Andrew Jordan, Esq. Bolliger, Hampton & Tarlow 1600 S.W. Cedar Hills Boulevard Portland, Oregon 97225 Re: City of Tigard Case No. SLR 90 0011 (Davis) Dear Andy: RECEIVED PLANNING FEB 2 8 199 cLAcxAmAs courn OFFICE 181 N. Grant, Suite 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266-1149 JAMES M. COLEMAN KENNETH M. ELLTOTF GARY Me GEORGEFF* ROBERT J. McGAUGHEY* Special Counsel CLIENT COPY We have reviewed the draft Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Ashbrook Farms and the Bylaws of Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association that you have prepared in connection With the above-captioned case. Our comments are as follows: 1. We will not be signing these documents to indicate our approval as attorneys for the City of Tigard. We will, however, Provide you with at letter indicating our approval separately. 2. We have not received or reviewed the Articles of Incorporation that are subject to our approval under the Final Order. We will need to review thoe before we grant our final approval. 3. We have not received or reviewed the Exhibits to be attached to the Declaration and will need to revieW those before we grant final approval. We note that the BylaWs in Article II refer to three Exhibits while the Declaration refers to only two. 4: .These cotmeht•apply to the Declaration:• (a) Page gi Aiticie III, p4taqtaph. Pt". While you have conformed to the Pi,h41 Ordet by•ptovidiril. that the City ot.Tiqat'dtttay issue citations f� ilur e to maintain the dbmtoft ,Property we requst that a0d. here that the A§hbtook litopetty .Owobt,s, Association has •hOt. only CYDONI4ELL, RAMIS, CREW & 44, Mr. E. Andrew Jordan February 27, 1991 Page 2 the power but the duty to maintain and repair the Common Property, to assess liens if the costs are not paid in a reasonable time, and, specifically, that the Common Property is to be maintained in accordance with city, state and federal requirements. The authority to assess expenses and to impose liens is granted to the Board of Directors and the Association, respectively, in ORS 94.704 and 94.709. Further, we request that you add here the formula set out in Section 7 (Voting) of the Bylaws to indicate the allocation of maintenance and repair expenses, as is required by ORS 94.580(1)(h). That statute also requires that the Declaration include the method of determining right of each owner to any common profits, which we did not find specifically included in the Declaration. (b ) Page 6, ArtiOle III, paragraph Q: ORS 94.665 requires 80% or more of the votes in the association before it may sell, convey or subject to a security interest any portion of the Common Property. The Declaration requires only 60%. (c) Page 6, Article III, paragraph R ORS 94.580(4)(a) requires that the procedUre for withdrawing property from .4, the planned community be included in the Declaration. We did not find any description of such procedure. Further, ORS 94.580(4)(o) requixes that the Declaration provide for a method of allocating votes if lots are withdrawn from the planned community. We did not find such provision in the Declaration. ) Page 6, Article III, paragraph S ORS 94.580(2)(d) reqUires that the Declaration describe the number of lots and units in the planned community. While the exact number of lots may be Uncertain at this time, we suggest that you estimate the numbors and reserve the right to change them in accordance with applicable planned commtnity regulations. (e) Page 7 Please delete the approval signature block for the City Attorney. .1' 01X5NkIELL, RAMIS, CREW & IGAN Mr. E. Andrew Jordan • February 27, 1991 Page 3 5. These comments apply to the Bylaws: (a) Page 3, Article III, Section 4: ORS 94.650(2) requires that an agenda accompany any notice of an association meeting. We suggest that the phrase in the last sentence of the Section ", in the case of a special meeting," be deleted. (b) Page 3, Article III, Section 6: ORS 94.660 provides that a proxy may be revoked only upon "actual notice of revocation to the person presiding over a meeting of the association." We suggest that this quoted language be added to the last sentence of Section 6 after the word "revocable" and be preceded by the words "only Upon." To be complete, you should add the following: "A proxy shall terminate one year after its date unless the proxy specifies a shorter term." (c) Page 5, Article VI, Section 1: Under ORS 94.635(7) and 94.640(7), all meetings of the board of director S shall be open to the property owners. Contrary to the provision in the bylaws allowing regular meetings with notice only to the Board of Directors, notice to the owners is required for all but emergency meetings. The same comments also apply to Section 2 regarding special Meetings. In addition, we call your attention to the incomplete sentence at the end of Section 1. (d ) Page 7, Article VII, Section (2) (j) (regarding maintenance of the ComMon Area): Please add after the phrase the following: "in accordance with city, state and federal requirements." (e) Page 11: Please delete the approval signature block for the City Attorney. A provision for the transitional advisory committee required by OAS 94.635(2) does not appear to be included. (g) A provision for the "method of approving payment vouchers" required by ORS 94.635(9) does not appear to be included. (f) The method of apportioning common expenses if new lots are added does not appear to be provided for as required by ORS 94.635(16). Please let us know if you would like to discuss any of these comments. Sincerely yours, 0 DONNELL, RAMIS, CREW & CORRIGAN Kenneth N. Elliott ---.----,------ -----,- O'D JEFF H. BACHRACH CHARLES E. COUIUGAN* STEPHEN F. CREW CHARLES M. GHtEEPF WILLIATIM[ A. MONAHAN NANCY B. MURRAY MARK P. O'DONNELL DENNIS M. PATERSON III TIMOTHY V. RAMIS SHEILA C. MDGWAYA WILLIAM J. STAMMER *Also Admitted to Practice la Rote of Wootlnatoa Hat, RA TS, CRIW & C ATTORNEYS AT LAW BALLOW & WEIGHT BULIDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222 -4402 FAX: (503) 243.2944 PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE March 12 ✓ 1991 E. Andrew Jordan, Esq. l3olliger, Hampton & Tarlow 1600 S.W. Cedar Hills Boulevard Portland, Oregon 97225 Re: City of Tigard - Case Nos. SL 1-86, SLR 90 0011 (Davis) C2.ACKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE 161 N. Grant, Suite 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266 -1149 JAMES M. COLEMAN KENNETH M. ELLIOTT GARY M. GEORGF.FF* ROBERT J. McGAUGHEY* Serial Comet Dear Andy: .. .., . T revised Ashbrook Declaration i �rW mV W�d t�� Covenants, Bylaws of have reviewed th Conditions and Restrictions of Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association that you have prepared in connection with the above- captioned case. You asked us if the Cit y Would the planned commercial development from the Covenantal, Conditions and Restrictions. After r reviewing h �issued n this we uy nderstand that the commercial properties encompass the majority of the property available for development. Therefore, in order to ensure that the open space areas maintained intended by the Orders, a a.. e advising the City to req uirethat the Declaration encumber all of the properties. We have, howe'v'er, drafted a description of What required. .. P we star.. asst you revise main enance to encom aas� g • the City �,ntendss the q Accordingly, gg . yo ise paragraph P Article ill on • page 5 Of the D eck ation •to read ass f ollot s ...a intenance _ aHd Rey .. �i, it of Corson P= 1 Declarant, or the Association wwhen formed, shall have the power and duty. the erty in accordance a wits n al Common ...Prop Y ... , .. awls anc applicable city, state and federal 1... re q uiremn. , ludi�� g . � en�� ins: n �� t limitation q those in the City of Tigard Nos. Sb �, dated nuar 2i. 1991, and an � a dmenta • 1thereto,. 85, dated May 18, 108' , a O'DONNELL, RAMIS, CREW & March 12, 1991 Page 2 MOAN • and to assess liens if costs are not paid in a reasonable time. 2. Once Declarant has improved the Common Property in accordance with the plan approved by the City of Tigard as required by condition of approval no. 2 in SLR 90-0011, the Declarant, or the Association when formed, shall maintain the Common Property to provide open space and wetland habitat and serve flood plain purposes as required by the Orders described above. Vegetation shall be planted, maintained and replaced as necessary to provide buffers between the wetland . habitat and commercial development, Streets, and livestock grazing areas. Any damage to the Common Property, including without limitation any wetland habitat, shall be promptly repaired. Improvements such as berms , bridges, fences, paths and vegetation shall be maintained to prevent damage to and to maintain the Common Property, including without limitation its wetland areas. 3. (Insert here the current i:Y= ragraph P after deleting the first sentence.) The following comments apply to the revised Declaration: (a) Page 6, Article III, paragraph Q: It appears that a line has been dropped in duplicating section 7 of Article III of the Bylaws. The ninth line, "owner or owners of a developed Commerdial Lot developed With," is missing from paragraph Q. In addition, because "Commercial Lot" and Multi-Family Lot" are not defined in the Declaration, Ve ask that you add these definitions to the Dediaration. (b) Page 6, Article III, paragraph Tt We recidest that you add the following phrase at the beginning of the paragraph: "After obtaining written approval from the City of Tigard,", in addition, we request that you add to the end of the first eentende, and in this Declaration." , *ti.4 0;■ O'DONN LL, RAMIS, CREW & March 12, 1991 Page 3 Page A III paragraph Thp� agraph repeats part of Article Paragraph I. This paragraph that you either delete this paragraph or provide fcx prior written approval of the City of Tigard as provided in paragraph 1. We request that you provide the City of Tigard and us a copy of the survey so we might review the legal descriptions attached as Exhibits 1 and 2 to the Declaration. Finally, these comments are subject to the review and approval by the City of Tigard of the revised documents, the legal descriptions and survey, and our suggested changes, and we reserve the right to make any revisions that the City may require. Please let 90 know if you would like to discuss any of these comments. ;1 i Xe: ne h Zit-: Elliott KNE/bjd cc: Jerry offer, City of Tigard ith a \9dt 24\4 V Ql6n.l I 'O'D JEFF H. BACHRACH CHARLES IL CORRIGAN* STEPHEN F. CREW CHARLES M. GREET WILLIAM A. MONAHAN NANCY B. MURRAY MARK P. O'DONNELL DENNIS M. PATERSON HI TIMOTHY V. RAMIS SHEILA C. RIDGWAY* WILLIAM .L STALNAKER oirelsomo *Aso tvIrritttal to Pratt*, La State of Washington HU, RAMIS, CR1W & C. IGAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW BALLoW c 'WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt 5treet Portland, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222-4402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE March 12, 1991 E. Andrew Jordan, Esq. Bolliger, Hampton & Tarlow 1600 S.W. Cedar Hills Boulevard Portland, Oregon 97225 Re: City of Tigard Case Nos. SL 1-86 SLR 90-0011 (Davis) Dear Andy: 11.11.1..111:11MMIMIZIalal CLACKAIVIAS COUNTY OFFICE 181 N. Grant, Sulte 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266-1149 JAMES M. COLEMAN KENNETH M, ELLIOTT GARY M. GF.ORGEFF* ROBERT J. McGAUGHEY* Spectal Coun9ct It has come to my attention that Bill Monahan, an attorney associated with this firm, represented Eugene and Vivian Davis in 1988 on a matter related to their property at issue in Case Nos. SL 1-86 and SLR 90-0011. We have not discussed any matters relating to our Current representation of the City of Tigard with Mr. Monahan and have taken steps 'co ensure that no conflict of interest ariges. Enclosed are affidavits executed by Mr. Monahan and me attesting to the step S We have taken to avoid a Conflict from arising from our representation of the City of Tigard. Please pass these affidavits along to Eugene and Vivian Davis. If you or they would like to discuss this issue further, please calL Sincerely yours, 09 0 NEL RAMIS, CREW & CORRIOAN I(eei1f. lliott col Jetty Offer OttenCil AFFIDAVIT OF WILLIAM A. MONAHAN STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Multnomah ) WILLIAM A. MONAHAN, being first duly sworn state that: 1. This affidavit is made pursuant to Oregon State Bar Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule 5-105(I)(1). 2. I attest that my current employer, the law firm of O'Donnell, Ramis, Crew & Corrigan, has implemented certain screening procedures to insure that I will have no involvement in or knowledge of this firm's representation of the City of Tigard to the extent that representation relates to Eugene and Vivian Davis and Case Nos. SL 1-86 and SLR 90 0011 before the City of Tigard. 3. At all times since March 11, 1991, when I first learned that this firm represents the City of Tigard with regard to Eugene or Vivian Davis, I have personally disqualified myself from any form of participation or representation of the City of Tigard in such matters. 3. During this period of disqualification, I will not participate in any manner in this firm's representation of the City of Tigard With regard to Eugene or Vivian Davis and Case Nos. SL 1-86 and SLR 90-0011 and will not discuss or otherwiSe communicate With any firm members concerning that representation. 4. The precautionary measures taken by this firm to insure that I have no involvement in the reprettentation of the City of Tigard with regard to Eugene and Vivian Davis and Case Nos' SL 1..86 aid SIR 90-0011 Include: the consolidation and Confinement of ail relevant information and materials in a Well-marked area; Page 1 - AFFIDAVIT O1 WILLIAM A. MONAHAN A6000140mmiumAA screening of all matter - related infor nation. from generally circulated office correspondence; and distribution of notice to all firm members, including administrative staff p explaining the nature and scope of my disqualification. 5. The foregoing precautions will remain in effect until final disposition of this matter or the firms representation of the .City of Tigard with respect to Eugene and Vivian Davis and Case Nos. SL 1 -86 and SLR 90- 0011. William A. Monahan, OSS #86075 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day .of March, 1991. Notary Public for Oregon Icy Commission Expires:,�.... . 0 P.40 2- ArrtbAVIT O itai A a • OXMAN **.d ustragginsevi arvitA'IT OF KENNETH 14. HLLIOTT STATE OP OREGON ) ss County of Multnomah ) If KENNETH M. ELLIOTT, being first duly sworn state that: 1. I am special counsel to the law firm of O'Donnell, Ramis, Crew & Corrigan. 2. I make this affidavit pursuant to Oregon State Bar :ode of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule 5-105(1)(2). 3. I attest that all firm members, including administrative staff, are aware of the requirement that William A. Monahan be screened from participating in or discussing this firm e s representation of the City of Tigard to the, extent that this client is involved in matters relating to Eugene and Vivian Davis and Case Nos. SL 1 -86 and SLR 90 -0011 before the City of Tigard. 4. The procedures being followed to screen Mr. Monahan from this matter include written notice to all firm members of the disqualification and the need to exclude Mr. Monahan from activities on this case; the consolidation and confinement of all relevant information and materials in a well- marked area; the screening of all matter - related information from generally circulated office correspondence placing warning notices on the case file itself; and keeping that file in my office or that /// /1/ /%/ /// of my associate, 'Nancy B. Hurray, and not in the general file storage area I 44P' n. Ken eth E liottow #80217 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day o: Notary Public for Oregon My commission Expires: Vs • 164 3 Page 2 - AFFIDAVIT OF KENNETII M. ELLIOTT ntonvolni4ymillottem Jt. January 28o 1 991 Keith Liden Planning Dept. City of Tigard Tigard, OR Dear Keith RECEIVED PLANNING FEB 4 1991 Thank you for your letter regarding the challenges at the hearing for SLR 90-0011, but I am afraid that it does not resolve the issue for me. As it, is, I could have accepted this explana- tion from you in the beginning, but went to the City Council on your advice Again I ask why such challenges were part of the framework of any hearings process held in the City of Tigard, but especially hearings on a sensitive land issue. For many present. all of whom did not testify, such a proceeding was not in the realm of their experience. Most had been giving testimony in many urisdictions for many years. Were it not for Larry Epeteine ability and con- sc i ensc (t o sne s s Andy Jordan would have been in charge playing games as It were with a process that should be open and straight- forward. There are many Andy Jordana out there, ready to use legal loopholes to limit the gathering of information. but a government entity needs to provide this arena for such disruption of testi mony4 Larry hie strategy at the outset Larr Epstein did. not override clarify the openness nness of hearing to all relevant testimony because of Tigard's rules and regulations', This is my understanding of his explanation of why the hearings were conducted as they were I am not going to forward your letter to those to whom I promised the City of Tigard's response® We request an answer from the City of Tigard attorne y which wo uld possibly explain the incredible charade that went on for those two hearings. In- deed, that is what I believe I requested at the Council meeting, Tigard's new wetlands policies offer borderline protection just the minimum necessary. the City boasted that its wet- la nds protections p rotections were su eriorctothose of Portland, Beaverton, and Washington hin t County. It is a tragedy at this point in time y that the y a re not. It is open space preserved vsior to- day that will make Tigard ade s rabbi p lacq �� which to live Thank yo U. it to the concerns of ou, Keith, for your sensl.t�.v residents of the area. Please refer this letter on the the City of Tigard attorney for his answer. re truly, Nancy acy 7 310 S. ®'fine at. Portland. OR 97223 (,511 OVA:-'1) ItCe `t January 24, 1991 Nancy Tracy 7310 S.W. Pine Tigard, Oft 97223 RE: Dr. Davis - Standing" issue Dear Nancy: This letter is in response to your presentation to the City Council on January right of certain s which were raised before the 15 1991. Your concern related to the challenges which to testify on the Davis Hearing :. Officer regarding the rig proposal. 7E 'mould like to clarify what took place during the two hearings. Davis' ttorney, challenged the right of several people to Andy Jordan, Di�'v e testify because he contended that they could not show how thay would be affected have ..g a ff to , s decision. Because this Day or l�narre an interest in the Hearings Officer's iGerr 6 ob ectian was raised, Mr. Epstein was obligated establish for the record how these people had standing to testify. Mr. Epstein felt he had to ask these individuals how they would be affected by the decision and he was not attempting to create an adversarial atmosphere for those wanting to testify. Since his decision could be appealed, it was important that information be in the record supporting his determination that they all had standing on the issue. The g will only ask these questions during a hearing if objections e Hearings Officer wi similar to Mr. Jordan's are raised. Please feel free to contact ma if you have any questions or concerns. CITY OF T OREGON Keith S. laden Senior Planner css City Council Pat Reilly Ed Murphy TRACE'. LTR /kl 1$125 hall slvd4 P+O Bob 233':7 Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) fib BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) FOR a sensitive lands permit and) No SL 1 -86, V 87 -02 variance on property zoned C-P ) and R -4.5, Gene and Vivian Davis,) applicant. CASE NO.: SL 146, V 87 -02 APPLICANTS: Gene and Vivian Davis PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Tax Lots 101, 2800! 4700, 4800, Map 1S1 35AC, and Tax Lots 1200, 1300, 1400 and 1500, Map 1S1 35AD, City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon. PUBLIC HEARINGS February 26, 1986, March 26, 1987, and April 30, 1987. HISTORY; property was annexed het�licant1a 1985 The y 2-85/AC 1 8 ) pp applied app and the case was heard on February 26, 1986. The item approval a was tabled to give the applicant time to prepare additional -information. The amended roosal also requires p p quires a variance. SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE A. PLICATION' J4 Re i .� e � ° & Associates Rex 'Van Warner • (w ld Ri hell Gene Davis 1�e1 5twut (;David Evans & AssoCiateldlife d Y f ord Tony +� s (.David. Evans )r expert). Page 1 -- SL 1 -86 V 07 -02 SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF THE APPLICATION: John W. Brome (The Wetlands Conservancy), Nancy Travis, Kevin Lapp, Pat Whiting, John S. Blomgren, Hazel J. Lyon, James E. Everitt, Roger A. Redfren, Mark Greenfield, Janet Thompson, Frances Boyechorn, Alice Juve, Nina Mills EXHIBITS: 1. Planning Department Staff Report 2. Preliminary Master Site Plan 3. Raetz Letter of 3/19/87 4. Raetz Letter of 2/18/87 5. DEA Letter of 2/25/87 6. Donner Letter of 3/18/87 7. Monahan Letter of 3/18/87 8. Cole Letter of 3/13/87 9. Hansen Letter of 3/13/87 10. Tray Letter of 3/13/87 11. Juve Letter of 3/13/87 12. Rigler Letter of 1/7/87 13. Davis Letter of 3/12/87 14. Noyes Letter of 3/16/87 15. Phifer Letter of 2/11/87 16. Proposal Map Figure 2 17. Amendment to Joint Application for ?ermit 18. Greenfield Letter of 3/26/87 19. Sedond Supplement Narative (DEA) 20. Notice of Application, Army Corps of Engineers 21. Comments from Park Board, 3/3/87 22. Oliver Letter of 4/29/87 23. Rowe Letter of 4/29/87 24. Wood Letter 0± 4/30/87 25. Audubon Letter of 3/26/87 26. Raetz Letter of 4/30/87 27. Pictures of flooding on cardboard plus 3 sheets xeroxed pictures 28. Tracy Letter of 4/30/87 29. Anadromous Fish Law Memo 30. MetzgerTProgress Community Plan 31, Overlay Map 32. 0-Foot Rise Floodway Map, 1/86 33. Atdubon magazine, tsallt 4Mitigatioh Isn t° 34. Transdript/Notes of Redfern Testimony y0100$.t ' a ' The area to the north and east is within the County Aha is designated . ... With wi •,.- for single amily . residential develo ment..tn maximum density of :aye :units periaore, -The. land to the northeast i8 dthin -he city and is zoned Highway. 217 . and an aparttent tomplok 261110a • (Residential, 12 units/acre abuts. the property. or the south and • •touthwebt, • Page 2 . 814 1 -86t V 87-02 Site Information The subject property is bisected by the main channel of Ash Creek which runs downhill from east to west. The majority oE the property is within the 100 year flood pia .,.. ",e property is underdeveloped and most of it is utilized for' attle grazing. A description of the property prepared by Beak Consultants, Inc. and Independent Ecological Services is included in the application materials. The western section of the property (WCTM 1S1 35AC, Tax Lots 101, 2800, and 4800, and the southwest corner of WCTN! 1S1 35AD, Tax Lot 1400) is zoned C -P and the remainder is zoned R -4.5). Tax Lot 1500 (WCTM 1S1 35AD) located at the eastern end of the property on 89th Avenue, contains a residence and small farm buildings. Phase I includes two acres of commercial development in the western section of the property adjacent to 95th Avenue on a number of single family residences totaling 1.3 acres located on the west side of 89th Y g Avenue. Phase II features a six acre commercial office project in the southwest portion of the site next to Highway 217. Access will be provided by an extension of ",3rd Avenue. A second street is envisioned to connect the 93rd nvenue extension to Hall Blvd, to accommodate the traffic anticipated from Phase II. Phase I will require 5,600 cubic yards of fill within the flood fringe. Mitigation is proposed with the excavation of 1,700 cubic yards of earth to establish a 0.71 acre pond /wetland area on the north side of Ash Creek. The proposed residential lots are above the 100 year flood plain elevation and no landform alterations are necessary. Phase II will involved 15,200 cubic yards of fill with proposed mitigation provided by removing 5,800 cubic yards of material to form a second pond /wetland area of approximately 1.5 acres in size. identified total wetland area The clentf 3ed by the applicant's consultant is 9. 3 acre including adjoining property to the north. Of the 7.29 acres ofwetland area on the applicant's property, approximately five ? � will improved. The ° wetland and other flood p lain � andwllbemantandp rivately. It is important to emphasize that the applicant has included con- ceptual development plans to give a clearer picture of what is ultimately intended for the property and to obtain preliminary comments from nearby property owners and reviewing agencies. The only approvals requested pp ques e u presently are for the proposed landform alterations within the flood plain p and wetland areas. The actual improvements of the property (eg. motel, office buildings, residences) will require subsequent applications, notification, and City review. PUBLIC 'ACILITZEES AND SERVICES Sanitar Sewers y UnifieCd Sewerage Agency .S.A.) currently has a. 30° mainline that traverses the site from west to east. Page 3 - SI, 1 -86, V 87.02 Storm Drainage This application primarily involves alteration and fill in the issues storm drainage in the Ash Creek drainage TheasWecificcissueaao�tswhether the applicant surrounding area. p meets the criteria of the ordinance and comprehensive plan will be discussed below. Streets The applicant has provided a tentative street layout which appears to be consistent with the Metzger - Progress Circulation Plan adopted by Washington County. However, as noted above, this application. only addresses the issue of fill and grading within the drainage- way and therefore, issues of streets will not be directly addressed in this decision. Applicable P lan Policies or Ordinance Provisions City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Sections 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2. 3, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, and 7. Cy of Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.84. The provisions of these sections are incorpo- rated by reference herein as though fully set forth. CONCLUSIONS Based i up the application, the comments received ,. on a review of t both in writing and at the public hearings, the major issues in this application relate to flooding, wildlife habitat, open space and variance criteria. Those issues will be addressed separately. k'1o4d2n 1. -Poli cy 3.2. l The p ro posal will cause a ne gli i ble ri se of l00 -.ear flood plain in the ro ect reach of the creek-. The proposed .rading will. cause a sign i ] r g ^y. p P if�.cant to the g Downstreaminthefl00e eao flood n n upstreai of the proaect. , Y floodplain plain will rise by 0.06 feet Mess then 3/4 4) because of the proposed grading. 2. Potic.. 302.2 The •floodway, as defined by the, thePlo o: d nsu rance , • Stud y for the g � the Iepplic an t• does not propose .development within the floodwayexn p for a road crosin . • 2oadway contruction not P rohibated in th e floodplain floodway in the City of Tigard or in Washington. County. p J maintenance o he zero ,. � . , function •an � �'� � � f t � _ . The ro `ect will • enhance the J Y d foot rise floodway by lowering the water surface elevation on upstream downstream f loodwa. excc t for the extremely tin nima , Y p 1 n to nea t ...,,,, . ...... . _ _ ., on ta�Ce. lthes rise of 0:06 " u cements are Y the unevene . feet:. Flood control measu s 0 ,. .. j � i ��. � �' ofConse�iue tl..., the '0 06surface due to the practical difficult ° `ng 1 u ypi r q the. foot fee... v.. y/ . risehit.a mathematicalachange, but is. not a•perceivable practical on: n changey or for purposes of .determining flood Control elevations, a measprable change • Page. 4 - S1, 1 46, V 7 02 e The zero -foot floodway is that central portion of the floodplain that must be kept clear to allow the 100-year ear flood event to flow without water surface elevation increase. Using detailed backwater analysis techniques, the applicant determined that the required opening, after land form alterations, met that criteria. The loca- tion and shape was changed from existing by the proposed grading. However, the function was not just maintained, but was enhanced. 3. Policy 3.2.3 - The stream flow capacity of the floodway will be maintained by the proposed excavation of the channel. This will lower the upstream floodway elevation and cause a negligible change in the downstream floodway elevation. The drawings and calculations submitted Show that there will be no detrimental upstream Or downstream changes in the floodplain. pain. Plantings of evergreen (and deciduous) plants are proposed on the edges of the creek and the perimeter of the commercial development. The proposed open space and adjacent floodway provide a very wide buffer of 100' to 200' between the - roect and residential land P � to north. per add additional qtr eet trees that along street will add to the buffer. The Ash Creek floodplain is not identified by the City aS desireable for a greenway Or a pedestrian bicycle pathway. 4. Policy 3.4.1 - The City has identified the site as containing significant wetlands. The applicant, with assistance from federal and state agencies, has identified the specific wetland area on the site The Hearings Officer walked the site with the applicant's Hearings t fish and wildlife expert, Mr. Redfern, of the opponents, and Keith City staff. layman's point of view the wetlands Liden of the Ct staff From a la as the y presently exist are of marginal quality and could be enhanced under the applicant's proposal. The site haS not been identified as having significant educational research value by the C... ity or any other agency or jurisdiction. The site has not been identified as having endangered plant or animal spedies, or significant natural features other than wetlands. 5 • Polic y 3.4.2 The proposal provides a broad open Space area { ` s along Ash Creek and maintains the only existing habitat Ctreesand brush) along the south bank of the creek. The existing habitat will be improved by plantings on the north side of the Creek and in other i ldlfe the proposed open nn s ac e' The project will vastly improve hab Lat erosion control', and wetland management as detailed in the proposed plans. The project is not a designated timbered or tree area. Page 5 SL 1 -866 V 87-02 • • The site is not designated as having important wildlife habitat value, as delineated on the "Fish and Wildlife Habitat Map" (Diagram V) of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Volume 1. The site is not designated by the City for incorporation into the Cty's greenway system. Open space is not required by the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is proposing to maintain a large private habitat area. 6. Policy 7.2.1 - The applicant has submitted a site development study, including plans and calculations, which illustrate that the proposed development is safe and will not create adverse offsite impacts. Natural drainage ways are proposed to be maintained and improved through clearing and widening to assure no adverse offsite impacts. Drainage from the site (when developed) will not increase offsite impact, as shown by the plans and calculations submitted. The 100-year floodplain elevation will be protected as shown by the plans and calculations submitted. Erosion control techniques are included in the proposal and described in the application. In general terms, all slopes created will be a maximum of 33% and will be vegetated sufficiently to control erosion. The City mandates no maximum slopes, and has concurred with the proposal in their recommendation. 7 Section 18.84.040 - The applicant, by submitting calculations which address the issue of offsite impacts both upstream and down- stream has satiSfied this section as to the flooding iSsue. Wild- life issues will be addressed below. Wildlie Plan Policies 3.2.4, 3,4.1, and 3.4.2 and Section 18.84.010(c) of the Code call for the protection of signifidant wetlands and wild- life habitat. The Metzger-Progress Community Plan, developed by WaShington County), designated the western portion of the property as a potentially signifiCant wildlife habitat. When the property was annexed into the City, a significant wetlands designation was applied to the same area. The record contains several important referende docUments on the iSSue of mitigation, and themanagement of riparian ecoEty8tems.. The Hearing S Officer found particularly helpftl Exhibit 29, the Anadromous fish LaW Memo, and Exhibit 33, the Audubon essay on mitigation. In disetisSion8 With the applicant's fish and wildlife exert during the site review, it waS determined that the area bordered on the west by the Pha8e1II boundary, the property owner- ship of Dr baviS on the north (or preferably the sottherh although h the portion between the applicaht'd property line and the southern boundary of the proposed street is not Within the jurisdiction of of this Hearings Offider) and the area bordered by has on the east, plUs the Phase I proposed Wildlife wetland area imiediatelY Pg ti 186, V .0-01 north of the proposed single - family house "1 ", all designated on page 1 of Exhibit 2, should remain as open space and wetland. The uncontradicted testimony by the applicant's zone expert was that this amount of property was appropriate for a line of site connection between proposed wildlife wetland pond to the north and the proposed wildlife pond to the south. Cattle dre the cause or source of several types of water pollution. On uplands, which could describe the area around the wetlands on the applicant's property, they accellerate erosion while removing vege- tation and trampling soil. Through runoff, eroded soil eventually finds its way into streams, creeks, and rivers leading to sedimen- tation and turbidity. When grazing livestock move on to the riparian zones, water pol- lution effects increase dramatically. If the area surrounding the wildlife ponds was not considered uplands, it would cettainly be considered a riparian zone. The literature of professional range and fisheries societies recognizes that excessive livestock grazing in riparian zones is the major cause of high sediment levels and fish habitat destruction. Studies indicate that many • streams require a rest, that is,,a no grazing period °of five years or more to begin rehabilitation of woody, herbaceous riparian vege- tation. While the applicant has appropriately used his property for grazing prior to development, the Hearings Officer concludes that continued grazing on the property would increase the management difficulties for the proposed wildlife area after fill and development. Finally, on the issue of wildlife, due to the importance of the inter-relation- ship of the two ponds which are proposed for mitigation, and the existing stream bed of Ash Creek, the Hearings Officer concludes that all of the wildlife mitigation work which is proposed, together with all the filling . and g rading which is proposed in this area, should be done as part of Phase S of the development. The Hearings Officer believes i this will minimize the negative impact that the g a.ve im act actual construction work will have on the seasonal wildlife habitat in the area, Once the area has been developed according to the j r _ applicant's , there must be a way to plans proposed by the expert, maintain the system even though it will be, theoretically, designed 1-,11 be maintenance free: The provision of public open space is not called for in either the YMetzger progress Community Plan or t `Plan Therefore, the intent to maintain the 2'a, and Comprehensive • g ood o � _ means the common f .: � ... . y through that , om re ensi a area throu '�t r.vate m lain and wildlife is appropriate). '1 he Hearings Officer believes that appropriate Vehicleofot, Uch maintenanc would be the creation ofnanp` owners Vehicle ion . through h a declaration, of conditions, .co . association" he entire of applicants restrictions for t ownership pp is proposed p y of the units would participate inthmaintenanceocosts for open sp +. ' based on a unit size ace ba wher.eby each dwelling Unit shall be deemed to be one share and each. xmge 7 - Sb 1461 v 8702 v a y '2,000 square fee "` � ' the proposed office com M, ' lc-shall be deemed one share and each five units of the motel shall be deemed one share, purposes apportioning costs associated with for ur poses of a ortionx.n the maintenance co the area. The owners association bylaws and conditions of restric- tions on the, private open space shall be subject to the approval of the city attorney of Tigard. As to the concerns expressed by opponents of petroleum degradation due to the proximity of Highway 217 to the southerly pond and the p y y g y y pond, Hearings Officer concludes proposed roadway to the northerly et�into heheeponds because proposed that petroleum products g private and public improvements will utilize oil separation stormwater catch basins and sediment will be controlled by required erosion control techniques during construction on the establishment of vege- tative coverup slopes, maximum 33% after construction. The proposed vegetative screen of 25 feet is adequate buffering between the proposed road and the proposed pond on the north, and there is additional planted buffer under City standards between the curb and the edge of the right of --Way that will include street trees and other p,'C. {` stings . In additi _,.�. r <. g ,« '#: >.. .rte •�' _ rs —� - i...ir . , - r ,r._. ... _.. .e :. ...o c r.:�:'., -r .� .. - L lt: -, - °_. � . - _ j. t v Fs... s 1:y + - -::.. "� +_....� ...- s- •t.;:._ _.. -,r �.: r., >.,:f�r. mss:.:: -- .k .. v.. . - -r_ - v .�. ,.. 't?a- . ... .. ., ?e. r.•. .. ... ..,. .. tt�� - -s .: ; i^:.�.r i max: s _►•t.r c tau• .'Ir ra l :2 � — _ p .l _. —} � _:i t.. sar >- } " , }. �S -s; F ' ' r`' ,c T ? r rt.4c t t ::a4t T 1.` �.s � Ki r� � � `r . rY � � a..: r ..#� i -` -s. � >► ire: .- : _-re:..: ' -._ c r n a ,; _ E . r. ;i kr }f t r •as.' ',t a .. '. .�.* �Ie r'. �.: •i, -. i 'x... -: TK ',. _ . rt R[ s , •-r -.f. �r- .� r -t= _i .. � .:F �� • � ' ,�' ^f' : s -r '`, .. *j-a .s f ti. {.s r r1� + � x * � }r -� fit" a ,a [s .YF� 't t — �:. ; } G y � y,}.. _ :t r�-s �.a*: ., ,.r - :t�r'_ . ; .r�• : ; = .-.p ,Se - i �..x°.. _ '_ s:^ :. -. , 3. The applicant shall provide documentation from a certified profes sional.engineer to the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation and the Engineering Section which shows • that this proposal will not adversely affect flood elevations downstream of Highway 217, along Ash Creek. and Fanno Creek. The applicant shall also indicate whether the SW 93rd Ave. Ash Creek crossing iS. going to be culvert (s) or a bridge. 4. The applicant shall grant to the public, on standard forms furnished by the City, a permanent storm drainage easement which includes all of Ash Creek (approximately top of bank to top of g ment document, • legal. bank). storm drainage. executed stor drains a ease description and accompanying map shall be subject to Engineering Section review and approval prior to recording. 5. The applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall dedicate that land as shown on Exhibit 2. in the 1987 exhibits to this a lica�` which area is described as being bordered on the pp Lion wh south by Dr Davis' property boundary,. on,the west by the property line for the Phase 11 development, on the north by Dr proposed eed ary and on the e g y p units p p Said r y asnopenfspace ind�erpetuity and shall be subject to covenants, i ons and an owners association which conditions ��nd restrict g p p a ortions. the maintenance costs for said area amon the ro erties 1 being developed through this application, in the following formula: Single-family ..y ...p eves A one share in le�famil residences one share each, du 1 per lot, office space - one share per 2,000 square feet of developed office space, proposed motel - one share per five developed units. p covenants, conditions The articles of incor oration, bylaws and and restrictions shall be subject to the approval of the city • attorney fot the City of Tigard, pp.. ,i improvements to the Ash Creek. The applicant shall. complete all imp c p the 6 hannel as proposed from way 21.7 to the u stream side of=t proposed • Sw 93rd extension together with all wildlife. mitigation Hl h � g includin' � the ' ro n `n fencing d _ g , and g = • g with Pose pond, berming planti�, , � g ' , g conjunction with Phase Z im rovements: ivestoc on � AIZ. 1 lc r p p et forth above the area described for dedication as open. s a shall cease ti on the be"innin of the construction of these improve- ments The wildlife mitigation plan as conceptually proposedin p. �,, beginning. Exhih,` ` application . sha� e followed 2 of the 198'7 exhibx ` 11 b he, ian for lantinthidrainageimprovement and year -, together with the pl p g, round water Source for the proposed pond, bject to the appx`o'f7a1 of the Staff an d the city su ty engineer. _ �.� . g . �. gs , ' applicant Shall submit detailed engineerin" drawnn i g p Ire are ` � en a.neer for, all roposed p p � = re i� ered rofessibnal °" channel work, These drawings shall be reviewed dbya grading. �;�llina and .. ... hall � = g .. action. nd a roved b"" th ction prior to constt a pP y e Engneerin Se . = p p pographic condiu . _ , ,o ow exist�.ng and proposed to Those drawings shall sho tions . An •as -built t p graphic survey will be.tequitoth Page 9 St, i4.88, V 87-02. IEESERDSZOWEASIEMENEEREMBWRinda 8. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final approval date. DATED this 18th day of May, 1987. L 1 $6- V 81-02 • page 10 �- S �- r ;4 41 STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard and say: se Print AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING 13EITEINMANUMIltin being first duly sworn, on oath depose That I am a for The City of Tigard, Oregon. That I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING for: That I served NOTICE OF DECISION for: City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Commission Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Hearing Notice/Notice of Exhibit "A") was mailed to each named attached list marked exhibit "B" on the said notice NOTICE OF DECICION as appropriate bulletin board on the and deposited in the United States Mail 1987, postage prepaid. 0 Iu Person who deli ered to POST OF ICE Decision) of which is attached (Marked persons at. the address shown on the day of .3.1,14,i/ 198. hereto attached, was "posted on an day of )1W a 19(3973 on the c;70 day 7 Person who post d on Bul etin Board (For Decision Only) Subscribed and sworn to befdte me on the 4 ! 4 4i .4444 44 4 4 MAROHA K HUNT NOTARY PUI3LIC — OREGON non My Commission Expires: //517- 0257P/0021P day of NOTA Y PUBLIC ON • •-■ .74 'OA ,16.4.+,14 , , 4 BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) for a Sensitive Lands Permit and) Variance on property zoned C-P ) and R-4.5, Gene and Vivian Davis) applicants. No. SL 1-86/V 87-02 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings Officer at the regularly scheduled public hearings of February 26, March 26, April 30, 1987, and upon order of the City Council for the City of Tigard, an additional hearing was held on Thursday, June 25, 1987, for the sole purpose of hearing from surrounding property owners who did not receive notice of the earlier hearings due to errors in the notification list submitted by the applicants; all hearings held at the Tigard Civic Center Town Hall Room, in Tigard, Oregon; and The applicants request a Sensitive Lands Permit and Variance to allow commercial and residential development on the property. The primary issue raised at the subsequent hearing was the effect of the proposed development on property owners Upstream along "Ash Brook", also known as a drainage ditch which drains from the Fred Meyer Store area, under Hall Blvd., runs along properties on gw Thorn and 89th Street, and finally onto the proposed develop- ment are The testimony was that durihg heavy rains, when Ash Creek floods, the Water in the 'drainage ditch, aka Ash Brook, backS up and overflows, flooding property on thorn and 89th Streets. •u ft, . , . 1,- •i.�•:": �� .. "1Ta K C {., t, ��r.A`C tr r.. f'"r. `'�s 7 After listening to testimony and evidence, including testimony by Herb Curtis, Ken Beck, Jerry Hoffman, David Tozer, Kristina Culliman, Louise Beck, Jean Curtis and Tony Regilli 4.e all of Ash Brook (approximately top of bank to top of bank) . The executed storm drainage easement document, legal description and accompanying map, shall be subject to Engineering Section review and approval prior to recording. 5. The following language shall be added to condition #5. The covenants, conditions and restrictions for. the Owner's' Association tion shall contain provisions which authorize the City of Tigard to issue citations for the Association's'failure to maintain or r ep air the open space dedicated pursuant to this condition of approval. In the event the problem cited is not corrected within a reasonable time, then the covenants, conditions and restrictions shall p rovide a procedure whereby the City may affect the necessary rep air or maintenance, bill the Owner's Association for the cost thereof, and in the event that bill is not paid within a reasonable time, the City shall have the authority to file liens against the owners of the property subject to the covenants, condi- tions ns and restrictions. As with the Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws and covenants, conditions and restrictions, the procedure for this citation /repair /lien process shall be subject to the Attorney of the City Y for the City of Tigard. 6. No amendment. . No amendment. 8. No amendment. DATED this•:oth day of July, i987 HEART : 5 OFFICER SC Page SL 1 -86/V 8/- 2 EUGENE & VIVI•AN DAVIS 4550 SW LOMBARD Beaverton, OR 97005 HERB & JEAN CURTIS 8850 SW THORN TIGARD, OR 97223 KEN & L. BECK 8820 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 JERRY HOFMAN 10950 SW 89th TIGARD OR 97223 DAVE TOZER 8770 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 KRISTINA CULLINAN 8775 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 TONY RIGHELLIS DAVID EVANS & ASSOC. 2626 SW CORBETT PORTLAND OR 97201 Nancy Tracy 7310 SW Pine St. Tigard, Or 97223 •KEVIN LAPP 8310. SW PINE TIGARD OR 97223 I- RaA,SA, ti =. toroeckcc. � ` �: ~ lam 04,4 I , t STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard I, and say: AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING ,'being first duly sworn, on oath depose Please Print That I am The City of Tigard, Oregon. That I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING for: for That I served NOTICE OF DECISION for 1,/ City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Commission ----Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Hearing Notice/Notice of Decision) of which is attached (Marked Exhibit "A") was mailed to each named persons at the address shown on the attached list marked exhibit "B" on the day of 198 7. said notice NOTICE OF DECICION. as hereto attached, was posted on an 'appropriate bulletin board on the day of 19n; and deposited in the United States Mail On thec. 1 day of 1987, postage prepaid. S gnatur orrAi, P.rson whto: ed on Bulletin Board For Deci on Only) Perso who •elivere to POST OFFIC Subscribed and sworn to before me on the 44-dat. ,ARCHA K1 HUNT NOTAR PU IC OREGON my Commtssion b(pires1425--, .1. Ny CommissiOn Expires: .02$1i5101iP.. . day of' . NOTA Y PUBLIC OF OREGON [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] MR VIE. Pt. A Cr CON DOMI ST > :. ®11!11® • IllilU ... LEHUAhN - 11 11111_111,111L&AINE11 ` ■. STR EET F/AT r®_ ®fir 1rr ■'� r ::1111 //. ,,,;a: ; .,YnP HEM tit! LAR 26 25 .3536 ■I 11 1111 IT BLVD. NORTH bAKOTA STTTEET tl Kd i ik gr. 341'35 3E t NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT GOVERNOR OREGON STATE LAND BOARD NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT GoVornor BARBARA ROBERTS Secretary of State ANTHONY MEEKER State Treasurer ‘;,', t." •„- , t ,‘ , , EhVisionaStareLands 775 SUMMER STREET, SALEM, OREGON 97310 PHONE (503) 378-3805 fifiEMOR October 2 5 , 1990 TO: Tigard Planning Department FROM: Joel Sha' h Division of State Lids SUBJECT: Sensitive Lands SLR 90-0011 Davis The Division . of State Lands, under state permit no. -11r 4570, is tequiring.the..-applid4tt to record deed restrictions on the wetland mitigation areas on the ptopetty (yellow area on attached map)... The deed. restriCtionS will require these areas tobe managed for wetland resource protection. Grazing, filling, or other alterations will be prohibited ekcept a!tequited fot„ • wetland protection • putpoaeb. Applicant has not recorded the.tegoited deed restrictions and is currently in violation Of the state pftmit, We are deferring enforcement of thi requirement until after the city of Tigard completes this We recommend that the City of Tigard modify the required open apace area to include, at a minimum, the ateaFhowh in yellow and pink on the attadhed. map. • includes the north wetland mitigation pond, a bOffer around the • pond that includes a strip AO' wide alohg, the hotth.i4e... of the pond and all of TO* Lot 1860 on the tohtb...;-. • and east Side o of the pond. We make, these redorindatiQflS for the folloWIng roObbii$t ..„„ . 1; Tb promote dorititefidy.betweeh stte and l�al tequiremeht8 •friditidlog the north wetland, mitiTatibh area within the City'...a •tequired open spade t06. will . . simplify the. tituatioh. fottho. aPPIld4fit4 govothmeht tgoOdioo. and the pubJ4t, ocT ?9 1990 . • 2. The recommended open space area is the minimum necessary to protect the remaining wetlands and stream on the property and maintain their associated wildlife, water quality, and flood storage values. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. cc: Gerry Black, Corps of Engineers Gene Herb, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Gary Voerman, EnvironMental Protection Agency Ralph Rogers, Environmental Protection Agency Emily Toby, Dept. of Land Conservation and Development Fans of Fanno Creek Cliff Epler John Blumgren Nancy Tracy LEGIBILITY STRIP u G4 'I N- .r c. GA v, :5 t ' ,s C> 'g4'4 r<71114iy -. 0/ -o(y 1L'L.,(ifa1 a p ?s an,n a,4 U0.' J77-A4sa1 r ci �r0LLJ LC d ancs=3---d ar(V L9C l I Ifrz [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] 4 TO: Keith Liden FROM: Randy Wooley DATE: November 19, 1990 SUBJECT: SLR 90-0011 Davis MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON comnjm t, 1. The request is to modify SL 1-86. SL 1-86 permitted filling in the flood plain of Aoh Creek, subject to a number of conditions. Work under SL 1-86 was begun in 1988. As of August of 1990, the work remained incomplete. Complaints were received from NPO #8, CPO 4, and various residents concerning violations of the conditions of SL 1-86. Staff agreed that the work was in violation of the conditions of approval. On September 13, 1990, a notice of civil infraction was filed. Subsequently, all of the conditions of SL 1-86 have been satisfied except creation of an open space area and fencing to keep livestock out of the open space area. 2. The applicant suggests that the pond created pursuant to SL 1-86 has improved the drainage of the area We find no basis for this conclusion. The pond was required as a method of mitigating the impacts on wildlife habitat resulting from the fill placed under SL 1-86. The regrading that occurred Under SL 1-86 may have improved drainage in the area However, we find this irrelevant to the question of the size of the required open space. The open apace and pond were intended for mitigation of impacts on wildlife habitat rather than for drainage control. When the applicant requested approval for filling, he submitted plans showing an area to remain Undeveloped. The open space requirement of SL 1-86 reflects this undeveloped area shown on the applicant's plan. 3i The applicant requests a reduction in the area to be dedicated as open Spade in accordance with SL 16-86. We have no objection to the requested reddction. However, we note that the dedication was a requirement that was added by the Hearings officer as a result of the public hearings on SL 1-86; it was intended to preserve open spade and mitigate impacts on the wildlife habitat. 4. The applicant requeSts approval to place additional fill in the flood piairi the only justification presented is the desire to increase the area of developable commercial ptopektY. WO find this confusing, since the applicant also ihdidatdd ah intention thu use tote prOperty for farming. It aPpearn to us that any dddtiohai filling should b® delayed until such time dd there is a apedifid proposal for domeitiai dovoloPitaht. Until adtdal • • development occurs, there is no need for additional filling. When a specific development proposal is submitted, consideration can be given to the need for additional fill. Additional fill can then be considered along with consideration of the creek crossing which will be required for development. There is no justified need for additional fill at this time. The applicant has a poor record of compliance with conditions of approval for filling in the past. Therefore, we recommend that the request for additional filling be denied. 5. The applicant complains that flow in Ash Creek is impeded by downstream sedimentation. We agree. However, the downstream conditions appear to be irrelevant to this application. In the past, the City has considered channel improvements to Ash Creek as a potential project for funding from the capital improvement budget. However, other projects with higher priorities have used all of the available capital improvement funds. The higher priorities were given to projects required to reduce the danger of flooding of existing structures and public improvements. As of July 1, 1990, responsibility for maintenance of the Ash Creek channel was transferred to the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA). USA has not yet developed a drainage master plan nor a long-range capital improvement program. The downstream siltation does not appear to have influenced the improvement requirements of SL 1-86. The downstream siltation does not appear to change the maintenance requirements of the mitigation ponds. The downstream siltation has no impact on the amount of open space that needs to be dedicated. It appears to ud that the downstream siltation is due, in part, to the improper construction activities of the applicant. 6 The applicant requests a delay in the formation of an °milord' association to guarantee permanent maintenance of the open space area We feel that some type of permanent maintenance guarantee is needed to assure that public fundd will not need to be ekpended for maintenance of the facilities Which were created solely for the benefit of the applicant. The maintenance guarantee should be in a form which will clearly transfer the responsibility to any future ownekd. Therefore, we recommend that the requirement for an association be retained or that demo dimilak perManent guakantee of Maintenande be impieinented. 7 We recommend that the decision clarify Condition No 6 of SL 1.,86. Condition No 6 provides that there shall be no grazing Of livestock in the open space alma, The applicant has interpreted this condition to allow the herding of livestock across the open space area when moving the livestock from One Orating area to another. Others have ittujOeeted that the condition prohibits livestock in the open epnoe area at all timed. clarification Of the intent of Condition No 6 is needed. roldnvie-oot • 158 N. FIRST AVENUE HILLSBORO, OREGON 97124 (503) 648-8621 Tigard, OR 97223 Item Copies Date Description as you requested for your information nformation for your approVal U for your review [� return requested Remarks From Russ LaWi4efice,., PE 'oject Msndgeir: .... 1' 81=41 r ky,krrl "� �k October 26, 1990 TO: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS FROM Tigard Planning Division RE: SLR90- 0011 DAVIS SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW SLR 90-0011 DAVIS NPO #8 Applicant requests Sensitive Lands Review to amend Sensitive Lands Review SLR 1 -86 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year flood plains Applicant also requests approval to adjust the area dedicated as private open apace to include the existing lake and 40 foot periniter as well as 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. ZONE: C P and R -4.5 (Commercial Professional, and Residential, 4.5 unite per acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, West of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 181 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and WCTM 181 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500) Attached is the site plan 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 by 11/06/90. You may use the space provided below ar attach a separate letter to return y our comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, Please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comrente in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639- 4171. '1 STAFF CONTACT: 4k4 l� A,J PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it Please contact ., 66 .. of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Comments: Name of person commenting.. Telephone number: FROM :WILDLIFE DIUISION &'HCD TO: Fish &Wildlife 503 684 `7297 OCT 29+ 1990 5 37PM 0161 P. 01 WILDUFE DMSON 2501 SW FIRST + P.O. BOX 69 a PORTLAND 97207 TRANSM1 L DATE: TO: Kk - LOCATION: FROM: c, " ort--AA-) INFORMATION OR INSTRUCTIONS 46.4L 4'11 FAX NO: NUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW 1 REPLY FAX T TO 229,4940 • 'TO VERIFY •RECEIPT CALL )229- DOLE X449 503 684 7297 UCT 29, 1990 5:37PM #161 P.02 Many Tigard Planning DePartment RR; EMEM,WILINEL_ALILAkkit.L_Rhyn (mPO VI) A request for Sensitive Lands review approval to amend Sensitive &ands review SLR 1-86 which would all Cattle grazing on property previously deto*mined to be within the 100 year Lie plain. Also requested Le approval to adjust tae area dedicated ae private open apace to inClude the existing lake and 40 foot perimeter ae well mg 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. =MN C-P and R-405 (Commercial Professional and Reaidentiol 4.5 unite/acro) LoCATIOND North of Highway 217, west of OW 04th Avenue (00TH 131 35A0, tax lots 101, 2800, 4000 and 181 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, A /500) Attached is the Oita Plan and aPPlioant's statement for your review. Orem information supplied by various departments and agenciaa and from othor information available to our staff, a report and rectamendation will be prepared and a deciSion wilt be rend on the proposal in the near future., If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by gigto124, 1922. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. 0” !Aci- .o4 e a 0 '1,411 Plenee phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon me possible.: XL you have any questions regarding Chia matter, contact the Tigard Manning Department, PO Bog 23307, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223, !Maga 639-4171. STAFF 44(HVEINCTo PLEASE CHECg THE POLVOlams ItTEHS THAT 'Onto we have teviewed the iroposaL gOd have Uct Obje0W005 to Lt. Please contact of our office. - PLOaaa refer to the mu:40mA Letter. MtLiteit name of Ptateon tommentings Phone ilumber * .ty4i� bicti/Utti90.11 . 10/29 9 17 34 x'50! 34 7297 RECEPTION OK TRANSACTION # CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES ACTIVITY REPORT 8135 G3 10/29 17:33 01'11 2 QA,g,,('P t Ij 001 1?5jvc031° teiker'j V NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT GOVERNOR OREGON STATE LAND BOARD NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT Governor BARBARA ROBERTS Secretary of State ANTHONY MEEKER State Treasurer Division of State Lands 775 SUMMER STREET, SALEM, OREGON 97310 PHONE (503) 378-3805 MEMOR A October 25, 1990 TO: Tigard Planning Department FROM: SUBJECT: oel Shah, Division of State Lands Sensitive Lands SLR 90 --0011 Davis The Division of Sta Lands, under state permit r RF 4570, 4570 , is requiring the applicant to record deed rob estrictions on the wetland mitigation areas on the property (yellow flow area on attached map). The deed restrictions will require these areas to be managed for wetland res ource protection. Grazing, filling, or other . alterations will be prohibited except as required for poses. app not recorded Bur 1 .can has wetland protection e, restrictions and is currently in violation of the ed the required permit. We are deferring enfor ceMentfofthisarequirement until after the City Tigard completes this review. that the City of Tigard . We recommend modify required . at a minimum, f the areas' open space area to include; a in yellow and pink on the attached map. This includes the north wetland mitigation pond, a buffer pond that includes a strip 40 wide along of the pond and all of Tax Lot 1300 on the west, South, and east Sides of the pond. We make these recommendations for the following reasons: 1. To p romote consistency y between .,.. s t ate an d local requirements: Including the north wetland mitigation . area within the City' required open space area will Simplify the situation for the ap t, plican go rr Ve' . -finen . agencies, and the public, OCT 2 9 1090 n�.�•;x a l ��ti {l� `�.a�: rW v . _: r �: 1� l ryr • ... • 2. The recommended open space area is the minimum necessary to protect the remaining wetlands and stream on the property and maintain their associated wildlife, water quality, and flood storage values. Thank Y ou for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. cc: Gerry Black, Corps of Engineers _ Gene Herb, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife 9 gon Dep p Gary Voerman, Environmental Protection Agency Ralph Rogers Environmental Protection Agency Emily Toby, Dept. of Land Conservation and Development Fans of Fanno Creek Cliff Epler John Flumgren Nancy Tracy • ri EMPEHT FCIE COMMENTS DATE: 14egtkro i0(?(9 TO: 15(.61(1 .(2 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: monNTLI4RNML__gm 90-0011 DAVIS (NPO #8) A request or Sensitive Lands review approval to amend Sensitive Lands review SLR 1-86 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Also requested is approval to adjust the area dedicated as private open space to include the existing lake and 40 foot perimeter as well as 40 feet along the eouthern border of Ash Creek. ZONE: C-P and R-4.5 (Commercial Professional and Residential 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (MTH 181 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 181 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, la 1500) Attached is the site Plan and applicant's 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 by ggta—ga, 1990. You may use the apace provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. ou are unable to ree..nd e the above date please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions ro7ardinq this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: Ag4thAkidgin PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to Lt. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Commontse_ Name of Pereon Commenting: 1/4) Phone Number: hkm/SLR90-11 :BKM 411 f 1 TLAVV Cg:oRc PRoTTcTrO J A-P--e A- be res1-r;cfl00 Ye v cQ. Ut ctev- State Pevt»J )Jo. RF 15 70 k -tol a /1v1 j yt t rtAVw cc req. r cp &JU spite / epp veSf r i-c1•a.ls regv;crec by (,' -r of T iz ctrcc \\ gagant- /I- %fec) dtt118 AJT118I931 TO: REQUEST liCR COMMEHTS DATE: er10, 19P FROM Tigard Planning Department RE: 82,MITIVE1 (NPO 48) A request for Sensitive Lands review approval to amend Sensitive Lands review SLR 1-86 which would allow cattle grazing gnproporty previously determine 100 year floodplain: Also requested is approval to adjust the area ---aidicated as private open space to include the existing lake and 40 foot perimeter as well as 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Cteek. ZONE: C-P and R-4 S (Commercial Professional and Residential 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 131 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 1S1 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1500) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's 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 by Oct. 22, 1990. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments t_you are unable to respoljhmthgl_ggITAAtm, pleJse phone the staff contact noted below with your commentd and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Hlvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONg: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no oilections to it lame contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. 1,,, Written Compaente/VPOSIa. _■24pA4 lo " AJ 1st er") Name of Person dommenting: Phone Number: ,42/..s- qq bkm/SLR90-11.BKM ',A. .4,4, wy" 0.,"" •,f",7+, LEGIBILITY ST TO:`---) RCM= VCR CON= DATg: ootober 10 1990 PROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: fiplEgMEL,011ILIMO (tWO #8) A request for Sensitive Lands review approval to amend 8,,neitive Lends review SLR 1-86 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Also requested is approval to aejust the area dedicated an private open space to include the existing /Ake and 40 foot perimeter as well an 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. ZONE: C-P and R-4.5 (Commarcial Professional and Residential 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 181 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 181 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, & 1500) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's 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 ng.ar future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by 1990. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. Ifyotaiale.„Ltc221,..Lbovedta24 please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing an noon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Nall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAPP CONTACT: Katth Liden PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: ivonsommamnoitl slOwl•MMIONINOM1 We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Pleas contact 11••••••••••■••■•••• of our office Please refer to the enclosed letter. written comma:Ito: kame ef Person Commentin Phone Number bkm/SLR9041 .DEM RECNEWEN, CCIP lia50 trt Lo _AA ilk A A A / 014 TO: 990 MIPAINITYDEVELOPME cc"mm. FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: pEmsItum_LAmpg_11022=20.1 Dima (NPO #8) A Lands review approval to amend Seneitive Lando review i. w iu allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Also requested is approval to adjust the area dedicated ao private open space to include the existing lake and 40 foot perimeter as well as 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. EOM C-P and R-4.5 (Commercial Professional and Residential 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, WOOt of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 151 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 181 35AD, tax lot, 1200, 1300, 1400, & 1500) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staffi a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendiored on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this appliication, we need your comments by Get. 22, 1990. You may use the space provided below Or attach a separate tatter to return Your comments. Ill..3tou are unable titmomat&LAIAAdLAMEaulatft& pleauo phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. /f you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR-97223i. PHONE: 639-4171. STAPP CONTACT: PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING /TENS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the propo6al and have no Objections to Lt. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed Letter. Written Comments: '■■■■•■•■■•- Name of Person CoMmenti 'Phone kumber: bkmisLR9041,13KM IIEQUEST COMMITS TO: DATE: October 10 1990 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: Ingram& LANDS SLR 90- 0011 DAVIS (NPO #8) A request for Sensitive Lando review approval to amend Sensitive Lands review SLR 1 -86 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Also requested is approval to adjust the area dedicated au private open apace to include the exiating lake and 40 foot perimeter as w .:11 as 40 feet along the southern . border of Ash Creep. ZONE: C -P and R-4.5 (Commercial Profesaiona1 and Residential 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: Borth of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 181 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 181 35AD, tax iota 1200, 1300, 1400, a 1500) Attached is the Site P1 n and applicant's statement for your .review. From information supplied by various department = ant information available to our staff, a report i prepared and a decision will be rendered on the .% If you wt h to comment on this application, we nem 1990. You may use the space provided below or return your coamentn. 1 you are unable to reapo GENE ®IRCHILL phone the staff contact noted below with your Deputy Fire IVIaashall p ommentes in writing as soon as possible. If you R , Plans E'xram/ner this matter contact the Tigard Planning De artan� "y' ", ' ;�iiP >` r writing matter, � g P ,, . .�r ,. ,_� X03- 5262502.. Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE. 639-4171. . FAX 525.2538 TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUI AND BEAVERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT STAFF CONTACT: Keith Lichen. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: 4755 S.W. Griffith Drive • Beaverton+ Oregon 97C We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Cornrpentu: w Name of Perelon Commenting: Phone Number: 4:>/t( bkm/SLR90 -11. DKM _at' REMPSIt FOR COMMITS DATE: gptober 10 1990 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: NLIM.1,SESIANDS,..ga92-00311TIS (NPO #8) A request for Sensitive Lands review approval to amend Sensitive Lands review SLR 1-66 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Also requested is approval to adjust the area dedicated as private open space to include the existing lake and 40 foot perimeter as well as 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. W=3 C-P and R4.5 (Commercial Profeesienal and Residential 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WTM 151 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 151 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, & 1500) Attached it the Site Plan and applicant's 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 by Oft. 22, 1990. You may use the apace provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If ou ar unable to res..nd b ' the above date please Phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. MAW' CONTACT: PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. please contact ••■■•=11.4.1.0.1011 AR01011•00■1■1111011 of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written CbittritOlittii ItilaillIZMINA■INIMMINIMMEml.iiiillon■11■10.11raMINNIIMW.Ni■■•••■••11111}1.1•111110.11 Name of Person Commenting: Phone b1um/SLR90 -11.8M --.....,„..„...„.„...„... .L.. „ . : .,.. ,....,..., . 'Or' 1 1 1690 • ..'.''''''' . eilV ..Of .. 0 .. . ''.1AISININt4:-..tittl.Pi. .. '.. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION FILE NO: SLR 90 -0011 FILE TITLE: DAVIS APPLICANT: EUGENE DAVIS 13095 SW HENRY BEAVERTON, OR 97005 OWNER: SAME REQUEST: Applicant requests Sensitive Lands Review approval to amend Sensitive Lands Review SLR 1 -86 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Applicant also requests approval to adjust the area dedicated as private open apace to include the existing lake and 40 foot perimit.er as well as 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. 4th lots 101, 2SOO�h4 of ®OOHi and aWCTM 'lSle35ADf tax BlOt ©Avenue (WCTM 1S1 35AC, tax LOCATION: North 1300, 1400, 1500) ZONING DESIGNAVION: 4.5 unite per acre) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Residential NPO No: C -P and R -4.5 DESIGNATION: CHAIRPERSON: Marilyn Hartzell PHONE: 245 -6299 STAFF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION �X HEARINGS OFFICER CITY COUNCIL (Commercial Professional, Commercial Professional, DATE . / /.. TIME DATE 11/13/90 TIME 7 :00 DATE // TINE :. X ATTACHMENTS: COMMENTS MAP ) T LANDSCAPING PLAN see attached 1is X NARRATIVE ARCHI TECTURAL �. TECTUi':AL PLAN . .. _. `X SITE PLAN X GRADING PLAN STAFF CONTACT PERSON: Keith Liden PREPARE FOR PLANNER APPROVAL: AL= X NOTICE TO PROPERTY MAILED ROPERTY OWNE.� . _ „_ �. X ADVERTISEMENT - TIMES __.. / _._. OWNERS TO BE MAILED / OREGONIAN ._.-. NOTICE TO DLCD ATTACHMENTS: APPLICATION / /. NOT �.. LET Residential Law - Density aeavatom Pet Cebtie GENE DAVIS, DVM 13095 S,W, HENRY BEAVERTON, OREGON 97005 (503) 646-6101 NARRATIVE We are applying For an alteration oF our Sensitive Lands Permit No, SL 1-86 as a result of various assumptions which did not prove to be correct. The main assumption was that this entire Field marked in red was thought to be within one Foot below the 100 year Flood plain. You will note the David Evans drawings taken From Army Engineers aerial topography maps indicated most oF this area at 160 Feet. In reality, this area is 161 and 162 Feet and is our Farm. We alWays planned, and still do plan to Farm it. I thought we might have to revert to crops rather than livestock, thinking we were in the 100 year Flood plain. This area had a drainage problem Which has been corrected by Forming a lake. ThereFore, we request the city to allow us to dedicate the lake and 40 Foot perimeter as well as i0 feet along the south border OF Ash Creek as shown in the dotted areas denoted in the legend captioned Open Space Deed Restrictions on W.B. Wells Easement Survey. This would make the permit consistent with State and Federal requirements in this matter. We also request the area along. the north border of Ash Creek adjacent. 95th Street and. Highway 817 be. re-graded end. Filled . . according to the 88 toot standard which We already have in our Ot6000t, permit o area was under-Filled and we lost substantial commercial property, Re Page .8i. rpplication Checklist • 8) Site tevelopment Plan Point 6) Storm drainage Facilities and analysis oF downstream conditid0O.,. The main problem With this .. whdle..drainage.prodess•is•the, lack of downstream attention. There it approximately 8: Feet of sediment already: in the box culverts just west of this Pe0Oet't4 going under Highway 811, This, and the Failure to give ON attentitift to tibliJilttear6 blockage is deFeating this peojobt. Thoed 1.5. :0014 8800 . Feet . From the :Highway 217 culvert to Panno: Creek, IF vdfifitittbek downstream is not cleaned, Od amount oF upstream work: will ao�mplish inuoh In daditioh to the two Feet : oe silted in material, there is two to .three teet OF water ItJokup, • u).,8:: et.(4& • *to: 4: j4,1:41 g re'LA. likZO ::0:4":74. 0.4 (.0 E1 t'At. 14g ›. ot.4 4.41)..{"ti 4 ■tp ' t) 95th AVE AVE LEGIBILITYST_RIP /4170,764-cer, °Pat ofrrts. -p Pao 176-it etz0D. Ea O E4p•I NJ 0 La% £�1 OREGM' a . . ?� a I,1GRWA'Y DIVISION RIGHT Or' WAY SECTION STATE HIGHWAY BLDG. pa 110 SALEM, ( 91 7811 LAND seTZ CCUMACT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of Highway Division Pile 32679,L -3884 85016250 199?, by and between the STATE OF OREGON, by and through its ,DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Highway Division, hereinafter referred to as "State", and GENE L. DAVIS and VIVIAN M. DAVIS, husband and w; :e, hereinafter referred to as "Purchasers". WITNESSETP That State, for the' consideration hereinafter mentioned, covenants and agrees to and with iurchaaers to sell and convey unto Purchasers, and Purchasers agree to purchase from State, the following described property, to wit: A parcel of land lying in Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, ai.M., Washington County, Oregon and being a portion of that property designated as Parcel 2 and described in that deed to the State of Oregon, b y and throu g h ito State Highway Commission, recorded in Book 458, Page 496, Deed Records of Washington County; the said parcel being that portion of said property lying Northeasterly the following described line: Beginning at a point opposite and 100 feet Northeasterly of Engineer's Station 365+00 on the center line of the relocated Beaverton- Tigard Highway which center line is described in said State of Oregon deed; thence Southeasterly parallel with said center line to a point opp osite Engineer °e Station 366+00 on said center line; thence Southeasterly in a straight line to a point opposite and 85 feet Station 36 0 on said center opposite thence Northeasterly Engineer's �. erl of �, aitid center line to a point center line; ortheast with s ... . Southeaster,. y► parallel Engineer's Station 368+00 on said center line. The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 0.23 acre, more or less. The above described property shall hereafter be referred to as 'premises'. 1. PAYMENTS. Purchasers agree to psy State therefor the sum of $20,000.00 payable as follows: -85 Tax Statements are to be Scut. to the foiitiol ng .address: Department of Transportation, highway Division • Tranbsportation Salem, OR 97310 �1 r r �r ir..M.v- 4r,�.,� �Y� .r rr.�iy r,7s•, �1.., �... _... Highway Division Tile 32679, L--3804 or are in writing signed by State. Purchaser° agree that Purchaser have ascertained, building, housing, and other from sources other than State, the applicable zoning, g gg regulatory ordinances fi and laws, and that Purchasers accept premises with full awareness of these ordinances and laws as they may affect the present use or any intended future ' use of premises, , and State has made no representations with respect to such laws or urdir,snces. Whenever the word "purchasers" is used herein the same shall be deemed to include Purchasers, their heirs, administrators, executors, personal representatives, successors or assigns. TV; '� remedies dies p rovided above shall be nonexclusive and in addition to any other 7�h remedies provided by law. This document is the entire, final, and complete agreement of the parties p pertaining to the sale and purchase of premises, and supersedes and replaces all prior or existing written and oral agreement s between the parties or their representatives relating to premises. In WITNESS WHEREUP p the parties hereto have affixed their signatures the day and year first above written. 1,'p �.(1VED AS TO hE, ;t� S� F.CIENGY wind h throug its ET�TE OF OREGt' �� , ��► , , DEPARTMENT oP 'TRANSPORT . JTION Hi:';' wa Dtvisio B Boyd, Ri of Way Manager Page 7 — LSC • , ••• • 4 .." • STATE OF OREGON; County of personally appeared the above named Gene L. Davis and Vivian N. Davis, who acknowiedged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act STATE OF OREGON, County of Marion Personally appeared J. B. Boyd, who being sworn, stated that he is the Right of Way Manager for the State of Oregon, Department Transportation, Highway Division, and that this document was voluntarily signed behalf of the State of Oregon by authority delegated to him. Before me: ,or A Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires STATE OF OREGON } SS County of Washtingion f, Donald W, Matoh, DirOciot of Assessment and TaXatiOn and Ex-OffiCio Recorder Of Con, VeyanCee for tairi, cOUrity; do hereby certify that the Within instrement of Writing Was rocehieci and recorded in book of records of said wanly, beheld W, Mason; Director �f Aeseseinent and Taxation; EX, brittle Ceti* Clerk � NW {Y�S,A• ,rr•,?�ti y • k .. 4 laltu► Au. i ••411 •►GIU.it•• ri i► lilt. vq Ate "AAAERICA T TI it ;i KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That .., F,PRll F e A + 1 INE M. .. ,., ALEXANDER egad CAfilElt._ gax. NDER huobaz►d and twa£e .. ... i.,.. ..• ,... .... H,u,•,rufJ l.1H1 „H11 b.1 C. » :.. .411 N:11 a1 . . •UIH4. U. , rYY S••,. i. n,44 •, .... +. ». », .,:. 4..44 4..41.. .1 i. a4141..4w..4 ., • •... a.:. r4.• .1.4.1 i -.. :>• 14,.41.:4 4.6.•r.i:,.r/ • •., ++, 4, •• 4 4. •1 .41 ,.+.1.44 4.1444.44.1.14444.4".44.444. .. w1 •,.441 �'�• 111 consuleraition of fen and 00/100...- w w• r r r r r r m® oe Dollars, and other valuable, considerations 4. • ii to, 4th f,... :, paid by EUGENE LOREN DAYA,PAO VIVI,A,W„lti,ARY DAVIS,, hucbl nd wad 11.344 H,{... .,: ,...N.♦ ai• rt1.Y > •. a1,.. 44441.4 , , 4 4 .1.44.4... 1 1 . 44 0. 41.4..4 .4.4.4.. Eu ene Loren Dc}vi, ly a ViV74 ��i�4X' D v do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convoy unto acrd g .y, Po d§ • hUsband and wife. :14.4.,4,•444{1 :,.16 .+1.1.1.1 4.1.4.13 111 ...:i 11, 441.if 4111.444..11rI1Ii 41 434.111...44.44.44:4.4.•14111:, 11.11441. :4.41.:• :.1443 their heirs and assigns, all the following reef property, with the tenements, .. lw,editan,ents and appurtenances, situated in the County of Washington.- ,,. .... ... :.... ........ and State al Oregon, bounded and described as follows, to -Wit: PAL I Beginning at a point in the center of pile Main ditch on the North line of LOT 21 in ASKSROOFARM, an addition in Washingtcn County,0 go as the same is losowu and designated on the map or plat thereof now on file in the office of ;he County Recorder of Conveyances of Washington County, Oregon, the same being in the D. C. Gre um Donation Laud Claim Number 52, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of Willamette Meridian, in Washington County, Oregon, whioh point is 301144 chains Easterly on the North line of said LCr 21 from the Northeast corner of LOT 20, ASHBROOK FARM; thence Easterly along the Course of paid ditch and along said North line of said LOT 21, .A.shbrook Farm, 609,8 feet, more or lees, to ;he West Boundary lino of a tract of lend sold to Louis Clifton Steele by Deed recorded October N31 19220 in Book 3214, page 291, Deed records of Washington County, Oregon; thence Southerly alc-ag the West line of said tract sold to Louis Clifton Steele recorded in Deed records as aforesatd 580.8 feot,moro or leas, to the South line of LOT 21; thence Westerly along the South line c.^ LOT 21, 608014 feet, more or leas, to a point that is 3.14 chains East of the Southeast cornbr of LOT 20; thence North parallel with the East lino of LOT 20, 9,.455 chains, more or less, tip the place of beginning, EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion of the herein described premises lyn within the boundaries of LOTS 36, 37 and 38, 39 and 140, GRAHAM ACRES, Washington County, Orono; ALSO EXCEPTING therefrom the portion thereof conveyed to the State of Oregon by Deed records;, it DEED 9, p 223, S►1 Count, oa PARCEL oII LOTS 38 and 39 , GRAXAM ACRES Washington County, Oregon PARCEL ill LOTS 36, 37 and 140 GLEAM ACRES, Washington County, Oregon EXCEPTING; ghts of public in and to that part of the herein described premises lying with the boundaries of roads end highways; Also United accept; in Deed from Ford F. Alexander and Catherine M. Alexander, husband and wifo, to State of Oregon, by and thru it's State Highway Department:, r ecorded September 11, 1961 in Deed Book 14.9,, page 223, Washington County, Oregi PremiSee lie within the Metzger Sanitary D s mot, and are subject t use and benefit of smao 7•�'fl}•j�Haave End toH }old the above described and ranted premises pinto the said Iand,lli+�.Y+6W L, i.Y➢„• +�,�61�• �S,Ib4,�d :. V1IMYM Y.>{ isifai „ii,,iflif, +i4fi,77�77,47477 i +4,..11 r. i.>i,f i,iiiliirff .114..• +•.• •.441,44 ... 44.4 ... .144444.4+ ,..4114.1414.,1. 1131.11.,41:,71141444444444444 .61444M{iiiiii /+6..+313.iii4 341 :.464,1416 :64 :,444, :6111,,: ..14.1 a •4 1,.111.4341411414.f4.14.14.4 .+..1, 411 14 .4444114414i44444444141i1414i34 .114 4..41.4.411411444 x44 1 alt1411 41 ..4{.,444 141+..+ 44411441114 44: 444ii: 4iifi:17711,143411f4444144i4444 31141114444144444441 :444 117 fif444441414f ....... 4.i414714f1 74144 .i44i4744fi4441i11444.44111 •.,1744: 644447444 444144i44443ii44 :iiii'44: 314434:: iii.. 4431 .'iii4644iiii4iiif4:464i.4i44 44141714. 144.111 14111144 {4,44144 /44414:41414411411• the aeada ements for t Eugene.6.r wea ..Decr.is 4444.444.14, 4114444 444444,444414.144 :444iii43 ..1- +4+.1.4. 1.+4,4: 44.4.3 /3ii13iiiiii4 :i ,heirs and assigns forever4 41.4{1 441+.{.,.1+1 14.+1.1:: 041.114441,144: :411 4{1.11:4 113 4 114 4 113 1 4.4 4 4 41414 4f46i1i4444i AAnd:' :y,.yry ^: F `�_e /•7 , . (� ®y(��•i p ��(1� n �/! jjj++ tl .. /jjji .l1 xy'ii�.�1 /� fin 11'ry.. y' nd ■MM ��4R+1 ©/a'iNl g41 Alf4111rdiiiidet„. WYYi1CatheA M41 „ Ale /4�:.41di3 '44�('.f463b4►I it `�44,IY.4 tiatf 1111414fliiiii ylJx{14 •14{ 1414 1.41„1,11+144414111744 +4 {Ii Ii6. 4444334311413131744 ,I1Y1411133, 11144431114{ 411, 1641344[ 441: 1.4434141111111143i1444444i344: :446414 11131414314614.444 141741144443411 the �rantorfl,,. above named dc,,....41 covenant t0 And With the above named grantee. n .............. thei .1',.444,.a1641...1.4,heira and aoslens that ranted premises are ,3 1414.47,. 4. Seized e hi led simple of the abo'v'e fantod gprre!nilses, that the atone ' s Exca' tit,An d14 4 r.i Y 1 Igwfttll b s, 1 �easament aand43 ,.of , w inoludin tr 3 y free from all eneum Book.. pa e. ,.11W on•,Connty, Oregon and,, Coadwitiojnc „and roa'trietibnc a ecuted by terms and, ri tisiona.,, ed.4to +.Zest ex S,auite Dit3 Louis 00 +Steele -711e:h11a1 "1.xnaordati„Dagtemi erii,l.0..ilg4.a"in+D®o�71B 553, �g 69 , ,' 0 IYoki i502:Qpago.4 .�j � Ii4Wp thigt V.K do 1nty,: . Oregon.,,,, 4741 .144,4f,4147i14i.7134411c43417 i :c1i44443f 74.1 i7a4tt4f 14 :1, 1, 43414411. .Y411,111141414..41{i41141:441. 4414144414:1i44i1. 71444.1•••4,. 1414.• 4111:1111:.•11:114.1141.14,4443 4411.. ••+. 1,441,141•. 441 /4.i44i444iii 11144. 414441, 4 111 114 4 /4,6144 /444444344 „4114.4.444„11 :4431.•37.. {+.1.1144444.4141,.144.„ / 141 4,,•,14.411,..444.10".+,...... 43i,44,f4,4411 4.1.,44+I4I44•44 441. i .1 ..i {117, 111 .144441444444, 441 is 41444411,4 {if 4l11,164i4414i4664,4 {43 {1444 {lf 41446111, 1,4 444414444411 4 31144 4 4 4 4.44, 3,4413411 ,64141113 ..... 44.4444644,4 444 4 .4444.1...44 •. ••1 ,.441 • .14 a• 1114 "ill .1.6644.ii11,4 ..... 114...44.• 4:•• • •• ••■•• 1•• ....41 ••1.1. •• 41. .414441 4 444441.1 141 ■••■ •■•• ■ r. 4.11. i4,44/114141:i•- r1 .4•./•1,••1, 41 11446. 144411146.•.4.+.113..4141•..•1. 1..411,• 1.1• ,• .I .... i .11 1 {4i1i1Y4.ali "441,.4.44144.4441• - 4fi.14f.111 1444 /43311416f4,4,441f4r43434i44 4441 4443.44:4.444..+ {1.414141.74 +111.14444.41••• 4 .4 4 •.. .1441. ,4144,441144 . 111 4' • and dirt. WO brie a1 ,.,At 1. „ Belts, ekeciytare and admii,istratorn, Shall Warrant and forever &tend the above dttJnti!d pt{einises, and every part mid parcel there 1, a ttirilsl ilfu law/ul Zltlliiis and dementia oall l ersat § Whamyoever, 4.4411414, 4., . 41+44 . . "44.1444 4444444414.410 4 . 4.44. 1•.414.4 .411.1.41.4,•14... .4. ..... 1 -4 •, 1 +. ..� /4y • �.$• 4.5.14 .. 441414/71 4{ 4411.•44 ,4441 1 41 • .4 .44.44.444 }4.4 ,y, >�144.41 1,44444,4o 44.4. X41• .441 44114 14445, 444 :4444444444i4444431444444444 ,,144.44(.44414 ►I lI ii x7.14, 44444414!444 Ti 74,4 •,4411414rhan 474 , and seal4a.441i ,1115•1134 1.i36Y••■ do 01 ,4. Li41iiiilriiM� i4i44Y344i4iiY44ii >4� ,�+4MM.ii Esecitted in the i resende at j1+ y1 1 u4 fi /14144444 111.1141,117.141+.14, I4{ 114/ 1{ Y6441114L14614414G4311 414i44i3413 /434664444134434,431446 111 .14H3iilf �i ..1. 41113 4, i .I.i, i, 4). 1,.G ' +....'♦4�[1N \1.4� t .1.i7/x.434116iii41{IIf44114i74 /SCi/4114.,: :741,11143 4 U ?'17,x• 4 Ia,f∎J 'e : TRi 4, 1a,e„,-(SEAL) ..1114 .341111.4, ...., •.• 4.•.•44.14, :f 414.440444444.44414444.144444414.44.4.1.41414.6.44.441 . . 4 1144 4ii444 /44411.44364i44Y464344444. 333, ,33,,34343 /3i413434ii44i6131i >74144tsktic4 144444144416414443,414461144 444i444i44134444444 :4i434:4i31344i 44111'314 ii ii44 64 4 4 14 6 614 3 ;Y{Hii 444i44114141Y6444 fU4,4 4 44164 317 44 44 636 444 316441 :111 4 1 4 41 4.00,.44644464..1'1E1015 6.1,1L11Jp.1i413 3 �. ' , o.ahinGtcm ..,.. }N. . STATE OF OREGON, County of W BE IT REMEMBERED, That on this 15.,....,.,.. , . , ., day of july...,. . 19, 66 , before me, the undersigned, a in and for said County and State, personally appeared the within named Ford F • amender end ‘,..,. Cothorine.,114,.Alexanclor ....hwabATIA.,14114...Ta9 eo..i 4646..40 , 000 ,, ••••44.o.41...444 . 6 .. 6 4•oor . 4144.4 o ..•• 4 4.• ... 4 . 444.4..444.4 4 ...... • 44,i44 oti4O44 i who ,, ore lo•oiol Itnosvn to me to be the identical individual,„0 described in and who executed Ma within instrument and acknowledged to me that thay executed the same freely and voluntarily. IN 'TESTIMONY WIIEREOP, I have hereunto set my hand and official real /h day rid y:ar last above written. li ...., 1.. ,,`' '. 1 , '■ ! e , . ,..7..... ... . ..... ry Public for Oregon. (1..t..,,„,.. . 441.4..44“ • My Commission expires te riiiiit '151 ',it. • 11) [ WO' oPiiiktilli41 , irto, 11.1 1th IAT Bid 41131IN " 1 LNiHI ,,,tintsaivireitHr 44 ft. ii*.1± ,ii, 1, o3 I OO Ooo 4 oio „ Ui r 0 4 't't■ t°*.‘ ,ittj49ii4j.4t=;: to. IL,: iloo.Y1* i4 Oil .11.144.4+1 4S 1+:44,4,•••-• 005 oOoo. 4 L�L" STATUTORY WARRANTY DECD) MF.4f. LThy.I i ; ,!touches, tts Lo an undivided 2interest, arid, Andrew Rouches Peter Rouches James Roaches, Oat ,Tnd Jennie IRuuches * * *, Grantor, colitt.'Y and +■,11 caul! DAY 14 agd. Li31i . .J Lw D.a tia, As fOnan t ........ b ;'.. the.,.( n.tir.oty the I'1►Itu!t nig ■10.0i HMI foal root rty I've or Bens and eheumbranccs, except as speeil'ietiliy set forth herein: * ** each as to an undivided 1 /10th interest, all as tenants in common v vc.C..0 34033254 Grantee, As described in attached Exhibit A * ** from or across the State Highway other than expressly therein provided for shall attach to the abutting property; Relinquishment of access as contained in Deed from John 0. Wick, to State of Oregon, by and through its State Highway Commission, recorded 10/16/61 in Book 451, page 203 (Affects that portion of Parcel III abutting State Highway No. 217); Relinquishment of access as contained in Deed from Anna George, a widow, to State of Oregon, by and through its State Highway Commission, recorded 3/5/62 in Book 458, page 351 (Affects Parcels I and II); Relinquishment of acces y s as contained in Deed from John 0. Wick , a wodower to State of Oregon by and through its State Highway Commission recroded 7/17/63 i 17/63 n Book 491, page 298; Easements of recordand 1984 -85 taxes, a lien but not yet payable "71•118 INST1i1.1MI N't 11(11s 14111 i,t % k i t t 111 1 .'+ 1`.- 1'I h I'Y IlitSL t.1ltt,t) IN 1111h II1;ti 1 \ :I It t, t , ;11. + , ('(1t N't'S' I'I.ANNINI, t)l $' \i:I'',II;ti1 It) !'t:1:11 ! +I'NRl'tt1 +1 ,i.s I •' ',r 1 ■ !' 4 i 'ill tali , ! i \I 'it i iI ' 'It. eo 1 iTliis property is free of liens and eneumbl'aneeti, BXCEPTt Statutory powers and assessments of Unified Sewerage Agency; The rights of the public in and to that portion highways; Limited access provisions contained ineDeedito the State • Oregon of the premises herein described lying by and through its State Highway Commission recorded 10/16/61 in Book 451 page 203' Which provides that no right or easement or right of access t0 * ** The true consideration Cor this 500.00 I')+1'T. ;t) thk , 27 till,( t1' i, _._►I13t _� _.:��i� — 1 i Phalle' aches Oev,tpr niche X Matthew Rouches Michigan $TAI'i ,(.)te th*620f11, r.'uultty It cfham tlld� I't►relittltlt. ilt'.tltltlteltl tats acknowledged before Ili(' tIi . tL1 _ _. da! of 19 sd t y Jennie Jtouchet , j(eCJ .r, . w.h ...tgok title 1 i 1 y� / 1 1 I ? 44.4:4.16 _„ Nuitit y I'lltiiit I lit t > +I1 I;uuititkslutt t�.t 1i q, a ROBERT W, NORTMAN` Moth Pubtiol 'tnahirn CuUnt11, MI My OtirnlairAlon btplrei July 24, t02, Title Order Ntt, -_ 384E1 i screw No, ,... _ 841495. Allot IL Iii(Ii h4 119n111 Ilr tiiraL American 1'nsurande Co Jib S.W 4th Atte PorLiand, OR 97204 BW II,,ii itktiti.1,rW I Hui 1 ■11 Oil 1,11 rl,11011,111, chid( Ito will It, Is 1UIlmi11111 u,liNlk. _... f 9 8.4l,.� r, ' J 4. AndreW Rotichgs X , . ,. / 1 ' i l ' . F ,. j ames 'Roaches ennig .Rouche Deck) who took title as Jenn:irCOI ORA L ACkNOWLEbGMENT S'1'A'I'r OP OIWOoN, Cuunty oi' )?;► 'Hie I'ut:going Inl;trunicnt was acknowledged dged before me this day or 19 , by , and. by . .� it corporation, on behalf or the eorporatiun, Nutury Ibnhlic Cut brogan by cuttitiiisslttii expires; srAL tfii SI'A "I~ IiI;SBIEVt ti i�oa kEGOkbai s 11SP. WASHINGTON. „ CoUlITY PEI PROf'tT2' TRANS 'ERA T �� FEE PAIb OATS N !E.lit,,tlllittt'1;, !44th tt 98 4 CIRCULATE. JX- H 8. RA .GA «Re kL 39 _ Z/v*6- 1. APPLICANT 2. PROPERTY LOCATION Address CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PRE- APPLICATION CHECKLIST Date Tax Map /Tax Lot 3. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION/NECESSARY APPLICATION(SY ./c.1496,,flivt. 4. USE Eddstin • g Adjacent Property north south east West 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGN . AT ON 4 6. ZONING a DESIGNATION. 7. , NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN A G ORGANIZATION 140. ._ CHAIRPERSON PHONE oils 6 64 CODE REQUIREMENTS Miol tum•• lot size/Widtb • t., corner $et�aC� 3 Fronter._,,. Special seth . di eets ac s stir 160efe z,ntena ity zones iide rear established areas Wetlands zero Fl.aS lots , .J aceessory str'uctures , ,.�:,� .,.ot 'Plait xmUtn `lot coeoe ge • tlak im4m bU L ld ing, 'he g ■ Special height limits flag lot olhe Density calculation Density transition Landscaping: minimum % of lot area Street Trees Buffer Areas Parking Areas. Visual clearance Parking and loading Access and circulation , Signs OTHER CONSIDERATIONS (See application ch cklist for specific items) floodplain drainageway >25% slope, Sensitive lands: Wetlands le•-** Open space Historic overlay Street improvements/connections/bikeways Right—of—waY dedication, Sanitary Sewer impeoUement Stoelh SeWee improvements 4. I ittpeoveitieht 6geeetrietit permit; Fee other prmits Csi id, 'PROCEDURE, • AdMiniSteatiVe• Staff eevxew. ..• . Puhit' ..1-ietteingitidatithg$. OffidEtte • Public 0e4einjitilwihing totoodion. The Administrative dection or 0o6Ut 14eaeitiq shall occur • 40peokitotily* 30 44y 1tee 400d0.• iieeida,fotiowd• all ddsi�fls.4 • (0610/0152114). . A . • *+' " ' ' * *" - 4 ,* CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST • Staff Date The item on the checklist below are required for the successful completion of Your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be brought and submitted with all other materials at the time you submit your application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call Planning at 639-4171. BASIC MATERIALS A) Application form (1 copy) B) Owner's signature/written authorization C) Title transfer instrument D) Assessor's map E) Plot or site plan F) Applicant's statement (G) List of propert owners & addresses within 250 feet (H) Filing fee ($ ) SPECIFIC MATERIALS _Inforti_2_tioli.11---alowin (Noe of copies 12k: Vicinity Map Site size & dimensions Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades > 10%) Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds Locations of natural hazard areas including: a) Floodplain areas b) Slopes in excess of 25% c) Unstable ground d) Areas with high seasonal water table e) Areas i Wth severe soil erosion potential 4 4 A) Site 7) ) 9) 1.0) ITEMS TO BE INCLUDED: 0 Areas having severely weak foundation so]. s Location of resource areas as shown oh the Comprehensive Map inventory including' a) Wildlife habitats b) Wetlands Othox site featUrest a) Rock outcroppings b) Trees With 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground level Location of existing strUctUres and their uses Location and type of on and off-site noise sources Location of existing U1i1ities and easements Location of existing dedicated right—of—ways ) (NOH, 1). Th...peciptiod:tito .oute,ouhdihg.•kopeetioo • 1) Contour lie 9) The location dittieh$16h0 and h4Oiet. of All! A). • • ExitItiq platted streets other public tiays and easements the site and oh. adjOihih.d properties APOLtd010 tOEORLIO .• Pogo. '4- , • . • , ' ' " ' b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site. c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension The location and dimension of a) Entrances and exits on the site ,b) Parking and circulation areas c) Loading and services areas d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation e) Outdoor common areas, f) Above ground utilities The location, dimensions & setback distances of all: a) Existing permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site 6) Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions 7) Sanitary sewer facilities 8) The location of areas to be landscaped 9) The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques 10) ) location of mailboxes 1) The location of all structures and their orientation 12) Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreement's Grading Plan (No, of copies J The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the followin g information 1) The location and extent to which grading Will take place indicating general contour lines, slope ratios and soil stabilization proposals, and time of year it is proposed to be done 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 c) That all g problems Will be mitigated and how the'yWill be mitigated 0) Architectural brawin s (No, of copies )! The site development plan proposal shall include; 1) floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures proposed for use on -site; and 2) Typical eleVatioh drawings of each structure, L) Landscape Plan ; 0No, of copies ): f the landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scal e o e site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate: E] (3 (3 t3 C3 1) D:es& iptioh of the irrigation system where • applicable j 2) Location and height • of fences, buffers and screenings APPLICATION CNECfLIST — Page 2 3) Lo °.. ion of terraces, decks, shelte iw,.;" play areas an common open spaces E 3 4) Location, type, size and species of existing and proposed plant materials. C ] The landscape plan shall include a narrative which addresses: 1) Soil conditions. C 3 2) Erosion control measures that will be used. C 3' "; F) Sign brawincls yt . Sign drawings shall be submitted in accordance ,with Chapter 18.114 of the Code as part of, Site Development Review or prior to obtaining a Building Permit to construct the sign. C y `^ G) Traffic generation estimate C � I rrb�w�.��_ Preliminar .artition or lot line ,adiustment mae_srhowin ry (No. of Copies ): 1) The owner of the subject parcel C 3 2) The owner's authorized agent C 3 vr'y $ 3) The map scale, (20,50,100 or 200 feet =l), inch north arrow and da e C 4) Description of parcel location and boundaries E 3 Y � lHt 5) Location, width and names of streets, easements and otherr public p c way s within and adjacent to the parcel C 6) Location of all permanent buildings on and within 25 feet of all property lines C 3 �4a Wr;r, 7) Location and width of all water courses C 3 $) Location of any trees with 6" or greater caliper at la4Y •4sw 4 feet above ground level C " r , 9) All slopes greater than 25% C 3 10) Location of existing utilities ahtltyeasements C 3 11 ) For ma or land partition which creates iip u public r { .,,•.,;au a) The proposed right- of-way location and width C 3 - b) A scaled crass - section of the proposed street plus any reserve strip C 3 a 1rf 12) Any applicable deed restrictions C 3 i that land partition Will not preclude 13) Evidence future land division where applicable C subdivision Preliminary Plat Map and data showing(No. of copies : .,., 1) Scalequaling 30, 50,100 or 200 feet to the inch and limited to one phase per sheet C a 2 ) The . ., proposed x .. • � 3) Vi. " ro Vicinity map showing name of the subdxv�sio ) h C owing property s relationship to to •; arterial and collector streets t 3 4) Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner developer, engineor, surveyor, designer, as applicableC 3 5) bate of application subdivided C pP ) lines of tract to or o d 6 k�ounda6�� , ...... , a `' 7) Names of adjacent subdivi Y of recorded owners of adjoining p Y , n diva d C 3 ,. lines related to a City—established bench- mark 8) Contour at 2' -foot intervals for 0 -10% grades greater than 10% S 9) The purpose, location, type and size of all of the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): C 3 a) Public and private right—of—Ways and easements b) Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines [ ) c) Domestic water mains including fire hydrants [ ] d) Major"'power telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) E 3 e) Watercourses 3 f) Deed reservations for parks, open space, Pathways and other land encumbrances I 3 10) Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated 11) Plan of the proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the location of Valves and fire hydrants. C ] 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;.[ ] 14) The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow 15) Location, width and direction of flow of all water- courses and drainage ways The proposed lot configurations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers, Where lasts are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or C] greater measured at 4 feet above ground leVel, and the location of proposed tree plantings, if any 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 Supplemental information including: a) Proposed deed restrictions (if any) b) Proof of property ownership c) A proposed plan for provision of subdivision improVements 20) EXisting natural features iticluding rock out- croppings, wetlands and marsh areas, A 21) If any of the foregoing information cannOt practicably be shown on the preliminary plat i it shall be incorporated into a narrative and submitted with the application. I 3 • C] C] jpie • 3) other Information • (23620100200) C /V ArA4 -7 • -01a? fr-4 OFZIMI ,.. w' ) *JP e APPLICAttON cHCkLtt Page 4.. z ' 410 •;. sl.•-:•.*. 47. 4 P/CATION LIST POR ALL APPLICA 1. NPO NO. C/1(2 copies) 2. CITY DEPARTMENTS ve- Building Inspector/Brad R. Recorder t.//Engineering/Gary A. 3. SPECIAL DISTRICTS Fire District (pick-up box bldg.) ___IeTTigard Water District 8777 SW Burnham St. Tigard, OR 97223 VMetzger Water District 6501 SW Taylors Ferry Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 4. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS Wash. Co. Land Use & Tranap. 150 N. First Ave. Hillsboro, OR 97124 Brent Curtis Kevin Martin Joann Rice Scott King Fred Eberle Mike Borreson Jim Hendryx City of Beaverton PO Box 4755 Beaverton, OR 97076 0/State Highway Division Lee Gunderson PO Box 565 Beaverton, OR 97075 5. SPECIAL AGENCIES P/General Telephone Mike Lutz 12460 SW Maih St. Beaverton, OR 97007 NW Natural Gas Don Thomas 220 NW Second Ave. Portland, OR 97209 I/CPO NO. lepre&62- _JZParks & Recreation Board Police Other dab/12 omme.111.■•• School Diet. No. 48 (Beavr) Joy Pahl PO Box 200 Beaverton, OR 97075 School District 23J (Tig) 13137 SW Pacific Hwy. Tigard, OR 97223 Boundary Commission 320 SW Stark Room 530 Portland, OR 97204 METRO 2000 SW let Ave. Portland, OR 97201-5398 DECD (CPA'S only) 1175 Court St. NE Salem, OR 97310-0590 Other ianwaffirmarror Portland General Electric Brian Moore 14655 SW old Scholia Ferry Beaverton, OR 97007 Metro Area Communications Harlan Cook TWin Oakd Technology Center 1815 NW 169th Place S-6020 Beaverton, OR 97006-4886 US West Pete Nelson 421 SW Uak St‘ Portlandi OR 97204 tOf04bItiviijOn Of Oke0Ohi Inc., :Nike HallOck 35�b SW Bond POttIS'.O4i OR 91201 ° ""'• .,• # • -;•• ,•„'• •, e ' STATE AGENCIES 6. , Aeronautics Div. (ODOT) Engineer Board of Moalth Fish & Wildlifo PaArku & Recrea. Div. Subdivision Supervisor Dept. of Energy Dept. of Environ. Quality Yfr • •••• .•■•■• " • ,‘ • , , , • , 7. FEDERAL AGENCIES Corps. of Engineers Post Office 8. OTHER • OGAMI Division of State Lands Commerce Dept.-14.11. Perk 1111■11.1•MIMMII0 Lope PUC, Fire Marshall other Other Southern Pacific Transportation Company Duane M. Forney, PLS - Project Engineer 800 NW 6th Avenue, Em. 324, Union Station Portland, OR 97209 NOT. L6 a • 8 ..711 ttw • GA • DS Staff Review CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNXTY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PRE-APPLICATION CHECKLIST pate 2ida 1. APPLICANT j�S___. 2. PROPERTY LOCATION North of Hwy #217, West of 84th Avenue Address 1S1 35AC #101, #2800 & #4800 Tar Map /Tact Lot 1S1 35AD _ # #1200 11300 . 11400 1 0.0 y y y , 3. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION /NECESSARY APPLICATION(S) ' a%A 511I(/1 14L.f2 USE Existing Farm Adjacent Property north south east west Farm Residential • Residential Commercial 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I ESIGNA OiV 6. ZONING DESIGNATION DESIGNATION L'? 4.;,.... /.. NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGAN C ATION NO. CHAIRPERSON AQrt��►ai ,4at��L 8s CODE REQUIREMENTS Minimum, lot size /width Setbacits 3 front cornea s ide. ream titiediat..otbtktt streets ottlbilthed. areas tower' Lhtohtity zohes wetlands ................. . e ,. w .. „ . .... " , i�1a., Xot ...... accessor• �t�uG�uhes � xef^o lot '14akitato tot Coverage M4x unucn bar i td it j he .ght Density transition Landscaping' minimum 1. of Dot area Street Trees Buffer Areas Parkin .Areais Visual clearance Parking and loading Access and circulation Signs aie�n clw cl�list for spec'lfictetns) OTHER lS�CO�RATQt1lS (See application Sensitive .aids jl.00dplain drainagvusay >25% Wetlands Opel space Historic overlay r r Street improvementsfconnectior�s MiReways Right-of-way dedication. ............. Sanitary Sewer improvement Storm Sewer improvements s , Other agency . pertuits A�. 10: 'PROCEQURE Admi.na.strative staff review Public 14ea►ring /6tca eisngs Off icor • Commission Heara P lannir►g pulHlxc Nears � .., . that occur :ign or Public The Aden' L:.. ative yd;eca, . . on �s falecl: A a.n� sir ..,.,. . a s ei^ a coin lete apP1tCat � aP6��i�its�►teAy �a � y 4O-day Appeal peri.o i follows alt dec .zioi s: (057AP/60220 Staff Date CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST The items on the checklist below are required for the successful completion of your application submission requirements. This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be brought and submitted with all other materials at the time you submit your application. See your application for further explanation of these items or call Planning at 639-4171. BASIC MATERIALS A) Application form (1 copy) 8) Owner's signature/written authorization C) Title transfer instrument D) Assessor's map E) Plot or site plan F) Applicant's statement (G) List of proper t owners & addresses within 250 feet (H) Filing fee ($ ) SPECIFIC MATERIALS Information showing. (No of copies 12-1: Vicinity MaP Site size & dimensions Contour lines (2 ft at 0-10% or 5 ft for grades ) 10%) Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds Locations ,of natural hazard areas including: a) Floodplain areas b) Slopes in excess of 25% c) Unstable ground d) Areas with high seasonal water table e) Areas with set/ere soil erosion potential f) Areas having severely weak foUndation soils Location of resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Map inventory including: a) Wildlife habitats b) Wetlands Other site features: a) Rock outcroppings b) Trees with 6" caliper measured 4 feet from ground level Location of egisting structures and their uses Location and type of on and off—site noise sources Location of existing Utilities and easements Location of existing dedicated right—of—ways 1 ) 8ito00tolopmehtLPAoh_thowihq (N� :,. of copies 1) The proposed site and toeeouhdihg. peopeetro17— • 2) Contour line intervals 3) • • The lotatioh, 4ittiohtioht ohd ilAttiOt-bf• all • Hblittihg & plated streets other public ways and o'A'tettiohtt oh the site and oh aajoiriihgi • prof a J. .4 b) Proposed streets or other public ways & easements on the site. c) Alternative routes of dead end or proposed streets that require future extension 4) The location and dimension of a) Entrances and exits on the sit .0 Parking and circulation areas c) Loading and services areas d) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation e) Outdoor common areas, f) Above ground utilities 5) The location, dimensions & setback distances of all a) Existing -permanent structures, improvements, utilities and easements which are located on the site and on adjacent property within 25 feet of the site b) Proposed structures, improvements, utilities and easements on the site 6) Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions *see attached narrative 7) Sanitary sewer facilities 0) The location of areas to be landscaped 9) The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques 10) The location of mailboxes ' 11) The location of all structures and their orientation 12) Existing or proposed sewer reimbUrsement agreements 1] 3 C] C] 3 C 3 L 3 C) Grading ' Plan (No. of copies 1.-1 C 3 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 general contour lines, slope ratios and soil stabilization proposals, and time of year it is proposed to be done, 2) A statement from a registered engineer supported by data factual substantiating: a) Subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering report E 3 b) The validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals tul/ c) That all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated b) Architectural Drawings (No, of copies ): C The site development plan proposal shall inclUde: 1) Floor plans indicating the square footage of all structures proposed for Use On—site; and [ 2) Typical elevation drawings of each structure, t E) Landscape Plan (No of copies )! t 1 The landsdape plan shall be drawn at the same scale of the site analysis plan or a larger scale if necessary and shall indicate! 1) Destription of the irrigation system where applicable 2) Location and height of fences, buffers and screeningS [ AOPLICATIOR aWORLX§T. — Patio 2. ' A e- " ' ' '11 ' k,"i • : .4 co • 5 I I, 9) The purpose, location, type and size of all of the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision): 1 3 a) Public and private right-of-ways and easements ( 3 b) Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines [ 3 (.) Domestic water mains including fire hydrants . ( 3 d) Majorpower telephone transmission lines (50,000 volts or greater) E 3 e) Watercourses ( 3 f) Deed reservations for parks, open space s pathways and other land encumbrances ( 3 10) Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated ( 3 11) Plan of the proposed water distribUtion system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire hydrants. E 3 12) Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of alt streets including street extensions for a reasonable distance beyond the limits of the proposed subdivision. ( 3 13) Scaled cross sections of proposed street right-of -way;,[ 3 14) The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm water overflow 15) Location, width and direction of flow of all water- courses and drainage ways ' ( 3 16) The proposed lot configurations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers. Where losts are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such lots 1 3 . 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, if any ( 3 18) The existing Uses of the property, including the • location of c,‘11 structures and the present uses of the strortures, and a statement of Which structures are to remaih after platting ( 3 19) supplemental information including: a) Proposed deed restrictions (if any) E 3 b) Proof of property ownership ( 3 c) A proposIA plan for proVition of subdivision improvements E 3 20) Listing natUral featUres including rock out- croppings, wetlands and marsh areas. i 3 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 plication, E 1 J) Oth-r Information 1 I Aria LI 4 WE Itio/40 4 ge ar. _LP 'J2cL OVEVErair,,11 i A, p t -4 (2a62p/0020) POLICATIOft CHMUT - 0A go 4 ... r WEIL GoOvnNo libSCtIMIDT e ............J OREGON STATE LAND BOARD NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT GoVornor BARBARA ROBERTS Secretary 01 State ANTHONY MEEKER State Treasurer Division of State Lands 775 SUMMER STREET, SALEM, OREGON 97310 PHONE (503) 378-3805 OCtober 2 5 , 1990 TO ME MO RA N D U Tigard Planning Department FROM Joel Sha , Divi ion of State Lands 'U SUBJECT: Sensitive Lands SLR 90-0011 Davis The Division of State Lands, under state permit no RF 4570i is requiring the applicant to record deed restrictions on the wetland mitigation areas on the property (yellow area on attached map), The deed restrictions will require these areas to be managed for wetland resource protection. Grazing, filling, or other alterations will be prohibited except as required for wetland protection purpoSes. Applicant has not recorded the required deed restrictions and 18 currently in violation of the state permit. We are deferring enforcement of this requirement until after the City of Tigard completes this review. We recommend that the City of Tigard modify the required open space area to include, at a minimum, the areaS Shown in yellow and pink on the attached map. This includes the north wetland mitigation pond i a buffer around the pond that includes a Strip 40' wide along the north side of the pond and all of Tax Lot 1300 on the west, South, and east side8 of the pond. We make these reCoMmehdation8 for the following reaSonS: 1, To promote consistency between state and local requirements. Including the north wetland mitigation area within the City's required open space area will simplify the situation for the applicant, government agencies, and the public. D'E If OCT 29 1990 2. The recommended open space area is the minimum . necessary to protect the remaining wetlands and stream on the property and maintain their associated wildlife, water quality, and flood storage values. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. cc: Gerry Black, Corps of Engineers Gene Herb, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Gary Voerman, Environmental Protection Agency Ralph Rogers, Environmental Protection Agency Emily Toby, Dept. of Land Conservation and Development Fans of Fenno Creek Cliff Epler John Blumgren Nancy Tracy LEGIBILITY STRIP ?pavWo�'� PptoPG.a r, V Ti-ANV 67 t 2 i C- ScuicE Pl Q c T ro.V r4g-G beer r eSs rtcfrOe CJYk. esr 5 r afe fey ?1,4 )U . E- it.5 TO yo 'nG�ie�Yi�ee M i tAim ,1 LC YELL CP6AU SMjtcE c ee t' (des t 1 drEc fro tt y"eT oif ect y Cu [ of Tractrca i r/ ti o t2_b TO NV \o P p v v oP2. .s ue- tn✓f V1: h.. /I 17►7 /irJ.!r" ✓ Yzi+i PIA) c,' GEDER 1411 I VI 0 STATE OF OREGON County of Washington City of Tigard AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING ) es. I, s t # jj ,IN,--- .,, being first duly sworn/af firs, on oath depose an say: (Please print) That I am a 1 ((°..Q ' 1SLs( J—t for The City of Tigard, Oregon. That. I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: That I served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Commission 1 /Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Hearing Notice /Notice of Decision) of which is attached (Marked Exhibit "A ") was mailed to each named eons at th address shown on the attached list marked exhibit "B" on they day of A. 19211_1# Y said notice NOTICE OF DECISION as beret attached, ed, was posted on and deposited appropriate bulletin board on the ''` day of �1 . ,r / ; in the United States Mail on the „��,,�,�,, day of u �rla , 19''1( portage prepaid. ---� Prepared ion_ Onjal Notice Posted For Su� ribed and sworn/affirm to me on the 19 l . day of on who delivers. to POST OFFICE SubscEed an swor /affirm to me on the % day o 19.9 Decision ,,? J �R, bl in/'AFFirm «`H NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON My Commission, Expires CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon • NOTICE o FINAL ORDER - ny HER/Ns OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s): SLR 90-0011 2. Name of Owner: gmgene Davis Name of Applicant: Same 3. Address t1113095sif City Beaverton State OR Zip 97005 4. 'Address of Property: _NorthcAllighwa 21 west of SW 84th Avenue Tax Map and Lot. No(c).: 131 35ACL_tax lots 101 2800 4800 and 131 35AD tax lots 12cm, 1300 1400 & 1500. 5. Request: rilsezmt....forkems,e1Cdands review approval to amend Sensitive Lands review SLR 1-86 which would allow cattion rcp_Lepsty_jargykaLsh, determined to be within the 102y Also is Ammagi to adimat the area dedicated as privategmgmspace to include the existing lake and 1.11Lferimeter an well as 40 feet,alono the southern border of Ash Creek. ZONE: C-P and A-4.5 Commercial Professional and Rosidential 4.6 units/acre.). Approval as requested Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notie: Notice was published in the newaParler, posted at City Hall, and mailed to: X The applicant and o'er(a) X Owners of record within the required distance X The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decididhi TOE bEdIalOM SBA= tit FINAL toM dianuatt.J.W3.- 1991 ottatt Appight IS vuttip. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and Statement of conditions can be Obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall, P.O. Box 238970 tigtatd, Oregen 97223. 9 Appeal : Any patty to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32 290(B) and 8edtidon 18,A2,310 which provides that a written appeal may be filed within id days after notice in given and dent the appeal may be OdbMitted on dity forms and must be accompanied by the appeal tee ($316.00) and transcript costs (varies up to d maximum of $600.00), The 40ddline for filing of an' OPOda1 1.0 164 .gg.gAtiotitti, fit..you have any questions, please dell the Oitybf•tigatit Planning bOitiatt046fit4:010411# • • • BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application by Gene Davis for Sensitive ) Lands Review and modification of conditions of approval ) of SL 1-86 for land adjoining Ash Creek in the C-P and ) R-4.5 zones in the City of Tigard, Oregon I. SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a Sensitive Lands Review to modify conditions of approval of Sensitive Lands Review SL 1-86 (1) to allow cattle grazing in an area that SL 1-86 required to be open space, (2) to reduce the area that SL 1-86 required to be preserved as open space, (3) to defer formation of a property owners association SL 1-86 required to maintain the open space, and (4) to place additional fill within the 100-year flood plain of Ash Creek. FINAL ORDER SLR 90-0011 (Davis) In July, 1987, after four hearings, hearings officer Beth Mason approved SL 1-86. That decision authorized the applicant to fill portions of the property. In return, it required the applicant to excavate two ponds, to preserve the majority of the site as open space, to replant vegetation in areas affected by development, to form a property owners association to manage the open space, to obtain necessary state and federal permits and local certifications regarding the impact of filling on the flood plain, and to discontinue use of the open space for grazing, among other things. The applicant did not appeal SL 1-86, The applicant undertook most of the filling and some of the impact mitigation measures required by SL 1-86, but did not form a property owners association, did not discontinue use of the property for grazing, and did not comply with state and federal permits in all regards. The City of Tigard began enforcement proceedings in 1989 to require the applicant to comply with the terms of SL 1-86. During the enforcement process, the applicant proposed changes to the conditions of SL 1-86. This application was filed to consider those changes. Further enforcement by the City and the Oregon Division of State Lands has been deferred pending action on this application. Hearings officer Larry Epstein held public hearings regarding the application on November 27 and December 20, 1989. The applicant and three witnesses testified in favor. Thirteen witnesses testified largely in opposition to the proposed changes. City staff and ODSL recommended approval of some of the requested changes and denial of others. A list of exhibits is included as an appendix to this final order, LOCATION: North of Highway 217 west of 89th Avenue, WCTM 151 35AC, Tax Lots 101, 2800, and 4800, and 1S 1 35AD, Tax Lots 1200, 1300, 1400 and 1500 APPLICANT: Gene and Vivian Davis, 13095 SW Henry Street, Beaverton, Oregon PROPERTY OWNER: Same APPLICABLE LAW: Tigard Community Development Code Chapters 18,84 (Sensitive Lands); Comprehensive an policies 2,1.1, 3,2,1, 3,2,2, 3.2,3, 3,4,1, 3,5,3, and 4.2.1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conditional approval in part and denial in prt EXAMINER'S DECISION: Conditional approval in part and denial in part Page I =. Rearirig,s4 Officer decidon SLR P0-00i1 (bah) "4 • 14" r. • tir' ' • • I • II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE, SURROUNDINGS, AND PROPOSAL A. Site size and shape : The site is an irregularly- shaped area more than 1000 feet north -south and 1600 feet east -west. B. Site location 'g y , p p ' s The site is situated north of and adjoining State Highway 217, south of � ertie fronting SW Oak Street, east of SW 95th Avenue, and generally west of SW 89th Avenue. C. Existing uses and structures : There is a residence and outbuildings on the west side of SW 89th Avenue. There is a roughly 3 /4 -acre pond on TL 1300 at the northeast portion of the site with an outflow to Ash Creek to the south. There also is a roughly 1 -acre pond extending north - south across the middle of the site with an outflow to Ash Creek to the north. The ponds were built as mitigation for the filling of Ash Creek pursuant to SL 1 -86. The applicant has grazed an undetermined number of cattle on portions of the property and on land to the north for about 20 years. D. Proposed fillin,g and changes in conditions and their rationale : 1 The applicant proposes to fill an undetermined portion of the Ash Creek channel at of the site. applicant argued that the construction drawings northwest corner o The a li the n approved in 1987 appro allowed. Alin sufficient to create a 26 -foot wide channel (see sheet 1 of 9 of Exhibit 29). There is nothing in the decision in SL 1 -86 specifying the permitted channel width. The 26 -foot width is not included as a dimension on the plans, but scale. The applicant only filled enough to create a . 40 -fot wide channe l at a few points. The applicant's engineer testified this probably resulted from an error. The applicant now wants to fill as much as was allowed pursuant to the original construction g p that filling expired, so a drawings. permit for new SL review is needed to authorize the r ros proposed filling . The applicant argued that P. P g . no the information submitted in 1987 is sufficient to conclude that the filling proposed w com 11es with applicable complies pp ' standards. The applicant did not submit a new hydraulic analysis or other substantial evidence regarding the proposed filling. 2. The applicant proposes to modify condition of approval #5 of the decision in SL 1- 86 to defer formation property . g p� p . tion of a owners association to manage the open space anti the rope is sold in the future. The applicant argued to ownership, pow e G st association is not necessary, because the property remains under a forming an association is not warranted; and condition #5 would preclude use of the open space for grazing as proposed by the applicant: pp proposes ' y conditions 6 of the decision in ' ° sof #5 and .. • 3. The applicant to rnodif open P SL 1 -86 to reduce the area the applicant is required to dedicate for en s :ace purposes, a. In hi . preserving about 6 i s 1986 a cation, the applicant the .area of the two tins . acres of the site pas open space; including � Y P P p ponds, the ancl... ....... be and ..... . t.. a Creek and Ash Brook. Hearings officer Beetth Mason accepted the a between l cant s a Ash sal and, in condition #5 required o ee p pp P P R ara0fficer' lecisiort 5L 90.0011 DVi • the applicant to preserve the open space as he represented he planned to do. In the 1990 proceedings, the applicant argued that hearings officer Beth Mason did not provide any rationale for requiring preservation of the open space to the extent required; however, it is patently clear that all Ms. Mason did was impose a condition that required preservation of the area the applicant said he would preserve. No further rationale would have been necessary. b. In 1987, it was assumed that the Ash Creek flood plain (elevation 162 feet k C above mean sea level (msl)) extended over most of the area required to be preserved as open space. See the 1987 plan in Exhibit 27. In early 1990, the applicant had a topographic survey of the property prepared. That survey revealed that the flood plain does not extend as far as assumed in 1987; about 2 acres of land assumed to be in the flood plain was not in the flood plain, including a 1.12 acre triangle illustrated on Exhibit 22 and the adjoining roughly 3/4 acre to the east. The applicant now proposes to exclude that land from the required open space. c. The applicant also proposes to exclude from the required open space an undetermined area at the southeast comer of TL 1300 south of Ash Creek. The applicant proposes to use that area for a single family dwelling in the future. d. The applicant also proposes to reduce the open space area around the pond at the northeast corner of the site City staff recommend the applicant be required to dedicate 40 feet around the pond for open space purposes. The applicant points out much land he argued that 40 feet is an excessive amount of land to does that he does not own 40 feet around all sides of the ond. Where he dac dedicate. u p from building a have on the Furthermore, he argued that it would southeast corner of TL 1300 and wulde prevent him from trans ortin cattle from the area south of the pond to the area north of the pond. He argued that the area west of the pond could be regraded so cattle can walk west of the pond without having their wastes pollute the pond. He further argued the dedication proposed by City staff would force a planned road farther north and would leave less , .�, developable area for TL 110.. City staff pointed out the road in question is I `J speculative; it has not been approved as an official road map. The applicant it ` 4 proposed a 25 -foot setback between the pond and the proposed road. lw °' ',,�.. 4. The applicant ay proposes approval #6 of the decision in SL 1 -86 to ows cattle razing on land dedicated for open space until that and is u grazing p P developed for urban uses, a. In particular, the applicant proposes to graze cattle on the 2 + acres between the two ponds n an undetermined area west of the south pond. To reach the area between the two o ponds, the applicant proposes to walls cattle from property to the north (TL 1300 and 1103) along the west edge of the north pond and across Ash Creek via a bridge illustrated in Exhibit 23. To reach the area west of the south pond, the applicant proposes to build a bridge to cross the outfall from the south pond to Ash Creek. b. The applicant presented expert testimony that, although much of the area would qualify is not jurisdictional and grazing under federal rules, the area around the north. uabf as a urisdichonal wetland will not adversely affect wetlands or adjoining water bodies, provided the ond nd creek are fenced, side rails are installed on the bridge outfall, grating different areas of the site. The testimony a was that `� maintains vegetation { and ro ides a better g p Page 3 ` hearings Officer d'ecisipm SLR 90.0011 tbay14 habitat for water fowl and shore birds. The applicant argued grazing should be permitted on commercial land west of the south pond as a nonconforming use, although not permitted by the underlying zching. 5. In the future the applicant proposes to develop the west portion of the property for commercial and office ses, based on the 1987 plan in Exhibit 27. SW 95th Avenue will be extended south into a cul de sac on the site to provide access to a motel on the north across Ash ee Creek. Creek SE 93rd Avenue will be extended south from Oak Street serve three office buildings and associated parking that come within about 40 feet of the south pond, A new road would be extended southwest from OStreet at 87t Avenue to 93rd Avenue north of Ash Creek. However, all of this proposed f p on i is somewhat speculative. The applicant does not T'P P t plan to develop any of these uses at this time, and the ultimate development of the property could be very different. Neither SL 1 -86 nor this final authorize any of the commercial/office development. E. Existing and proposed vegetation The area to be affected by the proposed filling and grazing is mostly grass- covered. There are scattered deciduous trees and clumps and groves of suet + trees on portions of deciduous site consists of pasture and ponds. `Where is a grove of trees at the tY . the site, but the majority of the southeast corner of Tl✓ 1300 where the applicant proposes to build a dwelling: A majority of the site would qualify as a disturbed wetland based on p testimony. expert t y Much of the wetland vegetation was destroyed by grazing and filling in the past. The applicant did not submit a landscape plan. The mitigation plan the City approved in 1987 and USCOE and ODSL ermits p require revegetation of the ponds and adjoining land. Not all revegetation has vccuixed. F. Topography and drainage 1. The site varies from elevation 158 feet msl along Ash Creek to 160 feet msl at the south pond, to 162 feet msl at the north pond to 165 feet msl to the east and south, The 100 -year flood elevation is 162 feet, based on City staff testimony. 2, ows due north edge of most of the site adjoins the south bank of Ash Creek, which Highway 217 at the southwest west and through a culvert beneath for situated just north of the creek There g The north pond is corner of the site USA is responsible b r Irian J ....ere is a inflow from the creek to the nd at the pond , outflow from the pond to the creek pond the southwest southeast comer of the and an corner of the pond. There is an outfall from pond to the ' the P t creek. due north of j P �y rom the south o p pond, A tributary of Ash Creek known as Ash Brook enters the site at the southeast the o : comer of the property and drains into the south pond 3. The record in SL 1486 provides the following information about the filling proposed in 1987 and wetlands on the site. , The First, thapplicant applicant would ° lace l the site and mitigate for that filling in two stages. ai Fir y . .cheek flood fringe, In chan e, the applicant licant�would excavate 1 �1l in the Ash the g pP 1700 cubic yards for the north pond: Second, the applicant would place 15,200 cubi Creek c �t ��„ P ards of fill in the Ash Ards fl o plain, In exchange, the applicant would excavate about 5800 cubic yards al from the south pond, Pdge 4 Hearings officer decision SLR 90 -00)) Maids) ) b. The total wetland area identified by the applicant's consultant is 9.3 acres including adjoining property to the north. Of the 7.29 . acres of wetland on the applicant's property, about 5 acres will be retained or improved. c. The filling will cause the flood plain dm of the site to rise .06 feet (less than 3/4 inch). Upstream of the site, proposed channel excavation was expected to lower the flood plain an undetermined amount. d. The banks of Ash Creek were to be graded to a maximum slope of 1 foot vertical for 3 feet horizontal. G. Plan designation and zoning The west portion of the site is designated and zoned C -P (Commercial-Professional). The east portion of the site is designated and zoned Low Density Residential and R -4.5 (Residential). H. Transportation The site has access to a number of different public streets. The west side of the site has access to SW 95th Avenue and from there to SW Oak Street. The northeast corner of site Oak Street. pardon n of the sites to the sate tics access to SW O ' The southeast the southeast portion has access the SW 89th Avenue. Cattle could be trucked from P northeast portion of the site without crossing the north plid area, although it would be inconvenient. I. Surrounding land uses There are single family detached dwellings east and north of the property. Northwest of the property are commercial and office uses. South of the property is SR 217. III, APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA & DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A, Chapter 18.84 Sensitive Lands Review). 1. Chapter 18.84 contains the regulations for land subject to sensitive lands review. 1. Sensitive lands review is intended to implement flood plain protection measures and to protect by : i g promoting bank stability, ... wildlife habitat, and reserving tact rivers, streams,. and creeks b minimizing and ro�iioting . water quality and preserving al. Section 18 84.015(C) requires Hearings enhancing q y ices 'Hearings maintaining en ancin wa ty and recreational p scenic quality • Officer approval of landform alterations in the 100 -year flood plain. 2 Section l8.84: 026 requires use of designs, materials, and practices that minimi damage ze flood e and the potential for damage, 3. Section 18.84.040 provides landforrn alterations subject to sensitive lands review most comply with the following criteriat n preserve o enhance plain ..r storage f nctiori a. Land form alterations pr .: nhance Elie flood lawn store e f win of and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway shall not result in any g the floodway boundary; b. Land form alterations or developments within the 100 -year flood plain shall be Page 5 Hearutgs Office?' dedsiori SLR 90 -0011 (Days allowed only in areas designated as commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan land use map, except that alterations of developments associated with public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.42 of the C mmunity Development Code are allowed in residential and industrial areas subject to applicable zoning standards; c. Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the flood plain it will not result in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100- year flood; d. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearing Officer as untimely; e The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood; E The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvals shall be obtained; and g Where land form alterations are allowed within and adjacent to the 100 -year flood plain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the flood plain in accordance with the comprehensive plan. This shall elevation for a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in the area shall include land of a suitable elevaho flood plain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. B. Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies. 1. Policy 2.1.1 provides the City will assure citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. 2. Policy 3,2.1 provides that the City shall prohibit any land form alterations or developments within the 100 -year flood plain that would result in any rise in elevation of the 100 -year flood plain. 3. Policy 3.22, as amended June 26, 1990, provides the City shall: a. Prohibit land form alterations and development in the floodway, except t may alterations ma be allowed which preserve or enhance the function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway; and b. Allow land form alterations or development in the flood plain outside the zero- foot rise floodway y which preserve or enhance the function of the zero -foot rise floodway provided: The land pm . form alteration and/or development is land use and alteration commercial or industrial on the comprehensive plan map factors set forth in Policy 3.2.3 can be satisfied; or (2) The land form alteration and/or development is associated With n unity recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities .. 4. Policy as amended June 26, 1990, provides that where development is proposed within the 100 ear flood lain outside the zero -foot rise ` flooday, the City. p P Y P Page 6 1!earirigs Officer decision SLR 500 -0011 (Davis) shall require: a. The streamflow capacity of the zero-foot floodway be maintained; b. Engineered drawings and/or documentation showing that there will be no deximental upstream or downstream effect in the flood plain area, and that the criteria set forth in the sensitive lands section of the code have been met; c. A buffer, either existing or planted, on the commercial or industrial land abutting residential land which adequately screens the development from view by the adjoining residential land and which is of sufficient width to be noise attenuating; and d. The dedication of open land area for greenway purposes adjoining the flood plain including portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan. 5. Policy 3.4.1 provides the City shall designate significant wetlands as areas of significant environmental concern. The Metzger-Progress Community Plan, adopted by Washington County before the area was annexed by Tigard, identified the west part of the property as a potentially significant wildlife habitat Areas along Ash Creek and Ash Brook are identified as significant wetlands by the Oregon Division of State Lands. 6. Policy 3,4.2 provides the City shall: a. Protect fish and wildlife habitat along stream conidors by managing the riparian habitat and controlling erosion, and by requiring that areas of standing trees and natural vegetation along natural drainage courses and waterways be maintained to the maximum extent possible. 7. Policy 3.53 provides: The City has designated the 100-year flood plain of Fanno Creek, its tributaries, and the Tualatin River as greenway, which will be the backbone of the open space system. Where landfill and/or development arc allowed within or adjacent to the 100-year flood plain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the flood plain, 8. Policy 4,2.1 provides that all development within the Tigard Urban Planning Area shall comply with applicable federal, state and regional water quality standards, IV, HEARING, TESTIMONY, AND NPO & AGENCY COMMENTS A, Hearing, • • , „ i , ., , the public hearhig about this . ..,.ficati The ekatntrier receiVek. testimony at is app on on November 27 and December 20, 1990, A record of that testimony is included herein as Exhibit A (Parties of Record), Exhibit 8 (Taped Ptoteedifigs), and Exhibit C (Written Testithotty), These exhibits are tiled at the Tigard City Hall, B. Withessd and a ,'vuttimary of their testimony Keith Liden testified on behalf of the City of Tigard Planning Department He Page 7 1-leanags Officer ciecisiori StR 90-0011 (DaVIS) summarized the staff report and recommendation, and responded to questions. 2. Andy Jordan appeared as the lawyer for the applicant Gene Davis. Dr. Davis also appeared on his own behalf. Rex Van Warner appeared as an expert witness regarding wildlife and wetland issues for the applicant. Dave Mills testified as an expert witness regarding engineering issues for the applicant. Most of their testimony is summarized in the finding describing the proposed development and its rationale. 3. Jeffrey Gottfried (Fans of Fanno Creek), Cliff Egler (NPO #8), Pat Whiting (CPO #4), Jack Broome, John Blomgren, Edward Hannevig, Joel Schaich, Doug Smithy, Mike Houck (Audubon Society), Nancy Tracy, Roger Redfern, and Louise and Ken Beck testified against the proposed changes to SL 1-86. a. The applicant objected to the standing of Mr. Broome, Mr. Smithy, Mr. Houck, and Ms, Tracy, but the hearings officer concluded each of these individuals has standing to testify, because they testified at the hearings regarding SL 1-86 and/or they or members of associations they represent could be adversely affected or aggrieved due to potential impacts on wildlife habitat, wetlands, and water bodies if the application is approved. b. The majoiity of the witnesses testified against the proposed changes in SL 1-86, because they believed that the decision in SL 1-86 represented an agreement among the parties to that case. They argued the applicant should not be able to benefit from that decision by filling Ash Creek without also complying with the obligations imposed by that decision. They argued that it is fundamentally unfair for the applicant to be able to change the conditions of approval of SL 1-86 after he failed to appeal the decision in that case without the consent of other "parties" to the "agreement" that resulted in that decision. c. Many of the witnesses also decried the fact that the applicant has not complied with the conditions of approval of that decision, evidencing a lack of diligent good faith, They speculated that the applicant will not comply with conditions to limit use of the property, based on this history. d. Several of the witnesses argued against allowing cattle grazing on the property, including Mr. Gottfried, Mr. Broome, Mr, Schaich, Mr. Houck, and Mr. Redfern, who demonstrated expertise in such matters by training, experience, or association. They argued cattle grazing would further destroy vegetation on the site that is necessary to sustain wildlife values on the property and to filter sediment from surface water runoff from the property. They argued waste from cattle would pollute the creek. They argued the site is too small to sustain cattle without causing adverse effects to the land and water. They argued allowing cattle grazing would further delay revegetation of the property and the survival of trees to be planted around the north pond. They argued that revegetation should include more than low grasses, because more diversity in vegetation on the site will lead to more diversity in the wildlife served by that vegetation, Mr. Houck explained that the Audubon Society is working with the Oregon Division of State Lands to get cattle off wetlands managed by the State; it is contrary to best management practices to allow cattle on sensitive wetland areas, Mr, tpler testified that Ash Creek is not completely fenced and that he observed cattle entering into the creekside area and into the ponds, where their wastes would pollute the water, e, Several witnesses argued that additional filling on the property was not 'e 8 Hedi'trigs' 0 e, decision SLR 06-6611 ('Davis) . . , warranted, because the applicant did not have a use for the property for which filling is necessary. Several also suggested that if additional filling is to be done, then the applicant should have to start the Sensitive Lands Review process over, including a delineation of wetlands on the property based on the federal rules adopted in 1989. Mr. Epler and Mr. lilloomgren introduced photographs showing flooding along Ash Creek as evidence that further filling will exacerbate flooding. Mr. Hannevig and Mr. and Mrs. Beck presented similar testimony about Ash Brook. Mr. Redfern argued that the area of proposed filling has steep, unstable side slopes that show evidence of undercutting. Further filling there would exacerbate the problem. Given the lack of any additional hydraulic specifications or analysis, further filling is not justified. f. Several witnesses argued in favor of requiring a property owners association at this time so that future purchasers of the property would know of the limits on use of the open space. C. NPO & Agency Comments 1. The Tigard Planning Department recommends that the open space on the site be modified to exclude the area within 230 feet of SW 89th Avenue and that the applicant be allowed to conduct cattle grazing in that area. They recommend that the applicant be required to form the property owners association to ensure proper maintenance of the open space by the applicant and prospective third party purchasers sers and to facilitate enforcement by the City. They recommend against further filling of the property in the absence of a use for the property or additional hydraulic study. They further propose modifications to the conditions of approval consistent with these recommendations. 2. The Tigard Engineering Department finds that the applicant has complied with the conditions of approval of SL 1 -86, except conditions requiring fencing to keep cattle out of open space areas and requiring establishment of the open space. They conclude available information does ponds applicant , i improve 'age for the area They there is no justification o afurthhcerr fiLuin t f the p pert Y They conclude that downstream drainage problems do not warrant the proposed changes to filling or open space: They recommend formation of a property owners association or equivalent means to ensure maintenance of the open space. They recommend modifying the condition prohibiting grazing to make it clear whether livestock can cross the open space: g, grazing Tigard Operations Division opined that the use of the wetland area for cattle ' .. incompatible with USA and other regulations. 3, The State �' g Y p g Highway t Tualatin n Valley Fire Rescue Department, epartment, and Metz g er Water Distri have no objections to the proposed changes. 4 The Oregon Division of State Lands recommends that the open space on the site be �e. ,.. , feet of SW 89th Avenue and that the , modified to exclude the area within � 230 f applicant be allowed to conduct cattle grazing in that area. See map accompanying Exhibit ti. Otherwise they support maintenance of the conditions of approval from SL 1 -86. 5, Oregon Division Fish and Wildlife oppose on he property e xcc ot within 2 Oe t of SW 89th Avenue. They that the hw p tazs of the miti g ation plan is to enhance and protect existing habitat by controlling � in g , Page 9 Hearbigs Ohicee dechion SLR 90 -0011 (bav s) • ''t" • od„ 6. USA staff note there are not regulations in effect that would prohibit grazing as proposed by the applicant But "best management practices" dictate that, for livestock to graze near water bodies, a riparian area should be provided at least 25 to 50 feet wide, and livestock should be kept out of water bodies at all times. USA staff also note that bacterial counts taken recently downstream from the property were above acceptable levels. 7. NPO #8 and CPO #4 object to the proposed changes. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. Proposed filling. 1. City planning and engineering staff argue the proposed filling of Ash Creek should not be permitted, because a specific use for the land is not being proposed. However, the hearings officer concludes the City Code does not prohibit filling simply for that reason. The Code allows filling in the 100 year flood plain outside the zero-foot rise floodway if it complies with the applicable standatds, The standards do not require specification of a use for the land where the filling is proposed Only when filling is proposed in a "drainageway" does the proposed use appear to be relevant See 18.84.040C(1) which relates permitted filling to the minimum extent allowed for the proposed use, The hearings officer assumes Ash Creek is not a "drainageway," 2 The applicant argued that the hydraulic analysis in the record of SL 1-86 is sufficient to show the proposed filling complies with applicable standards. Unfortunately, there was no discussion of that analysis, its assumptions, or application to the site, and no updated information was provided by the applicant or reviewing agencies regarding the planned fill. a. Sheet 9 of Exhibit 29 shows two "typical" sections for Ash Creek after filling. One section shows a 38-foot wide channel; the other shows a 26-foot wide channel, Both are measures from the top of the bank. There is no legend on the plan showing where these typical section g would be applied. The channel shown on Sheet 1 of Exhibit 29 scales to be approximately 26 to 28 feet wide, therefore, the hearings officer assumes the 26-foot typical channel was planned for that section of Ash Creek. Exhibit 21 shows the west end of the Ash Creek channel is about 38 to 40 feet wide at most points adjoining and west of the temporary bridge crossing of the creek, Therefore, the channel in that area was not graded as much as allowed by Exhibit 29. However Exhibit 29 was prepared after the decision in SL 1-86, Hearings officer Beth Mason had Exhibit 30 before her to consider, Sheet 4 of that exhibit shows a roughly 30-foot channel for Ash Creek in the area in question. Exhibit 30 does not indicate a 26-foot wide channel will be created 13. The applicant has not identified clearly where or how much filling is proposed, In the absence of a detailed filling plan, the hearings officer assumes the applicant now plans to fill as necessary to create a channel width of 26 feet in a roughly 250- foot area adjoining and west of the temporary bridge crossing, The issue therefore is whether such additional filling is permitted without an updated hydraulic analysis, c, The hearings officer concludes the existing analysis and record is not adequate to justify additional filling now for the following reasons! Page lo Ofileer decisiag SLR 90.0011 (Datil4 NJ (1) Conditions upstream and downstream of the site may have changed since 1987, leading to a change in the assumptions under which the 1987 hydraulic analysis was prepared. For instance, if downstream conditions have worsened due to erosion and sedimentation, or if upstream conditions have increased the flow of water across that site, then those changes should be considered when determining the effect of additional filling on the site The applicant decried the need for an updated hydraulic study, but failed to demonstrate conditions up- and downstream from the site are sufficiently similar to obviate the need for such an update. (2) City Code section 18.84.030B appears to allow the City to waive an updated hydraulic study only for 21/2 years after approval of the Sensitive Lands Review, or until about JanQary,1990 in this case, assuming conditions have not changed. Because another year has passed, the City does not have the authority to waive an updated hydraulic study. (3) The applicant did not bear the burden of proof that the proposed filling would fulfill Chapter 18.84. Relying on the 1987 hydraulic analysis as proposed by the applicant, the filling will increase the 100 year flood plain by .06 feet. Although this is a small change, 1884.040A(3) prohibits ay increase in water surface elevation of the 100 year flood. Therefore, the additional filling should not be permitted. . i oodway of Ash (4) Based on Sheet 7 of 9 of Exhibit 30, the zero -.foot rise fl Creek is more than 26 feet wide in the area in stion The fd filling applicant did not show that filling to create a 26 -foot wide channel would avoid g in the zero-foot rise floodway. Clearly, filling in the zero -foot rise floodway is prohibited. It may be that the City erred in authorizing filling to create a 26 -foot wide channel given restrictions on filling in the zero -foot rise floodway. In any event, the hearings officer is not convinced that the proposed filling should be authorized without additional analysis, B. Proposed changes to conditions of SAS 1-86. 1 There is nothing in the City Code to prohibit changes in the conditions of approval of SL 1 -86. On the contr ary, such actions are eh p ss :1y provided for Se e 18.32.250F(4), which provides a request for changes in conditions of approval shall be treated as a new administrative action: Although the decision in SL 1 -86 may reflect what was perceived to be an agreement among the parties to that case, there is nothing in the decision that prohibits its modification by the City. Other parties to SL 1 -86 have a right to participate in the 1990 application review and can appeal this decision if they believe it violates applicable laws SL 1 -86 does not prevent the applicant from requesting changes to that decision: L f 86 required preservation of open space the app applicant proposed 2. The decision is S �� to keep as open space: The a plicant proposed that that area be open space, because he y of Ash in question was in the flood plain. Once lie learned that all of the site south believed the area standpoint Creek is not in the flood plain, it was reasonable (from an economic t for him to to regain use of that land; However, the hearings officer concludes the applicant ro es to regain use of more land than is a. ropriate given PP proposes g �� s �i l?P p;; bn. and 1 e flood ele and Comprehensive Ply. the location of the bas vation on the as built" conto ar ma in Exhibits 21 and 22 and the applicable standards of the Code an p Page 11 11eartng o ce,' decision SLR 90 -0011 (Odds) a. Exhibit 22 illustrates in brown the area the applicant proposes to regain south of Ash Creek.A red line delineates approximately where the land is one foot below the 100 year base flood elevation. That red line weaves in and out of the brown area Not all of the brown area is outside of that line, so it is unclear what it signifies to the applicant. There is no reference in the Code or Plan to a line drawn 1 foot below the elevation of the base flood. (1) Section 18.84.040 requires "dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the flood plain in accordance with the comprehensive plan." Policy 3.5.3 requires ''dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the flood plain. In the absence of more objective standards, what is sufficient depends on the facts of the case. But, read together, these provisions and Policies 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 appear to encourage dedication of land within the flood plain as open space, particularly where such dedication also maximizes protection of wetlands and retention (or replanting) of vegetation along the flood plain. The record is clear that much of the site is wetland; even the applicant's expert concedes this is so The record also is clear that much of the site has been disturbed by grazing, Such grazing leads to erosion and sedimentation of adjoining water bodies and fecal coliforn and other degradation of surface water quality. (2) The hearings officer concludes that to protect wetlands adjoining the south pond and Ash Creek, to maximize retention of vegetation and protection of fish and wildlife habitat, and to ensure dedication of a sufficient area of open space, the applicant should be required to retain as open space the area shown in brown south of Ash Creek, b. The City staff and ODSL staff recommend that the open space area be reduced to exclude the area within 230 feet of 89th Avenue. A portion of that area is within the 100 year base flood elevation. However, as long as the area excluded from the open space is at least 40 feet from the limit of the south pond and Ash Brook, the hearings officer accepts the recommendations of those agencies to reduce the area of open space. The hearings officer notes that, to maintain a 40 -foot buffer from the south pond and Ash Creek, the area excluded from the open space will not be a uniform 230 feet from 89th Avenue. At the south end of that area, the area excluded from the open space will be less than 230 feet from 89th Street, based on Exhibit 22, ` applicant e objects � g�. dedicate space land he d st ow The Code does not uire the applicant to acquire and to dedicate for open pace under the circumstances of this case. Therefore, if the applicant is required to dedicate as open space a 40 -foot wide buffer around the north pond and Ash Creek, that r equirement should be limited to apply only to land. owned by the applicant as of the date of the application, d, and surrounds the north on . , g open space applicant objects to dedicating as o ens ace the L83 acres that includes The d. A number of arguments are advanced to susfau this P objection. (1) The applicant ` . j , , any land on or around � appears to object to dedication of an of the lan the north pond West f An l dig the Joining Ash Creek from a p an of the land including or add g point about 200 feet West o 89th ve tie to tie east edge of the site Such an objection is not justified. The pond is necessary to mitigate the impact of the Page 12 j ,Kear'aiigs Officer decision SLR 90 =0011 Oa as) filling authorized by SL 1-86. Ash Creek clearly is a significant wetland area and contains a floorlway. Their continued existence and protection can be achieved only by their dedication as open space, A 40-foot buffer around the creek is necessary to protect it from adverse effects due to sedimentation, erosion, and surface water quality impacts. The buffer around the north pond will vary as discussed more below. (2) The applicant objects to dedicating land 40 feet north of north pond as a buffer, because of its impact on the location of a future street and on the developable area of TL 1300 and 1103. The future road should have no bearing on the decision, because the City has not considered or approved it Its location is purely speculative assuming it is built at all Furthermore, the hearings officer is not convinced that the impact of the 40-foot buffer on adjoining developable land is significant, given the applicant planned to provide a 25-foot wide buffer anyway, there is a substantial developable area that remains north and east of the buffer, and no use is proposed for the area to the north that would be precluded by the dedication of the 40-foot buffer. On the other hand, given the north pond is developed in an upland area that is not part of a wetland, and the farther north one goes, the farther away the wetland is, the hearings officer concludes a 40-foot buffer is excessive. A 25-foot buffer measured north from the top of the and bank, replanted with trees consistent with the ODSL permit, will protect the pond from significant degradation. (3) Based on Exhibits 21 and 22, there is less than 40 feet of width between the top of the north pond banks and the east and west edges of the site adjoining it The distance varies from about 12 feet to about 35 feet The applicant should dedicate as open space all of the land east and west of the pond within the site, for the reasons listed in B2a(2) above. IL (4) The applicant argues there is a developable area on the southeast corner of TL 1300 where he wants to build a house, The record does not show there is sufficient land for such a purpose there. Moreover, such development would appear likely to remove substantial vegetation that now helps stabilize the land south of Ash Creek and filter storm water flowing into the creek, The hearings officer concludes the applicant should continue to dedicate a 40-foot wide buffer south of Ash Creek on TL 1300 for the same reasons as in finding B2a(2) above, This effectively eliminates any potential for a building site at the southeast comer of IL 1300, (5) Based on the foregoing, the applicant should dedicate as open space all of the 1.83 acres illustrated in brown on Exhibit 22, except for a 15-foot wide strip along the north edge of that area. 3. The applicant proposes grazing on the open space and proposes to have cattle cross the open space to reach land to the west The record contains conflicting testimony on the potential adverse and beneficial impacts of gra7Ang. a. The hearings officer is swayed by the weight of the evidence that grazing is significantly adverse to the protection of surface water quality, because of the potential for animal wastes to pollute the water. Grazing is significantly adverse to the protection of the wetlands on the site and to the maximization of Wildlife habitat protection and diversification. Therefore, the hearings officer concludes the applicant should be prohibited nom grazing on any of the area identified as open Page 13 - ileaelno 'Veer decision Al? 90-6011 (Davis) co m space and prohibited from crossing that area with cattle, except as necessary to move cattle from the area north of the north pond to the grazable area south of Ash Creek and west of 89th Avenue. b. The hearings officer concludes that the applicant should be able to move cattle from the north to the south (and vice versa) along the west edge of TL 1300 to reach the bridge across Ash Creek for the following reasons: (1) Agriculture is a permitted use in the zoning district. Moving cattle from one grazable area to another is a reasonable and common animal husbandry practice. Requiring the applicant to truck cattle from one grazable area to another makes that activity economically impracticable. Also a relatively small number of cattle is involved, given the grazable areas that can be reached. Lastly, the duration of the activity --- walking from point A to point B --- is relatively short. (2) The remainder of the area between the cattle path and the west edge of the north pond can be heavily landscaped --- like the north edge of the pond --- providing a buffer that generally equals or exceeds 25 feet in width. That should filter pollutants and sediment the cattle may cause by walking in the area. (3) Most of the cattle path is outside the floodplain and upland of wetlands. However, the cattle could cause significant adverse effects, Therefore, conditions are warranted limiting the width of the cattle path, requiring a fence to protect vegetation on the west bank of the north pond, requiring construction of a bridge with adequate side rails to prevent cattle waste from falling into the creek, requiring intensive revegetation of the west bank of the north pond, requiring the path to be below the top of the bank of the north pond, and requiring berms where sediment or waste from the cattle path could flow by gravity to Ash Creek. 4. The applicant objects to formation of a property owners association to protect the open space as an unnecessary expense and untimely. a. The association or an equivalent would provide notice to potential third party purchasers of the limitations that apply to the open space portions of the site The association also could enhance the City's enforcement options, because it authorizes the City to undertake maintenance and bill the association. The history of the use of the property since the decision in SL 1-86 shows that such enhanced enforcement i • rights are n the public interest and may be called for over time b. Substantially similar benefits would follow from imposing deed covenants or an equitable servitude on the property and making the City a party to those agreements. Such an approach may be easier to draft. co The hearings officer concludes that the applicant should form the association or execute deed coVenants or an equitable servitude that accomplish substantially similar purposes to those envisioned in the decision in SL 1-86. The cost of formation of such an association or the cost of drafting and recording appropriate instruments is an ordinary cost of doing business and is neither unnecessary nor untimely given the history of the use of the property. 5, Because of the long delay in the completion of conditiOns of approval Of SL 1-86, the applicant should be required to fulfill the conditions of this decision within a Page 14 - 11ear1rigs Officer decision SLR 90-0011 (baVis) • ; t-- ; . ' „"f • • • reasonable time, consistent with 18.32.250F(3). In this case, a reasonable time is deemed to be 60 days after the date the decision becomes final, unless a further delay is warranted for reasons beyond the applicant's control, such as due to weather. VI. am VISIT BY HEARINGS OFFICER The hearings officer visited the site without the company of others. VII. CONCLUSION AND DECISION The hearings officer concludes that the proposed landform alteration and chang`in conditions of approval of SL 1 -86 comply in part with the applicable approval criteria for a sensitive lands review permit. In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the hearings officer hereby: 1. SW 89th Avenue d at least 40 feet north a to exclude the area within 230 feet west of Approves open P of the centerline of Ash Brook and 40 feet east of the sout jl, pond; 2. Authorizes cattle grazing on the area excluded from the open space; provided, before such grazing occurs, the area within which gra zing is permitted shall be securely fenced to prevent cattle from entering into the open space; 3 Prohibits cattle grazing in or movement through the areas designated as open space except cattle can move along the west edge of 111300 and as necessary to reach the grazable land south of Ash Creek from north of the north pond, subject to conditions; 4. Affirms the requirement nropt ahon be f ©rmed as described therein , p rov ded a deed covenant or equitable sevt de c an be used to accomplish the same purposes as the property owners association if approved by the City Attorney; and 5. Denies the request for additional fill in Ash Creek. the following conditions of approval: modifications authorized herein, the applicant shall comply with Before implementing g 1 of Condition ` ' .approval 5 of the decision in SL 1 -86 is amended as follows . i including ...p. 5. The applicant shall cause. to have surveyed and shall designate as open s ace in etu that land shown in ink on Exhibit 6 of this decision, includin land perpetuity tY within 40 feet of the south pond and Ash Brook and land within 25 feet north of the top of the north pond bank. a. The applicant shall execute and file in the office of the County Recorder covenants, conditions, and restrictions and a property owners association, onions the � .'nenan . tint approved by he City Attorney which ,. a t equivalent equitablesetvttu a or eq ce costs for said are on the es included to this apportions . g Prop" one: share aer lot, office space single one � � er 20ii0 S ware eet of ch duplexes Pp r family residences one each, s floor P p per q � per five u. area, motel one share p nits. `t Pale 1 s U►,I i PLR IIedrtngs oer (leadoff 1 -0011 (bdW ) b. The articles of incorporation, bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall prohibit amendment, modification or dissolution unless authorized' by the City of Tigard. c. The articles of incorporation, bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall authorize the City of Tigard to issue citations for the failure of the owners to maintain or repair the open space designated pursuant to this condition. If the problem cited is not remedied in a reasonable time, then the covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall authorize the City of Tigard to undertake the necessary repair or maintenance, bill the owners or association for the cost thereof, and, if the bill is not paid in a reasonable time, file liens against the owners of the property. d. The articles incorporation, bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney. 2. Livestock are permitted only outside of the open space identified in condition 1 above, except that cattle can move along the west edge of TL 1300 and as necessary to reach the grazable land south of Ash Creek from the area north of the north pond five feet. Before ; . The with. he width of this cattle path shall not exceed ov�na cart a through this ueg, the applicant shall install a secure fence to keep cattle from encroaching on the vegetation on the west bank of the north pond, construct a bridge with adequate side rails to prevent cattle waste from falling into the creek when they cross the bridge, intensively revegetate the area between the cattle path and the north pond, grade the cattle path so its elevation is less than the top of the bank of the north pond measured lateral to the path, and install berms where topography is such that sediment or waste from the cattle path could flow by gravity to Ash Creek. Before v this condition, the applicant shall submit a plan for those improvements Division male�n a 11'n rove ntS to the Planning ng Director (and, if necessary, the Division of State Lands and Corps of Engineers) for review and approval. iat ay mov m not e thro !h i ' area n u . h i l . nnin di or : • • r : • diet t .1 , . - n 'e :: r e tht . plans. the applic im.1 men ,, hem . n• h Ci fin im or -an m l the approved land. Until this condition is fulfilled, the applicant will have to convey cattle of AslbyCreekr Other egrazable activities in other locations � end to the grazable area south agricultural on the property shall be subject to approval of the Division of State Lands and the Planning Director. 3. Additional filling is prohibited on the property er unless authorized b a subsequent sensitive lands review. p P y 4. Except as modified herein, the conditions of approval of SL 1 -86 continue to apply. 5 Conditions 1, 2, and 3 and the remaining conditions be fulfilled . ndltions of SL 1 $6 shall within y becomes unless the Planning Director authorizes additional time due to reasons beyond the a pp hiant s control. Page 16 Hearings Officer' decision SLR 90 -0011 (Danis) .Y DATED . is 2nd day of `'*"ary, 091, Celit,4&1119" Larry Epstein Pf g. Officer li V ExEm3rrs IN THE RECORD The following exhibits were introduced into the record: 1. Planning department staff report and notice 2. Hearings officer decision in the matter of SL 1 -86/V 87 -02 (Exhibit A of staff report) and exhibits cited therein 3. Supplemental decision in the matter of SL 1- 86/'6 87 -02 (Exhibit B of staff report) 4. Map illustrating plan approved in SL 1 -86 (Exhibit C of staff report) 5. Zoning map (Exhibit D of staff report) 6. Memo dated October 25, 1990 from Joel Shaich (ODSL) (Exhibit E of staff report) 7. One page narrative by the applicant 8. November 25 letter from CPO #4 to City planning department with attachments 9. November 25, 1990 postcard from Thomas tracy to Epstein 10. November 26 letter from Davis to M/M Cliff Epler 11. 19 items in a packet of materials dated November 26 from Nancy Tracy 12. November 27, 1990 letter from Jeff Gottfried (Fans of Fanny Creek) to Epstein 13. November 27, 1990 letter from Nancy Tracy 14. December 17, 1990 memorandum to file from Keith Liden re; USA comments 15. 8 items in a packet of materials dated December 17 from Nancy Tracy* 16. December 19, 1990 letter from Gene Herb (ODFVV) to Epstein 17 December 20, 1990 letter from Nancy Tracy to Epstein 18. December 20, 1990 letter from Roger Redfern to Epstein 19. Proposed grading plan for Ash Creek dated January, 1987 20. Proposed open space and storm drainage map from W13 Wells dated August 2, 1990 21 As built contour map for Ash Creek grading by W"R Wells dated February 1, 1990 22. As built contour map for Ash Creek grading with color coding dated November 21, 1990 24. �o 14 unmounted photographs �� p g p P pp� and 2 oversized pages of photographs by Bloomgren 25. 16 unmounted photographs 26. 25 mounted photographs by Cliff Epler 27. 3 oversized drawings and 3 corresponding 81/2 x 11 acetate overlays illustrating 1987 plan, proposed changes by applicant, and proposed changes by City staff 28. Oversized .p p by applicant (in frame)- 6luc ►J'8 ' L1 "Ott Vavya 29: nstructionodrawin s for filling �of A Ash Creek oversized July 1988) 6I C g (oversized, Y ) 30. Drawings for filling of Ash Creek and Master Plan (oversized, January 1987) -1/.41 r & f r r.e (.1G The applicant objected to introduction of this packet because the information it contained is irrelevant. The hearings officer accepts the packet into the record, because it contains some information that is marginally relevant. page le a Hearings Of eer decision SLR 90 -00)1 (D Vi ) • • •. • • JOEL SHAICH DIVISION OF STATE LANDS 775 SUMMER ST SALEM, OR 97310 CLIFF EPLER 8845 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD, OR 97223 JOHN BLOMGREN 9460 SW OAK TIGARD, OR 97223 NANCY TRACY 7310 SW PINE ST TIGARD, OR 97223 MIKE HOUCK PORTLAND AUDUBON SOCIETY 5151 SW CORNELL RD PORTLAND, OR 97210 KEN & LOUISE BECK 8820 SW THORN TIGARD, OR 97223 JACK BROOME PO BOX 236 TUALATIN, OR 97223 GENE & VIVIAN DAVIS 13095 SW HENRY BEAVERTON/ OR 97005 ROGER REDFERN 1701 SE LADD AVE PORTLAND/ OR 97214 PAT WHITING 8122 SW SPRUCE TIGARD/ OR 97223 DOUG SMITHEY 11396 SW IRONWOOD TIGARD, OR 97223 EDWARD HANNEVIG 8840 SW SPRUCE TIGARD, OR 97223 DAVE MILLS WB WELLS & ASSOC. 4230 NE FREMONT PORTLAND, OR 97213 JEFFRY GOTTFRIED, PH.D FRIENDS OF FANNO CREEK PO BOX 25835 PORTLAND, OR 97225-0835 GENE HERB DEPT. OF FISH & WILDLII?E 801 GALES CREEK RD. FOREST GROVE, OR 97116 ANDREW JORDAN BOLLIGER, HAMPTON, & TARLOW 1600 SW CEDAR HILLS BLVD SUITE 102 PORTLAND, OR 97225 REX VAN WORMER IES ASSOCIATES 8835 SW CANYON LANE PORTLAND, OR 97225 • It AGENDA ITEM 2.1 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 1990 - 7:00 PM TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OR 97223 I. SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST CASE: Sensitive Lands Review SLR 90-0011. SUMMARY: A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval to amend Sensitive Lands Review SL 1-86 to 1) allow cattle grazing in an area designated for private open space, 2) adjust the area dedicated as private open space to include the existing lake and a 40 foot perimeter as well as a 40 foot area along the southern border of Ash Creek, 3) to delay the formation of a property owners association for the maintenance of the private open space area, and 4) place additional fill on the property in the northwest section of the property. COMPREHENSIVE FLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial Professional and Low Density Residential. ZONING DESIGNATION: C-P (Commercial Professional) and R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre). APPLICANT: Gene and Vivian Davis 13095 SW Henry Beaverton, OR 97005 OWNER: Same LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of S.W. 89th Avenue, WCTM 151 35A0, Tax Lots 101, 2800, 4800, and 181 35AD, Tax Lots 1200, 1300 1400 and 1500. APPLICABLE LAW: CoMmunity Development Code Chapter 18.84 (Sensitive Lands) Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, and 4.2.1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a portion of the request subject to conditions. II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE AND SURROUNDINGS A. Site iodation: The area under consideration is north of Highway 217, west of SW 89th Avendd, and generally south Of Ash Creek. EiristinC.dsed and structures: A residence and Several odtbd Lica nqs are Iodated on the east Bide of the property On S.W. 89th AVende. The remainder of he property is Undeveloped. The main channel of Ash Creek tune from east to west actOds the northern boundary of the property. A pond is located immediately north of the Creek in the northeast Cotner Of the property i A smaller draina4eWay, referred to as Ash Brook, enterd the southeast Corner of the property and fioWO northwest into a second pond Which in turn drains into Ash Creeks The ponds Were donetkildted as a Condition Of the filling and grading work permitted by kislAnti466, OFFICER STAFF REPORT it. '06,0011 DAVIS 040t 1 , , , , • • .• •■•••• C. D. k, Sensitive Lands approval SL 1 -86 and related permits granted by the Division of State Lands and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Pro>,eaft uses and structures: In 1987, the City Hearings Officer reviewed a propoEtal on the subject property to place fill in the 100 year flood plain (File No. Sensitive Lands SL 1-86). The Hearings Officer approved the application subject to conditions (Exhibit "A "). Since the notification provided by the applicant was later discovered to be incomplete, a second hearing was held and an amended decision was issued by the Hearings Officer (Exhibit "8 ") The decision required the designation of a private open space identified in the applicant's site plan (Exhibit "C ") with related conditions requiring the formation of a property owners association to maintain it and the prohibition of cattle grazing in this open space area. The applicant proposes to amend this approval in the following manner: 1. To allow cattle grazing in a portion of the area designated for private open space as a condition of approval of SL 1 -86. 2. To reduce the amount of land previously designated for open space in approval SL 1-86. 3. A request to delay the formation of a property owners association as required by S 1 -86 until the property is solid. 4. To allow additional fill to be placed in the vicinity of 95th g according foot wide Avenue channel standard which was approved �in conjunction with SL 1-86. Plan _Denienation and Zoninc : The Comprehensive Plan and zoning eectioneiofsCommer dal. Professional divided into approximately ®quaff. designations property p y . zone) on the he western Abutting of the parcel and Low Density Residential R -4. zone). properties are similarly designated with the exception of an apartment complex to the southeast which is designated Medium Density Residential with a corresponding R -12 (Residential, 12 units/acre) zone (Exhibit non', III. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Chapter 18.84 (Sensitive Lands Review). 1. Chapter 18.84 contains regulations for land° within the 100 year subject to sensitive lands review. Sensitive flood�alainl that aprep ,, � '.. � � .. .. , _ . landepreview of ro o � d develo ents in thespe areas is intended to implement federally mandated flood plain rotection men and to pg tect 1 rivers, streams and creeks by mini gizing erroosion, romotin bank stabilit , maintainin and enhancin Water ,quality p tial Section 18484.015(C) �re mires ahearingd and fish and wildl , and presery g , , quality nd recreational cten a ,a a��.. far er approval of landforim alterations or development in the 100 yyeficfloodplain. 24 sractices to minimize flood e dame a °and f designs, Materials and p g the potential for damage. 3: section 16.84:040 provides that landform alterations subject t0. sensitive tattle Review meet comply with the following criteria: I I NGS OFFadNR tAtt, •REPORT ' -- SLR 90- =809.1 DAVIs '%3! PAGE 2 t'. N, a. Land form alterations shall preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero- foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary; b. Land form alterations or developments within the 100-year floodplain shall be allowed only in areal!' designated as commercial or industrial on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, except that alterations or developments associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in Chapter 18.42 of the Community Development Code shall be allowed in areas deeignated reoidential subject to applicable zoning standards; c Where a land form alteration or development is permitted to occur within the floodplain it will not remit in any increase in the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood; d. The land form alteration or development plan includes a pedestrian/bicycle pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan, unless the construction of said pathway is deemed by the Hearings Officer ao untimely; e The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood; f The necessary U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Oregon Land Board, Division of State Lands approvale shall be obtained and Where land form alteratione and/or development are allowed within and adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the dedication of sufficient open land area within and adjacent to the floodplain in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. 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. B. Applicable comerehendive Plah Policies: 1. Policy 2.1.1 provides that citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. 2. Policy 3.2.1 provides that the it will prohibit any development within the 100-year floodplain that would result in any ripe in elevation of the 100-year floodplain, ., e 3. pediey 3.2.2 provides that the city Ohlkil Iwohibit moat development in the floodway but may allow development in the tioodway it the alteration preserved or enhances the fUhetide and Maintenance of the eto-foot ride fiesedWay; Policy Mii also Provided that the dity may alit* limited specified deerelOPMeht in the flOOdplain outside the ZerOefelet rive flbodWay, . e . . . - . . _ 4, k did. y 3 . ,2, 3 pe o vid. e o that dettiopmeht in ithih the 100-.year flOOdpliii Otitdidd the zero-foot rifle n.00diltaY id conditioned upon - dpeeified tequikOfiehth 4 HEARINGS OFFICER STAFF REPORT - SLR 90-0011 - DAVIS PAGE 3 5. Policies 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 call for the protection of significant wetlands and wildlife habitat. The Metzger- Progress Community Plan, developed by Washington County prior to annexation, designated the western portion of the property as a potentially significant wildlife habitat. Areas along Ash Creek and Ash Brook have also been identified as significant wetlands by the Division of State Lands. 6. Policy 4.2.1 provides that all development within the Tigard Urban Planning Area shall comply with applicable federal, state and regional water quality standards. TV. NPO & AGENCY COMMENTS 1. The Engineering Department has the following commnts: A. The request is to modify SL 1 -86. SL 1-86 permitted filling in the flood plain of Ash Creek, subject to a number of conditions. Work under SL 1 -86 was begun in 1983. As of August of 1990, the work remained incomplete. Complaints were received from NPO #8, CPO 4, and various residents concerning violations of the conditions of SL 1 -86 Staff agreed that the work was in violation of the conditions of approval. On September 13, 1990, a notice of civil infraction was filed. Subsequently, all Of the conditions 86 have been satisfied except creation of an open sp ce area and fencing to keep livestock out of the open space area. B. The applicant suggests that the pond created pursuant to SL 1-86 has improved the drainage of the area We find no basis for this conclusion. The pond was required as a method of mitigating the impacts on wildlife habitat resulting from the fill placed under SL 1 -86. drainage the arts, red under SL 1 -86 may have improved c However, we find this irrelevant to the The regrading that occurred of the size of the required open space. The open space and pond were intended for mitigation of impacts on wildlife habitat rather than for drainage control. When the applicant requested approval for filling, he submitted plans ,. ans showi' ng an area remain undeveloped. The open space requirement of SL 1 -86 refleeta this undeveloped area shown on the applicant's plan. C. The applicant requests a reduction in the area to be dedicated as open space in accordance with SL 11 -86. We have no objection to the requested reduction. However, we note that the dedication was the that was added by the Hearings officer as a result of t o requirement public hearings on SL 1 -86; it was intended to preserve open space and mitigate impacts on the wildlife habitat. The pp qu approval place additional fill in the flood plain. The only justificationresent ©d is the desire to increase the area of developable commercial property. We find this confusing, since the applicant also indicates an intention to use the property for farming It appears to us that any additional filling should be delayed until such time as there is a specific proposal for commercial development. Until actual development d development there is no need for is additional filling. When a sp lopment proposal is submitted, consideration can be given to the need for additional HEARINGS OFFICER STAFF REPORT SLR 90 -0011 - DAVIS PAGE 4 at fill. Additional fill can then be considered along with a creek crossing which will be required for development. There is no justified need for additional fill at this time The applicant has a poor record of compliance with conditions of approval for filling in the past. Therefore, we recommend that the request for additional filling be denied. E. T1 r. applicant complains that flow in Ash Creek is impeded by downstream sedimentation. We agree. However, the downstream conditions appear to be irrelevant to this application. In the past, the City has considered channel improvements to Ash Creek as a potential project for funding from the capital improvement budget. However, other projects with nigher priorities have used all of the available capital improvement funds. The higher priorities were given to projects required to reduce the danger of flooding of existing structures and public improvements. As of July 1, 1990, responsibility for maintenance of the Ash Creek channel was transferred to the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA). USA has not yet developed a drainage master plan nor a long-range capital improvement program. The downstream siltation does not appear to have influenced the improvement requirements of SL 1-86. The downstream siltation does not appear to change the maintenance requirement a of the mitigation ponds. The downstream siltation has no impact on the amount of open apace that needs to be dedicated. It appears to us that the downstream siltation is due, in part, to the improper constrtiction activities of the applicant. F. The applicant requests a delay in the formation of an owners' asSociation to guarantee permanent maintenance of the open space area We feel that some type of permanent maintenance guarantee is needed to assure that public funds will not need to be expended for maintenance of the facilities which were created solely for the benefit of the applicant. The maintenance guarantee should be in a form which will clearly transfer the responsibility to any future owners. Therefore, we recommend that the requirement for an association be retained or that some similar permanent guarantee of maintenance be implemented. G. We recommend that the decision clarify Condition No 6 of SL 1-86. Condition No 6 provides that there shall be no grazing of livestock in the open space area The applicant has interpreted this condition to allow the herding Of livestock across the open space area when moving the livestock from one grazing area to another. Others have suggested that the condition prohibits livestock in the open space area at all times. Clarification of the intent of Condition No. 6 is needed. 2. The State Highway biViaion, the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Department, State Division of Wildlife, and the Metzger Water District all indidate that they have no objections to the proposal o the Water District does note that once the pro3ect is developed, water lined May need to be extended into', the pkopetty, The city of Tigard operations Division indicates that the usage of the wetland° area for grazing Of cattle and ito conipatibility, With 116A and regUlatiOnd Of Other gOverning bodies Should be ditinfirthed. HEARINGS OFFICER STAFF REPORT = SLR 90-0011 . DAVIS PAGE 5 ‘' • eee 4. The Division of State Lands recommends that areas be designated for open space and wildlife habitat area as indicated in a map submitted by the division. A copy of the letter and the map is attached to this report as Exhibit "E". 5. NPO #8 says that the members of the NPO unanimously object to any revision to meeting all current City, State and Federal requirements that apply to the project. CPO 4 Metzger will be meeting on November 21, 1990, and it is anticipated that comments from the CPO will be available for the hearing on Tuesday, November 27, 1990. 6. No other comments have been received. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. Compliance with Community Development Code. 1. The proposed fill and grading portion of the request does not comply with Chapter 18.84, because: a. Evidence has not been submitted to indicate that the proposed fill is justified. The applicant was advised in Auguet that if fill, as described in his application, was justified under the approval of SL 1-86, the Engineering Department would approve the proposal if an engineer could certify that fill was in accordance with the original approval. Due to this lack of calculation, related information, and confirmation from a registered engineer, it is tot possible to determine whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the floodplain storage function and maintenance of the zero foot rise floodway, or that the landform alteration would not result in an increase in the water surface elevation of the 100 year flood. B. Compliance Wite_emprehensive Plan Policies 1. The proposal complies with Policy 2.1.1 because notice of the application and hearing was provided to Neighborhood Planning Organization NPO #8 and to owners of property in the vicinity of the site Notice of the hearing was published in the Tigard Times newspaper. 2. The proposal does not comply with Policies 3.2.1, 3.2.2i and 3.2.3, because the .proposed land form modification is within, the 100 year floodplain, and sufficient information has not been provided to deeermine compliance with these policies. 3. The proposal does not comply With Policy 3.4.1 because the proposed grazing area is centrare to the Divisien of State Lande kecommendation which finds that an open apace atea, Without grazing, as described in the agency's memo (Exhibit "E") is the minimum necessary to protect the "remaining wetland:2i and eereani on the property and maintain their associated wildlife, water qualiey, and ilood Storage valued". The agency's recommendation doed allow movement of the presently required open Space boundary aPProxiMatelY 130 feet to the west. Although not Mentioned ie the applicant's narrative, intended that cattle be allowed to graze on the western portion HEARINGS OFFICER STAFF REPORT e SLR 90-0011 - DAVIS PAGE 6 44 ' • " . g,y„ ..,, , , , LEG!EIL5TY STRIP .41 • ; of the property as well as the eastern section near S.W. 89th Avenue. This activity will require that the cattle cross the wetlands area identified by the Division of State Lande. Also, farming activity is not a permitted use in the C-P zone and therefore, the grazing is a nonconforming use. Parming is permitted in the R-4.5 zone. Therefore, the staff recommends that future grazing be limited to the eastern 230 feet of the property as suggested by the Division of State Lande in Exhibit "E". 3. In regard to Policy 4.2.1, the staff has not found any relevant water quality regulation that would apply to the proposed grazing activity. However, it would appear that the 40 foot buffer area proposed from Ash Creek as recommended by the Division of State Lands (Exhibit "E") is appropriate and consistent with this policy. VI. RECOMMENDATION The staff concludes that only a portion of the application should be approved in the following manner: 1. The grazing area should be limited only to the eastern 230 feet of the property as illustrated by the Division of State Lands (Exhibit "E"). 2. The private open space area should be modified to in ."13 the area recommended by the Division of State Lands (Exhibit "E" 3. Because the method for maintenance of the private open space area is critical to ensure that the wetland area will be properly managed, the Staff recommends that the original conditions of approval continue to apply to this project. 4. The proposed filling should not be approved because of the lack of documentation regarding its effect upon the 100 year flood plain. Staff recommends approval of sensitive Lande Review request SLR 90-0011, subject to the following conditions: 1. Condition 5. of the previous Hearings Officer's decision shall be amended to state: The applicant shall cause to have Surveyed and shall designate that land as shown on Exhibit "F" as well as the northern pond and a 40 foot buffer surrounding it as open space in perpetuity and shall be subject to covenants, conditions and restrictions and an owners association which apportions the maintenance costs for said area among the properties being developed through this application, in the following formula: 5ingle-fami1y residendes - one share each, duplexes - one share per lot, offive space - one share per 2,000 square feet of developed offide space, proposed motel - one share per five developed unita. The articled of incorporation, bylaws and covenants, conditions and restrictions Ethan be subject to the apProVal of the city attorney for the City of Tigard. The covenants, conditions and rentrictions for the owner's addoCiation Shall Contain pro' isions which aUthorize the city of Tigard to issue citations for the association's failure to maintain or repair the open space designated pursuant to this Condition of approvali In the event the problem cited is not Corrected within a reasonable time, then the covenantS; conditions OtOtitd. OFFICER tVAtE tittkik. OA. 90-0011 *, DAVIS 144a 7 , , , i` J and restrictions ,shall provide a procedure whereby the City may affect the necessary repair or maintenance, bill the owner's association for the coat thereof, and in the event that bill is not paid within a reasonable time, the City shall have the authority to file liens against the owners of the property subject to the covenants, conditions and restrictions. As with the articles of incorporation, bylaws and covenants, conditions and restrictions, the procedure for this citation /repair /lien process shall be subject to the approval of the city attorney for the City of Tigard. 2. Livestock shall only be permitted within the area identified in Exhibit fF ". Other agricultural activities in other locations on the property shall be subject to the approval of the Division of State Lands and the Planning Director. In no Case shall agricultural activity occur on portions of the property zoned C -P. 3. .No additional fill or grading shall be permitted on the property unless approved through a sensitive lands review process. 4. With the exception of the modifications noted above, the conditions of the previous Hearings Officer decisions related to SL 1 -86 shall eemain in affect. Conditions 1 , 2., and 3. and remaining conditions for SL 1 -86 shall be fulfilled by February 1, 1991. PREP b. D BY: eith 8. Liden Senior Planner br /KL :SLR9011.ho HEARINGS OFFICER STAFF REPORT SLR 9b- +003: - )yAV'25 PAGl TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 1990 - 700 P.M. TIGARD CIVIC CENTER - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD., TIGARD, OR CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS EIENATIMETAND (NPO #8) A request for Sensitive Lands review approval to amend Sensitive Lando review SLR 1-86 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Also requested is approval to adjust the area dedicated as private open space to include the existing lake and 40 foot perimeter as well as 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. ZONE: C-P and R-4.5 (Commercial Professional and Residential 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 101 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 101 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, & 1500) OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT RAMC �A- Y1)0 L rS... b.11-vc Mr %PF---X • i'. . pan+v. arw4++y«..wwr..,.a.. �r u; .3(34.< Fro:Awe 141) va_ r is i5tontirP e41 `d... --Toe,( Sto locus NOTICE: AU persona desiring a to speak on any item ,mast Sign their name and note their address on thi sheet. (PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME) ITEM/DESCRIPTION: 2, 6 L D 0 j , o - I ww,' �.Ut c 114co, 1500 PLEASE PRINT YOUR _ NAME AND PULL ADDRESS PROPONENT _ FOR OPPONENT AGAINST . ._........ . Port. t4-4 foe r�tl ry, City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard Or 97223 TI ES PUBLISHING . Latoal ' 761 rigiA P.O, BOX 370 PHONE (603) 684.0360 Notice BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising 0 Tearsheet Not � . 0 Duplicate Affi e AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF W ASHlNGTON, ass. Judith Koehler c,ds ri depose say t fd Advertising principal cleric, of heg4erT g a newspaper and spa of general circul ion a& defined in ORS 193.010 193.020; published at g in the afo aid °vre r�gg Ta 1 a printed cope of which is hereto annexed, was, published In the One entire issue of said newspaper for consecutive in the following issues; November 15, 1990 successive and 41d, Subscribed' and sworn before rna this 15th day of November 1990 Notary Public for Oregon My Commisi l ► xpirea AFFIDAVIT STATE OF OREGON County of Washington City of Tigard x, depose and AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath say: (Please print) That I am a The City of. Tigard, Oregon. for ■That I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: That I served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Commission i <' Tigard Bearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Hearing Notice /Notice of Decision) of which is attached (Narked Exhibit "A ") was mailed to each named persons at th addre a shown on the attached list marked exhibit "B" on the 41,t- day of 194Tb _, said notice NOTICE OF DECISION as her rttached, was posted on an appropriate bulletin board on the day of 19 and deposited in the United States Mail on the ' day of p 19 g. postage prepaid. Prepared Notice /Posted (For Decision On1 �� 0 -,, 1? ,,1' o .. 4tp i�J,,d %.qJ! ii'�� OS.il a `V � Oa lit ,, ., Person who delivered to FOS'' OFFICE a) gibed and .!f. • -. sworn /affirm to me on the day of A PY PDBLXC OF My Commission Expires: s: Subs ribed and sworn /affirm to me on the 19_j day of AP& j + �` PUBLIC OF OREdON Yl / • nunis®ion Expires s NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON TUESDAY, November 27 1990, AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BLVD., TIGARD, OREGON, WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SLR 90-0011 FILE TITLE: Davis APPLICANT: Eugene Davis 13095 SW Henry Beaverton, OR 97005 OWNER: Same REQUEST: SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 90-0011 DAVIS (NPO 08) A request for Sensitive Lands review approval to amend Sensitive Lands review SLR 1-86 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Also requested is approval to adjust the area dedicated as private open space to include the existing lake and 40 foot perimeter as well as 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. ZONE: C-P and R-4.5 (Commercial Professional and Residential 4.5 units/ace) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTI4 181 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 1S1 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, & 1500) (See Map On Reverse Side) THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 or THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ANY PERSONS HAVING INTEREST IN THIS MATTER MAY ATTEND AND BE HEARD, OR TESTIMONY MAY BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD. FAILURE TO RAISE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND FAILURE TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FORM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT WHICH A COMMENT IS DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL BASED ON THAT CRITERION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT 639-4171, TIGARD OITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BLVD., OR CONTACT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATXON (NO) # 8 . cghIRPER5ON: PHONE tnntmaRt 2456299. . _ LEGIBILITY STRIP s.w. S.W. THORN S 1S135AC-02900 MILLS, NINA G 10620 SW 95TH PORTLAND 15135AC-03100 OR 97223 BRAXMEYER, PAUL BURTON 10560 SW 95TH PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC-03300 . ••oi. ■po . CULBERTSON, CHARZ4IE 9420 SW OAK STREET TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC-03500 BROOKE, MAC RAE B SEVIM B 9360 SW OAK ST PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC-03700 ..................... JUNGWIRTH, RANDY P AND RINGER, MICHELLE K 9330 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 18135AC-04200 ..................... WILSON, JOHN H 8960 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC -04400 .......... WELLINGS, COLLINS k ZAIDA 43700 SE TAPP RD SANDY OR 97055 1S135AC-02400 BOZICH, JAMES D MARIAN W 9425 SW LONGSTAFF TIGARD OR 97223 OSBORN, JOYCE M 1�86b SW 95TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 146,446OO• 1100cht$4. PHYLIS ET At 1321 NE COU CH PORTLAND OR 9132 ■••4 -. • ,„ ',+ ' '1."•■■■■‘4 1S135AC -03000 NOYES, BONNIE 21206 HUBBARD CUTOFF NE AURORA OR 97002 1S135AC-03200 BLOMGREN, JOHN S PEARL H 9460 SW OAK METZGER OR 97223 1S135AC-03400 ....... . . owioeoreo THOMS, CLARENCE E LOIS M 9400 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 18135AC,03600 000414.00, BROOKE, MAC RAE B SWIM B 9360 SW OAK PORTLAND . OR 97223 1S135AC-04100 STEWART, JOHN W PHYLLIS T 8980 SW OAK PORTLAND 1S135AC -04300 OR 97223 GEORGE, SHIRLEY AND ALFRED GEORGE, HELEN 8950 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC00100 ido.4.44...mioe...... DIXON, BROCK MARGARET DART, JOHN 0 MARCELLA G 1569 CALLE HACIENDA GREEN VALLEY AZ 85614 1S135AC -02600 HAOGENO PRISCILLA D 10890 SW 95TH AVE TICARD OR 97223 1s136Ad-02700 DICK DARRELL L BARBARA d 6160 SW OLESON ROAD PORTLAND OR 9131 hOtiChtdviOhitt6 NE tOtidll, • OOOttAkb•• • • :Oh .91231. 1S135AD -01800 GEHRING, RONALD L JUNE E 10860 SW 89TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD- 01900 ... WILLIAMSON, CARL E AND ANNA D 8818 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 18135DA -02500 ST JAMES ON HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 1S135DA -02601 ....d BRADY, REGINALD D ILA MAE 9055 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135DA- 03900 ST JAMES ON HALL IN '� -MRS BY JONES MGMT 50 SW 2ND STE 314 PORTLA OR 97204 1S135AA =02500 LYON, DONALD J HAZEL J 10440 SW 87TH AVE PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AL- 02800 HERBERHOLZ, ANDREW B FLORENCE HERBERI30L Z , DAVID 10530 SW HALL BLVD TIGAARD OR 97223 1Si35AA -03400 ....:... DORTLAND, SHERRY A 10580 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA -03600 .....i..i°i6.Ysi HANSEI ' LUCIA L 10575 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND OR 97223 15135AA -03702 .y.L'.iii..7iibb.i'. CULLINAN, RANDY J AND KRISTINA,0 • 877• SW 64X STREET TidARD OR 97223 1S135AD-018 .e......o ............. HANNEVIG, EDWARD 8840 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -02001 ................o.. MILLER, LEE W JP. DORIS E 8808 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND 1S135DA -02600 BRADY, ILA MAE 9055 SW NORTH D A ST TIGARD OR 97223 OR 97223 18135DA -02602 RING, CHARLES R DARCIA L 9025 SW NORTH DAKOTA TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA- 02000 „. PRINK, WILLIAM H STEIGER, JOHN M 10250 SW GREENBURG RD SUITE 102 -B PORTLAND OR 97223 15135AA- 02600 JONES, TOMMY B AND CINDY L 8686 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA- -02801 HIRNING, DOROTHY AND SARGEANT, SHARON 6325 SW 90TH AVE PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA- 03500 HILL, RONALD A 10550 SW HALL BLvD TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA -0370 ii.�i�ir e�i s TIPPIE, MICHAEL R AND ROBIN 8805 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA— 03703 BRANDT WALDO G' PEARL E 8835 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223' t�;• „gyp,;,, 1S135AC -04900 OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION FOREIGN MISSION FOUNDATION 4550 SW LOMBARD BEAVERTON OR 97005 1S135BD -00100 UTAH STATE RETIREMENT FUND C/0 F I A ASSN COURT PO.BOX 255187 SACRAMENTO CA 95865 1S135AD --1303 ..... ..... ...:..... 15135AD -01000 ....:: :.............. RANSTUEL, DONALD D DAVIS, GENE L 4050 SW LOMBARD ST BEAVERTO1` OR 97005 1S135AD- 01101 }IALPIN, PAMELA L 8845 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -01103 OGLE, CLARENCE A JEAN E 8811 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND 1S135AD-01302 OR 97223 SCHNETZKY, FLOYD E MARJORIE E 8870 SW OAR TIGARD 15135AD- 01600 ST JAMES ON HALL I BY JONES MGMT CO, 50 SW 2ND A PORTLAND OR 97223 : E 314 OR 97204 10.350-01701 SIT'WSKI, DOMINIC A JR HELEN L 8820 SW THORN TIGARD. OR 97223 15135AD -01705 HOFMANN JERRY D 10950 SW 89TH• TIGARD 1S135AB -0340 LINCOLN CENTER PHASE IV LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 10300 SW GREENBURG RD #200 PORTLAND OR 97223 1S13SBD -00300 ... GOOD SAMARITAN BY GOOD SAMARITAN HEALTH ENTERPRISES 1015 NW 22ND AVE PORTLAND OR 97210 1S135AD- 00901 . BENNETT, BRIAN S AND PATRICE B 19675 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD- 01100 ..................... MOON, BRETT A & SHERRIE A 8807 SW SPRUCE TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -01102 :.. JOHNSON, RICHARD BRION AND GAIL A 8815 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -01301 STATE OF OREGON C -1834 DEPT OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS PHIFER, ERIC H ARID E L 8840 SW OAK STEEP PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AD -01303 .........:...:: EVERITT, JAMES E KAREN L 8900 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -01700 .....+. ............... ST JAMES ON HALL INSTORS BY JONES MGMT:, 50 SW 2ND STE 314 POR OR 97204 1S135AD -01703 . • • LANG, DOLORES MAE 10980 SW 89TH TIGARD OR 91223 OR '97223 iS135AD -01706 CtiRTIS, HERBERT C AND CAROL 8850 SW THORN 'TI .............. OR 97223 iCARD 1S13SAA -03704 ,.......e..... ELLIOTT, T G H T 9380 SW 82ND PORTLAND OR 97223 *solo**. 1S13SAA -03900. ...a...... MOORE, TIMOTHY A AND TANDY J' 8910 SW OAAY PORTLAND OR 97223 EUGENE DAVIS 13095 SW HENRY BEAVERTON, OR 97005 MARILYN HARTZELL 10285 SW 70TH' AVE TIGARD, OR 97223 LARRY EPSTEIN 722.SW SECOND AVE. PORTLAND, OR 97204 1S135AAN -0380 FXNCK, DALE N IDA N 8875 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA- 03901 •••• CHEPIN f JOHN DOROTHY 3 8911 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 .4 1 CITY OF TGARD0 EGO $ENSITILICATION CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 1. GENERAL INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION North of Hwy #217, West of 84th Avenue FOR STAFF USE ONLY CASE NO.jj R "Q-001) OTHER CASE NO'S: ------ RECEIPT NO. 76-) APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: DATE: _I:2 - ?c) Applicat on elements submitted: ___JA) Application form (1) Owner's signature/written authorization :(C) Title transfer instrument (1) ....LOAssessor's map (1) L---(6-Plot plan (pre-app checklist) 4.-115Applicant's statement re-app checklist) G) List of property owners and addresses within 250 feet (1) H) Filing fee 524,,oc) TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NO. 1S1 35AC #101, #2800 & #4800 1S1 35AD #1200, #1300, #1400 & #1500 SITE SIZE 17 Acres PROPERTY,OWNER/DEED HOLDER* ADDRESS 13095 S.W. Henry CITY Beaverton, Or. APPLICANT* Eugene Davis ADDRESS 13095 S.W._BallaY PHONE 1516,7A111_____ CITY Beaverton, Or. zip 97005 4 4 • Eugene & YJavig PHONE an , :746-6,01 ZIP 005 When the 'Owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner with written authorization. The owner(s) must sign this application in the apace provided on page twp or submit A Written authorization with this applidation. 2. PROPOSAL, SUMMARY The owners of record of the subject property reddest a gensitive Lands Permit to allow Alteration of pious Oermit No1 SL 1-86 to OetrAt cattle grazing and to adjudt the area dedicated as priVate ()Peri 8Pace tri, a 40 foot strip ab depicted On eased survey dated 8-1=90 by WE wells, )523P/i3P teVidt 5/87 DATE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE: FINAL DECISION DEADLINE: COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION: C-6 " 2diA) ca, N.P.O. :Number: Approval Date: Final Apkovalbatek Planning. • g4gieering...:: List an y variance, conditional uses., or other land use actions to be considered as part of this application: Extension of Previous permit to ` allow creek configuration on north aide of Ash Greek adjacent to 95th to conform to or.ig it t c nnne design. 4. Applicants To have a complete application you will need to submit attachments ` described in the attached information sheet at the time you' submit this application. 5. THE APPLICANT(S), SHALL CERTIFY THAT: A. The above request does nat .violate any deed restrictions that ma be attached to or im osed uu on the sub ub act ro • ert B. If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. C. 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. and sc criteria, the and entire understand;; contents the requirements application, including , D. The applicant the policies , rements for approving or denying the application. DATED this 24th day of September SIGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and wife) of the subject property. 19 90 (ksL:pm %o7 '7p) 1S135AA-03704 ELLIOTT, TGMT 9380 SW 82ND PORTLAND OR 97223 18135AA..03900 ..................... MOORE, TIMOTHY A AND TANDY J 8910 SW °ARMY PORTLAND ' OR 97223 18135AA-0380 PINaR, DALE M /DA m ! 8875 SW OAR PORTLAND OR 97223 1813SAA..03901 ..................... CHEPIN, JOHN' DOROTHY J 8911 SW OAR ST TIGARD OR 97223 LEGIBILITY STRIP 1S135AC -04900 ....o......... OREGON DEPT OPT' TRANSPORTATION FOREIGN MISSION FOUNDATION 4550 SW LOMBARD BEAVERTON OR 97005 • • 18135BD -00100 .....e•......:....... UTAH STATE RETIREMENT FUND C/O F I A ASSN COURT PO BOX 255187 SACRAMENTO CA 95865 15135AD -1303 1S135AD -01000 RANSTHEL, DONALD D DAVIS, GENE L 4050 SW LOMBARD ST BEAVERTON oa 97005 1S135AD- 01101 •••• HALPIN, PAMELA L 8845 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 18135AD -01103 COLE, CLARENCE A JEAN E 8811 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AD -01302 •....e...F.....woos SCHNETZKY, FLOYD`E MARJORI7E E 8870 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 1s .35AD- 01600 :. : : n : : • ST JAMES ON HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 18135AD- 0170 SITOWSKI, DOMINIC A JR HELEN L 8820 SW THORN Ti0 1RD iS135AD- 01705 :..•: HOr IMANN JERRY D 10950 SW W 89TH TIGARD OR 97223 OR 97223 1S135AB -034 'es ...lie • • • • . . LINCOLN CENT PHASE IV LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 10300 SW GREENBURG RD #200 PORTLAND OR 97223 18135BD -00300 GOOD SAMARITAN BY GOOD SAMARITAN HEALTH ENTERPRISES 1015 NW 22ND AVE PORTLAND OR 97210 18135AD -00901 ..•............••.•e BENNETT, BRIAN S AND PATRICE D 19675 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -01100 ..........5.....•.•r. MOON, BRETT A & SHERRIE A 8807 SW SPRUCE TIGARD 18135AD 01102 OR 17223 JOHNSON, RICHARD BRION AND GAIL A 8815 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 18135AD- 01301 ...• :•• :.... STATE OF OREGON C -1834 DEPT OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS PHIFER, ERXO H AND B L 8840 SW OAK STEEP PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AD -01303 :•..... EVERITT, JAMES E KAREN L 8900 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -01700 ••..•...•.e :....•ee. ST JAites ON HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 18135AD- 01703 wd::::.e..•e LANG, DOLORES MAE 10980 SW 89TH TIGARD OR 97223 iS135A0- 017060.::: : : ::• CURTIS, HERBERT C AND CAROL 8850 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 18135AC -02900 ..:.... MILLS, NINA G 10620 SW 95TH PORTLAND OR 97223 ... 18135A0- .030 ... .., ...tie ..... 18135A0- .03100 e .. . .......... ... e.. BRAXMEYER, PAUL BURTON 10560 SW 95TH PORTLAND OR 97223 18135A0.- 03300 CULBERTSON, CHARMIE 9420 SW OAK STREET TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC- 03500 .................... BROOKE, MAO RAE B SEVIM B 9360 SW OAK ST PORTLAND - OR 97223 18135A0.03700 JUNGWIRTH, RANDY P AND RINGER, MICHELLE K 9330 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 18135AC- 04200 ..........:.......... WILSON, JOHN H 8960 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC- 04400 BILLINGS, COLLINS K 'AMA B 43700 SE TAPP RD SANDY OR 97055 18135AC- 02400 BOZICH, JAMES D MARIAN W 9425 SW LONGSTAFF TIGARD OR 97223 N ©YES, BONNIE 21206 HUBBARD CUTOFF NE AURORA OR 97002 18135AC- -03200 .ti... .. ...... . BLOMGREN, JOHN B PEARL M 9460 SW OAK METZGER OR 97223 18135AC-03400 THOMS, CLARENCE E LOIS M 9400 SW OAK PORTLAND. OR 97223 1S135AC -- 03600 ....... BROOKE, MAC RAE R BEVIM B 9360 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC- 04100 .:.......,..........f. STEWART, JOHN W PHYLLIS T 8980 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC- 04300 GEORGE, SHIRLEY AND ALFRED GEORGE, HELEN 8950 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC- »00100 DIXON, BROCK MARGARET DART, JOHN 0 MARCELLA G 1569 CALLE HACI � ... ENDA GREEN VALLEY AZ 85614 .... 18135AC -02500 ... ......e........ HAUGEN, PRISCILLA D 10890 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD 18135AC -02600 :....: OSBORN, JOYCE M 10860 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC- 04600 .::. • ROUCRES PHYLIS ET AL 1321 NE COUCH PORTLAND OR 97232 OR 97223 18135AC -02100 .... .. . DICK, DARRELL L BARBARA 6750 SW OLESON ROAD PORTLAND OR 97223 181 35AC -04700 :.. ...e....::.... ROUCHES, PHYLIS ET AL 1321 NE COUCH PORTLAND OR 97232 EZZL6 1,10 'OM/404 ?INTO MS SE88 • s 'IUvra A •9011 M ' /aMVRa. ........... EOLEO- 11S£t0T EZZL6 UP aaVOxy Nv0 MS 9008 NIBO a PTV 4 'WPM xox ' axdcLL TOLEO- YVSCTst EZZL6 40 ..•..... EZZL6 ZIO EZZL6 H0 (Moist tolst awls aaVH MS 0SS0T rr a'IvMou '1171H OOSEO- TVSETST ?AK H106 MS SUS N0 HS 'yNK80 WS aNV XHSOZ1oa 'ONINUIH TOSZO-VvSEUT (mom ILS MVO MS 9898 a RaNIO amm a MilioX 'sBMOr EZZL6 MHO 00920 -t t9ETsT aNi " IHOd s -ZOT auras all Ufl8NM M° MS 08 0t H NHOr '4 d380I HLS H RVIa'IIM 'xMnad 00020- 'SETS' EZZL6 HO Q WDLL tIL0)WU HmON Ms S2O6 ' womma 2I Sa ° ' 0NIa • .. ZO9ZO iraSETST e• EZZL6 2LO aH�OIs SS VL0)a HSHON Ms 9806 OVH V'II Aa as OO9Z0-VaSETST EZZL6 1O ammod BOnus Ms BOBS a SIlloa qtr .M za'I 'Unarm T00Z0- aYSEtst EZZL6 CIO auYOI& sS aoffadS Ms Ot8O UUVMaa 'OTAUHvH 8T0-Q 9£TST e E4L6 40 OIs 4444 /S )WO Ms 8448 • a t1NI I I • amt Aar •'uwwx'zana • .... ..R......•...... ZOLO- vtSETpT EzZL6 Ito atiVa xOd (LAM Tart MS 9490t a vIon7 aNaSHvH oo9EO-vvSETST e e•• ... a .. e t! EZZL6 110 aWozs aA'I8 TIVH MS O8SOx if X HaHS ' aNWXsUoa • • a 00f E0 -'f fSETBT EZZ46 H0 agora aim Timm Ms 0E50t awrc ' Z'IOI12i 1811 I a3Nallo7a1 8 M&2icNIP ' Z'IOH IEIUUBH .•a•o.�•�••r..••e••ae 00820- 111SETsT EZZL6 o 0MflS Od BAY HLL9 MS OIrPOT ,Lt 'IElZVH r Gammon 'Nora 00SZ0- 'ItSEtst. t0ZL6 HO aNv'ISHoa 'ATE 21s HAV aNZ Ms 05 00 sW0W sBNOr XS sHoIsSAMI 'I'IKH No S8Wr LS •' 006E0- "aS£TST EZZL6 110 savors ZS Emma H fl!ON MS s S06 avw v'II a aavHIDBE ' Xfinia T08Z0- YQSETst 'bOZL6 3!0 UN f'I3 1Od 'tE aiLB BAY an M9 OS 00 MOH SElNor a9 SUOLSaANI 'I'1 R Ho same ss • .. • .. • q . • • • • • . O0S 0- Va9£tBt EZZL6 210 • • ativaZHOd aBOnHdS MS 8T88 a►N as a 'I?t3 'N0SWfI'IIIM 006T0-ans£TST EZZL6 HO 0Wt0Is 8A f HL68 Ms 0980T H 8Nnr a aavH0ZI '01181.80 .........•..•• 0O8t0- aVSETST 95 t h 4+11117; - .444. 4.4.4.4 \ • \ Ok 'b 4 40 I 0.44' • k' CI! CO, 04 64,00 W Oros 0) 0 ; Ok ..\ • m Eh- 3m th m in ‘‘"■,. 4.:440t,4 0'40 ,■■: &4 It, .1640 110 I ti 4 .S GH (LI), No, lo le \ \ 95th < 4 139 0 11 cI. 1111, 0 3 c•14 EOM r 04 40! • R •1* 5410.10 P.T Ira _ 8 T PP Y '3 N gl 1 I§ 8 N F- ,'v 4 —t YJ , 18 -I 8 E4 .1. 99 .�. 5.4 .1. 1112 .4s CJ .1 M L. 199 _ ,1. RQ I0 a N 15 —100 l r t&T 81 18 J Va0AT1 — -1 A 95th IM 1 WAVED 111/111111 GARFIE r,..1 r °a 1 Ia• 1 n w 81 I ��AA� N ■ +rf. • f I4 "i ,�, V 8 I � LI0 A ro I x.;11 " i 81 eta — T — - ii V'A 1�I 7• _ ' I. Cdr -0 - 1 I A r I8 -4 -f Iggm J- `1 �, all 1 "'5.I I8 co g co • JI'2 — —us 'r. N 91 1 18 �,,' d1. & to $ — i ill 1 .:g of — .i., Y1 is uo .,_ 'g 4P. °c ec 4g L 'Ill _ ° ,eoF 1 };� 19 t3.w, 93 RI) AYEtJIIE -;�y E 1' ▪ •� N"' -- " '0 ie VACATED ( 99.35402 S. 8F a� I liA 1 Iple V 1 w �� f' �_ C) j J�� I t 1b o I Ifa 8 Ta �+r -- — off. CI .1. 0Q .1. 02 .4. E2 4. I22 8 TAYLOR i !•KEEP v°c *tl0 . •II /°II 8 I0 `}'` 10 0o .q. w 'f' — loo .- 0 m 4 O1 M + +, to 6 — F ..1: 59 .4. 19 4. 09 .4. . Iasi _ kI A O K ;,.O N VACATIO IN /II° — 4. w vv*cAi' 100 , — fiioj' -4- 13 14 tb r 4 A r 8 s g "" $ 81RE ii i rn / I / N SEE MAP I S I WAS " 2 --T"" SN OAK crt, NntenST REV' ■ clOCIO4 .11611e. 11.0 •4,,..4 to 4t$ Ina 11 900 .46 Ai 4j.4,4)).. 4 Glik,)/ �. 04, (.4 mirmorriewilsit at R10,, White o 0 5 A F4 NI ikgp s WADY I' 10. 000 96 14 it 1. I, 414 / too 3,30 Ai e.ist Co., LANE 4,, ■■■ ,4t , 23-71 / 04 6.1 V•9 4 0 41'7 k'S 400 4,4 S4 1oo Ai, / 1 SEE MAP IS I stioA 0' I I I DEE MAP is I asAc , rOort ASSESSMENT OUsiiodit3 ONLY bo NOT NEIN ON kin ANY oTHER USE ..,„ 're o AR D -tzl,,,,, II i. -„7:,,,, v 1, i s I 3t fib I4„, c,--It:T.,tr.:‘:!:',:k.::::"4,7,,,L4.,..A.• - . 1 - $ • • $ $ $ •^C^ • ..••$,,$ 4 ."4" LEGISILJTYSTRIP` Cg. '37710, 3sc 33,039 1:03, AN= ssr 00 0081 00ZZ- < C nrn 1160£1 •21-5-3) 65 00S: 133E :S •tof• as tx 1Z rn ITV ,►a; ffa 133E S= I -3sn1I3euo ANr- g 111 1:NO`•X1332I 014.oa ONO, S3SOcrelnet 1141 3N1d;: zrsrT Ode S�l: S 0 Cu: 7•fra[a'f•it.' oag, x31133873, *SE I: VI dCii33S'- I Ff v 00£ ,1,677 �_ZOfit f• 33Z:I15 ti" ffi> mws- 10:112)- I. _.,70L ZL' v....1 SI d'011 33S io 1 ,001%1 31V3S NO93130 AJ.N[1OO! N0LSNIHSVM' WM' MOH S I3. GS :N011336 WI 3N WI 3S 4 144:".114.11i l004�!: it - riaL ' eo' 4. On s �'►Yr � r::.3M1i.J \4y 444'4 , 4r FALL ;,�� . 7i, N ' 8 ' » Ma ,, 4 G11.1041; a � ■ I I d ' I 1.a,l+.rl °" A� I 1 b o 0 Y . OO.lI` 110' o: ,.• _ I , d e Y �•i. ..i. Co. Rd- No. 1766 It T AV 8 Y" E-IUE °1 r 11..111 w nt.t oseew oIP leeae / O j'i lei i ' - / Y '� a RS a d Pli R r` 1 N No%odD!qp ii.i ii ► "it w o.o}'[ •' f• , I1 g z»wea++>v. rio M° W #Cn a ;i Idwi ( Tl40lLi itotf o.L,r ilur ,p I N g h2 FCC for a a N I LA •� hOI O � fi I io '. Isms Si WI ii•iiiii ne.ei S fl e I F fo I (17 Iio.i .d: J• HALL, 1 lint eb•tb} }i loo 50,5 1 goo A cd4 8 hell .. IiLai eo+eo'w • 7 9OI ; D .; ' J .0• _J8 aro_L cd- 0'0 _1 0 0) w 51 t l :37 SEE MAP 15135A5 *'3.4 1000 590 ao riFin f a'—I ,so T su— 1. .ea 1 7 1T9;.7 ;G .r p ° ++ _ 12812 23-7 I i13 12 11 12 1 :I .T 6OJ i!r o °:1900 » ▪ 1800 1600 760. 2 1 01 7.7.2.' SEE MAP 131 35AA SUPPLEMENTAL 140.1 • STREE 4200 3707 44412'•° J •tso 2 = 2400 taros' 2201 • 4000 4101 1 ` . F 3 B "1JR 0 0 r.� r F.' 1 1 = : - r.s•4o x•12.2• , J ..L 1s7 it � Its 74935'I 74 R!'' M , -L C,FL 823 o f. Al... i 1 9 1 2300 23 ,7s 2304 10'.11.. ..12,11• OAK zt00 _:114 4'7 .nos' 2.801 STREET 300! SEE MAP IS 7 35AC b is e3• FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY DO NOT RELY ON FOR ANY OTHER USE C 3400 SEE MAP IS 'I 35AD rs.a1 PINE °9'�iS:lia3J3 July 10, 1991 E. Andrew Jordan Bolliger, Hampton, & Tarlow 1600 B.W. Cedar Hills Boulevard Portland, OR. 97222 CITY OF TIG D OREGON RE: City of Tigard/Ashbrook Farms - SLR 90 0011 (Davi Dear Mr. Jordan: As per your request I have reviewed the files regarding the City of Tigard Hearings Officer decision on the Dr. Davis sensitive lands approval. All conditions of SLR 90-0011 must still, be met. Dr. Davis submitted plans for fence construction relabtve to Condition No 2 of SLR 90-0011. These plans, were approved brthe City. Once the fence is constructed and before cattle use the crossing, Mike Mills of the City Engineering Department needs to be contacted for and inspection. Still to be completed are the property owners' association/deed covenant or equitable servitude; by-laws; the survey and designation of open space in perpetuity as per Condition 5 of SL-86 and as amended by SLR 90-0011; guarantee of maintenance of open space according to Condition No 5 as amended; and approval by the City Attorney. You also expressed concern regarding the difference between maintenance for the area Subject to the DSL permit and the open space to be dedicated to the City. Please be advised that the areas shown in pink on Exhibit 6 of the Hearings Officer decision are to be maintained as natural open space and free from cattle grazing. The yellow areas shown on Exhibit 6 are those to be maintained according to the provisions of the DSL permit. I hope this information will help. Questions regarding an application for modification Of the Hearings officer decision concerning the distribution of maintenance cost should be directed to Jerry Offer. SinCertlYi • tadhakd.....tiewtodott • Senior Pi:Witter Col. Joel 8hAidhi bai • Mike ilobiiwoiti City. Attotfloy 1M26 sW Hall Blvd, Ob, Bob 28807, tioded, Otedon 0228 (608) 680.4111. 0„, . 4 ",;',44"4".. • sr+ b ;;;. • REQUEST FOR COMMENTS FROM: Tigard Planning Department DATA= October 10 1990. RE: sENsrTxvE _ LANDS spit 90 -0011 v (NPO #8) A request for Sensitive Lands review approval to amend Sensitive Lands review SLR 1 -86 which would allow cattle grazing on property previously determined to be within the 100 year floodplain. Also requested is approval to adjust the area . dedicated as private open space to include the existing lake and 40 foot perimeter as well as 40 feet along the southern border of Ash Creek. ZONE: C-P and Rt-4.5 (Commercial Professional and Residential 45 unite /acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 181 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800 and 1S1 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, & 1500) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and reonaendation 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 ccmate by Oct x_.22, 1990. 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 clat®,. please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639 -4171. STAFF CONTACT: Keith Liden 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 Comment ®e, Name of Perelon Commenting: g Phone Number: b)UI /SLR90 -1i BkM 1. 2. CITY DEPARTMENTS 3. -Building inspector/Brad R. y Recorder Engineering/Gary A. •ni"---Permits Coordinator/Viola G. SPECIA4„;:. STRICTS ire District (pick-up box bldg.) • Tigard Water District 8777 SW Burnham St. Ti ard, OR 97223 Metzger Water District 6561 SW Taylors Perry Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 4. -AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS Wash. Co. Land Use & Transp. 150 N. First Ave. Hillsboro, OR 97124 Brent Curtis Kevin Martin Joann Rice Scott King Fred Eberle Borreson Te•Itte... AA7...., ($1, V Jim Hendryx City of Beaverton PO Box 4755 Beaverton, OR 97076 , state Highway Division Lee Gunderson PO Box 565 BeaveNton, OR 97075 er2 5. SPECIAL AGENCIES General Telephone Mike Lutz 12460 SW Main sh. Beaverton, OR 97007 NW Natural 0aS Don Thomas 220 NW Second Ave. Portland; OR 9/209 Parks & Recreation Board School Dist. No. 48 (Beavr) Joy Pahl. PO Box 200 Beaverton, OR 97075 School District 23J (Tig) 13137 SW Pacific Hwy. Tigard, OR 97223 Boundary Commission 320 SW Stark Room 530 Portland, OR 97204 METRO 2000 SW lst Ave. Portland, OR 97201-5398 DLCD (CPA's only) 1175 Court St. NE Salem, OR 97310-0590 Other Portland General Electric titian Moore 14655 SW Old Scholls Ferry Beaverton, OR 97007 •Metro Area Communications Harlan Cook TWin Oaks Technology Center 1815 NW 169th Place S-6020 beavertOn, On 97606i-4886 US West Pete Nelson 421 SW Oak S. Portland, OR 9•204 Tci dablevision of oregon, ±noe, Mike Hallodk 3500 SW Bond Portland# OR 97201 °b64.5L- rcAa. 6C0-00,_:X Vez1Z4b0.) seAo 7-0)4 • 4 4 4 STATE AGENCIES 6. Aeronautics Div. (ODOT) gineOr lard of Health Fish & Wildlife' 6PCWILI-LIRS Paarks & Recrea. Div. _Subdivision Supervisor Dept. of Energy Dept. of Environ. Quality 7. FEDERAL AGENCIES 8. t°1' OTHER Corps. of Engineers Post Office beAMI Division of State Lands Commarce Dept. -N.H. Park LCDC PUC Fire Marshall Other Other Southern Pacific Transportation Company Duane M. Forney, PLS - Project Engineer 800 NW 6th Avenue, Rm. 324, Union Station Portland, OR 97209 ttt CITY OF TIt F<1 NAMk DAVI 0 Gy EN DUVUlla ADDRE5 ' r 4550 ti5W sT PURPOSE . w ,, EC!< AMOUNT I PA'`d`1 NT DATE 9/2 /9 f SUB :(9.1 IONS OR c7O05- AMOUNT PAXD 520000 P400aVi: 00\1140M h C UNT PA Ala? L•0110$•:.. L c ► r� OO 6 LR q6-660---Auv s 1513SAC -04900 � iW ♦s �ati REGO +1 DEPT OF " Rf N PORTATXON O % F+ORB]ON H SSXON #ouribwktot 4550 SN tOkiahhb BSAVERTON 43s PI N 01u 4+43E %NU 4X1 k1 'q"! a 4410Es KcriVH 314'11 RHICRIVM13.0 etc. I A6fn w ACM ZL6 io DU LB I3nUds MS SSP88 Z vaaind imam . , ■... . * ... r.. . • • S IOLTO" QYSETST t$11 I, lit .1141/1 'w 1 "4'111111 /dli4 °tIPI 3 ,h fla I 06.0 - A0 N 'f) t_ 10 Qb ;:. ,r, S9es6 a L8tSSz Xi oa acs t�S Ti 1 4,0410 .. .. ootao -C'Es tST Avrc 1 100- 0 '79 S�g� Al:f telem eZ , 6 uQe 'PAIN IIPH ',911 £ZZL6 uoN L6e£z x 'PAM r s, OREGON STATE LAND BOARD NEIL GOLOSSCI&MIOT Governor BARBARA ROBERTS Secretary of State ANTHONY MEEKER State Treasurer Division of State Lands 1600 STATE STREET, SALEM, OREGON 97310 • PHONE (503) 378-3805 March 5, 1990 Eugene and Vivian Davis 40 SW Lombard Beaverton, OR 97005 Re St-ate Permit No. F.'' 4570 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Davis: On February 13, 1990, staff of the Division of State Lands visited your property along Ash Creek to determme your progress in complying with p previously met with Dana Siegfned of this office above. opt' during the conditions of the state removal-fill permit referenced g g October 1989. y remain the. lack ,of apparent areirnt com liance with the ers of your significant concerns principal p y p p ' tpal concerns are: 1) The 'temporary" bridge crossing on Ash Creek is not authorized; due to the poor construction of this crossing, a great deal' of sediment has eroded into the creek; Fencing f the wetland and stream corridor d what is required in the I does not conform to g cf ' ' e There appears to be no plantings, �p b and we have no plan from you that indicates successful plantings will be established; ' 4) ue nabs both ponds must be rocked, otherwise erosion will contin 5) D a hie a from the fil of well d ". draining 1 pad.. is r� esxgneu we found nunaerouis sediment to r g iirto the creek, adding additional unnecessary the creels; 6) been eland area north of the proposed building i C appears to have filled; Le., the fill pad does not cotdorm to the site plans. Rather than exchanging letters on this matter we would like you to call either Ken Bierly or me to set up a site meeting to discuss the items lasted above. Please note that Special Condition No 6 of Attachment A for your pert reads 'The mitigation actins as specified below in Special Condition.No. 7 shall be completed prior to filling for the motel complex and commercial facility." You are currently in violation of permit conditions, therefore, we look forward to your cooperation in fully meeting the conditions of your permit this summer. Sincerely, 6 Kenneth T. ranklam Environmental I ernnits Section K /ktf ken :26 cc: Don Weidinger, Corps of Engineers Mike Mills, City of Tigard DIVISION OF STATE LANDS STATE LAND BOARD BARBARA ROBERTS Governor PHIL KEISLING Secretary of State JIM HILL State Treasurer Re: DSL Permit No. 4570 (Corps N. OYA-4-6425) Ash Creek Commercial Fill, Eugene Davis Dear Mr. Picketing: This letter is a follow-up to mt, Gene Davis' letter of July 5, 19940 Arid your subsequent contact with our office concerning the Ash Brook PrOjedt. The 8i1e Wa8 inspected on July 211 1994, by. Gene Herb and . . , . . . Brenda Lewis of Oregon Dept, of Fish and Wildlife (ODVW). andmyse1f, It was observed that the larger mitigation pond. was functioning a8 desired with ttees and shrubs surviving as Mr. Davis outlined in his letter,. out office. would have no objection to commencing with the contraction of the bridge structure as depicted on drawing 8X10 SK2, and 8X3 (attached), This bridge • structure would allow access to the development parcel adjacent to Highway..217 (Phase 11) En order to satisfy . the intent of the mitigation plan for thiti:atea the. • following condition s. were agteed upon: • 1, The total mitigation site and designated open space area thail be fended .o, 2 The wetland mitigation area buffets. and Ash. Oreek. (between the :existing tipatian bordet and the Eende)i shall be planted. with tree t and shrubs as outlined on the attached plant litt, Tteet and shrubs should be planted on 20' centers with some clustering of vegetation, Due to the beaver activity at. this 1bdioni tree should be protected with wire meth and watered for a MiniMUm• Of to growing teatont,. sitodt NE Saleth, OR 97310-1V (50 378-3805 PAX (503) 378 4844 4, 7 Mr. Kurt Pickering Page 2 July 28. 1994 3. The springs near Highway 217 which feed the larger mitigation pond on the south end shall be protected by leaving the large woody vegetation and possibly fencing the site. Please contact our office if we can be of further assistance. You should contact the Corps of Engineers to see if they have any additional concerns involving the development of this area. Sincerely, a/61/4-01 William L Parks Natural Resource Coordinator Field Operations WIJP/A1 bil:421 Enclosure CC: Gene Herb, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Gene Davis, Property Owner Corp 8 of Engineers Dept. of Environmental Quality City of Tigard 1.........*......■............% \ \ \ I \ \ Z \\\ \ / / / / ,// / / / / / / / / / / / I // / / / \ I \ 1 / / 06 ‹ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / \ / r../ .. ... . .../... . I i / / / I / / / / \ \ / / - ,1 -/ / / . /- .,.6 . ........ ..4...,..e... . • BRIDGE BULKHEAD CONCRETE PAVEMENT • • /777 BRIDGE 'PLAN. NO SCALE 1646-Nottlibit �uh ttiett, ,01640.912Si (.0i ) riiit (603)-2324023 . • .ASH SPOOK POOJECT • J013 NO, ri4786' DA 6/28/94 „, „. S 1 4 PRECAST DECK ASH CREEK 4784D02 A'I 11145 Narthimat couch 51rca¢ P rilnr d Oroq 07232 Tel ono (503) 232 -2ti7+ Fa (503) 232 -4023 .110.001 PRJT JOB NOS P4786 DAM 6/28/94 r -. RAIL S' —O" �0 4 SIDEWALK riv CONCRETE PAVEMENT PRECAST DECK ' LC �,,,,,..._., y':�1 iv1��i :��,R�YL•N��.�7i�'.C!..�.�`�:F �t�tY�� W+.�SarM"r,�+ Y. "yi %HY��1.%.�i�A"i. ��i4t�. ^.a' OoOOo0OOO RAIL UT1LITIES ASH CREEK SECTION NO SCALE fix..�r; er � ,..x ,.i .. '�•J � ...xi,�i�..uxv �,(', .. r, �u.. .. -�y.n ». +., x �.11, �y:yl i` & W� 1 (a03) 132 pot{lnnd Ong 9723 4615 Ncrif► is Crtich S i�7� fax (503) 232-,8023 OREGON NATIVE SHRUBS, TREES AND AQUATIC PLANTS FOR WILDLIFE PLANTINGS diet Areal 4- 1. Oregon Ash (Ltaisho. leti,fglia) 2. Hawthorn (Crataegus, gsat lash) 3. Willows Mang, IR.) 4. Cottonwood (AROl us j �cIocarna) 5. Red Alder (Alma . .hal - Frost hardy, drought tolerant — Native tree, useful to over 20 bird species, fruit produced in late fall - Easy to establish from cuttings - Fast growing, provides good buffer - Streams and moist bottom areas 1. Pondweed (Potamogeton 2. Smartweed (P.QI gon um . ) 3. Sedges (Care . ) 4. Sul rushs (. rpu .. a.) 5. Burreed (par.anium IR.) 6. Wapato Duck Potato ($ ta r is latifolia) 7. Cattails (Tpha ;l ati fol i a) 8. Spike Rush (i od aril. - Grows in water 1-4' deep - Wet soils or shallow water - Several species, wet soils or shallow water - Shallow water to 1 1/2' deep • Edges pdwateolul /Z'lde�p edible seeds - Mud flats to r - Wet soils, shallow water - Wet soils 1. Cascara (Rhamnus purshiana) 2. Blue Elderberry (Sambucus cerul„ua) 3. Red Elderberry (Sambucus callicarpa 4. Indian Plum Qsmaranid C&td3ifoimiu) 5. Ch ocecherr y ( prunes vi rginiana) 6. Bitter Cherry aj 7. Dogwood, edosi (0rus 1 a) 8. Crabapple (Males diversifolia) 9. Honeysuckle (Lonicep $p•) Red Cedar (.Xhu.i a Pli cata.) 11. Setvi ceberry (A ch melan i�r alnifolia 12. Rvergreen Huckleberry (Vacc nium ovatthn) 13. Hazelnut (CorVlus Kcal ifornicai) 14. Woods Rose (Bela oymnocarpa) l5. Red - Flowering Cur'r'ant (Rbes sanquineuim) • Upl and Area /Wetland Peringter - Produces purple fruit, preferred by pigeons and songbirds - Fruit highly utilized by pigeons and songbirds - Fruits earlier than blue elderberry - Erect shrub, up to 15' ta11 Birds often eat fruit before it matures produce up to 80 lbs. of fruit - Produces purple fruit - Produces red, juicy, bitter fruit • Produces white berries used by game birds, songbirds, and bears - Small trees native to Oregon, produces Valuable food for wildlife - Produces red fruit late in summer, holds fruit into winter - Produces good winter cover on most sites, seeds for birds -- Dark blue fruit used by birds Prefers shade, blue berries, often planted as an ornamental - Provides brushy buffer as well as edible nut - Hips eaten by most birds; deer and elk browse fol,'age - Edible berries 4 .. DiVisiOn of State Lands 1600 State Street Salem, OR 97310 Phone: 378-3059 378-3805 %Actey Permit No. q4570 Permit Type—ifir—novir/Mr Waterway sh County 7F-12-1ion ount= ExpiratTOW Date June 4 1988 Ph 006425 EUGENE L. & VIVIAN M. DAVIS IS AUTHORIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORS 541.605 TO 541.695 TO PERFORM THE OPERATIONS DESCRXBED IN •TTA tiTOONS 1. This permit does not authorize trespass on the lands of others. The permit holder shall obtain all necessary access permits or rights-of-way before entering lands owned by another. 2. This permit does not authorize any work that is not in compliance with local zoning or other local, state, or federal regulation pertaining to the operations authorized by this permit. The permit holder is responsible for obtaining the necessary approvals and permits before proceeding under this permit. 3. All work done under this permit must comply with Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 340; Standards of Quality for Public Waters of Oregon. Specific water quality provisions for this project are set forth on Attachment A. 4. Violations of the terms and conditions of this permit are subject to administrative and/or legal action which may result in revocation of the permit or damages. The_permit holder is responsible for the activities of all ... contractors or other operators involved in work done at the site or under this permit. . 5. A copy of the permit shall be available at the work site whenever operations authorized by the permit are being conducted. 6. Employees of the Division of State Lands and all duly authorized representatiVes, of the Director shall be permitted attest to the project area at all reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting totk . performed under this peemit. Y. Any permit holder who ob3ectt, to the conditions • this peemit.mayeequett heating from the DitOttoh4 in Writing, within 10 days of the date this permit was ittued, floTICEt If removal is from state-owned submerged and tubmeesible_land the applicant must comply with leasing and royalty. peovitiont.of ORS 274.530, If the peoject• • involves ceeaton• of new lands by filling on .state.owned tubmeeged or submersible lands, you mutt comply,with...ORS 2140-05 . 2744040,, This permit does not relieve. the peeittee of an obligation to secure appeopeiate leases from the Olvition of State • Lands, to conduct activitlet on state-owned submerged be submersible lands, i Failure to comply with these requirements kay result in For • MOtO ihforOatiOk about these requirements, please contact the Divi$idii Of stat6. Lands, Wateeway Leasing. Office, 318.3806* d-tajti,,...ici..Oirettoe • • Oregon Division of State Lands AUthqtriz June•• nature. .• • Date. Issued u ,1, = " Attachment A 8/F 4570 Page two 8. The landowner shall record a deed restriction with the Washington County y mitigation site and spec Courthouse identifying them 9 ifying: "This parcel waxing, filling or is to be managed. for wetland resource prorecui�� for wetland protection other alteration is prohibited except as q purposes." A copy of the deed restriction shall be submitted to the Division of State Lands prior to completion of fill activities. 9. The applicant shall monitor the mitigation site annually for five years g y f. and report to the Division of State Lands by July 1 of each year on: a. Vegetation cover of the site. b. Planting success of the buffer area. c. Water levels in the mitigation pond. 10. Following receipt of the annual monitoring report, the Division of State Lands gill review the status tatusof the project and may require site to correct failures or ensure success thelmitigationtproject objectives. success o 9 1 Or egon Department of Fish and Wildlife biologist, Gene Herb (phone:,=,,,,. `1. 229- 5401), shall be contacted at least five (5) days prior to any construction of the mitigation pond. 12. The Division of State Lands retains ains the authority to temporarily halt or modify the project in case of excessive turbidity or damage to natural resources. COMMENT: , Please be advised that an additional permit is required for filling the .rate proposed Street. A seperate permit application shall be submitted when the Local Improvement District is formed. June 4, 1987 February 1 , 1986 Keith Liden City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 WASHINGTON COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING — 150 N. FIRST AVENUE HILLSBORO, OREGON 97124 RE: DR. GENE DAVIS - ASHBROOK FARM PROPERTY -- FLOOD PLAIN FILL PROPOSAL °a DEPT. OF LAND USE AND TRANSPOP Engin.ering /Survey Division 2nd Floor (503) 648.8761 I have reviewed the narrative, Engineer's statement,•environmental analysis and plan submitted for the Davis fill proposal. 1 had questions about the zero- •foot,floodway shown on the plan so I talked to Tony Righellis at David Evans an y g and Associates. He. indicated that City of Tigard Ordinance restricts fill to areas outside the zero -foot floodWay. In reviewing the plan, I note that the applicant proposes to place 20'o000'cy of fill in the zero -foot floodway. 20,000 'cy of flood storage This would remove 20,00 g year Tony submittal Wa's as required during the 100 ear flood. Ton. indicated that thi s by City Ordinance. The Ash Creek Drainage Master Plan has specifically studied the &available flood plain storage for this reach of ,Ash {Creek. 'Page 7 -3 of the Master Plan report is attached The report states, hAny reduction in available storage volume could result in increased vel oc .ties and peak,efl ows." I talked to Glen Kramer, Chin and Mao, Who, with Tony, was project leader for the Ash Creek ar... i .. g , Master Plan. yGl en 'expressed ressed concern with' the proposal, and agreed gGthatatheM proposed quantity significant. Glen also indicated . . p 1 oWs and that this proposal ocauld imlactu�ea�tf Was sY velocities down stream.. The zero -foot lodway determination is not a'hydrology study and does not address flood routing impacts. As this proposal could impact unincorporated areas in the County, .I think the county should be kept advised of this proposal: The City of Tigard should be aware that this proposal could raise flood Waters in downtown Tigard. i until the applicant provides a routing I request that this proposal be denied 1 ., _ . g study which d b i fled peak Registered �.n i flow velocities analysis/hydrology stud. wh�ceht�hows no ua�act toR �eak flows an�heer This analysis should be completed by .a q g g I also request that this proposal b_. e requited mitigate impacts , to the e wetland/ habitat areas and provide Screening/ afferng to unincorporated areas. Rick Raetz CoUrty bra page Ehginaer RR hs. c Ross. Van Loo, DLA1T Loren Meinz, DLHT • ati equal opportunity ernpvyer t. - # f ;1..1 r Y s r r rr LEGIBILITY STRIP r� >_ # �r F€+ ..- --�.}r '� i ++ �ar � a + r% � Y. a ,s Y. r <pl � i x' Fj -r 4 = ? •�� i ,£ 3,�; � y 1.rr Y r ,' �.4 #. s R rtg *', t _ ; � x` _ i r! yt � t ♦ i.,��Y t > e 5 > � WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON March 199 1987 Randy Clarno City of Tigard Engineering Department P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: DR. EUGENE L DAVIS, APPLICANT ASH CREEK PROPERTY 1 hav eveFriered1the1na and prepared by David Evans and Associates, Inc. y 13, , reviewed the accompanying plans Please reference my comments of February 18, 1986. before, the narrative of Pebru contains an Engineer's As r ary 13, 1987 sneer s Statement by Tony Righellis, P.E. which makes no reference to the Ash Creek Master Plan. Remember that page 7 -3 of the Master Plan (attached) states, "An reduction in available storage volume could result in increased velocities and peak flows. Fill in the flood way fringe as proposed " way b the applicant, was run in the Ash Creekcomputer model. An increase of approximately 13 percent in flow peaks beyond those albowed in Tigard °s Fenno Creek Study could result. applicant has not shown any computer analysis to Note that the a pliceni h �n afar an he engineer's statement does not address t s narrative Also note that support the statement on Page 10 of tie appl1cah not ss the master plan concerns. I strongly recommend that the applicant be required to verify original .. .. computer the pro5ec t 's impact on p eak flows usi n g the m as er plan con bter model Only by an analysis comparing peaks with and wi thout this development can the city o_. f Tigard be sure that downstream properties ... and downtown Tigard Will pot be adversely impacted. Tony Ri g hel l i s of David EVans Associates is well qUalified to perform the regtareri analysis and to Certify, a "no increase" in peak flow as a result of this protect. Also note that the submitted HEC -2 ''Step Backwateh ".does not address the peak flows is. site. i 50 North• i 'iret Moo bodatittiont.dirLihd Utm And irointiodtiMion, Enpinaoring/Surv®y ©ivision • Hiiiaboro, C it gon o 24 March 19 1987 Page 2 Subj: Dr. Eugene L. Davis, Applicant o Ash Creek Property Concerning the existing wetlands and proposed modifications o 1 have several questions: How can the applicant justify a net reduction of 3.5 acres (1.0 acre in Phase I)? Will the proposed wetland be retained in private ownership, dedicated as a tract or dedicated as a park. What guaranes the wetlands proposed will be maintained? ® The proposed horse pasture to remain undeveloped on this "master plan by will it be converted to commercial at some future time? What is the ultimate master plan for all properties? 1 a �fiah o pp ortunit y to comment. While the proposal leaves many unanswered, red, it is a good first proposal. Please keep me posted. edic- Rick bete Drainage Engineer Attachments Kenneth Chairman CPO 04 C: Kevin Lap. p, Chai r F. Eierly, Division of State Lands Gene Herb, Oregon Dept. of Fish A Wildlife Washington County Staff NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT GOvERNOA OREGON STATE LAND BOARD NEIL GOLDSCHMIOT Governor BARBARA ROBERTS Secretary of State ANTHONY MEEKER State Treasurer L. a Division of State Lands 775 SUMMER STREET, SALEM, OREGON 97310 PHONE (503) 378-3805 August 20, 1990 Eugene and Vivian Davis 40 SW Lombard Beaverton, OR 97005 Re: Violation of State Permit No.RF 4570 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Davis: We are contacting you to follow-up our letter of March 5, 1990 and our recent on-site meetings with you. As we have discussed with you previously, you ak'e in violation of the conditions of your permit. To minimize any confusion about what is required to resolve the violation we are listing the specific areas of non-compliance and our requirements for compliance. A. You have not completed the wetland mitigation plantings as specified on Sheet 3 of the permit or the buffer plantings as required in Special Condition 7.f. of Attachment A of the permit. We request that you submit a planting plan for the mitigation areas and the buffers. The plan should show species used, planting location, planting densities, and description of planting methods. The plan does not need to include emergent vegetation plantings in the mitigation areaS as these have developed emergent vegetation naturally. The plan mUat be submitted by September 14, 1990 for our review. The actual Planting work Must: be completed by October 31, 1990. B. You have not submitted a copy of recorded deed restrictions prier tO completion of the fill activities as required in Special Condition 8 of Attachment A of the permit. At our last meeting you stated that you would submit a copy of the deed restrictions to us by July 1, 1990. 1Val 0 ,!° " restrictions as required a copy of recorded deed. We request that you submit in the permit by .September 14, 1990. C. You have allowed catt le to pass through the mitigation sites and disturb the soils and vegetation. This is contrary to the required deed restrictions as specified in Special Condition 8 of Attachment A of the permit. We request that you discontinue any use of the mitigation sites by cattle until you have submitted a plan to us that proposes methods for use of the mitigation sites by cattle without causing degradation to the sites. D. Fill material and a culvert has been placed in Ash Creek. This fill is not authorized by the permit. We request that you remove the fill and culvert. The banks should be graded to a 3:1 slop seeded with grass. The work should be conducted to minimize turbidity increases in Ash Creek. This work must be completed by September 14, 1990. E. Fill material and a culvert has been placed in the outlet channel from the south mitigation area. This fill is not authorized by the permit. We request that you remove the fill and culvert by September 14, 1990. F. The outlet of the north mitigation pond is bare °soil which is subject to erosion. We request that you prevent further erosion by placing rock rxprap in the area or by using plant materials to stabilize the area We would like to have this project in compliance by the end of this summer °s work period. You are now in p,` fencing g of Special Condition 7.e. of Attachment A of the perm compliance with We look the encin re u�.r amen s oxtb forward to your continued cooperation in completing the permit requirements. 44r� + ^..r, 9. '4 rx `s r'r t '1% If you have any questions please contact me or Kean Franklin of this office. Sincerely, Joel Shaich Environmental Planning and Permits Section JAS /j as joe l09 Enclosure Gerry Black, Corps of Engineers Gene Herb, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Gary Voerman, Environmental Protection Agency Ralph Rogers, Environmental Protection Agency Mike Mills, City of Tigard Emily Toby, Dept. of Land Conservation and Development Fans of ranno Creek Cliff Epler John Blumgren Nancy Tracy • ' .," . , '4+1 9, r • • ,t+ Wk. GOLDSCHMOT OWE RNCY1 OREGON STATE LAND BOARD NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT Governor BARBARA AOESEATS Secretary of Stato ANTHONY MEEKER State Treasurer 4 oP Division of State Lands 775 SUMMER STREET, SALEM, OREGON 97310 PHONE (503) 378-3805 MEMORANDUM, October 25, 1990 TO: Tigard Planning Department FROM: Joel Shad SUBJECT: 141, 115 ww etaaryypoctolLa ot Mei eto It/61- km/6 , Division of State Lands • Sensitive Lands SLR 90-0011 Davis The Division of State Lands, under state permit no. RF 4570, is requiring the applicant to record deed restrictions on the wetland mitigation areas on the property (yellow area on attached map). The deed restrictions will require these areas to be managed for wetland resource protection, Grazing, filling, or other alterations will be prohibited except as required for wetland protection pUrposes. Applicant has not recorded the required deed restrictions and is currently in violation of the state permit. We are deferring enforcement of this requirement Until after the City of Tigard completes this review. We recommend that the City of Tigard modify the required open space area to include, at a minimum, the areas shown in yellow and pihk on the attached map. This inCludes the north wetland mitigation pond, a bUffer around the pond that inclUdes a strip 40' wide along the north side of the and and all of Tax Lot 1300 on the west, south, and east sides of the pond, We make these recommendations for the fo11bWin g reason5! 1, To promote conSistency between state and local requirements. Including the north wetland mitigation area within the City's required open space area will simplify the situation for the applidanti government agendieSi and the public. f 2. The recommended open space is wetlands and necessary to protect the remaining �a stream on the property and maintain their associated atife, water quality, and flood storage values. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. cc: Gerry Black, Corps of Engineers Gene Herb, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Gary Voerman, Environmental Protection Agency Ralph Rogers, Environmental Protection Agency Emily Toby, Dept. of Land Conservation and Development Fans of Fanno Creek Cliff Epler John Blumgren Nancy Tracy ' [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] 07/29/94 16:47 'x`503 232 8023 M.N. & BONNY -r -y-► CITY OF TIGARD • i o01 MOFFATT, NIC --IOL. Si. BONNEY, INC Consulting Engineers 1 845 N.M. COUCH STREET . PORTLAND, OREGON S7232 : CO] S3 23 .21 17 FAX CO 537 232-9023 TO: bb 4 FIRM:___U +41 1 Tli i FAQ; FROMJA PROJECT: brook— FAX TRANSMITTAL DATE: COPIES TO' s e'"-P—e.pried ORIOINAL TO FOLLOW VIA! PIease Dior /f' Us ot� . � �' dry trot red-diVe all pages NO. OF PAGES Including d ransimittaiL�� PROJECT NO: 0-2046-01 SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Geoteohnical Consultants 2255 SM. Canyon Road-Portland, Oregon 97201 .Telephone: (503) 223-6147 June 8, 1988 ,T! Mackenzie/Saito & Associates, P.C. 0690 S.W. Bancroft Portland, OR 97201 Attention: Mr. David Welsh *CV GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED THREE STORY STRUCTURE PORTLAND, OREGON Gentlemen: In accordance with our proposal of May 4i 1988, we have completed a geotochnical study for the above referenced project, This letter-report describes OLIt investigation and presents oUr comments and recommendations for foundation design. ' This report was prepared for the Use of the owner in the design of the subject facility and should be made available to potential contractors and/or the Contractor for information on factual data only, i.e., field boring logs and samples. This report should not be used for contractual DurPotes as a warranty of interpreted subsurface conditions such as those indicated by the formal boring logs; o' discussion of subsUrface conditions contained herein. akKgilskiLtga_LnaLl Th ..peopoted .peojatt it lotted in Pores i Ore on between KiOway 211 on the south and Ash tteek• on the totth., . The site itiocated in a.telativelY: ow area at an eIev4tion thAt:vatfel. ftom about 160 feet. to 162 feet,. The site hit a ..covtiog. 01. scrub trees and tt. currently 6004. uted.fotHoatt.Life 1 an WOhe L, • bavtd E1 h1III PE • . • • ticewt:ok Vio.e.,p16.000,1 . • • V104,040166) . • • 4560114 tr- • '''t0 , •, ■ • •1••••.' 07/29/94 16 :49 X503 232 3023 r'Mackenzie /Saito & Assoc. Jr ;,e 8, 19$8 Page 2 M.N. & BONNEY 4--+ CITY OF TIGARD ?] 003 P -83 0- 2046 -Q1 understand that the proposed structure will consist of a three story steel Structure with shear walls. The first level Will provide covered, at grade parking While the upper two levels will contain offices. The first level will be at an elevation of 163.7S feet. Lightweight concrete will l be used for the decking, Typical interior column loads will be about 210 kips design (170 kips real), and . perimeter loads will be about 130 kips design (105 kips real). r FIJ F pl Q 1 10N'S JV.. . dRATQRY TESTING The field exploratory p y program consisted of three bareholes, as shoWn on the Site Plan, Figure 1, The borehales, designated 8 -1, 8-2 and B -3 were dril1ed on May 12, 1988, by Greg VanDeFiey Soil Sampling of Forest Grove, Oregon, using a trailer mounted solid flight auger drill rig. A Shannon b Wilson, Inc., representative was present throughout the exploration urtinary boring logs are presented in Figures 2, 3, and 4 Soil descriptions and interfaces on the logs are interpretive, and actual changes �.sGr� Mons .,ay be gradual 41) samples were visually eXarni ned in °Or laboratory in order to refine the field classifications. The laborator; 9 consisted of water content determinations On samples . oh m les obtain Program cons fit l�ndr,a� ned' tr .� field exploration. In additi on, aka � 'n the i 1 compression test and two consolidation tests Were accomplished, The results of the triakial compression test are shorn on F` i gure 5, and the results of the consolidation tests re shoWn oh F inures 6 lg*PAc coNb flp 11'1e anal � ... " conclusions, acid recomrnendatiois contained in sus " th a s repot't awe based on Situ tbaditioll5 p as they °recently exist an tory s .�� are. r assume a e�p epro Lora sentative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site ." ot� on stlbsu " ng constru , rface coed Boni " s different frdsi • those. �:vyw. �. rtb. •:L1' R. •. ��M �•z. V;,.0 „'�rl : ,.�.: �'r .. �'1d.� t -�. ♦. t. }��'n�.,.r J��•,.'��A1. 07/29/94 16 :42 'x`503 232 8023 Mackenzie /Saito & Assoc. June 8, 1983 Page 3 M. N. & BONNEY 44-+ CITY OF TIGARD I1004 P. 04 0- 2O46-01 encountered in the exploratory borings are obs beneath eXcaaat #ons, we should be advised erVed or appear to be present these conditions and reconsider our recommendations lse�i at nice so that we may review where necessary. The three borings drilled on the si consists of to revealed that the subsurface profile a surface ;ayes of staff. y t � gra silty clay overlying medium dense, dark gray sandy silt at a depth � of about 4 feet. At a depth of about 12 to 14 feet; loose to medium dense, darbc ,� clayey silt 1 a�+ers was encountered to 9 aY silty fi n� wind with thin dark a depth of about 26 feet where dense. ray '� a blue gray 'silt is present. At a depth of 3/ feet, 6 layer of medium dense, brawn to orange a foot �''� s encountered • gravelly ci ayes', silty sand At a depth of 4. 9 brown, 3 feet, stiff to hard, dark red to red orange clay was present to the maximum depth drilled Groundwater was measured in the borings at The determinations of � r 9 a depth of about 3 to 5 feet, groundwater levels shown on the boring c�r� observed Water levels obtay ��iev for the. logs were based i 1 1 probably dates sha►�un» Grotirid�,ater levels p y vary with time and season and should b tif��tiest in late winter or early spring anticipated to be the. 9 and lowest �n early fall. 1 liNl Ar,4 LQN DEsto 8s5cd on the results of the field explorations and our �5nginecning characteristics of the subsurf._ kna�1edg.. ace soils in the e off' the our opinion that the building loads a, it is � can probably e are, supported on spread Footings. �{oaeVe.. A a61� �� sattsfaetoral. r f grade should be placed in ..... , ' fills required to bring the site �Q advance of building 5c�tE�lenlen[s due to the weight i 9 construction so that weight of th... c co the add�t�ono�th are substantiely Completed prior the buildn g loads. Based o des � gn f i i�st floor l e�e� - .. n the sung topography and e�i. approximately 4 feet .. of fill Wi1 be reqUire pttal settlement or 1 inch is estimated for this Eh� x � ^ a period ., ,. settlement will accur within ��, Most of the S4 p iod of 30 depth f the filling, to 60 day after completion of • 't 411 4;44;IVAi4t ' kto 07/29/94 1650 12503 232 8023 Mackenzie/Saito & Assoc. June 8, 1988 Page 4 M.N. & BONNEY 444 CITY OF TIGARD Z005 F' OS 0-2046-01 The allowable bearing pressure for footings founded on native soil as found on this site should not exceed 2000 pounds per square foot (psf). The recommended minimum width is 18 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated footings. All footings should be buried at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. W recommend that all footings be located on native soil or structural fill. If old miscellaneous fill is encountered at footing locations, we recommend that the fill be stripped feom beneath footing locations. In order to raise the footing elevation, the excavated fill may be replaced with compacted structural granular fill to grade. The side slopes of this compacted structural fill should not exceed 1H:2V. ,......„, it total settlement of footings designed as described in the preceding Paragrapht is estimated to be nohinal, appi-oximately 1 inch provided the settlement due to the required fills have been allowed to occur prior to construction, This estimate of settleMent additionallY assuMes that no disturbance to the foundation soils would be Permitted during footing .xcavation and construction. TO minimiZe the potential for distUrbance, it is recommended that the footihg excavations be made with a smooth bucket (nO 4'1 teeth) backhoe or that the final 3 to 4 inches be excavated by hand. Alternatively, the exposed subgrade could be compacted to a dry density of 0! !it least 98 percent of the standaed Orottor MaXimUM dry densitY (ASTM Ir i,....00ttc.j17 ig e0C„. If speed footings do not appear to be feasible because of the size, the gtructural loads will need to be suppoeted On Piles, 13ased on our Ig(-06 eki.li-iohce in the area; treated timber piles with a design load capacity of 0 to 60 kips aPPear to be the best suited type of pile. The piles will Probably develop the t-eqUired bearing ih the stiff to haedi daek eed to iel ' v:, I-ed,oeange clay encountered in boeing B.1 at a depth Of 43 feeti FOe . _ etiolatitig pueposeti the pilet should be assumed to be 50 feet lohg, , ; should piles appeal' to be eoluitedi we will pi-ovide ' ' the lenoth and O , - 4 deivihg criteria, etitila loixi i , si ., ■ 0, 4 07/29/94 10:51 e503 232 8023 M.N. & BONNEY Z006 *owl ,1•4fte •. • • • 000..: • or • ••• II•• a.domdlldromodisd.Pii , .....iibtalhISCIOMM0.0101b611.....641010•VOMNd%,1=d4db. os ,dtdidd....211.0.4haliplididard4421.62111111114matratil6elleleing;a2M1the 0-2046-01 '4 , A)) concrete Floor slabs on grade should be founded on a minimum 6-inch layer nf free-draining we11.g•4dad sand and aravel or crushed rock with a illanimum particle size nf 1.1/2 inches and not court than 2 Percent passing the No. 20O sieve (based an a weL sieve analysis). This underslab granular Illterial should be compactor! to a dry density of at least 98 Percent of the Standard Proctor maximum dry demslly (ASTM D (98). We recommend that a moi:ture/vapor barrier be installed beneath all floor slabs. At the presela time, w do not anticipate the need Lo make rernmmendationA for small cantilever retaimng walls or basemPnt walls or Underground tanks. If in the rioal design such structures are planned we recommend that we be allowed rn comment on the geotechnlUal considerAtions, 61.0011'6 The somgrade PeoPariltien ihold include stripping of all s(jrlicial orgdnic goil (topsoil) from all building and paVement sectieh areas. After 0.riboing the topsoil (approximately 6 to 9 inchek), these areas should be proefirolled with a leaded dump truck or SiMilat vehicle. Any ekc4ssive1Y !:oft ar that arc detected by the prenf -rolling should be removed and uarkfilled wilh Comoactod StrUctUr4) fill, The AttUal amoUnt of material to ue exc.IvAted may need to be deiermined in thn field* and wd recommend that tho 1perifirdilunt include a unit cost bid item for any OVer Ok4Av4titai, ue to th4 n;tere of the undeelying soils an this project, we recommend that the site work CoMMerIce in sUmMer Unless special provisions aee taken to Ordteer the SUbgrade, grain 0 contituttion opr4Liont occur nueiod the wei•-e,d4Ohi 4t mAy be oodtt“ay tO A. 12.Anth thitk ge4nul4i0 wntkpid �H Lho 00114100 tito 404 • tiaNeMent 4e64t, 'WO 04tomitito4 i in.$11itioo of 4. $oita61#. 6o0te*t1.1. p.eibt, to the 1))il'el'iitot of the woi;k04d . in th.t road & aril s.k40400. th.o. ,verkpad •houtd ton41.st. of A wfl tjetdod mat0141 hai4flg a ittaiMMO• $1i0.0r .3', • oe 4 inthOi and lets tha Okt'tdh passing the No, oo siV based on 2. so 44 , 7. if f t M 07/29/94 16 :51 'x`503 232 3023 Mackenzie /Saito & Assoc, June 8, 1988 Page 6 [ , N BONNIEY -,-► -+ CITY OF TIGARD Z007 0. 2046 -01 wet sieve analysis. The. warkpad should: be gal lifts; the bottom 8 inches should be placed over the site in two inches shoU7d be compacted to 95 percent Wally compacted and the top. 4 en nQm� d'ens i t p t o the standard Proctor maximum dry YiAS�Mpfi9�), Construction "operations may need to be Modified to minimize site .isttlrbance. Any disturbed soil will either t 5r�dar�ds or removed and replaced � � be compacted to acceptable jth compacted structui-ai fill, The contractor should be made responsible for develo -i construction access roads and major staging � ng an adequate workpad for g�n9 ao^eas far consieueton traffic. It may also be necessary to provide tempo footing excavations, nary dewatertng of both site and rt.ny sail that is free of organic or other deleterio .:�i t3t�le as fill or backf; "il beneath the slab, if us matter Noold be ^'a ►'m weather and it is Aerated (to lower � �t is placed during dry � the pater content) before it is Placed. On -situ material may require considerable drying before it can be ►;r`aper1y c ®mpacted: We also understand that Ash Creek may be widened, and some of this material gay be unsuitable if it is o I s aCCaryiRl fished during the. wet time. of the � grading �rork rgaitizc ear Z i` r potent passing the. No, 200 sieve clean (not more than 9 enac � based oh a Wet sieve analysis) granular -�:itcriay is eecommended. :i)1$ should be placed in 9 -inch loose tiifts and at least •9� C ®rnpacted t.o a dry densi�;y per �` {� hds�d Proctor ma rn m dry dens a .. As7 ,.. W i t 11 i n i ' ,' 1 , J cgn of the sea the building area and within a 2.=f0ot depth t snctiah All fills at�tside of this limit � _.,. pavement. couid b , p of air y 0( the maxih4u0 dry dens ty, a compacted to 90 pewCen,t pePmanehr • out and fill sl open .should be g~aomed . :slopes icrop o e l r y tut sytlpes • above the ter table mad n da et v+utrded the slo es are �Fl•�v slo es adegtlately Prot ►cted 'Nam ver • P Lh . not over 1O feet in helg it becomfing r� ly het oh dry iV 07/29/94 0- 2046 -01 gkopg It is recom1ended that close quality control be exercised during the preparation and construction of building foundations and pavement sections, I n addition, we also advise that the sub grade g preparation and the footing. .rtcavations be inspected by a geotechnical engineer. !t there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this r4ort and the start of work at the site, if conditions have changed due to 'Mural causes of construction operations at or adjacent to the site, or if th:► basic project scheme is significantly modified from that assumed, it is ot c m mended that this report be reviewed to determine the applicability of tr; Conclusions and recommendations considering the changed conditions and 1 apse, !laNticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully it rmined by merely taking soil samples, or drilling test burins. Such ,t,t'xpected conditions frequently require that addition. 9 al expenditures be ,i+, attain a properly constructed project. Therefore, some contingenc.. a �. to a P j'1 is recommended to accommodate such potential ektr' cost. truly yours, +1•."NON ,t WILsor LNcy '. t t ilre n t s LEGIBILITY STRIP • LEGIBarnr STRIP CO CO l Col PARKING riN N.N PROPOSED; BUILDING N CrS 0 Nk4„ _g 0 1 rt. 1 1 4 w. H 1< 0 'ri H` H 0 Y d HIGHWAY 217 40 SCALE IN FEET 8G ASH CREEK PROPERTY PROGRESS s -OREGON. 0 0 a� s tS1 a. 0 -S -S -S E`t -S t I S S -S 9 ;`S t1-S 0 a/ 01 A C •,_ r ICI u KJ a • r- - N! >? w A > to L •••• • 1 CPI L. ill ..0 Cu a ,4.3 13 411 . :4J I O J ,rt 4' I.. r to C. `3! o'a > L .X r 4 - U 4 Mi PS -a >,u ▪ t A 3,j ....................] 401 0' l— C -r- ,,,_J CD "sue M C3 I teni LEGEND 2.0" 0•0. '3PL I 1 SPOON !AUFL€ 1111111111 100S Scat 11 3.0" G_0_ THIN-WALL SRIi9LE VCIER LEVEL 4 SAMPLE 1401 :RESOr €R ;0 - P /E /OVd IUR I IP P SOAPLER 20SitE0 L'lfil'TS SC ui nrli0 salt tt "Qtllb ,L !(ll;i CLASSi6'tc o MATUTAL TAM! CONTLi1 PLAST)C LIMIT ASH CREEK PROPERTY PROGRESS, OREGON StilligON S. NI LSON, <_MC. CONSULTAir FOAjtAKD.. ORE CO ( kLfl e103 07/29/94 16:54 T.i'503 232 8023 4.) 414.' , 41 PI I 4 414 61 4444 6 44 1 .4 • 4 • wet • %PIO C:a " ,•0 & BONNEY 444 CITY OF TIGARD 1012 14 .6. tom 4.1 soaL OESCRPTION SURNICE iLEY)ITIDN ^.160 rt. Stiff, gray, silty CLAY- 4441, 4•••••••••••• Medium dense, dark gray, sandy SILT, tn I1 tr) scattered plant roots. Lope to mddiut dcnco, dark gray, silty fine SAND) occasional 16-3" clayey sflt layers, scattered roott, dar,,k: gray td biud-gray tat vbding. tb. blay $4f ib6 vey .-tiff 000 sif t, scattered plot doliHti, 5," rzi SL OD ts.) 1 .114- SIMARD PEMETRATIOX gESISTJ (14o Lo, Teton, aco oar A% HMS PER Mt 0 SO ::::444. a 0 44.4414426.444 • • 6411441 4 I..14, 66 6414:404210■44 4 4 44494410144044 4 •14,64.466•46 '4441 4 4 14 4 4 6 •1 4 4 : I : .4 1 : : : : : : : 4444,444844,4,464,,i440:4,4.4.4.11•44,446111466,4,44,64674,•4444441,414,41 6 6 c., , a , , • . , a . 4 a ci .aii a;.a4 ea at . 444„.. i • 4,. 6 • • 4 . 6 4 4 9 6 4 4 ■ a .. 614.64 4,i416411. 6 8446 41:60461.4 .4,664446 0.4.0 ..... 4 4 411440i 4 i 4:14 1,11.,,.:41.4; 0;4 4 4:40 44:11.6.4464": I: 4 i • .41 4444444ii i 641 6f4441,46• 4, 4 : : 6, 4, I, : 1 P, ,{ 4,, :' 4 6 IS i 1 ii: II :16 .64614 .6.1.44. , ar •446:446, 4 4 6 a 44 a a 1,014. ....0.1,41afiki.....1.4....,a4iiiiiii........“....: 1414a4 441444114. 4 i : 1, 40 4 4 1 4 4 0 • i 6 4 : :11 i 1: 6: 4 6 6 4 1 4 9 4 66 4 . 4 A I t 0 44144441 41644i 444.46444444 14464 4164144•64044.44.444.4,644146 6 8 4 4 4 4 : :4i• : I • J 1 4444 4 4 1 44,446444)1 I 1 4 4 8 4 6 . : : . 1 4 I I 4 A 6 4 44944444, a a 144.4.64111141a14....i. 44.16:4446,46 r44 14.6 6' 4 9 ./ 4 4 1 ic a .1 4999 I 4 . 4 , rr61414 16144 6 i 4 1149440. 4 11 4444 ail 4 a a a , 4 4 4 1 1 ; 44444.441 44 411, , a 4444 4446444. 4494.4464444, 46.4. 44.1.,...044.14114 34.1. 44 4.4..4..3,44 44 4.444. 4441 a 494444 4 4 4 4 4 i 444444 4 4 4 4444441. 14 1 4 . r 4 5 i 4 4 4 4 i 1: 64914449444 4 4 4444445 4444 4441414 44111114444 1-- P7'1 • 07/29/94 16:55 Dense, dark gray 4to blue -gray SILT grading to slightly clayey SILT, then very stiff clayey SILT, scattered plant debris. X1`503 232 8023 ill. N. & BONNEY w„ Y•.•�.�.::a�i��rA 4, 4444 .•.�.•..�q•r Ate• r • 1lOS•••••••.••••-■• • Medium dense, brown to orange - brown, gravelly, clayey, silty SAND. • .. d. .i®...+..+_....••• is e r •∎••• ■.••.•,.s •- •.11.x... Stiff to hard, dark red to red- orange CLAY. 4 gorrom OF BORING COMPI.E ED 5112/80 25,5 37 43 6145 4.744 CITY OF TIGARD Z01.3 25 •••••r.••.•'1 .•�...NrMr•yi i : • . . 4 . , r-4 30 35 • i L • i . 4 i .i.1•i44.. 1 4•' 4 i i_. i 4 . 7 i . • I :444:4..4...:..1 ji•14i1.....-.... ® : 7 : 4 - i. 1 1.• 1 i i J . 4 ♦ • : i • j a i• 4 • 4 4 4• •• 4.. 4 • • 1 i i■ 1 4 i • • i. I • . i : . 44 4 4 4 1• 4 i J. •iiii•44n •w {{Iti4 .4i,, 7 4.ii••1 /•- 1 1 1 4 , • 'a. 4 4 1 j 4 i J: 1. i. 1 : i i ._ .. . 7 i i:. i. 1 i 4• i i i 4 4. i 4•.• 4 i i i s i. • i i 4 •. 1 4 i 1 4 1 4 1+ 4 i i i i • 1 1. 4 6: 4 i. i 4: 6.: 4{,. 4: i i 4 ( 1„ i c 4 1 777 4 4 i 4 4 i • ®4 i 1 1•. 6: 4 4 4 4 1 1 1} 4 i 4 J 1 . 4•.. 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4. 4 4 1. 4. 4•. 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 6 4 4 4: ii 4•. 7. i 1 Y 1: 3 i . . f i 4. i J: r .. • 4 . 4 4 J • 4 4 •ii{i{4:•..4...166.4,.. y411•.44..�•,64...ii4r4 43 3.: 4 4' 4: 4. 1 8 . 4e 3: 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 i. i. 4 '. • 4 . i 1 4 i: : 4: 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 • 4 4 4 43 J•. i 4 J. • 4 i 4. 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44444 1 4 4 4 4. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4. 1 1 4 4 4. 3 4 6 4 4 1 4` 4 4.:. 4 3 4344341 j1j 4 1i•Ji4ci,ii.i4i,63844i.44.j1i44 6.::.•4.,464• ,ii i 4 i x 4 4 i i i• w 4 J i 4 4 :6 4 4 i. 4 7 6: 4 44 1 i 1 1 4 4 1 1 4 4: 4{ i 1 4 4 i 4 4 4 1 4: J 4 4 4 1 4 4 i ill 4 44443144.4444 144 1 i 4 4 4 i 1 4 4 1. 4 4 4 1 4 4 3 6 4 4 i i l 4 3. t i • 1 4 1, 1 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 p f 4 4 6 4 4 '1 4' µ J 4: 1 44443.144444414444441 4;• .4.4__4444444444144434433 4,.4.44 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 : 4 4 4 4 3 4 4. 1 4 4 4 1 4 6 4 1 4 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 t i 4 4 i 3 '. 4 4 1 4 4 1 4 1 4 T 4 3 i 4 4 4 4 r - 3 3 4. Y 1 1 3 4 t' 1 4 4 6, 4 4 4 3 4. 4 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 4 3 4 4 834 4 4 1 4 4 x i i 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 3 4 W t 4 '4 1 i, s 4 4 4 J 1 4 i. 43i44L .:414'.444V414114•i4J......°' �:4i41144i44444.444 «µ4•i1 4 J 4 1 4 1 i 1 4 ;, 1 t{ 4 4: µ 6 4 4: 4 1 1 4 1,4.144 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 1 1. 4 4 4 4 4 '4 x 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4= 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1, 1, 4 4, 4 1 1 4 4 3 4 1 4 1. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 3 4 4 4 4 3 1 4 4 i ' 1 4 3 1. 4 4 ! f 4: 3 4 3 4 4 8334488 4 4 1 4 4 1 14 4 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 9 EE 4 4 3 4 4 4 J 44.iiiiii.ii 4 4141 4144444 4 4 41 43 4 4 1144.'3i141 44 41 4 31i{14111444.f: .4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 { 4 3 4 tit 4', 1 4' 4' x 4 4 11 4 4 1 4 4 4 1 s. 4 4. 4 4 8 4 4 4 3 4 i '4 • 8 4 iii 4 1 4 4 4 4 11 r i.i 4 3 4 8 4 4 1t, '. is 4 4'. 4 i 4 4 it 4' i 4 4. i. i. 1. 4 11 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 !. 4. 8■ 4 4 4 44. 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4# i 4 J 4 4 4 3: 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4' 4 3 4 1 4 4 . 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4„,. 4 •••4444.414 45 • • 4 4 • 50 4M t' L 5 60 ss 70 �+' ■�14i•■r..:.:. =.w rem:: ".. --.�. 1:: �.: is 1` ttii 4444.1■1 2 H 0 H v t, t t ra 0 44 cbS Jta it, *ark gray - brown, silly C_ 1?',. 14°d--um dense, orange-brown, silty fine SAID to sandy S:1.7- ged'urn dense, dark g ezy tl blue-gray, Salad''- g ,�, ,y s__tr locse a 1:1 feet. Lowe to .are- ;li<an d.nsP dark gray to b ue gray, s i ty fine SAND to .sandy SILT, 11..3 end i:1:13I`; EQR_, G= (C3iPLETO 5/12/38) MUM L ZOk OMRIBFMI AND "M U/WM .;Alf .a1811P14ITlfrC 4448 ICCTUAL i savra stwies T• +CMO £fVS l.ANW Jal■ :bav /Ob. sa •tr ir- 90 Q 'UM eopTIN -Mai? dititS; 181031 1• 07/29/94 16:56 X3'503 232 8.023 M.N. & BONNEY 044.4......444..4 .61 .• 4 4.4 44 4, u i ..I • 4 w 11•46.66 • Zvi 01 x. to 4 rl .no 4� ca M n tet c• 3 Ow 444 lti M O N 1' Rl 10I11lli5S3C 11'i..� � 4 J. .t � ?.'..1• 45 5N. X44 -:} t1. -►x-+ CITY OF TIGARD a015 a l i sTR i IN PrROAT Vi Y'Iry .c • in • 4 4 4 i 6 6 i 4 , 44 1 41 , 1 L::r AZ 1664146414 441 44 i `1 (. : 4 i 4 4 i 4 i 3 ;. ,: y i i s. r 1 t : i 4 i t- ej 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 1,4 s f 4 l, 4 4 4 r , r i f 4 4 4, f 4 6 6 i i 66 6. 4 6 4 4 4 i f t 4 4 1 / 4 4 4 4 4 : 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 4 1., .. c 1 , 1 4: 6 . 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 ,i 1 3 1 4 4 , 4. 1 4. 4/, 4 4. 4 , 1 s " I Y 444 4 4 4 44 4 4 4/ 1 4{ l i i 4 i 4 Y 4 4 i i i{ i f 4 . 1. : i , 1 1 M 4 4 4: I. 4 4 '1 41144464 4i 4 4 8 4 . 4 4 4 4 4 r 4 4 1 4 1 6 1 4 6 6 4 4 4 6* 1 • Y 6.4 : Y 1 4 • W .:..4..4,•,IHI.4..44,4/4.44,, „.6.6: 44.0,31414444: , , ..6.441, ,•,, ,4:...4./1411 6,664.6.. ..44.:1 6 + f 4 Ir C / 4 4 7 ,,,4, t 6 ..4....l4jjif6..44..t. 4 4 6 i 4 1 : 4 f 4 • i • 1 • 664 4 I. i+. • •• - 44414 yis 6 siYC,i .,,. 6 4 4 , 44 , 1 1 i if 1 • . i ""e' 6 1 i 6 1 4+ 4 4 • i l i 4 1 4 4 4 Y i. 4 4 4. } i i. 4 4 4 f 4 I. 1 4 4 4 1• ; 4 1: 4 1 4• 4. i 6. 1 Y 4 n 4. .. 4 4 4 4 4. 4 4 4 4 . 4 1 1 c 6{ 4 i: l i 4 1 4 1 i• 4 3 4. 4 i 1 i 4 66 . - .. 4. 4 6 1 4 3 4 1{ 1 6• f 4: i i { 4: 6 4 4 1 6 6 3 i 1 166444 , L ! ! a r f i s s i ' t 3 1 Y Y i i i i 1 Y Y 6 4 4 4 1 1 4 4 8 i i 3 'i s s r Y 1+ s( f}'i i s i 'Y c i • 4 4 1 4 4:. 4 1 i 6 4 1 4 4 f 4; 6 4 1 4 6 4 4 4 4 4 I i 4 .4 3 4 4! 4 4 4. Y f 4 4 i( 4 1 Y 4 4 Y 14 1 1 4 4 i c i Y 1 4 4. 1 4 i 6 66 f 4 4 6 f 4 4 4 66 1• ► 4 4 i 4 4 i s 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 f{ f• •'.Yi i 4 t 4 4: 4 4. 1 3' Y 3 , i 144 fiiirl•ijw,41ui1Y.NILi,1:44w 14L...:/u n 4 44 1 6 x 4 4 4 4 T i u..4ls«4, 4441.. Y, I. 4 ..,,u4�1411,4.l4.4,.,4..4.i.y., 4434,11.46.6,6,444‘,46,4,6646 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 Y 1 4 i f• 4 4 44 4 1. 1 6 3 4 f...�.1- ri,.irii.l:..�... .44 1 i • 4 1 4 1' 6 4 i 4 1 f Y 6 6 6 1 3 1 4: Y 4 4 1 4 4• I 44 sit C 4 1 Y i • 4 i 1 1� : 4 4` ,. Y .�. �1. i • { i 6 4 i : 4 4/ 4 4 4 4 J844843444444 om_ i� -_ . .. r 4 3 i Y f" 4 4 4 4 4: 4 4 i 3 i I f 4 Y 6 i 4 14 6 4 1 3 6 3 4 4 1. 4 4 6 4 4 4 3 4. 4 i 4 4 4 4 i 4+ 4 1 1 u 1 f i i 4 i • 4 4 4 1 • • 4 4 4 4 4 6 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 6 4 f i i 4 4 l i f i i: 4 4 4 6 f i i' 4 4 4 1 '4 4 4 4 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 i 4 4 - 4 1 4 4 4' 1 4 4 lie 4 4 ( 4 4 4 4 4 Y" i i is 4 4 4 4 1 4 3 4 4 4 i 4 i 4. ' {[ t 4 4 4 1 4 4 i i 11446:4 i' i{ 1? i f i 4 1 6 i i 6 4 4 i 6 4 t 'i • 4 4' 4 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 4 i t i f 4 4 4 4 4 1. 4 4 1 4 4 4 1: 1 661 44146:48.146:4•434 . a 4 1 6 4 1 1 4 4 s•+4 44/i1Y14 44 :4 4NNw4 iii i 4 f} ' i 4 6 H:61.11!i4iV1iV I.i,4..L464Hi4 7j{1 1 4 4 4•: 4 �i 4 4 { 4 ! 4 4 4 `i• 4 4 4 6 66 4 4444••44.- iiiY434Ys ii s �rri .... . i....a..44f..:rr 44 +' 1 4 1 4 1 1 4 4{ 4( 1 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 i 4 1 4 4: 3 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 6 4 4 4 IL P 4 i i l i t 4 4 1: i i i 4 4 4 4 4 i i 4 4 : 4 i l i 4 4 4 1 1 j 4 4 4 4 4. 1 i 1 i : 4 4 t 1 i. 4 i i' Y 4 f i i 4 3 4 4 1 i i 4 4 4 cii Y 4 4 4 4 4 4 : 1 4 4 4 4 4 6 4 4 4 : 4 i 6 4 y 4 , f y 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 . •: 6 4 1 ' 4 1 3 4 4 4 4 4 i 1 4 6 3 • 4 1 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 444 4 4 4, 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 1 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 6 8 8 4. Y 4 i 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 4 414 4 1. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 4 1 i 4 i i 1 4 1 4 Y i 4 i i 4 4 4 4 'Y • 4 f I i F f i 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 l i 4 6'' 4 4 1 1 44 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 • 4 1 6 Y 4 f 6 6 l i 4 1 1 4 4 l 4 i 4 4 3 4 4 4 1 1 1 4 4. 6 I i t l i i i i i :3 4 4 1 4 4 l i 4 4 Y 4.466•4661,416/.6666144644,441444644 4...,44461 4444Y4646u1.3::4.wY164r6� 1 4 1'66 s 4 4 66 4 64:.4444,61,4 Oil 4 1 4 4 c ii 4 i 4 4 i 4 4 4 3 22.1.4 ••4,.,:•4.4.444 1 .4•:6:.4.6 +1664 c..:41,.44 wc4« i _ „ Y i Y 1- Y 1 ' 4 4 4 f 4 : 4 4 4 l 4 4 4 4 6 . 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 1 1Y us4..st,L..6•,...�4'�+ +..ter ,Ii 4 4 4 1 1 4 : 4 1 4 4 4 14 4 4 6 6 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 ' 4' 4 4 i 4 i i j 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 i y. n l ( 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 1 it r 4 4 Y Y/ l 4 4 4' i i 4 4 4 4 4 t l i 7 i la 4 • 1 4 4 r j / i i 1 ♦ • f : 4 4 4 1 4 4 6 4 4 6 4 4 4 144 4 4 4 4 • • i 1 • 1 • • 4 4 4 4 • 4 4 • 4 4 1 1 4 3 44 3 4 4 4 4 1 1 x i 4 l i l c 6 1 • • 1 4 4 4 6 1 4 1 : 4 1 i i 664 1 . 4 4 4 1 4 4' 1 1 6 4 4 1 4 4 4 3 04i 6 4' 1 4 4 4 4 4 6 3 4 6 8 4 6 4 4. i 6 1 1 1 4 6 6 1 4 4. 1 1 i 4 j 4 1 1� 4 Y 1 1 4 i: 1 4 I f n 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Y 4 4 1 Y 1 i 1 1 4 6 4 4 6+ ti 4' i • u4 4 x 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4, 1 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 1 4 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 6 4 4 6 4 4 4 i 4 . 1 4 i 4 1 4 4 4 4' 3. 4 1 1 4 4 4 4 1 4 1 1 1 4 4 4 1 i 4 a i l 1 4 4 4 144 41/44.144 4146411 44664 4444 46 4446iii ,...44.46. 44tH 44{ 4.:434. 4 1 1 4 4 4 4 1 4 14 1 i 3 41 4114/1{. Ii.: .:6, 4x.iq NlYi 4./1x4;4414,. 441.3444.4$4f••.44,4444461,44.44.4 4,4/ . 4. I 1444 6 f 6 4 4 4 ' 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 1 4 4 . 4 4 4 4 4 66 1 ./ 1 4 46/11.•114 i• +•�4 4.{ • 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 1 4 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 3 34 • { 1 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 4 1. 6 4 4 1 4 4 4 / 4 4 4 1 1 6 4 4 4 4 4, 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4. 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 1 4 4 6 '4 4 4 4 6 1 4 4 4 6 1 1' 4 4 4 4 4: 66 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 1. 4 i • ,...• i 4• y 4 i 4 4 4 4 4 1 4 j 4 1 4 1 4 4 1' 4 1 1 4 4 1 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 4 1 6' 4 1 6 4 6 4 6 4 f 4 1 1 4 4 4 y. .4 4 i i 4 1 1 1 4 6 1 4 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4. 1 4 1 ? 4 1 6 4/ 1 4 1 4 + 4 4 4 4 : 4 1 4 1 4 4 4 4 6 4 4 4 4. 4 4 4 4 3 4 6 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4! 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 4 1 1 6 4 i 4 4 c 4 4 6 4* 4 4 4 4 4 1 1 6/ 4 1/ 4 4 4, 4 4 4 4 61 1 4 4 1 ►� l i l i 4 4 6 ii:4,:"4:Ia444444HN,14.4«41641 :4. 144 .;N41i.iii14111•16114.+i6ii.1NH 4w446q .+4HU 4 �' 6 y o 4 4 4 i 4 x 4 4. 1 4 ( 4! 4 Y 1164. 44.. w. 44, �i: 1. Yli4 ..rx.41u4.6VI444444,444.c44Y ,i.4.144tU i�664fui1144 6 6 r 6.4. 1iw 1113M.. x16461 4 46;;166. 6+ 6666664.661.64• •6444444 6 Y 4 • 4'. 44' 07/29/94 10:57 V503 232 8023 „ 'ILL L ommoL4rLL.L.LL M.N. & BONNEY 9-0-0 CITY OF TIGARD CONSOLIDATION YOLONE CHANCE IN PERCENT 44. CP 4.0 —44.:4444.4,4 fb/.4i■ 4,404.00 l■i66.• 6 4 141 444 ILI: '4, 44.4444J 44... 44 Lin4Li LLL■LoLdOLLsolli i4 44...4 .4..4.164 .444,4 LL L11.4..4;4 4 61.0,0 4:4444 . 1LS4LL .161a, '441 41414 4.444. 4 4 44444_4 4,4 4.44641 I I 444 . , , , a 88...,,,,648:14 a LS 4 9t 'd T0- 5VDE -a- LEGIBILITY STRIP a'trail ar ( O) S° 3IdAVS ` -f yla- 1S:JL 1110110Sn3 ZZC93 J0' ' S "a3 LJOad *l 3dD& 41JlZ KSYr (puss °`uMo q -AVAI Ita` iaow aviiini13se {a ZC ►.S "Z all 3111 '331)Pira 92,6'0 Si113g t '1R`1i 1]1:' .131 'A IS113 1.311 1?1 J c. 11331116 11110.11103 UIINA 1IC1C t' L -S 131:. 'HI41t (do ) Z ° -S "' 3idwois Z -8' '3k 31 [I3E 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111E11111111111111111111111111 1 IR' i 11111111111111MIMME11111111111111 I II U # 11111111111111111111111111111111E111111111111 11 11Inn R 11111111 _ C 1 IIMINIMINIMININ.A1111111 r i ‘ii 111 11 . � 111 11 1111■ — In1I__ n 11 11n L _ ii 1112111111111111111111111111111111 1 nin .f13111111111 11E111 111111111111111111 1n1111111n111111M111.111 11111 t" f t 1►1 at St 01 CONSOLIDhtIO TOLUME CHA$GE 8: CA ins . . c4=11 C AA . • rf corzt 10(4,11;_-.) PA). CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER, - BY HEARINGS OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s) SL 1-86 and V 87-02 1-f2P' 2. blame of Owner: Eugene and Vivian M:IvaViS 3. Name of Applicant: Same Address 4550 SW Lombard City Beaverton State OR Zip 97005 4. Location of Property: Address__N A North of Hwy 217 between sw 89th & SW 95th Legal Description 1S1 35AC lots 101 2800 & 4800. 1S1 35AD lots '1200/ 1300, 1400/ & 1500. S. Nature of Application: For a Sensitive Lands Permit to allow the de esit of fill and excavation on land zoned C-P 1Commercial Professionall,A122LA1 Variance to allow the excavation of a flood retention/wildlife 102020L2DRE222.4Yzone R-4.5 (Residential/ 4.5 units/acre). 6. Action: Approval as requested xx Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: .Notice was published in the newspaper,. posted at City Hall and mailed to: XX The applicant & owners Owners of record within the required distance _21L. The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization xx. Affected goverftmental'agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON ,InuL197 _UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings Of fact, decision, and statement of condition can be obtained from the Planning Depariment: Tigard City Hail, 13125 SW Hall. Blvd., POD. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9, Appeal: Any party 10 the decision may appeal thiS decision km accordance wall 18.32.290(A) and Section 18,32.370 which provides that .a written appeal may be filed Within 10 days ' after notice is given and sent, • The deadline focfiling of an appeal is 430 Pat. +lune 1987 10,MueStionst ozslp if you have any quotibils please call the .City �f igacit Plannin g 0-opoetitioilti.40,411t. .4, E BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) FOR a sensitive lands permit and) No SL 1 -86, V 87 -02 variance on property zoned C -P ) and R-4.5, Gene and Vivian Davis,) applicant. CASE NO SL 1 -86, V 87 -02 APPLICANTS: Gene and Vivian Davis PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Tax Lots 101, 2800, 4700, 4800, Map 1S1 35AC, and Tax Lots 1200, 1300. 1400 and 15 00, 'Map 1S1 36AD, City of Tigard 'County of Washington, State of Oregon. PUBLIC HEARINGS: February 26, 1986, March 26, 1987, and April 30, 1987. HISTORY: property mmer of (CPA 2-85/AC 1 -85) . The. applicant applied for Sensitive The 'was annexed to the City l�edhf summer � l„ pp pp Lands approval and the case was heard on February 26, 1986, The item was tabled to give the applicaht time to prepare additional information The amended proposal also requires a Variance: SPFAKIN( 'IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATIO - ►7. Reid Y;Eord Gene Davis, Mel Stout (bavid Evans & Associates , Ton.,.. R� de he Lr,�hells , (David Evans • & Associates , Rex 'Van W'ariier (Wldla.fe expert). Page 1 sL 1 -86 V 87 -02 • SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF THE APPLICATION: John W. Brome (The Wetlands Conservancy), Nancy Travis, Kevin Lapp, Pat Whiting, John S. Blomgren, Hazel J. Lyon, James .E. Everitt, Roger_ A. Redfren, Mark Greenfield, Janet Thompson, Frances Boyechorn, Alice Juve, Nina Mills EXHIBITS: 1. Planning Department Staff Report 2. Preliminary Master Site Plan 3 Raetz Letter of 3/19/87 4. Raetz Letter of 2/18/87 5. DEA Letter of 2/25/87 6. Donner Letter of 3/18/87 7. Monahan Letter of 3/18/87 8. Cole Letter , of 3/13/87 9 Hansen Letter of 3/13/87 10. Tracy Letter of 3/13/87 11. Juve Letter of 3/13/87 12. Rigler Letter of 1/7/87 13. Davis Letter of 3/12/87 14 Noyes Letter of 3/16/87 15 Phifer Letter of 2/11/87 16 Proposal Map Figure 2 17 Amendment to Joint Application for Permit 18. Greenfield Letter of 3/26/87 19 Second Supplement Narative (DEA) 20. Notice of Application, Army Corps of Engineers 21. Comments from Park Board, 3/3/87 22. Oliver Letter of 4/29/87 23. Rowe Letter of 4/29/87 24. Wood Letter of 4/30/87 25 Audubon Letter of 3/26/87 26 Raetz Letter of 4/30/87 27, Pictures of flooding on cardboard plus 3 sheets xeroxed pictures 28 Tracy Letter of 4/30/87 29. Anadromous Fish Law Memo 30. MetzgerProgress Community Plan 31 Overlay Map 32, 0-Foot Floodway Map, 1/86 33 Audubon RMagazine Essay r i aton Isn''t" .:. Magazine, y g ,, 34 a Transcript /Notes of Redfern Testimony FINDINGS Vicinity Information with .:. . , � : :. s . y designated for sirialeofaminoresdentiast is wthn�tlle Count and is design g y development ith a maximum density of five units per acre: yn o the northeast is within the C��ty and is zoned A.445 Highway. 211. p and an apartment com to zoned R -12 (Residential, 12..units /aore abuts the property din thesouth and • southwest. Page 2 SL 1860 V 8702 Site Information The subject property is bisected by the main channel of Ash Creek which runs downhill from east to west. The majority of the property is within the 100 year flood plain. The property is underdeveloped and most of it is utilized for cattle grazing. A description of the property prepared by Beak Consultants, Inc. and Independent Ecological Services is included in the application materials. The western section of the property (WCTM 1S1 35AC, Tax Lots 101, 2800, and 4800, and the southwest corner of WCTM 1S1 35AD, Tax Lot 1400) is zoned C -P and the remainder is zoned R -4.5) . Tax Lot 1500 (WCTM 1S1 35AD) located at the eastern end of the property on 89th Avenue, contains a residence and small farm buildings. Phase I includes two acres of commercial development in the western section of the property adjacent to '95th Avenue on a .number of single family residences totaling 1.3 acres located on the west side of 89th Avenue. Phase II features a six acre commercial office project in the southwest portion of the site next to Highway 217. Access will be provided by an extension of 93rd Avenue. A second street is envisioned to connect the 93rd Avenue extension to Hall Blvd. to accommodate the traffic anticipated from Phase II. q fringe. e. M�.ti anon is proposed yards with of fill within the flood Phase I will require 5,600 cubicwTtrdthe excavat p. P pond/wetland on of 1,700 cubic yards The ro5osederesTde area on the Ards of earth to establish a 0. north side of Ash Creek. the 100 year- flood plain elevation residential lots are above on and no landform alterations are necessary. II will involved 15,200 Cubic yards of fill with proposed mitiggation .. provided by removin form a second pond /wetlandarea 8 ofapproximatelys1 5 a acres Tin Size. y The total wetland area identified by the applicant's consultant 7. ' entif �.e y applicant's is 9 3 h. +�f the • acres including adjoining the applicant's . Wing property to the acres of wetland area on ppl s property, approximately five acr be retained or improved. The wetland and other n flood laiwlan, p ' land will be maintained privately. It is important to emphasize that the applicant haSincluded con"- ceptual development plans to give a clearer picture of what is ultimately -intended for the property and to obtaLn preliminary comments from nearby property owners and .reviewing.agencies. The alterationsa�rTthinutheed p sen y the proposed landform � Pp g Mood w plain and wetland areas, The. actual rovements of the im 5 P Y� g� y i �. i. g � .. ences) P , pro petty � e' �. motel,- office buildin 's � resid will •require subsequent applications; notification, a1d•City review. Sanitary__ Sewers Unifie e Agenc° ( S A ).durrentl "" has a. 30 mainl' . d Sewerage i g Y U i y y '� irie that. ra`verses the site from west to east. Storm Draina e This application primarily involves alteration and fill in the Ash Creek drainage area which accommodates storm drainage in the surrounding area The specific issues of whether the appli LIU The zero-foot floodway is that central portion of the floodplain that must be kept clear to allow the 100 -year flood event to flow without water surface elevation increase. Using detailed backwater analysis techniques, the applicant determined that the required opening, after land form alterations, met that criteria. The loca- tion and shape was changed from existing by the proposed grading. However, the function was not just maintained, but was enhanced. 3. Policy 3.2. P no the channel. his w 3 - The stream flow capacity of the f loodwa T will be maintained by the proposed excavation will lower the upstream p y elevation and cause a negligible change inthedownstreamfloodway elevation. Y The drawings and calculations submitted show that there will be no detrimental upstream or downstream changes in the floodplain. Plantings evergreen (and deciduous) plants are proposed on the edges of the creek and the perimeter of the commercial development. The proposed open space and adjacent f loodway provide a very wide buffer of 100' to 200' between the project and residential land to the north. The proposed p p street will add an additional 60 feet. Street trees that will be required along both sides of the proposed street will add to the buffer. The Ash Creek floodplain entified by the City as desireable loodplaa.n is . antba�c bicycle pathway. for a greenway or a pedestrian y p Y 4. Policy 3.4.1 - The City has identified the site as containing ' - wetlands. The applicant, assistance from federal lic ant with assist si na.f a cant wetlan has ' identf �.E�d the. specific w � . on g ... the state aThecHearin Hearings Officer walked the site with the applicant s the site. The g fish and wildlife expert, Mr. Redfern, of the opponents, and Keith Laden of the City staff From a layman's point of view the wetlands as they presently exist are of marginal quality and could be enhanced under the applicant's proposal. The Site has not been identifie d as having significant ant educational research value by the City or an y other'agency or jurisdiction. The site has„ i not been dentified as having endangered plant or animal: species, or significant natural features other than wetlands. Policy 3.4.2 - °,.,,The ro osal rovzdeexi� � adhopen space area • y p p p bro g the onl. sting habitat trees and aloe oAsh,Creek and maintains t ,e� g l of the creek. The existn habitat w�:1. brush) aloe the south bank of , be itt rovedgb � plantings s on the north Side of the creek and in Other p y p g ro' osed open.. snarol � and wetland mans event asmdeta�.l - areas ,of the�p p p p p vastly. p. wildlife habitat, erosion co t , g ed in the proposed plans he projects not a designated timbered or free area Page 6 SL 1- 81,132 , ,�y1 �;. 1, The site is not designated as having important wildlife habitat value, as delineated on the "Fish and Wildlife Habitat Map" (Diagram V) of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Volume 1. The site is not designated by the City for incorporation into the City's greenway system. Open space is not required by the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is proposing to maintain a large private habitat area. 6. Policy 7.2.1 - The applicant has submitted a site development study, including plans and calculations, which illustrate that the proposed development is safe and will not create adverse offsite impacts. Natural drains a was are ro p osed to be maintained and improved through clearing and wideningto assure no adverse offsite impacts. Drainage from the site (when developed) will not increase offsite impact, as shown by the plans and calculations submitted. The 100 -year floodplain elevation will be protected as shown by the plans and calculations submitted. EroSioi control techniques are included in the'proposal and described in the application. In general terms, all slopes created will be a maximum of 33% and will be vegetated sufficiently to control erosion., The City mandates' no maximum slopes, and has concurred with the proposal in their recommendation. 7. Section 18.84.040 =- The applicant, by submitting calculations which address the issue of ,offsite impacts both upstream and down- stream has satisfied this section as to the flooding issue. Wild- life issues will be addressed below. Wildlife Plan Pa icies 3,2.4, 3,4.1, and 3.4.2 and Section 18.84 • 010(c) of the Code. 'Call for the protection of significant wetlands and wild- ife tzger- Progress Community Plan; developed by habitat. The Me ashin ton County! designated W g y, signated the western portion of the property as a potentially significant wildlife habitat. When the property • was annexed into the City; a significant wetlands designation was •applied to the same area.. The record contains several important reference. documents on the issue of mitigation; an i r P g � d the management of ripar�:an ecosystems,. The Hearings Cuff ices found particularly helpful, Exhibit ts29, one Anadromous Fish Law Memo; and exhibit 33, the Audubon y ions with , t .. pp• i ... i .i i . ,, . . mit ation In d'sc � determined that the area " Y • Y i uss � he a 1.Cant s fish and wildlife. .. g the . site review; it was expert durin tl� ....d on the w� , by the rPhaseerif' boundary; the property owner= - bordere est b ship of Dr. Davi,, on the o preferably ry page bounds p P . P . .. :: � ' � i .,. g although. of the ro� osed street as shown on Ex�iibzt 2 � a 1, althou 'h the portion between the applicant's property line and the southern .....:h . reet is.. not �..:..... J,' ; i i. i : - p p " � t wi thih the urisda.cta.on of of this Hearine ro osed st y ooundary of the.. Officer) and the area bordered by Phase on the eat; pito. the Phase 1 ro osed wildlife wetland area immediately P� P Page 6 - St. 1=86; V 87 -02 • ' • .• ''''. "It . ... - . ' . ., • , .....,. - . •‘ , , .. - -.-- , :, "'" 4- . r ,:. .t."-* ;'-'' ..,'; „ - F 7-',.. ...;.-t'' -' ---. ''''' ''''' - r-- . -- .-- -- ' — ' . ' ' . - '-',",:.:.-- -,;;-,, :1-ir !-'.4"Fxr- - . .' -; .*,-._,:' :;,. :: T. '-' 7 '',. t:'',,.- :-'sr.,,..1- .-; t '.'.. 'I..... :-., - ...,--i-''' --7-1:71."::;;;;,,,;- ": ' f ... ;'..,... ;........:,)--:•,,,i ...;,,, I- ". -::7,' '' .i..: : "1_,Jt':- ? :.: :•,- ••-.......• . - :-..;',,, : -.!.?" .'' .. 4 '..! . e' :;..e. -.' 1 • , „'4.•'-',4•4: "I• , - 4 ,,' i_f:Q_ 4 -,t• ...' ..;;.,,,,"1-; 4,' ,L.•‘..'' ....S:4,:r.:.;-. ! .., .f.':•_ . `;"... , "." '''' i '',. --'::4,••''''' '. ''''L • '" ' ..;V:I'Ll' ,-",.. 4 1'1.. ' - ,-...1-7.' '4 V't • . - '41••'1:5,... ' .1' l'," 4 '*:;*,.."-•• if....'"--: - ...;. ' . -, - .1. .•.' •-• -4....: 7.. 1. ; 4.--;,, •• - • 1.' - •••■• ' ' ': - , '' .- - .:- '."4' '4.:-.•••Ci,..1- r'----/7.-e.-'t-t-*--• i- ---..TIl..... .„---_, --,-1.: -...Ti;.s,- ... - : - ,-.' . . :-'g- '...s.... '...-t-'..,..., -.1**-1 .- -_*.e,;:" •*.` -.I' c":: .--t"r":.,;:-5..2...-'''''..--. -.: 7,:--- ..,;.`1,. ..-, ..-: ...,--:•.r: .': _!-..7: ;..." ---.`,1';'"*.-', ',-., -1,,..i., - - 1-----. .--, . ,--- ti,...,......:: ,. -,:::, ,". - LEGIBILITY Ully , , '', " . -• s- ..., . .„,. , ....• __,....-',. -. -. -- -- - .- ''. - • • ■ -..t.' ---• , . ..".. - r-'... . '--... . .. - ‘;f:,'''''?''.'.: ...e.;:- : -------' '...-! '-'' t .'rf' '''. -.'-- -'...--:'-- .14.'`. - ;. _, ir ' ,"'_' .,:r :•' ' :,-0 ' ; fir. - - -- - • + ' ' north of the proposed single- family house "1 ", all designated on page 1 of Exhibit 2, should remain as open space and wetland. The that this testimony by the applicant's zone expert was amount of property was appropriate for a line of site connection between propose '.. fe wetland pond to the north . and the'proposed wildlife pond to the south. Cattle are the cause or source of several types of water pollution. On uplands, which could describe the area around the wetlands on the applicant's property, they accellerate erosion while removing vege- tation and trampling soil., Through runoff, eroded soil eventually finds its way into streams, creeks, and rivers leading to sedimen- tation and turbidity. When grazing livestock move onto the riparian zones, water pol- lution effects increase dramatically. If the area surrounding the wildlife ponds was not considered uplands, it would cettainly be considered a riparian zone. The literature of professional range and fisheries societies recognizes that excessive livestock grazing p r zones of high sediment nt levels and fish habitat destruction. Studies indica that many any streams require is,,a period of five years or more to begin rehabilitation woody, herbaceous riparian vege- tation. While the applicant has Y appro p riatel used his for grazing P prior to development, the Hearings Officer concludes that continued grazing on the property would increase. the management ' g � g pro Y nt difficu: p lties for the.proposed osed wildlife area after fill and development. Finally, on . the issue of wildlife, due to the importance of the inter-relation- ship ship of the two ponds which are proposed for mitigation, and the existing stream bed of Ash Creek,•the Hearings Officer concludes that all of the wildlife mitigation work which is proposed, together with all the filling and grading which is proposed in this area, should be done as part , of e gat . . lopment The Hearings Officer believes this Will�minimize thene' negative impact that the Actual construction work will have 'on the seasonal wildlife habitat in the area. Once the area has been developed according to the plans osed by the applicant's must y to the system even though it will be, theoretically, " de P � P Y Y a licag s expert, there must be wa signed . to be maintenance free. The provision of public open space is the � Ty Tigard Com rehensve Plan�etzger Progress Cohlmunity Phan or not called for in either Therefore, the intent to maintain the common flood ° plain and wildlife area through private means plain a .,. appropriate: `Tie Hearings Cffider believes that an appropriate Vehicle for such maintenance would be the creation of an "owners association" through a declaration of conditions, covenants and restrictions for the entire ownership of the applicants which is . p y each of the units would participate proposed 'or develo meatwhereb° in the me,iYttenance costs for the open space based on a unit size whereby each dwelling unit shall be deemed to be one share and each Page 1 41 1=86 ,v , s7 -0 0 w AlingraaSHABOMMAIMIlsomffewra...... 2,000 square feet or the proposed office complex-shail be deemed one share and each five units of the motel shall be deemed one share, for purposes of apportioning the maintenanee.costs associated with the area.. The owners association bylaws and conditions of restric- tions on the private open space shall be subject to the approval of the city attorney of Tigard. As to the concerns expressed by opponents of petroleum degradation due to the proximity of Highway 217 to the southerly pond and the proposed roadway to the northerly pond, the Hearings Officer concludes that petroleum products will not get into the ponds because proposed Private and public improvements will utilize oil separation stormwater catch basins and sediment will be controlled by required erosion control techniques during construction on the establishment of vege- tative coverup slopes, maximum 33% after conbtruction. The proposed vegetative screen of 25 feet'is adequate buffering between the proposed road and the proposed pond on the north, and there is additional planted. buffer under City standards between the curb and the edge of the right-of-,way that will include street trees and4other plantings. In addition, the fencing and berming will protect against the strain of potentially incompatible adjacent uses. Open Space Discussed above. Variance.. ... variano: is requested in order to perform the excavation of the pond areas that are Within the .11-4.5 zone. Section 1.0.8.4.040 of the Code prohibits landform alterationt'withi'n-residentia1 'zoning dittrictt:. The applicant has addressed the applicable variance ." criteria, (Section 18.134.050 .ih a separate tlatt4tive. which, is . . i.ridotpotatedby reference hOrditi, RECOMMENDATIO Based upon the findingt And dOndltititibt above, the Hearings. :Officer recommends approval of 8t and V 81-02.ii SUbjeCt to the following dohditiorit, 1. A permit. thall. be obtained by the••applidatit from the Division of 8tatetandsand the Army C�rps of•,thqiheett-•(Authoti:tyi Section 404 Clean Water Act 4 tf.8,t.. 144). for ditchargeof dredge or: fill oaterial into waters of the uhita•8tte$,„ A dopy of sad permit shall be provided to the City Enqiheering Office bY. • the Applicant, 2-, The applidaht shall provide the thq3ileerihg•'8etti,dft.iiitith written doderoehtatoh that 0.8,A, has reviewed the proposal and that the • applicant obtAiia, any necessary pormitt The thqlheerthq. $edtidil shall alo be provided wi..th dopies of � sid permits. • Page 8 SI 1-86i V 87-, . •, , 4 .-141 ';" — ' t , 3. The applicant shall provide documentation from a certified professional engineer to the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation and the Engineering Section which shows . that this proposal will not adversely affect flood elevations downstream of Highway 217, along Ash Creek and Fanno Creek. The applicant shall also indicate whether the SW 93rd Ave. Ash Creek crossing is going to be culvert(s) or a bridge. 4. The applicant shall grant to the public, on standard forms furnished by the City, a permanent storm drainage easement which includes all of Ash Creek (approximately top of bank to top of bank). The executed storm drainage easement document, legal description and accompanying map shall be subject to Engineering Section review and approval prior to recording. 5. The ,applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall dedicate that land as shown on Exhibit 2 in the 1987 exhibits to this application) which area is described as being bordered on the south by Dr, Davis' property boundary, on-the west by the property line for the Phase 11 development, on the north by Dr. Davis' property boundary and on the east by the edge of the proposed single-family and duplex units. Said property shall be dedicated as open space in perpetuity and shall be subject to covenants, condtions and restrictions and an owners association' which apportions the maintenance Costs for said area among the properties being developed through this application, in the following formula: Singl.e -family residences , one share each, duplexes -.- one share per lot, office space - one,share per 2,000 square feet of developed office space, proposed motel - one share per five developed units. The articles of incorporation, bylaws and coVenants,, conditions and eestrictions shall be subject to 'the approval of the city attorney for the City of Tigard. 6. The applicant shall complete all improvements to the Ash Creek channel, as proposed, from Highway 217 to the upstream side of the Proposed SW 93rd extension, together with all wildlife mitigation ihcluding'the proposed pond, berming planting, and fencing in conjunction with Phase 1 improvements. All livestock grazing on the area described for dedication as open space as set forth above shall cease upon the beginning of the Construction of these improve - mehts. The wildlife mitigation plan as conceptually proposed in Exhibit 2 of the 1987 exhibits in this application shall be followed together With the plan for planting., drainage improvement and year- round water Source for the proposed pond, Stbject to the approval of the staff and the city engineer, 7. The applicant shall submit detailed engineering draWings, prepared by a registered professional engineer, for all proposed grading, filling and Channel Work. These .drawings shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Section Prior to*constrUction- Those drawings shall show existing and proposed topographic condi- tions. An as--built topographic survey will be required. Page 9 L 1400 V. 01.42 8. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final approval date. DATED this 18th day of May, 1987w HEARINGS APPROV MASON Page 10 L 14.6i V .870I " ' • ". • a ' 4, - 4, " A. • ' . ,, 1 1 4 -+ 1t.� ��. �. �iY x r ,t' .P.; ?.�.t, gri�r a i'.'f ry♦> ;MY:. t + .' °r'. ra, �:: 9!C == =Za === = = ma = = ='36Gt == = = = =tv= xssaasmsa = sss: ssa = = sis = = = ::e 3 = = = = = = = = sa¢ = = = = SLOPE TEMP. ACCESS, ROAD 12" MINUS RIP —RAP FILTER FABRIC SECTION CULVERT TEMP. DETAIL .... 4788 0100 AsHBROOk. PROJECT MOFFAfl l'.4.101:14010 so�ura�r, ie • Ceneultlng •E16gheua Oregon 1 DATE: '1/29/94 • • , .4 lished. To determine if flood insurance Is "available In this comminiity4 contact your insurance agent, or call the National Flood Insurifica Program, at (800) 638.6620. KEY TO MAP 500•Year Flood Boundary 100•Year Flood Boundary Zone Designations* W/ 100•Year Flood Boundary 500•Year Flood Boundary Base Flood Elevation Line With Elevation In Feet** Base Flood Elevation in Feet Where Uniform Within Zone** Elevation Reference Mark Zone D Boundary River Mile 513 (EL 987) RM7x •101,5 **Referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 *EXPLANATION OF ZONE DESIGNATIONS FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) "i 1 PANEL 509 OF 575 (SE E tviAp INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) EXPLANATION A Areas of 100-year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined, AO Areas of 100-year shallow flooding where depths are between one (1) and three (3) feet; average depths of inundation are shown) but no flood hazard factors are determined. Al- 1 Areas of 100-year shallow flooding where depths are between one (1) and three (3) feet; base flood elevators are shown) but no flood hazard fadtors are determined, Ai,A30 Areas of 100•year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors determined, Ai Areas of 100-year flood to be protected by flood protectIon system Under COnstrUction; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not deterrnined, Area between limits of the 1004'eAr flood and 500. year flood: or certain areas subject to 100.Vear firiod4 Ing with average depths lest than one (1) foot Or wherethe Contributing drainage area Is less than one sql.lare"- trifle; Or areas protected by levees from the base (Medium shading) Areas of niinlnial flooding, (No shading) Areas of undeterrnined) but possible) flood hazards. V Area of i oo.year coastal flood with velocity (wave action); base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not detertn,ined, VI n ,VJO Area Of o=year coastal flood With velotitY„(WaVe adtitth); base flood elevations and flood hazard factors deteernined, NOTES TO USER COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 410238 0509 B E1,FECTIVE DATE: SEPTEMBER 30, 1982 Certain areas not lh the special flood hazard reat (z�ies A and V) Inay be protected by flood control structures, This enap Is tor flood Insurance purposes only; it does not hod6, 'sadly tliOW all areas tubloet to flooding in the conirnunIty �r all blabloietio features outddo special flood hazard area§, POI= iitIJOItihilt na ahOki sse separately printed Index To Map Panels, Federal EtheigehoY M nagement Agditoy INITIAL IbENTWIcATIoNt JANUARY 24, 1976 FLOOb HAZARD tioUNbAkY MA REVIMoNs: SEPTEMBEFI 13, 10/ , LEGIBILiTY STR/P L 1 cis Pie 3 City of Tigard AREA No-r INCLUDED ZONE Er ZONE C CASCADE BOULEVARD GREENBURG < ZONE C: ROAD ZONE B ZONE G SIN' DAKOTA STREET City.° f Tigard AREA NOT INCLUDED SW- TIEDEMAM AVENUE JOINS PANEL 3-W-37 UDTJ ON SOCIETY OF PORTLAND A Branch o/ National Audubon Society. HONE 292.6855 • 5151 NORTHWEST CORNELL ROAD PORTLAND, OREGON 97'210 June 20, 1984 Dear Dr. Davis, This is to confirm our visit today to look at the wetlands on your and adjacent properties. There is no question that there are extremely valuable wetlands /wildlife habitat associated with the property in question. If you consult Washington County wildlife habitat inventory data provided the , that i p planners for your CPO you will note that i the Ash Creek area is listed, as, important wildlife habitat. 1 would agree with your proposal to bring in the access road from the western end of the property. t would be a disaster for the wetlands to bring I i n the road from near your own home The im pacts would be far less with the former route. I make this statement not on the basis of ;merits of the project, but only regarding potential road access. It appears to nle, with a lot of planning and cooperation, that you should be able to work up a development scheme for your pro- perty which mitigates and enhances the wildlife habitat. I look . forward to talking with you more about your property and sharing information with your partners and the community,planning group in your neighborhood. Perhaps a field trip for you and interested community activists would be in order? Sincerely, ichael C. Houck k r . ' W t t 1701 S.E. LAID AVENUE. PORTLAND, OREGON 97214 (503) 233 -2011 May 5, 1987 Ms. Beth Mason City of Tigard Hearings Officer 13125 S. W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: SL 1-86 and V 87 -02 Revised notes used for oral testimony given on April 30, 1987. Dear Ms. Mason: The information you requested is attached. 1 have only made minimal revisions to clarify the rough notes used in my oral presentation. s . present ation Cf you need further information please feel free all. 04 C9 uJ ROGER A. REDFERN CONSULTING GEOLOGIST 1701 S.E. LADD AVENUE PORTLAND, OREGON 97214 (503) 233-2011 NOTES FOR TESTIMONY GIVEN BEFORE BETH MASON, TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, APRIL 30, 1967 ,RE: SL 1-86 AND V 67-02 INTRODUCTION Credentials Resume attached Investigation The investigation included three site specific inspections, a review of all of the applicant's submissions for this and the previous hearing, and review of pertinent information on the sate soil, hydrology and geology. ........ r ... .....4.•••4":4. ......"/"/„..• ,.....,., •■,,,.4...._,:■': 4 7 , /.' 1/4.:,...•••44 ".4.-4., . / A. Prr:F't ......... Urn FINDINGS GENERAL My testitony addresses 3 general areas, based on the Sensitive Lands permit requirements and the appropriate Sections of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan 1. Floodplain altrration 2. Drainageway alteration 3. Unstable soils • VtobObtitiAll DEFINITIONS leca-YE4e rthotemiA) fr470,9 F2tvai'AY FelA16E roomi Fio0D41.0, Fr"9 F-LetpliAy FRI/06E 0-k-bOt- kiSC FtccOo i9Y . 4 44 44444 464 4 4 46144 /�(1�.,- 11■1Y11 4 4414441444144 44 4 4 4 444444 441./ Rx#: Fteti5A4V ise Atc6) EA-v9' •- v„.• ik• • • '11.• ' • ' — .14, 4:4' „:4. '■ , TESTIMONY GIVEN APRIL 30, 1987 TO TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER RE: SL 1-86 AND V 87-02 FLOODPLAIN ALTERATION Comp. Plan Ic19 3.2.1 - Prohibitsactions in the 100-year floodplain which would result in any rise in elevation of the 100-year floodplain. This proposal clearly violates this provision in that a rise in the 100-foot floodplain elevation is proposed to occur on the site, on off-site property to the north of Ash Creek and for a distance downstream. The rise In elevation on the site is calculated by Dan Evans and Associates (DEA) as about 1/2 foot. DEA also calculates that there will be an increase in the 100- year flood elevation downstream from this site of 0.06 fept or less than 3/4 of an inch. I agree that this value is an Insignificant elevation change, but I did inform DEA at the last hearing that I considered the change in flow velocity as more important than the change in elevation because of the potential for increased erosion. No quantitative information has been presented regarding the change in flow velocity and resulting erosion. No information has been presented regarding the impact from or the impact on the culvert under Highway 217 resulting from the increased flood velocity downstream from the project site. CP 3.2.2 b. - This section of the comprehensive plan prohibits actions between the 100-year floodplain boundary and the'0 -foot rise floodway unless the actions (1) preserve or enhance the function of the 0-foot rise floodway and comply with section 3.2.3. This development proposal includes structural fills and roadways Oft fills within the area hetweenthe..floodplain boundary and the 0-foot rise faoodway.....boundary. The 0.,-foot rise floodway ±s not preserved or enhanced: because the filling and development: would. , 0*.tend well beyond the 0-toot rase floodway boundary* raising the flood elevation and increasing the velocity of 'flood waters, Under section 32.2 b 3. iatdform a1tert.jon •is aAlowed where • One side of the floodplain is Planned forcotithi...ercil use ±f the landfort alteration or -development is.. an the lard designated cotmercial. 8utin . this dad the proposed road f±11 and r�dway is on residential land. The road iiia' be necessary because. of • tra±fic. problems but it is Alpatehly not allowed • 2 TESTIMONY GIVEN APRIL 30, 1987 TO TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER RE: SL 1-86 AND V 87-02 CP 3.2.3 - ThiQApction requires that development outside of the 0-foot rise fl5aaway maintains the streamflcw capacity of the 0- foot rise floodway and further requires dedication of a greenway. As stated above the proposal does not comply because the 0-foot rise floodway is constricted, resulting in a rise in the 100-year flood elevation. There has been no proposal for dedication of a greenway. Sensitive Lands (SL) 18.84.t)40 requires preservation or enhancement of the floodplain storage function. My diagram (Exhibit 31) clearly show the considerable amount of fill in the floodplain and the loss of floodplain storage. Some excavation is proposed to offset the filling, but the net result is a loss of the storage function of a large amount of the floodplain. The amount of excavated material should not be used to indicate the amount of compensation for the filling. This is because of the fact that excavation below the level of the ordinary water level in the stream and below the shallow ground water table at the ponds will not increase the area available for flood storage. This proposal severely restricts the storage function of the floodplain. The rise in the elevation of flooding and the changes in the volume of flood flow, the velocity of flood flow, and the duration of high flows, all affirm the result of the loss of the floodplain storage. SL 18.84.040 (a)(1 This section requires that maintenance of the 0-foot rise floodway shall not result in any narrowing of the floodway boundary. This proposal does not preserve the 0-foot rise floodway but in8tead proposes to channelize the stream and as a result of both the filling and the channeli.zation there will be a resultinti narrowing of the floodway. SL 18.84.040 (a)(8) - This section requires that no alterati'll or development occur in the floodway. The grading plan in the application and Exhibit 31 indicate a few relatively small intrusions in to the floodway (FEMA) and a large amount of filling in the 0-foot rise floodway. of particular concern is the filling in the FEMA floodway that will occur if ctiverts are used at the crossing of Ash Creek. A bridge could be constructed and not constrict the FEMA floodWay, 3 TESTIMONY GIVEN APRIL 30, 1987 TO TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER RE: SL 1-86 AND V 87-02 SL 18.84.040 (a)(4) - This section prohibits any activity that results in a rise in the elevation of the 0-foot rise floodway. The application admits to the fact of a substantial rise in the floodway elevation on the site and a very small rise in the flood elevation downstream of the site. Section SL 18.84.040 (a)(7) requires that the land within the 100-year floodplain boundary which remains after development shall be dedicated to the public. As stated previously there has been no proposal for dedication of all of the land within the 100-year floodplain boundary to the public or to a greenway. DRAINAGEWAY ALTERATION The Comprehensive Plan under section 7.2.1 requires as a pre- condition to development that it be hown that there will be no Adverse offsite impacts, that the 100-year floodplain elevation be protected, and that erosion control techniques be included as a part of the site development plan. The application indicates that there will be a substantial increase in the elevation of flood water on the site and an increase in the velocity of the flood flow on and off of the site The 100-year floodplain elevation will not be protected, and there is no substantiation of the need or the lack of need for erosion protection on the site or off the site. This section requires that actions within drainageways not create site disturbances to an extent greater than that requited for the uses. It has not been demonstrated that the proposed actions. are the minimum necessary to accomplish some development of this site Alternatives to the proposak....are not presented, Alternatives appear to eist_that.would eliminate or greatly reduce the impacts proposea. •Of particular. concern is the proposed crossing of the creek..., the applicant has not clearly indicated the type Of 'ctobbirig, This is probably because a tulverted and filled crossing is much less expensive cohipared to A. brid4e. ROWeVtti a bridge will not constrict the. floodway or cause as much di$ttitbAhe. as a road fill with a culvert, inappropriate or inadequately considered construction at the ctoboitig could result in dbWildUttihq or lateral. erosion below the crossing.. and retultatit•editehttioti.at tone point. downstread, 4 " tak LEG! . , „ . , . , , „ , „9;.• r. TESTIMONY GIVEN APRIL 30, 1987 TO TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER RE: SL 1-86 AND V 87-02 SL 18.84.0402_121_121 This section requires that actions will not result in erosion, sream sedimentation, ground instability or other adverse on-site and off-site effects or hazards to life or property. The proposed action will increase the velocity of floo4 water on the site and off of the site. Even a small increase in the velocity of the average annual or flood water velocity will result in erosion of the fine-grained material in the floodplain of Ash Creek. The result will be increased erosion and then sedimentation at some point downstream, possibly in Fenno Creek. Sedimentation can further raise the elevation of future floods, creating a hazard for downstream areas. This aspect of the development has been largely ignored. 14 Section alaziti.010121111 requires that the water flow capacity of the drainageway not be decreased. The hydrologic information provided by the applicant clearly indicates that there will be a rise in the flood elevation. This rise in elevation is the result of the constriction of the flow capacity of the drainageway and the storage capacity of the floodplain. UNSTABLE OR WEAK SOILS SL 18.84.040 OLL11 requires that the action not create site disturbances to at extent greater than that required for the uses. The applicant has only ldohtlfied the existence of weak foundation tatetial. The oIte-oped4f4d.eteht of the weak ooil . has not been Idettlfledi and the feeolbil4ty of oti4lidtut,e1 t111o•ot the ooii and u1rig eccavated soli in has not been addressed. tegulte$.,ihdirigo.that the Adtloh.will not teotilt in et4oOloh#..otteem teditehta.t4oh4 gtoith4-.1hotab.411t0 or other edverte- akid off-olte effects �r hatai,di. • As mentioned abov e there. 16 h0 infbtitiatibn.On the ihtoeoed velocity flood.wetei, and the. potehtlel fot ihdreaed , Inappropriate : development on the weak and thotableooll on this site could teoult in lOdailited opediAly- of fill embankments near the creek that would taile• • excessive eitioloh_and otboeoqueht oeditehtatloh atH.tOttie dowhott,eam ftetith. the ptopetty,. • 5 4, TESTIMONY GIVEN APRIL 30, 1987 TO TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER RE: SL 1-86 AND V 87-02 SL 18.84.04gLia_1al requires that the structures be found to be appropriately sited and designed to ensure structural stability in areas subject to shallow ground water, high shrink-swell soils, and compressible /organic soils. This site is subject to shallow groundwater, the soil is prone to shrink-swell, and the soils on much of the site are compressible and organic. However, there is no information on the methods for dealing with these hazards or the feasibility of the proposed structural fills and other development on this hazardous soil. This information must be provided by a qualified geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist following a detailed, site- specific investigation. 44' RECOMMENDATIONS Require runoff detention facilities out of the 100-year floodplain or other adequate methods to structurally mitigate the increased runoff from impervious surfaces for up to at least a 50-year storm or require proof that such facilities are not desireable. Obtain confirmation from Rick Raetz of Washington County. Require facilities to prevent particulates and petroleum products from exiting the developed portions of the,site. Require cettification by Tony Righeilis of the adequacy and accuracy of the calculations of flood hydrology After. developmerit. Requite . geotechnical investigation adequate to indicate the fealbility and cost of ptoviding.afe as proposed This study should include ihdepehdenti detailed site- specific oil mapping.. Soll.thappihg should ihcltide..detaiIed delineation of•hydtic .(wetland) soaJ. If tapping: of hydtid soil_ LL .howe.wetland. substantially greater an area th*h the biblogidal wetland thappihg.ih the :application then th.epetthlt and proposed develotent .should be. denied or substantially tevlowed.. equite binding bridge or culvert design for the toad crossing of Ash Cteek t) Requite fiitthet hydtologio ah411ti8 with .. particular ethphaib an the increase iri flood flow. voiocity i. the ithpact of ancxeased VaiddatY thethoddi the impact on peak flow in Fanno dtooki and the ithpadt on future development all the Ash Oteek.dtainage ba:boin, 4. • cHAAL0s IA swill RICHARD L LANG WM. N. NYTCHIZI.L COWARD J. suLuvApis'' WILLIAM c4Aernote° WM, H10.1.7 01.600 S. PENNOCK GHEEN° opanuct U4 WW1'1 . THAWS W TiENSON° JOHN A. wiTTHAVER° MM towooN solo vommenToN sum woosomaR wottatoN AND wtslowarco4. nom tammem WoOttocrraw Rom ONLY SCOTTJ.MSTIM RANDALL WUXI DAVID Pl. AMEIROSE. MICHAEL C. 7NTCHISU, MONICA 0. GILROY, JR.° Ono* lookAmeLomwe SUXASIETH A. SAMSON CANDACE H. WEATHERS*/ KATHLEEN L DICKERS 1001411.013 A *THAN CORINNE C. 1111ospr70N THOMAS 14, CHRIET MARK 11. RAUCH Ttammt M. WEINER MARK J. ancammtim CHARLES O. HARMS MICHAEL 0. pitimunNt 1.11311JE ANN auDzwirst MITCEIELL, LANG & SMITH ATTOIRMETS AT LAW 111000 ON C MAIN IIPLACC 101 0, W MAIN STREET PORTLAND, OREGON D7a04 TELCRHONE MOM 13214011 June 5, 1987 Ms. Nancy Tracy 7310 SW Pine Street Portland, OR 97223 RE: DaVis Sensitive Land Permit Our File No. 700/35815-0 43? semnit oreits RESIDENT PARTNER: 1. PENNOCR apistam Burns 1004 routarm BLANCHARD SUILOING OW FOURTH AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON estai Isosi otasula vANCOUVEN WINCE 100310ENT PARTNER: THANE W TIENSON sun* 150 ia wear um *ant= VANCOUVVI, witiNittariviv eassio BIOS) 0178-2337 12031 0014011 RALEM OForiCt J1140 courrAmts CENTER az° comTIA am= N.E. OAI.OM, OREGON 07301 03) 37011101 Dear Nancy: 1 spoke today with Keith Liden of the Tigard Planning Department, who informed me that the appeal of the Davis decision was not filed by Davis, but by a man named Curtis. The basis for the appeal was lack of notice and drainage concerns. Keith informed me that the City may try to talk Curtis out of the appeal. Alternatively, Keith's preference would be to reopen the hearing before the Herngs Officer to allow Curtis to participate. Apparently, Curtis was entitled to, but did not receive, notice of the proceeding before the Hearings Officer. • Liden tells me that Davis was satisfied with the Hearings Officer's decision. Accordingly, it is unlikely there will be additional changes to that decision. However, you should monitor action by the City with respect to the Curtis appeal. Should the 000061 .do to City Council, YOU may With to participate at that love10 Pleate• Call. Me if you have aby- tideetioht4 Very truly yours, & SMITH • Uatit d Greenfield mddlrm 4 ' , Oot "rn ;;"'.,?.;44 ‘e' „!• CHARLES T SMITH RICHARD L LANG WM4 H. MITCHELL EDWARD J, SULLIVAN" WILLIAM A MASTERS. WM. KELLY OLSON. E. PENNOCK COMM. BRUCE M. Point. THANE W TCNSON. JOHN A WIMKAYE:R° 'Himmel* ONIWON AND 4.4MiNOTON NA .40.1•[n ORTOON AND MtafopNOTON. D. c. woes SCOTT' J, MCV R RANDALL A. WILEY DAVID R. AMIDROSE* MICHAEL C. MtTCNCLL. PATRICK D. OILGROY. JR.. GREG MARTHOLOMEW. CLJZASCTH A. SAMSON CANDACE N. W(ATNEROY KATHLEEN L OICKER3 RICHARD A. LAYMAN CORINNE C. SHKRTAN THOMAS M. CHRIST MARK S. RAUCH TERRY M: WEINER MARK J. OREENFIELD CHARLES D. HARMS MICHAEL O. HEPOURN LESLIE ANN SUDLWITZ Ron Marg U.S. Azy'' Corps of Engineers egu,Ittory Branch Ppotox 2946 ortland, OR 97208 -2946 MITCHELL, LANG & SMITH Arr0IRNEYs AT LAW 2000 ONE MAIN PLACE 001 S. bit MAIN STREET PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 TELZPHONIC 11303) 221 -1011 May 5, 1987 ArATrLC orrice RESIDENT PARTNER; C. PENNOCK ONCEN CRATE 1004 FOURTH & OLANCHARD SUILDINO 2121 F01.14323.AVIENUE SEATTLE, NOTON O1I2II M00) 4434212 VANCOUVER OMr10E RE$IDICNT PARTNER: THANE W 1IILNS0N SURE 150 !IT Wtt3T 11" STREET VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON 065 0 ROM 50545337 I50a1 .aai- oii Re: Corps of Engineers No. 071- OYA -4- 006425 Oregon Division of State Lands No FP -4570 Our File No. 700/35815 -0 Dear Mr. targ: SALEM OFFICE 040 EoL rr* LE ceh rtn 1330 CENTER STREET N.C. SALEM. OREGON D7304 1Moa) 375-0101 This letter is written on behalf of my client, Nancy Tracy. Please make it part of the record of this matter. As this letter is being copied to the Division of State Lands, I also ask that i the Division make t part of the record of their proceeding. The proposal is to place nearly 11,000 cubic yards of fill material on portions of a 22.2-acre Tigard. ` 2 acre si�ke in Ti and That site contains a wetland identified significant by the city. Unfortunately, the quality of that wetland has deteriorated substantially in recent years, due entirely to grazing practices by the applicant, Dr Davis: See the attached letter from Mike Houck, Portland Audubon Society (Exhibit 1). compensate To ` _ of wetland, the applicant plans to introduce mitiationrmeaslres, including the creation of two onds I ... including that continued cattle ©razingninransarea adV'acentnto?athoseh ' onds p P by Y ;, could harm those ponds, applicant proposes to build a berm. However; the effect of the berm would be to channel cattle waste into 1 This is n acceptable result. Also p ` of an acc unacceptableissanyrpro�osal that could result in cattle wastes unacceptable Y proposal entering the ponds, is to compensate for d The purpose of mitigation p amaae done to wetlands by a development project: Mitigation m ay not yield total restoration or compensation, but at least it compensates for -=- or should compensate for - most of the lost habitat A """" ' • ■+. ...+`+ '■;;"+. „ MITCHEL., LANG & SMITH Ron Marg May 5, 1987 Page 2 ir However, as noted in the attached article which appears in the May, 1987 issue of Audubon magazine (Exhibit 2), benefits promised are often not delivered. Mitigation measures often fail. Failed mitigation measures, of course, serve no beneficial purpose. Here the mitigation measures proposed are threatened by continued grazing of cattle on the property -- the very use that led to the deterioration of the resource in the first place. Cattle may be appropriate in a rural area, but they are inappropriate it a heavily Urbanized area such as this. Moreover, cattle are especially inappropriate in an area earmarked for wetland restoration. Accordingly, we ask that any permit issued require, as a conditIon of approval, that all cattle be removed from the property. Also, because mitigation measures often fail, permit approval should be conditioned on development of an adequate monitoring program. The program should remain in effect for at least three to five years, with all costs of necessary repairs or improvements to be the responsibility of the developer or property owner. We support the recommendation in Nr. Houck's letter of March 26 1987 that "feathering" be made a condition of approval, and we also ask that the Phase 11 mitigation work be made a part of Phase 1. Nancy Tracy has participated in this matter before the City of Tigard. A copy of her testimony is enclosed as Exhibit 3. Thank you for this opporttnity to participate. Very truly yours, Itld/ditt. triclotute , Nancy Trai D±V±S±On of tat Lands Aalph..oq.ett Nark J. Greenfjeld. A ,.i.r . C19r110l 5047;9444855 Yr, K). "Jj +,°';''rr. '1 11 31 11611' c ; .Hal B lvd. if ,.1 f 40x ' 2497 K 'Tgardy ore0o6 97223 J...; , ,r. I.:: Tot o gings Offic '.Ret 1� No 's, a gene 404 V v art, , h' '1 hayed , gev • pro c PcoloilP; sourPO 00 0 0 submit Oe," ow _ r ' ,, S n�v 1��r �` l � G � � � �'�i��' 'lj JJ ., 1. Nip ,•, 'ics ltop ;', not notified about the hearing until v'a entry en , contacted by Nancy Tracy, a local r ;;r, , ,r' a 40 . L4t, , e lip ,t u lic }leering I attended on this issue a,,`► � 9 . , a e , o work with the agencies and Portland. � Q� �e was instr� ',a04 4� Society lie i consult with the Army Corps and oDFW, fit`' bu.�we did not hear om either the applicant or his co t... ` ,. � ultan 1s. '',V0* ,a A di®a ointed h did not occur nce I took the time to h� via ` th, Dr. Day s at his request two years ago to look at the #� , 2• ®ra1tMarch gaalsv After the document site recently .r,,+ h 04 submitted by ,.' 4 cavi a vans and Assoc a nc.ngI have no strongnobjections to ''.'the ro joct,, with the' o low ng caveats: t March 26, 1987 2 ensitive Lands Permits ps oc report, the �a Consul:atsandIndependent l'a SWIM meeting Pmong the re- for r the record t. mitigation :oA wit 'ia►ne r of th i Je beets contacted' by _, a. project and since `y ti ahou d pe involved !Iqk whic has been degra e4 t it ug overgrazing. i the roposid acceSs. 4a. ' h. 2. l question ' $ e 1L0 a large tract of land for Davos has apuaed the prope 1 have no problem with it b Creek should be done in conjunction • Since all ad iac ent lan downe have can n ao ogreemopt.olth t he a benefit from the project they n a narrow piece of land sheath og X t1'64e for enhancement O,t Ash Creek 1140** setting s idaatai�s to be citing purpoes1 lnmy opinion r. through his past grazing practices. ng in private ownership, with re- 1/4 ,, ,, , . 4 { 1n • e �'7 04, r�. y.. t. '.r �! rr ' K + r o I pro eosas that ,f .p wetland resources, but "' l do have a problem. if ggszing,.: 1 ; be `, etas ' euggested that' sho ' d consul.t� with ,the poi/ resource. It Q,. � and Water Conservation ®iatrict . to. evelop a ;plan ' l would,rsupport -that recommendation. y , era , °3., The pond to be c Lstructed as mitig tionl for Phase 11 should not eliminate all o the emergent wet/and habitat There should be feath � hi edges to allow for mergents. �tho " e��n ,� off' 1 4. Some form ,o& one, o in _.. should he °, � � program � e required to ensuZe the mitigstio4 �aat' s proposed is actually carried out and in performing the unctions intended. Thank$ tor , the o o 3n t to comment been involved in Pp � � Y t en,t ors the pro�e�ct. 1 have k th *issue for 'almost: three* years now, and first saw the site more than five years ago when 1 did the inventory for Washington County, I am hopeful these comments will prove useful in resolving the conflicts that were identified in earlier hearings Mike Houck go+v, 40u" Atm 94 tAl 144nc, 6001/64,15€47610, Test cmi.ego" W►N �F� �r Ca10611 , Vvri eel U,,,S .14 : (Atte. rare r►") awiAt ra � � : �m . tevovaas frn Wage 644-1-14 047,- Jul- drool for 5in.444 Joirc401444., Thut hen" et. cerokca9 tttea( b2p G°de aewsa� iremytti weboons oreem... The cot rmrmm count- dh one, co W pas) is ivy Via, n;111,610 MIL WouEw neadul ;fin ditttie Una- coo/ p:ci #o azcei0Mb14., %reca,C- Co IiFo rm CovAn+ - 240 or - 616 an oy,rea Ate 6. *to dF at, F,'II fief , 10o' deep • t�na►%we4era Abk Ctea, cit 611,4.414, 'Rd: covi9 aots. C.entib1-4#001,6i Aly4 Ciiititee4s f�' rezia, —cep I i .�1�- d�lc� �fo ►�r�v G $kod44( eofi IPA lAtmej Y'aLO'v o9wv �� Fdld nian, i (NI ►^eittsan Moir 41/v., incovriiA,k6�l of tive4444414 h C fir44,49 4'rati3O ' ' • ■ , . r MiyA 16/ 67 Autici,19TAi Compensation for habitat loss from development is a buy-off, and the benefits are often illusory. by PETER srEpiHARr A salt Marsh on San Francisco Bay: GroWing plants are not enotigh, ITIGATION—the formal sys- tem of fish and wildlife repata- dons required by fecierai law—has been with us for more than half a cen- tury, yet we keep losing habitat, One of the problems is that a lot of mitiga- tion gets unmitigated, For example; take Kesterson Na- tional Wildlife Refuge in California. Kesterson was made a wildlife tefitge to mitigate the loss of waterfowl hal). !tat caused by the Bureau of Reclama,, don's Sin Luis irrigation project, But Selenium from agticultural drainwiter ponded in the refuge so poisoned the birds that they gave bitth, if at A, to gtotesquely deformed young, Today, the LLS, Fish and Wildlife Service uses shotguns' and propane cannons to hake waterfowl away from the refuge, and Bultec is looking for land to buy as mitigation for its mitigation, Or take the fish hatcheries on the Columbia River, There are more than twenty of them, built and run with federal funds under tilt Mitchell At which was used chiefly itt mitigate damage to fisheries caused by big fed- eral darns on the Columbia and Snake rivers, The Reagan Administration to day denies that the hatcheries were part of the bargain, and insists that fish hatcheries ate state responsibill- ties, Every yet the Reagan Adminis- tration removes the hatcheries from the federal budget, and every yeat 'Wash- ington and Oregon officials scramble to get Congress to put the hatcheries back in, Such stories remind its of Indian tirades; pledges without real commit- ment, made to escape an argument and move on to other business. They are apt to make us give up on miti- gation. But mitigation is an issue that needs thought and care. Mitigation was written into federal law with the Fish and Wildlife Coordi- nation Act of 1934. The act stipulates that federal agencies building water projects must consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service, and that the Secre- tary of the Interior must recommend "measures for mitigating or compen- sating for damages" resulting from a project. At the outset little mitigation was written into big water projects. Northwest officials are still trying to get federal dam-builders to agree on the extent of damages to the fisheries so that the federals will undertake further mitigation efforts. But as the constituency for environ mental values grew, the National Envi ronmental Policy Act and state laws re- quired government agencies to consid- er environmental effects, and mitiga- tion became part of the decision-mak- ing process. Today, for example, several New Jersey laws require mitigation when coastal wetlands are destroyed. The federal Clean Water Act and indi- redly: the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act require mitigation when a wetland is filled or a small-scale hydroelectric dam is built. Mitigation is even agreed upon when a factory expansion will have adverse effects on local air quality. A Developers have increasingly ac- cepted the idea that it is less trouble to mitigate than to go on contesting per- mit requirements. Government agen- cies see mitigation as a way to get eilVi- ronmentat benefits without risking charges that they have prevented the developer from using his land at all, The agencies have found the process so attractive that they frequently an- nounce ahead of time what they want For exampl7„ the Oregon Division of State Lands publishes a formula by which developers can calculate the acreage a streambed alteration or wet. !arid fill will cost in mitigation, Says Gordon Thayer, who drafts mitigation plans for the National Marine Fisheries Service in North Carolirta, "We in the Southeast have been trying to write into the permits a two-to-one ot three- to-one compensation The Code �i Federal Regulations al- lows a developer either to =nutlike impacts on the development site or to preserve habitat away from the site, Developers prefer off-site mitigation because it interferes less with their building plans, But we are niniiirig out , ■‘'' 74. ,+' ' ' ,11,4W.,:- 7' ',4"„ ...:*':6114.4:4!;ir:V4 triltati '# 4 r �..* ,.) "lk .i.w.a<g4;It44.64 14.14,0A0 .1.t..M.vd:!.tiii!,�s►+AQtA c THERE HAVE BEEN efforts to be more precise about what we want out of a mitigation site, but they haven't often been successful. Wildlife officials use the Fish and Wildlife Service's Habitat Evaluation Procedure or tiffeepartment of Transportation's Wetlands Evaluation Technique to an- alyze the values of wetland areas. But the methods are seldom employed on both the project and mitigation sites so that the values of both can be com- pared closely. Few agencies have the manpower or funds to perform the ex- tensive studies needed to understand the hydrology or the biological produc- tivity of a wetland site. Usually, when a mitigation site is selected, the evalu- ation process is subjective, based not on quantitative measurements but on a walk over the site There are no regional goals whereby a permitting agency knows what ought to be the result of the total number of mitigation projects, On San Francisco Bay, most mitigation efforts call for res- toration of tidal salt marsh by breach- ing dikes on the bay, But most of the developments are in fresh and brackish wetlands, The result is that riparian and freshwater marshes continue to disappear, And there are no studies to de- termine whether mitigation succeeds years later, Says Thayer, "No one agen- cy has the money and the rn Mapower to do what we know is necessary bio- logically to evaluate these mitigation efforts, The federal dollar just doesn't go that far," In fact, almost no attention is paid to a mitigation site after the develop- merit is completed, Lynn Greenwalt, former director of the U, S, Fish and Wildlife Service, says, "One of the stark failures of the mitigation schemes has been an almost total lack of follow= up," A California study found that in two cases the developer purchased mitigation lands and deeded them to the state, but the state agencies did nothing to restore or enhance those ands as required by the Corps of En- gineers permit, Some developers sun- ply walk away from the mitigation re ci ' Several year after the Port of Oakland agreed to deed two - tenths of an acre to the State of California and restore otidal action to mitigate the o£ n filling e amount of tidal slough, the port had, not done so, Noncompliance is more common on p small projects since the Corps of En- gineers is less likely to send inspec- togs out to check them, At tulles, re- sponsibility for the mitigation is passed t,r on to a state game or land -use agency which is not a party to the permit, and so powerless to enforce any mitigation requirements the developer refuses or forgets to meet. Finally, there is often no long -term commitment to mitigation. Mitigation sites given to state agencies may not be deed - restricted to fit mitigation objec- tives, The receiving agency may end up managing the arca for another purpose, or not managing it at all. When Washington State fell on hard budgetary times, it simply returned the McNary Wildlife Management Area to the Corps of Engineers; the Corps had originally leased the area to the state in mitigation of damages caused by McNary Dam, The reality," says EPA's Kunz, ''is that mitigation is not easy, It is time - consuming, and, it requires a lot of money. This is something that needs to be known, Mitigation should not be the carrot dangling in front of our face: It should be the last resort." Adds Gor- don Thayer, "We continue to stress that mitigation is still an experimental technique that has not yet been ade- quately evaluated," Mitigation hasn't worked chiefly be- cause we have seen it as part of the bar- gain' ing process rather than part of the biological challenge of development. Senator Steve Symms of Idaho, hear- ing about mitigation requirements, declared, "All I can say is that it is a good thing we got as much of the country developed as we did before we got into this kind of business.” Despite the lip service paid by officials to en- vironmental and ot of officials als are R, e developers willing or ea- ger to pass environmental costs on to future generations. For all these failings, we are obliged to try to make mitigation work. "It beats the hell out of the alternative, which is no mitigation at all," says Lynn Greenwalt, "That was the alter- native for a long time." Mitigation is one of the few ways we can address the environmental costs of development here and now, It is also a test of our ability to manage lands that have already been so isolated or changed that nature alone can't sustain them, To make mitigation work we must realize that management of habitat is necessary and complex, and we must agree g that the obligation to habitat goes on forever, We nod at these ideas, We haven't yet mastered them WHY DOES ,? UR UTUAL F a, 1. r Bodotitt) WO att ectl�►e inVostntont to b® an t�nsa0e ®nd �un 8 0 t. Thee® tut ma* Other the ootn ont opportunitlos a�ti®lls to to invasttrt ®nrnenta&ly concerned invostc�r ut flVestr leyhts IPicellde i olar Cells 0 Energy Management O Cogeneration c ConserVatioh e Insulation 6 Solar Glass e Hosource Recovery NEW ALTERNATIVES FUND is a Mutual Fund that ��°iVis .. to conce y g 9 pa p � m� Hies the tr vice t ntrate � our investment on roV�th co that ca realize on energy cost consciousness r. , .LL. al . ,.. , environment pro ectlon, and our nit ion s tilsenci�antment Wth Nuclear Pot,>rier: NE'B� „,ALTE N ALTERNATIVES FUND A Mutual;. Fiend concentrating in Alternate (Energy, Solmr Mutual, and ConeeiVration inVestmmeits For more compfeie information, including charges and akpenses, send for our prospectus; Head if carefully before you Ihliest, See out track r teCotd 5itamine our IIst of Investments a Mlh, invest. menu $2650 Call collect;, 516-466.0808 or send coupon ma l adr aa aia ea a ami lea ias ae. aaaa TiVES f=UNd, 1 295 Northern El NEW ALT RNA vd, Great Neck, NY 11621 Please sand me a PPospecttla and Fund package, 1 1 Name Address City State zip mil im iii ma+ ®emir sell Imes red ®init. iiiam sea 661 i®a mm em r 1 iv of mitigation sites for developcis to buy. At the same time, mitigation re. quirements are getting more precise. That explains why, in the words of Cal- ifornia attorney Mike Wilmar, "For the responsible developer, mitigation is becoming an increasingly less attractive means of reconciling conflicts." It also explains why, after years of skirmish- ing, the Army Corps of Engineers can- not agree with the Environmental Pro- tection Agency on a mitigation policy. THE HE WORD mitigation is an old one. For six centuries, it meant to lessen the violence or offense or in- sult in something, Today, however, its meaning is changing. To many people, it now means compensation. Says Thayer, "I view it in terms of a min- imum of one for one, a like for a like." EPA's Jennifer Wilson says mitigation is what the agency considers after try- ing to avoid the project or rnuutruze the impacts on the site, to "try to corn pensate for the remaining unavoidable loss." But dearly, it's not always compen- sation. Says California environmental planner Charles Hazel, "Say you use a wetland, an ephemeral pool in a hardpan foothill habitat. It's a nat- *O. ural setting. If you remove that habitat by development or agriculture, you de- stroy it forever. You can go to another area and purchase a parcel of land that has ephemeral pools and give it to the state. That is not true compensation. It's a buy-off. You're giving up part of the pie in order to retain part of the pie." Seldom does a permitting agency get back as much as it allowed to be destroyed. For example, to mitigate for the toss of bottomlands along the Colorado River, the Bureau of Reclamation bought an Arizona state waterfowl management area and added it to the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge. The uniforms worn by the manag- ers changed, but the total nuMber of bottomland acres declined. An increasing amount of study sug- gests that many of the gains of miti- gation are illusory A study of Corps of Engineers wedand-fill permits in New England found that few of the mitigation requirements attached to them succeeded. In one, the devel- opers of a shopping center in New Hampshire were to provide four to five acres of wetlands to replace the thir- teen acres they developed, The devel- oper bulldozed several basins, but did A/PO.4X P■UOGIULJL Oh raved about the "unexcelled optics" of the Tele Vue Renaissance telescope lh its July 1986 review of spotting scopes, Now the some I hued, ible tOx to 200x petfottrohce IS dvdildble In d lighter, compact field version, The 3 operture Oracle 3 usos d new triplet dpochromot rnulti=tocrted lens for color-free inlagqt, Even focuses down i6 7 ft, The Oecicle Is also d superb 56ornen f/7,4 telephoto lent'. Why tolerate "tunnel vition" dh' the soft irndges of ordincity scopes? With pdtehted Nagler 8° field eyepieces, eXpetiente "d plefute window with Magni. fiedtion, " Send for free liteediUte toddy, Reveals Nature, Closer, Wider, Sharper Than You Ever Imagined 20 Odin& Pioro 0001 •Olvor, Ny Ib96 (01i0 •1t)-6.,40-4 "Even otier Thdn You IftiO§itie4" so with so little slope that no wetlands were produced. In another project, the Connecticut Depamnent of Transpor- tation was to create twenty-three acres of upland wetlands to replace twenty acres of wedands destroyed while building an expressway. The depart- ment excavated five basins. In one, the slopes were too steep to support wetland vegetation, and the basin merely served as a sediment trap for runoff from the highway. In all, only six acres of wetlands were produced, a net loss of fourteen acres. A similar study undertaken in Cali- fornia found that in more than half the projects, the mitigation required by the permitting agency either wasn't done or wasn't successful. And an EPA official says of an ongoing study of compliance with mitigation require- ments permits in the Pacific North- west, "I've only seen a couple of sites that looked good. Usually a good plan was not prl together, They did not un- derstand the hydrology or the plants or the type of habitat they were supposed to create." One problem with mitigation is that the permitting agencies often have no sense of what they are trying to get out of the mitigation effort. Kathy Kunz of EPA observes that the paper rec- ord" may say that the developer will ovate a wedand two miles away, but there is no specification as to what that wetland should produce, what it should look like, whether it is be- ing developed for water quality, fish and wildlife, endangered species, open space, or all of these, Assistant Secretary of the Army Robert K. Dawson, who is in charge of the Corps of Engineers, declares, "There have been successful creations of wetlands all over the country, and our Waterways Experiment Station in Vicksburg has literally stacks of tech- nical reports about the creation of wet- land.s," But those reports deal chief- with efforts to plant cordgras or pickleweed on dredge spoils, Too often, mitigation is Cleciared successful simply because the plants grew. Growing plants do not netts, sadly indicate a functioning Syttem, According to Gordon Thayer of NMB, "Some of the data sUggett that marshes that were created three to six years ago are nowhere OM the carrying capacity of natural marshes, The fish and invertebrates ate nowhere neat as abiindant," And Jennifer Wilson EPA Says, "We are unsure that man can create equivalent substitutes for natu, tally functioning wetlands," , ,„ ItAcy SUMMARY OF FEDERAL AND STATE PERMITTING GUIDELINES Army Corps of Engi nc-ers, ..EPA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon The Division of State Lands, and the Ore g on Department of Fish and Wildlife all consider the following general criteria when evaluating wetland dredge and fill permit applications or Environmental Impact Statements: 1. Public need 2. Availability of alternative locations or projects 3. Effect of development on the following wetland functions: a) Wildlife habitat b) Science and education c) Natural drainage and storage of storm water d) Groundwater recharge e) Water quality /purification f) Example of unique wetland ty ie Generally, if public need outweighs natural resource concerns, there are no other racticable alternative locations for the project, Permit nit may be granted.''' I owever, n recent years t has been very difficult for applicants to tip the scale in favor of a project. A recent amendment to EPA Guidelines provides that: °From a national perspective, the degradation Or destruction' of special aquatic sites, such as filling operations in wetlands, is considered to be among the most severe environmental impacts covered by these Guidelines." Eden when aflll and dredge,permit is granted; there are increasingly stringent mi tigation ". requirements that developers must meet. Federal and state agencies currently interpret mitigation to mean no net l s of. Wet.i.ands This means that, i n addition to limiting. impacts by creating vegetative buffers and imposing other deli n Stanrhre mustbe an enhancement o an • existing wetl an orthe e f a new wetland. and equal, in Valie to the wetland that is lost' For more information on the federal and state..dredge and fill Pe g i^mittin process,; contact Kenny Stein at Lane council ... of Governments, 6S7-4O562 4 t1 2. Stat'dd � 1 andCDC' Goal 5 Administrative Rulo e spa ati on and •Davel,fpmeflt Commission's Goal 5 and the Land Conservation that local define specific Statewide determini policy, � ver .efts 5 u must Administrative ... Rconducting inventories, o daval 0 must X011 oat when measures eneral g � �,eS for wetland-related natural impl�r�enta t1. revising . evel opt �+9 .. � the Goal t S ,Rule 9 the 9 , and aur�� e Although ,CDC i s , Curren t follow-will 1 i kel y r�o�ai n the same processes overnments must professes that local g •1 Apri 1 29, 1987 FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL WETLAND REGULATIONS Federal Regulatidns 1. U.S. Arm Corps of Engineers (Corpsj Permit Section 404 of the Clean Water Act authorizes the Corps to issue permits for the discharge nds which are defined wetlands "Waters of dredged or fill material ate l ino the waters of the United States. Waters of the United States includes as areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a q sufficient to support, and that under normal frequency cumsta a sd ddo duration , Vegetation typically adapted for life in circumstances support, 9 saturated soil conditions. See attachment for a summary of Corps permitting guidelines. 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Aenc EPA Under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the EPA has the responsibility of reviewing Corps permits for compliance with EPA 404(b)(1) fill and dredge guidelines (see attachment). The EPA has the authority to override any Corps permit not in compliance with EPA guidelines. . called the National �.inder section 309 of the Clean Water Act e(commonly to revi ew al 1 environmental ental Policy Act), EPA is required n ) An EIS is required for all federally funded Impact Statements (EIS). projects that might have a "significant" impact on the environment: U.S. Fish and Wildlife.ServiceUSFW S Like the EPA, the USFWS has the authority to review and .override a Corps, permit request. All three agencies have memorandums of understanding on the Section 404 permitting process. The USFVJS uses a different, more inclusive, definition of Wetland Sta' a Regulations 1. Ore on Division of ..State Lands (DSL) Permit 695 and 541. permit or any Under ORS 541605 -541 is required f removal or alt mit • 990 a er .. ,. .. .. alteration or . ii .... + Oregon waters. activity that proposes filling, , yards of mater of g g P " material wetlands which bed defined exactly as the. Corps defines y. Waters W (see above. • DSL ermi qig guidelines are very sitt;itar tot the Wetlands s )n� � p i ` Ccr s permitting guidelines, Applicants Usually fill out one joint permit application which the DSL and the Corps simultaneously review, May 13, 1987 HEA001 Mr. Xen Bierly Environmental Permits Unit Division of State Lands 1600 State Street Salem, OR 97310 RE: LETTER FROM WILLIAM L. PARKS REFERENCE STATE PERMIT NO. FP 4570 CORPS PN 006425 Dear Mr. Bierly: We have reviewed the letter from Mr. Mark Greenfield, forwarded by Mr. Parks of your office. Regarding the above referenced application for fill permits, cattle will be fenced from the wetland. If proposal, please do not h additional quest ions regarding the P P , p hesitate to Call. Very truly yours, DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Mel 0'. Stou MJS:lrd ID. \ \ib E\ DNS MbA SOCIATES INC , 1 \(11 1:1 t:►, SC VEVO tS,PLANNERS, L1,\1) (:.1i'1 iRCI lihl C i;S Ol1fl iMi(11th(Pci \, \ \.1.Siii,`(►1'O\ \lit,Aisiit►1t'Ir t;(1RItI 11 11; \(1 NIRCIAMIAMMS0'201m11 1 i11, i 1!. WIWI4 • TheWetlandsConservancy May 14, 1987 Mr. Ron Marg, Project Manager Regulatory Branch Portland District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 2946 Portland, OR 97208 RE: Ash Creek Fill 071- 0YA-4- 006425 Dear Mr. Marg, The Ash Creek development proposed by Dr. and Mrs. Davis has received a lot of public exposure and comment during the last two years and the project has been generally tailored to respond to these concerns. I am of the opinion that there should be little or no net loss of our few remaining wetland resources and that mitigation, unless sizable and well �. , a acts of the r low designed, is a poor substitu�e Therefore lthe mitigation original wetlands however quality they may seem to us. fill program are extremely important if this project is to proceed as invi- sion d g concern by local residents regarding flooding in great and fill has to positively . is also teat co thiseareaTandeany development a proposal p y assure these people that worse flooding will not result from this development. While this assurance can probably be given through computer the design 'g n n of the wetland mitigation is more a matter of professional judgement as to its loca- tion, size and character. Therefore my comments are. as follows: A team of qualified hydrologists, wetland ecologists) biologists, etc'.' from the various state and federal agencies involved with wetland pprootect'o with nad a b7olo gist from Portland Audobon Society should be empanelled to work ► g p Dr. Davis consultants in the detailed design and implementation of the mitigation plans There needs to be some assurance that the wetland mitigation areas and the p remaining other open spaces rema�n�ng undeveloped on the site will remain as open space in perpetuity, considerable in the Tigard public ` able concern hearings over the hfuture suseeof some of the designated open space and there e. a reat deal of concern expressed�o i ti g �he has been g over the elimination, or at t containment of the cattle grazing to the remainin wetlands very leash co 9 and open sapce= Any f111 ermit should be contingent upon a statement in the public record as to the future use of the proposed cattle grazing area since P development there could have major detrimental impact on the two mitigation pond areas straddling it Post Woo abx 206 Tualatin'. Oregbrr 97062 Phbrie 508 692 4006 Mr. Ron Marg May 14, 1987 Page 2 Since the only new wetland being created in this project is the proposed three - quarter acre Phase 1 pond, I urge the Corps to require some permanent open space preservation means for the balance of the undeveloped sited The Phase 2 pond is located in already existing wetland. Wetland enhancement is not is projects that are, little wetland replacement and it is rojectsslefta�ntthe Portland metro- politan little, destroying the few remaining wetlands politan area One acre of new wetland, and some wildlife ponds in an existing wetland are not equitable' replacement for the loss of the wetland area shown on the development plan. The area west of the Phase 1 pond and north of Ash Creek should be converted to wetland as part of the Phase 1 mitigation plan. Even with that additional new wetland, the net loss is considerable. It is in times like this when I wish Oregon had no net loss policy. Sincerely yours, J. W. Broome The Westlands Conservancy a1 NE 11, 00605010AID1 OCMAN'm Department of Land Conservation and Development 1175 COURT STREET NE, SALEM, OREGON 97310-0590 PHONE (503) 378-4926 Mr. Tom Brian, Mayor City of Tigard P.O.' Box 23397 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Brian; Recently the Department of Land Conservation and Development wat..4 asked by the Governor's office to respond to correspondence regarding the proposal of Eugene and Vivian Davis to develop property along Ash Creek. As a result we have talked to the Tigard citizens who wrote the correspondence. They have expressed concern about adegdate protection of wetlands and habitat on the property. We spole as well with representatives from the Corps of Engineers, the city of Tigard and the applicant's consulting firm. Material ' sUbmitted to the Corps in support of the applicant's request for a fill permit was also reviewed. After reviewing the information available to the DLCD, / am writing to state our support for the findings and recoMmendations issued by the city's hearings officer in support of project approval (No. SL 1-86, V 87-02). We believe that the recommendations fairly and thoroughly balance the competing interests of natural resource protection and economic development It is this type of sensitive decision-making which creates quality development and sustains a 1veable urban environment. The hearings officer's decision carries ott the intent of both Goal 5 and 9, natural resource protection and economic development, and is consistent with Tigard's comprehensive plan. I encourage you and the city council to support and enforce the hearings officer recommendations for approval of this this deVelopment as set forth on pages 8-10 of the report dated May 18, 1987. A...chtetwao# Office of the Governor Nancy -1,t4-oy• • Jim $itzmh4 Pottlah4 Ateh Viela.gepttdebtoitiv6 MAR-11-91 MOH 11 :S1 ORIES.0 AltioRNEVS JOHN K. BAKER, MA kALPH BOLLicp.Rt ANDREW E, GoLlasTEINoot LEwls KAMPTON BoHN L 010I,LOWAY JR, DARIN De HONN HARLAN EDWARD IONESi E. ANDREW JARDAN BRUCR fl ORfl ARTHUR L. TARLOW Admitted Clik$011 and Vdexhitigioh •eAdmitted New VorS; fOt Cotimal LisoAte ASSISTANTS SAMOA s REMY MATILENE L xF,RNER Ole SAMMONS LAwRENcE viviAW t Lip,NTz PATRICIA L. MORGAN MARV t ARM, SCHNELL *SW CROAti IrILIS MAU Sari tO, PORTLAND, OE OW „ (AO MOM FAX (.Ol) $41.201 10i E 011 St Witt :OS PO SOX S91 iStOliVEtt,,WA dOd) ISOMitItt FAX (N) 60.404 069 riunb AVitNiJE Prril FLOOR NEW $.0ftg, NY 04* 0101. !jilt ti4,140, March 5, 1991 Kenneth M. Elliott Attorney at Law 1727 NW Hoyt $t Portland OR 97209 E5 C3 25 M 25 2 49 et et P�2 Re: Dais/City of Tigard Our File No. 40117/22061 Your Case No. SLR 50-0011 Dear Ken: MAUERWMVIM Portland Office We are in receipt of your February 27, 1991 letter regarding the Declaration of Covenantee Conditions and Restrictions of Ashbrook Farms ("Declaration") and the By-Laws of Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association ("By-Laws"). Enclosed are copies of the revised Declaration and ty-Laws. We have Made all changes requested in your February 27 letter, except that we have not drafted Articles of Incorporation for the Ashbrook Farms Property Owners AssoCiation since it' will not be a CorPOratitOn, but Will rather be ah unincorporated association as allowe by ORS 94.625. Additionally, we do not gtee with YoUr commit in Section 4(b) of your letter which states "ORS 94.665 requires 80% or more of the votes ih the assodtation before it May eell, convey Of subject to a security interest any Portion of the Common Property." The statute states that "Ielxcept as otherwise provided ih the Declaration" an 80% vote is regOired. We are aUthorizing a 60% Vote in the Declaration. Please feel free to live me a call tegatdihg the Declatation ot By-Lawe. very BOLL GEA, HAMPTON & TARLOW ANbAt 40. OAN Db4/bs/ 52 • EUgene.DV14. . 0 rt t, " z � rti • - t -TY:E' S.� k LEGBLITY STRIP 1-91 MON 11 : S 1 °REMO 3IEtZ5425294+4 DECLARAT/ON OF COVENANTS, COND1tIONS AND RESTRICTIONS OF ASHBROOK FARMS P tfas Thie Declaration made this lay of - 1991, by Eugene Davis and Vivian M. DaviS, hereinafter called the •■•• Declarant, Witnesseth: Whereas, Declarant is the owner of the real property described in Article 1 of this Declaration, and is desirous of subjecting the real property described in Article 1 to the restrictions, covenants, reservations, easements, liens and charges hereinafter set forth, each and all of which 10 and are for the benefit of said property and for each owner thereof, end shall inure to the hen fit of and pass with said property, and each and every patc 1 thereof, and shall apply to and bind the successors in interes t and any owner thereof; Now, therefore, Declarant hereby declares that the real property described in and referred to in Article I hereof is and shall be held transferred' sold and conveyed subject to the Conditions, rWrictions, eaiements,,liens and charges hereinafter set fOrth. Definition of T rms Building Site shall mean any lot, or portion thereof, or any two or more contiguous iota or 6 parcel of land of record and in a single Ownership and upon which a dwelling or building may be erected in conformance with the requirements of these Covenantal. AssOciation shall refer tO the Ashbrook Farms Property Owners AttOciation. ReSidential Lot shall refer to those lots on Which Single-family or'duPlex reaidential housing is planned to be built. .0Omon Ptopetty• bholl toter to that property dea0.0bed in tit:41)5ft. 1:0•attedhed hereto 4n0 incorporated herein, which is intended -to bo.devotdd exelugivoly to oDeti. SPSte Otte., . . properties Shall tit16t to all Property describe .o• txhibit 2. • APTICLE .• ProPvt.Y$ubJeot.to thlo The teol propetty which fe0 and $holl 604 heid nd sholl • PAdt, OtOtAi44T;(514' 6P: ObVg0ANTS:i tbMbITI.ONS A$OttId410Mt • 4488H/DbR/040/01105/01,4$......, MAR X I --SI 1 MO t..4 1 1 p ' E S r " ' 1 2 ORE C � 2 4 2 . 4 4 4 P be conveyed, transferred and sold subject to the conditions, restrictions, covenants, reservations, casements, liens and . charges with respect to the various portions thereof set forth in the various articles of this Declaration is located in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon, and is more Particularly described in Exhibit 2, attached hereto and incorporated herein, and is referred to herein as the "Properties ". No deemed eub�ccttcthis�e��,ra that described shove shall be property p r other Declaration, unless and until specifically made subject thereto. Declarant has no immediate plan to expand the Properties. The Declarant may, from time to titme, without a vote of the Association or approval of the City of Tigard, Oregon, and without limitation as to number of lots or common property, subject additional real property to the conditions, restrictions, covenants, reservations, liens and charges herein set forth by aApropriate reference hereto: If additional property is added to this Planned community, it shall be subject to this Declaration and its owners shall be mer,'nbers of the Association. The expenses related to the Common Property and other common expenses, and votes in the Association, shall be allocated to the new property 8Y-laws. p Io additional the formula set forth in the Association's in proportion property a to this Declaration after the start pof anysf iscalsyear, the additional property shall be assessed a r beginning on the date eased e�cpensese pro rata, for the, year g ate an addendum to this Declaration is recorded making the additional property subject to this Declaration. ARTICLE. II •Genera l Purpose ose of Conditions The real ry es:t� d�a i�, p �' scr3.hed. an i�,rt�,cla� 1 hereof id sect$ t0 the c c1►s, co�idat�.can�c, h d reservations . la, n . E� s and c�, resit ct�o ovonm�,a barges hereby • declared to insure the w" -. p P ..p.. ... _.� p .. ..f ��ia E►u� 1��n .t��,ts�stoa pro rotate dev4l.o moat and �.en roverttent o , . habitat; g � protect open.. space, wetl,ande and to protect the ownors of Dus1ding Sites against mach improper use of sur g .. vii 11 c�epreci. ate the va 1ne of their pro�iert. , building as if p.. e, so far as practicable, the natural. toy des �. ned property: . , . _ .. � .� _ _ . � ... y ofotherpropert , Y ug . p pp pt a�ecitetgsuotura sins ea. e$ and an... structures • built. t the erection of poorly � � � _ l.t of n harrnoni.ous color schemes, to ioaure the hi hest and �. mp .per or unsuitable materials, to obtain development .of "" b1., nt " of the as propert 9 host develo me appropriate the e�," , .'. .. homea and..buidih � dive iogsawi.thnappro riato buildthgnloc tiOn . Sites to prevent ha ,, had 9 anon ran Dui.l.di p of Bullclln Sites to secure a_nd mai:ntai moniou® improved ent p ardandnipnrh�r�� g .Sit ,..0t4 �►nd ade� uate f � per settaacks fr d. "." ..p -. geriersl to r � $ tz`I.iCttir`es, aril in q tee s coca between s bvide ads ut ely. fora high type and quality of ?AGE 2' i DCCLARM Io11 CAP CDVIENWL CONDITIONS ADD gESTilICfiION 446 ®H /bbt,'sA11 Q /Qs /9i4 I ax; 1 .ta.• :��tL. �a y�..v MAR 7 1 '3 1 MON 1 1 ZZ ORE I3.0 oZ2 294 4 P EIS improvement on the property, and thereby to enhance the values of investments made by purchasers of Building Sites. ARTICLE 11I Covenants, conditions and Restrictions A. ontrei. No building shall be erected, placed, altered or substantially repaired on any premises in the planned community until the building planso speci.f ieat ens and plot plan showing the location of such building have been approved in writing as to conformity and harmony of external design with existing structures in the development, and as to location of the building with respect to topography and finished ground elevation, by an architectural committee selected pursuant to the By-laws of the Association, or by ' Le presentative designated by a majority of the committee. Until the Declarant turns members he s over cc�ntro�, of the Association, Declarant shall have all duties and responsibilities of the committee. In the event of death or resignation of any member of the committee, the remaining member or members shall have full authority to approve or disapprove such design and location, or to designate a representative with like authority. In the event the committee, or its designated representative, fails to approve or disapprove a proposed design and location within 30 days after plans and specifications have been submitted to it, such approval l wi l l not be required and this Covenant will be deemed to have been fully cornpiied with. Neither the members of such committee, nor its designated representative shall be 9 p.. services performed pursuant to tk�istcovenant�ybutmmpensatio n for may obtain reimbursement of their actual, e> pensee . B. Neillikeee, No noxious or offensive trade or activity shall be carried on upon any Lot or Common property or ho area described in Etibit 2, nor shall anything be one thereon which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to the planned community. C. i Eta trailer, basement tent, shack, ga�.tibar� ��a�.�. � ... garage, or er o,itbui lding other than guest by and serVants quarters erected on a Building Site coveter i by temporarily Covenanermshall at any time be Used for habitation p y permanently, ncr shall any of a temporary character be used for human habitation easement Y ails s are Provided, D. pr . Where no Y an s hereby `eserveci, over the tear and aide five feet of eaoti 8Uilding Site for utility installatjbn and maintenance. E. a Wall, hedge, �{ � w ��, No �enoe j or �11�� .plarit�.�lg oh Y g g permitted beyond the minimum bu�tic�i;n setbac�sel,lneles�a h to extend boyon .... ..... b1is ed herein except updn approval by PAdt . b8dtA'AA►7`_..QI � OF COVO a r dONDYTIOMS Aft RHOtAIOTZaS limmalmommeesemmumalme the architectural committee as provided in Section B of this Article. F. Minina.and,,E=Amation. Oil drilling, oil development operation, refining, mining operations of any kind, or quarrying shall not be permitted upon or in any of the Building Sites in the Exhibit 2 property nor shall oil wells, tanks, tunnels, imineral excavations or shafts be permitted upon or in any of the Building Sites covered by these Covenants. G. kramaxtyQuaexzAszaaLatista. There shall be created by Declarant an association to be known as the,Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Assoc The owner(s) of each Building Site to which these covenants apply shall become a Member of the Association and shall have rights, entitlements and obligation as set forth in this Declaration 'and in the Association's By-laws, which shall include formation of an ArchiteCtural ,Committee and the duty to pay assessments for maintenance and upkeep of the Common Property. Voting rights of owners and a maintenance assessment formula shall be governed by the By-laws of the Association. The Association shall have the right to assess and lien property pursuant to ORS 94.704 through 94.728. The Association shall be created by Declarant on or before the first conveyance of a lot or Building Site, H. Substistis. No Lot shall be partitioned o subdivided after initial conveyance without the express written consent of Declarant or the Architectural Committee, and appropriate governmental authorities. X. DUration of Coveunta, These Covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all owners of Exhibit 2 Property and all persons claiming under them until January 1, 2016, at which time the Covenants shall be automatically extended for successive periods of 25 years, unless by a vOte of Seventy-five percent (75%) of the shares In the Association entitled to vote, it is agreed to dissolve these covenants in whole or in part, These Covenants may be amended at any time by Obtaining a written consent or affirmative vote of seventy-five percent (75%) of the shares of the Association entitled to vote; Provied, however, that no amendMent or dissolution shall be Made tO any portion of these Covenants without prior written consent of the City of Tigard, Oregon. d. ylolatiosljskjCatenants, te an owner of any Exhibit 2 proPerty, or any Of them, or their heirs or asSigns Shall Violate or atteMpt to violate any of the covenant herein, it Shall be lawful for any other perton or perSonS owning any of the Properties or the Association in its own hame, or the City of i 4 A Tigard, Oregon, to prosecUte an proceedings at law or in eiVitY against the person or perSons violating or attempting to violate any such coVedant, and either to en3oin such Violation or recover damages, des or other relief for such violation. PAGS. 4 bgCLAAAt100• 60 COVENANTS, CONDiTIO44 AND AglItiT1600-,0;1011 • 44881iPb14/0Ad/OJi0,e0.1.91. . • , . 04. tReNrr. r1% nht irCt coNNgc T I oN I D MAIR71 1—'911 MON 11 :54 ORIEQC SO32432944 K. DAPlareet_Impeemgmente. Declarant doe e not agree to build any improvement, except as may be required by the City of Tigard, Oregon, and does not hereby limit Declarant's rights to add improvements which are not described in this Declaration. L. DIXIMMere...01__Centrel. Declarant shall have full control over all votes of the AssociatiOn until turnover of control to the Association. A turnover meeting shall be called no later than 120 days after lots representing aeventY-five percent (75%) of the votes have been conveyed to a party or Parties other than Declarant. Declarant may call the turnover meeting any time time prior to seventy-five percent (75%) conveyance. Cpampn EIPPAKIX. The Common Property will be °wiled by the Association or may b dedicated to the City of Ti. Oregon or other governmental entity. The deed to the Common Property will be conveyed to the Association or dedicated by Declarant on or befOre the date of the Turnover Meeting. The Common Property shall be reserved and used only as open space, except as may be permitted by the City of Tigard, Oregon and approved by the Declarant or, after tuenover, by thesAsSociation. N. AABildeationehlevare. The Association shall have the powers sPecified by ORS 94.630, as amended from time to time, Unless otherwise provided in this Declaration or in the Association By-laws. 0. RiegAIMRACOnInt. A reserve account shall be eestablished by Declarant pursuent to ORS 94.595; thereafter, the stablished shall be responsible for administering the account Purtuant to that statute. P. MAatenkafela_And_RePair of CoMM0n Pxopetty. The AssOciation has the power and duty to maintain and repair the Common Property in accordance with city, state and federal requirements and to assess liens if costs ate not paid in a reasonable time. The City of Tigard, Oregon may issue citations fOr the failure of owners or the Associetioh to maintain or repair the Common Propery. If after notice to the Assodiation and all owners, the problem cited is not remedied in a reasonable time, the City of TiOard may undertake the necessary repair or maintenance and oharge the owners or Association for the teasonable cotts thereof, and if the cherge 1S not paid in a reasonable time, the City shall have limas against the Exhibit 2 Property in the amoUnt of the charges. Such iien0 shall be prorated based,upon the number of Votes Of each owner. Any owner Paying in exceS8 Of his/her pro rata share of expenses shall have right o contribu tion against (Abet ownera paying less than their pro rata shate, plus ceete and teasoheble attorneys feee incurred ih Onfordihg Stich tight, i6kot t, ttaktAtRiN 00 dot Ars, 6501N4 ANb RigTgltTIONg • 44.6614,014/$WWW.014 • .i1k■ M A R 1 1 - 1 M 0 N 1 1 S oFeEttc 50 3 '4 2 44 P _ 0 0 Qo 1LQt.i la. The owner or owners of a Residential Lot shall have one vote per lot. The Owner or owra, ?rs of an undeveloped Commercial Lot or Multi- Family Lot L'hall have one vote per 7,000 square feet in such lot rounded to the closest 7,000 square foot increment but in no case less thin one vote. The owner or owners of a developed Commercial Lot or Multi- Family Lot shall have one vote per 2,000 square feet of apartment, office or other commercial space, except that the hotel or motel space shall have one vote per five (5) units of hotel ,)r motel space. For purposes of this section, "developed" shall mean the earlier of substantial, completion or occupancy, whether Full or partial, of a commercial, hotel or motel structure. When+ two or more owners own interests in a single lot or building site, the votes allocable to such lot or building site shall be voted as such owners may determine amongst themselves • provided, however, that not more than the votes allocated to each lot or b�uildn site shall be voted by such collective owners. R. Qmmdnt Fro'j, Any common profit of the AssociatioA. shall, be distributed in accordance with the prorated voting rights of members as described in Section Q. 8. v m'rope=d The Association may sell, convey or subject to a security interest any portion of p the o� the votes of the vote of sixty percent (*;0�) Common Property uhe Aan affirmative v, Association. No such sale, conveyance t r security interest shall change the herein restri.ctiohs on me of the Common grbperty. T. 't may . �.s awa � o f �.r w any real property described in Exhibit 2, except Common wropAra.. from Qi� Prop Arty, g�ecord�.ns of _ ¢. e date of 9 's Declarations provided however, r to on rein . the plan of withdraws. provision Shall be made in th that a F l to pay eacpcnses for maI.ntenance and upkeep of the Common Property consitteht with a the formula set forth in the Astoc`mtxon 's By-laws. The procedure to withdraw property from the requirements of the Declaration and By-laws of the Association shall requite the Declarant to Make such withdrawal in writing to the Association. � record a written effecting the �.tten docu�ne�t me Declarant shall of the property ha l also sec i F . Washington County, �►regon p ty w' t1� the ashx Recorder's Off tee. if property is withdrawn from m the pl€�nned off:' ..le. ►mun1ty the total number of votes tha11 be reduced by the by the withdrawn Y e F property. The obmmou e� arses t�i,ll:e�enteci, be assessed Fro rata to each renna�.n�.nc o by g..._. each property the percentage of the total Property �alciil;ats_in 'sac �► t to retnaan3n by using the g ... formula: property's 0 operty's vote by the total of all rem: a�,riingiv�.+� votes Votes shall be calculated property II . � � as set forth an Article III, Section Q of this Declaration. i..of.. Proper As of the date of this Declaration, k the, the number of lots or `its nor the allowed AGi iE A gAT x ON 00 cCVown 6, tONbYTI4S A0 b RESZtt OTI GN S 4088 /bbillS4d/'0/OS %0 , = 1 uses Of Exhibit 2 Property, except the Common Property, have been finally determined. Declarant estimates that the Property will be divided into six residential lots and six commercial lots. Exhibit 2 Properties zoned for residential, commercial or other use may be redesignated and subdivided by Declarant prior , to sale of lots pursuant to subdivision and/or planned community regulations of the City„ Tigard, Oregon. V. C011iAMMiiI-ALSWLYI-mantl. Invalidation of any one of these Covenants or any part thereof by judgments or court order shall not affect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. vote A .w . This Declaration may be�yamended byp a vote or agreement of seventy -five percent (75%) of the total votes described in Article III, Section Q of this Declaration. X. .o 'nl etta.e If any provision of this Declaration is breached and suit to enforce the provision is filed, the prevailing party may obtain reasonable attorney fees at trial or on appeal. WHEREFORE, Declarants hereby set their hands this _./4.„ day of ...__y 19;...M.,. STATE OF OREGON County of This instrument was subscsibe • d or acknowledged before one 11991 by Eugene Davis, NOTARY PUDLiC FOR OREGON My CoMmissio a Expire$ STATE OF OREGON County cif This instrument was suoactibed or acknooledg sd • on . 1091 by Vivian N. Davis NOTARY AR PUBLIC FOR OREGON'. icy Commission Expires:___„ �'A E I. b]ECL 1 dATtON OF COV0Ailt , COZ4DI INNS AND RE6TfICT10JS' ' MAR-119-91 MON 11 oRmer.c �322 94 P. 0 1 JEFF H, BACHRACH CHARLES L CORRIGAN* STEPHEN P. CREW CHARLES M. GREF,PF WILLIAM A. MONAHAN NANCY B. MURRAY MARK P. 01X)NNELL MINIS M. PA77ER5ON TIMOTHY V. RAMIS SHEILA C. RIDGWAY* WILLIAM J. STAINAICER AdallttOd tits Fred* 1:1 Stagg at VieihInglan O'DONNELL, RAMIS, CREW & CORRIGAN AITORNEYS AT LAW UALTLW & witidwr BUILDING 1717 N.W. Hoyt Street Pordand, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222-4402 PAX; (503) 243-2944 OIXASIREPWO PORILANCOPPICS MILX-ZEMSIMIgli..gniMBliEla DATE: March 11, 1991 CLIENT NO.: 90024-04 TO Jerry Offer City of Tigard FAX #: 684-7297 Phone 0: 639.64171 FROM: Nancy B Murray OiDONNtLL, RAMIS, CREW & CoRRIGAN 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 FAX # (503) 243-2944 COVENT: o' CLACKAMAs COUNTY OFFICE 161 N. Grant, Suite 202 Canby, Oregon 97013 (503) 266.1149 JAMES M. COLEMAN 2ENNE17r1 NI, ELLIOTT GARY M. GEORGEPP ROBERT J. MoGAUGHEY* oda, catifto ..,23 PAGES TO FOLLOW, EXCLUDING COVER SHEET. F YOU DO tible RECEIVE ALL 6F Tii8 PAGES, PLEASE CALL THE UNDERSIGNED AT (s03) 222-4402 IMEDIATELY. THANK YOU. SIGNED: Joyce ai Schaefer 14146,‘„ to* frt4 Ot teit; dk oft. eoPfrkti4,L.:, vitm,ext, A402,4 arm 7 BY -LAWS OF ASHBROOR FARMS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION ARTICLE I NAME AND LOCAT I ON The name of the organization is Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association, hereinafter referred to as the "Association". The Association may be incorporated by Declarant or upon a majority vote of the Board of Directors. The Principal office of thY Association shall be located at 13095 SW Henry, Beaverton, Oregon 97005, but meetings of members and director, may be held at such places within the State of Oregon,`' County of Washington, as may be designated by the Board of Directors ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS Section ,1. "Association" shall mean and refer to the Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association, its successors and assigns. Section 2. "Properties" er to that shall mean and refer read, property described in Exhibit 2 of the Declaration ,.. of Covenants, Conditions and RRestrich additions thereto as tions of Ashbrook Farms, may dated _ hereafter be brought: rwithin� the jurisdiction of the Association. Section " shall mean all real 3 . " Common Are a property owned by Declarant or the Association for the comnon use and enjoyment of the Owners and specifically described an Exhibit 1 of the Declaration. Section 4. "Lot° of "Building land " shall on mean and r lot or parcel of 1�te��, ariall any refer t�o any sea atep pp. the subdivision plat rna of the Properties except for the Common Ar =a Section 5 "Resi+1ent�za1 Lot`" Shall .1 meth a lot on which is conStrutted or planned a single- family of d0p1.ex. •residence. gection G LitA9 shah: mean a ak on • whioh are 00nstructed or p fan.ned tp.Attont nor e than two chits pet lot. r " r o o U On • . Camnterc�.a.� Lot' Ertel hoan a 1 section 7 which ie constructed of planned ony of tel, mote, • othor tOMMOrcia1 too, PAGE 1» •1 4At4 4 4IC /DOH /SAll03 /05/'91 $ • - . "1'1: M A R - 1 1 - 9 1 M IA 12 : 0 9 O R E C 50242944 P . 06 Section 8. "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, o the fee simple title to any Lot or Building Site which is a part of the Properties, including contract sellers, but excluding those having such interest merely as security for the perforMance of an obligation. Section 9. "Declarant" shall mean and refer to Eugentt and Vivian M. Davis, and their successors and assigns if such succestors or asSigns should acquire more than one undeveloped Lot or Building Site from the Declarant for the purpose of development. Section 10. "Declaration" shall mean and refer to the Dec*aration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Ashbrook Farms, a Planned community, applicable to the PropertieS recorded in the Office of the Recorder of Washington County, Oregon for the Properties. Section 11. "Member" shall mean and refer to those Declaration. pettons entitled to Association membership as provided in thellYN ARTICLE III MEMBERS section 1. membership. All Owners of any Properties subject to the Declaration shall be MemberS of the Association. Section 2. Annual Meetings. The first annual meeting of the MeMbers shall be held within one year from the date of formation of the Association, and the Association shall hold at least one meeting ahnUally thereafter at a time and place determined bycthe Board of DirectorS. Section 3. Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Members may be Called at any tiMe by the presideht of the Board of DireCtOrs or by the Board of Directors, or upon written request of the Members who are entitled to vote twenty-five Percent (25%) of all of the shares of the Association. Section 4, Notice of MeetingS. Written note of each meeting of the Members Shall be given by the addretary or person authOrized to call the meeting by Mailing a copy of such notice, oStage prepaidi at least 10 days before such meeting to each MeMber entitled to vOtei addrested to the Member's addrest last appearing on the books of the Association, or ul)Plied by such Member to the Atsociation for the purpose of notice. Sudh notice shall specify the place' day and hour of the meeting and the items on the agenda. PACE 2 tiZ,tAW' iit$01/WHAMIOV"titit. wastalesionsinek P. • MA-1 1-91 MON 12 :09 ORE&C 032 4S29 4 4 P 07 Section 5. Quorum. The presence at the meeting of Members or proxies entitled to cast twenty percent (20%) of the votes shall constitute a quorum for any action except as otherwise provided in the Articles of Incorporation (if the Association is incorporated), the Declaration, or these By-Laws. If, however, such quorum shall not be present or rePresented at any meeting, the Members entitled to vote shall have power to adjourn the meeting from time to time, without notice other than announcement at the meeting, until a quorum as aforesaid shall be present or be represented. Section 6. Promies. At all meetings of Members, each Member may vote in person or by proxy. All proxies shall be in writing and filed with the secretary. Every Proxy shall be revocable only upon actual notice of revocation to the person presiding over a meeting of the association. Each proxy Shall automatically cease upon Conveyance by the Member of his/her Lot. A proxy 'Shall terminate one year after its date unless the proxy specifies a shorter term. Section 7. Voting. The owner or owners of a Residential Lot shall have one vote per lot. The owner or owners of an undeveloped COmmercial Lot or Multr-Family Lot shall have one vote per 7,000 square feet in such lot rounded to the closest 7,000 square foot increi6ent but in no case less than one vOte. The Owner Or owners of a developed Commercial Lot or Multi-FamilY Lot shall have one vote per 2,000 square feet of aPartMent, office or other commercial space, exCept that the owner or Owners of a deVeloped Commercial Lot developed with hotel or motel space shall have one vote per five (5) units of hOtel or Motel spa00. For purposes of this Section, "developed" shall mean the earlier of substantial completion or oCduPancY, whether full or partial, of a commerCial, hotel or Motel structure, Where two or more owners own interests in a single lot or bnilding site, the votes allocable to Such lot or building site shall be Voted as Mich owners may deterMine among allocated d to eaCh lot or building site shall be voted by such collectiVe owners, • • ARTICLE IV BOARD OF biOtd10148: section 1. Outtibbit. Af turnover b Declarant, 35 • pbVide a. thdbb01,at'atib04 t'...hd'.6efai.ttti..0t. the Atittod1atiO4 ...011.0'.:11 be managed by a bottil of five (6) chrectots who ou6t be Memet5 . ot the '),..■Otbdiation r fi officer t ditedtbt be a M6ffibet be thd-A$tbdiOtititi Section 14 Term be Ofeidej At the. first hilhoot tlieletioi the. Meobeto $h011,.. elett totti bit'eotot6. for a tetil . tot ohe ye0t and three dite6toto: for A. ttm. Ot two Yeats bOd three • , ' ?AG t . .4$64141004/S'AJA3/05/01..5: , ,,„ "•■•■■ ' M A IR — 1 1 — 9 1 MON 1 2 1 0 ORE ratIC Se Z2 4 Z29 44 P . 08 • 4 directors for a term of three Years. At each annual meeting thereafter the Members shall elect two or three directors for a term of two years.. Section 3, Removal. Any director may be removed from the Board, with or without cause, by a majority vote of Association. In the event of death, resignation or removal of a director, hia or her successor shall be selected by the remaining Members of the Board and shall serve for the unexpired term of hi0 or her predecessor. Section 4, Compensation. No director shall receive compensation for any service rendered to the Association. However, any director may be reimbursed for actual expenses incurred in the performance of duties, Section 5. Action Taken Without a Meeting. The directors shall have the right to take any action in the absence of a meeting which they could take at a meeting by obtaining the written approval of all the directors. Any action so approved shall have the same effect as though taken at a meeting of the directors. Section 6. Open Meetings. All meetings of the Board of DireCtors shall be open to any Member of the Association. ARTICLE V ELECTION OF DIRECTORS Section 1. Election. Election to the Board of Directors Shall be by secret written ballot. At such election, the Member S or their proxies may cast, in respect to each vacancyi as many votes as they are entitled to exercise under the provisions of these By,-Laws. The PeraonS receiving the largest number of votes shall be elected, Cumulative voting is not permitted, Merlat VI VinTINdg OP DIRECTOR iedtii54l Regular Meetiovo, meetings 6e the 00.6t4 of atootott §11411 be h610 mAttetly to the. 4itectotio.i totTh . lace ot16'. 1)oot bg•••moy be firmed ktom• to time by ttolutioh of the 0o6t64 The toatd may dispobse with • tegolat meeting o upOti aoityv;te of aHtluotutbi. igbotioh 2 • kiepial Meetings tpedA01„.meeti1i9S tj.E the Board of OreCtora. Shall be held when •called by tho. • otoidetit of or by any two directors tftdt tot leso han 4hree (3) ddyt., written notic e to. 06th attedtoti or deliver ed: to the dikeotot#t . last kbowti.addletd,• • PAd tilt-tAWt • • . iist4WONAAd10/(01§1''t. .>n _.... ;t, e. ;, -.- € v . : a. •..:.. . _ pr F4 ,.,s. .s., � - _ - .f-:�, .. . � B . -c- , - :..,P ; _ • r-. s " , .. s. -y. .r,_.. _. •_• . S - t ..._ ms. ? • s • -•y'- . -w- _•T' =_ . :4 *:i� ;', � . fi. i r:s 4 Y. . �tF � � 4s ya - _�.• � 'F S -i x C 1 ._ . _ R .. . s _s . _ _ ~E , _ .. r ,: . _, . -_":- -.. ... : F t a a.- i!-'7.:::7-:;.''.17... „ t L7 :T. . ,.• i Li- S_ . J;. .i :L' t _ �O • .1 'C :- C ...G •.p - : -i. vro; ° ';-- .t. `._. ' - -. e _. t.' _ . k._ . : - : . . -- - s. ...47 .. -.'a; . _ r . .. w r• .l f _ s Yr . . y , x. _ _-` ... '. f..r.:s_, . i . _ . _ . - �.. t r t " :i 41• .",5. i' .-t- C _ ice•• . 1 s f f - 0f „ L i' , i - x -- . . w t3 f - _ . '. S-` 1., £ _- . _- r r - ..s i t _..�-.• . «r" .rs .. .... •F�.S.}. -C .7 ; S { t � r 2 t - :2�. ztfis > z �' - t. -... - r. - - . -.. 4: . _, - _ .. U. - ;, xi - - _ `: - .. -ce s ,; .. :..- :.. a, • MAR- 1 1-91 MON 12 : 1 1 OREMC S 032 4Z294 4 P Section 3. Emergency Meetings. Emergency meetinga may be held without notice. The reasoh(s) for the emergency shall be stated in the minutes of the meeting. Emergency meetings of the Board may be conducted by telephone communications. Section 4. Quorum. The number of directors cohstituting a quorum for the transaction of business shall be three 0). Every act or decision by a majority of the directors present at a duly lied meeting at which a quorum is present shall be regarded as the act of the Board. 4 SectiOn 5. Notice. For other than emergency 4 meeting, notice of the Board of Director's meetings shall be posted at a place or place on the property at least three days prior to the meeting or notice shall be provided by a method otherwise reasonablY Calculated to inform lot owners of such meetings. ARTICLE VII POWERS AND DUTIES OF THV BOARD O DIRECTORS Section 1. Powers. The Board of Director shall have power to (a) Adopt and publish rules and regulation governing the use of the Common Area, facilities, and other commonly used property, and the personal conduct of the Members and their guests thereon, and to establish penalties for the infractioh thereof; (b) Suspend the voting rights and right to use of the common area of a Member during ahy period in which such Member shall be in default ih the payment of any assessment levied by the ASsociation. Sudh rights may also be suspended after notice and hearing, fOr a period not to exceed 60 days for infraction of published tOles and regulations; (c) Exercise all powers, duties and authority vested in or delegated .to the Board and not reserved to the membership by other provisions of these By-Laws, the Articles of Incorporation (if the ASSOciation is incorporated) or the Declaratien) (dY bed16t6 the offiodi of a member o th Bo rd of DredtorS tO be .vaotitit th he even t such member .sii011. be .000eot titt5M thtee (2). oohtdootivo regular meetings of the bottil �f pleootot:g4 Ano. • (0) • tmOloY• a Okti(jet, indePehdeht COhttadtOrt, or , . employees 66. thoyatoM necesary, 0d to pt66otibitt thbit tomPhotitioti b14 duties, PAU. $4.• • • • 06414/bbit/tA4104/0/01-4t. MAR-1 1 - 9 1 moil 1 2 : 1 2 oREeic SO32432944 P. IG Section 2. Duties. It shall be the duty of the Board of Directors to (a) Cause to be kept a complete record of all the acts and affairs of the Association and to present a statement thereof to the Members at the annual meeting of the Members, or at any special meeting when such statement is requested in writing by wners holding twenty-five percent (25%) of the votes of the Association; (b) Supervise all officers, agents and employees of the Association, and see that their duties are properly performed; (c) Prepare an annual budget of anticipated common area expenses; (d) Fix the amount of the annual assessment ft all common expenses related to the CoMmOn Area and other comaionly used property against each Lot at least thirty (30) days in advance of each annual.atsessment period; (e) Send written notice of each assessment to every Owner subject thereto at least thirty (30) days in advance of each annual assessment period; (f) Foreclose the lien against any property for which assessments are not paid within thirty (30) days after due date or bring an action at law against the Owner personally obligated to pay the same; (g) ISSUe, or cause an appropriate officer to issUe, upon demand by any perSon, a certificate setting forth whether or not any assessment has been paid. A reasonable charge may be Made by the Board for the issuance of such certificates. If a certificate states an assessment has been paid, such certificate shall be conclusive evidenCe of such Payment; (h) Procure and maintain adeqUate liability and hazard insurance on property Owned by the AsSOCiation or for which the Assodiation is reSponsible; (I) CaUse all Officers or employees having fiscal responsibilities to be bonded, as it may deeM apprOpriate; (1 ) Cause the CoMMon Area to be maintained in accordance with city, State and federal requirementsi The board tht41 provide fo maintenance of the common Property by review1110 an maintenance required on the Coalmen Property at least seMiannually. If the beard adopts a resolution aOthorizing maintenande, it hall se inform the treasurer who 01E111 pa Y any ihvoiced expenses froM the AsSoCiation's fuhdt; PAGE 6 . 05414/6MAA4/0/614 MR- 1 1 - 9 1 MON 1 2 : 1 2 ORE&C S 0 "3 2 4 2 .9 4 4 (k) Cause the exterior of dwellings and other structures to be maintained; P 11 (1) Maintain insurance as required pursuant to ORS 94.675 or other applicable statute; Pa) Prepare and distribute the annual financial statements required by ORS 94.670 and other applicable statutes; (n) Enforce compliance with these BY-Laws and the Declaration; (o) File the necessary tax returns for the Association; and (p) Adopt administrative rules and regulations by resolUtion. ARTICLE VIII OFFICERS AND THEIR DUTIES Section 1. Enumeration Of Offices. The officers of the Association shall be a president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer, Who shall at all times be Members of the Board of Directors, and sUch her officers as the Board may from tiffie to time by resolution create. Section 2. Election of Officers. The election of officers shall take place et the first meeting Of the Board of Directors f011owing • each annual meeting of the Members. Section 3 Term. The officers of the Association shall be elected annUally by the Board and each shall hold office for One (1) Year or until their sUccessors are elected/ whithever it later, unleSs the officer than. Sooner resign, or hall be removed/ or Otherwise disqualified to serve. Section 4. Special Appointments. The Board may elect such other officexa as the affairs of the Association may reqUire each of Whom shall held office for such period, have such authority, and perform such duties as the Board may, from ti Me to time, determine. SectiOn 5. Resignation and Removal, Any officer may be removed from office with or withoUt cause by the Board. Any officer may resign at any time by giving written notice to the Boar& the president or the tedtetary. Such retignation shall take effect on the date of receipt of euch notice or at any later tiMe specified therein, and Unless other9ise specified therein; the addeptande of Such resignation Shall not be nedesSary to Make it effedtiVe. PAGE 7 4S$4144)0V1010/0/01..t.• ft t MAR- 1 1 -9 1 MOAN 1 2. 13 ORE C SS 132432944 P 1 2 Section 6. Vacancies. A vacancy in any office may be filled by appointment by the Board. The officer appointed to such vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the term of the officer replaced. Section 7. Multiple Offices. The offices of secretary and treasurer may be held by the same person. No person shall simultaneously hold more than one of the other offices except in the case of special offices created pursuant to Section 4 of this Article. Section B. Duties. The duties of the officers are as follows (a) The president shall preside at all meetings of the Association and Board of Directors; shall see that orders and resolutions of the Association and Board are carried out; shall sign all leases, mortgages, deeds and other written instruments and shall co- -sign all checks and promissory notes. stead of (b) be president president shal]. act in the place and The d iriabilit P ent in the event of absence, y or refusal to act,. and shall, exercise and discharge such other duties as may be required by the Board. (o) The secretary shall record the votes and keep the minutes of 611 meetings and proceedings of tae Board and of the Members; serve notice of meetings of the Board and of the Neribers, keep appropriate current records shawsn g the Members and directors of the Association together with their addresse s, an d shall perfotM such other dutie s as ie ixre by the Board. (d) The treasurer shall receive and deposit in appropriate bank accounts all monies of the Association and a shec rs, ailydisburse such funds asxgr� directed by resolution of the Board . .. checks and promissory notes of the Association; keep proper kooks of acccuht; Gauge an annual nual audit of the Assadiation books to be made by a public accountant at the completion of each fiscal ear; arid pre are the ahnual budget and a statement of income and expenditures to be presented to the membership at its regular annual meeting, and deliver a copy to each of the members. • ARTICtE•IX TW8XTIONALi AbVISORY CoMMTTTEB The fie ciarant shale, forma transitions advisory o ii imitt :e as ref itolarant or 4 6Oher s amended. The co tiittee $half, consist o4u reel by 6g8 .04�04) as cent sair� twig owners g, selected by the non=- Deotottnt owners, The non - .Declarant ov�ners shad elect their reptese tativea xh aodordance w .th their doting rights set forth in Article III, Sectio• 1 cif these 8ybaws PACE ti BY= -LAWS 4 5$414/bb /W/OA 0 11: P�j LEGIBILITY STRIP .t�:.�t 4 � A t• Y..V:�t�W.�: L.45 t M1 Y.i MAR- 1 1-9 1 MON 12 a 1 4 oREExC 503243 944 P r 13 ARTICLE x COITTEES The Board of Directors shall appoint an Architectural Control Committee, as described in the Declaration, or may designate itself as the Architectural Control Committee. In addition, the Board of Directors shall appoint other committees as deemed appropriate in carrying out its purpose. ARTICLE X3 BOOKS AND RECORDS The books, records and papers of the Association shall at all times, during reasonable business hours, be subject to inspection by any Member, The Declaration, the Articles of Incorporation (if the Association is incorporated) and the By -Lawns of the Association shall be available for inspection by any Mmber at the principal office of the Association, where copies may be purchased) at cost. ARTICLE III ASSESSMENTS As provided in the Declaration, each Member is obligated etto pay to the Association annual and spedial o s which shall be secured by a continuing lien upon the property against which the assessment is made. The amount a particular s required to p X shall be calculated by dividing he Member's total number of votes (as determined by the formula set forth in Article III, Section 7) by the total number of voteS held by all MembeiS at the time of assessment. The Member's assessnent shall equal such percentage multiplied by the total assessrnent for common expenses assessed to all Members, If new lots are added to thror�a ed as of the planned community, date of t r penses in that year shall be p the ex the recording of the detlaraEion addih,g the new property to the Planned community: The common e'lyenses assessed to each Member after the recording date shall be determined by dividing the Member 'S total numbet of votes (as determined by the formula Set forth ina�rticle 111, Section 7) by the total nth ber of voteS b held by all Members. ARTICLE XIII eMDERs ' O gi,fdATIC?Os All MenberS of tie Association shall l obtain liab .11ty insurance cov r �§, r n g. t a per e a e Navin li��. � o¢ not less than 500 a0o ocdurrence.. The insurance oo obtained d and. ma1n0ined by the aoard Of. Directors nay bevbrotght into 0o isUiranee bought by Owners of their Mortgagees. • n t z3. tr a 1 45-Adt 9 i' n4AWs 540 /f►tiI 1`SA /}0 1 /05/'4 15 a:i 0 ij MAR 1 1 --9 1 MON 1 2 C 1 Si ORE&C S�2432944 P 1 4 ARTICLE XIV AMENDMENTS Section 1. prior to turnover of control° these By -Laws may be amended by Declarant. After turnover of control, these By -Laws may be amended, at a regular or special' meeting of the Members, by a vote of a majority of a quorum of Members Presenevin person Or by proxy or by unanimous vote of the Board of Directors. Amendments shall not be effective until written approval, by the City of Tigard, Oregon is received. Section 2. In the case of any conflict between the Articles of Incorporation (if the Association is incorporated) and these By -Laws, the Articles shall control: and in the case of any conflict between the Declaration and these By-Laws, the Declaration shall control,, ARTI LE XV TURNOVER provided in the Declaration. Thy the Association shall occur as urnover o control over t e turnover meeting shall be called no later than 120 days after lots representing seventy -five ercent (75 %) of the votes have been conveyed to a party or parties other than Declarant. Declarant may 4811 the turnover �et9 � an y time prior to seventy-five nt Five pas� Sts) aonvey ance If Declarant does not cal l the meeting required by Chia Article XV, the transitional advisory committee or any b owner may call the turnover meeting and give notice as required by these By -Laws. Until the turnover meeting, Declarant shall exercise full control over the Association Notice of the turnover meeting shall be provided consistent with Article III, . Section 4 of these By-Laws, AnTIdLE Xv mISCELLANLOOS ,. first The fiscal �?az�uar year of the Association s hall begin o,n the y and end on the.3lst day of December of date of organization. ecept that the first fiscal year shall begin on the every year, sloe Ad! ' Y" =LASS 0 DDH/5 4/61 b5%91 5 " ,. • Mid7IR— 1 1-91 MON 1 2 .1: 1$ OREMC SO32432944 P . 1 S IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we, being Declarants of AshbroOk Parma a planned community, have hereunto set our hands this ----- day of , 19 and adopt the foregoing as the By-Laws of Ashbrook Farms Property Owners Association pursuant to ORS 94.6254 Eugene Davis __—_____ Vivian M. Davis 'STATE OF OREOON ) S County ) ...••■••••••••••••••••, This instrument was acknowledged before me on 1991 by Eugene Davit. STATE OF OREGON County of, ■ This inttrument was acknowledged before me on 1991 by Vivian M. Davis •••••■■•■••■••■•• NOTARY PUBLIC POR OREGON My Commission PAdO 11. nAM4b. ,r. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My CommiSsiOn Expires:__ 45641110bNi$0101/01014 • FIx bTra smittar Memo ho. of Pages TpdaYbDat ' -�. To 7672 OZ 4�j..,., , , e3 -1/ 9 / 7 r /1k 446,4y From Company CJ y F,-w. Company ,b Location /�/ (OF <G� , Location "Dept, Charge Fax # Telephone # co-- Fax # • Telephone /7, .r Comments /j/�/ }� ,tom, ` Amt ' ail ht (.5 /1 /4,4,- �//.04 1 Odglnal 0 Destroy El Return 0 p p _ 4 Dl�posifion. Call for IokU 771sc ZILO T 44,i vt?1 c12s5 /) D 2oN /iv6 A, PM t/ s Pkcv,GZT c� 00° soi4cr- *EA r Pcyo tr kuocd /7&,.5 ,°M-4) /045 "04 cov6 fJ t0i I AVE, 951h- AVE 92nd FAIRVIEW PLACE CONDOMINIUM - WASHINGTON 7 26 • in. !I!I NM 1 ■Il1■ ^ LEHMRrN H ® ■1 STREET 1`1 ®f� uii inri Imo _I rim. 9T ® REE 7,! ® plj ■ jIIIUWhM BORDERS X® ■u. HEM 26 25 35 36 • alias/ LW, BLVD. c S w._ WINDS° :1111 ■a mei i e ew. OAKOTA , ■ ®® a ..� .� - ®® 11• NoRTN STREET ® 11■ i ®,iPm ® ®.' ±' - e111 ®® • ig MI 111 NMI A OW 1441 41" November 26, 1990 Mr & Mrs Cliff Epier 8845 S.W. Spruce St. Tigard, Oregon 97223 eapectoit At GENE DAVIS, DVM 13095 S.W. HENRY BEAVERTON, OREGON 97005 (503) 646•6101 Dear Cliff and Kaye, This letter is to give you notice that you are trespassing on our property and request you vacate it tmediately. That includes pump, piping and other personal property. Beside, I doubt if yoU have a permit to pump out of the creek which is required by law. You've been here about one year and already your tttempting to take over more area and amahittes than you purchased. You have called the police on us, you voted to uphold a hearings officers order to dedicate a good portion of our fenced back yard providing an open area and making it difficult to keep livestock. You could have talked to me any time and didn't. YoU've changed the water level in our creek by trespassing on our property and added a board to our damn, Now, We may be forced to dedicate five acres or more when 3.285 is What We believe is indicate d . If the NP08 s recommendations are upheld we will no doubt have to put ih the ten houses along 89th and build one over the Wet area behind your house for oUrselves. That will necessitate a high fence along our north border. If you, however) can feel it personally worthWhile to vigoroUsly support Us at the public hearing and we get the grazing and open space issues solved in a Way that does hot impact our quality of life adversely, Vivian and i will be open to leasing to you the area of lot 1300, south of Ash Creek. Sincerely, Gene bavis, D,V,M. GD/jb w • ,1 • • Z, ' BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) for a Sensitive Lands Permit and) Variance on property zoned C -P ) and R -4.5, Gene and Vivian Davis,) applicants. The above- entitled matter came before the Hearings Officer at the regularly scheduled public hearings of February 26, March 26, April 30, 1987, and upon order of the City Council for the City of Tigard, an additional hearing was held on Thursday, June 25, 1987, for the sole purpose of hearing from surrounding property owners who did not receive notice of the earlier hearings due to errors in the notification list submitted by the applicants; all hearings held at the Tigard Civic Center Town Hall Room, in Tigard, Oregon, and No. SL 1-86/V 87 -02 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION The applicants request a Sensitive Lands Fe mit and Variance to allow commercial and residential development on the property. The primary issue raised at the 'subsequent hearing was the effect of the proposed development on property owners upstream alcng "Ash Brook ",also known as a drainage ditch which drains from the Fred Meyer Store area, under Hall Bivd., runs along properties on SW Thorn and 89th Street, and finally onto the proposed develop- merit area. The testimony was that during heavy rains, when Ash Creek f tooth, the water in the drainage ditch, aka Ash Brook, backs up and overflows, flooding property on Thorn and 89th Streets. Page 1 SL•1 -86/V 02 After listening to testimony and evidence, including testimony by Herb Curtis, Ken Beck, Jerry Hoffman, David Tozer, Krishna Culliman, Louise Beck, Jean Curtis and Tony Regillis, the Hearings Officer is convinced that there exists a problem with flooding of Ash Brook in that area, but that the proposed development will address the problem as earlier conditioned.. However, to clarify the Hearings Officer's recommendation as previously entered, that recommendation is amended as follows; continues to recommend approval the conditions found in the Hearings 1987, . which conditions of approval The Hearings Officer of SL 1 -86 /V 87 -02 subject to Officer's order dated May 18, are amended as follows: 1. No amendment. 2. No amendment. 3. The following language shall be 'added to condition i The applicant shall provide documentation from a certified County professional essonal en gi , to the Washington (count y De p artment of Land Use and Transportation and the 'Engineering Section of the City of Tigard which shows that this proposal will have a zero impact on flood elevations upstream along Ash Brook, and the applicant shall • make any improvements necessary from 89th Street downstream to •assure that there will'be. zero impact to upstream development as a result of this project, flowing. language shall be added. i 4: The fo � dried to condition �4 The applicant Shall grant to the public; on standard forms furnished by the Git" y, a permanent storm,drain easement which includes Pa e 2 - SL 1 -8E/ 87 -02 g� . °t�el .,f °`f, s�t°.��'f+sl � 'q'w, �di�4,�j1�, ��, ��1 '�i+�.,+ �•.j �.a C. ,' � ,Yv y'. "w �',.. all of Ash Brook (approximately top of bank to top of bank) . The executed storm drainage easement document, legal description and accompanying map, shall be subject to Engineering Section review and approval prior to recording. pp prior The following language shall be added to condition 45. The covenants, conditions and restrictions for the Owner's Association shall contain provisions which authorize the City of Tigard to issue citations for the Association's failure to maintain or repair the open space dedicated pursuant to this condition of approval. In the event the problem cited is not corrected within a reasonable time, then the covenants, conditions and restrictions shall provide a procedure whereby the City may affect the necessary repair or maintenance, bill the Owner's Association for the cost thereof, and in the event that bill is not paid within a reasonable time, the City shall have the authority to file liens against the owners of the property subject to the covenants, condi- tions and restrictions. As with the Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws and covenants, conditions and restrictions, the procedure for this citation/repair/lien process shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney for the City of Tigard. 6. No amendment. 7. No amendment 8. No amendment: DATEb this -nth day of aul y 1987: HEART S OFV10ER , Rry Page 3 SL 1 --86%V 87-0 EUGENE & VIVIAN. DAVIS :/ 4550 SW LOMBARD Beaverton, OR 97005 HERB & JEAN CURTIS 8850 SW THORN. TIGARD, OR 97223 KEN & L. BECK 8820 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 JERRY HOFMAN' 10950 SW 89th TIGARD OR 97223 DAVE TOZER 8770 SW THORN TIGARD OR 9722� 3 KRISTINA CULLINAN 8775 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 TONY RIGHELLIS DAVID EVANS & ASSOC. 2626 SW CORBETT PORTLAND OR 97201 Nancy Tracy 7310 SW Pine St Tigard, Or 97223 KEVIN LAPP' • 8310 SW PINE TIGARD OR 97223 1— i� �• .• v t Du- r � o V , 1 6`;'14.4 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard I,w and say: ,'being first duly sworn, on oath depose k/ City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Commission ------Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Bearing Notice /Notice of Decision) of which is Exhibit "A ") was mailed to each named attached list narked exhibit "B" on the said notice NOTICE OF DECICIO ' as appropriate bulietiin board on the l and deposited in the United States Mail 1987, postage prepaid. attached (Marked shown on the 198 _2* posted on an persons at the address day of q hereto attached, was day of on the p!, 1 day of S gnatur P•rson wh• /'os ed on Bulletin Board For peel on Only) day . ARCNA K HUNT" • NOTARY. .PUBLIC = OREUON My Cat mission f My GommissiOn Expires: o2 1i'/0021P• • FAIR VIEw I�LACE I:ONDO MINI UM ,yam, ...�, 11. 7. 26 wimpiwy ram ■rren :sn re,„,, STREET STREET NEM sN*OV. IN Stn1 1111111111/1 PP MP < s w w1NoSO NORTH' STREET k NGIiE,.St.> CO Uni ew/atom et Ceattc GENE DAVIS, DVM 13095 S.W. HENRY BEAVERTON, OREGON 97005 (503) 646-6101 NARRATIVE We are applying For an alteration of our Sensitive Lands Permit No. SL 1-86 as a result of various assumptions which did riot prove to be correct. The main assumption was that this entire Field marked in red was thought to be within one Foot below the 100 year flood plain. You Will note the David Evans draWings taken From Army Engineers aerial topography maps indicated most of this area at 160 feet. In reality, this area is 161 and 162 Feet and is our farm. We always planned, and still do plan to Farm it I thought we might have to revert to crops rather than livestock, thinking we were in the 100 year Flood plain. This area had a drainage problem Which has been corrected by Forming a lake. Therefore, we request the city to allow Us to dedicate the lake and '10 Foot perimeter as well as 4,0 Feet along the south border of Ash Creek as shown in the dotted areas denoted in the legend captioned Open Space Deed Restrictions on W.B. Wells Easement Survey. This would make the permit consistent With State and Federal requirements in this matter. We also request the area along the north border of Ash Creek adjacent to 9Sth Street and Highway 217 be re-graded and Filled according to the 26 Foot standard Which we already have in our ptesent permit. This area was under-Filled and We lost substantial commercial property, Re t Page 20 Application Checklist B) Site Development Plan Point 6) Storm drainage Facilities and analysis oF downstream conditions, The main problem with this whole drainage process is the lack of downstream attention, There is apprmamately 2 Feet oF sediment aireadg in the boX culverts jUst west oF this property going Linder Highwag 217, ThiS, and the FailUre to give any attention to doWnstreaM blockage is defeating this project. There is phig 2600 Feet From the Highway 217 culvert to Fenno Creek. IF FannO Creek downstream is not cleaned, no amoUnt oF upstream Work Will accomplish mUch, In addition to the two Feet or silted in Material, there is tWo to three Feet of water backup. cL,9/41 ov CI,. CS. Vo1/4. Ly-2,1 g ds' 0 cAri% tAAZtti-th .04/1+ 183-0 t's 45, bak_e,6e 4004 6Z//ffQ iieli)tt-t, ict,giv-a;,›,-,...4 01-k„,,, City of Tigard Planning Department;,,,�,� 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 CPO 04 Metzger & Steering Committee November 25, 1990 RE: SLR 90'0011 �/4"' l In response to your request for comments regarding Case 0 SLR 90- 0011, attached is the 1988 CPO %1 Metzger letter of acceptance of Beth Mason's Final Orders for SL 1 -86 and V l" 37 -02. We request that this information be included in your deliberations in that the agencies and groups findings had a determining role in the preservation of wildlife and wetland va],ues on this site. The ''natural wetland" that was on both Washington County and City of Tigard inventories of significant wetland and wildlife habitats and which was located on the west of this property, is now filled, compacted, and awaiting commercial development. Acknowledging that two ponds have been dug, it should be noted that few of the reparations appear to have been made. Unfortunately, concurrent action involving mitigation has not happened as it should have. The floodplain has been extensively graded, filled, fenced, channeled, bridged, and culverted. It should also be noted that sedimentation and erosion have their sources in poor management of stream corridors and pond environs. This proposal is not in conformance with the City of Tigard's Hearings Officer's final mitigation orders, as sited above. A point to be taken here is that the mitigation, accepted in 1987 by area reisdents, NPO's, CPO 04 Metzger, government entities and agencies, would not have been acceptable with a lesser amount of dedicated open space. We quote n of the Wetlands Conservancy: ord + as to fill permit shots ld beac contingent upon a statement in the public Y the future . use of the propsed cattle-grazing area, since could have major detrimental impact on the two mitigation pond areas straddling it (May 1987) We refer also to the Wildlife section of Hearing Officer Beth Mason's mitigation orders of aune land dedicated n e etuit was c specialist, 1987: Rex Van Wo r, the applicant's Concurred that the amount of p rp Y orrect$ that this amount was appropriate for the 7 Of line of site Connection between the two ponds as they now exist (pg s 6 the final order), The owner has allowed his cattle to intrude on the mitigation site a practice that has kept the emergent wetland vegetation from Making a healthy recovery. Cattle attle Mere excluded from these areas in the final orders, in order w of values got be compromised: To quote Ms Mason, ''The � that literature the wetly p ies recognized , rofessional tange and fisheres societ� ognized that 1,,1 excessive livestock grazing in riparian zones is the major cause of high sedimentation levels and fish habitat destruction," s Mitigation has an unfortunate track record of becoming' unmitigated. % gr ed this, and structured tect,. the Beth Mason ,.eco iz red her final order to ,pro mitigation from such erosion and loss. �z NOV 2s 1990 City of Tigard Planning Department November 25, 1990 Page -2- In conclusion, CPO #4 Metzger recommends that Beth Mason's Final Orders be reaffirmed now as the Permanent protective umbrella they were designed to be. Respectfully submitted., Pat Whiting John B1omgren Tom Smith Chair & Steering Committee vice Chair Secretary- Treasurer Encl: 1987 CPO #4 Metzger letter to Beth Mason Reprint, amialgam article on Mitigation, May 1981 Copy of Beth Mason's Final Orders, June 4, 1987 and July, 1987 • July 200 1987 Ms. Beth Mason City of Tigard Hearing Officer 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Or. 97223 RE R SL 1 -86 and V 87.02 Dear Ms. Mason, The Metzger Community Participation Organization, CPO k, would like to communicate its satisfaction with your findings and recommendations for management and main- tainance of the water resources involved in the Davis proposal. In addition we value highly the safeguards included in your final report for dealing with the po- tential for flooding upstream and down, on both Ash Creek and Ash Brook. The proposed developments are not water - dependent and other sites exist in the vicinity for office buildings and motel On the other had the property owners want to develop their land. C on;)romises needed to be made. We feel that they Were made with due fairness to both sides as a result: of the thorou ess with which you studied this issue. The preservation of the wetland, %fioodplain values of this land has long been a concern of this community. a- co gifeladdallginVAI#allaCan' MS. Beth Mass; July 20, Page 2 We thank you for the care and consideration that you have provided through three hearings, hours of testi- mony, personally touring the site with a professional from each Side, and dealing with the 30-plus exhibits that were turned in® Yours very truly, 40444110POOr.i. w, 400 Marten KIND, Cha_rm 'Pt 4 15(AdJut_ —16umtruv1/4sb-A-15 Burke Thornburg, Vice-Chairman CPO 4 Copies have been sent to Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Piff,otootibn Agency. • Division of Stab Larids Oregon Dept. o± Fish arid Wildlife Washington County .(Aiti A*tt) Mayor Tom tri*n4 Cit of Tigard tUgbn.e.: &ft4.Vivian Davis Xbith.1.11Aen,, City of Tigard Planning Dep4ttitoitit Pottlb.nd.Audubon Society 4 • • • 'P ■•, • CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEOZNGS OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s): SL 1-86 and V 87-02 2. Name of Owner: Eugene and Vivian 14:uavis e / irk/\-3 3. Name of Applicant: Same Address 4550 SW Lombard City Beaverton State OR Zip 97005 4. Location of Property: AddressZARorttL2f3n2j2 between SW 89th & SW 95th Legal Description 1S1 35AC lots 101,A00LiA00; 1S1 35AD lots'1200/ 1300, 1400, & 1500. 5. Nature of Application: For. a Sensitive Lands Permit to allow the deposit of fill and excavation on land zoned C-LICOmmercial Professionall. Alml_a Variance to allow the excavation of a flood retention wildlife ndonpEgmEtzmneRI-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre). 6. Action: Xpproval as requested xx Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: B. Final Decision: Notice was published in the newspaper,, posted at City Hall and mailed to XX The applicant & owners XX "owners of record within the required distance xX The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization _21L Affected governmental 'agencies THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON dune 1, 1987 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of condition can be obtained from the Planning Department; Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9, 1.12.2.91.4 Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a written appeal may be filed Within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 430 P.M. 10, OUestiono! If yo.L have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Departmenti 639-4171. c126p • BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) FOR a sensitive lands permit and) No SL 1-86, V 87-02 variance on property zoned C-P and R-4.5, Gene and Vivian Davis,) 0 applicant. ) CASE NO.: SL 1-86, V 87-02 APPLICANTS: Gene and Vivian Davis PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Tax Lots 101, 28000 4700, 4800, Map ISI 35AC, and Tax Lots 1200, 1300, 1400 and 1500,1161p 1S1 35AD, City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon.. PUBLIC HEARINGS: February 26, 1986, March 26, 1987, and April 30, 1987. HISTORY: The pitope..t.ty„tita ahhexed to the cit y. the ttlitOf 1985 'PA 285/AC 1-85). The applioant applied fot...$ehitive Land approval and the as heard on February 26, 180. The item was tabled to give the applicant time .to.prepate.adaitibhal tfi amended r�pcsa1 altb e ites a vatia0de. SPEAKIN( IN FAVOR t' THE APPLICATION J. Reid tfokdi Gebas, Mel : ttout ‘04i4::Evatio & A.tob.o1.4tet4i Tony • tv&h$. 4 Associates), Rex Vn Wainer (wildlife ekPett)- Page. 1 4742 ..:. • • 11, SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF THE APPLICATION: John W. Brome (The Wetlands Conservancy), Nancy Travis, Kevin Lapp, Pat Whiting, John S. Blomgren, Hazel J. Lyon, James E. Everitt, Roger A. Redfren, Mark Greenfield, Janet Thompson, Frances Boyechorn, Alice Juve, Nina Mills EXHIBITS: 1. Planning Department Staff Report 2 Preliminary Master Site Plan 3 Raetz Letter of 3/19/87 4. Raetz Letter of 2/18/87 5 DEA Letter of 2/25/87 6. Donner Letter of 3/18/87 7. Monahan Letter of 3/18/87 8. Cole Letter of 3/13/87 9. Hansen Letter of 3/13/87 10. Tracy Letter of 3/13/87 11. Juve Letter of 3/13/87 12. Rigler Letter of 1/7/87 13 Ik is Letter of 3/12/87 14. Noyes Letter of 3/16/87 15. Phifer Letter of 2/11/87 16. Proposal Map Figure 2 17. Amendment to Joint Application for Permit 18. Greenfield Letter of 3/26/87 19. Second Supplement Narative (DEA) 20. Notice of Application, Army Corps of Engineers 21. Comments from Park Board, 3/3/87 9 22. Oliver Letter of 4/29/87 23. Rowe Letter of 4/29/87 24. Wood Letter of 4/30/87 25. Audubon Letter of 3/26/87 26. Raetz Letter of 4/30/87 27. Pictures of flooding on cardboard plus 3 sheets xeroxed pictures 28. Tracy Letter of 4/30/87 29. Anadromots Fish Law Memo 30. Metzger-Progress Community Plan 31. Overlay Map 32. 0-Foot Rise Floodway Map, 1/86 33. Audubon Magazine, Essay "Mitigation Isn't' 34. Transcript/Notes of Redfern Testimony FINDINGS V.4,04,04tY_I.OfOrmat,3,00, The area to the north and east is within the County and it Aetighated. • . for single family residential development with A:na*Imuin.deitity of • five uhit$ per acre, The land to the hotthe.4t€ is withih the titY. and is zoned Oli.444y• .211 4ha an apartment totopltx. zoned R-12 (lie“OentiAli• 12 Unitti4dte-4but. the Ptotj'.ettY. ob the south and touthwet.t, • :7134§0.•2 V• 67.4..02.: • Site Information The stilTECt property is bisected by the main channel of Ash Creek which runs downhill from east to west. The majority of the property is within the 100 year flood plain. The property is underdeveloped and most of it is utilized for cattle grazing. A description of the property prepared by Beak Consultants, Inc. and Independent Ecological Services is included in the application materials. The western section of the property (WCTM 1S1 35AC, Tax Lots 101, 2800, and 4800, and the southwest corner of WCTN! IS1 35AD , Tax Lot 1400) is zoned C -P and the remainder is zoned R-4.5). Tax Lot 150,0 (WCTM 1S1 35AD) located at the eastern end of the property on 89th Avenue, contains a residence and small farm buildings. Phase I includes two acres of commercial development in the western section of the property adjacent to 15th Avenue on a munbber of single family residences totaling 1,3 acres located on the west side of 89th Avenue. Phase II features a six acre commercial office project in the southwest portion of the site next to Highway 217. Access will be provided by an extension of 93rd Avenue. A second street is envisioned to connect the 93rd Avenue extension to Hall Blvd. to accommodate the traffic anticipated from Phase II. Phase I will require 5,600 cubic yards of fill within the flood fringe. Mitigation proposed , g M�t� atzon zs ro.osed with the excavation 'of 1 ?00 cubic yards of earth to establish a 0.75 acre pond /wetland area on the north side of Ash Creek. The proposed residential lots are above the 100 year flood plain elevation and no landform alterations are necessary. Phase TI will involved 15,200 cubic yards of fill with proposed Mitigation. provided by remavin; 50.800. cubic yards of material to form a second pond /wetland area of approximately 1.5 acres in size. The total Wetland area identified by .the p ° consult: �. -ant 9, 3 acres including adjoining property atol the nnorth. Of the 7.29 acres of wetland area on theapplicant °s property, approximately five acres will be retained or improved. The d wetland an other flood plain land will be maintained privately.• It isaimport ntmeotemphasize that the applicant has included. con- ce p p g pic . • P i Y i p s to` give ayc],earer tune of what i,s P • .. � iminary ... • commentslfromtnearby fpro ert' owners the Aro ert and to obtain rel �' P Y . , . g • agencies . The p approvals requested resently Ate for the proposed .,. P y and revx.ew�.no. Died landform alterations within the floodplain and w the actua P,, property (e e �, etl , g. � g an area. motel,;. office bua.ld;in s, residences willorequire subsequent a lications notifi.. q pP cation, and City review: • PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES Santarr Sewers Unified Sewerage Agency )cu�rently has a 3 ®" Mainline that • stefrom west toeas Page 3 5L X86; V 87=:02 y y 1 = r � yY y • .« 1 . i f= �� :LEGIBIL STRIP +y h Storm Drainage • This app/ication primarily involves alteration and fill in the Ash Creek drainage area which accommodates storm drainage in the surrounding area The specific issues of whether the applicant meets the criteria of the ordinance and comprehensive plan will be discussed below. Streets The applicant has provided a tentative street layout which appears to be consistent with the Metzger-Progress Circulation Plan adopted by Washington County. However, as noted above, this application only addresses the issue of fill and grading within the drainage- way and therefore, issues of streets will not be directly addressed in this decision. Ap licable Plan Policies or Ordinance Provisions City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Sections 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, and 7.2.1; City of Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.84. The provisions of these sections are incorpo- rated by reference herein as though fully set forth. CONCLUSIONS: Based upon a review of the application, the comments received both in writing and at the public hearings, the major issues in this application relate to flooding, wildlife habitat, open space and variance criteria. Those issues will be addressed separately. Flooding 1715611cy 3.2.1 T The proposal Will cause a negligible rise of the 100year flood plain in the project reach of the creek. The proposed grading will cause a significant lowering of the 100-year floodplain upstream of the project. DoWnstream, the 100-year flood plain will rise by 0.06 feet (less then 3/4") because of the proposed grading. 2 Policy 3,2.2 The floodway, as defined by the Flood Insurance, Study for the City of Tigard, is the one-foot floodway. The applicant does not propose development within the floodwaY except for a road crossing. Roadway construction is not prohibited in the floodplain or floOdway ih the City of Tigard or in Washington Couhty. The project will enhance the function and maintenance of the Zero - foot rise floodway by lowering the water surface elevation on upstream downstreaM floodWay except for the extremely minimal rise of 0,06 feet. Flood control meastrements are only taken to the hearest 0.1 feet due to the practical difficulty of measuring the uneven serface of the typical flood water elevation. Consequently, the 0,08 foot rise is a mathematical change, but is not a perceivable practical change, or for ptirposes of determining flood control elevations: a measurable change, I've. 4 i V 814.2 4 • The site is not designated as having important wildlife habitat value, as delineated on the "Fish and Wildlife Habitat Map" (Diagram V) of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Volume 1. The site is not designated by the City for incorporation into the City's greenway system. Open space is not required by the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is proposing to maintain a large private habitat area. 6. Policy 7.2.1 - The applicant has submitted a site development study, including plans and calculations, which illustrate that the proposed development is safe and will not create adverse offsite impacts. Natural drainage ways are proposed to be maintained and improved through clearing and widening to assure no adverse offsite impacts. Drainage from the site (when developed) will not increase offsite impact, as shown by the plans and calculations submitted. The 100-year floodplain elevation will be protected as shown by the plans and calculations submitted. Erosion control techniques are included in the'proposal and described in the application. In general terms, all slopes created will be an maximum of 33% and will be vegetated sufficiently to control erosion. The City mandates no maximum slope5, and has concurred with the proposal in their recommendation. 7. Section 18.84.040 - The applicant, by submitting calculations which addresS the issue of .offsite impacts both upstream and down- stream has satisfied this section as to the flooding issue. Wild- life issues will be addressed below. Wiidlife Plan POliCiet. 102.4, 3.4.1, and 3#4.2 And SeCtiOn 18.84.010.(d) Of the Code Call fOr the protection of significaflt wetlands and wild- life habitat. The Mettqet4togtet commtinity Plan, deVelOped by . . . Washington County, designated the weteto pottioo of the property as a potentially. SignifItantVildllfe habitat.' When the property was into the City, a. 1..qhificant wetlands deignation was Applied. to the saui same area. The record rec�rdCbfltaths several important reference tiouttiehtt on the issue tif•mitIgation, .and.themanagethent of..tipatia0 The Heatihqofiicer found pattidt.latly the AnadrolflouS Fish Law Memo, and Exhiblt 33, the Audubon essay on In diduion with :the applicant's fioh and wildlife expert, during the tite review, . it 00 detetMihed that the area bordered on the wet by the Phase 11 boundary, the ptopektY oviiet- 114 of lit, Davis . on the north (or preferably the .outhetn bothtilty �f ke proposed ttteet•ashow0 On Exhibit 24 page. 1..; although the pOktiohbetween the applioant'...ptopettyl.ihe and the southerfl boundary of the ptopoted,..tvet.. is not within. the 3utitdidtioh of .• of Hearirigs and theatea. bordered by Phate 1.,:ott the. • east, plus th Pbate. I, ptoptiea wildlife wetiah0 atea iuediateiY tage 6 - 042. north of the proposed single-family house "1", all designated on page 1 of Exhibit 2, should .remain as open space and wetland. The uncontradicted testimony by the applicant's zone expert was that this amount of property was appropriate for a line of site connection between proposed wildlife wetland pond to the north and the'proposed wildlife pond to the south. Cattle are the cause or source of several types of water pollution. On uplands, which could describe the area around the wetlands on the applicant's property, they accellerate erosion while removing vege- tation and trampling soil. Through runoff, eroded soil eventually finds its way into streams, creeks, and rivers leading to sedimen- tation and turbidity. When grazing livestock move onto the riparian zones, water pol- lution effects increase dramatically. If the area surrounding the wildlife ponds was not considered uplands, it would cettainly be considered a riparian zone. The literature of professional range and fisheries societies recognizes that excessive livestock grazing in riparian zones is the major cause of high sediment levels and fish habitat destruction. Studies indicate that many streams require a rest, that is,,a no grazing period of five years or more to begin rehabilitation of woody, herbaceous riparian vegetation. - while the applicant has, appropriately used his'broperty for grazing prior to development, the Hearings Officer concludes that continued grazing on the property would increase the management difficulties for the proposed wildlife area after fill and development. Finally, on the issue of wildlife, due, to the importance of the inter-relation- ship of the two ponds which are Proposed for mitigation, and the existing stream bed of Ash Creek,.the Hearings Officer concludes that all of the wildlife mitigation work which is proposed, together with all the filling and grading which is propose iti this area should be done as part of Phase I of the development. The Hearings Office believes this will minimize the negative impact that the Actual construction work will have on the seasonal wildlife habitat in the area bhdb the area has been developed addOtdihq to the plans ptopo8ed by the applicahtt expert, there must be :b. wAy tO. • maintain the t!,ytem even thooqh it will be, theoretically, designed to be maintenance free. provision Of public. operi-tp6o6 is u, hot. called fotiheithet• the Mettilet-Ptotitett. COMMOnity Plan or • Tigard Comptehehive P1ah4. Thetefotel. the intent to maihtain . the common flood olain and wxldli.fe ateathtoughpivate meant • itapptoptiate, The Heatihgt Office*, believetu that an apptoptiate . vehicle: for tuch Maiht0hande'WOuld be thd_OteatiOh. of ah °OWflett,' through a declaration.... of bOhaitiOn8i covehahtt and rettiCtiOnt for the entire owhethip of the appiicahtowhichip. prOpood for 450ve1opment 'hb otioh of the units w�uid participate in the 'ffiaihtbbande. to8tt... 'fOt the open space :15.6.,ea.. oh :Ha unit size whereby each aWeilihg Ohiti than. be 4eemed to be one shae and each ''• • 139!.•1 81.02 . AMEISSZEREMSESIZEREMZEIBIEMESUCelmimetivattemomm 2,000 square feet for the proposed office complex shall be deemed one share and each five units of the motel shall be deemed one share, for purposes of apportioning the maintenance costs associated with the area. The owners association bylaws and conditions of restric- tions on the private open space shall be subject to the approval of the city attorney of Tigard. • As to the concerns expressed by opponents of petroleum degradation y 217 southerly pond and the due to the proximity of Hi hwa �i17 to the sout proposed roadway to the northerly pond, the Hearings Officer concludes P P roadway that petroleum products not get into the ponds because proposed private and public will utilize oil separation stormwater P P P catch basins and sediment will be controlled by required erosion control techniques during construction on the establishment of vege- tative coverup slopes, maximum 33% after conbtructiof. The proposed vegetative screen of 25 feet' is adequate buffering between the proposed road and the proposed pond on' the north, and there is additional planted. buffer under City standards between the curb and the edge of the right'-of-way that will include street trees and other plantings. In addition, the fending and ber'ming will protect against the strain g of potentially incompatible adjacent uses. Open space Discussed above. Variance A variance is requested in order to perform the excavation of the pond areas that are within the R-4.5 zone. 'Section 18.84.040 of the Code prohibits landform alterations 'within residential 'zoning districts. The applicant has addressed the applicable variance criteria . (Section 18.134.050) in a separate narrative which is incorporated by reference herein. PECOMMENDAT. ... recommends approval SL 1-86 above, the Hearings Officer Based upon the findings and co V ni- pP :subject to the following conditions. 1. State Lands and the fJ . S Arm t from the Division of A errriit shall be obtained b the a lican P y ,. PP Army Corps of Engineers (Authority.: , 33 U.S.C. 1344) .,for dischar a of Section 40$�� Clean Water Act of saa:d `ermt sha o,waters of the united States: copy dredge o� _ fill rila tll lbe �rova.ded to the C ' . , - , i A s co by . p ity bng neering Office by the applicant. 2 : The ap plcant shallY provide ' .._ g p , e the Engineera.n Sect�:on with. written men to tion .... A. has reviewed the " roposal and that the docu � that ,11.8,A, S� p applicant has obtained any necessarypermits. The Engineering Section shall also be provided with copies of said permitsd • Page 8 Sh •1 -86; V 81-02 I • 3. The applicant shall provide documentation from a certified professional engineer to the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation and the Engineering Section which shows , that this proposal will not adversely affect flood elevations downstream of Highway 217, along Ash Creek and Fanno Creek. The applicant shall also indicate whether the SW 93rd Ave. Ash Creek crossing is going to be culvert(s) or a bridge. 4. The applicant shall grant to the public, on standard forms furnished by the City, a permanent storm drainage easement which includes all of Ash Creek (approximately top of bank to top of bank). The executed storm drainage easement document, legal description and accompanying map shall be subject to Engineering Section review and approval prior to recording. 5. The applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall dedicate that land as shown on Exhibit 2 in the 1987 exhibits to this application, which area is described as being bordered on the south by Dr. Davis' property boundary, on the west by the property line for the Phase 11 development, on the north by Dr. Davis' property boundary and on the east by the edge of the proposed single-family and duplex units. Said property shall be dedicated as open space in perpetuity and shall be subject to covenants, conditions and restrictions and an owners association which apportions the maintenance costs for said area among the properties being developed through this application, in the following formula Single-family residences - one share each, duplexes one share per lot, office Space - one share per 2,000 square feet of developed office space, proposed motel - one share per five developed units. The articles of incorporation, bylaws and covenants., conditions and restrictions shall be subject to the approval of the city attorney for the City of Tigard. 4 6 The applicant shall complete all improvements to the Ash Creek channel, as proposed, from Highway 217 to the upstream side of the proposed SW 93rd extension, together with all wildlife mitigation . . . including the proposed pond, berming planting; and fencing in conjunction with Phase 1 improvements. All livestock grazing on the area described for dedication as open space as set forth above shall cease upon the beginning of the construction of these improve- ments. The wildlife mitigation ,plan as conceptually proposed in Exhibit 2 of the 1987 exhibits in this application shall bd followed together with the plan for planting; drainage improvement and year roUnd water source for the proposed pond, subject to the approval of the taff and the city engineer. 7. The applidant shall submit detailed engineering drawings, prepared bY a registered professional engineer; for all proposed grading, filling and channel Work. These drawings shall be reviewed and approVed by the Engineering Section prlor to construction. Those draWings shall show existing and propoleirtopographrEondi- .tions. An as-built topographic surveY will be reqUired. Page 9 8t 46i .V 8. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final approval date. DATED this 18th day of May, 1987. HEARINGS 2R APPROV MASON Page 10 SL i V 87.41.: • • 0,7 ;41 • "/ 0 / Puttatps-ni 444 • * E SSAY 4.444 444 ISN' Compensation for habitat loss fmm development is a buy-off, and the benefits are often illusory. by PETER STEINHART salt marsh on San Pranciseb Bay: Grotifing plants are not etioUgh, ITIGATION—the formal sys- tem of fish and wildlife repara- tions required by federal law—has been with us for more than half a cen. tury, yct we keep lasing habitat. One of the problems is that a lot of mitiga . don gets unmitigated, For example, take Kesteison Na tional Wildlife Refuge in California, Kesterson was made a wildlife refuge to mitigate the loss of waterfowl hab . tat caused by the Bureau of Reclaim. don's San Luis irrigation project, But selenium from agricultural &rainwater prided in aid refuge so poisoned the birds that they gave birth, if at Ai to grotesquely deformed young. Today, the U,S, Fish and Wildlife Service uses shotguns and propane cannons to hate Waterfowl afty from the rdtage, and Baal is looking for land to by as mitigation for its autigation, Or take the EA hatcheries on the Columbia Rivet There are More than twenty of them, built and run with feder21 funds under the Mitchell Act, which was passed chiefly to mitigate damage to fisheries caused by big fed. dal clams on the Columbia and Snake nvett, The Rea,gan, Administration to- day denies that the hatcheries were part of the bargain, and Insists that fish hatcheries are state tespontibill. ties, Every year the Reagan Adminit. dation removes the hatcletics froth' the fedetal budget, and evety year Wash, ington and Orcgon officials sc b e to get Congress to put the hatchenei back in, Such stories remind tit of Indian treaties, pledges without real COrninit, Merit, Made to escape an argument —8— an on to other business. They are apt to make us give up on miti- gation. But mitigation is an issue that needs thought and care. Mitiption was written into federal law with the Fish and Wildlife Coordi- nation Act of 1934. The act stipulates that federal agencies building water projects must consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service, and that the Secre- tary of the Interior must recommend, "measures for mitigating or compen- sating for damages" resulting from a project. At t outset little mitigation was written into big water projects. Northwest officials are still trying to get federal dam-builders to agree on the extent of damages to the fisheries so that the federals will undertake further mitigation efforts. But as the constituency for environ- mental values grew, the National Envi- 10(11111CLIGII Policy Act and state laws re . quiredgovernrnent agencies to consid- er environmental effects, and mitiga- tion became part of the dedsion-mak. ing process. Today, for example, several, New Jersey laws require mitigation when coastal wetland .s are destroyed, The federal Clean Water Act and, indi. rectly, the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act require mitigation when a wedand is filled or a small-scale hydroelectric dam is built. Mitigation is even agreed upon when a factory expansion will have adverse effects on local air quality. Developers have increasingly ac- cepted the idea that it is less trouble to mitigate than to go on contesting per. mit requirements, Government agen- cies see mitigation as a way to get env. ronmental benefits without risking charges that they have prevented the developer from using his land at alL The agencies have found the proem so attractive that they frequently an- nounce ahead of time what they want For example, the Oregon Division of State Lands publishes a formula by which developers can calculate the acreage a streambed alteration or wet . land fill will cost in mitigation, Says Gordon Thayer, who drafts mitigation plans for the National Marine Fisheries Service in North Carolina, "We in the southeast have been trying to write into the permits two-to-one or three to-one compensation." The Code of Federal Regulations al . lows a developer either to MIMMIZO imparts OD the development site OK to preserve habitat away from the site, Developers prefer off-site mitigation becaiise h interferes less with their building plans, But we are , • '4,4 I ik 1;4 *4 4'4 * '1 r,4,4 ,k.".,;4t4j!'.'4 ,.. itigati'bn sites for developers to At the same time, mitigation re- moments are getting more precise. oat explains why, in the words of Cal- forma attorney Mike Willmar, "For the responsible developer, mitigation , is becoming n increasingly less atuactive g gY means of reconciling conflicts." It also explains why, after years of skirmish- ing, the Army Corps of Engineers can- not agree with the Environmental Pro- tection Agency on a mitigation policy. HE WORD mitigation is an old one. For six centuries, it meant to lessen the violence or offense or in- sult in something. Today, however, its meaning is changing. To many people, it now means c o mpensation. Says Thayer, "I view it in terms of a rain- imnum of one for one, a like for alike." EPA's Jennifer Wilson says mitigation is what the agency considers after try- ing to avoid void �project on` uimiz e the imn acts on the site, to try to com- pensate for the remaining unavoidable loss." But, clearly, it's not always compen- sation, Says California environmental planner Charles Hazel, "Say you use a wetland, an ephemeral pool in a hardpan foothill habitat. Its a nat- oral setting. If you remove that habitat by development or agriculture, you de- stroy it forever. You can go to another area and purchase a parcel of land that has ephemeral pools and give it to the state. That is not true compensation. It's a buy -off. Y.u're giving up 'part of the .y '' ,,` , r . er to retain pan of the pie." Seldom does a permitting agency get back as much as it allowed to be destroyed. For example, to mitigate for the loss of bottormlands along the Colorado River, the Bureau of Reclamation bought an Arizona state waterfowl management area and added it to the Cibola National Wildlife Refuge. The uniforms worn by the manag- ers changed, but the total number of bottomland acres declined. An increasing amount of study sug- gests that many of the gains of miti- gation are illusory. A study of Corps of Engineers wetland-fill permits in New England found that few of the mitigation requirements attached to them succeeded. In one, the devel- opers of a shopping center in New I-iampshire were to provide four to five acres of wetlands to replace the thir- teen acres they developed: The devel- oper bulldozed several basins; but did de3 Reveals Mature, Closer, voider, Sharper Than You Ever Imagined 4 /bNudubon raved obout the `--- , , ' r , "unexcelled optics" of the Tele ,� , ,„// v u e Renaissance telescope in itr July 1986 review of spotting r scopes Now the same harmed- able 10it to 200x performance is available in o lighter, compact field version, The 3" aperture Oracle 3 uses a new triplet apochromat multi - coated lens for tolor = free images, Even focuses down to 7 ft, The Oracle is also d superb 56Ornrn 0,4 telephoto lens: Why tolerate "tunnel vision" and the soft imges of ordinary sco �e. s? With patented Nagler 82 field eyepieces, experience "ci picture windoW With rriagnl- ficotion, " Send for free literature toddy, el e 20 Deittef Plt� d 4oda PC "tverf Belle Thati YOU in�i gincd" so with so little slope that no wetlands were produced. In another project, the Connecticut Department of Transpor- tation was to create twenty -three acres of upland wetlands to replace twenty acres of wetlands destroyed while building an expressway. The depart- ment excavated five basins. In one, the. slopes station, and to support P sedan � g e basin merely served as a sediment trap for runoff from the highway. In all, only six acres of wetlands were produced, a net loss of fourteen acres. A similar study undertaken in Cali- fornia found that in more than half the projects, the mitigation required by the permitting agency either wasn't done or wasn't successful. And an EPA official says of an ongoing study of compliance with mitigation require- meats permits in the Pacific North- west, "I've only seen a couple of sites that looked good, Usually a good plan was not put together. They did act un- derstand the hydrology or the plants or rite type of habitat they were supposed to create." One P roblem with mitigation is that the permitting agencies often have no sense of what they are trying to get out of the mitigation effort, Kathy Kunz of EPA observes that "the paper rec- ord" may say that the developer will cheats a wetland two miles away, bur there is no specification as to what that wetland should P roduce, what it should look like, whether it is be- ing developed for water quality, fish and wildlife, endangered species, open space, or all of these. As3istaatU�► Secretary who � c Army of Robe i in charge of the Corps of Engineers + declares, "There have been successful creations of wetlands all over the country, and OUT Waterways Experiment Station in Vicksburg has literally stacks of tech- nical ncal reports about the creation of wet- lands," But those rcpoit5 deal chief- ly with efforts to plant cordgrass or pickleweed on dredge spoils, Too often, mitigation is declared successful simply because the plants grew. Growing plants do not neces ` ' airily indicate a fumicaoming sy Stern. Accotding to Gordon Thayer of NMES, "Some of the data suggest that marshes that were created three to six years ago are nowhere near the carrying opal' y of natural marshes, The fist and invertebrates are nowhere near as abundant:" And Jennifer Wilson of EPA says "We are irnstite that man can create equivalent substitutes for Ilatu- hilly ftinctio Wing wetlands. s • re c) a Eh • THERE HAVE BEEN effor more precise about what out of a mitigation site, haven't often been successful. W officials use the Fish and wit Service's habitat Evaluation P.. or the 1Dcpartrnent of Transports Wetlands Evaluation Technique alyze the values of wetland are the methods are seldorn empl y both the project and rnidgati so that the values of both can be pared closely. Few agencies ha manpower or funds to perform tensive studies needed to uncle rstand hydrology or the biological p zivity of a wetland site. Usually, wh mitigation she is selected, the ation roc ' process is subjective, base on quantitative measurements b a walk over the site. There are no regional goals wh a permitting agency knows what o to be the result of the total numb mitigation projects. On San Fran Bay, most mitigation efforts call fo rotation of tidal salt marsh by bre ing dikes on the bay, But most of the developments arc in fresh and brackish wetlands, The result is that riparian and freshwater marshes continue to , appear, And there are no studies to de- termine whether mitigation succeeds t �hallater. the Says Tay r, "No one agen- cy and the manpower to do what we know is necessary bio- logically to evaluate these mitigation efforts, The federal dollar just doesn't o that far,`` g In fact almost no attention is paid to a mitigation she after the develop- meat is completed, Lynn Greenwalt, former director of the U, S, Fish and Wildlife Service says, F stack fail ' Ysi "One of the ores of the mitigation schemes has been an almost total lack of follow- up," A California study found that in two uses the developer purchased mitigation lands + and deeded themiito the state, but the state agencies did nothing to restore or enhance those lands as required by the of En- gineers Corps gineers peimoit, Some developers sim- ply y, away from the mitigation re- quirements, Several years after the Port of Oakland agreed to deed two - tenths of an acre to the State of California lifornta and . r ettore it to tidal action to mitigate the fillip of a like amour the � t of tidal slough, . P � so, port had not done Noncom Lance is more co" ,.. moron on small to`ects since , p 1 i the Coops of En- gineers is less likely to send inspec tors out to check the a re A t � es sponsibility for the mitigation is passed is to be on to a state game or land -use agency we want which is not a party to the percent, and but they so powerless to enforce any mitigation ildlife requirements the developer refuses or dlife forgets to meet. rocedurc Finally, then is often no long-term tation's commitment to mitigation. Mitigation to an- sites given to state agencies may not be as, But deed - restricted to fit mitigation objet. o ed on tives. The receiving agency may end on sites up managing the area for another ve the purpose, or .not managing it at all. When Washington State fell on hard the ei budgetary times, it ; simply returned tand' the McNary Wildlife Management cinent Area to the Corps of Engineers; the en a Corps had originally leased the area to e gin mitigation of damages not caused b y McNary Dam, ut on The reality," says EPA's Kunz, "is . `gation is not easy. It '. that mitigation ereby time -co u tight of money. g Y ��g, and it requires a lot y This is something that needs er of to be known. Mitigation should not be cisco the carrot dangling in front of our face, r res. It should be the last resort." Adds riot- ach= on a that mitigation e�� continue to stress Y► an experimental technique that has not yet been ade- quately evaluated," Mitigation hasn't worked chiefly be- cause we have seen it as part tithe bar- gaining process rather than part of the biological challenge of development. Senator Steve Symms of Idaho, hear- .,. ing about mitigation requirements, declared, "All l can say is that it is a good thing we got as much of the country developed as we did before we got into this kind of business. Despite the lip service paid by officials to en- vironmental health, most developers and a lot of officials are willing or ea- ger to pass environmental costs on to future generations, For all these failings, we are obliged to try to make mitigation work. "It beats the hell out of the alternative, which is no mitigation at all," says Lynn Greenwalt, °'That was the alter. native for a long time," Mitigation is one of the few ways we can address the environmental costs of development here and now, It is also a test Of our ability to manage lands i that have already been so isolated or changed that nature alone can't sustain them. To make mitigation work we must realize that management of habitat is necessary and complex, and we 1must agree that the obligation to habitat goes on forever. We nod at these ideas, We haven't yet mastered them, WHY D ES 014111 MUTU FUN EXCLUDE NUCLE R POWER? Bec ®use We believe it to be sin unsafe and unattractive iroaestrnen t. There are many other inv®ttrn®nt ® Pporttnities avclIabi® to fur invost�ra�hts m rn telly contorted ineitidek a Solar Celia 6 Energy Management 6 Cogeneration inst�iatlon ®Co�nservation Geothermal polar Glass "TERN�►TlVES F�1N[3 Seaource Recovery u NEW AL al F red at gives you Motu the choke to concentrate your roves{ p . .P..... and .. ... ®y merit In AroiNth tom that capltaland ohieher -, cost consciousness, environment ores ei i NEW a "e d berichahtment with Nuclear ioower: LtEliNATIVES EWO A Mutuai Ftnd Cohaohitatihu, in A►t ®rnatr Ehergyi Saar Ehai gy and Cohitorvetlbn ir►'vestniontrr For more toe ode complete Intormat bh, inoludinp charges and of penses, P PAe Bad if caroiiiiiy beior'eeia InVeeyt. track NEW ALTER S m. ®4 Sae uric record iA�'iVt:,, FUNp, Inc. Eaa'iTiihe OW +.,. 8 295 Northern Blvd, Great Nikki NY i jO21 Hat of Pte ase send rn a Prospectus and Fund paekape, 1 i Invogtmehtt � � a Mint Ihvest= N me Merit: 52650 Gain edited 5i 6485 -0808 Of s®hd coupon Address eery Statta Y OF TIGARD PA* Watt) ok vk dap rA.Uvf" Washington County, Orogen NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s): 2. Name o ene And 3. Name of Applicant:_ Same Address 4550 SW Lombard City_asiamtOtAte.„01L,Zip_921(105 4. Location of Property: Address NA North of w 2 11-2311LJUM1-5ML.With--- Legal Description 1S1 35AC lots 101,IJ3PP. QJ3SIQ-t--12OOs 13000 1400. 1500. 5. Nature of APPLicstion:-222011.!af heariD2-12-221stislartenti11aQnr-a- ad.911Tsing residents who did not receive 4. Approval as requested X fipproval wi,p conditions (conditions modified) Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, Posted at City Hall and mailed to: xx The applicant & owners JUL Owners of record within the required distance jai_ The affectpd Neighborhood Planning Organization Affected governmental agencies 8 Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON e„aular_aLt_19112.21114LESS AN APPEAL IS MED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and aEatemenk of condition can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigard city Hall, 13125 SW 'Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 2339, Tigard, Oregon 97223. hiny party to the dediSion bait aPPeal this decision ih deterdante With 18.32.200(h) and deetien 18.32.370 which proVidet that A 'Written tOtodia nay be (lied within 1.0 day d Attee notice is given and tent. The deadline toe filing WE An appeal is AtO lo, optie§Liotts..: it yod have Aoy 4dottiod4 piooto call the city of Tigard tiiAnning botioetwenti 0257P BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) for a Sensitive Lands Permit and) Variance on property zoned C-P ) and R-4.5, Gene and Vivian Davis) applicants. No. SL 1-86/V 07-02 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings Officer at the regularly scheduled public hearings of February 26, March 26, April 30, 1987, and upon order of the City Council for the City of Tigard, an additional hearing was held on Thursday, June 25, 1987, for the sole purpose of hearing from surrounding property owners who did not receive notice 'Of the earlier hearings due to errors • in the notification list submitted by the applicants; all hearings held at the Tigard Civic Center Town Hall Room, in Tigard, Oregon; and The applicants reciueit a Sensitive Lands Permit and Variance to allow commercial and residential cieVelopment on the property. The primary issue raised at the 'subsequent hearing was the effect of the proposed development on property owners upstream along "Ash trook', also known as a drainage ditch which drains from the Fred Meyer Store area, under Hall Blvd. i. runs along properties on SW Thorn and 89th Street, and finally onto the proposed develop- ment area. The testimony was that during heavy rains, when Ash Creek floods, the water in the 'drainage ditch, aka Ash Brook, backs Up and overflows, flooding property on Thorn and 89th Streets. Pale 1 6/V After listening to testimony and evidence, including testimony by Herb Curtis, Ken Beck, Jerry Hoffman, David Tozer, Kristina Culliman, Louise Beck, Jean Curtis and Tony Regillis, the Hearings Officer in convinced that there exists a problem With flooding of Ash Brook in that area, but that the proposed development will address the profile as earlier conditioned. However, to clarify the Hearings Officer's recommendation as previously entered, that recommendation is amended as follows, The Hearings Officer continues to recommend approval. of SL 1-86/V 87 -02 subject to the conditions found in the Hearings Officer's order dated May 18, 1907, which conditions of approval are amended as follows: 1. No amencent. 2. No amendment. 3. The following language 'shall be added to condition 13: The applicant shall provide 'documentation from a certified professional engineer to the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation and the 'Elgineering Section of the City of Ti which g and wh is shoWS that this proposal will have a zero impact on flood ,elevations upstream along Ash Brook, and the applicant shall P g make any improvements necessary from 89th Street downstream to assure that there Will be zero impact to upstream development as result of this project. 4. The following 9 llo�in language uage 'shall be added to condition 14: . , grant p.... .., : , ornts The applicant shall rant to the ublac on standard furnished by the City, a permanent stormdrain easement which includes Page 2 /v 37 -02 • (sY k tole 1 C S GI, j all of Ash Brook Gpproxin ate1y top of bank to top of bank) The executed storm drainage easement document, legal description and accompanying map, shall be subject to Engineering Section review and approval prior to recording. 5. The following language shall be added to condition #5v The covenants, conditions and restrictions for the Ome _..r ' s Association shall contain provisions which authorize the City of City Tigard to issue citations for the Association's failure to maintain to or repair the open space dedicated pursuant to this Condition of approval. In the event the problem cited is not corrected within a reasonable time, then the 'covenants, conditions and restrictions shall provide a procedure whereby the City may affect the necessary repair o 1.r or maintenance, bill the Owner's Association for the cost thereof, and in the even that bill is not paid within P a reasonable time, City y ,shall have the authority to file liens against the owners of the property subject to the covenants condi- tions and restrictions. As with the Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws laws and covenants, conditions and restrictions, the p procedure ure for this citation /repair /lien process shall be subject to the p approval of the City Attorney 6. No amendment. 7. No amendment. e 8. No amendment DATED this for the City of Tigard. th' day of July, 1987. HEART s OFFICER page 3. SL 1 -86/v 87 -0 -V ffe.4,,,,,i5 ltf.....c.,:r- Lic��` � � • � l coy- t, �(. lo►, Ws -IP f 0, 4 ,....:cfli 4, 0, A C4KVIII'Ve r ‘tecorc.,1)14-4-'1N 4ctvc‘0,3'-iNi ek4 .."-$45-cC.rt. 11b� hoc. 14,AQ,.vkWASi `�1 N. " 'T S4r1"Al V"1.4' 44'1 1-:),A,ek c:',41 C..,,,,,t-,t +9 ott.ni, 44.K,s. tet1 ce4) i a ."(9k ril 4 ! p�I " S _ .a ot_ o ci- re -o► i j - er h b„ s 1 ► --1-114. ;s- a" omo.oyfe..„x-1- 6., ti 1.7'N ttNIL 4 .AL:F4 rs,i ,,,,i11,„...,1 ' ' LI. l',1 rz' 8-09 i e fir . kA � c . �,- . ft. ii November 27, 1990 Mr. Larry Epstein Hearings Officer City of Tigard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Epstein. I am Creek. We adamantly oppose ose tthe ero��rnabtelyDr 00 members of the Fans of �'artno y pp request by : Eugene Davis to change deed restrictions on his wetlands that were designed to protect these ecologically sensitive areas: We believe that his wetlands are significant to the ecological health and water quality of Ash part the Tualatin liver watershed, and need to be protected as agreed upon in (."reek, a art of th the City of Tigard, Notice of Final Order (SL1 -86 and V87 -02, June, 1, 1987). In June 1987 (case SL 1 -86, v87 -02) hearings officer Beth Mason clearly spelled out the need to protect Dr: Davis` wetlands: - "The majority of the property is within the 100 year flood plain, - "In discussions with the applicant's fish and wildlife expert, during site review, it was determined that the area bordered on the west by Phase I! boundary, the property ownership of Dr: Davis on the north (or preferably the southern boundary of the proposed Exhibit P g ) b., ordered b. y 1 lase I on the east, plus the e Phase proposed Wildlife wetland area immediately north of the proposed single family "1", c esignated on p i 1 of should remain as open space and wetland, The un ontradted testimony y the applicant's zone expert wa s that this amount of property was appropriate for a line of site connection between proposed wildlife wetland pond to the north and the proposed wildlife pond to the south" -"Cattle are the cause of or source of several types a . of water pollution: While the applicant has appropriately used his property for grazing prior to development, the hearings officer concludes that continued azin the property _._ n gx g„ on would increase the management difficulties for the proposed wildlife area after fill and development," -"Finally, �on the issue of .+ ' i +, i the importance of the int k - relationship of the two wildlife due to p ponds which are proposed for mitigation, and the existing stream bed of Ash Creek, the hearings officer concludes that all of the wildlife mitigation work which is proposed g t e with all the filling .. and grading which is proposed for this area, should be done o ... �' g p p as a part of Phase I of the development," Members of the Fans of Farr o Creek have monitored Dr, Davis' activities following g the June 1, 1987 Notice of Final Order and reported numerous violations of that order to the Division of State Lan have sent him warnings , , Lands Who ha° s of non-compliance, ance, with m li To this d. there are still aspects of the Notice of Final Order that have not been ftiliy complied with by ... systematic �., ., y � degrade � � grazing g g have the appearance of �a illegal fills attempt to the natural values of Dr, Davis, Dr, Davis continued cattle azin and 1 strengthen p , His ...... , his wetlands, perhaps so as to actions Since .his case for filling them, .j a 1987 have made a mockery of state and federal wetlands protection efforts, 1@I�liMT Larry Epstein, City of Tigard p. 2 Whether his actions were the result of malicious acts or just benijn neglect, Dr. Davis does not have a good record as a public citizen in this matter and is not deserving of any change in his deed restrictions. If anything, the deed restrictions should be made stronger to provide more wetland protection which is badly needed by Ash Creek. Furthermore, Dr. Davis should be fined to the full extent of the law for being not completing his mitigation project as ordered in 1987, so as to provide an example to othersr,who would degrade the wetlands and waters of the Tualatin Basin for the own personal financial gain. Jeffry Gottfried, Ph.D. Chairman, Fans of Fanno Creek P.O. Box 25835 Portland, Oregon 97225 -0835 TF.° . Y. . a _- .. .is .i c .-3% _ - E'1' '1t �-_.. _ l� - F.... .6 - .�1" e. x _ t " . s s t: _ ix r:r �* t:f T ,> }_ g .c f `¢ 1. fi X .` 'y r 43 - E •'fit'. , � �L � 1 F ;- t:1 Fa s 4 yw 'r xs • s� .� 1-`f s Z cam' ti w' • • LGI�ILI�Y STRIA b i ' — fi -. f s r _. : "' dew o 4 r z `� T •, , f -' �_s y «` R 'mss h t ' i t� o. _ - f a. y is Hearing November 27, 1990 Tigard Civic Center +0 144-7j ClpS411 4+10- vic:na 1",,h 44tc54. TO Nor. .;7, 19 go Re: Sensitive Lands Review (SLR 90-0011) Davis The final mitigation orders now being questioned were written after 3 hearings, numerous testimony and much professional input. The COE, DSL, EPA, Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, US Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, Portland Audubon Society, Specialists in Wildlife Resource Management, and Neighborhood CPO and NPO were all involved in this issue. Today, a wetland that was on both Tigard and Washington County registries of significant wetland/wildlife habitat is gone, along with the rich and varied wildlife it supported. 1 emphasize that all the wildlife, migrators and residents (the property is on the Pacific Flyway) may be presumed lost or decimated, for there are no vacarayaigng up in the few habitats that development has left untouched. BLit, the owner has achieved one goal; he has gained a filled compacted "wetland", devoid of life . a mounded dirt mass on sale now for commercial development. A point needs to be made here: the agreement to accept the mitigation for the loss of this valuable urban wetland was a compromise. The proposed developments were in no wax water dependent. The compromise was a yielding to intense pressure for commercial development that prevails in the City of Tigard. Now the owner has beet granted this return to the hearing table not because he hasn't gotten what he said he vatted, but because he has a., hidden agenda. He it going to keep pushing until the final order of the 1987 mitigation stands as given, with. itt own integrity and with the designation of dedicated open tpace in per meaning jutt. that - fotever. , In no way can the owner _claim that a. taking- of h3. land. has occured, Pirtt,, by the lettet of the 1.,aw, no. development thoold occur a wetland that is not water depeodetlt but . he :was .granted the permits to do just thit. Seondly) _the ..0i4t.het• purthated this i00-yeat floodplaio in the early .60'8 with full .knowledge of • the _stewardship responsibilities that this entailed .: The floodplain:then and now must continue to serve for water storage, flood. ..control, and. .maintainAnce of .!(4.atet. 1u4lity*. It was never prime land for future residential or commercial development conclusion, mitigation agreements Ate tibt:tobe broken. or....alterede Any State or Federal natural teOUtde agency will affirM..thit, What the :owner noW seeks to leave as dedicated open. space a Minimal would-not have been acceptable at the time. the hearings were taking._ place. The • agreement in 1987 to fill the natural wetland was then counterbalanced by _a designed to do the best to insure the sucoessful toihttodutiori: of wildtife and Wetland: vegetation •• on the manmade , , , • : 1. 1., " ' I' There is only one way open now to all of us, and that is to start from scratch. The owner will need to remove the fill and restore the natural wetlands, and fill the mitigation ponds. Two precious years have passed during which, through lack of monitoring, this mitigation has been allowed to fail. I predict that any new mitigation will have more teeth in it, to even better protect it against these kinds of abuses. , of Our nation's wetlands are disappearing at a catastrophic rateA between 250,000 to 500,000 acres a year, and this is One way it happens. James J. Kilpatrick wrote in his column in The Oregonian "Protection of our remaining wetlands is absolutely vital to the national ecology." Let's let it start happening here, for real. NOTE TO FILE FROM Keieraden, Senior Planner RE: USA Comments FILE: SLR 90- -0011 Davis DATE: 12/17/90 Talked with John Jackson, Planning Division Manager with Unified Sewerage Agency (phone 648- 8644), regarding applicable regulations pertaining to livestock grazing and its potential impact upon water quality. He indicated that there were no specific regulations for non- -point sources such as agricultural uses. However, he said the concept of "best management practices" is generally accepted as a minimum standard to apply. For livestock grazing near water bodies, this concept has two necessary components: 1. Maintain a riparian area of 25 to 50 feet between the water body and the grazing activity. 2 bodies at all tame Keep livestock out of water $ t o prevent bank erosion and reduce the potential for introducing harmful bacteria into the water. Mr. Jackson said that the bacterial counts recently taken from Ash Creek below the Davis property were above acceptable levels. Since the creek has not been studied in detail, ` it is not possible to determine what impact, y. pact, if any, the cattle grazing the Davis property has on bacterial levels in Ash Creek. SLR9 0 11. DIEM/ kl NEIL GOLOSCNMIO T GOVERNOR P ' lei. ": ✓.H . ..;'�:' .:b i . *. _ Department of Fish and Wildlife COLUMBIA REGION December 19, 1990 Larry Epstein, Hearings Officer City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 DEC 211990 RE: SLR 90 -0011, Davis Dear Mr. Epstein: The Department of Fish & Wildlife is very concerned about the proposal by Dr. Gene Davis to reclaim open space land for cattle grazing that is now protected from that use. 1 have been involved in this project since 1984 and have visited the site several tunes. I also worked closely with the Division of State Lands on the miti- gationiconditions included in Permit 44570 issued on June 4, 1987. The one item that concerns me is the contention that cattle grazing on this property with wildlife. In opinion, iintense cattle grazing in the past has is compatible been dtthe greatest factor degrading the existing wetlands on the Davis property. The ground has been heavily vegetative cover and shrubs can not get gr y trampled and natural ve �Lativ established. Ground nesting birds do not have a chance in this type of environment. Heavy grazing by cattle on a small area should never be confused with small numbers of cattle on large areas used to control vegetation after the nesting seastn on sortie wildlife management areas. A Sensitive Lands Application to the City of Tigard prepared Ti and that report included the vis by Evans and Associates in 1987. Appendix ' D' of po • ` was re ared for Dr. DaVis a wildlife with Beak Coristi].td].fe David s i She stated in her conclusions that "In general w'` isJueat the time. by Bernice Tannenbaum, e biologist ants g neral the site is not in good condition as a wildlife habitat because of disturbance to vegetation, stream banks and the ground by cattle." z agree with that analysis. i „ + _ , i i g plan, ... .. , than the pond construction , was to The whole basis of the mitigation lan, other th enhance and protect existing habitat by controlling the cattle grazing. Mr. w Davis' proposal falls far short of that. Our departmant accepts the reCommendationS of the staff report as the Minimum necessary to meet the intent of DSL Permit #4570. We also agree with D5L's position on the issue as stated in their October 25 1990 memorandum to the Tigard Planning Departrrient rke girl Teeulax,10 it0/40 b�l�w y b,'u Ira !"� "V' #. :{{;•; � �9.��. -,�, W� Larry Epstein, Hearings Officer December 19, 1990 Page 2 We are concerned that Mr. Davis is not in compliance with several conditions of his DSL permit and has not been for some time. These are explained in detail in letters from the Division of State Lands to Mr. Davis dated March 5 and August 20, 1990. It is difficult to consider changes that will have a negative impact to wildlife when the existing permit is in violation. Thank you cc: Keith Liden, City of Tigard Joel Shaich, DSL Regional Office, ODPW Patty Snow, ODFW Jack Broome, Wetlands Conservancy Mary Yoshinaka, USFWS Ralph Rogers, EPA Mike Houck, Portland Audubon Sincerely, Gene Herb District Wildlife Biologist December 20, 1990 Davis Public Hearing - SLR 90 -0011 Tigard Civic Center Hearings Officer, Larry Epstein A 8 gray area appears to loom as to the intent of the 1987 7 mi igation for restoration of lost wetland values. The applicent clearly feels that the mitigation Final Order re- stricts unfairly his use of all developmental land and poten- tially developmental. land. And so we are here. I fuel that it needs to , be remembered that both Sides. were called upon'to compromise. It appears that what the ap- ili ;..t now asks for is what he de i e the miti tion to n :7 - an a re for - roc match with h o ds h o �t►i- at on. In fairness to o r �ie �ie art c i �n�s of h -i 8 P � e hearings, I need to add here that these conditions would not have been acceptable then. Lo . t to filling but not to memory was a wetlands/Wildlife habitat described by Mike Houck in 1985 as extremely valuable .° It was a habitat full of a diversity of life. It sheltered nalnn taanld i on intrinsic values of daTwaai�fl bedayear-round luaover supply of sitehcb�tigation t I am con- cerned to hear that the ponds are primarily for shore birds, wading bards and waterfowl. I feel that this accepts a re- storation with a limited number of species in mind. If on other the d an abundant natural food suppply is envisioned, where isitag g oing to be established in a minimal corridocorridor of life around the ponds? It is well know that mitigation as a tool for replacing lost wetlands � man -made wetlands andft has a poor track record, � that c g these over ®300 s perhaps ®1000's of years. perhaps years. man-made sites are the causes for failure of mitigations o dean among tthe time la s between wetlands destroy- ed and replacement, inadequate monitoring, original intentions misconstrued. and superficial rather that diverse restoration of habitat. tat. All of thesecc onditions of failure are ha enin now to this mitigation. PP In f o nation 500 t 500,000 acres ft elost annually. our than5 � of Oregon's original w�tlandsr �a in today, and this is typical for moist states. Because the applicant feels that the he mitigation haft re- stricted his right use of his land, 1 feel that the entire site needs to be revisited for4p-dated wetland determinations It May also be timely for a review of the DSL permit. Davin Hearing Dec. 20, 1990 I®auea need clarification - such as what comes first, the pond granted ediatance in Phase 1 of the mitigation, or a conceptualised road that now appears to threaten the integrity of the ponds The input of USA this time around is imperative in regard to the r az ng issue. John Jackson, Planning Division Manager with USA recommends a 25' corridor on each side of the creek., and fenced from cattle. Mitigation should be done for area in which the cattle have destabilized the banks along the stream banks In regard to alter ition by cutting or filling, surely that would be in the Province of the permit agencies already involved. Again new wetland deteri inationa may be called for. In fLLirneae to all who were involved in the 87 round of hearings a .'and who agreed to abide with the Final Order, 1 feel that no concessions should be made at the time to return land - especially when the grazing of cattle is debateable, and of questionable value on this site - from the dedicated open spac e . , Action here could be c ontin nt upon imp' rtial professional review of the wetlands/Wildlife values on the ite. The potential of the agreed upon Pen space should be such as not to be put into . jeoprady b future land ue3 decisions p .. p at its boundaries. such open space will b e of ever increasing � value to a 21st century world that has already loot so much. Something terribly wrong if, each time a development is terr�.��l. yr plan comes along, it will threaen the site's v survival, plan that the site retin long -term protection around which development must be compatible, Thank you, f Nancy Lou tra y 710ine St. Tiard S.W. OR 97223 en 0 w -,,•• • '.:4;•:'jl • , ?;;;;,•:,;,* •;*••,, ' ,'•t" ^ " s;1 ROGER A. REDFERN CONSULTING GEOLOGIST December 20, 1990 Hearings Officer City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re t Sensitive Lands Review - SLR 90-0011 - Davis. 1701 S.E. LADD AVENUE PORTLAND, OREGON 97214 (503) 233-2011 0,61.4,44•4" At the request of Nancy Tracy; aoneighbor in the Davis area, and others, I have investigated the Davis request and would like to submit the following testimony. As background I would like to mention that in my 18 years of private practice; I have significant experience in hydrogeology and wetlands, as well as other areas. 1 would like to call the Hearings Officer's attention to the fact that I conducted an extensive investigation on the prior request (SLR 1-86 and V 81-2), I also oraily testified in that matter and submitted my notes in writing. The following comments are based on a review oft 1) the materials in the file on this matter on November; 26, 1990, 2) the staff repert, 3) a discussion With Keith Liden, Senior Planner for Tigard, 4) discussions with Mr. Jack BrooMe, The Wetlands Conservancy, and 5) a field visit to the site on November 26, 1990, The applicant has presented the Hearings Officer with What WoUld appear to be a simple reqUeSt; but the potential rafflificatiOns have not been adequately eXamined, In the preVioUS application and hoating the Hearingb Officer was presented with a much more thorough application With 606tantiating informa- tion and the testimony of the applicant's experts, Potentially affected neighbors i gtoietnMent officials; and concerned Individuals also brought in information and expert testimony, After thorough deliberation the previous Hearings Officer made a decision that some individuals were not heoetiritilY happy abOnt, but most were willing to live with, The key eleMehtS of concern to me and my clients were adequate mitigation; SUffiCiOnt open space and a return of part Of the area to a more natural riiihtihh and wetland condition, as d tradeoff of enhanced development potential for the applicant fot a return of a portion of the site Eb a semblance Of its otIgihdi physical and biological ValUes, The applioAnt hOW wants to t6Vetge a portion of that fatefully crafted decidifn and COMptoitiSO, HoWOVeri the atAiliednt has offered a vague i even confusing applifation, Keith Liden told me that he had the same pkdbleM and Was only able to develop his staff report after further discussions with Mt, Davis , At this point f most assume that the staff report s adedtate ih regards to the request, t? - - C.. ,-.. -- a- _, -..... , - - .c_: . �t-.- Y. r• _ .. te-.�., - . _. . ,r _. . # � .. r_ ._.. - .. ..- • : _ ', : . n:...�, . .f <r s'z.aa�' -�_- s' � 'L .'s.3a ,. ' � . S - y _ _ ' s .�i is �, -:x ' , ce aF ' , ;.7,.:-.:c".1,--..;" L = .g t.s-.. r - sff . ' . -.'. .� : ,._ .. . .k -t `�-.L_ ._t F_ � .'-.;;;,..-::::::.1•''',7;:,',..-,-.''.' ' •- -.-L ., <-. . . � s..t. r - c.r. k r i r' LF_. •: P- f3_ = . ._:._. � _, -"..- .a . r - s t._:_r .. .r.si+ �� -aY -E i - .. . -. _- - ;.a�. i e: f F' F � !-c'_ . .. x a .' t te:` C: F ; 4 •may +p _ -. - - _. ,� -k" .. -r F .. EE -.f .. -. Y r -7. • ,�:" , J1 ��•,�}v "+: ��t��. �. �.,�"s'� +,�S �,�T..r .Y,,. �ti Mf- �%:�.A �e r�'. � rn; . .. : i. .. +44r ..tt.' SLR 90- 0011 -Davis December 20, 1990 Page 2 The applicant has not supported his claim regarding flood elevation. As I recall, it was very clear at the previous hearing that most, if not all, of the area affected is in the flood plain. By approving the request there would appear to be an acknowledgement that the affected area is not in the flood plain and therefore suitable for filling and development. Information beyond the topographic map and elevation submitted is required to adequately support this request. A thorough investigation by a hydrologist or hydrogeologist would appear to be appropriate. On the surface it appears that the applicant is requesting permission for grazing of livestock in a portion of a wetland and in the riparian zone of Ash Creek. When I examined the property in 1987 with the previous Hearings Officer, the applicant's fish and wildlife expert and Keith Liden, we found a site that had been heavily grazed and had little of the physical and biologi- cal values of the Wetland and riparian zone, that would naturally occur there, because of alo type of along a channelizedgAshiCreek, notnth e typer oan" area was a very narrow zone f wide and lush riparian and woo wetland zone found on similar but unaltered sites in the area. Because of grazing there was very little of the wetland vegetation that is found on similar, but unaltered, sites that I have examined in the area. It is very obvious that grazing is not beneficial, much less compatible; with natural riparian or wetland values. In further regRr d to the compatibility and impact of grazing, c would like to c all the Hearings Officer's attention to the findings of the previous Hearings prior 7) . It Officer in the Notice of Final Order �otosed raz r application (page is necessary to understand that th proposed grazing has the potential to of decrease infiltration of rainfall by trampling of the soil and removal of Vegetation, essential Water e r�etlands and riparian Zone, andincrease sedimentdeliveryto w f th AshlCreek, The presence of manure in the flood and riparian zone is an additional concern in regard to water ty, Natural riparian Zones a in and pin Stream corridors have quali lues inreardtOslawd g flood in Stream which allows for increased additional Va g sediment filtration, flood damage reduction and ground water recharge: The applicant uests filling in of the Channel re � e1 of Ash Greek w the channel Was a arently widened ainoexcess of whet was allowed or planned, tl pp .. � � �� is applicant has not provided inform,tion t� show that this allegation The ,. , „ site I believe the applicant is referringe��tbehind true. stern portion of the where channel excavation has occurred and left oversteepened channel rone to slope fa "e and erosion, The applicant has des�.� ns on how t �� lur �� . p,. a noteprovidedhengineered his will be acco��lished or infortma- tion on how the prior alteration and the proposed filling would impact flood is or Plow velocity.,, , or eVidence plahtihgs leVe r the existing ohannel would not lmpr y the Highway the tingµCh'.�, ation along with appropriate sideslopes and ' annel configur ' plantings would promote flushing of the Highway 217 conduit, that appears to be amaOt ,� . �� of fir, bays y ,. not been T find it ne ^c�3sar to conclude that the Hearings Officer has pp pp a ion1 There is ample reason to complete or a rovable a licat believe ethat� approval of the request could re su1t in .significant Adverse enVirOnmental impacts, especially when combined with past alterations of the . . « �, s.. .. ,.�. -. _ .�. e .- :� .V. _4-». s.. ".tf - - ':f xs 't. � :: • .r i_ LEGIBILrry -- -. .�_ .:.z. fir- <s:,_..- - .-. .. _. .- r r. s -r.. .. ", r .. -, •a -. :- � _ r � � =C° .s - a •- -�, �, .. - �. ' • t...,¢��,e STRIP -" .�. . ' -i- b xi • r F.`�' �y . c � ,� � -_ � a. r T.r •" - � -* "'is ; i - r f {r -. s;.l�,� - T_'z _ *� _-` p'" - ` k a 4x [: :'f• •[.s - r SLR 90-0011-Davis December 20, 1990 Page 3 site. There is also ample reason to believe that the request significantly reduces the physical and biological mitigation requirements of the previous Hearings Officer that were accepted by the applicant at that time. 1 appreciate the Hearings Officer's attention to this matter. Respectfully, 410 14? or.4014A. Redfern , .,. [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] .4, ?"' • ,$ , . • e . . • 4.$ • = , t t �'.'�' u u :n' , LEGIBurt STRIP;. Lt 4), , • 4,11 . '. . ;, . k�' 7 v: � 'mow.. + ': t.•i�w w ,. . t �1 Vt . Y �i t �Y° w r i��.:q , :::,� e f ♦,.. . }i� 18 Y ANIT*151k- '•:•-; :0" • • Hag .4> t • � �i i • ;:tjtIk 14.5• "!. u,v �: yJ ;.r:vii :� •' :':� FrialIZEISMIXEMENEMEMS" =qv ..!!` 4 ,1 A e , , , 44 4f44 * , • 8. 1. s r . • • *'*'. '*, LEGIBILITY STRIP LEGIEILfl STRIP' • "1" • 4 1:•.•': , I ',. ' '" • • • •••'1 ".: •••••` ••• " ."‘ • " • • • • 4 4," ,7; 41, , • '; : , , , • . , LEGIBILITY STRIP' LEGIBILITY STRIP • • .1r r. I LEGIBILITY STRIP' Yi �A�1"' S +��i�t,�A,r u,� Sa1ki"�,�� +;w.',: .10 P,..;;•?,; ; • r",, ?ttrt t",'• •••'", t' - ' • pi.t4-•.," do. 7 • i mr• . ',...A•40 • • 14. „- • NAt'ik:wiwevoo "*".. - ! O.' • 4. • • ' .• . 1, . 0 )'111 4' . 44 ''' '."-'",l,.■ ii. , 4 ,, :1-k:,,,,,,■ .., • t tYi" to. 410,* 4^44' '4.1t et1 10411‘ 11' r * t • •4'q 4"1: • • • IA -• ••••• • ••• 7.7 ' 1,`," Op64-ciriN) 16( eAceictm-e41.1YI if‘hlAj rtg curd Al' eAnircAn 441%3 .01:11 1 Mtn. 1 oM (CPO �- d Via &la. ) yot,vy 44■h.61 -- k i ay o( {.1 Li :d emvek anki .� I` n Nj04_,e6 Sr i Tel & rnV -6 1 Pi ' 4 JVv ) J�cxs �� 1 `44- b Cai,vvct -1. o 44 .- Jim, rze/riti(ei 4ii/u., 641 -6m O ,NO2:g(11‘45-/' r1 ..,,�4 a� 144ekkivi fltpd s k-aw r4 kvi voti644. 69"..pd byhm,ce._, of fr440 va-1-tah, • V Y 1'w+' t T rte- N41- IG4t Repi'r'F 4.4 t o i- 1I)64 411413 h Or.t4 "eds,k, F 5 0. at-01-221e..) /,gym 11?-7 9- tilittA 1k, 4,1 Mal )0 VAL r4,60-rk -fa 5114)4 h 3iJ G44J ls.x-cry t. Moo- : m l 6,c4.4,0 47) trae, 4"fr 14) tt,a 444 rYki,t-14 ocrto-yk, r iL6 a. eity A.. rike4-0, evA(A* opvc61 Verikei thirik ;14.414,4,4to c4;e44..e, cis knem/ afx11- /149 .5 ier-p-ni ?cute ke kum, Cre" (Pre ntet4,1'- Pr7)674/8 ; • taa-reic /11M-r, /ek 9 fr 1,64.1/a Or 1 ilipy-We- I a d.641P-e N r;10:od kdati` Goat —FL o-krvt riA1A-is e/r.c, + ptcJ - wfr eryirtimuLay 4./4/ ‘41,01,4- prla Wrei kyen k,r4/ )1tf1 i4' ekm).441- sq-FrAgt., itdp etw I •W KA( tit OF-ren cruici5-e, toy) hi') 1toti1 arz p • 4kti-- 44 etedi airtAL riv& Avg, erret -co-r a Jeivatikoci-i;\) 1144614-° 119 exia ebiA. (.6p d A Leiva emt ,m41tte A-41,1dt .*„.,;:•`'', , ,,,,e41,• • " ' ?atilt lii‘10 1-410 1) I 4.p4; 40,4 • inn ..:7"Yik :1, .1,,, .1,11 ',1'.. ,..,,, ,,1 1.,,'• ,4 • i ', , ,an ir t e - d „Oeterlese.. ite/i'`',,i e a te t,,,t_.,,lijical`',44'X'Crii)11*4‘.' i 7 ritt12:(114';41,46;11)'F'' i dti, ie 1 i.,iiitfi,..1',6:1., , .„ ou 1 t.v..,,,,, : ic1'.and ,deve 1 o ed :.*i,,- The . ts d I rect 1, f i harm a a ,.;t ene . rtp, o f, Cows.,k,g ra`t i ng fi•,,, in , i;•,t.i),;`, 44 1 * hire t 1 and "almea's*:(310#*- houSest ha t'..." c'ou 1 d " bu i I t „Pa bc4;t:o /,1 th'ellp"ressul.e to changeMet 1 a nd s ;.' I, I ' . liebilghilqiili beairtfn*eiki 4' t l'a n d sr,.'.,gt hey ha Ve ,'-j, AO 44, !,lieeh,n.,iti`anged,401. de(it raied0a ttdri' ",,," a 1 a rm 1 ng il*4 . , i'ate!'PA,y0f,,',, tli46,,e4 eilli'g'Cidt2 i 5611.1 1 IOW - ' re 6 f e t " i . t ndt-i ' S k , e ' 1 d n - , t h,, V t?,t .", .. o r.;. 's At1 y t a i blt9 9r70 1 Slrg 1 n edi nie li 970 sr4 3e t4eeh hn I d-50sya ic:70a ; , , ,,,,i 11)Ou'i'•"‘L'I'll,,,ti'm I 11 1 onP/filt ret"„•,:of,:i We t,1 a ti dilai re): 1 bs t4j 414111 1 eLltih 1:y.:2l I 1 J'I dn, ac tesW`ire.,,, ) . r1/4)6Peit Mtc ' Thu ,I,1,:i n k , "i He deeitti titiiII 11,:4,t he'kEVIA t i- ,t et. ibl 2616, '0,4,yeft,,yal e lri.,,,x,bli f , 'flit d i'Vg, tilT,i'al Weitros S1,1;0,0' M 1 11,1 on'tkac rdiVIt!, . 'a . lw n , c e ,,,t, . ., st,ei ,t, ea,,,,,It.ii, t'ke '"Itt iv 'a‘ ' 6"481e't'' d'A Thi'Vtil''''''' eir'ar ' 4'4 d'TA 'tih,'4'sf efticiN'NeWY4v tri4Vidsiiklattd dt he 1 . . ren a e.1t:,(C•brit' 'nett lig : An es 1 ma te dAlliNfi,1 1' 20' th "1 P. Pt , ,. I i,;;I, , ,, i . . •A r ,At..ki, tit 4,41 ot, % ., , 4 +' ,; 4,, ,,,i 4 ...; v Ark, $- or, ,,,. 1 ,, t, , ' • , ,/ ph, , ".114-n. , . • ' ' 14141 n t . '' '1 .4' I■P'P cry,',,I,',‘‘t(liqit,..., l'Arlr, ,.i ,1,,),x ,,.• 'w),...fe:, ', , ° 1„1,,,,.* r, .,,,,,,Y.s.!‘qe,,,41'04. 4,i,itt *,11v To ', q*/ I k ir 'WETLANDS "a re areas We cal '';7 1' ma rs hes 'and a re ve ry full' 1 la r 'to"ii'S i'.' ho'Wevefi4 1 _ _ _ _ , .. , ll, , ■ 100 4p1; tS few of .,.. Us recognize . the ,,importani4rOl eAtheyA T' ..'. ''' • I. '' ' , i 4.,‘ t.' ■ ,44 30. 't 4 ie. ttlfpl aYI i ri,,, na tura 1" ecosystems q4,14;4,They,,,,a repirega r ed 4,,c:i a s.„,,oWa' s ter; pi aces , wh i ch ,, havelhadil 1 tt 1 eki3v V ., ., , ,.i.ii : .;.ii ,„ • Pecdn'om i CVa 1 Ue1.1",. Over'mos froft he"-0 pas . 0 otr .44 centur les we ,Kavi enacted I awSuk:lincd.., deVliedi:44:ii(\ ‘p"rograms ...that ,' encouraged the'rdevelopmentq.of '1 t ho, se a rea s 4,d,,,, DeVe 1 opmerit ,.nietinttchang i nji, ;0 I6 , ' . 1 total 1 yldes t tOy ng the., Wet 1 andsi*rte4cAt,,a „TesUlt' "al mos tV,1 00,, m1,1,1, l'on , ac re t of .thei'e.iln toile',./45'kter". , r..iii*, afeas'4havel, beem, lost, , and t ne I rAestructiloni ei'llidW,'\kl'ea 1 I te . t he '',', 1 nipo r"taii'd0 i of "tt416t'l iiiii:10;', b .i. • '' Is * ji4 1 S li ' rd have egun.sto,rever el4the,, .aw 4; o, . tha 'f, ' d,),,, r$,,,, I , .t . ..■i14141, ti li '1Se - 1:4- ' ' * • Wet 1 .an.i 1,1..,' ;,,s, dtectea0atnelA Piano ,I*deve 1 oped 4 : 4 T h e l l ' i m p o r t a ' n c e V i n d Pal Uitti 1. l'f' we ti a nd s iv 1 sticon'ii de tab 10 ,4COn' '.111get\thgl ..1I.'s fo 1 1 oW ng':(,They ,;prov 1 4'.,','"t'1,:v,ceidito!,''Spa''0,iaiid* i• ha b 1 ta t4 a reas,,for,i wa terfoWI*4fti qurb'ea re r s,1;04.,, iWe t lands 0'01 a yri'ativs"111116"Oirt'''1.61'e eil f • el,,,t If , i :Itic, 4,1 n Wa teOa e A 1 1 0/ ma i ntehande ilf The*, adttlii6Va I, - 41 4 '. fi °;" 'ill. i • i'''. 01, iefp01.11At i OiVt,..,f 1,1 iOrttandi pile I fy 'ikl' dt41.4' 0 otettiovrtig , 1. cherti 1 cb I '. cOntafilhant 6 and ntitrien sgtliet fl ' f tic t 1 ri:4 s6rTie3,.ii re a‘4151ii.a.it;e's41'.14a: l';•6411,1 .‘,,..4 b'eingtql d'ed AO f.'d 1 ipose "dfAtiticl V pil re„ klVeitldrii-C St 1' yet 1 an' d sarel,44•Ve, ,14,,y, p'i ',••ro'•duTV**0... f,la reas .,',6nd",,,, 0 eod ute , h I g hll'eVe 1 s ;:=,',o'fOrtg an 1 et;_,, 4 )Vir- - . .. 10,..1., ':',„ 4 'mite ela 1 tmvithew,ied a' product iiietatdiliip .1.11,,i41/111? cci en P.a rid 1whea t,,,f lei ds on . the:i:arsoun s,,,,tAci i .',41 Ca e biiiii, compound t t 0 ebd daettiOrh I ti ?tool eef oodegw' , ',aidijactAipeV,nt .a tld , .yl, j t 0 ihabl k:VI aidnd , IPrIfYahaorecharge i,o f' , 6e:444t ,041r * ,l, e assei ngla-eel lab I e'sOi-cfVer fo 4'aliitai 4 t 6 e d�iiiegtkm aii'dli tidutit I-, I a1 %,•Aise'e I ' 1 ' d I t bit, ,tta 1 ,1 t h s va 1 ues14 ,4 Wet i.Ad s11 ",,e4g6ii'bhir 114:0 i and4i:r8'eaS ilWrA411'heyla lityll'itiAtiCite 'to' be t' Ila' ' 4 b ea k 1 nzg ti. f o t''1 .1 thail caeabsbrblf oodstandf eieedutet amage 'IL■1; ''',r1srft n!" 1.:ib.,,11'hafid'i a 1 b'etief t „.t1liaitirilya t e,111 ndidWhirs r..11' kat he i-ivt,1 1 1.duwnd.‘..i'd.de 1,V.6 he f ,Wert,,tatict fe„d. f 1 Odd reNa tet71",,i du'Ortili 7,A,V1 1„d I ' ' Aare.,as , ,,, )4, w• .tile),Ve'r.'p"' st:tr, "!:1, st:. 6. diA,t 1 fill th 1 tife'd.1-$te7# the& t bti ter „i'','toethe'! ' e ' • e ,41' ' t t 4. ndeif ede*ral4gove?nmerit's ,i, a reKbeg 1 nit g 6' tac ViliOrbb 1 E and em.o f „ V e l an r? se'OderOnfg:The", ,',0 IV i g 1 onf ,45 fat Ci.,115.04'4, 'andg*601111A1 3,40 kilidtt:v6aeig illia 'Tg0,4 : „ 06:14trienii,04,41:1;1AneOffrOgY'd r:1yet 1410 1 t. We't,tandMIlbet Iiilk t g a t 4d #44. m it 44a tittiiil b'c't,(' ,,i'41ii!li daftin&ta, d' x heft reit tibn fpee SO esi t I WI, 1'04 li:% ‘, k, i, 0 0 i• 1' liKgiiiallie4 %f 76:ri 1 iel*:`e r i'l al *tif.titcal,';t: 'ha 1 'Alci ' Isoni 1 f8 haltalet 1 S 't i ele' „iWilliWV& 't4414'611#41t* tweitoolti.ii 4 t* ,rigetleillteti' ' 64101' ' tio'clidtti'v t tchii ttli WAX" '66L1 eittiAggiffil4c06, s I led '1/4 VW thit'd, et MhdEstiViate 41M4cf II ,, 0,. *tot .... it i gliotieb, titobRio - tigHl„. ?ded ki vittkietti, ,, , : 'Mr Ititt, .0 4 tit'dfl 1118 i ' • I ''" i'critak4414 sec1.1, '64464 :"( • . • d, g. p 141:filigis s du 4 LEGIBILITY STRIP goose,, an endangered, species_ It will he the cornerstone ofthe new 10,30G- acre San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refi.ige, to. be administered by the Fisk and Wildlife Service_ Audubon spearheaded the effort that won a $5 million appropriation. last year from, the federal Land andWater Conservation Fund for arther acqui=. sitions for the refuge_ - - - - ' - tee for evaluating the plan. Opportunities exist for Audubon members, chapters, and councils to get involved in state and local proj- ects related to the plan. For informa- tion on_ the joint venture in your area, contact: NAWMP, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Room 612, Federal Bldg., Fort Snelling, Twin Cities, Minn_ 55111. Where the. Wetlands Are Audubon-led team to reassess the value of the area. • - Restoring the Bayous Louisianans Vote to Stop Lpss 'pf - State's Disappearing Coastline - -- a -•- .' _ - '-. i -. . -7--:, - -- ''..- -. '21', I.' 7-': .•'-i... ..r ,-'-'---t-''' '''''f- - --: ' ' LARMED OVER THE LOSS Society, explains the reason for tar- - - of 50 square miles of marsh a - geting oil and gas revenues: "Much year froni their state's coast- ` of the damage to our wetlands has line, . Louisiana voters recently .- been done by oil and gas develop- passed by a 3-to-1 margin a constitu- meat. So it is only fitting that money tional amendment creating a special - from these sources goes into wetland fund to save and restore wetlands.. -- - restoration."=;,---7,-4- - The Wetlands Conservation and --F%-The coalition will also help the Restoration. Fund will pay-for wet- governor's office run a series of pub- lands restoration and conservation lic forums in March, where the peo- 4. projects, as well as the-salary of a _ ple of Louisiana will be asked what cabinet-level executive assistant in they think the fund.should do— the governor's office who is develop- which wetlands should be protected, ing a comprehensive plan for tackling . which type of wildlife is most impor- . the problem. The money will come tant, and whether the emphasis from ongoing oil and gas develop- should be on restoration or ment on. state lands. This year protection. ---' ti,' between $15 million and $20 million - In order sto be really effective, the .e, is expected. -. ...., '-- state will need more funds, so the The widespread support for the --coalition is working with the state's --:-. fund was the result of fierce lobbying members of Congress t ,obtain fed-:j -:" by the. Coalition. to Restore Coastal eral dollars for wetlands bnservation - - - :- Louisiana, which is comprised of through-the appropriations process. business, civic, industry, and envi--- "Louisiana has done its share," says ronmental groups, including three Dr. Paul Kemp, the coalition's execu- -- Audubon chapters. Margaret Bald- tive director, rand now it's the fed- win, president of Orleans Audubon eral government's turn." - - - - ' LL Wetland's in the Lower48 States - LEGEND' 1-1. Less than-5%; 5-15%, - 1525C Florida and tips= United sour:cans. Puir - - - Ej Greater than 25% , the two states with the highest propoition ofwetlancis in the con- , arerapiiily losing Amato dev mew- MAP:SALUEBALDWIN. ti vinnum VICE 1655_ 4/ii. .612 rant/wry_ 44,14/3 10-e_ Ofrei ? Attilki-btnn A-61;14 bi- -412 4 413n1 _J 71! Z ' • 4,14 • '4+, c;,..'zt,7 LEGIBILITY STRIP WETLANDS WATCH SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1989 PAGE 3 byKathyFranic itigat on— akind of reciprocity that has °little to do with Christmas and every- thing to do with the environmental; impacts of development—is - one aspect ofenvironmentaimpact assessment that strikes as many different chords in the environmental communityas a church: organ on_ Sunday_. Accordingto research carried out by DorsayFischer-,. agraduate student at Evergreen College and a Wetlands Watch volunteer; process =ofmitige - tion represents a systematic approach to avoidingorcompensatingfor=the environmental effects of development and otherland -use projects.. Avoidance is al gays the first choice _byeither- denying the orchoosing an alternate= site.. If avoid anceis not possible,. the developer attempts to reduce onto moderate the impact by scaling down the project or bymodifyingproject design_ For ex- ample, existing trees °.would be left or new-ones planted. to serveasabuffer between_ the wetland and development:: Finally,,ifnegotiations fortheabove are unsuccessful,: compensation for the unavoidable impacts on the environ- ment mustbenegotiated. Mostofthe controversy arises over,-this lastalter --- native. Compensation for. wetland impacts= usually-takes one of three forms: (1) the creation_ ofa new wetland;_ (2) the restoration ofa degraded ordesfroyed wetland; or (3) the enhancement of one or more functions or values -ofan existingwetland and/or its buffer: Otherless frequently yused forms of compensation include preservation of otherwettandareas, monetary com- pensation for lostwetlands,: and mitiga- tion banking (a complicated form. of "offsite” compensation). Accordingto Fischer, theleastcom- plicate& form_ of compensation : and the one mostlikely to succeed is enhance- ment., Wetlands enhancement usa- ally involves alteratioa of a wetland area to enhance one or more.values One enhancement project might be theformation of an open-water pond in the center of a marsh,, thereby diversi- fying tlewetland habitat and attract ing a greater variety of wildlife species to thewetland . Conversely, the most d'fficultform of compensation and the one most likely to fail is creation_ ofawetland:: Creation of awetland may be "on site:"° orr "off-site;" and n-kind" or "outof -- kin d.." On-site or off site creation simply means tl althe new wetland is- on, the same. site as the affected wetland,; and. offsite means it is created elsewhere:. rn-kind creation means that the newly created: wetland: replicates the vegetation and other characteristics of tlewetland: lost to development;: out of -kind does not. Off siteand out.- ofkindwetland creation are,, by and large; the most unfavorable form:. Ensuring-just com- pensation for the lost wetland values is often diff icull to: do= Also„ by moving thei compensation off-site, benefits such as flood storage,: flood convey- ance; and habitat are lost from the original site:.. Oftentimes a stipulation is made :thattheoff :site wetlandbe created within the same drainage; ba- sin in orderto retain as manyfunc tionsaspossible:. At the same time, on-site and in -1d 1 creation ofa wetland is an extremely complicated, .. lengthy, and risky prod ess, which elicits; a considerable de- gree of cautiousness on thepart of government-agency staff at the federal andstatelevel. Wetland creation and restoration oftenrequireacommit mentofagencydollars:andtunethat simplydo not exist_ Fischer ° found that a: major rethinle ing of the mitigation issue took place at the federal level, ; broughtaboutbya surveyofmitigation projects adminf sterecl bytheITS..Army Corps of Engi- neers in Washington State from 1980 to 1986. The: results showed that:; (1) one: hundred and fifty-two acres ofnaturalwe -hands were traded for100 acres ofcreatedarrestoredwetlands; (2) therewas a net loss of wetland diversity, with 73 wetlandhabitattypes beingreplaced by only 49; (3) additionalwetland losses were caused by time lags betweenwetland destruction: and replacement; and of the35projects surveyed: only two had mitigation completed prior to destruc- tion of the originalwetland; (4) monitoring of the mitigation process was only required in 18 of the 35-projects and actuallyper formed hi only ll,. resulting in five wetlands never being created or re- stored as negotiated; (5) contingency plans. (should the originalplan fail)' were only required in three of the 35 projects;, and (6) nearlyhalfofthenutigation plans failed to formulate any subs tivecriteria for'project design.: These results, Fischer concludes,.. clearly illustrate why mitigation has failed to do whatitwas designed to do: protect wetlands. Wetland scientists and managers claim: that poorly defined: objectives going-into the mitigation. process and inexperience with mitigation: are enough to spell failure °for most mitiga- tion projects before they even leave the negotiating table:. According to Friends of the Earth (F OE) research associate Rita Or- donez,. the process of mitigation pres- ents an even greaterchallenge be- cause it is often misused by developers as away ° to "sneak in the back door":: development effects onwetlandsare `mitigated" for on paper,_ while in real- ty no mitigation takes place- Under the State Environmental Pol:- icy-Act (SEPA),, projects that signify candy impact the environmentrequire . thepreparat:ion of an environmental impact statement (EIS) . In orderto circumventthis:requirement, develop- ers sometimes changetheproject plans to eliminate any adverse environ- mental effect'; thus the project receives a: "determination of nonsignificance" (DNS) by the reviewing agency. This effectively eliminates the requirement for an EIS. Friends of the Earth conducted a review ofdevelopmentprojects in Washington State from 1987 to 1989 to find !out howSEPA. deals with develop- ment projects affecting wetlands.. They found that in most cases, such . projects received' no environmental impact statement review:. The Department of Ecology pub- _ fishes a weeklySEPA register, which includes all DNSs and draft and final EISs.. Out of 114 SEPA registers, FOE found only ten projects affecting a wetland site for which a final EIS was prepared.. Five-hundred and fifty -six projects affectingwetlands were is-. sued: DNSs.. In King County alone over thepasttwo years, only two final EISs were prepared for projects on wetland: sites, compared to 136 DNSs. According to Ecology, however, it is important to note that although few final EISs were prepared, many wet- lands projects receiving DNSs did involve some mitigation: Fischer found that some untested: mitigation policies now exist among local governments, such as Island County, and similar policies are pro- posed for King and Snohomish coun- ties, King-County seems to be the only one with any hands -on experience with mitigation. The county's involve- ment has mainly been with enhance- ment projects, and it has already exile rienced lack of funding for monitoring, time lags of up to oneyear after wet- land destruction,; and lack of a: tracking_ and evaluation system for the mitiga- tion process itself_.. Ordonez maintains that, based on FOE, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) findings, mitigation is rarely successful in replacing the wet- land values and functions that are destroyed by development.. Further, says Ordonez,, as long as the process of mitigation is used as a back door" by developers to circumventreal com- pensation for lost wetlands, the public will not get a true environmental re- view of development projects in wet- land areas. Ordonez recommends that public comment periods be extended beyond the 15 days for DNSs and days for draft EISs. The Department of Ecology recog- nizes the need for tracking mitigation projects, and it has held extensive meetings on the mitigation issue to aid with formulation of wetland standards. In the meantime, it appears that . some consensus must be reached before wetlands receive the kind of protection that they deserve in Wash- ington State. Ordonez says that hope for the fu- ture protection of wetlands really lies in the passage ofa strong wetlands protection act at both the state and national level. Fischer. agrees, but holds that to exclude the use of mitigation entirely would be to deny the inevitable effects of development on our wetlands and sensitive areas. Rather, she concludes, we should become knowledgeable about the issues and use that knowl- edge to bring about the adoption and enforcement of the highest standards of mitigation possible. This much is for certain: Great care must be taken when attempting to replicate complex and diverse natural systems such as wetlands, which have often taken hundreds or even thou- sands of years to evolve. Any attempts at replication must involve long peri- ods of monitoring to verify the viability of the biological dynamics of the wet- land, so that the mitigation proponent is held responsible for the long term. Much uncertainty remains. Is it possible that, without adequate mitiga- tion policy, the environmental community's goal and Governor Gardner's promise of "no net loss" of wetlands will never be realized? President George Bush's remarks to the Ducks Unlimited Sixth International Waterfowl- Symposium: " les time to stand the history of wetlands destruction on its head. From this year forward, anyone who tries to drain the swamp is going to be up to his ears in alligators." 4 • CHARLES T. SMITH RICHARD L LANG WM, H. MITCHELL COWARD SULLIVAN** WILLIAm A MASTERS* WM, KELLY OLSON* IC. PENNOCK OHEEN* BRUCE M. WHITE* THANE YI TIENSON* JOHN A. WITTMAYER* *Ham= ORICOION AND WASHINGTON OARS "MIMOSA ONLOON AND WASHINGTON, D.C. MARS SCOTT J. MEYER RANDALL A. WILEY DAVID R. AMBROSIO MICHAEL C. MITCHELL* PATRICK 0, GILROY, JR.* OREO BARTHOLOMEW ELIZABETH A SAMSON CANDACE H. VVCATHERBY KATHLEEN L BICKERS RICHARD A. WYMAN coRtNNE c sHERToni THOMAS M. CHRIST MARK IC RAUCH TERRY M. WEINER MARK J GREENFIELD CHARLES 0, HARMS MICHAEL 13, HEPBURN LESLIE ANN BUDEwiTz Ms. Nancy Tracy 7310 SW Pine Street Portland, OR 97223 MITCHELL, LANG & SMITH ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 ONE MAIN PLACE 101 5. W MAIN STREET PORTLAND, OREGON 99204 TELEPHONE (803) 221-1011 May 20, 1987 RE: Davis Sensitive Land Permit Our File No. 700/35815-0 Dear Nancy: scArmE eyries RESIDENT PARTNERI C. PENNOCK OHICEN SUITE 1004 FOURTH G. BIANCHARD BUILDING 2121 FOURTH AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 00121 mem 443-1212 VANCOUVER OFFICE RESIDENT PARTNERI THANE YI TICNSON SUITE ISO 112 WEST Om 511:1EET VANCOUVER, WASH1Nc ION 08000 (2011) 0984,,, 37 15031 231-160 DAUM OFFICE 240 EQUITABLE CENTER 530 CENTER STREET N.E. SALEM, OREGON 07301 (803) 376-0101 Enclosed is a copy of Beth Mason's opinion. With respect to the wetlands/ I do not think you could ask for more than she has given. As far as possible violations of the ordinance go, the possibility of technical violations exist -- I would defer initially to Roger Redfern -- but I think any appeal would be difficult to win. If stopping development is what you want i 1 could examine that issue more closely, but appeals would prove costly ($3,000 - $5,000). If protecting the wetlands is what you want, 1 think the decision accomplishes that result. Please note that there are 10 days to appeal the decision. MY recommendation would be that you not appeal it I do not know if Davis will appeal or not, although if I Were his attorney, 1 would probably advise him against it. In any event, please let me know your desire by next Tuesday, May 260 at the latest. 1 hope you are pleased with the decision, /".":111(1k 44461.44) /017/CIO h p‘V 1—R a'n place) .e4612,01, A,4 PO "a3 1040 1611.444) (5141t.16 MaGirm EnCloSUre cc: Roger Redfern Very truly yours, 4ft-ftt40 LAW & ttitTO twek. J.I dteohtield • CHARLES T. SMITH RICHARD L LANO WM, H. MITCHELL E DWARD J. SULLIVAN** WILLIAM A. MASTERS* WM, KELLY OLSON* C. PENNOCK OHICE1,1* B RUCE M, WHITE* THANE 414 TIENSON* JOHN A. WITTMA.YER* .1410411ZPI ORSOON AND WASHINGTON SAM ''Mcdasom °stook AND WASHINGTON, D.C. OARS iMgMBEIR WASHINGTON SAN ONLY SCOTT J. MEYER RANDALL A. WILEY DAVID R. AMBROSE* MICHAEL. C. MITCHELL* PATRICK D. GILROY, JR.* GREG BARTHOLOMEW* ELIZABETH A. SAMSON CANDACE H. WEATHERBY KATHLEEN L. ROCKERS RICHARD A WYMAN CORINNE C. SHERTON THOMAS M. CHRIST MARK 5. RAUCH Timm ph WEINER MARK J. GREENFIELD CHARLES 0 HARMS MICHAEL D. HEPsURNt LESLIE ANN BUDIWITZt RICHARD L GRANT* Ms. Nancy Tracy 7310 SW Pine Street Portland, OR 97223 MITCHELL, LANG & SMITH ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 ONE MAIN MACE 10i 9. W MAIN STREET PORTLAND, OREGON 97ao4 TELEPHONE MOM 221-i011 July 6, 1987 SEATTLE OFFICE RESIDENT PARTNER: C. PENNOCK °HEIM SUITE 1004 FOURTH & etroicHARD 1111UILDING1 2121 FOURTH AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 913121 awe) 443-1212 VANCOUvER OFFICE RESIDENT PARTNER: THANC W T1EN8ON SUITE 100 112 WEST 117,1 STREIET VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON 09660 00131 698-2837 03031 221-1011 SALEM orrice 240 EQUITAIII1LE CENTER 830 CENTER STREET 6ALE14, OREGON 07301 (803) 3743-0101 Dr. Eugene L. Davis 4550 SW Lombard Street BeaVertOni OR 97005 Dear Ms. Tracy and Dr. Davis: On Saturday, June 27, 190.7, our office received a ViSit. from Dr, Davis, who spoke with myself and David Ambrose regarding some concerns he had with the activities of the Beaverton Urban Renewal Authority with respect to his property Beaverton ...At that point, neither Mr 4 Ambrose nor Z were aware that Dr, Davis. was the same person who was involved with MS. Tr ad's aCtiV-itieS in the City of Tigard. At the end of our meeting, .pr:._Davis pulled OUttt map and about his point i indicated to • Dr DiiiElt WetoUld not talk to him • about this matter, at least: until any further heatingt_were held and the appeal period ekpited.. 1 indicated to Dr Davis ty undortanding that MS. Tracy was satisfied wih the results o f the heatin g. and that neither she not Dr i had appealed the result of the hearings Offiderla. determination * 1 also. • n oted that ...Some third party had indicated that he or she had not teteiv04...totido and or an opportunity to be ti6Atd, 1 thdetstood. from Dr Davis that that hearing' had been held and that thete...P0eatedto be no further 600.,e41, from the hearings officer's f.utthet. detetm*nation 1 further understand that we have_Olobed out file on the ligted,appliottion i view. of the results of the hearings offidet,s determination We would not have 10160' of Dr o OttViS1 involvement in Tigard had he not brought it to out attention* .We ate, .therefor'04 Writing. both Of you to ditolote this-mattet•and to deter.Mine ro.s* r.n A4 MITCHELL, LANG & SMITE Ms. Nancy Tracy Dr. Eugene L. Davis July 6, 1987 Page 2 whether either of you have any objection. If so, please let us know immediately;, If Ms. Tracy does not wish us being involved with Dr. Davis" We have not us know wz utter in �o�vth�.sn�lettershoWuld let been within a week of the date asked to become involved in the development of the Tigard property and, if we were to be asked we would write Ms. Tracy separately. Thank you both for your kind attention to this matter. EJS /rm Very truly yours, MITCHELL, JLAN & SMITH lEdwar Ian CHARLES T. SMITH RICHARD L. LANO WM. H. MITCHELL EDWARD SULLIVAN” WILLIAM MASTERS* WM, KELLY OLSON* E. PENNOCK OHEEN* NRUcC M. WHITE* THANE W 71ENSON. JOHN A WITTMAYER* ,m042K2 OREGON AND WASHINGTON EARS "MEMNEPI 04EGON AND WASHINGTON. P.C. MARS SCOWJ.M1MM RANDALL A WILEY R AMBROGC. MICHAEL C. MITCNELL PATRICK D. GILROY, JR,* ORICO BARTHOLOMEW* ELIEASETH A. SAMSON CANDAC P4, WEATHERMY KATHLEEN L. BICKERS RICHARD I.. WYMAN CORINNE c GHENToN THOMAS M. CHRIST MARK S. RAUCH TERRY M. WEINER MARK J. GREENFIELD CHARLES 0. HARMS MICHAEL 04 HEPOURN LcaLIE ANN eUDEverz MITCHELL, LANG & SMITH ATTORNUY8 AT LAW 2000 ONE MAIN PLACE 101 B. W MAIN STREET PORTLAND, ORKOON 97204 TELEPHONE P803) 221.1011 Dr. Eugene L. Davis 455P SW Lombard Street Beaverton, OR 97005 Dear Dr. Davis: July 8, 1987 8EATTLE OPPICIC ne887ENT PARTNERS M. PENNOCK SHEEN suite 1004 FOURTH Cs ULANCHAFICI &WILDING 21E1 POURTH AV1ICNUIC SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 28121 9100) 443-1213 vANcouven orrice RESIDENT PARTNERI THANE W TIENEON SUITE 1110 DS WEST OM STREET VANCOLNEF10 WASHINGTON 08060 GOO1 098-2837 0103i 231•101i SALEM OFFICE. 540 EQUITASLIC CEN7E14 530 CENTER STREET MIL SALEM, OREGON 07301 18031 378-01131 As you know, I wrote to both yourself and Nancy Tracy regarding a conference we had on June 27, 1987. Ms. Tracy indicates that she is uncomfortable with our representing you, feeling that she may need us in the future and that our activities on your behalf may cause a conflict with her interests. Therefore, unless Ms. Tracy consents, we can represent You no further in your controversy with the City of Beaverton. If you need a reference to another lawyer, please give me a call and I would be glad to refer you. EJS/rm cc: Ms, Nancy Tracy David R. Ambrose Very truly yours, MITCHELL, LANG & SMITH ///Ic4/// Edward J. Sullivan • a • it v rr-•-� • '« .� r� i• up ti+ '$,'` if 11. ri i i \' it irt- PQ m V yyM. 41 -r1 „ k ile ! 's . r.. .4 i . \i j, \ li:\s., 4".''' . i../N... I:, I jL_,.�. t, 1. tifotelistrava 1 LEGIBILITY STRIP' Ot�I- Bida.0 Alb .•••• � :•M� .)?h a� ->!F. `vim -i:', ..i .11. .. r. • air For 10' 94 161qo Y., Af÷en+lotn. i<ti+ift 'taireit Efl6fe-61 flicco• i nj,td 41(16.5.e- rn44-er;4/3 .10 +h hit: No. 5L.1. c10-0011 , I-1- 16 imp.e,r'14:tive -1-ka+—The, new hectrivls officer now abbiltitd 4-0 +his review has a dricAnce, review +hest mai-vials) 4414, Ca6e, ha c lot3 The m44-arials also rneAme, -revzotvinj for-the ftii4' -1-trn'a} 4,he back1/49roancl iriforrna-Wan e a,n9 utnelex+itoridi.141 I wi&-b 60'in., on, • The fOliow n q are for I:lid/L.0:i ors in +he officiok, °retard 61.K.c16-001). I, SLAM OlArj o1 Rd , (I' 54e, 'Pert(); 14-4-1'n,i Guidti eivies , 4 . .Ltirkdr from Mik 14ouck t PAS, jiMIC. 20, 14 Vf 3. ‘i 0 TUk. Eaefz. ) Wash, Co" Feb . ig" 1 icite, 4. e% ee .. es . 0 i ltar, lel il9r1 6 kstunony , Roger. Red ftrru ) eelith or4//1 i A p r: 3d i iii cf7 6 kel-Rir From MArk 6roenfi'old, A414-cheir; fai.9 i*Smil-11 , re caffle,, li i i re I Davao p1-inc., o .g.it,. 1, L64-1-0,r f ram 01 54-ot.ti-iDavid 61/0.116 4-i4,550c. ) /144,3 13 ;too nal'14.9441" 91 it ii 04.6,k Broarn i7ht W4i-imul9 Cort6avoel ) Allitj 141 Mt7 lot pel&I ardex-i I-km-1111J Orfices 1 Bekl-, mcison, a atiri.e. ), iest(7 al, it 146k- frirn gotmo R066 i 1)L C ) jaw.. i 1 i 1'i V7 4., IR h'ai OrdeAr bj 1-1161145 ' Ofi ,-tv 1 6€4-te, /144-6m i kitA.19 61 I )(113 11. N04-16,0, , 1DsL ) &ark gohn661) f 1:544/i6 I cfoot T 4,„ i i 4 „., i i 4 i t.tt+0,r- Fran-, kehvitkli h t-rittiKii h ) uSi. i 1-0 u6W16 , Act( 5 Igo Jotl 5114,06ft i D,SL, A-tid. A 0 / Melo icicio * it■ LeAer froch lillit, 14-dwiL i TASi Mar. 26 i aqvy ' it, Mies trarvi 4-61. doW,6e6AY\ )4i4k Q'okh j'ack5tmi U6A ict, pit pY;tivi" 4 egele., AA41461,4-._.2:5 ,116„, ii . kg. iertiL, Of 01/.4 CC IA) f) ithavi 14t°1 ' 6-,:v i( . 479141"111-144 14, A AA, [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing]