The URL can be used to link to this page

SLR1991-00004POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. t DAVIS i3. of 217, W. of 84th Ave. 1S1 35AC, 101, 2800, 4800, 1S1 35 D, ~ • _ DIVISION OF STATE LANDS 775 SUMMER ST. N.E. SALEM, OREGON 97310-1337 (503) 378-3805 DATE -62°°1°.'ec9 1061°).-5- frOroSe89 oleil space clOseecP ces75-;e71,0,,,t Area ;446e¥ s psz., feem; re ci;re 0.4 e0.7' ‘v4 .1,5" -9140efr- col °pee -Vac e ci 'redo( ( 0( 71:y et orce /16 ( VA(' '-rOr" 1-1Ae ("eve /a/mem/I me. Avow -(0 Mve evt4/€ or6i 4te.e ceeeX res7',0- (%c,Y-:('6,0 (,0 Ae & afeleou;Ai ald re 044; eN) Alaki7L 411 k.e c4 tA- JOEL Entoroetnent Field Inspector ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND PERMITS SECTION ; 111.10•011001110■1110131•1•11,y.11.111410.1.1111.41.............", re' Divirzt • OF LiJ SigF APR Z 4, fiti April 1, 1993 Joel Shaich Division of State Lands 775 Summer St Salem OR 97310 : Deed Restriction for Dr. Davis Property Our Pile No. 40117/22061 Dear Joel: Enclosed for your review and approval are the form of deed restriction for wetland protection, the property's legal description, and a survey of the property being restricted. Upon receipt of your approval, we shall have the document executed by Mr. and Mrs. Davis and recorded promptly. Please call me if you have any questions. Very truly TARLO 1600 SW Cedar Hills Blvd Suite 100 Portland OR 97225 VAX (503) 641-2991 (503) 641.7171 SCHRADER. E. ANDREW 0 ro AN cc Dr. Eugene L. Davis A Tdiat aiUty Mciiiagettient Orgarti&itidii 1.s379icaihitr/4/1/93-1 4;* AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Tarlow, Jordan & Schrader, P.C. Attn: Gene L. Smiley 1600 SW Cedar Hills Blvd, #100 Portland OR 97225-5498 (40117/22061) This space provided for recorder's use. DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT WHEREAS, GENE L. DAVIS and VIVIAN M. DAVIS, husband and wife, are the owners of real property described in the attached Exhibit A, and WHEREAS, it is the desire and intention of the owners to set aside the property described above for wetland resource protection; NOW, THEREFORE, the owners hereby declare that all of the property described in Exhibit A is held and shall be held, conveyed, hypothecated, or encumbered, leased, rented, Used, occupied, and improved subject to the following limitations, restrictions, conditions, and covenants, all of which are declared and agreed upon for the purpose of protecting the property for Wetland purposes. All of the limitations, restrictions, conditions, and covenants shall run with the land and shall be binding on all parties having Or acquiring any right, title, or interest in the described property or any part thereof. The property described in Exhibit A is to be managed for wetland resource protection. Grazing, filling, or other alteration is prohibited, except as required for wetland protection purposes. Enforcement shall be by proceedings at law or in equity against any person or persons violating or attempting to violate the above covenants, either to restrain violation or to recover damages. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the owners have signed this Declaration this day of April, 1993. GENJ3L. DAVIS VIVIAN M. DAVIS STATE OF MOON ) ) ss, County of Washington ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on April , 1993 by dene L. Davis and Vivian M. Dais. NoTAille PUBLIC Poll OREGON My Commission txpires: . oecLwrioN OF -mTitittliM:OVeNANT • diAttikacdoo/4/1/0.1 BRAOLEY S. SCHLEINING President Legal Description for Ash Creek Property Open Space Deed Restriction No. 1 (W.B. Wells & Assoc., Inc. - Job No. 88-208) A tract of land for the purpose of an Open Space Deed Restriction being a portion of Lots 20 & 21 of the duly recorded plat of "Ashbrook Farm" in the D.C. Graham D.L.C." No. 52, and the N.E. one - quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the'N.E. corner of Lot 17, "Ashbrook Farm "; thence along the East line of Lot 17, South 00x33'18" East, a distance of 558.17 feet to the Northwesterly line of Lot 18; thence along said Northwesterly line, North 522e21'42" East, a distance of 37.65 feet to the North line of Lot 18; thence along the North line of Lot 18 and Lot 20, South 84x59'29" East, a distance of 220.05 feet to the True Point of Beginning of the herein described tract; thence leaving the said North line, South 00x33'18" East, a distance of 40.19 feet; thence South 84x59'29" East, a distance of 381.75 feet; thence South 04x59'43" East, a distance of 259.66 feet; thence South 33x11 r 13 it East, a South distance of 389.62 feet to the Westerly extension of the South line of Lot 36 of the duly recorded plat of "Graham Acres rr , thence along said Westerly extension, South , 89x30'30" East, a distance of 359.15 fee to the West right-of-way line of S.W. hence along said � _ North 00x06'30" W89th Ave.; Ave. ' " ,. est, a distance of 35.00 feet; thence leaving said West j e North 016x5? r 2 West., a t 1 . � �nee� North $9x30' 306r� W es t; a distance of 217.81 feet, thence distance . feet; thence North 19x21'30" West, a 57 14 f 34x41'37" , distance of 7 West, a 8 41 feet; et thence North of 109.97 feet; thence North 49x53'31" ' " West, a �.. thence North 3/x 4 1 West, a distance e of 68.98 feet; distance distance of 45.37 feet, thence North 47x45'59" West, a distance of 81.94 feet; thence North 78x57'42" West, a distance of 63.8 West, a 7 feet; thence North 02x09'05" � r� distance of 76,76 thence south 84x59 29" East, a distance of 552.27 feet, to the West line of that tract of land described in deed 28, to Louis Clifton Steele, recorded October 28 1922, in Book Page 294, Washington County 1922, Deed Records; thence along the Wert line of said Steele tract, North 00x07'00" West, a distance of 4.1.63 feet to the North line of said Lot 21; thence along the said North line, West, a distance of 16.78 feet; thence North 84x59'29" West, a distance of 986.43 feet to the Tribe Point of Beginning. •.' BRADLEY S, SCHLEINING President January 24, 1991 AND ASS6CIATES, ENGINIEES SURVEY° S Legal Description for Ash Creek Property Open Space Deed Restriction No. 2 (W.B. Wells & Assoc., Inc. - Job No. 88-208) A tract of land for the purpose of an Open Space Deed Restriction being a portion of Lot 13 of the duly recorded plat of "Ashbrook Farm" in the D.C. Graham D.L.C. NO. 52, and the N.E. one-quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, being more particularly described as follows Beginning at the S.E. Corner of that tract of land described in deed to Thelma Cpouch, recorded February 11, 1965, in book No. 540, Page 476, Washington County Deed Records, said beginning point bears West, a distance of 226.24 feet from the N.E. corner of Lot 21, said deed records; thence along the East line of said Cpouch tract, North 00°0700" West, a distance of 253.02 feet; thence leaving said East line, North 65°20'32" West, a distance of 67.50 feet; thence South 55°34'49" West, a distance of 148.60 feet; thence SoUth 81°16'10" West, a distance of 114.34 feet to the East line of said Cpouch tract; thence along the said East line, South 00°33'18" East, a distance of 171,54 feet to the North line of said Lot 21; thence along the said North line, South 84°59'29" East, a distance of 95.12 feet; thende East, a distance of 201.04 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 1.57 acres, more or less. 4 0 • DAVID W., M1.18 8041Rit: ft W.: • • • 1/3/1:41 • • • .N tiv): ..g.T•14t.t .• •pORTLANb. 01 0.0 N 9ii3 .• 204. ,.,T:83.0 6: �J t �S:yN r:it Y�� wt ,G,`,��'�f, +ir. K fyi 1r „:�'w .r }� t �a '�':��” '�� '::. . 1�`a..,'•t.,,r:. ..: AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Tarlow, Jordan & Schrader, P.C. Attn: Gene L. 'Smiley 1600 SW Cedar Hills Blvd, tt100 Portland OR 97225 -5498 (40117/22061) WHEREAS, DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT GENE L. DAVIS and VIVIAN M. DAVIS, husband and wife, are the owners of real property described in the attached it is the desire and intention of the owners to set aside the property described above for wetland resource protection; NOW, THEREFORE, the ow hereby i . and shall be held, conveyed, � Hers hereb declare � that � of the }��'suU�ecdto described in Exhibit A is held an following hnutat ons, trestrictions conditions and hypothecated, or encumbered, leased, rented, used, occupied, p� agreed p purpose p subject property for wetland purposes. All of the limitations, covenants, all of which protecting the e s conditions, and covenants shall run with the land and shall be loch are declared and a eed a on for the u ose of r g p 'coon } .. � binding on all parties having or acquiring any right, title, or interest resin in the described property or any part thereof. g , p Grazing, or other alteration is The property described in Exhibit A is to be managed for Wetland resource refection. Grazut , filling, prohibited, except as required for wetland protection purposes. Enforcement shall be by proceedings at law or in equity against any person or persons violating or attempting to violate the above covenants, either to restrain violation or to recover damages, IN WIT 1993. WITNESS WHEREOF, the owners have signed this Declaration this Z.?i �f pri GENE L. DAVIS 'lAN M. s AVIS STATE OF OREGON County of Washington This instrument was acknowledged before me on April ,2L, 1993 by Gene L. T)avis and l'`ivian M. Davis: ©FEIGIAL SEAL REIN IIULT A, �!R NOTARY PUBLIC - OAKUM COMMISSION NO400003 MY GOMMISSfON tX,PIFtES AUG, x£1,1 t' NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires Page i - DECLARATION OF RESTRIcTIVLc COVENANT dL3lJ18kn 4doc14ltI9J -1 BRADLEY S. SDHLEINING ProsiOnt April 29, 1993 (Third revision) AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SURVEY0tRS Legal Description for Ash Creek Property Open Space Deed Restriction No. 1 (W.B. Wells & Assoc., Inc. - Job No 88-208) A tract of land for the purpose of an Open Space Deed Restriction being a portion of Lots 20 & 21 of the duly recorded plat of "Ashbrook Farm" in the D.C. Graham D.L.C. No. 52, and the N.E. one-quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the N.E. corner of Lot 17, "Ashbrook Farm"; thence along the East line of Lot 17, South 00°33'18" East, a distance of 558.17 feet to the Northwesterly line of Lot 18; thence along said Northwesterly line, North 52°21'42" East, a distance of 37.65 feet to the North line of Lot 18; thence along the North line of Lot 18 and Lot 20, South 84°59'29" East, a distance of 220.05 feet to the True Point of Beginning of the herein described tract; thence leaving the said North line, South 00°33'18" East, a distance of 40.19 feet; thence South 84059'29" gast, a distance of 381.75 feet; thence South 04°59'43" East, a distance of 259.66 feet; thence South 33°11'13" East, a distance of 389.62 feet to the Westerly extension of the South line of Lot 36 of the duly recorded plat of "Graham Acres"; thence along said Westerly eXtension, South 89°30'30" East, a distance of 359.15 feet to the West right-of-way line of S.W. 89th Ave.* thende along said West line, North 00°06'30" West, a distance of 35.00 feet; thence leaving said West line, North 89°30'30" West, a distance of 217.81 feet; thence North 06°57'26" West, a distance of 102.34 feet; thence North 00°06'30" West, a distance Of 417,047 feet; thence South 84°5929" East, a distance of 255.86 feet, to the West line of that tradt of land described in deed to Louis Clifton Steele, recorded October 280 1922, in gook 124, Page 294, Washington County Deed Records; thence along the West line of said Steele tract, North 00°0700" West, a diStande Of 41.63 feet to the North line of said Lot 21; thence along the said North line, West, a distance of 16.78 feet; thence North 84°5929" West, a distance of 986.43 feet to the True Point of Beginning. dSk .00hbrOOk,r0S.... 428-6 N Te: M ON1 STET .16'6 'OIL A N. 115, .OREGON 0121,3 PON 84'896 • BRADLEY S. SCHLEINING President IAA January 24, 1991 AND ASSifiCIATESE, INC. ENGINEES SURVEYORS Legal Description for Ash Creek Property Open Space Deed Restriction No. 2 (W.B. Wells & Assoc., Inc. - Job No. 88-208) A tract of land for the pUrpose of an Open Space Deed Restriction being a portion of Lot 13 of the duly recorded plat of "Ashbrook Farm" in the D C Graham D.L.C. No 52, and the N.E. one-quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the S.E. corner of that tract of land described in deed to Thelma Cpouch, recorded February 11, 1965, in book No 540, Page 476, Washington County Deed Records, said beginning point bears West, a distance of 226.24 feet from the N.E. corner of Lot 21, Said deed records; thende along the East line of said Cpouch trAct, North 00°07'00" West, a distance of 253.02 feet; thence leaving said East line, North 65°2032" West, a distance of 67.50 feet, thence South 55°34'49" West, a distance of 148.60 feet; thence South 81°1610" West, a distance of 114.34 feet to the East line of said Cpouch tract, thence along the said East line, South 00°33'18" East, a distance of 171.54 feet to the North line of said Lot 21, thence along the said North line, South 84°59'29" East, a distance of 95.12 feet; thence East, a distance of 201.04 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 1.57 acres, more or less. ' neii-s, I .41,44404o ‘444 t LANt.D St:4: . • • .4.230 Ht4'„e'*. FREMOP4T STREEt POrtI14.AN.a,.. 6.14t.00-N. 0124J.. • Oeir,T4G011 JULY I& 1980 DAVIC) W, Mills 01,916 t Yk �. ✓is �P i r f a N}; 1 k Ca.t • tv t Y q�:: +'FY,'t {, �lrtu �,l. r. ,(.� •:t.�..'�.ri � skrr Joel Shaich Division of State Lands 775 Summer Street Salem OR 97310 Re: Deed Restriction for Dr. Davis Property Our File No. 40117/22061 Dear Joel: Enclosed for your review and approval are the form of deed restriction for wetland protection, the revised property's le ga l description and survey y o f the property being restricted. A copy of this information is also being sent directly to Dick Bewersdorff for his approval as well. Upon receipt of your approval, we shall have the deed recorded promptly. Please call me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, TAR%OW, JORDAN & SCHRADER 1600 SW Cedar Hills. Blvd • Suits 100 r' : tPortland OR 97225 VA? (503) 641-2991 (• 503) 641-7171 E. ANDREW JORDAN cc Dr. Eugene Davis Dick Bewersdorff A Mta /.QaalliY Mdnagii'itent OtgaMtfzadan • May 20, 1993 E. Andrew Jordan, Esq. Tarlow, Jordan St Schrader 1600 SW Cedar HMS Blvd., Suite 100 Portland, OR 97225 STATE LAND BOARD BARBARA ROBERTS GbVernor PHIL KEISLING Secretary of State JIM HILL State Treasurer Dear Mr. Jordan: The deed restriction you sent me on April 30, 1993 (copy enclosed) is adequate to meet the requirements of state permit FP 4570 for the Davis property. Please provide me with a copy of the recorded document for our records. Sincerely, Joel Shaich Environmental Planning and Permits Section t ft Enclosure 77g Sarittidt Sittet 8610t, OR 9731048V (g03) 878480g VAX (503) 37'8-4844 LEGIBILITY'STRIP \r rAtx ti CI December 17, 1992 Dr. Eugene and Vivian Davis 10075 SW 89th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Dr. Davis: in response to your question concerning the land on i writing which �. � =� within 40 feet of �a Creek. You 1�1 �5�iti� tax lot 1400 wh3. head a ked the City to state its understanding of the condition of approval which requires this 40 foot wide strip. 91� ®004 was issued. The Final Order for sensitive lands review SLR appeal on this on Nov r 12a 1991. The deadline for filing an app final order was November 27, 1991. No appeal was filed. The following iowin was stated in Section VII (Conclusion and Decision) of this Final Order SLR 91-0004: The applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall designate . the south as open space in perpetuity that land shown in pink � uoE�chabih 6 of this decision: including land within 40 feet pond and Ash Brook and land within 25 feet north of the top of the north pond bank. The City understands this to mean that these areas are in fact dedicated in perpetuity. Under the current decision there is no p not be Y developing h _, se onions of lad • they l be opportunity for develo xng t led as Open space, Y as these areas are to be design: included as a portion of a residential building include let or a of the . refore a setbacks Shall not any resid�sntna�. yard • �'he rti,ons of land which is required to be designated as open space. cation of position the City's ° s . for an Ands. . You had also asked f.on regarding a P g : • R-4.5 or CaP �ned l e change / comprehensive plan amendment appears pp1ication which would change a portion of your _ over�riew of your hamper a it land to � 12 0 �p�r ®va�l ere may be some In a precursory which would hasp , that the t subject land area may be j �' - .. � subject to tit � � t development enty li itatiOns such as flooding and poor drainage need Plan Policy 12.1). addition, the new designation Would need to ...., l ith the ss�urrounding land uses fit compatibly .. for of the applicable locational Amendment Plan $ at enclosing a copy �p �e 1 criaeraa f® u r review. a l Coiuprehensi. s�ucscesSfu demonstrate to the City Council that one of the following two situations estits u ,.r < Y r:'. •J jY :1:' I��ry .t �.�A _. A .11.1 �,:,�1� \�. x .• , CflY OF TIG OREGO 13125 MILlailBlvciv PA Box 23397,11gdrd, Oregon 97223 (503) 639 -4171 A mistake was made in tax original Comprehensive Plan designation for the site. The area in question should have received a different designation in the beginning; or® 2) A change in circumstances has occurred so th t the current Plan designation is no longer apprlpriate and that the appropriate plan designation should in fact be that which you are reg1esting. If you have any further questions or c nts a please contact the Cite of Tigard Planning Division at 639 -4i71. Sincerely, Ron Pomeroy Assistant Planner cruam rumAcTxou COMPLAINT STATE OF OREGON County of Washington City of Tigard CIVIL INFRACTIONS Cane No. 90-055-13 crry �»F ,P OREGON The undersigned City of Tigard CODE sumammgmmuT OFFICER certifies That on or but the 13th day of September , 1990 NAME: RUGkNE DAVIS ADDRESS: 13095 SW and says: Beaverton OR. 97005 City, State Zip Code did unlawfully and in violation of Sennitive14aSLAL-01 V 87-02 , of Tigard Community Development Code cjigAner13, did COMMIT/PERMIT to be committed the violation as follows: Mligl_Itotatecondititemis_t&&_23seondand5 as net forth in the AUGUST 2 th lettvrsigned b Bandr.201.1tEJEftgineert_ at Tax Lot ALSJ.MWAMMt._121IL00#4800, and 7....exargkj1S1 35AD #1200, 13ORLJ400 u_ilm iarqualgansimj2224ftst of 84th 21.112=1, in the City of Tigard: Washington County, State of Oregon. I certif, under penalty provided by ordinance and state la, I have reasonable groundE and do believe the above person (COMMITTED/PERMITTED to be committed) the above violation. Signat1 recof .mpla CODE wFORCEMENT 0 COY R. HUMPHREY Name of Person Signing thin Complaint (Please Print) c: RANDY WOE, City Engineer KEITH LID, Senior Planner SEPTEMBER 14, 1990 Date Complaint Issued SEPTEMBER 13 1990 Date comPlaiut Filed ulth Civil Infractions Hearings Officer caralch 13125 sW Hdil nivel, pa Box 2339Z Tigcird, Oregon 97223 003) 63/-4171 *z! CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon CIVIL INFRACTIONS SUMMONS TO: EUGENE DAVIS ------- 13095 SW Beam_ Beaverton F TIC OREGON Civil Infraction Hearing Case No. 90-055-Z Hearings Officer: ANTHONY PE, Jr. D te of Summons: oalag You have been charged with the following infraction: FailiamAsjmagamatth condi2!�1LJ2L-12.111M9IELEPALLAR4 5 of the Sensitiv4LIDAAPPreval Filq SL 1:41.602, a violation of Section 3.111_1.04Lainls_l_ of Tigard Community Development Code This is a Class 1 Infraction with a maximum possible civil penalty of $250.00 per day, per violation, the problem exists past the date to resolve. A hearing has been scheduled for AlsEPffilog25„112g, at Wang, in the Town Hall Room of the Tigard Civic Center, 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223. The bearing will be held should you or your representative fail to appear. You have the right to counsel at your own expense (please notify the Court Manager five (S) working days prior to appearing with attorney), the right to bring any Witnesses or supporting documents, and the right to cross-examine adverse witnesses. You have the right to compulsory process for the production of your witnesdes. If the Hearing Officer finds you guilty as indicated, you maybe charged witness fees, plus, the civil penalty or other hearing fees. * * * * lig * * 4 4 4 4 124oittrirr tunics * * * * * * * 4 * * * * * a * This SUmmone, and enclosed Complaint, has been filed with the Civil „ . Infraction Nearing0 Officer for the Tigard Municipal Court. Failure to comply with instructions in this Summons could result in a default jvidgement entered against you in favoi of the City of Tigard. hn Unpaid Civil Infraction penalty Cdia result in a lien against the propekty on which this iSfradtioS occurred. (comTimum ON REVERSE SIDE) 13125 SW Hai Blvd, pa Box 23397, Ticjard, Ore on 97223 (503) 639-4171 ---- SEPTEMBER 20, 1990 EUGENE DAVIS 13095 SW Henry Beaverton, Off.. 97005 DE strammTing sum= ON Sul SL LAIN Q fe ' ,,.D, _ This letter pertains to the above matter as required by ordinance. Cn SIP'` I4 19�JQ a certified, registered letter was to 095 SR r. .dG..;�,o�.� 0 I��t1$.Yer�d R.. Q ® 1. It was signed for and accepted (see enclosed signature). A Summons and Complaint was enclosed giving notice of a Civil Infraction Hearing (nee enclosed true copy). If you have questions concerning your scheduled court time or date, please contact NADINE ROBINSON, Court Manager. Her office hours are B:OOa m to 5:00paav Monday through Friday. The phone number is 539 -4X71. Thank you for your attention. Sin; arely, o: NADINE ROBINSON, Court Manager humphrey /david (sub ®er) a /ch 13125 SW 233971 atd, Otegoh •97223 . . $031 639 -4171 1.1: : La . 1.vuel Ir. John Beavers, rf, f , Staff Contact Planning Dept. City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR ,97223 Res SLR 91 -0004 Dear Mr. Bewersdorff, RECEIVED PLANNING NOV 4m 1991 The applicant has not acted in good faith since he accepted Hearings Officer, Beth Mason's final mitigation order in 1987. This is all part of the record -- 3 year of degrad- ing the area dedicated to open -space and wetlandsrby cattle, the ponds left devoid of vegetative cover. It is difficult b h tnowtto accept in good faith that this 3rd SLR called for by applicant licant is other than a move to further st,a1 ? accepting responsibility for fulfilling the mitigation requirements. If indeed the mitigation requirements are now putting off mprospective buyers, a remedy needs to be found by other ans than putting at risk the maintenance and repair of the dedicated open- space. We do not know but that other factors such as a non-nego- tiable selling price. inadequate sales promotion, or the limited accessibility �o the site, off Oak St. and in a congested area have influenced a prospective buyer's de- cision n not to buy. cent to wetlands attracts tenants willing mor e r Why, when commercial development � may Pax "or office space, is this wetland Site being presented as a draWback Perhaps' `g loW- through has left of mitigation fol the adedicated aopen-space p looking like a blighted area: g g +edn does open-sp ace , dedicated in perpetuity, and accep- ted as payment by the applicant and concerned residents' for the filling -in of the natural on -site Wetland for commercial development become final? Sincerely8 Gt) fl . � 'Tr'4/ Nancy iloU Tracy 73i0 S.W. Pine St Portland, OR 97223 NOV-04-1991 16:2? FROM BEAUERTON PET CLINIC awe' tom Pet TO 6647297 P.O. GENE DAVIS. DVM 13095 SM. HENRY BEAVERTON, OREGON 97005 (503) 646.6101 To; Richard Bewersdorff, Staff contact November 4, 1991 Fax - 684-7297 For: Mr. Larry Epstein Esq. Hearings Officer City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Re; John Broome letter of 1-November 1991, SLR 91-004 Dear Mr. Epstein= This is a very good letter in man Y regards but John Broome being self appointed is outside the information loop. Being unable to reach Andy Jordan, I'm responding to you directly. As you kriow, we recei"ed three permits on this project. The one from the Division of state Lands coVers all the areas of concern Mr. Broome addresses. Joel Schaich is the Wildlife Biologist who enforces that permit. He testified in behalf of the state. All the grading, etc, is done according to their criteria. Knowing that all the areas of concern listed ih Mr. Broomeis letter eXcept the Maintenance cost was under his aCtthoritY. He questioned deed restriction, etc but not these areas, However, We are u0ing Rex Van Wormer of Independent Ecological Services and hav a plan desidnd bY his company and approved by the State. We are three years into the program and envision s%lmost no R&M expenses beyond the fiVe Year Period as stated in John Broome's letter in the 4th to the last. Paragraph. f do plan to meet with him. however. Tha • dOt1604Vi Ob/jb . TCITA 'I! " 4' 1.4 TheWetiandsCons 1 November 1991 t ■ 41,.44 , , . . • 11 •••••, ''..,/,?1,;',S;ft.,k1,,, 1,,Y • • . • ancy •„.4 `..* qP Mr. Larry Epstein, Esq. Hearings Officer City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard OR 97223 RECEIVED PLANNING NOV 1 1991 Re: Dr. Eugene Davis Property, SLR 91-004 Dear Mr. Epstein: I have been thinking on the subject of Repair and Maintenance (R&M) issues for the Davis property on Ash Creek and have the following comments. There are several high quality environmental consulting firm3 in this area that could help Dr. Davis arrive at some reasonaae R&M parameters and costs. Fishman Environmental Services, Scientific Resources, Inc., and CHZM Hill to name just a very few. R&M implies that there is a defined project area that meets development standards for open space, flood plain, wetland and stream riparian habitat. The site does not now meet these standards. It is probably pockmarked by cattle hooves and the stream banks are too steep, hence erosion. There could be low berms to prevent runoff from the flood plain to the creek except at times of high water. Such low berms are often caused by nature which builds natural levies along stream banks where vegetation traps sediment. There is much basic work that needs to be one to the Davis property before R&M figures can be estimated. For example, the entire flood plain area probably should be disked and harrowed and reseeded. There might be some low spots where wetland plants might volunteer. If so, these areas could be left undisturbed. The banks of ASh creek should be regarded to a much more shallow slope. This woUld encourage growth of hydrophytes, purify the water and reduce or completely eliminate erosion and down stream siltation. Riparian trees and shrubs should be planted along the bankS to further stabilize them and to provide wildlife habitat. The eventual appearance of the entire open space needs to be considered and therefore a design including a grading and landscape plan IS heeded. Onde this has been done, then R&M costs can be estimated for a known quantity and quality of plant materials. i To my knowledge no one has ever seen sucha... design or even a vision statement of what the end proddct i to be AS Dr. Gottfried testified, R&M dosts cannot be estimated Until they are related Pott. ()Moo box 1195 • tuatUh Otebh 01062. .Phdri0; .(608).'691,..1 804 to a specific landscape. Some components of R &M could be however: 1. Annual mowing of certain areas. 2. Watering of new plants for the first two or three years. 3. Replacement of plants lost to various causes such as drought, flood damage, animal damage. Once a landscape has become established (5 year time frame) R &M costs could be reduced to trash cleanup, path maintenance, nest box replacement and the like. These are all very low cost items which could be funded from the earnings of a dedicated management fund. urge would r a g Dr. Davis to retain the services of a creative environ- mental consultant to develo p a written program statement for the property which would then become the basis for a landscape j ationvthe aesthetic and functional walcn.,.edsloftthe future adjacent consideration development while protecting functional ne � the functional values of the wetlands, flood plain, open water, stream and stream banks as an ecological entity which would maximize wildlife values, water storage and water purification. All of this is entirely psssibie and reasonable to expect but ` p can never be accomplished by planting a few shoots of this and that and then abandoning them to the ravages of our typically hot and dry summers. If Dr. Davis would make a good faith effort to accomplish these objectives, the Wetlands Conservancy would be willing to cooperate in their achievement. Sincerely yours, CV cc: Davis wIt„ : "..14 41, • • NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CHECKLIST NPO Request; Zone; Location: Applicant requests Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of conditions of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decisions SLR 90-0011, SL 1-86, and V 87-02. The proposed amendments relate to: 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costs, 2) properties to be subject to maintenance and repair costs to permit full recovery to City, 3) means of assuring performance subject to City attorney, 4) deletion of requirement for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and repair. ZONE: C-P and R-4.5 (Professional Commercial and Residential, 4.5 units per acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 1S1 35AC, tax lots 1011 2800, 4800, and 151 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, and 1500) Pleasp.review the attached development proposal and comment on those items listed below which concern(s) this MO regarding this application. This listing is a template to aid in your review of this proposal. Please let us know how you feel about this development taking place in your portion of the city. Thank You. Access To and From Site Traffic Impact Neighborhood Impact Environmental Impact Signed: WSW of e414- Date: LEGIBILITY STRIP 4 AGENDA ITEM 2.2 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1991 - 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 91-004. SUMMARY: A request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of conditions of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decisions SLR 90-0011, SL 1-86, and \ 87-02. The proposed amendments relate to 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costs, 2) properties to be subject to maintenance and repair costs to permit full 'recovery to City, 3) means of assuring performance subject to city attorney, 4) deletion of requirement for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and repair. ZONE C-P and R-4 5 (Professional Commercial and Residential, 4.5 units per acre) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION Commercial Professional and Low Density Residential'. ZONING DESIGNATION. C-P (Commercial Professional) and 11,-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre). APPLICANT: Gene and Vivian Davis 13095 SW Henry Beaverton, OR. 97005 OWNER: Same LOCATION.: NOrth of iiightotay 211i otst bi.SW 00th 4Veinie., WCTM .„ 1S1.35ACi-Tak Ioli 4800, and 141.3500i. . . . . , . Lots 1200, 1604. 1400 and. APPLICABLE LAW : Community Development .....dode • Chapter 18 84 (Sensitive Lards) Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1,1t 44141i $TAPV 1ktd010t04N4014:- AiJp.tov. deletion: :of the forim1a for appottlittoiot of costs, approve • .applicant's . definition • of litiAihteande'and:tepait eXdept that the mitigation ponds, wetland• • and " tr"' ihal 1 be •bubjedt t taintonande and repair t� „ .." natural causes and section (e) of the proposed maintenance definition shall be deleted. Direct applicant to prepare maintenance and repair agreement for the City Attorney's review according to Condition 1 of SLR 90-0011. II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE AND SURROUNDINGS SEE ATTACHED STAFF REPORT SLR 90 -0011 III. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SEE ATTACHED STAFF REPORT SLR 90 -0011 IV. NPO & AGENCY COMMENTS CPO reaffirm, i indicates an the hearing on SLR 91 -0004 "should serve to for all, protections spelled out in the mitigation orders of 1987 and 1991. It is time to finalize the mitigation with all the pro accepted it as remunera ,..io for the filling red when the applicant protections assn ago.'' ¢ • g r � of the natural on-site wetland 3 years ago. The entirety of CPO,4 s comments are attached to this report. NPO 8 recommended that the change of requirements be denied. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The applicant's proposed changes relate only to Condition 1 of SLR 90-0011 (as related to Condition 5 of SL - 8) requires that applicant 86). This condition qu , the app... licant execu�.e and file covenants, conditions and restrictions and a property owners association, equitable servitude or equivalent approved by the City Attorney which formula (single family residences - o h space area by apportions main repair costs for the open ac share per lot, o y one share each, duplexes =one p office space -- one share per 2000 square feet of gross floor area, and motel - one share per five units), The condition also requires the prohibition of the modification of restrictions, and covenants unless authorized by the City. The condition also specifies that the,cov....,. aut ize the City to issue citations for failure to maintain�orsre repair en space, the City cited P p p , for • p • problems • The City is to be au horized to the As cre not remedied, ion for the Costs against and to sub ectf to ythel ae ^�roval the property. All articles were to be 7 pp of the City Attorney, The psi 1 a 1 nis requesting amendment of the condition because a and bu yers apparently refuse refuse to purchase property that re Tres de pendence u pon residential home owners and tY..r♦ II bj ifwii� , fk L f, +fii ,� + . . - what the applicant says are maintenance and repair responsibilities and costs that are "ambiguous, undefined and unlimited...". The City's concern is that open space repair and maintenance be guaranteed. The area serves as a flood plain basin for a considerable area to the north. The applicant previously objected to the formation of a property owners association in his application for SLR 90-0011. The Hearings Officer concluded that the applicant should form an association or execute deed covenants or equitable servitude to accomplish the purpose envisioned by SL 1-86. The task of drafting the association structure was left to the applicant. Staff agrees with the applicant that a formula as required in Condition 1 is difficult to use given the unknown nature of the actual future development. Staff also finds the definition of maintenance and repair submitted by the applicant as acceptable with exceptions. One exception relates to section (b) of the proposed maintenance definition. Staff does not believe that the mitigation ponds and streams should be excluded from the definition of maintenance due to natural causes. The mitigation ponds were created and the stream changed in order to develop. They should be maintained and repaired for damage due to natural causes. The second exception relates to section (e) of the proposed maintenance definition. MaintEnance and repair should not wait until after all required improvements are installed. Staff believes that the open space maintenance and repair responsibilities should be from the date of approval of previous decisions. Maintenance and repair are a concurrent on-going issue relative to the area being able to serve as a flood plain basin. Staff and the City Attorney's office are not satisfied with the applicant's proposal to change the properties subject to maintenance and repair without specifics. Staff and the City Attorney's office are also unsatisfied with the proposal to provide security deemed sufficient °from time to time" by the City Attorney. The applicant's proposal is too open-ended to determine if the maintenance and repair of the open space can be effectively managed. The applicant's proposal has failed to specifically address the formation of "covenants, conditions and restriction and a property owners association, equitable servitude or equivalent" as required by SLR 90-0011. It appears to staff the foregoing requirements of the previous approval are both broad and flexible enough for the applicant to choose an appropriate mechanism for the City Attorney's review to guarantee the maintenance and repair of the open space. VI. RECOMMENDATION Staff reCommends that the Hearingb Officer approve the deletion of the formula for apportionment of costs and approve the applicant's suggestion for definition of maintenance with the exception that: (1) . the mitigation ponds, . wetlanda and Stream sh11 be bUbj.dt to the itiAihtehAtie and repair due to natural causes, and (2) section (e) and repair maintenance improvements of the proposed definition for maintenance requirements relating to repair and being required only after all required are installed or completed shall be deleted. The remainder of Condition 1 should be retained and the applicant directed to complete a specific mechanism to guarantee the maintenance and repair of the open space. This should allow applicant to define the appropriate security, property to included and which party or parties will be responsible. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Larry Epstein FROM: Dick Bewersdorff DATE: October 29, 1991 SUBJECT: Information relative to Davis SLR 91-0004 As requested, I have enclose copies of the following: o the Beth Mason final order dated May 18, 1987; o the Beth Mason supplemental decision - July, 20, 1991 a the Davis applicant's statement - 91 -0004 the DSL p ermit 4570 and the Corps of Engineers' permit � If you need additional information, please contact me. 4' NOV 01 '91 10:25 DIV OF STATE LANDS 503 ;'• P.2 November 1, 1991 Larry Epstein Hearings Officer 722 SW 2nd Avenue Portland, OR 07204 Re: SLR 91-0004 Davis Dar Mr. Epstein: alsossommeotemassmaia■,.....,.....mmot DIVISION OF 110110110■11111110Man..10IMIIMIMMIXIIIIM.....■ STATE LANns STATE LAND 130ARD BARBARA ROBERTS Governor PHIL KEISLING Secretary of State ANTHONY MEEKER State Treasurer The Division of State Lands has reviewed Dr. Davis's application. We Support the recoMmendations of the staff report with the following recommendation, Dr, Davi$, future homeowner si or develop ers may maintain the propertY responsibly, however, non of those parties is likely to have the expertise or interest to ensure proper management. We recommend as an alternative that the property be donated to a land trust, such as the Wetland Conervancy, along with an adequate maintenntme fund. The Conservaney is a local land truSt, which was established Specifically to manage wetland areas, has a decade of experience, a record of responSible Management, ohd is the one party most likely to ensure that the area is well -maintained and that the area' S full potential is reached in providing wildlife habitat, flood control, and public education benefits. The Conservancy also has the best information an long term maintenance requirements and costO, Working cut an arrangement for theM to receive the property and a maintenance furld will Provide Dr, Davia, and interested buyer, with the motA realistic maintenance cost reqUitements. It Will relieve D. Davis, and ihterested buyers, of ail future responelibility for Maintenande and will allow experienced managers to make the most of the site's Potential, There May also be tax benefits for br . bavis from the donation. 215 Stitthitir Sireek WE Saittmo OR, (80) 376e805 FAX (503) 878-4844 manamatainiaMialiiMEMICRIOSNII NOV 01 '91 10:36 DIV OF STATE LANDS 503 P.3 We recommend that the City review the existing requirements for this site and rewrite them as necessary to allow and encourage a donation of the property to th Conservancy or another suitable land trust. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Joel Shaich Environmental Planning and Permits Section JAS /dsh joe:311 act br, Eugene Davis Jack Broome, Wetlands Conservancy Richard B 'erSdorff, City of Tigard Planning Department NOV 01 '91 1035 DIV OF STATE 'LANDS 503 P.1 >zm**°"m3I'8"°"421m4"E'n" FAX TRANSMISSION COVER 5 tT DIVISION OF STATE LANDS 775 Summer St. NB Salem, OR 97310 phone: 378-3805 fax: 3784844 FROM: Name; Title: Section: at 11/01,91 10A5 e503 684 7297 L. CITY OF TIOARD 001 ACTIVITY REPORT ( RECEPTION Ok TRANSACTION 4 i4353 CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID G3 START TIME ii'oi 10,044 USAGE TIME 01'30 PAGES 3 44 r 4 October 10, 1991 Land Use Hearings Officer Tigard City Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Case No SLR 91 -004 CORPORATION Dear Sir: Allow me to introduce myself, I am Dennis Schuldheisz, President and Chief Executive Officer a for Spa Suites Corporation, portions of the property which is the i P orporation, a prospective purchaser � determining rn company's interest in. subject of the above- referenced case. In the mr of motel space, I have reviewed the portion property for development purchasing a ortion o upon the roro in the above case pertaining reation of a placed Fo property " �°s ace areas indicated . restrictions laced u n allocation of costs for maintenance of the open F homeowners association and in the decisions. It is the view of our company, as a prospective purchaser and developer of the property, that a homeowners assoc' • • up commercial . iation made u '3f commercial and residential owners is ial 1. , a _ • developer mere unacceptable to other commercial developers as wren- The interests oi be and will. be unaccep and residential property owners are diverse, and a requirement that a commercial an encumbrance subjected • n g p y constitutes to the interests of s re g ®suneort the application lxcation of Eugene surrounding residential property pe : accept. Therefore, , rs will not a ... r potential commercial developers that which. commercial developers . ,_ eats in order to assn e p Davis to eliminate those requiiem such association will not be required. .• i ' ' the above - referenced cases pertaining to the necessary that the re , restrictions therefore the allocation of maintenance costs, be eliminated c ®nS 1n In addition, it is presumably t on of votes, and p w y . . " Y fair p y and allocation � . F restrictions on the property. �' Those .,,allocations do � ro e which the from the re De ec a ai.., no necessan they ; :.....y` , other allocation property rty equitable allocation �f costs, and the preclude any oche � su red in the decisions is a • determine to be most rational. In addition, the allocation build -out how many units .�. droners p . ., system to implement because difficult it will not be clear until fu each property owner there will be in each commercial building and therefore how many votes eac Will have 2120 SW Jefferson, 3rd door Portland, Oregon 97201 • TEL (503) 294 -0921 1 =800- 772 -7848 a MX (603) 294 -0912 Id. Use Hearings Officer October 10, 1991 Page .. r . ... State, Lands is It appears from the decision that the interests of the City and the Division of could lake ems simply to assure that, the costs of maintenance are provided for Such system co many forms, and the development of a homeowners association and the specific cost allocation system . i only y • may palatable to required by decisions is onl one possible system. Others ma be much more , purchasers, and the degree to which such purchasers view the complexity or prospective p y property. The unfairness of the system required will cause substantial difficuflt • in marketing the payment City should permit the property owner to develop a system which will both pay y ' costs dprrevent unnecessary encumbrances on the pry• of maintenance co p For the above reasons, I support the application by Eugene Davis to eliminate the current • owner's ability to devise a system which will meet the restrictions and to substitute the property Y objectives of the City and yet retain the marketability of the property. Yours very truly, itasit."1" . Dennis W. Schuldheisz President & Chief Executive Officer DWS kin ' v N r q i l f tY r d C• >t { luA y: �.i t ��! a 1 .. ,,. r _�... U:t ....t.. ^`.4 Octdber e5, 1991 RECEIVED PLANNING CPO "4 Metzger Steering Committee 9885 S.W. 92nd Portland, OR 97223 Richard Bewersd©rff, , Staff Contact City of Tigard Planning Dept. 13125 S . At Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 t' Dear vir.. Bewersdorff, applicant purchased this land in 1965 it was 'gen° When the app year floodplain. eral knowledge that a substantial part was 100 which entailed responsibilities of management dfunctions of a It was also general knowledge that the essential ood lain area prohibited consideration for extensive wetlddevelopment. f utur i. 4 ° development upland open-space n the � time nzshed of surfaces and increas- ed Since that �,zme d�vel Metzger floodplain for retens t ? ; ° community of sthem100 year flood ion of ed •the importance Clean Water Act and USA's responsibilities in storm water. �'1 �! y�'1 !� a are R• i i!i .!. The its t•w�,� 1+♦•{�ai..L G �! i: ; regard to seeing that. Fanno Creek and �. Yarough.t up to federal standards have further enhanced the value of this area for storage, filtration, and cleansing of storm water • .y ? p �, eT� and The applicant in 1987 accepted conditions set down by Tigard ling in the na- Mason, as the cost x•{ � � Hearings � at the° west end of :his Officer, doer , Beth ial development a total wetland for could have appealed these final orders. He did property. He c ou p not do So. residen- ce t there was a second SLR initiated by the applicant, In 990 there The applicant gained land for lic which had two Dote o in regard to open-space, ; . mss. •�a� developme�xt, and the mitigation by Hearings officer dedicated in perpetuity, was reaff Y u �° spelled conditionS Larry Epstein carefully p dh utaco .ln° Mr. 'p area. C1'0 � �i to be kept out of Y, b which e � anewy y ch cattle were at this hearing, and concurred with the Hearings Of uu testified a ,., fcer ' s findings and decisions. 0 filed for 3rd . leant has ra ST,RUe cause he feels h w the ap s to his de- velopment o applicant e • uirements Stand as that the mztzgat�:on req obstacles applicant the mitigation. the merit plans. In oase no a 91 -0004, item � , th app. . ��.��'4 r� rK .�.�'K yt,� ;i \F, �}�.��'rY �rol,i:.Yr i��i Jf �9l:`;� ,� �,",1 -... A. �nj :. .1�. i..M .,'�i -.: Ult•„�.7r ..S F, SL1 91-0004 page 2 requests "deletion of requirements for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowners association, deed requirements, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repay very ,• p disband proceedures a The application ver sum ly seeks to disband and practices drafted explicitly to protect mitigation from failure 0. loss, in part or whole. Beth Mason noted at the con- clusion o` the 1987 hearing, over which she presided as Hearings Officer, article, on exhibit, influenced the that an of h her order, so that stewardship of the dedicated structuring dicated open -space would be assured. The May 1987 article, titled "Mitigation Isn't,!' described how mitigation has failed as an instrument to replace or re- store wetlands lost to development, and what the pitfalls were. Despite Beth Mason's clear directives, progress on the man -made wetland habitat has not gone smoothly. It had been p around p hoped that the area round the ands, created as part of the mitigation requirement, would have sufficient cover to serve wildlife displaced from the natural wetland. The was quick to fill in the natural wetland for ..... applicant development. He was slow to fulfill responsibilities pp commercial p indicated series of three • as indicated by a reregard to the DSL.gaThese letters should also be on record. reminders by Cattle were to be kept out of the dedicated area which enclosed the two ponds, as part of the mitigation. A letter Evans , s agreement p tto do time From Mel Stout E of David vans and Assoc., employed at by the applicant, attests to the applicant', so This letter is also part of the record of these proceedings. What y p was that thwerallowed to water at at the ca e.. ��hat actuall happened the ponds, with the end result that sensitive where wetland vegetation given recover, , tion was `being g ven a, chance to: The vegetative cover that was to have been were degraded. � by p planted around the ponds was delay . ed b. the vacant until applicant the DSL imposed a deadline 3 years later. This planting was also part of the mitigation. Confusion also existed during this time as t which entity, the Ii or the Oityeof ¶I igard, was to make inspectio and see that DS� ns an the instigation was on rack. This also caused delay. M SLID 91-0004 page 3 GPO M What this has pointed up is that firm directives that frame a long -range plan, not a piecemeal open -ended haphazard action plan, are needed. If problems of getting funding by the applicant truly de- rive now from Beth Mason's orders of mitigation, that is a pro- blem that needs to be remedied, not by disbanding protections for the dedicated open-space, but by finding an alternative funding mechanism that will in no way jeopardize funding for continuous care of the mitigation site. "In perpetuity" means just that - stewardship that is at no time subject to the vi- cissitudes of personality, time, ,place, economic condition, or capital need. Successful models exist in the area in which commercial entities manage wetlands in a partnership where the benefits are mutual. Effective stewardship enhances the commercial investment. The well -being and sense of connection gained by viewing wild open- space from office or hotel window is without question today. With this in mind, if it comes to making a decision to i stewardship from that responsibility for s p t now shared by mitigation both residential and commercial this order, the commercially developments responsibility. The commercial entity Would be- nefit most, and would be best equiped to handle these respon- sibilities as part of everyday business. The current application SLR 9a• -,004 , makes a reference to ro erty owners or HOA re0 onsibility, a�e 3 item b P� P y., � P gild ,��g s • • whioh suggests that maintainance and repair should not have any-- thin . to do with the effects of •weathers This • is difficult to gg g . p. ands preservation. are es- understand since flood lain and weal sential because o f the role each plats in effecting natural flood control following heavy rains,. and throughout the entire rainy season. The whole i p� , n p fates directly tosweatherland itsnseasonallpotentialsvfor re- . �' P for floodinga • A computor model existed which demonstrated how • poor man- age... t of t�a:s very Rick Raet��rasnaee �n ineer with Mash men floodin downtown, on Ilain Street i and g y ... Ssed this problem. • Two letters exist ii , ingthe re ordiofathese� proceedings • from Mr Raett, one in 19864 P another in 198 In conclusion we feel. that regular bi- annual on =site re-- views by a wetland professional are called for in the next few years; or until the roan -msade wetland open s..ace has est ab lished • itsel a oint of seasonal stability n not h appen Without •consistant good stewardship practices. ,.:t .:, „..,„...,............„. ......,.. ephon. Perry ,1.0,t .Whit rig Tom $Mith • M' • OhairMan ' - . AtiC•64,0haitttiali Or : .... .4.,.. ....., •• Sec. •PrO,..tettl.• - ...,,, ,,...;,... .,.ii? • 'SLR 91-0004 page 4 UPO 4 k As it exists now, the man-made wetland and surrounding dedicated open-space lacks protective cover and a natural food supply for support of diverse wildlife. In no way can the Division of State Lands assure success for this mitigatton by a once-every-five-year inspection. Further, the stress" that will be caused by the close presence of residential or commer- cial construction needs to be taken into account. If nothing else, we feel that this hearing on October 28th should serve to reaffirm, once and for all, protections spelled out in the mitigation orders of 1987 and 1991. It is time to finalize the mitigation with all the protections assured when the applicant accepted it as remuneration for the filling of the natural on-site wetland 3 years ago. We are submitting this response to your request for comment, and ask that it be entered into the record. Nancy ay VriVirOhMental•Liat0h: *--•••• "•••• t , ••• jOhh dity/dotillty LiAdOh Ward Rader MeMber at Larg October 5 1991 RECEIVED PLANNING OCT 0 71991 Richard Bewersdorff, Staff Contact City of Tigard Planning Dept. 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 91223 Dear lvr. Bewersdorff, CPU '4 Metzger Steering Committee 9885 S.W. 92nd Portland, OR 97223 Rea SLR 91 -000k When the applicant purchased this land in 1965 it was gen- eral knowledge that a substantial part was 100 -year floodplain, which entailed responsibilities of management and maintenance It was also general knowledge that the essential functions of a wetland /floodplain area prohibited consideration for extensive future development. Metzger Since that ttime hasddminimhed Qdsup�facesaand$ increas- ed comm i y pervious ed the importance of the 100-year floodplain for retension of storm water. The Clean at USA's responsibilities in regard to seem h g seeing that Fanno Creek and its tributaries are ,... brought up to federal standards have further enhanced the value of this area for storage, filtration, and cleansing of storm water. The applicant in 1987 accepted conditions set down by Tigard g � the cost of filling sndthe na- Hearings Officer r Beth I ason, as t e ed tese at t � ofjhis He could have appealed al tural Wetland for commercial development property. pp final orders. He did not do so. In ded cate1990 d n thereAs a econnd SLR ini triated the ap" pli c a n t , .n t ppicant d for residen- t]al development, and the miti g a on in e 0 nd .o P eris P aC a , per etu . ty by Vigard Hearings Officer E stein •carefull�� s harry �patein. Irlr. p "' y gelled out conditions_ .. y kept out of this area. , CPO k Iv anew b. which cattle were to be ke t testif ed at this hearing, and concurred with the Hearings of- ficer't th dings and. decisioriS velopmerit p e la n s« filed ftor 3rd because hI� s feels tha the mi. ti gat eon require . enu sand obstacles to In taS6 9 1000 , it i k , th a lacant �, �ir Ir . ' }i�;,.ip^� ri:9 iTyl�. " i, ➢M'.. h. .!�,. Q �' 4 i." K , lit requests "deletion of requirements for covenants, conditions, , and restrictions, Wr association, deed requirements, and ublervitudetosecure maint end repair." The app lication very simply seeks to disband proceedures a and .... practices drafted explicitly to protect the mitigationefrom failure o. loss, in part or whole. Beth Mason noted al a, � presided as Hearings. con- clusion o:� the 1987 hearing, over which she influenced Officer, that an Audubon magazine article, the structuring of her final order, so that stewardship of the dedicated open - space would be assured. The Fr.iay 1987 article, titled "Liitigation Isn't," how mitigation has failed as an instrument to replace or re- store wetlands lost to development, and what the pitfalls were. Despite Beth Mason's clear directives, progress on the man-made wetland nd habitat has not gone smoothly. It had been hoped that the area around the p onds, created as part of the mitigation requirement, would have sufficient cover to serve wildlife displaced from the natural wetland. - �. wetland for pP quick t The __. to fill in the applicant was quit commercial development. He was slow in regard to the mitigation, as indicated by a series of three reminders by 'nders by the DSL. These letters should also be on record. p y which Cattle were to be kept out of the dedicated area w , _..., A letter enclosed the two ponds, as part of the mitigation. ' employed at the time ` e1 Stout of David 'Evans and Assoc., , e byothe applicant, attests to the applicant's agreement to do l.icant s a eement so. This letter is also part of the record of these proceedings. .. dto sensitive area pp cattle. were allows was that the .. ; What :actually happened ened s on h the end result that s � rat the ponds, with recover, water was being given a chance to rec where wetland vegetation cover that was to . have been were degraded. The vegetative the applicant until. _ delayed by .._ "he app. e planted aroundthe dpadlne 3 y ondsw DSL imposed a as years 1 %ter. This planting was also partmofs the DAL ,� of the mitigation. . the 105L or the as which entityo during this time .. a. Confusion also existed Ti ard. was to make inspections and see that City of ' g ection the mitigation was on track. This also caused delay. "41f...k f " F , , • • UPO 4 'VI What this has pointed up is that firm directives that frame a long-range plan, not a piecemeal open-ended haphazard action plan, are needed. If problems of getting funding by the applicant truly de- rive now from Beth Mason's orders of mitigation, that is a pro- blem that needs to be remedied, not by disbanding protections for the dedicated open-space, but by finding an alternative funding mechanism that will in no way jeopardize funding for continuous care of the mitigation site. 'In perpetuity' means just that - stewardship that is at no time subject to the vi- cissitudes of personality, time place, economic condition, or capital need. Successful models exist in the area in which commercial entities manage wetlands in a partnership where the benefits are mutual. Effective stewardship enhances the commercial investment. The well-being and sense of connection gained by viewing wild open- space from office or hotel window is without question today. With this in mind, if it comes to making a decision to shift responsibility for stewardship from that now shared by 6 • io • both residential and commercial entities in the mitigation order, the commercially zoned developments should assume this stewardship responsibility. The commercial entity would be- nefit most, and would be best equiped to handle these respon- sibilities as part of everyday bUsiness. The current application - SLR 91-0004 - makes a reference to property owners or HOA responsibility, page 3, item b which suggests that maintainance and repair should not have any- thing to do with the effects of weather. This is difficult,to understand since floodplain and wetland S preservation are es- - . sential because of the role each plays in effecting natural flood control following heavy rains, and throughout the entire rainy season. The whole issue of floodplain and wetland preservation re- lates directly to weather and its seasonal potentials for floodingt A compUtor Model existed Which demonstrated how poor man- agement of this very Wetland could cause flooding downtown, on blab"' Street Tigard. Rick Aaetz, Drainage Engineer with Wash- ington County, has addreSsed this problem. Two letters exist , in the record of these proceedi1g5 from Mr. Raetz, one in 1986, another in 1987 d� htic e tel.-bhat...rogulaii bil,,bite. 14'644 views :by a wetItid litordda.o4o.1 are for the. nex± few th4..t4Ailitia.46:Wet14tid/Operi. space has .established• • itself lo a point of This will not happen WithbUt oohIbt4rit g �d prao1ices. t'u 4 1ti: As it exists now, the man -made wetland and surrounding dedicated open -space lacks protective cover and a natural food supply for support of diverse wildlife. In no way can the Division of State Lands assure success for this mitigation by a once- every - five -year inspection. Further, the stress that will be caused by the close presence of residential or commer- cial construction needs to be taken into account. If nothing else, we feel that this hearing on October 28th should serve to reaffirm, once and for all, protections spelled out in the mitigation orders of ,1987 and 1991. It is time to finalize the mitigation with all the protections assured when the applicant accepted it as remuneration for the filling of the natural on -site wetland 3 years ago. hue are tibmitting this response to your request for comments-, and ask that it be entered into the record. ', ±ephen terry C hA is rnan lkat ahitIng 'Vice- ,ha.irman • Nancy 'lacy t 1 rrvi,r,r1morit ic' soh 'tom Smith ec. Pro -tem.. John auffigt40. City %county ZAiason �r and fader Member a.t L+alr REQUEST FOR COMMENTS Vt (11(Lt:d.2? ( ---___ DATE: September 25 .991 UI -11 TO: FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 91-0004 DAV/4 (NPO #8) A request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of conditions of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decision SLR 90-0011, SL 1-86, and V47-02. The proposed amendments relate to 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costs, 2) properties to be subject to maintenance and repair costs to permit full recovery to City, 3) means of assuring performance subject to City attorney, 4) deletion of requirement for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and repair. ZONE C-P and R-4.5 (Professional Commercial and Residential, 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avtnue (WCTZ4 181 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800, and 181 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, and 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. 7, 1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your cOmmfants. are unabillt2EREMMIIILIULINIOMYSIL 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 =Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 PHONE: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: Richard Bewersdorff PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. ••■■••••••■■•■••■ Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: Name of Person Commenting: Phone Number: bkm/BLR91,.64,0KM LEGIBILITY STRIP' SLR 91 -0004 Digitet teto L map repraser- tatioa compiled by the City ei iigart otil1zieg 'Seegra- pine ;erorasties System CIS) software.. Icier— motion portrayed rare me, be iatseded as be used with additional taehsieal asd /er interpretative data as determined by the City of Tigard. (WPSCBS74) 400 (0210.4111)` (J) i- ...m12:6 11111111::::::5.%:1111111111:Z.:=:::-M; N4 • • 4' APPLICANT°S STATEMENT This application is a request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of the decitsion in SLR 90-0011, SL 1-86 and V 87-02 as follows: 1. Delete the formula provided for apportioning maintenance costs and allow applicant to determine any appropriate formula or other method of apportionment of costs which will, subject to determination of the City Attorney, reasonably assure that funds are generated to adequately perform the maintenance and repair required by this decision. 2. Delete the requirement in the decisions that all properties in the application shall be subject to the maintenance and repair requirements and allow applicant to determine which properties will be subject to those requirements subject only to a determination by the City Attorney that the property subiedted to the requirementS is of sufficient value to permit full recovery to the City on a her forecloSure for the lxpected maintenance Costs during any one-year period. 3. Delete the requirement in the dedisions that properties included in the application shall be Solely reSponsible for all maintenance and repair costs and alloW applicant or property owners to assure payment of part or all of Such dostS by meah8 of a performande bond, PA60. 1, APPLWA141"8:.$tAt6itOT 2411.0/8Ad/0810.8/2/91. , P - ° :,; • . • ro; dePosit of cash or securities in lieu of bond, letter of credit or other pledge, guarantee or security deemed sufficient from time to time by the City Attorney to assure that sufficient maintenance funds will be available to comply with the maintenance requirements of SLR 90-0011 and SL 1-86. Part or all of such bond, deposit or other security may be released by the City Attorney upon a showing that part or all of such bond, deposit or other security is no longer necessary to assure the required maintenance. If a deposit or other asset is provided as security, the interest or dividends from same may be paid when earned to applicant. 4. Delete the requirement of covenants, conditions and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions and equitable servitude to allow maintenance financing as otherwise allowed in thiS statement. a. For purposes of SLR 90-0011 and SL 1-86, define the terms maintenance and tepair to Mean and be applied as follow: (a) Applidant, property owners or }OA ha1i repair any damage to the wetland habitat aas or open sp ace caused by grazing Cattle. ••• PAGE 2 APELtdANT18 8tATOIWT. • 2411a/iA4/WOO/210i.,,2 • • tet • et' (b) Applicant property owners or HOA shall repair any damage to the fences, dams, wetland habitat or open space caused by any source other than weather, flooding, wildlife or other natural cause. (c) Compliance by Applicant with the five-year maintenance reporting plan required by DSL. (d) Repair shall include repair of fences or dams damaged by any source and replacement of plant life damaged by cattle or other than natural causes. Replacement of plant life need not include replacement of plants of equal size of those damaged. (e) Maintenance and repair requirements shall apply only after all required improvements are installed or completed. The above proposed amendments are necessary for the following reasons: 1. Commercial buyers and lenders refuse to purchase or loan on property subject to restrictions requiring aSsociation, interaction or dependence with or upon residential homeowner8. 2. Commercial buyer S and lenders refuse to purchase or loan on property subject to a restriction that property owners will be responsible for aMbigUoUS, undefined and Unlimited Maintenande responsibilities and cots. PAdi 14 APPLICANT STATEMENT . .2.4ildia41b6/61122/914 4, ii l' u , 1 tv tt. 3. it is inapprop3iate and unnecessary for the City to prescribe a specific cost apportionment formula or means of assurance of payment on any development. It is only necessary that the City assure that such costs will be paid. Thus, Applicant should have the flexibility to determine the formula and the means of assurance of payment subject only to City Attorney review for adequacy of security. 4. If the City intends to enforce its requirements of maintenance and repair, it should define those terms with some precision to apprise the Applicant and prospective purchasers of exactly what is required. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the approved map of the property subject to restrictions. This request does not change the boundaries of the property subject to restrictions. Mat. 4 • APPI+tdANT s sTATE I T • .2417d444/00103111 ,• &TLA D RC— Se(R&- PROT CTro_4i Age bee :rests;c ter► Yej_j veci ()V1C y Stae 'e✓mi- P.%Vo_'gF-`15.70 . 9sPR CE _QO�JGo ?L X U IT (T dIalS JI LI1181031 tZ CLI uj • ° 1.4.eizz-n../74 • eq. T. 02 • d.hc. /O. , 1,` .. A. L. C&.. /9 (L124.142.-131'6 Zit) e c frt CZ-4.a 271— "-e 66," kt.4.1.1 Zt. ' 06 (414,1,-td-' .-tv,/y- 0,0; 1... . ) i 16 yn-- 411- 0-tit-e. Li... 66,,Le.., ..i.32.-(2,0--)-71---?-74-■-.1--7-1-oe. '''''''''' /1.--4-'''-' ..A,e I a:66 .e..)," .e--44_, .4.). 0 .11. // ). e l p e 7-1—e e el t alf.) - Ai...-44.--:-,4,-i. L. 7 , -72., . --t--------46 .- i j 9 ei i:,,e7,1 04 i d!• ' I ::- .,4, . 0 i'• "*"-- t .e-e ..4..-, --.:.,,., .1....-., ...- , ite..et, e.e.e,e1: tr:A'y ..., . 4 C . e ':1 4' :.4,, - i‘ ,,, 1 ,„ i „ . 6 , 6 • V,_,4 es ': i , ,/, . 4 ;i.e.,' r e do 4.1-4:1-041 rr- L. - 0 () () 4'). • ' • •It1,'1•••.:•:tn ",` ;,!,••„;, ;,,,t • , • • ;.!, • s , • .„ , , • • • , . , REQUEST FOR COMMENTS FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SENSITIVE LANDS SLR DAVIS (NPO #8) A request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of conditions of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decision SLR 90-0011, SL 1-.36, and V 87-02. The proposed amendments relate to: 1) apportionment of ilaintenance and repair costs, 2) properties to be subject to maintenance and repair costs to permit full recovery to City, 3).meano of assuring performance subject to City attorney, 4) deletion of requirement for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and repair. ZONE: C-P and R-4.5 (Professional Commercial and Residential, 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 181 35A0, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800, and 1S1 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, and 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. 7, 1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. are unableesorez. 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: Richard Bewersdorff PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: ■ A Name of Perdon Commentin4: Phone Number: • i*iii/tIA01.44,0itii FILE NO:SLR FILE TITLE: APPLICANT: 91-0004 DAVIS PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION Eugene & Vivian Davi / s 13095 SW Henry Beaverton, Oregon 97005 OWNER: SAME REQUEST ZONE LOCATION: Applicant requests Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of conditions of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decisions SLR 90-0011, SL 1-86, and V 87-02. The proposed amendments relate to 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costs, 2) properties to be subject to maintenance and repair costs to permit full recovery to City, 3) means of assuring performance subject to City attorney, 4) deletion of requirement for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and repair. ZONE: C-P and R-4:5 (Professional Commercial and Residential, 4.5 units per acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 151 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800, and 1S1 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300 1400, and 1500) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Professional Commercial and Low Density Residential NPO NO: 8 NPO CHAIRPERSON: Cathy Chase PHONE NUMBER: 620-4790 CHECK ALL WHICH APPLY: STAFF DECISION COMMENTS DUE BACK TO STAFF ON 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF HEARING: X TIME:7:30 X HEARINGS OFFICER DATE OF HEARING: 19111111 TIME:7:00 CITY COUNCIL DATE OF HEARING: ____ TIME:7:30 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS AND ATTACHMENTS: X VICINITY MAP iL NARRATIVE X SITE PLAN LANDSCAPING PLAN ARCHITECTURALPLAN OTHER: PREPARE FOR pLAIsamtia•APPROVAill • JL ADVERTISEMENT - TIGARD _ NOTICE TO OWNERS .111.6 BE MAILED littiligft. or ACCEPTANCE OF APPLICATION NotICO•tb briti) ATTAtittiltNekti 0.411 CO'TACT: Richard bovetodotif• OREGONIAN APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA Comprehensive Plan Policies : 2.1 I 0 3.2.1 a " 3 2.2 , 3.2 . 3 O 3.4 .,1 3.5.3, 4.2.1 Code Sections: 18.84 (Sensitive Lands) ;,^ • • • • • • „ • I ti ii 6 0 v 0 r APPLICANT'S STATEMENT This application is a request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of the decision in SLR 90-0011, SL 1-86 and V 87-02 as follows: 1. Delete the formula provided for apportioning maintenance costs and allow applicant to determine any appropriate formula or other method of apportionment of costs which will, subject to determination of the City Attorney, reasonably assure that funds are generated to adequately perform the maintenance and repair required by this decision. 2. Delete the requirement in the decisions that All properties in the application shall be subject to the maintenance and repair requirements and allow applicant to determine which properties will be subject to those requirements subject only to a determination by the City Attorney that the property subjected to the requirements is of sufficient Value to permit full recovery to the City on a lien foreclosure for the ekpected maintenance coats during any one-year period. 3. Delete the requirement in the decisions that propertied included In the application shall be solely responSible for all Maintenance and repair costs and allow applicant or property ownerS to assure Payment of ParL or all of such dosts by meanS of a performance bond, 1, •APPLICANT' g $TAtEN$NT. 1411)EA4)ti6,08)...22,:411 deposit of cash or securities in lieu of bond, letter `of credit or other pledges guarantee or security deemed sufficient from time to time by the City Attorney to assure that sufficient maintenance funds will be available to comply with the maintenance requirements of SLR 90 -0011 and SL 1-86. Part or all of such bond, deposit or other 5ecurity may be released by the City Attorney upon a showing that part or all of such bond, deposit or other security is no longer necessary to assure the required maintenance. If a deposit or other asset is provided as security, the interest or dividends from same may be paid when earned to applicant. 4. Delete the requirement of covenants, conditions and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions and equitable servitude to allow maintenance financing as otherwise allowed in this statement: 5. For purposes of SLR 90 0011 and SL 1 -86, define the terms maintenance and repair to mean and be applied aS follows: (a) Applicant, property owners or HOA shall repair any damage to the wetland habitat areas or open space caused by grazing cattle. 24170 RAc7JDS/0gi'2 PA�� APp�+IG�AN�" S S`�AT�Ni�;N��' 2/91 (b) Applicant, property owners or HOA shall repair any damage to the fences, dams, wetland habitat or open space caused by any source other than weather, flooding, wildlife or other natural cause. (c) Compliance by Applicant with the five-year maintenance reporting plan required by DSL. (d) Repair shall include repair of fences or dams damaged by any source and replacement of plant life damaged by cattle or other than natural causes. Replacement of plant life need not include replacement of plants of equal Size of those damaged. (e) Maintenance and repair requirements Shall apply only after all required improvements are installed or completed. The above proposed amendments are necessary for the following reasons: 1. Commercial buyers and lenders refuse to purchase or loan on property subject to restrictions requiring association, interaction or dependence With or upon residential homeowners. 2. Commercial buyers and lenders refuse to purchase or loan on property subjeCt to a restriction that property owners will be reSponsible for ambigUouS, undefined and unlimited maintenance responsibilities and costs. PAGE 3., APPLIdAN10$ TATEMEt0 24.11d/W/06168/24101,4.. .s e 3. It is inappropriate and unnecessary for the City to prescribe a specific cost apportionment formula or means of assurance of payment on any development. It is only necessary that the City assure that such costs will be paid. Thus, Applicant should have the flexibility to determine the formula and the means of assurance of payment subject only to City Attorney review for adequacy of security. 4. If the City intends to enforce its requirements of maintenance and repair, it should define those terms with some precision to apprise the Applicant and prospective purchasers of exactly what is required. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the approved map of the property subject to restrictions. This request does not change the boundaries of the property subject to','strictions.' PAGE 4. APPLIdM4T's E T 24 .7G%`EP�,al $40- 3/}22101.x-2 m.w " LEGIBILITY STRIP Tke City of T I GARD Site Area THORN Digitel data k map reposes-- titian compiled Ay- the City et Tigard utillzieg COogra, Ore inform-sties System. CIS)- *onward.. lifer — motion portrayed bare ma/ be ietended to be used with additional NatTI tesbeieol otd/or interpretative dote as determined by the Mr of Tigard-. fkiPSLR214)- 400 (02/04111) _ . , „ „- : •Z. _ �: (. � +�! .i �t �i., T .+�.� t �ts(� k .��t., ��.1k S.� -:t 1. ! � �., srr. k°.4t 5��1+ t, a�� t . Yr:J'. •�" MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIG1 RD, OREGON TO: MIKE ROBINSON FROM: RON POMEROY DATE: September 18, 1991 SUBJECT; REQUEST FOR A.k ENDMENT TO CONDITION OF APPROVAL Please r =view the following request by Eugene and Vivian Davis and advise the City as to whether the City would be able to prepare and present a memo to the Hearings Officer stating the Citys' recommendation rather than preparing and presenting a complete staff report. Thank you. Peact AA-41R,143 ..117 fiklivezuf ARIttn., N .44) tal-4? 1P944.44 ---r- .�� }45:�...w !lY '�,�F74i •�F i� „tT 5�j; i7��,�..�..^'I� +x�i�,.�.1�F ��:3. �.�. +: S ��. :. �Vd� dz p� -l� X�Y .M;;9�: � •;�ZS�4,. 1.r .. ,T34 �... V / ,U' 15:Z5 V.0 3 5 72Tx7 C'"XtFTOA ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TRANSACTION # 13447 CONNECTION TEL 2432944 CONNECTION ID City Attorney START TIME 09/18 16:11 USAGE TIME 15'21 PAGES 23 wzr ATTORNEYS JOHN H. RAKER, AHA RALPH DOLLIGERt ANDREW E: GOLDSIEIN•''} LEWIS 0. HAMPTON JOHN H. HOLLOWAY, JR. • HARLAN EDWARD JONES6 E. ANDREW JORDAN BRUCE H, ORR* ARTHUR L. TARLOW eAdmitiid Qrogon and Washington iiiiAdnittted New York tOf Counsel LEGAL ASS STA 1TS BARBARA S. KELLY ' MARLENE L. MINER VIVIAN T. LT NTZ PATRICIA L: MORGAN, MARY CAROL SCHNELL, 1609 SW CEDAR HILLS BLVD: SIJITH'! 102 Pom'LANI, OR 972)5 (503j 6417171 'Ax Om) 6414991 August 26, 1991 PLEASE REPLY TO: Portland Office RECEIVED PIANNIvr, AUG3 0 1991 Jerry Offer City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard OR 97233 Res Eugene and Vivian Davis Sensitive Lands Application Requesting Modification of SLR 90 -0011, SL 1 -86 and V87-02 Our File No. 40117/22061 Dear Jerry: Enclosed are: 1. Sensitive Lands Review Application , au ene and for F° signed hy'Vvian E Andrew Jordan as attorney 9 sign upon their return Davis. �. The Dava.ses will sa.g from India in early September. A power of attorney is attached. 2. 12 copies of a narrative explaining the request for modification along with the approved boundary map ; and 3. My firm's check in the amount of $520.00 representing the filing fee for sensitive lands review. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Very tr BOL • .GE HAMPTO ► & TARLOW jot E PO �T 9 E 3 .. E ANDREW ' DAN VANCOUVER WA 98666.0891 A0� 06 60-45j4 949 PLNi /VV/6 3 25R- 3 i7rru1, AVENt1E E rI d l o s u r e s 9119 THIRD FLOOR . „. NEW 2 270366 cd Eugene Davis HOAX X w 644.7485 �A q t� `ti tMi Et 41 a Y 0 NELL, RAMIS, CREW & ATTORNEYS AT LAW BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 TELEPHONE: (503) 222-4402 FAX: (503) 243-2944 RECEIVED PLANNING AUG 0 8 1991 DATE: August 7, 1991 TO: Tigard/Ashbrook Farms File (90024-4) FROM: MCR RE: gOnMargatian_AULADV.....AQrdan I spoke with Andy Jordan today and discussed the following matters: 1. I told him that I had confirmed with Ken Elliott that the City does not care whether the development conforms to the requirements of the Oregon Planned Communities Act, ORS Chapter 94, or not. As long as they are willing to commit in the CC & Rs to conditions that will specify 20 lots or fewer in the development, the City does not necessarily want the development to be a planned community. 2. I .confirmed with Ken Elliott that the City does not care whether an incorporated or unincorporated homeowner's association is formed. In response to this, Andy asked whether a homeowner's association had to be formed at all Referring to Condition 4 under VII, Conclusion and Decision of the January 20 1991 Hearings Officer report, Andy said that it appeared to him that a homeowner's association, a deed covenant or equitable Servitude could be used, as long as the City attorney approves the form. I reviewed the condition and agree with his conclusion. It seems, however, that Condition 5.a. requiring shares for the various properties must go back to the Hearings Officer to be removed. I told Andy that I believed this Condition to be mandatory. 3. And and I discuSsed the form of security. I said that the City did not prefer one form over another and that a deposit acColint would be fine. I recommended the following for a deposit account (a) That the City set up the account to be funded by Davis for maintenance exceeding the annUal cap and for iamage caused by the cows. (b ) • That the. amount be $ib e r ■•■■ ' • " rt ; O'DONNEL,LY, RAMIS, CREW • L , ,RIGA N Memo re: Conversation with Andy Jordon August 7, 1991 Page 2 (c) That the City, hap the unilateral right to draw on the account under specified circumstances. (d) That Davis have no recourse. (e) That the account be for a 5 -year period with interest during the period to Davis and at the end of 5 years, the balance of the account be returned to Davis. MCR dd 8/5/91 cc: Dick Beweredorff iYg��rt�.�s Planner, Tigard If, LEGIBILITY STRIP' The City of TIGARD i to Area Digital data k map repreeea - tellon compiled by the City of Tigard ;Wittig Ceogra- piie Informoiisi System CIS) software. liter— motion portrayed here may be inteeded to be used with additional N 0 R T; g teciiicat eadfer iaterpretetiee date at determined by ;`�..rr; ®` the City of Tigard. i',:.3�':= �_'•:.. {YPSLR914) 400 {DU Q4It1) LEGIBILITY STRIP O €ek- reffi- cfga t'- F'e�il�we UVICt r s t2 e= te✓:4id /Ue. gPt510 er— Grenbleal ccrerx CP6A) spAce. cf,D fTeS 4 -cC t�v.� r reToit ec of 1- ctrcQ 1 4pprc�) l — 2 — 9 1 TU a 11 ttt 1 2 JEFP 11. BACH11/41.1 CHART . CORRTGA.N* STEPHEN p, CREW CHARTS M. GREW MARK E. 11811ZOG*10, WILI3AIVI A. MONAHAN NANCY D4 MURRAY MARK P. O'DONNELL TIMOTHY V, RAMIS smutit.C.nrawArAvt. NirmARL C. ROBINSON0* WILIIAM STAINAUER oRE4C zs ZS 2 4 2 9 4 4 1." O'DONNELL, RAMIS, CR1W & COR.RIGAN "AM PRACFICINWISCONSIn 4AINCWRRACTICINSAMOMASHINGIDN "AlADM ) RAC7CRINRINYORRONLY ATFORNEYS AT TAW BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Wee Poriland, Oregon 97209 TE.LEPH0NE: (S03) 2224402 FAX: (503) 243.2944 MASH IMPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICS ; ; • •tgn • P . 01 CLACKAMAS COUNTY OPFICE 181 N. Grant, Slake 202 Canby, Orrgon 97013 (S03) 20-1149 JAMES M. COI.P,MAN KENNETH M. mm017 2pmfa,1 trauma THIS CO 1 MUNICATION CONSISTS OF ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDEO ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED BELOW, IP THE READER OF THIS ME SAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT,. OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HERESY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY•4,ROHIBITED. IF YOU NAVE RECEIVE HIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY. US BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE US. POSTAL SERVICE, THANK YOU. DATE: TO tO,ttlatt„tit1;1:;';;.tigt "Irt g!tt' t'Itt " t .1".1,t)t ■11 c" July 23, 1991 CLIENT NO.: Dick Bewersdorff, Senior Planner city of Tigard FAX #: 684-7297 Phone Os 639-4171 'ROM Inioriael C. Robinson FAX 0 (503) 243-2944 DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT TRANSMITTED: Memorandum Re Ashbrook rams MMENTS: 3i PAGES TO Pott0wo EXCLUDING COVER SHEET. IF YOt7 DO tiOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL THE itINDEtistiGNEb AT (03) 22264402 IMMEDIATELY. THANK YOU. 90024-04 slWaltb: Barbara J. Davis AN ORIGINAL IS limNd mAnzo: AN muciNAL IS AVAILABIZ MN REQUEST: ,JUL-2-9 1 TUE 1 i e 1 ORER,C, 02429.4.4 P . 02 O'DONNELL RAMIS CRtT & CORRIGAN ATIVINEYS AT LAW BA UM WIUOHT BURPING 1727 N.M. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 971 TntzpiiONE (503) 222-4402 ANC, (503) t4a -2944 PATE: rut ► 23, 1991 TO: Pick 3ewersdorf, f, Senior Planner i PROM2 idchael C. Robinson, City Attorney °3 Office J RE: sh,brd5ok karma k " "' �� i�' `,.,fir. 11d� Jordan ;....� �. .�,FO...g 1 �.�,, 1991 telephone Call � one "��.Cy1`t� and proposed three alternatives for the covenants c r t Farms. The a1ti rnatives would ��atrid�ti. ®�d cC&�,i s, for AsYtbrook �'a allow the commercial portion of the pr'o j ect to be Acceptable to Apparently, enders are unwilling to coiiun t to a project Whereg eith the aual a ount of maintenanCe is unknown or the commercial properties are connected with the residential properties of maintaining the common area. The alternatives are ad folio 'e t ��.�,�' l / (2 Y 1 Give 'all of the ce mmcn atea maintenance raspoii ibi1ity to eith* the commercial, or the residential properties, ., �re t residential properties. There are 11 preferably residential lots. t cJ 2. If hiving the . oo nercial ' properties respondib1e ,. for the ') Maintenance hurt p then Will the City egret :ss4 ' „'' �`� to h.. ve residential �awnexe �'e onsiBale'?. ,,�. -i~i � oainme�a a sales, have �j y y” t .-. ,m... N �,� rw �+.L+ %1 r } -,i' ‘...40 :� � ��' J„sf • -ref r ,' , a . Association's: �r a only 3. but ovnera,eao . . a�. It o1i �.on e �O &� s in half the c��nmora�a�e '� ldl �1a a n'Ia� ay r deve.l.o m nt, d l . ,,. Gtr. of the cotitnnercial areas. 4, �,6r� ■ In �unoticn to cue E r 1, { .. gee to a oa On acldl�.tit�n, �r�iild the pity agree a ire . , t�ena I1dae of the common e And a h Dalai Would assume full teepoheibi,1ity for any lamag a caused by hie cows. e cj2,0,frbvp"��,..� --a`� final issue is when_, o .. ment iai nub, act to the oregor 'hate this do�el s Chapter 94 Planned dQ�nu�ity ;�ot �� '' $�� ay . � r ee � to s i &Ri m „that, there Will be nc) mots rthai� 2p 1��ts. ogS 94.570(1) (a) provides that o1S Chapter 94 d O er d ty oeai�ota l' oa la nne aommuni� cohta in in0 20 or fe�Wer lots i if the iih dleclarant h� a ra talint of lots in the lan ��a Boo �' � �, .. .. �� nec� oommun t � „ to lncroa�e the total beyond 2 I . 5 if. t) r r` Oki". .31.1111....-2Z-91 -rum 1 1 b 1. oREMC 5O242944 4emo re: 2ehbrook Farms 3uly 23, 1491 Page 2 P . ndum are copies of correspondence j��!'��1l��t� ��.��1 th�� a31q'1�pi�'a concerning ,the matter. a don't know if you have them in your file or not, so' that Ie why I an transmitting them to you. After you have revisit d the file, please give Meg a call before our meeting on Monday rind let me know what the City c position is' With respect to the thr4e options that Andy has outlined.. If you have any other question o Wit can discuss them at that time. I 'will see you on Monday, July 29th, 10:00 a.m. , at City Hall. Thanks for your help �iQnd�y on thi matter. NCR; bjd f I, r'r .w.�n *. >c!. ,rr 9Eo-yr . la�i �.r i_.:� ,��s . ,.. js �'� ,� t °.�Ki� r,. Jl, ,� - -.�4 .1,f...� �t.9. i �r��.:�., f „• ir1, �. .i. J�{rt'4,'� .��. �'�•v ,1'� '%I�:' -, e9.: ,:.•i JUL-2-31 TU(E 1 1 s 14 OREEIAC 5a 24Z2944 . MAY' 13 1991 Laryy.... Epstein, PC Attorney At Law f 722 SW Second Avenue, Suite 400 Larry Epstein, mcmbc� p�arct�nc�. orc,�an 97204 Oregon State Bar and � f (503) 223 -4855 • FAX (503) 228-7365 American institute of 'Certified Planners May 10, 1991 E. Andrew Jordaili Boll ger, itarripto, igc Tarlow 1600 SW Cedar eills Blvd, Ste 102 Portland, OR 97225 SUBJECT: Ci of Ti gg ard/Ashbrook Farms; City of Tigard case no. SL 1 -86 and SLR 90-11 (Davis): ?our file no. 40117/22061 Dear Andy: I ate writing in response to your request for a clarification dated April 15. I should conclude that the' ambiguity in condition of approval no. 5 of the decision in SR1-86 T suggested. That is, as modified by the decision in SLR 90 be construed in tit, e manner you sugg . � land 11 the condition :wa intended eq. applicant• • s i n to feet open space • � ,.. s uxt�nded to require that the designate as ° of SE 89th_ within 40 feet of the south pond . _ ere that 40 foot area is • based on the wk� Avenue, but not 'isewhcre around the south pond I draw this conclusion fallowing. CONCLUSION AND DECISION no. 1 approves proves the modification of the open p space to eclude the area wi • least 40 . feet north spa_.. that 2�0 feet west of SW 89th Avenue This CONCLUSION of a ate, t of the south pond, f they centerline Qf Ash Brook and 40 feet AI'1Ta DECISION' clarifies the intent of revised condition no. 5. Finding "r, .'13.2,b on page 12pf the decision discusses the City and ODSL staff �1d'.. e commendation's that the open space area be reduced to exclude the area within 230 feet of 89th Avenue, Tto finding provides: the open p pa 40 feet from the ��s long as the area excluded 5= n ens space is officer accepts t pond Brook, the hearings ppe hearings h limit of a south anti and Ash reduce the open space, The of those agencies officer ce ri t s t ats maintain a 40-foot buffer from the south pond and Ash o f fieEr „i to the a cluded the open spa , .., a uniform 230 ace will hot be a ttm At south end of that 'ea, the area excluded from. the Creek is ,C , fi'o'tn. ded feet peat space will be less than 230 feet from 89th St eet, based on Exhibit 22. the opeas�a .de< that the nnodtficahor to condition no, this discUSSion4 The l Xnth at the area excluded from open space did not ec i1 oSeoftlt�tcto. .:. that ndlnpt� Was � ensure � , encroach within 40 feet of the south pond. That condition was not intended to require a encroach � decision that 4o foot buffer around all of the d. utttto�n`n � south pond. 'Thee is �g To z n s Hoff it on .. : around the whole - impo t . tared 4 foot buffer being a'er� suggests . er , .. , .. ed� no such tY' Bests a �.. uirement I Would have had to explain why such a condition Was warrant.' re�� r explanation is provIde ,. that I hope is resolves the doubt raised by revised condition egtet nog 5 and r hope � � � � interpretation. a a yon at ► � 15 with City Staff regarding its interpre ambiguity as drafted left y u tY 0 4. yK�p a j,i, if Y ! ;",11e s M:, * ")rs x y':y JUL-2--9 1 TUE cc: Jerry Offer, C or T and vrten Elliott, O'Donnell, Ra tiLs Crew Corrigan , n1Y WIPI••••••••■•....sammum.ra.......me I.J.0110.1 ATPORNEVS JOHN H. HA!CE MA ALPU EOLLIOERt MUM E. GolAillaNio of Um" E. HAMPTON Jowl ilLoOLvOWAY, BL MARIAN EDWARD JONES* ANDEEW JoRDAtil EttucE H. ottiti minim L. TARLow wyninetiGnonandwuninem 04,141ffaitammulic tot,com LEGAL Assist/oft BARBARA 8, ItE1.1.v hviAkiltdo L, KERNER ;DV SAKMoists tAwRENGE ViANtLENTZ PATRICIA L. MOROO mAlky CAROL SCIintOL sw CPI)AR i�2 Eekh.AND, tsd3 )4414ili FAX 003) 44i,20i 101 it ititSt jtJ PO ROX ANCOINERIAVA 96 0t391 (166) 604 433 ' MX t206 00404 +40 itt,GOR ttit (id) itd-Zitt/ii EAU ttili 44144iii . TUE 11 : 1 OREQC 503243294.4 April 15, 1991 tarry Epstein Attorney at Law 722 SW 2nd Ave #400 Portland OR 97204 City of Tigard/Ashbrook Farms Case No St1-86, SLR90-0G11 (Davis) Our Pile No. 40117/22061 Dear tarry: P mAviwteleft Portland Office 1 a 1991 quotealLt, RAMS, As you know, this office represents DI e 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 'ten Elliott suggesting that we SUbmit this question to you for clarification. Specificallyr the 0Ontroversy arises at a result of L i 4 4 OdlE1On of ApproVal No. 5 the decision in Stil -86. ?oU amended that Condition, on Page 15 of your decision, to read as follows: 56 The applicant thnll cause to have surveyed and shall designate as open space in perpetUity that .and shown in pink on Exhibit 6 of this decision, inciUdin land within 40 fet of the south pond an Ash Brook atl land w thin 25 feet north of the top of the north pond bank. (Emphati added) Bated on the above language, the Staff has tohc1Uded that this condition requires A 40 foot bUffet around the entire pethntet of the south pOnd. (ee enclosed letter dAted March 25, 1991.) Xt iS oUr position that EU ; 1 ,.„, ' , , ■ JUL-239 I TUB LE I I = 16 O R E C tS 0 2; a 4 a IP 41 41 1;. Lary. Epstein April!150 1991 Page this tnterpretation is incorrect for the following reasolisl 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 Rona and Ash Brook. Exhibit 6 is enclosed and does not show a buffer around the entire. perimeer. Rather, it shows a "40 foot buffer" at the south eastern corner of the Pend 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 adoprelETTP767ViCause 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 8rook. 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 hear the south end of the pond and around Ash Brook. That is what the condition says, that is what Exhibit 6 says i and it is my personal recollection that the purse of the 40 foot buffer was only to protect the south corner of the pond and Ash tirook. 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 space. Therefore, the staff's cohclUsion that there is a 40 foot buffer all the way aroUhd south pond is clearly etroneoUs. 3. Condition No, 5 qhoUld be read in donjOnction With Paragraph 1 of Article vii, coNcLusroN AND DacIsioN, which reads ad folloWs: 1. ApPtoVes modification of the open space to exdlUde the area withit'i 230 feet west of Southwest 89th Avenue and at leagE 40 feet north of the center line of Ash Brock and 40 keet east of the south pond, -.X Li L- a ZS -- IP 1 lr Li EE 11. :18 Larry Epstein April'15, 1991 Page OFZEIZIO SO2324252944 P 0 61 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, bas70-6n your decision o is confined to the southeast corner of the south pond. There is nothing in your conclusion and decision not is there anything in the conditions of SL1-861 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 (SL1-861 V87-02) no in your dedision, other than the ambi uo sl written Condition No. 5, which i ca es that it was the intention of either Ms. Mason or yourself to require a 40 foot buffer oh any portion of the pond other than the southeast cornet where Ash Brook enters the pond. Based On the above, we request a clarification from the Hearins Officer with respect tO the existence of the 40 foOt buffet presently being reoiired by the staff. Very trUly yOurs, BOLLIOBR, HAMPTON & TARLOW Y. ANbAN dOgbAN gAJ/64/2288-2. gndlo0Ure$ ed: r. Gene ba#is en tlliott Oill Bsierski Jetty Offer „ „ „ „,„„„„ , . „ . " ' • .' • . . , . , , .3 Li L. -- .1a .15 -- 91 1 p JEFF H. BACHRACH CHARLES tt, CORRIGAN* srepuEN y.cRtw C:HARLYS M. GREER' WILLIAM h. MONAHAN NANCY B, MURRAY MARX P. O'DONNELL DENNIS M, PATERSON III TIMOTHY V, RAMIS SHF,I1A C. IIIDGWAy* mialARI. C. ROBINSON." WILLIAM J, sTALNAKER TUE 1. 1 OREQC seez:24Z2944 O'D 'MAO n1710 TO MIAOW. u ISThTE Of WI 014itgrioN "A1440 ADMItTID TO PMCT1O IN FIAT& Of VIIStaubiN EA IL, RAMIS, CREW fe C ATTORNEYS AT LAW BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Ossegon 97209 TELEPHONE: (S03) 2224402 FAX (503) 243.2944 PLEASE REPLY 1'0 PORTLAND OFFICE May 7, 1991 tip' I. P. CLACKAMAS COUNTY OFFICE ial N. Grant, Suite 202 Corthy, Oregon 97013 1303) 266-1149 1111Isimma.u. JAMES Me COLEMAN worm M. Ewan GARY Me GEORGEFF. 'ROBERT J. McCA1.701ire Speeitil Counsel Andrew Otto, tgq. DOilflger, 1aipton Tarlow 1600 S.W, $4dat Hi11 Boulevard Portlando .refloh 97225 Re: City f Tioard/Aghbrook 'arms Case Nog, SL 1-86, SLR 90-0011. (Daviz) pOar Alidyi! • . , understand that you have requdsted fro% the City. a. dtadripti611L of the maihtehahte requited for 00 to*1104.0teat in the above-taptiohod matter. We refer you to our tarch 12, 19914 letter to you in' which we proposed • 10iO4(10., deSdtibihq the required maihtehahtdr, It that letter/ We guggegted that yu revise paragtoph :P �t Article III on pale 5 of the rovided draft Dec .aratioh to. read as followgi except as modified to tefer to the Oivigion o State Lands Permit No, 4570: bLng COQL2PeTt A Deolataht, or the Association when OW.R14, hail have the power and doty. to .aintain the coirnon Property in accordance 01.01 all applicable city, state ad federal 4.0wo and requiroiliontt, . incltding without ii' itatioh those in the City of TWard 050er Om: $16 I-86, dated May 18.4 100# and SLR gOlii d4t64. 0'4rwakY 2 l91, an • any atiehaMehte therttoi•aild...ih uAsA Atty torps. of nqintar40e000 .Divi4ion. of .State Lands ettioA?al and Pill • Permit No, 46104 and any Atoendmohtg thereto, and tO assess lieht it dogtg ate not paid in a ke4A0hObiti time: 2, Once ..0dititobt• has improved the 06m:tit:* ..rowty in adootdandt with. the 010 approved• by the city of tivitd as required by condition df approval no 2 in §LA. 90-6011.4, and by qt. 4 rt TUE IL 1. : 1 gE+ OREMIC 5el32 4 2914 4 ObONNE.1, RAMIS.eREW & RR E. Andrew:Jordan, Esq. Nay 7, 1993. Page 2 I Army Corps of Engineers/Oregon Division of State Lands Removal and Fill Permit No. 4570, the Declarant, or the Association when formed, !shall ihtain the Common Property to prdv id ra a open space and wetland habitat and servo flood Wain purposes as required by the OrdOrs and Permit described above. Vegetation shall be "planted, maintained and replaced as necessary to proVide buffers between the wetland hab$tat . i and commercial development, streets, and livestock grazing areas. Ahy damage to the 'portion Property, including Without limitation any wetland habitat, shall be promptly epaired. Improvements such as berms, iridges, fences, paths and vegetation shall be 6aintained to prevent damage to and to aintain the Combon PropartY, including ithoUt limitation its wetland areas. (Insert here the current paragraph P fter deleting the first sentence0 lease let is know if you would like to discuss this Proposed language. P 10 Sincerely yours, 0 oNNEL RAMIS, CREW & CORRIGAN He 'h Elliott itet- XME/bjd Oct Mr. 41Trry Offer we • 1 Aek,40 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. 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 151 35AD, City of Tigard, CoUnty of Washington, State of Oregon. PUBLIC HEARINGS: February 26, 1986, March 26, 1987, and April 30, 1987. The property_wasannexed to :the City in the summer of 1985 . (00A •2.85/Ad 1.85),• The applicant applied for Seniztive Lands • approval and the case Was heard On February 26, 1986. .. The item was.tabled to give the applicant time to prepare additional information, Th6 amonded proposal also requires a v4riolicos SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION LI. Reid Iford, Gene Davis, Mel Stout (David Evans. & A88odiate5), Tony Righellis (David Evans & AssOdiates), Re X Van Warner (wildlife expert), 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 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 3/13/87w 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 4/30/8/ 27. Pictures of flooding on cardboard plus 3 sheets Xeroxed pictures 28. Tracy Letter of 4/30/87 29. AnadromoUs Fish Law Memo 30. MetzgerTProgres5 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: The areo.to the north and .04.8t is within. the County and is designated for single fatily.residentia1 developmei# with a itiaimum density of fivouriitg per Atte:, The land to the northeast is within. the City i and s oohed. 11-4,5, flighway• 217 and an aparttent oompleR zoned A-12. (Aosidontialo 12 units/adre abuts the property on the south and $outhwest, . • 4, } Il 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 Coultants, 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 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 I.I. 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 0.75 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 II will involved 15,200 cubic yards of fill with proposed mitigation provided by rog 5,800 yards material to form a second pond/wetland of approximately 1 .5 acres in size. The total wetland area identified by the applicant's consultant is 9.3 acres including adjoining property to the north. Of the pp ps property, approximately i p ". 7 29 acres of wetland area. on the applicant's will be retained or improved. The. wetland and other five acs: es wi. flood plain land will be maintained p y important to emphasize that the applicant has included con- ceptual p g` p' r' �t is mdevelopment plans to give a clearer cture of what i property and to obtain preliminary ultimately intended for the prop nearby property owners and reviewing agencies. The only approvals proposed ..: commen s• from q presently � the landfo rm Ferations within the flood plain and wetland re nested resentl are for alt ova within The actual y land areas: improvements of the property (eg. Moteli officebuildin.s, residences) Will require subsequent applications, notification, and City review. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SBRVICLS Sriiary sewers Unified Sewerage Agency. (U:S A:) currently•has a 30" mainl ne that fraverSes the site from 'West to east, Page 3 SL 1.86 V 87 -0 !1. Storm Drainage 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 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 gt be wihin the drainage - way and therefore, issues of streets will directly addressed in this decision. Applicable 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: upon a review application, _. of the the comments received both dinL 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 Policy 3.2 1 The proposal will cause. a negligible rise of 1. .p 7 the 100�y :p . : _ creek._ The in the rc� ect re ear flood lai.r� reach of the _ g� j lowerin of the 100 -year proposed grad�.ng will. ca�xse a si nficant g loodplain upstream of the project. • Downtream, the 100-- year.flood plain will rise by 0.06 feet (less then 3/4°) because of the proposed g r tiding. 2. Policy 3,2.2 . The floodway; as defined by the Flood Insurance, ded Y for the-city i ee � loodw aY The applicant i c ant oot ropose development within the. floodway except for a road crosing . Roadwae co Stcosnot p ro hibted in the floodplain or floodway the City Tigard or in Washington County. p �` c nhance the functi on and maintenance of the zero- foot rsefloodway by lowering the water surface elevation on upsfream. downstream floodway except for t he e k t remelY m in imal rise of 0.06 fee t, Flood control m asurements are only t� e feet due to the practical difficulty o f m easuran theunevensur f surface. e of the typical flood water elevation. Consequently„. the 0.06 foot rise is a mathematical change; but is not a perceivable practical. change, or for purposes of determining flood control elevations; . . a measurable d ange.• Page 4 - L 1,46, V 87 -02 0 r r;}rp r •.. i> The zero -foot floodway is that central portion f f the flo Calfin that must be kept clear to allow the 100-year flood event without water surface elevation increase. Using detailed backwater analysis techniques, the applicant determined 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. 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 provierlawide buffer of 100' to 200' between the project and residential to the north The proposed street will add an additional 60r eefeet. Street trees • that will be required along both si dd d p street will add to the buffer. T he 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 • i Y p assistance from federal significant wetlands The applicant, with ass�.stan and state aencies, has identified the specific wetland on agencies, walked the site with pplicant's the site. �The`Hearin s Officer walke the opponents, and Keith fish and wildlife pp ife expert, From�adlayman's point of view the wetlands Liden of the City staff. as they presently exist are of marginal quality and could be enhanced under the applicant's proposal. g significant educational • .y : other agency The site has not been identified as having szy or jurisdiction. research value by the City Y The site has not been identified as having endangered er site angered plant or The wetlands. animal species, or significant natural features other than w 4 2 The proposal provides d. hapi space area �' the only existing b a broad 5 , Polk 3 maintains y g existing (trees and eek and habitat will along Ash Creek along the south bank of the creek. de ofethecreelrt and in other . _. h ` on the Wort beuimproved by plantings areas of the ropOSednopen space.. The project will vastly improve P.. . . wildlife ha�aitat, • a . � . p p erosion control', and wetland management as detailed in the proposed plans. The project is hot a designated timbered or tree area. Page 5 St 1 -86, I 8702 • co LIA } 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 • i City's greenway designated by the City for incorporation into the Ci system. space maintain ' ate Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is totdabl the Comprehensive area. P� proposing g 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 general terms, i slopes created will be in the application. g ms, all sl g sufficiently to control a maximum The3Citynmandatesenoemaximum slopes, has concurred erosion. City with the proposal �in their recommendation. 7. Section 10.84.040 - 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 . i � 4 significant wetly 84.010 (c) of the Plan Policies 3.2.4, � .3bf•�iand Section l8ands and Wild- life .i� protection lifeChabitat. for the Community Plan, developed by Washington Count designated the western portion of the property g i County, �` When the property as a potentially significant wildlife habitat. P �' g was annexed into the City, a Significant wetlands designation was applied to the same area. The record contains several important reference documents on the of mitigation., and time management of riparian ecosyste i i i Officer found particularly helpful Dthibit 29rmt. g .. The ..,Hearings Of i particularly ..., i ., i Y , P' the � discussions 'with the applicant's ,. y i i n r- pp i � cant�sdf fish andciw Pi�h Law Memo, and i :�xh:�bit 3� j � wildlife- mitigation, nadr . A p.._t, g the site review., W4s determined that the area ex� ert Burin bordered on the west b the Ph y the property owner i y ship of nr. Davis on the north (.or preferably the southern s rs r .boundary of th e ptopobed shown on Exhibit 2r page. although the • porti on between the heapplicant property line and the southern boundary of the proposed street is not within the jurisdiction of this Hearing s izera�d the area bordered P ase an the east, phs t h e P hae proposed wildlife wetland i mmediately • Page 6 5L 1 X86, V 87= -02: 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 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 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 la grazing period of five years or more to gin rehabilitation of woody,herbaceous'Ciparian vege- tation. While the applicant ` `cer concludes thatoc grazing l ment, the floorings Offs he a licant has used his ro Property continued razin on the property prior to eve op g g p petty 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 .ponds which are proposed for mitigation, and the existing the bed. of Creek, the Hearings Officer concludes that all of the wildlife mitigation work which iS proposed., together with all the filling and grading which the development, in this area, should be done as Dart of Phase I The Hearings Officer believes. jthis will minimize the negative. impact that the • g actual construction work. will have on the seasonal wildlife. habitat in the area p g. Once the area has been developed accordin to the b� the a licant's expert, there must be a way sins pp p proposed. , y y theoretically, gned la m ntaa.n the s stem even -though. it will be be maintenance free. The provision of public open space is. riot in, "t�.. . _ refore - the intent. to manor Called for either the Mettgeer Progress Community Plan twin the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. T , °L wildlife area through private means the common`fiood olain and s Officer believes that an appropriate y is appropriate. The Hearing vehicle for cUdh maintenance would be the creation of an ''owners ,, . n �s ,� ants and association" through a declara�-zon of conditions, covert �" • r�s for the entire ownership of the appl Cants which is pe strict�.o � whereby. �. � ... participate proposed for development. whereb each of the .units size in. they nance costs for the open space based mar►te whereby eachdwelling unit shall be deemed to be one share and each 17a go 7 g - SI, 1 -86 y V 87 02 2 000 square feet �.�,. the proposed office comp rX . s r q � r� ' ., proposed -shall be deemed one share and each five units of the motel shall be deemed one share, for purposes of apportioning the maintenande 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 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 under City standards between the curb and the edge la.nted buffer unde of the right -of -way that will include street trees and other plantings. In addition, the fending and beaming will protect against the strain of potentially incompatible adjacent uses. 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) i in a separate narrative which is incorporated by reference herein. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the findings and conclusions above, the Hearings Officer recommends approval of SL 1 -86 and V 87 --02, subject to the following conditions. 1, A permit shall be obtained by the applicant from the Division of State Lands and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Authority: See ction 404 r Clean Water Act , 33 U.S.C, 1344) for discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the United States. A copy of said permit shall be provided to the City Engineering Office by the applicant. 2. The ap p lcant shall provide the Engiheerng Section with written documentation that U.S.A. has review 'Lite ed the proposal and that applicant has obtained any necessary permits The Ungineering Sect ion shall also be provided with copies of said permits. .� M; A N u �� a. 'f N ..�`.� .} +1 .yl . ��,. ..3 :: , 1 r i. - -.- L . t 1�:�•:'.n .rV k. ~.., c!- 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 application, as shown on Exhibit 2 in the 1987 exhibits to this lcat ion,, which area is described as being bordered on the south by Dr. Davis' property boundary,onithe 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 p as open space �. n ` erp ettiity and shall be subject to covenants, conditions and restrictions and an owners area the association which a o apportions the maintenance costs for sai among properties es P through `s application, in the following formula: • •o developed throw h this residences , one share each, duplexes - one share per lot, office space one p. ' square developed p g p are per 2 000 s ware feet punits e sh office space, proposed motel - one share per five developed oration bylaws and p � of incorporation, y conditions t to the approval of the city The articles and restrictions shall be subject for the City of Tigard. 6. The applicant shall c omplete all improvements to heidsh Creek channel, as proposed, from upstream side of the p p � Highway 7 to the ups proposed SW 93rd extension,Htogether lwith all wildlife mitigation includin t • � g planting, and fencing in ...junction with Phase Ioimprovements. All livestock grazing on con P the area described dedication as open space as set forth above do shall cease upon the beginning of f the construction of these .. p ` conceptually proposed in Exhibit 2hofwthe11987mexh bitshinithisSapplication flowed Exhi shall. be followed together with the plan for planting, drainage improvement a ,.. ndyear- roundwater source for the proposed pond, subject to the approval val of the staff and the city engineer. 7, The applicant shall Submit detailed engineering drawings, prepared by a registered p rofessional engineer, for a1 1 propo sed grading, filling and channel work. These drawings shall be reviewed and approved t. by the Engineering Section prior etotconstruction. try Whose drawings shall show existing and p p p g phic cond" tions. An as- built topographic survey will be required page.•9 Sh 1 .6, V 87 -02 8. This approval i. valid if exercised within one year of the final approval date. DATED this 18th day of May, 1987. HEARINGS PfR APPROV Alltd"ir MASON Page 10 81., 1-86, V 87-02 STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss• City of Tigard ) +' " �. �t ° 'i+te�t ,r,�:; �µa - �; °.M t.1., '.'H.�. ..� �..,_ ,..r, ., AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING and say: Ple =se Print That I am a The City of Tigard, Oregon. being first duly sworn, on oath depose C _ for That I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING for: That I served NOTICE OF DECISION for: City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Commission TTigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public. Hearint; Notice /Notice of Decision) of which is attached (Marked Exhibit "Al was mailed to each named persons at • the address shown on the ' ��li, 198.2—* attached list marked exhibit •• B �� day of on the ' was posted on an hereto attached, said notice, NOTICE OF DECICION as here 1� appropriate . ''2C) day of 2 board on the day off. , �2 Cc bulletin boa States Nail. on the ,� O ---' and deposited in the United Stat V 1987, postage prepaid. Person who post d on Bul .tin Board (For Decieion Only)' S Person who deli eked to POST OF.ICE Subscribed and sworn to before me on the it"grAT— • i•..T�uf iii iii 111ii' •Ilr•ii�ii;tc, C� A CHA K HUNT NOTARY PU[3LIC — OREGON lutiy dot mission Dpires,1/i„ .iyr- xiils NOT ' Y PUBLIC o ' 0 ° ON My Commissio n Expires: 1- c 0257P/0021P CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s): SLR 91 -0004 2. Name of Owner: Eugene & Vivian Davis Name of Applicant: Same 3. Address 13095 SW Henry City Beaverton State OR Zip 97005 • 4. Address of Property: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue Tax Map and Lot No(s).: 1S1 35AC, tax lots 101, 2800, 4800, and 1S1 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, and 1500 5. Request: A request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of conditions of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decision SLR 90 -0011, SL 1 -86, and V 87 -02. The proposed amendments relate to: 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costs, 2) properties to be subject to maintenance and repair costs to permit full recovery to City, 3) means of assuring performance subject to City attorney, 4) deletion of requirement for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and repair. ZONE: C -P and R -4.5 (Professional Commercial and Residential, 4.5 units /acre) 6. Action: Approval as requested X Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, and mailed to: X The applicant and owner(s) X Owners of record within the required distance X The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON November 27, 1991 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. 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 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290(B) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee ($315.00) and transcript costs (varies up to a maximum of $500.00). The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:30 p.m. November 27, 1991 10. Ouestions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, 639 -4171. BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application by Gene Davis for Sensitive ) FINAL ORDER Lands Review and modification of conditions of approval ) of SL 1 -86 and SLR 90 -0011 for land near Ash Creek in ) SLR 91 -0004 the C -P and 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 and 91 -0004 (1) to delete a formula that dictates how maintenance costs will be apportioned, (2) to delete requirements that certain techniques be used to ensure maintenance, (3) to delete requirements that all of the property will contribute to or secure performance of maintenance , (4) to delete requirements that a homeowners associations be formed and that a deed restriction or equitable servitude be created to ensure maintenance, and (5) to define the terms maintenance and repair. - Hearings Officer Larry Epstein held a public hearing regarding the application on October 28, 1991. The applicant's attorney testified in favor. Seven witnesses testified largely in opposition to the proposed changes. City staff recommended approval of some of the requested changes and denial of others. The Hearings Officer left open the public record for 7 days to receive additional written testimony. LOCATION: North of Highway 217 west of 89th Avenue. WCTM 1S1 35AC, Tax Lots 101, 2800, and 4800, and 1S1 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 plan 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: Approval in part and denial in part EXAMINER'S DECISION: Conditional approval in part and denial in part II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE, SURROUNDINGS, HISTORY AND PROPOSAL A. Incorporation of record by reference. The Hearings Officer incorporates by reference the January, 1991 decision in the matter of SLR 90 -0011 and the July, 1987 decision and modification in the matter of SL 1 -86. B. Relevant conditions of approval. Condition 5 of the decision in SL -86 as amended by SLR 90 -0011 reads as follows: 5. The applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall designate as open space in perpetuity that land shown in pink on Exhibit 6 of this decision, including land within 40 feet of the south pond and Ash Brook and land within 25 feet north of the top of the north pond bank. Page 1 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) a. The applicant shall execute and file in the office of the County Recorder covenants, conditions, and restrictions and a property owners association, equitable servitude or equivalent approved by the City Attorney which apportions the maintenance costs for said area among the properties included in this application as follows: single family residences - one share each, duplexes - one share per lot, office space - one share per 2000 square feet of gross floor area, motel - one share per five units. 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 of incorporation, bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney. C. Proposed changes. 1. The applicant proposes to delete the formula in condition 5a that apportions the responsibility for maintenance costs for the open space /wetland, arguing it is not necessary for the City to dictate the apportionment formula to achieve the City's goal of ensuring maintenance and repairs occur. In its place, the applicant proposes that the City require that the City Attorney find adequate funds are generated to adequately perform required maintenance and repair. 2. The applicant proposes to delete the implicit requirement in condition 5 that all properties in the application shall be subject to the maintenance and repair requirements of the decision. In its place, the applicant proposes that the applicant be allowed to determine what properties will be subject to maintenance requirements, subject to approval by the City Attorney. The applicant proposes to identify property whose value is sufficient to permit full recovery by the City for expected maintenance costs for any one year period, if a lien was foreclosed on that property. 3. The applicant proposes to delete the implicit requirement in condition 5 that only property can be used to secure performance of maintenance and repair responsibilities. In its place, the applicant proposes that maintenance and repair costs can be secured by performance bond, cash deposit or securities in lieu of a bond, a letter of credit or other pledge, guarantee or security deemed sufficient by the City Attorney. Furthermore, such security should be subject to release or partial release when no longer necessary to secure maintenance and repairs. Page 2 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) 4. The applicant proposes to delete the requirement in condition 5a through d that the applicant create a homeowners association, a deed restriction, an equitable servitude, and/or other deed covenant to implement the maintenance and repair scheme. 5. The applicant proposes to define "maintenance and repair" as follows: a. Applicant, property owners or HOA shall repair any damage to the wetland habitat areas or open spaces caused by grazing cattle. b. Applicant, property owners, or HOA shall repair any damage to the fences, dams wetland habitat or open space caused by any source other than weather, flooding, wildlife or other natural cause. c. Compliance by applicant with the five -year maintenance reporting plan required by ODSL. d. Repair shall include repair of fences or dams damaged by any source and - replacement of plant life damaged by cattle or other than natural causes. Replacement of plant life need not include replacement of plants of equal size of those damaged. e. Maintenance and repair requirements shall apply only after all required improvement are installed or completed. 6. The applicant argues these change are needed, because the commercial buyers and lenders refuse to purchase or loan on property subject to restrictions requiring association, interaction or dependence with residential homeowners or subject to ambiguous, undefined and unlimited maintenance responsibilities. The applicant argues it is not necessary for the City to use an apportionment formula to assure maintenance is performed. III. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA & DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Incorporation by reference. The Hearings Officer incorporates by reference the January, 1991 decision in the matter of SLR 90 -0011 and the July, 1987 decision and modification in the matter of SL 1 -86. IV. HEARING AND TESTIMONY A. Hearing. The Hearings Officer received testimony at the public hearing about this application on October 28, 1991. The Hearings Officer left open the public record until 5 p.m., November 4, 1991. A record of that testimony is included herein as Exhibit A (Parties of Record), Exhibit B (Taped Proceedings), and Exhibit C (Written Testimony). These exhibits are filed at the Tigard City Hall. B. Witnesses and a summary of selected testimony. 1. Dick Bewersdorff testified on behalf of the City of Tigard Planning Department. He summarized the staff report and recommendation, and responded to questions. Page 3 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) 2. Andy Jordan appeared as the lawyer for the applicant Gene Davis. Dr. Davis also appeared on his own behalf in a written exhibit dated November 4. Mr. Jordan summarized the changes proposed by the applicant and the reasons therefor. He characterized the changes as providing increased flexibility. He speculated that the cost of maintenance and repair will be low, and opined that it is inequitable and inefficient to use property worth hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars for a debt involving only several hundreds of dollars. He argued that the apportionment formula does not work, because it depends on a complete build -out of the property; until fully developed, the applicant cannot know how many dwelling units or square feet of office space or hotel rooms may be built. He introduced a letter from the president of a company by the name of "Spa Suites" in support. He argued the form of the homeowners association is not relevant to the City. He argued that assets other than real property could secure maintenance and repair responsibilities. He argued that "maintenance" is not defined, and that financial institutions will not loan on the property if encumbered with such vague responsibilities. He argued that the applicant should not have to repair the site for harm caused by natural causes, such as wildlife who eat young trees and flooding caused by downstream blockages. He argued the applicant should not be responsible for effects caused by downstream blockages. 3. Louise Beck, Jeffrey Gottfried (Fans of Fanno Creek), Cliff Epler (NPO #8), John Broome (Wetlands Conservancy), John Blomgren, Joel Shaich (Oregon Division of State Lands), Nancy Tracy testified generally against the proposed changes. CPO #4 also sent a letter dated October 5, 1991 objecting to the proposed changes. Ms. Tracy and Mr. Broome also sent letters raising concerns. Mr. Broome's letter suggests preparation of a maintenance and repair plan and program as the basis for estimating maintenance and repair costs. a. Several witnesses testified against the proposed changes, because they believed that the decision in SL 1 -86 represented an agreement among the parties to that case which should be binding on the applicant. They argued the applicant is trying to weasle -out of the agreement after benefitting from the filling allowed by the City. b. Several witnesses also objected that the applicant has not complied with the conditions of approval of the earlier decision and Corps of Engineers and Division of State Lands permits for the property, evidencing a lack of diligent good faith. c. Several witnesses argued in favor of requiring a property owners association so future purchasers of the property know of the limits on use of the open space. d. Several witnesses testified about the importance of ensuring the site accommodates expected storm water flows to prevent flooding of upstream properties. They also testified about the importance of protecting water quality in Ash Creek, a tributary of Fanno Creek. In the absence of any reliable data about costs of maintenance and repair, it is speculative to argue that those costs will be low or high. Only once a maintenance program is drafted and implemented can reliable cost estimates be computed. e. Mr. Shaich argued ODSL did not receive notice of the hearing, and requested that the record remain open for comment from the Division. He argued that the applicant has caused downstream sedimentation, based on his inspections of the site since 1989. Mr. Blomgren concurred. Mr. Shaich objected to suggestions the applicant could dredge a deep narrow channel to increase the developable area of the site. He noted the DOSL permit requires the applicant to provide for deed Page 4 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) restrictions preserving the open space as such. Tie argued the applicant is not complying with the requirement for deed restrictions. Mr. Shaich also introduced a letter dated November 1, 1991 in support of the City staff recommendation. In that letter he suggested the City allow the applicant to donate the open space to a land trust, such as the Wetlands Conservancy, to ensure maintenance occurs. f. Mr. Epler argued the applicant should be required to aerate the water more. He opined that, because all of the Davis property benefits from the open space, all of the property should secure or contribute to its maintenance. He also warned the City against accepting as security assets that are not typical for the City. g. Mr. Broome argued that enough land should be encumbered to secure enforcement of the maintenance and repair responsibilities, and that the City should not reduce the area encumbered until there is a plan from which maintenance and repair costs can be projected. He suggested several other ways of paying for maintenance and repair, such a management fund with the interest going to pay for maintenance. He argued the applicant should be responsible for maintenance and repairs warranted by natural causes as well as by other causes. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. Condition regarding formula. The Hearings Officer agrees with the applicant that the formula in condition of approval 5a is not necessary to achieve compliance with the purpose of the condition; that is, to ensure that the costs of maintenance and repair are secured. As long as the costs of maintenance and repair are secured, then whether and how much of those costs are paid by residential or commercial properties is not important to the City. The formula attempted to achieve a sort of equitable allocation of costs; but, it is not relevant to the applicable approval standards whether those costs are equitably allocated, as long as - they are paid privately. _ . B. Condition regarding extent of property subject to maintenance and repair requirement. 1. The Hearings Officer agrees with the applicant that it may not be necessary to treat all of the applicant's property as security for the maintenance and repair responsibilities for the open space and wetland. At some point the value of the property exceeds the reasonable cost of maintenance and repairs. 2. However, at this time, the record does not contain sufficient probative evidence for the Hearings Officer to determine how much of the property should be used to secure maintenance and repair costs, because neither those costs nor the value of the property are in the record. The Hearings Officer concludes authority should be delegated to the City to determine how much and what property or other assets should be used to secure maintenance and repair costs, once those costs and the value of the property or other assets are determined with reasonable reliability. C. Condition regarding form of assurance that maintenance and repair will be done. 1. Covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC & R's), a property owners association (POA), an equitable servitude, and similar devices serve two purposes in this case. First, they provide notice to potential third party purchasers that a portion of the property is a wetland and associated open space and is not developable. Second, they Page 5 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) provide a means to help enforce requirements that the wetland and open space be maintained; they provide a means to generate capital for maintenance and repair, they provide a legal entity (the POA) against whom the City can proceed if necessary to secure enforcement and to whom to send a bill for maintenance and repairs done by the City. 2. The terms used in condition 5 in the 1991 decision in this matter were intended to be illustrative and not confining. The Hearings Officer believes they were broad enough to allow the City to accept deed restrictions on only a portion of the property, to accept security other than the property itself, and to allow partial and full releases when warranted. However, to avoid further confusion, the Hearings Officer concludes that such authority should be delegated expressly. The City should be able to modify the method of compliance with condition 5, provided the applicant gives the City substantial evidence that warrants such modifications. Substantial evidence might include a maintenance and repair plan from which reasonably reliable cost estimates can be prepared and a schedule of specific parcels and/or other assets from which reasonable values can be ascertained. Until the City approves such an alternative plan for assuring maintenance of the wetland and open space property, the Examiner cannot conclude that a given amount of the property or a given value or type of assets is sufficient to ensure maintenance and repairs will be funded; therefore, the condition requiring CC & R's, POA, or equivalent should continue to apply, subject to the City's discretion to modify the requirement for good cause shown. D. Definition of "maintenance and repair." 1. The Hearings Officer fords that the term "maintenance and repair" should be defined to enable all parties to understand their obligations, rights and expectations. The defmition offered by the applicant is a reasonable one, except for the exclusion of damages from natural causes and the waiver of maintenance and repair responsibilities until all required improvements are installed. 2. Maintenance and repairs should be performed regardless of the cause of a problem. Otherwise greater adverse effects will follow. If downstream conditions create the problem, then the applicant has a right to bring an action against the persons who cause that downstream condition. If wildlife damage vegetation, then the applicant has a duty to protect the vegetation so it is not damaged. Waiving that responsibility invites neglect and failure of the mitigation plan. 3. Maintenance and repair responsibilities should attach immediately. Failure to provide maintenance and repair in a timely manner exacerbates maintenance and repair problems. Deferring maintenance and repair until all required improvements (whatever that means) are installed leaves a gap in maintenance and repair responsibilities. That gap is likely to result in further problems for which the general public will become responsible in the absence of other provisions. The applicant is undertaking and has undertaken development that contributes already to the need for maintenance and repair. There is no basis in the law for deferring maintenance and repair responsibilities. VI. SITE VISIT BY HEARINGS OFFICER The Hearings Officer visited the site without the company of others. Page 6 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) • VII. CONCLUSION AND DECISION The Hearings Officer concludes that the proposed landform alteration and changes in conditions of approval of SL 1 -86 and SLR 90 -0011 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 modifies condition of approval 5 of the decision in SL 1 -86 as modified by SLR 90 -0011 to read as follows: 5. The applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall designate as open space in perpetuity that land shown in pink on Exhibit 6 of this decision, including land 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 prohibiting development of the wetland and open space tracts identified pursuant to this condition and further requiring - the owner of such tracts to comply with a natural resource mitigation and management plan or plans for the tracts that are or may be approved by the City, the Oregon Division of State Lands, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. b. Unless waived by the planning director pursuant to condition 5d or 5e, the applicant shall execute and file in the office of the County Recorder articles of incorporation and bylaws of a property owners association. c. Except as authorized under condition 5d or 5e, the covenants, conditions and restrictions and bylaws of the property owners association shall: (1) Prohibit amendment, modification or dissolution unless authorized by the City of Tigard. (2) Authorize the City of Tigard to issue citations for the failure of the owners or association to maintain or repair the open space designated pursuant to this condition and to undertake the necessary repair or maintenance, to bill the association and owners of all or certain lots and parcel in the subject property for the cost thereof, and, if the bill is not paid in a reasonable time, to file liens against those lots and parcels. (3) Be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney as being consistent with this condition. (4) Provide for funding of maintenance and repair of the wetlands and open spaces identified in this condition and shall allocate responsibility for contributing those funds to owners of specific lots and parcels within the subject site. Not all lots and parcels within the subject site are required to contribute to maintenance and repair funds. The amount of contributions and lots and parcels subject to making them may be modified over time, provided the amount of funds available for maintenance and repairs continues to be adequate to pay for maintenance and repairs. Page 7 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) d. In lieu of requiring the conditions, covenants and restrictions or bylaws of the property owners association to provide funding for the maintenance and repair of the wetland and open space identified in this condition, the City may accept real or personal property, bonds, an irrevocable letter of credit, securities, or other pledge, guarantee or security deemed sufficient by the City to assure that sufficient maintenance funds will be available to provide maintenance and repairs of the wetland and open space identified in this condition. (1) The City may require the applicant to provide details of a maintenance and repair program for the subject property and to certify the costs of that program and to provide a certified appraisal of property or assets in lieu of conditions, covenants and restrictions or bylaws of a property owners association, before accepting property or assets in lieu of conditions, covenants and restrictions or bylaws of a property owners association. (2) If the City accepts property or assets in lieu of requiring a property owners association or conditions, covenants and restrictions that provide for funding of maintenance and repairs, then: (a) The City may waive requirements for a property owners association and may waive requirements for conditions, covenants, and restrictions except as provided in condition 5a; and (b) The City shall release property, assets or obligations if the City concludes such property, assets or obligations are not needed to secure funds for maintenance and repairs. e. In lieu of executing the conditions, covenants and restrictions or bylaws of the property owners association regarding maintenance and repair of the wetland and open space identified in this condition, the applicant may convey title for the wetland and open space identified in this condition to the Wetlands Conservancy or other organization the City fords has the resources and experience to maintain and repair the property, provided the Wetlands Conservancy or such other organization agrees in writing to accept responsibility for maintenance and repair of the wetland and open space identified in this condition. f. For purposes of this decision, SR 1 -86, and SLR 90 -0011, the term "maintenance and repairs" includes the following: (1) Maintenance and repairs to the wetland habitat areas or open space due to damage caused by grazing cattle; (2) Maintenance and repairs to fences, dams, wetland habitat or open space due to damage caused by other sources, including but not limited to cattle, weather, flooding, and wildlife; (3) Maintenance and repairs necessary to comply with the requirements of permits approved by the Oregon Division of State Lands or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and to comply with requirements of a mitigation or maintenance and repair plan subsequently approved by the City; Page 8 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) (4) Replacement of vegetation damaged by sources, including but not limited to cattle, weather, flooding, and wildlife; provided, damaged vegetation need not be replaced with vegetation of equal size of those damaged; provided further, replacement vegetation shall be of sufficient size at planting to make continued survival reasonably likely, and shall be of the same species as the vegetation being replaced or other species native to the site or similar wetlands and open spaces in the vicinity. D • TE is 12th day �•'v.ember, 1991. -. . • rZ A 1 4 it p -'1 I , Larry Epstein, ' 0 cer Page 9 - Hearings Officer decision SLR 91 -0004 (Davis) 4. CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER , 1. Concerning Case Number(s): 2. Name of Owner: Marie and tiajjanjig_Djudj 3. ?Jame of Applicant: Same Address 4550 SW Lombard 4. Location of Property: Address_jaa_ North 91lkazni, jatiagn_Slijititb_anALMA q(Ct h NO•111•11111•111111111■11111111MNIMINININIO. CityarmalgstateaLZip_921:105 Legal Description iSi 35AC Ipts 101 00 , • • 200, 1300, 1400, & 1500. 5. Nature of Application: RegatiLL'of heathig_tp_ssmiador_teardmay_ta,.. neiahborin- residents who did not recely.ft_AP.MgariAtg_nsltipe. iia:n■lionormonaw ■ii■raisavaraieaminiganie■oii 6. A41.911: 7. Katiet: Approval as requested xr Approval wiqi conditions (conditions modified) Denial amimigiimasnwomminnommerommerancomay. Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and wailed to: amiLL The applicant & owners ,..1121_ owners of record within the required distance The afitectpd Neighborhood Planning Organization Affected governmental agencies 8. Elul Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL oU -1.111.1/..3.1L-1.9.8.7.2PHLESS 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 Bait Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9. Appeal: Any paety to the deditien way appeal this decitien in accordance With 32 and Section 18.32.376 Which provides that A written may he flied Within Id daYt After notice it givott and tent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 4:30 pow, 10. ilgotions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, 639-4171. 0257P 4 • 444 `,1/4 • N MY, BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY or 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 at the regularly scheduled public. April 30, 1987, and upon order of Tigard, an additional hearing was No. SL 1 °86 /V 87-02 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION came before the Hearings Officer hearings of February 26, March 260 the City Council for the City of 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 mown as a drainage ditch which drains from the Fred Meyer Store area, under Hall Blvd., 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 A h creek floods, the water in the 'drainage ditch, aka Ash Brook, backs u p and overflows, flooding property' on Thorn and 89th Streets. Page 1 -- SL 1-86/V 87 =02 After listening to testimony and evidence, including testimony by Herb Curtis, Ken Beck, Jerry Hoffman, David Tozer, Kristina Culliman,iDuise 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 The Hearings Officer continues to recommend approval of SL 1- 86/v 87-02 subject to the conditions found in the hearings Officer order dated May 18, 1987, which conditions of approval are amended as follows: 1. No amendment. 2. No amendment. 3. The following language 'shall be 'added to condition 3 The applicant shall provide 'documentation from a certified professional engineer to the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation and the tngineering Section Of the it 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 8th Street downstream to asSuxe that there will be zero impact to upstream development as a result of this .. ., project. 4. The following language 'shall be added to condition The applicant shall grant to the public, on standard fors furnished b the Cite ., t by City, a p ermanen a tormdrain easement which include Page.- 2 SL I' 06 /V 87-, all of Ash Brook (approximately top of bank to top of bank) . The, executed storm drainage easement document, legal description and acc p om .:ny inn map, shall be subject to Engineering Section review and approval prior to recording. 5. The following language shall be added to condition 05. The covenants, conditions and restrictions for the per's Association shall contain provisions which authorize the City of Tigard to issue citations for the Association's failure to maintain 9 or repair the open space dedicated pursuant to this condition of approval. In the event the problem cited is not corrected within a reasonable times then the 'covenants, Conditions and restrictions ah: =11 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 ions and restrictions. As with the Articles of incorporation, Bylaws and covenants, conditions and reitrictions, 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: S. No amendment 2 th' day July, 198/e of Jul... , DATED thx.s REARI ! S OFFICER ,L� nags 3 - 5b 14 v • �6 042.•• iv4 ion, of State Lands 1600 State Street Salem, OR 97310 .`Phone: 378 -3059 378 -3805 Perm ;Jo. 4570 - RENEWAL Perm' ' "yyp.e Remova Fi 11 Waterway s ree a an s County Washin ton County Expi ratT n1 awe" $�l__'" PN 006425 IS AUTHORIZED Iii ACCORDANCE WITH ORS 541.605 TO 541.695 TO PERFORM. THE OPERATIONS DES R RE i " AT A ' ` 7157 THE APPLI CATTIOP S &]ECT TO THE SPECIAL ONDITIO S A A AND TO 0 "I GENERA 0 D T OAS; 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 Oregon Administrative Rules, permit must comply with Oreg Chapter�340eStandards�ofpeualit -for Public Waters of Oregon. Specific water quality provisions for this project are set forth on Attachment Ap 4 Violations of the terms and conditions , permit are subject to administrative and /or legal action may result in revocah on of the permit or dama holder p p damages. The permit Molder 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 oyees of the Di Vi s i on o p of State Lands and all duly authorized representatives of the Director shall be permitted access the project area at all reasonable ' d a s to times for the purpose of inspecting work performed under this permit. conditions of this permit may request a �• hearingmfromQthe�Director , i n Writing, n within 10 days of the date this permit was hearing � 9� y p issued. must comply f with easi n om state -owned s�lbmerged' and submersi b1 a and, the applicant 1.4. p y si grand royalty provisions of ORS 274.530. If the roject involves creati oh of nel�J. l a d y i g state owned submerged or submersi b� .. lands . ou must comply with ORS 274, 905 27 " s b fillin on � y � + P y o ri ate�l easessFrom i t does .not `relieve the perm Lands, to conductbactivitiesoohestate aoWned submerged or submersible�l nd of State finds. Failure to com 1. o Wit t ese re ui renehts may result in or criminal For • more ifrmation about theserequirements, p lease con tact thee. Di vision of State Lands; Waterway Leasing Office; 378 -3805. Martha 0 Pagel Director Oregon biVision of State Lands dune 20, .1988.... Authorized ature Date Issued • ATTACHMENT A Special Conditions for Material Removal/Fill Permit No. 4570 1. This permit authorizes the placement of up to 4,800 cubic yards of fill material in Section 35, T1S, R1W (wetland area.tributary to Ash Creek) for the construction of a motel complex and commercial facility as outlined in the attached permit applications map and drawings. This permit also authorizes the removal of material associated with the mitigation portion of the Project subject to Special Condition 7 below. 9 P P This ermit does not authorize fill for the ro.osed street. 2. The y operation ionrshall be conducted in a manner that will minimize any 3. There shall be no operation of equipment in the active flowing stream or wetland area between October 1 and June 1 i_ • °' 4. The fill slope shall be seeded or planted with grass and /or legumes. 5. Removal of existing woody vegetdti on shall be minimal. 6. The mitigation actions as specified below in Special C. onde ti on 7 shall b e completed prior to filling for the motel complex and commercial facility. 7 g The. Mitigation ate on a ction on the south side of the prope tseshall be completed in accordance to the following specifics n . a. Pond edges shall be sloped to at least 10 :1. b. At least two islands shall be created Within the pond. c. The to twelve inches of excavated material shall be stockpiled on -site and utilized for surface cover of berms and pond edges. A Water control weir shall be constructed on the drainage tributary of Ash Creek to control water level in the pond. e. The wetland and creek area shall be fenced With a 40 foot buffer between the Wetland/creek edge and the fence. • The buffers shall be planted anted with native or adapted tree and shru species on at least ten foot centers. A low berm shall be constructed at the perimeter of the wetland utilizing material removed for pond creation. -page ones' • � +t� r�� a 1��f�F�i�i� L � � -:i. Attachment A R/F 4570 Page two the Washington County shall • restriction with th "This County 8. The landowner hall record a deed Courthouse identifying the mitigation site and specifying mitigation filling or resource protection. azi Grazing, is �to be managed for wetland rasa protection P submitted to the alteration i s prohibited except as required for wetland prot c puh of the deed restriction shall be sub. purp ®ses." A copy► Division of State Lands prior to completion of fill activities° 9. The applicant shall monitor the mitigation te annually for five years by site 1 of each year on: and report to the Division of State Lands y a. Vegetation cover of the site. b. Planting success of the buffer area. c. Water levels in the mitigation pond. of the annual monitoring repoli't, ,the Division of State 1 O. Following receipt the status of'the mitigation project and may require Lands will modifications of to the site to correct failures or ensure reasonable : _ . cti vas. success of the mitigation project objectives. Department of Fish and Vii l dl i fe biologist, Gene erb .� ll , Oreg p contacted at least five (5) days prior �1) y shall be con constructi on of the mitigation pond. . halt or Vision of State Lands, retains the authority to temporarily artl 12e The Division �ro'ect in case of excessive turbidity or damage to modify the project resources. COMMENT: e advised that an additional permit is required for filling ithe proposed street. A seperate permit application shall be submit the Local ImproVement District is formed. dune 20, 1988 2269p. • U BIEMEAROMMEgallavzsgaglim',. • • JOINT APPLICATION FOR PERKIN U.S. AMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS STATE OF OREGON, DIVISION OF STATE LMU)S VREREAS Department of the Army permits 'for proposed work in or affecting navigable waters of the United Statee, the discharge of dredged or fill MAtettga into,those vatere, and the transport of dredged material for the purpose of dumping it into ocean voters are authorized by Section 10 of the River end Harbor Act of 1899, Section 404 of the t cleats Ulster Act of 1977, ind Section 103 of the Paring Protection ReseerCh and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, resuctively, - ..40---permits for that part of those project ectivitiee which includes the removal or fill in the usterUns of Oregon of rock, gravel, silt, and clay are authorized by the State of Oregon under O.R.S. 541.603 to S41.693 ../apactatoll mu tfErf TIM nquonetrrs 0! Dom MUCUS, vis 0 State Qe Oregon • Divislon of State L ir* • • Corps of 111.9.01VialaLJNOWalli-22K1 an 9 Engineers . tra DiStriCt ,0 PO Box 2946, Portland, 0 — i i!) Dete received ,. Creek wetegvay _21aILC1_L2.21.i_,__-------, mu 0 . 6 to 0 . 9m... __ Items of itivere Local Soot ion BLk_-§-LSE-kkL_Eg3-a5ovnehip gr ar6__1g.---L---------------- Range T,As.al-Ka------1"----"-----,. Date of Project March 1 1986 Data of ProPct —A2.29"Lj18"1---------. Estimated Starting Estimated Completion _ ApnacAra Si-Xi-gn--M-2-L—_Davi.s Ammr . Harr Rtisseliss°c . Inc . , Hoz OF AUTHORIZED Address 4550 SW Lombard ittpyCASdts6te, BVer_IE1.L._.9._E___9222.5-------_ ":7, State. Portland ,c)R92 zi_ 0040 ...—.........._ . Is 6466101 go.* g 46-5862 phone: tp.FA. 5 7-3010 uot..T222-2225_, ______,.......... 'tau,: 297-3010m0m ., M29:2525_ OR 97310 OR 0 97208-2946 Date received pone: Work :ITEErgs'on FROFERTY OMR IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT Address,' city; State, iip Code Area Arita pone: Work Rom* PROJECT ADDRESS cast Tigard, Oregon Zip Code , • . Asseseorie Riscords-.- Shown on Hop Tax 1 1 'ia •! suintivicionasruprook Fann Lot Block7::::::: mme of _ In order to expedite the processing of this application, the following city endior eounrY dePattmaint. uhicil has local jurisdiction over the proposed project, hem NAM. of Department: Address phone 04mbert Aii0fiAVALs on ctrairxciettott applied for Or direedY Obteined itOok Other igineiei eltyi gr..) e. any of the proposed pi-ejecta diedribed in this 8001iCationi City of Tigard been contacted: ard Oregoh 97223 po Box 23397 , Tigard, • •Form 58 • OdT.I9S0. • •• . • I va....m..64--- 4)4. • tiCIOStitO• • t tmtiLbmn,mA "14.5it*gsistil Sensitive Lands Dvls- Permit ' Ashbrook OndOraili intOratate, state, county4 • PALALAWASMJIM att.ia 1727/86 Pending siLoamm tri. 1 ' in 1\ 1! " I Ili .1 h .:.) 44 , IF,4 1 , t: '^ ,. f s, sr_ ey :s'w t s�'C 3 _� •r r K } LEGIBILITY STRIA r f >E f ,'^ F ~` •' ` t.F Yom•.. : 006425 (Ash Creek - Fill) p>UFPeK=;Nb UPL.,ND UNC?EItTorr' PL+IT * -raamea (f)Se LeI pp Pt..4.447 MTOR:Im,") EZAVIINer OHA,NNEL- C/ONFlaUPAr pON) GIZEErc,. •`r Creek, Section i.0041Nb ooNN tANM Nell-ANC) Al2E,A MILL ►PE t= i'ihfD W PLAN;b Cn lco", ,4L PRonaveo Ft.C*0 RSTENTION nit.Ot.tFo/ rve-a.A.so. paw Paeo. t*I.ANT WO aAltg.A.n HANA14 ' & # D r, Id oRT � IVE ISLANO FOZ. Hk.b 1A- PFoVioN . 1NIW71 •IFE roor) 4 oa\iEa. : kagorA644. A. 2059 4, Wildlife . Pond & island Section 6%)4642446.' Gz UNt?I tz r OR`' 1.67ae -e q ry (hea PI.'T MAfLWM.y7 4 Wildlife Wetland Pond Bank Section Representative Plant List t.Nue, izUbQA &ALI . i4.&IANC7P" oarzYLUe GGRNi/r 40.1.1X 1910001..0X OPULEA DOUbLA i AEC) Mi-Lors Pti .r' W r.� Nildt.or . ` NARONAG NINE+4 catie o SPeoTeNaLf .LWI4Nf�C:R ' 04400U6, RO4o51,40 . geo ELoERe5 27' 40,44eX DuiomE5� *Ec' -a ?YPnA LAisFO:.IA GARRE?( 061■UP -r# ftGJ *rf &ei sE PrtALAP*A124.1N704/V.0% REED ,ovri.RYb > MAO." M' PROPOSED 'WGTLA±D FILL In Asti Creek At a Cai hti Of Ste a lore on Appl i cotl on b J t I erie & 'Uit? n Darr S.. Dote 1•eiier xg8.7 5 ilt LEGIBILITY STRIP Ash Greek Improvement Project LEGIBILITY STRIP n06475, (Ash= Creek -• F1iI I) - �_ � �['1 I . ! . I•t' L! 1 f rr =r i F Lure ! hake ' T , --MO - ~ WETLAND' .r.. Glee r�r.acrty- Phase ceir.* WETLAND firs e r - vaoPtveo= Wco'E� - PPELLMtNfr' tr tfva,t J „ Kr, goer.: lg' Et tPL.CrEE e :'fr, r/ I& PN'J t7LJP..t%- LPL' rMME. ^PROFo W 0 "G comPLC)C- P2Et.tM iA¢'" FLA:. i•Prttor ISo.000 4Q r 1,6Vet Wier"' OP", IJ4e,„ * 'QOIT *G: octxr_ 0,-4- VfOraT orf:.l oort" eArts,trk._ 95 Oat SU at:x, G-V01-01m Ogf 14/TeitY rI.O.W. „70;000 9GC:'T ,.„,. Buffer Plantings _ as OM/ev►ENT Fence PROPOSED WETLAND FILL REV in Ash Creek' IIMMeMINNO At �P�Q County of Washington , State Ore e Application byEtn;e�e Date February 1987 Sht 2 of a._ O SO 'CO 100. .t a , %‘110 • ! e, �!� +i. s oti 4,, Attu'' Rely of: DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY RTLAND DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEE...A P. O. BOX 2946 PORTLAND, OREGON 97208 -2946 January 8, 1988 Planning Division (CE!NPP -PL-R) Subject: 071-0YA --4- 006425 (Ash Creek - Fill) Eugene L. & Vivian M. bav1s 4550 B.W. Lombard Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Gentlemen: enclosed are your fully executed Department of the Army Permit and a notice of authorization which must be posted at the work site. Please carefully read the permit and its conditions. In addition, if you have a contractor and /or agent, please review these conditions with them to ensure that the work is performed in accordance with the permit terms. If the work is not completed prior to the permit expiration date, you may apply for a time extension. We recommend you apply for a time extension at' least 90 days before the expiration date of the permit. If you have any questions, please contact Ron Marg , Project Manager, at the above address or telephone (503) 221 -6995. Sincerely, G. A. Newgard Chief, Regulatory Resource Planning Branch Enclosures DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PORTLAND DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS P. oa, BOX 2946 PORTLAND. OREGON 97206 -2946 December 21, 1987 Eugene L. & Vivian M. Davis 4550 SW.; Lombard Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Dear Mr. and Hrs. Davis: Enclosed are two unsigned copies of your requested permit. In order to make this permit valid, please read the conditions of the pemit carefully, , sign both copies, and return both copies, along with a check in ' r $100.00, payable to Finance and Accounting Officer, USAED, Portland, in the enclosed, self- addressed, postage-paid envelope. Your copy of the fully executed permit will then be returned to you. You are cautioned, however, not to begin work under the terms of this permit until you receive the fully executed document, as such action would be in violation of Federal law,. Sincerely, G. A. ! . , rd Chief, Re latory and Resource Branch Enclosure e k a s erk.z c 3 J /C ■p {/.�� •3 9 ■■ ■ ■age `EG 3 LC..: .- S IP ,� 4 _• ; ri . °"0 "." DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT Permittee GENE L. & VIVIAN M. DAVIS Permit No. 07 1- -OYA --4 —00642 5 Issuing Office. Corps of Engineers„,-Portland District NOTE: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the persnittee or any future transreree. The term "this office" refers to the appropriate ,district or division office of the Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted activity or the appropriate official of that office acting under the suto.,rity of the commanding officer. You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below. Project Description: See Page la. Purpose: To prepare land for commercial and residential development. Drawings: Two sheets marked 006425 (Ash Creek Fill) . Project Location: Ash Creek, Mile 0.9, in Washington County, at Tigard, Oregon. Permit Conditions: General Conditions: , _ December 31 1990 lr The time iitnit for completing the work authorized ends on If you find that yota need p y► your q . more. time to complete the authorized activit submit our re nest for a time extension. to this office for consideration at least one month before the above date is reached, 2, You Must maintain the activity authorized by ;his permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and condi- tions of this pethth, You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make a good faith transfer to a third party in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you Must obtain a Modification of this permit from this office. Which may require restoration of the area, 3, If you discover any previously unknown historic or archeological remains while accomplishing the activity authorized by this permit, you must immediately notify this office of what you have found, We will initiate the Federal and state coordina- tion required to determine if the remains Warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, ... Jc FORM 1/21, Noy Be gbVeit OF SEP 82 IS besbL rE, 0401014 0F'R 325 (Appendb A)) • • Permittee: EUGENE L. St VIVIAN H. DAV IS Permit No. 071-0YA-4-006425 Project Description (cont d) Prepare a 22.2-acre site for development. The site has 703 acres of wetland and would be developed in two phases. The work would consist of the following: PHASE I. Place 4,800 cubic yards (cy) of material on 1 acre of wetland for construction of a motel and associated parking. PRASE II. Fill approximately 1.3 acres of wetland for an office complex and associated parking. MITIGATION: To offset project impacts, the applicant would create a 1,5 acre wetland pond for Phase I development and a 0.75 acre wetland pond for Phase 11 development, a la Pe rmi t tee: V, UOENE L. & V IV IAN M. DAIVS Permit No. 071-0U-4-006425 Special Conditions a. through 1. a. All construction debris shall be disposed of in such a manner that it cannot enter the waterway. b. Care shall be taken to prevent an y petroleum other deleterious materials from enteringthewatel products, chemicals, or c. Work in the waterway shall be done so as to minimize turbidity in- creases in the water that tend to degrade water quality and damage aquatic life. g d. When a filling activity is adversely affecting by fishery agency that notified b a f ishe harvest y g fish or wildlife resources or the er subsequently directs remedial measures, the og�erm3.ttee shall comply Engineer mply with such directions as may be received to suspend or modify the activity, to the extent required to mitigate or eliminate the adverse effect. e. The applicant shall monitor the mitigation site annually for five years and report to the Division of State Lands by July 1 of each year on: i. 2. 3. Vegetation cover of the site. Planting success of the buffer area. Water levels in the mitigation pond. f. Following receipt of the annual monitoring re Following p part , the Division of State Lands will review the status of the mitigation project and may require reasonable modifications to the site to correct failures or ensure success of the mitigation g project objectives g. ��-�� 'Oregon Department shall be corn and. Wildlife biologist , one Herb of Fish Phone acted at least five (5) days prior to any construction of the mitigation pond. h. All storM drains on the project site must contain oil and grease separators. i. Runoff from the grazed pasture should be shiinte4 to a shallow • etention area containin g a welr prior to allowing dischaicge to Ash (.Year. J. A low berm sHou:, ,. . pieced � the. , ld be placed to contain the wildlife pond. P wildlife pond and old Phase 1T bu rated between the new Phase 1. lc: buffet far of trees and shrubs should be la ildingpark Og lot 4tea 1. A 40-foot-wide fenced buffer of riparian vegetation should be maintained atone the south hank of Ash Creek,; 2a Permittee: EUGENE L. N IVIAN M. DAVIS Permits 071- 0YA -4- 006425 e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit. 4. Reliance on Applicant's Data The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public interest was made in reliance on the information you provided. 5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision: This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any time the circumstances warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following: a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit. b. The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been false, incomplete, or inaccurate (See 4 above). c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision. Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modification, and revocation procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326,5. The referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the terms and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any corrective measures ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations (such as those specified in 33 CFR. 209,170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the cost. • 6, Extensions. General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity authorized by this permit. Unless there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest _;,^ decision, the Corps will normally give favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit, Your signature below; as perm e, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of.thia permit. (PERMI?ITTEE) (DATE) pe' This 't becomes effective When ` hen the�Federal official; designated to act for the Secretary of the Army; has signed beiow. 171STRICT ENGINEER) ,DATE) When the structures or work authot'ized b " y this permit are still in existence at the time the properly Is transferred; the terms and conditions of this permit Will continue to be binding on the new Owners) of the property, to validate the transfer of this permit and the associated liabilities associated "with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below, /7'RA,�i5F`C14 EE) (DATE) *0,t, OoVEpNNEN i P $4 o C1 FICa' 1980 r�i +42s • • • 4" a 0 006425 (Ash Creek — Fill) ......•■•••■■■••••■•■••■•■••••••■•••■••.......... OUPPela:146, O 1.112L-^N(7 UNI0Mg&Tolzr rt.-0441,& (ee• Lei op PLos44 ■ MATERIA4.0) 1 6)(19I1tv& P'peaTUP.M.ANIC, ( 6HPNNet, CIONF'I&URAcTION) A.6•-• ORS E•C_ - 1°411 4.* Creek Section 0okiNeVz.v-i4A V•le-rt.k+IP PrloPeier, V•ilLoLIF:e 1:014) p..10.12.1,644 PL..kt•rr&: 00:260evi evx-r;64. Pt2OFV0,5t2 FiZt9 t7 P.Mtv-iioN vilt.r)LIPE/ HEILANfo pow fraea rt-frwl 04/mAleg..t../er HAVINO 6WelP 14711460 reac*•-' laseet, #12" I'02. Nate-s7st.e0 HkJ5re+ri PrzoVoil,* ftor.*) 4 csavwx. 1-th,goriAr.,444 a5-xv oo.14-irre.,4,2064&& Wildiii.e.,.,Pona- 161and.,seotion, auppetz146, oe- Lirsic,P.42‘.:/rog-r* inkvr. war.- L&T FLPI•rr plocrep.t.b.E.&) Wildlife Wetland Pond Bank Section Representative Plant List -rs&i ikt..14Uo pzUe2J gm? kivelz i.4.4O1A1,7112F2,4. Reo tmi-Lothl tvicrrt.u* NtIrA NE-'T44 HANZei.. 614LUE30:4/1.4.fA k1/441i1.3.,OIN ongek. GOU6,LIN&i HANg01-1fre• Pt-re*CreP424riuv NllJE,V- RU'U' ‘,.e‘t-piot.1131;erz.r• 644 otico, emowN geo eLoat2.D111.2-e CARVA ettNt4o.t2ei.*■ oLtimze40.4 4.sta.0-E TepriALAIhroL.IA 6.1Nze>t ONJUPTAN tvveo- PtiAL,-12.1* AoltutApit4pEfr. rzEer; ivip+Jok ItIONgt15 t4EFLMID Vitt: 4. 1 ' At Caihty of wasteon State ,ic)12.gon. Application bgEt_iiser±q,A.AtLian_natia, Dote 1981 ShtL of [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] 4 ,t44/10 .*4 : • • ROBERT M, SCHLEiNiNG President AND ASSOCIATES, INC. E SURVEYORS FEBRUARY 25, 1991 LEGAL DESCRIPTION DR. DAVIS ENTIRE PARCEL "ASH CREEK PROJECT" (W.B. WELLS & ASSOC., INC. - JOB NO. 88-208) PARCEL A tract of land being a portion of Lots 17, 18, 20, 21 & 13 of the duly recorded plat of "Ashbrook Farm", situated in the Northeast one-quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 17 of said "Ashbrook Farm"; thence along the East line of said Lot 17, South 00°33'18" East, a distance of 205.42 feet to the True Point of Beginning of the tract herein described; thence continuing along the said East line, South 00°38'18" East, a distance of 352.75 feet to its intersection with the Southeasterly right-of-way line of the abandoned Oregon Electric Railway; thence along said right-of-way, North 52°21'42" East, a distance of 37.65 feet to the North line of Lot 18, said "Ashbrook Farm"; thence along the North line of Lots 18, 20 & 21, South 84°59'29" East, a distande of 1206.48 feet to an angle point in the North line of said Lot 21; thence East 16.78 feet to the West line of that tract of land described in deed to Louis Clifton Steele, recorded October 28, 1922, in Book 124, Page 294, Washington County Deed Records; thence along said west line, South 00°07'00" East, a distance of 71.03 feet to the North right-of-way line of Spruce Street as laid out in the duly recorded plat of "Graham Acres"; ,thence along said North right-of-way line, North 89030130" West, a distance of 24.85 feet to its intersection with the West right-of-way line of S.W. 89th Ave.; thence along the said West right .-of -way line, South 00°06'30" Eat, a diEltance of 504.40 feet to the South line of said Lot 21; thence along said South line, North 89°30'30" 1est, a diatance of 585.89 feet to the Northeasterly line of State Highway No. 217; thence along said right-of-way rtne, North 56°01'44" West, a distance of 34.64 feet to Engineers Station 375.4-50, 90.00 feet left of centerline; thende North 57°27'40" West, a distance of 200.06 feet to Engineers Station 3734-50, 85.00 feet left of centerline, thence North 56°01'44' West, a diatance of 650400 feet to EngineerS Station 367+00, 85.00 feet left of centerline; thence along the right'-of-WaY line 4230 N,E, REMoNT stNEET PokTLANb, OREGON 97213 PHONE 284-6896 • . „ . • • • • , r••44+., • • 4. • . • „ Page 2 Legal Description - Parcel 1 "Ash Creek Project" established by contract to "Foreign Mission Foundation", dated July 27, 1989, recorded as Fee No. 89-34374, North 44°15°38" West, a distance of 245.15 feet to Engineers Station 364+60, 135.00 feet left of centerline; thence North 62°05'38" West, a distance of 160.90 feet to Engineer v Station 363+00, 118.00 feet left of centerline; thence leaving said right-of-way and along the West line of said Fee No. 89-34374, North 33°58'16" East, a distance of 134.91 feet to the West right-of-way line of S.W. 95th Ave.; thence South 82°38'18" East, a distance of 40.00 feet to the East right-of-way line of said S.W. 95th Ave.; thence along said right-of-way line, North 07°21'42" East, a distance of 26.72 feet to the South line of that tract of land described ,in deed to Michael G. Rankin, recorded June 14, 1978, as Fee No. 78-2666; thence along the South line of said Rankin tract, South 88°14'18" East, a distance of 184.72 feet to the Southeast corner thereof; thence along the East line of said Rankin tract, North 00°27'18" West, a distance of 84.60 feet to the Northeast corner thereof; thence along the North line of said Rankin tract, North 88°13"e9" West, a distance of 173.15 feet to the East right-of-way line of said S.W. 95th Ave.; thence along said right-of-way line, North 07°21'42" East, a distance of 84.98 feet to the North line of that tract of' land described in deed to C.W. Hoyes and Bonnie J. Hoyes, recorded June 10, 1974, in Book 979, Page 42; thence along the North line of said Hoyes tract, South 88°14'18" East, a distance of 111.95 feet to the most Northerly Northeast corner thereof; thence South 00°27'18" East, a distance of 29.00 feet to the Southeasterly North line of said Hoyes tract; thence along the last stated North line and its Easterly extension, South 88°1418" East, a distance of 155.20 feet to the True Point of Beginning. EXCEPTING that tract of land described in said C.W, Hayes deed. Parcel 1 donidiA6 more or less. NbT1jL This desdription indlades a portion of S.W. 95th AVe. Which is proposed to be vacated. t. y LEGlBIL STRl I 1, , Page 3 Legal Description - Parcel II "Ash Creek Project" PARCEL 11 A tract of land being a portion of Lot 13 of the duly recorded plat of "Ashbrook Farm" and that tract of land described as Parcel 2 in contract to Eugene L. Davis and Vivian M. Davis, recorded October 16, 1980, as Fee No. 80037232, Washington County Deed Records, situated in the Northeast one-quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Davis tract, which point bears West, a distance of 226.24 feet from the Southeast corner of said Lot 13; thence along the boundarieS of said Davis tract the following courses and distanceb, North 00°07'00" West, a distance of 482.76 feet to a point which.bears South 00°07'0C" East, a distance of 170.00 feet from the North line of said Lot 13 (North line of Lot 13 being the centerline of S.W. Oak Street); thence parallel to and 170..00 feet distant from said North line, South 89°30'42" West, a distance of 299.39 feet to the West line of said Lot 13; thende along said West line, South 00033'18" East, a distance of 411.92 feet to the S.W. corner of said Lot 13, thence along said South line South 84°59'29" East a distande of 95.12 feet to ah angle point; thence East, a distance of 201.04 feet to the Point of Beginning. Pardel II contains 3 .28 acres, more or less. 4 REG1STV.RED PROFESSIONAL LAND SUR'VEYOR • OREGON .„ JULY le. ioso DAVID W. tvdLLS 01915 FORM No. 15 —'OW11R of ATTOft flY. TK COPYRIGHT goo 6TeVaNt.NH98 LAW PUB. CO., PORTLAND, OR, 97aO4 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That I, M • DAVIS have made, constituted and appointed and by these presents do make, constitute and appoint E. _ ANDREW JORDAN my true and lawful attorney, for me and in my name, place and stead and for my use and benefit, to Prepare, execute and file the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of ASHIBROOK FARMS, a planned community, and By —Laws of the Ashbrook Farms Property Owners' Association, including amendments thereto. ( Ashbrook Farms is more fully describedcn attached Exhibit "A ") giving granting p all and every act and thing whatsoever rea tt�s tea and necessary attorney be done, as fully, to all intents and purposes,ras X might or could do if per- sonally 1 , sonally present, hereby ratifying and confirming all that my said attorney shall lawfully do or cause to be done, by virtue hereof. In construing this instrument and whore the context so requires) the singular includes the plural: Dated „„„4J amax:;t::a ".23 : 43, 434) a4 :1,-444:4 :: YG4 :: a44iii.1444 4. 4i: :4 :44— #4444, 4444: a: 4444::4 :1 :.44 :444 " ' 4 :44ai44 ai4 VI IAN M. DAV •:44 4a .,.'.'.....44:4 444:44:4 4444:::4444 :4 444 :4iaaaaa4 :4444 4•144 :144443.4.144.4444 444 :14:14:ia a ::,,,,,,44,444444:4444 4444:4344444 :4:4,44 444.,444:444, :44444aa444 :46:,4.4 "444 444, 44..44: 4444, 4, 44444446:4a4:41:: :44344:44 :44.4. Anuan a3.4,a4...,:-419:91 aa. STATE OF OREGON, County of :L�111.as�1�.Ilg�+AI7�44.4if ss1 Via. .,. y pp .' 1 •, �it .1v44.4a444,i:aLa4a4ai .:4443i :44G.:ii44 :'4i434aa, 444:,3 14.:4: ,, :.:4,4444 ` �, t� fed ed thq foregoing metro tit to :.,,,.34i,44Personall •.•a eared the above named 4 :1.a443.a4�.�.u�4.•anaY .4.iDa be. 4.. i4he .r. :.a „a44.4ii.. :.voruntc�ry ad and deedl II i., :��+�, OFFICIAL SEA, c NOTARY PUBLIC ' GON m (OFFicIAL ,vt,ri #�' COMMISSION NO :002175 . 1 MY • COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT: 09, 1994 rp j'jev +Y'�'.�1S,pti 00:60N0nw'roJ,ioa w POWEROFATTORNEY (FORM No 13) 'a :3i4fV �4 ♦iil '.j M,. ,:, DAVIS.... t444a:444444a4 44:::4:444444 G : :4caaiii,, aaGi :3 :3 :34ar :4a 4444 :14444444 L :: :34444444 4i 444444'444 :s: : :ii4Y :s a.4i4 TO E. ANDREW JORDAN 444x4: :i444.4a4444a4Gi,ii :4 44444447 444 444i441i4i4 :44:Y.t.fx3444444444 i 4444444:14444 ",'""*".'"•'‘ 74444.:44445 i G i :'aL' 4 14444'4 4.4.44: a y4i444at a4 c44aa4:xsax44., ... ...,... ... ... ..... AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO BQLL Lc 1R.r44:1.1 o�r,Rdanj 4 .{...�]r/T /'��.�.G /`j�y+.Ya,{y�.�t+� •4L�'i1iL L�RI1N�Y�7rryMy �7.�4i:4'/L�)4 4�y,606..S.YY•i43Vr�.+1 at. :xyy11.1A �wG:Ata,44410. po: latidG4.og.a 0� . :44a444444a4c4a43,44447LL4:i —, 'JAMB, ADDIi1S88, z P' Notar Public .a Oregon. . G:443:atiii for My y c co ommission expires...„„ ron IIECORDER'8 Ued 4443:4 44G44444G4a4444:a :4 „444444:3 :i :4.444414 ::4: STATE Of OREGON) ss4 County of r 344444 444 44:4444444:44:4::443444444:444:44 1 certify that the within inslru- rnent was received for record on the day of /j :443444444444 y ::tG4:4ii 33: s441: 4444 is i :4ia3YL4) i 934 LL4 :x4. at x4:444u4434a4a o'clock —AIL) and recorded in a .. book/reel/volume No44: :444: i4: a :a4a3 :4 :4: a4, i4) on p a d i., i e 43:i34i444 44x ia.4aii:41L4G or as fee /file %tnstru- me/ri /'t /mici ofih /reception NoL 44:444 ::43444,.4) Recordof 4344:4 4444 4434434444 :14:444444+44444:4441 :474444444444,. of said County, Witness my hand and seal of County affixed, 444 44444444444444.'4444444 :4iaa :44444*44Y.44.L4 44;"44:4ii :44'4,'LO NANik 8044..4444444444443—'.. "'44: 4444: 444444444444444444444i44Deptity re ROBERT M, SCHLEINING President et 44 AND ASSOCIATES, CMT"ES, INC. E ?6INEEJ S SURVEYORS`'- FEBRUARY 25, 1991 LEGAL, DESCRIPTION DR. DAVIS ENTIRE PARCEL "ASH CREEK PROJECT" (W.0. WELLS & ASSOC., INC. JOB O. 88 -208) PARCEL, _ I A tract of land being portion at of "Ashbrook Farm", , situal & 13 of the duly recorded plat situated in the Northeast one- quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South; Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot 17 of said "Ashbrook Farm"; thence along the East line of said Lot 17, South 00 °33'18" East, a distance of 205.42 feet to the True Point of Beginning of the tract herein described; thence continuing along the said East line, South 00 °38'18" East, a distance of 352.75 feet to its intersection with the Southeasterly right -of -way line of the abandoned Oregon Electric Railway; thence along said right -of -way, North 52 °21'42" East, a distance of 3745 feet to the North line of Lot 18, said "Ashbrook Farm"; thence along the North line of Lots 18, 20 & 21, South 84°59'29" East, a distance of 1206.48 feet to an angle point in the North line of said Lot 21; thence East 16.78 feet to the West line of that tract of land described in deed to Louise Clifton Steele, recorded October 28, 1922, in Book 1240 Page .294, Washington County Deed Records; °' ". East, a distance along of 71.03 feet to the North right-of-way OO line of thence distance ; � Spruce of spruce Street ae laid out in the duly recorded distance 24..85 feet to its "Graham Acres"; .thence of h right -of -way line, , thence along North 89°30'30" 67est, a intersection e eatd ight-of -way line of 8.W. 89th ve ; the ce alon the West right-of-way right -of -way line, South Ave.; 0 along 00°06'30" East, . a distance of 504.40 feet to the South line of said Lot 21 ► thence along .,said said South line, Worth 89°30'30" West, distance of 585.89 feet to the Northeasterly line Of State Highway No. 217; thence along . , ° ' 44 " West, a distance said right --of -way 1ne . " North 56 Ol of 34.64 feet to Engineers Station 375 +50, 90.00 feet left of centerline; thence North 57°27'40" West , a distance of 200.06 feet to Engineers Station 373 +50, 85.00 feet left of centerline; thence North 56°01'44" West, a distance of 650.00 feet to Ingirneers Station 367+00, 85.00 feet left of centerline; thence along the right- of-way line x.230 N E EREMONT STREET iDc TLAI1'O OREGON • 9721.3 • p R O N lE 284 '.6$66. i‘• Page 2 Legal Description - Parcel 1 "Ash Creek Project" established by contract to "Foreign Mission Foundation t, dated July 27, 1989, recorded as Fee No. 89-34374, North 44°15'38" West, a distance of 245.15 feet to Engineers Station 364+60, 135.00 feet left of centerline; thence North 62°05°38" West, a distance of 160.90 feet to Engineers Station 363+00, 118.00 feet left of centerline; thence leaving said right-of-way and along the West line of said Fee No. 89-34374, North 33°58'16" East, a distance of 134.91 feet to the West right-of-way line of S.W. 95th Ave.; thence South 82°38'18" East, a distance of 40.00 feet to the East right-of-way line of said S.W. 95th Ave.; thence along said right-of-way line, North 07°21'42" East, a distance of 26.72 feet to the South line of that tract of land described.in deed to Michael G. Rankin, recorded June 14, 1978, as Fee No. 78-2666; thence along the South line of said Rankin tract, South 88°14118" East, a distance of 184.72 feet to the Southeast corner thereof; thence along the East line of said Rankin tract, North 00°27'18" West, a distance of 84.60 feet to the Northeast corner thereof; thence along the North line of said Rankin tract, North 88°13'C9" West, a distance of 173.15 feet to the gast right-of-way line of said SW. 95th Ave.; thence along said right-of-way line, North 07°21'42" East, a distance of 84.98 feet to the North line of that tract of land described in deed to C.W. Hoyes and Bonnie J. HoYdS, recorded June 10, 1974, in Book 979, Page 42; thence along the North line of said Hoyes tract, SoUth 88°14'18" East, a distance of 111.95 feet to the most Northerly Northeast dorner thereof; thence South 00°27'18" East, a distance of 29.00 feet to the Southeasterly North line of said Hayes tract; thence along the last stated North line and its Easterly extension, South 88°14'18" East, a distance of 155.20 feet to the True Point of Beginning. EXCEPTING that tract of land described in said C.W. Hoyes deed. ParCel I contains 17.34 acres, more or less. NOTE: This descripLion include a portion of 8.W. 95th Ave. which is proposed to be vacated. Page 3 Legal Description - Parcel II "Ash Creek Project' PARCEL 11 A tract of land being a portion of Lot 13 of the duly recorded plat of "Ashbrook Farm" and that tract of land described as Parcel 2 in contract to Eugene L. Davis and Vivian M. Davis, recorded October 16, 1980, as Fee No 80037232, Washington County Deed Records, situated in the Northeast one-quarter of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, State of Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Davis tracte which point bears West, a distance of 226.24 feet from the Southeast corner of said Lot 13; thence along the boundaries of said Davis tract the following courses and distances, North 00°07'00" West, a distance of 482.76 feet to a point which bears South 00°07'00" East, a distance of 170.00 feet from the North line of said Lot 13 (North line of Lot 13 being the centerline of S.W. Oak Street); thence parallel to and 170.00 feet distant from said North line, South 89°30'42" West, a distance of 299.39 feet to the West line of said Lot 13; thence along said West line, South 00°33'18" East, a distance of 471.92 feet to the S.W. corner of said Lot 13; thence along said South line South 84°59929" East a distance of 95.12 feet to an angle point; thence East, a distance of 201.04 feet to the Point of Beginning. Parcel II contains 3.28 acres, more or less. '274 tttG1STERED,,,, PitiOttei81101Wiii LANtb SURVEYOR • OREGON JULY te, i9a0 DAVID VV: FORM Fla. 1111—POWER OP ATT©RNOY. COPYRIGHT 1000 OT6VENS•NMI LAW PUG. CO, PORTL,AND. OR. Y7aO4 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That ', B•tJGEN$ DAVIS have made, constituted and appointed and by these presents do make, constitute and appoint 4.4 .. EA. ANDREW i..J.QRD,AN , my true and lawful attorney, for me and in my name, place and stead and ilor my use and benefit, to Prepare, execute and file the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of ASHBROOK FARMS, a planned community and By- Laws of the Ashbrook Farms Property Owners' Association, including amendments thereto. ( Ashbrook Farms is more fully described on attached Exhibit "A ") giving and granting unto my said attorney full power and authority to do and perform all and every act and thing whatsoever requisite and necessary to be done, as fully, to all intents and purposes, as I might or could do if per- sonally present) hereby ratifying and confirming all that my said attorney shall lawfully do or cause to be done, by virl;rc hereof: construing this instrument and where the context so requires, the singular in• ude ,w plural. Dated .....ta...4:. .,.X Y..{..l2 .........t...., 1991 f 4444a444 444: 4: 4. 41: :.4..44:444411444..:::..'4:144. 444:.): is i .. ,.. '4 . 4..4.4::444: it 4:. 4:: 44• a! :a:: 4:•44• 14444'44'444 4 "- "4'44444 -4- 4, 4444444 -4- L4:a:{.i4:a.: 44'4.114441444 +ii 4444: a.. 444 tt4 :140 4:4.4.4:444 aa41. 44.4..4 {4444L LY'tlt.:.Y:a 1.41.144.i.. 4. "44 -4'444 SStar.:: it: 44444' STATE OF OREGON, County of .Tisas.ha..n.gttQxll„tit) es. Jannary.i <a2.:.r141t., 1991aia: Personally appeared the above named Y4 4:.iN.1: Eugene.Da .t.i.s.a....i 3 . ......i ::4.l..a: 1.:4:. .i�t.. :1:1.i :L: .[. • gec t oregain . trument to be, i.. .his...4... {....voluntar act and deed, OFFICIAL SEA y {.� �. 4144):. t! 1 .a4 . .f: .i 4 14.14 i!. {lY.:: V •1.... {.t 77/41-62221/ 4 it •• (OFFtCIAit i..� t Notary Pis i .,'43 NC©NIMISS ON NO.OU2175 •lYC for Oregon. My commission axpires.: 4 444)4 I MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT, 09,1994 ,....r.in .4rphirod:r., tcamqvietox m POWER OF ATTORNEY (FORM Nc, 1¢1.... EUGENE WWI 444441.44444 . 44111:444444 STATE OF OREGON) County of Se` :: 44'44:)') 4Yi Y31Yi Y44i iii :T Y4 4'444 i1a Y:. it 1 certify that the within instrir- meet was received for record on the 41)4)4344444: day of LLYY 4LL 4444YY4ii1 :4tiiY :l4143fiiY44, 19 .41.4, .•" 4••444 4434 :ii.Yi'44444444444,4414 ::3i :4444444444444:444443:44: AANDRE 4 AN 4i44.i4,,U4.i64Y i4Y,444'444: ®PACE Rea�nVen Ova R CORDaR'a van 44423 ii4.4444444414444.4.444.4444444.4.4.444.4.44444444.4.41444444.444 ... AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO E. Andrew J1_111 o.. r u a n BOLL g ti,,,,HL PWO N ., :&- ARL111O1. W.. Y4ii 1.60 0 cedar -14111--a - 1'2., at YY4 YL 1iiY :4433 o`cloclt ac6,4 .; and recorded in Nook /reel 'voltirne No$4YY14344AaY44.LLt4:Y:4:41414) Vn page 4ti444:Y4t4lYi:414Y41liiii or as fee/file /instru- ment/microfilm/reception No, ai1431iiitaii :) RecordOf 3 :Y : :i3i4i :i :i :i4 :4ia41iY4f,43 YYi )441'4 4):444 Y44Yi LLiY i4 of said County. Witness my hand and seal of County affixed, 4444i466i11.344 .444 Y4 1444 i$4i344ii.i$4,44Y:$L'i4Y'i44 NAME 'YITLa �%4[1.GfiYf i{ii43tiY :4aaiiiYiY iY44iYYC JJJ... NAME, ADDtlBs i44ii3:iiY'i4iYi$$44i444$i Y$4Y413y34444YY4444444i'94 Deputy uJ STATE OF OREGON County of Washington City of Tigard • ■, 4J 'V..' k., o`r AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING ) s , being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath .. depose and say: (Please print) That I am a A i e..4 4-4,t/4-t0E: for The City of Tigard, That I served ■••••■••••■■■ L"That I served Oregon. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Commission --77-ligard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Hearing Notice/Notice.of Exhibit "IV) was mailed to each named attached list marked exhibit "B" on the said notice NOTICE OP DECASION as beret bulletin board on the day of No in the United States Mail on the postage prepaid. • / .:1Prepare tics Pc_2±,9„c1_12.._'orDediorzlionl • 4..0'. J.' 44; n f irm 1.9 LI to me on the HJ 4‘ 40,104. ."1.r, C IA • ' 4;44,, ,4444,io ', 1,tv 41.1 Pinifit*!"1 * Decision) 'of which is attached (Marked perqons at theaddres4s4own orltbe jr day of att- hed, was poste A on an appropriate 19_:11.__; and deposiited day of day of ijf NOTA PUBLIC OF OREGO My i. isdien Expires: 41.004,...:21,;› PerSon 0 deliver d to POST OFFICE Subscribed And sworn/affirm to me on the bkm/AFVIDAV.BKH day of 4,/. NO AR( P L C OF OREGON MY dodimitisi-o0 tkpitetit •• • •• ^ •h. ' ' IS4AAint- A CITY OF TIGARD Washington Coufty, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s): SLR 91-0004 2. Name of Owner: Eugene & Vivian Davis Name of Applicant: Same 3. Address 1JQ2A_SV,,Tj=____ City Beaverton State at_ Zip 97005 4. Address of Property: NorthotHii of SW 84thyenue Tax Map and Lot No(s).: ISI 35AC tax lots 101 2800 4800 and 151 35AD tax lots 1202, 1300, 1400nd 1500 5. Request: A request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend p2Etions of conditions of 021MMTILLUSOILLIT-IIMICity Hssringgfficsr in decision SLR 90-0011, SL 1-86, and V 87-02. The posed amendments relate to: 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costALL2,3.agt to maintenance and re ir costs to ermit full recover io cityilumpans of assuring performance subiect_to City attorneiLAIdelgtiongfguirement for covenants conditions and restrictions homeowner's association deed restrictions and e itable servitude to secure maintenance air. ZONE: C-P and R-4.5 Professional Commercial and Residentia14_4.5 units acrel and re air 5 definition .of maintenance and re 6. Action: 0.0.11•■■■•■• Approval as requested X Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, and mailed t:03 X The applicant and owner(s) X Owners of record within the required distance X The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies S. Final bedlEtiohi THE DECISION SHALL SE FINAL ON November 21, 1991 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED, 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 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. 9. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290(B) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a Written appeal may be filed Within 10 days after notice is given and Seht. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and mud be accompanied by the appeal fee ($31S‘00) and transcript costa (varies up to a maximum of $500.00). The deadline for filing of an appeal is 330 p.M. November 27, 1991 10. Questiong: If yOU have any questions Plaaae call the City of Tigard Planning Department, 639-41714 BEFORE THE LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application by Gene Davis for Sensitive • ) FINAL ORDER Lands Review and modification of conditions of approval ) of SL 1-86 and SLR 90-0011 for land near Ash Creek in ) SLR 91-0004 the C-P and 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 and 91-0004 (1) to delete a formula that dictates how maintenance costs will be apportioned, (2) to delete requirements that certain techniques be used to ensure maintenance, (3) to delete requirements that all of the property will contribute to or secure performance of maintenance , (4) to delete requirements that a homeowners associations be formed and that a deed restriction or equitalk servitude be created to ensure maintenance, and (5) to define the terms maintenance and repair. Hearings Officer Larry Epstein held a public hearing regarding the application on October 28, 1991. The applicant's attorney testified in favor. Seven witnesses testified largely in opposition to the proposed changes. City staff recommendtd approval of some of the requested changes and denial of others. The Hearings Officer left open the public record for 7 days to receive additional written testimony. LOCATION: North of Highway 217 west of 89th Avenue. WCI1v11S1 35AC, Tax Lots 101, 2800, and 4800, and 1S1 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 plan policies 2.1.1, 34241, 3,2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.5.3, and 4.2,1 STAFF RECOMMENDA'TION: Approval in part and denial in part EXAMINER'S DECISION: Conditional approval in part and denial in part FINDINGS ABOUT SHE, SURROUNDINGS, HISTORY AND PROPOSAL A, Incorporation of record by reference. The Hearings Officer incorporates by reference the January, 1991 decision in the matter of SLR 90-0011 and the July, 1987 decision and modification in the matter of SL 1-86, B. Relevant conditions of approVal. Condition 5 of the decision in SL -86 as amended by SLR 90-0011 reads as follows: 5 The applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall designate as open space in perpetuity that land shown in pink on Exhibit 6 of this decision, including land Within 40 feet of the south pond and Ash Brook and land within 25 feet north of the top of the north pond bank, Page 1 - Ileakings Officer decision SLR 91-0004 (avis) " 4 4 ■ ..,,,,. t.:7 ,. • ,„:.;.d..),:•,,,,- e, i'.., ..i .;..,,,,, •..„,,i,,,i,',.. -.„ 4 4 44.,4,r! a. The applicant shall execute and file in the office of the County Recorder covenants, conditions, and restrictions and a property owners association, equitable servitude or equivalent approved by the City Attorney which apportions the maintenance costs for said area among the properties included in this application as follows: single family residences - one share each, duplexes -- one share per lot, office space - one share per 2000 square feet of gross floor area, motel - one share per five units. 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 of fricorporation, bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions, equitable servitude or equivalent shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney. C. Proposed changes. 1. The applicant proposes to delete the formula in condition 5a that apportions the responsibility for maintenance costs for the open space/wetland, arguing it is not necessary for the City to dictate the apportionment formula to achieve the City's goal of ensuring maintenance and repairs occur. In its place, the applicant proposes that the City require that the City Attorney find adequate funds are generated to adequately perform required maintenance and repair. 2. The applicant proposes to delete itt implicit requirement in condition 5 that all properties in the application shall bt, subjerA to the maintenance and repair requirements of the decision. In its place, the applicant proposes that the applicant be allowed to determine what properties will be subject to maintenance requirements, subject to approval by the City Attorney. The applicant proposes to identify property whose value is sufficient to permit full recovery by the City for expected maintenance costs for any one year period, if a lien was foreclosed on that property. 3. The applicant proposes to delete the implicit requirement in condition 5 that only property can be used to secure performance of maintenance and repair responsibilities. In its place, the applicant proposes that maintenance and repair costs can be secured by performance bond, cash deposit or securities in lieu of a bond, a letter of credit or other pledge, guarantee or security deemed sufficient by the City Attorney: Furthermore, such security should be subject to release or partial release when no longer necessary to secure maintenance and repairs, Page 2 = ici Offiee decision SLR 9J-0004 (beivi.) 4. The applicant proposes to delete the requirement in condition 5a through d that the applicant create a homeowners association, a deed restriction, an equitable servitude, and/or other deed covenant to implement the maintenance and repair scheme. 5. The applicant proposes to define "maintenance and repair" as follows: a. Applicant, property owners or HOA shall repair any damage to the wetland habitat areas or open spaces caused by grazing cattle. b. Applicant, property owners, or HOA shall repair any damage to the fences, dams wetland habitat or open space caused by any source other than weather, flooding, wildlife mother natural cause. c. Compliance by applicant with the five-year maintenance reporting plan required by ODSL. d. Repair shall include repair of fences or dams damaged by any source and rplacement of plant life damaged by cattle or other than natural causes. Replacement of plant life need not include replacement of plants of equal size of those damaged. e. Maintenance and repair requirements shall apply only after all required improvement are installed or completed. 6. The applicant argues these change are needed, because the commercial buyers and lenders refuse to purchase or loan on property subject to restrictions requiring association, interaction or dependence with residential homeowners or subject to ambiguous, undefined and unlimited maintenance responsibilities. The applicant argues it is not necessary for the City to use an apportionment formula to assure maintenance is perfoimed. M. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA & DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Incorporation by reerence, The Hearings Officer in' corporateS by reference the January, 1991 decision in the matter of SLR 90-0011 and the July, 1987 decision and modification in the matter of SL 1-86. IV. HEARING AND TESTIMONY A. Hearing. The Hearings Officer received testimony at the public hearing about this application on October 28, 1991, The Hearings Officer left open the public record until 5 p.m., November 4, 1991. A record of that testimony is included herein as Exhibit A (Parties of Record), Exhibit B gaped Proceedings), and Exhibit C (Written Testimony). These exhibits are filed at the Tigard City Hall, B. Witnesses and a summary of selected testimony, 1. Dick Bewerklorff testified on behalf of the City of Tigard Planning Department. He summarized the staff report and recommendation, and responded to questions. Poe nedhrie Officer decision SLR 914004 (Davis) 1- w • 2. Andy Jordan appeared as the lawyer for the applicant Gene Davis. Dr. Davis also appeared on his own behalf in a written exhibit dated November 4. Mr. Jordan summadzed the changes proposed by the applicant and the reasons therefor. He characterized the changes as providing increased flexibility. He speculated that the cost of maintenance and repair will be low, and opined that it is inequitable and inefficient to use property worth htindreds of thousands or millions of dollars for a debt involving only several hundreds of dollars. He argued that the apportionment formula does not work, because it depends on a complete build-out of the property; until fully developed, the applicant cannot know how many dwelling units or square feet of office space or hotel moms may be built. He introduced a letter from the president of a company by the name of "Spa Suites" in support. He argued the form of the homeowners association is not relevant to the City. He argued that assets other than real property could secure maintenance and repair responsibilities. He argued that "maintenance" is not defined, and that financial institutions will not loan on the property if encumbered with such vague responsibilities. He argued that the applicant should not have to repair the site for ha= caused by natural causes, such as wildlife who eat young trees and floodin' g caused by downstream blockages. He argued the applicant should not be responsible for effects caused by downstream blockages. 3. Louise Beck, Jeffrey Gottfried (Fans of Fanno Creek), Cliff Epler (NPO #8), John Broome (Wetlands Conservancy), John Blomgren, Joel Shaich (Oregon Division of State Lands), Nancy Tracy testified generally against the proposed changes. CPO #4 also sent a letter dated October 5, 1991 objecting to the proposed changes. Ms. Tracy and Mr. Broome also sent letters raising concerns. Mr. Broome's letter suggests preparation of a maintenance and repair plan and program as the basis for estimating maintenance and repair costs. a. Several witnesses testified against the proposed changes, because they believed that the decision in SL 1-86 represented an agreement among the parties to that case which should be binding on the applicant They argued the applicant is trying to weasle-out of the agreement after benefitting from the filling allowed by the City. b. Several witnesses also objected that the applicant has not complied with the conditions of approval of the earlier decision and Corps of Engineers and Division of State Lands permits for the property, evidencing a lack of diligent good faith. c. Several witnesses argued in favor of requiring a propaty owners association so future purchasers of the property knovv of the limits on use of the open space. d, Several witnesses testified about the importance of ensuring the site accommodates expected storm water flows to prevent flooding of upstream properties. They also testified about the importance of protecting water quality in .Ash Creek, a tributary of Fanno Creek, In the absence of any reliable data about costs of maintenance and repair, it is speculative to argue that those costs will be low or high, Only once a maintenance program is drafted and implemented can reliable cost estimates be computed. e, Mr. Shaich argued ODSL did not receive notice of the hearing, and requested that the record remain open for comment from the Division, He argued that the applicant has caused downstream sedimentation, based on his inspections of the site since 1989, Mr, Blomgren concurred, Mr, Shaich objected to suggestions the applicant could dredge a deep narrow channel to increase the developable area of the it He noted the Dos', permit requires the applicant to pi Wide for deed 1 Poe - Hearings Officer decisidri SLR 91-0004 (bavis) .." �1 t� ➢v� 1 restrictions preserving the open space as such. He argued the applicant is not complying with the requirement for deed restrictions. Mr. Shaich also introduced a letter dated November 1, 1991 in support of the City staff recommendation. In that letter he suggested the City allow the applicant to donate the open space to a land trust, such as the Wetlands Conservancy, to ensure maintenance occurs. f. Mr. Epler argued the applicant should be required to aerate the water more. He opined that, because all of the Davis property benefits from the open space, all of the property should secure or contribute to its ma; .1tenance. He also warned the City against accepting as security assets that are not typical for the City. • g. Mr. Broome argued that enough land should be encumbered to secure enforcement of the maintenance and repair responsibilities, and that the City should not reduce the area encumbered until there is a plan from which maintenance and repair costs can be projected. He suggested several other ways of paying for maintenance and repair, such a management fund with the interest going to pay for maintenance. He argued the applicant should be responsible for maintenance and repairs warranted by natural causes as well as by other causes. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. Condition regarding formula. . g , agrees with , applicant that the formula f n condition; of approval The 13eattirn s Officer a s with the � a and repair are pecpured. that is to 5a is not necessary too achieve compliance ensure that the costs of maintenance ance p the secured. As long as the costs of maintenance and repair are secured, then whether and how much of those costs are paid by properties po o the City. The formula b residential or commercial is not important to attempted to achieve a sort of equitable allocation of costs; but, it is not relevant to the applicable approval pp ' standards whether those costs are equitably allocated, as long as ro they are paid privately. B. Condition regarding extent of property sfubject to ,maintenance and repair requirement. 1. The Hearings Officer agrees with the applicant that it may not repair' necessary toi treat lines all of the applicant's as security for the maintenance property for the open ace and w d At some point the value of the o'P exceeds the reasonab cost of maintenance and repairs. the Hearings at this time, the record does not contain sufficient probative evidence for 2 However, g .. the property should be used to secure weve determine how much of maintenance repair costs, because neither those costs none the value of the property are in the record. 'Tphe +Hearin s Officer concludes authority should be delegated to the Cie to determine how much and what City P P rtY to secure costs, once those costs and the value the pproperty or other maintenance and repair co P assets are determined with reasonable reliability. g � gC. Condition re ardin form o f assurance that maintenance and repair will be done, 1'. Covenants; condit CC ons and restrictions +`� R +ry "e two rty owners association ro e ble s, purposes oses in ibis case. Cl'QA� an equitable uita servitude, and similar` devices u o � q�a senvntu e e i third . purchasers that a portion of the first, they provide ynotied issue aced open party and is not developable: Second; they property is a wetland an p p P Page 5 x liedriiigs Officer' decista i SLR Pi -0004 ,Davis) w'L z, 4,1 k At. • - *".° '4; 1,4 , provide a means to help enforce requirements that the wetland and open space be maintaine,d; they provide a means to generate capital for maintenance and repair; they provide a legal entity (the POA) against whom the City can proceed if necessary to secure enforcement and to whom to send a bill for maintenance and repairs done by the City. 2. The terms used in condition 5 in the 1991 decision in this matter were intended to be illustrative and not confining. The Hearings Officer believes they were broad enough to allow the City to accept deed restrictions on only a portion of the pmperty, to accept security other than the property itself, and to allow partial and full releases when warranted. However, to avoid further confusion, the Hearings Officer concludes that such authority should be delegated expressly. The City should be able to modify the method of compliance with condition 5, provided the applicant gives the City substantial evidence that warrants such modifications. Substantial evidence might include a maintenance and repair plan from which reasonably reliable cost estimates can be prepared and a schedule of specific parcels and/or other assets from which reasonable values can be ascertained. Until the City approves such an alternative plan for assuring maintenance of the wetland and open space property, the Examiner cannot conclude that a given amount of the property or a given value or type of assets is sufficient to ensure maintenance and repairs will be funded; therefore, the condition requiring CC & R's, POA, or equivalent should continue to apply, subject to the City's discretion to modify the requirement for good cause shown. D. Definition of "maintenance and repair." 1 The Hearings Officer finds that the term "maintenance and repair" Should be defined to enable all parties to understand their obligations, rights and expectations. The definition offered by the applicant is a reasonable one, except for the exclusion of damages from natural causes and the waiver of maintenance and repair responsibilities until all required improvements are installed. 2, Maintenance and repairs should be performed regardless of the cause of a problem. Otherwik greater adverse effects will follow. If downstream conditions create the problem, then the applicant has a right to bring an action against the persons who cause that downstream condition, If wildlife damage vegetation, then the applicant has a duty to protect the vegetation so it is not damaged. Waiving that responsibility invites neglect and failure of the mitigation plan. 3. Maintenance and repair responsibilities should attach munediately. Failure to provide maintenance and repair in a timely manner exacerbates maintenance and repair problems. Deferring maintenance and repair until all required improvements (whatever that means) are installed leaves a gap in maintenance and repair responsibilities. That gap is likely ,to result in further problems for which the general public will become responsible m the absence of other provisions. The applicant is undertaking and has undertaken development that contributes already to the need for maintenance and repair, There is no basis in the law for deferring maintenance and repair responsibilities. VI. 81'IE VISIT BY I-LEARINGS OFFICER The Hearingg Officer Visited the site Without the company of others, Page 6 - Hearings Office?' decision SLR P.I-0004 (Daas') ; 4 V".1'7,;,•1,1‘.4'"•,.:'''',.: cyl VII. CONCLUSION AND DECISION g proposed dform alteration and changes in The Hearings Officer concludes that the sed lan conditions of approval of SL 1 -86 and SLR 90 -0011 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 modifies condition of approval 5 of the decision in SL 1-86 as modified by SLR 90 -0011 to read as follows: 5. The applicant shall cause to have surveyed and shall designate as open space in perpetuity that land shown in pink on Exhibit 6 of this decision, including land 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, s, and restrictions prohibiting development of the wetland and open space tracts identified pursuant to this condition and further requiring the owner of such tracts to comply with a natural resource mitigation and management plan or plans for the tracts that are or may be approved by the City, the Oregon Division of State Lands, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. b. Unless waived by the planning director pursuant to condition 5d or 5e, the applicant shall execute and file in the office of the County Recorder articles of incorporation and bylaws of a property owners association. c. Except as authorized under condition 5d or 5e, the co conditions and restrictions and bylaws of the property owners association shall • 1) Prohibit amendment, modification or dissolution unless authorized by the City of Tigard. (2) Authorize the City of Tigard to is . sue citations for the failure of the owners or association to maintain or repair the open space designated pursuant to this condition and to undertake the necessary repair or maintenance, to bill the association and owners of all or certain lots and parcel in the subject property for the cost thereof, and, if the bill is not paid in a reasonable time, to file liens against those lots and parcels. (3) Be submitted to and approved b the City Attorney as being consistent by with this condition. (4) Provide for funding of 4 . n maintenance and repair of the wetlands and open spaces identified in this conditio n and shall allocate responsibilit y for contributing those funds to owners of specific lots and parcels within the i parcels within the subject amount site are required to contribute subject maintenance and repair funds. The amou stto of contributions site Not all lots and and loth and parcels subject to making them tnay be modified over time, provided th amount of funds available for maintenance and repairs continues to be adequate to pay for maintenance and repairs, J Page 7 iedr!rtgs Officer ded dull SIR 91 -0004 (Danis) MidEliffniggironalellanItalenatnalle ) d. In lieu of requiring the conditions, covenants and restrictions or bylaws of the property owners association,to provide funding for the maintenance and repair of the wetland and open space identified in this condition, the City may accept real or personal property, bonds, an irrevocable letter of credit, securities, or other pledge, guarantee or security deemed sufficient by the City to assure that sufficient maintenance funds will be available to provide maintenance and repairs of the wetland and open space identified in this condition. .(1) The City may require the applicant to provide details of a maintenance and repair pogram for the subject property and to certify the costs of that program and to provide a certified appraisal of property or assets in lieu of conditions, covenants and restrictions or bylaws of a property owners association, before accepting property or assets in lieu of conditions, covenants and restrictions or bylaws of a property owners association. (2) If the City accepts property or assets in lieu of requiring a property owners association or conditions, covenants and restrictions that provide for funding of maintenance and repairs, then: (a) The City may waive requirements for a property owners association and may waive requirements for conditions, covenants, and restrictions except as provided in condition 5a; and (b) The City shall release property, assets or obligations if the City concludes such property, assets or obligations are not needed to secure funds for maintenance and repairs. e. IrA lieu of executing .the conditions, covenants and restrictions or bylaws of the property owners association regarding maintenance and repair of the wetland and open space identified in this condition, the applicant may convey title for the wetland and open space identified in this condition to the Wetlands Conservancy or other organization the City finds has the resources and experience to maintain and repair the property, provided the Wetlands Conservancy or such other organization agrees in writing to accept responsibility for maintenance and repair of the wetland and open space identified in this condition. f, For purposes of this decision, SR 1-86, and SLR 90-0011, the term 'Maintenance and repairs' includes the following: (1) Maintenance repairs to the wetland habitat attag or open space due . , to datnage caused by grating cattle; (2) Maintenance and repairs to fences, dams, wetland habitat or open space 44 _. due to damage caused by other sources, including but ilot nmitect to cattle, weather, flooding, and wildlife; „ • (3) maintenance and repairs necessary to comply With the i'OgilitenientS of permits approved by the Oregon bivision of State Lads Or U,8 Army Corps of Engineers and to eothply with requitethehtg of a nititip.tiott or iffaiiitehatiCe and repair plan gubsequently approved by the City Page 8 - kearitigs' bjficer decisiori SLR 01,0ood (Dap's) 'ger- *44', • • (4) Replacement of vegetation damaged by sources, including but not limited to cattle, weather, flooding, and wildlife; provided, damaged vegetation need not be replaced with vegetation of equal size of those damaged; provided further, replacement vegetation shall be of sufficient size at planting to make continued survival reasonably likely, and shall be of the same species as the vegetation being replaced or other species native to the site or similar wetlands and open spaces in the vicinity. Larry Epstein, Page trbg Offieek decision AR 91,0004 (Davis) .• ANDREW JORDAN 1600 SW CEDAR HILLS BLVD PORTLAND OR 97225 KEN & LOUISE BECK 8820 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 ,.1 {per v S� /7K4 t.A, JEFFRY GOTTFRIED FANS OF FANNO CREEK PO BOX 25835 PORTLAND OR 97225 -0830 JOEL SHAICH 7707 SW LOCUST PORTLAND OR 97223 JOHN S BLOMGREN 9460 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 YKi CLIFF EPLER 8845 SW SPRUCE TIGARD OR 97223 NANCY TRACY 7310 SW PINE ST TIGARD oR 97223 JOHN W BROOMS PO 00X.1195 TUALATIN OR 97062 GENE & VIVIAN DAVIS 13095 SW HENRY BEAVERTON OR 97005 JOEL SHAICH DIVISION OF STATE LANDS 775 SUMMER ST NE SALEM OR 97310 -1337 DENNIS SCHULDHEISZ SPA SUITES 2120 SW JEFFERSON PORTLAND OR 97201 PAT WHITING 8122 SW SPRUCE TIGARD OR 97223 CATHY CHASE 8365 SW STEVE TIGARD OR 97223 STEPHEN PERRY 9885 SW 92ND PORTLAND 01 97223 TOM SMITH 9930 SW 77TH ' METZGER OR 97223 STATE OF OREGON County of Washington City of Tigard AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING 1, v\A(Ilfkurv-- depose and says (Please print) That I am a V The City of That I That A , being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath 6 y`Z for Tigard, Oregon. served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Commission i.- Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public was mail d to eaachi named persons Decision) at thei.c�t is attached (Marked Exhibit "A") ess shown on the attached list marked exhibit "8" on the -111221 day of 19_11_, said notice NOTICE OF DECISION as heret„ attached, was posted on an appropriate bulletin board on the day of r 19_____; and de pog *.ted in the United States Mail on the postage prepaid. day of Pre.ared:Nptice Posted __ (For_._Decisiom �Only1 Ur 't r' t y . r r OM), °.�Ub s fecribed +e�and; sworn /affirm to me on the � r Person w = livered to POST OFFICE Subscribed and shorn /affirm to me on the 193L. OFFICIAL ssAL Ma JOANN HAVES NOTARY PUbLIC.OREGON COMMISSION No 006513 MY COMMISSION 01kEs MAY 5, 1995 bkni AFFIDAV. Bfit day of PUBLIC OF OREGON mmission Expires: dayo NOT My C 49 PUBLIC OF OREGON isaion Expired: NQTE: ' Change of location for the public hearing NOTICE OF PUBLIC H E A R I N G NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, October 28 1991, AT 700 PM, AT THE T GARD WATER DISTRICT, 8777 SW BURNHAM ,STREET, TIGARD, OREGON, WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SLR 91-0004 FILE TITLE: Davie NPO NO: 8 APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: 101, 2800, APPLICABLE Lande) and and 4.2:1. Eugene & Vivian Davis 13095 SW Henry Beaverton, OR 97005 OWNERS: Same SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 91 -0004 DAVIS (NPO #8) , A request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of conditions of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decision SLR 90 -0011, SL 1- 86, and V 87 -02. The proposed amendments relate to 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costs, 2) properties to be p i Subject to maintenance and repair costs to permit full recovery to City, 3) means of assuring performance subject to City atto rney, 4) deletion of requirement for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and Repair. ZONE: C -P and R -4 5 (Professional Commercial and esidential, 4.5 unite /acre) North of Highway 211, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 181 35AC, tax lots 4800, and 151 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, and 1500) REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Deveiopment Code Chapter 18.84 ( Sensitive Policies 2.1.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.5.3, (See Map On Reverse Side) THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULES OF PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ANYONE WISHING TO PRE WRITTEN NY ON THIS PROPOSED ACTION MAY DO SO IN WRITING P RIO R TO OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. ORAL E MONY MAY BE PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE PUBLIC 'HEARI OFFICER WILL RELIEVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE HEARING; THE HEARINGS BOTH ORAL AND TESTIMONY. THE HEARINGS OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING; AND INVITE 1 OFFICER MAY CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANOTHER MEETING TO OBTAIN ANOTHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION; OR CLOSE THE THE t ,.... EVIDENCE PUBLIC TO THE APPLICATION ON THE APPLICATION. TF A PERSON . 1 SUBMITS TITLED T �vz AFTER October 8° 1991 ANY PARTY IS EN O REQUP,ST A CONTINUANCE OF THE HEARING. . THERE EVIDENTIARY CONTINUANCE, IF A PARTICIPANT SO REQUESTS BEFORE THE ACONCLUSI N OF THE ETNITIAL EVIDENTIARY HEARING, 1 G THE RECORD SHALL REMAIN OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS AFTER THE HEARING. . TH�1 TIGARD COMMUNITY REVEL OF APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST LIST ,�GARD COMPREHENSIVE . � „� , CODE PLAN. . „ . _ „_ . � .,, DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD .. ." . ... INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A FROM APPROVAL OR D ISAPPROVAL OF THE , .., .. -" tag , . ' �, .1 , , 1 'IMPORTANT BASED UPOPi THESE .CRITERIA Aft THESE CFcTTREQUE T BX THE HEARIN 5 O�'FT EFt tSLiMBD , 1 1 1 1 / TANT THAT d0HMENTS RELATING TO THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLYTO THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA LISTED. 4, AN IS FAILURE TO RAISE TIME HEARING ON THE IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SU + ICIENT SPECIFICITY HH TLOTE E , ,; IL NT PRIOR TO T ' " "' TO THE TO A AFFORD THE DECISION MAKER AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO. THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BISED ON THAT ISSUE. ALL DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE -NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAS:VABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER Dick Beweradorff AT 639 -4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BLVD., OR CONTACT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION (NPO) # 8 CHAIRPERSON: Cathv-Chase PHONE NUMBER: 620 -4790 ly� fl ST 0044 1111111im ■ �`1 ■ i Jc PA ■ d C. N • The City of T1GAR0 SLR 91 -0004 lit x At o 1 1+11 ilii i iiI .111404 tii111 1t +i Yli J. 114 : .1 it +,ii +i ►1,. Y li tiYlii iY•! 1Y1iYii� r+ it +il t... iiliii.i i 41 ,. Fit ii lii1i .1 'i1 +i 4i1 1i i1(1 if . 11 Iris i 11 1 Y Y. ii 111Yi e1. ,Ii1Y, N d ii T g ,i,i•1!i1 +. Yf ii.i 44,01 iYd 11 11 It'! _ Atl i11 i 1 1Yi ,Ri Y • 1S135DD -00100 ..... . .. UTAH STATE RETIREMENT FUND c/O IP I A ASSN COURT PO BOX 255187 SACRAMENTO CA 95865 1S13526- 01101 .. .... EPLER, CLIFFORD F & KAYE V 8845 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD OR 97223 1S135BD- 0O30a°. 3.. • . • ................ C-OOD SAMARITAN BY GRAYCO RESOURCES, INC 5331 SW MACADAM AVE #200 PORTLAND OR 97201 1S 135AD -01102 JOHNSON, RICHARD BR /ON AND GAIL A 8815 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 EUGENE & VIVIAN DAVIS 13095 SW HENRY BEAVERTON, OR 97005 CATHY CHASE 8365 SW STEVE TIGARD, OR 97223 t,:; 4 ' '" ;*, t ■," ' • ••• ^ ' IS135AD-01800 ....... . • GEHRING, RONALD L JUNE E 10860 SW 69TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 OR "7223 1S135AD-018t ff HANNEVIG, EDWARD 8840 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD-01900 ................ . WILLIANSONe CARL E AND ANNA D 8818 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AD-.02001 HILLER, LEE W JR DORIS E 8,008 SW SPRUCE TVOLTLAND OR 97223 1S135AD.-02000 .. ........ . ....... MILLER, LEE W AND DORIS E 8808 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 1S13SAD..01700 . ............... ST JANES ON BALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGM CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND (R 97204 ; 1S135AD-01701 SITOWSKI, DOMINIC it JR mum L 8820 SW THORN TIGARD OK 97223 1S135AD-,01705 . HOFMANN, JERRY D 1.0950 SW 89TH TIGARD OR 97223 15135AD-01703 LANG, DOLORES MAE 10980 SW 89TH TIGARD OR 97223 15135AD:01706 CURTIS, HERBERT C AND CAROL 8850 SW THORN TIGARD OK 97223 15135AD-03300 • k' 1,-ft • 1S135AD-03500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HOWARD & CHATERINE RAYBORN 17645 SW JURGENS TUALATIN, OR 97062 1S135AD-3300 TENLY PROPERTIES,CORP. PO BOX 414 HILLSBORO, 011 97123 "12 ;■■ 151358D-00700 HARING' JACK 2414 BROADWAY #8 VANCOUVER WA 98663 1S135AA-02600 JONES, TOMMY 13 AND CINDY L 8686 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA-03700 HERB I4ORISSETTE BUILDERS INC 10400 SW ALLEM BLVD BEAVERTON OR 97005 1S135AA-03702 • CULLINAN, RANDY .7 AND KRISTINA G 8775 SW OAK STREET TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA-03704 ELLIOTT, THOMAS G BY MAMMON & WOLF PO BOX 547 TUALATIN OR 9/062 1S135AA-03800 PINOK, DALE H IDA H 9875 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA-03901 CHEPIN, JOHN AND DOROTHY .7 8911 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135DA-42600 odi4.4.44■■■:.4.4■4,4Ww■ BRADY, ILA MAE 9055 SO gOkill bAkotA ST TIGARD OR 01/23 1Si3hb-06060 JEIVIC, ALICE SARikH 10655 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND OR 97223 iS13hb,-61606 DONALD D t dERE. L SO LORO'00.. St Oh Oltibt • 18135AA-0251. LYON, DONALD J HAZEL .7 10440 SW 87TH AVE PORTLAND OR 97223 ' • 1S135AA-03600 . . HANSEN, LUCIA L 10575 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA-03701 . . TIPPIE, MICHAEL R AND ROBIN 8805 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA-03703 BRANDT, WALDO 0 •PEARL E eirompamwommia4-47.6 8835 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA-03707 ...... HITCH, DORIS PO BOX 35 BEAVERTON OR 97075 1S135AA-63900 MOORE, TIMOTHY A AND TANDY J 8910 SW OAKWAY PORTLAND OR 97223 • 1S135DA-02500 ST JAMES ON HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 1S135bil..603960 ST JAMES 00 HALL BY JONES ti4it 50 SW 1140 , STE 314 PORT PCRT.s OR 07264 1S135AD -00901 BENNETT. BRIAN 5 AND PATRICE D 19675 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 • * i4‘,6:4444.44s.r.4+4+4■ MOONE BRETT A & SHERRIE A 6661 sW .0A0dE ttdAh0 0122j PNI ss40"Pg 93 1 D XH . l+ ILLI `lVHVS Poop 00£00- 0aSETsi ,► h, SOOL6 40 a QaTall4Ava8 HQ;[ MS' O S S D' xHVH MVIAIA NHUa'x 4a4004 ' SIAV 00VIO- OHSETST II EZZL6 HO qa tD J as )1VO MS 0968 H mor 'NOS'IXM ..' 00Z0O-3VS£TSI EZZ46 UO 0aVoXa 3iitO MS 0006. 2NII °Pava u 'No SNiior • r w . • • • O • • •• • • •• - ••, 00010- 3KSEY.ST EZZL6 NO !a VOLL as 4tO Os OEE6 X 37 i autumn ON* a =WU snam1491UU OOLE0- 3tfSETST EZZL6 UO Nti'13..U0d as 0 Ms 09E6 MAW 4v4 OVR ' LO0U$ 00SEO- 3VSETST EZZL6 U0 Od33s ISMS XVO MS 0Z76 2IHU ' NOSLUa0'Ifil3 00E£o- 3VSEIST EZZL6 UO Plivlamo4 8GLS6 MS 09SOT Haman 'Inva '?IXtRNXIMl 00TEa- 3iSETST EZZL6 UO 011V7I2 0d RS6 MS 0Z90T 0 %THIN 'STAN • • • • • P • • O • • • • • 11 •. b O • • • 006`i0_amseiSt EZZL6 HO SaIVDI.1 aAV R!S6 MS 0980T W 0xor ' di ios so 0no-0vSEtST auHno� s4V V I 4 0/p OM04 ZRI' Xa44 8a VLS i va;p oOTOO. ...,.•.,...... aESETST y... EZL6 214 at/V.11110d 00Z# 0H 34t19WaD2!O MS OOEOT dIHSuaNS2 ra gaLINI'I AI asvPa U ?SNa3 U ,.00NY'I ow•.•- O017E0-HV5ETSI £4446 40 0NV7a 110a )1to Ms 0060 M mor BJ;U`i'Maa'E;S •. •..• ' OOTb0- 0VSEis 9ZZL6 U0 OAIVIDIOd voor o X11 Sint' dUOC UJaVr N VHXUU30 '9 v 7I411?3Fta[ ' Q?30afulq -. 7•r�a�� 009E0-OVSEbST EZZL6 U0 ONTILUOd N4'P MS 49E6 8 3141 3'H '4110040 009E0 "3YSETSt MLA U0 ONtl'ILUOd WO MS oobt $ SIO'I 4 a3NmW 'I3 'SHOIW,t- 00IEN-o1SEIST EZ4L6 40 4.4Dzam 3x30 MS 0916 1 7UV3d S =or ' iS1640'KI OOZE() OifSVES1 ZOOL6 110 101040v aN amp= ammaGB 90Zt Z .... . .e�.d...... UINN08 'STAN .• ••••••,,• 000E0- OVSETst EZZL6 HO 0HVLT Ioa 1fOU NOSWIO MS 09L9 r v4vouvo 7110'x0 • • • a • • • • w • • • • • t o • O..•. • 0oI ZO- OVSEIST. PI9S0 Zf AH77VA N$SlID KQNfIOVN sTIV3 6991 9 WIsOU a O mum, 'Iwo JraUU0uMN 3I30218 'NORM 00100-OVSETSI EZZL6/ 110 funqvii. V ,rz.r, TnInTU M; L' Ccf4 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING .STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard i, ". 1;140/ 1 V'L t K i k koiL-( t . , being first duly sworn /affirm, on oath depose and says: (Please print) That I air a _1i_ LAl C)fl 7 55 6_04 .Jam- 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 Bearing Notice /Notice of Decision) s a of which is attached (larked ' pe at the . ad ssss shown on the Exhibit licit mark d ex hibit each on the ' day of �P �- 1.9 '1 I _ said notice NOTICE OF DECISION . posted pp -T y appropriate 19 and deposited bulletin board on the day o� here attached was steel on an a rpo 3n the Oni' eel Stabs Mail ,on the day of . lets , 194i/ postage prepaid. Prepared Notice Posted _ For _ Deci filar Qr4yj. day of /. ✓ P Person who delivered to POST OFFICE Subscribed and sworn /af f irul to me on the day of OFFICIAL 36AL M: JOANN NAVES NOTARY PURLiC,OREGON ,OO � Ml63loN Not 006603 .. MY COMMISSION SKPINgS MAY gf 066 Mri /AFFIDAV. BKM _. -.i.. •. > µ. b ,- -_.. F �i!' _ a.. - ... .. `',.'1!.s=7;-- .s. -.. - « _, -. t � 4 x a -.... .a _. : --.. w. � .. - __ -..: .. 1L .... z yt _ ,..>,:7-:-, �- a. • .F... x+.. M: �.. >• '17'.'f-l• }� -a K' ( { .1 _S, -Y S F..F al. i - • 4. .. '.... .. -. "' .. .: .. 1.. .` ,,,..:1- :: -, . . .. f ---1,7`' 4 I }. - .7,.-4• f . 'F. . 4 • . _ :. ,sm . :. -. .. t, J - r.F'- ".... �,. � .. - . h -x •.. .: ` �- i:. 6 �'� k 1 .E �"... •tF .t,.`. _ ?L � -'.L.. af: . • . , z _ . , r x r 7--35',:-.Z,:- �.. .� _ r , i - . -. .. - 8. _, ` q ;� r. .�� ' : F -r4 r:- s ti ,7- -` ? L•s 5 at.. E_. 4_, "iv r... �a .. , . - -; t -:s ..� K,. , - -tS' =i 'Er +f' ••r:�c -,r _ t. s ..� ar N;Et': .s,- ^.,._ a'•. -_.. ., -.. .•: ---:----r--------- E"._.= ,:<. r.._. •u�L., '?- - •,s_- ,.a.t_. _ t 'e �� -i. 4 . .. �. •♦. _. �. �_.. -. a. .:.. .r... «�,.. -. -. .. - -tea � r.. B _ _t k. fla.. f. s..� ...�. -:c� .� i iii=+ i•- Yl - -_'_a .�.:,. .. -Y i. .. __ ..4.. a fa. - N O T I C E OF p U H L I C HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON MONDAY, October 28. 1991, AT 7:00 PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OF THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER e 13125 SW HALL BLVD., TIGARD, OREGON, WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: SLR 91-0004 FILE TITLE: Davie NPO NO: 8 APPLICANT: Eugene & Vivian David OWNER: SaMe 13095 SW Henry BeaVertoni OR 97005 REQUEST: SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 91-0004 DAVIS (NPO #8) A request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of cohditiOsd of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decision SLR 90-0011, SL 1- 86, and V 87-02. The proposed amendMents relate to 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costa, 2) properties to be subject to maintenance and repair Costs to permit full recovery to City, 3) Meane of aOdUring performance subject to City attorney, 4) deletion of requirement for cOvenanta, conditiohe, and reetrictions, homeowner's aSsOdiatioh, deed restrictions, and equitable Servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and repair. ZONE:. d-P and Et4.4.5 (ProfeSSiOSal Commercial and Redidentiai. 4.5 Unite/adre) LOCATION : North of Highway 217, west of sW 84th Avenue (WCTM 151 35AC, tax lote 101, 2800, 4800, and 11 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, And 1800) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: CoMmUhity Development Code Chaptol 18.84 (8ensitive Lands) And CoMptehehtiiVe Plan POliCide 2.1.1, 3.2.10 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.1, 3.5:3, and 4.2.1. (See Map On Reverse Side) THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL SE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 18.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT do= AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY. ,COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL, OR RULE or PROCEDURE SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.30. ANYokt WItkINd to i)AttENT WRITTEN TESTIMONY ON tktt PROPOSED ACTION WI Do to IN WAITINO PRIOR TO OR At THE PUBLIC tEAAINd. ORAL tEtTIMONY MAY BE imEtENTED AT TAB PUBLIC AthAING. AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, THE HEARINGS olitfctit WILL RECIEVE A STAFF REPORT PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY PLANNER; OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING; AND INVITE BOTH ORAL AND WRITTEN ttstitioNy, THE HEARINGS oPPIdth MA t CONTINUE THE Pdatito titAtitkd TO ANOTHER titttitid TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL tilPOAMAttOki OR dtbst THE PUBLIC 'HEARING AND tAkt ACTION ON THE APpiitcAttOtt: IF A PERSONS SUBMITS ExitbEtidt IN SUPPORT TO THE APPLICATION Atotth. October 1091, ANY PATtT 18 ENTITLED TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE OP THE titAkING, UNLESS THERE ta A doidtklikildt, tt A PAhttdipArit sO REQUEST 8 tstikitit THE CONCLUSION OP THE INITIAL tVttithttiiitt htiukttid, THE RECORD SHALL itti4Atti OPEN FOR AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS AFTER THE litAittitth INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE IS A LIST or APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE REQUEST FROM THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE HEARINGS OFFICER WILL BE BASED UPON THESE CRITERIA AND THESE CRITERIA ONLY AT THE HEARING It Is /MPORTANT THAT COMMENTS RELATING To THE REQUEST PERTAIN SPECIFICALLY TO TES APPLICABLE CRITERIA tocsi.tED: 711 1 4 14,4 4 ,^ • a '00 ; .;,; 04 .4 " • FAILURE TO RAISE AN IS IN PERSON OR BY LETTER AT SOME NT PRIOR TO THE CLOSE .11 OF THE HEARING ON THE QUEST OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE SU ICIENT SPECIFICITY TO AFFORD THE DECISION MAKER AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE ISSUE PRECLUDES AN APPEAL TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS BASED ON THAT ISSUE0 Ara, DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA IN THE ABOVE.-NOTED FILE ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST OR COPIES CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. AT LEAST SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, A COPY OF THE STAFF REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT NO COST, OR A COPY CAN BE OBTAINED FOR TEN CENTS PER PAGE. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE STAFF PLANNER Dick Bewersdorff AT 639-4171, TIGARD CITY HALL, 13125 SW HALL BLVD., OR CONTACT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION (NPO) # 8 . CHAIRPERSON: Cathy Chase PHONE NUNBER: .620-4790 bkin/SLR91-.04 .BKM \ •Z' It-- 40 ST PIO" *hi: Ul mirdis ra mi PN u. L it 11 The ty of TIGARD mu SLR 91-0004 „log • 11 ill mut 111 111 (.) ' k". . r •■,;- Silo Areo 1,0111 14111 i 414 11414141, 111114 Ii4k1111 41 lki kill 41 11111i 61111i,14 iiiklik 14144441,11 ilk) 14114404 111414 1441114 4411111141 1444 kik 44 ,411414 1, 44 4444 1.14 1,11(11411 6 4444.444 441141 i::4 :1114 411:4W4T414441 loof■i) 441 44414,10) 14J , . , f VUO0o0 n vfts% IAAme,1 TIGARD OR /97223 1S135AC-00100 ........ . DIXON, BROCK MARGARET DART, JOHN 0 MARCELLA G 1569 CALLE HACIENDA GREEN VALLEY AZ 85614 13135AC.,02700 ••• DICK, DARRELL L BARBARA J 6750 SW OLESON ROAD PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC-03000 NOYES, BONNIE 21206 HUBBARD CUTOFF NE AURORA OR 97002 1S135AC-03200 BLOMGRENt JOHN S PEARL M 9460 SW OAK METZGER OR 97223 1S135AC-03400 MOMS, CLARENCE E LOPS M 9400 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC-03600 BROOKE, MAC RAE B SEVIM 9360 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 • 1S135AC-03800 DUNFORD, DARRELL A & BERTHA M % JATA CORP 4485 NW WALLOWA PORTLAND OR 97226 1S135AC -04100 .. STEWART, JOHN W PHYLLIS T 8980 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 LINCOLN CENTER PHASE IV LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 10300 SW GREENBURG RD #200 PORTLAND OR 97223 UTAH STATE RETiRJM1NT FUND • CYO r 1 •Cotht • . 1S135AC-026 c.:,'a .... ............. OSBORN, JOYCE M 10860 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC-02900 MILLS, NINA G 10620 SW 95TH . PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC-03300 BRAXMEYER, PAUL BURTON 10560 SW 95TH PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC-03300 ......... . ........... CULBERTSON, CHARMIE 9420 SW OAK STREET TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC-03500 BROOKE, MAC RAE SEVIM B 9360 SW 0 ST P0nTANV OR 97223 1S135AC-03700 JUNGWIRTH, RANDY P AND RINGER, MICHELLE K 9330 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC-04000 JOHNSON, RICARDO. LAINE 9000 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 18115Ad 04200 -,- WILSON, JOHN 8960 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD-01400 EUGENE LOW30 ViVxiig MARY 4550 sW tojk bEAVEktd OR 91005 i813stib-odo0 GOOD SAMARITAN BY GRAYCO 85CES, INC .• 1s135BD -00700 HARING, JACK 2414 BROADWAY #8 VANCOZJVER WA 98663 1s1.35UL-02600 JONES, TO$1, 8 AND CINDY L 8688 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 18135AA -03700 • 0 HERB MORISSETTE BUILDERS INC 10400 SW ALLEN BLVD BEAVERTON OR 97005 1s135AA-03702 CULLINAN, RANDY J AND KRISTINA G 8775 SW OAK STREET TIGARD OR 97223 1s135AA-03704 ELLIOTT, THomAs G BY ERICKSON & WOLF Po BOX 547 TUALATIN OR 97062 1s135AA-03800 FINCK, DALE 0 IDA M 8875 SW °AK PORTLAND OR 97223 16135AA-03901 .............4... CHEPIN, JOHN AND DOROTHY J 8911 SW out ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S1351)11.6•6600 .4.64' -' BRADY. ILA MAE 9055 sW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 1s135AD -00900 . . ....... JuvE, ALICE sARAH 10555 sw HALL BLVD PORTLAND OR 97223 tiAtittAtt4 DONALD % .1)4vt4 dgRg...ti• . . 440. $W tOkOkik0.:gt ttAitkiitOR OR 01605 • • „”. 1S135AA-025 ..................... LYON, DONALD J HAZEL J 10440 SW 87T0 AVE PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA-03600 ..................... HANSEN, LUCIA L 10575 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA-03701 ........... . TIPPIE, MICHAEL R AND RODIN 8805 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA-03703 •. .............. BRANDT, WALDO G PEARL E 8835 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA-03707 oeiroaseses s. 0. HITCH, DORIS Po BOX 35 smAvERToN oR 97075 1S135AA-03900 MoORE, TIMOTHY A AND TANDY J 8910 SW oAKWAY PORTLAND OR 97223 1s135DA-02500 ST JAMES ON HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT Co so SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 1s115DA -03900 6.4" ' ............. ST JAMES �N HALL 1 0AS BY JONES MGMT •.t 50 SW 2ND ! •C STE 314 POATLp+ OR 97204 1s135AD -00901 BENNETT, BRIAN s AND pATRIcE D 19675 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD oR 97223 • MOON,. itAktt A & SHEREXE 4, 8807 SW SPRUCE . • tidAbO. • OR 0123 • 1S135AD -01800 GEHR/NG, RONALD L JUNE E 10860 SW 89TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 UANNEVIG, EDWARD 8840 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 18135AD-01900 WILLIAMSON, CARL E AND ANNA D 8818 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 13135AD 02000 ososi00000soossossoos MILLER, LEE W AND DORIS E 8808 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 181351D-02001 ................... . MILLER, LEE W JR DORIS E .:08 SW SPRUCE 'RTLAND OR 97223 r i 18135AD-01701 ossoOsooss000ioi000ss SITOWSKI, DOMINIC A aR :!ELEN L 8820 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -01700 ..... ST JAMES ON HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 1S135AD-.01703 LANG, DOLORES MAE 10980 SW 89TH TIGARD OR 97223 - echos al 15135AD.,.01705 HOFMANN, 1RRY D 10950 SW 89TH TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD.-01706 CURTIS, HERBERT C AND CAROL 8850 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 18135AD-03300 TENLY PROPERTIES, CORP Pa BOX 414 HILLSBORO, OR 1g13 A3:0"03400 Sao Se if or I SSoisil 65t:t, r ")'(. •,R 1s135AD-,03500 4os .444 swiss...es o HOWARD & CHATERINE RAYBORN 17645 stl JurtdEN8 TUALATIN, OR 97062 1S135AD-3300 TENLY PROPERTIES,CORP. PO BOX 414 HILLSBORO, Og 97123 ' 4'4 114 .,.414 4.44I 44•4, , - • • ' r 406 , 1S13513D-00100 . . . • • UTAH STATE RETIREMENT FUND C/0 F 1 A ASSN COURT PO BOX 255187 SACRAMENTO CA 95865 • • 3.3sBD-003 • . • a • • • • • " " ° • GOOD SAM.ARI'fAN GRAYCO RESOURCES, INC 331 8 MACADAM AVE #200 PORTLAND OR 97201 1S135AD —01101 . . RFLER , CLIFFORD W & KAYE V 8845 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD OR 97223 EUGENE & VIVIAN DAVIS 13095 SW HENRY BEAVERTON/ OR 97005 CATHY CHASE 8365 SW STEVE TIGARD, OR 97223 1S135AD —01102 . . . . . . . . 4 et • • • • . • • JOHNSON, RICHARD BRION AND GAIL A 8815 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 4 I 4 CITY OF TA t• • Op EON SENSITIVE...LANDS APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 1. GENERAL INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS /LOCATION North Df West of SW 84th Aventle FOR STAFF USE ONLY 1 CASE NO. 51 1 OTHER CASE NO'S: 1 RECEIPT NO. 9/w- 1 APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: 1 DATE: 1 Application elements submitted: Highway 217 1 1 TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NO. lgr 35NC, tax lotg 101, 2800 1 4800, and 1S1 35AD tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400 & 1500 1 SITE SIZE irregularly shaped area more than 1000x1600' 1 PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* Eugene and Vivian Davis 1 ADDRESS 13095 SW Henry PHONE 646-6101 1 CITY Beaverton ZIP P7005 APPLICANT* Eugene and Vivian Davis 1 ADDRESS 13095 SW Henry PHONE 646-6101 1 1 (H) Filing fee (43520) CITY Beaverton ZIP 97005 ■•••••■•■■••■••••■ *When the owner and the applicant are different (A) Application form (1) (B) Owner's signature/written authorization (04/62441thsudgessabitimuisfistatgesietazil) a (D) Assessor's map (1) (E) Plot plan (pre'app checklist) (F) Applicant's statement (pre-app checklist) acklacsomaarabiammacei people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record 1 or a leasee in possession with written authorization 1 from the owner or an agent of the owner with written 1 authorization. The owner(s) must sign this 1 application in the space prdifided on page two or 1 submit a written authoritatiOn with this applidation. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2, t!IOPO$AV.........$0MAY, Th7e' owners Of record of the Atihjett property tegoeet A. Sensitive tanda Per mit to allow (See at-bachedj 02 3t Relied: 3/88 0101.0■1.1■1 DATE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE: FINAL DECISION DEADLINE: COMP. FLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION: Nothet1 Fin al Approval bate: Planning Engineering • • 3. List any variance, conditional uses, or other land use actions to be considered as part of this application: SL 1-86 V 0-02 and SLR 90-0011 . 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 re uest does not violate an deed restrictions that may be vattacbed to,or im osed u on the sub ect 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. ■• D. The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. DATED this day of SIGNATURES of each owner ( g. husband and wife) of t 19 * Power of attorney attached. Applicants are .in India until september 8, 1991 and will execute this form bpon their return and prior to hearing. (kgtiPtit/01310 • • 9 • •• . Ck..c .°l �'. .., '! MC , . 4 ,,.'i a �n�., a ii V 1, • MARSHA 14 9055 S W OAK STREET TIGARD OR 97223 16135AC- 00100 DIXON, BROCK MARGARET DART, JOHN 0 MARCELLA G 1569 CALLE HACIENDA GREEN VALLEY AZ 85614 1S135AC -02700 .......•••••••• DICK, DARRELL L BARBARA J 6750 SW OLESON ROAD PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC -03000 NOYES, BONNIE 21206 HUBBARD CUTOFF NE AURORA OR 91002 1S135AC -03200 BLOMGREN, JOHN S PEARL S 3 9460 SW OAK METZGER OR 97223 18135AC -03400 THOM S, CLARENCE E LOIS M 9400 SW o. PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC- 03600 BROOKE, MAC RAE B S EVIN F 9360 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC -03800 . DiNFORD, DARRELL A & BERTHA M JATA cO1 P 4485 NW WALLOWA PORTLAND OR 97226 1S1 35AC-04100 .. STEWART, JOHN W PHYLLIS T 8980 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135A8 -03400 .......i...•e• LINCOLU CENTER PHASE TV LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 10300 SW GREENBURG RD .0200 • .PORTLAND OR 97223 • 1513580- 00100 0,44::: .. ...�... UTA$ STATE RE'T'IREMENT FTJND• 0/0 .0 I A ASSN COURT 1S135AC -02600 OSBORN, JOYCE M 10860 SW 95TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 18135AC -02900 .... ... 0• ••••...a. MILLS, NINA G 10620 SW 95TH PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AC- 03100 BRAXMEYER, PAUL BURTON 10560 SW 95TH PORTLAND OR 97223 41 1S135AC -03300 ..........�. CULBERTSON, CHARMIE 9420 SW OM STREET TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC -03500 .... BROOKE, MAC RAE B SEVIM B 9360 SW OAK ST PORTLAND OR 97223 16135A0 -.03700 JUNGWI (TH, RAND' P AND RINGER, MICHELLE K 9330 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AC- 04000 JOHNSON, RICARDO LAINE 9000 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 16135A0 -04200 WILSON, JOHN H 8960 SW OAKS ST TIGARD OR 97223 .S . 1S135AD- 01400 ..y..o.... DAVIS, EUGENE LOREN VIVIAN MARY 4 550 SW LOMI3ARD BEAVERTOT OR 97005 1S135BD- 00300...1i............r ".. GOOD SAMARITAN' BY G� RAYC© RESOURCE'S, INC 1S135BD -00700 .......•n...... HARING, JACK 2414 BROADWAY #8 VANCOUVER WA 98663 . s 1S135AA- -02600 JOAES, TOMMY B AND CINDY L 8686 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA- 03700 HERB NORISSETTE BUILDERS INC 10400 SW ALLEN BLVD BEAVERTON OR 97005 1S135AA -03702 CULLINAN, RANDY J AND KRISTINA G 8775 SW OAK STREET TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AA -025 LYON, DONALD J HAZEL .T 10440 SW 07TH AVE PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA -03600 ..................... HANSEN, LUCIA L 10575 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA 03701 .......•...e....... TIPPIE, MICHAEL R AND ROBIN 8805 SW OAK TIGARD OR 97223 . . 18135AA- -03703 .4 ................... BRANDT, WALDO G PEARL E. 8835 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA-03704 ............. ELLIOTT, THOMAS c BY ERICKSON & WOLF PO BOX 547 TUALATIN OR 97062 13135AA -03800 FINCK, DALE 1 ! XDA 11 Y 8875 SW OAK PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AA- 03901 CHEPIN, JOHN AND DOROTHY J 8911 SW OAK ST TIGARD OR 97223 S135DA,-02600 BRADY, ILA MAE 9055 SW NORTH DAKOTA ST TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD -00900 JUVL, ALICE SARAH 10655 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND OR 97223 1SI35AD -01000 .....i..i..44.44.4. "s4 RAN �STHEL, DONALD D DAVIS, GENE L 4450 SW LOMBARD ST BEAVERT0N • OR 97005 1S135AA- .0:3707 ... „ « ■. n v .... ∎ ..... 0 HITCH, DORIS PO BOX 35 BEAVERTON OR 97075 18135AA= 03900 MOORE, TIMOTHY A AND TANDY J 8910 SW OAKWAY PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135DA -02� 500 ■■■■■■■•e•.�.■■■■•■■■ ST JAMES 011 HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 1S135DA- ,03900 ■.d.a....».. ST JAMES ON HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 1s135AD- 00901 .....44::46.... BENNETT, BRIAN 3 AND PATRICE 1D 19675 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD OR 97223 1S135M —01110 . . 6 • .... $00Ne HRETT A & SHERRIE A. 8807 •Ski' SPRUCE TIGARD OR 97224 8845 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD OR 97223 18135RD.41800 ............. GEHRING, RONALD L JUNE E 10860 SW 89TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 18135AD•41900 .........0........... WILLIAMSON, CARL E AND ANNA D 8818 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 1S135AD•02001 00000lb000l40000s00000 MILLER, LEE W JR DORIS E 8808 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 18135AD.41801 . ..............0. RANNEVIG, EDWARD 8840 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 18135AD•02000 MILLER, LEE W AND DORIS E 8808 SW SPRUCE PORTLAND OR 97223 18135AD...01700 ST JAMS ON HALL INVESTORS BY JONES MGMT CO 50 SW 2ND AVE STE 314 PORTLAND OR 97204 6P A 1S135AD.41701 04•40.00.0."." SITOWSXI, DOMINIC A JR HELEN L 8820 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 .S135AD-.01703 ioio . 000 . .... LANG, DOLORES MAE 10980 SW 89TH TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD-41705 O000 . 00000loe000e HO#MANN, JERRY D 10950 SW 89TH TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AD-01706 • 400ttoaos0000 CURTIS, HERBERT C AND CAROL 8850 SW THORN TIGARD OR 97223 1S135AID 03300 ooloO4eoioliOlolooOsoo 18135AD43600 44404 15305 NW WEST UNION RD PORTLAND OR 97229 1S135BD-00100 UTAH STATE RETIREMENT FUND C/0 F 1 A ASSN COURT PO BOX 255187 SACRAMENTO 18135AD-01101 ••• • 1.• •• CA 95865 EPLER, CLIFFORD F & KAYE V 8845 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD OR 97223 •• PO BOX 21545 SEATTLE W 8111 1S135BD -00300 .........••• GOOD SAMARITAN BY GRAYCO RESOURCES, INC 5331 SW MACADAM AVE #200 PORTLAND OR 97201 18135AD-01102 .... 000••• JOHNSON RICHARD BRION AND GAIL A 8615 SW SPRUCE ST TIGARD OR 97223 F� . - - :t ;: -`�.? . _. , .� s'.i fir• .r __ + � ''. - ; � S = .:. • - . °._ } -s`.. ..:_a� t _ ai. _ _ s '. t s ter. 7F t t -:r-:� ., d-.. � 7 - a f 't, f - , •�., t s< •,� . : _ ,_ ,. � ; - �� - _ - -, a ._...+u s ,`_x. s # * 3• '# .. ' s {: " 5... T:: five; x. '�a s. F.s � . - .x.. LEC�IBILf 40* TO REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: flajgsu nber 25 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 91-0004 DAVIS (NPO #8) A request for Sensitive Lands Review to amend portions of conditions of approval imposed by the City Hearings Officer in decioion SLR 90-0011, SL 1-86, and V 87-02. The proposed amendments relate to: 1) apportionment of maintenance and repair costa, 2) properties to be oubject to maintenance and repair costs to permit full recovery to City, 3) means of assuring performance subject to City attorney, 4) deletion of requiromert for covenants, conditions, and restrictions, homeowner's association, deed restrictions, and equitable servitude to secure maintenance and repair, 5) definition of maintenance and repair. ZONE: C-P and R-4.5 (Professional Commercial and Residential, 4.5 unito/acre) LOCATION: North of Highway 217, west of SW 84th Avenue (WCTM 131 35AC, taX lots 101, 2000, 4800, and 181 35AD, tax lots 1200, 1300, 1400, and 1500) , Attached Jos the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information OuppIied 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. 70 1991. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If ou are unable to respond...12 the above date pleaoe 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: Richard Beweggdogfif PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: •■••••■101.MON■Pl.... Name of Person dommanting: Fhone Ntimber: bkm/sLR91-04.BKM 4*.f. '4• ."4 NOTIFICATION LIST FOR _ALL APPLICATIONS NPO NO. St__(2) copies co P NO. 2. CITY DEPARTMENTS wilding Official/Brad R. City Recorder j''Pingin erinag /Chris D. ' vs/Permits Coordinator /Viola G. 3. SPECIAL DISTRICTS Fire District - (Pick -up box) Parke & Recreation r..� Board Police Field Operations Jolw. gaol C►,l trO4) Tigard Water District 8777 SW Burnham St. Tigard, OR 97223 b/Tualatin Valley Water District 6 501 SW Taylors Ferry Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 4. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS Wash. Co. Land Use & Tranep. 150 N. First. Ave. Hillsboro, OR 97124 Brent Curtis Kevin Martin Joann Rice Scott King Fred Eberle Mike Borreeon dity'of Beaverton Jim t endryx PO Box 4755 Beaverton, OR 97076 School Diet No. 48 (Beaverton) Joy Pahl PO Box.200 Beaverton, OR 97075 School Diet. 23J (Tigard) 13137 SW Pacific Hwy. - Tigard, OR 97223 Boundary Commission 320 SW Stark Room 530 Portland, OR 97204 METRO 2000 SW 1st ave. Portland, OR 97201- 5398 DLCD (CPA's only) 1175 Court St. NE Salem, OR 97310 -0590 Other 5. SPECIAL AGENCIES General Telephone Rues Wells 12460 SW Main St. Tigard, Oh 97223 NW Natural Gas Scott Palter Ave. 220 NW 7 Portland, OR Second 97209 TOX Cablevision Of Oregon Mike Hallock 3500 SW Bond St. Portland, OR 97201 Columbia Cable ,(Frank Stone) 14200 SW Brigadoon Ct. Beaverton, OR 97005 Portland General. Elec. Brian Moore 14655 SW Old h u Fry. Beaverton, OR 97007 Metro Area Comunicaons Jason Hewitt Twin Oaks Technology Canter 1815 NW 169th Place S -6020 Beaverton, OR 97006-4886 US West Pete Nelson 421 SW Oak St. Port land, OIL 97204 E. STATE AGENCIES 7 Aeronautics Div. (ObOT) DOGANI Engineer Division of State Lando Mxpi. sH /te oard of Health .. Dept. Phi, E. ` lPar➢s (Fish & Wildlife 40 ee Parks & Recreation Div. LCDC Subdivision Supervisor Dept. of Energy PUC Dept. of Environ. Quality Fire Mar hall Other FEDERAL AGENCIES Corps. of Engineers Poet Office 8. OTHER Other southern Pacific Transportation Company Duane M. Forney, PLS w Project Engineer 800 Nisi 6th Avenue, R. 324, Union Station Portland, OR 97209 [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] LEGIBILITY STRIP WASHINGTON COUNTY ORE . SCALE 1 %i SEE MAP IS 13 5 C.R. NM 823 0291 20 1303 .44Ac. 0 83 3O2 .29 Ace 1M9.20 8S -5 • PSS. &3 509.6 '.Sz, .CH 302.38 102 ' 1500 141.9' 141.9' THORN 19.40 Ch., S89° 07'2 1703 F? 33.9 37 ,:_ !mu 423.7 GRAHAM ACRES LOTS .31- 35 VACATED' 78-16636 S89° 34,•W s 20 403.43 SEE MAP IS 1 350A LEGIBILITY STRIP' SEE MAP I S 1 3AB 82- 13888' 801.20 SEE. t�1P ISie AC 77 °06`3•°6. 900: Ac 800 .4.17i A X SS 200 t004 e9ff A 400 !_00 Ac. FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY a . DO NOT RELY ON FOR ANY OTHER USE EAST Z31.T • • R 1 .t./.1 g • 1 ...,,7 Ir. rr . I G .....:, 1002 1 0 1 ..,, ----too- .0 1 0 e .., i...... 1.5_0.L. 1.5. 62a. , .,, 13 12 11 4 J.3 .....7 2_ I! _ _ ( , SEE MAP ,1.5 1 2 ', to „, -,, oi / 0 i 42 — --:—:-7----:-- --77:—=-Ii--1 — ---14;'---- 7.6: _r__.1.17. 111 1 19_ 1 1 19 130,1 7 1102 .fg L 3 9.7 11E9 40 1 ;4, ior iRTAcy ' SUPPL.E MENTAL IS I 35A A SEE MAP 1 S 1 6 5A B /1200 ,,i)1 / 4 II -0 CA, 10138 NO. 1 21 - 8 i o o' j9 53' 750* 3,071 367, 20' 2000 19 4,16' ImumemomiraidememanimnialmnsulaWatimia■ '4e074';',%..14,7". . . r ," ..'741,0:%;74.7. ' r • r■freVrer iller 7 V 42 0 () 0. ° / o . / 201 3705 , 9) / ibP I C. S, No, 12893) 3902 0,1 c°...4 138■37 129,04 Oi In Z°3 "L 1 °- / 0 t; I I 12 C4* t44/ 0' Ne9a4o'w • ;711 is eyll g r7) a) Al (CS,40, 1210) Y4"),14/ SEE MAP is 1 35 AC FOR ASSESSMENT pURPOSEs ONLY DO NOT RELY ON FOR ANY OTHER USE ' '44 'ro tg, itt'OR Aa ote v or) t111:1, C.S. 10107 1702 1700 10578, a 367. 23' 16' 190.3 r 1'90 SEE MAP. 1S135AA SUPPLEMENTAL N0.1 2000 200 1 !9 0,3' 2202 125 2201 » 129,01 8 0 ,;, , /. r 8 eo I 3 705 0 Nt c. S. No, 12893') co 139■37. —i3„ 700 129,04 i 79 16 95,3 r yy � rJ _.i 9 0, 3 in E�i'1.323ii .' c1 1. STREET tAsT 44 40' 0410 635 `, 14.6351 2700 19 03' [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] Y.� CITY . OF, 1 d !"iRD.! '"''. . REC I PT O "" 1 .O Y MEET [''+�E.�aE'X "�/1��}�y`f��!#gC/�a {�» �r :9 �S 1 7 ek+3 • d ` •CI4 CR ..� MOUN.[ M $0,:00 C4'?. C3L I G R I IA' +IPTON + � `(RLC1.. C( SW . dAMOUl�` 0 fl DRESS 1 y.PRO E 3ION (tI.. 00.(40ORRTI,ON P. 0E.NT gll 09 ' ..1/ 1 1 t0 W .CEDAR' H. LL i ,90 1 �'` A SUBD I V I ION : P01R ° .. f t fl), UR 472'x$!'' M PURP.UEE 0. `P# MINT 0MOUN1`... P(ID PURPOSE OF F rn'MENT U1QUNT P "i • L( ND �t (PP +eL R 'tf ... o Z' 52 (0. 000 - .r�tdwYa. l•H4.:,.: �,.....: i.}.�t'edh ,.1'!',abiti�aal 'A�di+u':m.kt� .uJ r,'i��r [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing]